Michael, I beg to differ. The Smithsonian Astrophysical Laboratory used measurements of the "Sargasso Sea surface temperatures derived from 18O/16O (Oxygen) ratios. These are indicators of evaporation, hence a proxy for sea surface temperature. The Sargasso Sea is a 2,000,000 square mile body of water in the North Atlantic Ocean lying roughly between the West Indies and the Azores, at approximately 20-35 deg. North Latitude. It is relatively static through its vertical columns so that potential interference from mixing with other water masses and sediment sources is minimal. The isotropic ratios are derived from biotic debris that has vertically precipitated onto the seafloor. Wide and abrupt variations in temperature are indicated... The horizontal line is the average temperature for this 3000-year period." Quote form "Rate and Magnitude of Past Global Climate Changes" by Bluemle, Sabel and Karlen (2001). They also show a graph of Sargasso Sea temperature from 3000-years ago to the present that shows that we are still below the mean temperature for that period. See http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewImage.do?id=8722&aid=3842 and http://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/viewArticle.do?id=3842&archives=true Don't get me wrong, I believe there is clear evidence for global warming since about 1810 see http://www.ece.byu.edu/mers/long/papers/TGARS1999MayLong.pdf, I am just not convinced that CO2 is as much a factor as solar temperature changes. -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Michael Carnes Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 10:56 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Science Fair Don, you're cherry-picking your data.
I think there is still a controversy over how much economic development
contributes to global warming.
While there is much yet to learn, the so-called controversy is largely clouding of the waters by those with an economic interest. Within the last month there's been renewed information of the rate of melting of the Greenland ice-sheet, in addition to melting in other zones, such as Mt. Kilimanjaro. Thousands of ice cores taken over the last century show that the ice goes back tens of thousands of years. If it had been as warm during the Roman era as your sources indicate, that ice would have melted then or would never have formed. Arctic permafrost that has been stable since the last ice age (as shown by the number of mammoths preserved in it) is rapidly turning to mush. Of course you can find a few scientists who disagree with this assessment, just like you can find a few scientists who don't like evolution. You can find a few scientists who believe in ghosts, in Sasquatch, in fairies, in alien abduction, and in all sorts of things. It is extremely rare in science that someone who goes against the grain is shown to be correct (Galileo, Kepler, etc). Most of them are just cranks. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com