Does John Stossel have the brains God gave a chicken wing? Most people say no. Some say yes. One thing's for sure: the debate isn't over!
Stossel 8
David Roberts is staff writer for Grist. You can follow his Twitter feed at twitter.com/drgrist.
Related Stories
Add a Comment
You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
Comments
View as Flat
Biodiversivist Posted 3:19 pm
23 Oct 2007
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 4:26 pm
23 Oct 2007
Also notice they cut off Al Gore's statement.
He was referring that if Greenland all melted, sea level would go up 20ft. Which is true by anyone's measure.
Gore doesn't give a "When" that will occur.
However given the fact that the glacier melting speed has doubled in the past 6 years, thats certainly something to think about.
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 4:32 pm
23 Oct 2007
Permalink
justlou Posted 9:47 pm
23 Oct 2007
Stoessel is a real pro with the PR spin. It is amazing that ABC tolerates his very one sided commentary presented in a news format.
One thought about the link between temperature rise and CO2 levels: Does it really matter which comes first? If we are now raising temperatures by increasing CO2 levels we could be compounding the problem -- high CO2 results in the release of more CO2 as a consequence of temperature rise. Ominously, these events seem to be revealed by sharp spikes in the graphs depicting CO2 and temperature rises.
Unfortunately, the idea of tipping points has not been grasped by many people who think that we can adapt to slowly rising temperatures and sea levels. But, judging from prior climate history, this "wished for" soft landing may be just a self delusion that is being propagated by sock puppets like Stoessel who merely view the data as a weapon to defeat the messenger, Al Gore.
The very worst thing we could do is to keep pouring more man made CO2 into the atmosphere during a rise in earth temperature. The following report by Joseph Romm explaining the link with CO2 saturation in ocean waters is a critical case pointing toward a potentially catastrophic tipping point.
Permalink
KenG Posted 10:53 pm
23 Oct 2007
"One thought about the link between temperature rise and CO2 levels: Does it really matter which comes first? "
Actually, it is a critical issue if you are benchmarking climate change computer modeling. The recent speculation about rising temperatures limiting the ocean ability to hold CO2 would provide a theoretical basis for a "CO2 follows temperature" relationship if global temperature is more governed by another effect such as solar activity. This may not be the most popular interpretation at the moment but it does have more basis than idle speculation.
I have reservations about the accuracy in dating and magnitude of any of these historical temperature and CO2 records but that just reinforces that all these versions are still theories and points out the hyperbole in Gores assertion that the debate is over.
Permalink
justlou Posted 11:25 pm
23 Oct 2007
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 2:43 am
24 Oct 2007
It's a false dichotomy.
Solar intensity was the initial driver of glaciation cycles, via Milankovitch cycles.
However what they goad you into thinking is that it can't be BOTH the Sun and CO2 working in tandem.
_
What they also want you to believe is that solar activity is the reason for the current warming.
But it can't be. Because we've been measuring the solar activity for 40 years with multiple sets of satellites, and the solar activity has practically flatlined since then.
http://greyfalcon.net/solar.png
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 2:48 am
24 Oct 2007
Permalink