While I understand your reluctance to accept that 6 billion people could have any effect on this planet, many reports prove otherwise. Al Gore deserves his award, he's put a lot of time and effort into it. He created something besides a Turd Blossom.
Sorry, I may not hold Dr. Gray in such reverence as some, but I've been playing with Hurricanes since 1985 and I can't remember one year that his crystal ball was correct, not one. He predicts and then changes his predictions and get close…but no cigar. Not that it would make a difference to someone sitting at 5000 ft. above sea level, but for my money I'd just a soon bet on the accuracy of reading sea turtle migrations to predict hurricane activity as I would on Gray.
If you will only accept US scientists try Jim Hanson, another controversial figure.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/To remove the retired and controversial I'll settle on Bob Correll
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._CorellPut all these opinions aside and just do your own snooping. I see coral reefs turning white, I see glacier that both you and I have walked on….gone. We may be the only ones here that know the difference between a glaciers and snowfield, by just walking on them.
We had fires here just as your experiencing them on the left coast now, earlier this year. This is happening around the globe. In 1993 when I was working at White Sands you could watch the desert expanding right in front of your eyes. I saw the same activity in the Sonora desert and the Mojave.
Take a drive up Mt. Shasta.
There is no way to separate what is naturally occurring from what is man made, but they both exist, and both need to dealt with. We need to manage both and we need to do it now, not argue who or what is responsible. Even those who don't have two brain cells to rub together would realize that auto emissions can kill you. They can comprehend that darker colors are hotter than lighter or reflective colors. They can feel the cooler temperatures in the forest, on the grass compared to on the road. This isn't rocket science, this is common sense. We do have an affect on the climate and I don't need a weatherman in Colorado to tell me which way the winds blowing.
QUOTE
Advance of Whitney Glacier
In 2002, scientists made the first detailed survey of Mount Shasta's glaciers in 50 years. They found that seven of the glaciers have grown over the period 1951-2002, with the Hotlum and Wintun Glaciers nearly doubling, the Bolam Glacier increasing by half, and the Whitney and Konwakiton Glaciers growing by a third.[5] The study concluded that though there has been a two to three degree Celsius temperature rise in the region, there has also been a corresponding increase in the amount of snowfall. Increased temperatures have tapped Pacific Ocean moisture, leading to snowfalls that supply the accumulation zone of the glacier with 40 percent more snowfall than is melted in the ablation zone. Over the past 50 years, the glacier has actually expanded 30 percent, which is the opposite of what is being observed in most areas of the world. Researchers have also stated that if the global warming forecast for the upcoming next 100 years are accurate, the increased snowfall will not be enough to offset the increased melting, and the glacier is then likely to retreat.[6][7] Note that both these references make the claim that the Whitney Glacier is now the only glacier in the world known to be larger than it was in 1890, but this is erroneous. For example, several glaciers in Alaska, most notably the Hubbard Glacier, are larger now than in 1890.[8] However, Hubbard Glacier, along with a few other notable glaciers whose termini are at sea level, is what is known as a "calving glacier". "Glaciologists often point out that glaciers are sensitive indicators of climate. This paradigm should not be applied to calving glaciers. During most of the calving glacier cycle, the slow advances and relatively rapid retreats are not very sensitive to climate. For example, the calving glaciers that are currently growing and advancing in the face of global warming, were retreating throughout the little ice age. Calving glaciers become sensitive to climate only late in the advancing phase, when the mass flux out of the accumulation area approaches the mass lost by melting in the ablation area and losses due to calving can no longer be replaced. No reasonable change in climate will change this imbalance and stop the advances of these few glaciers".[9]
QUOTE
Summary
There is near unanimous scientific consensus that greenhouse gas emissions generated by human activity will change Earth's climate. The recent (globally averaged) warming by 0·5°C is partly attributable to such anthropogenic emissions. Climate change will affect human health in many ways—mostly adversely. Here, we summarise the epidemiological evidence of how climate variations and trends affect various health outcomes. We assess the little evidence there is that recent global warming has already affected some health outcomes. We review the published estimates of future health effects of climate change over coming decades. Research so far has mostly focused on thermal stress, extreme weather events, and infectious diseases, with some attention to estimates of future regional food yields and hunger prevalence. An emerging broader approach addresses a wider spectrum of health risks due to the social, demographic, and economic disruptions of climate change. Evidence and anticipation of adverse health effects will strengthen the case for pre-emptive policies, and will also guide priorities for planned adaptive strategies.
Back to top
Prof Anthony J McMichael PhD
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/a...xt#bibliographyI see the health effects on the elderly and the death tolls are rising, but if a report will be more convincing…
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2007/2007-10-23-10.aspQUOTE
September 2007 is Eighth Warmest on Record for Contiguous United States
Drought Worsens Across Southeast and Tennessee Valley
Temperatures in September 2007 were the eighth warmest on record, hot enough to break 1,000 daily high records across the United States, according to scientists at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C.
The heat also helped spread the worsening drought to almost half of the contiguous U.S., with conditions across the Southeast, Mid-Atlantic and Tennessee Valley hardest hit. The global surface temperature was the fifth warmest on record for September, and the extent of Arctic Sea ice reached its lowest amount in September since satellite measurements began in 1979, shattering the previous record low set in 2005.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/resear.../sep/sep07.htmlThe resent ability for oil companies to venture into the arctic ought to be a clue.
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard/http://nsidc.orgAmerican scientists are all onboard, accept maybe those bought by Exxon/Mobile.
