The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > It's no global warming storm in a tea cup! > Comments

It's no global warming storm in a tea cup! : Comments

By Gareth Walton, published 4/2/2005

Gareth Walton argues that we need to act now to halt global warming.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
You can't blame Gareth for spewing forth his pseudo-science rhetoric. Without the global warming monster he'd be back to waiting tables while he completed his 8th uni degree.
Posted by bozzie, Friday, 4 February 2005 11:52:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gareth - What are the direct and indirect subsidies to fossil fuels? Why have they been implemented and what are their impacts?
Posted by ericc, Friday, 4 February 2005 12:09:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Of course there are scientists who disagree and are quite reputable..

Here is a recent paper on how human influences have delayed or even stopped an ice age, and that if we had stopped all the emissions etc, we would not be in a great position right now...

It's never so straight forward is it?

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_aset=B-WA-A-W-A-MsSAYZW-UUA-AAUYDAEAUW-AAUZWEEEUW-YZVCUWEYZ-A-U&_rdoc=1&_fmt=full&_udi=B6VBC-4DTK6RV-1&_coverDate=01%2F01%2F2005&_cdi=5923&_orig=search&_st=13&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000043031&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=777686&md5=b816c76f923052b0cd8cf28324d2f9dd

News article on paper for those without oodles of spare time required to read the full paper: http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/world/Full_Story/did-sgsAtWaxCKF0EsgTbBP-2fa91M.asp
Posted by Grey, Friday, 4 February 2005 12:49:47 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As Michael Crichton has pointed out Greenpeace is in the business of augmenting Public fears. I would possible take their Greenhouse rants more seriously if that organization changed its views towards nuclear power generation. After all I understand that the founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore is no longer opposed to the nuclear option.

None-the-less there is an argument that will allow Greenpeace to retain both its opposition to nuclear power and its dire warnings re climate change. The historical records and records of tree rings and ice cores etc all point to the reality of climate changes. Ice ages followed by warm spells.

The questions are:

1. Is climate change determined by other forces then atmospheric CO2
2. What percentage of atmospheric CO2 is derived from non-human sources?
3. What evidence is there that curbing human CO2 emission will reverse global warming?
4. How sure are we of global warming? Recent reports from N. America and Europe seem to suggest a mini ice age
Posted by anti-green, Friday, 4 February 2005 1:47:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A few qualifiers first before I start my rant

I am not an industry hack (whatever that is)
I have never worked for an oil company (although i do use petrol often to drive my kid to pre-school and to get to work that sort of thing.
I am not part of a right-wing think tank
I don't love George Bush
I have studied environmental science
I have studied the politics of the green movement

OK.

Global warming is going to have more positive benefits than it will negative ones, if it is occurring at all.
Warmer temperatures mean longer growing seasons, less people dying of the cold, less extreme weather not more.
Computer models used by the IPCC are sketchy at best given the unknowns.
Even so, the models predict extremely wide ranging outcomes - some of the links Gareth had predicted between 1-11 degrees warming.
The average temperature of the earth is around 15 degrees so these predictions range from a six to a 70 per cent change in temperature.
Warming and cooling cycles have happened throughout the 4.2 billion year history of the earth and will continue to do so.
taking a thirty year slice of climate now (which includes the heat island effect) will not give a true indication on a cycle which is 100,000 years old.
It is like watching just the final credits of a movie and assuming the whole thing was black background with white writing.
There are other problems in the world which money could be better spent and certianly better environmental projects.
As someone from the country, money would be better spent enclosing irrigation canals to stop evaporation and ensure water supplies for rural communities. water projects in other parts of the world would also be more beneficial.
Money is scarce - use it on solutions to problems we can confirm are happening.
Posted by the usual suspect, Friday, 4 February 2005 1:52:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
According to anti-green's sources, instead of global warming we are about to face a mini-ice age. And the usual suspect assures us that global warming will be a positive rather than a negative.

Both contributors might not appreciate how steady-state systems, such as our global weather system, might be tipped into catastrophe through negative feedback. Relatively "minor" perturbations resulting from initial global warming, such as the melting of the polar ice caps and tundras already occurring, could themselves produce further and worse perturbations that we cannot yet discern.

The increasing frequency of extreme weather events that we are now observing around the planet may well be the first signs that the balance of the global weather system is "wobbling" towards catastrophe. Perhaps we boil, perhaps we freeze. We just don't know, but we should be very alert if not alarmed given all the signals.

Anti-green could be partly right, in that the global warming effects that are already being observed could tip parts of the planet into a mini-ice age. I am not sure that is any consolation. But the usual suspect is probably wrong because global warming is not occurring uniformly at a predictable pace, even if we could adapt fast enough to benefit.
Posted by grace pettigrew, Friday, 4 February 2005 5:52:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy