Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 433 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Topic Options
#16534 - 09/03/06 04:31 PM IPCC lowers global warming predictions
TwoSheds Offline
Member

Registered: 08/17/06
Posts: 52
Loc: MA

Top
.
#16535 - 09/03/06 07:05 PM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
the problem with this report is that it includes all causes of climate changes but does not accept that some of them will be reversing in the next century.

I did notice that they claim the rise in sea level will be less than a half meter, rather than the 6 meters some have said would happen by the end of the century.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#16536 - 09/06/06 07:34 PM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
Andist Offline
Member

Registered: 09/03/06
Posts: 78
Loc: London
This is interesting speculation, considering that climate change experts consider a 3 c rise to be a "trigger point" for an exponential rise in the rate at which Greenland and Antarctica will melt.

I firmly beleive that this "intergovernmental" panel was just saying what governments want us to hear.

How do they reconcile these projections with the fact that Greenland's ice is melting at a faster rate than previously predicted.

Apart from the publishers of that journal, who recognises those authors as the world's leading experts?

I happen to know someone with chairs at two british Unis, who has spent the last 45 years researching climate change, and he holds no such optimism, but still does not profess to be able to make any reliable prediction on what the future holds.

There are too many different scenarios possible for anyone to make such certain predictions.

This is an inter-governmental scam to keep you burning things.
_________________________
"The written word is a lie"

Top
#16537 - 09/07/06 12:16 AM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
the thing about greenland, is that the edges are melting faster while the interior is getting thicker. how does that add up to the ice melting off faster.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#16538 - 09/07/06 11:40 AM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
Anonymous
Unregistered


I'm concerned with those methane leaks beneath Sibir.
1 kg of methane per 100 years has 23 times stronger greenhouse effect than same amount of CO2.

If plants have used efficiently solar energy to sustain life, couldn't we use vast masses of
methane(primarily product of anaerobic digestion) for energy and thus slow down the
global warming effect?

If you burn metahne, you get CO2, a
less dangerous greenhouse gas.

Top
#16539 - 09/07/06 11:41 AM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
Andist Offline
Member

Registered: 09/03/06
Posts: 78
Loc: London
Well, for one thing, it is highly unlikely that the edges are melting at the same rate that the interoir thickens.

Which atmospheric conditions would give cause for a body of ice to melt at it's edges, and thicken internally?

It is often too cold for snow in Greenland, I can only guess that a slight increase in temperature is causing more snow to fall in Greenland, this temperature increase allows for the increase in the melting of the edges, also.

I don't see this mentioned in a thread about 10 down from here right now, it supports my assertion that the ice is melting faster and makes no mention of any increase in thickness.
_________________________
"The written word is a lie"

Top
#16540 - 09/07/06 11:01 PM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
The problem with that is that no one that puts out the studies is willing to take in to consideration that there is a much larger area that is increasing. Why because to get the funding for the study, they have to state they are looking for evidence of global warming. They dont want to take the increases in snow in the interior into account.

DA posted a link some time ago about how the glacers there were moving faster. somehow while they did mention that the snow was much thinker on the top of the glacers, this did not come out as part of the reason for the faster speed of the glacers in their conclusion. they insisted that it was the temperature under the glacers (which was not measured) that was causing the increase in speed.

so if the glacers are moving faster, how are the glacers getting thicker.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#16541 - 09/08/06 12:43 AM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
Andist Offline
Member

Registered: 09/03/06
Posts: 78
Loc: London
An obvous explanation is that snow is lighter.

The seas are warming, causing the 90% of submerged ice to melt. On the suface, warmer temperatures allow for more snow. Snow is not prduced below a certian temperature around 0c.

That maybe how.
_________________________
"The written word is a lie"

Top
#16542 - 09/08/06 02:08 AM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
that goes contrary to the simplist of phyics logic.

ice on water is 90 percent below the water level. if the submerged ice melts, the ice above will push more of it down. If 90 percent of the submerged ice was to melt, 90 % of the above ice would replace.

a recent study proved that the amount of snow falling on greenland has not changed much over the last 5 centuries. There is so much variation that all the differences in the last year are nothing. There is no way to say that the snow is changing there based on a single decade or even two. It is extream fally to base the benchmark on the coldest year of the last 2 decades like all those who try to prove that greenland is melting do. If you deliberately choise the coldest year for the benchmark of course all the other years will be warmer. The year they choise are the year mount pinatuba reduced the temperature all over the northern himisphere and caused the greatest snowfall. Can you really expect the rest of the years to be as cold.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#16543 - 09/08/06 12:45 PM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
Andist Offline
Member

Registered: 09/03/06
Posts: 78
Loc: London
Whether the seas are warming, or cooling, the climate seems to be changing.
Climate, or weather is highly unpredictable even if one ignores "climate change".
Even if you assume that the overall world climate is warming, it would not be unreasonable to expect parts of it to cool, or remain constant.

The climatic extremes seen in europe a few years ago, combined with increasing sea-levels, lead one to assume that theories on Global "warming" must have been correct.

One nightmare scenrio, as i'm sure you're aware, is the reversal of the gulf stream.
This would mean arctic conditions in Britain. I will not be clomplaining of high temperatures myself.

From what I've read above, some people think research is biased in favour of global warming.
I beleive that the IPCC is biased, had they projected the temperature rise to be even 0.5 c higher, the implications would be very much worse.
Exactly 3 c is considered to be a trigger point.

We agree that research into this is biased, one wy, or another.
Most researchers, including the IPCC ones above, agree that the temperature is rising. Most of them would not presume to be able to give such an accurate weather forecast for 2106ad, but most think that there will be an increase of more than 3 c.
_________________________
"The written word is a lie"

Top
#16544 - 09/08/06 08:21 PM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Da posted a link once, we will not go into the exact discussion. It was a article written by a scientist to answer a letter. In the message, this guy was saying that he was an older man now, but he remembered as a child fishing off a pier built by the Romans near his home and letting his feet cool in the water. The pier was built for small boats, and had been maintain over the years, but not built up. shortly before he had written the letter, he had taken his grandkid fishing off the same pier and once again they had soaked their feet in the water, just has he had done as a kid. he asked, where is the sea level rising, if this pier, built for boats hardly bigger than a large rowboat, had been a just above sea level during high tide and is still just above sea level. The change in sea level is not the same world wide. In fact there appears to be places that have not changed at all according to some reports.

The point is that to justify the global warming reports, they have to cherry pick their stats.

another factor that must be taken into account is that there are lots of factors causing the changes in climates. Solar flare, total solar output, shifts in tectonic plates, changes in earths orbits, and more.

The IPCC has refused to accept that there is a possiblity that man is not the major cause of global climate changes. What they have done is to indicate that there are alot of possiblities, by lumping them all together, then making it seem like man is the cause of them all. you have to find the fine print to find out that what climate change is, is infact all of the things causing it.

By doing so, they can show a graph of the CO2 going up and ignore the fact that solar flares activity is dropping, and say that all of it will increase at a stable rate. That is how they come up with the 3 degree increase. If solar flair activity does decrease as expected, the temperature will drop instead. The knowledge of this would take away their power.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#16545 - 09/09/06 10:09 PM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
Andist Offline
Member

Registered: 09/03/06
Posts: 78
Loc: London
What do governments have to gain from promoting the idea of "global warming"?
_________________________
"The written word is a lie"

Top
#16546 - 09/10/06 01:37 AM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
in a word control.

its not mainly the goverments themselves, its the politicians that are pushing it. If enough of the ones wanting to pass legislature to gain controls of industies get elected, a lot of out "luxeries" will become a thing of the past. When its the people that are in control of the goverment that are pushing it, then they will continue to gain more control. Also every one of the studies cost money. these require that the tax man get more money from the people for these studies rather than other things that other politicians want.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#16547 - 09/10/06 10:17 AM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
RicS Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 03/26/06
Posts: 310
Loc: Sydney, Australia
Hi dehammer,

Well put. It is very difficult to get any funding unless you are willing to agree with the basic principals that is the general concensus. I should know, I am just about finished getting a grant and the hassles were enormous, especially when I started pointing out frauds in global warming studies that I was asked to review. That went down like a lead balloon.

There are studies on Greenland but they are not very comprehensive. The net effect from satellites according to NASA is an INCREASE in locked water on Greenland. The same is true for the Artic in general, especially Siberia. The one area where the differences are really huge is Antartica where ice thickness has increased by hundreds of metres over vast areas locking up a great deal more water than the breaking off of floating ice sheets. This is an area studied reasonably well because of the permanent presence of the US, Russians, Australians and others. The snowfall has not changed significantly but I have not been able to fund a single study to actually look into the reasons for the thickening ice.

There is now conclusive evidence that warming on a global scale is accelerating a little in the last two years. The evidence is in satellite mapping of world temperatures. This follows on from a general but by no means earthwide warming trend from 1980 on, giving us a total increase in average temperature of a bit over 0.1 degrees. If you really are interested in global warming find out how much the last cooling trend cooled the earth by in the mid 70s.

Richard
_________________________
Sane=fits in. Unreasonable=world needs to fit to him. All Progress requires unreasonableness

Top
#16548 - 09/10/06 07:24 PM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
RicS Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 03/26/06
Posts: 310
Loc: Sydney, Australia
G'day Andist,

You asked an interesting question of dehammer. Why would governments want to believe in a theory that may not be correct since it does not seem to benefit them at all?

I was reading a completely unrelating study a week or so back concerning the functioning and evolution of the modern human brain. It seems we are hard wired for irrational beliefs and that only a very small percentage of people can perceive most things in a rational way.

If you think this is far fetched think of "It's bad luck to see a bride on her wedding day" and happily walk under a ladder, take a room on Floor 13 (or 8 or 7 in other cultures) or watch a small child come up with an explanation for the physical world they have not been taught how it functions. Think of the Catholic Church who locked up a priest for 20 years because he said light could be split into component colors (a rainbow but man made), nearly condemned Galileo to death, or the Spanish Inquisition or the Salem witch trials or any jury trial where a spouse is accused of murder and the only evidence is of adultery (even if almost every one on the jury has committed the same offence at some point in their marriage).

It was a fascinating theory and very nicely meshes with my religous studies (no not theology, the history of religions). Ancient man had a bunch of spirits that could be nice or mean that controlled everything because they understood almost nothing of the how the natural world worked. As knowledge increased these spirits were converted into Gods, still nasty or nice, but there was only a few of them. A bit more knowledge and you end up with a single God but at first this is a pretty ugly God. Think of the Old Testement smiting and destroying cities or insisting on the slaughter of your first born. Now that is not a nice god. The same is true for pre Mohammad, Islam although some sects had much nicer Gods than old Johovah.

Knowledge develops a little further and the God not only gets nicer but also more distant. He answers prayers but not directly. Miracles occur but only in such a way that you have to have faith to believe in the miracle.

Funnily enough the progression then stops. Getting rid of that last God seems to be impossible. This latest research suggests why. We simple need to have faith or be able to understand everything. Well, I know I understand most things but I'm not a normal human being, so irrational explanations are the ones that most humans will believe, even when faced with considerable evidence to the contrary.

What has all this to do with Global Warming? You only have to look at Mr Gore, and his evangilism to spread the word of Global Warming. Do not heed him and there will be NO governments in 100 years because we'll all be dead. Does this sound like a person that is acting rationally?

Governments might not like Global Warming but it has now reached a critical mass where saying it is poppycock or even going as far as presenting real scientific evidence that it either is a minor fluctuation or it does not exist, and you are likely to lose the next election. The lobby system for global warming is now truly huge.

To quote your good self:

"I firmly beleive that this "intergovernmental" panel was just saying what governments want us to hear."

In other words you believe this panel is biased because it was funded by governments and they obviously cannot genuinely believe there is no global warming, they just want to downplay it so they are not responsible for damaging global economies. Or they simply want to stick their heads in the sand.

Actually you pre-answered your own question.

I currently have a job reviewing studies on global warming. Aside from the outright frauds that use false data, I have not found one study that is not based on assumptions biased towards the writer or funder's point of view. And since my funder is very, very, very pro global warming, it is not making my job easier, I can tell you. Indeed, the current study is a huge one and I cannot get a great deal of the raw data because it "is not available" but what I have received has been altered from the raw data of the same things obtained from other sources. This puts into doubt the foundation upon which the whole very, very large study is based and bodes very badly for some very prestigous institutions that are supporting it. I am currently attempting to withdraw from the study of this study because I believe that if I keep going I won't have anything to do again.

What is truly strange is the raw data rarely, if ever, supports any argument for global warming.

The weather is getting wilder and more extreme. Not according to all reasonable records kept with one exception. There were a record number of hurricanes in the West Indies/East of US than ever recorded. Any good meterologist will tell that records get broken every day have have been getting broken since meterology became a science but that would not be good enough for most people. It would seem that the record number of hurricanes is only a record if you rely on recorded weather patterns since it has been recorded. However, there is apparently evidence that there has been worse Hurricane seasons as around 300 years ago, and that was at the start of the mini ice age. But why let the facts get in the way of a good argument.

The sea levels are rising. Actually no they are not based on raw data. It is only if you factor in things that the writers think have to be taken into account. Those islands in the Pacific that are being swamped are often used as prime examples of rising sea levels but Pacific islands have a nasty tendency to sink. You can thank the American missionaries for disasters such as the Marshall Islands. The islanders used to use the ocean as a toilet. That meant nakedness. So land based toilets had to be used. That meant water had to be found. That meant it was taken out of the ground. Funny thing is that if you do that for long enough in a place where there is not a huge rainfall and eventually the whole land area shrinks. Of course then you have other islands such as Nauru, that have been mined within an inch of the sea level all to the profit of the Australians in that case, and the gluttony of the local populations and their addiction to fatty foods paid for out of royalties. But real sea level data from stable regions where the land has not moved in relation the rest of the earth and the RAW data shows nothing. No rises. No falls other than minor fluctuations up and down that seem to correspond with solar activities but only in a very small amount.

The water temperature is rising. Actually no it isn't. There is now 30 years of good accurate sea temperature data, although spotty and the raw data shows a rise in line with the very small rise shown by satellites since 1980.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas, is man made, and will inevitably lead to runaway warming. Good theory. Where is the proof? Try and find it. Show an experiment that replicates the atmosphere and add in more CO2 and that this then leads to major warming. You'll probably have a hard time because so far no one has managed to achieve this.

How about looking at other times that CO2 was many times higher than now. Then you get the rather inconvenient truth that it sometimes corresponded with the beginning of an ice age or significant global cooling.

I've even seen Venus used as an example of CO2 causing global warming. Funnily enough the CO2 on Venus (about 96% of the atmosphere) keeps the planet hundreds of degrees cooler because it acts as an atmospheric coolant and since when can you compare an atmosphere almost pure CO2 with earth with an atmosphere that has clouds, liquid water, and the CO2 is measured in parts per million.
_________________________
Sane=fits in. Unreasonable=world needs to fit to him. All Progress requires unreasonableness

Top
#16549 - 09/10/06 07:50 PM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
Andist Offline
Member

Registered: 09/03/06
Posts: 78
Loc: London
I agree with much of what you say, ricS, it is part of the human condition to predict gloom and doom, and these days you have to do it through science to reach the largest audience.

I am, perhaps more cynical of goverments. I beleive most war to be financially motivated.
If global warming is being falsely promoted, there will be a financial incentive.

More tax on fuel, because it is bad for the environment is one of many possible incentives to falsely promote climate change.
_________________________
"The written word is a lie"

Top
#16550 - 09/10/06 09:45 PM Re: IPCC lowers global warming predictions
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
Hello RicS, good to see you back again. I agree with both what you said and what Andist said. Its very good to have someone in the know stating things like that again.

I learned a good deal from you and hope to have the chance to learn more.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.