PDA

View Full Version : Global warming,or not?



Qtec
03-05-2004, 04:57 AM
Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
Sunday February 22, 2004
The Observer

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..
A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

............
So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with Bush's stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report in his campaign.

The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry's cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defence's push on ballistic-missile defence.

Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. 'It is yet another example of why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this issue.'

Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high-powered energy and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was received sceptically in the Oval Office. 'This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies,' he added.


Full story, http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html

Q

Wally_in_Cincy
03-05-2004, 07:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>...major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. ... <hr /></blockquote>

This sentence is self-contradictory.

eg8r
03-05-2004, 07:45 AM
Global warming is a hoax, just ask all those people who went to hear Gore in NY a month or so ago.

eg8r

moblsv
03-05-2004, 09:31 AM
I do not believe the 'global warming is a hoax' hoax at all. Science says there is an abundance of evidence and politics says it can't be true because dealing with it will hurt the economy, Who do you believe?

moblsv
03-05-2004, 09:55 AM
I could post evidence on this all day but most people focus on the political aspects. I am not an expert on this but I have done some research on this in the course of obtaining my engineering and physics degrees. Over the past twenty years I have found that the evidence supporting the claim that we are causing real changes in the worlds climate is overwhelming and the evidence to the contrary is usually actually also supporting evidence that has been taken out of context to support a political belief.

A group of preeminent scientists released a statement
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/rsi/rsirelease.html
about distorted science influencing political decisions and the bush administration is "disappointed in the report, and called it biased."
http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,62339,00.html

Iowashark
03-05-2004, 10:04 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer
Q <hr /></blockquote>


This might be the biggest load of crap I've ever read.

BeanDiesel
03-05-2004, 10:49 AM
i used to think it's a hoax too. after taking a geology class, i changed my mind. it is happening.

eg8r
03-05-2004, 11:14 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Science says there is an abundance of evidence and politics says it can't be true because dealing with it will hurt the economy, Who do you believe? <hr /></blockquote> What I believe is this...The more you look at the data, the more it will begin to look the way you want it to.

eg8r

TomBrooklyn
03-05-2004, 11:31 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BeanDiesel:</font><hr> i used to think it's a hoax too. after taking a geology class, i changed my mind.<hr /></blockquote>If you learn only from the global warming proponents you will believe it as they make some very rational sounding arguments based on the best scientific information and knowledge they have. However, many of the worlds best scientists disagree. If you get the whole story, you are more likely to be unconvinced that global warming exists or at least you will realize it is not a fully accepted theory.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration used to have a very well researched paper on their website opposing the idea of a global warming crisis. I could not find it just now. There is an NOAA FAQ on Global Warming here (http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html) which is inconclusive. There are some links from there I didn't have the time to research right now. I have contacted the NOAA to see if I can get a more definative opinion from them on the subject and will let you know what I find out.

TomBk

Wally_in_Cincy
03-05-2004, 11:59 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote moblsv:</font><hr> ...Over the past twenty years I have found that the evidence supporting the claim that we are causing real changes in the worlds climate is overwhelming... <hr /></blockquote>

The climate will change despite what little effect we have on it.

I would worry more about a new Ice Age than I would global warming.

We actually had a warmer climate before the Middle Ages and it worked out great. Britain had a long growing season and there were vineyards all over. When the planet cooled near the turn of the first millenium...*poof*...no more grapes.

bigshooter
03-05-2004, 12:10 PM
Heres a 1975 Newsweek article discussing the disaster of
Global Cooling.
1975 Global Cooling Article. (http://www.globalclimate.org/Newsweek.htm)
First its Global Cooling now its Global Warming.
Lets face it, scientists and researchers live on government grants and charitable contributions and the more they can scare the crap out of us the more they get.

The earth has natural cooling and warming cycles and we have very little if anything to do with any of it.

Qtec
03-05-2004, 12:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> Global warming is a hoax, just ask all those people who went to hear Gore in NY a month or so ago.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

Global warming is a fact. The ony discussion is , is it man made?

Q

eg8r
03-05-2004, 01:33 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Global warming is a fact. The ony discussion is , is it man made? <hr /></blockquote> Since this is the only discussion, I am confused why you would need to state it again. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif You are correct, as I am guessing that is the only issue anyone really is concerned with. This is why I did not feel the need to point it out so explicitly. There would be no scientists running around making all these ridiculous claims about man and industry and their attempt to cook the earth if it was absolutely evident it was purely natural. So, in the end you are correct that I did not waste my time at that point in time to point out the absolutely obvious. Since you decided it was worth clarifying, I thought maybe it would be worth agreeing.

There you have it, two people wasting their time pointing out the painfully obvious from one person's short-but-to-the-point-unclear-post.

To further clarify my post, I absolutely do not believe that the global warming issue is man-made, or that man had any significant effects for or against it. For one, the earth goes through natural cycles (scientists are the ones that say this not me), and I know this could be a stretch for the environmentalists out there, but we just could be in one of those cycles again. There is very very little mention of the increase sun activity, scientists continue to talk about the melting glaciers in the Arctic, but never mention the increase glacial mass in the Antarctic. So who is to believe the scientists? I said it before, this is data will say exactly what you want it to if you look long enough.

eg8r

Wally_in_Cincy
03-05-2004, 02:06 PM
Haliburton is responsible for global warming. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

bigalerickson
03-05-2004, 05:38 PM
THe reason our govenment is backasswards in all of this, is because only C students engineering and scientific schools go to work for the government. The A students are working in the private sector making a six figure income, laughing their happy-ass off at these ideas.

Then again, maybe I'm just happily ignorant.

Oh, and not to pimp my posts out, but this one is important to me, d=npr&amp;Number=126591&amp;page=0&amp;view=expanded&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;f part=1
Today will henceforth be known as Black Friday (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=npr&amp;Number=126591&amp;page=0&amp;v iew=expanded&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=1)

Thanks for listening,

Alex

TomBrooklyn
03-13-2004, 03:16 AM
I've written to Howard J. Diamond, the leader of the GeoSpatial Data and Climate Services Group of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

In response to a comment I made about making a conclusion on the validity of the global warming theory, he wrote to me: "I wish that I could indeed give you a conclusive statement, but that is still not possible at this time; there is no doubt that there is strong evidence of rising temperatures.

Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.6C (plus or minus 0.2C) since the late-19th century, and about 0.4F (0.2 to 0.3C) over the past 25 years (the period with the most credible data). The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S.) have, in fact, cooled over the last century."

TomBk