Is it Warming or Cooling?

I have posted before that I flatly dont believe the crap being shoveled on us by democrats who know not a damn thing about science that the world is ending due to "Global Warming".

Although the climate is changing, because it is a totally dynamic system (and we have proof of this in the geologic/fossil record), Mother Nature has a remarkable ability to regulate herself, which is what this article is all about.

Reporter Alister Doyle writes that while the world is suffering through one of the hottest years on record due to global warming, some places are getting much colder. "We are disrupting the entire climate system," says Rajendra Pachauri, of the UN panel on climate change. "It's not as though there is going to be a uniform warming of the entire planet."
Pachauri says, "There are also many of these (cooling anomalies). But merely to cite one as evidence that there is no warming is not rational."

"When the oceans get warmer, you get more evaporation so you create more clouds. Then you can have more precipitation and in some areas it can be in the form of snow," says NASA scientist Josefino Comiso.

www.unknowncountry.com...

Dragonrider this article seems over simplified "As it gets warmer more ocean water evaporates..." yeah.

But haven't we debated before the importance of the Gulf Stream? And the dependancy of the convection current on the salinity of the water, which could be greatly reduced in the gulf stream locality due to melting ice.

So yes, the world will balance a global warming...but with an Ice Age

And while I don't think we're causing as MUCH global warming as some would like to think, you can not deny that we've helped things along.

It's the climatologists saying that, not just the democrats, who'd support any idea that isn't the "Norm".

Hmm. The site claims copyright protection on what was posted in the original thread. And from a moderator.

Simplified? Yes it is. I didnt think that much of ATS wanted to sit through a Masters Thesis on the mechanics of climatology and climate regulation.

Can "global warming" cause global cooling? Yes. Not a surprise, as it is part of the natural climate regulatory cycle between Hot House and Ice House conditions that the earth has maintained (and been tracked by geologists) for millions of years.






Global warming can cause global cooling
Jeff Poling

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scientists announced in the July 21, 1999, edition of the journal Nature findings that suggest that global warming can sometimes lead to cold weather or even a worldwide freeze.

Scientists have long known that a severe cold spell occurred after the end of the Pleistocene glaciation, approximately 8,200 years ago. The cause, however, has been a mystery. The authors of the Nature article write that the centuries long cold spell might have been caused by meltwater from the disappearing glaciers, cooling the North Atlantic.

The Laurentide Ice Sheet covered parts of North America with ice up to two miles thick for more than a million years. When the Earth began to warm 10,000 years ago, it retreated back toward the poles. The ice sheet left in its wake at least two lakes containing more water than the Great Lakes combined.

In the Hudson Bay, ice held the water in place like a plug in a bathtub. When the plug finally melted, trillions of gallons gushed into the Labrador Sea, flowing out at 100 times the rate water leaves the Mississippi.

www.dinosauria.com...



The effect that we are having on "global warming"? Hardly any at all. "Global warming" is psuedo science that was born of politics latching onto a highly speculative theory. SOME climatologists will spout this crap for largely party line political reasons. The majority of true climatologists who maintain thier scientific integrity (which is most of them) have taken a "wait and see" approach, as they are not at all sold on the theory.

I don't know where you get your "wait and see" approach feelings, since nearly the whole international community of Climatologists addressed the UN that if Global Warming wasn't curbed, there would be a good chance of an Ice Age, they put out that warning in I think 1995...if we can curb global warming, we're causing a part of it.

Hmmm...would this be the same UN conference that was largely orchestrated by the liberal members in order to advance the Green agenda? Of course that is the overwhelming opinion put forth, as it is on the media... meanwhile, those who actually look at data are still waiting to see, and not getting involved in the politics.

Let me put it this way: last year I was faced with a proposal from my municipal government regarding a clean air initiative. Considering that we are under regulatory review by state and federal environmental agencies for non compliance to air quality standards, we were under a LOT of pressure to sign off on the proposal (which incidentally, was NOT composed by any scientists... god I hate it when politicians jump into crap they dont know anything about)

The proposal contained a good deal of language concerning "greenhouse gasses" and "global warming". I sent it right back and said I could not sign off on it because there is not enough credible information to support the assertions made in that document.

That pissed a lot of politicos off (oh well), and eventually they came and talked to us scientists, who went and talked to the regulatory agencies and hammered out a WORKABLE plan (that DID NOT include ANY references to the "greenhouse effect")

Originally posted by Freddie
Hmm. The site claims copyright protection on what was posted in the original thread. And from a moderator.

It is perfectly acceptable to post excerpts and a link to the proper work.

I disregard the UN anyways, so fairly noted about their possible librality...however I think it would be ignorant to shrug off our possible effects on Global Warming...but I suppose the problem could be is that we have indeed effected our Ozone in some way, and so confuse the whole climate change with that...?

Eitherway...I'm looking forward to an Ice Age, heat is annoying...

Actually, we are currently IN an ice age...

Ice House conditions are defined by any time in the geologic record where solid frozen water exists on the planet year round. Hot House conditions (characterized by ocean High Stands and large amounts of dolomite/high mag calcite formation) is defined as times in the geologic record where ice DOES NOT form year round anywhere on the planet.

As we do have an ice cap at the poles, this is geologically defined as an ice age. They do however tend to get worse.

Yes...well don't be so technical and just pray it gets "worse"...or in our case...better

Originally posted by Freddie
Hmm. The site claims copyright protection on what was posted in the original thread. And from a moderator.

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I am with you all the way Freddie, there is a double standard no matter where you go.

"I have posted before that I flatly dont believe the crap being shoveled on us by democrats who know not a damn thing about science that the world is ending due to "Global Warming". "
DR quote

I have received warnings for less and have had my threads thrown in the garbage for less, and have received no response to requests or complaints
This is not a perfect world, although there are those here that are puffed up with perfect air!

tut

I read a really good article that said global warming may change over the years. They looked at records from years ago or something like that and found that temperature has been going up and down for a long time now. I wish I still had that article.

Here's some data I posted on an earlier thread concerning this theory. please remember that global warming was and still is based on computer simulations. Although it is still championed by the liberal left, actual data does not corrospond to the computer model. It seems that politicans have a hard time understanding the Earth's climate. I do, however like how they have now linked any cooling to their theory as well. If the Earth gets warmer or cooler, its our fault. Seeing as it is a dynamic system affected by the inner core fusion, solar winds and rotational drift, I'd say they have all the bases covered.




Here's a link from a recent comprehensive study done on the global warming theory. Its the most scientific, less political study done to date.

www.cfa.harvard.edu...



Most of the scientific community has pretty much abandoned the global warming theory and only a handful who selfishly defend their theory and many political activist groups using the idea as ammunition to to exercise control over others still champion the entity.

www.oism.org...


While it may be true that the earth is warming, its by far not the warmest climate and studies show an actual warm-up from little Ice Age at the end of the mid-evil period. The important fact overlooked by the ones that use this as ammo for their political platforms is that the rise in carbon has followed the warm up by about 300 years and not preceeded it.


While your climate may presently be abnormally warm, the eastern US has experienced abnormally cool weather thus far this spring. Although we think it may be the result of some major climate change, we soon find by looking back at meteorlogical records that this isn't the case. For the most part, we tend to compare our climate to only the past 1 or 2 seasons when a longterm view is needed to make such a judgement. Rest assured that when the Vikings settled Greenland and founded a semi-agricultural culture, the Earth was much warmer globally. For more answers to your inquiry, I provide a few more links.

news.bbc.co.uk...

www.sciencedaily.com...

www.worldnetdaily.com...

news.bbc.co.uk...


...and all you could care to know about C02....

www-eosdis.ornl.gov...



..as well as what leading climatologist have to say..

www.newsmax.com...


The fatc that this theory is a dead one does not mean me or anyone else is advocating the act of pollution..just that carbon is naturally occuring and does play an important role in the atmosphere..but the levels cannot be changed enough by humans producing it to change our climate globally from its course. We can, however see the LOCALIZED affects of pollution from the 'dust domes' that tend to form over major industrialized metros.

Well there cracker heads,

Gaze upon this.

www.iceagenow.com...

Global warming leads to Ice Age and there is geological evidence and proof that it naturally occurs every 11,ooo years. It is no Big Deal!
\However that said, the burning of fossil feuls and the advancement of the industrial revolution is stupidity at its peak. And is purely driven by industrial maniacs that seek financial power, aas if that held any consequence over a 12,000 year period!

Wake Up

TUT

The Earth ain't going anywhere....WE are. The Earth will shake us (humans) off, like a bad case of fleas...

I've always thought this global warming thing was a sham... Hell, we had one of our coldest winters on record recently...I actually had to fire up the ancient heaters in my house (and man, they are ancient).

Does anyone here think pollution is a major cause to "Global Warmin"? Because I've heard it is and I for the most part believe it. It seems logical. No?

Originally posted by mrmulder
Does anyone here think pollution is a major cause to "Global Warmin"? Because I've heard it is and I for the most part believe it. It seems logical. No?

No.

Please read the above material, it explains why this is NOT true.

I have been working in the environmental field, and although we do in fact have some very serious problems with pollution, it is blown FAR out of proportion by the media. And, there is NO evidence that it affects global warming, except for that put forth for political reasons.

Originally posted by astrocreep
The fatc that this theory is a dead one does not mean me or anyone else is advocating the act of pollution..just that carbon is naturally occuring and does play an important role in the atmosphere..but the levels cannot be changed enough by humans producing it to change our climate globally from its course. We can, however see the LOCALIZED affects of pollution from the 'dust domes' that tend to form over major industrialized metros.

Oh, I missed that quote. Sorry about that.

Originally posted by dragonrider

Originally posted by mrmulder
Does anyone here think pollution is a major cause to "Global Warmin"? Because I've heard it is and I for the most part believe it. It seems logical. No?

No.

Please read the above material, it explains why this is NOT true.

I have been working in the environmental field, and although we do in fact have some very serious problems with pollution, it is blown FAR out of proportion by the media. And, there is NO evidence that it affects global warming, except for that put forth for political reasons.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I also have been employed as a consultant in the enviromental field since 1999, as a matter of fact here a couple of years ago I was contacted and contracted by Alyeska as a first responder to an idiot that shot a hole in the pipeline. A C-140 was dispatched from Elmendorf to Kenai the night of the incident and my equipment was loaded and headed that way. I followed commercially so I could drink and think about it.
And I disagree withe the Grumpy Dragon.
And I gave up my position of DragonSlayer long ago, getting to old to mess with upstart Dragons that Breath Fire and Ice.
I deefer to my assosciates.
========================================


World Scientists' Warning to Humanity
From the Union of Concerned Scientists



We are on a collision course to disaster if we continue to damage the planet.

Editor's Note: Some 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including the majority of Nobel laureates in the sciences, issued this appeal in November 1992. Their message is still valid today.

Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment and on critical resources. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society and the plant and animal kingdoms, and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know. Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about.

The environment is suffering critical stress:

www.actionbioscience.org...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

With all due respect,

tut tut

Hey everybody, sorry I've been MIA for the past few days. Been trapsing around the Smokeys on my vacation. Just wanted to offer a word of calming to Tut's post of such dyer pessimism about the environment. If you will read the links I posted above, I think you'll find that global warming preceeded the increase in CO2 which makes sense if you look at where thre bulk of the extra CO2 comes from. Humans produce only about 5% of global CO2.

I also stated that no one is advocating pollution and I strongly encourage anyone with knowledge of straight piped sewers or illegal dumping of trash or chemicals to please report this to your local law enforcement agency..however, driving you SUV to work or play everyday isn't gonna make one hill of beans to the atmosphere globally. You may contribute to local smog problems but the rise in CO2 in the upper atmoshpere isn't abnormal as it has been much much higher in the past and likewise the global temp has been higher too. I know a handful of climatologist and scientist still cling to the global warming theory..most likely pollitical activists and those persuaded to to stake their careers on it by pollitical activists but we here at ATS have discussed this sort of "theory guarding" by scientists in length and can recognize when someone refuses to release a faulted theory for these reasons. I once chimed in for the global warming crowd but time and research proved the actual conditions did not follow the computer model. We have dozens of other reasons why the earth has warmed the least of which is CO2 release. Its pollitical, purely and simply and it disrupts and takes funds away from other important scientific work.

[Edited on 2-8-2003 by astrocreep]