Comments on: CBO Report: The Real Story http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/21/cbo_report_tax_vs_cap/ Blogging the science and policy of global warming Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:33:35 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Climate 411 » Phone Calls from the Congressional Budget Office - Blogs & Podcasts - Environmental Defense http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/21/cbo_report_tax_vs_cap/comment-page-1/#comment-867 Climate 411 » Phone Calls from the Congressional Budget Office - Blogs & Podcasts - Environmental Defense Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:11:51 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/21/cbo_report_tax_vs_cap/#comment-867 [...] February 21 post, CBO Report: The Real Story, caught the attention of the folks at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Last Wednesday, I [...] [...] February 21 post, CBO Report: The Real Story, caught the attention of the folks at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Last Wednesday, I [...]

]]> By: Sheryl Canter http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/21/cbo_report_tax_vs_cap/comment-page-1/#comment-830 Sheryl Canter Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:53:24 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/21/cbo_report_tax_vs_cap/#comment-830 bwebster, what you state about the temperature record is simply incorrect. I refer you to two previous posts. This one talks about the 1930s: http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/08/13/nasa_correction/ This one talks about how temperature data is collected (and why there is a margin of error): http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/05/2007_temperature_rank/ I won't bother going through the rest of your message point by point. I would just ask that you please not make unsubstantiated claims. If you state a claim, back it up with a link to the data (as we always do) or don't make the claim. Anyone can spout misinformation. It just muddies the discussion and serves no one. I would ask the same of you, fred1. You've posted many unsubstantiated claims on this blog. Thank you. bwebster, what you state about the temperature record is simply incorrect. I refer you to two previous posts. This one talks about the 1930s:

http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/08/13/nasa_correction/

This one talks about how temperature data is collected (and why there is a margin of error):

http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/05/2007_temperature_rank/

I won't bother going through the rest of your message point by point. I would just ask that you please not make unsubstantiated claims. If you state a claim, back it up with a link to the data (as we always do) or don't make the claim. Anyone can spout misinformation. It just muddies the discussion and serves no one.

I would ask the same of you, fred1. You've posted many unsubstantiated claims on this blog.

Thank you.

]]> By: fred1 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/21/cbo_report_tax_vs_cap/comment-page-1/#comment-827 fred1 Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:39:45 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/21/cbo_report_tax_vs_cap/#comment-827 bwebster, i could not agree more. to add to what you are saying, in the last several thousand years, civilization has tended to flourish in warmer periods and have difficulties in colder periods (little ice age). i am also surprised by the alarmism over the fact that warming will result in greater incidence of diseases. What? When is cold and flue season? not in the summer that is for sure. the largest malarial outbreak occured in Russia in the 1920's. no tropical paradise there. Nat, looking forward to a response to these posts. i will tell you, i am a closet environmentalist. I recycle, i try to save energy (and money at the same time) by turning the thermostat down in the winter, i sweep my fertilizer off my driveway so hopefully it doesn't flow into the local sewer. i just am not sure i understand the alarmism over global warming. it has become political. China and India are having their coldest and snowiest winters in 50 years. we don't hear any radical press stories about that. (By the way probably need to include the American West as having one of its coldest and snowiest winters in decades as well.). no huge alarmist headlines about that. ironically if it was the hottest summer in the last 50 years that would make huge headlines. please admit that this is has become far too politically charged of a debate. the fact of the matter is CO2 as the driving factor for global warming is not even close to being proven. historical records do not correlate that at all. bwebster,

i could not agree more. to add to what you are saying, in the last several thousand years, civilization has tended to flourish in warmer periods and have difficulties in colder periods (little ice age). i am also surprised by the alarmism over the fact that warming will result in greater incidence of diseases. What? When is cold and flue season? not in the summer that is for sure. the largest malarial outbreak occured in Russia in the 1920's. no tropical paradise there.

Nat, looking forward to a response to these posts. i will tell you, i am a closet environmentalist. I recycle, i try to save energy (and money at the same time) by turning the thermostat down in the winter, i sweep my fertilizer off my driveway so hopefully it doesn't flow into the local sewer. i just am not sure i understand the alarmism over global warming. it has become political. China and India are having their coldest and snowiest winters in 50 years. we don't hear any radical press stories about that. (By the way probably need to include the American West as having one of its coldest and snowiest winters in decades as well.). no huge alarmist headlines about that. ironically if it was the hottest summer in the last 50 years that would make huge headlines. please admit that this is has become far too politically charged of a debate. the fact of the matter is CO2 as the driving factor for global warming is not even close to being proven. historical records do not correlate that at all.

]]> By: bwebster http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/21/cbo_report_tax_vs_cap/comment-page-1/#comment-824 bwebster Sun, 24 Feb 2008 01:52:18 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/02/21/cbo_report_tax_vs_cap/#comment-824 A lifelong interest in meteorology, climatology, geology, astronomy, and related sciences, and being familiar with the scientific method (as a mathematician), I am amazed that certain assumptions are taken as proven, one of them being that the greenhouse effect is a significant driver of climate change, another being that concentrations of atmospheric CO2 are a significant driver of climate change (aka, global warming). Recent warming in the several decades from late 1970s through the late 1990s has stabilized and there is growing evidence of a significant cooling trend over the next several decades (at least). When errors in the data were corrected, the 1930s resumed the title of warmest decade since the Little Ice Age, and 1934 is once again the hottest year in recorded history (not a very long time in terms of climate). Clearly, little understood solar interactions with the Earth climate system appear to be a far better match for climate change than any measure of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere, and with good reason (there is no credible science to support the theory that CO2 emissions -- from whatever source -- are responsible for significant climate change). Tracking various solar measures (magnetic flux, solar wind, sunspot cycle, frequency, etc.) shows a much stronger correlation than that produced by atmospheric CO2 concentrations (which have grown steadily and consistently since at least the beginning of the Industrial Revolution). It is far more plausible to suggest that the rise in CO2 is attributable to the gradual long term warming as the Little Ice Age ended and the Modern Warm Period began. Ironically, the arguing over "global warming" is likely (according to recent studies and observations) likely to spill over into the most intense period of cooling since the Little Ice Age. One wonders why there is so little concern over the much more dangerous potential for global cooling? The adverse consequences to all life forms of protracted global cooling are far more serious than that which would attend global warming. A lifelong interest in meteorology, climatology, geology, astronomy, and related sciences, and being familiar with the scientific method (as a mathematician), I am amazed that certain assumptions are taken as proven, one of them being that the greenhouse effect is a significant driver of climate change, another being that concentrations of atmospheric CO2 are a significant driver of climate change (aka, global warming). Recent warming in the several decades from late 1970s through the late 1990s has stabilized and there is growing evidence of a significant cooling trend over the next several decades (at least). When errors in the data were corrected, the 1930s resumed the title of warmest decade since the Little Ice Age, and 1934 is once again the hottest year in recorded history (not a very long time in terms of climate). Clearly, little understood solar interactions with the Earth climate system appear to be a far better match for climate change than any measure of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere, and with good reason (there is no credible science to support the theory that CO2 emissions — from whatever source — are responsible for significant climate change). Tracking various solar measures (magnetic flux, solar wind, sunspot cycle, frequency, etc.) shows a much stronger correlation than that produced by atmospheric CO2 concentrations (which have grown steadily and consistently since at least the beginning of the Industrial Revolution). It is far more plausible to suggest that the rise in CO2 is attributable to the gradual long term warming as the Little Ice Age ended and the Modern Warm Period began. Ironically, the arguing over "global warming" is likely (according to recent studies and observations) likely to spill over into the most intense period of cooling since the Little Ice Age. One wonders why there is so little concern over the much more dangerous potential for global cooling? The adverse consequences to all life forms of protracted global cooling are far more serious than that which would attend global warming.

]]>