The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 46 of 54 FirstFirst ... 364445464748 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 460 of 540

Thread: Speaking of Global Warming

  1. #451
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    N.E. Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,131

    Default

    I read yesterday that the hunt is on for animals that thrive in higher temps to raise for food. I wonder if any of those who are studying this have thought about the possible need to grow crops for these animals ( cattle were mentioned ). Someone said we might need to go vegan. Not sure how you do that if you can't grow plants to eat. We tried cactus one time and I'm here to tell you I would not need much of that
    charly

    There ought to be one day -- just one -- when there is open season on Congressmen.
    ~Will Rogers~

  2. #452
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    1,921

    Default

    Gerry....don't confuse Golddogs with facts.....they are so uncomfortable to deal with!

    He will perhaps take his own advise and continue to "Ignore" the facts!
    Last edited by swampcollielover; 05-07-2014 at 12:21 PM.

  3. #453
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Detroit Lakes, MN
    Posts
    1,443

    Default

    Here is a link to the highlights of the new National Climate Assessment. http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights The full report is also available at a link on this page.

    I know, I know, just another example of 300 liberal scientists taking from the public to enrich themselves and further the grand scheme to redistribute wealth.

  4. #454
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Detroit Lakes, MN
    Posts
    1,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    I'm surprised they used that polar bear photo again, when this year it was reported the bears were endangered due to TOO MUCH ice!
    Gerry, please post any story that talks about a global situation where there was to much ice for polar bears. The story you posted previously was related to a very small area of Alaska and a situation which occurs on a regular basis. I did not call you on it then.

    Just another cherry picked story just like weather reports.

  5. #455
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,927

    Default

    http://americanthinker.com/blog/2014/05/researchers_call_white_house_climate_report_pseudo science.html

    The White House issued its third National Climate Assessment (NCA) yesterday to much fanfare and an avalanche of positive press. But two climate researchers, scientists Patrick Michaels and Paul Knappenberger of the libertarian Cato Institute, called out the administration for relying on faulty data and non-scientist input.


    Daily Caller:
    “It clearly believes that virtually everything in our society is tremendously dependent on the surface temperature, and, because of that, we are headed towards certain and inescapable destruction, unless we take its advice and decarbonize our economy, pronto,” Michaels and Knappenberger added.
    The NCA says that the U.S. average temperature has risen between 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit to 1.9 degrees Fahrenheit since 1895, with most of that increase occurring since 1980. This temperature rise, the report argues, has been linked to increased extreme weather, like hurricanes and droughts, as well as ecosystem imbalance across the country.
    The NCA warns that the average temperature could increase another 4 degrees Fahrenheit in the coming decades, causing more extreme weather, sea level rises and deaths. The NCA suggests a slew of regulatory solutions from cap-and-trade to green energy subsidies to mitigate global warming.
    “It is to provide cover for a massive regulatory intrusion, and concomitant enormous costs in resources and individual liberty,” Michaels and Knappenberger wrote. “History tells us that when scientists willingly endorse sweeping governmental agendas fueled by dodgy science, bad things soon happen.”
    Michaels’ and Knappenberger’s 75-page critique of the NCA points out the many weak points and flaws present in the government’s analysis of the impact of global warming. For example, the NCA relies on not only peer-reviewed scientific literature, but also non-peer reviewed work from environmental activist groups — which the government did not disclose.
    The libertarian Cato scholars point to environmental and political advocacy groups cited in just the NCA’s chapter on water resources. The groups include the Union of Concerned Scientists (who are not actual scientists), the Southwest Climate Alliance and the Water Climate Utility Alliance.
    Michaels and Knappenberger also pointed out that the measure of climate sensitivity used by the report is 40 percent higher than what more recent scientific literature points to. Climate sensitivity is the measure of how much warming would occur if carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were doubled. The current literature puts that number at about 1.5 degrees Celsius, but the government used estimates from the United Nations’ 2007 climate report putting climate sensitivity at 2 degrees Celsius to 3.3 degrees Celsius.
    The report is at odds with some of the UN's conclusions in its most recent studies. For example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report notes that there has been no increase in the severity of storms in decades. There was also no mention in the NCA of the 15 year pause in rising temps, nor why the increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere has not led to an increase in temperatures as all models say it should.

    Henry, that was the article I previously posted that I was referring to.
    This appears to be a pretty balanced article on polar bears. It's kind of long, but very interesting.
    http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/mag...olar_bears.asp
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  6. #456
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    1,921

    Default

    Henry V......Touché

    Point goes to Gerry!

  7. #457

  8. #458
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Detroit Lakes, MN
    Posts
    1,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    [FONT=times new roman]http://americanthinker.com/blog/2014/05/researchers_call_white_house_climate_report_pseudo science.html
    …..
    So, Mr. Michaels and Mr. Kappenberger from CATO take issue with the NCA, there is a surprise. Did you look at the report Gerry? Can you find anywhere where the pieces of the article that you posted are supported in their report? For example, here is one of their statements:
    It clearly believes that virtually everything in our society is tremendously dependent on the surface temperature, and, because of that, we are headed towards certain and inescapable destruction, unless we take its advice and decarbonize our economy, pronto,” Michaels and Knappenberger added
    Where in the NCA is this statement supported?
    Your article then sights some data reported in the NCA but does not “say” the data is not true.
    Your article then includes:
    The NCA suggests a slew of regulatory solutions from cap-and-trade to green energy subsidies to mitigate global warming.
    “It is to provide cover for a massive regulatory intrusion, and concomitant enormous costs in resources and individual liberty,” Michaels and Knappenberger wrote. “History tells us that when scientists willingly endorse sweeping governmental agendas fueled by dodgy science, bad things soon happen.”
    Again, have you read the report or viewed the summary? Your authors suggest there is some large regulatory agenda in the report. There is not. Why would they write in such a way to mislead people?
    The rest of the article seems to pull at the uncertainty thread. If all the science isn’t exactly the same, then none of it is true. They also point at the sources used and they provide few of their own. Note how the daily caller calls your authors are "climate researchers" and then the term “scientists”. Almost like they are suggesting they are climate scientists, which they are not. For background on them see: http://www.desmogblog.com/chip-knappenberger (note the nice article he did on the benefits of coal back in 2011)
    And https://www.skepticalscience.com/pat...ient-data.html (the comments section notes many more issues with how he uses data)

    The polar bear article is great. Last time you referenced this issue, I did a search of Polar bear ice and found nothing but right wing sites pointing to the Alaska data and misrepresenting the facts.

  9. #459
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Detroit Lakes, MN
    Posts
    1,443

    Default

    John Oliver did a great job on this issue last night. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg

  10. #460
    Senior Member Golddogs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,236

    Default

    Scientists warn Antarctic ice melt can’t be stopped

    Researchers say sea level could rise 10 feet or more in coming centuries



    By Justin Gillis and Kenneth Chang


    New York Times


    A large section of the mighty West Antarctica ice sheet has begun falling apart and its continued melting now appears to be unstoppable, two groups of scientists reported Monday.

    If the findings hold up, they suggest that the melting could destabilize neighboring parts of the ice sheet and a rise in sea level of 10 feet or more may be unavoidable in coming centuries.

    Global warming caused by the human-driven release of greenhouse gases has helped to destabilize the ice sheet, though other factors may also be involved, the scientists said.

    The rise of the sea is likely to continue to be relatively slow for the rest of the 21st century, the scientists added, but in the more distant future it may accelerate markedly, potentially throwing society into crisis.

    “This is really happening,” said Thomas Wagner, who runs NASA’s programs on polar ice and helped oversee he research. “There’s nothing to stop it now. But you are still limited by the physics of how fast the ice can flow.”

    Two scientific papers released Monday by the journals Science and Geophysical Research Letters came to similar conclusions by different means. Both groups of scientists found that West Antarctic glaciers had retreated far enough to set off an inherent instability in the ice sheet, one that experts have feared for decades.

    NASA called a telephone news conference Monday to highlight the urgency of the findings.

    The West Antarctic ice sheet sits in a bowl-shaped depression in the Earth, with the base of the ice below sea level. Warm ocean water is causing the ice sitting along the rim of the bowl to thin and retreat. As the front edge of the ice pulls away from the rim and enters deeper water, it can retreat much faster than before.

    In one of the new papers, a team led by Eric Rignot, a glaciologist at the University of California, Irvine, used satellite and air measurements to document an accelerating retreat over the past several decades of six glaciers draining into the Amundsen Sea region. And with updated mapping of the terrain beneath the ice sheet, the team was able to rule out the presence of any mountains or hills significant enough to slow the retreat.

    “Today we present observational evidence that a large sector of the West Antarctic ice sheet has gone into irreversible retreat,” Rignot said in the NASA news conference. “It has passed the point of no return.”

    Those six glaciers alone could cause the ocean to rise 4 feet as they disappear, Rignot said, possibly within a couple of centuries. He added that their disappearance will most likely destabilize other sectors of the ice sheet, so the ultimate rise could be triple that.

    A separate team led by Ian Joughin of the University of Washington studied one of the most important glaciers, Thwaites, using sophisticated computer modeling, coupled with recent measurements of the ice flow.

    That team also found that a slow- motion collapse had become inevitable. Even if the warm water now eating away at the ice were to dissipate, it would be “too little, too late to stabilize the ice sheet,” Joughin said. “There’s no stabilization mechanism.”

    The two teams worked independently, preparing papers that were to be published within days of each other. After it was learned that their results were similar, the teams and their journals agreed to release the findings on the same day.

    The new finding appears to be the fulfillment of a prediction made in 1978 by an eminent glaciologist, John H. Mercer of the Ohio State University.

    He outlined the vulnerable nature of the West Antarctic ice sheet and warned that the rapid human-driven release of greenhouse gases posed “a threat of disaster.”

    He was assailed at the time, but in recent years, scientists have been watching with growing concern as events have unfolded in much the way Mercer predicted. (He died in 1987.)
    Never trust a dog to watch your food!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •