I love how these guy release their findings to CNN before they publish a paper. It's not exactly good SCIENCE.

Anyone remember the breathless claims made in this article:
http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/vie ... im+burnett
We're still waiting for a paper on that one.

From that article..

Well, I did suggest at that time that the article was written by a 5th grader.
To date there has been no paper released by Barnett's team.

I am wrong about Hansen's study, however.
It was published in Science, just like it says in the article.

G8 scientists tell Bush: Act now - or else...

An unprecedented warning as global warming worsens

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
08 June 2005

An unprecedented joint statement issued by the leading scientific academies of the world has called on the G8 governments to take urgent action to avert a global catastrophe caused by climate change.

The national academies of science for all the G8 countries, along with those of Brazil, India and China, have warned that governments must no longer procrastinate on what is widely seen as the greatest danger facing humanity. The statement, which has taken months to finalise, is all the more important as it is signed by Bruce Alberts, president of the US National Academy of Sciences, which has warned George Bush about the dangers of ignoring the threat posed by global warming.

It was released on the day that Tony Blair met Mr Bush in Washington, where the American President was expected to reaffirm his opposition to joining the Kyoto treat to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Over dinner at the White House last night, Mr Blair appeared to make little progress on one of his main priorities for Britain's year chairing the G8 - a new international effort to combat climate change. The Prime Minister is trying to draw the US, China and India into the discussion, but there is little sign that the Bush administration will accept the growing scientific evidence about the problem.

Lord May of Oxford, the president of the Royal Society, Britain's national academy of sciences, lambasted President Bush yesterday for ignoring his own scientists by withdrawing from the Kyoto treaty. "The current US policy on climate change is misguided. The Bush administration has consistently refused to accept advice of the US National Academy of Sciences ... Getting the US on board is critical because of the sheer amount of greenhouse gas emissions they are responsible for," Lord May said.

Between 1990 and 2002, the carbon dioxide emissions of the US increased by 13 per cent, which on their own were greater than the combined cut in emissions that will be achieved if all Kyoto countries hit their targets, he said.

"President Bush has an opportunity at Gleneagles to signal that his administration will no longer ignore the scientific evidence and act to cut emissions," Lord May said. "The G8 summit is an unprecedented moment in human history. Our leaders face a stark choice - act now to tackle climate change or let future generations face the price of their inaction.

"Never before have we faced such a global threat. And if we do not begin effective action now it will be much harder to stop the runaway train as it continues to gather momentum," he added.

The joint statement by the national science academies of the 11 countries does not mention Kyoto but it does refer repeatedly to the United Nations Framework on Climate Change that spawned the 1995 protocol to limit future greenhouse gas emissions, which the US has signed up to.

Climate change is real, global warming is occurring and there is strong evidence that man-made greenhouse gases are implicated in a potentially catastrophic increase in global temperatures, the statement says. "It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities. This warming has already led to changes in the Earth's climate."

Human activities are causing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to rise to a point not reached for at least 420,000 years. Meanwhile average global temperatures rose by 0.6C in the 20th century and are projected to increase by between 1.4C and 5.8C by 2100.

"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action. It is vital that all nations identify cost-effective steps that they can take now to contribute to substantial and long-term reduction in net global greenhouse gas emissions," the statement says.

In a veiled reference to President Bush's reluctance to accept climate change by claiming that the science is unclear, the academies emphasise that action is needed now to reduce the build-up of greenhouse gases.

"A lack of full scientific certainty about some aspects of climate change is not a reason for delaying an immediate response that will, at a reasonable cost, prevent dangerous anthropogenic [man-made] interference with the climate system," the statement says.

"We urge all nations... to take prompt action to reduce the causes of climate change, adapt to its impacts and ensure that the issue is included in all relevant national and international strategies."

The national academies warn that even if greenhouse gas emissions can be stabilised at existing levels, the climate would continue to change as it slowly responds to the extra carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere. "Further changes in climate are therefore unavoidable. Nations must prepare for them," the statement says.

CO2 on the increase

1958: A US scientist, Charles Keeling, begins measuring the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) on an extinct volcano in Hawaii. It stands at 315 parts per million (ppm).

1968: The US spacecraft 'Apollo 8' takes the first pictures of Earth from a distance, beautiful but fragile - which help start modern environmentalism. The C02 level has reached 323ppm.

1972: The UN Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm - the moment when the world first recognises environmental threats to the Earth as a whole. CO2 now at 327ppm.

1988: The world wakes up to the danger of climate change, with an outspoken warning from scientists, and a speech by Margaret Thatcher. CO2 level stands at 351ppm.

1992: The Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro sees more than 100 countries sign the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the first global warming treaty. CO2 now at 356ppm.

1995: The Kyoto protocol to the UN's climate treaty is signed in Japan, binding countries, including the US, to make cuts in their CO2 emissions. The CO2 level has now reached 360ppm.

2000: Obvious that the 1990s were the hottest decade in the global temperature record, with 1998 the hottest year in the northern hemisphere for 1,000 years. CO2 is 369ppm.

2001: George Bush withdraws the US, the world's biggest CO2 emitter, from Kyoto, alleging it will damage America's economy - jeopardising the whole process. CO2 level now at 371ppm.

2003: First two weeks of August are the hottest period ever recorded in western Europe: 35,000 people die. New record high temperature for Britain. CO2 now at 375ppm.

2004: After much dithering, Russia ratifies Kyoto, enabling the protocol to enter into force despite the desertion of the United States. But that doesn't stop the CO2 level rising to 377ppm.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/sci ... ory=645071

Man-made global warming is a reality.

The idea that Kyoto will do anything to help it is a myth.

Anyone still worried about 0.6 degrees?

Ask the crocodile fossils in Greenland.

Unwittingly, you make a good point.
Tropical glaciers and the greenland ice cap(both of which exist today) are features of ice ages. Neither have been present for a majority of earth's history.

Unwittingly?
I knew what I was saying big dog. We're just now coming out of an ice age.
What can't be denied is that the speed at which this is occuring is being affected by humans.

Get with the program. Future generations aren't going to have to deal with this because the rapture is coming in THIS generation. Sheesh.

You're right, no need to worry about drought, heat waves, melting glaciers, sea-level rise, ecosystem shifts and species die-off.

Well, considering we're at the early stages of leaving the last ice age and that historically the global climate has been MUCH warmer than it is now...what do you think we should do? I'm buying real estate in Nepal.

I'm going to invade Canada.

That's not such a good idea.

Over the last couple of years, Nepal has recorded a hazy winter, hotter summer months and frequent landslides, which experts attribute to climatic change. Global warming has increased the pace of snow melting in the Himalayas.

Right now I live at about 50 feet above sea level, maybe less..and about 3/4 mile from the shore. I'll have ocean front property soon. W00t!
So again, since this ice age is ending, what shall us humans do to stop the inevitable?

Oh, snap. Zing!


Anyway, I've read a lot of posts about this subject, and while there may be a change in our climate (there's bound to be, since the earth is not a static thing) I'm not so sure about Man's part in it. I'm not saying that we should pollute with impunity, and I'm against heavily polluting vehicles, anyway, because they guzzle so much fuel, a finite resource. All I'm saying is, without real proof that man, and only man, can change the earth's climate, I'm not sold.

MOVING TO THE MOON.

Damn, I was going to post a picture of Paulie Shore in BioDome!

That is simply not true(or not proven, at least).
Let's look at the actual data.
There seems to be a general consensus among scientists(even gw sceptics) that the earth has seen a temp. increase of approx 0.6 C in the 20th century. There is a problem, of course, with comparing sophisticated modern day equipment with obsolete early 1900's thermometers, but we'll use the 0.6 C as factual.
It is significant to note, that most of the warming took place pre- 1940, before the rise of atmospheric CO2.
(and, did you know that the El Nino event of '98 warmed the earth that much in ONE year).
For you to suggest that the warming is anthropogenic(can't be denied!you say) you would have to prove that the temp. rise is abnormal--it is not.

GW alarmists will tell you that an imminent rise of 2-5 C is likely for the next century--this of course, is data from computer models that have proved to be rather ineffective at predicting actual temperature.

For instance, the computer models have suggested that a tropospheric warming should have been occuring the last 20 years. The warming in the troposphere has been at the edge of statistical zero for that period (makes you wonder how accurate the surface temps are).

So, dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere does or doesn't affect the climate? I'm not comparing the levels contributed by humans to the naturally occuring ones. Humans DO dump gases into the atmosphere, right? These gases DO affect climate right?