I'm not hearing much about global warming now days.

newfie

Well-Known Member
Statement on climate change from 18 scientific associations
"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver." (2009)2


  • American Association for the Advancement of Science
    "The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (2006)3

  • American Chemical Society
    "Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem." (2004)4

  • American Geophysical Union
    "Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes." (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007, 2012, 2013)5

  • American Medical Association
    "Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2013)6

  • American Meteorological Society
    "It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide." (2012)7

  • American Physical Society
    "The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (2007)8

  • The Geological Society of America
    "The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s." (2006; revised 2010)9
SCIENCE ACADEMIES
International academies: Joint statement
"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)10


  • U.S. National Academy of Sciences
    "The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere." (2005)11
U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

  • U.S. Global Change Research Program
    "The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases. Human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice." (2009, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12
INTERGOVERNMENTAL BODIES

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
    “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.”13

    “Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems.”14

all presented by the climate alarmist hit group. still waiting for the North Pole to lose all its ice as Mr. Inconvient truth promised. Or perhaps the end of the world in 2016 as other alarmist have promised.
 

zubenelgenubi

I'm a star
ad hominem is not a member here. speak english
IknVO3Tl.jpg
 

zubenelgenubi

I'm a star
We know human activities are driving the increase in CO2 concentrations because atmospheric CO2 contains information about its source. Scientists can tease apart how much CO2 comes from natural sources, and how much comes from combusted fossil fuel sources.


Compared to other carbon sources, carbon from fossil fuels has a distinctly different “signature,” essentially the relative amount of heavier or lighter atoms of carbon (technically δ13C). The more negative the δ13C, the higher the proportion of carbon from fossil fuels.


Over the years, δ13C has decreased while the overall amount of CO2 has increased. This information tells scientists that fossil fuel emissions are the largest contributor of CO2 concentrations since the pre-industrial era.


CO2_signature%20.jpg

Direct Evidence of Fossil Fuel Derived CO2 in the Atmosphere. While the concentration of carbon has increased, the carbon originating from natural sources has decreased.

I guess I'm missing something here. Hydrocarbons we refer to as fossil fuels theoretically derive from living organic material. So how would they not be considered natural? I think they should be distinguishing between modern and ancient carbon sources. (Edit: upon further research I found that they are differentiating between CO2 preferred by biological sources, and CO2 released by geological processes, so it's not just fossil fuel burning, but all biological sources of CO2. The question I have now is why is the CO2 from geoligical sources decreasing?)

Unless they are using the abiotic oil theory, in which case they should not refer to it as fossil fuel. This data also seems to suggest that if we weren't burning fossil fuels, atmospheric CO2 may have dropped to dangerously low levels.
 
Last edited:

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
I guess I'm missing something here. Hydrocarbons we refer to as fossil fuels theoretically derive from living organic material. So how would they not be considered natural? I think they should be distinguishing between modern and ancient carbon sources. Unless they are using the abiotic oil theory, in which case they should not refer to it as fossil fuel. This data also seems to suggest that if we weren't burning fossil fuels, atmospheric CO2 may have dropped to dangerously low levels.

100% nope.

Carbon is carbon, ancient or modern.

Literally no one is suggesting that we aren't burning enough fossil fuels, and you seemingly don't understand the data that was presented.
 

zubenelgenubi

I'm a star
100% nope.

Carbon is carbon, ancient or modern.

Literally no one is suggesting that we aren't burning enough fossil fuels, and you seemingly don't understand the data that was presented.

You are only seeing what you want to see. Please read the edit. The post I was quoting is differentiating between carbon 13 and carbon 12. The issue I was having is that they used the term "carbon originating from natural sources". I took that to mean biological sources, after I looked into it further I determined they meant geological sources as carbon 12 is supposed to be the preferred carbon of biological processes, whereas carbon 13 would be what comes from volcanic type sources.

I did not suggest that we aren't burning enough fossil fuels, I said that from the data provided it seemed as though without burning fossil fuels carbon dioxide levels may have dropped to dangerously low levels. Two different things.
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
...I said that from the data provided it seemed as though without burning fossil fuels carbon dioxide levels may have dropped to dangerously low levels...

K.

We need to burn fossil fuels to keep the carbon dioxide levels up?

You didn't understand the data.

Get back to me later.
 

zubenelgenubi

I'm a star
This link seems to be contradicting the information from your previous post.

From link:

Carbon dioxide comes from both natural and anthropogenic [burning fossil fuels] sources; natural sources are predominant.

From previous post:

This information tells scientists that fossil fuel emissions are the largest contributor of CO2 concentrations since the pre-industrial era.

And what about carbon 14?
 

zubenelgenubi

I'm a star
K.

We need to burn fossil fuels to keep the carbon dioxide levels up?

You didn't understand the data.

Get back to me later.

I don't have an answer for that. I would love to hear the proper explanation of the data. Plants and algae need atmospheric CO2 to live. I would hate to see us fix the anthropogenic CO2 emissions issues just to find out some other unaccounted for process is causing CO2 levels to drop too low.
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
This link seems to be contradicting the information from your previous post.

From link:

Carbon dioxide comes from both natural and anthropogenic [burning fossil fuels] sources; natural sources are predominant.

From previous post:

This information tells scientists that fossil fuel emissions are the largest contributor of CO2 concentrations since the pre-industrial era.

And what about carbon 14?

Don't get lost in the weeds.
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
I don't have an answer for that. I would love to hear the proper explanation of the data. Plants and algae need atmospheric CO2 to live. I would hate to see us fix the anthropogenic CO2 emissions issues just to find out some other unaccounted for process is causing CO2 levels to drop too low.

FFS.
 

zubenelgenubi

I'm a star
Come on now, it's well known that one of the biggest threats to the environment is falling CO2 levels. We're all very concerned about it:wink2:

The way we solve problems, I am pretty concerned about the possibility. Kill off the plant life, we're doomed. Heat up the planet 6 degrees, civilization may collapse, but life will continue on.
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
Come on now, it's well known that one of the biggest threats to the environment is falling CO2 levels. We're all very concerned about it:wink2:

But, but, I would hate to try to understand this word: anthropogenic, even though I know it's super-serious.

Also, I'm super-serioiusly worried that CO2 levels will drop too low, that seems super-serious.
 
Top