Thursday, December 28, 2006

Episode #14 Author Steven Rinella, Outdoor News, and More!


Author Steven Rinella stops by the show to discuss his book "The Scavangers Guide to Haute Cuisine", plus outdoor news and tip of the day.
Click Here to Listen!

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Joe discusses his view on global warming and that wants someone to show him the evidence.

I suggestion is you rent "The Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore to find out more.

He lays it all out.

Joe Duckworth said...

The inconvienient truth is that Al Gore is a partisan nut-job, not a climatologist.
I suggest you read this before you come here and post again.
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/
And be prepared......... there will be a test.

The bottom line is this...... he, and his supporters, are using computerized climate models as scientific evidence!
Since 2006 did NOT see the catastrophic increase in hurricanes that a "consensus" of these models predicted, I still maintain that these are HIGHLY un-reliable and easily skewed by people with an agenda. You need ACTUAL evidence to convince me, not liberal enviro-wacko spewage and computer guesses.

Anonymous said...

Gore's politics and personality aside, he does a nice job of presenting and explaining the "facts" you say your looking for. Let me know if you gotten a chance to see it.

I read thru at that article you linked. Quiz away.

Joe Duckworth said...

Ok......
1)Why did the the planet actually cool between 1940 and 1980, when human emissions of CO2 were rising faster than at any other time in history?

2)There is between (measurements are disputed) 750 and 830 BILLION tons of CO2 in the atmosphere. Humans account for less than one half of one percent, or about 3 billion tons.
To illustrate how insignificant this is, the earths oceans alone release 210 billion tons per year.
In fact, we are less than 5 percent of the margin for error in trying to determine how much there is in the first place!
Why does Al Gore fail to account for this in his movie?

Here are some statements by EXPERTS in their fields, released after the movie was premiered. Please tell me how Al Gore, liberal arts major and lifelong politician, is to be believed (even after, like most politicians, being proven wrong on many, many issues) and these people are to be dismissed.

- - -

"I can assure Mr. Gore that no one from the South Pacific islands has fled to New Zealand because of rising seas. In fact, if Gore consults the data, he will see it shows sea level falling in some parts of the Pacific." -- Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, University of Auckland, N.Z.

- - -

"We find no alarming sea level rise going on, in the Maldives, Tovalu, Venice, the Persian Gulf and even satellite altimetry, if applied properly." -- Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics and geodynamics, Stockholm University, Sweden.

- - -

"Gore is completely wrong here -- malaria has been documented at an altitude of 2,500 metres -- Nairobi and Harare are at altitudes of about 1,500 metres. The new altitudes of malaria are lower than those recorded 100 years ago. None of the "30 so-called new diseases" Gore references are attributable to global warming, none." -- Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, unit of insects and infectious diseases, Paris, comments on Gore's belief that Nairobi and Harare were founded just above the mosquito line to avoid malaria and how the mosquitoes are now moving to higher altitudes.

- - -

"Our information is that seven of 13 populations of polar bears in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago (more than half the world's estimated total) are either stable or increasing..... Of the three that appear to be declining, only one has been shown to be affected by climate change. No one can say with certainty that climate change has not affected these other populations, but it is also true that we have no information to suggest that it has." -- Dr. Mitchell Taylor, manager, wildlife research section, Department of Environment, Igloolik, Nunavut.

- - -

"Mr. Gore suggests that the Greenland melt area increased considerably between 1992 and 2005. But 1992 was exceptionally cold in Greenland and the melt area of ice sheet was exceptionally low due to the cooling caused by volcanic dust emitted from Mt. Pinatubo. If, instead of 1992, Gore had chosen for comparison the year 1991, one in which the melt area was 1% higher than in 2005, he would have to conclude that the ice sheet melt area is shrinking and that perhaps a new Ice Age is just around the corner." -- Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax.

"The oceans are now heading into one of their periodic phases of cooling.... Modest changes in temperature are not about to wipe them [coral] out. Neither will increased carbon dioxide, which is a fundamental chemical building block that allows coral reefs to exist at all." -- Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.

- - -

"Both the Antarctic and Greenland ice caps are thickening. The temperature at the South Pole has declined by more than one degree C since 1950. And the area of sea ice around the continent has increased over the last 20 years." -- Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia.

- - -

"From data published by the Canadian Ice Service, there has been no precipitous drop-off in the amount or thickness of the ice cap since 1970 when reliable overall coverage became available for the Canadian Arctic." -- Dr./Cdr. M.R. Morgan, FRMS, formerly advisor to the World Meteorological Organization/climatology research scientist at University of Exeter, U.K.

- - -

"The MPB (mountain pine beetle) is a species native to this part of North America and is always present. The MPB epidemic started as comparatively small outbreaks and through forest management inaction got completely out of hand." -- Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C., comments on Gore's belief that the mountain pine beetle is an "invasive exotic species" that has become a plague due to fewer days of frost.

- - -

I'm sorry........ your (and his) argument is just not very persuavisive.

Anonymous said...

Joe,

To Dr. R.M. Carter I would like to point him to the Artic Council (8 nations, 160 Scientists) report that "the arctic climate is now warming rapidly and much larger changes are projects" http://www.acia.uaf.edu/PDFs/ACIA_Policy_Document.pdf and to NASA which has photos showing the ice shrinking since 1979. http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2006/seaice_meltdown.html

Dr. Chris de Freitas; I would not expect people to abandon their homes given that most scientist expect the polar ice caps to last another 30 - 90 years. A lot can happen between now and then and besides, humans are pretty stubborn. As a whole we live on active volcanoes and around flood, hurricane and earthquake zones. That's just what we do. And when that volcano erupts or the land floods or shakes we ride it out, cry and rebuild if we can.

To Dr. Nils-Axel Morner; Please let the world know at point sea level rise qualifies as "alarming".

Nothing you mention here changes my opinion. The scientists are trying to explain what they see or don't expect to see.

I'll tell you what I see. 72 degrees in January when the normal is 36. Back to back "once every 100 years" storms in Denver. Pitiful ski conditions in Stratton. ( I mean 12" of natural snowfall all year in Vermont? Come On!).

The bottom line for me is, a) we are on the front end of global change; the signs are there. More then I care to name. b) 6-1/2 billion humans are contributing to the changing environment in small and large ways. c) There will always be people with see the 'facts' and draw vastly different conclusions; history laughs as some of them just like it laughs at people that could 'scientifically' prove the world was flat.

Dennis

Don said...

Regional peak temperatures, or even regional trends, mean nothing when looking at the global climate. If that was the case then "The Big Freeze" in Texas in the late 1800's would have signalled serious global cooling, which was not the case.

Back-to-back 100-year storms may only mean that it is 200 years before we see another one, or we could have 10 back-to-back and not see other one for 1000 years.

Climate is what you expect, weather is what you get. What you are describing is the nature of weather.

Subscribe Via E-Mail!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

*NEW* Visit The Forums!

HuntCast- The Outdoor Show now has a brand new forum/message board!

The new board is HERE!

HuntCast - The Outdoor Show on Facebook