Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gases takes Effect

[doole]

>> I wish the people would hurry up and make up their minds already.

I think that hits the nail right on the head. If the experts don't agree on what the facts are, how can you forge a meaningful 'accord'.

I think there are probably many better ways to reach a committment on reducing emmissions.

 

[TCDiver1]

I wish the people would hurry up and make up their minds already.

Personally i think anyone that thinks they have more than a rudimentary understanding of mother nature is only fooling themself. Its such a complex system. I think we are only beginning to understand what we don't understand.

It certainly explains why many, very smart individuals, can be in such disagreement on this issue.

 

[archman]

It certainly explains why many, very smart individuals, can be in such disagreement on this issue.

Two words sum it all up.... Insufficient Data.

 

[drbill]

I thought the facts were fairly well accepted that global warming is occuring over relatively short time frames (1-2 centuries). I think the interpretation of the causes is what is being debated. "Global warming" as I understand it is a fact. The cause is still subject to interpretation. Any one with more expertise in this area care to comment?

Dr. Bill

 

[pt40fathoms]

I thought the facts were fairly well accepted that global warming is occuring over relatively short time frames (1-2 centuries). I think the interpretation of the causes is what is being debated. "Global warming" as I understand it is a fact. The cause is still subject to interpretation. Any one with more expertise in this area care to comment?

Dr. Bill

Sorry to correct you in what you understand as fact. But the argument among scientists is just that. "Is this cyclical in nature, or is this the product of human influence”. That is the real question that has not been properly addressed and given the debate and peer review of answers supplied. We are being spoon fed a load of garbage that is being passed off as scientific fact, when in fact it is still just theory. As a theory it should not be given even a passing glance when it come to public policy and national agendas. But it is, and that is the real crime in this sorry tale of misdirection and slight of hand.

Global warming as a result of human actions is not fact. Cyclical changes to global climate has been proven to be fact and is not disputed by any reputable scientist. Just as the sun goes through predictable cycles of high and low sun spot activity, so too does this planet go through cycles of high and low temperature phases. Claiming that this change in climate is as a result of mans intervention is pure folly and high headed deceit.

 

[dlndavid]

I thought the facts were fairly well accepted that global warming is occuring over relatively short time frames (1-2 centuries). I think the interpretation of the causes is what is being debated. "Global warming" as I understand it is a fact. The cause is still subject to interpretation. Any one with more expertise in this area care to comment?

Dr. Bill

Bill,
They are only the facts you choose to believe. When you ask for expert input, you only want input which already agrees with what you believe, not facts.
Let's go back a couple of centuries. What methods of obtaining temperature data were there? Not as sophisticated as the methods of today. So how can you use old data and new data to come to any conclusion?
What is a fact, is there is much money at stake here, and alot of people are doing whatever they can to get this money. It's about money, global warming is, not facts.

 

[MacHeath]

Sorry to correct you in what you understand as fact. But the argument among scientists is just that. "Is this cyclical in nature, or is this the product of human influence”. That is the real question that has not been properly addressed and given the debate and peer review of answers supplied. We are being spoon fed a load of garbage that is being passed off as scientific fact, when in fact it is still just theory. As a theory it should not be given even a passing glance when it come to public policy and national agendas. But it is, and that is the real crime in this sorry tale of misdirection and slight of hand.

Not quite sure how this is different to what DrBill said.

Anyway, the 'facts' that we are being fed in Europe and SE asia are as follows:

1. The mean temperature of the earth is currently rising.
2. There is a proven mechanism by which CO2 etc in the atmosphere can cause some of the heat radiated from the earth to be trapped. Thus increasing global mean temperature.
3. We have a proxy record of the last 100,000 years of so of temperature vs CO2 level in the atmosphere. There is a very good correlation between the two.
4. We can estimate how much CO2 human activity puts into the atmosphere. We can measure CO2 concentration. The rise in CO2 level is consistent with the human activity contribution.
5. The vast majority of climate scientists agree that, at least in part, global warming is caused by human activity.

I'm not arguing one way or the other, I just find it interesting to see what 'facts' people in different countries are fed.

 

[dlndavid]

Hello!
Facts? What Facts?
Oh my, the sun was hotter today than yesterday is a fact,
(if that were the case),
but we are talking about a small portion of a timeline, where the gathering of information is but a small portion of the samplings of the true world, not what someone in academia who wants another grant to waste money. There are many out there that only want to jump on the money wagon and scream chicken little.

 

[MacHeath]

Err, hence my use of the inverted commas....
Was just interested in what the news media in various parts of the world give out as their 'facts'

 

[Kim]

but we are talking about a small portion of a timeline, where the gathering of information is but a small portion of the samplings of the true world,

I think that the ice core samples that they take in Antarctica amount to a bit more than a 'small portion'.