This was a great event. I hope lots of tree were planted. Tree Planting Benefits

Planting trees helps reduce energy costs.
Planting trees cools urban areas.
Planting trees reduces ambient noise.
Planting trees improves air quality.

Trees are the only portion of community infrastructure that actually appreciate in value.

This is a classic example of posters having too much time on their hands. What's the big deal! There is not doubt that planting trees is good for asthetics and makes people feel good that they are doing something for the environment. I participated in yesterday's tree planting and thoroughly enjoyed it. If you don't believe in any of this stuff, just stay home on your lazy boy recliner and watch TV-- don't make feeble attempts to appear educated and articulate when others who really do care are doing somthing.

Name - you may have missed my original post on this site - I have no problem with people like you planting trees for asthetics, shade, maybe to harvest in a few years, but the premise from the article was planting these trees was going to help us change the weather, and that is crazy talk.

Much like, Guest, I really don't understand why you need to ruin your post with the lazy-boy recliner and watch TV comment. It makes no sense.

Name, you can see the effort is futile. Magres is resigned to giving no citations for their case, complaining about people stepping up and being active in their community, and not actually reading any of the facts provided. It is indeed sad that these closed-minded people spend so much of their time spreading mis-information and then cry about it when you call them out.

What citations do you want, Guest? You acknowledged the earth has cooled the past eleven years, but how could that be given the human induced CO2?

I'm not complaining about anyone "stepping up and being active in the community", I merely raised the mis-guided notion that you could change the weather by planting a few trees.

I admit not reading any of the links you listed - I've found lot's of opinion offered as fact, or fact based on faulty data, but nothing proving humans are responsible for the warming period just prior to 1998, but none of the other warming periods the earth has cycled through.

I just want you to tell me what caused the Vashon Glacier to melt and why that force could not possibly be responsible for the warming the earth saw just prior to 1998.

1) The citation that provides data showing the global mean temperature has decreased over the last 11 years. Produce that.

2) Read my citations. They are not opinion pieces. Rather, they provide facts and data showing that humans are responsible for the significant warming trend starting post-industrial era. If you believe the data are faulty, provide the argument for their fault.

3) The melting of the Vashon glacier happened at the end of the last ice age. In fact, it was the last glacier of the Pleistocene Epoch, which lasted from 2.588 million to 12,000 years BP (Before Present). The reason it melted was because of a regional warming trend induced by the El Nino which was predominant during this time period known as the beginning of the Holocene interglacial.

While this impacted our region significantly at the time, other regions experienced significant cooling, such as most countries in the southern hemisphere. Overall, this climatic event was a result of predictable changes in the Earth's orbit known as Milankovitch cycles.

At that time, axial tilt was 24° and nearest approach to the Sun (perihelion) was during boreal summer. The calculated Milankovitch forcing would have provided 8% more solar radiation (+40W/m²) to the Northern Hemisphere in summer, tending to cause greater heating at that time in those regions.

This is not the case today, and thus is not causing the catastrophic glacial melt we currently observe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Dioxid...

You're welcome. Now it's your turn to answer my questions.

You're hopeless, Guest. Time will prove me right, provided you believers don't ruin our economy in the meantime.

HAHA! I've refuted every one of your statements and you still can't provide me with a single citation. Still waiting on that "eleven years" source. It seems at though you are the one who is hopeless, Magres!

And you sound like George W, with that, "Time will prove me right" comment. Unfortunatley our planet doesn't have the luxury of time on it's side when we're destroying it at this rate.

Guest –

I’m curious to know, from the standpoint of a believer, why the earth cooling over the past eleven years is insignificant in your mind?

I assume you believe man’s evil habits with fossil fuels account for close to 100% of the most recent warming trend. These evil habits haven’t diminished over the past number of years, yet the earth has been cooling. Why?

What happened to the massive increase in hurricanes predicted by Al Gore? Why are we getting all these cold/snow records broken this year? How did the Vashon Glacier that carved Puget Sound melt 10,000 years ago (i.e. before the evil SUV) and why couldn’t that force be responsible for the most recent warming trend? Why do you believe the Medieval Warming period never happened, yet there is a trove of evidence, including first-hand accounts, supporting it?

CO2 accounts for such a small portion of greenhouse gases (which by the way haven’t been proven responsible for warming trends), yet people like you want to mandate draconian social engineering schemes on unwilling participants to limit only the fossil fuel portion of CO2 emissions?

Can’t wait for your reply.

Wow, you are a dim one, aren't you Magres? 11 years is a minuscule fraction of the of the overall trend of global warming. Just like, your IQ is a minuscule fraction of an average 4th grader's IQ.

Take a look at this TREND LINE and note that spans more than 11 years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_...

All you are doing is picking that last point on that line and saying the case is closed. All I am saying is you are an idiot for thinking that way.

Yes, if you would have read my post you would have seen that this "trove" of evidence was isolated to European observers only. Today's scientists have looked at the facts and found that this "warming period" is not scientifically supported. Seriously, did you miss the rest of my comment? For a non-believer you are pretty quick to buy into this.

How about this - I'll answer your questions after you answer mine. I posed a few in my previous post (remember, The Flintstones?) so I'll give you time to do some research as opposed to spout your gut-inspired nonsense. Honestly, some sources would really help your standing in this effort. You're coming across like a brain-dead ass hat.

Can't wait for your reply.

Guest--
I am sympathetic with your viewpoint. However, it would be much better received if it came with a bit of civility. Whatever happened to discussions rather than attacks? We are so polarized in this nation that no one is listening to the other side anymore.

At first I was excited to have this website for our neighborhood but over the months have become increasing discouraged by the viciousness of many of the comments. I fear that this site has done more harm that good for Magnolia.

Let's take a step back and try to remember that we are neighbors.

Typical. Once backed into a corner, start flinging mud & name calling rtather than answer the questions.

The Medival Warm Period happened to coincide with the rise of Central American and South American civilizations as well - I'm sure you knew that since your so much smarter than me, but you probably conveniently forgot about it.

magresi = Argument FAIL

Good job, Guest ;)

It's so funny to hear global warming deniers take a snapshot simply from the past 11 years and close the book on the issue. How old is the earth again (and if you say 4000 years you can dismiss yourself from this conversation right now)?

For those curious about the actual science around global warming, real human impact on global CO2 levels, and access to climatology data sets proving these concepts, go to a source that studies this - the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarmi...)

A few tidbits for you shortsighted, unscientific earth-haters:

- Seven of the eight warmest years on record have occurred since 2001 and the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1995. This fact goes back slightly more than 11 years.

- Human activity has been increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide from combustion of coal, oil, and gas; plus a few other trace gases). There IS NO scientific debate on this point.

- The global concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere today (>380 ppmv) far exceeds the natural range over the last 650,000 years of 180 to 300 ppmv. Well that's inconvenient, they're looking at more than 11 years here too.

- Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.74°C (plus or minus 0.18°C) since the late-19th century, and the linear trend for the past 50 years of 0.13°C (plus or minus 0.03°C) per decade is nearly twice that for the past 100 years.

1. The Medieval Warming Period AD 800-1300 was MUCH warmer than the years you cite,
2. Humans have been contributing CO2 to the atmosphere since they started knuckle dragging on earth. The amount humans add is an insignificant amount, and you CANNOT prove otherwise,
3. Who says 380 ppm is above average, and who are you to tell the world what the "perfect" amount is?
4. All current publication point to cooling over the past eleven years. Read something more current.

FoxNews would be proud. Let me break it down for you point by point.

1. Actually, Global temperature records taken from ice cores, tree rings, and lake deposits, have shown that, taken globally, the Earth may have been slightly cooler (by 0.03 degrees Celsius) during the 'Medieval Warm Period' than in the early- and mid-20th century. A 2001 IPCC report summaries this research, saying "…current evidence does not support globally synchronous periods of anomalous cold or warmth over this time frame, and the conventional terms of 'Little Ice Age' and 'Medieval Warm Period' appear to have limited utility in describing trends in hemispheric or global mean temperature changes in past centuries."

2. Let me get this straight? You are arguing that "knuckle-dragging" humans exploited natural resources to the same degree as post industrial-age humans have? How do you suppose our ancestors did that exactly? Oh keep in mind the Flintstones is only a cartoon and those Geico cavemen are actors.

3. Don't take my word for it:

- Dr James Hansen (top US climate scientist; Director, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies; member of the prestigious US National Academy of Sciences; 2007 Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility of the prestigious American Association for the Advancement of Science; Adjunct Professor, Columbia University, New York, USA)
- Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research., Germany
- Professor Barry Brook (Sir Hubert Wilkins chair of climate change and director of climate science at the University of Adelaide's Environment Institute
- Dr Barrie Pittock (former leader, Climate Impact Group, CSIRO, IPCC Lead Author, and author of Climate Change: Turning Up the Heat
- Australia's premier research organization, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO)
- Dr Graeme Pearman (former CSIRO Climate director; GP Consulting; interim director, MSI; Monash University Sustainability Group, Melbourne)
- The Royal Society on 6th July 2009 (including as Working group signatories Professor John Veron (Coral Reef Research), Dr Mary Stafford-Smith (Coral Reef Research), Prof. Ove Hoegh-Guldberg (University of Queensland) and Sir David Attenborough FRS and 20 other eminent scientists)
- the World's top climate scientists including Professors James Hansen (US), Hans Joachim Schellnhuber (Germany) , Paul Crutzen (Netherlands Nobel Laureate for discovering the ozone hole chemistry), in the top scientific journal Nature that atmospheric CO2 must NOT exceed 350 ppm (September 2009)
-Dr Andrew Glikson (an Earth and paleo-climate research scientist at Australian National University, Canberra, Australia)

...just to name a few (source: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/33961&Itemid=1)

4. OK, you still don't get my point, do you? It's called a trend. 11 years is a point on a line. I'm not saying that mean temperatures haven't decreased over the past 11 years. But to make a determination based solely on this significantly limited amount of data is irresponsible.

Let me explain it to you like this: looking at ONLY 11 years of data and coming to a conclusion on climate change is like reading one page in the middle of a book and saying you know how it ends. The people who've read everything up until this point have a better understanding of what's to come.

I'm glad you finally agree the earth has been cooling the past eleven years.

With respect to the remainder of your reply, I find it amusingly one-sided and consider it as evidence that the science isn't as settled as some desire.

"...one-sided and consider it as evidence that the science isn't as settled..." Mmm-hmmm. Anyone else see anything wrong with that statement?

I looked at the Sustainable website after reading this notice and I am amazed there continues to be groups like this given the news of the earth’s cooling over the past eleven years.

If you believe there is a direct correlation between CO2 and global temperatures, there can only be three reasons: 1. varying levels of CO2 causes temperature fluctuations, 2. varying global temperatures causes changes in the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, or, 3. something else causes the changes in both temperatures and CO2 levels.

NONE of the above has been proven. Human contribution to CO2 levels in the atmosphere is insignificant.

Go plant a tree if you think it’s going to look nice, provide shade or will be fun to climb in a few years, but to plant a tree thinking you are controlling the weather is lunacy.

There has been another scientific study on jet fuel in our atmosphere and global cooling. Some scientists confirmed that September 11 2001 after the grounding of all airplanes the ground temps. warmed do to the lack of exhaust or fumes blocking the sun radiation. Maybe all the jets flying around have some affect??

Ummm, what?

I hate Cascara trees!