Is this the year that God embarasses Al Gore about global warming?

Question

The following notes taken from Dr Edward Blick writer of about 150 scientific papers and publications.
Acording to him we need CO2 for the growth of vegetation [trees to veggies]. Also everything can be blamed on the sunspots that causes global warming only for a season of time. He also listed 15 wrong assumptions made in the movie !!! Starting this year we will have the beginning lesser sunspot activity and the decrease of the warming trend !!!
What will Al Gore say then? A new movie, eh?

Answer 1

Yes, CO2 is paramount to plant growth. I wonder how plants ever grew before we were around to produce it. Look, CO2 is a record level, there is no debating that. Its the effects that are contested. If I had to make a prediction, the climate will continue to warm after these sunspots die down. That would negate the idea that our current trend is caused by sunspots. The idea that a dynamic and short lived on the surface of the sun 93 million miles away would make a lasting, steady, notable and gradual rise in our temperature seems completely ludicrous. Temperature and CO2 (along with other greenhouse gasses) are linked - with out the greenhouse effect, we'd all be freezing (the unacclerated effect raises the temp like 54 degrees). The only question that remains is if human activity enhances this effect. The scientific community seems to think so, and I'll have to agree.

Oh, and about the sunspot theory, "Although they are blindingly bright at temperatures of roughly 4000-4500 K, the contrast with the surrounding material at about 5800 K leaves them clearly visible as dark spots." They are cooler - how does that equate to our climate warming? There rest of the sun gets brighter, in theory. But there are solar events all the time (notably 1859) and they never changed our temperature measurably, that I am aware of. Sunspot numbers rise and fall with an irregular cycle with a length of approximately 11 years, so our climate should follow the same pattern. And yes, I know the 'little ice age' occurred at a time when there were few observed sunspots, but it is more than likely a coincidence. In 2000 it was found that "a modest cooling of the Northern Hemisphere during this period [little ice age] of less than 1°C, ... current evidence does not support globally synchronous periods of anomalous cold or warmth over this timeframe, and the conventional terms of 'Little Ice Age' and Medieval Warm Period appear to have limited utility in describing trends in hemispheric or global mean temperature changes in past centuries." The overall effect of the little ice age was negilible, and there happened to be an eruption of a volcano, Tambora, in 1815 that filtered the sun and caused the 'year without a summer'.

So no. Next year will not be the end of the global warming debate, end of argument.

Answer 2

This doesn't strike me as an actual question but just a polemic against Gore. This Dr. Edward Blick has no background that I can find in the subject of climate science, and although he apparently has a reputation in fluid mechanics and aeronautical engineering--he also apparently argues that science supports the hypothesis that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old! Frankly, anyone that believes that the Earth is that young will not have a clue what he is talking about when it comes to climate. Even if Gore gets some particulars wrong in his movie does not mean that carbon dioxide is not a threat to climate. You mention that Blick is the author of more than 150 papers, but there are more than that number of scientists with real credentials in climate that have worked on the IPCC report that says that carbon dioxide IS a problem. It will be great if the earth doesn't warm as expected--but do you really want to put your trust in someone untrained in the field that apparently refuses to believe the most basic tenets of physics or geology?

Answer 3

international warming is purely the subject count of the 2d. My buddy Al is purely getting publicity to maintain himself extremely appropriate. AL is a similar guy that replaced into crying international cooling a gaggle of years in the past. Did you notice that the massive assembly in Washington D.C. on international warming had to be canceled through fact of a snowfall? right here is my take on the finished deal -- it fairly is a organic incidence, and we pass with the aid of 10~11 365 days cycles. That plenty is certainty. it fairly is authentic that flowers choose the CO2. I say do your area to shop the wood!!

Answer 4

Looks like your out of luck, chum.

2007 is on track to be the 2nd warmest year EVER.

http://digg.com/environment/2007_seen_as_second_warmest_year_as_climate_shifts

In 1900, the human population was about 2,000,000,000.

Now it's over 6.6 billion and the level of CO2 in the atmoshere is the highest it's been in the past 600,000 years.

Coincidence?

I think not.

I have a feeling that by Oct. 1st. Global Warming will be on all our minds.

Answer 5

i love this question.
you might be interested in 'the great global warming swindle'. its a BBC film which i believe brings up a few of the points you made above. the thinking man's answer to al gore.
i'm not sold either way but i at least want to see all the facts.

Answer 6

ANYONE who tries to out guess God is barking up the wrong tree.