Peter K. wrote:

On 25 Oct, 15:39, Randy Yates <ya... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
  3. If true, what should we do about it?

I don't know. It's not clear that any of the suggested remedies (e.g.
Kyoto protocol) are actually going to have any effect.

I don't know how these canards start.

Some of it is clearly malice and
some may be wishful thinking. Most, I'm afraid arise from profound
ignorance and abiding distrust. There's a tee shirt around that proposes
a return to McCarthyism in order to defeat "Obama's Communism." Media
figures and politicians were calling doctor-patient end-of-life-care
conferences paid for by Medicare "Death Panels" of doctors who had the
power to enforce euthanasia long after their true nature was explained
in detail. There are still crazies who don't believe that Obama isn't a
US citizen. Do they know that McCain was born in Panama?

"Richard" == Richard Owlett<rowlett at (no spam) pcnetinc.com> writes:

Richard> Peter K. wrote:
Hi Randy,
Interesting video! I haven't watched it all, but bits and pieces.
On 25 Oct, 15:39, Randy Yates<ya... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
[snip]

2. I've thought for a long time the "global warming" crisis was
manufactured. Or at least that there really wasn't a "consensus".
Warming is happening.


Richard> Are you *SURE* ? ???

Richard> Here in SW MO (I'm in Springfield) the _average_ temperature this
Richard> summer has apparently been a *near* record low.

Richard> *IF* 'global' temp rising, what's to say it's *NOT* natural?

Today's temp is higher than yesterday's. Global Warming!!!!

But wait1 Tomorrow's temp will be lower than today. Global
Cooling!!!!

Even if global temp rise were natural, can anyone believe that dumping
zillions of tons of CO2 into the air at a rate faster than ever before
is a good idea?

Trying to deal with this is an insurance policy for something that may
not happen but if it does, you are totally screwed.

Ray

On 10/29/2009 9:17 AM, Raymond Toy wrote:
"Richard" == Richard Owlett<rowlett at (no spam) pcnetinc.com> writes:

Richard> Peter K. wrote:
Hi Randy,
Interesting video! I haven't watched it all, but bits and
pieces.
On 25 Oct, 15:39, Randy Yates<ya... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
[snip]

2. I've thought for a long time the "global warming" crisis was
manufactured. Or at least that there really wasn't a
"consensus".
Warming is happening.


Richard> Are you *SURE* ? ???

Richard> Here in SW MO (I'm in Springfield) the _average_
temperature this
Richard> summer has apparently been a *near* record low.

Richard> *IF* 'global' temp rising, what's to say it's *NOT*
natural?

Today's temp is higher than yesterday's. Global Warming!!!!

But wait1 Tomorrow's temp will be lower than today. Global
Cooling!!!!

Even if global temp rise were natural, can anyone believe that dumping
zillions of tons of CO2 into the air at a rate faster than ever before
is a good idea?

But is it? Depending on who you listen to, forest fires and volcanoes
and other natural sources STILL produce far more CO2 than humans do. And
this is with less volcanic activity than in the earth's history and
human control to keep fires minimized and quickly extinguished.

Also, depending on who you listen to, CO2 isn't that big of a deal in
the atmosphere, anyway.

Trying to deal with this is an insurance policy for something that may
not happen but if it does, you are totally screwed.

Ray

But there are a lot of things that are like that. If we don't start
taking better care of the fresh water supply there's going to be a
crisis much bigger and more immediate than climate change, and there's
no hope of natural control loops to fix that one.

Eric Jacobsen wrote:
On 10/29/2009 9:17 AM, Raymond Toy wrote:
"Richard" == Richard Owlett<rowlett at (no spam) pcnetinc.com> writes:

Richard> Peter K. wrote:
Hi Randy,
Interesting video! I haven't watched it all, but bits and pieces.
On 25 Oct, 15:39, Randy Yates<ya... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
[snip]

2. I've thought for a long time the "global warming" crisis was
manufactured. Or at least that there really wasn't a "consensus".
Warming is happening.


Richard> Are you *SURE* ? ???

Richard> Here in SW MO (I'm in Springfield) the _average_ temperature
this
Richard> summer has apparently been a *near* record low.

Richard> *IF* 'global' temp rising, what's to say it's *NOT* natural?

Today's temp is higher than yesterday's. Global Warming!!!!

But wait1 Tomorrow's temp will be lower than today. Global
Cooling!!!!

Even if global temp rise were natural, can anyone believe that dumping
zillions of tons of CO2 into the air at a rate faster than ever before
is a good idea?

But is it? Depending on who you listen to, forest fires and volcanoes
and other natural sources STILL produce far more CO2 than humans do.
And this is with less volcanic activity than in the earth's history
and human control to keep fires minimized and quickly extinguished.

Forest fires release CO2 that the vegetation took out of the atmosphere
by growing, and will take it our again as the forest regrows. It is a
net zero in the long run. Permanent deforestation, on the other hand
adds CO2 permanently.

Also, depending on who you listen to, CO2 isn't that big of a deal in
the atmosphere, anyway.

I know some people who claim that the earth is some 6,000 years old. I
lump them with the "no big deal" crowd.

Trying to deal with this is an insurance policy for something that may
not happen but if it does, you are totally screwed.

Ray

But there are a lot of things that are like that. If we don't start
taking better care of the fresh water supply there's going to be a
crisis much bigger and more immediate than climate change, and there's
no hope of natural control loops to fix that one.

We can always burn coal to power desalinization plants.

On 28 Oct, 22:51, Richard Owlett <rowl... at (no spam) pcnetinc.com> wrote:
Peter K. wrote:
Hi Randy,
Interesting video! I haven't watched it all, but bits and pieces.
On 25 Oct, 15:39, Randy Yates <ya... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
[snip]
2. I've thought for a long time the "global warming" crisis was
manufactured. Or at least that there really wasn't a "consensus".
Warming is happening.
Are you *SURE* ? ???

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html

On 28 Oct, 21:04, Jerry Avins <j... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:

Peter K. wrote:

On 25 Oct, 15:39, Randy Yates <ya... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
3. If true, what should we do about it?
I don't know. It's not clear that any of the suggested remedies (e.g.
Kyoto protocol) are actually going to have any effect.
I don't know how these canards start.

Perhaps I didn't express my self clearly: It's not clear to me that
the Kyoto protocol will have any effect, because even most signatories
have not met their targets for reducing green house emissions... and,
even if they were meeting their targets, it's not certain they would
be enough to change the rate of warming.

My understanding, which is limited to what I can glean from what is
written on the subject, which is often contradictory, is that the oceans
have the capability to absorb and release vast quantities of CO2.
Depending on what it going on with the global environmental system, the
CO2 being measured (especially at a place like Mauna Loa) could well be
coming from the ocean as a result of the increasing temperatures, not as
a causation of it.

One thing that becomes clear from listening to the various experts
expound on the subjects is that the interactions in the system are
highly complex and not well understood. But politicians know what to
do, anyway.

On Oct 26, 4:24 pm, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nos... at (no spam) nowhere.com> wrote:

Rune Allnor wrote:

Global warming is a fact.

3. If true, what should we do about it?

Keep cool. Our minds, that is. We should certainly *not* start
messing with global-scale temperature altering panic actions,

Think positive. New ice age would be much worse :-)


When I was a child (1960s) they scared us to death with media and
science stories about the coming of the New Ice Age.

I can't keep up. BUT back to DSP.What filter would you use to
'predict' global warming?

On Oct 29, 5:38 pm, Eric Jacobsen<eric.jacob... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
But is it? Depending on who you listen to, forest fires and volcanoes
and other natural sources STILL produce far more CO2 than humans do.
And this is with less volcanic activity than in the earth's history and
human control to keep fires minimized and quickly extinguished.

I was thinking about this some time ago. I ended up downloading all
the CO2 level data from NOAA's Mauna Loa monitoring station
(http://tinyurl.com/27eq88) for the past 50 years. I wanted to see if
there was a statistically significant rate of increase in the CO2
levels
over this time, my assumption being that the world was burning more
fossil fuels and chopping more forests every year. The NOAA site
has some analysis, but I did my own (http://tinyurl.com/yg85atv).
The first plot shows that CO2 levels are no doubt rising. The second
plot shows the first derivative, which at first blush doesn't seem to
trend upward. When I look at the 12 month averages though, I do see
a slight upward slope of 0.05/year. I have no idea where it comes
from (man, nature, measurement error), but the pace of increase is
increasing very slowly.

On the recent cooling, if you look at the solar cycle information,
again
from NOAA (http://tinyurl.com/d9xjcc), the predicted min was 2008 and
the next max is 2013. So if five years from now we see temperatures
above the 2000-2001 levels then its another piece of evidence that
we are in the midst of a long term warning trend. Is it caused by CO2
level increases, and are those increases caused by humans? I have
no clue, but I do recognize correlation and causality are different
things.

Darrell

Eric Jacobsen<eric.jacobsen at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
(snip)

My understanding, which is limited to what I can glean from what is
written on the subject, which is often contradictory, is that the oceans
have the capability to absorb and release vast quantities of CO2.
Depending on what it going on with the global environmental system, the
CO2 being measured (especially at a place like Mauna Loa) could well be
coming from the ocean as a result of the increasing temperatures, not as
a causation of it.

As I understand it, a lot of CO2 goes into the ocean every year,
and a lot comes out. The difference between those is the increase
in atmospheric CO2. Also, that the equilibrium time (between ocean
and atmosphere) is on the order of 1000 years. (Longer than we
can wait to see what happens.)

One thing that becomes clear from listening to the various experts
expound on the subjects is that the interactions in the system are
highly complex and not well understood. But politicians know what to
do, anyway. ;)

Maybe not quite fast enough, though.

-- glen