Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

key2thecup

Norway Data Shows Earth’s Global Warming Less Severe Than Feared

50 posts in this topic

Hmmm, I wonder why... /sarcasm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_claims_in_the_Arctic#Norway

Norway ratified the UNCLOS in late 1996 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_claims_in_the_Arctic#Norway on November 27, 2006, Norway made an official into the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (article 76, paragraph 8). There are provided arguments to extend the Norwegian seabed claim beyond the 200 nmi (370 km; 230 mi) EEZ in three areas of the northeastern Atlantic and the Arctic: the "Loop Hole" in the Barents Sea, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_claims_in_the_Arctic#Norway Nansen Basin in the Arctic Ocean, and the "Banana Hole" in the Norwegian Sea. The submission also states that an additional submission for continental shelf limits in other areas may be posted.[19]
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Climate change is happening in the whole solar system not just earth

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but does our solar system not also travel in an orbit? So how do we know that "climate change" isnt just that

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What has gotten lost in this media frenzy is that the paper is under review and has not been published. All the new articles are based off a press release. It is rather interesting to see how some are quick to embrace this even though no one has even seen the results, or the data that goes into the study.

What is also lost in the media frenzy is that this is one study, whereas the body of knowledge is really the sum of a broad range of evidences.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately what matters is how much sunlight the earth is receiving. This can either happen by the sun changing its brightness, or the earth becoming closer/further away from the sun due to orbital changes.

We have been monitoring the amount of sunlight received via satellites, and there has been no systematic change since 1978 beyond the 11 year cycle (see for example this). If anything it decreased slight which should've led to cooling.

In addition, based on warming pattern we can actually deduce the source of the warming. One example is that observation suggests that the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) is cooling while the lower atmosphere is warming, which is consistent with what happens as you increase greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. The same is not expected if the warming were due to increase in solar energy. Another important "finger print" is that the nights are warming faster than the days, which again expected from an increase in GHG.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love how people like to jump all over the results of one study. Kinda like the nutjobs who gobbled up the "vaccines cause autism" study that was .... oops... full of crap and fake.

Man there are a lot of sheep, on BOTH SIDES.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love how people like to jump all over the results of one study. Kinda like the nutjobs who gobbled up the "vaccines cause autism" study that was .... oops... full of crap and fake.

Man there are a lot of sheep, on BOTH SIDES.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are other things beyond just the visual band that affect climate. Solar activity has risen steadily over the long term. Sunspot numbers have increased (we are in a period called the modern maximum right now). There may not have been a systematic change since 1978 besides the 11 and 22 year cycles, but longer term cycles haven't been measured by us yet.

We have only been measuring the sun's output directly for a relatively short period of time. Due to the thermal inertia of the oceans, climate changes are much more sensitive to the longer term variations we haven't been able to measure yet, and most high frequency signals are dampened out.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 2008, reports of polar bears' inevitable march toward extinction gripped headlines. Stories of thinning Arctic ice and even polar bear cannibalism combined to make these predators into a powerful symbol in the debate about climate change.

The headlines caught Zac Unger's attention, and he decided to write a book about the bears.

Unger made a plan to move to Churchill, Manitoba, a flat, gray place on the Hudson Bay in northern Canada accessible only by train or plane. For a few months out of the year, as the bay starts to freeze, tiny Churchill boasts as many polar bears as it does people.

Unger packed up his wife and three small kids, and set out with a big bold idea. He wanted to write the quintessential requiem of how human-caused climate change was killing off these magnificent beasts.

In the end, he came away with something totally different, Unger tells NPR's Laura Sullivan.

Interview Highlights

On wanting to write the next great environmental tract

"My humble plan was to become a hero of the environmental movement. I was going to go up to the Canadian Arctic, I was going to write this mournful elegy for the polar bears, at which point I'd be hailed as the next coming of John Muir and borne aloft on the shoulders of my environmental compatriots ...

"So when I got up there, I started realizing polar bears were not in as bad a shape as the conventional wisdom had led me to believe, which was actually very heartening, but didn't fit well with the book I'd been planning to write.

"... There are far more polar bears alive today than there were 40 years ago. ... In 1973, there was a global hunting ban. So once hunting was dramatically reduced, the population exploded. This is not to say that global warming is not real or is not a problem for the polar bears. But polar bear populations are large, and the truth is that we can't look at it as a monolithic population that is all going one way or another."

On moving his family to "Polar Bear Capital of the World"

"We were in this town in northern Manitoba where polar bears literally will walk down Main Street. There are polar bears in this town. People will leave their cars and houses unlocked, and it's perfectly good form just to duck into any open door you can find when there's a polar bear chasing you.

"People use what they call Churchill welcome mats, which is a piece of plywood laid down in front of the door or leaned up against the door with hundreds of nails sticking out so that when the polar bear comes up to pad across your porch, he's going to get a paw full of sharp nails."

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ If one wonders why I'm so vehemently opposed to this green environmental propagandist/alarmist movement, this little story thoroughly encapsulates why.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That you define your view based on the extreme side of anything is what's puzzling.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.