"It's Cooling," concedes NY Times

Main Page | Report this Page

Science Forum Index » Environment Forum » "It's Cooling," concedes NY Times

Page 1 of 1

Author

Message

Obama Rama Lama Ding Dong

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 6:38 am

Guest

In a New Climate Model, Short-Term
Cooling in a Warmer World
The New York Times, by Andrew C. Revkin Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought - 4/30/2008 11:22:36 PM Post Reply
After decades of research that sought, and found, evidence of a human
influence on the earth’s climate, climatologists are beginning to
shift to a new and similarly daunting enterprise: creating decade-long
forecasts for climate, just as meteorologists routinely generate
weeklong forecasts for weather. One of the first attempts to look
ahead a decade, using computer simulations and measurements of ocean
temperatures, predicts a slight cooling of Europe and North America
_______

I suspect this is the first in what will be the latest orchestrated
effort from the left to counter the latest common sense realization of
millions of observers who have noticed that the Earth is now cooling
and has been for the last ten years.

What is troubling is the prospect that millions of people will starve
to death thanks to what will one day come to be regarded as the
largest case of world wide mass insanity called the belief in climate
change.

As always, the left is anxious to continue its record of famously bad
decisions. This one will be their second based on junk science. The
first was the DDT hysteria that resulted in the death of one million
people from malaria. Their darling of that moment was Rachel Carson
and her book, Silent Spring. Now we see Al Gore rushing to grab the
fool's mantle and the many many millions of dollars that goes with it.

___

Frank Arthur

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 7:53 am

Guest

"Obama Rama Lama Ding Dong" <not@work>

The Greenland ice sheet shrank by 50 cubic miles last year. Were it to
melt completely, sea levels would rise 20 feet-which would leave large
areas of Washington, D.C., including the Mall, between the Lincoln
Memorial and the Washington Monument, underwater.

While Washington Slept
The Queen of England is afraid. International C.E.O.'s are nervous.
And the scientific establishment is loud and clear. If global warming
isn't halted, devastating sea-level rises will be inevitable by 2100.
So how did this virtual certainty get labeled a "liberal hoax" in the
U.S.? Try the same tactics Big Tobacco used to deny the dangers of
smoking.
by Mark Hertsgaard May 2006
Ten months before Hurricane Katrina left much of New Orleans
underwater, Queen Elizabeth II had a private conversation with Prime
Minister Tony Blair about George W. Bush. The Queen's tradition of
meeting once a week with Britain's elected head of government to
discuss matters of state-usually on Tuesday evenings in Buckingham
Palace and always alone, to ensure maximum confidentiality-goes back
to 1952, the year she ascended the throne. In all that time, the
contents of those chats rarely if ever leaked.

So it was extraordinary when London's Observer reported, on October
31, 2004, that the Queen had "made a rare intervention in world
politics" by telling Blair of "her grave concerns over the White
House's stance on global warming." The Observer did not name its
sources, but one of them subsequently spoke to Vanity Fair.

"The Queen first of all made it clear that Buckingham Palace would be
happy to help raise awareness about the climate problem," says the
source, a high-level environmental expert who was briefed about the
conversation. "[She was] definitely concerned about the American
position and hoped the prime minister could help change [it]."

Press aides for both the Queen and the prime minister declined to
comment on the meeting, as is their habit. But days after the Observer
story appeared, the Queen indeed raised awareness by presiding over
the opening of a British-German conference on climate change, in
Berlin. "I might just point out, that's a pretty unusual thing for her
to do," says Sir David King, Britain's chief scientific adviser. "She
doesn't take part in anything that would be overtly political." King,
who has briefed the Queen on climate change, would not comment on the
Observer report except to say, "If it were true, it wouldn't surprise
me."

With spring arriving in England three weeks earlier than it did 50
years ago, the Queen could now see signs of climate change with her
own eyes. Sandringham, her country estate north of London, overlooks
Britain's premier bird-watching spot: the vast North Sea wetlands
known as the Wash. A lifelong outdoorswoman, the Queen had doubtless
observed the V-shaped flocks of pink-footed geese that descend on the
Wash every winter. But in recent years, says Mark Avery, conservation
director of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, she also
would have seen a species new to the area: little egrets. These shiny
white birds are native to Southern Europe, Avery says, "but in the
last 5 to 10 years they have spread very rapidly to Northern Europe.
We can't prove this is because of rising temperatures, but it sure
looks like it."

Temperatures are rising, the Queen learned from King and other
scientists, because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the
atmosphere. Carbon dioxide, the most prevalent of such gases, is
released whenever fossil fuels are burned or forests catch fire.
Global warming, the scientists explained, threatens to raise sea
levels as much as three feet by the end of the 21st century, thanks to
melting glaciers and swollen oceans. (Water expands when heated.)

Unless greenhouse-gas emissions are curbed, warns James Hansen of
NASA, global temperatures could climb 2 to 3 degrees Celsius by 2100.
Such a rise would leave little of Manhattan but the skyscrapers.

This would leave much of eastern England, including areas near
Sandringham, underwater. Global warming would also bring more heat
waves like the one in the summer of 2003 that killed 31,000 people
across Europe. It might even shut down the Gulf Stream, the flow of
warm water from the Gulf of Mexico that gives Europe its mild climate.
If the Gulf Stream were to halt-and it has already slowed 30 percent
since 1992-Europe's temperatures would plunge, agriculture would
collapse, London would no longer feel like New York but like
Anchorage.

The Queen, says King, "got it" on climate change, and she wasn't
alone. "Everyone in this country, from the political parties to the
scientific establishment, to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to our oil
companies and the larger business community, has come to a popular
consensus about climate change-a sense of alarm and a conviction that
action is needed now, not in the future," says Tony Juniper, executive
director of the British arm of the environmental group Friends of the
Earth.

At the time of his meeting with the Queen, Blair was being attacked on
climate change from all ideological sides, with even the Conservatives
charging that he was not doing enough. Yet Blair's statements on the
issue went far beyond those of most world leaders. He had called the
Kyoto Protocol, which has been ratified by 162 countries and requires
industrial nations to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions 5 percent below
1990 levels, "not radical enough." The world's climate scientists,
Blair pointed out, had estimated that 60 percent cuts in emissions
were needed, and he committed Britain to reaching that goal by 2050.

But it wouldn't matter how much Britain cut its greenhouse-gas
emissions if other nations didn't do the same. The U.S. was key, not
only because it was the world's largest emitter but because its
refusal to reduce emissions led China, India, Brazil, and other large
developing countries to ask why they should do so. All this Blair had
also said publicly. In 2001 he criticized the Bush administration for
withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol. In 2004 he said it was essential
to bring the U.S. into the global effort against climate change,
despite its opposition to Kyoto.

Hothead McCain

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 9:06 am

Guest

In article <4819ab92.3158765@news.usenetmonster.com>, not@work says...

Quote:

Why do you guys feel the need to lie about everything??

"... LONDON (Reuters) - The 11 warmest years on record have all occurred
in the last 13 years, with 2007 set to be the seventh hottest since 1950,
according to provisional global data from the UK's Met Office and the
University of East Anglia.

The top eight hottest years since global records began are all this century,
except the hottest of all, 1998, when the mean global temperature was 0.52
degrees Celsius above the long-term average for 1961-1990..."

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSL1388572320071213

David Hartung

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 4:11 pm

Guest

Hothead McCain wrote:

Quote:

In article <4819ab92.3158765@news.usenetmonster.com>, not@work says...
In a New Climate Model, Short-Term
Cooling in a Warmer World
The New York Times, by Andrew C. Revkin Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought - 4/30/2008 11:22:36 PM Post Reply
After decades of research that sought, and found, evidence of a human
influence on the earth=3Fs climate, climatologists are beginning to
shift to a new and similarly daunting enterprise: creating decade-long
forecasts for climate, just as meteorologists routinely generate
weeklong forecasts for weather. One of the first attempts to look
ahead a decade, using computer simulations and measurements of ocean
temperatures, predicts a slight cooling of Europe and North America
_______

I suspect this is the first in what will be the latest orchestrated
effort from the left to counter the latest common sense realization of
millions of observers who have noticed that the Earth is now cooling
and has been for the last ten years.

Why do you guys feel the need to lie about everything??

"... LONDON (Reuters) - The 11 warmest years on record have all occurred
in the last 13 years, with 2007 set to be the seventh hottest since 1950,
according to provisional global data from the UK's Met Office and the
University of East Anglia.

The top eight hottest years since global records began are all this century,
except the hottest of all, 1998, when the mean global temperature was 0.52
degrees Celsius above the long-term average for 1961-1990..."

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSL1388572320071213

I suppose that it was warmer last year than it was in my area, but my
anecdotal observation is that last year was not one of our warmer years.

Hothead McCain

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 8:49 pm

Guest

In article <YJKdnbIVTcBirIfVnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@comcast.com>, d_hartung@comcast.net says...

Quote:

Hothead McCain wrote:
In article <4819ab92.3158765@news.usenetmonster.com>, not@work says...
In a New Climate Model, Short-Term
Cooling in a Warmer World
The New York Times, by Andrew C. Revkin Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought - 4/30/2008 11:22:36 PM Post Reply
After decades of research that sought, and found, evidence of a human
influence on the earth=3Fs climate, climatologists are beginning to
shift to a new and similarly daunting enterprise: creating decade-long
forecasts for climate, just as meteorologists routinely generate
weeklong forecasts for weather. One of the first attempts to look
ahead a decade, using computer simulations and measurements of ocean
temperatures, predicts a slight cooling of Europe and North America
_______

I suspect this is the first in what will be the latest orchestrated
effort from the left to counter the latest common sense realization of
millions of observers who have noticed that the Earth is now cooling
and has been for the last ten years.

Why do you guys feel the need to lie about everything??

"... LONDON (Reuters) - The 11 warmest years on record have all occurred
in the last 13 years, with 2007 set to be the seventh hottest since 1950,
according to provisional global data from the UK's Met Office and the
University of East Anglia.

The top eight hottest years since global records began are all this century,
except the hottest of all, 1998, when the mean global temperature was 0.52
degrees Celsius above the long-term average for 1961-1990..."

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSL1388572320071213

I suppose that it was warmer last year than it was in my area, but my
anecdotal observation is that last year was not one of our warmer years.

If you want to make anecdotal observations and draw conclusions from a single

instance, you should take LSD if you want to live to be 102 years old. Albert
Hofmann, the man who discovered LSD recently died at that ripe old age. Surely,
LSD must be a fountain of youth.

V-for-Vendicar

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 11:17 pm

Guest

"Obama Rama Lama Ding Dong" <not@work> wrote

Quote:

In a New Climate Model, Short-Term
Cooling in a Warmer World

Cooling ay? Here is the data from the last 10 years.

1998 14.57 *********************o*****
1999 14.33 *****************>>>>o
2000 14.33 *****************>>>>>o
2001 14.48 ************************o
2002 14.56 *************************o**
2003 14.55 **************************o*
2004 14.49 *************************>>o
2005 14.63 *****************************o**
2006 14.54 ***************************>>>o
2007 14.57 *****************************

Showing a warming of roughly 2'C per century...

Page 1 of 1 All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Mon May 12, 2008 8:17 am Science Forum Index