[QUOTE=Christenson;270306]And yes, if you want to live to be 100, you had better start walking around a lot.[/QUOTE]
I'm in full agreement with you, Eric, about the benefits for each of us individually and everyone else of limiting our meat consumption.
One thing though in relation to the above quote: Oddball, as evidenced by [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=13378"]this thread[/URL], is already a remarkably talented and accomplished athlete.:smile:

[url]http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110924/ap_on_sc/us_climate_the_disconnect[/url]

[QUOTE=Christenson;268612]I was listening to a random San Jose/Santa Cruz area radio program last week, and it was pointed out that we are currently at a solar minimum, with sunspots disappearing for months on end......[/QUOTE]

That would surprise my solar-physicist friends; we're coming out of a solar minimum, and the sun is perfectly reasonably supplied with sunspots:

[url]http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/sunspots/[/url]

is the picture now, we had an X-class flare on 7 September.

[QUOTE=Christenson;268612]I was listening to a random San Jose/Santa Cruz area radio program last week, and it was pointed out that we are currently at a solar minimum, with sunspots disappearing for months on end......[/QUOTE]Last year, on Astronomy Day (varies by year [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomy_Day[/URL]) in a shopping mall there was a group set up with solar filters and projection screens during the day. I took a long look for sunspots, and didn't see any -- first time in my life I'd seen the Sun without any spots at all.

I hope this isn't too far off the subject, but I think it's ok since some of the last few posts talked about eating. What is a person supposed to do who can't eat alot of green leafy vegetables due to their vitamin K content? Thank you.

[QUOTE=Jwb52z;272776]I hope this isn't too far off the subject, but I think it's ok since some of the last few posts talked about eating. What is a person supposed to do who can't eat alot of green leafy vegetables due to their vitamin K content? Thank you.[/QUOTE]

It's WAY off topic...we were talking about the need to eat more vegetables....but not to the exclusion of meat.

If leafy greens are a problem, then you need to think about replacing the vitamins and minerals therein...the ones that aren't going to poison you...and fire your Dr if he can't help with this problem. Google for the name of the issue, as I doubt you are the only person in the world with exactly this problem.

CEOs call for tougher climate action
 

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15352764[/url]

[quote]Almost 200 CEOs of major companies call for tougher action on the climate. "Companies signing up include UK retailer Tesco, energy provider EDF, electronics company Philips, chemicals giant Unilever, eBay and Rolls-Royce.[/quote]
[QUOTE]On Wednesday, the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change, representing more than $20 trillion in assets including banking giants HSBC and BNP Paribas, made a similar call.

They argue that governments acting quickly to implement tough climate policies would reap the biggest investments and the biggest rewards.[/QUOTE]



Paul

Getting back to the scientific evidence ...
 

"The Earth continues to build up heat"

[URL]http://www.skepticalscience.com/The-Earth-continues-to-build-up-heat.html[/URL]

[quote=John Cook]New research has been published that finds the planet has continued to build up heat well into the 21st century. [URL="http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2011GL048794.shtml"]Church et al 2011[/URL] extends the analysis of [URL="http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009JD012105.shtml"]Murphy 2009[/URL] which calculated the Earth's total heat content through to 2003. This new research combines measurements of ocean heat, land and atmosphere warming and ice melting to find that our climate system continued to accumulate heat through to 2008.[/quote]

[ATTACH]7215[/ATTACH]

(Higher resolution at [URL]http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics/Total_Heat_Content_2011.jpg[/URL])

Here's another blog post on the same subject, but based on other papers:

"Global warming and ocean heat content"

[URL]http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/10/global-warming-and-ocean-heat-content/[/URL]

[quote=Gavin Schmidt]The connection between global warming and the changes in ocean heat content has long been a subject of discussion in climate science. This was explicitly discussed in Hansen et al, 1997 where they predicted that over the last few decades of the 20th Century, there should have been a significant increase in ocean heat content (OHC). Note that at the time, there had not been any observational estimate of that change (the first was in 2000 [Levitus et al, 2000]), giving yet another example of a successful climate model prediction. At RC, we have tracked the issue multiple times e.g. 2005, 2008 and 2010. Over the last few months, though, there have been a number of new papers on this connection that provide some interesting perspective on the issue which will certainly continue as the CMIP5 models start to get analysed.

The most recent paper was a new study from NCAR out last week that looked into what happens to OHC in models when there is are occasional 10 year periods with no trends in global surface temperatures [Meehl et al, 2011].

. . .

So what can we infer about the real world from these tests? First, we can conclude that we are looking at the right quantities. Total OHC changes are a good measure of the overall radiative imbalance. Second, there is likely to be a systematic issue if we only look at the 0-700m change – this is a noisy estimate of the total OHC change. Third, if the forcings are close to what we expect, we should anticipate that the deeper ocean (below 700m) is taking up some of the slack. There are of course shorter term sources of variability that also impact these measures (OHC changes associated with ENSO, solar irradiance variability over the solar cycle) which complicate the situation.

Two further points have come in comment threads recently that are related to this. The first is whether the changes in deep ocean heat content have any direct impact other than damping the surface response to the ongoing radiative imbalance. The deep ocean is really massive and even for the large changes in OHC we are discussing the impact on the deep temperature is small (I would guess less than 0.1 deg C or so). This is unlikely to have much of a direct impact on the deep biosphere. Neither is this heat going to come back out from the deep ocean any time soon (the notion that this heat is the warming that is ‘in the pipeline’ is erroneous). Rather, these measures are important for what they tell us about the TOA radiative imbalance and it is that which is important for future warming.

The second point is related to a posting by Roger Pielke Sr last week, who claimed that the Meehl et al paper ‘torpedoed’ the use of the surface temperature anomaly as a useful metric of global warming. This is odd in a number of respects. First, the surface temperature records are the longest climate records we have from direct measurements and have been independently replicated by multiple independent groups. I’m not aware of anyone who has ever thought that surface temperatures tell us everything there is to know about climate change, but nonetheless in practical terms global warming has for years been defined as the rise in this metric. It is certainly useful to look at the total heat content anomaly (as best as it can be estimated), but the difficulties in assembling such a metric and extending it back in time more than a few decades preclude it from supplanting the surface temperatures in this respect.

. . .[/quote]- - -

It should be noted that the author of this post, Gavin Schmidt, recently was announced as recipient of the first Climate Communications Prize of the American Geophysical Union.

"Inaugural Climate Communications Prize Winner Announced"

[URL]http://www.agu.org/news/press/pr_archives/2011/2011-34.shtml[/URL]

[quote]WASHINGTON, DC — In recognition of his exceptional work as a climate communicator, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) has selected Gavin Schmidt as the recipient of its inaugural Climate Communications Prize.

Schmidt is a climate scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and co-founder of the RealClimate.org, a blog that covers areas of science related to climate-from present-day measurements to paleoclimate proxies, from natural climate variation to anthropogenic change. Schmidt has also worked with photographers on a popular science book, on museum exhibits, and on online courses and has often appeared on TV and radio and in print.

The award, which was established by AGU earlier this year, recognizes excellence in climate communication as well as the promotion of scientific literacy, clarity of messaging, and efforts to foster respect and understanding for science-based values related to climate change.
"AGU created this award to raise the visibility of climate change as a critical issue facing the world today, to demonstrate our support for scientists who commit themselves to the effective communication of climate change science, and to encourage more scientists to engage with the public and policy makers on how climate research can contribute to the sustainability of our planet," said AGU president Michael McPhaden. "That's why we are so pleased to recognize Gavin for his dedicated leadership and outstanding scientific achievements. We hope that his work will serve as an inspiration for others."

. . .[/quote]

The Empire Strikes Back ...
 

... which results in friendly fire.

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15373071[/url]


Paul

Not sure if this article has been posted- it discusses the apparent censorship by a Texas state agency of, among some climate change discussion, data that indicates that the ocean level in Galveston Bay is now rising by 3 millimeters per year, compared to a historic average of 0.5 mm.

Norm

[URL="http://www.chron.com/default/article/Professor-says-state-agency-censored-article-2212118.php"]http://www.chron.com/default/article/Professor-says-state-agency-censored-article-2212118.php[/URL]