Posts Made By: Jason Cosford

Al's just bitter that GW Bush was vindicated when all of those WMDs were found. The reason Americans believe Saddam was involved in 911 is because it is so obvious that he was. That's what Cheney tells us. Why would he lie. Al's also bitter that Paris gets more coverage than him. Why? Because she is hotter than the planet will be in 50 years according to Al's crazy "theory."

Anyway, I'm off to the creationist museum....

Jason

So when do W and Dick get their prize for liberating Iraq?

The judges decision was that Gore used alarmist language,
not that the science of global warming is in error.

The judges agreed “That climate change is mainly attributable to man-made emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide (‘greenhouse gases’).” They went on to say: 1) temperatures are rising 2) severe consequences will result 3) governments and individuals can do something about it.

The games should never have been awarded to China in the first place.

As for the Chinese government's assertion that the western media responsible for spreading misinformation and outright lies, well, what about all of the non-western media, e.g. Chosun Ilbo, Korea, Japan Today, etc. and citizens, that cover the same story and have conducted similar protests?

The Olympics are a political event with sporting overtones.

New study casts further doubt on the link between cosmic rays and global warming. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7352667.stm
Turns out that cosmic rays do little to induce cloud formation.

Good stuff!

Bush's White House calls Italian leader "amateur" and "hated by many."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7495754.stm

I can imagine that when Bush hears this he will give him a call and say "Me too! I thought I was the only one!"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7522738.stm

What a departure from Rummy talking about "old Europe."

Obama (like Clinton) is received in Europe with cheers and flags flying. Quite a contrast to Bush - jeers and flags on fire.

The man is looking Presidential!!

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/07/journalistic-whiplash/

This is an interesting read about how the media covers new research.

Hi Jim,

Global dimming is quite interesting and certainly we have more to learn. This paper: http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2008/2008GL034228.shtml discusses the effect on Europe. The implication is that global dimming is suppressing the full brunt of global warming induced by humans (a negative feedback). Another interesting factor is that of the (South) Asian Brown Clouds (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v448/n7153/full/nature06019.html) that serve to intensify global warming. Perhaps Robert could help us out on this one. Is there a threshold concentration with particulates and aerosols that determines a positive or negative relationship?

New data and new ideas are necessary to test any hypothesis. Global dimming does not disprove the anthropogenic contribution to global warming, so we keep the hypothesis. I don't think the scientific community is dismissing the effects of particulates.

As to your last set of questions, it is difficult to respond because we don't know. There, I said it. What do you mean by "point of no return?" A Venusian runaway? Or a point at which our inputs to the system will alter climate on centennial time-scales before the dominant natural drivers overwhelm the climate signal? That the climate is changing is understood. How it will change is less well-known.

Should we be moving people out of harms way now? Well, you know from your own comments that the problem ultimately is that there are just too many people. There is no where to move them!! Too many people consuming too many resources. What to do about it? Women need to be educated and given opportunities in the work force. This will certainly confront the sensibilities of many cultures around the world, but it is the only humane way to bring down birth rates. Women who are educated and pursue careers give birth later in life, have fewer children, and are better prepared financially to take care of the children. We all know this. We also need to overcome our addiction to oil, as even GWB has acknowledged. How about another "Apollo Project" as discussed here: http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/08/01/f-apolloenergy.html

Did you ever see the movie "The Matrix?" There is a scene where Agent Smith tells Morpheus that, like a virus, humans continue to reproduce and consume resources to the point at which survival then requires a move a new host/region. We need to stop acting like a virus. We need to find balance between stable population/economy and environment. Sadly, in nature, this balance is called homeostasis, in economics it is called stagnation. We need an economist to come up with a zero growth economic model that allows health populations in balance with nature.

Jim Babcock said:

http://www.politickernj.com/bguhl/22291/doherty-new-scientific-data-justifies-repealing-global-warming-response-act

What new scientific evidence are they speaking about?

I have no idea.