I don’t really like the use of the word alarmist. It’s a word that the PR departments who claim global warming is junk science love to hear.

For that matter does a rising/falling sea levels have an effect on the earth’s orbit (5ft-50ft-200ft-tides)?

Is the suns radiation still increasing over what it was in the past and do the climate models take this into account?

Earth’s Fickle Climate: Lessons Learned From Deep-Time Ice Ages
“We currently live in an “icehouse” — a climate in which large continental ice sheets exist, in this case at both poles. The onset of this icehouse began in Antarctica 34 million years ago and in the Arctic about 2 million years ago. The latter stages of human evolution occurred in this bipolar icehouse, and human civilization unfolded during the relatively stable, most recent interglacial phase of this icehouse (the glacial times are popularly known as ice ages). This particular climate state, however, represents only a fraction of 1 percent of Earth’s history. Thus, humans evolved during, and are adapted to, an atypical climate state.”

Is our climate warming? As Professor Carter, at James Cook University in Queensland, Australia, so ably points out; “It depends”. If the measure is the trend from the beginning of the last Ice Age to the present day, based on sampling of ice cores taken from Greenland, then yes, the climate is warming. If the measure is the temperature trend from the beginning of the Holocene period (10,000 years ago) until the present day, then the climate is cooling. If the measure is the temperature trend from say, 2000 years ago until the present day the cooling is even more dramatic. If the measure is the earth’s temperature over the last 700 years from the beginning of the “Little Ice Age” the temperature trend is stable. Over the last 100 years the climate shows a warming trend and over the last 10 years the temperature has been demonstrated to be stable.

Of course, advocates for anthropogenic warming in countering any questioning of their pet theory will point to climate models that show rising levels of man–made CO2 are indeed the cause. What they do not point to is that these same models, when applied to historic climate data, are unable to recreate past known conditions (also known as ‘hindsight forecasting’).

What we need is an honest assessment of the situation by scientists, politicians and the media, not sycophantic agreement with those who have a scientific, political or financial axe to grind, such as Al Gore who now as a partner at venture capital giant, Kleiner Perkins, stands to make millions.

I do not have a problem with a concerted effort to encourage and establish new clean sustainable energy sources. I do have a problem with the effort being based on a theory that is now being slowly disproved and the spending of billions unnecessarily on carbon credits and other such nonsense. So before we go tilting at windmills, let’s pause and focus on the things that do matter, like bringing clean water to the billions of people who don’t have it.

We do have a consensus you silly twit. As to whether the planet has been warmer in the past, yes it has. The problem is the RATE of CHANGE now, you stupid bastich, and how it will effect the population of homo sapiens which are well and truly packed into this planet like sardines. Six billion people cannot survive a major climatic shift.

If this warming trend was occurring over the next millennia or two we could adapt, but you are asking a couple of billion people who have NO RESOURCES to fall back on to lose everything in two decades.

So you want to bring clean water to billions of people who don’t have it. There’s a plan. What we need to do is find a way to fund the clean water.

Global warming has among its possible solutions a tax on carbon fuel burning or carbon dioxide release tax. Making carbon fuels more expensive will help in reducing their usage.

Have a worldwide tax on burning carbon and have the tax money to this go to funding the great ‘clean water to billions of people who don’t have it’ program.

We’ve just help solve 2 problems.

Do I think you will be for this program? No. You bring up clean water to billions of people not because you care about billions of people, but you want those who may want to solve the global warming problem to feel guilty about those without clean water.

But we can have win-win. I hope you will get behind this.

I refuse to believe every scientific magazine, journal or article, virtually every scientific body on the planet, or the scientific literature extant in hundreds of journals; but gee whiz whenNewsMax runs a story saying what they want to hear by gosh, that’s good enough for me.

Best,

D

All in good time, see esp the last paragraph.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ Newsroom/ NewImages/ images.php3?img_id=17257

If so, this is good news! Global warming may not have affected Antarctica yet. And if the ozone hole is to blame, that’s good news too, because the hole is closing up unexpectedly fast. The consensus is that the CFC ban is working faster than the science predicted, so maybe in a few years, as the ozone hole heals further, Antarctic temperatures will stabilize again. And in the short term, maybe the build-up of ice on Antarctica can offset the melting Arctic ice and reduce the rate of sea level rise so all those folks in the South Seas can live on their coral reefs a little bit longer.

If someone can contradict my interpretation of this data with sound, scientific evidence to support their claims, I would greatly apprecitate their expertise.