Straight out of the movie The Day After Tomorrow, yet another hyperventilating alarmist scary fable
Climate change will destroy the planet’s circulatory system
We can’t have the birds or the bees. We can’t have woolly mammoths. For the love of Gotye, even the red pandas are in danger. And if we keep releasing all these greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, soon we won’t even have water that flows in the right direction: A pair of new studies suggests that warming temperatures and melting Arctic ice sheets could have drastic effects on global ocean currents. Welcome back to Spoiler Alerts, where climate change grayscales all the Nyan Cats.
According to some research, “climate change” did help cause the extinction of the wooly mammoth. Of course, there weren’t any fossil fueled vehicles around back then, nor any of the other things Cult of Climastrology members Blame. Might it have been *GASP* natural, much like most of today’s minuscule 1.4F warming since 1850?
Part of the problem with melting ice, argues the first study, is that it’s mostly freshwater. Don’t get me wrong, I love freshwater — can’t get enough of the stuff— but cold freshwater doesn’t sink the same way cold saltwater does (because it’s not as dense). And part of what helps the currents do their job is the fact that cold water tends to sink. Any disruptions in temperature and salinity are likely to toy with that system in a severely objectionable manner. The Washington Post reports:
Blah blah blah. Realistically, the science is, in fact, sound. This has happened many times before, where changes in the oceanic circulatory systems have changed, moving from warm to cool, just like there are fluctuations from cool to warm. Earth is a very dynamic system. What it doesn’t mean is that mankind is mostly/solely responsible for the tiny warming during the Modern Warm Period.
In 2007, al gore predicted (based on his cast understanding of global climate) that by 2014 we would have no more ice on the Earth.
The inconvenient truth though is that we have two times more ice on the Earth now then we did back in good old 2007.
Supposedly though we have reached the point of no return, but I’m pretty sure the only point that Al Gore and all the global climate fear mongerers have reached is no return from being proven a joke and fraud.
But it won’t matter to the religiously devout climate fear mongerers. The threat is real in their minds and 40 years from now when they are old and gray they will say they saved the planet from certain doom.
I was not aware of that fact. Can you tell us more? My understanding is that most of the ice is in Antarctica, Greenland, the Arctic ocean, around Antarctica (in their winter) and glaciers. “Warmist” dogma tells us that the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets and the Arctic are on the decline, and Antarctic sea ice is growing. Is the increased snow in some of these areas more than making up for the losses?
What *GASP* natural processes are causing the warming now?? 1.4F is hardly miniscule.
I thought humans hunted the wooly mammoth to extinction.
Looks like you mis read it again Teach
Nowhere does it say “will” it says could
So
Construct the strawman first, then ……….
And Michael you really have to give citing when you make outrageous statements
Actually what Hire said was that some studies including the U.S. Navy showed that as early as 2012-2016 the Arctic COULD be ice free in summer
Michael try looking up primary source material instead of living in your right wing bubble
We are looking at one of the 4 lowest arctic ice extents since sat coverage began in the 70s
All 4 of the least ice events have occurred since 2007 I guess Teach will say it happens because of the PAUSE
Here are three interesting articles on this topic.
One from NASA, one with data from Nasa one from The Register.
The last shows Arctic ice since 1979 in terms of million of square kilometres.
gov/press/2014/october/nasa-study-finds-earth-s-ocean-abyss-has-not-warmed/#.VfCdbnjnN8shttp://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/21/arctic_bounces_back_world_returns_to_sea_ice_levels_seen_in_1980s/
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png
I think these links did not copy correctly. Try these.
Here are three interesting articles on this topic.
One from NASA, one with data from Nasa one from The Register.
The last shows Arctic ice since 1979 in terms of million of square kilometres.
https://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/october/nasa-study-finds-earth-s-ocean-abyss-has-not-warmed/#.VfCiv3jnN8s
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/21/arctic_bounces_back_world_returns_to_sea_ice_levels_seen_in_1980s/
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png
Sorry, I don’t really have much time to dedicate to providing all the links to support what I said but here is a simple story put out by Forbes recently regarding the issue although it’s pretty conservative compared to my claim.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/
I will try and put aside more time to give you real studies that show both north and South Pole ice expanding, not retracting.
Dear Michael:
Thank you for posting this link. I found the article very interesting.
James Taylor gets a lot of flac with his articles, but the key here is to focuss on NASA based data as it should be the most reliable of all the information on AGW.
regards
Phil
Micheal and Phil,
Instead of providing links for these two bozos perhaps have them provide links backing their claims.
1.4 F warming? Link?
Some studies show…? Link?
“What ‘gasp’ natural processes are causing the warming now?” The same GASP natural processes that have been causing the warming, and cooling, for the last 4 billion years.
Read it and weep, John.
“Some studies show..” Yes, and “some studies” show no warming for 18 years
Would you be so kind to name one?
>The same GASP natural processes that have been causing the warming, and cooling, for the last 4 billion years.
>Would you be so kind to name one?
The Sun.
According to scientists, changes in the Sun’s activity are responsible for at most 15-20% of the current rapid warming, mostly in the early 20th Century.
Wait, are they really blaming global warming for the extinction of the woolly mammoth? I s’pose Fred Flintstone’s car just spewed CO2! 🙂
Dear Jeffery:
(According to some scientists?) The ones with no names! The ones that are politically biased.
There are many scientists that claim the temperature is almost solely based on the sun. (Don Esterbrook) Once more, their predictions have been quite accurate over the past 20 years! (Predicted lack of warming in to start in 1998)
SLIGHT warming began BEFORE Co2 started to rise in 1945. How?
Based on warming and cooling cycles of the sun that’s how.
You keep claiming the temperature is rapidly increasing but again using an excerpt from my last email to you, that is false by your own data.
Here is that excerpt:
Looking at the data that you pointed me to through Sceptical Science, we both proved that the temperature may be slightly warming or cooling depending on which years you look at and what form of measurement you use. What we BOTH proved is that the weather has rose or declined insignificantly.
>My opinion (Jeffery’s opinion) is that the Earth is warming fairly steadily and superimposed on this warming (from greenhouse effect) are natural variability such as El Nino, La Nina, volcanic eruptions and changes in albedo and insolation.
What do you think?
I think (Phil’s opinion) it is possible the other way around. Weather warming do to natural variability, and a very slight addition due to greenhouse gas. I do not know why you keep claiming the Earth is warming fairly steadily when your own data says otherwise.
Here is my opinion. The recent slight increase of temperature from 1985 to 2000 is a result of better measurement.
Imagine that you have an old weight scale and for years you weigh 180 pounds and then you get a new one. One that is far more accurate. You weigh yourself and now you weigh 180.1. Are you gaining weight or have you always been 180.1? Well if you are gaining weight due to diet and lifestyle then your weight should continue to rise, If the measurement is more accurate then you should see a basic one time weight increase. This is what is happening. Since the introduction of satellites the temperature has been somewhat stagnant after an initial slight rise, This is not in accordance to the theory of climate change. We should see a much more dramatic temperature increase as was predicted in 1985.
What does not help the warmest cause and is a red flag for me is all the attempts to hide this lack of warming from the public while at the same time there is a steady stream of ridiculous articles of extreme exaggeration to convince the public that the situation is more dire than it is. These reports enjoy a lack of media scrutiny and fact checking enjoyed by no other topic.
***Using Hadcrut dataset from 2000 to 2015 is disingenuous as it starts from a cooler year after the warmer 1998 year and ends on an el Nino year and even then the results are insignificant.
If you use 1998 the hottest year on record then you WANT to see an increase since then to determine if this is a result of greenhouse gas or natural viability, and you do not. Choosing 1990 to 2016 (2016 give you a better rendered chart) gives you a better overall picture and shows that other than 2015 an el Nino year the temperatures have been cooler than 1998. It even shows that 2014 is not the warmest year on record as the media claims. Going from el Nino year to el Nino year we should see warmer than average temperature on those years if el Nino is the cause and we do. 1998, 2010 and 2015 all show spikes compared to the years before or afterward. There is reasonable doubt that greenhouse gas is at play here. If greenhouse gas was a murderer on trial the jury would be setting him free.
Ok, now that I have set aside a little time, I will elaborate and only use the NASA references regarding ice growth on Earth since Al Gore’s wonderful 2007 prediction that by 2014 we would no longer have any ice on earth.
First here are some fun predictions that were made regarding snow and ice that time has relieved to be completely false.
But in 2013, Arctic sea ice coverage was up 50 percent from 2012 levels. Data from Europe’s Cryosat spacecraft showed that Arctic sea ice coverage was nearly 2,100 cubic miles by the end of 2013’s melting season, up from about 1,400 cubic miles during the same time in 2012.
The most widely used measurements of Arctic ice extent are the daily satellite readings issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by NASA. These reveal that on August 25, 2014, the area of the Arctic Ocean with at least 15% ice cover was 5.62 million square kilometers.
This was the highest level recorded on that date since 2006, and represents an increase of 1.71 million square kilometers over 2013-2014 – an impressive 43%.
Other figures from the Danish Meteorological Institute suggest that the growth has been even more dramatic. Using a different measure, the area with at least 30% ice cover, these reveal a 63% rise – from 2.7 million to 4.4 million square kilometers.
Hahahaha In 2013, the UK’s climate authority predicted that 2014’s winter would be drier than usual, with only a 15 percent chance of being wet. They were very wrong. The UK was hit with snowstorms wetter than in 248 years.
In 2014 World-renowned climber Hamish MacInnes exclaimed that they have had the most snow in hills in 69 years!! Hahaha I guess Dr. Viner and Adam Watson could be labeled extremists nutjobs…
But the record levels of snowfall that hit the very next year (2014) may have caught UCS off guard. The U.S. east coast was hit with a massive snowstorm that stretched for 1,300 miles and those in the Baltimore-D.C. area were hit with a 141-year record cold of 4 degrees Fahrenheit in 2014.
“Many places tied or broke record lows all over the Eastern half of the U.S.,†reported CBS Baltimore.
This year, 2015, “Great Lakes ice is now running ahead of last year and ice will increase with more brutal cold coming,†says meteorologist Joe d’Aleo. “We are likely to have the most ice since records began.â€
Great Lakes Ice.
Well, Unfortunately it took me longer than I thought and ran out of time…. be back again some other time.
P.S. I’m not a right wing member… Right wingers are too conservative for my blood, sorry. I’m also not part of the left wing…. in fact I’m not part of any of the bird that preys on American citizens for their own version of rulership over others…
Let’s keep that straight and not insult me, thanks!
Phil,
Once again I lift my glass to you sir.
Hear, hear!
Dear Drowningpuppies:
Thank you for your words of support. I want you to know I appreciate it very much.
I often wonder how many people read these posts. I am pleased that at least you do.
Also, today we have another excellent post from Michael (LibertyCommand.org).
This is how to write a post. Michael has listed his sources and names so that anyone can fact check his data.
He is wise to use only NASA sources as they are the most reliable at this point. He has made a very compelling case here.
You may choose to disagree but I think any honest person would say that this issue is far from decided. AGW has no smoking gun, therefore purports try to use consencious to try to demonstrate that AGW is likely, if not for certain. However, they do not do society justice by creating the illusion that there is a smoking gun. The bigger issue is that they are unwitting advocates in a scheme to rob them. If Paris goes the way they hope the first is to sign on and then pay money to those who did not earn it and do not deserve it. The result is emmisions will not drop but wealth will be distributed in it’s name.
“Would you be so kind to name one..?” Well, somebody gave you an answer, and you respond with “scientists say..” But not all scientists “say” and your answer is an un-proven hypothesis. Actually, would you be so kind as to tell us why this warming, that’s stopped, is any different than warming that’s occurred during the other 4 billion years? Notice that you don’t deny previous warming periods- so why don’t you tell us what caused them? In other words, there’s no doubt many variables that can cause warming. But anyway, would you be so kind as to tell us how warming now is “rapid”, as you say, when there’s nothing to compare it to- to know if it’s rapid or not? Meaning, of course- we have thermometer temperature records since 1880, but before then, none.
But admittedly, there is no evidence supporting the claim that there is twice as much ice now as in 2007.
I MAY have discovered the source of the disinformation. Looking at a plot of Arctic sea ice it’s clear that 2007 was a year of low Arctic ice, in fact, less Arctic ice than in 2014. But the trend is just as clear. We’re losing Arctic ice.
j,
Changes in the amount of solar energy reaching the Earth is not causing the Earth to warm.
Try again.
Why is this warming period (which has not stopped) different from the others? This one is caused by CO2 added to the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.
I asked for other explanations for this warming. One person incorrectly answered, The Sun. You claim because it’s warmed before that CO2 can’t be causing the current warming.
All I’m requesting is a plausible explanation for this warm period.
The sun warms and cools the earth daily. Temperatures vary several degrees from morning till night and from dusk to dawn.
Temperatures vary by season based on if the earth is tilting toward the sun or away from it. No factor effects temperature as strongly as the sun.
Prior to the theory of climate change, the theory was the sun controled our temperatures by warming or cooling the oceans which in turn warmed or cooled the earth in 20 to 30 year cycles. Based on that theory it was possible to predict that after a cooling period from 1948 to 1978 to earth would warm for 20 years or so which it did from 1978 to 1998 and then enter again into a cooling phase. At first it seemed the temperature was stagnant but now overall it seems to be slightly cooling with spikes during El Nino years. Nasa confirms this cooling. Soon this cooling cycle will end between 2020 and 2030.
During this entire time Co2 increased. From 1948 to 1978 in increased and the world cooled. Then it increased again and the world warmed, then it increased again and the world cooled.
Skeptics do not debate that Co2 is rising. They question it’s impact. Why doesn’t the pro warming community post the temperatures by year. Because they are not being honest and forth coming. Simpy create a chart that says 2014 is 14.6 c and 2013 is 14.6 c etc. They do not because it would then become plainly obvious that the earth is not significantly warming. Better to hide behind charts. This should be a red flag to anyone.
I think the evidence here and else where is enough for any sincere person to question the validity of this theory. We now have enough time to see that the atmosphere is not as sensitive to C02 as was first thought.
I think Jeffery, who means well, needs to sincerely reflect on this and have the integrity to give AGW the benefit of a doubt. There are far more worthwhile causes that he could devote his energies to to make the world a better place for us all.