Are Global Warmists Pulling a Cool Fast One? »
Posted By pc25 1 year, 2 months ago in Science & TechnologyMounting evidence of lower temperature trends despite rising atmospheric CO2 levels is becoming a real problem for the greenhouse gas crowd. And reports that the cooling appears to follow a period of dormant solar activity aren't likely to ease their anxieties. Indeed, without an immediate alarmist course correction, years of "the science
Read Full Story at americanthinker.com »
237 Views Share Story 13 Comments Report
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 50 of 52 Comments (view all)
-
0%
pc251 year, 2 months ago
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/04/nas...
NASA Confirms Natural Climate Shift
FTA
NASA has confirmed that a developing natural climate pattern will likely result in much colder temperatures.
"A cool-water anomaly known as La Niña occupied the tropical Pacific Ocean throughout 2007 and early 2008. In April 2008, scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory announced that while the La Niña was weakening, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation-a larger-scale, slower-cycling ocean pattern-had shifted to its cool phase."
Reply-
0%
libsRfunny1 year, 2 months ago
It's a pity when bona fide science contrary to the global warming hype has to couch its findings in an apologetic tone. Simple fact is, humans are not causing a great global warming catastrophe. That pittance of CO2 - a naturally occurring gas - we put into the atmosphere doesn't amount to anything. As Bryson said: you can spit and cause more global warming.
Reply -
-
0%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
LOL
Now NASA's JPL is owned by big oil.
The tracking of CO2 and Temperature on the graphs for millenia show in one of them CO2 lagging temperature. But everybody ignored that.
JPL and Hughs worked together to put up satellites to measure atmospheric change. I was told by a Hughs scientist I was working with that the Earth and moon were the same temperature. That is easy to verify. The GOES satellites send down an IR and visual full globe pictures every half hour. The IR picture can give average temperature. Compare the results with an IR pictures of the moon at full moon and new moon.
There is currently evidence that greenhouse gases don't give the greenhouse effect.
Reply -
-
-
0%
pc251 year, 2 months ago
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/02/sun...
Sun Days Will Never Be the Same
"Yet another climate expert concurs that, while solar activity normally fluctuates in 11-year cycles, we now appear to be at a cold standstill. And his research adds voice to growing concerns that Sun cycle 24's late start may have a chilling effect on the Earth's Climate.
The Sun expert reminded readers that a similar sunspot holiday in the 17th Century (The Maunder Minimum) corresponded with the coldest and most damaging temperatures of that millennium (The Little Ice Age).
Then last week, we discovered that scientists at Canada's National Research Council are also concerned with the apparent hibernation of old Sol, and are seeking emergency funding for equipment to better observe our primary source of heat. And they, like Whitehouse, also believe we may be entering into another minimum."
Reply-
0%
RickyDawkins1 year, 1 month ago
Others have attempted to show that last year's numbers imply that 'Global Warming has stopped' or that it is 'taking a break' (Uli Kulke, Die Welt)). However, as most of our readers will realize, these comparisons are flawed since they basically compare long term climate change to short term weather variability.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2...
Reply
-
-
-
0%
RickyDawkins1 year, 1 month ago
GLOBAL WARMING FOR DUMMIES:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2...
The red line is the annual global-mean GISTEMP temperature record (though any other data set would do just as well), while the blue lines are 8-year trend lines - one for each 8-year period of data in the graph. What it shows is exactly what anyone should expect: the trends over such short periods are variable; sometimes small, sometimes large, sometimes negative - depending on which year you start with. The mean of all the 8 year trends is close to the long term trend (0.19ºC/decade), but the standard deviation is almost as large (0.17ºC/decade), implying that a trend would have to be either >0.5ºC/decade or much more negative (< -0.2ºC/decade) for it to obviously fall outside the distribution. Thus comparing short trends has very little power to distinguish between alternate expectations.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
Wolfie20071 year, 1 month ago
Just another disappointment. I wanted to believe in glow bull warming. I wanted where I live become as warm as the Caribbean but my hopes have been dashed against the rocks of scientific truth. Why do I ever let liberals get my hopes up, it never works out, not for me. LMAO
Reply -
0%
RickyDawkins1 year, 1 month ago
There has been a lot of nonsense written about the lack of much if any warming over the last few years.
In fact, global warming has stopped repeatedly over the last 150 years --- meaning that there are many instances when the temperature reached a maximum that took many years to surpass.
The reason is clear. A warming rate of 3 degrees C per century corresponds to an annual average rate of warming of 0.03 degrees C per year. At the same time, interannual variability, such as El Niño events, are of the order of 1 degree C per year. Thus, over short time scales, the slow upward trend can be completely swamped by the large year-to-year variability.
Over the course of several decades, however, the slow warming trend dominates, and you end up with significant warming. Thus, to determine if global warming is occurring, you have to look at time periods of decades, not years.
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/05/no_glob...
Reply -
0%
RickyDawkins1 year, 1 month ago
It is true that sunspot records go back to the 17th century, but sunspots actually block the Sun's radiation.
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/ear...
Direct measurements of solar output since 1978 show a steady rise and fall over the 11-year sunspot cycle, but no upwards or downward trend .
Similarly, there is no trend in direct measurements of the Sun's ultraviolet output and in cosmic rays. So for the period for which we have direct, reliable records, **the Earth has warmed dramatically even though there has been no corresponding rise in any kind of solar activity.**
Reply -
0%
IAmMine1 year, 1 month ago
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Amer...
"American Thinker (AT) is a conservative daily internet publication"
"There is ample evidence to support the notion that AT serves as part of the right wing's echo chamber."
Why is this always the case?
Reply -
0%
hamy1 year, 1 month ago
Really! Is it not possible that putting less pollutants into the air is a good thing regardless of whether or not it is warming or cooling the planet?
Can't we agree that whatever the outcome, putting less emissions up into the atmostphere is at least going to stop some of the cases of asthma and respiratory infections.
You are a complete moron if you don't think so.
So why would you say that people who are just trying to maybe get their city in better shape environmentally for their children are evil or stupid or only doing so to support Al Gore.
Al Gore may not be the greatest guy in the world. But at least he is trying to do something to help make it better.
That is more than any of you can say.
Reply
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.