Caring for Creation makes the Christian case for climate action

[RickG]

[Staff edit]

The current climate change is not only mostly anthropogenic, the warming is occurring faster than anytime in the paleo-record.

Carbon dioxide has been observed and known as a greenhouse gas as early as 1861, John Tyndal.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/108724?cookieSet=1&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

The amount of warming due to increased CO2 was calculated closely to what we are currently experiencing in 1896, Svante Arrhenius.
http://www.trunity.net/files/108501_108600/108531/arrhenius1896_greenhouse-effect.pdf

In 1931, American physicist E.O Hulburt ran calculations to determine the effect of doubling carbon dioxide came up with a figure of around 4°C of warming. Current calculations as well as observations are 3.0-3.5°C.
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0959-5309/43/1/305/meta
And I can go on showing that global warming and climate change due to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is real and well established well before politics and social media begin it misrepresentation of climate science.

But I'm sure your next question is how do we know the increased atmospheric CO2 is due to fossil fuels? Actually quite simple. The ratios of 12C & 13C are noticeably different from those contained in fossils and that of naturally occurring atmospheric CO2.

Stuiver, M., Burk, R. L. and Quay, P. D. 1984. 13C/12C ratios and the transfer of biospheric carbon to the atmosphere. J. Geophys. Res. 89, 11,731-11,748.

 

[HitchSlap]

[Staff edit]

You're either a part of the problem, or you're a part of the solution.

 

[expos4ever]

staff edit

We are called to be stewards of a creation that God promises He will ultimately restore - how does it not logically follow that we are called to try to preserve that creation?

 

[Paidiske]

MOD HAT ON

This thread is closed for review.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Paidiske]

MOD HAT ON​

This thread has been through an extensive clean. Please keep to the topic, and review and abide by CF's rules on flaming and goading:

Flaming and Goading
● Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue.
● Do not personally attack other members or groups of members on CF. Address only the content of the post and not the poster.
● Do not maliciously ridicule other people or groups of people (e.g., members and non-members, public and non-public figures, political figures and political groups). Constructive criticism is allowed, but destructive and cruel criticism is not allowed.
● NO Goading. This includes images, cartoons, or smileys clearly meant to goad. Quoting and then editing another members post to change the original meaning, commonly referred to as "fixed it for you" (FIFY), is considered goading.
● Stating or implying that another Christian member, or group of members, are not Christian is not allowed.
● If you are flamed, do not respond in-kind. Alert staff to the situation by utilizing the report button.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[RickG]

I have a question for the participants of this thread.

What do you think is the most accurate way to determine global average temperature, weather stations or satellites?

 

[AV1611VET]

I have a question for the participants of this thread.

What do you think is the most accurate way to determine global average temperature, weather stations or satellites?

Shouldn't they both return the same result?

Now you know why I'm always asking, "After how many tries?"

It seems to me, the most [sic] accurate way would be a weather station, confirmed by satellite -- done the first time around.

Or vice versa.

 

[HitchSlap]

Interesting interview with Michael Mann.

NPR 2012

 

[RickG]

Shouldn't they both return the same result?

Now you know why I'm always asking, "After how many tries?"

It seems to me, the most [sic] accurate way would be a weather station, confirmed by satellite -- done the first time around.

Or vice versa.

No, they should not return the same result, in fact, they measure two different things. Satellites measure the upper troposphere as opposed to actual ground stations that measure the temperature where we live. Additionally, satellites don't even measure temperature directly, its a proxy that is converted into a temperature value. Also, satellites tend to drift in their orbits, not to mention that in their orbits they are not taking measurements globally at the same time that ground temperatures are taken.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, they should not return the same result, in fact, they measure two different things. Satellites measure the upper troposphere as opposed to actual ground stations that measure the temperature where we live. Additionally, satellites don't even measure temperature directly, its a proxy that is converted into a temperature value. Also, satellites tend to drift in their orbits, not to mention that in their orbits they are not taking measurements globally at the same time that ground temperatures are taken.

So it was a trick question?

 

[RickG]

Interesting interview with Michael Mann.

NPR 2012

Fantastic NPR segment HitchSlap, fantastic. That is something everyone needs to listen to in its entirety.

 

[RickG]

So it was a trick question?

In other words, the answer to the question yielding the opposite of what you thought it would. Welcome to science. Here's a video by describing some of the satellite problems. The person being interviewed is Carl Mears, a senior scientist for RSS.