|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Ian Stirling" wrote ...
In sci.physics Paul Blay wrote: "relay61:13:214:23" wrote ... We could simply cool the earth down by covering India with Al foil and reflecting the heat back out to space. 'simply' huh? Yes. There are a number of ways to cool the earth that would cost less than an 11C uncontrolled climate change. From orbiting sun-shades on down. None of which get the adjective 'simple' particularly if the way chosen is covering India with Al foil. Simple-minded I'll grant. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote: January 26, 2005 http://www.nature.com/news/2005/0501...050124-10.html http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=3Ddn6934 http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...yID=3D744 00= 23 http://www.physorg.com/news2831.html http://www.climateprediction.net Thomas Lee Elifritz http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net There is an implicit assumption (not yet justified) that climate change (especially 'global warming') is necessarily bad. Shortly after the end of the last glaciation there was a period in which the globe was approximately 5=B0 C warmer than it is now and sea levels were several meters higher. It is known to anthropologists and archaeologists as the "Holocene thermal optimum" and was also a time of much greater biomass, the Sahara grasslands, and much larger forests. Agriculture flourished, people built cities and learned to write, and trading became commonplace. The Stone age was supplanted by the Dawn of Civilization. All without fossil fuel consumption... When circumstances do not change, adaptation ceases. When adaptation ceases, species stagnate and become more vulnerable to change. Change is inevitable. Adapt or die. Tom Davidson Richmond, VA |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"tadchem" wrote in evul-printable ...
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote: http://www.nature.com/news/2005/0501...050124-10.html http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6934 http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=7440023 http://www.physorg.com/news2831.html http://www.climateprediction.net Thomas Lee Elifritz http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net There is an implicit assumption (not yet justified) that climate change (especially 'global warming') is necessarily bad. There is a working hypothesis on which many studies have been done that effects of climate change (especially 'global warming') to date and as predicted to proceed from now have already had and will continue to have significant negative impact over and above any positive effect. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Blay wrote: snip repost There is a working hypothesis on which many studies have been done that effects of climate change (especially 'global warming') to date and as predicted to proceed from now have already had and will continue to have significant negative impact over and above any positive effect. "Seek and ye shall find." - Matthew 7:7 You write of "a working hypothesis ... that effects of climate change .... have already had and will continue to have significant negative impact over and above any positive effect". That is not good science - it is religion. I would expect something like this from the proponents of 'creation science', not climatologists or bio-ecologists. It leads the 'investigator' to bias in data. Data that fails to validate the hypothesis is not reported and therefore is unknown to or ignired by later investigators. A good working hypothesis is unbiased. What is needed is a "working hypothesis" that seeks to quantify the effects of climate change *without* the built-in prejudice that specific impacts are either negative or positive. Every species that becomes extinct opens up an ecological niche into which another species may evolve. Change is inevitable; resist it at your own peril. Tom Davidson Richmond, VA |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
January 27, 2005
tadchem wrote: There is an implicit assumption (not yet justified) that climate change (especially 'global warming') is necessarily bad. Shortly after the end of the last glaciation there was a period in which the globe was approximately 5° C warmer than it is now and sea levels were several meters higher. You exaggerate obsolete data. Your sea level claims are just plain wrong too. http://www.pages.unibe.ch/shighlight...e03/davis.html Human population during this time was very low. Thomas Lee Elifritz http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"tadchem" wrote in news:1106838542.903202.201330
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: There is an implicit assumption (not yet justified) that climate change (especially 'global warming') is necessarily bad. Since we've adapted our civilization to the current climate any change will be bad. Are todays sea levels optimum? Perhaps not, but moving all port cities if it changes is going to be horribly expensive. What about flood plains located just about sea level. What will people who live there do if sea levels rise? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rhino" wrote in message news "Uncle Al" wrote in message ... Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote: [snip crap] Tell it to New England. There is a difference between amount of snow and temperature. Lots of snow does not contradict global warming. It's just one place and one week. The overall average temperature could still go up. This was the first year since record keeping began in 1870 that Indianapolis made it through the entire year without reaching 90F even once. ;-) |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Harold Brooks a écrit dans le message ... In article , says... "Mike Rhino" wrote in message news "Uncle Al" wrote in message ... Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote: [snip crap] Tell it to New England. There is a difference between amount of snow and temperature. Lots of snow does not contradict global warming. It's just one place and one week. The overall average temperature could still go up. This was the first year since record keeping began in 1870 that Indianapolis made it through the entire year without reaching 90F even once. ;-) And still managed to average 1 F above normal for the year. -- Harold Brooks hebrooks87 hotmail.com http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/tltglhmam_5.1 http://climate.uah.edu/dec2004.htm http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate...ing/ipcc12.gif http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate...rat2001_pg.gif http://wwwagwx.ca.uky.edu/all_ky_temp.txt http://www.co2science.org http://www.sepp.org/scirsrch/EOS1999.html http://www.john-daly.com/stations/inuvik.gif http://www.john-daly.com/stations/fairbnk1.gif http://www.john-daly.com/stations/cet-1659.gif http://www.john-daly.com/stations/de-bilt.gif |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
relay61:13:214:23 wrote:
[snip] We could simply cool the earth down by covering India with Al foil and reflecting the heat back out to space. And even if it does not work, it will still be a laugh. Socks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CO2 and global warming | freddo411 | Astronomy Misc | 314 | October 20th 04 09:56 PM |
CO2 and global warming | freddo411 | Policy | 319 | October 20th 04 09:56 PM |
global warming could trigger an ice age at any time | Ian Beardsley | Astronomy Misc | 3 | February 24th 04 10:34 AM |