[kucheravka]

For the record, it was a bus trip.

[adverwork]

Originally posted by Arrian
So "recorded history" = 1979 to present.

While I am concerned about the environment, that isn't exactly a wealth of data.

-Arrian by itself, sure. Its one more piece of the picture.


to put it another way - we know theres been global warming occuring the last couple of hundred years.

This suggests that it is accelerating the last 30 years.

Thats both a matter of concern itself, and IIUC, it would tend to confirm the IPCC models of global warming, which IIUC suggest that warming SHOULD be increasing with greater concentrations of GHG. IE it reduces (at least slightly) the likelihood that A. This is not anthropogenic B. The likelihood that it the rate of warming wont continue to accelerate.

There is also the issue of decreasing global albedo (sp?) as ice cover decreases, which further indicates this is a self reinforcing, rather than equilibrating, phenomenon. and the likelihood of impacts on ocean currents, creating significant secondary effects.

Altogether, not a trivial piece of data, I think.

[c6vkuNRg]

You weren't part of that David Suzuki diesel bus tour were you?

That would be the cross country tour with a handful of people on a diesel bus to inform us about GW (and slam Conservatives...)

[CatLuvkaLover]

Originally posted by Arrian


Allow me to rephrase.

It tells us that there is warming occuring (or rather is an additional piece of info supporting the warming, which everyone knows is occurring). It isn't necessarily proof of the cause of the warming - which is where I assumed Odin was going with this. Im not sure, isnt acceleration of the pace of warming at least further evidence that the warming is anthropegenic?

Look, at it the other way. If the melting were slowing down, wouldnt that be used by skeptics to challenge the IPCC model, since that model suggest that the rate of change should be increasing? A chance to empirically falsify the model, and the model emerges unscathed.

[Avoireeideree]

There were periods in the distant past where there was some pretty quick warming, no? That had nothing to do with us.

Anyway, I'm tired of this debate. Pollution is bad, even if you don't buy that GW is being caused by humans, so I'm all for reducing pollution. Therefore I'm on "your side" as it were.

-Arrian

[Dweplyododo]

Originally posted by Arrian
There were periods in the distant past where there was some pretty quick warming, no? That had nothing to do with us.

Anyway, I'm tired of this debate. Pollution is bad, even if you don't buy that GW is being caused by humans, so I'm all for reducing pollution. Therefore I'm on "your side" as it were.

-Arrian
1. There may well have been times in the past when there was quick warming, and when it accelerated. The point is that the IPCC model of whats happening specifically suggested that something like this would happen, and it did. How else do you test a theory, other than by looking for falsifiable predictions?

2. GW isnt like all pollution. A. We've been dealing with other forms of pollution for 40 years. We really havent done much of anything about this, till Kyoto. B. Most pollution has localized effects (more or less) This is global. C. The potential effects, in the worse (but NOT chicken little) scenarios, are massive. D. The way the climate is, we have to make decisions long before we see the consequences. If we reduce SO2 emissions, we get results pretty quickly. If we reduce GHG emissions, it will take decades to change the momentum of climate change. Which means we probably have to act with incomplete knowledge.

[janeseymore09092]

Thanks for the link, LotM.

Hopefully, Senator Dingell is wrong when he says that "I sincerely doubt that the American people are willing to pay what this is really going to cost them."

But I don't think he is.

-Arrian

[formobilagsw]

Originally posted by Wezil
You weren't part of that David Suzuki diesel bus tour were you?

That would be the cross country tour with a handful of people on a diesel bus to inform us about GW (and slam Conservatives...)

No, but are you implying that a diesel bus is not a good way for such a group to travel?

In terms of green house gases, it's probably the best way for a group of people to travel outside of biking.

[QiuCIOdO]

Originally posted by Arrian

It isn't necessarily proof of the cause of the warming - which is where I assumed Odin was going with this. Actually, no. Even if the arctic ice cap melted for totally natural reasons it would still NOT be a good thing. For one thing it will shift the Intertropical Convergence Zone (the climatic equator) northwards significantly (it already is around 5 degrees north because the impact of the Antarctic cap is greater then the Arctic cap), screwing with tropical rain patterns. Plus it will mean the extinction of creatures like polar bears and seals that depend on the arctic cap for thier survival.

[dremucha]

1. There may well have been times in the past when there was quick warming, and when it accelerated. The point is that the IPCC model of whats happening specifically suggested that something like this would happen, and it did. How else do you test a theory, other than by looking for falsifiable predictions? A few months ago I predicted August would be our warmest month... and I was right, yippee... Why doesn't this happen in June when the sun is furthest north? Because the higher latitudes need time to absorb heat and retain it even as the sun heads for the equator. This is undoubtedly true as the sun cycles between 21.5 and 24.5 degrees, we're at ~23.5 now heading for the minimum, i.e., its the middle of August in our year, and in our Milankovich cycle.

[eEwbYjOH]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


I read somewhere recently that there was never THAT much farming in Greenland, the areas where the norse settlers did farm are basically warm enough to farm today, but its not economically feasible (the norse settlers didnt have access to a world grain market dominated by US midwestern corn, Alberta wheat, etc) And then it got colder and their settlements starved out...

[iodillalm]

Originally posted by notyoueither


And then it got colder and their settlements starved out...
The point was not that the little ice age didnt occur. The point was to show that claims that the farming in Greenland showed the medieval warm period to be warmer than the present are false.

[Sadsidioribre]

BTW, the reason no ice on the Arctic Ocean is worrisome is because water (dark) absorbs more sunlight than ice (light). A reduction in the area covered by ice causes a feedback loop which reduces it further.