Friday, July 06, 2007
Hey Al, Oldest DNA Ever Recorded Shows Warmer Planet....
Dare I Blaspheme ?
Scientists who probed two kilometers (1.2 miles) through a Greenland glacier to recover the oldest plant DNA on record said Thursday the planet was far warmer hundreds of thousands of years ago than is generally believed.
DNA of trees, plants and insects including butterflies and spiders from beneath the southern Greenland glacier was estimated to date to 450,000 to 900,000 years ago, according to the remnants retrieved from this long-vanished boreal forest.
That contrasts sharply with the prevailing view that a lush forest of this kind could only have existed in Greenland as recently as 2.4 million years ago, according to a summary of the study, which is published Thursday in the journal Science.
The samples suggest the temperature probably reached 10 degrees C (50 degrees Fahrenheit) in the summer and -17 C (1 F) in the winter.
They also indicated that during the last period between ice ages, 116,000-130,000 years ago, when temperatures were on average 5 C (9 F) higher than now, the glaciers on Greenland did not completely melt away.
"These findings allow us to make a more accurate environmental reconstruction of the time period from which these samples were taken," said Martin Sharp, a glaciologist at the University of Alberta, Canada, and a co-author of the paper.
"What we've learned is that this part of the world was significantly warmer than most people thought."
In a separate paper, also published in Science, European experts said they had analysed the world's deepest ice core, enabling them to reconstruct patterns of warming and glaciation over the past 800,000 years.
The 3,260-metre (10,595-feet) core was drilled into the East Antarctica icesheet at the Franco-Italian base, Dome C. The drillers, gathered in a venture called the European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (EPICA) stopped just 15 metres (48.75 feet) short of the bedrock.
Using traces of the hydrogen isotope deuterium in air bubbles trapped in the ice layers, the scientists built a record of greenhouse-gas concentrations over the aeons, which in turn provides a record of temperature.
They found the temperature varied widely, by as much as 15 C (27 F) over the 800,000 years. In the last Ice Age, which ended around 11,000 years ago, the temperature was 10 C (18 F) lower than today.
The EPICA team had previously analysed the Dome C core to a depth equivalent to 650,000 years ago.
You think they will read this report on stage at one of the warmie's concerts this weekend ?
Scientists who probed two kilometers (1.2 miles) through a Greenland glacier to recover the oldest plant DNA on record said Thursday the planet was far warmer hundreds of thousands of years ago than is generally believed.
DNA of trees, plants and insects including butterflies and spiders from beneath the southern Greenland glacier was estimated to date to 450,000 to 900,000 years ago, according to the remnants retrieved from this long-vanished boreal forest.
That contrasts sharply with the prevailing view that a lush forest of this kind could only have existed in Greenland as recently as 2.4 million years ago, according to a summary of the study, which is published Thursday in the journal Science.
The samples suggest the temperature probably reached 10 degrees C (50 degrees Fahrenheit) in the summer and -17 C (1 F) in the winter.
They also indicated that during the last period between ice ages, 116,000-130,000 years ago, when temperatures were on average 5 C (9 F) higher than now, the glaciers on Greenland did not completely melt away.
"These findings allow us to make a more accurate environmental reconstruction of the time period from which these samples were taken," said Martin Sharp, a glaciologist at the University of Alberta, Canada, and a co-author of the paper.
"What we've learned is that this part of the world was significantly warmer than most people thought."
In a separate paper, also published in Science, European experts said they had analysed the world's deepest ice core, enabling them to reconstruct patterns of warming and glaciation over the past 800,000 years.
The 3,260-metre (10,595-feet) core was drilled into the East Antarctica icesheet at the Franco-Italian base, Dome C. The drillers, gathered in a venture called the European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (EPICA) stopped just 15 metres (48.75 feet) short of the bedrock.
Using traces of the hydrogen isotope deuterium in air bubbles trapped in the ice layers, the scientists built a record of greenhouse-gas concentrations over the aeons, which in turn provides a record of temperature.
They found the temperature varied widely, by as much as 15 C (27 F) over the 800,000 years. In the last Ice Age, which ended around 11,000 years ago, the temperature was 10 C (18 F) lower than today.
The EPICA team had previously analysed the Dome C core to a depth equivalent to 650,000 years ago.
You think they will read this report on stage at one of the warmie's concerts this weekend ?
Labels: Al Gore, Global Warming Hoax
# posted by Mark Dunn @ 7:00 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Mark,
So what is your point. Let me make this suggestion. Forgart whether man is an agent of the production or acceleration of global warming.
The analysis is: Are we as a species better off by reducing our impact on the globe or by ignoring the efects of pumpng CO2 and other items, like pollution and particulates into the atmosphere and the ocean?
Every time I hear a comment aboiut "warmies" on this blog, I think: "Somebody here is not getting it."
Enjoy the music.
T
So what is your point. Let me make this suggestion. Forgart whether man is an agent of the production or acceleration of global warming.
The analysis is: Are we as a species better off by reducing our impact on the globe or by ignoring the efects of pumpng CO2 and other items, like pollution and particulates into the atmosphere and the ocean?
Every time I hear a comment aboiut "warmies" on this blog, I think: "Somebody here is not getting it."
Enjoy the music.
T
# posted by 
: 10:18 AM
: 10:18 AM
If it is really about just reducing our impact, just say that.
The global warming fearmongering and bad science (potentially all lies or seriously misleading half-truths) are not the way to go.
Or is there something else on the agenda?
The global warming fearmongering and bad science (potentially all lies or seriously misleading half-truths) are not the way to go.
Or is there something else on the agenda?
I am not defending bad science. But tell me, is feearmongering more effective than appealing to people's sense of responsibility?
# posted by : 6:20 PM
: 6:20 PM
Wow! Just Wow! This is one "report" you should run with to the global warming hoax bank to cash all your chips in. That is if it was all one report, which it isn't. This post and the misrepresented story on brietbart.com (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070705191403.gahmdtoi&show_article=1)
are terrific examples of global warming deniers gone mad. To claim victory based on this is ludicrous. The Sharp et. al. report (who knows where the other crap came from) is but one piece of the overall body of research, and remember this is largely evidence of a local phenomena. You do not get to conclude, based on this, that the earth as a whole was warmer during this time period.
I know Roger likes to ridicule those who look at the large body of evidence and conclude that the LIKELY cause of the current warming is LARGELY human-induced. So let me take the words from Dr. Sharp that were omitted from the report to give you some perspective:
'Sharp, who has supported the idea that current global warming is the result of human activity, believes the new research offers evidence that climate warming on the current scale is possible through natural conditions.
However, he cautions that this research does not prove that ongoing global warming is not human induced.
"It could mean that our current warming is the result of both natural processes and human influences, and we may be heading for even bigger temperature increases than we previously thought," Sharp said.'
Source: http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/article.cfm?id=8577
Please, when you quote a cobbed up story and swallow it whole without any further research into its accuracy, you lose credibility.
are terrific examples of global warming deniers gone mad. To claim victory based on this is ludicrous. The Sharp et. al. report (who knows where the other crap came from) is but one piece of the overall body of research, and remember this is largely evidence of a local phenomena. You do not get to conclude, based on this, that the earth as a whole was warmer during this time period.
I know Roger likes to ridicule those who look at the large body of evidence and conclude that the LIKELY cause of the current warming is LARGELY human-induced. So let me take the words from Dr. Sharp that were omitted from the report to give you some perspective:
'Sharp, who has supported the idea that current global warming is the result of human activity, believes the new research offers evidence that climate warming on the current scale is possible through natural conditions.
However, he cautions that this research does not prove that ongoing global warming is not human induced.
"It could mean that our current warming is the result of both natural processes and human influences, and we may be heading for even bigger temperature increases than we previously thought," Sharp said.'
Source: http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/article.cfm?id=8577
Please, when you quote a cobbed up story and swallow it whole without any further research into its accuracy, you lose credibility.
Sorry, the URLs seem to be cut off so here are the links:
Breitbart.com article:
http://tinyurl.com/3cddlc
U Alberta article:
http://tinyurl.com/3dvc5a
Breitbart.com article:
http://tinyurl.com/3cddlc
U Alberta article:
http://tinyurl.com/3dvc5a
Sure fearmongering is more effective.
But do you really want to be on that side, to further an agenda/argument/policy by appealing to emotion rather than reason. I thought we had progressed further than that--it is the tool of political charlatans and dictators (and something that the left has ridiculed Bush for employing).
And if humans have such a big impact on global climate, why has 200 years produced such a tiny change in comparison to other natural causes that have raised and lowered temperatures many times greater, for longer periods of time, and sometimes more quickly? Even Kyoto's targets would have reduced temperatures by an infinitesimally small amount (compared to the hyped computer models that expect great temperature increases).
I agree that most weather phenomenon is now traded anecdotally--if it is hot or hotter than normal, it is global warming;colder, there is not climate change, etc.
But do you really want to be on that side, to further an agenda/argument/policy by appealing to emotion rather than reason. I thought we had progressed further than that--it is the tool of political charlatans and dictators (and something that the left has ridiculed Bush for employing).
And if humans have such a big impact on global climate, why has 200 years produced such a tiny change in comparison to other natural causes that have raised and lowered temperatures many times greater, for longer periods of time, and sometimes more quickly? Even Kyoto's targets would have reduced temperatures by an infinitesimally small amount (compared to the hyped computer models that expect great temperature increases).
I agree that most weather phenomenon is now traded anecdotally--if it is hot or hotter than normal, it is global warming;colder, there is not climate change, etc.
"Please, when you quote a cobbed up story and swallow it whole without any further research into its accuracy, you lose credibility."
This is true. But Roger has been so consistently right on the Iraq affair and on the positive effects of the Bush administration that I think we should cut him a little slack.
This is true. But Roger has been so consistently right on the Iraq affair and on the positive effects of the Bush administration that I think we should cut him a little slack.
# posted by : 4:35 PM
: 4:35 PM
The Iraq affair ?
Niiiiiice.
I guess that whole US foreign policy of Iraqi regime change, that was signed into law five years, before any of the actual 17 UN resolutions were finally called onto the carpet to either piss or get off of the pot, regarding Sadaam......well....nevermind at this point.
I just caught the Police doing Message in a Bottle on the Live Earth wrap up. Special guests John Mayer and Kanye West. I wonder how Kanye feels being the most white dude, on that stage...?
Niiiiiice.
I guess that whole US foreign policy of Iraqi regime change, that was signed into law five years, before any of the actual 17 UN resolutions were finally called onto the carpet to either piss or get off of the pot, regarding Sadaam......well....nevermind at this point.
I just caught the Police doing Message in a Bottle on the Live Earth wrap up. Special guests John Mayer and Kanye West. I wonder how Kanye feels being the most white dude, on that stage...?
"I wonder how Kanye feels being the most white dude, on that stage...? "
For the life of me, i can't figure out what this sentence means. Please explain.
Post a Comment
For the life of me, i can't figure out what this sentence means. Please explain.
# posted by : 1:02 AM
: 1:02 AM << Home
