Scientists say that mmgw is EXAGGERATED.

[mohican]

looking a little further, it seems that you are correct, but that at some time in the past Greenland was green.

[MLD Woody]

So you don't even believe we're going through a climate change with an overall warming effect? Let alone whether man influences that?

[MLD Woody]

Is global warming occuring? there is a lot of credible evidence that shows that the earth has cooled since the El Nino cycle in the 1990s.

 

Is global warming bad? Perhaps if in the extreme. On the other hand, global cooling can effect food production and can drive things like "black plague", either directly or indirectly.

 

Has it been warmer? It has been warmer, at least in the Northern Hemisphere. When the Vikings settled Greenland, it was a green land in it's entirety, and there was self sustaining agriculture through from north to south. I don't know if you could even grow a "cold" wheat crop there.

 

Considering you were pretty much wrong about the last part, for why Steve explained, I'd like to see your evidence for the first part. Climate change happens over decades and decades though. Basing it off of an unusually high point and then as it goes back to the original trend, may show a cooling trend, but that's offer a short period. Inaccuracy would have a big affect on that, and it basically isn't showing the real trend. Decades and decades of a trend outweigh a much shorter pweiod.

 

 

Tho I still want to see your data

[WalterWhite]

Oh for fucks sake,

 

They have created a currency behind Global Warming and now it's big bucks. There is big bucks in all of this shit.

[gftChris]

Pope on the matter:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22530044.500-pope-to-make-moral-case-for-action-on-climate-change.html?utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=SOC&utm_campaign=twitter&cmpid=SOC%7CNSNS%7C2014-GLOBAL-twitter#.VLez6yusV2x

[Westside Steve]

Pope on the matter:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22530044.500-pope-to-make-moral-case-for-action-on-climate-change.html?utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=SOC&utm_campaign=twitter&cmpid=SOC%7CNSNS%7C2014-GLOBAL-twitter#.VLez6yusV2x

Well seeing as how bearing false witness, coveting thy neighbors property, disrespecting your mother and father, stealing etc is still commonplace I'd be surprised if the Pope can convince us to stop driving and eating hamburgers.

 

Just a guess...

 

 

WSS

[mohican]

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/31/climate-change-froze-the-vikings-out-of-greenland-say-scientists/#.VLffQ3tYBnk

 

The Norse Vikings arrived in Greenland around 980 AD, during a 300-year-long warm period. Starting around 1100, however, the climate cooled rapidly. Average temperature dropped 4 degrees Celsius (7 degrees Fahrenheit) in only 80 years. Since the Norse—Viking fame aside—were largely farmers, this drop in temperature likely hit them hard. They began to leave Greenland shortly thereafter, and by the mid-15th century their settlements lay abandoned.

 

The article goes on to talk about current arctic or near arctic warming, with decrease in Ice Sheets, but the arctic ice cap is growing: http://guardianlv.com/2013/09/arctic-ice-cap-growing-at-tremendous-rate/

 

CNN predicts that global warming is coming and then greenland could be farmed, but as posted the Ice cap is growing - indicating arctic and near arctic is getting.....colder http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/04/world/greenland-secrets/index.html

 

Greenland is an autonomous territory that is partially administered by Denmark. The police force and military in Greenland are Danish and Greenland sends three members to the Danish parliament. It is the largest Island in the world and was discovered around 982 by an explorer named Eric the Red who had been exiled from Iceland for murder for three years.

That is significant because Eric the Red sailed to Greenland in a small wooden boat, but nowadays the area around Greenland is covered all year with pack ice and icebergs. It would have been impossible for him to penetrate the ice fields around Greenland with the vessels of the day.

So many researchers have come to the conclusion that temperatures in Greenland must have been much higher in the 10th century than they are today. Also, the fact that he named the territory "Greenland" seems to indicate a more lush landscape than the barren plains and mountains one can see now.

 

does a bit to support what I said.....

 

 

[mohican]

Warming as a benefit- cooling brings misery http://earthsciencesus.blogspot.com/2008/01/black-death-and-climate-change.html

 

the Medieval Warming Period, which ended around the year 1300, enabled abundant crops over much of Europe for hundreds of years. This continual abundance of food then created a population boom. The milder winters and longer growing seasons resulted in smaller amounts of environmental stress on the European peoples. As a result, by the year 1300 most of Europe’s people’s were well fed and generally healthy.

 

Then came the Great Famine of 1315–1322, the direct result of the cooling of the European climate, usually called the Little Ice Age. It started with three years of torrential rains beginning in 1315.The bad weather of the spring of 1315 resulted in crop failures over most of Europe and lasted until the summer of 1317.The unstable weather lasted in Europe until the 19^th century and was characterized by severe winters and no or very short growing seasons.

When did the Black Death ravage Europe? From the years 1347 to 1351.

It doesn’t take a college degree to figure the natural chain of events caused by the Climate Change of 1300 to 1322.

The so called “Global Warming” of the Medieval Warming Period sparked the greatest boom in prosperity and health of the last 1,000 years in Europe. The climate change resulting in the Little Ice Age caused massive death and misery.

 

When people of the first half of the 1300's became starved, their immunity to common infections dropped, that combined with improper sanitation,lack of clean water and environmental stress set the stage for the Black Death.

 

http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/the-little-ice-age-and-the-black-death.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age

[gftChris]

Warming as a benefit- cooling brings misery http://earthsciencesus.blogspot.com/2008/01/black-death-and-climate-change.html

 

http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/the-little-ice-age-and-the-black-death.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age

Have you had a read of this before? It purports the opposite, that warming is in fact bad

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-advanced.htm

[mohican]

I'd like to preface this by saying I'm not for pollution. I drive a car that gets about 40-45mph, and I try to keep my consumption of things (other than gunpowder and lead) low.

 

I'm not a republican, or a democrat. I'm not looking at this because I think Palin is a Milf that I'd like to drill baby drill, but from some loose analysis.

 

I am an observer, and a reader of things scientific since my formative years in the 1970s. I am an engineer by profession, so I am analytical.

 

I also read a good bit of history.

 

I also can observe. My observation brings me to believe that for one thing, Al Gore is a charlatan who does not practice what he preaches.

 

I know that light has been brough to bare on very questionable scientific practices.

 

Beyond that, there are factors that probably affect climate that are rarely in the debate. Such as continental drift, and perhaps polar or magnetic shifts.

 

So it does happen that places on earth fluxuate from year to year in their relation to the sun. I know that comparing Ohio Forestry maps from the 1970s to current maps that declination from magnetic north to true north has changed.

 

I

[mohican]

Not really. when it was founded Eric the Red wanted to attract people to form a new colony and called it greenland instead of desolate ice covered wasteland. Ironically the opposite of Iceland. Originally named to keep people away.

 

WSS

One can find places that say that Eric The Red naming Greenland as a red herring. One can also find that during their approximate 300 years on Greenland, the Norse farmed extensively, enough so that soil erosion might have been a problem. (another discussion entirely) And that a cooling period did, to a large degree, drive the Vikings off Greenland.

 

http://blogs.discove...s/#.VLffQ3tYBnk

 

The Norse Vikings arrived in Greenland around 980 AD, during a 300-year-long warm period. Starting around 1100, however, the climate cooled rapidly. Average temperature dropped 4 degrees Celsius (7 degrees Fahrenheit) in only 80 years. Since the Norse—Viking fame aside—were largely farmers, this drop in temperature likely hit them hard. They began to leave Greenland shortly thereafter, and by the mid-15th century their settlements lay abandoned.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...rets/index.html

Greenland is an autonomous territory that is partially administered by Denmark. The police force and military in Greenland are Danish and Greenland sends three members to the Danish parliament. It is the largest Island in the world and was discovered around 982 by an explorer named Eric the Red who had been exiled from Iceland for murder for three years.

 

That is significant because Eric the Red sailed to Greenland in a small wooden boat, but nowadays the area around Greenland is covered all year with pack ice and icebergs. It would have been impossible for him to penetrate the ice fields around Greenland with the vessels of the day.

 

So many researchers have come to the conclusion that temperatures in Greenland must have been much higher in the 10th century than they are today. Also, the fact that he named the territory "Greenland" seems to indicate a more lush landscape than the barren plains and mountains one can see now.

 

[mohican]

Considering you were pretty much wrong about the last part, for why Steve explained, I'd like to see your evidence for the first part. Climate change happens over decades and decades though. Basing it off of an unusually high point and then as it goes back to the original trend, may show a cooling trend, but that's offer a short period. Inaccuracy would have a big affect on that, and it basically isn't showing the real trend. Decades and decades of a trend outweigh a much shorter pweiod.

 

 

Tho I still want to see your data

Turns out I was right about Greenland being much warmer than it is today. And I can spell period.

[Westside Steve]

http://www.skepticalscience.com/greenland-used-to-be-green.htm

[mohican]

So you don't even believe we're going through a climate change with an overall warming effect? Let alone whether man influences that?

I never said we are not going through a period of climate change. If you stick around on earth longer than 5-10 years you will experience some form of climate change. A lot of evidence shows that since the peak of the El Nino cyle, we have been cooling. That is mainly due to solar activity.

 

If you are relying on a premise that mankinds generation of CO2 is driving a warming period, I just might go all CalFox on you http://www.ihatethemedia.com/noted-global-warming-expert-rfk-jr-predicted-that-washington-dc-might-never-see-snow-again.

 

Some people that do some research and comparisons to the past think we might want to stock up on mittens and brace for a "maunder miniumum". http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/12/another-parallel-with-the-maunder-minimum/

 

Back to CO2 - you can pull different figures from different places but humans are the cause of 6% of carbon dioxide (a high side?) The largest generation of carbon dioxide is competely our of our hands - it's due to oceanic turnover -( warning - there are many contradictory studies on the matter. 97% don't agree on the totality of it.) By most calculations, the 6% of carbon dioxide generated by humans have what % of increase in temperature? And would that be regional versus global? At that point, wouldn't it be more accurate to say "regional warming"? China generates the majority of man made C02, which might lead some credence to C02 as a driver, but I have sat over two PHD physicists who disagree on whether C02 drives temperatures, or is driven by temperatures, and by how much.

 

On a regional basis I would venture that my summers and winters have been cooler than the late 1980s or the late 1990s.

[mohican]

Have you had a read of this before? It purports the opposite, that warming is in fact bad

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-advanced.htm

I'm skeptical of it. It smacks of Obama promising to lower the oceans.

[mohican]

http://www.skepticalscience.com/greenland-used-to-be-green.htm

Duelling links? http://sciencenordic.com/vikings-grew-barley-greenland

 

Prior to the Norse, there was a time (4000 years ago?) that Inuits also did cultivation on Greenland.

 

And as alluded to - the icepack at surrounding sea could not have been what it is now, or the Nordic/Vikings would not have made it there in their boats.

[Westside Steve]

basically I'm thinking that a .02 even a .2 rise is not significant and the ice sheet has been there for almost a million years. Anyhow.... I don't get alarmed over global warming. I know a lot of people do.

WSS

[mohican]

As stated, I have doubts about global warming, manmade global warming, and whether it's good or bad. How I get to these positions is differnent from a lot of people.

 

There is much conflicting data out there