Most of what we study from core samples are sedimentary samples, and is just a fraction of what actual was. Anything lighter than air goes into the atmosphere not an ice cube and what is believed to cause the greatest environmental impact is gases, also not all parts of a climate are tangible and don’t leave traces when gone. Weather is pretty intangible once it has happens you can’t gauge what it was if it no longer exist, the scientist can’t tell what the wind used to be or how hot it was, but they can speculate and give semi accurate information. For example scientist no a huge dust storm hit the Caribbean, core samples showed that it came from Africa because of the African dust, and used the aging of minerals found in this area to come up with a time and predicted Africa had a great dust storm, stemming from a drought, while studying this they discovered the Caribbean used to be full of animals, and now speculate the dust storm or human intervention wiped out majority of the animal. In different environments/climates minerals breakdown differently, the earth has proven it changes, this change, changes the way the earths/minerals age which deludes the accurateness of any equation used to identify the age of the surface and sedimentary minerals. Some of the more accurate ways they collect data are from areas with the least exposure to the environment (deep caves, canyons). Most of the ice on earth is directly effected by its exposure to the environment/climate that is why the ice caps melting is one of the telling signs of change(quick to change), though the ice caps have preserved some great finds and contribution there are much better ways to study the environment/climate in a truer form, the layering in cliffs, rocks, and soot on the ocean floor all offer excellent ways to determine weather pattern and change. There is only a few hundred years of written records of weather reports, which we use to find the highs, lows, and averages of most weather conditions, think of the offshore forecast many of too
Ice core samples are a poor indicator of world climate for many reasons , one of which is that they only come from cold places - that old issue of local weather vs global. The problem with biomass fuel is the heat(energy)used to extract it is less than the energy yield. The problem with wind and solar is the initial cost and the low output, and the longevity. about the time a panel or a windmill has reached cost recovery it is replacement time. For some reason there is lots of petroleum and coal on this earth. Perhaps the answer to the riddle is to learn to use what we have more efficiently and cleaner. I really don’t buy what a consensus of scientists think. They have been wrong before IE- the world is not flat, the sun does not circle the earth, and the Salem witches were probably a fun bunch of girls!
quote:
Originally posted by natureboyI really don’t buy what a consensus of scientists think. They have been wrong before IE- the world is not flat, the sun does not circle the earth, and the Salem witches were probably a fun bunch of girls!
So you have scientific proof to back that up or you just going with your gut?
And how you are going to compare people thinking the earth was flat, back in the dark ages, to how far science has come over the last 100 years alone?
So… are we at the scientists say the world is flat cycle on this or are we at the point when scientists say the world is round cycle. ?.. what will the next cycle be??? Whatever is profitable I would guess.
I agree with nature boy… whatever a group claims they can prove, another claims they can prove it wrong…
-Albemarle 248xf “Chella”
-Dolphin 18BC Pro
-Miscellaneous boats
“Praise the lord and pass the ammunition” -Howell Forgy
How many sailboats do you see offshore fishing? How do those guys get out there to complain about our habits? Any one ever seen a solar powered NOAA boat?
100 years from now our time may be considered the dark ages
In this day and age science is quite political. Remember the scandal of IPACC fudging the numbers on GW or CC ? They were considered the final word on Global Cooling at first , then warming , then cc
quote:
Originally posted by shevyquote:
Originally posted by natureboyI really don’t buy what a consensus of scientists think. They have been wrong before IE- the world is not flat, the sun does not circle the earth, and the Salem witches were probably a fun bunch of girls!
So you have scientific proof to back that up or you just going with your gut?
And how you are going to compare people thinking the earth was flat, back in the dark ages, to how far science has come over the last 100 years alone?
Jimmy Carter had us freezing to death during his presidential term. And that was just a few years back.
Yes - the Carter years were interesting! Jimmy and his drunken brother Billy were fun! Jimmy looked like Mr Rodgers that sweater, and I still have a few 6 packs of Billy beer left! The scientists were worried back then that we were just about out of oil on a global level. Now were almost swimming in it with gas prices under $2.00