Location: land of the Lilliputians, In the state of insanity
Posts: 24,185
Great, we are finally getting that ice age we were promised in the 70s.
ON another note, this has to be all wrong. Remember, we are banking all our money on the hockey stick graph. How can you refute the hockey stick graph.
__________________
kaafir mushrik
Unintended consequences and God have one thing in common: Liberals don’t believe in either of them.
I found this article very interesting. Sounds like solid science. These guys don't sound like hacks in the hire of the Big Bad Energy Corporations. I wonder how much attention it will get or if suddenly these scientists will get demonized and punished by the AGW zealots? Time will tell. Whatever, I'm personally glad to hear the next 30 years the thermostat is going down: I don't like hot weather.
Of course, Al Gore would retort bombastically "The science on global warming is settled! The train has left the station! Game over! Elvis has left the building! Get over it!"
Latif, a professor at the Leibniz Institute at Germany's Kiel University and an author of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, believes the lengthy cold weather is merely a pause -- a 30-years-long blip -- in the larger cycle of global warming, which postulates that temperatures will rise rapidly over the coming years.
At a U.N. conference in September, Latif said that changes in ocean currents known as the North Atlantic Oscillation could dominate over manmade global warming for the next few decades. Latif said the fluctuations in these currents could also be responsible for much of the rise in global temperatures seen over the past 30 years.
That is what I call having it both ways.
Science better regain it's credibility quick before it is reduced to the level of politics.
C. Davis
__________________ Am I greedy because I don't want to give you what is mine?
or
Are you greedy because you want to take what is not yours?
Only the New Green "Eco-Weenies" (I love that term Chicken!) would have the stones to say "Don't pay attention to your eyes, pay attention to what I say." Climate involves changes and in addition to periods of warming I'll bet there will be periods of cooling. Kind of reminds you of the old George Carlin line in the "Hippy Dippy Weatherman" routine, ......... "The weather tonight will be, .......DARK! Followed tomorrow by early morning LIGHT!"
At a U.N. conference in September, Latif said that changes in ocean currents known as the North Atlantic Oscillation could dominate over manmade global warming for the next few decades. Latif said the fluctuations in these currents could also be responsible for much of the rise in global temperatures seen over the past 30 years.
SO, let me get this straight. IF the "fluctuations in these currents could be responsible for much of the rise in global temperature", why then does he beleive that MAN has any impact in any earth warming that may or may not accure. IF natural cooling can happen, why is it that naturul warming can't happen?
__________________
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have.
SO, let me get this straight. IF the "fluctuations in these currents could be responsible for much of the rise in global temperature", why then does he beleive that MAN has any impact in any earth warming that may or may not accure. IF natural cooling can happen, why is it that naturul warming can't happen?
That would be against their agenda of an international power grab.
__________________
Obama=The Fourth Reich,
Just look at the parallels of the Nazi regime and the Obama Administration amazingly similar arent' they.
First, I will grant that in all likelyhood none of us posting on this thread are bonafide climate scientists. Nevertheless, we can make some observations about this new information about Multi-decadal oscillations (MDO).
First . . . it is NEW. What does this mean? It means it is a new, previously unknown effect that substantively impacts climate. We do not have to be climate scientists to conclude from this that climate science is immature. This is akin to being unaware whether the universe is all part of the same star system (same "galaxy" a term which doesn't really make a lot of sense when the presumption is everything is contained in one galaxy) or stars are organized into a large number of separate galaxies, as was the case with astronomy before the work of Edwin Hubble in the early 20th century. The science of astronomy then (and perhaps now, not my call) was immature. I don't bet billions of dollars or trillions of dollars on a whim of an immature science -- lowering CO2 emissions levels in the hope of reducing "global warming."
Second . . . because it is NEW, this new information recasts the projection of the warming seen over the last 30 years (the last 10 years of which has evinced global cooling, by the way). If you trend over warming seen in the last 30 years that all glaciers are going to melt and the North Pole will be free of sea ice by 2013 when you DON'T KNOW THE MDO EXISTS, then your trend is going to change pretty substantially when you take account of the MDO. Specifically, the trends are going to be pushed well out in time. So, when we are told we must act within 10 years to save the planet, this may change to we must act within 100 years to save the planet. Additionally, in all probability, accounting for this previously unknown effect is going to substantially attenuate the quantification estimates associated with Human Caused Global Warming (Anthropogenic Global Warming -- AGW). When AGW was projected to raise sea levels 200 feet or 20 feet over the next 100 years, people got excited. When this is modified to 2 feet or 2 inches over the next 100 years, people are going to be less willing to wear hairshirts and live in a cardboard box down by the river to lower their CO2 footprint.
Don't let anyone tell you otherwise, if the MDO is truely a new, previously unaccounted for climate mechanism, it is going to have very major implications for the AGW debate. Now, on the otherhand, if this has been a long known effect that experts in the field are already well versed in, that could be different. But the way I read the article was that it was new information. Something that bolstered my impression of this was that supposedly this new understanding was enabled by new sensing technology that promotes measuring sea water temperatures several thousand feet below the surface of the water. You couldn't learn about the MDO previously so perhaps it cannot be "old news."
We shall see what the fall out will be.
I mean . . . does anyone else get the impression these guys are bumbling, fumbling, shoot from the hip crusaders. "Ooops. I didn't notice the MDO that leads to major, alternating 30 year periods of hot and cold. My bad!"
Global Warming??? Check This Algore!!!
