Positive effects of Global Warming?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

Somehow you think that a measurements starting in 1973 is not cherry picking. How about the last 450 million years that show the cyclical interglacials?

---

Glacier Records?
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/308/5722/675.abstract

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

Somehow you think that a measurements starting in 1973 is not cherry picking. How about the last 450 million years that show the cyclical interglacials?

---

If 38 years of temperatures is cherry-picking in your view, then why is 15 years of temperatures not cherry-picking, in your view?

If you want to go back 450 million years, that's fine with me. But if you go back that far, you have to account for the fact that the Sun was a lot dimmer then than it is now. And if we do that, what do we find? The combination of CO2 and solar output account for pretty much all observed paleoclimate changes. We also find that a doubling of CO2 results in 2.8° of warming, very close to the IPCC's equilibrium figure of 3°. (Royer 2007).

And while we're at it, since I've addressed your points, please address mine:
1. Where did you get the figure that 800 ppmv of CO2 will only cause 1° of warming?
2. Who said that that only bad things will come from global warming?
3. Who said that breadfruit used to grow in Iceland?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Debater

If 38 years of temperatures is cherry-picking in your view, then why is 15 years of temperatures not cherry-picking, in your view?

If you want to go back 450 million years, that's fine with me. But if you go back that far, you have to account for the fact that the Sun was a lot dimmer then than it is now. And if we do that, what do we find? The combination of CO2 and solar output account for pretty much all observed paleoclimate changes. We also find that a doubling of CO2 results in 2.8° of warming, very close to the IPCC's equilibrium figure of 3°. (Royer 2007).

And while we're at it, since I've addressed your points, please address mine:
1. Where did you get the figure that 800 ppmv of CO2 will only cause 1° of warming?
2. Who said that that only bad things will come from global warming?
3. Who said that breadfruit used to grow in Iceland?

---

The history of climate has shown the earth to alternate between a frigid ice house like today to a steaming hot house like during the dinosaurs. We are currently in a mild interglacial during an ice age and it is bound to either go one way or another no matter what we do.

If you think measuring the last 100 years and making predictions off of it is anyway comparable to defining a "normal temperature" for earth, then go for it. Everyone needs a hobby.

http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

The history of climate has shown the earth to alternate between a frigid ice house like today to a steaming hot house like during the dinosaurs. We are currently in a mild interglacial during an ice age and it is bound to either go one way or another no matter what we do.

If you think measuring the last 100 years and making predictions off of it is anyway comparable to defining a "normal temperature" for earth, then go for it. Everyone needs a hobby.

http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm

---

Milankovitch cycles

Ever heard of them?

And yes, global warming study IS a hobby of mine which is why I know that mankind is currently affecting global climate

Now again let us ask "Why are you dismissing science that has proven current climate change but believing science that has determined what changes have occurred in the past?"

Surely if science is right about one aspect they are right about the rest

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bowerbird

Milankovitch cycles

Ever heard of them?

And yes, global warming study IS a hobby of mine which is why I know that mankind is currently affecting global climate

Now again let us ask "Why are you dismissing science that has proven current climate change but believing science that has determined what changes have occurred in the past?"

Surely if science is right about one aspect they are right about the rest

---

You should notice if you read what I write, I don't dismiss that man contributes to global warming or that global warming happens. I do consider taking the claims of doomsday with a large grain of skepticism.

I agree there is some consensus, but unlike many, I do not take that to be consensus on everything, which it clearly is not.

I am very familiar with modeling since I have been working in computer science since the early 70's so I do know that GIGO. I am also familiar how science can be very political as it is now and especially the IPCC whose very existence depends on AGW.

It is clear that the modeling has not predicted the current cooling phase yet, after the fact, it is now part of the "new prediction". Lots of back peddling. Convenient.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

You should notice if you read what I write, I don't dismiss that man contributes to global warming or that global warming happens. I do consider taking the claims of doomsday with a large grain of skepticism.

I agree there is some consensus, but unlike many, I do not take that to be consensus on everything, which it clearly is not.

I am very familiar with modeling since I have been working in computer science since the early 70's so I do know that GIGO. I am also familiar how science can be very political as it is now and especially the IPCC whose very existence depends on AGW.

---

And now we are back to conspiracy theory - tell me, how the conspiracy actually WORKS

Please - I would love to know

Oh! and BTW the IPCC is not the only metanalysis of the science - it is just the most comprehensive and well recognised

Quote:

---

It is clear that the modeling has not predicted the current cooling phase yet, after the fact, it is now part of the "new prediction". Lots of back peddling. Convenient.

---

What "current cooling phase" and how did they "fail to predict it"

Specifics please and not radio shock jock blurb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bowerbird

And now we are back to conspiracy theory - tell me, how the conspiracy actually WORKS

Please - I would love to know

Oh! and BTW the IPCC is not the only metanalysis of the science - it is just the most comprehensive and well recognised



What "current cooling phase" and how did they "fail to predict it"

Specifics please and not radio shock jock blurb

---

You would need to have a memory past last week to remember the predictions of doom that did not come about, the predictions of increased hurricanes that did not come about, etc..

There are plenty of skeptics, but the religion of global warming cannot accept the fact that they exist unless they categorize them somehow as kooks or profiteers. That is what true believers do.

Politics in science has nothing to do with conspiracy and everything to do with psychology of man. To ignore such things is to deny history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

You would need to have a memory past last week to remember the predictions of doom that did not come about, the predictions of increased hurricanes that did not come about, etc..

There are plenty of skeptics, but the religion of global warming cannot accept the fact that they exist unless they categorize them somehow as kooks or profiteers. That is what true believers do.

Politics in science has nothing to do with conspiracy and everything to do with psychology of man. To ignore such things is to deny history.

---

NOW I know where you are coming from!

Riiiight - how to confuse bad journalism with science

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bowerbird

NOW I know where you are coming from!

Riiiight - how to confuse bad journalism with science

---

Unfortunately you confuse true belief with science.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

I am very familiar with modeling since I have been working in computer science since the early 70's so I do know that GIGO. I am also familiar how science can be very political as it is now and especially the IPCC whose very existence depends on AGW.

---

And you're not at all concerned about the denier scientists who pick up paychecks from the fossil fuel industry? How very one-sided of you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

It is clear that the modeling has not predicted the current cooling phase yet, after the fact, it is now part of the "new prediction".

---

Can you show me any actual evidence of cooling? Didn't think so. It's just your fantasy of what you wish the world was really like, so you can ignore the truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

Lots of back peddling. Convenient.

---

Backpeddling ... hmmm. Is that anything like claiming breadfruit used to grow in Iceland, and then pretending you didn't? Convenient indeed.