The Kyoto treaty and meaning what you say!

[St Leo]

I liked the line about the Russians thinking global warming might benefit them (they should play CTP2 if they want to terraform tundra).

They'll be singing a different tune by the time the Gobi desert swallows Ukraine.:P

[Ned]

Originally posted by gsmoove23
Ned, glaciers are retreating all across the globe. Melting ice caps are only one of the indicators of global warming. http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming..../glaciers.html

gsmoove, thanks for the link. The glacier melt cited has been going on for more than 100 years due to the dramatic warming since the mini-Ice Age. In 100 years, sealevels have risen 6 inches.

I expect they may rise another 6 inches in the next 100 years.

Now, compare that to the scaremonger's statements.

[gsmoove23]

The fact that anthropogenic warming coincides with natural global warming is no proof that its not there and we can assume as emission of greenhouse gases increases it will increase the speed of warming.

[Ned]

Originally posted by St Leo
I liked the line about the Russians thinking global warming might benefit them (they should play CTP2 if they want to terraform tundra).

They'll be singing a different tune by the time the Gobi desert swallows Ukraine.:P

Why woudl the Russians give a damn about the Ukraine if the good wheat growing regions move north into Mother Russia herself!

Get real. The Russians certainly know a good deal when they see one.

[Dinner]

It is also interesting that 75% (or a percentage very close to that) of the 6 inch sea level increase occured during the first two decades of the 20th century; a time with the lowest CO2 output in the last century. If increasing CO2 output is causing the melt (instead of the general post ie age warming trend) then you would expect the melt to increase in speed with an increase in CO2. We don't see such a thing happening.

[Ben Kenobi]

A wise advice

Indeed. We are not even sure if people are the primary cause of global warming. Best to be sure before we implement Kyoto which will drastically change our current system.

The big logjam for Canada is the 'carbon-sinks' part of the deal where treeplanting and forestry maintenance all count towards the Kyoto reduction.

[Dinner]

Tree planting is always a good idea. Kyoto or no Kyoto.

[gsmoove23]

Oerdin, where did you get that information on the first 2 decades? From what I've seen that just isn't the case. http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/19.htm

Indeed. We are not even sure if people are the primary cause of global warming. Best to be sure before we implement Kyoto which will drastically change our current system.

Its funny how people can come to completely opposite conclusions with the same information. My first thought would be if there is any evidence that global warming is being effected by CO2 then start limiting CO2 production just in case. But, I would think that the evidence for anthropogenic global warming is enough to support this conclusion anyway.

[Ben Kenobi]

Canadians love treeplanting. We just want to be credited for the carbon-sinks produced.

We won't stop planting regardless. We need the trees, 50 years from now.

[Dinner]

Hmmm, a newspaper article linked to one of our other threads on this topic. It spoke about most of the sea level rise occured very early in the century and the small remaining bit occuring over a very long time.

Ask one of our resident anti-Kyoto experts. I'm sure they can farit out a source.

[Ben Kenobi]

global warming is being effected by CO2 then start limiting CO2 production just in case.

Natural climate change would dwarf human efforts. Even if stopped producing C02 at all, the change would not stop.

What we have to track down are the natural sources for C02, and their effects.

[Ned]

Originally posted by gsmoove23
Oerdin, where did you get that information on the first 2 decades? From what I've seen that just isn't the case. http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/19.htm



Its funny how people can come to completely opposite conclusions with the same information. My first thought would be if there is any evidence that global warming is being effected by CO2 then start limiting CO2 production just in case. But, I would think that the evidence for anthropogenic global warming is enough to support this conclusion anyway.

gsmoove, the central problem in this debate is the environmetalist's fearmongering. No one wants to take a hard look at the actual evidence of warming vs. the models because we are told that if we wait THAT long, warming will be upon us, it will be too late to do anything about it and the world will come to an end.

But, as I said, even the official US government reports show that warming benefits Northern countries. Russia apparently knows this, and may switch from being PC on Kyoto, to supporting more global warming. The bottom line: Global Warming can have a net positive effect on the Earth. It is very certain to increase agricultural capacity dramatically. This alone is important when one considers the world's expanding population.

[gsmoove23]

CO2 emissions naturally occur on a large scale. The problem is that significant human emissions of CO2 upset the balance outpacing the natural CO2 sinks. Of course, cutting large swaths of CO2 sinks down also contributes to the problem.

[Ben Kenobi]

Global Warming can have a net positive effect on the Earth.

I'm sure the Dutch will agree with this, Ned. Have you accounted for low-lying areas around the world?

[gsmoove23]

Ned, I can only think of 1 US report that SUGGESTED global warming MAY help northern countries and it certainly didn't SHOW it or prove it. Also, I'm sure you realize that if a cold climate becomes more suitable for agriculture, there are many climates already suited for agriculture that will become less suited. Certainly in the US we'd probably have little net gain.

But, thats assuming that global warming means simply an all around rise of a couple of degrees. Many people suggest that it will also result in rapidly changing weather patterns, evidence suggests that the gulf stream would be disrupted, changing temperatures in the N Atlantic significantly, not necessarily making it warmer. The one thing that is certain is no one can predict the effect of global warming on the weather in local regions.