Global cooling!

[Pidgey]

If you've got the savvy to wade through it to the bitter end, this is the theory that's come closest to actually pegging what we're seeing, and that from decades before:

http://bourabai.narod.ru/landscheidt/new-e.htm

In order for a theory to be worth much, it needs to be able to accurately predict the future.

Pidgey

 

[Pidgey]

You just gotta' love this stuff:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...g-the-people-they-set-out-to-help-807764.html

Pidgey

 

[PLC1]

You just gotta' love this stuff:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...g-the-people-they-set-out-to-help-807764.html

Pidgey

Requiring ethanol really has nothing to do with global warming. Here's the latest:

A Senate panel, responding to high gasoline prices and pressure from farm states, voted unanimously yesterday to require refiners and importers to more than double the use of ethanol and other agriculture-derived fuels by 2012

.

Now, why in the world would there be pressure from "farm states"? The answer, of course, is obvious. The pressure to increase the use of ethanol is simply a way of increasing profits at the expense of the rest of us. Get the right lobbyists to work for you, spend a couple of million priming the Washington DC pump, and then stand back with a bushel basket and catch the flood of federal dollars that result. The ethanol hoax is politics at its worst.

The rest of the story is here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/25/AR2005052502048.html

 

[Pidgey]

Requiring ethanol really has nothing to do with global warming.

No, I don't think so either although it has something about climate change in the title of the article. I'm guessing that somebody believes that trying to get away from fossil fuels in any possible way constitutes mitigation of the AGW scenario. Of course, taking two steps back for one step forward is obvious in hindsight but a lot of folks are incapable of accurately guessing where a course may take them--"The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

Pidgey

 

[PLC1]

No, I don't think so either although it has something about climate change in the title of the article. I'm guessing that somebody believes that trying to get away from fossil fuels in any possible way constitutes mitigation of the AGW scenario. Of course, taking two steps back for one step forward is obvious in hindsight but a lot of folks are incapable of accurately guessing where a course may take them--"The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

Pidgey

I can see where there may be a few who really believe that using ethanol might mitigate global warming. They're wrong, of course, and their good intentions are helping to pave that downward road. Most of the asphalt is made up of government subsidies that are gained through special interest lobbyists.

 

[Pidgey]

Anytime a few of us humans band together with a common interest, there's going to be a lobby. And every time I try to look at the problem (trying to establish a Grand Unified Utopia) from several different angles, I can't find a really decent way of creating a Big Picture that all can share equally, given our many differences.

Anyhow, one thing that I'd been considering through all of this is what a true slide to a glacial period would look like beginning from our standpoint in time. So, going by that half-a-million year graph showing the five interglacial periods, I literally measured and averaged the major vertical downward slides and compared them to the total length of the graph to get the proportional amount of years. Averaging the four previous downward slides from the same high points on the y-axis to the corresponding same low points on the y-axis, they seem to be about 10,000 years. 10,000 years to go down from approximately a 14 degrees C world global average to about 5 degrees C. This amounts to something in the neighborhood of a thousandth of a degree C per year downward trend. As such, the slide into an ice age isn't something that we're going to be able to notice in our lifetimes.

Pidgey

 

[Pidgey]

This is actually a pretty good summary piece on the subject:

http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=3059

Pidgey

 

[Pidgey]

Might be a bad growing season here in the northern U.S.:

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/theres-a-chill-in-the-air/

Pidgey

 

[PLC1]

Might be a bad growing season here in the northern U.S.:

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/theres-a-chill-in-the-air/

Pidgey

I'm not sure why you're posting information about local weather in a thread about global climate change.

 

[Pidgey]

Well, shucks... you got me! Maybe you'd like this one better:

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/The_Ice_Caps_are_Growing.pdf

Pidgey

 

[PLC1]

Well, shucks... you got me! Maybe you'd like this one better:

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/The_Ice_Caps_are_Growing.pdf

Pidgey

And yet, pictures taken from space clearly show the ice caps shrinking.

 

[Pidgey]

It is interesting that most of the sea ice webpages are woefully behind on their data and pictures. Even Cryosphere Today (which averages only a week behind) has several articles on their home page that are literally years old. It's said that most of them are funded by AGW money. I wanted to reply earlier but Cryosphere Today is either getting too much traffic these days or they need to fix their server, don't know.

Rather than linking, seeing as how I was having such difficulty all day today pulling up the graphs, I'll post the latest anomaly images. I guess you click on the thumbnails to pull them up. What they show is that the Arctic ice just isn't melting as fast and, thus, is slowly approaching no anomaly for the 1979-2000 mean. The Antarctic ice is probably going for a record as it's about a million and a half square kilometers over normal. Right now, we're at about a million over the 1979-2000 mean for the planet and have been slowly rising for awhile.

Satellite pictures can be a little deceptive because the Antarctic sea ice normally goes from about 15,000,000 sq kilometers down to 2,000,000 in a yearly cycle, and the Arctic sea ice goes from about 14,500,000 down to 5,000,000. Yes, it was trending down for the last several years and now it's trending back up. My original entry into this thread was due to my own worries about the extended solar minimum which is getting even worse. I have essentially proposed here that it would have a noticeable effect and that's how it's tracking although that is not an original thought from me--much of it is what I'm reading on real scientific sites that are not derived from politicians or grant money. Those people are, as I've previously indicated, scared to death for the possible consequences. And... they've been expecting this for decades based on the works of some scientists decades ago.

Pidgey

 

[r0beph]

What really confuses me, is why the hell everyone is all feisty to disprove global warming... WHO CARES real or not, don't be dense, just hey lets stop polluting like massive asshats. Whether the planet is heating or cooling doesn't matter, even if it's not that crap being pumped into the air isn't HEALTHY. It's that simple... So all your lil squiggly lines don't mean jack diddly in comparison to the fact that I can't eat fish out of the river near my house without risking all kindsa scary stuff.....

I mean seriously its these people who continually tout "omg it's so hot! It must be global warming" yeah ok I detect sarcasm since it's only like 50 degrees, but who cares, my city is still covered in lovely haze consisting of likely no less than 8 rather poisonous metal particulates among other nasties.... but hey, long as the earth stays cool, its ok right? Justify that.... it's really a jagoff idea that global warming is the only (real or unreal) problem that may come from pollution, all the arguing ignores the much easier to see BS....

 

[PLC1]

What really confuses me, is why the hell everyone is all feisty to disprove global warming... WHO CARES real or not, don't be dense, just hey lets stop polluting like massive asshats. Whether the planet is heating or cooling doesn't matter, even if it's not that crap being pumped into the air isn't HEALTHY. It's that simple... So all your lil squiggly lines don't mean jack diddly in comparison to the fact that I can't eat fish out of the river near my house without risking all kindsa scary stuff.....

I mean seriously its these people who continually tout "omg it's so hot! It must be global warming" yeah ok I detect sarcasm since it's only like 50 degrees, but who cares, my city is still covered in lovely haze consisting of likely no less than 8 rather poisonous metal particulates among other nasties.... but hey, long as the earth stays cool, its ok right? Justify that.... it's really a jagoff idea that global warming is the only (real or unreal) problem that may come from pollution, all the arguing ignores the much easier to see BS....

Happy Earth Day!

What you are describing is a much broader problem than global climate change, which is not really driven by "pollution" as it is by an increase in carbon dioxide.

Nevertheless, you are correct: We humans have been poor stewards of the Earth and need to mend our polluting ways.

Oh, and here is more on climate change. I visited this place (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6496429.stm) in the '60s. I remember thinking that it was pretty cool to be able to ski year around. Of course, the altitude takes some getting used to, since it is higher than any mountain in the US outside of Alaska.

Farewell to a melting glacier Latin America analyst James Painter returns to the Chacaltaya glacier in Bolivia for the first time in 15 years to find it is melting fast.

Chacaltaya was famous then for being the world's highest ski run at 5,300 metres (17,400 feet). I remember seeing exhausted but exhilarated skiers crashed out on the floor of a nearby ski lodge, gasping for breath.

Chacaltaya could be as much as 18,000 years old, but it has lost 80% of its area in the last 20 years.

Now it is almost gone. How sad.

 

[ilikeboobs]

On August 24th, 1992 at approximately 5:00 AM Hurricane Andrew made landfall in southern Florida. It cut a swath of destruction across the peninsula, made a right turn over the Gulf of Mexico and slammed into Louisiana.

This natural disaster killed 60 people and displaced around two million Americans. The estimated cost of the damage was more than $20 billion. We saw it coming, and we were powerless to prevent it.

We all stand on a thin crust of rock, surrounding a ball of molten magma suspended in a frozen vacuum held in place by a force we call "gravity" that we understand but can't fully explain. To think that we have the power to influence this situation to any significant degree is arrogant and somewhat amusing. A mutated virus, something too small to see could sweep this globe tomorrow and eliminate 90% of the Human Race. A big old ball of rock and ice could smack into us and kick up a cloud causing a century-long winter that eliminates 90% of the Human Race.

What is the point? You are not in control. You may influence your tiny sphere. You may influence others to some extent. You may make a positive contribution to your community and your world. But in the end you will not change the Earth. It is much bigger than the sum of all of us. If you disagree I invite you to go out and try to stop the next hurricane.