kipposhi

So let's assume that CO2 is good for trees.
But how do we know whether it caused global warming or not?

One of the quotes says that historically CO2 levels were much higher.  Which period are we talking about?  Were human existant at that time?
快樂牛郎 發表於 2010-2-4 02:15

For your first question:  

First, we have to define global warming.
Second, is that "global warming" (or  "climate change") really a problem?
Last but not least, what is the cause of "global warming"?  caused by human activity or nature?  (This is the most important question.  The one Al Gore talks about is called "Anthropogenic [Man-Made] Global Warming".)

Even according to IPCC, the global average temperature has increased 0.6°C only over last century.  Does it really matter?



That period should be last 600 million years.  It talks about the average CO2 concentration.
Whether human existed at that time?  We don't know because human have not developed time traveling technology yet.  But the first human is believed to have existed about 200,00 years ago as it is the oldest human fossil has been found.

B2L2

Even according to IPCC, the global average temperature has increased 0.6°C only over last century.  Does it really matter?
kipposhi 發表於 2010-2-4 13:35

First, thanks for the link.  I wasn't familiar with all these data and honestly wasn't paying much attention on global warming.  But the link you gave actually brought up the alarm for me.  

0.6°C over last century may not seems that much, but I do worry about that.  However, what bothers me more is the trend showed in those graph.  They also mentioned about the reduce in snow coverage and raise of sea level.  So all these don't even bother you at all?

I don't know who/what caused the change, but being human, I believe there is something we could do, instead of keep saying the damage we made is insignificant.

kipposhi

First, thanks for the link.  I wasn't familiar with all these data and honestly wasn't paying much attention on global warming.  But the link you gave actually brought up the alarm for me.  

0.6°C over last century may not seems that much, but I do worry about that.  However, what bothers me more is the trend showed in those graph.  They also mentioned about the reduce in snow coverage and raise of sea level.  So all these don't even bother you at all?

I don't know who/what caused the change, but being human, I believe there is something we could do, instead of keep saying the damage we made is insignificant.
B2L2 發表於 2010-2-4 13:33

Assume both the reduce in snow coverage and raise of sea level are true,  there are not proven to be related to the raise in temperatire.

If global warming is not induced by human, then there are not much we can do.

But one thing for sure is, 2009 is the year of global cooling.  In addition, some studies show that the global average temperature has been declining since year 1999.  According to the warmists' argument, we are supposed to use more energy especially fossil fuel to increase the temperature.

If man-made global warming is really a critical issue, why do they make the value-added data in the first place?

B2L2

Let me ask whether you agree that the 0.6°C could account for at least part of the snow/sea level issue?  Instead of keep quoting others comment, what's your actual stand on this topic?

One side, you said there isn't much human could do, and the other side, you quote other suggestion to use energy to increase the temperature.  So which one you agree that's possible?

Scientists are just human and human does lots of dirty things for ones benefit.  I don't why they want to adjust data and I can't tell who is telling the truth.  You quoted a link for our reading and I'm just base info off that.

kipposhi

Let me ask whether you agree that the 0.6°C could account for at least part of the snow/sea level issue?  Instead of keep quoting others comment, what's your actual stand on this topic?

One side, you said there isn't much human could do, and the other side, you quote other suggestion to use energy to increase the temperature.  So which one you agree that's possible?

Scientists are just human and human does lots of dirty things for ones benefit.  I don't why they want to adjust data and I can't tell who is telling the truth.  You quoted a link for our reading and I'm just base info off that.
B2L2 發表於 2010-2-4 15:04

In my opinion, I disagree with that slightly increase in temperature can cause the snow/sea level issue.  I would say we human race is still unable to predict the climate accurately.

Sorry, I did not make it clear and made a typo.  I mean "according to the warmists' logic".  The warmists never admit the global average temperature has been declining since 1999.  They have never suggested increase the use of fossil fuel either.  The trend of oil consumption in last few decades has been increasing.  If man-made global warming is true, the yearly average temperature would not decline.

The income of those warmist scientists are mostly from government funding.  If they deny global warming, they cannot get those easy money.

kipposhi

I don't know how many of you read this news:

UN climate body admits 'mistake' on Himalayan glaciers

大C姐

I don't know how many of you read this news:

UN climate body admits 'mistake' on Himalayan glaciers
kipposhi 發表於 2010-2-4 17:01

就係呢D實失報導成日覺得好可疑囉。好多時都大大隻字標題嘩眾取寵嚇左你先﹐等你驚餐懵。永遠都係雷聲大雨點小﹐之後又唔聲唔聲唔知邊度發聲明話其實唔係準確﹐但係一般小市民唔會日日追住副刊﹐有時呢D"follow-up"連報紙都未必會寫。

同埋好多人都好似MJJ果D老伯性覺得聽埋聽埋呢D報導就去"扮環保"﹐但係無人講過真正計算呢D動作有咩效益﹐可能得不償失都未定。但係你哋班蛋散就信晒。當然啦﹐你被洗左腦就challenge我﹐覺得"車~呢個世界唔係淨係講數字既﹐邊有人計得咁準呀﹐先知咩﹗"但係老友﹐班科學家經常以好確定嘅語氣去project雪山幾時無晒﹐幾多年後陸地又少﹐水又少﹐Himalayas又無埋... 呢D數字又係點嚟呢?

-- 小心求證大C姐

playingtoy

趁夜晚黑。個個訓晒。走去。搬左個雪山。番屋企。

playingtoy

洗左腦。右腦未洗。

大C姐

洗左腦。右腦未洗。
playingtoy 發表於 2010-2-5 00:19

咪就係死得囉﹐左腦係控制邏輯思考﹐無左腦的話就靠晒右腦去胡思亂想。所以D蛋散先個個都會盲目去相信D偽科學之嘛。

-- 抽C剝揀