|
Post by louise on Mar 2, 2011 11:28:48 GMT 1
But the Earth isn't getting warmer, louise. Don't you get disheartened pedalling this tripe. That may be your opinion. I form my own by reading the science publications (rather than the Telegraph or the Guardian). It doesn't matter how often you state AGW is dead or even if the media and blogs parrot this statement too - the world will continue to become warmer. It's a matter of physics.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Mar 2, 2011 11:55:24 GMT 1
The science has been debunked
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 2, 2011 11:56:34 GMT 1
"the world will continue to become warmer" but the important question is why.
I may well become a little warmer for a little while, and who knows why, Louise, but nothing is more certain in climatological prediction than that it will descend into another ice-age. Or do you believe that we are at the end of our cyclical climatic history?
That would take some arguing - and by a better brain than yours, I'm afraid, Louise.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Mar 2, 2011 14:20:50 GMT 1
A couple of degrees warmer would be excellent. Could you try to imagine, louise, if it were a couple of degrees colder? The shortened growing season, long periods of severe snow, reduced sea temperature..... Do you have the tools to imagine how this would be so much worse than a little extra, life giving, warmth? Do you know that most humans live in temperate regions which would be devastated by colder conditions? Or are you just a co2 fetishist with a malignant, socialist outlook?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 2, 2011 14:48:13 GMT 1
We cannot stop "warmer" and we cannot stop "colder". We can only adapt - and we are VERY good at that these days.
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Mar 2, 2011 17:37:54 GMT 1
We cannot stop "warmer" and we cannot stop "colder". We can only adapt - and we are VERY good at that these days. Indeed, but according to the scientists it will be the 'knock-on' effects of global warming that will cause problems. Insects, for example, will be more able to occupy niches not previously available to them which in turn could prove damaging to the surrounding flora. I think the basic message is that too much global warming will upset the current balance of things to the extent of making life very problematical for human beings as well as other species.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Mar 2, 2011 17:45:39 GMT 1
You've been reading the Guardian again, haven't you abacus. Oh dear.
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Mar 2, 2011 18:00:18 GMT 1
You've been reading the Guardian again, haven't you abacus. Oh dear. Well, I prefer to listen to people like David Attenborough. Now you're not going to tell me he's prejudiced, are you? The most trustworthy man in broadcasting!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 2, 2011 18:05:19 GMT 1
Abacus why is it only pests that will thrive and cuddly mammals that will go extinct because of warming? Perhaps vice versa could also happen? Have a read of this article and more importantly the comments which follow. Excellent, well-informed discussion. Pining away about bugs and global warmingPosted on February 28, 2011 by Anthony Watts Cause and effect, or correlation not causation? wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/28/pining-away-about-bugs-and-global-warming/
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Mar 2, 2011 19:14:42 GMT 1
You've been reading the Guardian again, haven't you abacus. Oh dear. Well, I prefer to listen to people like David Attenborough. Now you're not going to tell me he's prejudiced, are you? The most trustworthy man in broadcasting! He is absolutely prejudiced.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 2, 2011 20:51:49 GMT 1
He's a very, very nice man, is our David - National Treasure. But he is wrong if he believes "global" warming is the same as Anthropogenic Global Warming.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 5, 2011 9:44:53 GMT 1
No ice here ... move along please Posted by Richard Saturday, March 05, 2011 lh4.googleusercontent.com/-ateMevFzj4A/TXF4s1NnVLI/AAAAAAAAS6I/403ckdgGk1o/s1600/Ice-challenges.jpg[/img] When your former prime minister goes public and declares that the government should buy a new icebreaker, then you're not talking about Britain – yet. This is former prime minister and industrialist Tiit Vähi, who comes from Estonia. He believes that the state should urgently order a new icebreaker, "Instead of spending money on buying icebreaking services." At the moment, Estonia has two icebreakers, the Tarmo (pictured below) and Zeus, but "difficult ice conditions" in the Gulf of Finland are forcing the Maritime Administration to look for a third. The Gulf of Finland is covered by thick ice from the Estonian mainland to Osmussaar, making it possible for only large ships to reach Muuga Harbour. Recently, eight vessels were icebound near Kunda and Sillamäe. The situation has been no different on the Gulf of Riga, where the port authority is working its icebreaker Varma non-stop, and still needs help. Chaotic conditions have been reported. The Baltic is no stranger to freezing conditions, but recently the ice has expanded into the central part of the sea, and in some regions there is simply not enough icebreaking capacity. Already, the Estonian government has had to allocate €3 million extra for icebreaking, and since 14 February, its two icebreakers, have been working in the vicinity of the northern Estonian ports, yet as the ice conditions are getting more complicated. The need for reinforcements is inevitable, the Administration says. Very recently, it was reported that, following another extended stretch of sub-zero temperatures, ice coverage on the Baltic Sea was greater than it had been for nearly a quarter century. About 100,000 square miles of the Baltic Sea were covered in ice. The last time so much of the Baltic had frozen was the winter of 1986-87, when ice covered nearly 150,000 square miles of the sea's surface. But, what is so much fun here is that, long term-investment is being considered necessary, for what is obviously been seen as an ongoing problem, and the ice is expected to freeze over even more than 1987. Yet EU funded researchers, with €22 million of research grants, are claiming that "the sea surface temperature of the Baltic Sea was warmer in the past". Professor Aarno Kotilainen at the Geological Survey of Finland says: "Some estimates suggest that climate change in the Baltic Sea area causes sea surface temperatures to rise, increased winds and shortened ice-cover season." Perhaps he should be looking out the window a little more often. Despite this, Estonia economics minister Juhan Parts thinks a new icebreaker is needed. He says the situation is quite worrying. Severe ice conditions are expected to last another three to four weeks and there is only one reserve vessel available for emergencies. Arrangements to use it depend on the needs of Finland and Sweden. That makes spending the €22 million on climate change research a real shame. That would have been a useful down-payment on a new icebreaker ... especially as the meteorologists are warning that ice coverage on the Baltic could expand further in the coming days, possibly setting a new record. But then, what do they know? The proper, EU scientists are working from computer models, and they beat icebreakers any day - there is no ice ... move along please. eureferendum.blogspot.com/2011/03/no-ice-here-move-along-please.html--------- Last Winter ice-breakers were needed even in the southern Baltic and it was possible to walk from Denmark to Sweden over the ice. Many ships were trapped in the ice then, if you remember.
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Mar 5, 2011 20:16:49 GMT 1
Well, I prefer to listen to people like David Attenborough. Now you're not going to tell me he's prejudiced, are you? The most trustworthy man in broadcasting! He is absolutely prejudiced. Oh come on, rsmith! Why would you think that?
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Mar 5, 2011 20:59:16 GMT 1
Because he has whole-heartedly jumped on the CAGW bandwagon.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 21, 2011 18:29:27 GMT 1
|
|