State of Fear is brilliant
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 09:09:51 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate
  Book Reviews and Discussion (Moderator: Torie)
  State of Fear is brilliant
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: State of Fear is brilliant  (Read 8723 times)
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,777


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: June 14, 2006, 01:53:52 PM »

Here is an example of something that should be considered.  The first chart is the deperature and CO2 levels for the last about 18,000 years.



The second is sea level increases:
   

CO2 was increasing from 18,000 BP until about 13,500; then it stopped until 11,500.  What happened?  Both sea level and temperature began to rise prior to CO2 level rising (for about 1000 years).  Then all three jumped.

Then what happened?  Sea level rose, temperature fluctuated, but stayed in the same range, and CO2 decreased.  Then temperatures peaked, to 2 degrees C above the baseline, just before 8,000 BP.  CO2 levels dropped slightly, sea level continued to increase.

I'm sorry, but this isn't exactly a strong correlation.  There has to be some mechanism(s) that we don't understand.

The biggest problem is that typical observable effects like sea level rise and hurricane frequency have no demonstrated correlation to the CO2 rise. The strongest correlation is between human activity and the CO2 rise of the last century, a rise more rapid than any other in the last 20,000 years. A secondard correlation exists between CO2 rise and temperature increase, but that includes many factors. The paper I cited earlier troes to esblish the strength of that correlation and concludes that the human-induced CO2 increase does correlate with part of the global temperature rise.

Effects like sea-level rise could be expected to take many centuries to exhibit themselves after a temperature increase. Note that the sea-level increase from 11,000 to 8,000 years ago continued long after temperatures had more generally leveled off. Any future sea-level increase in response to a current temperature rise would also develop over a similar period of time.
Logged
WoosterLibertarian
TheLoneLiberal
Rookie
**
Posts: 198


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: June 14, 2006, 01:59:56 PM »

If you read michael crichton's author note, he says that he believes that global warming exists and that it is mainly a human problem. Also, more than half of his cites say that global warming exists and that it is a himan problem. So i dont really see whay people say this is a book that once you read, you cant believe in global warming because of all of its "facts".
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2006, 06:01:17 PM »

If you read michael crichton's author note, he says that he believes that global warming exists and that it is mainly a human problem. Also, more than half of his cites say that global warming exists and that it is a himan problem. So i dont really see whay people say this is a book that once you read, you cant believe in global warming because of all of its "facts".

The authors of these studies will claim to believe in global warming.  But their evidence contradicts their conclusions.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: June 25, 2006, 08:06:27 PM »

If you read michael crichton's author note, he says that he believes that global warming exists and that it is mainly a human problem. Also, more than half of his cites say that global warming exists and that it is a himan problem. So i dont really see whay people say this is a book that once you read, you cant believe in global warming because of all of its "facts".

This is what he said, specifically:

"I suspect that part of the observed surface warming will ultimately be attributed to human activity.  I suspect that the principal human effect will come from land use, and that the atmospheric component will be minor  (p. 626)."

Now, that's a lot different than the claims being made so frequently about global warming, like CO2 being the "main" greenhouse gas.  He does not even believe it's atmospheric.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.032 seconds with 13 queries.