Arctic Warming Causing Cold Weather

[MadMadWorld]

There are way to many environmental nerds on this board!

 

[fbrissette]

There are way to many environmental nerds on this board!

I don't like being called a nerd. I'm challenging you to a ski-off !

 

[Not Sure]

Warming ....Colling? In the end who knows what will happen.....But Here's another thought.
If another larger metor hits the earth in an area that harbors large amounts of hydrocarbons the secondary explosion could cause mass extiction.Use it in a contolled manner over time and as clean and efficent as possible possibly, the use of hydrocarbons could save the human race.
So I'm coming down on the side of fossil fuels vs Climate change , in the end the Earth will adapt as it has for millions of years.
And if you think this theory is crazy wip out your I phone an Google "Manicougan resivoir" not to far north of Maine....a 47 mile wide hole!

 

[jack97]

during the AGU 2013 meeting held in San Fran, a panel of solar physicist observed that the sun is going into a phase of lowest activity. All agreed that this is something they have never seen in their lifetime. In the coming years, the system (meaning climate) will have a new stimulus, something no living scientist has observed. This may prove or disprove the sun is one of the dominating factors in our climate.

For the scientist and activist who are concern and want to stop the melting glaciers... beware they might get their wishes and more.

 

[fbrissette]

Though fbrissette is still wrong about "Global Cooling" not being a mainstream scientific climate theory in the 1960s/1970s.

Since I feel generous with my time, why don't you start educating yourself with this. This was peer reviewed in a very good journal and cited more than 50 times over the past 5 years.

Peterson, Thomas C., William M. Connolley, and John Fleck. "The myth of the 1970s global cooling scientific consensus." Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 89.9 (2008): 1325-1337.

There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then

This figure shows results from a thorough review of literature of the time. Global cooling was NEVER a consensus.

 

[jack97]

Since I feel generous with my time, why don't you start educating yourself with this. This was peer reviewed in a very good journal and cited more than 50 times over the past 5 years.

Peterson, Thomas C., William M. Connolley, and John Fleck. "The myth of the 1970s global cooling scientific consensus." Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 89.9 (2008): 1325-1337.



This figure shows results from a thorough review of literature of the time. Global cooling was NEVER a consensus.
View attachment 11311

haha... the famous or infamous peer review process of the IPCC. Yet another political process.

 

[jack97]

btw... talk about media hype. Here's a blast from the past.


WFT? The late Stephen Scheinder of IPCC fame involved in show about the coming ice age.

 

[fbrissette]

haha... the famous or infamous peer review process of the IPCC. Yet another political process.

Why don't you go read the 1960 to 1979 literature and figure out on your own ? There was no IPCC at the time. But no, you won't do it. It's so much easier to pass on second hand information without any critical judgment.

 

[Not Sure]

 

[deadheadskier]

Who cares what was said in the 70? That's when you know a polarizing subject has gone epic.......40 year old history of the subject is argued with no one giving an inch on their position. :lol:

 

[fbrissette]

btw... talk about media hype. Here's a blast from the past.


WFT? The late Stephen Scheinder of IPCC fame involved in show about the coming ice age.

What I get from this video is that you get your scientific information from youtube while dismissing the peer-review process which is the universally accepted way of diffusing results in all fields of science.

 

[BenedictGomez]

There was no IPCC at the time.

Life was tough back when there was nobody around to hide the conflicting data.

 

[fbrissette]

Life was tough back when there was nobody around to hide the conflicting data.

You really don't know anything about the scientific world and scientists in general if you think that it is indeed possible to operate a conspiracy involving thousands of large-ego scientists.

Since the IPCC was formed after 20 years of an ever growing body of evidence about global warming, can you tell us who was leading the conspiracy and hiding the conflicting data prior to the IPCC ?

 

[jack97]

What I get from this video is that you get your scientific information from youtube while dismissing the peer-review process which is the universally accepted way of diffusing results in all fields of science.

like a politician, resort to ridicule to for the mudslinging remarks.

As it turns out, universities have video taped lectures for their graduate courses, so I have grown to accept this new media. Even s/w vendors have started using ytube as means to show new features and have to navigate the new menus.

In terms of the peer review process.... if the peers are politically driven toward AGW then they will accept and agree to such thought. How else can you explain that AGW is still widely accepted among the alarmist when surface and troposphere temp have been at a pause for 17 years. BTW, I sure you know about the remote sensing satellite web site. Kinda of dry and it not as much fun as slinging mud....

http://www.remss.com/measurements/upper-air-temperature

 

[jack97]

You really don't know anything about the scientific world and scientists in general if you think that it is indeed possible to operate a conspiracy involving thousands of large-ego scientists.

Some of the scientist have been lead authors of past IPCC chapters and they do not believe in AGW. Again they have been cast out. Funny thing is that most of these scientist are tenure professor who don't need to make their bones and they have the professionalism to stand for there scientific belief.

 

[fbrissette]

How else can you explain that AGW is still widely accepted among the alarmist when surface and troposphere temp have been at a pause for 17 years.

Go read the scientific literature. You'll find why 98% of all climate scientists (the so called alarmists) still believe in AGW, despite the pause. You'll also find some good stuff in the IPCC working group I.

But of course you won't. I for the life of me cannot understand why you would totally bypass reading the science and instead choosing to solely rely on second-hand information from dubious websites in most cases.

The frickin data about the warming pause comes from the so-called alarmists. Wouldn't it be easier to doctor the data like they supposedly do all the time ?

 

[Not Sure]

The frickin data about the warming pause comes from the so-called alarmists. Wouldn't it be easier to doctor the data like they supposedly do all the time ?

You mean Doctor like this http://www.prisonplanet.com/ipcc-scientists-caught-producing-false-data-to-push-global-warming.html

 

[jack97]

Go read the scientific literature. You'll find why 98% of all climate scientists (the so called alarmists) still believe in AGW, despite the pause. You'll also find some good stuff in the IPCC working group I.

But of course you won't. I for the life of me cannot understand why you would totally bypass reading the science and instead choosing to solely rely on second-hand information from dubious websites in most cases.

The frickin data about the warming pause comes from the so-called alarmists. Wouldn't it be easier to doctor the data like they supposedly do all the time ?

Having one or a set of documents from a political organization such as the IPCC is not scientific proof.

 

[jack97]

You mean Doctor like this http://www.prisonplanet.com/ipcc-scientists-caught-producing-false-data-to-push-global-warming.html

or like this from a Berkeley prof who believes in AGW.... haha another ytube link

 

[BenedictGomez]

The frickin data about the warming pause comes from the so-called alarmists. Wouldn't it be easier to doctor the data like they supposedly do all the time ?

Impossible. Their failure is so complete that it became scientifically implausible to hide behind "soon", and "you'll see" much longer.

For YEARS they denied that the warming that was predicted wasnt occurring. They couldnt deny and hide any longer. It was a completely untenable position.

You really don't know anything about the scientific world and scientists in general if you think that it is indeed possible to operate a conspiracy involving thousands of large-ego scientists.

Who said anything about a conspiracy?

Some of the scientist have been lead authors of past IPCC chapters and they do not believe in AGW. Again they have been cast out. Funny thing is that most of these scientist are tenure professor who don't need to make their bones and they have the professionalism to stand for there scientific belief.

BIG TIME. Same with Al Gore in the early 1990's.

If you didnt believe in man-made Global Warming, your ass was tossed out of NOAA. He purged anyone with a dissenting belief........because.......you know....that's exactly how science works.