Hello PanhandleChuck. An open call for posters to discuss GW and you haven't had any comments yet? That is surprising. Anyway, I figured I would introduce myself and my current position concerning GW/AGW. I usually comment in Dr.Rood's blog and occasionally in Dr.Master's blog.

I am skeptical of the IPCC's position on anthropogenic global warming. I do believe that there has been an overall warming trend over the last century. I also believe that CO2 emissions have significantly contributed to an increase in atmospheric CO2, which in turn is responsible for a portion of the last century's observed warming. That is about as far as I can go on the pro-AGW side of the argument. Below is a quick list of points that further define my AGW views:

1. While I believe that warming has occurred over the last century, I think it is uncertain exactly how much. I think the historical temperature record is subject to significant errors.

2. I am not convinced that recent warming is unusual or unprecedented. I think that proxies used to estimate past temperatures are subject to significant uncertainties.

3. I don't think that natural causes for the warming of the last century have been sufficiently ruled out. Variations in cloud cover as a contributor to warming remains one possibility. The PDO also seems to correlate well with warming/cooling periods over the last century (this may be related to variations in cloud cover as well). Note that this is not intended to be an all-inclusive list by any means.

4. I think that the IPCC climate projections for the year 2100 are likely overestimated due to feedbacks assumed in the climate models used that have not been adequately observed in real life. That is not to say that feedbacks in the climate system do not exist, but I believe that our understanding of them is insufficient.

5. I also believe that the doom and gloom scenarios resulting from the IPCC's predicted temperature increases are highly uncertain.

Whew! This is getting too long so I'll truncate it here. In closing, I would like to add that I have no problem with alternative fuels. In particular, I think solar power shows some promise in some applications. I don't think the switch to alternative fuels needs to occur before they are economically viable. I think that a switch to alternative fuels will occur gradually primarily due technological advances that make them more viable as well as demand/supply issues that will eventually increase the cost of fossil fuels.

Sorry for such a long post. It will be interesting to see if any discussion occurs that rises above the typical "The debate is over and everyone who says otherwise is not credible" variety.
Member Since: February 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 568