1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

The Irony of the Bali Global Warming conference

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by TimBikes, Dec 12, 2007.

  1. TimBikes

    TimBikes New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    2,492
    245
    0
    Location:
    WA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    While participants of the latest Global Warming conference meet in Bali there is much irony in the fact that the case for anthropogenic GW just keeps getting weaker.

    In addition to the problems with the surface temperature datasets mentioned here...

    http://priuschat.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40501

    ...this new paper in the The Royal Meteorological Society's INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATOLOGY raises significant questions about the skill of GCMs (General Circulation Models) used for predicting climate change. The upshot - model predictions are falling far, far short of atmospheric observations:

    "We examine tropospheric temperature trends of 67 runs from 22 ‘Climate of the 20th Century’ model
    simulations and try to reconcile them with the best available updated observations (in the tropics during the satellite era).
    Model results and observed temperature trends are in disagreement in most of the tropical troposphere, being separated by
    more than twice the uncertainty of the model mean."

    "We have tested the proposition that greenhouse model
    simulations and trend observations can be reconciled. Our
    conclusion is that the present evidence, with the application
    of a robust statistical test, supports rejection of this
    proposition."

    "On the whole, the evidence indicates that
    model trends in the troposphere are very likely inconsistent
    with observations that indicate that, since 1979, there
    is no significant long-term amplification factor relative to
    the surface. If these results continue to be supported, then
    future projections of temperature change, as depicted in
    the present suite of climate models, are likely too high."

    See:
    The Royal Meteorological Society's Website for the paper titled "A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model
    predictions" here:
    http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/117857349/ABSTRACT

    or the full paper here:

    http://icecap.us/images/uploads/DOUGLASPAPER.pdf
     
  2. Washington1788

    Washington1788 One of the "Deniers"

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    197
    0
    0
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    I concur!

    Although we're in the vast minority on these forums! :)
     
  3. Washington1788

    Washington1788 One of the "Deniers"

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    197
    0
    0
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    I concur.

    However, I think we are in the vast minority for this issue! :)
     
  4. TooFolkGR

    TooFolkGR New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    34
    0
    0
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    There are legitimate criticisms of current Global Warming models, and I think it would be foolish to say once and for all we've got it all figured out and here are the numbers.

    That said, the study you posted would look a lot more credible to me if it didn't have Fred Singer's name on it. Too much "Pretend-Science for Hire" in his CV for my tastes.
     
  5. richard schumacher

    richard schumacher shortbus driver

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    7,663
    1,041
    0
    Location:
    United States
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    When you're already warm and you throw another blanket on the bed it may be hard to predict whether your crotch or your armpits will start sweating first, but you can be certain that you're going to be too hot. Same deal with global warming: the models have a devil of a time with the details but the data are already unambiguous.
     
  6. FL_Prius_Driver

    FL_Prius_Driver Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    4,319
    1,527
    0
    Location:
    Tampa Bay
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    I
    Why is "Global Warming" the "doom" for one extreme and "non-existent" for the other extreme? Always sidestepped in both sides is CO2 pollution. There is not much to debate that this is being generated by human activity. Yet all discussions leave this common area for the extremes. Why?
     
  7. amped

    amped Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    3,892
    694
    0
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge, Oregon
    Vehicle:
    Other Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    Maybe because CO2 isn't considered a pollutant by many reasonable people, which by definition excludes the majority of lawyers in black robes on the US Supreme Court.
     
  8. patsparks

    patsparks An Aussie perspective

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    10,664
    567
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide South Australia
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    I'm going to say something stupid,
    Forget global climate change.

    Now what about depletion of resources, increasing CO2 levels displace oxygen in the atmosphere. No one is saying these things don't exist. We can act on it to minimise our impact on the earth or we can just throw our hands in the air and say f*** our kids and their kids, they will just have to put up with our mess. The people in the most affluent countries have the biggest impact, that's us.
     
  9. F8L

    F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    19,011
    4,081
    50
    Location:
    Grass Valley, CA.
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    Studies in oceanography would lead me to believe otherwise. This also goes for soils and freshwater systems. My hope is there is some method (or collection of) of breaking the positive feedback loop before it gets out of hand and proves even more deleterious for lifeforms (including us) than it does now. I do not think it will happen quickly enough. The oceans may be close to saturation and become a net carbon source rather than a net sink but we need to do more studies to be sure. What's frightening is that no one thought it would reach that point so quickly.

    It would be wonderful if more people studied the other effects of massive CO2 release into the global carbon cycle. Here is a good place to start.

    The Ocean and the Carbon Cycle

    Since many of you cannot read the scientific journals I'll post the RealClimate article that talk about them and cites the sources for those who do have access. Is the ocean carbon sink sinking? I've read (have)three of the four papers David cited in that article.
     
  10. F8L

    F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    19,011
    4,081
    50
    Location:
    Grass Valley, CA.
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    That is not stupid Pat. In fact that is what I've been telling people in a round-about way. You don't have to believe in global warming, global cooling, or global dimming to see the other effects of anthropogenic pollution and excess emissions. You are on the right track IMO. If contrarians want to dig in their heals and refuse to believe that "global warming" is occuring then that is fine, if they then decide to also dismiss the other effects of fossil fuel burning and deforestation then there is a problem. A problem with their grasp on reality. :)
     
  11. patsparks

    patsparks An Aussie perspective

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    10,664
    567
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide South Australia
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    The something stupid was: - "Forget global climate change."
    I think to do so would be very stupid.
     
  12. F8L

    F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    19,011
    4,081
    50
    Location:
    Grass Valley, CA.
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    You know I agree with you. I am just saying that there are other effects to fossil fuel use than just climate change and that more people will likely be swayed to curb their use if they understood those effects. :)
     
  13. patsparks

    patsparks An Aussie perspective

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    10,664
    567
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide South Australia
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    OK, now I follow.
    For a second there I thought you were a climate change skeptic all of a sudden.
    I should have read all of your post. I'm not very bright this late at night.
     
  14. Ichabod

    Ichabod Artist In Residence

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    1,794
    19
    0
    Location:
    Newton, MA
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    Even if you forget about pollution and all the problems associated, there's still global conflict over energy. It should be obvious to ANYONE with half a brain that we shouldn't depend on the middle-east, or anyone else for our energy resources.

    Energy independence for all nations would reduce global conflict. Easier said than done, but it won't happen if nobody decides it needs to. So no, there's no irony in addressing problems that affect people all around the world. The irony is that anyone would say it's not something we need to do.
     
  15. desynch

    desynch Die-Hard Conservative

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2007
    607
    2
    0
    Location:
    Lakehouse
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    If the liberals wouldn't freak at the idea of drilling ANWR maybe we wouldn't be so reliant upon middle eastern oil.
     
  16. DaveinOlyWA

    DaveinOlyWA 3rd Time was Solariffic!!

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    15,140
    611
    0
    Location:
    South Puget Sound, WA
    Vehicle:
    2013 Nissan LEAF
    Model:
    Persona
    wow!!! a GW thread that actually addresses the fact all year suntans is not the only thing we have to worry about...

    always wondered why financing middle east countries to act on their "ideologies" never seemed to be important..

    undermining our economy

    destroying our environment

    lowering our quality of life when forced to pay more for comfort and basic needs

    taking employment dollars out of america's pocket and shipping it elsewhere
    (ever think of how many employees would be needed if the government fully backed alternative energy with tax credits, low interest loans and deferments??)

    hugh advantages of localized power sources like water, wind, and solar... brings jobs to the heartland. someone has to build and maintain them...
    everyone complains about walmart (ooops!! wrong thread) taking jobs away from americans... now we get some back and enjoy a HUGE benefit in return
     
  17. FL_Prius_Driver

    FL_Prius_Driver Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    4,319
    1,527
    0
    Location:
    Tampa Bay
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    I
    One of the very core reasons for focusing on CO2 pollution (vs. GW) is that burning all the world's oil is a problem, but of 'debatable' consequences for many right now. But then shifting to coal and burning all the world's coal makes the oil contribution insignificant....really, really insignificant...and conversely make any effect of CO2 pollution vastly, vastly greater.

    It's only when the layman understands how much coal needs to be burned to maintain the energy appetite of the world, that the GW issue becomes secondary.
     
  18. madler

    madler Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    289
    13
    0
    Location:
    Pasadena, California
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    If you forget about the exhaust, then there is a very easy, as well as cost effective solution to energy independence. Coal. We have enough in the US to last for hundreds of years.

    Of course, it makes that other little problem a lot worse.
     
  19. F8L

    F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    19,011
    4,081
    50
    Location:
    Grass Valley, CA.
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    If people wild actually start giving a %$#@ and conserve we wouldn't need to in the first place. I'm sorry but I do not relish the idea of destroying fragile ecosystems just so some jackarse can continue to drive his Excursion back and forth to work while thumbing his nose at those who do conserve. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is not the answer here.
     
  20. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    I suspect the people who deny anthropic global warming are the same people who deny evolution. Both groups use the same sort of tactics: Invent false data, and apply bogus reasoning to real data. The only difference is the GW deniers don't claim the Bible as their source of information.