Print Page | Close Window

Coming of the Ice Age - 2014-2015

Printed From: Avian Flu Talk
Category: Main Forums
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Description: (General discussion regarding the next pandemic)
URL: http://www.avianflutalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=34972
Printed Date: April 27 2024 at 7:00pm


Topic: Coming of the Ice Age - 2014-2015
Posted By: Medclinician
Subject: Coming of the Ice Age - 2014-2015
Date Posted: October 02 2015 at 10:58am
Some of my threads do continue for quite awhile. This one really began with a series of articles and data from NASA showing that we might be have an Ice Age coming - this thread got truly huge and I need to start a new one for 2016.


There is a new post today - added to this rather large thread people come from all over the world to state the facts about "global warming." Some of us have said although we may have some globally warming, we may have a small Ice Age in the United States and Europe because of the dilution of the Gulf Stream by melting ice which carries warm from the south and and heats the continents in the Atlantic. There are a number of sites bitterly ripping apart those stating this as opposed to global warming. Did humankind with its miserable pollution mess up the climate of the world and are we soon to experience drought and many places becoming deserts. Time to bring out the current facts - not those advance by oil companies and special interests. What is the real news and real situation? 

Medclinician

http://avianflutalk.com/coming-of-the-ice-age-2015_topic33424.html - http://avianflutalk.com/coming-of-the-ice-age-2015_topic33424.html

It has been more than 6 months since I posted this and earlier over years have been predicting an Ice Age as opposed to global warming. It is the melting of the Ice caps and also glaciers that will dilute the main stream which warms North America which could bring about a mini-Ice Age. We are already in the midst of one as it is.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3156594/Is-mini-ICE-AGE-way-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3156594/Is-mini-ICE-AGE-way-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html

The new model of the Sun's solar cycle is producing unprecedentedly accurate predictions of irregularities within the Sun's 11-year heartbeat. It draws on dynamo effects in two layers of the Sun, one close to the surface and one deep within its convection zone.

Predictions from the model suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the 'mini ice age' that began in 1645, according to the results presented by Prof Valentina Zharkova at the National Astronomy Meeting in Llandudno.

The model predicts that the pair of waves become increasingly offset during Cycle 25, which peaks in 2022.

During Cycle 26, which covers the decade from 2030-2040, the two waves will become exactly out of synch and this will cause a significant reduction in solar activity.

'In cycle 26, the two waves exactly mirror each other – peaking at the same time but in opposite hemispheres of the Sun,' said Zharkova. 

'Their interaction will be disruptive, or they will nearly cancel each other. 

'We predict that this will lead to the properties of a 'Maunder minimum''





-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician



Replies:
Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: October 02 2015 at 11:13am
Perhaps as Fall and Winter approach and we once again experience mind-numbing record low temperatures, the persistent voices talking about Global Warming will have to re-evaluate. There of course are the theories and the realities. Last year we saw temps in some areas that set 100 year records. Chicago and many Northern States experienced temps with wind chill factor of -30 degrees are more.

A storm is coming and an increase in Flu cases and other illnesses as a result of the cold, may make things a lot worse.



Medclinician - "not if but when."


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: DeepThinker
Date Posted: October 02 2015 at 3:04pm
You raise an interesting point here Medclincian...    Any unbiased pracactly thinking person looking at climate has to assume that the Sun is the reason for climate change.    Scientists have retorted though that there isn't a significant enough change in the suns energy to explain climate changes.   To some extent this is true but it is way to simple.

This brings me to a question I asked on the other thread "what greenhouse gas has the most profound effect on our environment".  Most people are shocked to learn that it isn't CO2 or Methane.   It is water vapor.   Let me explain why this matters.

While the total energy output from the sun doesn't change much, its electromagnetic/radiological profile does change significantly.   This interacts with the magnetosphere of the earth.  Research is suggesting that this can have a profound effect on cloud formation on earth.

If you don't believe me about H2O as a green house gas. have you ever noticed that cloudy nights tend to be much warmer than clear nights?   When it is humid it never cools off at night.
(I am sorry my post is a bit off topic for this board... but not this subject)


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: October 03 2015 at 2:28am
That might be significant if the amount of cloud cover was demonstrably increasing, and I'm not aware of any evidence that suggests that. And don't forget that greater cloud cover would also increase the albedo of the Earth, creating a cooling effect.

"Any unbiased pracactly thinking person looking at climate has to assume that the Sun is the reason for climate change."

Sorry, but that's a stretch. It ignores the huge body of scientists that attribute climate change to human activity.
You obviously put a lot of thought into this topic, but you seem to find great relevance in some things, but be highly dismissive of others. You seem to acknowledge that CO2 is a greenhouse gas (and the fact that it's concentration is increasing is undeniable), yet you choose to believe that it will have no effect. An increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases without a change in temperature flies in the face of everything we know. As I said on the other thread, it's cause and effect - one of the most basic scientific principles.





-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: DeepThinker
Date Posted: October 03 2015 at 9:27am
Jacksdad that was a sharp response but I can take it.   When it comes to climate I am truly an open minded skeptic.   I like exploring alternative views.  I am not competently sure what my personal views exactly are.

The reason I am so skeptical about CO2 is that observational studies suggest that CO2 reacts to climate change... it  doesn't necessarily cause climate change.   Temps rise THEN CO2 levels go up.  Maybe this is because the geological record isn't as accurate we wish and we cant accurately time temp rises and CO2 rises.   However, if we are using an assumption of inaccuracy to prove our point, the whole argument falls apart.


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: October 03 2015 at 10:05am
I guess this is one where we'll find out one way or another. Personally, I think it's significant enough of a threat to be considering relocating to an area that might weather (sorry...) the changes best. The Southwest is already stressing it's water supply, and that will only get worse as human populations increase. I honestly believe that it's only prudent to consider the ramifications of potential climate change as part of our preps.
Fun debate, by the way Thumbs Up




-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: OriginalHappyCamper
Date Posted: October 03 2015 at 10:19am
ATLANTA, Aug. 3— Six American fighter planes and two bombers that crash-landed in Greenland in World War II have been found 46 years later buried under 260 feet of ice, searchers said today.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/08/04/us/world-war-ii-planes-found-in-greenland-in-ice-260-feet-deep.html

To pry climate clues out of the ice, scientists began to drill long cores out of the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica in the late 1960s. By the time Alley and the GISP2 project finished in the early 1990s, they had pulled a nearly 2-mile-long core (3,053.44 meters) from the Greenland ice sheet, providing a record of at least the past 110,000 years. Even older records going back about 750,000 years have come out of Antarctica. Scientists have also taken cores from thick mountain glaciers in places such as the Andes Mountains in Peru and Bolivia, Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania, and the Himalayas in Asia. 

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Paleoclimatology_IceCores/

Doing the math

110,000(years)/46(years)= 2,360(years) x 260’ = 613,300’/10,560’(2 miles = 10,560 feet) = 6 miles.

Conclusion: Something is wrong with the methodology of measuring the ice cores.

Man’s theories are just that, they are not facts.

-------------
Jesus Christ died and was raised on the third day, the only "God" to overcome death.


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: October 03 2015 at 10:33am
I agree, OHC. Climate science with regards to global changes is still in it's infancy, and the climate is such an incredibly complex and dynamic system that we'd be fools to say we know it all at this point - or ever.
The things that I can't get past when the topic of climate change comes up are tangible phenomena like increases in ocean acidification, sea level rise, glacial melting - things that are clearly and verifiably happening at an astonishing rate. I don't buy the blanket climate change denial angle because it makes no sense to me, and it's all too easy to follow the money back to the Koch brothers, big oil/gas, etc.
As with anything, there are extremes in the argument - we just have to find the point on the line between those two extremes where we feel most comfortable. For me, it's undeniable that it's human activity that's driving much of what we're seeing now, but I understand if others don't see it that way. Let's face it, we're going to find out one way or another if we wait long enough...




-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: October 03 2015 at 1:51pm
Several years ago - especially as we had two very bad winters with record lows - more data started coming in as to whether the "warming" as glaciers and icecaps melt would bring on an Ice Age.

This line of thinking can be more simply understood like this... Also the sun cycles and lower output would not help but accelerate the problem.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0130-11.htm -
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0130-11.htm

While global warming is being officially ignored by the political arm of the Bush administration, and Al Gore's recent conference on the topic during one of the coldest days of recent years provided joke fodder for conservative talk show hosts, the citizens of Europe and the Pentagon are taking a new look at the greatest danger such climate change could produce for the northern hemisphere - a sudden shift into a new ice age. What they're finding is not at all comforting.

In quick summary, if enough cold, fresh water coming from the melting polar ice caps and the melting glaciers of Greenland flows into the northern Atlantic, it will shut down the Gulf Stream, which keeps Europe and northeastern North America warm. The worst-case scenario would be a full-blown return of the last ice age - in a period as short as 2 to 3 years from its onset - and the mid-case scenario would be a period like the "little ice age" of a few centuries ago that disrupted worldwide weather patterns leading to extremely harsh winters, droughts, worldwide desertification, crop failures, and wars around the world.

Here's how it works.

If you look at a globe, you'll see that the latitude of much of Europe and Scandinavia is the same as that of Alaska and permafrost-locked parts of northern Canada and central Siberia. Yet Europe has a climate more similar to that of the United States than northern Canada or Siberia. Why?

It turns out that our warmth is the result of ocean currents that bring warm surface water up from the equator into northern regions that would otherwise be so cold that even in summer they'd be covered with ice. The current of greatest concern is often referred to as "The Great Conveyor Belt," which includes what we call the Gulf Stream.

The Great Conveyor Belt, while shaped by the Coriolis effect of the Earth's rotation, is mostly driven by the greater force created by differences in water temperatures and salinity. The North Atlantic Ocean is saltier and colder than the Pacific, the result of it being so much smaller and locked into place by the Northern and Southern American Hemispheres on the west and Europe and Africa on the east.

As a result, the warm water of the Great Conveyor Belt evaporates out of the North Atlantic leaving behind saltier waters, and the cold continental winds off the northern parts of North America cool the waters. Salty, cool waters settle to the bottom of the sea, most at a point a few hundred kilometers south of the southern tip of Greenland, producing a whirlpool of falling water that's 5 to 10 miles across. While the whirlpool rarely breaks the surface, during certain times of year it does produce an indentation and current in the ocean that can tilt ships and be seen from space (and may be what we see on the maps of ancient mariners).

This falling column of cold, salt-laden water pours itself to the bottom of the Atlantic, where it forms an undersea river forty times larger than all the rivers on land combined, flowing south down to and around the southern tip of Africa, where it finally reaches the Pacific. Amazingly, the water is so deep and so dense (because of its cold and salinity) that it often doesn't surface in the Pacific for as much as a thousand years after it first sank in the North Atlantic off the coast of Greenland.

Medclinician




-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: DeepThinker
Date Posted: October 03 2015 at 2:39pm
This current trend of global warming appears to be 200 years old or older.   The VAST majority of the CO2 that we have been putting into the atmosphere has been in the last few decades.

I find it very difficult to blame warming 200 years ago on human causes.

Medclinician-All you said is true but you missed part.   Warmer temps lead to more precipitation.   More precipitation leads to more snow.   More snow reflects more solar energy than dry land.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: October 03 2015 at 3:30pm
Ok so here is my crack pot theory on global warming. I believe that global warming is exactly what needs to happen when it comes to God's plan for the earth. Yes I said God! Oh my gosh how dare I say that dirty word (to many not me).

Look I believe we are here by God's grace and love and he make sure we had oil so we could live and advance he made sure our earth has an atmosphere so we could live (the other planets don't have that ) he made sure we had water so we could live. So I believe He is in control not us.

Now if we are producing too much co2 He will help us realize a solution or not. God may have a plan may be that we need to be warm because our sun may put us into a bad cold spell and we need the heat to live.

I guess my trust in God may be naïve to many of you but I do Trust In God. I hope some of you will do the same.


Posted By: Johnray1
Date Posted: October 03 2015 at 7:25pm
Medcliniclian, I agree with you.When enough of the ice and snow melts to lower the salinity of the Ocean enough and the Gulf Stream stops.-----I wonder how fast and how far south will the ice come to?

I wonder how far south would be safe? Maybe FL? Johnray1


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: October 04 2015 at 12:55am
Coincidence, right?




Of course, if we could just compare the data to all the other times over 20 billion tons of additional CO2 was pumped into the atmosphere annually. No wait....




-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: DeepThinker
Date Posted: October 04 2015 at 1:56pm
Jacksdad.... now I am not saying the chart is incorrect...

However is it just a coincidence that just happened to line up the scale of the two graphs to match?  Not saying the two things aren't related... they just made the graph in a way that makes them look like they are follow the same exact curve.    I am sorry, my propaganda detector is just a bit sensitive on these matters.


Posted By: Kay
Date Posted: October 04 2015 at 2:28pm
Good post I agree flu mom


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: October 04 2015 at 6:31pm
Kay, all these people are trying to figure out why all of this is happening. Did you ever think about if we came from the apes why do we still have apes? Some of just turned over the thousands of years and the others did not? Good luck with that one.

Look it is hard for people to think that God may be in control of this earth and not us so they choose to try and solve this warming problem. I still say there is a reason for this heat we may need this heat so that we can have food if the sun goes to "sleep" for 20-30 years.

We are not like the time of the Maunder Minimum 1645 - 1715 population 500 - 680 million, today 6,060–6,150 million. How will we feed all these people if we do not have a warm earth?

God knows best.


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: October 05 2015 at 12:27am
Deep Thinker - maybe they seem to follow the same curve because there really is a correlation between an increase in CO2 and global temperatures? Graphs and charts are meant to help us visualize patterns and relationships, so why would it be suspicious to scale a graph to do just that?


-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: Technophobe
Date Posted: October 05 2015 at 7:55am
That is my thinking, FluMom.  

I think the apes changed too, just in different ways.  But the temperatures.........  
                                                                                                                               We are due another maunder minimum.  Global warming may turn out to be a good thing after all.


-------------
How do you tell if a politician is lying?
His lips or pen are moving.


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: October 18 2015 at 1:17pm
Welcome back to the Ice Age - it is possible - although we are in one - for a small one lasting 30 years to begin very soon.

Warm up - or  actually cooling down - beginning now with nasty weather moving into the Midwest and East Coast i.e. New York areas.

Yes, it is winter isn't it... this normal? No... wait - no it isn't - This is October and snow is hitting early. An truly nasty period with El Nino become the wicked witch of the Gulf Stream should be bring a nastier winter than has been seen in a long time. The melting of the ice caps and glaciers will push the waters back south or block them prevents them from warming North America and parts of Europe.
click on YouTube below video to see full size and on YouTube.



Medclinician


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: October 18 2015 at 1:20pm
http://high-school.beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2015/10/sorry-al-gore-but-there-are-more-predictions-of-a-coming-ice-age-3065462.html%20 - http://high-school.beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2015/10/sorry-al-gore-but-there-are-more-predictions-of-a-coming-ice-age-3065462.html

According to a piece in the http://beforeitsnews.com/r2/?url=http://www.express.co.uk/news/weather/612369/SHOCK-CLAIM-World-is-on-brink-of-50-year-ICE-AGE-and-BRITAIN-will-bear-the-brunt - UK Express , The world is on the brink of an ice age that will last at least 50 years and Britain will bear the brunt. The ice age is driven by freak changes in global ocean conditions and a weakening of the sun.

Climate experts warn a rare pattern of water cooling in the north Atlantic will trigger a chain reaction of events leading to a “fully-blown ice age”.

The say the UK is on alert for a “serious climate situation” with regular winter whiteouts pushing emergency services to the limit.

Medclinician




-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: October 18 2015 at 1:21pm
http://www.express.co.uk/news/weather/612369/SHOCK-CLAIM-World-is-on-brink-of-50-year-ICE-AGE-and-BRITAIN-will-bear-the-brunt - http://www.express.co.uk/news/weather/612369/SHOCK-CLAIM-World-is-on-brink-of-50-year-ICE-AGE-and-BRITAIN-will-bear-the-brunt

Crippling blizzards, snowstorms and sub-zero temperatures threaten a yearly dose of Arctic misery for the next FIFTY YEARS at least - and possibly decades more.

Climate experts warn a rare pattern of water cooling in the north Atlantic will trigger a chain reaction of events leading to a “fully-blown ice age”.

The say the UK is on alert for a “serious climate situation” with regular winter whiteouts pushing emergency services to the limit.

Medclinician




-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: October 18 2015 at 3:32pm
http://avianflutalk.com/arctic-sea-ice-collapse_topic34744.html - http://avianflutalk.com/arctic-sea-ice-collapse_topic34744.html

This needs to be seen Dutch Josh. I have put a link up on Facebook and this data is right in line with what we have been tracking for some time now.

Medclinician


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: October 18 2015 at 3:40pm
Originally posted by Johnray1 Johnray1 wrote:

Medcliniclian, I agree with you.When enough of the ice and snow melts to lower the salinity of the Ocean enough and the Gulf Stream stops.-----I wonder how fast and how far south will the ice come to?

I wonder how far south would be safe? Maybe FL? Johnray1


It would be good to get some solid numbers in here. At this point it not relevant whether natural climate variation or humankind did this with all of their nasty pollution emitting factories. Is there time to lower the emissions enough to stop this?

Medclinician


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Kilt-3
Date Posted: October 18 2015 at 5:04pm
There is an Ice Age coming.

The Fresh water run off stops the circulation of the oceans taking warm water to cold areas and cold areas to warm areas

when it stops there is an Ice Age 


Posted By: Dutch Josh
Date Posted: October 18 2015 at 10:51pm
I do not see any indication for an "ice-age". But a lot of indication for "wierding of the weather" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/global_weirding - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/global_weirding

http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/593648/Weather-Warning-El-Nino-storms-autumn-winter-Britain?_ga=1.77754388.1075145855.1444898159 - http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/593648/Weather-Warning-El-Nino-storms-autumn-winter-Britain?_ga=1.77754388.1075145855.1444898159  

Dr Nick Klingaman, climate scientist from the Department of Meteorology at the University of Reading, said because observational records are still scarce it is difficult to predict the outcome of this year’s El Nino.

He said it is already the third biggest on record and is showing signs of becoming the most significant event ever seen.

He said the main effects will hit Asia and America with the UK and Europe impact this year still very uncertain.

“El Nino affects northern Europe and America because of changes to air currents in the tropics which then reach the extra-tropical Pacific and then the Atlantic,” he explained.

“In the UK there is a slight tendency towards cooler winters but there is evidence showing that the impacts in early winter can differ from later on in the season.

“In the US the weather is more governed by the Pacific so El Nino has a greater effect there, the UK and Europe is more Atlantic driven.”

and: 

He added that although Pacific cyclones do not usually affect our weather, due to the high volume being caused by El Nino - there have been a record 19 so far - there is a chance one could steer off course. 

“One of these could move northwards and across China,” he said.

“Then it can have an effect on the jetstream by nudging it out of its current position.

“Depending on which way the jet is pushed by the storm, it will lead to cooler weather or milder more unstable conditions.”

Earlier this year oceanologists and meteorologists confirmed a pattern of warming driven by a weakening of sea winds had started in the waters around Peru.

However in the past few weeks experts say it has escalated with the strongest event for at least 50 years or even on record now likely.


-------------
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein


Posted By: Dutch Josh
Date Posted: October 18 2015 at 11:00pm
When a pacific cyclone would reach the Arctic this will increase the temperature there. Already methane-release might be the main greenhouse gas. Such a cyclone will make things much worse in methane-release terms. 

As far as I understand the present view is that solar activity is believed to be of very limited influence on the temperature on earth. The earth climate is a product of geological events in an "atmospheric scale" that limits the influence of the sun. 

But I may be totally wrong on this issue. As far as I know what is causing an ice age is also not realy clear. We-as mankind-may not know enough to understand the full picture.


-------------
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein


Posted By: Dutch Josh
Date Posted: October 19 2015 at 12:21am
http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/09/18/climate-hiatus-never-happened-new-stats?cmpid=ait-fb - http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/09/18/climate-hiatus-never-happened-new-stats?cmpid=ait-fb  and 

http://astronomynow.com/2015/08/08/corrected-sunspot-history-suggests-climate-change-not-due-to-natural-solar-trends/ - http://astronomynow.com/2015/08/08/corrected-sunspot-history-suggests-climate-change-not-due-to-natural-solar-trends/

The sunspot number is the only direct record of the evolution of the solar cycle over multiple centuries. The apparent upward trend of solar activity between the 18th century and the late 20th century has now been identified as a major calibration error in the Group Sunspot Number. Now that this error has been corrected, solar activity appears to have remained relatively stable since the 1700s.

http://astronomynow.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/iau1508c_1280x340.jpg">A graph showing the sunspot Group Number as measured over the past 400 years after the new calibration. The Maunder Minimum, between 1645 and 1715, when sunspots were scarce and the winters harsh is clearly visible. The modulations of the 11-year solar cycle is clearly seen, as well as the 70–100-year Gleissberg cycle. Image credit: WDC-SILSO.

A graph showing the sunspot Group Number as measured over the past 400 years after the new calibration. The Maunder Minimum, between 1645 and 1715, when sunspots were scarce and the winters harsh is clearly visible. The modulations of the 11-year solar cycle is clearly seen, as well as the 70–100-year Gleissberg cycle. Image credit: WDC-SILSO.

The newly corrected sunspot numbers now provide a homogenous record of solar activity dating back some 400 years. Existing climate evolution models will need to be reevaluated given this entirely new picture of the long-term evolution of solar activity. This work will stimulate new studies both in solar physics (solar cycle modelling and predictions) and climatology, and can be used to unlock tens of millennia of solar records encoded in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmogenic_nuclide - cosmogenic nuclides  found in ice cores and tree rings. This could reveal more clearly the role the Sun plays in climate change over much longer timescales.

The new data series and the associated information are distributed from  http://www.sidc.be/silso/ - WDC-SILSO . It is a member of the World Data System of the International Council for Science (ICSU), dedicated to the preservation and distribution of large and/or long-duration reference datasets in all domains of science.



-------------
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein


Posted By: Dutch Josh
Date Posted: October 19 2015 at 12:46am
There are gasses that can go against global warming. Gasses that break down CO2 and CH4 (methane). What the data is suggesting (as far as I understand it) is (increased) global warming (leading to ice melting a.o. near Greenland wich explains the cold blob there). 

But (polar vortex etc.) has meant that some parts of this planet did get extreme cold winter weather. An ice-age is a global event (not a regional one). The sun is the main source of heat and has influence on the weather on earth. 

Pierce Corbyn 's http://www.weatheraction.com/ - http://www.weatheraction.com/ is trying to explain world weather (for short and long term) on bases of solar activity. It would be nice if that would work.


-------------
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: October 19 2015 at 10:17am
Okay, what I talk about in the second half of this post has been suggested and not implemented. There must be huge money involved in the whole global warming thing and questioning whether we are headed for a period of warmer temps or cooler. Perhaps an Ice Age is pushing it a bit - but we do have a lot of data - especially showing the ice caps are at an all time low which may dilute the Gulf Stream and cause cooler rather than warmer temps in the U.S. and Europe.

As for a global Ice Age, it would be a bit to sort out the effects of a large super cool part of Canada and the U.S. from this messed up Gulf Stream.  It would seem whether warming or cooling, if human industry pouring filth into the sky is the cause - both theories would support aggressive efforts to cap the emissions around the globe.

I am seeing sites which label the whole coming Ice Age thing as some malevolent conspiracy backed by people intentionally trying to alarm the world for some sort of personal gain. This is ludicrous. In a time where the media and accurate information about anything is hard to find, it is matter of research to simply find out the truth. No money to be made by us little data miners just looking for answers.

Not writing a book to make money by scaring people here. There will be no "The Ice Age Cometh" from jbm or any other author name I have. This not political, I receive no current grants or money or even work for anyone associated with power.

There is (my term) in the box (as opposed to out of the box) science that regurgitates the same foundation-less  spin year after year. Recently I put up a bit of science on how there are sun cycles and when the sun is not putting out as much energy as it should, we could get another ice age.  It does get complicated in whether our climate is based on CO2 or water vapor. There are factors we are not even aware of ... i.e. magnetic fields or natural cycles which are beyond our current science.

The fact that some Mastodons and perhaps even dinosaurs were flash frozen means in some points in our history climate change occurred in minutes not centuries. Last year I was reporting about a lake in Europe that froze so fast the fish were encased in ice unable to swim away.

So - let's hope free speech doesn't get labeled insidious and someone starts passing laws against it. That would be a sorry day for America.

Medclinician

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/sen-whitehouse-d-ri-suggests-using-rico-laws-global-warming-skeptics_963007.html - http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/sen-whitehouse-d-ri-suggests-using-rico-laws-global-warming-skeptics_963007.html

That's right -- a sitting U.S. Senator is suggesting using RICO laws should be applied to global warming skeptics. Courts have been defining RICO down for some time and in ways that aren't particularly helpful. In 1994, the Supreme Court ruled http://www2.law.columbia.edu/faculty_franke/Civil%20Rights/NOW%20S.pdf - RICO statutes could be applied to pro-life activists on the grounds that interstate commerce can be affected even when the organization being targeted doesn't have economic motives. 

Obviously, there's a lot of money hanging in the balance with regard to energy policy. But when does coordinating "a wide range of activities, including political lobbying, contributions to political candidates, and a large number of communication and media efforts" go from basic First Amendment expression to racketeering? The tobacco analogy is inappropriate in regards to how direct the link between smoking and cancer is. Even among those who do agree that global warming is a problem, there's a tremendously wide variety of opinions about the practical effects. Who gets to decide whether someone is "downplaying the role of carbon emissions in climate change" relative to the consensus? If message coordination and lobbying on controversial scientific and political issues can be declared racketeering because the people funding such efforts have a financial interest in a predetermined outcome, we're just going to have to outlaw everything that goes on in Washington, D.C.

Medclinician





-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Satori
Date Posted: October 27 2015 at 7:42pm
if an ice age is coming
it may want to get here a little sooner
because

THE ICE IS MELTING

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/28/1441491/-There-is-a-melt-event-beginning-to-happen-in-Greenland - There is a melt event beginning to happen in Greenland


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/28/1441491/-There-is-a-melt-event-beginning-to-happen-in-Greenland




Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: October 28 2015 at 2:47am
Originally posted by Satori Satori wrote:

if an ice age is coming
it may want to get here a little sooner
because

THE ICE IS MELTING

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/28/1441491/-There-is-a-melt-event-beginning-to-happen-in-Greenland - There is a melt event beginning to happen in Greenland


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/28/1441491/-There-is-a-melt-event-beginning-to-happen-in-Greenland




It is this melting that will cause a dilution of the Gulf Stream as cold waters move to the south further blocking the movement of warming water to the north. Perhaps this will not bring on a global ice age, but it could definitely result in dramatic cooling in North America and parts of Europe.

Medclinician


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Technophobe
Date Posted: October 28 2015 at 3:55am
Med, is right.  The dilution of the cold salty water in the area off Greenland is what stops the thermohaline current.  This is what has triggered the past ice ages.  That is the current scientific theory (not hypothesis).

There is now a race on between the direct effects of global warming and the side-effects such as the slowing of this current.

Eventually, it will end up hotter, but how long that will take and whether or not there will be a cooling-pause in the process is anyone's guess.  Those scientists who think they know which will win are being arrogant.  No one really knows.

For our, our children's and our grandchildren's lifetimes, I can guarantee change, weather wierding and encroaching disasters.  Nothing more.


-------------
How do you tell if a politician is lying?
His lips or pen are moving.


Posted By: OriginalHappyCamper
Date Posted: November 02 2015 at 6:48am

NASA Debunks Global Warming: Ice Sheets Growing


Recent NASA studies show the Anarctic ice sheet is gaining more mass than it is losing,  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151030220523.htm - ScienceDaily.com  reports. 

In 2013, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said the Antarctic ice sheet had lost large amounts of mass with little or no gain, but new NASA studies say the opposite. 

Jay Zwally, who led the NASA study, said his study agrees with others that there's been "ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica. But in other areas, such as East Antarctica and interior West Antarctica, there's been ice gain.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com  http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/antarctic-ice-gain/2015/11/01/id/700061/#ixzz3qLUgGQaS - http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/antarctic-ice-gain/2015/11/01/id/700061/#ixzz3qLUgGQaS  



-------------
Jesus Christ died and was raised on the third day, the only "God" to overcome death.


Posted By: Satori
Date Posted: November 02 2015 at 4:58pm
SATORI DEBUNKS NASA
DEBUNKING GLOBAL
WARMING


October of 2015 May be the Hottest Month Ever Recorded — A Record That May Stand For But a Month


http://robertscribbler.com/2015/11/02/october-of-2015-may-be-the-hottest-month-ever-recorded-a-record-that-may-stand-for-but-a-month/




NASA did NOT debunk global warming

that headline belongs to  NEWSMAX

which like the FAUX N"News" Network is a right wing extremist,propaganda organization


many climate models predicted the ice actually growing in the Antarctic


its still melting most other places and at unprecedented rates


NEWSMAX does the same thing DRUDGE often does

they change the title of an article to something that suits their agenda and is inflammatory in nature

BUT


when you bother to actually read the article you quickly realize what they have done


sorry

global warming has NOT been debunked


the ice is melting


ready or not



Posted By: Satori
Date Posted: November 02 2015 at 5:49pm

Scientists confirm their fears about West Antarctica — that it’s inherently unstable


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/02/scientists-confirm-their-fears-about-west-antarctica-that-its-inherently-unstable/



Posted By: Technophobe
Date Posted: November 03 2015 at 3:29am
The latest on this subject is available on:   http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/weather/west-antarctic-ice-melt-could-raise-seas-by-3-meters/ar-BBmLASe?li=AA59G2&ocid=LENDHP - http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/weather/west-antarctic-ice-melt-could-raise-seas-by-3-meters/ar-BBmLASe?li=AA59G2&ocid=LENDHP   This suggests further ANTARCTIC ice loss is imminent (geologically speaking- 300 years or so).

I do not think they have taken the melting/release of methane-hydrates into consideration in their estimates - which would make that period much shorter.

Whenever it goes, it means a 3m sea level rise.  Avoid buying coastal property!

On the other hand, The Telegraph (which is a respected paper) reports increasing Antarctic sea ice  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/11970682/NASA-reveals-that-Antarctica-is-actually-gaining-ice.html - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/11970682/NASA-reveals-that-Antarctica-is-actually-gaining-ice.html  and Jay Zwally is a respected Nasa glaceologist.  So that is far from debunked.  BUT, Warming can produce temporary local cooling (the thermohaline, for instance, is but one large eddy in a profoundly complex system) and overall ice seems to retreat and advance, apparently at random, over both poles:   http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/october-arctic-sea-ice-in-line-with-last-decade.html - http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/october-arctic-sea-ice-in-line-with-last-decade.html .  So, Zwally's observations could be irrelevant.

This brings me to my final point:  Satori and Med' are both reporting precice, accurate and correct things.  They cannot agree on what that means for the future of our predictions.  Well neither can the experts!  There is some limited degree of consensus that we are to blame and it is warming.  But by how much, by how much will it warm, for how long, what path it will take, can we stop it, or slow it, or reduce it, or prepare for it?  ???????  If the experts don't know, what hope is there for the rest of us? 

So, please keep up the good work.  But stop arguing - you are starting to sound like the experts!


-------------
How do you tell if a politician is lying?
His lips or pen are moving.


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: November 03 2015 at 9:13am
I wish the idiot that first coined the term "global warming" had kept it to himself. "Climate change" is what we're looking at, and any hint of somewhere getting colder automatically brings out the naysayers and deniers. It's a global warming trend that will change weather patterns resulting in changes in localized temperatures, rainfall, wind patterns, etc. It's describes what we're seeing, and I don't understand why people are so determined to deny it in the face of measurable data, especially given the dire consequences to the ecosystem and ourselves. The sea levels are rising, Greenland is melting, glaciers around the world are disappearing, CO2 levels are increasing, each year is hotter than the last - all things we can see and quantify.
I've posted this before because people seem to have trouble getting their heads around the fact that the thin envelopes of gas and liquid clinging to our planet is not as big as we might believe. The blue sphere is all the water on Earth, and the pink one represents the atmosphere. Dumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into both can only bring about change.









-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: November 03 2015 at 9:15am


-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: November 03 2015 at 9:16am


-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: November 03 2015 at 9:17am



-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: November 03 2015 at 9:18am


-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: November 03 2015 at 6:32pm
en passant
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/enpassant - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/enpassant

It is amazing how heated this thread has gotten. I will have to check out the then and now pics of glaciers which really - anybody's guess these days - need to be checked out which are melting.

An estimation of the dollar figures wrapped up in this is probably more than even the oil industry with its spills versus the coverup of the Eco-damage in Alaska oil spills and availability of electric cars and hybrids.  Big money around global warming and especially loud voices.

So let's look at things a bit closer - for one the coverage from some major media sources is blatantly false

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/25/news-corp-climate-change-coverage_n_1912896.html - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/25/news-corp-climate-change-coverage_n_1912896.html

3 percent of Fox News' and 80 percent of the Wall Street Journal opinion pages' climate coverage is inaccurate and misleading according to an analysis titled " http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/global_warming/Is-News-Corp-Failing-Science.pdf - Is News Corp. Failing Science, " from The Union of Concerned Scientists. The report examined how various media outlets fare in their coverage of climate related news.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/09/22/fox-news-distorts-climate-science/ - Scientific American explains that, according to the analysis, in 37 out of 40 occurrences, Fox's staff made dismissive and inaccurate comments regarding climate change, http://video.foxnews.com/v/1729695908001/climate-scientist-explains-record-temperatures - misleading audiences of its importance and relevance , and that from August 2011 to July 2012 only nine out of the Wall Street Journal's 48 mentions of climate were accurate.

> drum roll <

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/04/chasing-ice-trailer-james-balog_n_1852839.html - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/04/chasing-ice-trailer-james-balog_n_1852839.html

"I never imagined that you could see glaciers this big, disappearing in such a short time. There's a powerful piece of history that's unfolding in these pictures," National Geographic photographer http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/photography/photographers/photographer-james-balog/ - James Balog describes in the new http://www.chasingice.com/ - "Chasing Ice" trailer.

"Chasing Ice" follows Balog's journey as he works to capture the fast-vanishing Arctic glaciers. Armed with 30 time-lapse cameras on three continents, Balog and his team compress years of video footage into seconds to reveal the disappearance of mountains of ice.

> one more <

point is - no one is saying the ice isn't melting - it is...

The fact it is melting so fast and could dilute the Gulf Stream hugely could bring us a "Mini Ice Age" in an area... not globally is very possible.

Still - we are hearing this - and the word mini-ice age keeps coming up

http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/21/scientists-fear-another-little-ice-age-is-on-the-way/ - http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/21/scientists-fear-another-little-ice-age-is-on-the-way/

“By looking back at certain isotopes in ice cores, [Lockwood] has been able to determine how active the sun has been over thousands of years,” http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/posts/Real-risk-of-a-Maunder-minimum-Little-Ice-Age-says-leading-scientist - the BBC reported . “Following analysis of the data, Professor Lockwood believes solar activity is now falling more rapidly than at any time in the last 10,000 years.”

Aundhkar now argues that winter temperatures have dropped in the North Pole, causing severe winters, like the so-called “polar vortex” experienced by the U.S. last winter.

“This has also triggered the jet stream, which is active in the northern parts of the globe to shift in inter tropical climate zone like India,” Aundhkar said. “As a result, cold wind conditions were witnessed during the last two years. The unseasonal hailstorms in November and December are a result of the influence of the jet stream. This has also led to steady weakening of magnetic energy of the sun, leading to mini ice age like situation.”

comment: it's a wait and see this winter. Things can turn around rather quickly when polar vortexes start forming and we saw quite a bit of that last year.

A storm is coming - there always is somewhere - question is how much, how long, and how cold will it get and for how many years will it stay that way.

Medclinician


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Satori
Date Posted: November 03 2015 at 7:35pm




Antarctica Is Gaining Ice. Here’s Why That’s Not Actually Good News


http://www.newsweek.com/antarctica-gaining-ice-heres-why-thats-not-actually-good-news-389904




Posted By: Dutch Josh
Date Posted: November 05 2015 at 4:42am
http://arctic-news.blogspot.nl/2015/10/methane-vent-hole-in-arctic-sea-ice.html - http://arctic-news.blogspot.nl/2015/10/methane-vent-hole-in-arctic-sea-ice.html brings me to this: http://guymcpherson.com/forum/index.php?topic=3233.0 - http://guymcpherson.com/forum/index.php?topic=3233.0 .

Methane is being released in large amounts from beneath the (thin) Arctic ice shield. Methane (CH4) is a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2 and has become the major greenhouse gas. 

The inflow of warmer water from the oceans towards the Arctic (were it ends up under the ice) means that more CH4 will be released (just like melting permafrost in Siberia, Canada/Alaska will mean more CH4). 

A "mini ice age"could be more than welcome to slow things down. But the outlook is not good at all. 


-------------
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein


Posted By: Satori
Date Posted: November 05 2015 at 5:20am



NASA found a way to track ocean currents from space. What they saw is troubling


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/04/nasa-can-now-detect-worrying-ocean-circulation-changes-from-space/



Posted By: OriginalHappyCamper
Date Posted: November 05 2015 at 5:41am

MELTDOWN MYTH: Antarctic ice growing is just the first EVIDENCE global warming is NOT REAL


http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/617144/Antarctica-not-shrinking-growing-ice-caps-melting

When you get a large religious organization involved in a non religious issue ie global warming ask yourself why are they involved.


-------------
Jesus Christ died and was raised on the third day, the only "God" to overcome death.


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: November 05 2015 at 8:29am
Originally posted by OriginalHappyCamper OriginalHappyCamper wrote:

MELTDOWN MYTH: Antarctic ice growing is just the first EVIDENCE global warming is NOT REAL
When you get a large religious organization involved in a non religious issue ie global warming ask yourself why are they involved.


http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/latest-data-shows-arctic-ice-volume-has-increased.html - http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/latest-data-shows-arctic-ice-volume-has-increased.html

All religious considerations aside - how could we go from large increases to record levels to a current meltdown. Who is putting out the numbers and which are accurate?

Latest Data Shows Arctic Sea Ice Volume Has Increased

05.02.2014
05.02.2014 20:45 Age: 2 yrs

Satellite data shows that Arctic sea ice is getting thicker as Antarctic sea ice extent continues to expand to near record levels, according to a report issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, in Boulder Colorado, today, 5 February 2014.

comment: and then this


In 3 years have we had a major meltdown? If so, this has to be messing up the Gulf Stream and we could see record low temps this winter in North America and Europe.

Medclinician


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: November 05 2015 at 8:33am
Jacksdad - Look at what I posted for 2012. Apparently a lot happened since 2006.


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: November 05 2015 at 9:28am
Yep, I've been seeing the slew of news stories about the apparent increase in ice, Med. Things are definitely changing, and at an unprecedented rate.
I think the thing we should take away from this is that our climate is indeed moving away from what we've long considered to be the norm, and in a way that's apparently a lot faster than we would expect. Human intervention? I believe so. While others can deny it, I still stand by my assertion that if you accept our weather/climate is determined in large part by the amount of solar energy our atmosphere can hold on to, significantly changing the composition of that thin layer of gas has to have repercussions. It's just cause and effect - pure and simple.
What many people fail to understand is that climate change is not as simple as "global warming" - localized cooling can be one of the consequences of a warming planet and doesn't automatically debunk it. If we screw things up badly enough we can disrupt complex and powerful mechanisms like the thermohaline circulation, and gulf/jet streams, and significant cooling can result in some regions while average global temperatures continue to rise. I'll be the first to admit that climate change science is still in it's infancy, but I don't believe we know enough about this to be so blase as to dismiss it given the potential ramifications for future generations. Climate change denial is pseudoscience at best, and at worst a deliberate campaign of misinformation by those who stand to profit the most.
Hey, here's a thought. How about we all agree to disagree on this one, but quit polluting the one planet we have because it's the intelligent thing to do? Just a suggestion.


-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: November 06 2015 at 8:59am
Originally posted by jacksdad jacksdad wrote:

Yep, I've been seeing the slew of news stories about the apparent increase in ice, Med. Things are definitely changing, and at an unprecedented rate.
I think the thing we should take away from this is that our climate is indeed moving away from what we've long considered to be the norm, and in a way that's apparently a lot faster than we would expect. Human intervention? I believe so. While others can deny it, I still stand by my assertion that if you accept our weather/climate is determined in large part by the amount of solar energy our atmosphere can hold on to, significantly changing the composition of that thin layer of gas has to have repercussions. It's just cause and effect - pure and simple.
What many people fail to understand is that climate change is not as simple as "global warming" - localized cooling can be one of the consequences of a warming planet and doesn't automatically debunk it. If we screw things up badly enough we can disrupt complex and powerful mechanisms like the thermohaline circulation, and gulf/jet streams, and significant cooling can result in some regions while average global temperatures continue to rise. I'll be the first to admit that climate change science is still in it's infancy, but I don't believe we know enough about this to be so blase as to dismiss it given the potential ramifications for future generations. Climate change denial is pseudoscience at best, and at worst a deliberate campaign of misinformation by those who stand to profit the most.
Hey, here's a thought. How about we all agree to disagree on this one, but quit polluting the one planet we have because it's the intelligent thing to do? Just a suggestion.


One of the best parts of AFT is the ability to agree to disagree. Over the years it has evolved from some pretty heated debates to intense but mostly courteous exchange of opposite views. Perhaps climate change is a science which at present is not as developed as it will be with advances in technology and the ability to extrapolate from the narrow band of data we have over millions of years.

As many in the U.S. and other countries became more "eco-aware" in the last part of the 20th century, people have seen the results of the Industrial Revolution.
http://www.softschools.com/timelines/industrial_revolution_timeline/40/ - http://www.softschools.com/timelines/industrial_revolution_timeline/40/

Is the climate change related to something done by humankind?

On the edge of things we have this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program
This is not industry - this is military. By doing research on controlling the weather, could we have messed up parts of the Ozone layer?

Is America the primary polluter in the world of gases which may be causing global warming or regional cooling?

China, United States, Russia, India, Japan, Germany, Canada,Britain,South Korea, and Iran are the worst and in that order, China being #1.
http://www.reuters.com/news/picture/who-are-the-worlds-biggest-polluters?articleId=USRTXRKSI#TiH5DMJwHlu0XGSZ.97 - http://www.reuters.com/news/picture/who-are-the-worlds-biggest-polluters?articleId=USRTXRKSI#TiH5DMJwHlu0XGSZ.97

Some surprises there for me. Iran?  South Korea? in the top 10? Yes, there are. So, any efforts to lower pollution is going to be the result of a pact formed by these nations to lower their output of it. How many of these nations have real serious intentions of doing so and not just stalling doing so by a decade or more? How quickly will their lack of action cause us problems?

Many say it already is and even if we stopped today it would take a hundred years or more to really make a difference.

So while many can agree in the private sector, who is willing to give up jobs and threaten their economy during a period of global economic instability.

For now we can continue to agree to disagree on whether or not humankind is causing it and to what degree. As to whether they can fix it... signs point to no. We had best prepare for decades of climate issues and possible power blackouts and either very cold or very hot.

Medclinician




-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: November 06 2015 at 9:01am
Originally posted by Medclinician Medclinician wrote:

Originally posted by jacksdad jacksdad wrote:

Yep, I've been seeing the slew of news stories about the apparent increase in ice, Med. Things are definitely changing, and at an unprecedented rate.
I think the thing we should take away from this is that our climate is indeed moving away from what we've long considered to be the norm, and in a way that's apparently a lot faster than we would expect. Human intervention? I believe so. While others can deny it, I still stand by my assertion that if you accept our weather/climate is determined in large part by the amount of solar energy our atmosphere can hold on to, significantly changing the composition of that thin layer of gas has to have repercussions. It's just cause and effect - pure and simple.
What many people fail to understand is that climate change is not as simple as "global warming" - localized cooling can be one of the consequences of a warming planet and doesn't automatically debunk it. If we screw things up badly enough we can disrupt complex and powerful mechanisms like the thermohaline circulation, and gulf/jet streams, and significant cooling can result in some regions while average global temperatures continue to rise. I'll be the first to admit that climate change science is still in it's infancy, but I don't believe we know enough about this to be so blase as to dismiss it given the potential ramifications for future generations. Climate change denial is pseudoscience at best, and at worst a deliberate campaign of misinformation by those who stand to profit the most.
Hey, here's a thought. How about we all agree to disagree on this one, but quit polluting the one planet we have because it's the intelligent thing to do? Just a suggestion.


One of the best parts of AFT is the ability to agree to disagree. Over the years it has evolved from some pretty heated debates to intense but mostly courteous exchange of opposite views. Perhaps climate change is a science which at present is not as developed as it will be with advances in technology and the ability to extrapolate from the narrow band of data we have over millions of years.

As many in the U.S. and other countries became more "eco-aware" in the last part of the 20th century, people have seen the results of the Industrial Revolution.
http://www.softschools.com/timelines/industrial_revolution_timeline/40/ - http://www.softschools.com/timelines/industrial_revolution_timeline/40/

Is the climate change related to something done by humankind?

On the edge of things we have this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program
This is not industry - this is military. By doing research on controlling the weather, could we have messed up parts of the Ozone layer?

Is America the primary polluter in the world of gases which may be causing global warming or regional cooling?

China, United States, Russia, India, Japan, Germany, Canada,Britain,South Korea, and Iran are the worst and in that order, China being #1.
http://www.reuters.com/news/picture/who-are-the-worlds-biggest-polluters?articleId=USRTXRKSI#TiH5DMJwHlu0XGSZ.97 - http://www.reuters.com/news/picture/who-are-the-worlds-biggest-polluters?articleId=USRTXRKSI#TiH5DMJwHlu0XGSZ.97

Some surprises there for me. Iran?  South Korea? in the top 10? Yes, they are. So, any efforts to lower pollution is going to be the result of a pact formed by these nations to lower their output of it. How many of these nations have real serious intentions of doing so and are not just stalling doing so by a decade or more? How quickly will their lack of action cause us problems?

Many say it already is and even if we stopped today it would take a hundred years or more to really make a difference.

So while many can agree in the private sector, who is willing to give up jobs and threaten their economy during a period of global economic instability?

For now we can continue to agree to disagree on whether or not humankind is causing it and to what degree. As to whether they can fix it... signs point to no. We had best prepare for decades of climate issues and possible power blackouts and either very cold or very hot One of the best parts of AFT is the ability to agree to disagree. Over the years it has evolved from some pretty heated debates to intense but mostly courteous exchange of opposite views. Perhaps climate change is a science which at present is not as developed as it will be with advances in technology and the ability to extrapolate from the narrow band of data we have over millions of years.

As many in the U.S. and other countries became more "eco-aware" in the last part of the 20th century, people have seen the results of the Industrial Revolution.
http://www.softschools.com/timelines/industrial_revolution_timeline/40/ - http://www.softschools.com/timelines/industrial_revolution_timeline/40/

Is the climate change related to something done by humankind?

On the edge of things we have this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program
This is not industry - this is military. By doing research on controlling the weather, could we have messed up parts of the Ozone layer?

Is America the primary polluter in the world of gases which may be causing global warming or regional cooling?

China, United States, Russia, India, Japan, Germany, Canada,Britain,South Korea, and Iran are the worst and in that order, China being #1.
http://www.reuters.com/news/picture/who-are-the-worlds-biggest-polluters?articleId=USRTXRKSI#TiH5DMJwHlu0XGSZ.97 - http://www.reuters.com/news/picture/who-are-the-worlds-biggest-polluters?articleId=USRTXRKSI#TiH5DMJwHlu0XGSZ.97

Some surprises there for me. Iran?  South Korea? in the top 10? Yes, they are. So, any efforts to lower pollution is going to be the result of a pact formed by these nations to lower their output of it. How many of these nations have real serious intentions of doing so and not just stalling doing so by a decade or more? How quickly will their lack of action cause us problems?

Many say it already is and even if we stopped today it would take a hundred years or more to really make a difference.

So while many can agree in the private sector, who is willing to give up jobs and threaten their economy during a period of global economic instability.

For now we can continue to agree to disagree on whether or not humankind is causing it and to what degree. As to whether they can fix it... signs point to no. We had best prepare for decades of climate issues and possible power blackouts and either very cold or very hot climate in some areas or even globally.

Medclinician





-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: jacksdad
Date Posted: November 07 2015 at 11:19am
Originally posted by Medclinician Medclinician wrote:

For now we can continue to agree to disagree on whether or not humankind is causing it and to what degree. As to whether they can fix it... signs point to no. We had best prepare for decades of climate issues and possible power blackouts and either very cold or very hot.


Thumbs Up




-------------
"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.


Posted By: Technophobe
Date Posted: November 07 2015 at 1:48pm
Spot on!  Dry/wet, windy and unpredictable too.

-------------
How do you tell if a politician is lying?
His lips or pen are moving.


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: December 01 2015 at 8:49am
Just could not leave this thread alone. People reporting or submitting data saying that we are not in a period of global warming are being "noted" and there are even some sites up fiercely debunking reports of cooling. Getting back to basics, things are melting yes, but at the same time it is diluting the Gulf Stream and we could see (with a bad El Nino) fierce cooling in the United States and Europe.

Assuredly, I swear, the current mentally of TPTB (the powers that be) in having a conference in Paris which was just hit by terrorist has to be a classic mistake. As people gather from around the world to change history by stating that humankind is responsible, protestors and naysayers abound.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference

The 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conference_of_the_parties - COP 21 or CMP 11 is being held in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Bourget - Le Bourget , from November 30 to December 11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference#cite_note-dipl-1 - [1] It will be the 21st yearly session of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conference_of_the_parties - Conference of the Parties to the 1992 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Framework_Convention_on_Climate_Change - United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 11th session of the Meeting of the Parties to the 1997 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol - Kyoto Protocol . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference#cite_note-2 - [2] The conference objective is to achieve a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legally_binding - legally binding and universal agreement on climate, from all the nations of the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference#cite_note-NYT-20151128-3 - [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference#cite_note-AP-20151129-4 - [4] Leadership of the negotiations is yet to be determined.

According to the organizing committee, the objective of the 2015 conference is to achieve, for the first time in over 20 years of UN negotiations, a binding and universal agreement on climate, from all the nations of the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference#cite_note-dipl-1 - [1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Francis - Pope Francis published an encyclical called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laudato_si - Laudato si' intended, in part, to influence the conference. The encyclical calls for action against climate change. The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Trade_Union_Confederation - International Trade Union Confederation has called for the goal to be "zero carbon, zero poverty", and the general secretary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharan_Burrow - Sharan Burrow has repeated that there are "no jobs on a dead planet".

Medclinician





-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: December 02 2015 at 8:39am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Niña - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Niña

La Niña causes mostly the opposite effects of El Niño, above-average https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precipitation_%28meteorology%29 - precipitation across the northern Midwest, the northern Rockies, Northern California, and the Pacific Northwest's southern and eastern regions. Meanwhile, precipitation in the southwestern and southeastern states is below average. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Ni%C3%B1a#cite_note-7 - [7] This also allows for the development of many stronger-than-average hurricanes in the Atlantic and less in the Pacific.

The synoptic condition for the Tehuantepecer is associated with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-pressure_system - high-pressure system forming in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_Madre_de_Oaxaca - Sierra Madre of Mexico in the wake of an advancing cold front, which causes winds to accelerate through the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isthmus_of_Tehuantepec - Isthmus of Tehuantepec . Tehuantepecers primarily occur during the cold season months for the region in the wake of cold fronts, between October and February, with a summer maximum in July caused by the westward extension of the Azores-Bermuda high pressure system. Wind magnitude is weaker during La Niña years than https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Ni%C3%B1o - El Niño years, due to the less frequent cold frontal incursions during La Niña winters,

comment: perhaps El Nino is getting a lot of attention right now - but soon things will change - perhaps drastically - and those polar vortexes will be coming down to visit us once more.

Medclinician https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Ni%C3%B1a#cite_note-8 -


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: carbon20
Date Posted: December 04 2015 at 1:39pm
the Global convayer stopped just after the last ice age,

result the world was in another ICE AGE for a 1000 years ,

its on the brink of stopping now ,

melt water from Greenland is pouring MILLIONS of gallons a minute into it ,

when it stops as it has in the past ,all the northern hemisphere will be plunged into another 

ICE AGE .......

i fully agree with everyone on this point,and have been saying it for years,

WAKE UP its happening NOW


-------------
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.🖖

Marcus Aurelius


Posted By: carbon20
Date Posted: December 04 2015 at 1:53pm
2000 years ago the population of the planet was 2billion and had been that way for millenia up until the

 industrial revolution 1850

from 1850 till now we have put on this planet another 6 billion people 

300 years ago there was not a car on the road ,plane in the sky and all ships where driven by the wind,

think of all the live stock that has also been added to feed us,

wake up we are the cause.......



-------------
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.🖖

Marcus Aurelius


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: December 04 2015 at 9:34pm
Yes we are all the cause and that is why a pandemic will have to take out millions to maybe a billon or two of us. We need to cleanse the earth of too many people.


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: December 06 2015 at 9:39am
Originally posted by FluMom FluMom wrote:

Yes we are all the cause and that is why a pandemic will have to take out millions to maybe a billon or two of us. We need to cleanse the earth of too many people.


With the mutation of new viruses, a real possibility that we will see at least North America - Europe climate change that will be a whole lot like an Ice Age for New York and London -  with or without our little elevated C02 and nasty factories, the Earth can fend for itself and will. No religion has ever promised us that we will be here forever and we won't.

Medclinician


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: December 07 2015 at 1:02pm
http://www.americantraditions.org/Articles/New%20Evidence%20that%20Man-Made%20Carbon%20Dioxide%20%28CO2%29%20Does%20Not%20Cause%20Global%20Warming.htm -
http://www.americantraditions.org/Articles/New Evidence that Man-Made Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Does Not Cause Global Warming.htm

Global climate changes have been far more intense (12 to 20 times as intense in some cases) than the global warming of the past century, and they took place in as little as 20–100 years. Global warming of the past century (0.8° C) is virtually insignificant when compared to the magnitude of at least 10 global climate changes in the past 15,000 years. None of these sudden global climate changes could possibly have been caused by human CO2 input to the atmosphere because they all took place long before anthropogenic CO2 emissions began. The cause of the ten earlier ‘natural’ climate changes was most likely the same as the cause of global warming from 1977 to 1998.




-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: December 30 2015 at 8:12am
So gathering data to continue the possibility of at least possible mini-age temperatures in the United States and Europe in the next 20 years.  I am continuing this thread in Coming of the Ice Age 2016

Medclinician


-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician


Posted By: Medclinician
Date Posted: December 30 2015 at 9:35am
Climate Myths courtesy of Robert M. Carter

LAYING TEN GLOBAL WARMING MYTHS

Myth 1     Average global temperature (AGT) has increased over the last few years.

Fact 1       Within error bounds, AGT has not increased since 1995 and has declined since 2002, despite an increase in atmospheric CO2 of 8% since 1995. 

Myth 2     During the late 20th Century, AGT increased at a dangerously fast rate and reached an unprecedented magnitude.

Facts 2      The late 20th Century AGT rise was at a rate of 1-20 C/century, which lies well within natural rates of climate change for the last 10,000 yr. AGT has been several degrees warmer than today many times in the recent geological past. 

Myth 3     AGT was relatively unchanging in pre-industrial times, has sky-rocketed since 1900, and will increase by several degrees more over the next 100 years (the Mann, Bradley & Hughes “hockey stick” curve and its computer extrapolation).

Facts 3      The Mann et al. curve has been exposed as a statistical contrivance. There is no convincing evidence that past climate was unchanging, nor that 20th century changes in AGT were unusual, nor that dangerous human warming is underway.

Myth 4     Computer models predict that AGT will increase by up to 60 C over the next 100 years.

Facts 4      Deterministic computer models do. Other equally valid (empirical) computer models predict cooling. 

Myth 5     Warming of more than 20 C will have catastrophic effects on ecosystems and mankind alike.

Facts 5      A 20 C change would be well within previous natural bounds. Ecosystems have been adapting to such changes since time immemorial. The result is the process that we call evolution. Mankind can and does adapt to all climate extremes.

Myth 6     Further human addition of CO2 to the atmosphere will cause dangerous warming, and is generally harmful.

Facts 6      No human-caused warming can yet be detected that is distinct from natural system variation and noise. Any additional human-caused warming which occurs will probably amount to less than 10 C. Atmospheric CO2 is a beneficial fertilizer for plants, including especially cereal crops, and also aids efficient evapo-transpiration. 

Myth 7     Changes in solar activity cannot explain recent changes in AGT.

Facts 7      The sun’s output varies in several ways on many time scales (including the 11-, 22 and 80-year solar cycles), with concomitant effects on Earth’s climate. While changes in visible radiation are small, changes in particle flux and magnetic field are known to exercise a strong climatic effect. More than 50% of the 0.80 C rise in AGT observed during the 20th century can be attributed to solar change. 

Myth 8     Unprecedented melting of ice is taking place in both the north and south polar regions.

Facts 8      Both the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are growing in thickness and cooling at their summit. Sea ice around Antarctica attained a record area in 2007. Temperatures in the Arctic region are just now achieving the levels of natural warmth experienced during the early 1940s, and the region was warmer still (sea-ice free) during earlier times.

Myth 9     Human-caused global warming is causing dangerous global sea-level (SL) rise.

Facts 9      SL change differs from time to time and place to place; between 1955 and 1996, for example, SL at Tuvalu fell by 105 mm (2.5 mm/yr). Global average SL is a statistical measure of no value for environmental planning purposes. A global average SL rise of 1-2 mm/yr occurred naturally over the last 150 years, and shows no sign of human-influenced increase. 

Myth 10   The late 20th Century increase in AGT caused an increase in the number of severe storms (cyclones), or in storm intensity.

Facts 10    Meteorological experts are agreed that no increase in storms has occurred beyond that associated with natural variation of the climate system.

comment: So - depending on whose computer model you run you can get just about anything. In some conclusions the common sense factor is noticeably absent.




-------------
"not if but when" the original Medclinician



Print Page | Close Window