Russian scientist predicts global COOLING!
binauralsounds
Posts: 1,357
Ok, WHICH IS IT?????????
Russian scientist predicts global cooling
MOSCOW, Aug. 25 (UPI) -- A Russian scientist predicts a period of global cooling in coming decades, followed by a warmer interval.
Khabibullo Abdusamatov expects a repeat of the period known as the Little Ice Age. During the 16th century, the Baltic Sea froze so hard that hotels were built on the ice for people crossing the sea in coaches.
The Little Ice Age is believed to have contributed to the end of the Norse colony in Greenland, which was founded during an interval of much warmer weather.
Abdusamatov and his colleagues at the Russian Academy of Sciences astronomical observatory said the prediction is based on measurement of solar emissions, Novosti reported. They expect the cooling to begin within a few years and to reach its peak between 2055 and 2060.
"The Kyoto initiatives to save the planet from the greenhouse effect should be put off until better times," he said. "The global temperature maximum has been reached on Earth, and Earth's global temperature will decline to a climatic minimum even without the Kyoto protocol."
Russian scientist predicts global cooling
MOSCOW, Aug. 25 (UPI) -- A Russian scientist predicts a period of global cooling in coming decades, followed by a warmer interval.
Khabibullo Abdusamatov expects a repeat of the period known as the Little Ice Age. During the 16th century, the Baltic Sea froze so hard that hotels were built on the ice for people crossing the sea in coaches.
The Little Ice Age is believed to have contributed to the end of the Norse colony in Greenland, which was founded during an interval of much warmer weather.
Abdusamatov and his colleagues at the Russian Academy of Sciences astronomical observatory said the prediction is based on measurement of solar emissions, Novosti reported. They expect the cooling to begin within a few years and to reach its peak between 2055 and 2060.
"The Kyoto initiatives to save the planet from the greenhouse effect should be put off until better times," he said. "The global temperature maximum has been reached on Earth, and Earth's global temperature will decline to a climatic minimum even without the Kyoto protocol."
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
The difference between then and now is that back then there wasn't billions of tons of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere every year and CO2 sinks such as forests were not logged widescale.
secondly, climate change is affecting us right now ... the monsoons and typhoons in asia have killed thousands this year alone ... there is a drought in a friggin' rainforest on vancouver island now ...
killer heat waves this summer in the northern hemisphere ...
articles like this are just a distraction ... there is a global and scientific consensus on this topic ...
So what you are saying is, this one report rubbishes the endless stream of data that proves climate change is real, is going to kill an awful lot of people?
You rubbish ALL evidence that shows this then?
IF so, you need help. IF not, why the fuck post an inane little article like this?
ha! ... just goes to show you aren't reading anything ... cuz dude isn't refuting climate change ... all he's saying is that a decrease in solar output will offset the changes ...
but feel free to comment anyways
no, its because i drive a ford expedition..al gore said so.
absolutely, development and population growth impacts the consequences but the severity of these weather events have long been predicted to increase and we are seeing this ... its not like these villages that are getting swamped haven't been there for years ... its just that the monsoons are more severe ... as with everything else ...
the destruction of natural barriers such as wetlands and mangroves also affects the ability of places to deal with these events as well ... but in any case - we are definitely seeing an increase in extreme weather as the planet tries to compensate for the warming ...
Yes, higher death rates may have to do with more population, but the a higher intensity and frequency of storms may be a contributing factor.
umm....are you saying this russian scientist speaks the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, but all those "other" scientists are just making things up....
yeah, that makes perfucked sense...
What about all the articles in the 70's stating we were heading for global cooling STAT?!?!?!?!?!
Nice that you call an article insane that you disagree with.
Have a nice day!
No, not the article from TIME. I mean when I was younger, back in those days, all I heard was talk of global cooling especially after the severe harsh winters we had. Then along came global warming, and now, just the tip of global cooling seems to be getting talked about again. Honestly, I think these scientists are winging it. Half say one thing, the other group claim the other philosophy. Who REALLY knows?
the fact that you are comparing what you heard as a kid to the stuff now pretty much indicates that you really haven't done the research on this ... like dude said - there was no global scientific consensus on that and it is pretty much only brought up by people who aren't interested in finding out about climate change ... its like a convenient excuse to ignore what is all around us right now ...
I think everyone who has taken the time to post in this thread should read this book. I think some of you might find it very enlightening.
And Gore never claimed to have invented the internet, so it's long past time to put that one to rest :rolleyes:
Yes, planning and development along storm prone areas contribute to the amount of death that has occurred. No one has disputed this, but if you want to debate the crux of the issue (warming) than fire away.
I would have thought you'd have learned your lesson by now.
Unfortunately, you have not.
Shame.
However, once the temperature shifts high enough during summer extremes the ice caps begin to melt, this leads to a massive amount of freezing water being added to the oceans, salinity, sea level, and global temperature will be affected most likely on a downturn, a serious downturn.
The fresh water inclusion begins to change prevailing currents, which begins to change prevailing winds and eventually the global weather patterns. The ultimate result of which will ironically be that a global "warming" trend inevitably leads to something resembling an ice age.
By Roger Harrabin
BBC environment analyst
Sea levels could rise by four metres over the next century, he warns
One of America's top scientists has said that the world has already entered a state of dangerous climate change.
In his first broadcast interview as president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, John Holdren told the BBC that the climate was changing much faster than predicted.
"We are not talking anymore about what climate models say might happen in the future.
"We are experiencing dangerous human disruption of the global climate and we're going to experience more," Professor Holdren said.
He emphasised the seriousness of the melting Greenland ice cap, saying that without drastic action the world would experience more heatwaves, wild fires and floods.
He added that if the current pace of change continued, a catastrophic sea level rise of 4m (13ft) this century was within the realm of possibility; much higher than previous forecasts.
To put this in perspective, Professor Holdren pointed out that the melting of the Greenland ice cap, alone, could increase world-wide sea levels by 7m (23ft), swamping many cities.
Safe limits
He blamed President Bush not only for refusing to cut emissions, but also for failing to live up to his rhetoric on harnessing technology to tackle climate change.
"We are not starting to address climate change with the technology we have in hand, and we are not accelerating our investment in energy technology research and development," Professor Holdren observed.
He said research undertaken by Harvard University revealed that US government spending on energy research had not increased since 2001. In order to make any progress, funding for climate technology needed to multiply by three or four times, Professor Holdren warned.
Last year, the UK's Prime Minister, Tony Blair, held a science conference to determine the threshold of dangerous climate change. Delegates concluded that to be relatively certain of keeping the rise below 2C (3.6F), CO2 levels in the atmosphere should not exceed 400 parts per million (ppm) and the highest prudent limit should be 450 ppm.
In October, at an international conference in Mexico, UK environment and energy ministers will try to persuade colleagues from the top 20 most polluting nations to agree on a CO2 stabilisation level.
Professor Holdren expressed doubt that progress could be achieved because if the US administration agreed that there was a need to limit CO2, this would inevitably lead to mandatory caps. President Bush has already rejected that option.
For more than a year, the BBC has invited the US government to give its view on safe levels of CO2. Our request is repeatedly passed between the White House office of the Council on Environmental Quality and the office of the US chief scientist.
To date, we have received no response to questions on this issue that Tony Blair calls the most important in the world. Professor Holdren called on the US Government to back the UK position.
John Holdren, in addition to his presidency of the AAAS, is a director of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, and Professor of Environmental Policy at Harvard University
E-mail this to a friend Printable versio