Climate change worse than originally thought

[Old Rocks]

Believe the lie Old Rocks? I lived that time period. We were all told the next ice age was coming and coming soon. It was late 60's early 70's to be more accurate.

Nothing accurate about it at all. And I read the NAS 1975 report on this not long after it was published. Are you even aware of that paper? Do you even know what the initials NAS in this context stands for?

Did scientists predict an impending ice age in the 1970s?

1970's ice age predictions were predominantly media based with the majority of scientific papers predicting warming.


The notion that the 1970s scientific consensus was for impending global cooling is incorrect. In actuality, there were significantly more papers in the 1970s predicting warming than cooling.


Scientific studies in the 1970's re global cooling
Most predictions of an impending ice age came from the popular press (eg - Newsweek, NY Times, National Geographic, Time Magazine). As far as peer reviewed scientific papers in the 1970s, very few papers (7 in total) predicted global cooling. Significantly more papers (42 in total) predicted global warming due to CO2. More on 1970s science...

 

[saveliberty]

AccuWeather.com: Global Warming News, Science, Myths, Articles

CO2 could have an Even Greater Impact on Global Temperatures
According to a new study, only a relatively small rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) was associated with a period of substantial warming in the mid and early Pliocene era, which was between three to five million years ago, when temperatures were approximately 3 to 4 degrees Celsius warmer than they are today, according to EurekAlert.

Based on the results of this study, Yale University Geologists believe that the kinds of increases in atmospheric CO2 taking place today could have a significantly larger effect on global temperatures (meaning more global warming) than previously thought.

The study was published in Nature Geoscience.

I liked this part of your source:

What is facing the major population centers of the northern hemisphere is unlike anything that we have seen since the global warming debate got to the absurd level it is now, which essentially has been there is no doubt about all this. For cold of a variety not seen in over 25 years in a large scale is about to engulf the major energy consuming areas of the northern Hemisphere. The first 15 days of the opening of the New Year will be the coldest, population weighted, north of 30 north world wide in over 25 years in my opinion.

 

[saveliberty]

Believe the lie Old Rocks? I lived that time period. We were all told the next ice age was coming and coming soon. It was late 60's early 70's to be more accurate.

Nothing accurate about it at all. And I read the NAS 1975 report on this not long after it was published. Are you even aware of that paper? Do you even know what the initials NAS in this context stands for?

Did scientists predict an impending ice age in the 1970s?

1970's ice age predictions were predominantly media based with the majority of scientific papers predicting warming.

The notion that the 1970s scientific consensus was for impending global cooling is incorrect. In actuality, there were significantly more papers in the 1970s predicting warming than cooling.


Scientific studies in the 1970's re global cooling
Most predictions of an impending ice age came from the popular press (eg - Newsweek, NY Times, National Geographic, Time Magazine). As far as peer reviewed scientific papers in the 1970s, very few papers (7 in total) predicted global cooling. Significantly more papers (42 in total) predicted global warming due to CO2. More on 1970s science...

A good case inpoint that the media is often wrong about things like this. Thanks for the confirmation.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

A good read:

BMI Special Report -- Fire and Ice

 

[Sinatra]

A good read:

BMI Special Report -- Fire and Ice

Chicken Littles been at this for a loooong time...

___

Following the ice age threats from the late 1800s, fears of an imminent and icy catastrophe were compounded in the 1920s by Arctic explorer Donald MacMillan and an obsession with the news of his polar expedition. As the Times put it on Feb. 24, 1895, “Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again.”

Those concerns lasted well into the late 1920s. But when the earth’s surface warmed less than half a degree, newspapers and magazines responded with stories about the new threat. Once again the Times was out in front, cautioning “the earth is steadily growing warmer.”

The New York Times ran warming stories into the late 1950s, but it too came around to the new fears. Just three decades ago, in 1975, the paper reported: “A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable.”

That trend, too, cooled off and was replaced by the current era of reporting on the dangers of global warming. Just six years later, on Aug. 22, 1981, the Times quoted seven government atmospheric scientists who predicted global warming of an “almost unprecedented magnitude.”


BMI Special Report -- Fire and Ice

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Without missing a beat, within 6 months Old Rocks is going to be posting Scientific Studies showing that slight increases in CO2 are responsible for Global Cooling and a New Ice Age is the biggest threat to mankind

 

[Sinatra]

Without missing a beat, within 6 months Old Rocks is going to be posting Scientific Studies showing that slight increases in CO2 are responsible for Global Cooling and a New Ice Age is the biggest threat to mankind

That's how the flat-earth warmers/coolers have been doing it for over a hundred years.

The scary part is that we have now elected a president who is full on with what they are sellin' due to its implications of greatly expanding the power of government.

Bring on the EPA backdoor regulations...

 

[Old Rocks]

AccuWeather.com: Global Warming News, Science, Myths, Articles

CO2 could have an Even Greater Impact on Global Temperatures
According to a new study, only a relatively small rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) was associated with a period of substantial warming in the mid and early Pliocene era, which was between three to five million years ago, when temperatures were approximately 3 to 4 degrees Celsius warmer than they are today, according to EurekAlert.

Based on the results of this study, Yale University Geologists believe that the kinds of increases in atmospheric CO2 taking place today could have a significantly larger effect on global temperatures (meaning more global warming) than previously thought.

The study was published in Nature Geoscience.

I liked this part of your source:

What is facing the major population centers of the northern hemisphere is unlike anything that we have seen since the global warming debate got to the absurd level it is now, which essentially has been there is no doubt about all this. For cold of a variety not seen in over 25 years in a large scale is about to engulf the major energy consuming areas of the northern Hemisphere. The first 15 days of the opening of the New Year will be the coldest, population weighted, north of 30 north world wide in over 25 years in my opinion.

Really? Now just where on that page is this drivel?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

AccuWeather.com: Global Warming News, Science, Myths, Articles

CO2 could have an Even Greater Impact on Global Temperatures
According to a new study, only a relatively small rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) was associated with a period of substantial warming in the mid and early Pliocene era, which was between three to five million years ago, when temperatures were approximately 3 to 4 degrees Celsius warmer than they are today, according to EurekAlert.

Based on the results of this study, Yale University Geologists believe that the kinds of increases in atmospheric CO2 taking place today could have a significantly larger effect on global temperatures (meaning more global warming) than previously thought.

The study was published in Nature Geoscience.

I liked this part of your source:

What is facing the major population centers of the northern hemisphere is unlike anything that we have seen since the global warming debate got to the absurd level it is now, which essentially has been there is no doubt about all this. For cold of a variety not seen in over 25 years in a large scale is about to engulf the major energy consuming areas of the northern Hemisphere. The first 15 days of the opening of the New Year will be the coldest, population weighted, north of 30 north world wide in over 25 years in my opinion.

Really? Now just where on that page is this drivel?

Again we see you do not even read your own source links, you just quote them like bible verses!

 

[Sinatra]

I liked this part of your source:

What is facing the major population centers of the northern hemisphere is unlike anything that we have seen since the global warming debate got to the absurd level it is now, which essentially has been there is no doubt about all this. For cold of a variety not seen in over 25 years in a large scale is about to engulf the major energy consuming areas of the northern Hemisphere. The first 15 days of the opening of the New Year will be the coldest, population weighted, north of 30 north world wide in over 25 years in my opinion.

Really? Now just where on that page is this drivel?

Again we see you do not even read your own source links, you just quote them like bible verses!

Yup - O.R. appears to know very little of that which he speaks...

 

[Walt]

Mitchell Anderson | MIT Researchers Unveil Climate Roulette Wheel

Scientists from MIT revealed the most comprehensive study so far on climate change and, as usual, the latest news is not good.

Projected warming of the planet will be at least twice as bad as previously believed, and could kill billions this century unless there is "rapid and massive action" on reducing global carbon emissions.

So freaked out are the researchers by these results, they resorted to using a roulette wheel to illustrate just how dangerous the do-nothing option is.

The MIT scientists published the peer-reviewed results in the Journal of Climate showing a 90% probability of global temperature will rise as much as 7.4 degrees Celsius, more than twice the previous projection from 2003.


"There is significantly more risk than we previously estimated," says study co-author Ronald Prinn of MIT. "There's no way the world can or should take these risks

Your article is from May. He must have changed his mind because here is what he said in June.

Is Global Warming Part of Earth's Natural Cycle: MIT Team Says "Yes" -A Galaxy Insight

Methane accounts for roughly one-fifth of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, though its effect is 25x greater than that of carbon dioxide. Its impact on global warming comes from the reflection of the sun's light back to the Earth. Methane is broken down in the atmosphere by the free radical hydroxyl (OH), a naturally occuring process. This atmospheric cleanser has been shown to adjust itself up and down periodically, and is believed to account for the lack of increases in methane levels in Earth's atmosphere over the past ten years despite notable simultaneous increases by man.

Prinn has said, "The next step will be to study [these changes] using a very high-resolution atmospheric circulation model and additional measurements from other networks. The key thing is to better determine the relative roles of increased methane emission versus [an increase] in the rate of removal. Apparently we have a mix of the two, but we want to know how much of each [is responsible for the overall increase]."

The primary concern now is that while the collected data in 2007 reflects a simultaneous world-wide increase in emissions, how relevant are any of the data findings at this late date?

One thing does seem very clear, however; science is only beginning to get a focus on the big picture of global warming. Findings like these tell us it's too early to know for sure if man's impact is affecting things at "alarming rates." We may simply be going through another natural cycle of warmer and colder times - one that's been observed through a scientific analysis of the Earth to be naturally occurring for hundreds of thousands of years

 

[saveliberty]

AccuWeather.com: Global Warming News, Science, Myths, Articles

CO2 could have an Even Greater Impact on Global Temperatures
According to a new study, only a relatively small rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) was associated with a period of substantial warming in the mid and early Pliocene era, which was between three to five million years ago, when temperatures were approximately 3 to 4 degrees Celsius warmer than they are today, according to EurekAlert.

Based on the results of this study, Yale University Geologists believe that the kinds of increases in atmospheric CO2 taking place today could have a significantly larger effect on global temperatures (meaning more global warming) than previously thought.

The study was published in Nature Geoscience.

I liked this part of your source:

What is facing the major population centers of the northern hemisphere is unlike anything that we have seen since the global warming debate got to the absurd level it is now, which essentially has been there is no doubt about all this. For cold of a variety not seen in over 25 years in a large scale is about to engulf the major energy consuming areas of the northern Hemisphere. The first 15 days of the opening of the New Year will be the coldest, population weighted, north of 30 north world wide in over 25 years in my opinion.

Really? Now just where on that page is this drivel?

When I read your posted drivel, I expect you to read it first. For the most part it was a weather blog by a TV weatherperson. I notice you rarely reply to a challenge to your sources and points more than once. You just trolling or do you believe the crap you post?

 

[Sinatra]

Mitchell Anderson | MIT Researchers Unveil Climate Roulette Wheel

Scientists from MIT revealed the most comprehensive study so far on climate change and, as usual, the latest news is not good.

Projected warming of the planet will be at least twice as bad as previously believed, and could kill billions this century unless there is "rapid and massive action" on reducing global carbon emissions.

So freaked out are the researchers by these results, they resorted to using a roulette wheel to illustrate just how dangerous the do-nothing option is.

The MIT scientists published the peer-reviewed results in the Journal of Climate showing a 90% probability of global temperature will rise as much as 7.4 degrees Celsius, more than twice the previous projection from 2003.


"There is significantly more risk than we previously estimated," says study co-author Ronald Prinn of MIT. "There's no way the world can or should take these risks

Your article is from May. He must have changed his mind because here is what he said in June.

Is Global Warming Part of Earth's Natural Cycle: MIT Team Says "Yes" -A Galaxy Insight

Methane accounts for roughly one-fifth of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, though its effect is 25x greater than that of carbon dioxide. Its impact on global warming comes from the reflection of the sun's light back to the Earth. Methane is broken down in the atmosphere by the free radical hydroxyl (OH), a naturally occuring process. This atmospheric cleanser has been shown to adjust itself up and down periodically, and is believed to account for the lack of increases in methane levels in Earth's atmosphere over the past ten years despite notable simultaneous increases by man.

Prinn has said, "The next step will be to study [these changes] using a very high-resolution atmospheric circulation model and additional measurements from other networks. The key thing is to better determine the relative roles of increased methane emission versus [an increase] in the rate of removal. Apparently we have a mix of the two, but we want to know how much of each [is responsible for the overall increase]."

The primary concern now is that while the collected data in 2007 reflects a simultaneous world-wide increase in emissions, how relevant are any of the data findings at this late date?

One thing does seem very clear, however; science is only beginning to get a focus on the big picture of global warming. Findings like these tell us it's too early to know for sure if man's impact is affecting things at "alarming rates." We may simply be going through another natural cycle of warmer and colder times - one that's been observed through a scientific analysis of the Earth to be naturally occurring for hundreds of thousands of years

____

These comments have been coming from the science community off and on for years but were rarely reported. Over time scientists realized that if they were to be "heard", they stood a far better chance of doing so by towing the warming line. The hacked emails clearly showed just how aggressive the move was to silence any and all dissent where possible via control of the peer review process, and thus, publication.

Now with the climategate scandal blown wide open, you will see many more scientists coming out and speaking their mind on what might really be going on with the earth's climate - and that with or without humankind, there will always be "climate change".

 

[code1211]

AccuWeather.com: Global Warming News, Science, Myths, Articles

CO2 could have an Even Greater Impact on Global Temperatures
According to a new study, only a relatively small rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) was associated with a period of substantial warming in the mid and early Pliocene era, which was between three to five million years ago, when temperatures were approximately 3 to 4 degrees Celsius warmer than they are today, according to EurekAlert.

Based on the results of this study, Yale University Geologists believe that the kinds of increases in atmospheric CO2 taking place today could have a significantly larger effect on global temperatures (meaning more global warming) than previously thought.

The study was published in Nature Geoscience.

Does "associated with" mean "caused" or "caused by"?

Where did this come from? Why did it occur? Was it the result of rising temperature as all experience would suggest? This sounds like the Al Gore implied conclusion pointing to the graphs of temp and CO2 that is intentionally misleading.

 

[skookerasbil]

litle message going out to all the k00ks tonight........................


Right now over at DRUDGE..........................




Winter Could Be Worst in 25 Years for USA...
CHILL MAP...
3 Deaths Due To Cold in Memphis...
PAPER: GAS SUPPLIES RUNNING OUT IN UK...
Vermont sets 'all-time record for one snowstorm'...
Iowa temps 'a solid 30 degrees below normal'...
Seoul buried in heaviest snowfall in 70 years...
Historic ice build-up shuts down NJ nuclear power plant...
Beijing -- coldest in 40 years...
Miami shivers from coldest weather in decade...








MMGW is a fcukking hoax assholes................................................

 

[SFC Ollie]

litle message going out to all the k00ks tonight........................


Right now over at DRUDGE..........................




Winter Could Be Worst in 25 Years for USA...
CHILL MAP...
3 Deaths Due To Cold in Memphis...
PAPER: GAS SUPPLIES RUNNING OUT IN UK...
Vermont sets 'all-time record for one snowstorm'...
Iowa temps 'a solid 30 degrees below normal'...
Seoul buried in heaviest snowfall in 70 years...
Historic ice build-up shuts down NJ nuclear power plant...
Beijing -- coldest in 40 years...
Miami shivers from coldest weather in decade...








MMGW is a fcukking hoax assholes................................................

And what it all amounts to is:

Baby it's cold outside!