NOAA reports on Global Warming

[NoOneLikesUs]

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/20080619_climatereport.html

Global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases, according to the report. Many types of extreme weather and climate event changes have been observed during this time period and continued changes are projected for this century. Specific future projections include:

* Abnormally hot days and nights, along with heat waves, are very likely to become more common. Cold nights are very likely to become less common.
* Sea ice extent is expected to continue to decrease and may even disappear in the Arctic Ocean in summer in coming decades.
* Precipitation, on average, is likely to be less frequent but more intense.
* Droughts are likely to become more frequent and severe in some regions.
* Hurricanes will likely have increased precipitation and wind.
* The strongest cold-season storms in the Atlantic and Pacific are likely to produce stronger winds and higher extreme wave heights.

 

[Fudgie the Whale]

Well that should end the debate. No need for anymore discussion on this issue. Move along.

 

[Armchair_QB]

Yep. I'm going to start making all my clothes out of hemp.

 

[NoOneLikesUs]

Well that should end the debate. No need for anymore discussion on this issue. Move along.

Not to be smug, but when a gov't entity attached to the commerce department is saying this, the debate is pretty much over.

 

[Armchair_QB]

Did the study also say what caused climate change in the 50 years prior to 1958? Or the 50 years prior to that?

 

[PeteyPirate]

How did George Bush not get final edit on this?

 

[Fudgie the Whale]

Well that should end the debate. No need for anymore discussion on this issue. Move along.

Not to be smug, but when a gov't entity attached to the commerce department is saying this, the debate is pretty much over.

Oh, I agree. I just foresee the nuttiness.

 

[Pastor]

Having spent time talking to engineers that actually work at NASA and deal with this extensively (satellites that gauge salt content in water, etc), it is pretty damn fascinating how much research has gone into this.

A_QB, I know you are loath to give up on this, but you would be wise to invest some time reading what these scientists and engineers have actually been doing. The technology involved is so mind-bogglingly advanced that I end up scratching my head often enough.

 

[PeteyPirate]

Having spent time talking to engineers that actually work at NASA and deal with this extensively (satellites that gauge salt content in water, etc), it is pretty damn fascinating how much research has gone into this.

A_QB, I know you are loath to give up on this, but you would be wise to invest some time reading what these scientists and engineers have actually been doing. The technology involved is so mind-bogglingly advanced that I end up scratching my head often enough.

That's because you're an idiot!

 

[Pastor]

Having spent time talking to engineers that actually work at NASA and deal with this extensively (satellites that gauge salt content in water, etc), it is pretty damn fascinating how much research has gone into this.

A_QB, I know you are loath to give up on this, but you would be wise to invest some time reading what these scientists and engineers have actually been doing. The technology involved is so mind-bogglingly advanced that I end up scratching my head often enough.

That's because you're an idiot!

That could also be true.

 

[Armchair_QB]

Having spent time talking to engineers that actually work at NASA and deal with this extensively (satellites that gauge salt content in water, etc), it is pretty damn fascinating how much research has gone into this.

A_QB, I know you are loath to give up on this, but you would be wise to invest some time reading what these scientists and engineers have actually been doing. The technology involved is so mind-bogglingly advanced that I end up scratching my head often enough.

That's because you're an idiot!

Funny FDP.

It would be nice to see a study of what caused climate change 100-200 years ago.

 

[PeteyPirate]

Having spent time talking to engineers that actually work at NASA and deal with this extensively (satellites that gauge salt content in water, etc), it is pretty damn fascinating how much research has gone into this.

A_QB, I know you are loath to give up on this, but you would be wise to invest some time reading what these scientists and engineers have actually been doing. The technology involved is so mind-bogglingly advanced that I end up scratching my head often enough.

That's because you're an idiot!

Funny FDP.

It would be nice to see a study of what caused climate change 100-200 years ago.

I agree, it would be fascinating. But you dance with who brung you.

 

[Armchair_QB]

I have no idea what you mean by that.

 

[PeteyPirate]

I have no idea what you mean by that.

We can't go back in time and study the atmosphere or record temperatures. We have to go by the data we are able to collect.

 

[alleyallen]

Having spent time talking to engineers that actually work at NASA and deal with this extensively (satellites that gauge salt content in water, etc), it is pretty damn fascinating how much research has gone into this.

A_QB, I know you are loath to give up on this, but you would be wise to invest some time reading what these scientists and engineers have actually been doing. The technology involved is so mind-bogglingly advanced that I end up scratching my head often enough.

That's because you're an idiot!

Funny FDP.

It would be nice to see a study of what caused climate change 100-200 years ago.

And that would change the current reality, how? Does it really matter what happened 100 or 200 years ago if what has happened the last 50 years (man-made causes in large part) have sped up the process? Shouldn't we instead be focusing on how to deal with it rather than quibbling over your attempt at a point?

 

[Armchair_QB]

Problem is, we don't know if we're speeding up the process unless we know what caused it in the past.

 

[alleyallen]

Problem is, we don't know if we're speeding up the process unless we know what caused it in the past.

Again...does it matter? And to me, people a lot smarter than both of us are saying this is indeed the case. Why continue to belabor the point rather than, y'know, try to do something about it?

I know...because it's easier to pretend it's not a problem, or too big a hassle to fix it, than to actually try to resolve the issue.

 

[Armchair_QB]

I'm not saying we shouldn't do something about it.

I'm saying there's no way to know how much an affect "man made" causes are in the grand scheme of things. I also think it's the height of stupidity to force a few countries that aren't the biggest part of the "man made" problem - US, EU, Canada, etc. - to change their economies to "fix" it while letting the countries that are the biggest polluters - India, China - slide.

 

[PeteyPirate]

Problem is, we don't know if we're speeding up the process unless we know what caused it in the past.

Science doesn't prove anything and never will. It only disproves alternatives. Gravity is only a theory, but it's universally accepted. That we don't know manmade climate change to be a "certainty" is a non-starter as an argument, and to fail to act on scientific conclusions that indicate a need for action because we can't access information that is forever lost to history seems short-sighted.

 

[alleyallen]

I'm not saying we shouldn't do something about it.

I'm saying there's no way to know how much an affect "man made" causes are in the grand scheme of things. I also think it's the height of stupidity to force a few countries that aren't the biggest part of the "man made" problem - US, EU, Canada, etc. - to change their economies to "fix" it while letting the countries that are the biggest polluters - India, China - slide.

Not saying that those countries SHOULDN'T clean up their act, but do we really want to continue down the same idiot path of "If those countries won't do it, then neither should we!" That's like sticking your tongue out at an enemy. It's childish.

And if you don't believe the U.S. is a big contributor to the problem, then, well, we have a problem. Not as bad as the others you mentioned, but we're not a drop in the bucket, either.