Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (100580)	2/15/2005 12:44:04 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Respond to of 793699

Show me a list of similar scientists with comparable backgrounds who believe in Global Warming. The best I have ever seen someone present was a list of Nobel prize winners, many of which came from the social science fields. Science Magazine ( Science, Vol 306, Issue 5702, 1686 , 3 December 2004) sciencemag.org The scientific consensus is clearly expressed in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)..... IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, begins: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise" [p. 1 in (5)].... Others agree. The American Meteorological Society (6), the American Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (8)..... The drafting of such reports and statements involves many opportunities for comment, criticism, and revision, and it is not likely that they would diverge greatly from the opinions of the societies' members. Nevertheless, they might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions. That hypothesis was tested by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI database with the keywords "climate change" (9)...... This analysis shows that scientists publishing in the peer-reviewed literature agree with IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, and the public statements of their professional societies. Politicians, economists, journalists, and others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect"

To: greenspirit who wrote (100580)	2/15/2005 1:58:16 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793699

March 2005 issue of Scientific American has article: "How did humans first alter Global Climate?"... by William F. Ruddiman A bold hypothesis suggests that our ancestors' farming practices started warming the earth thousands of years before we started burning coal and driving cars. ..."New evidence suggests that concentrations of CO2 started rising about 8,000 years ago, even though natural trends indicate they should have been dropping. Some 3,000 years later the same thing happened to methane, another heat-trapping gas. The consequences of these surprising rises have been profound. Without them, current temperatures in northern parts of North America and Europe would be cooling by three to four degrees Celsius --enough to make agriculture difficult. In addition, an incipient ice age -- marked by the appearance of small ice caps -- would probably have begun several thousand years ago in parts of northeastern Canada. Instead the earth's climate has remained relatively warm and stable in recent millennia." ... Big article, magazine just out, haven't started to read it yet....and it's not yet on their website... Have humans possibly averted the start of a new ice age???? Even the scientists don't know, and can't agree.