Some warnings about Global warming

[Dolomite_supafly]

Warning we are doomed....break out your swim suits !!!!

 

The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.

 

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.

Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BTW, this was an article in the Washington Post from 1922 and reported by the AP the same year.

 

 

Seems like it would have happened in the past 90 years if it was going to happen as dramatically as they claim. I am all about protecting the enviroment from pollution but I believe any climate change we see is the normal eb and flow.

 

 

 

 

According to Snopes it is factual.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/science/globalwarming1922.asp

 

[GlockSpock]

http://www.ihatethemedia.com/earth-day-predictions-of-1970-the-reason-you-should-not-believe-earth-day-predictions-of-2009

[Superman]

Global warming, HA. People are so naive to think we could cause global warming. The air may be a little dirtier than it was 500 years ago, but thats about it. Besides this global warming they speak of is what 1/2 or 1 degree or something right?

[NoBanStan]

We certainly didn't cause it, but we certainly could take better care of our messes. It's a real bummer to hear every time they discover those giant flotillas of garbage out on the ocean. I think there were 2-3 BEFORE the tsunami. I'm no tree hugger by any means but I can't stand to look at piles of trash laying around.

[jgradyc]

Meanwhile, unreported by the major media, antarctic sea ice hit the highest level ever recorded back in September last year.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/

 

Also, the actual recorded temperature increase is less than half of the projected increase over the past 20 years and is now BELOW the lowest predicted level of all 44 IPCC climate change models.  See graph here.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/CMIP5-global-LT-vs-UAH-and-RSS.png

 

 

If you want to follow the AGW debate, here's a good site to see the news from both sides.

http://climatedebatedaily.com/

 

Two other good sites...

http://www.drroyspencer.com/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

 

Here is the skeptic's theory that seems to hold the most water so far.

 

Cosmic rays help create clouds in the lower (below 2 miles) atmosphere.  More cloud cover over several years = global cooling.

During periods of high solar activity, the solar wind blocks cosmic rays from reaching earth. Therefore, less clouds and hotter weather.

There is a very high correlation (0.92) between solar irradience and low level cloud formation.

Obviously, other factors are at work, but the IPCC completely discounts solar irradience as a factor, while at the same time stating that it is not completely understood.

Edited April 24, 2013 by jgradyc

[Guest Cami]

Ask any school child and they will tell you we did it...

[jcoosi]

The sky is falling :panic: The sky is falling :panic:

[atlas3025]

Global Warming?  This has been the shittiest, coldest spring I can remember in years.  Yeah, yeah, I know...that proves global warming.  AGW is like art.  Anything is caused by AGW. 

 

I remember a couple of years ago one of he greenie types proclaimed "Global Warming is even worse than we orignally thought because the changes aren't as dramatic as we predicted".  Noodle that one for a minute. 

[jcoosi]

Like others have stated Im no tree hugger but more people do need to pick up their trash and put it where it goes. Its not rocket surgery

[Guest uofmeet]

 

Here is the skeptic's theory that seems to hold the most water so far.

 

Cosmic rays help create clouds in the lower (below 2 miles) atmosphere.  More cloud cover over several years = global cooling.

During periods of high solar activity, the solar wind blocks cosmic rays from reaching earth. Therefore, less clouds and hotter weather.

There is a very high correlation (0.92) between solar irradience and low level cloud formation.

Obviously, other factors are at work, but the IPCC completely discounts solar irradience as a factor, while at the same time stating that it is not completely understood.

 

If the above is the case, then is should be about an 11 year cycle.

[Ted S.]

People look at me like I am kookoo when I tell them, ”If there is warming, I think the sun has the most to do with it....” because out of all of my limited research on climate and weather, the one thing I do know for sure is that the sun is a key factor.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

If the above is the case, then is should be about an 11 year cycle.

 

Yep, but there are also longer cycles, and when the sun is in a relatively active part of a long cycle, the sunspot count can be "pretty high" even at minimum. Any sunspots at all at the low side of an 11 year cycle, is LOTS of spots compared to for instance the "little ice age" where there were virtually no sunspots for about 70 years, as best I recall.

 

Don't have time to look it up, but there was a legit astronomer or two who attempted to correlate the longer cycles with planetary alignments, i.e. perhaps if the more massive planets are in certain positions, it might create enough tidal forces in the sun to modulate its behavior.

 

The sun is a variable star, but only slightly variable. A few percent. The small change in absolute radiation probably doesn't affect climate a whole bunch as far as is known, but the solar wind amplitude modulates the solar magnetic field, and the solar magnetic field definitely modulates cosmic ray density at the earth's orbit. What was one of the first particle detectors invented for nuclear research? Yep, cloud chamber. 

 

Maybe the cosmic ray theory is BS, but it is very seductive.

[jgradyc]

If the above is the case, then is should be about an 11 year cycle.

 

That would be if solar magnetism was the ONLY factor. There are others. Google Henrik Svensmark if you'd like to know more. Here is one link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrik_Svensmark

 

Apparently, in the troposphere (the atmosphere from 1 mile to about 11 miles high) there is a strong correlation to the 11 year cycle.  It's only at ground level that we don't see this 11-year cycle. Perhaps it is due to ocean oscillations. Cosmic rays themselves also vary based on the proximity of supernovae and when these stars exploded. Sorry that I don't understand Svensmark's work enough to better explain it.

 

My point is that Svenmark's theory of climate change seems credible, yet the climate alarmists reject it out of hand.  There is no objectivity in climate science today. Scientists start with a preconceived outcome and when their research doesn't support it, they tweak the research until it does. There have been too many cases of this for me to believe that humans are the primary cause of climate change.

Edited April 24, 2013 by jgradyc

[JAB]

The really 'funny' thing is that archaeological and geological evidence indicate that there was a time in Earth's past when there were NO polar ice caps.  This was likely before Australia broke away from Africa.  Before Australia separated, the theory goes, there were circum-global ocean currents which kept global temperatures much more 'even'.  In other words, warm water from the equator moved to the poles and kept the temps there warmer than they are, today.  Likewise, cooler water from the poles moved back to the equator and kept temps there cooler than they are, today.  When Australia broke away and drifted into something like its current location, the circum-global currents were interrupted.  However, the evidence indicates that while these circum-global currents were in effect:

 

* There were no polar ice caps

 

* Alaska probably had a climate that was more like modern-day Florida.  Denver, Colorado likely had a climate that was more like modern day Miami and Florida's climate was more like modern day Panama.

 

*The east coast of what is now North America lay somewhere along the modern day border of TN and North Carolina.  The modern day Carolinas were largely under water.  Much of modern day California was also under water.  Tennessee was likely a jungle.

 

This was several million years before the first hominid existed.  Kind of hard to blame it on humans when even our distant ancestors were yet to arise.

 

Another interesting fact is that there is absolutely no reason, whatsoever, to believe that the 'last' great ice age (the Wurm) ever actually 'ended'.  Instead, it is entirely possible that the whole of modern human history has taken place during a break or a warming spell DURING the Wurm ice age.  In fact, there is evidence to indicate that some lengthy warming trends that took place DURING the great ice ages saw average temperatures that were higher than average temperatures, today.  It could well be that we are finally seeing the true end of the last, great ice age.

 

What is the gist of all this?  Well, what I am saying is that it is entirely possible that the natural condition of the Earth - the condition that it was possibly in for a much longer period than not - is a much warmer, more humid environment.  In other words, far from being 'man made', the current warming trend could well indicate that the Earth's climate is attempting to right itself and get back to normal.

 

Part of the problem with the current hysteria is that proponents of 'man made global warming climate change' keep referring to 'the highest temperatures on record' and blah, blah, blah.  So what?  How long have truly reliable records been kept?  100 years?  Maybe 200?  Sure, that sounds like a long time to you and me but compared to geological time that's maybe half an eye blink, if that, and a pretty insignificant amount of time. 

Edited April 25, 2013 by JAB

[Randall53]

Here's another outlook at the immediate weather future:

 

http://io9.com/5906413/our-sun-could-soon-have-four-poles

[Guest PapaB]

That 1922 report was partially accurate. Most cities on the left coast are now uninhabitable. Maybe global warming causes liberalism. :rofl:

[DWARREN123]

It's a living planet, things change. If things quit changing then worry!

[Spook]

In Dallas tonight they are expecting the second coldest May temp on record. The only other time it was in the 30s this late in the season was 1903. Must have had a lot of carbon emissions back then, too.

[Jesse]

Every planets climate will go through change.

Nothing will stay the same. Even the sun will slowly burn out. Humans should stop worrying and be glad they got to be a part of the short life on earth.

[Guest uofmeet]

http://www.youtube.com/embed/iKiq5EwkzDg

Edited May 2, 2013 by uofmeet

[Jonnin]

We certainly didn't cause it, but we certainly could take better care of our messes. It's a real bummer to hear every time they discover those giant flotillas of garbage out on the ocean. I think there were 2-3 BEFORE the tsunami. I'm no tree hugger by any means but I can't stand to look at piles of trash laying around.

 

Honestly, its not US anymore.  The USA has done a 100% turn around since the 50's - 70's era of big pollution and nasty manufacturing.  If the world needs to go green, look elsewhere first and come back to us in 50 years.   The sky here was ORANGE when I was a kid and smelled like an iron pot left on a hot eye only about 1000 times stronger.   Now its clean ... we sent all our jobs and manufacturing overseas.   The trash is nasty but its not super toxic like the manufacturing chemistry that is dumped all over the world. 

 

We certainly can do a lot of damage.  That was never in doubt.  Its even possible that we could raise the temp by a degree which would destroy a lot of life in the oceans  (a lot of critters cant handle even small changes, the ocean changes little and they fail to adapt --- ask any saltwater fish person about screwing up things just a little and losing a tank).   I will give the left 100% of global warming as an issue.  Fine.  But I reject their solutions --- cap and trade is just a tax on industry which is a tax on consumers and it solves nothing, they did not stop pollution, they just paid for it.  I reject tax money spent on crap research that is of no value.  I reject the idea that government can fix the problem with money, in other words.  That leaves me with a desire to go green and be a good steward of the planet, but a distrust of anyone who thinks they can fix it with money.   You want to fix the planet?   Stop buying goods from third world countries that have no pollution controls, which allows them to make it cheaper and faster at the cost to the environment.   You want to fix the planet, stop using all the corn to make crapgas and focus on making cars that can run off ---ane gas canisters or hydrogen or whatever.   You want to fix the planet, give rewards to clean industry rather than punishments to offenders.  You want to fix the planet, do not use the issue as an agenda to punish your political enemy....  I never see anyone pointing a finger at the unionized car manufacturers and the pollution of the rust belt.....   I see them going after big oil, their political enemy.... which invalidates anything they have to say.