| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 11/22 |
| 2008/5/14-16 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:49943 Activity:nil |
5/14 "Planning a Trip? 20 Cities Global Warming Might Melt Off Map"
link:www.yahoo.com/s/880567
\_ Enough with Global Warning. It doesn't exist. Now the claim is
it's going to "take a break" for 10-15 years. But watch out! Then
it's going to go NUTS!
\_ What are you talking about crazy man?
\_ http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/05/decade_break_in_global_warming.html
\_ http://preview.tinyurl.com/6depom [nature]
\_ Here's from this very article that you're citing:
"Has global warming stopped? Is this a nail in Al Gore's
coffin? Well, no."
\_ Surface temperatures != total heat energy and North America
!= the world.
\_ Global Warming == Cthulhu? |
| 11/22 |
|
| blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/05/decade_break_in_global_warming.html paper in this week's Nature predicts that, rather than warming, North Atlantic sea surface temperatures may actually decrease slightly in the next decade. What's more, the paper suggests global surface temperatures may not actually increase either. Global warming could stop NATURALLY for ten years, say scientists' that is not what this paper is about. What this new paper by Noel Keenlyside, of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences in Germany, sets out to do is incorporate data on short term variations in climate into our models of climate change. By doing this they push us into the arena of creating shorter term predictions, in this case of the next decade. News and Views" commentary on the piece in the same issue of Nature Richard Wood explains: Keenlyside and colleagues' model uses a very simple ocean initialization method in which they add heat to or remove it from the ocean surface until sea surface temperatures across the globe are close to observed values. They use their model to produce a set of retrospective forecasts' starting from earlier states, which they test against what actually happened. Their system produces refined temperature predictions a decade ahead for large parts of Europe and North America. predicts North Atlantic, European and North American sea surface temperatures will cool slightly; tropical Pacific temperatures will likely be almost unchanged and global temperatures will probably be offset by this variation. This does not mean we don't need to worry about global warming. his blog: Whether their prediction of a plateau for warming for a decade in North America and Europe is correct or not, their research may signal a shift that many climate researchers have been calling for for awhile now -- toward service-oriented climate science ... main piece with a useful quote from Kevin Trenberth, of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research: "Too many think global warming means monotonic relentless warming everywhere year after year. on his Prometheus blog: I am sure that this is an excellent paper by world class scientists. But when I look at the broader significance of the paper what I see is that there is in fact nothing that can be observed in the climate system that would be inconsistent with climate model predictions. If global cooling over the next few decades is consistent with model predictions, then so too is pretty much anything and everything under the sun. TrackBacks Comments On 1/27/06 Algore said we only had ten years to save the planet from a scorching. According to the doomsday clock that started ticking on that day we only have 7 yrs 8 mo. You now someone who believes this crap could start to get confused. May 2, 2008 04:01 AM This is the alarmist's attempt to maintain their global warming fantasy in the face of a cooling world. It actually is possible for an oscillation of cold ocean surface water to mask global warming (where an active sun is raising the average temperature of the oceans), and it even happened a mere 60 years ago (between 1940 and 1960), but this is NOT what is happening now. Instead, we have a very dangerous situation where the cooling effect of a fall off in solar activity is being compounded by cold Pacific and Atlantic oscillations. Warming effects incur negative feedbacks that make them self limiting. Not so with cooling effects, which regularly plunge the world into 100,000 year long ice ages, with the next one due any century now. We should be guarding against this very real danger by pumping out as much greenhouse gas as we can, tailored to patch the infrared "holes" in our greenhouse blanket. May 2, 2008 05:36 AM There is an old German saying: "No matter how far you have gone down the wrong road, don't be afraid to turn back." It is time for the AGW crowd to admit they were wrong--very wrong--about "Global Warming". It is time to stop this destruction of the credibility of science for the sake of egos and grants. May 3, 2008 06:22 AM I thought Al Gore and friends said that the science of Global Warming was certain, which included their predictions? Isn't it amusing that every time there prediction turn out to be wrong, they have a whole new theory to account for it! We had global cooling, global warming, global dimming and now this! Lets screw over countries economies now, before it is too late, the world is ending, people are fleeing the rising ocean waters! I am sorry, but this stinks of government funded scientist supporting a political agenda of radical liberal global wealth redistribution and big global government! Although the paper does not provide any evidence that anthropogenic climate change has ceased to be a problem, the statement 'Global warming could stop naturally for ten years' is an accurate summary of the paper's thesis. Pielke's point that just about any short-term variation can be made to be in agreement with climate change predictions is a good one. May 7, 2008 09:11 AM Every day we hear the shocking news of melting of ice, vanishing glaciers and increase in the water level in the oceans. But do we make efforts to do save the environment from future turmoil and devastation. I appreciate your efforts for focusing the world's attention by covering such issues. May 7, 2008 12:45 PM Post a comment Comments will be reviewed by the blog editors before being published, mainly to ensure that spam and irrelevant material (such as product advertisements) are not published . Excessively long or offensively phrased entries will be edited. E-mail addresses are required in case we need to discuss your comment with you directly. We won't publish your e-mail address unless you request it. |
| preview.tinyurl.com/6depom -> blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/05/decade_break_in_global_warming.html paper in this week's Nature predicts that, rather than warming, North Atlantic sea surface temperatures may actually decrease slightly in the next decade. What's more, the paper suggests global surface temperatures may not actually increase either. Global warming could stop NATURALLY for ten years, say scientists' that is not what this paper is about. What this new paper by Noel Keenlyside, of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences in Germany, sets out to do is incorporate data on short term variations in climate into our models of climate change. By doing this they push us into the arena of creating shorter term predictions, in this case of the next decade. News and Views" commentary on the piece in the same issue of Nature Richard Wood explains: Keenlyside and colleagues' model uses a very simple ocean initialization method in which they add heat to or remove it from the ocean surface until sea surface temperatures across the globe are close to observed values. They use their model to produce a set of retrospective forecasts' starting from earlier states, which they test against what actually happened. Their system produces refined temperature predictions a decade ahead for large parts of Europe and North America. predicts North Atlantic, European and North American sea surface temperatures will cool slightly; tropical Pacific temperatures will likely be almost unchanged and global temperatures will probably be offset by this variation. This does not mean we don't need to worry about global warming. his blog: Whether their prediction of a plateau for warming for a decade in North America and Europe is correct or not, their research may signal a shift that many climate researchers have been calling for for awhile now -- toward service-oriented climate science ... main piece with a useful quote from Kevin Trenberth, of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research: "Too many think global warming means monotonic relentless warming everywhere year after year. on his Prometheus blog: I am sure that this is an excellent paper by world class scientists. But when I look at the broader significance of the paper what I see is that there is in fact nothing that can be observed in the climate system that would be inconsistent with climate model predictions. If global cooling over the next few decades is consistent with model predictions, then so too is pretty much anything and everything under the sun. TrackBacks Comments On 1/27/06 Algore said we only had ten years to save the planet from a scorching. According to the doomsday clock that started ticking on that day we only have 7 yrs 8 mo. You now someone who believes this crap could start to get confused. May 2, 2008 04:01 AM This is the alarmist's attempt to maintain their global warming fantasy in the face of a cooling world. It actually is possible for an oscillation of cold ocean surface water to mask global warming (where an active sun is raising the average temperature of the oceans), and it even happened a mere 60 years ago (between 1940 and 1960), but this is NOT what is happening now. Instead, we have a very dangerous situation where the cooling effect of a fall off in solar activity is being compounded by cold Pacific and Atlantic oscillations. Warming effects incur negative feedbacks that make them self limiting. Not so with cooling effects, which regularly plunge the world into 100,000 year long ice ages, with the next one due any century now. We should be guarding against this very real danger by pumping out as much greenhouse gas as we can, tailored to patch the infrared "holes" in our greenhouse blanket. May 2, 2008 05:36 AM There is an old German saying: "No matter how far you have gone down the wrong road, don't be afraid to turn back." It is time for the AGW crowd to admit they were wrong--very wrong--about "Global Warming". It is time to stop this destruction of the credibility of science for the sake of egos and grants. May 3, 2008 06:22 AM I thought Al Gore and friends said that the science of Global Warming was certain, which included their predictions? Isn't it amusing that every time there prediction turn out to be wrong, they have a whole new theory to account for it! We had global cooling, global warming, global dimming and now this! Lets screw over countries economies now, before it is too late, the world is ending, people are fleeing the rising ocean waters! I am sorry, but this stinks of government funded scientist supporting a political agenda of radical liberal global wealth redistribution and big global government! Although the paper does not provide any evidence that anthropogenic climate change has ceased to be a problem, the statement 'Global warming could stop naturally for ten years' is an accurate summary of the paper's thesis. Pielke's point that just about any short-term variation can be made to be in agreement with climate change predictions is a good one. May 7, 2008 09:11 AM Every day we hear the shocking news of melting of ice, vanishing glaciers and increase in the water level in the oceans. But do we make efforts to do save the environment from future turmoil and devastation. I appreciate your efforts for focusing the world's attention by covering such issues. May 7, 2008 12:45 PM Post a comment Comments will be reviewed by the blog editors before being published, mainly to ensure that spam and irrelevant material (such as product advertisements) are not published . Excessively long or offensively phrased entries will be edited. E-mail addresses are required in case we need to discuss your comment with you directly. We won't publish your e-mail address unless you request it. |