"One stalagmite in Western Australia, known to be 81 years old, showed a 20 percent decrease in annual precipitation since 1965,".

Wait a minute, theoretically, if man made warming is increasing ocean temperatures, therefore introducing more greehouse water vapor into the atmosphere, creating more rain and storms, should we be worried about droughts? Another piece out of a 1000 that doesnt seem to fit the AGW arguement.

Reply: There could be many reasons for this drying trend, including GW. Keep in mind, it is also localized to just western Australia.

Regardless, who cant think of more important things to worry about other than the earth getting a couple of degrees warmer? How much have we spent as a direct result of the cold? Way too much! And now we should spend more to prevent it from getting warm? And how exactly do we intend to stop warming? Whats the game plan alarmists?

As the New Hampshire Sierra Club proudly boasts...NH can stop global warming! Really? You might want to rethink this statement. LMAO!! Ever check out these websites? The caliber of thinking is downright SCARY.

As fas as I see it. The earth is our greenhouse. It only seems normal for a greenhouse to be warm. Go to your local florist. Do they have the temperatures warm or cold in that greenhouse? Warming creates and sustains life. I thank God that we are not heading into another ice age.

I see the dire concern of AGW slowly subsiding. Even my friends who were completely sold on AGW are having a slight change of heart. I proudly take some credit in that. Accuweather helped with this as well. Sorry alarmists...but we have to break through the hype!

This is a very interesting idea! One thing bothers me, though: the overburden for each cave is different and changes with time. That would imply different penetration times for the groundwater, which in turn would distort the timings they get.

Moreover, I would think that caves with large overburdens would experience greater temporal mixing of groundwater, spreading out the precipitation signal over a longer time.

Most of western and northern Australia has been above normal rainfall for the last three years.
ftp://ftp.bom.gov.au/anon/home/ncc/www/rainfall/percent/36month/colour/latest.gif

How would this method rule out changes in landscape due to normal climatical events such as floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, glacial melting, etc. Along the lines of what Chris C. pointed out, I think it would be quite a leap of faith to assume that precipitation caused water to seep into the caves the same way for hundreds of thousands of years. What if there was a tsunami or massive flood that saturated the ground and greatly sped up the formation at various times?

cherry picked just for you LOL
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadsst2sh.txt
December 2007 came in a -0.010! and coolest year 2007 in 11 years in the SH!

This method is already used in the science. Here is a reference for such study: http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/data/mwp/studies/l1_spannagel.jsp

I know that scientists in my country also are using stalagmites to track the paleoclimate and they claim that the findings are very precise. Of course, they blow the Mann's hockey stick: no such thing in the climate history.

Gosh...That does seem like an accurate method of determining past weather events. Huh? And many of you say that Nuclear Bomb Tests are bad, see, they are an important part of climate science.

And in other news....Scientists now have determined that by assesing the time it takes for whale poop to hit the ocean floor they can measure the salinity and acidity of the water, thereby providing an accurate representation of the quality of ocean and how much CO2 is in solution. Said one reseacher, this has shown that man is definitely affecting the normal operations of the whale/ocean ecosystem. Said another, the only thing worse than waiting for Gore's speeches to end is waiting for a whale to use the outhouse.

Film at 11.

Seriously, who pays for this research and shouldn't the scientists be doing something else? Like putting up temperature gauges or something.

Rich repeats the oft-made point that a little warming might be nice in his cold clime. That's probably true. Indeed, I'm sure that Siberians would appreciate a rise in temperatures.

But there are other people in the world, too, and they might not find global warming so pleasant. The people of Bangladesh, for example, might not appreciate a small rise in sea level because they're already suffering greatly from the flooding that comes with the monsoon. And the people of many low-lying islands such as the Maldives will not like the idea of losing their countries. Should those who gain from global warming pay for the relocation of those who lose their homes?

There will be winners and losers from global warming. If you're one of the losers, are you going to just shrug your shoulders and say, "Nichivo"? Or are you going to demand compensation from the people in the north who benefitted from global warming? What will you do if their proffered compensation falls well short of your expectations?

Darren writes

Seriously, who pays for this research and shouldn't the scientists be doing something else?

Darren, did you know that the computer you're using uses technology that started off with a bunch of eccentric eggheads screwing around with solid state ideas when hard-headed, practical people were asking, "Who pays for this nonsense? Shouldn't they be working on vacuum tubes?" Every time you put your fingers to the keyboard, you confirm the benefits of scientists going off and exploring ideas that seem crazy to everybody else.

Darren,
Welcome to the wonderful life of paleoclimatology.It's all about the search for the perfect proxy.

CC:

Good point, I just thought computers happened.

Besides, my computer does run on tubes, and it's in the other room. I mean the whole room. In fact, all my missives are done on punchcard.

Anybody need any paper?

Chris Crawford,

And the people of many low-lying islands such as the Maldives will not like the idea of losing their countries

Just how much has sea level rose in the Maldives in the last century? They seem to have survived the Medieval Warm Period, when temperatures were much warmer than today's, quite well.

Is their concern really about sea level rise or island subsidence? You do realize that these islands, like the Hawaiian chain, are built on submerged oceanic volcanoes, don't you? Over the millenia, these volcanoes have a tendency to sink into the oceanic crust. Maybe if we stopped continental drift, we could solve the alleged problem.

Paul:
Maybe if we stopped continental drift, we could solve the alleged problem.

Damn paul. Now we will be showered with demands for everyone in the world to stop walking east as that causes the contenental drift to move west.

And of course there will be the need to tax movement.
Then there will be the movement offset credits where we cna pay somone to walk west to counter our eastward movements.
You can see where this will lead.
In future, please stop giving the socialist nutbars ideas.
thanks

Paul, we don't know much about the history of the Maldives, but we do know that they're very low and are definitely susceptible to sea level rise. Yes, they will subside over the millennia, but the sea level rise that we are contemplating will take place within a century, not several millenia.

Chris Crawford,

You: There will be winners and losers from global warming. If you're one of the losers (from natural disasters) are you going to demand compensation from the people in the NORTH who benefitted from global warming?

Reply: Wow! Thats quite a statement from no doubt, an intelligent man. But Chris, Chris, Chris. You remind me of my sister and brother in law. Brilliant people. They both have their doctrines and are scientists working for the government(food). However, as intelligent as they are, the common sense thing just seems to allude them sometimes. Perhaps because their brains are so preoccupied with all that knowledge they paid for?

Anyway, let me give you a reality check. Try to follow my logic here. You and your THEORY are concerned about a couple degrees of warmth. Siberia and half of Canada roughly start at 60 degrees north latitude. If you add in 60 degrees south latitude, you get a third of earth(dont worry about the prime meridian). This THIRD of earth has normal temperatures of -10 to -80 degrees, 6 months out of the year. New Hampshire, my state, is at 43 degrees north latitude. It is almost halfway (45) to the north pole, which means that NH is essentially halfway between the north pole and the equator. NH, even near sea level has feet of snow on the ground.

On a globe, 43 degrees north, marks or encompasses more than a quarter of the earth. 43 degrees South latitude is the same. If you put them together, you get MORE than half of the earth that endures WINTER conditions. Let me say that again. More than half-of-the-earth endures WINTER conditions. And you are worried about a couple degrees of warmth?

Again, you said: There will be winners and losers...If you're one of the losers(from natural disasters) are you going to demand compensation from the people in the NORTH...

I obviously have to remind you that you LIVE in a (northern)country that HAS...the worst natural disasters in the world. Tornados, hurricanes, earthquakes, noreasters, droughts, volcanos, fires, icestorms, snowstorms. We have deserts and we have mountains. NH is world famous because it is home to the worlds WORST weather. http://www.mountwashington.org/

Bangaladesh and the Maldives, as according to a nonconcensual - scientific theory, may be threatened with natural disasters? Really? Well, hey...join the club! America is always threatened with natural disasters. Need I remind you of New Orleans? What were our compensation DEMANDS from other countries after that natural disaster? What about compensation DEMANDS from ALL of our natural disasters? Hmm? Lets go, pay up other countries. How ballsy of you to toss around words like...DEMAND Of Others, for something that happened...naturally. These natural disasters have been around...Forever. Even before safe and reliable(evil) SUVs. BTW I have one because I need one. As do many of us.

Chris, if I may psychologically try to breakdown where I think your head may be. People of the NORTH benefitting was your concern? What about people from the Southern Hemisphere? They also have to endure winter. Will they not benefit as well? However, again your concern was for people of the NORTH benefitting. Was this a Freudian slip? Did you intuitively mean people of the North...America benefitting? Did you mean people of...America...benefitting? Well God forbid if this big, bad country of ours benefits from anything. I mean who the hell really likes benefits anyway? Well...I DO! I love benefits! Do you?

Chris, may I ask? Are you a socialist? You obviously dont have to answer, but its an honest political question. I am not ashamed to say that I am a capitalist.

Anyway, in closing. Your theorized anthropogenic global warming of 1, 2, or 3 degrees is all but irrelevent in the grand scheme of earth. Lets keep it real, ok? You are talking about a couple of degrees. It-is-as insignificant as the 110 parts per million increase in atmospheric CO2. An increase from a THEORY with inconclusive results, that IF were true, could STILL not be blamed entirely on man. Let me add: The earth is our greenhouse. Go inside an actual greenhouse. How are the temperatures? Warm or cool? Warmth is the key. It creates and sustains...life. I thank God we are not heading into another ice age.

Chris, what do you know about the precession of the earths rotation axis? The precession of the equinoxes? What about changes in the earths inclination? Do you think that these factors effect the climate?

Thank you.

Chris Crawford,

The Maldives highest elevation is 15 feet above sea level. Now, consider that these islands are coral atolls resting upon on marine lavas formed during the movement of the Indian Plate over a hotspot. Last I heard corals don't do very well above sea level, so that must mean that sea level was at least 15 feet higher at some point during one of the interglacials during the Pleistocene. Aren't we in an interglacial, now?

On the bright side, maybe the reefs will get a bit higher.

Sorry that you feel that nobody is paying attention to you. I thought you might have a little more intestinal fortitude and try to stick it out. Oh, well. Ja mata!!

Hi Paul,

What is your point about corals needing to live below sea level? Corals have evolved considerably over time.

In the Cambrian, they thrived at 7000 ppm CO2. Now the mere mention of CO2 makes them go pale, start choking and die a dramatic death - worthy of Shakespeare. Obviously corals were much tougher in the past, and much less dramatic.

Perhaps ancient corals crawled out of the ocean, made their nests in the tops of Maldive trees, and dined on coconuts and Pina Colladas?