Right, the climate scientists are looking at all relevant factors. This is an excellent video looking at Sandy and recent trends:
One of the scientists interviewed, Dr. Kerry Emanuel of MIT, quips about the slight cooling we saw from the 1950's to the 1980's as resulting from the black lining in a silver cloud that was the Clean Air Act. In other words, we were getting shading from particle and aerosol pollution, and now that we have cleaned up our air, we have resumed the warming trend.
Teleman, that is a copy of the IPCC chart I posted earlier, with the level of understanding indicator removed. Though the other portions from that page do indicate that the contribution to CO2 is direct and not with feedbacks like I had orriginally thought.
My only argument so far which is not well developed yet is that they did the energy radiation measurements using a black body source, while the earth is a grey body.
Neil: While their is some truth to larger more powerfull storms being tied to global warming sensationalizing a single event as proof is still not a good argument tool for me when I am arguing the cause and you are arguing effect.
Who is sensationalizing one event? As mentioned in the video, the 5 biggest storms all occurred since 1992 and 4 of those since 2005, and the insurance actuarial tables show the trend. I hope you watch the video.
A SEARCH says it was a patent medicine...mostly alcohol?
Only 12%, but it sold well in 'dry' states. Wikipedia has it as Hadacol. It's a story that's more about advertising than it is medicine. Big Hollywood names on the Hadacol Caravan.
I'd heard about 20z/10gal of acetone but I haven't tried it. Do you see any difference in your mileage? Is the Xylol 'and' or 'or'? And what's the synth oil for? My digression bears fruit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard
On the carbon sequestration front; this is yet another huge advantage of organic perennial agriculture - plants would improve the soil by sequestering carbon both in the soil and in the plants themselves.
Perennial? As in orchards? According to this article the Amazon basin was worked on that basis. To quote:
Quote:
1491——Before it became the New World, the Western Hemisphere was vastly more populous and sophisticated than has been thought—an altogether more salubrious place to live at the time than, say, Europe. New evidence of both the extent of the population and its agricultural advancement leads to a remarkable conjecture: the Amazon rain forest may be largely a human artifact
Cool Planet distinguishes C3 and C4 plants; the latter fix 10x the atmospheric carbon compared to C3, and the ones they use are all annuals—corn, sugar cane, sorghum and Giant Amaranthaceae.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEnemy
Freebeard: I had read it, I had dismissed it as impractical. The ammount of biomass required to accomplish thier goals is just immense. Maybe as a partial solution, even if I am right it would improve the soil which is still a win.
Cool Planet is just monetizing the process to make it palatable to business.
Quote:
There still hasn't been any significant argument against my showing that base solar contribution is being compaired to the contribution of CO2 with feedbacks, the closest was the argument that the sun's intensity hasn't increased to which I posted documentation showing it had.
I'll admit I don't understand 'forcing', but I see you posted a Wikipedia link, so I will read that.
Last edited by freebeard; 11-28-2012 at 04:41 PM..
Reason: added link to The Atlantic
I did watch it, it was using $ values for damage caused, without correcting for inflation, and without correcting for coastal population density increase. The only decent information they had was the correlation between sea surface temperatures and storm intensity.
That chart from NOAA does not match their posted report, which has the US at cooler than average.
•The average temperature for the contiguous U.S. during October was 53.9°F, just 0.3°F below the long-term average, ending a 16-month streak of above-average temperatures for the lower 48 that began in June 2011.
If your going to cherry pick data at least pick correct data.
It doesn't even match the global which is the most important.
•The average combined global land and ocean surface temperature for October 2012 tied with 2008 as the fifth warmest October on record, at 0.63°C (1.13°F) above the 20th century average of 14.0°C (57.1°F). Records began in 1880.
Freebeard: while your at it look up black body radiation, absorbtion spectrum, and grey body. I have a feeling the discussion will be heading down that path.
Neil: Pretend for a moment that I am right, would many if not all of the things you posted still be true? Wouldn't the poles still warm faster? Wouldn't the polar ice, glaciers etc... still be melting? Wouldn't storm intensity still increase? Wouldn't the tundra still be thawing?
When I lived in the Florida Keys in the early 1980s we had a cold spell that got many worried about the water temp dropping below 60 degrees, which would kill the coral reefs.
Those reefs were supposed to be millions of years old.
regards
Mech
No answers to explain this, makes all of the global warming advocacy seem ludicrous, when barely 30 years ago they were worrying about a several million year old coral reef dying in the cold (below 60 degrees) ocean waters off the Florida Keys.
This is first hand personal experience. If you can't address this then you can't explain anything in any sensible manner, just propaganda and noise, wasted bandwidth.
Bottom line is according to the original post title, it's too late to rectify the melting earth scenario.
Why was it freezing just 3 decades ago? Maybe I should just keep spamming this dumb thread with this first hand FACT that you advocates just can't seem to swallow or explain, without your whole argument going to crap.
The US average is not the same as the world average.
Mech, there was a slight cooling trend from the 1950's to 1980's due to air pollution shading. But the Clean Air Act has now cleaned up the air and we are now warming again.