Smoothseas provided a link to Frontline to prove his point on Global warming. This is what I found.
Okay all you people that want to destroy nations to save the Earth read this!
I have a copy of the real IPCC report on Global Climate Change. I will quote from it when needed. I also have a report from Frontline a PBS television propaganda network. I will quote from them as well seeing as some people here think that they tell us the truth.
Starting with Frontline;
FRONTLINE correspondent Deborah Amos reports:
In February 2007, the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that the science on global warming is "unequivocal" and asserted with 90 percent confidence that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) from human activities, primarily from the burning of fossil fuels, have been the main cause.
The IPCC Report:
It is very likely that the current atmospheric concentrations of CO2 (379 ppm) and CH4 (1,774 ppb) exceed by far the natural range of the last 650 kyr. Ice core data indicate that CO2 varied within a range of 180 to 300 ppm and CH4 within 320 to 790 ppb over this period. Over the same period, antarctic temperature and CO2 concentrations covary, indicating a close relationship between climate and the carbon cycle.
• It is very likely that glacial-interglacial CO2 variations have strongly amplified climate variations, but it is unlikely that CO2 variations have triggered the end of glacial periods. Antarctic temperature started to rise several centuries before atmospheric CO2 during past glacial terminations.
• It is likely that earlier periods with higher than present atmospheric CO2 concentrations were warmer than present. This is the case both for climate states over millions of years (e.g., in the Pliocene, about 5 to 3 Ma) and for warm events lasting a few hundred thousand years (i.e., the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, 55 Ma). In each of these two cases, warming was likely strongly amplified at high northern latitudes relative to lower latitudes.
If you notice the report itself says there is "close agreement" not a consensus. The word "likely" is used not definitely, it is not stated as fact but as a guess. You have now read a part if the IPCC report the same as the reporter. Does this read as unequivocal to you? Does it sound like they have 90% certainty that anything will happen? If you go to the report you will see that I change none of the wording the word "likely" was italicized by the authors not by me. This was done to stress that it is not fact, it is not a consensus, and it is not a certainty, it could happen, and is likely to happen if everything in their model is accurate and correct. The fact that they use at least 5 different models just to get them up to a level of likely is more than suspect, and to say anything more definite than “likely” would be non-scientific. You see this is the actual report not the hype from people that desire to ruin the world. There in no scientific conclusion, it is the conclusion of the reporter that we are told.
Keep this in mind, the best computers used to model the weather today can’t predict with any certainty more than four days in advance, yet we are to believe that the five or more models used to predict the weather 100 years from now is accurate.
The IPCC Report:
All models assessed here, for all the non-mitigation scenarios considered, project increases in global mean surface air temperature (SAT) continuing over the 21st century, driven mainly by increases in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations, with the warming proportional to the associated radiative forcing. There is close agreement of globally averaged SAT multi-model mean warming for the early 21st century for concentrations derived from the three non-mitigated IPCC
Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES: B1, A1B and
A2) scenarios (including only anthropogenic forcing) run by the AOGCMs (warming averaged for 2011 to 2030 compared to 1980 to 1999 is between +0.64°C and +0.69°C, with a range of only 0.05°C).
Yes, you read correctly. The big warming that is going to kill us all is a grand total of 0.05°C by 2030, and for the kicker that is the part that is caused by man if we don’t stop burning fossil fuels. So if we do stop burning all fossil fuels right this minute we will be 0.05°C cooler in the year 2030. WOW global warming is killing us and we didn’t even know it. Five one-thousandths of a degree, and to get us that cool all we have to do is stop burning all fossil fuels world wide. Get rid of cars, buss trains and air planes, walk to work, don’t use coal fired power plants, or oil fueled power plants. In short we have to go back to 1500’s but not burn anything for heat or light. Is that worth being 0.05°C cooler?
This is from LiveScience.com, and it also is from a couple of months ago;
"Antarctica hasn’t warmed as much over the last century as climate models had originally predicted, a new study finds. Climate change's effects on Antarctica are of particular interest because of the substantial amount of water locked up in its ice sheets. Should that water begin to melt, sea levels around the globe could rise and inundate low-lying coastal areas."
"The new study, detailed in the April 5 2008 issue of the journal Geophysical Research Letters, marks the first time that researchers have been able to give a progress report on Antarctic climate model projections by comparing climate records to model simulations. ... Information about Antarctica's harsh weather patterns has traditionally been limited, but temperature records from ice cores and ground weather stations have recently been constructed, giving scientists the missing information they needed."
"This is a really important exercise for these climate models," said study leader Andrew Monaghan of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder.
“Monaghan and his team found that while climate models projected temperature increases of 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.75 degrees Celsius) over the past century, temperatures were observed to have risen by only 0.4 F (0.2 C),"
"This is showing us that, over the past century, most of Antarctica has not undergone the fairly dramatic warming that has affected the rest of the globe," Monaghan said. It hasn't affected the rest of the globe, either. "The gap between prediction and reality seemed to be caused by the models overestimating the amount of water vapor in the Antarctic atmosphere.
Well wait a minute those are the same estimates used to model our weather 100 years from now! Seeing as they are off by a full degree could it mean that instead of 0.05C it will really only go up 0.00005C because of man?
My point is that we should wait to get all the facts in, assess those facts and then make a plan to do something if we are able to do anything. 30 years ago they wanted to melt the ice caps to protect the world from the next ice age. Now they want to save the ice caps to protect us from droning, and heat stroke.
Is the planet getting hotter? Yes, it is. Is man the reason the planet is getting hotter. Not according to the IPCC or any published reports from credible scientists. What has happened with the IPCC report is that people read it and tell you what it means. This is why I posted excerpts for you to read yourself. The fact the that the IPCC has had to publicly admit that the Earth has been in a 10 year cooling period NASA has published that the ten hottest years in the last century were in the 20’s the 30’s. Oh yeah and the melting ice that we are supposed to fear. It seems that the ice in the last two years had come back to where it was before the panic started and is getting thicker.
Notice that the temp has been a lot cooler this summer? I live in Florida and it seems that way to me. No science to back it up just what I have noticed. It might be cooler only in my city and the rest of the state is suffering that 0.05C global warming. Hard to tell cause my thermometer does not register more that tenths of a degree.