You can see that the South Pole ice cap is at near record highs. Obviously this is not human GLOBAL warming, but periodic shifts in regional climate that have been happening since long, long, long before humans.
altair7 Cherokee (3.8 mt)
Joined: Aug 10, 2007
Posts: 362
Location: San leon, Texas
Posted:
Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:26 pm
Uhhh I don't know it could be global warming, but then again it could just be a Climate shift like they have always happened in the past.
Graviton Mike (10.4 mt)
Joined: Sep 03, 2006
Posts: 1307
Location: USA
Posted:
Wed Oct 03, 2007 11:27 pm
altair7 wrote:
Uhhh I don't know it could be global warming, but then again it could just be a Climate shift like they have always happened in the past.
You make an art of retelling me what I just wrote, and as if you were advising me.
Good find. Clearly this material is worthy of wider dissemination in order to combat the propaganda material of the green doom mongers and anti-capitalist Red Greens.
It transpires that Al Gore's heap of hot air movie (contributing greatly to global BS by the amount of half-truth conjecture and intellectual pollution it contains) is being shown in UK schools masquerading as fact. A school governor has just bought a court case see
Lorne Gunter, National Post
Published: Monday, February 25, 2008
NP Network Blogs
Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.
The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January "was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average."
China is surviving its most brutal winter in a century. Temperatures in the normally balmy south were so low for so long that some middle-sized cities went days and even weeks without electricity because once power lines had toppled it was too cold or too icy to repair them.
There have been so many snow and ice storms in Ontario and Quebec in the past two months that the real estate market has felt the pinch as home buyers have stayed home rather than venturing out looking for new houses.
In just the first two weeks of February, Toronto received 70 cm of snow, smashing the record of 66.6 cm for the entire month set back in the pre-SUV, pre-Kyoto, pre-carbon footprint days of 1950.
And remember the Arctic Sea ice? The ice we were told so hysterically last fall had melted to its "lowest levels on record? Never mind that those records only date back as far as 1972 and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past.
The ice is back.
Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year.
OK, so one winter does not a climate make. It would be premature to claim an Ice Age is looming just because we have had one of our most brutal winters in decades.
But if environmentalists and environment reporters can run around shrieking about the manmade destruction of the natural order every time a robin shows up on Georgian Bay two weeks early, then it is at least fair game to use this winter's weather stories to wonder whether the alarmist are being a tad premature.
And it's not just anecdotal evidence that is piling up against the climate-change dogma.
According to Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona -- two prominent climate modellers -- the computer models that show polar ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (a la the movie The Day After Tomorrow) are all wrong.
"We missed what was right in front of our eyes," says Prof. Russell. It's not ice melt but rather wind circulation that drives ocean currents northward from the tropics. Climate models until now have not properly accounted for the wind's effects on ocean circulation, so researchers have compensated by over-emphasizing the role of manmade warming on polar ice melt.
But when Profs. Toggweiler and Russell rejigged their model to include the 40-year cycle of winds away from the equator (then back towards it again), the role of ocean currents bringing warm southern waters to the north was obvious in the current Arctic warming.
Last month, Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, shrugged off manmade climate change as "a drop in the bucket." Showing that solar activity has entered an inactive phase, Prof. Sorokhtin advised people to "stock up on fur coats."
He is not alone. Kenneth Tapping of our own National Research Council, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon.
The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased.
It's way too early to claim the same is about to happen again, but then it's way too early for the hysteria of the global warmers, too.
lgunter@shaw.ca
HIGHLY recommended short film made by professional climatologists:
You know altair7 it could just be a climate shift like they have always happened in the past... but then again it could be Global Warming. I don't know...
Graviton Mike (10.4 mt)
Joined: Sep 03, 2006
Posts: 1307
Location: USA
Posted:
Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:25 pm
Do have a look at this film.
I repeated the link in case some missed it above.
It will show you clearly how the IPCC bureaucrats acted on their own, without any concensus from the science community that was originally consulted and ignored by the IPCC politicians. Former IPCC scientists are furious over how the UN politicians at the UN acted on their own and ignored the scientific community about climate issues.
It's not HUMAN global warming. This year was the coldest in decades for many countries around the world.
You can see that the South Pole ice cap is at near record highs. Obviously this is not human GLOBAL warming, but periodic shifts in regional climate that have been happening since long, long, long before humans.
It may be unrelated, but during the Cretaceous period, there is no ice in the Arctic, and the temperature is estimated to be 40 degrees Celsius.
Quote:
Not really the result one would have hoped for; most teachers in State schools subscribe to this sort of cr*p anyway....
Here in the Philippines, they even made a series that is inspired by An Inconvenient Truth. We all know that it contains inaccuracies, such as that Katrina is pointed out separately that it is off the expected power, that it alone caused billions of dollars of damage. It did cost billions of dolloars of damage, but it is also caused by faulty levess of Corps of Engineers.
Another addition to the global warming hype are the worst-case scenarios when it hit us. As Al Gore states, it will cause a surge of refugees that are escaping rising sea level, more intense storms, longer droughts, and may more. But then, it may also cause Canada and Russia to become new breadbaskets of the world, giving millons of tons of wheat, rice, or corn!! Where should we go??
Note, however, the we-follow-the-rest-of-the-sheep caveat in red at the beginning of the article by the APS Establishment:
The following article has not undergone any scientific peer review. Its conclusions are in disagreement with the overwhelming opinion of the world scientific community. The Council of the American Physical Society disagrees with this article's conclusions.
By placing this disclaimer at the beginning of the article, the APS are hardly trying to encourage debate; quite the opposite in fact. Scandalous toadying to the green misanthropists!
FF
Graviton Mike (10.4 mt)
Joined: Sep 03, 2006
Posts: 1307
Location: USA
Posted:
Mon Jul 21, 2008 3:42 pm
Yet this is opening the way to more debate, and certainly a furious reply to come. The fact that this article has not been suppressed is a positive sign.
We also do not know who added that red note, or if in outrage or protest against the article, or if this red note really gives the real views of the council.
Another fact is that overwhelming scientific community is biased toward socialist ideology.
What's also so demeaning about climate change "science" is that it is overwhelmingly funded by government politicians, and most of those governments are heavily set in socialist ideology, especially in Europe where conservatives -- consider that deeply conservative Otto von Bismarck introduced socialism to now 82 million strong Germany -- are also socialists. French also started the early test practice of liberal socialism in the 1870s, influenced by Lamarck, the French philosophical spin on Darwinism, rejecting chance and other aspects of Darwinism. Try to get funding for dissenting research by politicians deciding who gets the money.
bueschu Cherokee (3.8 mt)
Joined: Mar 17, 2008
Posts: 402
Posted:
Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:57 pm
Graviton wrote:
Another fact is that overwhelming scientific community is biased toward socialist ideology.
What's also so demeaning about climate change "science" is that it is overwhelmingly funded by government politicians, and most of those governments are heavily set in socialist ideology, especially in Europe
Yah, right. And all Americans are gun-loving rednecks and christian fanatics and constantly confuse Sweden with Switzerland. Sounds like a clichée? Well it is, just as much as your constant ranting about everybody disagreeing with your views beeing a "socialist". And for somebody who criticises politicians, environmentalists et al. to create a new totalitarian religion called GW your radical stance against MMGW has almost the traits of a crusade itself. You clinge to straws and suspect thousands of people who just ry to do their jobs to be part of an insanly huge conspiracy.
Back to the article: It has been quite heavily criticised for being "full of errors, misuse of data and cherry-picked examples". Comments on its writer, Viscount Monckton, are: "[his] science is self-taught and his paper qualifications nonexistent"[4] and that "he is trying to take on the global scientific establishment on the strength of a classics degree from Cambridge." It seems that his fight against the IPCC and MMGW in general is politicaly motivated (Monckton is a staunch conservative). So no big revelation there about MMGW being a scam.
Yeah, I know: Typical greeny-tactics to attack the guy, not the science. But if the guy is politicaly motivated (while not actually beeing a scientist), has ties to PR-firms, oil-companies etc. (seems to be the case with the guys who are behind the "famous" anti-MMGW-site "friends of science", not Monckton) it is just so damn easy to do so. Because hands on heart: Nobody here is a climatologist or something similar. So we simply can't verify the truthfulness of most graphs and formulas presented in such articles.
View next topic View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
