Options
The battle for Warmth and Cooling.....
binauralsounds
Posts: 1,357
Here are a few articles I've had in my faves folder and wanted to share.. From what I've read here on the train and to what I've read elsewhere, I believe it all to be cyclical.
Oceans Suddenly Cooled!
http://www.cgfi.org/cgficommentary/sudden-cooling-of-world-oceans-revealed-by-new-research
National Academy Flunks as Global Warming Referee
http://www.cgfi.org/cgficommentary/national-academy-fails-global-warming-ref
(From 1988) Global Cooling has begun!!
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf116/sf116p12.htm
Battle against Global cooling
http://www.breakfornews.com/articles/GlobalCooling.htm
Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/april2006/15/warming2.html
There are ominous signs that the Earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically
http://www.the-signal.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=32376&format=html
Ice Age To Start In 50 Years
http://www.russia-ic.com/news/show/2597/
Good/Interesting interview with Dr. Fred Singer
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/singer.html
Climate of Fear: From Nuclear Winter to Global Warming
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5790
Good read... this quote sounds like the moving train.. "Stated simply (and probably unfairly), [I think] conservatives do not believe that global warming exists (because they don't want it to exist) whereas liberals believe in global warming (because they want it to exist)".
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/aprilholladay/2006-08-07-global-warming-truth_x.htm
EDITED:
And this just in TONIGHT....
Climate panel lowers global warming forecast...
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20332352-601,00.html
while this still states global warming exists, it does show that scientists everyday change their stance on the issue!! As I've tried to say over and over, it's cyclical and the scientists show this by changing their stance/predictions every few weeks/months/years!
Oceans Suddenly Cooled!
http://www.cgfi.org/cgficommentary/sudden-cooling-of-world-oceans-revealed-by-new-research
National Academy Flunks as Global Warming Referee
http://www.cgfi.org/cgficommentary/national-academy-fails-global-warming-ref
(From 1988) Global Cooling has begun!!
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf116/sf116p12.htm
Battle against Global cooling
http://www.breakfornews.com/articles/GlobalCooling.htm
Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/april2006/15/warming2.html
There are ominous signs that the Earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically
http://www.the-signal.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=32376&format=html
Ice Age To Start In 50 Years
http://www.russia-ic.com/news/show/2597/
Good/Interesting interview with Dr. Fred Singer
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/singer.html
Climate of Fear: From Nuclear Winter to Global Warming
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5790
Good read... this quote sounds like the moving train.. "Stated simply (and probably unfairly), [I think] conservatives do not believe that global warming exists (because they don't want it to exist) whereas liberals believe in global warming (because they want it to exist)".
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/aprilholladay/2006-08-07-global-warming-truth_x.htm
EDITED:
And this just in TONIGHT....
Climate panel lowers global warming forecast...
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20332352-601,00.html
while this still states global warming exists, it does show that scientists everyday change their stance on the issue!! As I've tried to say over and over, it's cyclical and the scientists show this by changing their stance/predictions every few weeks/months/years!
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
I absolutely agree with that statement! The few on here lambast me for pointing out contradictory information like the above links. If that's there thing, so be it. I'm just stating my position which is I believe it all to be cyclical!
As far as polluting, absolutely, it is NOT a good thing!
and binaural, a few years ago in research for a paper that i was writing i came across a report that said the air was cleaner in london in the year 2000, than it was in 1900...have you seen that one?
If you acknowledge that we need to control our air pollution then you have to acknowledge that given the earth's population, the amount of abuse we are inflicting on this planet is a huge issue. Too much of anything can cause a problem. 6 billion people contributing to this problem can make the problem very alarming. The earth may have always been heating and cooling for years...but there has never before been 6 billion people contributing to this problem and consuming more than ever in the past. You have to add in all factors and for see the amount of damage that can be done. Past situations aren't the same as the current one. Too ignore this can become deadly.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
The last article (Australian one) does not show any of the science that brought along the conclusion except blast the scientific community. Not once does it show any statistics, research findings or any such evidence to disprove climate change.
The article Re: ocean temperatures falling, I again haven't been provided with any data or references to scientific research. To the contrary, I have seen many articles that refute this. Hurricane activity and extreme weather in coastal areas have continually broken records for both frequency and intensity which is attributed directly to warmer ocean temperatures. Monsoons and hurricanes have dominated news stories which would imply that the oceans are not cooling at all.
The article which uses grape vineyards in Britain as proof of warmer temperatures following the medieval ice age is flawed. It may indeed have been warmer in Britain, but colder globally. Global warming speaks of a global temperature trend, not a regional one. So, it may have been warmer in Britain, but colder in other places, but the science does show from worldwide tree samples, ice core samples, pollen samples, that the global temperature was indeed lower then. The article only basis its conlcusions on assumptions based on the vineyards, but offers no empirical data.
I won't go through them all here, but I think my point is that there really isn't much of an argument at all on the subject in scientific circles. There are some scientists that believe it is not occurring, but then again, you can have scientists that will claim cigerettes are not linked to cancer.
Monkeyspanker, you're right the air is cleaner now than it was in 1900 in London, however globally there pollution is much more distributed than it was back then. We can indeed alter the atmosphere. The atmospheric layer that contains greenhouse gasses is very thin and we are altering its composition by emitting billions of tons of CO2 into it. Of course we can change it. We proved we could change it when we opened a hole in the ozone layer.
Nicely done.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
I believe that to be true. the articles are very good reads.
yes, earth has been expanding and contracting since the beginning of it's existence, and as book did state; never has there been the pop living nor the technology to destroy. until 1800's when industrialization began. think about it for a second. many people live in suburbia have no inkling as to how even that piece of plastic that holds together a six pac can cause devastation and murder to species...
so here's my question......how do we stop this train of destruccion? ppl like my mom think that we will live in those geocommunities on mars becasue we weil have exhausted all resources; air wil be polluted; water will be polluted and not wind nor rain will be even able to cleanse...my question to her is why can't we save the planet we live on? i don't wanna live in a bubble; i wanna live in lake county and to keep it precious; safe from developers...
before we see attractions of strip malls; think of mother nature and think that even that piece of log laying alongside a coutnry road is a habitat to species of food chain....
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
i prefer sleeping with just the sheet and the window open. however, my wife being filipino, can't seem to get warm enough. it's a constant struggle.
Esther's here and she's sick?
hi Esther, now we are all going to be sick, thanks
I take it that you are of the opinion that we do not accept the theory. Why is this so? Just out of curiosity, what is it about the science that you feel is wrong?
Deep ice tells long climate story
By Jonathan Amos
Science reporter, BBC News, Norwich
Epica drills have extracted ice from deep under the surface
Carbon dioxide levels are substantially higher now than at anytime in the last 800,000 years, the latest study of ice drilled out of Antarctica confirms.
The in-depth analysis of air bubbles trapped in a 3.2km-long core of frozen snow shows current greenhouse gas concentrations are unprecedented.
The East Antarctic core is the longest, deepest ice column yet extracted.
Project scientists say its contents indicate humans could be bringing about dangerous climate changes.
"My point would be that there's nothing in the ice core that gives us any cause for comfort," said Dr Eric Wolff from the British Antarctic Survey (BAS).
"There's nothing that suggests that the Earth will take care of the increase in carbon dioxide. The ice core suggests that the increase in carbon dioxide will definitely give us a climate change that will be dangerous," he told BBC News.
The Antarctic researcher was speaking here at the British Association's (BA) Science Festival.
Slice of history
The ice core comes from a region of the White Continent known as Dome Concordia (Dome C). It has been drilled out by the European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (Epica), a 10-country consortium.
The column's value to science is the tiny pockets of ancient air that were locked into its millennia of accumulating snowflakes.
Each slice of this now compacted snow records a moment in Earth history, giving researchers a direct measure of past environmental conditions.
Not only can scientists see past concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane - the two principal human-produced gases now blamed for global warming - in the slices, they can also gauge past temperatures from the samples, too.
This is done by analysing the presence of different types, or isotopes, of hydrogen atom that are found preferentially in precipitating water (snow) when temperatures are relatively warm.
'Scary' rate
Initial results from the Epica core were published in 2004 and 2005, detailing the events back to 440,000 years and 650,000 years respectively. Scientists have now gone the full way through the column, back another 150,000 years.
The picture is the same: carbon dioxide and temperature rise and fall in step.
Like tiny time capsules, bubbles trap ancient samples of atmosphere
"Ice cores reveal the Earth's natural climate rhythm over the last 800,000 years. When carbon dioxide changed there was always an accompanying climate change. Over the last 200 years human activity has increased carbon dioxide to well outside the natural range," explained Dr Wolff.
The "scary thing", he added, was the rate of change now occurring in CO2 concentrations. In the core, the fastest increase seen was of the order of 30 parts per million (ppm) by volume over a period of roughly 1,000 years.
"The last 30 ppm of increase has occurred in just 17 years. We really are in the situation where we don't have an analogue in our records," he said.
Natural buffer
The plan now is to try to extend the ice-core record even further back in time. Scientists think another location, near to a place known as Dome A (Dome Argus), could allow them to sample atmospheric gases up to a million and a half years ago.
Some of the increases in carbon dioxide will be alleviated by natural "sinks" on the land and in the oceans, such as the countless planktonic organisms that effectively pull carbon out of the atmosphere as they build skeletons and shell coverings.
But Dr Corinne Le Quéré, of the University of East Anglia and BAS, warned the festival that these sinks may become less efficient over time.
We could not rely on them to keep on buffering our emissions, she said.
"For example, we don't know what the effect will be of ocean acidification on marine ecosystems. There is potential for deterioration," she explained.
More CO2 absorbed by the oceans will raise their pH, and a number of recent studies have concluded that this increase in acidity will eventually disrupt the ability of marine micro-organisms to use the calcium carbonate in the water to produce their hard parts.
i took my study a bit further and looked at el nino's patterns...for myself, watching el nino y la nina patterns pretty much gives a great measureing tool to make observatons without scientific proof....
i do know there are many, many gov't out there trying to address the issue...
but ala s, it may be too late .....
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
why won't you answer the posts that put forth the scientific basis for climate change?
we are well beyond the whether its real or not stage ... even that dumbass bush has acknowledged our impact ... you can post all the articles from op-ed pieces u want but the PR campaign to discredit climate change is just about dead ...
the reality and the science has taken over ...
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
naděje umírá poslední
this insn't his first post ... its the same thing every time ... in all honesty - i like when he posts ... it puts it out there which is important ...
yeah polaris, go!!!
and gimme some more hope.
great summary you put here....
...the PR campaign might be just about dead, but as we see so clearly here,
all humans stand still and still do not enough to save at least some of our great life/ planet.
...but lets hope, and hey, there could be some chance by now,
cause at least reality and science have taken over.... so there should be a solution to be found sooner or later.
...the world is come undone, I like to change it everyday but change don't come at once, it's a wave, building before it breaks.
The first two articles that you refer to as very good reads are from the Hudson Institure. The Hudson Institute is a conservative thinktank on the bankroll of ExxonMobil.
This next article is from an astology site:
This next article distorts a study, then they include commentary by Dr Benny Peiser, from the International Policy Network, which is on ExxonMobil's bankroll.
Here the author, Prof Bob Carter, is employed by the Tech Central Science Foundation, bankrolled by ExxonMobil.
This next article is an opinion piece from a republican state senator: Dr. Fred Singer is President of the The Science & Environmental Policy Project, which of course is funded by ExxonMobil. Also Dr Singer has served as a consultant to several oil companies. And he has worked in the EPA.
This next one is an opinion piece cluttered with misleading statements and innaccurate conclusions. This last one is an incomplete brief pulled from a draft, certainly out of context. The author, and you, confuse tightening of an estimate with changing of a stance.
I actually tried to do this, but couldn't stomach getting through them all.
yeah. lets make this threat spreading around, especially it is now so obvious that we indeed have to struggle a big PR agenda on that one.
thanks, big times.
...the world is come undone, I like to change it everyday but change don't come at once, it's a wave, building before it breaks.
and how long before he puts another post without responding to this one? ...
1. yes, there can be a cooling too. This can be related to the collapse of the ocean thermohaline circulation (THC). This is a vertical circulation in the ocean, to not be confused with the gulf stream that is instead a wind-driven surface horizontal circulation. The THC bring warm waters from the equator to the artic region. There it sinks and brings deep cold water back. It looks like that the THC is sinking further south. This can imply a cooling of the northern regions (due to the lack of warm equatiorial waters arriving there) and a warming of the equatorial regions. There's some different possible patterns/scenarios for this, so don't believe anyone that tell you that he knows the truth.
2. there's a freshening of the artic ocean, as a result of the collapse of the THC, not as a result of polar cups melting.
So, yes, there's a climate change going on also in the ocean, and this feedbacks in the atmosphere.
PS: even if there's a climate change and it can be dangerous, i believe that al gore is an asshole when he says that climate change "is a worst threat than terrorism". Do you always need the word "terrorism", in the u.s.?
www.amnesty.org.uk
If this is indeed a cop out, then please provide us with your view of the situation re:Global warming.
This is a clear example of the danger of allowing politicians to be granted responsibility in matters of such global significance. Isn't it about time these swindling liars and muderers are consigned to a role in society, and the larger world, which doesn't exceed their actual purpose of being anchormen for the big corporations?
Perhaps it will require a seismic shift ecologically to engender a parallel seismic shift in the way human beings govern themselves and allow themselves to be governed. Perhaps we are nearing a time when the philosophers of this world are given more respect and authority than businessmen?
terror or terrorism is what is driving american policy now ... the war in iraq, afghanistan ... the focus on iran ... the patriot act ... the wiretapping ... everything is related to terrorism ... it is what allows this administration to continue to do what its done and been totally inactive as it relates to climate change ...
so ... what gore is really saying is that there is a bigger crisis in front of us ... more than "terror" ...