Scientists at UN: Warming is Officially OVER

Well, my daughter will be thrilled that she will see more snow.

ha ha ha -

I'd think you have a few years yet Shay. At this point of the game the global warming taxes aren't going to make it, though. Like the guy in the article says - more to give to the banks, LOL.

An ice age won't appear overnight, but it's on its way. It will be one long event though and explains some of the extinction patterns as natural and not man induced. Mass extinctions always accompany an ice age. The problems will be heating fuel if our Gov doesn't get off the pot and allow development of alternatives to fossil fuels.

I wasn't aware you got snow there less than once a winter. When I say snow I know full well I'm talking an inch rather than the foot or two that can dump here, but I thought you got some every year. As long as the cold sticks to the cold seasons even if those seasons are colder, you are probably safe. It's the off-season cold snaps that are dangerous - and they are dangerous. There are a lot of countries where this news is being treated with much less comic relief than I find our US citizens greeting it with. Ask the hungry people in the 33 countries that experienced food shortages this year from last year's cold induced disasters how funny they find it.

Sal,

I'm using that article on my website. In Southern Ca, we've had our seasons clustered into a couple of weeks...then mild. So, summer is 117 degrees for two weeks then the rest of the time, it's fall-like. This winter, it was two weeks--24 degrees or lower at night, 30's in the daytime, after that, it's been like spring.

I wonder how the global warming nuts are going to backpedal?

dorothy

The disaster of the day could be about anything. As we move into cooling, there are going to be many - cooling brings wet, so floods, blizzards, etc are going to increase. So will crop failure and famine. I'm sure they will have an easy time of it finding something new -- and ways to blame it on us so they can take our money from us over it, too.

It's easy for the average citizen to backpedal -- after all the lying and scamming that's all it takes is to point out that they had a right to trust the authorities. People still want to believe they can trust those in charge. What I wonder is what are the Professors in the Colleges who were TEACHING this stuff going to say? They knew better, yet built whole programs on warming - had students wrapped into whole curriculums that were based on *******ized science for profit. I hope they get sued through the noses. Might straighten out the poly sci departments fast enough to allow some changes to truth in those, too.

You got the whole reason I tell people to "do the math" right there, Pat. If they do the math themselves, they know the truth. How much food does the average person eat in a year - how much land does it take to grow it. Population number x land needed for food. Arable land mass - yearly loss to desertification. Amount of oxygen needed for each person - how many trees needed to produce that amount x entire population. How much trash generated per person - how much waste produced annually x how much land needed. Always do the math before you believe ANYONE. Logical formulas too - diagram whatever they say and find out which premises aren't sound in their arguments then start asking questions.

It's a bit late in the day for us to just believe anything we are told.

Tell the people living on Tuvalu that the ocean's aren't rising.

It's funny how people listent to about 1% of the scientific community, if it fits theire agenda. But anyone can see that Tuvalu is being drowned by rising seas. Tell them, as they paddle kayaks to their front doors. Tell them, while then entire culture is being lost, because the entire island nation is having to move.

As far as a satelite photo "proving" the poloar ice cap is as big as it was, did they measure the DEPTH of the ice? No, they didn't.

Did they mention that for the first time in man's history, a "northern passage" has opened through the artic circle? Explain why Russia and Canada are now fighting over rights to these sea passages, if Russia doesn't believe that the ice is melting.

Not to mention, the "solutions" to warming are beneficial even if global warming doesn't exist. Carbon based fuels still polute the air, causing cancer and other diseases, and are you going to dispute this? Carbon based fuels (is oil) also require us to give our money to foreign countries, most of whom don't like us very much.

So, even if you don't believe in global warming, are you against this country's heath, economy and military safety? Because that's what buring fossil fuels gives us. What are YOUR solutions to this?

BTW Sal, can you read Allen's post about NO POLITICS? You know, the one pinned to the top of this thread? And anyone that doesn't think this is political, why alll the liberal bashing?

I'm from SoCal too and the weather there in the last 10
years has gotten weird. I dunno what caused it but it
started getting hotter in the summer and colder in the
winter - also wetter sometimes - plus bizzarre winter heat
waves.

Now I'm in New England and it's just f-ing cold.

Pseudo-science and politicians have already coined a term for this new global cooling trend... Global dimming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course, it's YOUR fault, and you should feel guilty about it.

It should find it's way into your kids' text books very soon.

Dave

Being a little older than the average contributor here, I would like to point out that 50 years ago the news and fear was that an Ice Age would be with us before 2050.
This was based on much the same science that the current Global Warming warnings are based on.
I guess the truth is that they just don't know but have to say something to keep their sinecures (oops! jobs!).
Certainly Spain has suffered the coldest winter in living memory with snow abundant in all areas, apart from part of Andalucia, causing road closures and traffic chaos.

Well, I think I'll go start my car and let it idle for a couple hours. Just doing my part...

We're actually in an ice age right now. The last 10,000 years or so has been a "temporary" interglacial in a much greater ice cycle, and we're overdue for a return to ice.

Interglacial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Short-term climate cycles run in ways that are very hard to predict. Meteorology uses some of the most powerful computer programs on earth, simply because the complexity of modeling it is beyond anything else.

We are definitely changing things right now, but as to what effects these changes are really having, and what was going to happen anyway, we don't really know.

Also, a few cold or hot years doesn't really mean very much. There was a period a few hundred years ago when the river Thames froze over for several winters in a row. The river Thames! In London! People skated on it, it is very well documented. If that happened now, they would be freaking out.

I think the best tool we have for changing the climate is probably to create mandates controlling of the number of big macs that gets eaten - but until they make up their minds whether it's more or less, no-one really knows what to do.

The problem with keeping the debate scientific and not political, is that global warming is political. The statements and of politicians on matters of climate affect the entire fortunes of giant corporations, and such corporations will do anything in their power to either silence or shout scientific viewpoints, depending on whether they serve or hinder the fortunes of their shareholders.

Where are we going to find "independent" scientists? And who is going to be independent enough to verify that they really are independent?

Lexilexi -- you hit the very point I've been trying to make for sooooo long. Global warming isn't science - it's politics. Money scheming politics and that's it. It's just that scientists have finally gotten their fill of having their research and reports censored and changed to reflect a political agenda instead of scientific fact.

The truth is that desertification is human caused and THAT is the most ignored and under-reported problem going on -- and it is that way because they would have to purport population control to fix it and people scream like banshies when you suggest they quit dropping kids in levels that meet or exceed replacement.

As you might have seen in some of my other posts, I'm now tracking crop failures - because if we are going to get colder, we are going to have more crop ruinage and that is a deadly situation. And we can thank the political "lets make money from the temporary thaw" agenda for the whole damned mess that we are going to experience because of it.

You're kids will get used to it, Shay. At least being near the beach you have access to a few buckets of sand for your driveway when it gets icy

I dunno. When will it make more money for the rich to save lives? We are enticed to help the starving. Sure - send your money. The people very rarely see much of it; most goes to the governments. As long as they have starving populations, they have a means to make masses of money for themselves. A few charities do a fairly good job after operating costs. The truth is, there isn't much we can do at this point to save everyone. It's gone too far. If we get a REAL freeze, it's over for at least half of us -- and it will be fairly quick. There is no margin for time to turn it around now.

The fact is that if saving lives was the motive, governments would have stemmed population growth a hell of a long time ago instead of editing scientific data to support their monetary whims. The Chinese are the only ones who have gotten it so far and they get slammed for it by people who feel that it is immoral. Yet at over one billion people in just their own country, they were in an emergency state before they instituted population controls. So they have put saving lives over money and they are being hated worldwide for it.

There are 33 countries right now that are in food emergency status. How much help is there left to give? If they export they kill their own. If they hoard, they lose the money made from the export and what services will that cut? Medical? Education (a more long range disaster)? There are still people who feel it is immoral to sterilize a woman who is pregnant again even though she already has starving children and continues to lose children to starvation. There is an "aid" sentiment - we just need more help to feed them. Had the issue been dealt with as the Chinese are doing now, there would not be a starving population - and much of the desertificated land would still be arable.

So - where do we start? Who are we willing to piss off to save the world? Whose moral and religious beliefs do we trash to do what is scientifically correct? What happens if we anger a religious group and they decide to take it to battle?

Those were questions that should have been answered about 40 years ago. At this point in time, nature is going to decide for us. That doesn't mean we give up. It just means that many will succumb to our ignorance, greed, and apathy, and Mom Nature before a healthful balance can be achieved even if we get rid of the guys at the top that kill for bucks.

I was speaking to one of my companies about sending a machine to Africa, to a desertified region, that has humidity, proper temperature, but no ground water resources....the problem is the warlords....they take whatever is given to the people. The people end up starving to death.

China, yea limiting population growth in one aspect was a wise thing, but even so, they are the most populated nation on earth. However, the Three Gorges Damming project, from what I have read will bring water to Western and Southern China where the manufacturing growth is taking place at the expense of the rest of South East Asia. So, we kill three billion people in about nine nations through desertification and starvation? The same story...greed and money at the expense of humanity.

Like you said, Sal, Mamma will deal with her children. Oy Vay does she spank hard ....where's my Perek Shira ( Songs of the Universe )?

dot

Water is going to be a big issue in the coming years Dot. If you look at what America has just recently done, you might get a little bit of a chill. Many of our municipal water supplies are being sold to private buyers (many foreign) and they have a bill, not sure if it passed yet or not, that give government ownership of ALL water - not just maritime waterways. They also made a move to try to get all bottled water fluoridated (I think the outrage the medical communities are starting to voice against fluoridation that that one is about dead).

If you need it to live, someone will buy it and withhold it from you for their own profit. China might like to consider that killing off their own consumers isn't real bright.

Here's a illustration from NASA that shows how the ice cap has shrunk since 1979:



And this doesn't even include how much THINNER the ice has gotten.

I'm going to try to find the latest pic for ya, Kurt. There was a melt down but we are now sitting on more ice since 1981. If you saw the old pics (that might be one of them) the ice was a lot smaller of an area than what you have showing in this pic. Let me see if I can dig up the progression again.

Back it off, Kurt. We are talking about science -- and if that involves politics at one level, that's really just too bad -- because that's not the main deal here, just side notes.
There are some points at which we can't separate science and politics and if you ask me that is a bad state of affairs. But if you're saying we can't talk science now because government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong, then that is really going too far. There's a hell of a lot of fascism in your complaint there, Kurt. Are you planning on complaining because someone said the word Government and outlines a few measures they have taken regarding science? Or was it the word "Japan" when we pointed out what they are doing about desertification that set you off of was it the water sales - which aren't all governmental, some are corporate.

I know the definition of fascism - I was referring to the attitude of it, not the dictionary definition. The silencing of anything controversial.

We are NOT talking politics. We really aren't. Just because you can't talk science without government being involved, doesn't make a conversation ABOUT politics. good grief.

Here's the link to check sea ice levels - any day of any year compared to any day of any year -- Daily Arctic Sea Ice Maps
As you can see - we are NOT presently at a loss of sea ice. Also to consider - yes we did lose sea ice and we did lose a shelf -- however, scientists say that these loses can't be attributed to warming. There were many factors to consider - we only heard warming because it looked convincing and it was a profitable appearance. There's a lot of good science at http://www.icecap.us. As far as the IPCC - they are so widely discredited at this point that they are a joke in scientific circles so any data from them is not going to be taken as credible by anyone who knows anything about climatology. It was a (forgive me for using this word in this forum but......) political group with an agenda and had little regard for actual science or the actual scientists who have now reduced them to comic book status.

I know the definition of fascism - I was referring to the attitude of it, not the dictionary definition. The silencing of anything controversial. Don't worry, Allen is a smart guy - he can see the difference between science and political even if politics are mentioned within - and the only disturbance he has with it is the people who run to him and complain because things are being discussed that THEY want silenced. If we can't discuss anything meaningful, why bother to talk. My favorite........... just doesn't cut it for everyone - and there is still the main forum for the IM meat and potatoes.

We are NOT talking politics. We really aren't. Just because you can't talk science without government being involved, doesn't make a conversation ABOUT politics. good grief.

NOW -
Here's the link to check sea ice levels - any day of any year compared to any day of any year -- Daily Arctic Sea Ice Maps
As you can see - we are NOT presently at a loss of sea ice. Also to consider - yes we did lose sea ice and we did lose a shelf -- however, scientists say that these loses can't be attributed to warming. There were many factors to consider - we only heard warming because it looked convincing and it was a profitable appearance. There's a lot of good science at . As far as the IPCC - they are so widely discredited at this point that they are a joke in scientific circles so any data from them is not going to be taken as credible by anyone who knows anything about climatology. It was a (forgive me for using this word in this forum but......) political group with an agenda and had little regard for actual science or the actual scientists who have now reduced them to comic book status.

This is true - I didn't realize it was political AT ALL and I believe Kurt's post was the first time the word 'politics' or 'liberal' was even mentioned. It was about the weather. Go figure where weather is political????

go figure.

My wife and I have lived out in the Fens for 30 years, it is stark, it is baron and this year has been the coldest winter that we have seen. No where as bad as what some of you guys have been through. But cold anyway. Yesterday a pair of Little Egrets landed in the Hurn (Our farm track) and it was the first ever visit by the little Heron's to the Fens. Even deer are coming out into the fens.


A great song about Global warming

OOOOOPPPPPPS - I fixed the link in my last post, LOL - it was icecap.us not icecap.com what a difference a few letters can make.

Yes - you are right Floyd, the Arctic is now thought to be an Archipelago. Interestingly - when something sits on a mantle plume, it warms up. Go figure.

There is also a mantle plume in Africa in an area that "warming" was tooted about for quite some time. LOL. Areas where mantle plumes sit beneath the surface will always show signs of warming....uh.....because they ARE; but, it is localized warming and it is not atmospheric at all, it is ground warming. We have some of that in the Great North West and most people LOVE the magnificent hot springs which are produced without worrying that they are a result of global warming. Unfortunately - it's getting colder so you freeze your hinney off in winter getting out of them.

We believe anything we don't learn better ourselves - that, again, is why when I talk about exceeded carrying capacity, I tell people to do the math instead of provide it. It's quite simple math, really. When people do that math by themselves they don't scream "nut case" or "conspiracy theory" at you afterwards. Very nice.

We lost shelves in the Arctic, too by the way - Some of those shelves in the Arctic were helped down by seismic activity, too. There was a change of water flow and in places the water is a tad higher - but in the .00s and not the feet predicted - and in other places that were predicted to succumb the water levels are actually lower.

And we are not all gonna fry in a magnetic pole shift but a lot of birds are gonna get lost heading to one of several temporary poles, LOL.

Actually, BTW, one of the reasons the N. snow melted was reduced cloud cover - but consider the reasoning of C02, then reduced cloud cover - they don't fit together nicely. The polar bears don't care though, because only two of their tribes are in trouble and 19 are doing exceedingly well. Conversely, those not doing well are in areas uneffected by melt.

They have also finally proven decisively that C02 FOLLOWS warming not causes it -- and it has done so for hundreds of millions of years.

I just wanna say "KUDOS" to the scientific community for fighting for, and regaining their voices. How frustrated they must have been to see their research and knowledge *******ized and used like that. I hope archaeology follows suit - what a boatload of surprises they have in store!

Oh and Kurt - lowering C02 levels during warming is NOT beneficial. C02 is a natural gas, not a pollutant - It protects plants during warming (and has for hundreds of millions of years) so to cut it could actually harm our forested areas. What needs to be lowered is Carbon MONOXIDE, which is a quite deadly pollutant. Somewhere along the way, those two seem to have been switched around and confused a tad. The #1 greenhouse gas is evaporated water.

I never did believe all the hysteria about global warming, but it is just after 10 am here and it is 40 C (104 F) and we are headed for 44 C (111 C) which might be our hottest January day ever.

I hope this global warming stuff doesn't happen as it might actually get rather warm here.

We could use some of that heat here in Ohio too. Tonight we are getting smacked with another snow storm. This one is supposed to dump 6-8 inches on us. It started about 2 hrs. ago and there is 2" on the ground so far.

This is just something from the dusty recesses of prior learning: um hum ( dusting off old brain cells )----doesn't the ocean release frozen methane which has been collecting for the last 10,000+ years. Old fish, whale, human solid waste? Once the frozen methane expands it is supposed to do one of two things--1) cause world wide flooding or 2) ignite into a fireball because of the sea floor vulcanism?

Ideas? ( sneeze---dusty in here )

dot

There are gas pockets under a lot of water bodies, Dot. One erupted a few years back and killed a whole village of people who lived at the edge of the lake - can't remember what country that was now, in Africa, I think.

Oceans also release the C02 when they warm. Methane might just come from all the underwater volcanoes that are going off, too - which does nothing for water temperatures, but to say that the temps are rising because of warming when, in fact, they are rising because of the volcano that is pouring hot lava into the area is ....a bit misleading (to say the least).
Anyhow -- yes, oceans release methane.

Bet the people who got stuck in the ice on this ship in the St. Lawrence river yesterday don't think much about the idea that ice has disappeared:

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/s...--summary.html