Global Warming Truth

[silverfish]

Paul ,

I feel that you have misunderstood what Urban Warming is.. It is a strong argument put forward by sceptics.
One reason for the claimed increase in global temperatures is due to the ever increasing temperature reading by urban thermometers. This is not caused by the rise in co2 (aka. global warming) it is caused by the increase in traffic and the increase of the number of things such as air conditioner heat exchangers being placed too close to met stations etc. This inflated data is then used to show that the world is warming , which is not occurring in rural areas. Imagine the effect on a thermometer placed near a busy airport. Each year more and more multi-engine jets are landing/taking off , this would show an increase in the temp reading for that thermometer .

Your claim that global warming is being seen in cities is not correct, what you are seeing is the Urban Heat Island effect. This has nothing to do with co2 levels in the upper atmosphere. It  is however seriously biasing the the global temperature reading and giving many people the impression that the earth is warming much faster than it actually is, as many of the met station are located at airports or in urban areas.

Please be aware, most septics do not deny co2 has an effect, we are simply arguing that co2 has very little effect and the billions of dollars spent on a futile attempt to reduce it would be much better spent on more serious pollution problems.

It is odd that we are both arguing for a better environment , you are obviously aware that we can not continue to pollute our planet and expect no consequences. Have a look at some of the horrific photos of pollution in this link and you will see why I feel there are more pressing issues than CO2 at the moment.
http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/

It is my belief that support for AGW is falling rapidly both within the "layman" population and the scientific population. I hope this leads to a global review of the impacts man is having on the planet and some serious discussions can be held on what can be done to reduce them. If only a fraction of the money spent so far on AGW had been spent on serious alternative energy research, it would make the CO2 issue mute anyway.

cheers
Tony.

Great post, some good points here, and what I have been saying all along that there are real pollution issues to be concerned about, but CO2 is not one of them

The BBC's Andrew Neil is beginning to recognise that 'The Dam is Cracking' as far as global warming is concerned:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypolitics/andrewneil/2010/01/the_dam_is_cracking.html

[PaulLowrance]

Paul ,

I feel that you have misunderstood what Urban Warming is.. It is a strong argument put forward by sceptics.
One reason for the claimed increase in global temperatures is due to the ever increasing temperature reading by urban thermometers. This is not caused by the rise in co2 (aka. global warming) it is caused by the increase in traffic and the increase of the number of things such as air conditioner heat exchangers being placed too close to met stations etc.

They know the addition of heat from traffic. Years ago I've seen the research on this. Trust me, academic  scientists know the difference.

Your claim that global warming is being seen in cities is not correct, what you are seeing is the Urban Heat Island effect. This has nothing to do with co2 levels in the upper atmosphere.

Umm, such co2 is one cause of global warming, lol.  I'll trust academic active publishing climatologist over anti global warmest thank you very much.



Lets all work together to reduce our carbon footprint. And hopefully in a few years time we will never need Big Oil again.

[PaulLowrance]

Paul,

Your 97% is only 79 people, hand picked out of over 10054 Earth scientist.  All 10054 are considered current, where picked for the survey because of there knowlege in the field of earth science.  Why do they leave out the rest of the other scientist.  It is bias, because they want a small number with a high precentage that makes headlines.

LOL, I'll answer you again. The 10054 are *NOT* active publishing climatologist. And please stop insinuating what the 10054 are. If you think you know, then post the reference that shows it. And please learn about statistics. That survey was done by a University. They know a thing or two about statistics.

[PaulLowrance]

Since Climategate, Glaciergate, and now Amazongate, so-called 'scientists' have revealed themselves to be some of the most biased people on the planet, willing to sell out the truth for a few hundred thousand dollars worth of research grants.
     You may huff and puff all you like but even the BBC is beginning to admit that Global Warming is beginning to look like a load of hot air. And that's because - it is!!

Wrong. You anti global warmest are trying to make good scientists guilty of the failings a few bad scientists.

And also there's word going that those few bad apples did it on purpose to destroy the global warming movement. That's just rumors so far, but hopefully it will be investigated. I wouldn't put it past a conservative to take such drastic sick actions.

[Azorus]

LOL, I'll answer you again. The 10054 are *NOT* active publishing climatologist. And please stop insinuating what the 10054 are. If you think you know, then post the reference that shows it. And please learn about statistics. That survey was done by a University. They know a thing or two about statistics.

Poor Paul,

You are absuletly right, they are not all climatologist.  They are Earth Scientist which is why they where selected for the survey.  You have outlined the Bias of the survey.  Thanks!