Global warming

That's one funky mathematical function... A warming of 3.5 degrees on Pluto in 14 years, compared to so much less on Earth. Besides, if the Sun really was acting up, wouldn't all the planets in the solar system be warming?

Well actually, if you clicked the link back there you'd notice more than one small time-scale graph. And I didn't even say I was in favor of green taxes.

Jupiter's climate change is due to changes in internal turbulence fueled by the internal heat source, it has nothing to do with the Sun.

 

Pluto doesn't really have a thick enough atmosphere (like Earth has) to shield it from the brunt of the solar increase.

 

Source?

Observations of the expansion of Pluto's atmosphere in the past few years has led to questions about whether the greenhouse effect is occurring on Pluto. Pluto just passed the pericentre of it's orbit; some of the methane could have evaporated and continued to warm the planet even as it moves away from the Sun again.

 

Humans may be responsible somewhat, but they are not the sole source of this. The Sun is very old, and will evntually erupt in a destructive Supernova, and it will naturally heat up more and more before reaching this point. So maybe the Sun will be gone soon? This is purely theoretical. (The conclusion, at least.)


However, human beings do need to be more aware of how they are effecting the planet.

 

The earth goes through cycles in its climate and tempature.


We're still 6 degrees F under the average tempature of 6000 years past, which is a very large number considering the average temp change since temps have been recorded is 1 or 2 degrees.

 

Show us some links/pages/sources. It would make the conversation so much more productive if we were all aware of where each other's mindset was.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto

Does Pluto move close enough to the Sun to make the methane pass its evaporation point?

 

Ones I read before posting that tidpit you quoted:

http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11642

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12051

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto#Atmosphere :laugh:

EDIT: I don't actually know what the hell is going on anymore. Wikipedia says that the melting of the atmosphere cools the planet, apparently. What it's saying is that there hasn't been any warming on Pluto anyway - the thick atmosphere is due to the south pole of Pluto coming out of shadow for the first time in 120 years, resulting in loads of sublimation.

If someone knows the score on Pluto (or whatever it's called now), please tell me

 

I lol'ed. Solar radiation is a TERRIBLE response to the possible trends in warming.

To start above, pluto would hypothetically heat much easier than Earth. Earth has many mechanisms (namely water, which has a huge heat capacity (takes a lot of energy to heat up) that keep the temperature as stable as possible.

Let me quote Sythe's own livescience article:
"The radiation output of the Sun does fluctuate over the course of its 11-year solar cycle. But the change is only about one-tenth of 1 percent—not substantial enough to affect Earth’s climate in dramatic ways, and certainly not enough to be the sole culprit of our planet’s current warming trend, scientists say."


My theory for what's going on. Simple, a planet has to be either heating, or cooling. Under the assumption that there's a 50/50 chance of either happening (meaning eventual equilibrium), half the planets should indeed be heating up as we do. The article does NOT say, that the heating is consistent across all the planets. Seems like a statistical fallacy: Just because global warming has almost a 100% correlation with the decrease of pirates, it does not mean the decrease of pirates caused global warming.

 

Thank you sythe for setting them straight i agree that it is all a scam.
Look who thought it up btw,That fat ummm...O yea Al Gore(forgot name)
I mean come on...There is no actual evidence that it excist so...

 

Um, Sythe did not say there was no evidence of global warming. The argument is whether it is human-caused or not.

Read or gtfo.

 

the earth has heated up before then came the ice age. it is the process the earth goes through.

 

Sythe, that graph you've posted... Where did you get it from, and can I have a link to the study to see the raw data for the chart?

This is a much fairer representation of temperature estimates



Source

Climatologists haven't been ignoring the Sun, observe how it is accounted for as a radiative forcing component:



Global warming religion? Yeah, that must be it, all those irrational climatologists are in a conspiracy with the government.

 

In my honest opinion, this whole "Global Warming" issue is completely natural. If you think about it, we are natural people, and everything is made from natural things. So obviously, us consuming/emiting things is natrual, so therefor we might cause "Global Warming" but its completely normal, and nothing out of the ordinary.

 

It's just history repeating itself.

 

Your "much fairer" chart was developed by a site that supports global warming. There is no "much fairer" chart in your eyes unless it was developed to support your ideas and will-full speculations. We're all probably like that to an extent. If you want a fair chart then gather the raw data yourself and chart it.

They say if you want to prove something wrong, then go at it trying to prove it right. If it's truly wrong, you won't be able to prove it right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

(Now it's your turn to post something that makes me look like an ideological moron.)

 

I haven't seen an argument where the sun's radiation has NO effect on temperature + sunspots affecting weather has not really even been proven, the evidence is subtle at best.

Variation is caused by change. Unless the Earth is tilting more, or the sun's solar radiation reaching the earth can be proven to be increasing and causing the temperature change, one must explore the other variable possible.

In fact, a global dimming phenomenon (may have been caused by pollution), caused less sunlight over a few decades to hit the earth till the 1990's. Speclated to be 10% less, but I didn't notice any ice age (well my parents didn't).

Your "climatology" graph is NOT in concurrence with other sources. I can't find any other graphs that match up any of that data.


Notice an exponential increase

 

Hm. All I said was, "I think it's part of a natural cycle the earth is going though, as it has done so for thousands of years before." Who would of thought that would of caused such a distinct argument like it has. Anyways, this argument has evolved enough to give some fair input. The few of us who think that the earth is going through a natural stage have two challenges.

One - We need to find the mechanism behind our "natural" cause for the earth's natural cycle theory we have provided.

Two - We need to provide explanation to why the 35% increase in the second most important green house gas is not effecting the global temperature.

Explanation One - The short-term statistical fluctuations in the sun's irradiance and the longer-term solar cycles is a more plausible answer to the global warming question.

Picture Proof:


Explanation Two - The green-house gas emissions that "we" are emitting in to the atmosphere simply aren't enough to raise the temperature to the level it has escalated to.

Thus, giving viable proof that the sun is indeed causing this "massive" warming of the earth. Which, in fact, supplies proof that Sythe can be right about the government scam to add a new carbon tax as he has called it. Also, if you payed attention you notice that I did not dis-credit green-house gases as a reason for global warming. It can be a factor, however, it his highly unlikely to be the main source of the warming.