White House: U.S. is cold because the planet is hot

Once apon a time this cold weather and snow use to be called winter.

reply to post by Jobeycool


A star for you my friend, we don't need stinking mentally challenged morons in the white house under government pay roll to tells us what we used to know when we used to believe in nature and its natural cycles.

Now because we are as mentally challenged as the morons in white house on special interest payroll we need the government to tells us why we got seasons in the planet and how bad they are for us.

Incredible.

We know that there have been times when the earth climate was so cold that entire hemispheres were covered in ice, and the oceans were 100+ feet lower than now, and there were times when it was so hot there was little to no ice and the oceans were much levels were much higher. Everything else is highly speculative science at best.

For all we know, climate change can come gradually over long periods of time, for a large number of theoretical reasons, and it can come over shorter periods of time. Perhaps past mass-extinction events were a result of abrupt climate shifts, and for all we know now, we are entering a chaotic period of abrupt climate shift.

Could humanity survive if such a climate shift left the entire northern hemisphere covered in snow and ice, and in bitter cold temperatures that could last for decades?

Imagine the impact on livestock, agriculture, transportation, energy consumption, the economy... It would literally lead to a potential near mass-extinction for all of us.

The funny things is, that mankind will point fingers and blame others until the end. It is the nature of man in his arrogance to assume that he can control nature. Maybe it's time for a real wake up call?

Yeah sure! Fire melts steel, too!

reply to post by AthlonSavage


It's sad that more people don't understand terrestrial weather in relation to solar bodies and climate change. If the globes average temperature is rising, there will be exacerbated weather systems that can chill various regions (i.e.-North America and Europe).

That being said, we're also probably on the verge of experiencing another Maunder Minimum from the Sun, so everyone better have a good jacket nearby...for the next 80 years or so. Additionally anthropogenic-global warming is a shame at best...believe it and look forward to hearing your grand-children complain about paying carbon taxes on every purchase.

crazyewok
I see ATS does not understand the concept of ocean currents and there affect on weather.

Higher tempratures and melted ice have disrupted those, this leads to unpredictable weather.


Now im skeptical on the role humans have but climates do change, natrually it gets hotter and colder in cycles.

What's humorous to me is the fact this planet has been taking care of itself, climate-wise, for millions of years. And now some idiot decides we need to save the planet from ourselves. As if no one's in control, and if we don't act, we're all doomed.

Some of us are too smart for their own good.

AthlonSavage
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Why does it get colder when the planet is getting hotter?

It doesn't....this is stupid science. Schlock science. Political science.

If this were true then what about back in the Triassic, the Jurrassic etc? Were the winters then brutal, given that the average temperatures were several degrees warmer than now?

If this were true, then obviously the opposite should be true as well. Summers during the coldest of the Ice age must have been brutal, no?

Umm...NO! NO! and NO! Just NO!

Could global warming result in moving into a glaciation period? (After all, we are still in the Ice Age) Possibly so...but conditions have not been satisfied to prove that theory.

Okeyd57

crazyewok
I see ATS does not understand the concept of ocean currents and there affect on weather.

Higher tempratures and melted ice have disrupted those, this leads to unpredictable weather.


Now im skeptical on the role humans have but climates do change, natrually it gets hotter and colder in cycles.

What's humorous to me is the fact this planet has been taking care of itself, climate-wise, for millions of years. And now some idiot decides we need to save the planet from ourselves. As if no one's in control, and if we don't act, we're all doomed.

Some of us are too smart for their own good.

It is critical that we blame climate change on humans. Otherwise my Green stocks, my investments will be worthless.

Let's see...perhaps we should consider Solar Activity, perhaps we should also consider the weakening magnetosphere when we notice changes in climate patterns. OH HECK NO! We must ignore those and strictly focus on Human activity....

Ignore the hole in the magnetosphere the size of California over the Atlantic, instead we should convince the little people to cut their carbon footprint...all the while I am still flying around in my private jet.

EFF you Hollywood, EFF you Politicians, EFF you bigshot investors in Green Industry! Show me some leadership by doing so yourself in meaningful ways, then I may pay attention.

As long as Al Gore is riding around in his fleet of SUV's, flying around in private jets and living in a home that is 20 times the size of mine with a carbon footprint that would dwarf mine.... I will keep my middle finger extended for him. He has millions invested in the whole climate change crap.

Follow the money.

bbracken677

AthlonSavage
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Why does it get colder when the planet is getting hotter?

It doesn't....this is stupid science. Schlock science. Political science.

If this were true then what about back in the Triassic, the Jurrassic etc? Were the winters then brutal, given that the average temperatures were several degrees warmer than now?

If this were true, then obviously the opposite should be true as well. Summers during the coldest of the Ice age must have been brutal, no?

Umm...NO! NO! and NO! Just NO!

Could global warming result in moving into a glaciation period? (After all, we are still in the Ice Age) Possibly so...but conditions have not been satisfied to prove that theory.

It is beyond illogical to compare temperatures and weather patterns from the Jurrasic, Triassic etc. to what we are experiencing currently. the continents were not where they are now which means ocean currents were nothing like they are now high means weather patterns were not remotely the same. The atmosphere was also slightly different as well. All of these factors contribute to a very different world and environment because of the way thermal comvection acts. The only schlock science is dismissing something out of hand without exploring all the variables.

m.space.com...

Xterrain
reply to post by AthlonSavage

 

It's sad that more people don't understand terrestrial weather in relation to solar bodies and climate change. If the globes average temperature is rising, there will be exacerbated weather systems that can chill various regions (i.e.-North America and Europe).

That being said, we're also probably on the verge of experiencing another Maunder Minimum from the Sun, so everyone better have a good jacket nearby...for the next 80 years or so. Additionally anthropogenic-global warming is a shame at best...believe it and look forward to hearing your grand-children complain about paying carbon taxes on every purchase.

If you take the earth's history into consideration regarding the weather/climate we have experienced during most of the last 6000 year or so you would realize (generic you) that we have had very mild weather with little variations. Historically speaking the earth's weather tends to be more extreme, more violent than we are used to. Nature has been nice to us humans recently. There is no logical reason to expect such treatment to continue indefinitely, in a manner of speaking.

Even though we are at a solar max, it has been a very mild solar maximum. Add to that the weakening magnetosphere (I am sure if we try hard enough we can blame that on human activity as well??) and you are very likely to see weird weather.

I live in Dallas...this has been one of the coldest winter's I have ever experienced. Last winter, here in Dallas, was more like a fall transitioning into spring type weather. This last summer was also very mild.

Kinda seems like with every unexpected bit of weather we are like chicken little. I remember a very cold winter back in the late 70s, early 80s when I lived in MS. I did not think much about it in terms of global consequences. It's a fact that some winters are colder than others.

Climate change is a different animal and taking a single summer, or a single winter to have some deep significant meaning is bad science. I will grant that it does appear to be changing (climate) but I know enough about geology (hence past climates) to know that to blame climate change solely on human activity is rather disingenuous.

If we think we can affect the weather, then what is the answer? A return to horse and buggy days? Not practical. Anything short of that is just peein in the wind, IMO.

I mean really, there are 7 billion humans on the planet...do we really think that if we cut co2 emissions by a few percentage points that all climate ills will disappear?

I think not.

peter vlar

bbracken677

AthlonSavage
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Why does it get colder when the planet is getting hotter?

It doesn't....this is stupid science. Schlock science. Political science.

If this were true then what about back in the Triassic, the Jurrassic etc? Were the winters then brutal, given that the average temperatures were several degrees warmer than now?

If this were true, then obviously the opposite should be true as well. Summers during the coldest of the Ice age must have been brutal, no?

Umm...NO! NO! and NO! Just NO!

Could global warming result in moving into a glaciation period? (After all, we are still in the Ice Age) Possibly so...but conditions have not been satisfied to prove that theory.

It is beyond illogical to compare temperatures and weather patterns from the Jurrasic, Triassic etc. to what we are experiencing currently. the continents were not where they are now which means ocean currents were nothing like they are now high means weather patterns were not remotely the same. The atmosphere was also slightly different as well. All of these factors contribute to a very different world and environment because of the way thermal comvection acts. The only schlock science is dismissing something out of hand without exploring all the variables.

m.space.com...

Ah...true enough to a degree. However, during a growth of glaciation do we experience hotter summers? Our last period of strong glacial growth occurred not so long ago and the continents were placed as they are now. What were summers like?

It is beyond logic to take a single winter and draw conclusions regarding climate change. It is beyond logic to disregard the effect of solar activity as well as the weakening of the magnetosphere and then blame climate change on human activity. It is beyond logic, taking solar activity and the weakening magnetosphere in account, to believe that man can somehow cut carbon emissions by a few percentage points and "fix" things.

I like to tell people that if "global warming" is due to man's activities then why don't we all just turn on the AC and open windows and doors to cool the earth (I never explain why that wont work at all). The funny thing is that no one ever catches the fallacy...but yet they do mindlessly repeat the mantra of climate change. This is rather disturbing....specially when you consider that the most vocal of global warming/climate change advocates are heavily invested in industries that are positioned to profit heavily from legislation that would result should everyone get bent about climate change.

When I follow the money, I want to just puke. It's all about man's activities and has nothing to do with solar activity or the earth's magnetic field. Let's all sing koom bayah and declare man can fix it by cutting carbon emissions by 10% or whatever.

BS

vkey08

NullVoid
Without reading other people posts, I say this

HAARP

How doth thou explain the climate changes that the planet has been through (periodic warming/cooling cycles) one as recently as the late 1800's when HAARP didn't exist? You can't... because HARRP has nothing to do with any of this...

Climate change in cycles, sure, agreed, but they dont happen in 1 year difference.

I dont have seasons, and yet , my trees shed its leaves, but I'm not supposed to have seasons, so, what is the trees telling me ?
Weather screwed is not a direct HAARP manipulation, but a side effect.

The bad thing is, we will suffer from nature response.
The good thing is, the user will suffer too.

NullVoid

vkey08

NullVoid
Without reading other people posts, I say this

HAARP

How doth thou explain the climate changes that the planet has been through (periodic warming/cooling cycles) one as recently as the late 1800's when HAARP didn't exist? You can't... because HARRP has nothing to do with any of this...

Climate change in cycles, sure, agreed, but they dont happen in 1 year difference.

I dont have seasons, and yet , my trees shed its leaves, but I'm not supposed to have seasons, so, what is the trees telling me ?
Weather screwed is not a direct HAARP manipulation, but a side effect.

The bad thing is, we will suffer from nature response.
The good thing is, the user will suffer too.

HAARP

*chuckle*

NullVoid

vkey08

NullVoid
Without reading other people posts, I say this

HAARP

How doth thou explain the climate changes that the planet has been through (periodic warming/cooling cycles) one as recently as the late 1800's when HAARP didn't exist? You can't... because HARRP has nothing to do with any of this...

Climate change in cycles, sure, agreed, but they dont happen in 1 year difference.

I dont have seasons, and yet , my trees shed its leaves, but I'm not supposed to have seasons, so, what is the trees telling me ?
Weather screwed is not a direct HAARP manipulation, but a side effect.

The bad thing is, we will suffer from nature response.
The good thing is, the user will suffer too.

None of this has been a one year difference, the NOAA has been putting out reports for YEARS showing the gradual changes we are now seeing the effects of. HAARP is for low frequency ultrasonic waves for communications research, nothing more, hell the antennas alone are so simple in nature you could probably build an array in your backyard. However...

We have had more volcanic activity in the past few years then we have had in a long while, that ejecta spewing into the atmosphere, combined with what man (and Cows, gotta remember the cows) put out, would cause a short acting situation where you'd see the difference in only a one year period..

I wish everyone would stop blaming everything on HARRP or Fukishima

AthlonSavage
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Why does it get colder when the planet is getting hotter?

I don't mean this to come across as condescending, but here 'goes anyhow...

A lot of people are firmly against the facts of global warming (by facts I mean the measured, factual data that the planet has been increasing in temperature - the debate/theories/opinions being the reason(s) why it is happening.) From what I have seen, such people usually base their denial on the temperature being colder where they live, or the fact that there is still snow and ice in parts of the world despite an average planet-wide temperature increase of a degree or two.

For those confused, to sum it up simply, the "average planetary temperature" refers to the average temperature across all of earth. This means if Earth had only 4 different temperatures, and they were 0, 50, 75, and 100, you would add those together and divide by 4 (225/4=56.25°)
The people who are confused and experiencing a 20° day will tell you there's no way it's true, because it's 20° by them. What they don't understand its that Earth is large, and does not have a uniform temperature throughout its geography, nor throughout the seasons.

To make matters worse, some of those people don't understand that weather systems are complex. Things like warmer than usual ocean temperatures can shift patterns and cause colder than usual weather in other locations.

If more people paid attention in school past 2nd grade or bothered to put their literacy to use, these extremely basic concepts wouldn't be so confusing to so many people.

Personally, I don't believe that many people are actually that stupid, I think many just turn it into a political issue and think that by denying common sense it makes their political viewpoints somehow more valid to them.

bbracken677

peter vlar

bbracken677

AthlonSavage
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Why does it get colder when the planet is getting hotter?

It doesn't....this is stupid science. Schlock science. Political science.

If this were true then what about back in the Triassic, the Jurrassic etc? Were the winters then brutal, given that the average temperatures were several degrees warmer than now?

If this were true, then obviously the opposite should be true as well. Summers during the coldest of the Ice age must have been brutal, no?

Umm...NO! NO! and NO! Just NO!

Could global warming result in moving into a glaciation period? (After all, we are still in the Ice Age) Possibly so...but conditions have not been satisfied to prove that theory.

It is beyond illogical to compare temperatures and weather patterns from the Jurrasic, Triassic etc. to what we are experiencing currently. the continents were not where they are now which means ocean currents were nothing like they are now high means weather patterns were not remotely the same. The atmosphere was also slightly different as well. All of these factors contribute to a very different world and environment because of the way thermal comvection acts. The only schlock science is dismissing something out of hand without exploring all the variables.

m.space.com...

Ah...true enough to a degree. However, during a growth of glaciation do we experience hotter summers? Our last period of strong glacial growth occurred not so long ago and the continents were placed as they are now. What were summers like?

Summers were more mild during the last glacial maximum. The reason for this is somewhat in tandem with why we would be experiencing more precipitation during winter currently. More winter precipitation is a result of the increased level of water vapor saturating the upper atmosphere. When there are massive ice sheets like during the last glacial maximum there is less moisture in the Atmosphere as there is more locked into glaciers and ice sheets. Thus you end up with temperate climates even in tropical zones.

It is beyond logic to take a single winter and draw conclusions regarding climate change. It is beyond logic to disregard the effect of solar activity as well as the weakening of the magnetosphere and then blame climate change on human activity. It is beyond logic, taking solar activity and the weakening magnetosphere in account, to believe that man can somehow cut carbon emissions by a few percentage points and "fix" things.

I completely agree. It's like looking at a Picasso and only seeing the reds but ignoring the other colors. You're going to have no idea of what the picture is supposed to be. One winter is a blip on the radar. However when there is over a century of fairly accurate first hand climate data to go along with a few hundred thousand years of ice cores and tree ring samples it does paint a picture that leans heavily in favor of mankind having a rather averse affect on worldwide climate trends. That's not to say that there aren't natural cycles, that would be ludicrous as the data is incontrovertible. However when you look at the data for the past 200 years there has been a huge, unnatural explosion of atmospheric carbon since the dawn of the industrial revolution and increased pollutants caused by humans. But you're completely right in your assertion that every variable must be accounted for. Particularly so with the waning magnetosphere. Is it weakening due to solar forces? Or is it part of the natural procession of pole reversals? What effects could we expect and for how long? A pole reversal can last 2000 years, do we have to prepare for 2 millennia of catastrophic atmospheric fluctuations nf weather patterns? These R definitely things that need to be explored further and faster.

I like to tell people that if "global warming" is due to man's activities then why don't we all just turn on the AC and open windows and doors to cool the earth (I never explain why that wont work at all). The funny thing is that no one ever catches the fallacy...but yet they do mindlessly repeat the mantra of climate change. This is rather disturbing....specially when you consider that the most vocal of global warming/climate change advocates are heavily invested in industries that are positioned to profit heavily from legislation that would result should everyone get bent about climate change.

Sadly, a lot of people are sheep, the rest are just damned lazy and haven't stumbled across concepts like due diligence. But that could send me off on a massive thread derailing tangent so ill stop right there.

When I follow the money, I want to just puke. It's all about man's activities and has nothing to do with solar activity or the earth's magnetic field. Let's all sing koom bayah and declare man can fix it by cutting carbon emissions by 10% or whatever.

BS

Again, I agree. Al Gore is one of the worlds greatest hypocrites. While pontificating about saving the climate and saving our history he spent a great deal of money at his plantation using heavy machinery to bulldoze and destroy Mississippi Culture Mounds into the river. To me that is simply disgusting. Unfortunately, the fact that he's little more than a money whoring opportunist doesn't necessarily make the concept of global climate change wrong. It just makes it less palatable because he's such a prominent spokesperson which to me is unfortunate. Instead of taking the time to at least investigate all sides and potentialities, people simply write it off as nonsense because someone like Gore has become the "face" of the movement. A far s I'm concerned he is to climate science what Dawkins is to Anthropology, a belligerent face who may or may not mean well and may or may not be a profiteer bt at the end of the day is still correct but the message is too bitter to swallow due to who is spreading the word.

I guess we'll find out whether or not this AGW-caused "wavier Polar Vortex outside of natural variability" theory is correct or not over the next 5-10 years...

Until then, it's just "weather" (as defined by climatology).



This might be why there's been no mention of it in the IPCC's AR reports as of yet:

A study in 2001 found that stratospheric circulation can have anomalous effects on the weather regimes. In the same year researchers found a statistical correlation between weak polar vortex and outbreaks of severe cold in the Northern Hemisphere. In more recent years scientists identified interactions with Arctic sea ice decline, reduced snow cover, evapotranspiration patterns, NAO anomalies or weather anomalies which are linked to the polar vortex and jet stream configuration. However, because the specific observations are considered short-term observations (starting c. 13 years ago) there is considerable uncertainty in the conclusions. Climatology observations require several decades to distinguish natural variability from climate trends.

Wiki

So since this is the first major Sudden Stratospheric Warming event to occur in approximately 20 years, Holden's little speech might be considered somewhat hyperbolic at this time, scientifically speaking.

reply to post by pikestaff


d00d, I wasn't being serious in my post :p

Cows? Seriously? I see some folks talking about the methane that cows produce---inferring that cows are somehow responsible for increases in methane levels.....sigh.....do you know how many bison were on this continent before the US government put them on the "hit list" so railroads could be built across the continent? May I suggest you do just a tiny bit of research on what methane levels across the plains must have been with those millions of tons of manure and methane-producing critters roaming about?
I've yet to meet a True Believer in human-made climate change that can explain to me why the solar cycle, volcanic eruptions and several other factors are never included in the computer models for our future. Could it be because those things aren't predicable? We've been watching them for centuries now, recording them precisely and yet the truthful scientists, those with no lobbying or investment issues, will admit that these things are not predicable. Right now they are scratching their heads about the solar cycles. They have no idea of the actual effects of the multitude of volcanos now pumping thousands of pounds of various chemical mixtures from deep in the earth into the atmosphere.
I get a bit tired of hearing "scientists" proclaiming their "solutions" to a warming trend while completely discounting the past activities right here on our earth and on the sun. Have the schools stopped teaching about the Ice Ages, the little Ice Ages, sun spot cycles etc.? Logical, critical thinking requires that all factors be considered and yet when logical, thinking people bring up past cycles and sun cycles, the True Believers scoff.
I have no problem believing that climate change occurs. It always has changed. What really bothers me is that the True Believers put their faith into computer models which are as incomplete as the visions of old seen and told by the wizards who gazed into crystal balls or animal entrails. If those True Believers do indeed believe the "man-caused climate change," I have no problem with that as long as they walk the walk while trying to convince me with logic and comprehensive data. But those who are followers of BigAl and his lot, flying across the globe, driving the very SUVs they are condemning, buying oceanfront homes that will disappear shortly under the ocean---seriously? And please, those of you who think BigAl is the bringer of Truth, just remember that while he was "fighting the big tobacco interests," he was collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars in tobacco subsidies from the government on the tobacco being grown on his land. Can you really trust such a man?
However, let me say that if you are in the 20-30-somethings, I know that you've had it crammed down your throat since you were in preschool or kindergarten so I can see why you "believe" but please, please try to find a way to wake up the critical thinking skills that were turned off by your education system.

reply to post by diggindirt

I've yet to meet a True Believer in human-made climate change that can explain to me why the solar cycle, volcanic eruptions and several other factors are never included in the computer models for our future. Could it be because those things aren't predicable? We've been watching them for centuries now, recording them precisely and yet the truthful scientists, those with no lobbying or investment issues, will admit that these things are not predicable. Right now they are scratching their heads about the solar cycles. They have no idea of the actual effects of the multitude of volcanos now pumping thousands of pounds of various chemical mixtures from deep in the earth into the atmosphere.

Simply because a) you can't blame man for them
b) they are not controllable, therefore there is no money to be made there
c) they would represent an effect that would have greater ramifications than anything man could do, barring nuclear winter.
d) they do not fit the agenda

Not because they cannot be predicted, since obviously if you want to prove a climate model, you would have to include such events as occurred in the past in order to correlate with the climate or weather during that period. A correct model would take the solar activity into account, at the very least, simply because without it you have crap. Any model that does NOT include solar activity cannot possibly give accurate results.

What you could do, if solar activity is included, is run basic scenarios where by the solar activity is at lvl x and this is the general world avg temps as a result. Anything less than that is crap.