Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
Open thread
- By Phillip Brownlee
- Posted June 4, 2007 at 1:05 a.m.
- Filed under Open thread
- Permalink
- Comments RSS
- Both comments and trackbacks are closed
75 Comments
http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/3967
Scientists Rally Around NASA Chief After Global Warming CommentsWASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Jun. 1 -/E-Wire/–
“NASA’s top administrator, Michael Griffin, speaking on NPR radio made some refreshingly sensible comments about the present global warming scare,” said Robert Ferguson, Director of the Science and Public Policy Institute. “Many rationalist scientists agree with him, clearly demonstrating there is no scientific consensus on man-made, catastrophic global warming,” said Ferguson.
Griffin said he doubted global warming is “a problem we must wrestle with,” and that it is arrogant to believe that today’s climate is the best we could have and that “we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn’t change.”
“I certainly support Griffin’s comments,” said William Kininmonth, a former head of the Australian National Climate Centre. “Not only is it speculative to claim that humans can in any way influence the course of climate but it is arrogant to suggest that today’s climate is getting worse than it has been in the past. For example, who would prefer to return to pre-industrial conditions as they were during the Little Ice Age? Frost Fairs were common on many rivers of Europe and the London diarist John Evelyn records that in 1683-84 the Thames River froze from late December to early February. Conditions were terrible with men and cattle perishing and the seas locked with ice such that no vessels could stir out or come in. The fowls, fish and exotic plants and greens were universally perishing. Food and fuel were exceptionally dear and coal smoke hung so thickly that one could scarcely see across the street and one could scarcely breathe.”
“Kansas geologist, Lee Gerhard added, “Griffin’s statement focuses on the hubris that affects much of public policy. It is great to know that someone out there besides geologists understands that humans do not dominate earth’s dynamic systems.”
“Dr. Pat Michaels at the University of Virginia agrees: “NASA Administrator Michael Griffin’s statement about whether or not it is in fact a “problem” is supported by a scientific literature that his employee, James Hansen, appears to ignore. It is well-known that much of the Eurasian arctic was between 4 and 12 degrees (F) warmer than modern temperatures for much of the 6,000 years between 3,000 and 9,000 years ago, and that such warming was caused by a massive intrusion of warm Atlantic water into the arctic. Given that the only way it can get there is to flow east of Greenland, Mr. Hansen’s well-publicized fears that a massive amount of Greenland’s ice will fall into the ocean in the next 100 years is mere science fiction. It is ironic that today President Bush appears to have given in to Hansen’s hysteria rather than to the calm reason of NASA Administrator Griffin.”
“Finally, Harvard University physicist Lubos Motl praised Griffin’s climate comments, calling them “sensible.” On his public blog, Motl said he applauds Michael Griffin and encourages him to act as “a self-confident boss of a highly prestigious institution.” “I have always believed that the people who actually work with hard sciences and technology simply shouldn’t buy a cheap and soft pseudoscientific propaganda such as the ‘fight against climate change,’” Motl added.”
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/archives/story.html?id=975f250d-ca5d-4f40-b687-a1672ed1f684
Clouded researchLAWRENCE SOLOMON, Financial PostPublished: Friday, February 23, 2007
Jasper Kirkby is a superb scientist, but he has been a lousy politician. In 1998, anticipating he’d be leading a path-breaking experiment into the sun’s role in global warming, he made the mistake of stating that the sun and cosmic rays “will probably be able to account for somewhere between a half and the whole of the increase in the Earth’s temperature that we have seen in the last century.” Global warming, he theorized, may be part of a natural cycle in the Earth’s temperature.
Also for the first time, very basic answers about the drivers of climate change may surface to dispel the general paucity of data on the subject. “By studying the micro-physical processes at work when cosmic rays hit theatmosphere, we can begin to understand more fully the connection between cosmic rays and cloud cover,” CERN explains. “Clouds exert a strong influence on the Earth’s energy balance, and changes of only a few per cent have an important effect on the climate.”
CERN is no fringe laboratory pursuing crackpot theories at some remote backwater. CERN, based in Geneva, is the European Organization for Nuclear Research, a 50-year old institution, originally founded by 12 countries and now counting 20 country-members. It services 6,500 particle physicists — half of the world’s total — in 500 institutes and universities around the world. It is building the $2.4-billion Large Hadron Collider, the world’s most powerful particle accelerator. And it is home to Jasper Kirkby’s long-languished CLOUD project, among the most significant scientific experiments to be proposed in our time. Finally, almost a decade after Dr. Kirkby’s proposal first saw the light of day, the funding is in place and the work has begun in earnest.
“To accomplish all this, Dr. Kirkby has assembled a dream team of atmospheric physicists, solar physicists, and cosmic ray and particle physicists from 18 institutes around the world, including the California Institute of Technology and Germany’s Max-Planck Institutes, with preliminary data expected to arrive this coming summer. The world of particle physics is awaiting these results with much anticipation because they promise to unlock mysteries that can tell us much about climate change, as well as other phenomena. The world of climate science, in contrast, is all but ignoring the breakthroughs in climate knowledge that CERN is about to reveal.”
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=069cb5b2-7d81-4a8e-825d-56e0f112aeb5&k=0
Limited role for C02The Deniers — Part XLawrence Solomon, Financial PostPublished: Friday, February 02, 2007
“Even doubling the amount of CO2 by 2100, for example, “will not dramatically increase the global temperature,” Dr. Shaviv states. Put another way: “Even if we halved the CO2 output, and the CO2 increase by 2100 would be, say, a 50% increase relative to today instead of a doubled amount, the expected reduction in the rise of global temperature would be less than 0.5C. This is not significant.”
In another study, directly relevant to today’s climate controversy, Dr. Shaviv reconstructed the temperature on Earth over the past 550 million years to find that cosmic ray flux variations explain more than two-thirds of Earth’s temperature variance, making it the most dominant climate driver over geological time scales. The study also found that an upper limit can be placed on the relative role of CO2 as a climate driver, meaning that a large fraction of the global warming witnessed over the past century could not be due to CO2 — instead it is attributable to the increased solar activity.
CO2 does play a role in climate, Dr. Shaviv believes, but a secondary role, one too small to preoccupy policymakers. Yet Dr. Shaviv also believes fossil fuels should be controlled, not because of their adverse affects on climate but to curb pollution.
“I am therefore in favour of developing cheap alternatives such as solar power, wind, and of course fusion reactors (converting Deuterium into Helium), which we should have in a few decades, but this is an altogether different issue.” His conclusion: “I am quite sure Kyoto is not the right way to go.”
Why now, and not when you actually had the power to change things on the ground?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070603/ts_alt_afp/usiraqunrestpolitics;_ylt=AjenUEuB8scsb.IoHhV14uVH2ocA
US can forget about winning in Iraq: top retired general
by Sig Christenson Sun Jun 3, 4:28 PM ET
SAN ANTONIO, United States (AFP) – The man who commanded US-led coalition forces during the first year of the Iraq war says the United States can forget about winning the war.
“I think if we do the right things politically and economically with the right Iraqi leadership we could still salvage at least a stalemate, if you will — not a stalemate but at least stave off defeat,” retired Army Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez said in an interview.
Sanchez, in his first interview since he retired last year, is the highest-ranking former military leader yet to suggest the Bush administration has fallen short in Iraq.
“I am absolutely convinced that America has a crisis in leadership at this time,” Sanchez told AFP after a recent speech in San Antonio, Texas.
“We’ve got to do whatever we can to help the next generation of leaders do better than we have done over the past five years, better than what this cohort of political and military leaders have done,” adding that he was “referring to our national political leadership in its entirety” – not just President George W. Bush.
Sanchez called the situation in Iraq bleak, which he blamed on “the abysmal performance in the early stages and the transition of sovereignty.”
He included himself among those who erred in Iraq’s crucial first year after the toppling of the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
Sanchez took command in the summer of 2003 and oversaw the occupation force amid an insurgency that has sparked a low-grade civil war in Iraq.
He was in the middle of some of the most momentous events of the war, among them the dissolution of the Iraqi army and barring millions of Baath Party members from government jobs: two actions seen as triggering the rebellion among Sunni Muslims, who fell from power with Saddam.
Sanchez is also most closely identified with the Abu Ghraib scandal, which occurred on his watch.
Though he was cleared of wrongdoing by an Army probe, Abu Ghraib’s images of naked prisoners humiliated by a rogue torture squad cost Sanchez an almost certain fourth star in the Senate, which approves general officer promotions.
Sanchez, 56, declined to talk about Abu Ghraib or other key events of the war, or say who was to blame for what went wrong.
“That’s something I am still struggling with and it’s not about blame because there’s nobody out there that is intentionally trying to screw things up for our country,” he said. “They were all working to do the best damn job they can to get things right.”
Despite those good intentions, Americans will be forced to “answer the question what is victory, and at this point I’m not sure America really knows what victory is,” said Sanchez, who is thinking of writing a tell-all book about his year in Baghdad.
The US ambassador in Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, reacted on Sunday to Sanchez’s comments by insisting: “It’s just way premature to be talking in terms of victory or defeat.”
“What we’re trying to do here is stabilize the security situation, particularly in Baghdad, to allow a political process some time and space to work,” he said on Fox News.
He said time was needed for Bush’s “surge” strategy, launched in January, of ploughing thousands more troops into Iraq “to make a difference on the streets and then time for this political process to unfold.”
Sanchez said a large troop commitment would be needed for years to come but conceded it is “very questionable” whether Americans would support it.
Still, he said, “the coalition cannot afford to precipitously withdraw and leave the Iraqis to their own devices.”
Andrew Krepinevich, a former aide to three defense secretaries who heads the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington, shared that assessment.
“What you are looking at are three factions who are profoundly mistrustful of one another,” he said. “Iraq is a country where those on top have brutally repressed those on the bottom, and that is the way they look at seizing power and maintaining power.”
Retired Army General Barry McCaffrey, a ground commander in the 1990-1991Gulf War, said he’s trying to remain optimistic but thinks domestic support for the war will evaporate within 36 months.
“I personally don’t think it’s over yet,” said McCaffrey, who recently toured Iraq. He said he thinks General David Petraeus, the coalition commander in Iraq, and Crocker can stave off a wider civil war.
“The question is, can the ambassador and Petraeus open reconciliation talks among Iraqis, and (Secretary of State) Condi Rice keep the regional powers from meddling any more in Iraq? The jury’s out,” he said.
As I’ve said before Republican, you can go to Iraq and help even though you may be old and disabled.
You CHOOSE not to for reasons known only to you. How about your children, wife, relatives…have they volunteered?
The truth is you COULD go and help in Iraq but you refuse to. For that I call you a lying hypocrite.
Republican chooses to collect his government handout (like most Republicans) and refuses to travel to Iraq to be part of the solution in helping that country achieve democratic stability.
HE IS A LYING HYPOCRITE.
As for me, I won’t go to Iraq and I don’t care if Iraq falls into chaos…
What I find very amusing is that the US is now offering immunity to the same terrorists who killed our solders. I hope it’s a double cross, like all of the promises made to the Indians…
A Bush appointed head of NASA doubts global warming. Gee, there’s a shocker.
Uh-oh, Republican, the Al GOracle’s are not going to be happy that someone is pulling their rug out from under them.
Remember when W (Worst President Ever) said that when the “Iraqi army stands up, we’ll stand down?”
They even had a target number = 375,000 troops.
Apparently, that’s the number of troops that the US should have used when we first invaded and occupied the place.
Anyway . . . what happened to “when they stand up, we’ll stand down?”
How’s that working out for us?
http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/191942
Arkansas GOP Chair Says We Need Another Attack to “Appreciate” Bush
Dennis Milligan, state Republican chair “said he’s ‘150 percent’ behind Bush on the war in Iraq.
“’At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001 ], and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country,’ Milligan said.”
Uh . . . yeah.
There’s nothing like a good terrorist attack that kills thousands to really make us Americans “appreciate” the heckofajob W.’s doing for us . . .
Or something.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/05/29/investigation_involves_alaska_senator/?rss_id=Boston.com%2B%2F%2BNews%2B%2F%2BNation
Investigation involves Alaska senator
May 29, 2007
ANCHORAGE, Alaska –Federal agents are looking into Sen. Ted Stevens’ role in the ongoing investigation into the remodeling of his Alaska home, according to two law enforcement officials familiar with the probe.
The investigation has been open for some time, and is linked to the VECO Corp. bribery case that earlier this month produced guilty pleas from two of the oil-field service company’s top executives, the law enforcement officials said.
The FBI and Justice Department are investigating corruption in Alaska — which may extend to the state’s federally elected officials in Washington, the officials said.
The remodeling work in summer and fall 2000 more than doubled the size of the house, a four-bedroom structure that is Stevens’ official residence in Alaska.
Ted Stevens and his wife, Catherine, declined to answer questions about the Girdwood house. Stevens’ office issued a prepared statement.
******
More corruption, graft and greed from the party of the rich?
I am shocked . . . SHOCKED!
“Dr. Pat Michaels at the University of Virginia agrees: “NASA Administrator Michael Griffin’s statement about whether or not it is in fact a “problem” is supported by a scientific literature that his employee, James Hansen, appears to ignore.”
I’d like to make a correction here. Dr. Pat Michaels knows or should know that James Hansen is no more Michael Griffin’s employee than Dr. Michaels is the employee of Dr. Jay Zieman, UVA Dept of Environmental Sciences Chair, or for that matter, John T. Casteen III, UVA President.
An employer is somebody who owns an enterprise and pays an employee’s salary. Dr. Hansen’s employer is the the federal government, i.e. NASA, a public entity. Dr. Griffin is merely NASA’s Administrator, an employee of NASA, not owner, which is to say not anybody’s employer.
Capn — I have wondered just how long it takes for the Iraqi troops to “stand up”?? Seems like it only takes six weeks to train our recruits before they get sent to Iraq… How come it takes all these years to train the Iraqi soldiers to “stand up”??
Actually, MPS, an owner many times employs OTHERS to hire and fire employees… They are usually called HR specialists… or Personnel Heads… So, in the government, the Head of NASA might well be the Head honcho for hiring and firing… the chain of command if you will…
Wow MPS, talk about picking nits, that’s one of the most finely picked nit I’ve seen in a long time.
You know Happy, I’ve been considering your proposal. I looked up jobs under Blackwater and I might just apply for that 200K/a year in their Air Operations Division.
That way, I can suck even more of your tax dollars out of the system.
Watcha think Happy?
Republank,
We already discussed Michael Griffin.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/05/at_least_bush_i.html#comment-71215812emphasis added)’NASA Chief Questions Urgency of Global Warming’http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10571499“I’m aware that global warming exists. …I’m also aware of recent findings that appear to have nailed down — pretty well nailed down the conclusion that MUCH of that is MANMADE. Whether that is a longterm concern or not, I can’t say.”—–That’s the same thread where you falsely claimed I’d turned “Uni-bomber”.http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/05/at_least_bush_i.html#comment-71378332
If you can’t remember what you read, please take notes, and stop wasting everyones time.
“If you can’t remember what you read, please take notes, and stop wasting everyones time.”
Oops! Somebody posted something about global warming and cosfapfap gets excited.
Republank,
Did you check out the source of your post, Science and Public Policy Institute, at top of this thread?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Carlo
And Robert Ferguson, “director” of SPPI, MISQUOTED Michael Griffin.
Sorry Cosmos, but you don’t get to dictate what I can post. Suck it up greenhorn…
And about your climate models on an open system of Climate. Heck, they can’t even put together a Computer Model of a submarine yet without causing great errors. Your conclusive science based on Climate Models is mud down the sewer line. As useful as teats on a boar hog.
And the uni-bomber comparison sticks Cosmos. You blame technology on causing global warming, just like the uni-bomber blamed technology on the demise of man. It’s a classic case of copy-cat identity crisis Cosmos. So get used to being known as a kook, because you are one. :)
It would be better for everyone Cosmos if you left the white space on these pages untouched so you won’t confuse them with your techno-fears and real science.
Hillary’s Political Horror Story
“Why did Hillary Clinton vote to send Americans and Iraqis their doom without reading a report throwing cold water on the reasons she later gave (and continues to give) for supporting the war? Asks Nicholas von Hoffman
Slowly, very slowly, Hillary Clinton’s vote to invade Iraq is turning into a political horror story. It is the moldering hand of a murder victim coming out of the grave to grab her by the ankle.
Bodies would not be jumping out at the candidate of the money wing of the Democratic Party if she had only said she made a mistake in voting for the war, but she has refused to do that so often that if she did it now she would open herself up to a chorus of catcalls.
She may be concerned that a retraction will make her look weak. So her line of defense has been, “My vote was a sincere vote based on the facts and assurances that I had at the time.” She says it over and over again.
The facts she had and the facts she could have had before she cast her vote for the war are two different things. We learn that from an article in The New York Times Magazine by Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr.
These two, who have made a career out of investigating Hillary, have dug up a couple of facts the Senator is going to have a hard time ignoring. The big fact is that she had access at the time to a highly classified report, the National Intelligence Estimate, which contained authoritative doubts that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
Gerth and Van Natta have established that she did not read this report. Because it was classified, senators wishing to read it had to sign in, and Hillary did not. Although one of her Democratic colleagues, Bob Graham, then chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, urged Hillary and all the other Democratic senators to read it, few did. Graham, however, read the ninety-page document and was so shaken by the questionable evidence for the existence of WMDs that he voted against going to war.” More:
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/opinion/?id=20949
Republank,
Too bad you’re not smart enough to realize that your posts help PROVE that humans are causing global warming.
Your post at the top of thread is from an obscure, tiny “Institute”. It misquotes Michael Griffin, and cites a few ’skeptics’ in a futile attempt to prove your incorrect opinion.
And you post LIES about me:”You blame technology on causing global warming,”
You think(sic) a coal-fired boiler is “technology”?
I see “technology” as the solution to AGW. Thin-film and sliver PV’s, passive and central solar, improved batteries, wind farms, hydrogen, fuel cells, microturbines, distributed generation, carbon fiber, new computer designs for higher mpg vehicles, better insulation, and so on…
Global warming is ridiculous and the whole concept is simply padding the pockets of democrats. You think Gore is really that concerned or do you think he found something he is good at and makes a lot of money from? It’s a cycle! That’s it and I agree that we are awfully arrogant to think that we could create that much change on the globe. Cows produce more carbon pollution than cars………should we just kill off the cows? Stop eating meat? Oh wait………that would bring out the animal rights folks.
RepukeBlank finds himself on the same page as – wait for it – Red China when it comes to Climate Change.Talk about traitors…http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-06-04-voa19.cfm
Come to think of it, China sounds much like our own Bush administration.
Jared,You have a good point that humans probably do not have that much of an impact on the environment to have ’caused’ global warming.
The global climate constantly changes, always has, always will.Whether we affect those changes or not is not really even important.
We need to find ways to deal with it though. The first step, however, is acceptance. Everyone needs to realize that the world’s climate is changing and there probably is not much we can do about it.
Re posts at top of thread,
‘William KininmonthNo peer reviewed climate science’http://www.desmogblog.com/node/1136
‘Patrick MichaelsPaid by fossil fuel industry’http://www.desmogblog.com/node/1567
‘Lee Gerhard’http://www.colorado.edu/cwa/bios.html?id=228&year=2002“His history includes petroleum exploration, management of exploration programs, oil and gas regulation, …Gerhard is an honorary member of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists Studies,…”
‘Recent Warming But No Trend in Galactic Cosmic Rays’http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/recent-warming-but-no-trend-in-galactic-cosmic-rays/
‘Taking Cosmic Rays for a spin’http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/10/taking-cosmic-rays-for-a-spin/
Friedman, did you HEAR her response to the question last night during the debate on why she authorized?
She said that they were assured by the president that we would only invade once the weapons inspectors went in and found the WMD and made sure it was there FIRST.
She did not read the National intelligence estimate (which contained BOTH sides), but she had others brief her on it- a common tactic considering the enormous paperwork involved in these things.
John Edwards backed her up on this.
Even I supported the move with what information the Bush administration put forth.
I do believe she made the best vote based on the information she was given. It’s not her fault that Bushco are liars.
Why is global warming ridiculous?
Think about the inside of your house…when you cook, does your house not get hot? When you spray oven cleaner, does it not linger? Do you really think all of this crap we’re spewing into the air has no effect?
Think about the volcanos that erupt and how they put out crap all over the world. Think about how Mercury is now in the fish. Think about how smog lingers over the big cities causing health problems.
We ate a hole in our ozone layer for heavens sake.
jared,
If you’re going to try to spin the issue, learn the basics.Livestock produce methane.
And not that you care, but human-added CO2 stays in the atmosphere (and warms the Earth) much longer than methane.
brian,
Human-added greenhouse gases are causing significantly more warming than the small increase in solar energy.
And if the sun is getting hotter, it’s an even stronger reason to reduce our GHG emissions.
Have you looked at any of the science at http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html ?
Try the FAQ.
jared,
So you believe that Joseph Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1859), Arrhenius (1896), Chamberlin (1897) were all “democrats”?http://www.aip.org/history/climate/timeline.htm
And the 100’s of scientists worldwide, listed in the annex here, are all “democrats”?http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html
Conservatives don’t care about climate change. They won’t be around when the chickens come home to roost.
Cosmos just refuses my way of thinking that the U.S. can clean up its own environment through its own methods and not be the subject of International blackmailers disguised as the United Nations.
You don’t think they will blackmail? Just look at recent lawsuits filed against the U.S. by France for not complying with Kyoto Treaty standards which of course the U.S. never signed.
It would only get worse if the U.S. was subject to treaty violations. If the U.S. lost a case in World Court, France or any other podunk country could seize U.S. assets
No thanks.
Cosmos is another U.N. butt kisser and wants to give up our rights to an extremely corrupt league of Environmental glory hogs would wish to glean hundreds of billions of dollars out of the U.S.
Look at cosfapfap post over and over again. He sure is a wanker.
Poor Republank… he’s not smart enought to understand that climate science, and solutions to reduce human-added GHG’s are two SEPARATE issues.
And poor fleettwood. He faps wildly over Rosell’s link,http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/05/at_least_bush_i.html#comment-71210014
despite Michael Griffin’s complete opinion,http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10571499“I’m aware that global warming exists. …I’m also aware of recent findings that appear to have nailed down — pretty well nailed down the conclusion that MUCH of that is MANMADE.”
So much bilge water Cosmos. The solutions to fix your problem is currently in the hands of the U.S. and its brilliant, innovative scientists. Solving problems is what the U.S. is all about, not creating problems like your beloved U.N. Cosmos.
Of course Cosmos, not being a scientist, you wouldn’t understand that. You are just another “used car salesman” on the payroll of Environmental pay me first boys.
Back at ya Republican:
http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/nasa-earths-climate-dangerous-tipping-point-13346.html
NASA and Columbia University Earth Institute research finds that human-made greenhouse gases have brought the Earth’s climate close to critical tipping points, with potentially dangerous consequences for the planet.
From a combination of climate models, satellite data, and paleoclimate records the scientists conclude that the West Antarctic ice sheet, Arctic ice cover, and regions providing fresh water sources and species habitat are under threat from continued global warming. The research appears in the current issue of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.
Tipping points can occur during climate change when the climate reaches a state such that strong amplifying feedbacks are activated by only moderate additional warming. This study finds that global warming of 0.6ºC in the past 30 years has been driven mainly by increasing greenhouse gases, and only moderate additional climate forcing is likely to set in motion disintegration of the West Antarctic ice sheet and Arctic sea ice. Amplifying feedbacks include increased absorption of sunlight as melting exposes darker surfaces and speedup of iceberg discharge as the warming ocean melts ice shelves that otherwise inhibit ice flow.
The researchers used data on earlier warm periods in Earth’s history to estimate climate impacts as a function of global temperature, climate models to simulate global warming, and satellite data to verify ongoing changes. Lead author James Hansen, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, concludes: “If global emissions of carbon dioxide continue to rise at the rate of the past decade, this research shows that there will be disastrous effects, including increasingly rapid sea level rise, increased frequency of droughts and floods, and increased stress on wildlife and plants due to rapidly shifting climate zones.”
The researchers also investigate what would be needed to avert large climate change, thus helping define practical implications of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. That treaty, signed in 1992 by the United States and almost all nations of the world, has the goal to stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gases “at a level that prevents dangerous human-made interference with the climate system.”
Based on climate model studies and the history of the Earth the authors conclude that additional global warming of about 1ºC (1.8ºF) or more, above global temperature in 2000, is likely to be dangerous. In turn, the temperature limit has implications for atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), which has already increased from the pre-industrial level of 280 parts per million (ppm) to 383 ppm today and is rising by about 2 ppm per year. According to study co-author Makiko Sato of Columbia’s Earth Institute, “the temperature limit implies that CO2 exceeding 450 ppm is almost surely dangerous, and the ceiling may be even lower.”
The study also shows that the reduction of non-carbon dioxide forcings such as methane and black soot can offset some CO2 increase, but only to a limited extent. Hansen notes that “we probably need a full court press on both CO2 emission rates and non-CO2 forcings, to avoid tipping points and save Arctic sea ice and the West Antarctic ice sheet.”
A computer model developed by the Goddard Institute was used to simulate climate from 1880 through today. The model included a more comprehensive set of natural and human-made climate forcings than previous studies, including changes in solar radiation, volcanic particles, human-made greenhouse gases, fine particles such as soot, the effect of the particles on clouds and land use. Extensive evaluation of the model’s ability to simulate climate change is contained in a companion paper to be published in Climate Dynamics.
The authors use the model for climate simulations of the 21st century using both ‘business-as-usual’ growth of greenhouse gas emissions and an ‘alternative scenario’ in which emissions decrease slowly in the next few decades and then rapidly to achieve stabilization of atmospheric CO2 amount by the end of the century. Climate changes are so large with ‘business-as-usual’, with additional global warming of 2-3ºC (3.6-5.4ºF) that Hansen concludes “’business-as-usual’ would be a guarantee of global and regional disasters.”
However, the study finds much less severe climate change – one-quarter to one-third that of the “business-as-usual” scenario – when greenhouse gas emissions follow the alternative scenario. “Climate effects may still be substantial in the ‘alternative scenario’, but there is a better chance to adapt to the changes and find other ways to further reduce the climate change,” said Sato.
While the researchers say it is still possible to achieve the “alternative scenario,” they note that significant actions will be required to do so. Emissions must begin to slow soon. “With another decade of ‘business-as-usual’ it becomes impractical to achieve the ‘alternative scenario’ because of the energy infrastructure that would be in place” says Hansen.
NASA
Poor Republank…
Even after I point out that climate science, and solutions to reduce human-added GHG’s are two SEPARATE issues, he’s not smart enought to understand the difference.
cosmo = boring
Seriously, fleetwood, is that all you have? You have to resort to calling someone boring so you can have the last word on subject? So many of you posters on here are the same – you simply can’t let anyone else have the last word, regardless of how right or wrong or JUVENILE your final comment has to be….
look what’s charging into the persian gulf:
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2623#more
You know Happy, I’ve been considering your proposal. I looked up jobs under Blackwater and I might just apply for that 200K/a year in their Air Operations Division.
That way, I can suck even more of your tax dollars out of the system.
Watcha think Happy?
Republican: Great! I’m all for people doing and saying what they believe in. I want nothing more than to be able to say that Republican walks the walk and doesn’t just crap out on his beliefs.
If you as a Republican want even more handouts from the government more power to you! I say grab every tax dollar you can with your greedy little hands until us badass Libs show you true conservatism and cut off your dirty oil war money.
Let us know when you’re leaving…we’ll throw a party!
Cosmos… I agree with you totally…. BUT… here’s the plain and simple truth… Repub and his friends, are all re-cycled John Birchers… And there is NO CHANCE in hell that you will ever get any of them to change their way of thinking… It cant possibly be man-made problems causing climate problems… and it cant be solved by any cooperation with anybody or any group OUTSIDE of the United States…. That’s the John Bircher way… Thats the neo-con and neo-republican way… Unfortunately you or anybody else will be able to change that… when we start to feel the total effects of climate change, and when we SEE it happening, THEN — MATYbe… they might believe… but most likely, maybe they wont!! I mean after all, they said the Titanic couldnt be sunk… but most of the world knows it did… But, if the UN had any opinion on it, none of the neo-cons would believe it…
I see Bush is coming to Wichita, we should go up and picket.
Phantom,
I’d hate to picket the Boys & Girls Club. They do great things.
Dogs smarter than scientists thought:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/03/AR2007060300960.html
Experiment indicate that dogs are able to get inside the head of another dog. Heretofore considered a human skill exclusively.
Dogs eat their own feces, can’t be too smart.
Al Gore spends almost $800.00/month just to heat his pool. What’s that equate to about 1000 trees planted?
Or is he going to buy a carbon credit or two and throw another log on the fire. Yeah, that will reduce emissions.
Too bad CO2 from soil surrounding the tree as well as methane, tree growth cover will actually worsen the problem of gases.
But hey! The GORACLE gets to go to U.N. Garden Parties in his gas guzzling limousine and fap fap about how his turning the world green. That would of course, be moldy green.
The blank must have some very ill dogs. It should take better care of its animals.
http://www.peteducation.com/article.cfm?cls=2&cat=1551&articleid=155
“Dogs who eat their feces usually do not have a dietary deficiency. Some medical problems, however, can contribute to coprophagy including severe disorders of the pancreas (pancreatic insufficiency) or intestine, severe malnutrition from massive parasitic infestations, or starvation. These cases are rare.
Some dogs, especially those in kennel situations, may eat feces because they are anxious or stressed. One researcher suggests that dogs who have been punished by their owners for defecating inappropriately start to think any defecation is wrong, so they try to eliminate the evidence.
Another theory is that coprophagy is a trait passed down through the ages. Dogs’ cousins, the wolves and coyotes, may often eat feces if food is in short supply. Feces from herbivores (animals that eat plants for food) contain many of the B vitamins. Some researchers suggest that wolves (and some dogs) may eat feces to replenish their vitamin supply.”
Happy, you have to understand that Republank pretends to be a former officer in the military.
Of course, this is a recent development. Give it a few more months and he will be a retired General or Admiral.
In fact, after a few more months, he will have been a Four Star General that saved the world during a secret mission that he can’t talk about.
A few days later he will disappear, only to resurface a day later under a new nic.
Watch.
‘Rear’ Admiral
I had no idea you were such an expert on poop Tom.
I had no idea you were such an expert on poop Tom.Posted by: Republican | June 04, 2007 at 04:59 PM
I never used to be. Wading through the bullshit you spew onto this blog, though, has been quite the education.
KMFGA. :)
Did you sample any Tom? Did it taste like fudge?
Perhaps you can get the corner on the market for Fecal Slurpees?
From a man who has been in the State Department for over 17 years:
“You’ve probably never heard of a State Department official named Price Floyd (I hadn’t until a few days ago), but his resignation-in-protest, late last March, is as damning a commentary on President George W. Bush’s foreign policies as any of the critiques from retired military officers.
Floyd was director of media relations at Foggy Bottom, the most recent of several diplomatic posts that he’d held over the past 17 years, beginning in the administration of Bush’s father.
He explained his reason for quitting in a little-read op-ed piece in the May 25 edition of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (his former hometown newspaper): Basically, he was tired of trying to convince journalists, here and abroad, “that we should not be judged by our actions, only our words.”"
Full text at: http://www.slate.com/id/2167287/fr/flyout
Anyone wondering how Bush is perceived by pros, read the full text.
Good article, J M, well worth a read – too bad that the Neocons will drop it and accuse Mr. Floyd of being a pinko leftist coward subversive that just has a secret hatred of GWB.
That is how it usually goes, isn’t it.
As i watch repub on his fishing mission to get some sort of attention i can’t help but laugh. If i were a betting person, i’d wager blackwater wouldn’t hire a handicapped/disabled former double top secret general admiral ninja. Just my viewpoint….Anywho, have a great day all.
I’m guessing First Timer is another Fister and also someone who has never served in the military.
Anyone in the military who receives sensitive information knows about NDA’s.
If they don’t know and served in the military, they probably didn’t rise about the rank of E-2.
Anyone that ha worked in a relatively high level in management in business knows about NDA’S. Don’t get fooled, a NDA is not unique, I have personally signed five or six of them.
No big deal.
Chas,
I know that Republank is hopeless, as are the others.
But it’s kinda fun to cause him to make his stupid posts, like on this thread.
He starts out with a post from a one-person “Institute” quoting some low/zero credibilty ’skeptics’.Then he makes personal attacks on me, and the U.N.And then he (predictably) attacks Al Gore.
Republank, by being unable to prove his opinion, helps prove that humans are causing global warming.
Tennessee Valley Authorityhttp://www.tva.gov/greenpowerswitch/
US cuts back climate checks from spaceAssociated Press – June 4, 2007 7:13 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AP) – President Bush is trying to convince the world the US is ready to take the lead in reducing greenhouse gases.
But meanwhile, the administration is drastically scaling back efforts to measure global warming from space.
A confidential report to the White House, obtained by The Associated Press, warns that American scientists will soon lose much of their ability to monitor warming from space.
They’ve been using a costly and problem-plagued satellite initiative begun more than a decade ago. It was intended to gather weather and climate data. But the Pentagon has decided to downsize and launch four satellites instead of 6 satellites.
The reduced system will now focus on weather forecasting. Most climate instruments needed to collect more precise data over long periods are being eliminated.
A House panel has called for a hearing later this week.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Hummmmmmmmmmmm!!!!!
Cosmos wrote:
“If you’re going to try to spin the issue, learn the basics.Livestock produce methane.
And not that you care, but human-added CO2 stays in the atmosphere (and warms the Earth) much longer than methane”
I’m sorry, as I understood it cows breathed oxygen and exhaled CO2….and “COSMOS” I understand that your crap may not stink and you could possible be the only human that DOES NOT produce methane but I’m pretty sure all of us “HUMANS” produce methane as well. If the air you breathe out is the same as the words you speak then you could be right….maybe your methane comes out of your mouth. I will go brush up on my basic biology and be sure that I’m not just mistaken about the whole livestock producing CO2. It’s quite possible that they exhale methane like you.
Hey jared!
http://www.epa.gov/rlep/faq.html“Cattle emit methane through a digestive process that is unique to ruminant animals called enteric fermentation.”
‘Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes (Years) ‘http://www.epa.gov/nonco2/econ-inv/table.html
Um…ok! What does that have to do with what I was talking about? Did you notice that CO2 and Methane were the two lowest of the GWP (Global warming Potential) in years? 1 year with CO2 and 21 years with methane with 10’s of thousands for most everything else. Hmmm……better run out a buy me some “Carbon” credits.
In five years the Dems will be on some other kick. Global warming will pass. Funny that in the age of Global warming it snowed in Orlando, Florida before it snowed here in Kansas this year.
jared wrote:
“What does that have to do with what I was talking about?”
Absolutely nothing… if you’re a ruminant animal.
jared wrote:”Did you notice that CO2 and Methane were the two lowest of the GWP (Global warming Potential) in years? 1 year with CO2 and 21 years with methane with…”
No, I didn’t notice that, because that’s NOT true.
CO2 is “defined” to have a GWP of “1″, over a 100 year time horizon.
And one molecule of methane has 21 times the GWP of one molecule of CO2.
CO2 has a lifetime of 50 to 200 years.Methane has a lifetime of about 12 years.
Are you and Republank related?
This is no way to treat a vet.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070605/ts_nm/usa_iraq_marine_dc_1;_ylt=AlSebvSk3oWnNCkL9ZRkj5ZlM3wV
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxo6RpjPC7M
ALERT!!! Michael Griffin, of NASA, has issued an apology for his comments “much quoted” on this Blog — see above — You can find the video on AOL.com…
WW……………WW…….AAA…WW………….WW……AAAAA…..WW…..W….WW…..AA…..AA…..WW.WWW.WW……AAAAAAAA……WW……WW…….AA………AALL……………KK…..KKLL……………KK…KKLL……………KKKKLL……………KK…KKLLLLLLL……..KK…..KK..OOOOO…….NN…….NN.OO….OO……NNN…..NNOO……OO…..NN..N…NN.OO….OO……NN…N..NN…OOOOO……NN…….NNBBBBB………YY………..YYBB….B……….YY…….YYBBBBBB………….YYYYYBB…..BB…………YYYBBBBBB…………..YYY
Good one, Capn’!
That’s been show before Phantom, old news
?????? ???? ????????????? ?????? blogs.kansas.com!????? ?????????? ? ??????? ?????? ? ????????????????? ????????. ??? ?????? http://www.uxxicom.com/