Global Warming or Global Cooling? You make the Call

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Wesley, Feb 26, 2008.


Is it global warming in yet another poll question?.

Poll closed Mar 4, 2008.
  1. Yes, it is global warmig and we need to become more procative.

    14 vote(s)
  2. It is normal as usual and it will not affect me in my lifetime.

    27 vote(s)
  3. I do not care about carbon dioxide or amount of sunspot activity.

    5 vote(s)
  4. It is entering global cooling like the 1400s in a min ice ge cycle

    4 vote(s)
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Wesley

    Wesley Well-Known Member

    Apr 12, 2006
    Envr Engr/Program Manager
    +544 / 0 / -0
    #1 Wesley, Feb 26, 2008
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2008
    Forget global warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age

    Forget global warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age

    Lorne Gunter, National Post

    Published: Monday, February 25, 2008

    Carbon report says tax could save Canadians money

    Climate change could be the next subprime meltdown

    Most of country coping with winter storms

    Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.

    The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January "was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average."
    China is surviving its most brutal winter in a century. Temperatures in the normally balmy south were so low for so long that some middle-sized cities went days and even weeks without electricity because once power lines had toppled it was too cold or too icy to repair them.
    There have been so many snow and ice storms in Ontario and Quebec in the past two months that the real estate market has felt the pinch as home buyers have stayed home rather than venturing out looking for new houses.
    In just the first two weeks of February, Toronto received 70 cm of snow, smashing the record of 66.6 cm for the entire month set back in the pre-SUV, pre-Kyoto, pre-carbon footprint days of 1950.
    And remember the Arctic Sea ice? The ice we were told so hysterically last fall had melted to its "lowest levels on record? Never mind that those records only date back as far as 1972 and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past.
    The ice is back.
    Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year.
    OK, so one winter does not a climate make. It would be premature to claim an Ice Age is looming just because we have had one of our most brutal winters in decades.
    But if environmentalists and environment reporters can run around shrieking about the manmade destruction of the natural order every time a robin shows up on Georgian Bay two weeks early, then it is at least fair game to use this winter's weather stories to wonder whether the alarmist are being a tad premature.
    And it's not just anecdotal evidence that is piling up against the climate-change dogma.
    According to Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona -- two prominent climate modellers -- the computer models that show polar ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (a la the movie The Day After Tomorrow) are all wrong.
    "We missed what was right in front of our eyes," says Prof. Russell. It's not ice melt but rather wind circulation that drives ocean currents northward from the tropics. Climate models until now have not properly accounted for the wind's effects on ocean circulation, so researchers have compensated by over-emphasizing the role of manmade warming on polar ice melt.
    But when Profs. Toggweiler and Russell rejigged their model to include the 40-year cycle of winds away from the equator (then back towards it again), the role of ocean currents bringing warm southern waters to the north was obvious in the current Arctic warming.
    Last month, Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, shrugged off manmade climate change as "a drop in the bucket." Showing that solar activity has entered an inactive phase, Prof. Sorokhtin advised people to "stock up on fur coats."
    He is not alone. Kenneth Tapping of our own National Research Council, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon.
    The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased.
    It's way too early to claim the same is about to happen again, but then it's way too early for the hysteria of the global warmers, too.

  2. bos

    bos Legend
    Staff Member

    Apr 10, 2006
    Network and Server Admini
    +2,215 / 30 / -0
    Sweet a poll. Im voting. Baa, baa, baaaaaa
  3. mike4cy

    mike4cy Well-Known Member

    Aug 4, 2006
    +58 / 0 / -0
    #3 mike4cy, Feb 26, 2008
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2008
    Oh great, 5 centuries of winter! How many times would the groundhog have to see his shadow to give us 5 more CENTURIES of winter? I am pretty sure the guy up in weather control took the winter off and just forwarded all of the winter storms to Iowa this year!
  4. Cyclonepride

    Cyclonepride Thought Police
    Staff Member

    Apr 11, 2006
    Sales manager
    A pineapple under the sea
    +14,884 / 672 / -0
    I would have voted, but there is not an answer that says: "Scientists have no freaking idea what is coming next, and whatever is coming next, is probably a natural cycle. So **** off." That would have been my answer:yes:
  5. SplitIdentity

    SplitIdentity Well-Known Member

    Mar 31, 2007
    Student, future teacher
    +1,161 / 99 / -0
    There should be an option that says "I believe whatever the media tells me to believe"
  6. ISUonthemove

    ISUonthemove Well-Known Member

    Jan 31, 2007
    Sports Photographer
    +98 / 0 / -0
    I'll believe anything Al Gore tells me. Without him, we wouldn't even have the internet to use CycloneFanatic.
  7. 1100011CS

    1100011CS Well-Known Member

    Oct 5, 2007
    +979 / 31 / -0
    I don't know what to think about global warming but I do know that we can't continue to rely on fossil fuels for energy. Especially oil from the d*mn muslims.
  8. Angie

    Angie Tugboats and arson.
    Staff Member

    Mar 27, 2006
    +3,694 / 59 / -0
    I think this is a very smart post - who cares if there is global warming or cooling? The point to me is that we should be taking care of the environment anyway. How hard is it to NOT litter? Or to try and make the air clean by improving our industries?

    I would like to vote "sick of threads about this".
  9. SplitIdentity

    SplitIdentity Well-Known Member

    Mar 31, 2007
    Student, future teacher
    +1,161 / 99 / -0
    Now, I agree with this.

    IMO, I don't care if people want to clean up the environment, and be more environmentally friendly or whatever.

    The problem I have is "Oh, well we're obviously the cause of global warming, and if we don't do something within the next few years, WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!!!"

    Public hysteria annoys me - especially when there isn't a good reason for it.
  10. Phaedrus

    Phaedrus Well-Known Member

    Jan 13, 2008
    Military Contracting
    +304 / 0 / -0
    Global warming/cooling theory is not only theory about a large and unpredictable field (the global environment) but it is also about trend analysis, which is ALSO a large and unpredictable field, both of which are unproven, unreliable, and noone has a really good track record of dealing with them, if each one were taken separately.

    Put together, anyone who claims to be able to predict the global environmental future, based on one variable, is on crack, is an idiot, or is selling snake oil or all three.

    Having said that, cleaning up our local environments is important, but a certain amount of economic wealth is necessary for a clean environment, and to get that wealth, nation-states need to pollute in the short term and consume natural resources.

Share This Page