"Smoking gun" proves global warming exists?

[XT]

Ok Hentor, I wanted to get back to you on this (I’m certain you have been breathlessly awaiting my response to you…lol) after I had time to read through not only your cite but look over and digest some additional information.

In reguards to my statement: “I don’t think it settles it once and for all, but its certainly another piece of the puzzle. I don’t think we still have enough data, especially long term data, to completely accurately model the earths climate and make accurate predictions…and until and unless we do, there will always be questions.”

I think you are correct, and there IS a consensus among the major scientific groups both in the US and world wide that ‘global warming’, or climatic weather change is reality. It seems things have moved forward since I last really looked at this issue, and the data has firmed enough that scientists (who actually study this stuff) are making very hard statements confirming it. So, long and the short…it appears I was wrong about this.

I am still unsure that there is enough data to actually model what effects global warming or global climate change will have on the earth, and nothing I’ve read tonight changes my mind on that. Nor has what I’ve read tonight changed my mind on whether or not the data is there that humans are the chief cause…though I have to say it seems the data is firming up in that direction also.

However, I conceed that the OP was asking about whether global warming itself is: “Does this settle the question once and for all? Or is it still possible to have reasonable doubt as to whether global climate change is taking place?” To this I also retract my first post based on both your cite and what I’ve dug up myself tonight…again, seems on this point I was wrong. Same to you pdx_craig.

-XT

[XT]

Sorry for the double post. Wanted to include the last two paragraphs from your cite, but hit the submit button before I remembered. Just as food for thought on what I was getting at with the aspects I’m still unsure about:

The scientific consensus might, of course, be wrong. If the history of science teaches anything, it is humility, and no one can be faulted for failing to act on what is not known. But our grandchildren will surely blame us if they find that we understood the reality of anthropogenic climate change and failed to do anything about it.

Many details about climate interactions are not well understood, and there are ample grounds for continued research to provide a better basis for understanding climate dynamics. The question of what to do about climate change is also still open. But there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen.

-XT

[scr4]

@Mr. Moto

Most of the data I have seen shows that the earth has warmed as solar activity has increased, and that the relationship is linear… For a vivid illustration of this, please note the graph at the top of this page.

You should look at the updated graph, shown at the bottom of this page. It shows a correlation between solar activity and earth temperature - until the 1970s, when the earth temperature starts to increase dramatically without a corresponding increase in solar activity. The text says: “We think this is likely to be due to the anthropogenic greenhouse effect.”

[scr4]

By the way, I thought this study was the real smoking gun? To quote:

In the new study, Barnett and his colleagues used computer models of climate to calculate human-produced warming over the last 40 years in the world’s oceans. In all of the ocean basins, the warming signal found in the upper 700 meters predicted by the models corresponded to the measurements obtained at sea with confidence exceeding 95 percent. The correspondence was especially strong in the upper 500 meters of the water column.

It is this high degree of visual agreement and statistical significance that leads Barnett to conclude that the warming is the product of human influence. Efforts to explain the ocean changes through naturally occurring variations in the climate or external forces— such as solar or volcanic factors—did not come close to reproducing the observed warming.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

xtisme, you have integrity. I appreciate your returning to a debate to make a statement like the one you have above.

[XT]

When I’m wrong I’m wrong. Besides, I’m come on this board to learn and to challenge my ‘beliefs’, so I actually appreciate it when I can change them and learn something. Besides, if I were younger and unmarried it would help me impress the chicks at parties.

-XT