Humans ARE responsible for GW pt 2

Clippo · 28-04-2008, 07:20 PM

Quote:

There is little doubt that humanity is responsible for the rapid rise in carbon dioxide levels. The rise in temperatures that has accompanied our fossil fuel addiction seem too much of a coincidence to be just chance. Most people now agree that our actions are having an effect on Earth's climate.

Climate change: the facts | Science | The Guardian

The rest of it is simple enough for most of you sceptics here to understand. (just in case you find the science a bit difficult)

(logging off now so you've plenty of time to read & inwardly digest)

mkpdavies · 28-04-2008, 07:32 PM

Thank you brother. I'm always grateful for your Guardian links! They truly are the guardian of humanity!

mkpdavies · 28-04-2008, 07:34 PM

To save fellow brothers the hassle, here is the most undeniable proof yet. If this doesn't scare the bejesus out of the loony Libertarians, then I don't know what will.

What scares me most,is the way the line not only changes colour, but goes all smooth and consistent. If that isn't proof of mans hand, I don't know what is!

It also seems that water vapour has been entirely wiped out! More proof!

Poptech · 28-04-2008, 07:38 PM

Well then Clippo you should read the Skeptic Resource:

"More informed respondents both feel less personally responsible for global warming, and also show less concern for global warming" - 2008 Texas A&M University Study

Climate of Fear (Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT)
The Case for Skepticism on Global Warming (Michael Crichton, A.B. Anthropology, M.D. Harvard)
Climate chaos? Don't believe it (Christopher Monckton, The Daily Telegraph, UK)

Guides:
A Global Warming Primer (PDF) (National Center for Policy Analysis)
A Skeptic’s Guide to Debunking Global Warming Alarmism (PDF) (US Senate Environment & Public Works Committee)
A Skeptical Layman's Guide to Anthropogenic Global Warming (PDF) (Climate Skeptic)
Global Warming FAQ (PDF) (Competitive Enterprise Institute)

Myths:
Fallacies about Global Warming (Science & Public Policy Institute)
Global Warming Myths (Friends of Science)
Green Myths On Global Warming - Debunked (The Association of British Drivers, UK)
Heartland President Debunks Global Warming Myths (The Heartland Institute)
Myths and Facts About the Environment (National Center for Public Policy Research)
Myths of Global Warming (National Center for Policy Analysis)
The Global Warming Myth? (John Stossel, ABC News)
Top 10 Environmental Myths (PDF) (U.S. Chamber of Commerce)
Top 10 'Global-Warming' Myths (Human Events)

Papers:
Apocalypse cancelled (PDF) (Christopher Monckton, Former Policy Advisor for British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher)
Climate Science: Climate Change and Its Impacts (PDF) (David R. Legates, Ph.D. Climatology)
CO2: The Greatest Scientific Scandal of Our Time (PDF) (Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D. Ph.D. D.Sc.)
Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (PDF) (Arthur Robinson, Ph.D. Chemistry)
Is the Sky Really Falling? A Review of Recent Global Warming Scare Stories (PDF) (Patrick J. Michaels, Ph.D. Ecological Climatology)
Is There a Basis for Global Warming Alarm? (Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT)
Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate (PDF) (S. Fred Singer, Ph.D. Physics, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia)
The Global Warming Folly (Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc.)
The Myth of Dangerous Human Caused Climate Change (PDF) (Robert (Bob) M. Carter, B.Sc. Geology, Ph.D. Paleontology)
The Nature of Arguments for Anthropogenic Global Warming (PDF) (Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT)

g hall · 29-04-2008, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poptech

Well then Clippo you should read the Skeptic Resource:

He did It's NOT peer reviewed

Akria · 29-04-2008, 03:48 PM

Poptech, I don't have time to read all of your links at the moment (rest assured I will; I know how you seem to like debating, as well as spamming links

) but you do realise how disingenuous Monckton's 'battle of the graphs' is and has been for as long as it's been around?
The graphs cover different time periods and different areas of the globe and even use different scales on both the x and y axes.

Poptech · 29-04-2008, 03:59 PM

I really do enjoy providing overwhelming evidence for my position, alarmists call this spamming.

You do realize how discredited the top graph is?

Akria · 29-04-2008, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poptech

I really do enjoy providing overwhelming evidence for my position, alarmists call this spamming.

You do realize how discredited the top graph is?

You mean the MBH?

The method of statistical analysis used to produce it was flawed, yes, but the conclusions - that the twentieth century's temperature rise is unprecedented in the past millennium at least - was ruled to be broadly accurate.

And it is supported by several other papers. Though I know you dislike Wiki, I would like to thank some enterprising Wikipedian for compiling these datasets and plotting them, thus saving me the bother of having to:

Akria · 29-04-2008, 04:12 PM

The sources, BTW:

Quote:

The reconstructions used, in order from oldest to most recent publication are:

1. (dark blue 1000-1991): P.D. Jones, K.R. Briffa, T.P. Barnett, and S.F.B. Tett (1998). High-resolution Palaeoclimatic Records for the last Millennium: Interpretation, Integration and Comparison with General Circulation Model Control-run Temperatures, The Holocene, 8: 455-471.
2. (blue 1000-1980): M.E. Mann, R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes (1999). Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations, Geophysical Research Letters, 26(6): 759-762.
3. (light blue 1000-1965): Crowley and Lowery (2000). Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstruction, Ambio, 29: 51-54. Modified as published in Crowley (2000). Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years, Science, 289: 270-277.
4. (lightest blue 1402-1960): K.R. Briffa, T.J. Osborn, F.H. Schweingruber, I.C. Harris, P.D. Jones, S.G. Shiyatov, S.G. and E.A. Vaganov (2001). Low-frequency temperature variations from a northern tree-ring density network, J. Geophys. Res., 106: 2929-2941.
5. (light green 831-1992): J. Esper, E.R. Cook, and F.H. Schweingruber (2002). Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability, Science, 295(5563): 2250-2253.
6. (yellow 200-1980): M.E. Mann and P.D. Jones (2003). Global Surface Temperatures over the Past Two Millennia, Geophysical Research Letters, 30(15): 1820. DOI:10.1029/2003GL017814.
7. (orange 200-1995): P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). Climate Over Past Millennia, Reviews of Geophysics, 42: RG2002. DOI:10.1029/2003RG000143
8. (red-orange 1500-1980): S. Huang (2004). Merging Information from Different Resources for New Insights into Climate Change in the Past and Future, Geophys. Res Lett., 31: L13205. DOI:10.1029/2004GL019781
9. (red 1-1979): A. Moberg, D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data, Nature, 443: 613-617. DOI:10.1038/nature03265
10. (dark red 1600-1990): J.H. Oerlemans (2005). Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records, Science, 308: 675-677. DOI:10.1126/science.1107046

Poptech · 29-04-2008, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akria

You mean the MBH?

The method of statistical analysis used to produce it was flawed, yes, but the conclusions - that the twentieth century's temperature rise is unprecedented in the past millennium at least - was ruled to be broadly accurate.

WRONG! The report said the following:

"It can be said with a high level of confidence that global mean surface temperature was higher during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period during the preceding four centuries."

No kidding since this goes back to the little ice age. They made no such conclusions about the MWP.

Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years (PDF) (National Academy of Sciences, 2006)

Quote:

Originally Posted by National Academy of Sciences

Even less confidence can be placed in the original conclusions by Mann et al. (1999) that "the 1990s are likely the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year, in at least a millennium" [...]

Prior to about 1600, ...periods of medieval warmth are seen in a number of diverse records, including historical information from Europe and Asia; cave deposits; marine and lake sediments; and ice cores from Greenland, Ellesmere Island, Tibet, and the equatorial Andes. [...]

Using proxies sensitive to hydrologic variables (including moisture-sensitive trees...) to take advantage of observed correlations with surface temperature could lead to problems [...]

For tree ring chronologies, the process of removing biological trends from ringwidth data potentially obscures information on long-term changes in climate. [...]

Large-scale surface temperature reconstructions yield a generally consistent picture of temperature trends during the preceding millennium, including relatively warm conditions centered around A.D. 1000 (identified by some as the “Medieval Warm Period”) and a relatively cold period (or “Little Ice Age”) centered around 1700. The existence and extent of a Little Ice Age from roughly 1500 to 1850 is supported by a wide variety of evidence including ice cores, tree rings, borehole temperatures, glacier length records, and historical documents. Evidence for regional warmth during medieval times can be found in a diverse ...set of records including ice cores, tree rings, marine sediments, and historical sources from Europe and Asia

Von Storch, Zorita and Gonzalez-Raucen statement on the NAS Panel Report (Climate Audit, June 22, 2006)

Quote:

We share the assessment of the NRC committee that the evidence for unprecedented warming of a single decade or even a single year in times prior to 1500, or so, is stretching the scientific evidence too far. However, this was the key claim made in the contested 1998-nature and 1999-GRL-papers by Mann et al.

With respect to methods, the committee is showing reservations concerning the methodology of Mann et al.. The committee notes explicitly on pages 91 and 111 that the method has no validation (CE) skill significantly different from zero. In the past, however, it has always been claimed that the method has a significant nonzero validation skill. Methods without a validation skill are usually considered useless. [...]

Thus, the public perception that the hockeystick as truthfully describing the temperature history was definitely false.

We find it disappointing that the method of Mann et al. was not sufficiently described in the original publication, and thus not peer-reviewed prior to publication, and that no serious efforts were made to allow independent researchers to check the performance of the methods and of the data used.

Spin can’t hide the facts concerning the hockey stick (PDF) (Stephen McIntyre, B.Sc. Mathematics, Ross McKitrick Ph.D. Economics, July 26, 2006)

28-04-2008, 07:32 PM	#2 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	Thank you brother. I'm always grateful for your Guardian links! They truly are the guardian of humanity! __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

28-04-2008, 07:34 PM	#3 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	To save fellow brothers the hassle, here is the most undeniable proof yet. If this doesn't scare the bejesus out of the loony Libertarians, then I don't know what will. What scares me most,is the way the line not only changes colour, but goes all smooth and consistent. If that isn't proof of mans hand, I don't know what is! It also seems that water vapour has been entirely wiped out! More proof! __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems Last edited by mkpdavies; 28-04-2008 at 07:37 PM.

28-04-2008, 07:38 PM	#4 (permalink)
Poptech Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 124	The AGW Skeptic Resource Well then Clippo you should read the Skeptic Resource: *"More informed respondents both feel less personally responsible for global warming, and also show less concern for global warming"* - 2008 Texas A&M University Study Climate of Fear (Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT) The Case for Skepticism on Global Warming (Michael Crichton, A.B. Anthropology, M.D. Harvard) Climate chaos? Don't believe it (Christopher Monckton, The Daily Telegraph, UK) Guides: A Global Warming Primer (PDF) (National Center for Policy Analysis) A Skeptic’s Guide to Debunking Global Warming Alarmism (PDF) (US Senate Environment & Public Works Committee) A Skeptical Layman's Guide to Anthropogenic Global Warming (PDF) (Climate Skeptic) Global Warming FAQ (PDF) (Competitive Enterprise Institute) Myths: Fallacies about Global Warming (Science & Public Policy Institute) Global Warming Myths (Friends of Science) Green Myths On Global Warming - Debunked (The Association of British Drivers, UK) Heartland President Debunks Global Warming Myths (The Heartland Institute) Myths and Facts About the Environment (National Center for Public Policy Research) Myths of Global Warming (National Center for Policy Analysis) The Global Warming Myth? (John Stossel, ABC News) Top 10 Environmental Myths (PDF) (U.S. Chamber of Commerce) Top 10 'Global-Warming' Myths (Human Events) Papers: Apocalypse cancelled (PDF) (Christopher Monckton, Former Policy Advisor for British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher) Climate Science: Climate Change and Its Impacts (PDF) (David R. Legates, Ph.D. Climatology) CO2: The Greatest Scientific Scandal of Our Time (PDF) (Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D. Ph.D. D.Sc.) Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (PDF) (Arthur Robinson, Ph.D. Chemistry) Is the Sky Really Falling? A Review of Recent Global Warming Scare Stories (PDF) (Patrick J. Michaels, Ph.D. Ecological Climatology) Is There a Basis for Global Warming Alarm? (Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT) Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate (PDF) (S. Fred Singer, Ph.D. Physics, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia) The Global Warming Folly (Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc.) The Myth of Dangerous Human Caused Climate Change (PDF) (Robert (Bob) M. Carter, B.Sc. Geology, Ph.D. Paleontology) The Nature of Arguments for Anthropogenic Global Warming (PDF) (Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT)

29-04-2008, 03:48 PM	#6 (permalink)
Akria Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Grimsby, NELincs Posts: 2,405 Party: None	Poptech, I don't have time to read all of your links at the moment (rest assured I will; I know how you seem to like debating, as well as spamming links ) but you do realise how disingenuous Monckton's 'battle of the graphs' is and has been for as long as it's been around? The graphs cover different time periods and different areas of the globe and even use different scales on both the x and y axes. __________________ http://real-democracy.co.uk \| Admin and proud The commonality of mankind: If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

29-04-2008, 03:59 PM	#7 (permalink)
Poptech Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 124	I really do enjoy providing overwhelming evidence for my position, alarmists call this spamming. You do realize how discredited the top graph is?