Not in Japan:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/25/jstor_climate_report_translation/

If you do your homework, and look back far enough, you will find that global warming has gone on from the 1600s, with an almost linear increase, to the present.

Wow, with that and keeping our tires inflated, the O-bomber will save us all!

Given the uncertainty, what should we do?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF_anaVcCXg

Let's get some other country to do it instead.

It's easy to knock incremental deeds like whitewashing roofs and inflating tires, but was metal recycling and food rationing met with such cynicism during WWII? Such liberal concepts! These days, we like our foreign wars and other "difficult things" to be as far away from our daily existence as possible. Put your precious head in the sand, American Idol is on!

Painting roofs white is not some new-fangled idea. It's pragmatic... it's the right thing to do for selfish and unselfish reasons.

No one argued about rations because a war was on. It could have been viewed with absolute certainty that the war was on. There was no dispute that the war was on.

Many people who aren't in belief of man made global warming would argue that it's silly to jump through these hoops when the cause is non existent. I mean, if there was a group out there telling us all that space aliens are coming in 20 years, and there is consensus among their group that this is fact, and the only way to stop them is to start wearing underwear on your head, would you start doing it? Or would you call them silly and claim that they are wrong? This is, I believe, the perspective you should be looking at things.

George- Thanks for the link. I bet a lot of kids love having him for a science teacher.

RW, truth be told, the rooftop painting makes a hell of a lot of sense whether or not you accept the data on human-caused warming. For everywhere below the 45th parallel, in particular, it's an idea that's already been applied in a lot of venues. All you need is one $400 electric bill in the summer for air conditioning to see the logic of reflecting as much sunlight as possible during the summer. Then again, considering where I live, where our summers range from "hot" to "wading through pools of molten concrete," maybe I'm biased.

Texas Triffid Ranch,

I love the name by the way.

I agree with you. I was just pointing out the reason why people think these ideas are silly. I didn't say they put much logical thought into it.

I'd like to have a white roof someday, but I sure don't want it mandated.

This idea has been around some time and it has some merit. I first read about it in the mid 1990's in Technology Review magazine in an article about urban heat islands. Seems all this asphalt makes cities hotter and they use a lot more electricity. Quite common problem down south as has been pointed out. I seem to recall the article mentioning that Iowa didn't use asphalt on its roads.
This shouldn't cost much to implement and might save more in the long run whether or not global warming is real or otherwise. If the government is going to continue to build roads, yea I know Portland is against the idea, it might just help to use a lighter color material. Just stand on an asphalt road and then a concrete one in late July, or maybe August and see what the difference is. And since they have to replace roofs once in awhile how about making them lighter. Save on electricity

It should rise in such a manner if you tack the base period to the depths of the little ice age. If we're going to talk about preserving the world that we evolved in, we need to think in that kind of scale, tens of thousands of years.

If you look it on that scale its a linear trend downward. Do your homework.

Not in Japan:/

oh, my, god! three scientists in Japan have a different opinion about "global warming"! thank god this bombshell was unearthed!

whew.

I mean, if there was a group out there telling us all that space aliens are coming in 20 years, and there is consensus among their group that this is fact, and the only way to stop them is to start wearing underwear on your head, would you start doing it? Or would you call them silly and claim that they are wrong? This is, I believe, the perspective you should be looking at things.

I mean, if there was a group out there telling us that the environmental disasters we're witnessing are not man made, and that we need to stop trying to say they are, and there is consensus among their group that this is fact, and the only way to stop them is to ignore the environmental disaster, would you start doing that? Or would you call them silly and claim that they are wrong and tell them they'd better help clean up their own sh*t before they drown in it? This is, I believe, the perspective you should be looking at things.

I mean, if there was a group on the Titanic pointing at the iceberg and saying "there's no proof we're going to hit that", and instead they said to rearrange the deck chairs and await proof, would you do that? Or would you call them silly and claim it doesn't matter, the time to take action, correct course and man life boats is *now*, before the moment of certainty about the potential impact? This is, I believe, the perspective you should use to look at things.

They cant say with complete certainty that the sun will come up tomorrow. How can they say the same about an "environmental disaster"? They can't. Its Wild Ass Guess. Its kinda funny..when I was in school, I remember being told NOT to follow everyone else, not to believe the status quo, yet when it comes to global warming, as are all supposed to act like sheep and follow along.

Just like Bush and the Neocons ranting about terrorism, the global warming cabal is a scare tactic to push an agenda.

I mean c'mon...their savior du jour is carbon credits? The biggest scam of the century. Also known as "I'm rich, why should I change my life when I can pay someone else to change theirs?"

They cant say with complete certainty that the sun will come up tomorrow.

who is "They", anyway? I've always wondered that. where do "They" live? do "They" all dress alike?

but seriously, I know what you mean. I'm critical of the carbon credtis scheme too. I'm critical of blind ideology.

and here's the thing: climate change isn't an ideology, any more than than any other theoretical framework. like any science, something gets studied, scientists disagree, a majority is found, theories are proposed, research (and debate) continues. meanwhile, the majority is calling for action.

so, the whole demonization of scientists that support the theory and laypersons that agree is silly. I don't demonize either "side", but I do have little empathy for those looking to broad-brush demonize.

so, the whole demonization of scientists that support the theory and laypersons that agree is silly.

True. But that goes both ways. I just wish those scientists who dont agree were not ostracized by their peers.

and here's the thing: climate change isn't an ideology

Maybe not, but I think some of the scientists and the nearly all "laypersons" you mentioned treat it that way.

And I think people like Al Gore totally treat it that way. But I think he does for a different reason- because he is trying to keep himself relevant. Its all he has left.

I just wish those scientists who dont agree were not ostracized by their peers.

I agree--especially because history's full of minority views being the right ones.

but--still--there comes a time when action is more important than certainty.

take water, for example: there's a real global crisis of long-term water shortage and declining water resources. many say that climate change is chiefly responsible.

so--after thoughtful consideration, if I'm fairly convinced but left with some degree of uncertainty about cause (i.e., "climate change is probably but not certainly the chief cause",) do I act? Or do I wait until there is 100% certainty about that climate change cause?

and Al Gore? I don't know. It seems like a hell of a lot of work just to "stay relevant", especially given that he's been saying the same thing and working on the same issue for almost 30 years.

This sounds silly at first, but the effect is huge. A lecture I heard recently by Amory Lovins about industrial energy efficiency described a consult at a liquid natural gas plant. The LNG storage tanks were painted green and installed on blacktop. He suggested painting the tanks white and covering the blacktop with white sand. This created a net savings of between 0.6 and 1.2 BILLION dollars just at the one plant.