Video scenes shots:
Watch the video:
| URL: | |
| Embed: |
Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment
Other videos by this author:
 |
Northwestern University Formula SAE Posted by: NorthwesternU
Video duration: 161 seconds Related: N/A Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
Further Reading: Global Warming - Climate Change - Energy - Recycling - Pollution
Latest articles: Facts about solar energy ~ Pros and cons of solar energy ~ How does solar energy work ~ Solar energy advantages disadvantages ~ Types of energy ~ Advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy ~ Who are the world's 1 renewable energy site? ~ How does recycling affect the environment? ~ Why is recycling so important? ~ Interesting recycling facts ~ Natural causes of global warming ~ Is global warming real? ~ Safe and clean energy ~ Effects of water pollution ~ Types of water pollution ~ Land pollution ~ Poems about pollution ~ Definition of climate change ~ Fiji social capital community meetings climate change
Latest comments made on this video:
By: grunder20. on 03 Jan 12, 17:21:28
does it affect the ocean? i thought it? only affects the farms, propagation.
By: thegreeensky. on 29 Nov 11, 17:04:17
nice speech.. well said...?
By: StephanieLisaTara. on 21 Sep 11, 18:10:21
HAIKU I hatch! Crawl! And swim! Oh how I love my sweet life, But?why's the sea so warm? ?A? Green Sea Turtle
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 23:23:50
BTW, if you'd like to read some? of the original research on the attribution stuff, send me a PM, I can give you some links to papers. They're a bit technical though.
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 19:53:36
@MrMZaccone The urban heat island effect is real and well known, but it is taken into account when calculating trends. Plus, when only stations are used that are removed from urban areas, we find the same warming trend as we do for all stations? combined. But more importantly, we also measure temperatures of ocean water, we use satellite measurements, and we use a number of other proxies for the reconstruction of past temps. All give a largely consistent picture of a warming world.
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 19:49:29
(cont) Under greenhouse forcing, we should also see nights warm faster than days, whereas under solar forcing, we should see the opposite. Again, our findings are consistent with CO2 forcing, not solar. Finally, we can determine that the CO2 in the atmosphere is ours in a number of ways. The most used is isotopic analysis; fossil fuels have a distinctive C12-C13 ratio, so if we are the ones emitting the CO2, we should see the ratio shift in accordance with predictions. This has? been observed.
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 19:44:46
(cont) So that's basically a direct observation of greenhouse gas? effects. Similarly, we should see the troposhere warming while the stratosphere cools, because the radiation that normally reaches the troposphere from the ground decreases, while the solar input should stay roughly the same. If the sun is responsible for warming, however, we should see both warming up. Again, what we see is consistent with greenhouse forcing. (continued)
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 19:40:36
(cont) on the issue of attribution: we can look at how the earth is warming, not just whether? it is. If the warming is due to CO2 forcing, we would expect less infrared radiation in CO2 associated bandwidths to come out of the top of the atmosphere, while we should observe more radiation in those bandwidths reflected back towards us at surface level. This is exactly what we observe (continued)
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 19:36:38
@MrMZaccone Maybe you're referring to something else in the emails than I am? Keep in mind that? three different investigations found no evidence of tampering, and I'll repeat that noted climate skeptic Roy Spencer's data set agrees with that of Jones et al. Jones says some stupid things in the emails, probably written in a fit of frustration, but what matters is whether or not he actually did any of them.
By: MrMZaccone. on 26 Jun 10, 19:33:02
@werecow2003 Actually, I'm unconcerned about an accusation of hiding data. What concerns me is the admission of hiding and destroying data contained in? the emails. Wouldn't that be "evidence" and contrary to your claim that there isn't any? As for temperatures being higher, that's obvous. We are after all, still coming out of an "ice age". The question isn't whether it's warmer but, "why?".
By: MrMZaccone. on 26 Jun 10, 19:32:58
@werecow2003 I'm curious. How do we know that the instrumental record? is more reliable. I understand that the instrumental record was in question because of the increased incidence of urban vs. rural measurement over the last century. (urban measurements are obvously going to be warmer.)
By: MrMZaccone. on 26 Jun 10, 19:32:40
@werecow2003 You're quite right. Dirty tactics are all too common in this debate.? That's why I'm still a skeptic.
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 18:08:18
@chrisgojai420 Yes, but you can check for yourself. I looked up a fair portion of the organizations mentioned, and they all support the consensus as wiki says. By contrast, the large number of libertarian and conservative think tanks notwithstanding, I've yet to find a? single significant scientific body that is still officially skeptical about anthropogenic climate change. It's significant for any respectable science body to make a statement like this, as they're generally very conservative.
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 17:24:37
@rudidas89 Maybe NorthwesternU doesn't? like us discussing other videos on their channel. }|:op What are you studying btw?
By: rudidas89. on 26 Jun 10, 17:16:51
@werecow2003 ye it says "Comment removed".. weird, but i have it in my email!! i understand ur busy :) i am too - starting my MSc next year? :P
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 17:15:13
@rudidas89 My comment seems? to have been deleted for some reason, so either I hit a wrong button, or youtube didn't like it somehow. I'll send you a PM.
By: rudidas89. on 26 Jun 10, 16:00:58
@werecow2003 i see.. do you mean know-how of video making? well, i have? a bit of feel for that area... and i've been studying climate change, but i'm assuming you may have more knowledge than me at this point, which leads me to an idea - would you want to collaborate?
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 15:54:30
@rudidas89 Yes, I? certainly do. I'm quite interested in climate change myself, but there aren't a lot of reliable channels out there that are addressing the issue systematically. If I had the time and know-how, I might try it myself, but unfortunately right now I have neither. }|:o/
By: rudidas89. on 26 Jun 10, 15:47:56
@werecow2003 actually, don't? know - it was a project for uni, to make a video out of a hypothetical series, but we only had to make one... do you think it has potential?
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 15:43:36
@rudidas89 Nice vids! Are you planning on doing more in the? future?
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 15:32:25
(cont) It's relevant because hiding data is one of the key accusations leveled at the climatology community on the basis of the phrase "hide the decline", when in fact it's never hidden from discussion. Of course, the issue raises questions about the reliability of tree ring proxies, which is still being? studied. But they're not the only type of proxies that are being used, and all give similar results; global mean temps now are higher than in at least the past 1000 years, probably longer.
By: werecow2003. on 26 Jun 10, 15:26:22
@MrMZaccone It's a well known problem in dendropaleoclimatology that tree ring proxies can be influenced by other factors besides temperature. That's what the divergence problem is; after the 60s, we see a disparity between tree ring proxies (which? show a decline in "temperature") and the instrumental record. Since we know the instrumental record is more reliable, the tree rings must be wrong. It is this decline that was "hidden", but not in any nefarious sense of the word. It's well documented.
By: rudidas89. on 26 Jun 10, 15:08:24
@MrMZaccone i think you would be interested in my video that i made on the ocean and climate change - let me know what you think! it has relevance to? this presentation tooo
By: MrMZaccone. on 25 Jun 10, 18:21:32
@werecow2003 I've looked at it and fail to see the relevance, but that's what we have you for I'm sure. (I'm not being sarcastic, I'd really like to hear it? as I'm legitimately on the fence about this issue.)