Xtra News Community 2
July 11, 2020, 08:57:46 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to Xtra News Community 2 — please also join our XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP.
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links BITEBACK! XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP Staff List Login Register  

Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers”


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 55   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Some reading for the “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers”  (Read 18025 times)
DazzaMc
Don't give me Karma!
Admin Staff
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 5553


« Reply #150 on: December 12, 2009, 08:14:21 pm »

Yer - but the first hurdle was the 2007 bit - and then there's the small problem of the Author working with/for the Heartland Institute (which is funded by Exxon - as are most skeptics).

 Smiley
Report Spam   Logged

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 8266



WWW
« Reply #151 on: December 13, 2009, 02:40:35 am »





Antarctic Temperatures of the Past Two Centuries
 
http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N40/EDIT.jsp
 
In order to assess the uniqueness of the current temperature regime in any part of the world, it is important - nay, necessary - to know its past temperature history; and to determine if a region's current temperature regime may validly be attributed to CO2-induced global warming, it is important that its temperature history stretch as far back in time as possible. Consequently, and as "the temporal variability of Antarctic climate is not well known, as continuous meteorological observations in the Antarctic began only in the late 1950s," according to Schneider et al. (2006), this group of seven researchers decided to utilize 200 years of sub-annually-resolved δ18O and δD records from precisely-dated ice cores obtained from Law Dome, Siple Station, Dronning Maud Land and two West Antarctic sites of the United States component of the International Trans-Antarctic Scientific Expedition to create "a 200-year-long Antarctic temperature reconstruction (representing the main part of the continent) methodologically similar to temperature reconstructions covering other geographic regions."
The results of this significant undertaking, following application of a multi-decadal low-pass filter to the yearly data, are presented in the figure below, along with the similarly-treated data of the Southern Hemisphere instrumental temperature record, where the zero line represents the 1961-1990 climatological means of the two records. We present the figure for the purpose of discussing what Schneider et al. have to say about it, much of which we consider to be rather disingenuous.



Figure 1. Mean temperature histories of Antarctica (dark line) and the Southern Hemisphere (lighter line), adapted from the paper of Schneider et al. (2006).
In reference to the figure, its creators say "it is notable that the reconstructed Antarctic temperature record is in phase with the Southern Hemisphere mean instrumental record." This statement roughly describes the relationship between the two histories, but only until 1990, after which the Antarctic temperature history takes a "nosedive" and dramatically diverges from the Southern Hemisphere record.

The seven scientists also say the Antarctic temperature reconstruction "provides evidence for long-term Antarctic warming," and if all the data we had were those that stretch from 1840 to 1990, one might be inclined to believe them. However, when their "before and after" data are included, this statement is readily seen to be false. In fact, the entire record suggests the existence of a multi-decadal or centennial-scale cycling of climate, where Antarctic temperatures in the early 1800s were equally as warm as they were in the late-1930s/early-1940s, as well as in the late-1980s/early-1990s.

We additionally note that a number of other analyses of Antarctic instrumental surface and air temperature data also indicate the continent has recently experienced a net cooling, which likely began as early as the mid-1960s (Comiso, 2000; Doran et al., 2002; Thompson and Solomon, 2002). Furthermore, it is obvious from the figure we adapted from Schneider et al. that there has been a net cooling over the entire course of their Antarctic temperature reconstruction of nearly 0.3°C.

So what do Schneider et al.'s data really suggest? First of all, their data suggest there was nothing unusual, unnatural or unprecedented about any Antarctic temperatures of any part of the 20th century. Second, their data demonstrate it was significantly colder in Antarctica near the end of the 20th century than it was in the early decades of the 19th century (when the atmosphere's CO2 concentration was about 100 ppm less than it is currently), while the data of others indicate it may be even colder there today. Finally, Schneider et al.'s data indicate there is something drastically wrong with the theory of anthropogenic-induced global warming, when a 100-ppm increase in the air's CO2 concentration leads to a large decrease in air temperature in a part of the world (one of earth's two polar regions) where CO2-induced greenhouse warming is predicted to be most dramatic and most readily detected.

Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso

References
Comiso, J.C. 2000. Variability and trends in Antarctic surface temperatures from in situ and satellite infrared measurements. Journal of Climate 13: 1674-1696.

Doran, P.T., Priscu, J.C., Lyons, W.B., Walsh, J.E., Fountain, A.G., McKnight, D.M., Moorhead, D.L., Virginia, R.A., Wall, D.H., Clow, G.D., Fritsen, C.H., McKay, C.P. and Parsons, A.N. 2002. Antarctic climate cooling and terrestrial ecosystem response. Nature advance online publication, 13 January 2002 (DOI 10.1038/nature710).

Schneider, D.P., Steig, E.J., van Ommen, T.D., Dixon, D.A., Mayewski, P.A., Jones, J.M. and Bitz, C.M. 2006. Antarctic temperatures over the past two centuries from ice cores. Geophysical Research Letters 33: 10.1029/2006GL027057.

http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20061013/20061013_02.html

Mysterious warm periods found in Antarctic history

20 November 2009, by Tamera Jones

Temperatures in Antarctica during the warm periods between ice ages, called interglacials, may have been higher than previously thought. The findings, reported in Nature today, could help researchers better understand more about how the climate can quickly change on the continent.


Antarctica
Until now, scientists thought maximum temperatures during interglacials were a little warmer than today's temperatures. But they now think they may have been up to 6ºC warmer.

'Our results suggest that Antarctica warmed rapidly in the past, but at the moment we don't know why,' says lead author, Dr Louise Sime from the British Antarctic Survey. 'It might be that at higher CO2 levels Antarctic temperatures are more sensitive to small variations, due to regional warming feedbacks.'

Climate has flipped
Scientists have known that the climate has flipped between ice ages and interglacials over the last few million years for some time. Fossils of animals that lived during warm or cool climates in deep-sea sediments and rocks reflect changing temperatures.

'Our results suggest that Antarctica warmed rapidly in the past, but at the moment we don't know why.'
Dr Louise Sime, British Antarctic Survey
Ice cores tell a similar story. Changes in the proportion of different types of atoms of the same chemical element, or isotope, in ancient ice give researchers detailed information about how temperatures varied.

When it's cold, water made with the heavy version, or isotope, of hydrogen - deuterium - falls out of the sky as snow sooner than water made with normal hydrogen, because it's heavier than normal water. Ice cores containing ancient ice record this, so they tell scientists what the temperature was thousands of years ago.

'Isotopes in ice cores are a very neat temperature proxy, because you're using fairly simple physics,' says Sime.

To figure out average changes in temperature each year, scientists have assumed that the way snowfall records annual temperatures each year hardly varies over East Antarctica.

But when Sime and scientists from the Open University and the University of Bristol analysed ice cores from three regions of East Antarctica containing 340,000-year-old ice, they found differences in the way snowfall records annual temperature.

Sime says, 'It's unlikely that all of the differences in ice cores depend on temperature. Instead there are also likely to be some changes in snowfall.'

'Further data on interglacial climates from Greenland would be invaluable to help understand what's going on,' she adds.

The world has seen cycles of glaciation with ice sheets advancing and retreating on 100,000-year time scales. These periods are called glacials and interglacials respectively. We're currently in an interglacial, which started around 11,000 years ago.

http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/news/story.aspx?id=602
« Last Edit: December 13, 2009, 03:40:07 am by Im2Sexy4MyPants » Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 8266



WWW
« Reply #152 on: December 13, 2009, 03:02:14 am »


An erupting solar prominence photographed by the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO)

Scientists Predict Big Solar Cycle

12.21.2006

Dec. 21, 2006: Evidence is mounting: the next solar cycle is going to be a big one.

 Solar cycle 24, due to peak in 2010 or 2011 "looks like its going to be one of the most intense cycles since record-keeping began almost 400 years ago," says solar physicist David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center. He and colleague Robert Wilson presented this conclusion last week at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco.
 .

Their forecast is based on historical records of geomagnetic storms.

Hathaway explains: "When a gust of solar wind hits Earth's magnetic field, the impact causes the magnetic field to shake. If it shakes hard enough, we call it a geomagnetic storm." In the extreme, these storms cause power outages and make compass needles swing in the wrong direction. Auroras are a beautiful side-effect.

Hathaway and Wilson looked at records of geomagnetic activity stretching back almost 150 years and noticed something useful:. "The amount of geomagnetic activity now tells us what the solar cycle is going to be like 6 to 8 years in the future," says Hathaway. A picture is worth a thousand words:


Above: Peaks in geomagnetic activity (red) foretell solar maxima (black) more than six years in advance. [More]

In the plot, above, black curves are solar cycles; the amplitude is the sunspot number. Red curves are geomagnetic indices, specifically the Inter-hour Variability Index or IHV. "These indices are derived from magnetometer data recorded at two points on opposite sides of Earth: one in England and another in Australia. IHV data have been taken every day since 1868," says Hathaway.

Cross correlating sunspot number vs. IHV, they found that the IHV predicts the amplitude of the solar cycle 6-plus years in advance with a 94% correlation coefficient.

"We don't know why this works," says Hathaway. The underlying physics is a mystery. "But it does work."
According to their analysis, the next Solar Maximum should peak around 2010 with a sunspot number of 160 plus or minus 25. This would make it one of the strongest solar cycles of the past fifty years—which is to say, one of the strongest in recorded history.

Left: Hathaway and Wilson's prediction for the amplitude of Solar Cycle 24. [More]

Astronomers have been counting sunspots since the days of Galileo, watching solar activity rise and fall every 11 years. Curiously, four of the five biggest cycles on record have come in the past 50 years. "Cycle 24 should fit right into that pattern," says Hathaway.

These results are just the latest signs pointing to a big Cycle 24. Most compelling of all, believes Hathaway, is the work of Mausumi Dikpati and colleagues at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado. "They have combined observations of the sun’s 'Great Conveyor Belt' with a sophisticated computer model of the sun’s inner dynamo to produce a physics-based prediction of the next solar cycle." In short, it's going to be intense. Details may be found in the Science@NASA story Solar Storm Warning.

"It all hangs together," says Hathaway. Stay tuned for solar activity.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/21dec_cycle24.htm
Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 31011


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #153 on: January 04, 2010, 11:53:09 am »


While “anti-warmalists” and “climate-change deniers” fiddle, Rome burns!
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 8266



WWW
« Reply #154 on: January 05, 2010, 04:19:21 pm »

.
Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 8266



WWW
« Reply #155 on: January 05, 2010, 04:34:31 pm »

.



Proponents of Man-Made Climate Fears Enjoy Monumental Funding Advantage over Skeptics
source: ICECAP





Often when I or any other skeptic are quoted in a newspaper, do a TV interview that is carried on the station’s or network’s web site or get mentioned in an alarmist blog, the first knee jerk reactions of some commenters is to accuse us of being part of some far right wing conspiracy to preserve the status quo (many of us are independent or even left of center politically – it is not about politics but about science) and continue our polluting ways (CO2 is not a pollutant but a plant fertiilzer), or most commonly of being a shill for big oil, or dirty from coal, or bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry. That is clearly not the case.

Compared to the proponents riding the big grant money gravy train we are the person on the corner with a tin cup. Marc Morano did a comparison of the funding received by the proponents in comparison to the smaller funding for objective scientists who take a more skeptical or open minded position (the way science used to be before the lure of money corrupted it). Marc did not include the funding the alarmists blogs get from folks like George Soros, Fenton Communications, convicted Canadian felons, environmental groups and activists which runs in the many millions of dollars. Here is Marc’s summary. You may have other examples. If so please email me (jdaleo@icecap.us).


Paleoclimate scientist Bob Carter, who has testified before the Senate Environment & Public Works committee, explained how much money has been spent researching and promoting climate fears and so-called solutions. “In one of the more expensive ironies of history, the expenditure of more than $US50 billion on research into global warming since 1990 has failed to demonstrate any human-caused climate trend, let alone a dangerous one,” Carter wrote on June 18, 2007.  (LINK)

The U.S. alone has spent $30 billion on federal programs directly or indirectly related to global warming in just the last six years, according to one estimate. (LINK) ($5.79 billion in 2006 alone).  Adding to this total is funding from the UN, foundations, universities, foreign governments, etc. Huge sums of money continue to flow toward addressing climate fears.

Even if you factor in former Vice President Al Gore’s unsubstantiated August 7, 2007 assertion that $10 million dollars a year from the fossil fuel industry flows into skeptical organizations, any funding comparison between skeptics and warming proponents utterly fails. Gore launched a $100 million a year multimedia global warming fear campaign. Gore alone will now be spending $90 million more per year than he alleges the entire fossil fuel industry spends, according to an August 26, 2007 article in Advertising Age. (LINK)

Meteorologist Dr. Roy W. Spencer, formerly a senior scientist for climate studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center and currently principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, “Of course, the vast majority of mainstream climate researchers receive between $100,000 to $200,000 from the federal government [to conduct research in] support of manmade global warming,” Spencer wrote in an August 15, 2007 blog post. (LINK)

James Spann, a meteorologist certified by the American Meteorological Society, suggests scientific objectively is being compromised by the massive money flow to proponents of man-made climate fears. “Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story,” Spann wrote on January 18, 2007. (LINK) “Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab,” Spann added.

The well-heeled environmental lobbying groups have massive operating budgets compared to groups that express global warming skepticism. The Sierra Club Foundation 2004 budget was $91 million and the Natural Resources Defense Council had a $57 million budget for the same year. Compare that to the often media derided Competitive Enterprise Institute’s small $3.6 million annual budget.

In addition, if a climate skeptic receives any money from industry, the media immediately labels them and attempts to discredit their work. The same media completely ignore the money flow from the environmental lobby to climate alarmists like James Hansen and Michael Oppenheimer. (ie. Hansen received $250,000 from the Heinz Foundation and $500,000 from the David Foundation and Oppenheimer is a paid partisan of Environmental Defense Fund)

The most repeated accusation is that organizations skeptical of man-made climate fears have received $19 Million from an oil corporation (ExxonMobil) over the past two decades. To put this $19 Million over two decades into perspective, consider: One 2007 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) grant of $20 million to study how “farm odors” contribute to global warming exceeded all of the money that skeptics reportedly received from an oil giant in the past two decades.  To repeat: One USDA grant to study the role of “farm odors” in global warming exceeded ALL the money skeptics have been accused of receiving from an oil giant over the past two decades. (Excerpt from article: “The United States Department of Agriculture has released reports stating that when you smell cow manure, you’re also smelling greenhouse gas emissions.”

http://images.google.co.nz/imgres?imgurl=http://ihatealgore.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Global-cooling-Al-Gore-300x266.jpg&imgrefurl=http://ihatealgore.com/%3Fp%3D1062&usg=__ye0vByPVovw8l0C6rGL5KNHeijo=&h=266&w=300&sz=28&hl=en&start=38&um=1&tbnid=hR4UTu5RlfHr8M:&tbnh=103&tbnw=116&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dglobal%2Bcooling%2Bcartoons%26ndsp%3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26start%3D20%26um%3D1
Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 8266



WWW
« Reply #156 on: January 05, 2010, 05:16:52 pm »

.


Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
bennyboo
Bloody-Good Member
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #157 on: January 05, 2010, 05:33:36 pm »

Yer - but the first hurdle was the 2007 bit - and then there's the small problem of the Author working with/for the Heartland Institute (which is funded by Exxon - as are most skeptics).

 Smiley


Hang on a sec - sure you're not confusing the Author"s" (there's more than one) workplace when its their findings from academic work presumably carried out at their various institutions?  The fact that Heartland finds the research convenient for their view is of no surprise (if it was contradictory then we'd assume they wouldnt be published by Heartland) but I dont think you can say these people are working with/for Heartland... and the same could be said of govt funded programs used to peddle IPCC/human induced global warming/climate change agendas... and we've seen the failed hockey sticks, we've seen evidence of data manipulation, we're seeing too many scientists speaking out against the assumptions and basis of human caused global warming/climate change for the debate to be over despite the attempts to hurry things along while trying to drown out opposing views.
Report Spam   Logged
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 8266



WWW
« Reply #158 on: January 05, 2010, 05:45:25 pm »

.

Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
bennyboo
Bloody-Good Member
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #159 on: January 07, 2010, 02:29:16 pm »

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.”

Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”


http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/simpson_bio.html
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/02/27/now-this-is-interesting-pielke-on-dr-joanne-simpson/
Report Spam   Logged
bennyboo
Bloody-Good Member
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #160 on: January 07, 2010, 02:44:08 pm »


Hmmm.  A new fly-on-the-wall TV series "When scientists go bad" perhaps???


....Michael Mann – creator of the incredible Hockey Stick curve and one of the scientists most heavily implicated in the Climategate scandal – is about to get a very nasty shock. When he turns up to work on Monday, he’ll find that all 27 of his colleagues at the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University have received a rather tempting email inviting them to blow the whistle on anyone they know who may have been fraudulently misusing federal grant funds for climate research.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100021135/climategate-michael-manns-very-unhappy-new-year/


More on Michael Mann:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=2&oq=michael+mann+hock&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4DKUK_enGB324GB324&q=michael+mann+hockey+stick+hoax
Report Spam   Logged
bennyboo
Bloody-Good Member
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #161 on: January 07, 2010, 11:08:43 pm »

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” –

Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.



"Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp … Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” 

Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.



“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.”

Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh


http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/36010144.html

The full report here:

More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims
Scientists Continue to Debunk “Consensus” in 2008 & 2009


http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=83947f5d-d84a-4a84-ad5d-6e2d71db52d9&CFID=29582132&CFTOKEN=14381516
Report Spam   Logged
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 8266



WWW
« Reply #162 on: January 08, 2010, 07:10:37 am »

Airport chaos as icy weather grips northern Europe

The icy weather gripping northern Europe has disrupted flights at airports in the UK, France, the Irish Republic and the Netherlands.
Many flights were delayed or cancelled at Orly airport in Paris, Dublin airport and Amsterdam-Schiphol, as well as major UK airports.
In Germany, at least nine homeless men aged from 42 to 62 froze to death.
A Eurostar train was stuck for about two hours in the Channel Tunnel on Thursday. It later reached the UK.
Four other Eurostar trains were cancelled, a company spokesman said.
Last month the Eurostar service was suspended for three days after several trains broke down in the tunnel. Powdery snow getting into the engines was identified as the cause.
Widespread delays
Many parts of Germany saw temperatures fall below -10C on Thursday, the Deutsche Welle news website reports.
Grit supplies for clearing snow are running very low in many parts of Germany.

Traffic jams around Schiphol airport made road gritting difficult
In the North Rhine-Westphalia region two derailments in as many days have caused havoc with the rail timetable, triggering cancellations and delays.
In the Irish Republic, Dublin airport is open but Knock airport has suspended flights.
All roads into Dublin are extremely icy and hundreds of Irish schools have closed, the Irish Times reports.
Heavy snow caused big traffic jams around Amsterdam and Haarlem on Wednesday evening, Radio Netherlands reports. Few buses were running in the affected areas.
Icy roads have disrupted road freight deliveries to France's Channel ports. Snow is blanketing a large swathe of France, reaching as far south as Bordeaux.
In Hemavan, in the far north of Sweden, a new winter low of -40.8C (-41.4F) was recorded overnight, Radio Sweden reports.
The Arctic freeze has also seen temperatures in central Sweden plummet to between -30 and -40C - the coldest weather since the mid-1980s.
The winter death toll in Poland has reached 122 - most of the victims reportedly homeless people.
In Burzyska nad Bugiem, in the east of the country, the army has installed makeshift bridges after flooding and ice split the village in two.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8445613.stm



The current big chill is a result of high pressure over the polar region, which has pushed cold air out of the Arctic towards much of northern Europe, parts of Asia and the US. Winds from the north and north east, rather than the south and south west, have brought freezing temperatures to the UK.


Provisional Met Office figures for December show temperatures for much of the UK were 1.5C and 2.5C below the mean temperatures for the last 30 years. Scotland saw temperatures dip still lower - from 2.5C to 3.5C. On Tuesday, temperatures in Scotland plunged to -15C in places.


Winds from the north also brought cold weather to parts of Asia, with Beijing receiving its heaviest snowfall for nearly 60 years. At the weekend, up to 30cm (12in) of snow fell in China's capital and its neighbouring port city of Tianjin. Dozens of people have also died in a cold snap in northern India.


However, while parts of the world suffer freezing temperatures, the seesaw patterns mean other areas are warmer than usual, including Alaska, northern Canada and the Mediterranean. Met Office figures for the end of 2009 show some places dropped 10C below the average, while others were 10C above.

Global Brrrrrrrrrr wwww Warming Is blown Away By The Cold Wind  Grin
Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 8266



WWW
« Reply #163 on: January 08, 2010, 07:45:43 am »

Global Cooling? Saudi Arabia covered with snow in coldest winter for 20 years

RIA Novosti
Friday January 11, 2008

Northern parts of Saudi Arabia are covered with snow with schools, mosques and administrative bodies paralyzed, local media reported Friday.

The oil-rich kingdom is being hit with subzero temperatures and snow storms with freezing winds of up to 50 km/h (30mp/h). Some regions have been experiencing problems with water supplies as pipes have frozen, and livestock has died from the cold.

The Saudi Gazette reported late in December that the winter was expected to last 89 days, with temperatures reaching below zero. National media said the winter is the coldest in the country for 20 years.
Morning and afternoon prayers are being combined in many mosques because of the morning cold and some schools will reopen later than scheduled.

The bad weather is fun for children and teenagers, however, who have been making snowballs and building snowmen with enthusiasm.

http://infowars.net/articles/january2008/110108Cooling.htm
Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
bennyboo
Bloody-Good Member
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #164 on: January 11, 2010, 10:53:05 pm »


Some pretty pictures of Europe and US under the snow.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/image.cfm?c_id=2&gal_objectid=10619048&gallery_id=108765

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/image.cfm?c_id=2&gal_objectid=10619048&gallery_id=108765
Report Spam   Logged
Sir Blodsnogger
Guest
« Reply #165 on: January 12, 2010, 02:03:17 am »

The net effect of the recent snow storms in Europe will be more global warming because the sun will melt the snow and it will get warmer.
Report Spam   Logged
Yak
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 6541



« Reply #166 on: January 12, 2010, 05:59:28 am »

The bitter winter afflicting much of the Northern Hemisphere is only the start of a global trend towards cooler weather that is likely to last for 20 or 30 years, say some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists.
Their predictions – based on an analysis of natural cycles in water temperatures in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans – challenge some of the global warming orthodoxy’s most deeply cherished beliefs, such as the claim that the North Pole will be free of ice in
summer by 2013.

According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007 – and even the most committed global warming activists do not dispute this. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html
« Last Edit: January 12, 2010, 07:14:49 am by Yak » Report Spam   Logged

nitpicker1
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 11886


Nothing sexceeds like sexcess


« Reply #167 on: January 12, 2010, 07:06:40 am »




awww sheesh I think I have had the equivalent of a religious conversion
 
 --- I've  advanced to two layers of thermals, plus one acrylic and one woollen over the last week --- was thinking it might be the draught from them iceburgers that are on their way to Aussie

now we gotta phart more and cut down all the trees we planted

The bitter winter afflicting much of the Northern Hemisphere is only the start of a global trend towards cooler weather that is likely to last for 20 or 30 years, say some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists.
Their predictions – based on an analysis of natural cycles in water temperatures in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans – challenge some of the global warming orthodoxy’s most deeply cherished beliefs, such as the claim that the North Pole will be free of ice in
summer by 2013.

According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007 – and even the most committed global warming activists do not dispute this. 

more



the link ain't working  

Report Spam   Logged

"Life might not be the party you were expecting, but you're here now, so you may as well get up and dance"
Yak
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 6541



« Reply #168 on: January 12, 2010, 07:21:29 am »




awww sheesh I think I have had the equivalent of a religious conversion
 
 --- I've  advanced to two layers of thermals, plus one acrylic and one woollen over the last week --- was thinking it might be the draught from them iceburgers that are on their way to Aussie

now we gotta phart more and cut down all the trees we planted




the link ain't working  



"Oh Bother!" said Pooh as he chambered another round..........

Should be OK now - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html
Report Spam   Logged

nitpicker1
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 11886


Nothing sexceeds like sexcess


« Reply #169 on: January 12, 2010, 08:03:56 am »


"Oh Bother!" said Pooh as he chambered another round..........

Should be OK now - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html

tnx, that one didn't misfire. I think this fits here now  http://xtranewscommunity2.smfforfree.com/index.php/topic,211.0/msg,65994.html 

Report Spam   Logged

"Life might not be the party you were expecting, but you're here now, so you may as well get up and dance"
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 8266



WWW
« Reply #170 on: January 12, 2010, 12:27:22 pm »

.
Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Magoo
Guest
« Reply #171 on: January 22, 2010, 05:59:23 am »

http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/3251967/Apology-for-errors-in-key-climate-change-report
Apology for errors in key climate change report
AP
Last updated 00:00 22/01/2010
Share
Print
Text Size
Relevant offers

Five glaring errors were discovered in one paragraph of the world's most authoritative report on global warming, forcing the Nobel Prize-winning panel of climate scientists who wrote it to apologise and promise to be more careful.

The errors are in a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a UN-affiliated body. All the mistakes appear in a subsection that suggests glaciers in the Himalayas could melt away by the year 2035 - hundreds of years earlier than the data actually indicates. The year 2350 apparently was transposed as 2035.

The climate panel and even the scientist who publicised the errors said they are not significant in comparison to the entire report, nor were they intentional. And they do not negate the fact that worldwide, glaciers are melting faster than ever.

But the mistakes open the door for more attacks from climate change skeptics.

"The credibility of the IPCC depends on the thoroughness with which its procedures are adhered to," Yvo de Boer, head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, told The Associated Press in an e-mail. "The procedures have been violated in this case. That must not be allowed to happen again because the credibility of climate change policy can only be based on credible science."

The incident follows a furor late last year over the release of stolen e-mails in which climate scientists talked about suppressing data and freezing out skeptics of global warming. And on top of that, an intense cold spell has some people questioning whether global warming exists.

In a statement, the climate change panel expressed regret over what it called "poorly substantiated estimates" about the Himalayan glaciers.

"The IPCC has established a reputation as a real gold standard in assessment; this is an unfortunate black mark," said Chris Field, a Stanford University professor who in 2008 took over as head of this part of the IPCC research. "None of the experts picked up on the fact that these were poorly substantiated numbers. From my perspective, that's an area where we have an opportunity to do much better."

Patrick Michaels, a global warming skeptic and scholar at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, called on the head of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, to resign, adding: "I'd like to know how such an absurd statement made it through the review process. It is obviously wrong."

However, a number of scientists, including some critics of the IPCC, said the mistakes do not invalidate the main conclusion that global warming is without a doubt man-made and a threat.

The mistakes were found not by skeptics like Michaels, but by a few of the scientists themselves, including one who is an IPCC co-author.

The report in question is the second of four issued by the IPCC in 2007 on global warming. This 838-page document had chapters on each continent. The errors were in a half-page section of the Asia chapter. The section got it wrong as to how fast the thousands of glaciers in the Himalayas are melting, scientists said.

"It is a very shoddily written section," said Graham Cogley, a professor of geography and glaciers at Trent University in Peterborough, Canada, who brought the error to everyone's attention. "It wasn't copy-edited properly."

Cogley, who wrote a letter about the problems to Science magazine that was published online Wednesday, cited these mistakes:

- The paragraph starts, "Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world." Cogley and Michael Zemp of the World Glacier Monitoring System said Himalayan glaciers are melting at about the same rate as other glaciers.

- It says that if the Earth continues to warm, the "likelihood of them disappearing by the 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high." Nowhere in peer-reviewed science literature is 2035 mentioned. However, there is a study from Russia that says glaciers could come close to disappearing by 2350. Probably the numbers in the date were transposed, Cogley said.

- The paragraph says: "Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometres by the year 2035." Cogley said there are only 33,000 square kilometres of glaciers in the Himalayas.

- The entire paragraph is attributed to the World Wildlife Fund, when only one sentence came from the WWF, Cogley said. And further, the IPCC likes to brag that it is based on peer-reviewed science, not advocacy group reports. Cogley said the WWF cited the popular science press as its source.

- A table says that between 1845 and 1965, the Pindari Glacier shrank by 2840 metres. Then comes a mathematics mistake: It says that's a rate of 135.2 metres a year, when it really is only 23.5 metres a year.

Still, Cogley said: "I'm convinced that the great bulk of the work reported in the IPCC volumes was trustworthy and is trustworthy now as it was before the detection of this mistake." He credited Texas state climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon with telling him about the errors.

However, Colorado University environmental science and policy professor Roger Pielke Jr said the errors point to a "systematic breakdown in IPCC procedures," and that means there could be more mistakes.

A number of scientists pointed out that at the end of the day, no one is disputing the Himalayan glaciers are shrinking.

"What is happening now is comparable with the Titanic sinking more slowly than expected," de Boer said in his e-mail. "But that does not alter the inevitable consequences, unless rigorous action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is taken."
Report Spam   Logged
Yak
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 6541



« Reply #172 on: January 22, 2010, 06:33:00 am »

Quote
The IPCC has established a reputation as a real gold standard in assessment;


Report Spam   Logged

Magoo
Guest
« Reply #173 on: January 22, 2010, 06:41:23 am »

Quote
But the mistakes open the door for more attacks from climate change skeptics
Oh!!! did they think the door was shut at some time?
Report Spam   Logged
sickofpollies
Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 1234



« Reply #174 on: January 22, 2010, 10:24:00 am »

Oh!!! did they think the door was shut at some time?

Apparently the 'science' was settled...
Report Spam   Logged

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 55   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Open XNC2 Smileys
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum


Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy
Page created in 0.078 seconds with 14 queries.