More BS on Global Warming
Evidence of Link to GreenHouse Gases?
I don’t think so. The study measured ocean temperatures. Great. What does that have to do with the emission of greenhouse gases? Where is the link between the rise in ocean temperatures and green house gas emissions? How can you possibly prove such a link by simply studying the temperature of the world’s oceans? How about studying changes in the composition of seawater to see if these gasses are saturating the world’s oceans, changing the salinity of the water, causing the temperatures of the oceans to rise as a result? Got proof of that?
No. You just have a study that says that those temperatures are on the rise. Good to know. That’s important to the health and well-being of coral reefs and other oceanic ecosystems. But, it still doesn’t say jack about green house gas emissions and how they are connected to that rise in temperature.
I am more than willing to believe that human-beings can have an impact on the environment. I am also more than willing to believe that air pollution has an impact on our world, but I am unwilling to take what is said to me about the greenhouse effect on faith. This planet has already lived through one greenhouse era, that was not manmade in origin, or did anyone forget the Dinosaur age when Montana and Canada supported palm trees and ferns?
Until you can prove a conclusive, scientific link between the gasses themselves and the effects, there is no evidence that the effects are not a natural state of the planet. It does absolutely no good to study an effect without determining the cause.
February 20, 2005 1:51 pm 
Subscribe
By Dave Justus, February 21, 2005 @ 8:21 am
While I am no fan of this sort of Science by Press conference, the stuff I have seen on this study is compelling, and if it stands up to peer review a very strong case for global warming being human caused.
Basically, the study claims that the observed temperature changes in the worlds oceans match the predictions that a human-caused CO2 based model arrives at.
By Random Gemini, February 23, 2005 @ 4:34 pm
That is interesting, but I don’t find that compelling.
I want to know the chemistry behind the rise in ocean temperatures. Certainly, any pollution we are putting into the atmosphere would have to cause a chemical reaction of some sort, if it is outside of the planet’s natural abilities to process such gasses.
Further I want to know if these temperature variances are enough to cause harm to aquatic life. A coral reef, if left at a temperature above 84 degrees (F) for an extended period of time, will die. If the temperature shift amounts to partial points of a degree, I would suspect that this shift is well within the scope of natural phenomena (aquatic life is adapted to adjustments in temperature within 2-4 degrees). Without a direct link to greenhouse gasses, there is no way to prove conclusively that the greenhouse effect is anything more than a theory.
Regardless of my feelings on this particular matter, I do think that signing the Kyoto Protocol is a good idea that might put us on the right track overall. We do need to be aware of our surroundings. What irks me, is that these studies offer possiblities, not conclusions, and the “scientists” behind these studies sell their theories as “conclusive proof” to a public that is far too trusting of its media.