K, the breast implants. Too bad nothing else he's saying adds up.
It's funny.
And how do they dissect CO2 influences from volanic vents, they don't explain this. Are we to take their word?
If that's so, you could dissect CO2 influences from anywhere in the world.
But the fact remains, that the climatologist chose two different locations to sample CO2 and bridged them together instead of avg them together side by side so that they could produce favorable data conclusions.
Now he's comparing CO2 sampling to a weight loss study. Do I really need to break it down as to why thats a ridiculous analogy?
If I find it - and I will because everything scientists due as far as methedology is concerned is published so that you DON'T have to just take their word for it - will you be able to understand the methodology? I doubt you will, and thats no knock on you becasue I doubt any of us who aren't atmospheric experits will.
I'll look for it though.
He doesn't think that.
He mentioned the fact that there were 3500 scientist who signed a pe ion which stated that they had significant differences with the consensus.
ALso, he brought up very good points in how the bar chart data was flawed since their date collection method was flawed.
And when they finally did factor the different data findings, they still end up saying that there was no conclusive point after all like in the Real climate site you posted.
THe weight loss study is fictional as he stated.
he's just using it to illustrate how today the metods of data gathering occuring in estimating CO2, lack common sense, and he's using a fictional diet study to put it in laymen's terms.
Also, the measurements used for that graph may only be the Hawaii measurements, but there samples taken from all over the world. Thats what goes into the studies. What Al Gore used for his movie is irrelevant.
They don't lack common sense. Do you really think that all atmospheric scientists are idiots and are completely manipulation data collection?
I'm at the 37 minute mark. I'll pick it up again tomorrow. I'm bored at the moment, and this is proving far less challenging than I had envisioned.
map of network gathering carbon dioxide data
In that study he was referring to it involved only a group of scientist who used one location to used data for CO2 levels pre 1950 and using a different site to showing CO2 levels after 1950.
These were only a handful of scientist, and not all of them as you claim who did this bar chart, therefore it's not insane to hold them accountable for using a flawed method of combining two diff areas to show how CO2 levels have risen, because C02 levels are different in many parts of the world.
It's as if i took data that showed the purchasing of Chevy tahoes in Granolaville, Oregon in 2005 and then using data from sales amount of Chevy tahoes in Sugarland, Tx to show that chevy sales have improved 100% within the last year. THat's not right.
Well, if the global warming theory was based on that one study then maybe he'd have a leg to stand on.
Cant you just feel the warmth of Christmas. I can
and can you figure out how to measure that? I can.
Good Will Toward Man.
Hope everyone had a good CHRISTmas and have a
good New Year.
No need to see the clip. Manny is doing a good job refuting your video.
Even the WH admits global warming is a fact.
====================
U.S. Wants Polar Bears Listed as Threatened
Designation May Force Action on Global Warming
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 27, 2006; A01
The Bush administration has decided to propose listing the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, putting the U.S. government on record as saying that global warming could drive one of the world's most recognizable animals out of existence.
The administration's proposal -- which was described by an Interior Department official who spoke on the condition of anonymity -- stems from the fact that rising temperatures in the Arctic are shrinking the sea ice that polar bears need for hunting. The official insisted on anonymity because the department will submit the proposal today for publication in the Federal Register, after which it will be subject to public comment for 90 days.
Identifying polar bears as threatened with extinction could have an enormous political and practical impact. As the world's largest bear and as an object of children's affection as well as Christmastime Coca-Cola commercials, the polar bear occupies an important place in the American psyche. Because scientists have concluded that carbon dioxide from power-plant and vehicle emissions is helping drive climate change worldwide, putting polar bears on the endangered species list raises the legal question of whether the government would be required to compel U.S. industries to curb their carbon dioxide output.
( I'm sure dubya wont' actually inconvenience any polluting (energy) corps about silly old polar bears. I figure the Arctic ice and polar bears are now beyond saving )
"We've reviewed all the available data that leads us to believe the sea ice the polar bear depends on has been receding," said the Interior official, who added that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials have concluded that polar bears could be endangered within 45 years. "Obviously, the sea ice is melting because the temperatures are warmer."
Northern la udes are warming twice as rapidly as the rest of globe, according to a 2004 scientific assessment, and by the end of the century, annual ocean temperatures in the Arctic may rise an additional 13 degrees Fahrenheit. As a result, researchers predict that summer sea ice, which polar bears use as a platform to hunt for ringed seals, will decline 50 to 100 percent. Just this month, researchers at the National Center for Atmospheric Research outlined a worst-case scenario in which summer sea ice could disappear by 2040.
By submitting the proposal today, the Interior Department is meeting a deadline under a legal settlement with three environmental advocacy groups -- the Center for Biological Diversity, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Greenpeace -- that argue the government has failed to respond quickly enough to the polar bear's plight. The department has been examining the status of polar bears for more than two years.
NRDC senior attorney Andrew Wetzler, one of the lawyers who filed suit against the administration, welcomed the proposal for listing.
"It's such a loud recognition that global warming is real," Wetzler said. "It is rapidly threatening the polar bear and, in fact, an entire ecosystem with utter destruction."
There are 20,000 to 25,000 polar bears worldwide, 4,700 of which live in Alaska and spend part of the year in Canada and Russia. The other countries with polar bears in their Arctic regions are Denmark and Norway.
Although scientists have yet to fully assess many of the 19 separate polar bear populations, initial studies suggest that climate change has already exacted a toll on the animals.
The ice in Canada's western Hudson Bay is now breaking up 2 1/2 weeks earlier than it did 30 years ago, giving polar bears there less time to hunt and build up fat reserves that sustain them for eight months before hunting resumes. As local polar bears have become thinner, female polar bears' reproductive rates and cubs' survival rates have fallen, spurring a 21 percent population drop from 1997 to 2004.
Scientists have not charted the same rapid decline within the U.S. polar bear populations, but federal scientists have observed a number of troubling signs as the bears have resorted to open-water swimming and even cannibalism in an effort to stay alive.
Polar bears normally swim from one patch of sea ice to another to hunt for food, but they are not accustomed to going long distances. In September 2004, government scientists observed 55 polar bears swimming offshore in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea, an unprecedented e, and four of those bears died. In a separate study that year, federal scientists identified three instances near the Beaufort Sea in which polar bears ate one another.
The Interior official said government officials studying Alaskan polar bears in the southern Beaufort Sea area have observed thinner adult bears and a lower rate of survival among cubs. Although the population has yet to dip, "unless the polar cub survival rate goes up, it would have to happen," the official said.
Still, the official added that the decision to propose polar bears as threatened with extinction "wasn't easy for us" because "there is still some significant uncertainty" about what could happen to bear populations in the future.
"This proposal is sort of like a scientific hypothesis. You put this out there and say to the world, 'Tell us, is this right or is this wrong?' " the official said, adding that Interior will hold several public hearings about its proposal. "We're projecting what we think will happen in the future, not just what's happening at this moment."
The department could take up to a year to complete its proposal, and it could abandon the listing if it unearths new scientific projections about the bears' fate. But that appears unlikely, as recent models have consistently pointed to a faster deterioration of Arctic sea ice.
Although federal officials cited rising sea temperatures once before in a threatened species proposal -- in May, when they called them a "major stressor" on Caribbean elkhorn and staghorn corals -- today's proposal will mark the first time the administration has identified climate change as the driving force behind the potential demise of a species.
Robert Correll, the scientist who chaired the international Arctic Climate Impact Assessment in 2004 and now directs the global change program at the H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment, said in an interview that the proposal to place polar bears on the endangered species list is "highly justified."
Correll added that he is participating in an administration-funded study at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on how climate change could affect national security and foreign policy.
That, along with the proposal on polar bears, he said, "plays into a reality that, in my opinion, they're going to be rethinking their position" on global warming.
Last edited by boutons_; 12-29-2006 at 02:58 PM.
December 29, 2006
Ice Mass Snaps Free in Arctic
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 6:46 a.m. ET
TORONTO (AP) -- A giant ice shelf has snapped free from an island south of the North Pole, scientists said Thursday, citing climate change as a ''major'' reason for the event.
The Ayles Ice Shelf -- all 41 square miles of it -- broke clear 16 months ago from the coast of Ellesmere Island, about 500 miles south of the North Pole in the Canadian Arctic.
Scientists discovered the event by using satellite imagery. Within one hour of breaking free, the shelf had formed as a new ice island, leaving a trail of icy boulders floating in its wake.
Warwick Vincent of Laval University, who studies Arctic conditions, traveled to the newly formed ice island and couldn't believe what he saw.
''This is a dramatic and disturbing event. It shows that we are losing remarkable features of the Canadian North that have been in place for many thousands of years,'' Vincent said. ''We are crossing climate thresholds, and these may signal the onset of accelerated change ahead.''
The ice shelf was one of six major shelves remaining in Canada's Arctic. They are packed with ancient ice that is more than 3,000 years old. They float on the sea but are connected to land.
Some scientists say it is the largest event of its kind in Canada in 30 years and that climate change was a major element.
''It is consistent with climate change,'' Vincent said, adding that the remaining ice shelves are 90 percent smaller than when they were first discovered in 1906. ''We aren't able to connect all of the dots ... but unusually warm temperatures definitely played a major role.''
Laurie Weir, who monitors ice conditions for the Canadian Ice Service, was poring over satellite images in 2005 when she noticed that the shelf had split and separated.
Weir notified Luke Copland, head of the new global ice lab at the University of Ottawa, who initiated an effort to find out what happened.
Using U.S. and Canadian satellite images, as well as seismic data -- the event registered on earthquake monitors 155 miles away -- Copland discovered that the ice shelf collapsed in the early afternoon of Aug. 13, 2005.
Copland said the speed with which climate change has effected the ice shelves has surprised scientists.
''Even 10 years ago scientists assumed that when global warming changes occur that it would happen gradually so that perhaps we expected these ice shelves just to melt away quite slowly,'' he said.
Derek Mueller, a polar researcher with Vincent's team, said the ice shelves get weaker and weaker as temperatures rise. He visited Ellesmere Island in 2002 and noticed that another ice shelf had cracked in half.
''We're losing our ice shelves and this a feature of the landscape that is in danger of disappearing altogether from Canada,'' Mueller said.
Within days of breaking free, the Ayles Ice Shelf drifted about 30 miles offshore before freezing into the sea ice. A spring thaw may bring another concern: that warm temperatures will release the new ice island from its Arctic grip, making it an enormous hazard for ships.
''Over the next few years this ice island could drift into populated shipping routes,'' Weir said.
================
Another aspect of shipping is that the lack of Arctic ice will open up new year-round shipping routes.
It might already be too late, this is a very scary thought, in addition to the fact the arctic is one of the most interesting when it comes to animals and habitat.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
