Letters: Proper perspective on global warming

Robert Endlich's column on the "facts of global warming" describes a narrow perspective based on selective use of currently available climate data. Read more
First Prev
of 6
Next Last
good god

United States

#1 Jul 26, 2009
Mr Skinner, the Sun-News is not going to change it's editorial bent. It serves as mainly a liberal organ for the abundant left wingers, which outnumber conservative views. Unfortunately, most of this State is controlled and run by Democrats. We can only hope that more citizens see what the Democratic Party stands for: making people dependent on the government, creating and maintaining class warfare, and having total control over peoples lives, to mention just a few.
Old Timer

United States

#2 Jul 26, 2009
RE: DONALD NEIDIG's letter concerning "Global Warming."

First, I agree that we, the human race, are causing the warming. We are measuring temperatures in areas which we have created, with concrete, stucco, areas covered with plants which don't usually grow there naturally, and have generally messed up the landscape by moving out of natural caves, and building artificial, above ground caves to live in.

In addition, we have harnessed energy electricity, burning of natural gas/oil, and generally made things a lot easier for ourselves, by creating energy consuming 'slaves,' and getting rid of the human slaves of earlier years.

In a prior missive, I asked why, if Death Valley was undergoing 'Global Warming,' we had not established a new record high temperature there, since the Highest Temperature Measured for the United States was established in 1913 (135 degrees). Perhaps it is because there has not been a significant change in the exposure of the instruments at that location, by having a bunch of buildings/condo's/black Macadam highways built around the site. In other words, we have surrounded most observing stations with buildings and new energy sources, which have the effect of creating artificial heat islands (UHI) in cities, and are measuring something other than what was originially measured at that location, before 1900.

When we learn to measure the temperature for 100 years at a site which has had no changes, including any changes within at least 100 miles, with the same sensors which we started with, and show a temperature increase which is above the accuracy tolorance and noise of the instrument, then I will admit that we have a problem. However, we must also consider that instruments 'drift,' and shelters change their colors, and must maintain them by proper calibration and cleaning/painting/refurbishing with the original finishes, in order to keep the colleting of the data as close as possible to that which it was when we started.

It looks like about the only one which qualifies is the Death Valley site, and it was moved in the 1930s from its original site, according to the few documents which give any information on it...

In addition, many of the original observing stations have been shut down, due to the loss of the observers, and relocated where someone can do the job, and is willing to do the job, rather than remaining at the old location (Generally relocated to towns from their original isolated farms). This changes exposure, surroundings, and, because the new temperature sensors have to have a cable to connect to the house where the readings are recorded, and where electricity is available, generally are close to the house, or other buildings, not out in an open field away from everything. Just maybe, this relocation might contribute to the higher temperature readings.

Hmmmmm.....
Border Native-American

Florissant, CO

#3 Jul 26, 2009
Dear Friends,

Some of the faces in Washington may have changed but the tactics are as duplicitous as ever. The Democratic leaders are up to no good---they are deliberately misleading America about their intent to cover illegal immigrants under their health care plan. That's right, while it's been widely reported that illegals are not being covered-don't believe a word of it.

We need to put a little light of day on this matter---and no one can do that better than you. I'll give you the facts-then you need to call, write, email, or just show up in their district offices and let your congressman know that you know and you are not standing for it.

Obama and the Democrats know their socialized health care scheme is a tough sell for the American people. And if they give our taxpayer funded health care to illegal aliens, they know they will pay dearly at the ballot box. A recent Rasmussen poll stated that 80% of Americans are against government providing health care to illegals.

With this in mind, Senate Finance Chair Max Baucus said, "We're not going to cover undocumented aliens, undocumented workers. That's too politically explosive."

Translation: he wants it, but the American people won't stand for it.

Even Barack Obama said this week that he was against giving national health care to illegal aliens with one important exception, the usual left wing canard. He wants it for the children. He wants taxpayers to pay for the health care of all illegal alien minors-sounds like a fantastic reason for foreigners to travel to the US illegally-especially if they have a really sick or needy child.

But Obama didn't stop there-and risk disappointing La Raza and the other open border fanatics who support him. He added that he would solve the problem of uninsured illegals by creating "a situation where we're dealing with illegal immigration, so that we don't have illegal immigrants... And I want a comprehensive immigration plan that creates a pathway to achieve that." In other words we will first give them amnesty, and then health care!

But even this is a lie. Illegal aliens will be able to get Obama care. The bill doesn't say straight out "we're giving health care to illegals," but there is absolutely nothing in the bill that requires screening to ensure that illegal aliens don't abuse the system. This past week Congressman Dean Heller introduced an Amendment to the Ways and Means Committee that would have required that the federal government to verify the legal status of applicants for the government health care plan or credits for private health insurance. Every single Democrat on the Committee voted against this common sense Amendment!

Let's show Baucus just how "politically explosive" giving free health care to lawbreakers is. Call up your representative and tell them to vote against Obama Care. Tell them that if they vote for the bill, they are voting to give billions of dollars of your tax dollars to illegal aliens, and that you will hold them responsible come election time.

This fight is raging right now. Some conservative Democrats are trying to stop this insanity. But they need your help. I'll be writing a column about the fraud of Obama care and bringing it up on television but the best way to stop it is the same way we stopped the treasonous amnesty bill-with your calls.

Thanks for all you do to keep Washington from taking this country right over the edge. If we can hold on for another fifteen months we can throw some of these bums out and send to Congress Americans who will fight for us! Please call today, and again on Monday and Tuesday!

With all my respect and appreciation,

Bay Buchanan- Team America


Think about it

AOL

#4 Jul 26, 2009
RE: DONALD NEIDIG's letter concerning "Global Warming."

We are not experiencing global warming that is unusual or unprecedented.

Mr. Neigig's letter points out that past extreme warmings happened millions of years ago, that's true. He also points out that there have been warmer and cooler time periods in our recent history. The Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age.

Mr. Neigig's estimation of the extent of the MWP and the LIA however is erroneous. Both of these climate periods lasted between 300 and 400 years, depending on the location on the earth. Yes both the MWP and the LIA were global events.

If you count the warming as a result of comming out of the LIA, then our current warming has been happening for the last 100 - 150 years. Not even half of either of the prior climate events.

Did you know that during the LIA, our earth saw the largest extent of glaciation since the younger dryas, 12,000 years ago? The LIA was one of the coldest periods of our holocene optimum.

The holocene optimum is the interglacial that we currently live in. An interglacial is the interruption of a period of glaciation during an ice age. We are in an ice age. The last 3million years have been an ice age with the last 500,000 years being the most severe period of the ice age.

There have been many periods of warm and cool during our holocene. Backwards, it looks like this for the last 2500 years.

LIA cold
MWP warm
Dark Ages Cold Period cold
Roman Warm Period warm

You get the pattern, here's a look at the holocene as recorded in the vostok ice core data.
http://www.socialtext.net/data/workspaces/wir...

Here's a look at our holocene as compared with the eemian, the prior interglacial.
http://www.theoildrum.com/uploads/12/vostok_e...

Here's a look at the last 500,000 years from the vostok ice core data.
http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/e107_files/p...

And for fun here's headline from 1895 on climate change.
http://www.almanac.com/timeline/index.php
Think about it

AOL

#5 Jul 26, 2009
Old Timer wrote:
RE: DONALD NEIDIG's letter concerning "Global Warming."
Hmmmmm.....
Right you are. We have a lot of 'issues' with the method of collecting data. In the 90s many rural reporting stations were dropped and as a result there was an immediate increase in 'global warming'.
Here's a look at 2008 compared to 1880. The graphic shows 2008 cooler in parts of the US than it was in 1880. 1880 is when the mechanically measured temperatures begin for the purpose of measuring global warming. The grey sections are areas of the globe where there is no reporting. Take a good look and ask yourself how we can know how hot we've got if we don't have records to compare.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
How about 1890?
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1900 Are we warmer or cooler in 2008 than in 1900 in South America or Africa or Antarctica, who knows not many if any temperatures are recorded for the purpose of determining climate.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1910 US still cooler in 2008 than in 1910. Why is that important? The US has the longest most reliable temperature record of any country. England has the longest temperature record for a singular location.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1920
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1930
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1940
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
Think about it

AOL

#6 Jul 26, 2009
1950, 2008 cooler in the US but warmer for many areas of the world.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1960 Slight decrease in global warming, Asia still hot.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1970
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1980 Western hemisphere cooler in 2008 than in 1980, southern hemisphere cooler/about the same. Asia still hot.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1990 Where did the global warming go? 2008 cooler in many areas of the 'global' record than in 1990.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
For fun 1998, the warmest year on record.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
2000 Find the 'global warming'
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
Jack Martin

Albuquerque, NM

#7 Jul 26, 2009
Selective use of data as a means of downplaying the reality or the seriousness of human-produced global climate change is a familiar tactic that we might expect from groups that have a vested interest in preserving the status quo. Surely not from meteorologists, too?
You seem to want to ignore the selected data in order to
preserve the status quo of the theory.

The problem here, is the "Selective use of unsubstantiated forecasts as a means of UPplaying" imagined crises by those with a different vested interest.

ALL of the global temperature trends ( MSU-MT, MSU-LT, sea surface temprature, land-ocean temperature indices )
are well below the IPCC's best estimate for the "LOW scenario" of about 1.8K/century.

And ALL of the major global temperature trends indicate
a DEceleration from that sub IPCC modeled rate.

The fifteen year trends are lower than the thirty year trends.
The ten year trends are lower than the fifteen year trends.
And the seven year trends are now cooling trends.

And the middle troposphere shows a cooling trend since 1996.

Should this cooling continue, in association with the solar
magnetic decline, it will mean much of the twentieth century warming was likely due to the millenial solar magnetic maximum which peaked in the 1990s.

This is a theory we can and should all test going forward.

And craft a more complete theory which doesn't exclude 'selected' data because it might contradict a previous theory.
Rubberband Man

Las Cruces, NM

#8 Jul 26, 2009
good god wrote:
Mr Skinner, the Sun-News is not going to change it's editorial bent. It serves as mainly a liberal organ for the abundant left wingers, which outnumber conservative views. Unfortunately, most of this State is controlled and run by Democrats. We can only hope that more citizens see what the Democratic Party stands for: making people dependent on the government, creating and maintaining class warfare, and having total control over peoples lives, to mention just a few.
I always thought the Sun News was too conservative right-wing. Read Krauthammers column. No matter what he is writing about, there is an Obama bash included. He wrote a column last week about going to the moon and bashed Obama, saying that Bush envisioned us going back to the moon by 2020 and so far we've heard nothing from Obama. Well, Bush didn't "envision" us going back to the moon until three years into his first term, and Obama increased NASA budget by over a billion dollars emphasizing that we need to do more space exploration, less than six months into his first term. I wish the Sun News would stop buying Krauthammers column and go back with Kathleen Parker, a much more reasonable voice.
Rubberband Man

Las Cruces, NM

#9 Jul 26, 2009
Think about it wrote:
1950, 2008 cooler in the US but warmer for many areas of the world.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1960 Slight decrease in global warming, Asia still hot.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1970
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1980 Western hemisphere cooler in 2008 than in 1980, southern hemisphere cooler/about the same. Asia still hot.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
1990 Where did the global warming go? 2008 cooler in many areas of the 'global' record than in 1990.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
For fun 1998, the warmest year on record.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
2000 Find the 'global warming'
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_...
Global warming has happened in past eras but never so quickly. As global warming occurs, the ice shelf melts which affects ocean currents and ocean temperatures. The change in ocean temps and currents causes weather and climate change that is hard to predict. An increase in hurricanes, drought, monsoons, hotter temps, cooler temps. Anything can happen. Even if man is not to blame, isn't it a good policy to keep pollution to a minimum?
Woody

Gallup, NM

#10 Jul 26, 2009
It is time to vote all congressmen out of office regardless of their party affiliation. That is still our right and responsibility to ourselves and future generations.
--RON PRENTICE / Las Cruces

Amen! We need to "drain the swamp", and put in people who are in touch with reality.

Since: Jul 09

Las Cruces NM

#11 Jul 26, 2009
The antarctic ice shelf is growing!!!
Earthling

Muro De Alcoy, Spain

#12 Jul 26, 2009
Jack Martin wrote:
You seem to want to ignore the selected data in order to
preserve the status quo of the theory.
The problem here, is the "Selective use of unsubstantiated forecasts as a means of UPplaying" imagined crises by those with a different vested interest.
ALL of the global temperature trends ( MSU-MT, MSU-LT, sea surface temprature, land-ocean temperature indices )
are well below the IPCC's best estimate for the "LOW scenario" of about 1.8K/century.
And ALL of the major global temperature trends indicate
a DEceleration from that sub IPCC modeled rate.
The fifteen year trends are lower than the thirty year trends.
The ten year trends are lower than the fifteen year trends.
And the seven year trends are now cooling trends.
And the middle troposphere shows a cooling trend since 1996.
Should this cooling continue, in association with the solar
magnetic decline, it will mean much of the twentieth century warming was likely due to the millenial solar magnetic maximum which peaked in the 1990s.
This is a theory we can and should all test going forward.
And craft a more complete theory which doesn't exclude 'selected' data because it might contradict a previous theory.
Some very interesting information!
I'd be grateful for any links that cite these claims?
Jack Martin

Albuquerque, NM

#13 Jul 26, 2009
Rubberband Man wrote:
<quoted text>
Global warming has happened in past eras but never so quickly.
Not so.

The sea surface temperatures rose at a greater rate (1.7K per century) from 1910 through 1945.

Surface temperatures rose at a lower but comparable rate during this period.
As global warming occurs, the ice shelf melts which affects ocean currents and ocean temperatures. The change in ocean temps and currents causes weather and climate change that is hard to predict. An increase in hurricanes, drought, monsoons, hotter temps, cooler temps. Anything can happen.
Anything has ALWAYS happened:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0905244.html

Droughts, floods, and cyclones also dominate this list:

http://www.disastercenter.com/disaster/TOP100...

And it doesn't seem to have much to do with what the statistical global average temperature is.
Even if man is not to blame, isn't it a good policy to keep pollution to a minimum?
CO2 is not pollution.

There are no carbohydrates without carbon dioxide.

No carbohydrates means no
cheetos, or carrot sticks, or prime rib, or Pinot Grigio, or whatever it is you consume!

All plants grow better, yield more and are more drought tolerant in studies of doubled and even tripled CO2.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#14 Jul 26, 2009
Earthling wrote:
<quoted text>Some very interesting information!
I'd be grateful for any links that cite these claims?
Oh come on!

This crap was put out by the fossil fuel industry shills months ago!

*I* could post you the links.
Che Cazzo

Minneapolis, MN

#15 Jul 26, 2009
Proper perspective is not a directive.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#16 Jul 26, 2009
You did post an interesting experimental test of the greenhouse effect:

http://www.picotech.com/experiments/global/gl...

This test shows two atmospheres, one with 380ppm CO2 and the other with 1,000,000ppm CO2. The astounding result is that the atmosphere with 2632 times more CO2 warmed only 4 degrees centigrade more than the container with 380ppm CO2. The greenhouse effect is far weaker than the IPCC says. Someone should clue them in.

“I'm not really a teacher.”

Since: Mar 08

Las Cruces, NM

#17 Jul 26, 2009
To categorically deny there is any possibility of climate change due to our output of C02 is just as stupid as insisting there is.

The systems involved are far too complex for even the very smartest people to decipher. Us too.
JRS

Oak Creek, WI

#18 Jul 26, 2009
educator II wrote:
To categorically deny there is any possibility of climate change due to our output of C02 is just as stupid as insisting there is.
The systems involved are far too complex for even the very smartest people to decipher. Us too.
You must be the "the very smartest people" you just deciphered the complex system and formed a dogmatic conclusion.

Basically you just said that "Every scientist" is stupid. The honest ones, the ones singing the politically correct song, and those caught up the middle.

==

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.”–.

Geoffrey G. Duffy,
a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

==

“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….

Every scientist

knows this,

but it doesn’t pay to say so…

Global warming, as a political vehicle,”-

Dr. Takeda Kunihiko,
vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

==

“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…

The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle.

It became an ideology, which is concerning.”-

Environmental Scientist
Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal,
the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

==

“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.”-

Atmospheric physicist
James A. Peden,
formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm...
Che Cazzo

Minneapolis, MN

#19 Jul 26, 2009
Better cover your hot butt because global FREEZING is upcoming.

FACT: The earth is cooling at MINUS 0.001 degree Celsius per year.
truthist

Tampa, FL

#20 Jul 26, 2009
educator II wrote:
To categorically deny there is any possibility of climate change due to our output of C02 is just as stupid as insisting there is.
The systems involved are far too complex for even the very smartest people to decipher. Us too.
Keep it to yourself.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Las Cruces Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Unemployment rate rises for NM cities as other ... (Jul '13) 10 hr Roger 383
News Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 11 hr scirocco 71,697
nita tredway/rusak Wed Kimberly atencio 8
News Robbery suspect commits suicide - Alamogordo Da... (Feb '08) Wed Philly buster 84
News MMA fighter Joe Torrez's legal woes continue Wed King Joe Zarate 1
News Martinez prefers to stick to issues (Jun '10) Mar 23 Mr T 6,225
Don't lend money to friends Mar 21 Not that anyone c... 3
Las Cruces Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Las Cruces People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]