Climate Change & Global Warming

[cosmos]

as this old world of ours ages climate changes second by second despite anything the human race does to it---there is no doubt pollution goes into the upper air layers but try telling that to china,india,america or the sviet union?? enjoy living each day as if it was your last---the only certainty in life is death.

[justlookin]

If this doesn't explain what's going on. Nothing will!!!

 

The President’s chief advisor, Rahm Emanuel, has said, “It’s a shame to waste a good crisis†— certainly this is sound advice. People are willing to give up freedoms and self-determination in times of crisis. In the absence of a crisis, those who wish to force an ideology on a population must create one. Otherwise, it is exceedingly difficult in a free society to convince the population to do what otherwise makes little sense.

 

Have you noticed recently they have stopped using "Global Warming" to try and scare us and begun to use just simple old "Climate Change". That impending warming isn't working out so well. Much safer to say is only gona change now. Not.. "definitely warm" as before.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

phantom-storms-how-our-weather-leaks-into-space

 

There may be more to worry about than escalating solar activity, though. In the past few years, stratwarms have been at their strongest and longest-lasting since regular records began three decades ago. During a stratwarm in January this year, for example, the air above the North Pole heated by 70 °C above its winter average of -50 °C - exceeding typical summer temperatures. Some speculate that this trend is a product of climate change, and warn that if it is a reflection of a change to the underlying planetary waves, it could have a big impact on space weather. "This is an open question: the climate implication requires long-term monitoring and modelling studies

____________________________________

 

So far, all results from Goncharenko's widespread survey point strongly towards a link between the stratosphere and the upper atmosphere. "In a casino, it's called hitting a blackjack," she says. "In research, it's a successful experiment."

 

The question remained: how exactly might weather on Earth drive these space-weather events.

 

No process known to atmospheric physics would allow a specific local phenomenon like the stratwarm to propagate all the way from the stratosphere above the North Pole to the ionosphere above the equator.

 

Of course that very much depends upon whos physics you rely on.

 

ghostly tides of charged particles

 

Who you gonna call?

[Para Handy]

Maybe after all this time. Some of the places around the world, have been hogging all the heat, to them selves for to long. And now the rest of the world is going to get some of it at last

[Skunnered]

It's getting urgent.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/04/arctic-seas-turn-to-acid

So it seems that the whole world needs to do a lot more than just put up a few thousand windmills, and a lot sooner. This implies we need to reduce carbon emissions to zero within 5 years, not by 20% within 20 years or whatever.

[ArabiaTerra]

It's getting urgent.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/04/arctic-seas-turn-to-acid

So it seems that the whole world needs to do a lot more than just put up a few thousand windmills, and a lot sooner. This implies we need to reduce carbon emissions to zero within 5 years, not by 20% within 20 years or whatever.

Yep, that about sums it up. Bet you're glad you didn't plunge all your life savings into that mussel farm. (You didn't, did you?)

 

[sarcasm] Look what we've done, wasn't it clever. [/sarcasm]

[KOYAANISQATSI]

In Germany, Italy, the UK, China, America, all over, airplanes are leaving ominous trails across the sky. These aerosol trails contain particles that linger for hours, getting dispersed by the wind and eventually falling to earth.

Now this type of intervention in our stratosphere has been applied to geo-engineering in the form of weather modification. The most publicized event was the 2008 Olympics where the Chinese used chemicals to control rainfall in Beijing. This is happening all over the world without any regard to the leaching of chemicals into the environment.

 

In Germany a meteorologist has sued the military for chemtrails that he has repeatedly recorded on radar. The trails were so big he said that there must have been tons of particles dropped to create cloud so huge that seamed to appear instantly on radars. All of those particles fall to the ground and get absorbed into the environment.

 

In the US an Arkansas man recorded planes leaving trails in the sky and collected a sample of particles that floated down afterward. When he gave the sample to a news agency they had it tested and the results showed unusually high levels of Barium.

 

Mark Ryan a director of the center for disease control says that short term exposure to Barium can lead to anything from stomach to chest pains and long term exposure causes blood pressure problems and functions to weaken the immune system.

 

The Council on Foreign Relation (CFR) wrote in a briefing titled Unilateral Geo-engineering that despite great uncertainty and significant risks such as ACIDIFICATION OF THE OCEAN, the destruction of coral reefs, and changes in composition of terrestrial ecosystems geo-engineering might be needed to avert or reverse some dramatic change in the climate system.

 

The bottom line is that geo-engineering may not work as expected, impose large unintended consequences on climate systems as well as terrestrial ecosystems, and the public is not given a choice on the issue.

 

http://tankerenemy.blogspot.com/2009/09/weather-modification-chemtrails-and-geo.html

[MuckleJoannie]

What happened to global warming?

 

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

 

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

 

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

 

So what on Earth is going on?

 

Climate change sceptics, who passionately and consistently argue that man's influence on our climate is overstated, say they saw it coming.

 

They argue that there are natural cycles, over which we have no control, that dictate how warm the planet is. But what is the evidence for this?

 

During the last few decades of the 20th Century, our planet did warm quickly.

 

 

Recent research has ruled out solar influences on temperature increases

Sceptics argue that the warming we observed was down to the energy from the Sun increasing. After all 98% of the Earth's warmth comes from the Sun.

 

But research conducted two years ago, and published by the Royal Society, seemed to rule out solar influences.

 

The scientists' main approach was simple: to look at solar output and cosmic ray intensity over the last 30-40 years, and compare those trends with the graph for global average surface temperature.

 

And the results were clear. "Warming in the last 20 to 40 years can't have been caused by solar activity," said Dr Piers Forster from Leeds University, a leading contributor to this year's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

 

But one solar scientist Piers Corbyn from Weatheraction, a company specialising in long range weather forecasting, disagrees.

 

He claims that solar charged particles impact us far more than is currently accepted, so much so he says that they are almost entirely responsible for what happens to global temperatures.

 

He is so excited by what he has discovered that he plans to tell the international scientific community at a conference in London at the end of the month.

 

If proved correct, this could revolutionise the whole subject.

 

Ocean cycles

 

What is really interesting at the moment is what is happening to our oceans. They are the Earth's great heat stores.

 

 

In the last few years [the Pacific Ocean] has been losing its warmth and has recently started to cool down

 

According to research conducted by Professor Don Easterbrook from Western Washington University last November, the oceans and global temperatures are correlated.

 

The oceans, he says, have a cycle in which they warm and cool cyclically. The most important one is the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO).

 

For much of the 1980s and 1990s, it was in a positive cycle, that means warmer than average. And observations have revealed that global temperatures were warm too.

 

But in the last few years it has been losing its warmth and has recently started to cool down.

 

These cycles in the past have lasted for nearly 30 years.

 

So could global temperatures follow? The global cooling from 1945 to 1977 coincided with one of these cold Pacific cycles.

 

Professor Easterbrook says: "The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling."

 

So what does it all mean? Climate change sceptics argue that this is evidence that they have been right all along.

 

They say there are so many other natural causes for warming and cooling, that even if man is warming the planet, it is a small part compared with nature.

 

But those scientists who are equally passionate about man's influence on global warming argue that their science is solid.

 

The UK Met Office's Hadley Centre, responsible for future climate predictions, says it incorporates solar variation and ocean cycles into its climate models, and that they are nothing new.

 

In fact, the centre says they are just two of the whole host of known factors that influence global temperatures - all of which are accounted for by its models.

 

In addition, say Met Office scientists, temperatures have never increased in a straight line, and there will always be periods of slower warming, or even temporary cooling.

 

What is crucial, they say, is the long-term trend in global temperatures. And that, according to the Met office data, is clearly up.

 

To confuse the issue even further, last month Mojib Latif, a member of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) says that we may indeed be in a period of cooling worldwide temperatures that could last another 10-20 years.

Professor Latif is based at the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at Kiel University in Germany and is one of the world's top climate modellers.

 

But he makes it clear that he has not become a sceptic; he believes that this cooling will be temporary, before the overwhelming force of man-made global warming reasserts itself.

 

So what can we expect in the next few years?

 

Both sides have very different forecasts. The Met Office says that warming is set to resume quickly and strongly.

 

It predicts that from 2010 to 2015 at least half the years will be hotter than the current hottest year on record (1998).

 

Sceptics disagree. They insist it is unlikely that temperatures will reach the dizzy heights of 1998 until 2030 at the earliest. It is possible, they say, that because of ocean and solar cycles a period of global cooling is more likely.

 

One thing is for sure. It seems the debate about what is causing global warming is far from over. Indeed some would say it is hotting up.

 

 

 

[KOYAANISQATSI]

The Earth is freezing, burning, freezing, burning, and only a massive tax on workers can fix it!

 

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/1038/globalwarmingcartoon.jpg

 

• 1895 - Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again – New York Times, February 1895

• 1902 - “Disappearing Glaciers…deteriorating slowly, with a persistency that means their final annihilation…scientific fact…surely disappearing.†– Los Angeles Times

• 1912 - Prof. Schmidt Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age – New York Times, October 1912

• 1923 - “Scientist says Arctic ice will wipe out Canada†– Professor Gregory of Yale University, American representative to the Pan-Pacific Science Congress, – Chicago Tribune

• 1923 - “The discoveries of changes in the sun’s heat and the southward advance of glaciers in recent years have given rise to conjectures of the possible advent of a new ice age†– Washington Post

• 1924 - MacMillan Reports Signs of New Ice Age – New York Times, Sept 18, 1924

• 1929 - “Most geologists think the world is growing warmer, and that it will continue to get warmer†– Los Angeles Times, in Is another ice age coming?

• 1932 - “If these things be true, it is evident, therefore that we must be just teetering on an ice age†– The Atlantic magazine, This Cold, Cold World

• 1933 - America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-Year Rise – New York Times, March 27th, 1933

• 1933 – “…wide-spread and persistent tendency toward warmer weather…Is our climate changing?†– Federal Weather Bureau “Monthly Weather Review.â€

• 1938 - Global warming, caused by man heating the planet with carbon dioxide, “is likely to prove beneficial to mankind in several ways, besides the provision of heat and power.â€â€“ Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society

• 1938 - “Experts puzzle over 20 year mercury rise…Chicago is in the front rank of thousands of cities thuout the world which have been affected by a mysterious trend toward warmer climate in the last two decades†– Chicago Tribune

• 1939 - “Gaffers who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right… weather men have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer†– Washington Post

• 1952 - “…we have learned that the world has been getting warmer in the last half century†– New York Times

• 1954 - “…winters are getting milder, summers drier. Glaciers are receding, deserts growing†– U.S. News and World Report

• 1954 - Climate – the Heat May Be Off – Fortune Magazine

• 1959 - “Arctic Findings in Particular Support Theory of Rising Global Temperatures†– New York Times

• 1969 - “…the Arctic pack ice is thinning and that the ocean at the North Pole may become an open sea within a decade or two†– New York Times, February 20th, 1969

• 1970 - “…get a good grip on your long johns, cold weather haters – the worst may be yet to come…there’s no relief in sight†– Washington Post

• 1974 - Global cooling for the past forty years – Time Magazine

• 1974 - “Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age†– Washington Post

• 1974 - “As for the present cooling trend a number of leading climatologists have concluded that it is very bad news indeed†– Fortune magazine, who won a Science Writing Award from the American Institute of Physics for its analysis of the danger

• 1974 - “…the facts of the present climate change are such that the most optimistic experts would assign near certainty to major crop failure…mass deaths by starvation, and probably anarchy and violence†– New York Times

Cassandras are becoming

increasingly apprehensive,

for the weather

aberrations they are

studying may be the

harbinger of another

ice age

• 1975 - Scientists Ponder Why World’s Climate is Changing; A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable – New York Times, May 21st, 1975

• 1975 - “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind†Nigel Calder, editor, New Scientist magazine, in an article in International Wildlife Magazine

• 1976 - “Even U.S. farms may be hit by cooling trend†– U.S. News and World Report

• 1981 - Global Warming – “of an almost unprecedented magnitude†– New York Times

• 1988 - I would like to draw three main conclusions. Number one, the earth is warmer in 1988 than at any time in the history of instrumental measurements. Number two, the global warming is now large enough that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause and effect relationship to the greenhouse effect. And number three, our computer climate simulations indicate that thegreenhouse effect is already large enough to begin to effect the probability of extreme events such as summer heat waves. – Jim Hansen, June 1988 testimony before Congress, see His later quote and His superior’s objection for context

• 1989 -â€On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This “double ethical bind†we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.†– Stephen Schneider, lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Discover magazine, October 1989

• 1990 - “We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing – in terms of economic policy and environmental policy†– Senator Timothy Wirth

• 1993 - “Global climate change may alter temperature and rainfall patterns, many scientists fear, with uncertain consequences for agriculture.†– U.S. News and World Report

• 1998 - No matter if the science [of global warming] is all phony . . . climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.†—Christine Stewart, Canadian Minister of the Environment, Calgary Herald, 1998

• 2001 - “Scientists no longer doubt that global warming is happening, and almost nobody questions the fact that humans are at least partly responsible.†– Time Magazine, Monday, Apr. 09, 2001

• 2003 - Emphasis on extreme scenarios may have been appropriate at one time, when the public and decision-makers were relatively unaware of the global warming issue, and energy sources such as “synfuels,†shale oil and tar sands were receiving strong consideration†– Jim Hansen, NASA Global Warming activist, Can we defuse The Global Warming Time Bomb?, 2003

• 2006 - “I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.†— Al Gore, Grist magazine, May 2006

• Now: The global mean temperature has fallen for two years in a row, which is why you stopped hearing details about the actual global temperature, even while they carry on about taxing you to deal with it…how long before they start predicting an ice age?

 

http://anhonestclimatedebate.wordpress.com/2009/08/02/climate-change-alarmism-timelin/

[ArabiaTerra]

What happened to global warming?

I read this article and it seemed to me from what I already know to be a complete load of rubbish, so I did a little checking and found a comprehensive debunking of the arguments used. These are as follows:

 

It's cosmic rays

 

It hasn't warmed since 1998

 

There is no consensus

 

It's cooling

 

It's the Pacific Decadal Oscillation

 

It's a shame to see the Beeb publishing such obvious tabloid standard garbage as they are usually fairly objective in their reporting on this subject, but there you go. Nobodies perfect.

[Skunnered]

It's getting urgent.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/04/arctic-seas-turn-to-acid

So it seems that the whole world needs to do a lot more than just put up a few thousand windmills, and a lot sooner. This implies we need to reduce carbon emissions to zero within 5 years, not by 20% within 20 years or whatever.

Yep, that about sums it up. Bet you're glad you didn't plunge all your life savings into that mussel farm. (You didn't, did you?)

 

[sarcasm] Look what we've done, wasn't it clever. [/sarcasm]

No mussels, just good old fashioned dependable, reliable, solid, secure British Banks!

(Oh dear!! )

[ArabiaTerra]

At last! An outbreak of sanity in Washington, long may it continue...

 

http://climateprogress.org/2009/10/11/senate-climate-deal-lindsey-graham-john-kerry/#more-12506

[KOYAANISQATSI]

An outbreak of sanity in Washington

 

Wow, did you really just type that without a single creeping doubt crossing your mind.

[Pleepsie]

What happened to global warming?

I read this article and it seemed to me from what I already know to be a complete load of rubbish, so I did a little checking and found a comprehensive debunking of the arguments used. These are as follows:

 

It's cosmic rays

 

It hasn't warmed since 1998

 

There is no consensus

 

It's cooling

 

It's the Pacific Decadal Oscillation

 

It's a shame to see the Beeb publishing such obvious tabloid standard garbage as they are usually fairly objective in their reporting on this subject, but there you go. Nobodies perfect.

 

It seems to me that you pour scorn on the BBC report simply because it doesn't agree with your views.

 

All the 'comprehensive debunking' links you offer are from one mans website and are his personal views, as he says in his introduction 'Skeptical Science is strictly a labour of love - maintained in my spare time.'

[ArabiaTerra]

^^^^ Why don't you try reading the links, Pleepsie? You will notice that every one of them links to multiple, peer reviewed, scientific papers which comprehensively refute the BBC report. The BBC report, on the other hand, links to nothing and offers no backup to it's claims.