Wrong."In a sense, the burden of proof has shifted from the people who are saying there's a risk, to the skeptics now," Michel Jarraud, WMO secretary-general, said in an interview.
Temperatures Climb As Warming Talks Stall
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent 10 minutes ago
NEW YORK - In the high Arctic, deep in the Atlantic, on Africa's sunbaked plains, climate scientists are seeing change unfold before their eyes. In the global councils of power, however, change in climate policy is coming only slowly.
In Geneva on Thursday, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) reported that 2005 thus far is the second warmest year on record, extending a trend climatologists attribute at least partly to heat-trapping "greenhouse gases" accumulating in the atmosphere.
In New York,
NASA's Goddard Institute projected that 2005 will surpass 1998 to end as the hottest year globally in the 125 years since reliable records have been kept. It said warming has accelerated and is now boosting the mercury every decade by more than 0.3 degrees Fahrenheit.
"The observed rapid warming thus gives urgency to discussions about how to slow greenhouse gas emissions," the NASA researchers said.
Five days earlier in Montreal, however, the annual 189-nation U.N. climate conference ended two weeks of such discussions by failing once again to win U.S. commitments to reduce greenhouse emissions — as almost all other industrialized nations are committed to do by 2012 under the Kyoto Protocol.
The Montreal delegates did adopt technical rules for that 1997 agreement, leading Canadian conference president Stephane Dion to declare, "The Kyoto Protocol has been switched on." And the 157 Kyoto Protocol nations agreed to negotiate further emissions reductions for the post-2012 period.
But Kyoto's first-phase, country-by-country targets are modest and may not all be met; there's no guarantee the second-phase negotiations will produce deeper cuts, and the United States, the biggest greenhouse emitter, remains an outsider.
Carbon dioxide, most important of six greenhouse gases covered by Kyoto, is a byproduct of automobile engines, power plants and other fossil fuel-burning industries.
The atmosphere now holds more than one-third more carbon dioxide than it did before the Industrial Revolution. In fact, European scientists reported last month that analysis of ice cores from Antarctica shows that today's level is 27 percent higher than any previous peak looking back 650,000 years.
A U.N.-organized network of scientists warns of shifting climate zones, ocean levels rising via heat expansion and glacial melting, and more extreme weather events if emissions are not reined in and average temperatures continue to rise.
Among fresh reports of warming's impact:
_The WMO said Thursday that in the Arctic Sea, where average winter temperatures have risen as much as 7 degrees Fahrenheit over 50 years, the ice cap this summer was 20 percent smaller than the 1979-2004 average.
_British oceanographers reported this month that Atlantic currents carrying warm water toward northern Europe have slowed. Freshwater from melting northern ice caps and glaciers is believed interfering with sal****er currents. Ultimately such a change could cool the European climate.
_In southern Africa, beset by four years of drought, average temperatures during the 12-month period ending last July were the warmest on record, British scientists said. The mercury stood more than 2 degrees Fahrenheit above a recent 40-year average.
_In Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea in the southwest Pacific, rising seas are forcing hundreds of islanders to abandon vulnerable coastal homes for higher ground, according to U.N. and news reports.
A small, vocal minority of climate skeptics, who long theorized manmade emissions weren't influencing the climate, has grown quieter as evidence of global warming and its effects has mounted.
"In a sense, the burden of proof has shifted from the people who are saying there's a risk, to the skeptics now," Michel Jarraud, WMO secretary-general, said in an interview.
In Montreal, Bush administration envoys, who once cited scientific uncertainty in rejecting the Kyoto pact, focused instead on the argument that emissions controls would damage the U.S. economy.
Largely isolated, the Americans agreed only to joining a nonbinding, exploratory global "dialogue" on future steps to combat warming.
Those who ratified Kyoto, meanwhile, decided a working group should develop proposals for emissions reductions by 35 industrialized nations after the current pact expires in 2012. They didn't agree on a deadline for that work, however, and made little headway on how to draw China, India and other newly industrializing countries into the emissions-control regime.
___
EDITOR'S NOTE — Associated Press Special Correspondent Charles Hanley has been writing about climate change for a decade. He covered the U.N. climate conference in Montreal last week.
Wrong."In a sense, the burden of proof has shifted from the people who are saying there's a risk, to the skeptics now," Michel Jarraud, WMO secretary-general, said in an interview.
"So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3
So a bunch of guys all agree the weather is changing over time.
Gee, what a shocker.
And I assume that all these scientists and anthro global warming fairies would agree that the burden of proof for the God/non-God argument has shifted to those who are skeptical?
-dale
I see what you are saying with the small vocal minority analogy. But the difference is that there is evidence that supports CO2 driven global warming. Proof of God is usually just based on faith; I don't really know of anyway to prove his existence.Originally Posted by dalem
I, of course, see no evidence for either.Originally Posted by barrowaj
-dale
CO2 does add to global warming. That isn't the issue. The issue is the degree to which it affects it, and if global warming is a bad thing.Originally Posted by barrowaj
Satilites have shown a zero degree increase in Tempature. They are the only true global temperature measurers. Land stations, are just that land stations. Most are concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere, near large cities, that give off a lot of heat.
Catastrophic global warming is a myth.
That's something I've never heard anyone say before. But I have actually read that a little bit of warming might be a good thing by helping to improve agricultural productivity. A lot would probably be bad though.Originally Posted by Praxus
The heat island effect was investigated in a paper in Nature a few months ago. What they did was measure the temp on a windy night and on a still night. You would expect that if there was heat trapping within the cities, then the temp would be higher on the still nights. But they showed there was no statisitcally significant difference between the two. It doesn't mean there is no heat island effect, but it does show that if the effect is there, it doesn't make much of a difference. Also, they can measure temperatures from ships too, which show surface warming.Originally Posted by Praxus
But as for satellite data, as far as I know, it is showing an increase in surface temperature as well. I think the idea that satellite measurements were not increasing was a misunderstanding that was resolved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satelli...e_measurements
There are quite a few problems with doing research like that (for example, what qualifies as "windy"). We'd have to see all the accurate data to see if their conclusion is true.Originally Posted by barrowaj
From same site: "Data collected by satellites and balloon-borne instruments since 1979 indicate little if any warming of the low- to mid- troposphere - the atmospheric layer extending up to about 5 miles from the Earth's surface. Climate models generally predict that temperatures should increase in the upper air as well as at the surface if increased concentrations of greenhouse gases are causing the warming." [17]"But as for satellite data, as far as I know, it is showing an increase in surface temperature as well. I think the idea that satellite measurements were not increasing was a misunderstanding that was resolved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satelli...e_measurements
Well it survived peer review. I don't know the title of the article, but I think its in Nature.Originally Posted by Praxus
Yeah, but if you just read the two paragraphs that follow what you posted... and the section above it...Originally Posted by Praxus
And all the evidence says it's NATURAL, and occurs again and again as part of a cycle.Originally Posted by barrowaj
I say leave global warming be, it is MUCH better than global cooling.
Unless you like icebergs in NY harbor...
Or New York under water.Originally Posted by M21Sniper
It HAS been really, really hot here for December.
"The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world. So wake up, Mr. Freeman. Wake up and smell the ashes." G-Man
It has been REALLY REALLY cold here for December. I live in the same area as Sniper, he'll tell you. For a good couple weeks it was 10-15 degrees colder then normal.Originally Posted by leibstandarte10
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Share this thread with friends: