Canada is going through the new ice age not global warming?

Question

we have received tons of snow in Canada this year and say they still lie and talk about global warming , and pretend that humans could control it, were the primitive neolithic men in Siberia responsilbe for the ice age by using "gaz emissions"when it was turned from a tropical place to a freezing land?

Answer 1

Yes they had Mammoth sized SUVs, Saber toothed sports cars, It probably was that mammoth gas come to think of it.

I'm just kidding! You make a great point.

Have a great day!

Answer 2

Just one below average winter, which doesn't mean a thing.  It happened in 1982, 1991-1992, 1999-2000.  EVERY TIME global warming came back stronger than ever.  Proof.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2007/

discussed in detail, with confirmation, at:

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/g...

Either you're wrong or most all the scientists in the world are.  I think I'll go with them.

As long as we keep making greenhouse gases in enormous amounts, global warming will dominate in the long run.  It's simple physics.

http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/earthguide/di...

Answer 3

Skeptic argument:  It's the Sun

Wrong!

http://environment.newscientist.com/chan...

http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

Skeptic argument:  They predicted cooling in the 70s.    Not a valid argument.

Yes in 1972 a handful of scientists theorized that.

Three years later the head scientist recanted, admitting that he had under estimated the amount of CO2

"In the 1970s, there was a book in the popular press, a few articles in popular magazines, and a small amount of scientific speculation based on the recently discovered glacial cycles and the recent slight cooling trend from air pollution blocking the sunlight. There were no daily headlines. There was no avalanche of scientific articles. There were no United Nations treaties or commissions. No G8 summits on the dangers and possible solutions. No institutional pronouncements. You could find broader "consensus" on a coming alien invasion."

Skeptic argument: The earth has cooled in the last 10 years

Not a valid argument:

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11...

1998 was an anomaly because of a strong el nino year.

"At the time, 1998 was a record high year in both the CRU and the NASA GISS analyses. In fact, it blew away the previous record by .2 degrees C. (That previous record went all the way back to 1997, by the way!)"

"According to NASA, it was elevated far above the trend line because 1998 was the year of the strongest El Nino of the century. Choosing that year as a starting point is a classic cherry pick and demonstrates why it is necessary to remove chaotic year-to year-variability (aka: weather) by smoothing out the data."

"But any scientist in pretty much any field knows that you cannot extract meaningful information about trends in noisy data from single-year end points. It's hard to hear a scientist make this argument and still believe they speak with integrity in this debate -- seems more like an abuse of the trust placed in them as scientists."

  Skeptic argument:  It was way colder than normal today in Wagga Wagga, proof that there is no global warming.

"Does this even deserve an answer? If we must ...

"The chaotic nature of weather means that no conclusion about climate can ever be drawn from a single data point, hot or cold. The temperature of one place at one time is just weather, and says nothing about climate, much less climate change, much less global climate change."

And one winter is not anywhere near long enough to be meaningful.

You are just repeating lame arguments in your question.  

Skeptic Argument:

The polar ice cap and glaciers are growing.

Yeah right.

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/10...

"Firstly, it is more than "a few glaciers" that are receding; it is a pervasive, sustained, and accelerating global trend. The National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) maintains a chart of global glacier mass balance, and for as far back as their data allows us to look, all but a few years have shown a loss in ice volume of subpolar and mountain glaciers. Further, annual losses are increasing."

Skeptic Argument:

CO2 didn't cause warming after the last ice age.

In case you didn't catch it, that's the one where skeptics make references to whooly mamoths driving SUVs and such.  They assume they are being clever.

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/12...

"Given the fact that human industrialization is unique in the history of planet earth, do we really need historical precedent for CO2-triggered climate change before we accept what we observe today? Surely it is not far-fetched that unprecedented consequences would follow from unprecedented events."

"During the glacial/interglacial cycles, temperatures and CO2 concentrations showed remarkable correlation. Closer examination reveals that CO2 does not lead the temperature changes, but lags by many centuries. Even so, the full extent of the warming can not be explained without the effects of CO2. Though these cycles do not demonstrate that greenhouse gas initiated warming, they do lend credence to the importance of CO2 and CH4 in setting the planetary thermostat."

It would seem to me that the skeptics are making my point for me.  No, cavemen didn't drive SUVs, that's the point.  This is unprecedented.  

"There are also events in geological history when sharp rises in temperature were initiated and driven by large spikes in greenhouse gases -- not unlike the fossil-fuel-emissions spike today. The Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum is such a case. Roughly 55 million years ago, ocean pH levels dropped drastically and global temperatures rapidly rose over 5oC. The resolution of available proxy records indicates that this occurred in a period of time no longer than 5K years; it's not possible to know if it happened even faster. The likely cause was massive releases of methane from the ocean floors, perhaps due to some smaller warming or changes in sea level. It took over 100K years for the ocean, atmosphere, and temperatures to return to their previous state. The result was a mass extinction event that took millions of years to recover from."

"In short, it is simply untrue that history lacks precedent for greenhouse-gas-driven warming. The precedents are there, as are the dire warnings."

  Skeptic argument: Current global warming is just part of a natural cycle:

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/12...

"While it is undoubtedly true that there are natural cycles and variations in global climate, those who insist that current warming is purely natural -- or even mostly natural -- have two challenges. "

"First, they need to identify the mechanism behind this alleged natural cycle. Absent a forcing of some sort, there will be no change in global energy balance. The balance is changing, so natural or otherwise, we need to find this mysterious cause. "

"Second, they need to come up with an explanation for why a 35% increase in the second most important greenhouse gas does not affect the global temperature. Theory predicts temperature will rise given an enhanced greenhouse effect, so how or why is it not happening?"

"The mainstream climate science community has provided a well-developed, internally consistent theory that accounts for the effects we are now observing. It provides explanations and makes predictions. Where is the skeptic community's model or theory whereby CO2 does not affect the temperature? Where is the evidence of some other natural forcing, like the Milankovich cycles that controlled the ice ages (a fine historical example of a dramatic and regular climate cycle that can be read in the ice core records taken both in Greenland and in the Antarctic)? "

Answer 4

Since global warming (AGW) advocates claim the sun's variability has no real impact on global warming, they may find it hard to explain if the current solar sunspot cycle continues to be so weak and temps begin to cool. Some of us are aware that when the sun is up it's usually warmer than when it's not. It's magnetic field usually keeps a large portion of cosmic gamma radiation from reaching Earth, when it's inactive like it is now, that doesn't happen and it gets cloudier and cooler. This is Svensmark's theory and like Anthropogenic Global Warming, it's still just a theory, but it's worth further study - despite those who want to stifle debate.

We may not be heading into an ice age or even a little ice age, but if we do we'll quickly find that a colder planet is far more dangerous than a warmer one. Think glaciers covering most of Canada, the upper parts of the Midwest, and New England, and much of Montana and Washington. And temp too cold to grow nearly as much in California and Florida, resulting in massive starvation. I hope it does start getting warm again so I hope they're right about CO2, but I have a hard time believing it's that simple.

Answer 5

Montreal Set To Break All Time Snow Record

MONTREAL - Several dozen schools were expected to remain shut this week in the Canadian province of Quebec over fears their roofs may collapse under the weight of near record amounts of snow, officials said on Monday.

Administrators at Montreal's French-language school board said only 73 of the roughly 200 schools shut since Friday will reopen on Tuesday.

Some of the others may not open until after the four-day Easter weekend, which begins Friday.

"The objective, of course, is to open the maximum of schools but at the same time to proceed carefully because we want there to be zero risk," school board president Diane de Courcy told reporters.

All told, 90,000 students have been out of school in the Montreal area since Friday.

Primary and secondary schools and adult education centres will reopen only once their roofs have been cleared of snow and the buildings have been inspected for structural safety, de Courcy said.

Four people have been killed in the mainly French-speaking Canadian province of 7.6 million after roofs collapsed under the weight of accumulated snow, though none of the incidents involved schools.

In Shawinigan, about 150 kilometres northeast of Montreal, a 55-year-old man died on Saturday when the roof of his home collapsed.

Three women were killed in Morin Heights north of Montreal last Wednesday when part of a food warehouse roof caved in under the weight of snow.

To date, some 350 centimetres of snow has fallen in the Montreal area, approaching a record level of 383 centimetres set in 1971.

Despite periods of rain over the past few weeks, some school roofs have three meters of accumulated snow, school board officials said. About 300 workers were using shovels, scoops and even chainsaws to cut through the snow and ice.

There has been even more snowfall in Quebec's outlying areas. The Mont Orford ski hill about 120 kilometres to the east of Montreal has had 527 centimetres of snowfall since the beginning of the season.

Those seeking updates on the Montreal school closures can visit the school board's Web site at: www.csdm.qc.ca or call 514-897-4444.

Answer 6

The circumstances that preceded the ice age were similar to those anticipated out a couple hundred years... worlds oceans warmed up enough to continue to support snowfall despite heavy cloud cover.

No, there was nothing at all they could have  done to prevent going into the warm end of cycle, and nothing that they could have done to prevent having an ice age.

They might have mitigated, reduced the severity of global warming if they had been causing part of the increase in that severity . But if you have not caused part of the warming you have nothing to give up for lent.

No, we can not stop our drift into elevated temperatures. At most we can delay it and limit how high temperatures can go by cutting GHG,

We can also conserve fossil fuels for use when we more critically need them by not using them up now.

Answer 7

If Canada melted, we'd be flooded and evetually turn into a rainforest.

Answer 8

Ooh, how amazing, snow in Canada during winter. How unique. Have you ever considered that increased moisture in the air due to weather pattern changes will cause more snow during winter?

Answer 9

I assume you have a PhD in Atmospheric Phenomena... so you should have studied how Global Warming can have some strange effects.. Like MASSIVE SNOW FALLS.... so you can laugh at how ignorant people will only look at the local weather and wrongly conculde that Global Warming does not exist.