global warming everywhere

[Bill O]

Interesting article about a "huge" snowstorm across China. One place is reporting 56mm of snow!

That is 2.2 inches ......

http://www.shanghaidaily.com/article...&type=National

That was liquid. The biggest snow total I saw in that article was 20cm. I'm not familiar with where this fell, but it could be huge if they never get snow in that location.

[TEX]

It is good to read that someone else has not bought into "global warming" I am concerned about our enviroment and we should do all we can to preserve our planet for furture generations. I remember here in Texas the summer of 1980 when we had several days of 100+ temperatures. If it only got to 99 it seemed like a pleasant day. A couple of years later we had a record cold winter. (it got down to 2 degrees)

[druford]

Hello all. I just registered because this discussion is worrying to me.

One cannot legitimately evidence a claim for or against the existence of human activity related climate change based solely on isolated weather events in specific places. Period. It doesn't take a very keen understanding of the scientific approach to get this. So saying that it's really cold outside now, or the Scots can't ski this winter, or speculating on whatever happened in the spring of '82 are mostly pointless in legitimate debates about climate change. These things can be selected and used at will to support what a person has already decided to believe anyway. It is just this kind of simplistic thinking and half-science that makes it so easy for the politicians of the world's most wasteful country to keep dragging their heels about highly needed policy changes. Larger global and longer-term trends must be observed with the recognition that there will be fluctuation within these trends. And as far as I have seen, there is a huge consensus among scientists that human-related climate change is very, very real.

Thanks. D.

[tkahike]

If you have time watch this The Great Swindle, very good.

[tkahike]

Mars 'more active than suspected'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4266474.stm

New images of Mars suggest the Red Planet's surface is more active than previously thought, the US space agency (Nasa) reports.
Photographs from Nasa's orbiting spacecraft Mars Global Surveyor show recently formed craters and gullies.
The agency's scientists also say that deposits of frozen carbon dioxide near the planet's south pole have shrunk for three summers in a row.
They say this is evidence to suggest climate change is in progress.
Mars rumble
The new gullies appear in an April 2005 image of a sand-dune slope. A previous shot from July 2002 had no trace of them.
The team operating the Mars Orbiter Camera on MGS has found many sites on the Red Planet with fresh-looking gullies, and checked back at more than 100 gullied sites for possible changes between imaging dates, but this is the first such find.
Such gullies might have formed when frozen carbon dioxide, trapped by windblown sand during winter, vaporised rapidly in spring, releasing gas that made the sand flow as a gully-carving fluid, the team speculate.
"To see new gullies and other changes in Mars' surface features on a time span of a few years presents us with a more active, dynamic planet than many suspected," said Nasa's Michael Meyer, Nasa's Mars Exploration Program chief scientist.
Bright future
The newly released images also show boulder tracks at another site, which were not there two years ago.
Michael Malin, the principal investigator on the Mars Orbiter Camera, said it was possible strong winds or even some kind of seismic activity had caused them to roll to their new positions.
But some changes may be happening slower than expected, the scientists report.
Studies suggested new impact craters might appear at only about one-fifth the pace assumed previously, Dr Malin said. This had important implications, he added, because crater counts were used to estimate the ages of Martian surfaces.
The Mars Global Surveyor has been orbiting the planet since 1997; Nasa expects it to carry on doing so for several years to come.
"Our prime mission ended in early 2001, but many of the most important findings have come since then, and even bigger ones might lie ahead," said Tom Thorpe, project manager for Mars Global Surveyor.

[tkahike]

Here you go. Scientists are 100% correct, until they are proven wrong.

http://www.saveportland.com/Climate/index.html

[Bill O]

Good article here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17997788/site/newsweek/

[Mike D]

A natural tendency is for people to wait for a result, and then react to it. Global warming critics say we have no hard evidence linking severe storms, droughts, or floods to anthropogenic warming, therefore we should not act rashly... or at all. I would agree with the wait-and-see approach, if we were talking about something less dire, like the effect of steel tariffs on the construction market. But if there's even a 1% chance that man-made global warming could render this planet unrecognizable (or uninhabitable!) a century or two from now, then we have no other reasonable choice but to cut down our worldwide greenhouse gas emissions.

Chances are no one is going to steal your car, but you lock it anyway. We should apply the same cautionary principle to the environment that we apply in our daily lives.

PS - I am not speaking for the Observatory here. The Observatory is not a political advocacy group. Stepping off soapbox...

[tkahike]

Mike, I agree with you. However this is two fold. If you get the chance watch the video I posted. What is being fed us, is not the real story.

We should not live without worries, but sometimes the solutions are worse then the problems. Example: Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage

Lets not put our heads in the sand to either side of it. I want this world to be beautiful for my childrens children too.

[forestgnome]

Hello all. I just registered because this discussion is worrying to me.

One cannot legitimately evidence a claim for or against the existence of human activity related climate change based solely on isolated weather events in specific places. Period. It doesn't take a very keen understanding of the scientific approach to get this. So saying that it's really cold outside now, or the Scots can't ski this winter, or speculating on whatever happened in the spring of '82 are mostly pointless in legitimate debates about climate change. These things can be selected and used at will to support what a person has already decided to believe anyway. It is just this kind of simplistic thinking and half-science that makes it so easy for the politicians of the world's most wasteful country to keep dragging their heels about highly needed policy changes. Larger global and longer-term trends must be observed with the recognition that there will be fluctuation within these trends. And as far as I have seen, there is a huge consensus among scientists that human-related climate change is very, very real.

Thanks. D.

I agree that a cold April or a warm December as proof for or against global warming is absurd.

But, the planet has been and will continue to warm, which is a good thing. The model used to predict environmental armageddon is invalid. It does not work when it is used to hindcast. When we use the data from the past 100 years to forecast today's climate, it "predicts" today's climate to be much hotter than reality.

A "huge consensus" means very little. Anyone who says "the debate is over" has no understanding of science. Discovery is made when scientists question, not when they dig in their heels. There are far more scientists dicovering and reporting evidence against man-made climate change than we read in mainstream media.

China will soon pass US as the world's top producer of greenhouse gas, yet noone wants to punish them. They say China is a "developing nation" so it's OK. What?!!! China just destroyed a satellite in orbit with a missle, and they will soon have their own GPS system. They are planning a manned mission to the Moon. They are opening new coal-fired power plants at the rate of one per week, yet they are given a pass. This makes it clear that global climate change alarmism is more about punishing America than protecting the environment. Chinese CO2 is the same as American CO2.