 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, to take a look at the article you link to:
"He says that a warming planet will dry out forests in tropical areas making them much more likely to suffer from wildfires."
But a warming planet has a higher humidity and rainfall so it wont be drier. (At least according to AGW alarmists such as the GUardian: the Sahara desert is expected to shrink with global warming as more plentiful rain [^]
In any case we know forest firs are mostly started by arsonists, and exacerbated by not keeping the forest floor clear of scrub and dead growth bu clearing a controled burning. This is as we aslo know a result of environmental activism.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Gaskey wrote: according to the U.N. World Meteorological Organization, there has been no recorded global warming for more than a decade, or one-third of the span since the global cooling scare.
Will doesn't give a cite for this but, assuming the claim is accurate, it doesn't mean much. For short-term weather reasons (in addition to long-term climate reasons), 1998 was unusually hot, which means that any measure starting at 1998 has a bias toward cooling.
The 2008 report of the U.N. World Meteorological Organization gives the following rankings for the hottest years on record (going back over 150 years to 1850):
1. 1998
2. 2005
3. 2003
4. 2002
5. 2004
6. 2006
7. 2007
8. 2001
9. 1997
10. 1995
Accordingly, I don't think there is a lot of comfort for the denialists in the record of the past decade.
http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcdmp/documents/WMO1031_EN_web.pdf[^]
John Carson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, John, It would be intersting to know where Will got his information. Quoting from the document you linked to:
"Since the beginning of the twentieth century,
the global average surface temperature has
risen by 0.74°C, but this increase has not been
continuous. The linear warming trend over
the past 50 years (0.13°C per decade) is nearly
twice that for the past 100 years."
That seems to contradict Will's assertion as to what the WMO is saying.
[Edit] apparently the statement stems from this.[^][/edit]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Graham wrote: Quoting from the document you linked to:
"Since the beginning of the twentieth century,
the global average surface temperature has
risen by 0.74°C, but this increase has not been
continuous. The linear warming trend over
the past 50 years (0.13°C per decade) is nearly
twice that for the past 100 years."
That seems to contradict Will's assertion as to what the WMO is saying.
Not necessarily. It could be true both that a linear fit to the data over the past 50 years shows a warming trend and that a linear fit to the last 10 years doesn't show a warming trend --- provided there was sufficient warming in the first 40 years.
Like I suggested, if you get the hottest year on record in 1998 and then the temperature bounces around in the vicinity of that hottest year for the next decade, then a linear fit for those 10 years could show no upward trend. Nevertheless, the fact that temperature stays at near record levels is highly suggestive. If Will's claim is correct --- on which I reserve judgement --- then I strongly suspect that continued warming will show up in the data in the next 2-3 years as short-term weather effects wash out.
John Carson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Carson wrote: Not necessarily. It could be true both that a linear fit to the data over the past 50 years shows a warming trend and that a linear fit to the last 10 years doesn't show a warming trend --- provided there was sufficient warming in the first 40 years.
For sure.
And the longer term trends all show cooling. Post MWP, post bronze age, and for the last 10,000 years.
Fact is todays temperatures are many degrees off either the highs or the lows. (The rate of change isnt spectacular either).
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Satellite data shows an averaged cooling trend of around 3` per century since 2003.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/18/giss-divergence-with-satellite-temperatures-since-the-start-of-2003/[^]
The bronze age was a lot warmer than today, the MWP was warmer too. We had it very cold during LIA, and warming since then up to around 1930. After that due to increased data the picture is less consistent:
The US, Greenland, Canada, the Arctic, and much of the rest of the far north got colder, then hotter, but no hotter than the 1930's. (Ignoring the 1998 freak year)
Antartica and parts of the south have kept getting colder.
And now we seem to be at the beginning of a general cooling trend.
Warming? Nope. Global? Nope.
Its just plain variabilty and any CO2 we produce is good for crops and should not be limited.
Any other stance than that is unscientific self delusion and lies.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, I see you showed up at an Obama event...[^].
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I see you attended one of your events.[^] Oh wait, they were carrying US flags, you don't salute that anymore. 
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Craig wrote: Oh wait, they were carrying US flags, you don't salute that anymore
Does that mean he's supporting Obama[^] now?
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Turned into a real right wing troll since the election, haven't you?
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some left wing trolls might see it that way. Other people might see it as calling you on your trolling. 
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The first link only attacks Wills assertion that the cooling scare of the 70s has a bearing on todays situation. (Which is arguable, depending on you position)
The second uses language such that it discredits itself.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whether the cooling period its 11 or 7 years depends on whether you accept the exceptional el-nino 1998 as the peak. If not, the GW peaked at around 2002. Either way, its a significant trend.
Re the calamities thinhg though, I think its true. We always liie something to worry about. And so post cold war we had to comeup with somehting to replace the bomb and AGW was the result.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fat_boy wrote: so post cold war we had to comeup with somehting to replace the bomb and AGW was the result.
must have boogey man, repeat, must have boogey man. so, yup, I agree with you.
Mike - typical white guy.
The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh.
Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil."
The NYT - my leftist brochure.
Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”.
God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
|
|
|
|
|
 | Economic advice from a most unlikely source |  | JimmyRopes | 14hrs 43mins ago |
|
|
Last week, in advance of the Gang of 7 (G7) meeting in Rome yesterday, Giulio Termonti, Italy's finance minister, gave a review of the Obama administration's stimulus package in the Corriere della Sera newspaper, "If the problem is an excess of debt, the cure is not adding more debt, whether that debt is public or private".
This advice from the finance minister of one of the most indebted countries in Europe!
I thought this was a strange place to be getting financial advice since the US debt is approximately 40% of the US GDP while Italy's debt exceeds Italy’s GDP.
I am not saying that 40% debt is good or that the stimulus package will actually stimulate the US economy but shouldn't he be practicing what he is preaching at home in Italy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But consider that Italy has not been known for political stability. Just look at the number of General Election that Italy has had since end of WWII.
Without political stability, how can you achieve Financial stability? - you can't is my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Richard A. Abbott wrote: But consider that Italy has not been known for political stability.
Regardless of the cause it just seems ironic that a finance minister of a failed economic system is giving financial advice. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
just because he's not doing it, doesn't mean he doesn't know he should.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Graus wrote: just because he's not doing it, doesn't mean he doesn't know he should.
Point taken, but it would just be more credible if he was actually doing more at home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, of course. It proves he's a hypocrite, but it doesn't prove he's wrong.
Christian Graus
Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Graus wrote: It proves he's a hypocrite, but it doesn't prove he's wrong.
I never said he was wrong. I was just commenting that it was an unlikely source of economic advice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jimmy, I appreciate that. But, one of the most fundamental aspects of any government is the collection of taxes etc and the proper processing of government revenues and that means clear fiscal policies. And to have a government that lasts a little longer than a year or two requires stability. When you change horses mid-race it is hardly surprising that nobody really knows which direction to head. And thus, financial management is incompetent. However, with Italy a member of the Euro club, certain disciplines are enforced from Brussels.
But you are right, a strange source of financial advice.
|
|
|
|
|
News 
Question 
Answer 
Rant 
Admin