Re: [Marxism] Global Warming again
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On 12/9/2009 6:33 PM, Greg McDonald wrote: > I liked Mark Bowen's "Thin Ice". Part primer on paleoclimatology > which reminds me of a very interesting book i am reading, "Climate Change in Prehistory: The End of the Reign of Chaos" by William J Burroughs. Les Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Global Warming again
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == I liked Mark Bowen's "Thin Ice". Part primer on paleoclimatology, part adventure story, I found the argument both understandable and convincing. http://www.mark-bowen.com/book_ti.html Greg Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Global Warming again
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On 12/9/2009 5:13 PM, Paddy Apling wrote: > I know very well there is a correlation between atmospheric CO2 and global > temperature - but they can also be correlated with many other things - even > such as the increase in basic postal charges !!. Correlation is not > causation; > it becomes causation with a workable model, and there are a number of models out there that show positive sensitivity to CO2. now you have to sit down and understand the models. help is available if you give it a try. Les Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Global Warming again
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On one level, at least the holocaust deniers could plead that they weren't around at the time it was taking place. Not so with global warming...or with its kindred willful deniers of the absence of WMDs in Iraq, etc. Fifty to twenty years ago, enough people were doing this work to where some were passing through my rather narrow, not particularly scientific circles in a small Midwestern city. The fallback position, that it's just a natural cycle, is equally absurd. In the US, we have about 20% of the population whose entire self-perception is wrapped up in what can only be called a religious frenzy of denial. And about half the overall population thinks it bad manners to point out that they're just nuts. Anyway, at the rate things seem to be headed here, we might well wind up with another global warming denier in the White House...and won't that be peachy keen for the rest of the world So, Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Global Warming again
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Plant growth? Full disclosure-- I've never studied this. However, if we accept that increased levels of carbon dioxide are the result of currently organized production, transportation, distribution etc., and that mode requires and maintains clearing of vast areas of natural plant growth, where is the benefit to plant growth? Somehow I think burning the rain forests in the Amazon to clear the land for cattle raising is of no benefit to the rain forest, or to other forests for that matter. But maybe that's just me. - Original Message - From: "Paddy Apling" Not zero, but vastly over-rated and not justifying the hyperbole, just consider the facts; not least its contribution to plant growth - see web-sites, of various scientists including mine at apling.freeservers.com/science.htm awaiting updated links. Paddy http://apling.freeservers.com Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Global Warming again
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Not zero, but vastly over-rated and not justifying the hyperbole, just consider the facts; not least its contribution to plant growth - see web-sites, of various scientists including mine at apling.freeservers.com/science.htm awaiting updated links. Paddy http://apling.freeservers.com - Original Message - From: "Les Schaffer" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 12:58 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Global Warming again == Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Paddy Apling wrote: > Events of the last few weeks show clealy that the time has come to > properly consider and discuss the science of climate where you been Paddy, that's been going on for decades. you just don't like the results to date. any other scientist knows its not just models, tho they are important. there is proxy data, there is measurements. you are surprisingly inept at making sound scientific assessment about climate science, yet you talk as if you know what you are saying. in this regard, you ARE in the camp of climate change denialists. all heat, no light. but you are following the good rule of propaganda, just say NO!. so, Paddy, you think the sensitivity of the climate to CO2 changes is EXACTLY zero, is that your position? Les Nature Geoscience Published online: 6 December 2009 Earth system sensitivity inferred from Pliocene modelling and data Daniel J. Lunt, Alan M. Haywood, Gavin A. Schmidt, Ulrich Salzmann, Paul J. Valdes & Harry J. Dowsett Abstract Quantifying the equilibrium response of global temperatures to an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations is one of the cornerstones of climate research. Components of the Earth's climate system that vary over long timescales, such as ice sheets and vegetation, could have an important effect on this temperature sensitivity, but have often been neglected. Here we use a coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation model to simulate the climate of the mid-Pliocene warm period (about three million years ago), and analyse the forcings and feedbacks that contributed to the relatively warm temperatures. Furthermore, we compare our simulation with proxy records of mid-Pliocene sea surface temperature. Taking these lines of evidence together, we estimate that the response of the Earth system to elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations is 30–50% greater than the response based on those fast-adjusting components of the climate system that are used traditionally to estimate climate sensitivity. We conclude that targets for the long-term stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse-gas concentrations aimed at preventing a dangerous human interference with the climate system should take into account this higher sensitivity of the Earth system. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/e.c.apling%40btinternet.com Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
