There's that global warming again.

[FluffyMcDeath]

According to NASA, yet.
2005, warmest year in a century.

And average temp is up 0.6C over 30 years.

[blobrana]

Hum,
Current levels of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere are higher now than at any time in the last 650,000 years.

BBC Science correspondent David Shukman is currently embedded with the British Antarctic survey team at the Rothera Research Station and has been producing a number of reports for BBC News.
Media player (stream)

Scientists say they have found the first direct link between melting Antarctic ice and an increase in greenhouse gases.
The British Antarctic Survey (BAS) has been studying air bubbles trapped in the ice on Adelaide Island on an Antarctic Peninsula .

Another link to peruse

[PMC]

Actually, I was a fervent advocate of Global Warming for many, many years until I read Michael Crichton's "State of Fear".  

While it's an interesting work of fiction, he's pulled mean temperature data going back two centuries from various locations around the world.  He makes a compelling case that two centuries ago, most of the data collection sites were in wilderness areas and over the decades, gradual urbanisation has encroached on those sites.

Data from these sites show an increase in mean temperature, that is beyond doubt.  However, data collected from sites that have avoided urbanisation and remain otherwise undisturbed show a slight fall in mean temperature over the decades.

As we all know, cities and towns produce heat.  Air conditioning units, domestic heating and car usage all produce large amounts of thermal energy.  Crichton's arguement is that the theory of Global Warming is flawed because of this.

He goes on to show evidence of polar ice crusts actually appearing to grow over the last 100 years and points to data taken from ice cores which appear to support his assertion that a slight fall in mean temperatures is in evidence at the poles.

I'm not a scientist, but I am open to the idea that the issue may not be as clear cut as we think it is.  However, I agree with Crichton that the very worst thing we can do is interfere without proper analysis of the data.  With the scientific community apparently being split in their opinion as to whether Global Warming is an issue it would appear that we need to pour government (and not commercial) funding into extensive research.

[PMC]

I should add to the above post that I am acutely concerned about the state of our environment and passionately believe that humanity should do as much as possible to minimise the impact of our lives on the planet.  

I'm certainly not saying we should do nothing and continue to drive our SUVs without remorse, but history has shown that when humans act arbitrarily without checking our facts first, the results tend to be catastrophic.

[Cymric]

I do believe firmly that there is a greenhouse effect. That's simple heat balances of the kind any student in mechanical, chemical or physical engineering can set up for him/herself and calculate the answer to.

What I'm a whole lot less certain about is the impact humans have. Despite feverish research, we are beginning to realise the problem isn't as easy as it looks. People make solid arguments for changes in the heat flux from the Sun, slight oribital wobbles as the Earth travels around the Sun, the still-not-well-understood effect of aerosols and clouds, the impact of various thermohaline cycles in oceans, and many, many more. Heck, it was recently discovered that the so-called lungs of the Earth---rainforests---release substantial amounts of methane into the atmosphere. And really recently people have begun to worry that it isn't CO2 which will be the killer greenhouse gas, but NOx, because it is largely unregulated and thus unmonitored. We just don't know. There is a lot of honest science in that field, but I'm also sure that many people will concede that there is still a heck of a lot of valuable data and computing power missing.

However, since large shifts in the climate will do nobody good, it makes sense to excercise caution. Unfortunately, to many with power to vote, it isn't a worthwhile effort. They are used to solving problems when they show up because then all noses are aligned in one direction.

So here's to the new wines England and the Netherlands are able to grow in a century if the worst comes to the worst; it will be most interesting what people think of them.

[PMC]

Well put Cymric.

Methane & CO2 emissions from cattle and sheep make up a huge proportion of the world's total greenhouse gas output every year.  Indeed, IIRC New Zealand is taxing livestock farmers according to their alleged environmental impact (the so called "Fart Tax").

It could be argued that there are more sheep & cows now than at any time in the past, but we're not looking at the whole picture - all organisms fart.  Even bacteria produce Methane and given that most of the living organisms on this planet are are too small to see with the naked eye, I'd wager that all the bacteria in the world produce more Methane than the cows & sheep.

 

[whabang]

Brr! At least 2006 is cold so far... :nervous:

[blobrana]

m,
thats because someone has stolen 30% of our thermohaline circulation...

[Amiduffer]

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles%202005/NoGlobalWarm.pdf

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles%202005/GobalWarmStevenson.pdf

There you go. Check those out if you want to throw a little cold water on the hyperventilating about "global warming" :lol:

[FluffyMcDeath]

This story fits in here, methinks.

[FluffyMcDeath]

And while the Bush administration is still officially ney (though apparently he'd like to get the US of oil dependence)
Mr Tony Blair seems to have woken up

[Tigger]

Of course this is an interesting Global Warming tidbit.

Plants generate 10-30% of the worlds Methane

     -Tig