More Global Warming Debate

As if we don't have enough nut cases to deal with right here on CR4!

Actually, great link and suggestion.

Hey Ken, how's that water shortage in Atlanta doin?

Things are still pretty dismal, even after four straight days of rain over the holidays. Still no outside water use of any kind permitted. My little sailboat is filthy because I can't wash it, and unusable, because the lake levels are too low. We have a number of large pines which keep hanging on -- I can't imagine how, though. We've had entire months with hardly a drop of rain.

Raleigh is in sad shape too, I hear from a relative. How's Knoxville?

Below normal but the Tenn. river is fine.

thanks for the link - when i was in school we we all going to freeze to death because the green house gases were going to form a shield and reflect the sun.

today in michigan we have almost 2 inches of rain! if it were snow - it would be almost 2 ft deep

Originally from Raleigh, NC - i have been watching and feel your pain - the original reason i move to MI was the lakes for sailing --

Ken if you get no rain before spring come on up this summer -- that would be July 1 thru the 15th! ha ha

I used to sail in upstate New York. We usually had one sunny day/year. We also one windy day/year, but it was never the same day as the sunny day. Swimming, though, was much better, with the water being survivable for a full week at the end of August.

Would love to send you some of the rain/snow mix that gets pumped up the Ohio River valley from the Gulf of Mexico and dumped on my area; unfortunately we dont yet know how to divert these storms. For my money, I would like to see a program initiated aimed at heavy research into that type of activity, rather than reducing carbon emissions. I believe major governmental funding in this area would have a greater impact "down the road" on our weather than GW spending, but then think of all the environmental lobbyists put out of a job.

Of course we know how to divert storms - we see it happen all the time - mountains. We just need to take the oxygen out of the CO₂ and pile up the carbon into a new Appalachian range running from Illinois down to Mississippi. That'll stop it. Two birds with one stone.

I should put this into some kind of grant proposal.

I should put this into some kind of grant proposal.

Sadly... ain't it the truth? I used to work in the coal mining industry -- maybe I could get back into it.

Nature's own Global Warming -- Recently there have been articles and reviews on the melting Arctic ice and the warming temperatures. While we may blame humans for "global warming," Nature itself has provide a much greater source of greenhouse gases in the form of "Burning Ice" (Methane Hydrates) that in the geological past have outgassed in massive amounts periodically into the atmosphere. I will review the megatons of burning ice later on, but first there is a technical scientific issue to resolve.

The issue of "global warming" brings up the need for good mathematics in analyzing the various data sources to determine the true causes-and-effects ("inputs" and "outputs") and to filter out those causes that either do not affect the output, or in minor ways, or in combined effects that do not show up until certain conditions are correct. As I have spent time in R&D and also getting my series of degrees, I have found that very few scientists and researchers know how to use statistics properly to be able to filter and view data for the actual, true cause-and-effects. Too many times statistical regression methods are used that assume a direct relationship between the causes and effect, which may not be real. Although there are several books on the market, one of the best books I know of that can help researchers, analysts, and scientists is a book entitled, "Statistics for Experimenters," by Box, Hunter, and Hunter.

When it comes to global warming, there are more causes than most scientists have considered. For example, the increase in the number and intensity of solar eruptions has a much higher statistical correlation than the other causes/inputs. There are not many web pages that show these in good ways, but here are two articles for present the correlations rather easily.

http://www.qualitydigest.com/mar98/html/spctool.html
http://www.qualitydigest.com/april98/html/spctool.html

Although these graphs are from the late 1990s, the use of this type of statistical tool, SPC charting, has hardly ever been used by scientific researchers and investigators. Most of them have used other mathematical methods that assume a direct correlation between greenhouse gases and Global warming, as directed and determined by the process modeler. This traditional "assumption" may not be correct, and in some cases may potentially mislead scientists and modelers. These other tools can allow a scientist to purposely minimize the effects from natural causes and to maximize the effects of human sources.

Some researchers say that they know all the effects that the increased solar flux has on the atmosphere and have included this in their models, and stated that there are no real effects from the solar flux. But then there are other scientists with different theories on the effects of increased flux that present different scenarios for atmospheric reactions, such as the geomagnetic fields and changes, volcanics and their outgassings, etc. You do not hear much in the news about these other scientists and their results.

People should be very cautious about assuming that the global warming "effect" is due solely to "greenhouse" gases. Also, it should be noted that recent satellite data has shown that upper atmosphere is actually cooling:

http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pa/News/121699text.html
http://ees5-www.lanl.gov/IGPP/Debate2.html
(some of these links may not be working due to computer changes since 9-11)

Some researchers say that their theory and modeling shows that this cooling should occur, while others show differing effects. We see that there is still not complete agreements on the causes and especially the effects of global warming. Then there are some researchers who have purposely manipulated their models, formulas, and analyses to purposely disregard all other inputs and only tie the temperatures to greenhouse gases.

There is the other issue of how some scientists and researchers can purposely change the structure of the formulas used in their models, the mathematical terms used in the formulas, the parameters and scaling factors in the formulas, and the values of any exponentials so as to obtain predetermined results that the scientists wanted to get anyway. This allows the scientist to minimize effects from natural causes and to maximize the effects of human sources. This is "tampering" with the formulas so as to get the predetermined results that someone might want to get, no matter what the real processes are.

In my experiences in the scientific / R&D cultures, I have seen this happen several times, even with Peer Reviews. Peer Reviews are "supposed" to catch incorrect things, inconsistencies, and errors. But this does not always occur. In some cases, the scientific peers involved in those Peer Reviews also wanted "certain" results to come out of the modeling and designs that they were reviewing. In other cases, the peers were not paying attention to critical items and issues.

Also the issue of temperature collection has not been properly resolved. Temperatures are taken in cities that have the heat island effect. I have seen several different approached to handling and correcting these heat effects, but these approaches vary and also give various results. Then there is the issue of thermometer calibration. I have observed where some thermometers for city temperatures were not calibrated properly at the required intervals, and some times not calibrated at all. How can we trust the temperature data if there are these variations in the instruments?

When it comes to Nature's greenhouse generators through the Burning Ice (Methane Hydrates), we soon realize that our gases are very small when compared to the megatons of methane hydrates that are held within our oceans in a manner similar to a bathtub ring. Also the Earth has had major accumulations and releases in its geological past over the eons, some of which scientists now believe may have lead to some great temperature increases in the Earth's past, long before humans were ever around.

Let me give you some web sites that describe the characteristics and issues with the Earth's Burning Ice and the natural abundance of methane greenhouse gases:

General information on chemistry and biology of Methane Hydrates:
--> http://www.at-sea.org/missions/extremes/preview.html

--> http://www-ocean.tamu.edu/Quarterdeck/QD5.3/sassen.html

--> http://ench1.ench.ucalgary.ca/~hydrates/

--> http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/oilgas/hydrates/

--> http://www.mbari.org/ghgases/

--> http://www.mbari.org/ghgases/geochem/gas_hydrates.htm

--> http://www.mbari.org/volcanism/Margin/Marg-Hydrates.htm

--> http://www.netl.doe.gov/scngo/NaturalGas/hydrates/index.html

U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) fact sheets:
--> http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/hydrates/

--> http://marine.usgs.gov/fact-sheets/gas-hydrates/title.html

--> http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs021-01/

--> http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/hydrates/

Germany's research:
--> http://www.mpi-bremen.de/deutsch/biogeo/mumm2.html

--> http://www.gashydrate.de/

In the geological records and how dramatically and even violently the climate has changed, long before modern man came around. There is very strong geological and scientific evidence that the massive Extinction in the Permian Era many millions of years ago in the Earth's geological past was caused both by massive volcanism and by Methane Hydrates.
http://www.terradaily.com/news/deepimpact-05r.html

Study breaks ice on ancient Arctic thaw:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Study_Breaks_Ice_On_Ancient_Arctic_Thaw_999.html
(previous periods of global warming)

And then there is the aspect of climate change from meteors:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzo.html

Outgassing of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) from volcanoes:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs172-96/

Inaccuracies in measurements of climates:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Antarctic_Snow_Inaccurate_Temperature_Archive.html

Ancient Climate Studies Suggest Earth On Fast Track To Global Warming
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Ancient_Climate_Studies_Suggest_Earth_On_Fast_Track_To_Global_Warming.html

Green plants also cause Global Warming:
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/22944/
http://www.germany-info.org/relaunch/info/publications/week/2006/060113/e-list.html#Wi1
http://www.terradaily.com/news/The_Forgotten_Methane_Source.html
http://www.terradaily.com/news/Could_Forests_Worsen_Global_Warming.html
http://www.terradaily.com/news/Extinctions_Linked_To_Climate_Change.html

Farming Provides Wildlife Habitat And Reduces Global Warming
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Farming_Provides_Wildlife_Habitat_And_Reduces_Global_Warming.html

Prehistoric warming helped preserve fossils:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzzi.html

Ancient tropical warming and nature's greenhouse gases
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzzj.html

Volcanic impacts on ocean levels:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/oceans-05y.html

Climate change and massive flooding:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/The_Role_Of_Massive_Floods_In_Climate_Change.html

Late Pleistocene Americans Faced Chaotic Climate Change Environments:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Late_Pleistocene_Americans_Faced_Chaotic_Climate_Change_Environments.html

Global Warming evidence from 55 million years ago:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzzzb.html

Tropical ice cores shows two abrupt Global Climate shifts:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Tropical_Ice_Cores_Shows_Two_Abrupt_Global_Climate_Shifts_999.html

How continental splits resulted in global cooling:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/antarctic-05q.html

Earth's burping from wobbling also affects climate:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzt.html

Geomagnetism as one factor in rain / weather:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Magnets_Help_Explain_Rain_Patterns.html

None of the environmentalists or businesses involved in reducing carbon emissions can go and blame massive climate changes in the past on power plants and vehicles!

It is not wise to make international policies on theories that are not agreed upon by the scientists who have been studying these causes and effects. Other scientists have published their works dealing with other causes, but have not been given the publicity such as the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) has received.

But if the Solar Sun is the major, primary cause and we are just a minor contributor, then our Governments are imposing on us a major compliance issue that will NOT solve the problem. Control of carbon emissions does NOT equal Control of the Solar Sun and its flux intensities on us. Several environmental groups have told us and openly admitted at other times that they want to use the idea of human sources in order to shut down industrial activities -- their words, not ours.

Catherine, Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA.

You really would fit in nicely here. Thought of joining? Nice post.

cr3

Here is another source for you to consider.

I don't know if you have ever heard of John Coleman. He used to be a TV Weatherman here in Chicago. I heard him on the radio yesterday talking about Global Warming and CO2. He basically said that Al Gore should be arrested and charged with fraud for selling Carbon Credits, when he clearly knows that Global Warming is a hoax.

Here is a site that link's to John Coleman's original comments about the Global Warming Hoax.

http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/comments_about_global_warming/

Dick Hourigan
Visit
www.RichardHouriganInc.com

"But if the Solar Sun is the major, primary cause"

Dear Catherine and others,

if the solar energy output, better: the share that is absorbed by our earth is not the primary cause we still shall not act headless and hastily.

There have been massive climatic changes, some described in your links.

We do not know what causes were working, so we act without profound knowledge in a sensitive system where we do not know where we want to be!

What I think useful to add to your list of effects of climatic change:

1. iron oxide blown by desert winds fertilise the oceans and bury by subsequent algae life the amount of CO2 that is buried. This effect is driving the climate towards cold.

2. the flipflop behaviour of flatlands in northern and southern latitudes: if covered by snow the solar energy that is trapped will go down from 80 to 10% of incoming energy. This effect is stabilising both the warm as the cold situation.

3. The hydrogen-sulfide poisoning of oceans where oxygen exchange is too low. This can act in both directions as if existing only in the deeper layers then carbon burying is more effective but if extending towards shallow water then any life will be killed and carbon storage blocked totally.

4. The volcanoes that produce methane, CO2 and dust. The first two will bring warming the last very effective cooling. Same with asteroids: if a hit is on carbonaceous soil then massive CO2 is freed (warming) but if hitting a gypsum rich soil then massive amounts of SO2 is freed (cooling).

5. Massive heat traps by deep level valleys (death valley, dead sea, Mediterranean sea some 5 to 20 million years ago) by trapping almost any heat influx.

6. Oscillating mechanisms (R-C-oscillators, 1 energy storage the capacitor, 1 dissipater the resistor) as the area of Tibet: this was depressed by the last ice-age and is now coming up at a rate of 20mm per year and reaching in 40thousand year an altitude where will be snow and ice all year long thus preventing some % of total earth energy gain to be reflected to space. This is one hard fact to trigger the next ice-age. After accumulating enough ice (slowly) and after squeezing the whole plate into the underlying magma there will be melting of the ice again and the next cycle can start. This in itself is an oscillator, to be modified in frequency by other influences.

7. I am tired to go further:

We will waste our money that we need to build our future, that we need to educate everybody to his or her limits. So if we proceed to do ridiculous things (burning food with a lot of taxpayers money in car-driving) if we proceed then our civilisation will be lost to extinction in an attempt to stabilise itself along wrong and misinterpreted effects and guidelines.

Maybe this is a bit too like to Kassandra's warning in the war on Troy, nobody would hear her warnings. The real dangers for us are coming from ourselves and our limited understanding of necessities and side effects.

RHABE

Everybody who believes in simple statistics and correlation coefficients shall look to the German storks in the years 1965 to 1975 and the number of newborn babies during this period: both declined to 50% of the 1965 level. (Limited capacity?)