I Guess That Settles It - MSP TV Meteorologist Tells Rotary Club No Human Link To Global Warming

Dave Dahl, chief meteorologist at KSTP in the Twin Cities, told Hudson Rotarians that man is not the culprit when it comes to global warming, or climate change, issues. Dahl spoke to the Hudson Thursday Noon Rotary Club on July 9 and said what was called “global warming” is now tabbed “climate change” because temperatures on the planet have decreased in the past couple years.

“Over 30,000 scientists are now saying that humans are not causing changes in global conditions,” Dahl said. “The climate has ‘changed’ since the planet began.”

He said that the heating of the earth — which is mostly a good thing — is caused primarily by water vapor — about 98 percent. He said carbon and other elements account for about 2 percent of the mix. Of that 2 percent, human involvement represents only about 2 percent of that (.0004 percent).

“It is my feeling, and the opinion of more and more scientists, that the sun is the driving force behind climate changes — heating and cooling,” Dahl said. “Solar activity, including flares and sunspots, is usually quite active during warm stretches. The activity has been very quiet the past couple of years and the temperatures have dropped.”

Ed. - emphasis added.

EDIT

http://www.hudsonstarobserver.com/event/article/id/35079/

They denied that for the longest time.

He's in the group that says, "It's cool this week in Minnesota. Global warming must be a hoax." Fortunately, the science on this is so consistent (in spite of Dahl's fantasies to the contrary), that most governments are beginning to realize we have a very real problem.

resident meteorologist.

Dahl cites Jim Inhof's imaginary 30,000 scientists, and Inhof puts him on his list of 30,000 scientists. Regressus infinitus absurdum.

that didn't pass the state standards.

The list that's apparently too stupid to die.

Do they also have power plants and SUV's pumping GHG's? Our polar ice has shrunk over the same period. Are these independent events?

Sheesh. :banghead:

Martian ice caps are composed primarily of frozen CO2, not water ice, and are hence much more unstable (CO2 sublimates directly from a solid to a gas, without passing through a liquid phase). A fluctuation in Martian dust storms could have major effects on the climate of Mars. And once the CO2 caps start to melt, that CO2 amplifies the effect by acting as a greenhouse gas.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-on-mars.htm

Yes, they are likely independent events.

I've been on vacation for the last two weeks and lost track of that thread. I assume that response is the same as you've given here.

I read an explanation in an article in National Geographic that talked about planetary wobble and it seemed ridiculous to me.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

I'll look into Martian dust storms and consider if that is more plausible. I'm always skeptical about coincidence - my opinion is still that the sun is causing climate change on both planets and it will take a pretty compelling case to change that.

If you were unfortunate enough to miss out on science education
then it will not be anywhere near as "blindingly obvious" as some
frustrated people find it.

It will take some scientific understanding to explain why your view
of what is "ridiculous" and what is "coincidence" isn't actually
valid in the world of facts rather than opinions.

:hi:

There are thousands of scientists and other educated people who are skeptical about attributing global warming to human activity. I just spent two weeks in Alaska (on vacation) and learned that most of the glaciers there have been retreating for about 250 years. Some glaciers are actually still advancing. Somehow, things like that get ignored in the debate and the focus is limited to only the last 30 or so years. That makes me skeptical.

I was trying to cut some slack for someone who *was* unfortunate
enough to miss out on a decent science education (and there are
far too many such people around).

If, however, you are "a registered professional engineer", then
(assuming that this title means more than "have been on a two day
course in how to replace toilets") you are obviously failing to
apply any science thus acquired to the problem of climate change.

You sure put vincna in his place! Comparing a PE to someone who took a two day course to learn how to install a toilet. That's great!

Too bad you didn't bother to look up what a PE is or you could have avoided showing your own ignorance.

> Too bad you didn't bother to look up what a PE is or you could
> have avoided showing your own ignorance.

Information for you to avoid showing your ignorance in future:

1) Wise up on how reliable the claims of strangers are on the
internet before they really bite you (hence the cartoon.)

2) In general, there is no restriction on the right to practice
as an engineer in the UK. To be specific, the title of "engineer"
by itself is not regulated in the UK. This is precisely why
there have been standing jokes about "enhanced" job titles
(e.g., "Sanitation Engineer" = plumber, "Refuse Engineer" = binman)
and why my crack at a two-day toilet fixing "certification" came up.

3) Even in the US (where the use of the title Professional Engineer is
restricted to those holding a Professional Engineer's license), I see that
each state has its own licensing procedure, and the license is valid
only in the state that granted it. Adding to the confusion is the fact
that other use of the term "engineer" is not legally controlled, and
is frequently applied to fields where practitioners may have no
engineering background.

4) As I stated in my post, I assumed that the claimed title (PE)
was a valid one and so was disappointed that the claimant was
failing to apply any science thus acquired to the problem at hand.

(FWIW, the salient point from #3 is that even allowing that the poster
had a valid title, it has little bearing on the subject matter except
as an appeal to authority.)

In other words, read what I wrote before trying to snark at me otherwise
you only advertise *your* ignorance.

of Junk Science does one need to take in order to believe the Global Warming scam?

Get used to the insults, I have.

Just review the ones on this thread. I don't see a lot of disputing what he said, just insulting him. A few examples:

The miracle is that they are admitting global warming exists at all.

Dave Dahl is an idiot.

I'll bet that he lives in Michelle Bachman's district and serves as her resident meteorologist.

And my favorite:

"Big ball of fire in sky make hot". As if.

Huh? The sun doesn't warm the earth?

Here is the link to the imaginary petition. I don't see Ginger Spice's name on it.
http://www.oism.org/pproject/

Congrats on the PE.

I have a thick skin and it doesn't bother me at all. It's unfortunate when the discourse sinks to that level, but when it does, it's best to just ignore it.

Thanks for the link as well. I hadn't seen this and based on just an initial quick scan, it paints a very different picture.

Try taking your questions here:
http://www.realclimate.org/

This is the most studied topic in history, and the evidence is unequivocal: anthropogenic climate change due to human use of fossil fuels is real and very, very dangerous for our species.

Please look up "ocean acidification" to see one emerging body of evidence that supports what I just wrote.

I plan on spending time on both sites

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine#History

"When questioned in 1998, OISM's Arthur Robinson admitted that only 2,100 signers of the Oregon Petition had identified themselves as physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, or meteorologists, "and of those the greatest number are physicists." This grouping of fields concealed the fact that only a few dozen, at most, of the signatories were drawn from the core disciplines of climate science - such as meteorology, oceanography, and glaciology - and almost none were climate specialists. The names of the signers are available on the OISM's website, but without listing any institutional affiliations or even city of residence, making it very difficult to determine their credentials or even whether they exist at all. When the Oregon Petition first circulated, in fact, environmental activists successfully added the names of several fictional characters and celebrities to the list, including John Grisham, Michael J. Fox, Drs. Frank Burns, B. J. Honeycutt, and Benjamin Pierce (from the TV show M*A*S*H), an individual by the name of "Dr. Red Wine," and Geraldine Halliwell, formerly known as pop singer Ginger Spice of the Spice Girls. Halliwell's field of scientific specialization was listed as "biology." Even in 2003, the list was loaded with misspellings, duplications, name and title fragments, and names of non-persons, such as company names. The current web page of the petition itself states "31,478 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs.""

there is no such thing as global warming. My bad.

... for what it's worth, the northeast is having the coolest, wettest spring and summer in decades, maybe even a century. In NJ, we haven't even been close to 90 yet and normally, we regularly see 90 degree temps in July.

ever recorded anywhere in LA County just 1/2 mile from where I am sitting, in 2006: 119F. This past April we blew a 100 year old heat record out of the water by nearly 10 degrees when it hit 104F (IN APRIL!!!). But since then, it has been an unusually mild year.

Global warming models predict worse extremes, and that is exactly what we are seeing. In our case, it's extremes of heat and drought. In your case, cold and wet. But these are two sides of the same coin, and they both will lead to crop failures and famine if it keeps up in enough places long enough.

When was it 119 in LA?

According to:
http://www.laalmanac.com/weather/we03.htm
The record high in LA was 112 in 1990.

NOAA agrees with that:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/climate/data/cqt_himax.txt

Same with weather.com:
http://www.weather.com/outlook/travel/vacationplanner/vacationclimatology/monthly/USCA0638

So exactly when was it 119 in LA?

PS: Are facts important?

which does include the city of Los Angeles, was in July of 2006, 1/2 mile from where I am sitting right now, in Woodland Hills. 119F (official temp). I remember that day very well. There is such a thing as "frightening heat", and that was it. I'll never forget it as long as I live.

And last June (third week) we had right here a 9 day heat wave that included two days in a row of 117F (official temp). That was also frightening. The power (and AC) failed at my clinic and I had to evacuate kitties to my home, which was over 90 inside with AC running full blast.

112F is laughably low. I didn't follow your links, but I am assuming that 112F is the high for DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES, lol, which is consistently 10-15F cooler than us out here. We are also in the City of Los Angeles, but official "LA" temps are recorded downtown where the ocean breezes moderate temps greatly.

FACT: Highest temperature EVER recorded anywhere in Los Angeles County including the city itself was 119F on a day in July of 2006 in Woodland Hills. Hope I got the year right - I am pretty sure there was a milder year between that record and our bad spell in 2008.

Is courtesy to fellow DUers who know exactly what they are talking about important?

I await your humble request for forgiveness.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2006/jul/julyext2006.html

The first chart - scroll down to the very bottom. You see where on the left it says WOODLAND HILLS, CA?
Please do read. I'll await your apology.

part of the City of Los Angeles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodland_Hills,_Los_Angeles,_California

"Woodland Hills is a district in the city of Los Angeles, California, United States.....It is located in the southwestern area of the San Fernando Valley, northeast of Calabasas and west of Tarzana. To the north Woodland Hills is bordered by West Hills, Canoga Park, and Winnetka. Running east-west through the community is U.S. Route 101 (Ventura Freeway) and Ventura Boulevard, which starts in Woodland Hills and intersects Valley Circle Boulevard."

I have lived in this area for 26 years. I know a little bit about it, particularly its weather, I gardened for 15 years and finally had to quit because the heat was making it damned near impossible to produce ANYTHING I like to eat.