How much waffling will the public take before demanding some accountablilty for the hoax?

Question

Some AGW proponents are now saying the earth may cool for 10 to 30 years despite the enormous effect CO2 supposedly has on climate.

They say the cooling is a natural variation that will temporarily mask the soon to be catastrophic global warming.

They want to make it so people will believe what ever they say no matter how ridiculous it sounds. Warming = Cooling

Wake up America!

Answer 1

Yeah it's pretty ridiculous.  The whole global warming scare is just another ploy to push political agenda's and make money.  

They'll never admit they're lying though.  At the most they make up some other bs theory and say it "counter-balanced" our carbon dioxide emissions.

Answer 2

Don't you just love the links these people put on these questions ?

Look at some for temperatures for the  middle ages, I didn't think we had thermometers back then.

Answer 3

It's not a hoax.

A few guys think man made global warming will alter ocean currents, bringing up cold water from the depths and TEMPORARILY reducing the increase due to global warming.

They may not be right, but it's not a ridiculous idea, unless you know little about ocean currents and ocean water.

EDIT - Heretic - What sudden stall of the Gulf Stream?  Got a reference?  It's been discussed as a theoretical possibility, but I didn't know anything actually happened.

EDIT2 - This is one explanation of the "stall", which I think (not sure) was more about changes in salinity than actual changes in circulation.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v44...

This remains pretty controversial at this point.  More data should clarify things.

Answer 4

According now to NASA and the the UK Meteorological Office’s Hadley Center for Climate Studies we are seeing a shift in the PDO and they are projecting ten years of cooling.  From NASA:

"The shift in the PDO can have significant implications for global climate, affecting Pacific and Atlantic hurricane activity, droughts and flooding around the Pacific basin, the productivity of marine ecosystems, and global land temperature patterns. “This multi-year Pacific Decadal Oscillation ‘cool’ trend can intensify La Niña or diminish El Niño impacts around the Pacific basin,” said Bill Patzert, an oceanographer and climatologist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif."

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroo...

So Hurricanes,droughts, flooding, will increase in the next decade not due to global cooling, not global warming.  Bet you any money they will blame global warming, sorry, climate change.

Here is the biggest scam.  One that involves a ignorance of the public in the science behind AGW.  The Hadley Centre is saying that these natural variations is going to hide global warming for ten years.  

According to AGW theory, the increase in temperatures due to the increase of co2 levels alone, without any feedbacks is small.  Nothing to be alarmed about.  Were the increase will be large is from positive feedbacks, or amplification of co2.  It is vital for this positive feedback to occur (in theory), we have to have a continuous warming of the oceans. Warming oceans emit more co2.   Without it we will not get rapid acceleration of  temperatures.  So if the oceans cool, the only increase in temperatures we will see is from the increase in co2 in the atmosphere which will be small.  What is more according to the same theory, cooling oceans,  absorb co2.  So we will not get a positive feedback, but a negative one.

The other point is that they are saying these natural variations that is going to cause temperatures to fall over the next ten years, is noise.  If the PDO, which runs in twenty to thirty years cycles, when it is  in its cool phase is noise, then when the PDO was in its warm phase, since the late 70's, that accentuated warming, has to be  noise also.  But they are saying that almost all of the warming has been due to greenhouse gases, without any noise. So if there is noise, then the climate is less sensitive to co2 then what the models are saying.  Less climatesensitivity=less temperature increases.

Edit:  The link that Bob provided means that there are negative feedbacks.  Negative feebacks=less climate sensitivity.  

That is also a great hoax of theres.  Their hypothesis is not warming, but catastrophic warming.  He is making a case for warming.  But he provided a link that disproves his real hypothesis, catastrophic warming.

Answer 5

Most scientist now believe that the warming of the last 100 yrs. has been caused by increasing greenhouse gas content in the atmosphere. Global predictions are based on Global Circulation Models. These are models that attempt to model global climate change using computers and complex algorithms that describe physical processes that take place in in the atmosphere (solar radiation input, loss of long wave radiation from Earth, movement of water vapor). One problem with these models is that they are not coupled with models of the oceans, geosphere, cryoshere, and biosphre. Therefore, GCMs do not accurately portray all real world conditions mainly because we do not understand these conditions perfectly. Two of the most difficult things for GCMS to predict are the effects of clouds and aerosols(dust particulate matters in atmosphere) that have a cooling affect on the environment. Our scientific understanding of the physical processes at work in the atmosphere are not perfect. Clouds cause both a cooling effect and warming effect-which will be more dominant if clouds increase? Feedback loops are extremely important in trying to get some understanding of what may happen to the environment. Many processes can have both a positive and negative feedback affect, which will provide completely different outcomes. However, presently most reputable scientist agree that global warming today is mostly contributed to the amount of carbon dioxide in the environment. Hope this helps your understanding :)  Read  some peer reviewed journal articles for accurate information on this topic.

Answer 6

its been so over done that the average person pays no attention anymore. its just more background noise that everyone ignores.

you've got to admit it takes a lot of imagination to attribute both warmer temperatures & colder temperatures to the same cause.

I find it amusing that both the warmer temps & less ice in the arctic and the colder temps & increasing ice thickness in the antarctic this past year are claimed to be proof of manmade  global warming.eventhough the average temp globaly didnt change.

the weather has never been the same & never will be.

Answer 7

That's why it's referred to by those in the know as global climate change, silly.  

You have to do the homework to get the answer to the question.  My digesting it and giving it back to you condensed and in my own words is not going to persuade you.  Using words like "hoax" in your question seems to mean that you're looking for responses that agree with your world view.  This also means to me that you're not comfortable enough in your views to accept a thoughtful challenge.

I'm awake, and my eyes are wide open.  How about you?

Answer 8

I think what (Bob) was trying to say was the unknown stall and sudden start up of the Gulf Stream. "The jury is still out on that one."

ed: (bob) : http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/200...

The (WHOI) web site also has it. Just finished watching a Doc on the Hist Chan. Read a few blogs about a partial stall in 2007. Nothing set in concrete but interesting.

Answer 9

It's all about control.  First it's global warming, then it's climate change, now it's global cooling, but it's all the same.  When it's hot, blame it on global warming, when it snows, blame it on climate change, when it's warm in January-- like it always does . . . then it's called global cooling.  Then the warm weather kicks in and we get storms-- like we always do and now it's back to climate change.  

In other words, those who want to see us give everything up and live in tents don't know what to call it and they're trying to keep everyone on edge by changing the name of a  non-event.

Answer 10

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) weather influence was discovered in 1996 by researchers doing fish studies.  It's not something that climatologists discovered:

"The term PDO was coined in about 1996 by Steven Hare at the University of Washington. He, along with colleagues Nathan Mantua, Yuan Zhang, Robert Francis and Mike Wallace discovered the pattern as part of work on fish population fluctuations."

http://topex-www.jpl.nasa.gov/science/pd...

Climatologist can however work ocean current oscillations into their models.  The PDO influence does appear to account for the slight pause in warming in the 1960s and 1970s:

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)

http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/

However, you can see that there was no letup in the overall rise in temperatures starting 100+ years ago:

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2...

So we may get a temporary pause in the damage from warming, but we should use that time to minimize the damage that will come when the PDO flips to the warm cycle again.

Answer 11

Some people are easily influenced by hypocrites like Al Gore and so on. I work with someone who worships him and ignores all of his blunderings and she even wastes plastic containers at work and admits to it but still does it just to save a couple minutes at the end of the day. I think that about sums up the general population of "environmentalists".

I'm all for reducing waste, I think its a good idea but this global warming is a bunch of c**p. I keep reading  these reports of the oceans temp not changing for years with thermometers measuring them and people are upset because its NOT getting warmer which means they could be wrong instead of seeing it as a positive thing. This was one of the coldest winters on record in many parts of the world, etc... Of course you will never see that on the network news because they will have to admit they don't know everything and a liberal will never do that.

Yes the weather fluctuates, it has through out history , how do you think the earth came out of the Ice Age, global warming! There weren't even people to blame it on then. And so it will continue to.

And now places like China are having developmental growth causing more pollution and they are not going to stop. America had its industrial century of escalating pollution and now they are doing the same. It sucks but telling them to stop is hypocritical on our part.