gobal warming

Unknown · May 2007

Been out riding today cold and wet
gobal warming whats that all about.
today i was cold its nearly june for christs sake ********
colinw

Unknown · May 2007

I know it was horrid almost as cold as winter. brrrrrrrrrrrrrrr [:(]

Dunk

Me
My Bike
Bored? Click a star to explor the web. Beware some don't work!!!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Unknown · May 2007

i reckon we are gonna enter a new ice age........ global warming has a number of effects and random / more extreme weather is one of them....

Kona Humu 29er

http://www.pinkbike.com/photo/899671/

Unknown · May 2007

That is if global warming is real it could just be natural fluctuation.

Dunk

Me
My Bike
Bored? Click a star to explor the web. Beware some don't work!!!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Seagull · May 2007

It was this cold last May. This time last year I went walking in the Lake District and it was snowing. Whilst average temps seem to be rising we have always had cold patches during summer, it all depends where the wind is coming from.

my photos NYM biking routes My full Suss My Hardtail

Vegeeta · May 2007

IMO there is a very good counteracting force that should prevent things from ever getting too hot... in theory at least.
Because if it gets warmer, more sea water will evaporate which will blah blah blah science and then we'll cool down.

<center>A red Aireal Symetech XC rear hub! Aireal EV-2 headset! A blue Aireal Symetech hub!</center>
<center>AIREAL AUSTRALIA</center>

<center>[:)] [:D] [8D] [:I] [:p] [}:)] [;)] [:o)] [B)] [8] [:(] [8)] [:0] [:(!] [xx(] [|)] [:X] [^] [V] [?]</center>

Seagull · May 2007

You're nearly there veg. More evaporation is whats needed, becuase global warming will cause more rain, which in turn will dilute the water, so more water will need to be evaporated to alter the bouyancy of the water to allow it to return back to the carribean.

my photos NYM biking routes My full Suss My Hardtail

Vegeeta · May 2007

I watched an interesting program on 'global dimming' where they said particulate matter and increased amount of water vapour caused by the enhanced greenhouse effect was preventing the rain belts in Africa from rising north each year thus causing drought and desertification.

I wouldn't be suprised if when the great pyramids were built if Egypt was all covered in lush trees and grass.

<center>A red Aireal Symetech XC rear hub! Aireal EV-2 headset! A blue Aireal Symetech hub!</center>
<center>AIREAL AUSTRALIA</center>

<center>[:)] [:D] [8D] [:I] [:p] [}:)] [;)] [:o)] [B)] [8] [:(] [8)] [:0] [:(!] [xx(] [|)] [:X] [^] [V] [?]</center>

Seagull · May 2007

There is evidence that the climates have been very different to now in recent times, in Roman times there was documents about grape growing in Northern England. I believe that humans are having an effect on the climate, but i'm not sure anyone truly knows what that effect will really come to.

my photos NYM biking routes My full Suss My Hardtail

rindlewmb · May 2007

The suns activity is at a higher state than it has ever been since records began (1610) this could perhaps account for the rise in temperature ovr the last centuary or so. The maunder minimum or little ice age (a period of low solar activity at the end of the 17th centuary) caused the temperature on earth to drop by about 3 degrees. it does not therefore seem unreasonable that the higher state of solar activity could cause the temperature on the earth to rise by 3 or four degrees. If my theories and many others suggested by the scientific cmmunity are correct the temperature of the earth should cool by around 2 degrees over the next sixty years. This evidence is based on the fact that the maxima of the solar activity cycles appear to form a sinusoidal wave which we have just reached the peak of.

I'm not saying that global warming doesn't exist but i think this information has to be tken intoconsideration.

Topshelf · May 2007

We know so little about our climate it's impossible to predict next weeks weather accurately let alone any possible human caused global warming effect.

There is no evidence whatsoever that supports global warming, the sea ice in Antartctica is actually getting thicker (it's the peninsula which is melting, they don't know why).

We're on our third atmosphere and it's perfectly normal for our climate to fluctuate massively over time. Most of the average temperature data used is wildly skewed by increasing urbanisation. Scientists haven't figured out a way to accurately weight this data so it's reliable.

Most recent data I saw on sea levels was circa 2004 and that showed an increase of a mere 3mm in the North Pacific and a drop in the South Pacific of 1mm in 10 years.

All the predicted temperature rises from 10+ years ago have proved wildly inaccurate by a factor of 300%! Why believe what they say it will be in 100 years?

www.topshelfcomponents.com

mudface · May 2007

global warming??

has everyone forgotten what british summers are like, let alone spring?

topshelf, have you spent a lot of time in the US or something?

mudface · May 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Vegeeta

I watched an interesting program on 'global dimming' where they said particulate matter and increased amount of water vapour caused by the enhanced greenhouse effect was preventing the rain belts in Africa from rising north each year thus causing drought and desertification.

I wouldn't be suprised if when the great pyramids were built if Egypt was all covered in lush trees and grass.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

i saw that too. they also mentioned that it's off-setting the effect of global warming by a couple of degrees. but basically we're all doomed.

Unknown · May 2007

We are actually at a solar minumum, one of the quietest peroids the sun has been in recent time. The next max is not until 2011

<center>GT Zaskar LE
GT Ruckus
Me!
MYSPACE<hr noshade size="1">Park Tools - help and instructions for all general bike fixes
Sheldon Brown - info about anything and everything</center>

Unknown · May 2007

Physical experiments on the thermal properties of C02 show that by itself, a raise to 450ppm will increase the mean temp of the atmosphere between 1.4 and 2.8 degrees. Thats significant. Natural cycles may increase it by more, but nevertheless our contributions are marked.

<center>GT Zaskar LE
GT Ruckus
Me!
MYSPACE<hr noshade size="1">Park Tools - help and instructions for all general bike fixes
Sheldon Brown - info about anything and everything</center>

Topshelf · May 2007

Haven't spent any time in the U.S. actually, just haven't taken what the media tells me as gospel and done some research myself, actually looking at the raw data and studies rather than just the conclusions. Could give you some interesting references if you like.

I was a committed believer in global warming until a good friend pointed me in the direction of some interesting work, not by scientists but intellectuals in various fields, based on scientific data which basically tears the whole theory apart.

There are so many variables involved in calculating our climate and the weather they can't accurately work anything out. Supersonic - what experiment are you referring to? I'd love to know what physical experiment can take into account all the variables when they are still learning about them.

As an example, according to global warming theory the upper atmosphere should be warming which then leads to an increase in lower atmosphere temperature. The upper atmosphere has shown no increase at all.

As for increasing temperatures the main ones showning rises ar ein major population centres, the vast majority of the ones in rural areas are stable or decreasing. Global temperatures are often shown to us over a 100 year period, 100 years ago in remote parts of the world you reckon their readings were accurate? Anyway, the trend is upward but the hottest period was the 1930's (around 1934-37 i believe). If you look at global temperatures for 1940-2004 the trend is downward, for the USA the trend form 1930-2004 is also downwards so where's the global warming?

Did you know the net expected temperature decrease expected form all the kyoto agreements, with all the associated costs,tax increases, effects on curbing economic growth etc is 0.4% in 100 years time?

Also if global warming does happen the net effect has ben shown by many studies to be positive, i.e. longer growing seasons for food so higher yields, milder winters so better for the majority of nature and fewer fatalities etc. The world could even be better off with a warmer/wetter climate!

www.topshelfcomponents.com

Pinheadwmb · May 2007

The Japanese have come up with a surefire solution to rising sea levels. They've started killing more whales again. Take enough whales out of the sea and the sea levels are bound to drop. Another solution would be to remove Japan and let the sea flow into the hole it creates.

guilliano · May 2007

Without Japan we wouldn't have half decent electrical products, reliable cars or sushi. Getting rid of America would be more beneficial

http://www.flickr.com/photos/guilliano/

buddha · May 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Topshelf
The world could even be better off with a warmer/wetter climate!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
... And countries like Bangladesh will be virtually wiped off the map. Is that better ?
On the positive side, if you live on a hill you house will be worth more !

I don't know if my house will burn down tomorrow (probs not, as it's raining). So I take out insurance.

So, if there is something I can do (or more likely can refrain from doing), however small its contribution, isn't that a step in the right direction?

<center>Lardy | Madame de Pompadour</center>

Pinheadwmb · May 2007

Oh yeah. Perhaps a compromise is in order. We could put Japan on top of America and encourage Sushi chefs to start using bigger fish.

buddha · May 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by guilliano

Getting rid of America would be more beneficial<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Agreed ... All that hot air [:D]

<center>Lardy | Madame de Pompadour</center>

Unknown · May 2007

"There are so many variables involved in calculating our climate and the weather they can't accurately work anything out. Supersonic - what experiment are you referring to? I'd love to know what physical experiment can take into account all the variables when they are still learning about them."

I am not taking into account other factors - just the contribution from this one gas. I shall find you the text. For now please study the thermodynamics of CO2. Yes, there are many other factors too in the climate, but you seenm to have got mixed up between weather - which is chaotic - and its statisitics - which are not. A chaotic system is not always unpredictable. You cannot accurately forecast the weather one day to the other, but you can make predictions on trends based on statistical evidence (further backed up by knowing the physical properties of this gas). Which is what global warming is all about. You will not see temps rise everywhere, the systems that are driven can change such as the gulf strem and jet streams. We don't fully understand what will happen, but you would have to be incredibly naive to think that pumping into the atmosphere a gas with these properties will not make a change just because we apparently can't measure them. So we ignore it? No. We study more and refine. The predictions are made on statistics, physical knowledge within error bounds.

90% of the worlds scientists agree on this subject. Not that the world wouldn't be warming up anyway, but that our influence as stored more energy in the atmosphere than it otherwise would. A large volcano may just slow everything down, or the sun may decide to decrease its output for a few decades. That we cannot predict. But we can control our influence. many cycles studied are over 1000s of years. We are seeing rapid changes in tens of years.

For the record, I don't just take what the media says, and have studied this as part of a physics degree. I have read many many texts on the subject and is my belief that this is happening. I do however think claims of 6 degrees are OTT. I would say more like 2 IF the CO2 rises to 500ppm and IF most other factors remain largely stable (mean temp increase measured over 10 years)

<center>GT Zaskar LE
GT Ruckus
Me!
MYSPACE<hr noshade size="1">Park Tools - help and instructions for all general bike fixes
Sheldon Brown - info about anything and everything</center>

Unknown · May 2007

This is not the text I read, but a simplified version which shows the properties of co2 and how concentrations in the atmosphere alter the thermal absorbtion of re radiated light

http://brneurosci.org/co2.html

They arrive at the same conclusion.

<center>GT Zaskar LE
GT Ruckus
Me!
MYSPACE<hr noshade size="1">Park Tools - help and instructions for all general bike fixes
Sheldon Brown - info about anything and everything</center>

Topshelf · May 2007

I'm not talking about Co2's thermal properties, you have to agree that it's only 0.03% of our atmosphere so we still don't know what affect an increase of 0.01% will have. It has been far higher before and will be again.

In every debate, all sides overstate the extent of existing knowledge and it's degree of certainty. We know astonishingly little about every aspect of the environment, form it's past histor, to it's present state, to how to conserve and protect it.

90% of the world's scientists may agree but that doesn't make them right. So 10% are brave enough to go against the grain? Why? It's fashionable to go with it and there is huge amounts of money being ploughed into it so it's in their interests to support the theory. I have read research papers which all the way through show no evidence whatsoever of global warming but in the conclusion the scientist says they still believe in it.

Any idea how many glaciers there are on earth? How many of these are being monitored for melt and how many are decreasing in size?

Greenland and Antarctica have been melting for 6000 years. At the current rate of melt Greenland will take 1000 years, they don't tell you that in the news.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing and human activity is the probable cause. However, we are also in the midst of a natural warming trend that began about 1850, as we emerged from a 400 year cold spell known as the 'Litle Ice Age'.

If you've done this as a part of a Physics degree maybe you can tell me why computer models for future warming vary by 400%. We can't predict changes only make an infomed guess, this is still a guess though and so far they have all been way off the mark (by 300%).

Nobody knows how much of the surface warming is due to changing land use as opposed to Co2.

Supersonic- you're saying a 2c rise with 500ppm, i saw the scientist who first proposed the theory of global warming in 1969 say that if it reches 400ppm (i think we're at 389 at the moment) then our climate will go into irreversivble meltdown. Which is it? No-one knows, it's all guesses.

Scientists haven't predicted the temperature increases accuratley over the last 10 years so why should i believe their 100 year ones?

I'm not saying we don't study it but don't see why we should get all wound up, incur huge costs and curtail economic development of third world countries on a thoery that could well be wrong.

www.topshelfcomponents.com

Unknown · May 2007

"I'm not talking about Co2's thermal properties, you have to agree that it's only 0.03% of our atmosphere so we still don't know what affect an increase of 0.01% will have. It has been far higher before and will be again."

Its the highest it has been for 500,000 years, and it is exactly these properties which cause the warming. The text explicity outlines the contribution.

I am not saying what the effects might be: I am saying the thermal properties of CO2 will raise the temperature! Thats all. This is the important paragraph:

It is important to realize that the original factor of 0.042 to 0.084 represented the incremental fraction of the total global warming, taken as a holistic phenomenon, initiated by carbon dioxide. In other words, in the absence of carbon dioxide, the present average temperature of the Earth after adaptation to the loss would be 1.4-2.7 degrees cooler. This means that the calculation automatically includes the secondary and amplification effects caused by increased water vapor, changes in albedo, and so forth, caused by including the Earth's adaptation to the increment of carbon dioxide.

In many ways I am agreeing with you. Lots of models are poor.

<center>GT Zaskar LE
GT Ruckus
Me!
MYSPACE<hr noshade size="1">Park Tools - help and instructions for all general bike fixes
Sheldon Brown - info about anything and everything</center>

Topshelf · May 2007

This planet is on it's third atmosphere, what makes us think it's not going to change anymore? What makes us think we are significantly affecting it? What makes us think we can keep it stable or even change it?

So Co2 was as high if not higher 500,000 years ago, before humans then? So what's the worry? The planet has been there before and will again.

I've read too much evidence now to be eaily swayed in favour of global warming. We are fed so much misinformation by scientists, remember when they said we wee entering another ice age? That was in the 1970's.

www.topshelfcomponents.com

Topshelf · May 2007

Anyone got any hard data on sea level rises? Any info on glacial melt? Any evidence of rising global temperatures? I'd love to compare it to my contradictory or simply inidfferent evidence.

Just look into it yourselves people, have a look at Science magazine online and the research articles they've published etc. That's a publication which accepts global warming but plenty of it's content does not suport this.

www.topshelfcomponents.com

guilliano · May 2007

Who measured CO2 levels 500,000 years ago?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/guilliano/

Unknown · May 2007

There is plenty of evidence of mean temperature rises. You can't take any one year. You need to take a few at a time and compare.

You are completely missing what I am outlining here: that this gas does indeed have the potential to raise the temperature of the atmosphere. I have not said or arguing what the conseqences are or maybe. Core data shows us levels over time, and we are undergoing a rapid increas in atmospheric co2, a gas which I stress again, has thermal properties which will harbour extra energy and plays a role in the planets temperature. Data taken from Hawaii shows the trend very well, and seasonal variation due to extra absorption in the northern hemisphere during the seasons. The sharp rise in CO2 is very consistent with the amount of fossil fuel we burn and deforestation. So burning fossil fuel is just a coincidence in this?

Just to clarify: I disagree with the extreme climate models, my beleif is that the temperature addition from CO2 is much smaller.

<center>GT Zaskar LE
GT Ruckus
Me!
MYSPACE<hr noshade size="1">Park Tools - help and instructions for all general bike fixes
Sheldon Brown - info about anything and everything</center>

Unknown · May 2007

And we have moved on since the 70s. Our data and understanding is much better. Confidence intervals have increased a lot even in the last 10 years.

We are affecting the atmosphere because we are adding to it a gas which is upsetting the equilibrium of the carbon cycle, resulting in a net gain and increase in concentration.

<center>GT Zaskar LE
GT Ruckus
Me!
MYSPACE<hr noshade size="1">Park Tools - help and instructions for all general bike fixes
Sheldon Brown - info about anything and everything</center>

Seagull · May 2007

Even if all of the models on climate change are wrong, its no reason to reject building sustainability into our lives. I think that we will have to change our ways to increase sustainability, but most of the reasons people reject these concepts is just a reluctance to accept change. Oil WILL run out, coal is dirty, gas is going to come from corrupt sources; sustainability makes sense without global warming. Another aspect is that the more of the energy industry that moves abroad, the less jobs it creates here. Sustainability involves us creating our own energy, and we can benefit from the jobs it creates in this country. I suspose one of the main barriers is that we may not have enough technical experts to develop these new energy sources.

my photos NYM biking routes My full Suss My Hardtail

gobal warming

Comments

Categories