Ottawa Blizzard Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Below I have posted a link to a debate on man made climate change on a Canadian news channel (Global News). It is a very interesting read. http://liveblogs.globalnews.ca/Event/Climate_change_debate?Page=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 That link doesn't work for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawa Blizzard Posted October 1, 2013 Author Share Posted October 1, 2013 Sorry to hear. Is everybody else having the same problem with the link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Sorry to hear. Is everybody else having the same problem with the link? Yeah it didn't work for me either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WXheights Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 No worky linky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toronto blizzard Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 http://globalnews.ca/news/871523/climate-change-live-blog/ This the link that works. Enjoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WXheights Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Toronto wasn't there some poll showing 97% of Canadians believed in Climate Change just with the last couple of years? If so then how is this sampling possible because it does not jibe. thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 If a Canadian is denying climate change caused by humans. They are just ignorant of their own history on so many weather and climate fronts. It's really sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAD_Wedge_NC Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 If a Canadian is denying climate change caused by humans. They are just ignorant of their own history on so many weather and climate fronts. It's really sad. Or maybe they are beginning to realize the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f2tornado Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The poll question under the article is poorly written and as such one shouldn't take the results too seriously. "Be it resolved that climate change is caused by humans: Agree or Disagree" makes it out to be an all or nothing affair when the real world scenario is a combination of human + natural forcing. Any person, especially a Canuck, with an elementary science education knows there was an ice age and if they were paying close attention would know there were multiple ice ages. Perhaps a better way to state the poll question is "Be it resolved that (recent) climate change is mostly caused by humans". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Or maybe they are beginning to realize the facts. What facts are those? That permafrost is melting and they consistently have above average winters even when compared to the last 30 years, the warmest climate block on record? That sea ice melts earlier and freezes later? Or is it the disappearing glaciers in the Canadian west and Arctic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 If a Canadian is denying climate change caused by humans. They are just ignorant of their own history on so many weather and climate fronts. It's really sad. Why should Canadians be any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Or maybe they are beginning to realize the facts. What facts are those? That permafrost is melting and they consistently have above average winters even when compared to the last 30 years, the warmest climate block on record? That sea ice melts earlier and freezes later? Or is it the disappearing glaciers in the Canadian west and Arctic? Where exactly is this? Surely you aren't talking about Toronto.... Canadians don't follow the arctic anymore than we do, its been relatively benign until 2007. Not many people form their opinion based on PIOMAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ineedsnow Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 I think its natural factors and im american. We go threw cycles and I believe this is just one of them. Maybe we start to cool soon maybe we dont I guess we will have to wait and see. If a Canadian is denying climate change caused by humans. They are just ignorant of their own history on so many weather and climate fronts. It's really sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 It's an internet poll. Internet polls are completely worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 I think its natural factors and im american. We go threw cycles and I believe this is just one of them. Maybe we start to cool soon maybe we dont I guess we will have to wait and see. So you deny the fact that CO2 is a greenhoues gas, that this is basic science established in laboratories over a century ago, and that not only the climate of earth but the climate of other planets is both dependent and predictable based on the concentration of these greenhouse gases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 So you deny the fact that CO2 is a greenhoues gas, that this is basic science established in laboratories over a century ago, and that not only the climate of earth but the climate of other planets is both dependent and predictable based on the concentration of these greenhouse gases? The most widely used example of a planet is Mars, that planet is 96% CO2..... Global warming being initiated by co2 has never happened before.... You act like this is so simple. NO experiment in a lab can replicate this planet. NONE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The most widely used example of a planet is Mars, that planet is 96% CO2..... Global warming being initiated by co2 has never happened before.... You act like this is so simple. NO experiment in a lab can replicate this planet. NONE. Mars has a much much thinner atmosphere than Earth, so I don't think that comparison is valid. Agreed with the complexity of the climate system though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The idea that because the atmosphere is complex it is not possible to know the strength of CO2 as a greenhouse gas is a basic logical fallacy. A doubling of CO2 concentration causes 3.7W/m2 of radiative forcing. This value has been known for many decades. At equilibrium, the surface temperature of the earth must be 1.2C warmer. Nobody said the atmosphere is simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Where exactly is this? Surely you aren't talking about Toronto.... Canadians don't follow the arctic anymore than we do, its been relatively benign until 2007. Not many people form their opinion based on PIOMAS. Where is this? In Canada. Canada consists of much more than just the area right along the US border. If Torontoans don't care about what's happening in their own country it doesn't matter. The facts stand whether people care or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toronto blizzard Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 If a Canadian is denying climate change caused by humans. They are just ignorant of their own history on so many weather and climate fronts. It's really sad. No maybe you're just ignorant on believing that humans are the cause of Global warming and you don't want to look at the facts that support Natural climate change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Where exactly is this? Surely you aren't talking about Toronto.... Canadians don't follow the arctic anymore than we do, its been relatively benign until 2007. Not many people form their opinion based on PIOMAS. Where is this? In Canada. Canada consists of much more than just the area right along the US border. If Torontoans don't care about what's happening in their own country it doesn't matter. The facts stand whether people care or not. Any polling done on the citizens will come mostly from Ontario, where there has been little warming. The arctic is where most of the change has taken place, just because Canada has arctic territory, doesn't mean people live there and care anymore about it than we do. I would suspect Canadian and American opinion to be very similar. Those same people have to take the opinions of scientists who have consistently made poor forecasts of future warming scenarios. Coming in under the lowest least warming scenario doesn't help build faith in predictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 So you deny the fact that CO2 is a greenhoues gas, that this is basic science established in laboratories over a century ago, and that not only the climate of earth but the climate of other planets is both dependent and predictable based on the concentration of these greenhouse gases? No one has to deny the radiative properties of CO2 in order to claim that a chunk of the warming was naturally induced. We know for sure that CO2, and other known anthropogenic forcings are not enough to explain the early-20th Century Warming. Even the late-20th Century warming may have a natural component to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 No one has to deny the radiative properties of CO2 in order to claim that a chunk of the warming was naturally induced. We know for sure that CO2, and other known anthropogenic forcings are not enough to explain the early-20th Century Warming. Even the late-20th Century warming may have a natural component to it. Nice strawman. I did not say there was no natural component. I was responding to somebody claiming the warming is "just a cycle" which is false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 I was responding to somebody claiming the warming is "just a cycle" which is false. The warming is definitely at least partially cyclic.. but has an anthropogenic component to the warming as well. The question is how much of this warming is anthropogenic? It's likely that a significant fraction is natural.. and a significant fraction is anthropogenic.. and this is supported by peer reviewed science. http://pages-142.unibe.ch/products/books/qsr2000-papers/beer.pdf http://www.paperscloud.com/GridWeb/resources/download/27.pdf http://www.rengy.org/uploadfile/file/%E4%B8%AD%E6%96%87%E7%89%88/%E8%B5%84%E6%BA%90/%E6%96%87%E7%8C%AE/2000/Response%20of%20climate%20to%20solar%20forcing%20recorded%20in%20a%206000-year%20time-series%20of%20Chinese%20peat%20cellulose%20%20.pdf http://www.researchgate.net/publication/223789003_Globally_synchronous_climate_change_2800_years_ago_Proxy_data_from_peat_in_South_America/file/79e415107d07ae60f7.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nflwxman Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 The warming is definitely at least partially cyclic.. but has an anthropogenic component to the warming as well. The question is how much of this warming is anthropogenic? It's likely that a significant fraction is natural.. and a significant fraction is anthropogenic.. and this is supported by peer reviewed science. http://pages-142.unibe.ch/products/books/qsr2000-papers/beer.pdf http://www.paperscloud.com/GridWeb/resources/download/27.pdf http://www.rengy.org/uploadfile/file/%E4%B8%AD%E6%96%87%E7%89%88/%E8%B5%84%E6%BA%90/%E6%96%87%E7%8C%AE/2000/Response%20of%20climate%20to%20solar%20forcing%20recorded%20in%20a%206000-year%20time-series%20of%20Chinese%20peat%20cellulose%20%20.pdf http://www.researchgate.net/publication/223789003_Globally_synchronous_climate_change_2800_years_ago_Proxy_data_from_peat_in_South_America/file/79e415107d07ae60f7.pdf Doesn't the IPCC suggest -0.1 to 0.1 degrees is associated with internal variation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 I believe most peer reviewed papers suggest about 80% of the warming has been anthropogenic and this percentage has been rising steadily as solar forcing has exerted a negative forcing (cooling) over the last 10-20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 No maybe you're just ignorant on believing that humans are the cause of Global warming and you don't want to look at the facts that support Natural climate change Those silly scientists and their science. When will they learn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAD_Wedge_NC Posted October 6, 2013 Share Posted October 6, 2013 Those silly scientists and their science e-mails. When will they learn? fixed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted October 6, 2013 Share Posted October 6, 2013 fixed What do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.