Global Warming

Here is a graph from NASA showing solar irradiance from 1980-2005:

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/images/content/93617main_sun4m.jpg

And here is an average global temperature plot which includes that time period:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

There is little correlation between the two. For example, solar irradiance decreased dramatically from about 1980-1987, while the average global temperature increased by over a tenth of a degree. The current level of solar irradiance is roughly what it was 25 years ago, but the average global temperature is about 0.4°C higher.

How can anyone realistically blame the Sun for this warming?

Just in case someone decides to blame sunspots, here is a similar plot showing their lack of correlation to global temps as well:

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/600px-Temp-sunspot-co2.svg.png

2007-09-18 06:46:43 · 18 answers · asked by Dana1981 7

Hansen, NASA Global Warming Guru, said the difference between 1998 being the warmest year for the United States and 1934 being the warmest year was completely "irrelevant" to the debate.

So why did he suddenly change which program he uses to publish data with - from SHAP (warmest -1934) to FILNET (warmest - 1934 ties 1998)?

For decades, NASA has used SHAP results, and now they've suddenly (in the last 3 weeks) started publishing FILNET temps as the "official" record.

If it's so darned "irrelevant" then why the change? And why no discussion? No explanation? Just a "business as usual, ignore the man behind the curtain" continuation.

This is akin to a company saying "ok, if we use GAAP, we LOST money, but if we use the EBITDA method, we MADE money - let's report THAT to our stockholders!"

And why are they diddling the RAW data (c.f. Walhalla, SC ) from surface stations?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/09/17/nasa-s-hansen-playing-enron-accounting-games-climate-data

2007-09-18 04:38:51 · 13 answers · asked by jbtascam 5

Give background about this trading and related web site.

2007-09-18 03:50:50 · 5 answers · asked by Nitin D 1

Anybody know of any scientists or articles pertaining to Global warming. I am not making you do all the work I am also looking but any pointers to a certain scientists who specialises in GW or a good artical, I would apreciate it greatly. Thank you!

2007-09-18 03:11:17 · 15 answers · asked by obsidiangrl 2

If so, do you work for the government or a government contractor?

2007-09-18 01:05:22 · 6 answers · asked by Larry 4

when historical records prove otherwise. http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/greenland/

If the hockey stick graph is correct, how can such a colony survive?

2007-09-17 21:18:02 · 9 answers · asked by eric c 5

My worst fear is that with the coming reliance on nuclear power then there would be an increased chance of a meltdown somewhere on this planet - i was wondering if those 'greenhouse gases' could contribute to the resulting explosion.

2007-09-17 20:20:08 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-09-17 16:03:42 · 7 answers · asked by Rocketman 6

how the heat of the earth melt the ice and rises the sea level.

2007-09-17 12:36:20 · 11 answers · asked by Justina L 1

What is the relationship between global atmospheric CO2 concentrations and mean global atmospheric temperature over the past 600, 000 years?
Al Gore said it's like the fit of South American and African contients, what does he mean by that?

2007-09-17 11:45:36 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-09-17 11:41:00 · 28 answers · asked by MLJ 6

I've been wondering this for a while. I can't find anything on the internet concerned with reversing the damage we've done, only slowing it.

I believe that we're too late to stop devastating global warming. Rising carbon emissions on top of a growing population, widespread deforestation and possibly carbon-sink reversal (which pretty much spells the end, as far as I can see) means that soon the whole house of cards will collapse.

So, given that everything we have done (not much) and everything we're likely to do (not enough) to prevent catastprophy, I believe that civilisation as we know it will fall.

So, in the future, faced with living on an ever more inhospitable planet, is there anything the survivors could realistically do to reverse global warming?

You could remove carbon by encouraging reafforestation, storing it in oil (you can make lots of oils), geo-engineering or maybe something I havn't thought of.

What are the realistic solutions?

2007-09-17 09:57:11 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

This girl is trying to get people to try to save our enviroment and she wants others to help.

Now she told people what is destroying the Earth somewhat and she said something about Global warming...I dont think there is anyway to stop it but is it really destroying/changin our enviroment? What is it causeing and is there any way to stop it?

any help will be thanked

2007-09-17 09:38:50 · 9 answers · asked by X_Emo_Blondie_X 2

I'm trying to figure out what chuda is going on about in this question:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ahcv_Bibgu9s.zetjaawxfPty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070917050525AAjH0xK&show=7#profile-info-a85bd4d28281b52b7bdecfc33cd65da3aa

This is why I wanted to discuss this via email - his additional details are so long that I can't even figure out what he's talking about anymore. He seems to have ignored my response and continues to claim that I'm wrong when I say Hansen's 1988 predictions were quite accurate, and he's even gone so far as to say that Crichton was not wrong when he claimed that Hansen was off by 300%.

Here is my evidence to support my claim. As you can see, up through 2005 Hansen's scenarios B and C were both quite accurate:

http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptic_arguments/models-dont-work.html

Therefore Crichton's claim that Hansen was off by 300% (lie by omission of Scenarios B and C) is wrong.

Can anyone clarify what the heck chuda is arguing?

2007-09-17 09:31:23 · 9 answers · asked by Dana1981 7

based on an average family car, doing average 12000 miles per year. take into account the technology required to design, make, fuel and dispose/recycle the car. average life 10 years.

2007-09-17 08:26:42 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

I really want to become one and i just don't get what people have aginst them.

2007-09-17 08:19:05 · 17 answers · asked by ♥ Pompey and The Red Devils! 5

does anyone know of a site that attempts to predict climate change across the world?
I would like to know which countries are getting hotter and which are getting cooler.
Can anyone help?

2007-09-17 07:45:17 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-09-17 07:36:56 · 12 answers · asked by vote_usa_first 7

Latest Research Erodes CO2's Role In Global Warming

http://www.dailytech.com/Latest+Research+Erodes+CO2s+Role+in+Global+Warming/article8588.htm

2007-09-17 07:34:19 · 6 answers · asked by Larry 4

With all the evidence, with all the scientist who support SGW (Solar Global Warming) why are there still people who try to deny that the Sun is the Earths biggest heat source?

There are many fine scientist, many of them have several PhD's who have spent their entire life dedicated to climate science, yet they are dismissed like they are children. And by whom? Politicians and twenty something’s that believe they know everything about how the world works? Somehow, I think not.

We should listen to these scientist whom over 90% believe that SGW is real, and not to the skeptics and deniers who think warming is man made.

2007-09-17 07:13:28 · 13 answers · asked by Dr Jello 7

Who do sensible people really trust? I tend to trust thousands of respected scientists who have each given years of their lives to get educated and to conduct research. It wasn't too long agot he public were in denial over the effects of smoking, now people with such views are not so common. Will people who deny global warming and humanity's role in it also be seen as ridiculous in years to come? Can we afford to risk it and do nothing in the mean time?

2007-09-17 06:55:37 · 33 answers · asked by Phil McCracken 5

why dont they do anything to prevent it, and why do a lot of people ignore it???

2007-09-17 06:09:44 · 14 answers · asked by gabby.!^# 3

The whole world has notice changes, with earthqakes, tornados, tsunami, flooding and freak weather.

Could this be the energy force of mother nature?

2007-09-17 05:47:37 · 14 answers · asked by Pink Angel 2

Preferably Capital cities.

2007-09-17 05:01:01 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

One of the scarier claims made by supporters of an international climate treaty is that global warming will spawn epidemics of deadly "tropical diseases" – malaria, dengue fever, Yellow fever – not only in countries where such scourges are already entrenched but in North America and Western Europe as well. Many prominent individuals in government, academia, and media embrace the "warmer is sicker" hypothesis. Indeed, some claim the expansion of disease vectors due to global warming is already under way.

http://www.cei.org/gencon/014,01520.cfm

2007-09-17 04:20:59 · 6 answers · asked by Larry 4

Dr. Michael Griffin, "The head of NASA -- the National Aeronautical and Space Association--is "an idiot" and "in denial." He is also "surprisingly naive" and "a fool." With his judgment and competence so lacking, demands abound for his resignation as head of the largest and most accomplished science agency in the world."

"Some might think Dr. Griffin is entitled to think for himself. Apart from his PhD in aerospace engineering, he holds five masters degrees, he is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and the International Academy of Astronautics, he manages a US$1.1-billion climate-research budget and was unanimously confirmed to head NASA by the United States Senate."

"But no. He is either "totally clueless" or "a deep anti-global warming ideologue," concludes Jerry Mahlman, a scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, in a statement similar to many."

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/comment/story.html?id=2271ac23-6895-4789-9da0-6b

2007-09-17 03:50:08 · 11 answers · asked by Larry 4

2007-09-17 02:19:02 · 14 answers · asked by windybrr 3

Global Warming Alarmist dana recently asked two questions suggesting that GW sceptics (“deniers” as he insists on calling them) are ignorant and make unsupported claims. (See… http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgOT8_D0rVyOQscQmCm1i6kgBgx.;_ylv=3?qid=20070915114539AALKDM0&show=7#profile-info-20f3291b9320a302e9070bf55325531daa and… http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsnaXgA5ZRZt6X2rPr60moggBgx.;_ylv=3?qid=20070915140412AAXC2h9&show=7#profile-info-20f3291b9320a302e9070bf55325531daa )

In answering those questions, I pointed out that dana himself was just as guilty of this, and cited as proof the fact that he has quoted the flawed Mann hockey stick graph and claimed that James Hansen’s 1988 guesses of how much temperature would rise by 2000 were “extremely accurate”.

Dana didn’t respond to me in the questions themselves, but subsequently contacted me direct with the following…

2007-09-17 01:05:25 · 21 answers · asked by amancalledchuda 4

If so, what is the timeframe. How will it happen? What would the process be like? What will be left of the world? Or will the world come to an end for another reason?

2007-09-16 20:08:10 · 14 answers · asked by Adam S 1

there are several arguments that state global warming is not necessarily caused by humans.

2007-09-16 16:33:03 · 16 answers · asked by AvantExec 4