Scientist: Forget Global Warming, Prepare for New Ice Age...Oncoming Ice Age?

Question

This story that I am posting about is contradicting itself in a few places, but one big quote has me chuckling.

"This is the fastest temperature change in the instrumental record, and it puts us back to where we were in 1930," Chapman wrote in The Australian Wednesday. "If the temperature does not soon recover, we will have to conclude that global warming is over."

So now they're going from Global Warming to an Ice Age coming? Science is so confused by itself, I think. The same article says it's warmer, but then says were back to tempuratures seen in the 1930's. What I derive from this article is, "maybe global warming, maybe global cooling. Science is unclear."

What do you guys think?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352241,00.html

Answer 1

Here is a good web page about the 4 recorded solar minimums.

Note one minimum (Wolfe Minimum) may have killed off about 1/4 of the worlds population?

Climate events of the Last 1,000 Years

http://home.earthlink.net/~ponderthemaun...

This solar scientist believes in AWG but really hasn't studied it.  However he is a good read for projections of solar cycles - he seems more accurate than most others:

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/Conf2...

Answer 2

This is what happens when you cherrypick one scientist who cherrypicks the data instead of listening to the scientific consensus.

Here is the key comment from Chapman:

"If the temperature does not soon recover..."

Guess what?  It already "recovered".

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

I don't know who this Chapman guy is, but he doesn't seem to know the difference between weather and climate.

Answer 3

Remember scientist have a limited data base t work from. Most accurate temperature data is from the last 100 years. Climate change exists but little is really known about it. Two years ago we heard how we were in for terrible hurricane seasons of untold consequences.

Answer 4

The fact that newspapers in Australia are prepared to publish this type of story without worrying about the public outcry (from a small but vocal segment of the public) and self ritcheous critism from shows like media watch on the ABC is a sign that the global warming hysteria is starting to run it's course.

It's well known that sunspots have a much stronger corrolation with global temperature than atmospheric CO2, but researchers who have suggested that there is a connection have been libeled by the AGW crowd.  It seems the sunspot connection is better science, but worse politics.

Answer 5

No.

I think people need to read the whole article posted.  EDIT - I didn't mean to attack the poster.  Just wanted other people to actually read it.

"[Critics quickly pointed out that Chapman may have been "cherry-picking" the data. A strong La Nina formation in the Pacific pushed down January temperatures over much of the Northern Hemisphere from where they had been a year earlier, but average global temperatures are still much higher than the 20th-century average, and the NOAA said last week that last month was the warmest March on record.]"

Just another crazy guy who's not a climatologist, and either doesn't understand the data, or is grinding a political axe (more likely)..

Answer 6

have you ever read about the little ice age, or maunder minimum?

Answer 7

Liss, you pose a very serious question that deserves serious answers.  I stopped posing questions a while ago because I was called stupid or ignorant simply because I didn't believe one side.  

I did read that article earlier today, before your question was posted.  I agree with the author, there is a direct relationship.

I did read another article that pretty much summed up what I believe about AGW/GW.

More than 30 years ago political scientist Anthony Downs discerned what he called the “issue-attention cycle,” a five-stage process by which the public and especially the news media grow alarmed over an issue, agitate for action, generate piles of scary headlines, and then begin to draw back as we come to recognize that the problem has been exaggerated or misconceived, and the price tag for action comes in. While Downs thought that the issue-attention cycle for the environment would last longer than most issues, it appears the mother-of-all-environmental scares -- global warming -- is following his model and is going to begin to fade like other environmental alarms of the past such as the population bomb and the “we’re running out of everything” scares.

Any prediction as to the next 'scare'?

Good luck!

Answer 8

if a bazillion scientists came on and said the globe is cooling the global nonwarming sheeple would tell you its because of global warming.  since the conclusion is that global warming is over, or soon to be over, the environazis will tell you its because of their important measures to stop it. its all bunk.

Answer 9

Climate change is a money and power grab scheme by the bottom feeder politicians and power brokers. It's nothing to do with ecology and everything to do with money.

Con artists like Gore have enriched themselves on this issue, taking home Oscars, Nobel Prizes and millions of dollars. Meanwhile, evangelical leaders are setting up their flocks for extreme fleecing by leftist politicos like Barack Obama, who will appeal for Christian votes by talking in glowing, biblical-sounding terms about "being good stewards of God's creation."

Here is truth about global warming:

Global warming is one-half of the climatic cycle of warming and cooling.

The earth's mean temperature cycles around the freezing point of water.

This is a completely natural phenomenon which has been going on since

there has been water on this planet. It is driven by the sun.

Our planet is currently emerging from a 'mini ice age', so is

becoming warmer and may return to the point at which Greenland is again usable as farmland (as it has been in recorded history).

As the polar ice caps decrease, the amount of fresh water mixing with oceanic water will slow and perhaps stop the thermohaline cycle (the oceanic heat 'conveyor' which, among other things, keeps the U.S. east coast warm).

When this cycle slows/stops, the planet will cool again and begin to enter another ice age.

It's been happening for millions of years.

The worrisome and brutal predictions of drastic climate effects are based on computer models, NOT CLIMATE HISTORY.

As you probably know, computer models are not the most reliable of sources, especially when used to 'predict' chaotic systems such as weather.

Global warming/cooling, AKA 'climate change':

Humans did not cause it.

Humans cannot stop it.

Answer 10

Ummm....

And in the 1970's the scientific community was all agog over...GLOBAL COOLING!  How many of you remember that?

Personally, it's obvious that humans are impacting the Earth badly. I'm not yet ready to buy into the the current trend of global warming.

Why?  The press hypes anything it can to sell copy.  People in general only look at short term (10-50 years or so) trends, in this case rainfall and temperature.  The world doesn't work that way.  It operates on decades, hundreds and thousands of year long cycles at the very least.

Temperature and weather extremes are happening but, they've happened repeatedly before and guess what; in cycles that are recorded in human documentation.  People just need to read archived records.  

I was just reading some histories of my state from the 1830's-to around 1890.  Some of the rain, drought, and temperature spikes were more extreme than today's.

Answer 11

Hey, maybe we have lost our orbit and are drifting away from the sun. Maybe scientist are expecting years of pyroclastic material to stay suspended in the atmosphere for many many years ahead. Maybe science is lost as an easter egg.

Answer 12

Well, I read an article this morning that says global cooling has started and that since just last year the globe has cooled 1 degree centigrade. That was from 4 different agencies across the US who all agreed for once. Now what am I supposed to do with all of this sunscreen I bought? Can I recover my investment from the global warming zealots and greenies thru court action? Now I got to go buy cold weather clothing cause we are going to freeze. Looks like ya'll could get somethin right or just shetup.

Answer 13

I'm afraid that it isn't science or scientists that are confused, but those which claim to be scientists.

The fact that we have seen no increase in global temperatures during the last 7 years might be an indication that we have reached this current peak in temperatures.

I personally hope not in many ways however.

With the high cost of energy, warmer temperatures would actually have many financial benefits, mainly in the form of warmer winters, and milder summers, reducing the need for heating and cooling.

Although there would be many other benefits also, we will have to accept whatever nature throws our way.

Answer 14

It is about TAX follow the money

EPW Fact of the Day: Clinton, Obama Sign Onto to Boxer’s $4,500 Climate Tax on American Families May 9, 2007http://www.firesociety.com/article/24204...

Posted by Marc Morano - [e-mail] - 1:34 PM ET   Senate Environment & Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have proposed the "Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act" aimed at combating climate change. The proposed partisan bill (S.309) is supported by another 15 senators, including: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY); Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL); Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT); Sen. Joseph R. Biden (D-DE); Sen. Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI); Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-WI); Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI); Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA); Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ); Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT); Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ); Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI); Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI); Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-MD), and Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD). FACT: A new MIT study concludes that the Sanders-Boxer approach would impose a tax-equivalent of $366 billion annually, or more than $4,500 per family of four, by 2015. And the annual costs will grow after 2015. [Read full MIT study]  The Kyoto Protocol would have imposed an equivalent tax of $300 billion a year, 10 times the size of the Clinton-Gore tax increase of 1993. In addition to the MIT study, a new Congressional Budget Office study released recently, details how a carbon cap-and-trade system would result in massive wealth redistribution from the poor and working class to wealthier Americans. [Read more on CBO study] Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), EPW Ranking Member, said today:

"Carbon caps would artificially and needlessly raise the cost of energy the most on the people least able to afford it. It astounds me that any Senator could support such a proposal."

Read Senator Inhofe's full opening statement from today's EPW subcommittee hearing [Link]  

Global Cooling and Climate Cycles

The exploitation of climate science for purely political goals has been occurring throughout the developed world for years. Not long ago, in the 1970s and 80s, many "climate experts" claimed certainty and consensus about global cooling. However, there is nothing especially unusual about the current weather and climate changes. In fact it is generally within long-term normal patterns.

- The Cooling World --Newsweek, April 28, 1975.- Warming Over the Last Century by Roy Spencer, Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center- Temperatures Over the Last 2000 Years, by Roy Spencer- What if we get global cooling instead of warming? by Tim Ball- Early Explorers Documented Climate Change by Tim Ball

Carbon Dioxide .....dangerous?

Humans add to the green house gas concentration by exhaling, harvesting plants, and generating and releasing energy for our homes, cars, factories, etc. All of these actions involve hydrocarbons such as petroleum, coal, and natural gas. Carbon dioxide is not a byproduct or a pollutant but the intended result of energy production. The more efficiently one combusts hydrocarbon, the more CO2 one produces. For this reason, those who are that "energy efficiency" is the solution to global warming are wrong.

- Global Warming, Humans, Carbon Dioxide---Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts? by Timothy Ball

- World Temperature Falling Whilst CO2 Keeps Rising---New Proof- A Skeptic's Take on Global Warming by Bill Steigerwald of Human Events

Tax Increases

Americans are about to be hit with a $1.3 trillion tax increase if Al Gore and his radical climate alarmists push succeed in their agenda. Hundreds of millions of dollars are being pushed to create the largest expansion of government power in our nation's history. This massive tax scheme could cripple the economy and allow bureaucrats to tax air.

- CBO Report Exposes Lieberman-Warner Bill's $1.2 Trillion Tax Increase by Marc Morano, Inhofe EPW Press Blog

- Tim Ball, public speaker and climatology consultant says that the federal

government is spending buckets of moneyPart 1, Part 2

- EPW Fact of the Day: Clinton, Obama Sign Onto Boxer's $4,500 Climate Tax on American Families by Marc Morano

Killing Our Economy?

Spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year to "fight" global warming just doesn't make sense, and is more likely to ruin economies of first-world nations than make any significant impact.- Roy Spencer, author of Climate Confusion: How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians, and Misguided Policies that Hurt the Poor, says that there is nothing we can do--short of shutting down the global economy. More here- Wake Up Wal-Mart: Global Warming Regulation is Bad for Business by Thomas Borelli

- Mutal Fund Calls on GE to Stop Advocating Global Warming Regulation by Steve Milloy of the Free Enterprise Action Fund- My Take on Gore and Global Warming by Larry Kudlow- Inhofe Praises President Bush for Rejecting Lieberman- Warner Bill

Answer 15

This stuff is not propaganda, and is quite scary... We had all better cross our fingers that Solar Cycle 24 starts to pickup later this year and next year.  If it does not, then there is a chance that we can see a massive shift in climate temperature that will bring back the ice sheets to North America just as they were 11,000 years ago.  Also, looking at previous data, it can occur in less than 20 years.  I am not saying it will, but if this was to occur billions of people would starve as a consequence simply by the way that our agricultural system is currently setup...

But the way, this is exactly what happened in the 1100's thru the 1700's... This should not be ignored, but we can only wait until more SOHO data comes in during the next two years....  Meaning, in the next couple of years we will know which way this will go, and potentially how bad it will be..

Answer 16

Everyone was all a-buzz in the 70s with a "second ice-age." Then we went into a "global warming" freak-out phase. Now the temperatures are steadying and dipping. The reason....it's called climate change. It happens. It's always happened. I'm not a scientist so I don't know and can't explain exactly, but it's nothing to be worried about and is not man-made. The temperatures will continue to change whether or not every person on earth decides to live in a tree and drive a hybrid.