I was impressed, a year or so ago, to read about an English scientist who predicted global warming back in the 1890s. Of course he thought it would not be for another couple of hundred years, based upon his (then) current survey of how much coal the world was then using. He did not foresee the rapid increase in the use of oil/gas/coal. However, he was aware of how the earths atmosphere traps the gases from burning coal and predicted that it would produce a greenhouse effect.
Anyway, like others I do not put much stock into a single statement. I do find it rather humorous that some people (like my very conservative sister) will take a snowfall (like we just had here in Fort Worth; 12.5 inches, a record) and chortle So much for global warming! It does no good to point out that 1) Fort Worth is not the globe; 2) if global warming does exist and glaciers are melting at an accelerated rate we can expect parts of the world to have more moisture (including snow) than historically usual; and 3) it beggars belief that so many scientists from around the globe, including China, UK, Australian, etc, would all enter into some vast conspiracy to convince people of global warming.
Of course, I hope that global warming, due to whatever reason (manmade of natural), is not occurring. I do not want to see flooding and misery occurring in parts of the world, offset by drought and misery in other parts (which seems to occur anyway, historically). If new information comes out that shows to a certainty that global warming is not occurring and that everything is peachy keen, I will not shout I win, but will give a sigh of relief and focus on other problems that plague this unhappy planet.
However, I doubt that such news will be forthcoming (i.e., that global warming is not occurring). No doubt there will always be some evidence that pops up that can be interpreted as showing that maybe warming is not occurring, or at the very least not at an alarming rate. I am old enough to recall the dire warning of global cooling that was issued in the late 1960s. Nevertheless, the better part of prudence is to prepare for the worse while hoping for the best.
I also have written previously in another thread about a glacier I visited in Switzerland in 1980 (Lower Grindelwald) and how I camped out close to the foot of this glacier; about how I read, at the time, about the glaciers retreating at a steady rate (couple of feet per year); about how, instead, the glaciers retreat sped up to such a surprising extent that it is no longer a tourist attraction, and the tourist center has closed. I realize this does not prove global warming, but, to me, it does give me some pause. I had fully planned to return to the lower Grindelwald at some point, but it is too late.
Finally, beware of the internet scientist. An internet scientist is a person with no training whatsoever in any of the disciplines used to study the globe and its climate system including meteorology, atmospheric chemistry, hydrology, geophysics, geodesy, oceanography, etc. However, this person will spend 15 or 30 minutes on the internet until he/she finds some article that fits his/her viewpoint, cut and paste to said article and then awaits the applause for their research proving that they are right (i.e., whether the globe is cooling, warming or is just right). Indeed, I believe one reason that this board now prohibits political threads is because such threads ended up being nothing but a few posters cutting and pasting to various blogs, news items, etc., all without forming one original opinion themselves.
