On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 4:25 PM, Joe Bauman via Utah-Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> wrote: I meant his "explanation" for the Eocene Extinction. On , Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> wrote: Re. Tyson's somewhat tortured explanation of the Permian Extinction: Russia's Popigai Meteor Crash Linked to Mass Extinction On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 4:21 PM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/hidden-volcanoes-melt-antarctic-glaciers-below-1905065... On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 3:55 PM, Brent Watson via Utah-Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> wrote: Rich and all, I hear the claims made that sea level has already risen. The commenters in the above article quote an unbelievable rise in sea level per degree centigrade, and yet I have not seen a graph that shows this to be true. Can you point me to a place where I can see this rise in sea level, please? (Intended to be a respectful and honest request, not a satirical comment.) Global warming cannot be measured by local temperature rise, and I think that may apply to specific countries as well as more localized places. Australia and the US may be larger places, but should the measure be more global than that? I am also interested in the reduced sea ice claims. My observation says that the sea ice in Alaska has begun to rebound. I watch the sea ice cams in Barrow and there always seems to be plenty. They are still ice bound today - at least by land fast ice. Again, perhaps this observation is more local than what is meaningful. Locals will say that there has been more ice in the last two or three years than in the past. Is sea ice rebounding in spite of the fact that CO2 is rising? Where is the data? (It may exist, but I have not seen it.) The well substantiated altering and choosing of data by some of the UN groups has not added to my confidence in their arguments. In short, I am still confused by all of the claims that are being made by both sides of this debate, and I have not seen reliable data to back up many of the claims. The only claim I have seen that seems to be consistent is that warming has stopped on a global basis since the late 1990s. On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 3:24 PM, Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> wrote: A couple of thoughts... Looking at the graph, the "hiatus" or plateau for surface air temps is sitting well above the 20th century averages; this is already a problem, since the last decade contains several of the highest average global temps on record. Last year the highest ever for Australia -- the year before for the continental US. We are ALREADY seeing the adverse impacts of climate change -- invasive species costing farmers and ranchers (and forests here in UT) millions in losses. The article fails to mention that sea levels are rising FASTER than the IPCC forecasts. Vast stretches of coral reef are dying, fresh water resources are disappearing for large metro areas across the globe, and the antarctic ice is starting to break up, at disconcerting rates. The article concludes with, basically, "it's OK to wait and see what happens next" -- a foolish summary, IMO. It may already be too late to reverse course in time to make a difference. We may already be past the tipping point. What's ridiculous is that these costs are orders of magnitude above any imagined profit losses to energy companies (whose FUD machine annually outspends NASA's entire budget). My 2 cents. /R ________________________________ From: Brent Watson via Utah-Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 2:39 PM Subject: [Utah-astronomy] An interesting article This article points out a common occurrence in science. Models that are used to predict the future are notoriously fallible. They must be continually tweaked to make sense. This is the essence of science and the scientific method. Rarely do we get it right the first time. I bring this up so there can be an intelligent conversation about the topic. There is always way too much name calling and innuendo made by commenters, as can be seen in the comments section of this article. Please, lets have a civil conversation. Without civility there can be no unemotional, fact based debate. I for one would really like to hear the rational facts from both sides of this (unfortunately) hotly debated topic. Again, please no name calling, and only rational fact based debate. http://business.financialpost.com/2014/06/16/the-global-warming-hiatus/ _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options". _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options". _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".