BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: GUEST,LDB
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 02:46 PM

Little Hawk

Need money? 10,000 US dollars awaits you! The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (now called the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry) has for many years offered that amount of money to ANYONE who could demonstrate their ability to do dowsing under controlled conditions. No one has EVER been able to do so...

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: pdq
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 02:28 PM

IPCC is a politically-based unit of the United Nation. They do not do research. They support any one who prints things they like to see. Then they demand that "developed nations" give billions to the UN and to "developing countries" as some sort of reparations. Actually, it is just a big shakedown scam.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: TheSnail
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 02:04 PM

Ringer, give this a try -
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch05.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Ringer
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 01:24 PM

Thank you for your contribution, TIA. How much credence am I to place on the postings of someone who apparently does not know the difference between radius and diameter?

You don't address what Prof Morner says, you merely discount it on the basis that he also thinks that dowsing is a valid technique, and also because he is a "well-known climate change curmudgeon, and a member of the partially Exxon-funded International Climate Science Coalition." On the same basis, I can discount anything you say because you are a warmista. You must address the facts; anything else is ad hominem.

As to the NOAA figures on satellite-measurement of sea-levels: your cite is cluttered with get-outs. First its claim to be "estimates" of sea level; what does that mean? If it's measurements, it's surely not "estimates". Then, "common annual signal"s have been removed; what does that mean? Furthermore, it seems that the figures have been "massaged" by including some and excluding others; why? What happens if the excluded figures are included?

I am open to debate here: I am sceptical of "global warming" because I have, in the past, been a developer of models (but not climate models) on a computer, and recognise that if climate models have programmed into them "increase in carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere leads to temperature increase," then the computer-model will project increased temperatures in 2100AD (or whenever), and also because I see that there is evidence that there has been no warming for a decade or so. But if computers cannot predict the weather in a fortnight's time, what chance of their predicting the climate in 2100? If sea-levels have been rising as your NOAA cite, where are the tide-gauge figures from actual measurements of sea-level (I'm not saying there are none: give me a cite)? Satellite measurements must be calibrated with "on the ground" data.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: TIA
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 01:58 PM

PS
I even have no problem with a University course on dowsing. But not if it is taught as science - in particular geophysics.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 01:55 PM

I have no problem with you (and Axel-Morner) believing in dowsing. However, it is absolutely outside the realm of science. The man is a geophysicist, and tried to teach dowsing as geophsyics. Mine was not a cheap shot in any way shape or form.

Please believe whatever you will. But there are beliefs that are not properly taught as science, and one should be very suspicious of anyone who tries to.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 12:46 PM

I don't have any particular opinion one way or another about sea level rise, TIA. I'm not informed enough about it to have any opinion.

However, I am acquainted with dowsing, I know that it works (though I am not quite sure how it works exactly), and I think it's silly for you to take a cheap shot at someone because he believes in dowsing and wanted to teach a course on it. You can teach a course on dowsing, it does work, and it's a very interesting and useful technique for locating underground water and many other things as well.

You can detect the strength of a person's energetic field (which is all around their body at all times) by dowsing. I've done it. It's the simplest thing in the world to do it, anyone can do it, and it is consistent and accurate. You can weaken their field or strengthen it by having them do various things. For instance, if they think about something that makes them feel happy, their field strengthens and enlarges. If they think about something that frightens or depresses them, their field weakens and contracts. This indicates dramatically that the state of your thoughts affects your entire nervous system (the generator of your energetic field)...an excellent reason for learning to govern your thoughts better and not keep sliding into negative thoughts like worry, anger, hatred, revenge, resentment, bitterness, etc...because to do so weakens your entire biological system and can eventually cause serious illness to manifest.

There's absolutely no reason why someone should not teach a university course on dowsing...other than the stark ignorance and prejudice of people who know nothing about it themselves, and therefore figure it can't possibly be real.

Remember: I am making no statement here either pro or con about sea level rise. I am simply saying that you shouldn't take a cheap shot at someone over his belief in dowsing. It's kind of like the old "little green men" canard that people trot out whenever someone tries to seriously discuss a UFO incident.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: TheSnail
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 10:52 AM

Sea level rise: It's worse than we thought - environment - 01 July 2009 - New Scientist

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: TIA
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 10:39 AM

The link above is to a famous interview with Nils Axel-Morner, a well-known climate change curmudgeon, and a member of the partially Exxon-funded International Climate Science Coalition. In addition to his assertions on sea level rise, he is a vocal champion of dowsing - even attempting to teach a course on it at Stockholm University before his (some say forced) retirement.

In the interview, he claims that Australian Climate scientists cut down a tree that he says proves there is no sea level rise in the Maldives. This allegation has been shown to be extremely dodgey. Apparently there was a tree at one time, then it was gone (nobody knows why), and Morner brought one in from elsewhere on the island, and propped it up, then had it pulled it out to make a "documentary". Four years later he admitted to staging the whole thing.

The satellite altimeter data that he bases his sea level views on are available from NOAA. Please look, and make your own interpretation:

NOAA satellite data

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Ringer
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 10:18 AM

Sorry. That last "GUEST" is me.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 09:36 AM

Sorry for the delay: my first grandchild has just arrived, somewhat early. I have more reason than ever to care about the Earth now. I said I'd come back with evidence for sea-levels not rising; here it is.

Bangladesh, incidentally, is affected by coastal erosion, not by sea-level rise.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:40 PM

That splains it.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:34 PM

The "blizzard in Copenhagen" line is straight from "FOX and Friends" this morning. I saw/heard it.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:07 PM

"Just as an aside, if the sea really was rising, then simple physics dictates that the world's spin would slow (as a ballet-dancer's spin slows when she extends her arms). Have you noticed your clocks running fast?"

And you are a simple physicist?

No my clock are not accurate enough, even if your simple physics were.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: pdq
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 01:42 PM

Just for the record (not to argue) but the Turkey Vulture (aka buzzard) is native to all the lower 48 states and a small part of southern Canada. It is, however, becoming more abundant is the far NE than it once was.

The Opossum (aka possum) is native to the central part of the eastern US. They may be found in most states and are actually common now in California, but they were never west of the Mississippi River before being introduced by pioneers.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: kendall
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 01:07 PM

I dont care what ring says, or pdq or any of those bought and paid for scientists, I see with my own eyes what is happening. Smokestacks pouring billions of tons of pollution into the atmosphere just like Krakatowa did in the late 19th century and caused temps to drop for years. Only this time the pollution is blocking the suns rays from returning to space and causing warming.Bangladesh is under water now and they cant even flee to India because India is building a 10 foot fence to keep them out! W@here the hell are they to go?
Ok, we know that climate change is a natural thing, but I can tell you this, Cardinals, Buzzards and Possums are NOT natural to the state of Maine!

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 12:35 PM

Guest/FolkE, where do you find the forecast of a blizzard for Copenhagen? I find only 'Partly cloudy. Chance of light snow'. I'm serious- how does one find the blizzard forecast? Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: GUEST,The Folk E
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 11:05 AM

Huge blizzard reported in Copenhagen for the summit.

Ironically hilarious!

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: GUEST,John from Kemsing
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 10:11 AM

Why so gloomy? All this goings on about global warming and its supposed effects. 1 degree C rise, 5 degree C rise, 1/2" rise, 2 ft. rise. Does it REALLY matter? So what!. I know what your thinking when reading these comments but I ask you again. Does it really matter?. Infinity, or eternity if you will, is the past and the future and man`s span is but less that the blink of an eye. Our scientists can show us heavenly bodies dying and ending and some time or another that is surely the way the earth will go, regardless of how .many carbon footprints we make. So, bring on nuclear power and let`s enjoy what we can while we can and let the future take care of itself.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 09:30 AM

Faulty physics Ring.
Sea levels rise and fall thousands of feet without changing Earth's rotatio.
Diameter is 6371 km.
A change of 1 part in 6k is negligible - especially since isostasy mitigates the change.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Ed T
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 09:20 AM

An interesting article on China Coal and Carbon at this site (though not directly on topic)
http://special.globaltimes.cn/2009-12/492378.html

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 08:07 AM

"If it is caused by human actions, we can't do anything about it.
    If we could do anything about it, it would cause too much economic damage."

                   Something probably could be done about it, but nobody in a position of authority wants to talk about the root cause.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Ringer
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 07:57 AM

That's not a serious cite, Bill D. The only hard fact in it (I may be exagerating slightly) seemed to be "such floods have been occurring more and more frequently in recent years," which sounds, in the absence of evidence, like anecdote, notoriously unreliable.

The Maldives, of course (like many as-yet-undeveloped nations) , have a vested interest in appearing to be the victims of industrial nations' emissions: rich industrial nations pour cash into them to assuage guilty consciences. You may recall recently that the Maldives government recently held a cabinet-meeting under water, to make the point! Obviously (obviously, at least, to the cognoscenti like me) a "gimme gimme gimme" stunt.

But I maintain, nevertheless, that sea-levels are not rising. Don't go away: I'll find some evidence.

Just as an aside, if the sea really was rising, then simple physics dictates that the world's spin would slow (as a ballet-dancer's spin slows when she extends her arms). Have you noticed your clocks running fast?

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 01:08 PM

Didn't Kevin Costner already make a movie about that?

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 01:04 PM

ah, but there HAS been a rise recently...it just isn't enough to make Miami like Venice yet. But there are island nations in the far east which are seeing it.

http://itotd.com/articles/499/disappearing-island-nations/

"Why should we believe there is to be a rise shortly?" Because those icebergs falling off of Antarctica are going faster....

It won't make a lot of difference in MY lifetime, but I hope my son buys land in the mountains.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Ringer
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 12:49 PM

There has been no rise in sea-level in the last half-century. Why should we believe there is to be a rise shortly?

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 12:22 PM

"Are you advocating moving entire cities to higher ground?"

Ummm.. I think he DID suggest almost this very thing awhile back....I'm sure he will fill us in...

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Ebbie
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 11:41 AM

I'm curious, bb- how do you suggest that we "adjust" to global warming? I'm serious. Are you advocating moving entire cities to higher ground? Suggest that we -mankind - should build underground cities?

How does civilization adjust to calamity?

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 06:33 AM

I'm confident that most GW "hotheads", especially those in politics and the "green" industry, but even ordinary Prius driving liberals and GW zealots on this thread know that man made global warming has not been proven and that the effort to check it will hurt millions of people, and take resources away from any effort to adjust to the real GW that will occur regardless of man's efforts, due to normal and natural climactic change. They deny it in their own short term interest.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 05:29 AM

I don't see the point of arguments like this one. I'm confident that most GW deniers, especially those in politics and the energy industry, but even ordinary SUV driving Republicans and GW deniers on this thread know that man made global warming exists and that unchecked it will hurt millions of people. They deny it in their own short term interest.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 01:09 AM

Another thing to worry about! Hamsters are getting overheated due to Global Warming. This is causing many hamsters to spend less time on the exercise wheel. This is causing a significant drop in hamster-generated electrical power in many urban areas and has been responsible for "brown-outs" in Schenectady, Albany, Syracuse, and 55 other uninspiring American cities, and that's just the tip of the iceberg!

What will happen when gerbils, pet rats, chinchillas and laboratory mice are similarly affected? We could be looking at a complete breakdown in rodent-supplied urban power by the year 2012. I, for one, think this is a far worse threat than the Mayan prophecies, and it could mean the end to life as we know it.

Get scared, for f*cks sake! Show that you care. Fan an overheated hamster today and fight Global Warming.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 07:29 PM

so...pdq relies on a 5½ year old 'study' by a conservative think tank.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

pdq....there ARE many, many studies and data from scientists who have no political ax to grind. Read a few.....

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 06:18 PM

Of course you can find individual glaciers that are advancing. But the vast vast majority are retreating. The global mass balance or mean volume of all glaciers as a function of time is plotted here.

If you look, you will see nearly constant decline (since monitoring began in the 1940s), with a precipitious drop-off beginning in the mid-1990s.

You will also note that there was a brief period of increasing glacial mass in the late 1960s. This is part of what sparked the very brief popular (but never a scientific consensus) view that an new ice age might be approaching.

It is disingenuous and a logical fallacy to try to refute current "global" changes with specific local examples.

Subject: RE: BS: More Global Warming Things to Worry about
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 03:17 PM

pdq seems to have found a backup for his arguments about climate change: The Heartland Institute. I did a bit of checking on the Heartland Institute and posted some of what I found HERE

Anything but reliable.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: Paul Burke
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 02:46 PM

Global warming isn't happening.
If it is happening, it might be a good thing anyway.
If it isn't a good thing anyway, it's not caused by human actions.
If it is caused by human actions, we can't do anything about it.
If we could do anything about it, it would cause too much economic damage.
Anyway, it only affects poor third world people.
And by the time I'm proven wrong, I'll be dead.

Is this a fair summary of the contrarians' position?

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 11:23 AM

On the other hand some alarms are on the silly side. Take, for instance, from yesterday's paper, this:
You Don't Want to Live to be 500

The Earth's atmosphere has already passed the tipping point, and in the next 500 years, temperatures will rise considerably, sea levels will rise considerably and millions, even billions, of people from the tropical and temperate zones of the Earth will be forced to migrate north in search of food, fuel and shelter. This is where Alaska, and Alaskans, will play a central role.

"By the year 2500, Alaska could be home to millions of climate refugees from the Lower 48 and Central and South America who will have migrated north, seeking safe harbor from the devastating impact of global warming in those future times"

It is not that I necessarily disbelieve Dan E. Bloom's premise but worrying about what could happen 500 years from now seems prematurely alarmist. He says that this generation and the "next few generations" won't need to worry but after that, watch out..

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 11:22 AM

"More careful analysis of the data, collected since the satellite's launching in 2002, has also revealed levels of carbon dioxide, methane, ozone and other gases in the midtroposphere — the atmosphere between 3 and 7 miles above the earth's surface.

"In essence, we're videotaping the atmosphere and its constituents," Thomas Pagano, the instrument's project manager, said at a news conference in San Francisco during a meeting of the American Geophysical Union.

Carbon dioxide does not mix evenly in the troposphere, the scientists said. This allows them to track movement of the gas to see where it ends up, and predict whether oceans can continue to absorb much of it.

Carbon dioxide from factories, car travel and other human activity is believed by most scientists to be driving the warming of the planet. Levels of carbon dioxide in the air are currently approaching 390 parts per million, up from roughly 280 in the preindustrial age.

But the carbon dioxide itself only accounts for about a third of the increased trapping of heat on earth.

Using the AIRS data, Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University, looked at the El Niño cycle of warming and cooling waters in the tropical Pacific.

As expected, water vapor increased when waters were warm and fell when temperatures cooled, and the measurements fit closely with climate models previously developed by scientists.

Thus, warming from rising carbon dioxide should also lead to increased water vapor and additional warming, doubling the warming effect of the carbon dioxide.

"Water vapor is really not much of an uncertainty anymore," Dr. Dessler said.

Other heat-trapping gases like methane and ozone, also measured by AIRS, are known to contribute to global warming as well."

NYT

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: GUEST,Mr Red
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 10:59 AM

The chimney sweeps don't have brushes long enough to clean the snowcaps ................

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 10:47 AM

The scary perspective from an actual scientist.


A

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 11:54 PM

And if you look, pdq, I think you will find that in the case of many of the glaciers that are "growing" the ice indeed is covering more ground but it is *significantly* thinner. In other words, it is not behaving as glacial ice is supposed to do.

In the past, pdq, you have linked and posted material that purportedly or allegedly refutes the whole issue of unnaturally fast changes in in our polar ice. You know what? I think you are being contentious and disengenuous. I am quite sure you know better.

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: Janie
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 11:34 PM

James M. Taylor is managing editor of Environment & Climate News

From Sourcewatch:

Environment & Climate News (E&CN) is a monthly publication of the Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based corporate funded think tank. Although it describes itself as an "outreach publication for common-sense environmentalism," in fact it consistently takes positions contrary to those of most environmental organizations.
Sample headlines from E&CN's June 2005 issue exemplify its anti-environmentalist leanings:

The complete reference can be found at Sourcewatch on Environment & Climate News.

There is science. Then there is news. Then there is opinion. Then there is propoganda.

The tools and the information are out there to find out how to evaluate what one reads.



From the Sourcewatch link, also click on Heartland Institute to learn more more about the organization.

More on Sourcewatch, and its parent, Center for Media and Democracy

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: pdq
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 10:40 PM

Nature Study Debunks Kilimanjaro Glacier Myth - by James M. Taylor - Environment & Climate News

Written By: James M. Taylor
Published In: Environment & Climate News > February 2004
Publication date: 02/01/2004
Publisher: The Heartland Institute


"The icecap atop Mount Kilimanjaro," reported a 2001 New York Times article, "which for thousands of years has floated like a cool beacon over the shimmering equatorial plain of Tanzania, is retreating at such a pace that it will disappear in less than 15 years, according to new studies." The article created a media sensation with its alarmist claim and with its emphasis that global warming was surely to blame.

In truly poetic language, the Times reported, "The vanishing of the seemingly perpetual snows of Kilimanjaro that inspired Ernest Hemingway, echoed by similar trends on icecapped peaks from Peru to Tibet, is one of the clearest signs that a global warming in the last 50 years appears to have exceeded typical climate shifts."

Global warming, however, is not to blame for the retreating Kilimanjaro ice cap, according to a November 24, 2003, article published in Nature magazine.


Deforestation "More Likely Culprit"

According to Nature's Betsy Mason, "Although it's tempting to blame the (Kilimanjaro) ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit."

Forests at the base of Kilimanjaro have been steadily disappearing for decades. "Without the forests' humidity," Mason reports, "previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine."

"Why has [the Kilimanjaro ice cap] been melting so relentlessly?" asked climatologist John Daly. "The greenhouse industry say 'global warming,' but then they would say that, wouldn't they?

"The only problem with that knee-jerk explanation is that there has been no measurable atmospheric warming in the region of Kilimanjaro," noted Daly. "Satellites have been measuring temperature since 1979 in the free troposphere between 1,000 and 8,000 meters altitude, and they show no tropospheric warming in that area. None."

According to Daly, human-induced global warming should not have been named the primary culprit, even before a connection to deforestation was made.

Said Daly, "Kilimanjaro is above most of the weather and is thus exposed to the equatorial sun, a sun that has been hotter during the twentieth century than at any time since the medieval period. That would be a sufficient explanation in itself for the depletion of the ice cap."

"The advance/buildup or retreat/melting of glacial ice is often interpreted as a sign of climate change," reports the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (http://www.co2science.org). "Climate alarmists have already rendered their verdict: There has been a massive and widespread retreat of glaciers over the past century, which they predict will only intensify under continued CO2-induced global warming. This assessment, however, may be a bit premature."

According to the Center, "Following the peak of Little Ice Age coldness, it should come as no surprise that many records indicate widespread glacial retreat, as temperatures began to rise in the mid- to late-1800s and many glaciers returned to positions characteristic of pre-Little Ice Age times.


Some Glaciers Shrinking, Others Growing

"What people may find surprising, however, is that in many instances the rate of glacier retreat has not increased over the past 70 years; and in some cases glacier mass balance has actually increased, all during a time when the atmosphere experienced the bulk of the increase in its CO2 content."

A study published in Progress in Physical Geography (Braithwaite, R.J., 26: 76-95 (2002)), analyzed mass balance measurements of 246 glaciers from around the world between 1946 and 1995. According to the study's author, "there are several regions with highly negative mass balances in agreement with a public perception of 'the glaciers are melting,' but there are also regions with positive balances."

Within Europe, for example, "Alpine glaciers are generally shrinking, Scandinavian glaciers are growing, and glaciers in the Caucasus are close to equilibrium for 1980-95," according to Braithwaite. Significantly, regarding this most recent 15-year period of time, Braithwaite noted "there is no obvious common or global trend of increasing glacier melt in recent years."

Daly predicts that because of mountain base deforestation, and all other things being equal, "What happens on Kilimanjaro will also be happening on countless mountains all over the world where forests on lower slopes have been replaced by open pasture.

"Blaming it all on 'global warming' was just too glib and convenient for an industry desperate to convince a skeptical public that the end of the world was nigh," said Daly. "With a more down-to-earth cause like this identified, other 'global-warming-did-it' phenomena should be looked at again for simple local causes like this."


"Not a Thermometer"

"The Kilimanjaro ice cap is not a thermometer," said S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia and president of the nonprofit Science & Environmental Policy Project in Arlington, Virginia. "It may well be melting, but this is simply a delayed consequence of a natural climate warming during the early part of the twentieth century. Moreover, it will continue to melt as long as the climate doesn't return to the temperatures of the Little Ice Age of past centuries."

Added Singer, "The National Academy of Sciences published a report (in 2000) that defines the geographic regions of warming and cooling during the last 20 years. Surface measurements of East Africa show no warming trend. Weather satellites show a pronounced cooling trend of the atmosphere there. No one has questioned these data."

"One of the endlessly fascinating aspects of modern journalism is the absolute lack of critical insight tendered towards environmental scares," said Pat Michaels, research professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia and a past president of the American Association of State Climatologists. "A cursory inspection of (Kilimanjaro) data shows that Kilimanjaro's glaciers would be dying even if Homo sapiens were still just hanging around the trees of the Rift Valley, a few hundred miles to the West.

"From 1953 through 1976, 21 percent of the original (ice cap) area was uncovered. This was during a period of global cooling--yes, cooling--of 0.13º F," said Michaels. "Around Kilimanjaro, satellite data show a cooling of 0.40º F since 1979 Still, Kilimanjaro's glaciers continued to shrink."

Added Michaels, "Kilimanjaro turns out to be just another snow job, precipitated by a journalistic community that has lost its desire for critical factual investigation when it comes to our globe's environment."

James M. Taylor is managing editor of Environment & Climate News.

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 10:20 PM

Here are a couple of astonishing views

The Difference in Seven Years

"The snow cap that formed 11,000 years ago shrank by 80 percent during the past century. The Landsat satellite captured the images of Kilimanjaro shown above on February 17 1993 (upper) and February 21 2000 (lower)."

Black soot discussion is nothing new. Here is an article from April 2003

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: bubblyrat
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 07:47 AM

Far Canal !

Subject: RE: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: gnu
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 05:23 AM

Gosh!

Subject: BS: More GW Things to Worry about
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 01:05 AM

I thought there'd be an applicable thread to tack this post onto but I didn't find one. So here goes:

Black Soot Melting Himalyan Snows