• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Why is Global Warming a Hoax??

Free episodes:

Has anyone here actually changed their minds or moved their position on this issue? Or is everyone firmly convinced he or she is correct no matter what else has been said or what additional data has been brought to bear on the subject?

I am as confused, if not more, as I was when we started.

It makes me wonder where the problem lies. I think there is a gap in the way that public gets information, particularly concerning science. I do keep up to date, but who is to really tell how good the data is and more importantly how good the conclusion is.

Although I'm slamming somewhat on the anti-AGW side, it doesn't mean that I won't accept any truth. And I even thought for a moment how similar some of this is to the UFO saga. Misinformation, disinformation, agendas, lies, etc. Sounds familiar doesn't it??

It is one of those things that I can't verify myself. I can't go out and perform the experiments, collect the data, and so forth. So I'm resigned to someone else telling me what is going on. And that has proved more difficult than I could imagine. Maybe we should have all the scientists drink truth serum before opening their mouths.
 
So, whenever science weighs on on anything environmental, then it is shit. Right??

Because energy companies seem to be the ones funding any kind of research suggesting otherwise. Are you saying they have nothing to gain?? I'm not even saying that is neccessarily true, but you seem to think whenever we would need to take action against a potential threat, then it is bullshit.

What about the ozone layer?? What about the dust bowls?? We had to take action in those areas because of our actions did we not?

Are you actually familiar with how the dust bowl came about?
Whenever GOOD science weighs in on something, it's good. Whenever JUNK Science, or FALSE Science weighs in, and flies in the face of the evidence going back nearly 700 years, it is utter bullshit.

Do you have ANY idea what the mean temperature of the Mid Jurassic was? Think really hard before you answer. Do you have any idea of what the mean temperature during the Pleistocene was?

How about 400 years ago?

200 years ago?

100 years ago?

50 years ago?

Do you see a pattern? Weather has been, and always will be cyclical. Technically, we are still in an ice age.

The mean temperature of this planet during the Cretaceous period was somewhere between 119 degrees, and 136 degrees, EVERY FUCKING DAY, and guess what? There wasn't one human being around.

Only the poles froze, and even then, it wasn't a hard freeze that killed anything, as most of the animals at the poles were able to endure it just fine, and THEY WERE REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS.

Of course, the oceans were a lot shallower then, and there was a lot more water vapor in the atmosphere.

Water Vapor happens to be a green house gas by the way.

Climate Change is NOT man made. The sky isn't falling. The world isn't going to end. Life on this planet will continue, and human beings will always be fucking stupid when it comes to being able to stop liars and thieves from stealing their prosperity and freedom under the guise of saving the fucking planet.
 
Are you actually familiar with how the dust bowl came about?


Climate Change is NOT man made. The sky isn't falling. The world isn't going to end. .

Please explain the dust bowl to me Tommy.

And why does any mention of human caused whatever have to mean that the sky is falling?? Because of the dipshit named Gore. There is plenty of scietists that say we don't know the consequences of what we are doing, but they might not, and are probably not catastrophic. The anti-side always wants to take the worst case(Gore scenario) and blanket it towards eveyone which is ridiculous. Not everyone is an alarmist on the AGW side. Not even a lot of people.
 
The carbon taxes governments in almost all countries around the world intend to implement are very real - whether you believe in global warming, or not.
 
Has anyone here actually changed their minds or moved their position on this issue? Or is everyone firmly convinced he or she is correct no matter what else has been said or what additional data has been brought to bear on the subject?

Nope, my mind is still worried we are going to hell in a hand basket, because we are not cleaning up after ourselves. Whether or not we are messing up our climate with methane, ozone-eating chlorofluorocarbons, massive oil and diesel spills, steaming shale for oil, burning coal or cutting down trees - I think it is time we were made to clean up our rooms.

Jobs and a healthy economy mean nothing if we don't have a house to live in, do they?
 
TClaeys;53214]Please explain the dust bowl to me Tommy.
The dust bowl was caused by over farming and a drought. It really has nothing to do within a climate change discussion. Man did cause this. However, better farming techniques (field rotation and large segments of of farmland outlined by trees to act as wind breakers) helped to curtail the pehnomenon. To this day in Oklahoma a bunch of farmland is still partitioned and those partitions are surrounded by a line of trees. Here is an image that illustrates this.
http://www.oklahomaballooning.com/images/gallery/hotairballoon-ride-13.jpg

Straight from Wikipedia.

The Dust Bowl or the Dirty Thirties was a period of severe dust storms causing major ecological and agricultural damage to American and Canadian prairie lands from 1930 to 1936 (in some areas until 1940). The phenomenon was caused by severe drought coupled with decades of extensive farming without crop rotation or other techniques to prevent erosion. Deep plowing of the virgin topsoil of the Great Plains had killed the natural grasses that normally kept the soil in place and trapped moisture even during periods of drought and high winds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_bowl
 
Ok, but that still doesnt answer my question. Where is the melt water going?

my point was to OuterJoin because he replied to me that melting ice which was resting in water would raise the levels.

I said only if the ice originally rested on a land mass or something else would it increase the water levels of the planet's oceans/seas. that is where OuterJoin disagreed with me.

And that is true, as anybody can prove it to themselves and I went and did it, just to make sure I knew what I said was correct.

By now, it is hard to figure out where this disagreement started, but if you want to wade back through, that is where the issue about melting water in a glass came about. I think. Because right now, I am trying very hard not to swear loudly in frustration :frown:
 
There is another issue here where the seal level could rise. I don;t know if we have any area like this on Earth right now, but as the earth started warming about 12,000 years ago subsequent to the last glaciation (which we are STILL coming off of) there were millions, if not billion of gallons of water in the Hudson Bay trapped there by land ice and glaciers that had not yet melted. When this dam DID break, it sent enough water into the world's oceans to raise the sea level something like 40-60 feet. This wiped out those sea-based civilizations which were extent at the time, especially around India, and that is where our universal flood myth story originated. This is completely documented in Graham Hancock's Underworld if anyone wants to take a look.
 
without including the part where I clearly stated that ice resting on a land mass would cause the water levels to rise if it melted.

By now, it is hard to figure out where this disagreement started, but if you want to wade back through, that is where the issue about melting water in a glass came about. I think. Because right now, I am trying very hard not to swear loudly in frustration :frown:

Sorry, I missed the part about ice on a land mass adding to the ocean level. My appologies. I get frustrated when I hear about how "all the glaciers are melting at an alarming rate" and they never want to discuss exactly where the water is going. Unfortunatley this topic is not unlike abortion or religion. Everyone has their side and rarely are convinced otherwise.
 
There is another issue here where the seal level could rise. I don;t know if we have any area like this on Earth right now, but as the earth started warming about 12,000 years ago subsequent to the last glaciation (which we are STILL coming off of) there were millions, if not billion of gallons of water in the Hudson Bay trapped there by land ice and glaciers that had not yet melted. When this dam DID break, it sent enough water into the world's oceans to raise the sea level something like 40-60 feet. This wiped out those sea-based civilizations which were extent at the time, especially around India, and that is where our universal flood myth story originated. This is completely documented in Graham Hancock's Underworld if anyone wants to take a look.
Your right. There are studies that show there may have been a total of 3 inland ice dammed lakes. From about 17,000 to 12,000 years ago the ocean level have raised almost 120 meters and shorelines in some places moved inland up to a hundred miles. Currently, there are no such lakes in existance in the world that I am aware of.
 
Interesting article:

Scientist: Earth Cooling, Not Warming
Thursday, April 24, 2008 10:53 AM
By: Philip V. Brennan

A San Francisco-based scientist says that current solar activity strongly indicates that the earth is on the verge of a new ice age.
"Sorry to ruin the fun, but an ice age cometh," warns Phil Chapman writing in The Australian. Chapman is a geophysicist and astronautical engineer who was the first Australian to become a NASA astronaut.

"The scariest photo I have seen . . . is at www.spaceweather.com, where you will find a real-time image of the sun from the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory [SOHO], located in deep space at the equilibrium point between solar and terrestrial gravity," Chapman wrote, adding ominously that "what is scary about the picture is that there is only one tiny sunspot."

"This is where SOHO comes in," he explained. "The sunspot number follows a cycle of somewhat variable length, averaging 11 years. The most recent minimum was in March last year. The new cycle, No. 24, was supposed to start soon after that, with a gradual build-up in sunspot numbers."
That, he writes did not happen. "The first sunspot appeared in January this year and lasted only two days. A tiny spot appeared last Monday but vanished within 24 hours. Another little spot appeared this Monday. Pray that there will be many more, and soon."

Why? According to Chapman "there is a close correlation between variations in the sunspot cycle and earth's climate. The previous time a cycle was delayed like this was in the Dalton Minimum, an especially cold period that lasted several decades from 1790. Northern winters became ferocious: in particular, the rout of Napoleon's Grand Army during the retreat from Moscow in 1812 was at least partly due to the lack of sunspots."

Although the rapid temperature decline in 2007 coincided with the failure of cycle No. 24 to begin on schedule is not proof of a causal connection, Chapman warns that it is cause for concern.

"Disconcerting as it may be to true believers in global warming," he explains, "the average temperature on earth has remained steady or slowly declined during the past decade, despite the continued increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, and now the global temperature is falling precipitously.

"All four agencies that track earth's temperature [the Hadley Climate Research Unit in Britain, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, the Christy group at the University of Alabama, and Remote Sensing Systems Inc in California] report that it cooled by about 0.7 C in 2007." This, he says is "the fastest temperature change in the instrumental record and it puts us back where we were in 1930. If the temperature does not soon recover, we will have to conclude that global warming is over."

Moreover, he says, there is also plenty of anecdotal evidence that 2007 was exceptionally cold, noting that it snowed in Baghdad for the first time in centuries, the winter in China was simply terrible and the extent of Antarctic sea ice in the austral winter was the greatest on record since James Cook discovered the place in 1770.

Chapman wrote that the global warming dogma should be put aside, "at least to begin contingency planning about what to do if we are moving into another little ice age, similar to the one that lasted from 1100 to 1850."

How bad could a new little ice age be? "Much worse than the previous one and much more harmful than anything warming may do. There are many more people now, and we have become dependent on a few temperate agricultural areas, especially in the U.S. and Canada." Global warming, he added, "would increase agricultural output, but global cooling will decrease it. Millions will starve if we do nothing to prepare for it [such as planning changes in agriculture to compensate], and millions more will die from cold-related diseases."

And grim as that outlook is, Chapman predicts that there is also another possibility, remote but much more serious — the Greenland and Antarctic ice cores and other evidence show that for the past several million years, severe glaciation has almost always afflicted our planet and under normal conditions, most of North America and Europe are buried under about 1.5 km of ice.

This bitterly frigid climate is interrupted occasionally by brief warm interglacials, typically lasting less than 10,000 years.
The present interglacial period we have enjoyed throughout recorded human history, called the Holocene, began 11,000 years ago, so an ice age is overdue. And glaciation can occur quickly: The required decline in global temperature is about 12 C and it can happen in 20 years.

His conclusions: "The next descent into an ice age is inevitable but may not happen for another 1,000 years. On the other hand, it must be noted that the cooling in 2007 was even faster than in typical glacial transitions. If it continued for 20 years, the temperature would be 14 C cooler in 2027."

By then, he writes, "most of the advanced nations would have ceased to exist, vanishing under the ice, and the rest of the world would be faced with a catastrophe beyond imagining."

"All those urging action to curb global warming need to take off the blinders and give some thought to what we should do if we are facing global cooling instead," he writes. "It will be difficult for people to face the truth when their reputations, careers, government grants or hopes for social change depend on global warming, but the fate of civilisation may be at stake."

© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved
 
And another:

Ice In The Greenhouse:
Earth May Be Cooling, Not Warming
By Jens Bischof

Climate change has become a topic of great public interest. Hardly a week goes by without newspaper articles proclaiming global warming, the greenhouse effect, melting polar ice caps and retreating glaciers. No self-respecting weather forecaster can resist the temptation to see a connection between slightly abnormal weather patterns and El Nino, the eternal culprit. And while it is clear that the burning of fossil fuels such as petroleum, coal and wood, and the ensuing rise of carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere must trigger a reaction of the global climate system, it is completely unknown exactly what kind of reaction will occur.

Indeed, there are signs from some natural systems that global warming is under way. Observations of the pack-ice thickness of the Arctic Ocean from submarines with upward-looking sonar, for example, show a thinning trend since the 1970s. The margin of permafrost is moving north, and the vegetation in the high northern parts of the world is changing toward more temperate forms. But it is by no means clear whether these signs indicate real, worrying proof of manmade, permanent and potentially disastrous climate change, or just regular, naturally occurring variations in the Earth’s climate system.

If proven a reality, the most troubling aspect of global warming is that it would cause melting of the polar ice caps, which in turn would cause the global sea level to rise and flood some of the most densely populated regions on Earth. Other effects could be changes in rainfall patterns, which could lead to widespread droughts and threaten agricultural production. One need not be a prophet to imagine the ultimate consequences: forced emigration of unprecedented scale into higher elevations, straining the economies and societies of the involuntary host nations, causing political turmoil and, knowing how humans traditionally react to such changes, most likely war.

But are these assumptions correct? In science, as in other sectors of public life, outcomes of investigations are very often guided, if not determined, by an a priori idea, a tenet. One could also call it a belief. In the case of global warming, this belief is that, if enormous amounts of greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere, a temperature rise must occur. This prior assumption has guided scientific thinking and triggered a true deluge of investigations, all desperately trying to prove just that. What has been totally forgotten is the fact that natural climate changes occur as well as manmade ones, and on time scales on the order of decades, in some cases.

Overdue Cold Snap

I believe the only way to detect these changes is from the geologic record of marine sediments. In the high northern latitudes, those sediments contain ice-rafted debris, or IRD. The IRD is deposited on or within ice sheets, portions of which eventually calve as icebergs and then travel on vast ocean currents. The composition and movement of this drifting ice can provide insights into the future direction of climate change. Contrary to the prevailing beliefs inside and out of the scientific community, my studies indicate that warming may not be the direction in which global climate is headed after all.

The last 10,000 years of geological history are referred to as the Holocene Era. During that time, global climate has been relatively stable, with swings from warmer temperatures to cooler and back again. On average, however, there has not been the kind of extreme climate oscillation that has in the distant past led to periods of glaciation. Nevertheless, Earth is overdue for a cold snap. Close examination of the way ice is presently traveling in ocean water, from frigid to warmer regions of the globe, suggests that the mechanisms for widespread planetary cooling may once again be engaging.

Ice rafting is a simple idea: particles such as stones, pebbles and fine grains become embedded in ice. As that ice drifts, it melts, depositing those particles in oceanic sediments, leaving a “drift track” indicative of its source. Geologists are then able to reconstruct past ice-drift directions by finding a method by which particles can be connected to a specific point of origin.

The process of ice rafting is intimately connected to temperature changes on global and regional scales. The physical movement of excessive amounts of ice from polar regions to lower latitudes by shifting ocean currents can lead to substantially lower temperatures. If, for example, the air pressure distribution over the Arctic Ocean was such that winds blew from the Bering Strait across the North Pole toward Fram Strait, then massive amounts of pack ice would be moved into the Norwegian Greenland Sea. In the winter, this process would continuously produce additional sea ice in the open leads created by offshore winds in the Bering Strait region, setting in motion a veritable “ice machine.” The regional extent of ice and snow cover in the Greenland Sea would increase, cooling the region, and boosting the albedo, or amount of solar radiation reflected back into space, further amplifying cooling.
Depending on the strength and duration, this process could lead to an episode of relatively cold climate over the North Atlantic region, perhaps lasting from a few years up to decades. But if it were sufficiently strong and durable, it could set the stage for global climate to return to full glaciation.

Ice As Predictor

If sea ice were to thicken and expand by other means, such as cooling forced by celestial mechanisms, including variation in solar radiation or orbital changes, declining temperatures would occur seasonally, during winter and summer, but also on much longer time scales, such as thousands and tens of thousands of years. Polar fronts would be pushed toward the Equator. Such cooling is self-perpetuating, increasing the extent of snow- and ice-covered regions, thus augmenting the albedo. The albedo increase, in turn, further amplifies the cooling trend, creating a positive feedback loop that leads to additional cooling, which leads to more ice and snow, higher albedo and more cooling.

Global cooling brought on by ice drift, however, does not require an external motor, such as the periodic variation in the Earth’s orbit that brings it closer to or farther away from the Sun, or a slight change in the tilt of the Earth’s axis, also periodic. Rather, a mere change of the ice-drift direction in the Arctic could set cooling on its way, possibly even on a global scale. The geologic record is certainly clear: The climate pendulum has repeatedly swung between a relatively warmer worldas we experience today, and glacial climates during which much of Earth was submerged under thick sheets of ice.

In my book Ice Drift, Ocean Circulation And Climate Change, I look not just at older data that otherwise would never have seen the light of day but also new data that I believe is persuasive that ice drifting can be as predictive as it is archival. That is, to understand the future, at least in terms of climate, one must understand the past. Any computer model designed to predict future climate change such as greenhouse gas-induced global warming must also reproduce the reconstructed past changes of ice drift in order to be considered reliable. Ice rafting is not just a passive recorder of past surface-ocean circulation, but also actively influences and changes present ocean circulation as well.

At present we do not yet know if the circulation changes occur over one or more decades relevant to humans. This is simply because the low, and in some cases, very low sedimentation rates of the polar oceans do not permit time resolution at these short scales. But recent progress in the analysis of Arctic Ocean sediments has shown that it is possible to find areas with high resolution. This, and the prospect of new equipment in the form of a polar icebreaker able to be on station 200 days per year, hold the promise that the mystery of the driving forces of climate change may be eventually solved.

In the meantime, we should prepare ourselves for the possibility that our cherished ideas about global warming may be, if not dead wrong, only partially correct. Intriguing recent evidence gathered from ice-rafted debris looks remarkably similar to a much older pattern that preceded an ice age. We may have to entertain the possibility that Earth’s natural climate development may be on a return to another such period, or at least to colder conditions than we now experience. If so, and ironically, the very greenhouse warming we fear may either mitigate the cooling or cancel it altogether.

Jens Bischof is author of Ice Drift, Ocean Circulation And Climate Change and is a research assistant professor in Old Dominion’s Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences.
 
It just keeps getting better! I don't know the date on is one.

CATASTROPHIC predictions of global warming usually conjure with the notion of a tipping point, a point of no return.

Last Monday - on ABC Radio National, of all places - there was a tipping point of a different kind in the debate on climate change. It was a remarkable interview involving the co-host of Counterpoint, Michael Duffy and Jennifer Marohasy, a biologist and senior fellow of Melbourne-based think tank the Institute of Public Affairs. Anyone in public life who takes a position on the greenhouse gas hypothesis will ignore it at their peril.
Duffy asked Marohasy: "Is the Earth stillwarming?"

She replied: "No, actually, there has been cooling, if you take 1998 as your point of reference. If you take 2002 as your point of reference, then temperatures have plateaued. This is certainly not what you'd expect if carbon dioxide is driving temperature because carbon dioxide levels have been increasing but temperatures have actually been coming down over the last 10 years."

Duffy: "Is this a matter of any controversy?"

Marohasy: "Actually, no. The head of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has actually acknowledged it. He talks about the apparent plateau in temperatures so far this century. So he recognises that in this century, over the past eight years, temperatures have plateaued ... This is not what you'd expect, as I said, because if carbon dioxide is driving temperature then you'd expect that, given carbon dioxide levels have been continuing to increase, temperatures should be going up ... So (it's) very unexpected, not something that's being discussed. It should be being discussed, though, because it's very significant."

Duffy: "It's not only that it's not discussed. We never hear it, do we? Whenever there's any sort of weather event that can be linked into the global warming orthodoxy, it's put on the front page. But a fact like that, which is that global warming stopped a decade ago, is virtually never reported, which is extraordinary."

Duffy then turned to the question of how the proponents of the greenhouse gas hypothesis deal with data that doesn't support their case. "People like Kevin Rudd and Ross Garnaut are speaking as though the Earth is still warming at an alarming rate, but what is the argument from the other side? What would people associated with the IPCC say to explain the (temperature) dip?"

Marohasy: "Well, the head of the IPCC has suggested natural factors are compensating for the increasing carbon dioxide levels and I guess, to some extent, that's what sceptics have been saying for some time: that, yes, carbon dioxide will give you some warming but there are a whole lot of other factors that may compensate or that may augment the warming from elevated levels of carbon dioxide.

"There's been a lot of talk about the impact of the sun and that maybe we're going to go through or are entering a period of less intense solar activity and this could be contributing to the current cooling."

Duffy: "Can you tell us about NASA's Aqua satellite, because I understand some of the data we're now getting is quite important in our understanding of how climate works?"

Marohasy: "That's right. The satellite was only launched in 2002 and it enabled the collection of data, not just on temperature but also on cloud formation and water vapour. What all the climate models suggest is that, when you've got warming from additional carbon dioxide, this will result in increased water vapour, so you're going to get a positive feedback. That's what the models have been indicating. What this great data from the NASA Aqua satellite ... (is) actually showing is just the opposite, that with a little bit of warming, weather processes are compensating, so they're actually limiting the greenhouse effect and you're getting a negative rather than a positive feedback."

Duffy: "The climate is actually, in one way anyway, more robust than was assumed in the climate models?"

Marohasy: "That's right ... These findings actually aren't being disputed by the meteorological community. They're having trouble digesting the findings, they're acknowledging the findings, they're acknowledging that the data from NASA's Aqua satellite is not how the models predict, and I think they're about to recognise that the models really do need to be overhauled and that when they are overhauled they will probably show greatly reduced future warming projected as a consequence of carbon dioxide."

Duffy: "From what you're saying, it sounds like the implications of this could beconsiderable ..."

Marohasy: "That's right, very much so. The policy implications are enormous. The meteorological community at the moment is really just coming to terms with the output from this NASA Aqua satellite and (climate scientist) Roy Spencer's interpretation of them. His work is published, his work is accepted, but I think people are still in shock at this point."

If Marohasy is anywhere near right about the impending collapse of the global warming paradigm, life will suddenly become a whole lot more interesting.

A great many founts of authority, from the Royal Society to the UN, most heads of government along with countless captains of industry, learned professors, commentators and journalists will be profoundly embarrassed. Let us hope it is a prolonged and chastening experience.

With catastrophe off the agenda, for most people the fog of millennial gloom will lift, at least until attention turns to the prospect of the next ice age. Among the better educated, the sceptical cast of mind that is the basis of empiricism will once again be back in fashion. The delusion that by recycling and catching public transport we can help save the planet will quickly come to be seen for the childish nonsense it was all along.
The poorest Indians and Chinese will be left in peace to work their way towards prosperity, without being badgered about the size of their carbon footprint, a concept that for most of us will soon be one with Nineveh and Tyre, clean forgotten in six months.

The scores of town planners in Australia building empires out of regulating what can and can't be built on low-lying shorelines will have to come to terms with the fact inundation no longer impends and find something more plausible to do. The same is true of the bureaucrats planning to accommodate "climate refugees".

Penny Wong's climate mega-portfolio will suddenly be as ephemeral as the ministries for the year 2000 that state governments used to entrust to junior ministers. Malcolm Turnbull will have to reinvent himself at vast speed as a climate change sceptic and the Prime Minister will have to kiss goodbye what he likes to call the great moral issue and policy challenge of our times.

It will all be vastly entertaining to watch.

THE Age published an essay with an environmental theme by Ian McEwan on March 8 and its stablemate, The Sydney Morning Herald, also carried a slightly longer version of the same piece.

The Australian's Cut & Paste column two days later reproduced a telling paragraph from the Herald's version, which suggested that McEwan was a climate change sceptic and which The Age had excised. He was expanding on the proposition that "we need not only reliable data but their expression in the rigorous use of statistics".

What The Age decided to spare its readers was the following: "Well-meaning intellectual movements, from communism to post-structuralism, have a poor history of absorbing inconvenient fact or challenges to fundamental precepts. We should not ignore or suppress good indicators on the environment, though they have become extremely rare now. It is tempting to the layman to embrace with enthusiasm the latest bleak scenario because it fits the darkness of our soul, the prevailing cultural pessimism. The imagination, as Wallace Stevens once said, is always at the end of an era. But we should be asking, or expecting others to ask, for the provenance of the data, the assumptions fed into the computer model, the response of the peer review community, and so on. Pessimism is intellectually delicious, even thrilling, but the matter before us is too serious for mere self-pleasuring. It would be self-defeating if the environmental movement degenerated into a religion of gloomy faith. (Faith, ungrounded certainty, is no virtue.)"

The missing sentences do not appear anywhere else in The Age's version of the essay. The attribution reads: "Copyright Ian McEwan 2008" and there is no acknowledgment of editing by The Age.

Why did the paper decide to offer its readers McEwan lite? Was he, I wonder, consulted on the matter? And isn't there a nice irony that The Age chose to delete the line about ideologues not being very good at "absorbing inconvenient fact"?
 
Posted By Marc Morano – 4:57 PM ET – Marc_Morano@EPW.Senate.Gov

Earth's 'Fever' Breaks: Global COOLING Currently Under Way

[Disclaimer: Since there is no "normal" temperature of the Earth, there is no way the Earth can have a "fever." The headline's reference to "fever" is for amusement purposes only. See also the U.S. Senate Minority Report:“Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007”

News Round Up: A sampling of recent articles detailing the inconvenient reality of temperature trends around the planet.
Report: Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling (Daily Tech – February 26, 2008

Excerpt: All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously. A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year time. For all sources, it's the single fastest temperature change every recorded, either up or down. […] Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on. No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

Forget Global Warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age (Canada's National Post – Feb. 25, 2008

Excerpt: 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. 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. […]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.

Arctic Sea Ice Sees 'Significant Increase' in Size Following 'Extreme Cold' (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation -CBC – February 15, 2008

Excerpt: There's an upside to the extreme cold temperatures northern Canadians have endured in the last few weeks: scientists say it's been helping winter sea ice grow across the Arctic, where the ice shrank to record-low levels last year. Temperatures have stayed well in the -30s C and -40s C range since late January throughout the North, with the mercury dipping past -50 C in some areas. Satellite images are showing that the cold spell is helping the sea ice expand in coverage by about 2 million square kilometres, compared to the average winter coverage in the previous three years. "It's nice to know that the ice is recovering," Josefino Comiso, a senior research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Branch of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, told CBC News on Thursday. […] Winter sea ice could keep expanding. The cold is also making the ice thicker in some areas, compared to recorded thicknesses last year, Lagnis added. "The ice is about 10 to 20 centimetres thicker than last year, so that's a significant increase," he said. If temperatures remain cold this winter, Langis said winter sea ice coverage will continue to expand.

Ice between Canada and Greenland reaches highest level in 15 years (Greenland’s Sermitsiak News – February 12, 2008

Excerpt: Minus 30 degrees Celsius. That's how cold it's been in large parts of western Greenland where the population has been bundling up in hats and scarves. At the same time, Denmark's Meteorological Institute states that the ice between Canada and southwest Greenland right now has reached its greatest extent in 15 years. 'Satellite pictures show that the ice expansion has extended farther south this year. In fact, it's a bit past the Nuuk area. We have to go back 15 years to find ice expansion so far south. On the eastern coast it hasn't been colder than normal, but there has been a good amount of snow.'

New Peer-Reviewed Study Shows Arctic COOLING Over last 1500 years
(Study published in Climate Dynamics, and the work was conducted by Håkan Grudd of Stockholm University’s Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology - Published online: 30 January 2008

Excerpt: “The late-twentieth century is not exceptionally warm in the new Torneträsk record: On decadal-to-century timescales, periods around AD 750, 1000, 1400, and 1750 were all equally warm, or warmer. The warmest summers in this new reconstruction occur in a 200-year period centred on AD 1000. A ‘Medieval Warm Period’ is supported by other paleoclimate evidence from northern Fennoscandia, although the new tree-ring evidence from Tornetraäsk suggests that this period was much warmer than previously recognised.” < > “The new Torneträsk summer temperature reconstruction shows a trend of -0.3°C over the last 1,500 years.”

Antarctic Summer Thaw 'Later Than Normal' (AccuWeather Global Warming News – February 6, 2008

Excerpt: Actually, the summer thaw down there was later than normal, and NASA believes that La Nina might have something to do with that. Usually, the breakup of fast ice around the Antarctica Peninsula occurs in early to mid-December, but this area was solidly frozen well into January. By the way, according to the Polar Research Group at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, the current southern hemispheric sea-ice area is at 2.9 million sq/km, which is about 400,000 sq/km greater than the normal level expected for this time of year, or slightly above-normal. Based on the latest trend on the chart, it appears that the southern hemispheric sea-ice area could be right at normal by March.

Global warming sceptics bouyed by record cold (UK Telegraph – February 26, 2008

Excerpt: Global warming sceptics are pointing to recent record cold temperatures in parts of North America and Asia and the return of Arctic Sea ice to suggest fears about climate change may be overblown. According to the US National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), the average temperature of the global land surface in January 2008 was below the 20th century mean (-0.02°F/-0.01°C) for the first time since 1982. […]Asked about the Arctic ice cover, Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, told the Post the Arctic winter had been so severe, the ice has not only recovered but was actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than the same time last year. "

GLOBAL WARMING? IT’S THE COLDEST WINTER IN DECADES (UK Daily Express – Feb. 18, 2008

Excerpt: NEW evidence has cast doubt on claims that the world’s ice-caps are melting, it emerged last night. Satellite data shows that concerns over the levels of sea ice may have been premature. It was feared that the polar caps were vanishing because of the effects of global warming. But figures from the respected US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that almost all the “lost” ice has come back. Ice levels which had shrunk from 13million sq km in January 2007 to just four million in October, are almost back to their original levels. Figures show that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than is usual for the time of year. The data flies in the face of many current thinkers and will be seized on by climate change sceptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming. […] Central and southern China, the USA and Canada were hit hard by snowstorms. Even the Middle East saw snow, with Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman and northern Saudi Arabia reporting the heaviest falls in years and below-zero temperatures. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan snow and freezing weather killed 120 people.

Report: Sun's 'disturbingly quiet' cycle prompts fear of global COOLING (February 8, 2008 - Investor’s Business Daily)

Excerpt: Now, Canadian scientists are seeking additional funding for more and better "eyes" with which to observe our sun, which has a bigger impact on Earth's climate than all the tailpipes and smokestacks on our planet combined. And they're worried about global cooling, not warming.
Solar data suggest our concerns should be about global cooling – (By

Geologist David Archibald of Summa Development Limited in Australia – March 2008 Scientific Paper)

Excerpt: Solar Cycle 24: Implications for the United StatesExcerpt: I will demonstrate that the Sun drives climate, and use that demonstrated relationship to predict the Earth’s climate to 2030. It is a prediction that differs from most in the public domain. It is a prediction of imminent cooling. […] The carbon dioxide that Mankind will put into the atmosphere over the next few hundred years will offset a couple of millenia of post-Holocene Optimum cooling before we plunge into the next ice age. There are no deleterious consequences of higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are wholly beneficial.

Report: Too Much Ice = Polar Bears Starving? (Scientist Philip Stott’s Global Warming Politics – February 15, 2008

Excerpt: Apparently, according to a report, Svend Erik Hendriksen, a certified weather observer in the Kangerlussuaq Greenland MET Office, who is responsible for all the weather observations at Kangerlussuaq Airport (near to Sisimiut), says that the cause is too much sea ice: “Several polar bears located (at least 6) close to Sisimiut town on the West coast ...Too much sea ice, so they are very hungry...Error number 36 in the movie An Inconvenient Truth Al Gore says the polar bear need more ice to survive... Now we have a lot of ice, but the polar bear is starving and find their food at the garbage dumps in towns. It's also influence the local community, polar bear alerts, keep kids away from the schools and so on.... The first one was shot at February 1st.” Sadly, that “first one” is the poor female hung out in the newspaper photograp.
Report: Solar Activity Diminishes; Researchers Predict Another Ice Age -

Sunspots have all but vanished in recent years. (Daily Tech – February 9, 2008

Excerpt: In 2005, Russian astronomer Khabibullo Abdusamatov predicted the sun would soon peak, triggering a rapid decline in world temperatures. Only last month, the view was echoed by Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences. who advised the world to "stock up on fur coats." Sorokhtin, who calls man's contribution to climate change "a drop in the bucket," predicts the solar minimum to occur by the year 2040, with icy weather lasting till 2100 or beyond. Observational data seems to support the claims -- or doesn't contradict it, at least. […] Researcher Dr. Timothy Patterson, director of the Geoscience Center at Carleton University, shares the concern. Patterson is finding "excellent correlations" between solar fluctuations, a relationship that historically, he says doesn't exist between CO2 and past climate changes.

Snow Returns to Mount Kilimanjaro (International Herald Tribune – January 21, 2008

Excerpt: I had wanted to climb to the roof of Africa before climate change erased its ice fields and the romance of its iconic "Snows of Kilimanjaro" image. But as we trudged across the 12,000-foot Shira plateau on Day 2 of our weeklong climb and gazed at the whiteness of the vast, humpbacked summit, I thought maybe I needn't have worried. An up-and-down-and-up traverse of the south face of Kibo, the tallest of the mountain's three volcanic peaks, showed us a panorama of the summit ice cap and fractured tentacles of glacial ice that dangled down gullies dividing the vertical rock faces. And four days later, when we reached 19,340-foot Uhuru, the highest point on Kibo, we beheld snow and ice fields so enormous as to resemble the Arctic. It looked nothing like the photographs of Kibo nearly denuded of ice and snow in the Al Gore documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." Nor did it seem to jibe with the film's narrative: "Within the decade, there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro." […] But several weeks of heavy rain and snow preceded the arrival of our group, 10 mountaineering clients and a professional guide from International Mountain Guides, based near Seattle. That made for a freakishly well-fed snow pack and the classic snowy image portrayed on travel posters, the label of the local Kilimanjaro Premium Lager and the T-shirts hawked in Moshi's tourist bazaars. But to many climate scientists and glaciologists who have probed and measured, the disappearance of the summit's ice fields is inevitable and imminent. […] Patchy snow covered the upper slopes above approximately 18,500 feet. At dawn, as we reached Stella Point at the lower lip of Kibo's summit crater, the fluted walls of the flat-topped Rebmann Glacier stretched out to our left. Snow blanketed the summit area, a mile and a half wide and hemmed by glaciers. Uhuru, the highest point in all Africa, was a 45-minute slog ahead. - See photo of snows return on Mount Kilimanjaro here.

Greenland climate not varying from ‘natural climate variability’ (Greenie Watch - Dec. 2007)

Excerpt: RECENT PAPER ON THE HISTORY OF GREENLAND ICE MASS Showing that, although the Greenland melt has increased during the 1992-2006 period, the melt was even higher in 1900s, 1930s, 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. So there is no indication that the current melt is above natural climate variability. Of course people who look just on the 1990 to 2007 period "see" great melting acceleration and influence of carbon dioxide and anthropogenic climate change.

Scientist predicts 'Coming of a New Ice Age' (Winningreen February 2008 ) (By Gerald Marsh. retired physicist from the Argonne National Laboratory and a former consultant to the Department of Defense on strategic nuclear technology and policy in the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton Administration.)

Excerpt: Contrary to the conventional wisdom of the day, the real danger facing humanity is not global warming, but more likely the coming of a new Ice Age. What we live in now is known as an interglacial, a relatively brief period between long ice ages. Unfortunately for us, most interglacial periods last only about ten thousand years, and that is how long it has been since the last Ice Age ended. How much longer do we have before the ice begins to spread across the Earth's surface? Less than a hundred years or several hundred? We simply don't know. Even if all the temperature increase over the last century is attributable to human activities, the rise has been relatively modest one of a little over one degree Fahrenheit — an increase well within natural variations over the last few thousand years. […] NASA has predicted that the solar cycle peaking in 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries and should cause a very significant cooling of Earth's climate. Will this be the trigger that initiates a new Ice Age? We ought to carefully consider this possibility before we wipe out our current prosperity by spending trillions of dollars to combat a perceived global warming threat that may well prove to be only a will-o-the-wisp. [See also the U.S. Senate Report released December 20, 2007, “Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007”
 
Global Temperature timeline:

globaltemp.jpg
 
AnnetteMarie - I was not telling you to shove it at all!!! The melting ice in a glass theory has been trotted out (by what I think is a very successful disinformation campaign - and I confirm this by reading other posts in this thread) from FOX TV to my local Ottawa conservative radio host and regurgitated around water coolers by my co-workers and I spend countless hours pointing out obvious facts that everyone should know.

It makes me sick that people do not know essential facts about the planet that gives them life - if I had my way the Natural Sciences would not be a major in University it would be taught from Kindergarten on...

So being rather passionate about the subject I guess I did write an unqualified statement - AnetteMarie - your arguements with Outerjoin simply reminded me of roughly four years of a recurring nightmare. I was not directing a rude comment towards you, and, as a good Canadian I suppose I should not have made it unless Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, or Lowell Green were sitting across the table from me.
 
This has been a tough winter, I don't know anyone that would dispute that. I also found this photo that shows a rare event of ice coverage on Lake Superior late in the winter. Buts let not get weather and climate confused. The AWG side say that the trend is still for warming and it is funny, if not emphatically ironic, that next to several Earth cooling stories are "Warming is worse than we thought" stories. Is it any wonder at all there is confusion??

I'm also thinking about what kind of summer we might have because sure as hell the emphasis will switch to people dying from heatstroke and all that stuff when we get a hot day. Anyway lots of good information, thanks.
superior_amo_2009062_lrg.jpg
 
Back
Top