Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
micronut
Trad climber
fresno, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Apr 8, 2009 - 01:07pm PT
|
I'm in the process of hashing out a long "Global Warming" argument with some buddies. We meet weekly to hash this out.
One thinks the whole thing is left wing crapola,
One thinks man's abuse of the planet is a major causative factor,
I'm in the middle. I want to look at good data and make an informed decision on the whole thing. I recycle, buy from green companies and attempt to lessen my footprint in many many ways. I'm pretty green but its not because I believe man is responsible for sea levels rising and the impending armageddon.
I want to know where you guys who are serious about this stuff get your info. Websites, journals, publications, etc. "An Inconvenient Truth" doesn't count as a source. I'm looking for the cutting edge of climate change thought. Any help or input would be much appreesh.
Thanks-
Scott
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Muir Woods National Monument, Mill Valley, Ca
|
|
Yer knott supposed to ask any questions, lest you be labeled a "denier"...
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Seems funny to me that this is even controversial. We humans are continually burning energy, of course it heats things up.
If I light a candle in my bathroom, it gets appreciably warmer
Peace
Karl
|
|
micronut
Trad climber
fresno, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 8, 2009 - 01:21pm PT
|
No argument there Karl, The question becomes...is the amount we produce of large enough consequence to affect change in the system. That candle, or that truck motor vs. natural release of greenhouse gasses from ocean evaporation, methane bogs in Siberia, solar radiation, the natural process of the planet...the universe.....etc...
I'm insearch of data, not spurious corellation or "gut feeling."
Trying to stick to science on this one.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
I agree it is sad that we even have to keep arguing that humans are really screwing up the planet (I feel sorry for the next generation and I'm not even a parent).
If your buddy who thinks it is all a left wing conspirancy has specific arguments (like claiming it is all a result of solar fluctations, bad satellite data, etc.) the following site:
http://www.realclimate.org
or as a better starting point:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/start-here/
is a good resource for debunking some of the garbage that the global deniers spew out.
|
|
Aya K
Trad climber
New York
|
|
What data exactly are you looking for? That global warming exists? That humans have contributed to global warming? What global warming/climate change are? Need more specifics. Also, why do you put the word data in quotation marks?
|
|
micronut
Trad climber
fresno, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 8, 2009 - 01:40pm PT
|
Thanks August and Stud,
Aya, I totally believe the earth is warming. I kinda used the quotes to indicate the concept of manmade global warming versus a change in climate that may or may not be caused by human factors. It seems people use the terms interchangably though.
Aya, I'm looking for the consensus work that has led to the scientific communities' correlation of man's effect to the increase in climate change.
like....Man produces x
Temp used to be y......taking hundreds of major and thousands of minor variables into account, an increase in x leads to an increase in y.
What are some of these x's?
Can this all be happening despite man's contribution? That's the thought from many who don't buy into the fact that man is the big factor here. The planet most likely went through severe climate increases in the past prior to man's arrival. In our little brian trust we are not allowed to use lame science or opinion to back up our stance. I'm an open mind but don't want to use Karl's type of reasoning on this one.
|
|
Dolomite
climber
Anchorage
|
|
Check out Jim Balog's site:
info@extremeicesurvey.org
Jim is monitoring shrinking glaciers around the world. I don't see how this concrete, visual evidence can be disputed.
|
|
Patrick Sawyer
climber
Originally California now Ireland
|
|
Climate change is the more definitive term.
Some places on the earth are actually cooling down, some warming up, but there is enough evidence that regional climates are undergoing changes that are significantly different than 'recent' historical activity and patterns.
Is it a natural cycle that the earth undergoes periodically? Is it being influenced by human activity? Is it cows farting and belching? Volcanoes blowing? Is it a combination of these factors? These are the questions, but changes are happening, accurate records show that, and even if one ignores the computer models, these records show that there is change.
|
|
micronut
Trad climber
fresno, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 8, 2009 - 01:45pm PT
|
Thanks Dolomite for the link,
My right wing buddy thinks the governmental/world finacial cost of all this is absolutley ridiculous if it turns out that man has a miniscule effect on the system compared to bigger, non-human factors.
My left wing comrade thinks no cost is too much, but he has done very little homework. He's on the bandwagon but doesn't know much about the wagon or where its taking him.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
the IPCC Working Group 1 has the task to review the scientific basis of climate change. They have a very comprehensive bibliography which you can follow up on yourself.
I also think they have done a very good evaluation, and considered all criticisms in their analysis. So it behooves you to read their analysis carefully, they were aware of the political forces involved and went to great lengths to keep the discussion on a scientific basis.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/
|
|
Porkchop_express
Trad climber
the base of the Shawangunk Ridge
|
|
I agree with Patrick on this one. There are many changes going on which are becoming more obvious as our collective data increases with each passing year.
The causes of the changes or how much of the "green" movement really can or will impact climate change is another question all together.
It seems to me that the whole concept of "green" products is just another market innovation geared towards making people feel better about throwing away perfectly good stuff to buy newer, costlier, environmentally "friendly" stuff. Quite paradoxical.
|
|
micronut
Trad climber
fresno, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 8, 2009 - 01:49pm PT
|
I'm tired of posers/companies claiming to be GREEN or having HOPE because its cool or good for business. Gets old.
Ed, thats what I'm looking for. Great link. The political and financial impact on research is startling in general, and I only did three years of research. I know data has a way of ending up statistically significant when it needs to.
|
|
Elcap76
Trad climber
Long Beach, CA
|
|
Here is a link to a summary of the data collected and analyzed By the US Global Change Research Program. It was originally published in 2000, and available on the web at:
http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library/nationalassessment/overviewfindings.htm
The US Global Change Research Program integrates research carried out under the auspices of a number of Agencies of the US Federal Government including:
Agency for International Development
Dept. of Agriculture
Dept. of Commerce, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin. (also, National Institute of Standards and Technology)
Dept. of Defense
Dept. of Energy
Dept. of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health
Dept. of State
Dept. of Transportation
Dept. of the Interior, US Geological Survey
Environmental Protection Agency
National Aeronautics & Space Administration
National Science Foundation
Smithsonian Institution
Their conclusions indicate the following:
1. Increased warming
Assuming continued growth in world greenhouse gas emissions, the primary climate models used in this Assessment project that temperatures in the US will rise 5-9 degrees F (3-5 degrees C) on average in the next 100 years. A wider range of outcomes is possible.
2. Differing regional impacts
Climate change will vary widely across the US. Temperature increases will vary somewhat from one region to the next. Heavy and extreme precipitation events are likely to become more frequent, yet some regions will get drier. The potential impacts of climate change will also vary widely across the nation.
3. Vulnerable ecosystems
Many ecosystems are highly vulnerable to the projected rate and magnitude of climate change. A few, such as alpine meadows in the Rocky Mountains and some barrier islands, are likely to disappear entirely in some areas. Others, such as forests of the Southeast, are likely to experience major species shifts or break up into a mosaic of grasslands, woodlands, and forests. The goods and services lost through the disappearance or fragmentation of certain ecosystems are likely to be costly or impossible to replace.
4. Widespread water concerns
Water is an issue in every region, but the nature of the vulnerabilities varies. Drought is an important concern in every region. Floods and water quality are concerns in many regions. Snowpack changes are especially important in the West, Pacific Northwest, and Alaska.
5. Secure food supply
At the national level, the agriculture sector is likely to be able to adapt to climate change. Overall, US crop productivity is very likely to increase over the next few decades, but the gains will not be uniform across the nation. Falling prices and competitive pressures are very likely to stress some farmers, while benefiting consumers.
6. Near-term increase in forest growth
Forest productivity is likely to increase over the next several decades in some areas as trees respond to higher carbon dioxide levels. Over the longer term, changes in larger-scale processes such as fire, insects, droughts, and disease will possibly decrease forest productivity. In addition, climate change is likely to cause long-term shifts in forest species, such as sugar maples moving north out of the US.
7. Increased damage in coastal and permafrost areas
Climate change and the resulting rise in sea level are likely to exacerbate threats to buildings, roads, powerlines, and other infrastructure in climatically sensitive places. For example, infrastructure damage is related to permafrost melting in Alaska, and to sea-level rise and storm surge in low-lying coastal areas.
8. Adaptation determines health outcomes
A range of negative health impacts is possible from climate change, but adaptation is likely to help protect much of the US population. Maintaining our nation's public health and community infrastructure, from water treatment systems to emergency shelters, will be important for minimizing the impacts of water-borne diseases, heat stress, air pollution, extreme weather events, and diseases transmitted by insects, ticks, and rodents.
9. Other stresses magnified by climate change
Climate change will very likely magnify the cumulative impacts of other stresses, such as air and water pollution and habitat destruction due to human development patterns. For some systems, such as coral reefs, the combined effects of climate change and other stresses are very likely to exceed a critical threshold, bringing large, possibly irreversible impacts.
10. Uncertainties remain and surprises are expected
Significant uncertainties remain in the science underlying regional climate changes and their impacts. Further research would improve understanding and our ability to project societal and ecosystem impacts, and provide the public with additional useful information about options for adaptation. However, it is likely that some aspects and impacts of climate change will be totally unanticipated as complex systems respond to ongoing climate change in unforeseeable ways.
Hope this helps!
Dana
|
|
Mary J. Pickford
climber
South Park
|
|
Micronut,
By far the most compelling evidence is based on ice core data. Please see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core
Notice that there is a tight correlation between temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentration. The data extend to 400,000 years, so one cannot argue that these correlations are statistical fluctuations.
We all have seen the graph of atmospheric CO2 concentration spanning the past ~ 100 years. The massive increase over this time is clearly different than any pattern in the ice core data. At this point, there really is no decent alternative explanation than man-made causality.
Mary
PS I do not know how someone who rolls in a FJ cruiser can consider themselves 'green'.
|
|
pip the dog
Mountain climber
planet dogboy
|
|
I'm with Karl (in the bathroom with a candle), and Studly!
...um, that doesn't read quite right
^,,^
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!