'Scepticism' over climate claims

[David WJ Sherlock]

Accelerating ice-melting may be a sign of global climate change
The public believes the effects of global warming on the climate are not as bad as politicians and scientists claim, a poll has suggested.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/gore_a_bad_week_for_gore.htm

[Cruise4]

Sun: More activity since 1940 than in previous 1150 years, combined

Mercury: Unexpected polar ice discovered, along with a surprisingly strong intrinsic magnetic field … for a supposedly “dead” planet

Venus: 2500% increase in auroral brightness, and substantive global atmospheric changes in less than 30 years

Earth: Substantial and obvious world-wide weather and geophysical changes

Mars: “Global Warming,” huge storms, disappearance of polar icecaps

Jupiter: Over 200% increase in brightness of surrounding plasma clouds

Saturn: Major decrease in equatorial jet stream velocities in only ~20 years, accompanied by surprising surge of X-rays from equator

Uranus: “Really big, big changes” in brightness, increased global cloud activity

Neptune: 40% increase in atmospheric brightness

Pluto: 300% increase in atmospheric pressure, even as Pluto recedes farther from the Sun

“climate change” phenomena are occurring, not just here on Earth, but, in fact -- throughout the entire solar system. The idea that man can turn a few lightbulbs off or give false governments vast sums of money to waste on a solution, is ridiculous.

[David WJ Sherlock]

[Newspeak International]

Just Googled the first line, it's from here:

http://www.enterprisemission.com/_articles/05-14-2004_Interplanetary_P art_1/Interplanetary_1.htm

[Light Infantree]

Of course, the greatest irony is that none of the so called 'leaders' of the western world want to discuss the carbon footprint of the armed forces doing their wonderful peace keeping bit out in the middle east. Perhaps we should be alerting our MP's about our concerns over how much of the armed forces waste material is being delt with in the appropriate manner?

Laugh? I nearly re-cycled my underpants.

My ten year old daughter is going away on an overnight field trip next week to an eco-friendly woodland type place. Parents have been asked to provide a packed lunch that has a, wait for it....low carbon footprint! Nice touch! At the end of the stay the waste is all weighed and a prize given to most carbon friendly class. Don't get me wrong, I ve been re-cycling stuff for about 20 years and we need to look after our enviroment but please do me a favour! Lets get this in some sort of perspective here. When the average temperatures rose on our planet, where were all the factories and the planes, cars and carboard? Earth is much older than the industrial revolution.

What goes on here on our wonderful planet is probably a popular fly-on-the-wall documentary on Delagoogon, 4th planet of the Vontagomar system in the Sirius sector. I expect its listed as comedy but thinking about it, it probably gets listed under the heading of 'Surreality TV'

Whats going here on our beautiful jewel of a planet, continues to be evermore incredible and defies the law of common sense. No doubt it is keeping our intergalactic neighbors on the edge of their hover-sofas.

Will somebody please turn the light on!

Global Warming, oooooooh put the kettle on mother

[David WJ Sherlock]

[James C]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not sure whether I support climate change theory but I feel I should defend the official reason, for the sake of debate.

Quite simply, CO2 is a greenhouse gas, which is incontrovertible. Without it, our planet would be much much colder. For thousands and thousands of years, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen and fallen to give an average reading of 280+ ppm. But just in the past few decades, this has shot up by a third to 380+ ppm. This level hasn't been witnessed for 800,000 years and the rise has been the fastest in history.

Then again, this could be atributable to something else but this simple information is hard to ignore.

[Newspeak International]

Yes it's hard to ignore James, it's in your face all the time on all the channels and every paper.

So is the "Al Queda hate us for our freedoms" mantra!

[Cruise4]

CO2 is a so called Greenhouse gas, but not a significant one.

On a much bigger timescale, looking back 600 million years or more – when CO2 levels may have been as high as 5000 parts per million at times – there are substantial questions about whether the CO2-temperature correlation holds up.

The term 'Greenhouse' Gas comes from the example of a Greenhouse 'trapping' CO2. But this is a closed system. The earth is not.

CO2 levels could be affected by so many things that I can't say what a rise or fall may signify... how many forest fires have there been for example. Maybe its the planets way of cooling itself somehow for all I can find out.

But what we can be confident of is, it ain't causing the current Climate Change.

Those planet references are backed up, at least in the cases I checked, by NASA and I also came across this site: http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/solar.html

[TonyGosling]

moved from news

[David WJ Sherlock]

[lockerbie]

"Pluto: 300% increase in atmospheric pressure, even as Pluto recedes farther from the Sun"

Now I must say this is total *, by what means do we have to measure the atmospheric pressure on Pluto?

"Mars: “Global Warming,” huge storms, disappearance of polar icecaps"

Mars is forever heating up, that's what it gets for being so small.

"Mercury: Unexpected polar ice discovered, along with a surprisingly strong intrinsic magnetic field … for a supposedly “dead” planet "

Well the magnetic field mens nothing except it has a liquid core. And I would like to see any actual evidence of this polar ice.

[paul wright]

[lockerbie]

what is so wrong with co2 being a greenhouse gas? it's why we measure certain chemicals by co2 equivalent after all.

and it fits climate models.

yes co2 provides a smaller greenhouse effect than water vapor but there is not much we can do about water without killing ourselves, co2 which accounts for 12% of the greenhouse effect can be dealt with.

for the last half a million years and co2 has never been this high and has never risen this fast and we've past through at least 3 ice ages.

[Cruise4]

Pluto's atmosphere was observed by an international team of astronomers including French researchers from the Laboratoire d’Etudes Spatiales et d’Instrumentation en Astrophysique (LESIA - CNRS, Observatoire de Paris, Universités de Paris VI and Paris VII) and the Institut de Mécanique Céleste et de Calcul des Ephémérides (IMCCE - CNRS, Observatoire de Paris). Two occultation phenomena, that is, when Pluto passes between us and a star, made it possible to study the atmosphere of the planet. These occultations were observed in northern Chile with a 30-cm telescope on July 20, 2002, and with the Canada-France-Hawaii 3.6-m telescope on August 21, 2002. Contrary to expectations, the atmospheric pressure was found to be twice as much as when it was measured in 1988 when Pluto was closer to the sun. This could be the result of the sublimation(1) of the nitrogen ice located on the south polar ice cap. This research is published in the journal Nature dated July 10, 2003.

GROUND-based radar observations of Mercury have revealed unusually strong, highly depolarized echoes from the north1,2 and south2 poles. These anomalous echoes have been cited as evidence of polar ice deposits1–5. Thermal studies3–5 suggest that the permanently shaded floors of large polar craters are cold enough to preserve water ice in a stable state over aeons, in spite of Mercury's proximity to the Sun. Here we present high-resolution radar maps of Mercury's polar regions, derived from delay-Doppler measurements. We have resolved the north and south polar anomalies into numerous crater-sized features, and we have been able to identify the source craters for many of these features after making small corrections to the pole positions on the Mariner-10 images. The coincidence with crater locations, together with other properties of the radar features, are consistent with the polar-ice hypothesis.



References 1. Slade, M. A., Butler, B. J. & Muhleman, D. O. Science 258, 635−640 (1992).
2. Harmon, J. K. & Slade, M. A. Science 258, 640−643 (1992).
3. Paige, D. A., Wood, S. E. & Vasavada, A. R. Science 258, 643−646 (1992).
4. Ingersoll, A. P., Svitek, T. & Murray, B. C. Icarus 100, 40−47 (1992). | Article |
5. Butler, B. J., Muhleman, D. O. & Slade, M. A. J. geophys. Res. 98, 15003−15023 (1993).
6. Davies, M. E., Dwornik, S. E., Gault, D. E. & Strom, R. G. Atlas of Mercury (NASA, Washington DC, 1978).
7. Shaded Relief Map of Mercury (USGS Map I-1149, US Geological Surv., Reston, Virginia, 1979).
8. Grolier, M. J. & Boyce, J. M. Geologic Map of the Borealis Region of Mercury (USGS Map I-1660, US Geological Surv., Reston, Virginia, 1984).
9. Strom, R. G., Malin, M. C. & Leake, M. A. Geologic Map of the Bach Region of Mercury (USGS Map I-2015, US Geological Surv., Reston, Virginia, 1990).
10. Ostro, S. J. et al. J. geophys. Res. 97, 18227−18244 (1992).
11. Muhleman, D. O., Butler, B. J., Grossman, A. W. & Slade, M. A. Science 253, 1508−1513 (1991).
12. Harmon, J. K., Slade, M. A. & Hudson, R. S. Icarus 98, 240−253 (1992). | Article |
13. Davies, M. E. & Batson, R. M. J. geophys. Res. 80, 2417−2430 (1975).

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Earth's dusty neighbor Mars is grappling with its own form of climate change as fluctuating solar radiation is kicking up dust and winds that may be melting the planet's southern polar ice cap, scientists said on Wednesday.

Researchers have been watching the changing face of Mars for years, studying slight differences in the brightness and darkness of its surface.

These changes in brightness have been generally attributed to the presence of dust, but until now their effect on wind circulation and climate has not been clear.

http://www.convenient-lie.com/information.html#solar

Using computers to conduct what is referred to as a "time series analysis" on the colouration and thickness of the annual layers, we have discovered repeated cycles in marine productivity in this, a region larger than Europe. Specifically, we find a very strong and consistent 11-year cycle throughout the whole record in the sediments and diatom remains. This correlates closely to the well-known 11-year "Schwabe" sunspot cycle, during which the output of the sun varies by about 0.1%. Sunspots, violent storms on the surface of the sun, have the effect of increasing solar output, so, by counting the spots visible on the surface of our star, we have an indirect measure of its varying brightness. Such records have been kept for many centuries and match very well with the changes in marine productivity we are observing.

In the sediment, diatom and fish-scale records, we also see longer period cycles, all correlating closely with other well-known regular solar variations. In particular, we see marine productivity cycles that match well with the sun's 75-90-year "Gleissberg Cycle," the 200-500-year "Suess Cycle" and the 1,100-1,500-year "Bond Cycle." The strength of these cycles is seen to vary over time, fading in and out over the millennia. The variation in the sun's brightness over these longer cycles may be many times greater in magnitude than that measured over the short Schwabe cycle and so are seen to impact marine productivity even more significantly.

Our finding of a direct correlation between variations in the brightness of the sun and earthly climate indicators (called "proxies") is not unique. Hundreds of other studies, using proxies from tree rings in Russia's Kola Peninsula to water levels of the Nile, show exactly the same thing: The sun appears to drive climate change.

My comment:
Given the nature of the distance and difficulties involved in this sort of data it has to be viewed speculatively and debate is ongoing. If you google for information you will find various articles on all this stuff. This is by no means a cut and dried issue. How could it be. BUT overall I reckon its relevant to a CO2 Global Warming argument. However I am not qualified in this area and cannot argue for any case (about planetary conditions). My point is the whole solar system appears to be in flux. I could post a book on all this but I won't.

[lockerbie]

"BUT overall I reckon its relevant to a CO2 Global Warming argument. "

well melting on mars is easily explained without solar variation and in fact would continue to happen if the sun was to get much colder.

"However I am not qualified in this area and cannot argue for any case (about planetary conditions)."

as far as my knowledge goes i spent 2 years studying the terrestial planets (excluding mercury because it's very boring) and know a bit about their conditions and weather and geology.

and yes the planets are all in flux (i won't be a dick about pluto not actually being a planet) but in no way does this point to a single source, planets just tend to do that.