- Barry Bozeman This will give you a pretty good view of what "SMALL" is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6pFDu7lLV4
- Bob Keim A termite fart is pretty small, too. But when you add the methane gas produced by trillions of termites in the Amazon rain forest to our atmosphere, it becomes an interesting question.
- Barry Bozeman The relatively small 8 tenths of a degree warming globally is not as important as the current 4 or 5 degree temperature increase in the Arctic and Greenland. - the thawing of the permafrost in Canada and Siberia has the potential to release massive amounts of methane in a feedback loop that will accelerate the temperature rise to a point we don't want to contemplate..
- Barry Bozeman There are currently 5 gigatonnes of methane in the atmosphere - yet the arctic regions seabeds and the permafrost contain 100's of tonnes of methane. So relatively minimal changes in Arctic temperature have huge potential impact for methane release and the methane is a potent greenhouse gas that serves to exacerbate the whole warming process.
- Barry Bozeman Since carbon dioxide from the dawn of the industrial age that accelerated in 1970 to go from 300ppm to 400ppm has tracked with the warming trends we see in measurements it really doesn't matter if people believe the CO2 is contributing to the warming. It's happening in the Arctic as the methane trackers show and that release has a very dangerous potential
- Barry Bozeman This is the absolutely current Sea Ice data for the arctic
http://neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov/csb/index.php?section=234
- Missy Griffin Klens http://www.onearth.org/.../carbon-dioxides-surge-in-one...
- Tom McLaughlin Barry, for as brilliant as you are, I am amazed at how one sided you are on this issue. You completely parrot the administration's line, even though more scientists every year are turning against the AGW bandwagon. We are now more than 17 years into a ...See More
- Tom McLaughlin http://dailycaller.com/.../global-cooling-antarctic-sea.../
- Tom McLaughlin http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../antarctic-sea-ice-hit.../
- Tom McLaughlin http://wattsupwiththat.com/.../cryosat-shows-arctic-sea.../
- Tom McLaughlin http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/.../latest-data...
Click to enlarge. Arctic sea ice extent for January 2014 was 13.73 million squar...See More - Tom McLaughlin http://www.forbes.com/.../peer-reviewed-survey-finds.../
- Tom McLaughlinhttp://www.nas.org/.../Estimated_40_Percent_of_Scientists...
- Barry Bozeman Really Tom McLaughlin you give us a 2011 "guess" from a 1987 group funded extensively by politically conservative foundations, including the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, the Bradley Foundation, the Castle Rock Foundation,...See More
- Tom McLaughlin The weakness of the"science" is what is truly pathetic.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/.../Top-climate-scientists...
- Tom McLaughlinhttp://www.dailytech.com/After+Missing+5.../article33457.htm
- Barry Bozeman The ORGANIZATION STUDIES "paper" is really a doozy Tom.
It's study of engineers and scientists in Alberta tied to the tar sands project - the largest source of CO2 in Canada should provide enough context for anyone who reads this kind of language:
"...See More
- Barry Bozeman Try showing us something not tainted by self interest Tom - we get your Conservatism - really we do. No need to waste your time or ours here We can read the charts all available here:
http://rushlimbaughtomy.blogspot.com/
We won't be swayed by your Conservative Think Tank babble or the slanted "opinions" of people paid by the fossil fuel industry.
- Tom McLaughlin The bottom line is that all science is funded by someone. And scientists strive to arrive at results that match the hypothesis that has been the source of funding. Most climate science is funded by governments. You are hopelessly naive if you don't thi...See More
- Barry Bozeman It's really quite illuminating the link place in the wildly misleading headlined article about Global Cooling and Sea Ice records.
Since reaching its annual maximum extent on March 21, Arctic sea ice extent has declined somewhat unevenly, but has con...See More
- Barry Bozeman You've wasted enough of our time Tom. Posting Conservative Think Tank babble and misleading bullshit serves no purpose here. I've spent about 30 minutes sourcing your links and that''s it I'M DONE with it. This "debate" has been over for some time. T...See More
- Barry Bozeman Like everything else the deniers take isolated upticks and claim wild assertions about Global Cooling - but the trend line remains the same.
- Tom McLaughlin You're right, I've wasted my time. As long as you want to make this a political debate, and respond to my commentary by accusing me of posting babble and bullshit (in spite of the fact that I debated respectfully and without resorting to attack words),...See More
- Barry Bozeman Everybody who is paying attention to the situation knows about the eons of global temperature change Tom. That doesn't change what is happening in the last 100 years with unprecedented levels of CO2 - now beyond any known level.
- Barry Bozeman When you look at this data you should be able to comprehend the difference in what was and what now is: A 5400 year decline reversed about 100 years ago and the change of that miniscule period of time is alarming
- Barry Bozeman The rhythm of Global Temperature Change is being significantly altered and the only key measurable difference is CO2
- Barry Bozeman People who claim this is all about the SUN are wrong. Using the Suns energy output we should be cooling but we are not
- Barry Bozeman Bullshit is bullshit TOM -and what you have provided is bullshit. There is no more debate TOM - the evidence is in - it's clear it's complete it's undeniable.
- Barry Bozeman The measurements are accurate and undeniable. And we've now reached the 400 ppm landmark
- Barry Bozeman If you want to debate something that might be controversial I suggest you focus on these questions
- Barry Bozeman Because the 1000 year warming chart and increasing CO2 levels match up and fit. So the only thing you could possibly claim is that the measurements are inaccurate. But the problem is far too many people are taking these measurements and they can't all be wrong
- Barry Bozeman So you have to claim a broad conspiracy among numerous data collectors from many different countries. Is that what you're claiming TOM? Have the scientists from across the world collaborated to mislead the world? What is their motive TOM?
- Barry Bozeman When NASA, the IPCC and the US Military agree with each other the conspiracy must be global and endemic. The problem is that their conclusions don't profit anyone like the profit motive from the fossil fuel industry deniers. You know the guys who fou...See More
- Tom McLaughlin We are not as far apart as you seem to think we are Barry, if you read my responses, you would see that something I said a while back was that responsible stewardship of the planet is something that is to everyone's benefit. Changing the balance of atm...See More
- Barry Bozeman The oil industry has prospered over the past decade, thanks to high oil and gasoline prices. The five largest companies -- BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, and Shell -- earned more than $1 trillion during this time. In the first nine months of ...See More
- Barry Bozeman The subsidies to Oil and Gas companies remain substantial. It seems to me the money is all still slanted to Oil Gas and Coal.http://reneweconomy.com.au/.../fossil-fuel-subsidies...
- Barry Bozeman I don't pretend to have a chance of changing any minds or impacting the situation in any way. My reason for doing this is to engage family and friends in a future discussion of what I fear we might have to do to make the future survivable for my grandson and their grandchildren. I'm pretty certain we can't change what's coming but we might be able to prepare for it.
- Candy Degville Sad that we can't work together on this climate change issue now instead of looking in the rear view mirror years down the road which is what we have come to accept - last minute out of control emergency fixes. And it is a very politically divided belief: http://www.nytimes.com/.../on-climate-republicans-and...
No comments:
Post a Comment