How are all the Al Gore cronies liking the latest National Geographic Solar warming article?

Question

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said.

Solar Cycles

Abdussamatov believes that changes in the sun's heat output can account for almost all the climate changes we see on both planets.

Mars and Earth, for instance, have experienced periodic ice ages throughout their histories.

"Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

Answer 1

They will ignore it, like all the other information that is available to them. If they ignore it, it doesn't exist (in their tiny little liberal mind)

Answer 2

Global warming is the cooling scare of the 70s all over again. I love that article. It is funny how the global warming activists never really say much. I agree it isn't proof that global warming isn't man made, but the global warming activists never had proof that it was. It is just another piece of the puzzle, and a little more information we need before we can make an informed decision. Rather than a knee-jerk reaction like Al Gore and the global warming activists.

It is also more than 1 scientist that believes this. Also we have been wrong in the past. We used to think the world was flat and people were killed for believing otherwise. We also though the sun revolved around us. We are learning day by day how large the universe is. We are also finding new species of life on this planet on a daily basis. Just recently scientists found that a large portion of mantle is protruding through the the outer crust under the sea near the Canary Islands. We never new this was possible and still don't understand how this can happen.

My point is, that we are always learning new things about our planet, solar system, and universe at our technology gets better. I know people here are going to say we have new technology now that we know for a fact that the earth is round. My point is we didn't learn this until we had the ability to do so. We don't know what is around that corner, and you can't dismiss NASA findings that Mars is warming along with us. It could be coincidence, but on the other hand, it might not be. We need to keep an open mind about both sides of the issue.

Answer 3

An overwhelming majority of scientists who are qualified to comment believe the Earth is indeed going through an unprecedented period of Global warming. There will always be a minority who oppose any scientific theory. And the majority is sometimes wrong.

Your argument about ice ages is specious. Scientists agree in even greater numbers that ice ages & global warming are definitely related issues. When the Earth & its oceans heat up, cloud cover increases.until a point of no return is reached. Eventually the cloud cover and associated rain causes cooling of the Earth over a long period of time, resulting in ice covering a larger area of Earth. Eventually the loss of evaporation creates less cloud cover until the heating process starts again. and the cycle begins again. National Geographic has published this several times over the years.

The reasons for global warming don't matter as much as the inevitability of it happening. Human influence is speeding up the process. Human efforts to decrease the amounts or greenhouse gases will slow it down.

Why should we do that? Even before the ice age begins, seas levels will rise dramatically, reducing the amount of dry land we have to live on. Climate patterns are already changing. creating larger storms in some areas, drought in others, extinction of many species, and major disruptions for all life, even humans. Civilizations are already being altered (for the worse, IMO) & will do so even more as time passes. If we manage to slow the warming process. we & all living organisms have more time to adjust.. In simpler language, we we would be buying time.

Answer 4

Cronies?

It's the GOP that's practicing Cronyism. Heckuva job there Brownie!

As far as the science is concerned, don't mistake the opinion of a scientist with proven science. If he believes he can show that all of the environmental changes are due to this... fine, then prove it.

Until then, it's just more gums flapping.

The truth is that the factors are combined. Global Warming believers don't profess that CO2 emissions are the sole movers of environmental change...

...and interestingly, this scientist doesn't discount the effects of greenhouse gases:

""Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said."

What he's discussing is his belief that another factor has a greater influence, not that man-made greenhouse warming isn't happening.

So, yeah... maybe you should read more closely.

Answer 5

There are a few scientists who agree with Abdussamatov, but almost all the rest believe human activity is the major cause of global climate change. To quote the second page AND A MAJOR POINT of the National Geographic article

""His views are completely at odds with the mainstream scientific opinion," said Colin Wilson, a planetary physicist at England's Oxford University."

Answer 6

Let's read what the article actually says.

Apparently this idea is the brainchild of one single scientist. And to further quote from your article:

"His views are completely at odds with the mainstream scientific opinion," said Colin Wilson, a planetary physicist at England's Oxford University.

"And they contradict the extensive evidence presented in the most recent IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] report." (Related: "Global Warming 'Very Likely' Caused by Humans, World Climate Experts Say" [February 2, 2007].)

Amato Evan, a climate scientist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, added that "the idea just isn't supported by the theory or by the observations."



By the way, Bush, McCain, Giuliani, and Brownback all have stated global warming is real and is caused by humans.

This is not a political issue, but a moral one.

Answer 7

I think you'd like this:

http://www.glennbeck.com/steakoutourfuture/

According to a UN study, the production of animals for food produces more greenhouse gases then all the cars and trucks in the world combined. So according to PETA, if you're going to be on the global warming band wagon, you better be a vegan...hmmmm, it may be easy to support treaties, but I wonder how many people are actually willing to go vegan for that? Maybe they'll just come up with some meat offset indulgences like the terra-passes.

Look, I think it would be great to reduce polution - I mean, I like clean air to breath - but I just observe things like terra-passes, and it seems like it's all just getting out of control.

Answer 8

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming030307.htm
Kyoto...
Under this treaty, a new tax will be imposed on Americans. If we sign this treaty, you will pay an increased 25 cents to 50 cents per gallon on diesel fuel and gasoline.
Developing nations are exempt from the treaty. Many of these nations are where American jobs and factories are moving. Argentina is exempt; it is becoming a major beef, dairy and wheat exporter competing with the United States.
Brazil is a direct competitor with America in world markets for corn, cotton, soybeans and even for American farmers. Brazilian company AgBrazil has been trying to lure American farmers to move their operations to Brazil.
India, which is becoming Asia's Silicon Valley and information center, is exempt. China, which makes two-thirds of the world's copiers, microwave ovens, DVD players and shoes, and produces 16 percent of the world's carbon dioxide emissions and will exceed the United States by 2030, is exempt.
Farm Bureau chief economist Terry Francl estimated the treaty would cost American farmers and ranchers between $10 billion to $20 billion in increased expenses. The biggest hits to farmers would come in increases to energy, fertilizer, fuel and transportation costs. Fertilizer accounts for 36 percent and fuel 25 percent of farmers' expenses.
Francl did percentage estimates for several commodities. The cost of producing milk would rise 4 to 8 percent. The cost of raising beef cattle and hogs would rise between 5 and 10 percent. The cost of growing wheat would rise between 13 and 27 percent; the cost of growing soybeans would rise between 14 and 27 percent. The cost of growing cotton would rise between 13 and 25 percent.
Another disturbing element of this treaty is the pollution credits each nation would be allotted. Developing nations are allowed more credits than developed nations. Pollution credits are also allowed to be bought, sold and traded. Anyone with enough cash can buy them.

Answer 9

Do you ever watch C-Span? If you do...you would know for a FACT..that the Bush administration has told many scientists NOT to give any reports supporting anything that Gore has said or has tried to prove.

Answer 10

WOW, how in the h-e-double toothpicks did that get past the editors. Someone must have been asleep. No doubt we'll see an apology and retraction in next month's issue, along with a fake picture of poor old polar bears on an iceberg on the front cover.