user47602 Loc: ip 304.0.0.33.32

unfortunately, a lot of people treat science like astrology... it's real only if it fits into their exisitng belief system

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

LOL I hear all this about Climate Change and the Administration ringing the alarm bells and directing his EPA to further restrict our economic development.... and all I can think to myself is.....

Whatever happened to the separation of church and state?

nakkh Loc: San Mateo, Ca

One outlier isn't a trend. Lets take a look at what people who know what they're talking about have to say.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2014/5

Sample:
The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for May 2014 was record highest for this month, at 0.74°C (1.33°F) above the 20th century average of 14.8°C (58.6°F).
The global land surface temperature was 1.13°C (2.03°F) above the 20th century average of 11.1°C (52.0°F), the fourth highest for May on record. For the ocean, the May global sea surface temperature was 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 16.3°C (61.3°F), making it the record highest for May and tying with June 1998, October 2003, and July 2009 as the highest departure from average for any month on record.
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the March–May period was 0.74°C (1.33°F) above the 20th century average of 13.7°C (56.7°F), making it the second warmest such period on record, behind 2010.
The March–May worldwide land surface temperature was 1.26°C (2.27°F) above the 20th century average, the third warmest such period on record. The global ocean surface temperature for the same period was 0.54°C (0.97°F) above the 20th century average, also the third warmest March–May on record.
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the January–May period (year-to-date) was 0.66°C (1.19°F) above the 20th century average of 13.1°C (55.5°F), the fifth warmest such period on record.

RichieC Loc: Adirondacks

All scientists agree, we are in an interglacial period. The earth will absolutely, positively, without a doubt- endure another glaciation. Our human species has largely developed during the present interglacial period, so we think it will go on like this forever. It will not. And when confronted with this fact, we look for someone to blame. In the old days, they cut the hearts out of sacrificial humans to appease the gods. Now these "preists" are interested in our money. Same game, different name.

Go ahead and ask NASA what will cause the next glacial period... answer, nobody knows. Are you aware that many of the temperature tracks and co2 levels they publish, designed to get everyone in a tizzy to grab headlines and spurn $$$ support, are based on computer models from data fed into their big blues etc.?, But the computer models don't jive with actual temperatures and levels... so they move the goal posts... LOL

One theory is that warming may cause the next glaciation, as it may allow currents to go into the far north ( south in southern hemisphere, etc. ) rather then being diverted, (in the Atlantic), just past Nova Scotia to Europe, bathing them in relatively warm water and the effect on weather it brings,. If the currents swing farther north, the water that reaches Europe will be a lot colder, glaciers will cease to recede and begin to grow, once they get big enough, after 100's or 1000's of years, maybe more, they will actually create their own weather patterns, then Earth is in for the duration. Wind is constant and dry, sunlight reflected. Once, way back when, the earth was entirely ice covered- google "frozen planet" . I wonder who you'd blame for that one???? for all the 5 glaciations and interglaciations???...

So like the weather, everyone talks about it, but nobody (can) do anything about it.

Wanna talk pollution? Well that is something we should do something about, and we have- but more needs to be done.

nakkh Loc: San Mateo, Ca

Perhaps I would ask NOAA not NASA.
You've got the Atlantic current idea backwards. The theory goes that so much fresh meltwater will come down from the north if the icecaps melt, that it will overtop or block the Atlantic current which keeps Europe & the east coast of the united states toasty warm. Also the warming atmosphere puts a shit ton more energy into the weather patterns all over the world creating bigger storms & deeper droughts. Not to mention that c02 is acidic & kills plants & animals in the worlds oceans at the base of the food chain. Baaaad news.

GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Agreed,

Read up on LanzaTech - In April, the company's microscopic bacteria began ingesting carbon monoxide from a steel mill in China. Carbon monoxide goes in one end of the bacteria and ethanol comes out the other.

Products like this are the real answer to CM. The world will be tied to carbon fuels for at least 50-75 more years, so instead of using non-science, oppressive government, and a state of fear to address it, encourage more real innovation like LanzaTech. Also think wind power ----- go with the underwater mills, as waves never stop! Also, the avoidance of catastrophic bird kill is a plus by itself.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Keep in mind that the North Pole is located in the middle of the Arctic Ocean amid waters that are almost permanently covered with constantly shifting sea ice. If it melts, it has little to no effect on water levels, as water displacement has already been accounted for.

This is another one of the scare tactic myths from the bad science crowd....the melting North Pole will raise water levels on the U.S.east coast by 16 feet! Right.

nakkh Loc: San Mateo, Ca

Agreed tapping the ocean currents will yield gigawatts of renewal energy.

davefales Loc: Virginia

I don't think many people argue with the CO2 data. But...so what? Dozens of expensive models have failed to link CO2 to temps over the past 17 years. It can be argued there is a negative correlation.

nakkh Loc: San Mateo, Ca

It's more that just climate change
http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/What+is+Ocean+Acidification%3F

James Shaw

What you refer to is a local temperature. Warming is worldwide.

Besides look at the graphs presented here again and you will see that each has its ups (warming) and downs (cooling) periods over hundreds of thousands of years represented by the data. However, the increase in recent times has far exceeded any of the previous "ups."

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

There have been many times in Earth's history when the CO2 levels have been much higher than 400PPM..About 10 or 12 thousand years ago ( not even an eyeblink in geologic time) where I am sittin now in Norhern CT, the ice was 1 mile thick. Why is it not here now? 1 guess. It got WARMER. While the CO2 levels were rising for the last 17 years it has gotten COLDER. The end of international tariffs would be a good thing. Cleaner energy is a good thing. Natural gas is among the cleanest fuels, and The US has an abundance of it, if only we would get rid of the environmental crazys. You would be very lucky if Nat Gas would be found on your property. You and your heirs would have more money than you could possibly spend. Oh wait a minute. you would refuse to let them get it becauso it might bring the CO2 level to 401 PPm.

nakkh Loc: San Mateo, Ca

You are right regarding the north pole. Greenland is another story. 20' of sea rise if it melts. That would be bad. real bad.
http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=1162

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

:thumbup: :thumbup: