I would like to see the IPCC study that breaks down the % of greenhouse gases created by man and the % created by the earth itself. Frozen tundra has trapped huge amounts of CO2 and methane under the ice for millenia. Massive amounts of methane are emitted by the earth naturally and from the ocean depths. Methane is a more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2.dsm wrote:Another 0.2 cents worth on this topic ...
> Who are the IPCC ?
- http://www.ipcc.ch/
> What are the key point(s) that the IPCC is making ...
- Humans are responsible for a massive increase in CO2 in the atmosphere which based on (the now discredited) 'hockey stick' calculations of a pair of US scientist, was going to cause a massive and rapid global warming that would melt the polar caps, melt glaciers (such as in the Himalayas), raise the oceans & flood low lying islands.
- That we humans can reverse this. One solution being by handing over billions of $s in compensation to third world countries (as demanded by them at Copenhagen)
- That all countries should raise taxes to pay for more efficient energy. One tax being the carbon credits tax.
> I have no trouble believing in global warming (and global cooling followed by warming followed by cooling .... been happening for at least 400Million of the past 650 million years)
> The worlds oceans in historically recent times (when humans were reasonably well established) were at least 70 feet higher than they are to day. This was est to be 14,200 Years ago. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 072043.htm
> Was global warming the cause ? - much evidence says so !
> Were humans responsible for the 70 ft ocean rise 14,200 years ago ? - no !
> Are we in a period of Global warming now ? - some scientists are sure of it, others think we are on the edge of a significant period of cooling (Solar cycle 24)
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009 ... iction.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle
http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2008 ... ears-time/ <<<=== A good read
> Is global warming shown to be influenced by human activity ? - this is easy to believe but not necessarily proven beyond doubt !. There are many factors affecting global climate fluctuations.
> Is human triggered CO2 the 'hockey stick' trigger for a massive & rapid global warming ? - The IPCC's 'hockey stick' report is so discredited it now has few legs (google IPCC Hockey Stick)
> Is the IPCC a totally impartial scientific body ? - Nope it is a political body set up as part of the UN and is selectively using scientific reports & data to make political points!
> Is the point that the IPCC is making something we really should be getting excited about ? - well we can't ignore the issues nor can we be confident they have all the facts too many of their most extreme claims have been discredited.
> Should we humans be doing anything about the way we use fossilized energy & cut down forests ? - absolutely, and that is the heart of one practical message from the IPCC and perhaps the best good they will achieve, but, the IPCC is on thin ice if their conferences insist we developed nations need to pay billions of dollars to under-developed nations to compensate them for the perception that we developed nations are solely responsible for the current global warming. That remains open to conjecture. Too many of those under-developed nations would LOVE to be given $billions no matter what the reason or excuse & so it is not at all surprising that they would want to see developed nations blamed for global warming and that they would use their extensive voting power at the conferences to swing things their way.
*******************************
I am preparing for a future IPCC report that warns us of how developed nations are solely responsible for the global cooling that has suddenly occurred when it comes (all memories of the great global warming scare having faded away), as their political objectives won't change no matter what the current scare is
DSM
Another interesting study would be the impact that solar activity has on the earths temperature.
My concern with the scientific community is that the controversy created by a "climate change" scare is self-serving. If they create a panic or crisis then they can lobby the earths governments for funding. Their livelihood is dependent on creating crisis. In the 1950s, global cooling was feared by the scientific community as pollution was blocking the suns warming rays. (http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm) In the 1970s the ozone layer was disappearing and soon everyone would get skin cancer.
I am not disputing global climate change or saying that we should pollute the earth by not being responsible, what I am questioning is the cause of the change and the scale that can be attributed to mankind. I also dont appreciate that politicians are using the issue to try to change my behavior by taxing it.
