[Boater2be]

If the "green house effect" is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Then I guess power boaters are a huge part of the problem. Averaging only about 1 mile per gallon. Maybe we should leave the lake to the sail boaters this year and see what the effects are.

Interesting subject Mike. It would be nice to know what the absolute truth is. It just gets a little old hearing all of the doomsayers. "Eggs will kill you". "No wait now their not that bad." "Second hand smoke is worse for you then smoking yourself." "OK it's not really that bad." For EVERY scientist that clams one thing there is one that counters it. I don't have the time or patience to try and keep up it. <_<

 

[Cadmonkey]

yeah I'm more worried that it'll stop spinning first...or get hit by meateor....but sure we'll all kill oursleves off long before that.

 

[DMisaras]

All,

I wish I had the time to really reply to this. Just a couple of points:

Capt'n Mike - The oceans actually act as a buffer across the global system which balances change. That's why you see the temperature shifts from the average that are high in one place and low in another when you study historical data. The "experts" who are saying otherwise are the doom and gloomers using scare tactics when reporting their junk science. Follow their affilliations to understand their agenda.

Boater2be - you should have stated that "the theory of the alleged green house effect blames the burning of fossil fuels as the cause of global warming". Junk science any way you cut it. All of this doom and gloom is predicted using immeasurably flawed computer models. Their models normally do not include the oceanic buffer effects, the cooling counter-effects of increased cloud cover and decreased light penetration that would occur with atmospheric warming, as well as other factors. They show you what they want you to see and back it up with flawed data. Would you trust your heart surgeon if he did that?

Sleeper - Bravo! You're paying attention. Now add eruptions at Mount Pinatuao, St. Helens, take your pick. Heck, why didn't we see a drastic warming after Mount Vesuvious wiped out a good portion of the Roman Empire in Italy way back when. By the doom and gloomers predictions we shouldn't even be here. Many singular eruptions have introduced more hydro flourocarbons, chlorine, sulfer, and a host of other "ozone destroying" and "green house gases" than produced by mankind since the beginning of the industrial age. Besides, volcanic gases are superheated and introduced into the higher atmosphere.

Unlike underarm deodorants and air fresheners.

Sorry for the long post but this tweaked a nerve. Please, don't get me started on asbestos or freon.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Capt'n Mike]

QUOTE(DMisaras @ Feb 26 2004, 01:20 PM)Capt'n Mike - The oceans actually act as a buffer across the global system which balances change. That's why you see the temperature shifts from the average that are high in one place and low in another when you study historical data.
The ocean in more than a buffer. It's mostly responsible for the climates around it. The fluctuation of the saline levels plays a big part in the climate even. Read up on the Great Conveyor Belt, and what would happen if that system stopped.

 

[Cadmonkey]

QUOTE(DMisaras @ Feb 26 2004, 01:20 PM)...don't get me started on asbestos or freon.
whats wrong with asbestos or freon? I love my new asbestos comforter it keeps me warm when I got freon leaking into my house in the summer from my central air.

i keed, i keed...

 

[DMisaras]

Cpt'n Mike,

I'm well aware of the Great Ocean Conveyor but I refuse to buy-in to the scare tactics that the junk scientists use to foment debate. It sound like you are aquainted with the latest rantings from Wallace Broecker of Columbia University. He has linked a collapse of the conveyor to manmade global warming. Again, using computer models, he determined that freshwater injections from Arctic rivers could cause the shutdown of thermohaline circulation. The result would be violent temperature swings of up to 10 degrees in just a few years. His study has serious shortcomings however. Broecker's model assumes, for example, that the "excess of precipitation plus runoff over evaporation" will increase by 50 percent. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change only predicts an increase of precipitation of 5 to 10 percent. Furthermore, these same Artic rivers draw their waters from the interior of the Asian continent which is supposed to get drier as a result of global warming. Additionally, the North Atlantic is in the midst of a long-term cooling trend. Broecker himself admits that current knowledge concerning ocean circulation is incomplete, which is why he has said "there's nothing to do but guess" about the chances of a climate flip- flop. He sounded the alarm anyway citing; precisely because of the climate's capricious nature.

Sound science? I think not!

The "polar ice is melting" doomsayers spout that only a few degrees of warming is enough to flood coastal cities. These folks omit important facts: A "few" degrees of warming will still leave polar areas well below freezing. But assuming their predictions have some truth to them, evidence exists that warmer polar temperatures actually increases the snowfall which creates the ice pack. Ocean levels have been increasing 7 inches per century for several centuries, and nobody knows why. But it is certainly not due to climate changes or any human influences. The current body of data actually shows that if the climate was to warm, for any reason, it is likely to depress sea level rise due to a transfer of water from the ocean to polar ice.

Which way do they want it?

Regards,

Dave

 

[Bigtatas]

QUOTE(Capt'n Mike @ Feb 25 2004, 11:46 PM)Changes are occuring that suggest Europe could freeze over as early as 2020!

Thank God!!! Some of those places in Europe need to be frozen over. Naples smells like the arm pit of the entire world.

If glactures were really melting woulden't our lake levels be higher than they are and have been in the past?

 

[rerun]

Dave I just want to know what you do for a living? Your either a waether guy by trade or really well read and smart.

 

[Capt'n Mike]

I caught wind of this on the Peter Werby show, late nights on the WRIF. He had another radio guy, Thom Hartmann on, and they were talking about this. It was the first I heard of it. I was really surprised when I started looking into it, how many others were on the same page as him.

You have some great ponts, Dave. I've haven't looked into the opposing views yet, but that's interesting...