Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

BBC: Globe Not Warming, Maybe Cooling


AROCES

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mattshark

    11

  • questionmark

    10

  • Caesar

    9

  • acidhead

    8

Top Posters In This Topic

It's obvious that environmentalists' efforts to forestall global warming has worked. Now we don't have to worry about silly "greenhouse gases" and supposedly harmful "CFCs". Look, even this BBC article points out that it will be cooler in 2008.

The only important part of it is the first (bold) paragraph. Just ignore the rest. Also, ignore the fact that it's 2009.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7329799.stm (EDIT: missed the link)

Edited by aBlackCatNamedFred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's obvious that environmentalists' efforts to forestall global warming has worked. Now we don't have to worry about silly "greenhouse gases" and supposedly harmful "CFCs". Look, even this BBC article points out that it will be cooler in 2008.

The only important part of it is the first (bold) paragraph. Just ignore the rest. Also, ignore the fact that it's 2009.

you mean like

The UK Met Office's Hadley Centre, responsible for future climate predictions, says it incorporates solar variation and ocean cycles into its climate models, and that they are nothing new.

In fact, the centre says they are just two of the whole host of known factors that influence global temperatures - all of which are accounted for by its models.

In addition, say Met Office scientists, temperatures have never increased in a straight line, and there will always be periods of slower warming, or even temporary cooling.

What is crucial, they say, is the long-term trend in global temperatures. And that, according to the Met office data, is clearly up.

To confuse the issue even further, last month Mojib Latif, a member of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) says that we may indeed be in a period of cooling worldwide temperatures that could last another 10-20 years.

Read more...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, Alarmism. First it's global warming, then global cooling, then global warming again, and now climate change. And the only solution is always -- you guessed it! -- taxes.

Wrong, you are confusing media with science. Only one of them has been shown by science and that is warming. Sorry but you do not know what you are talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what benefits do we have if this is passed? higher costs and the loss of jobs?

I've already received notification from my electricity provider stating that if cap & trade passes, our monthly rates would definitely increase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my humble opinion, global warming is a statistical mess-up, where everybody is using all kinds of data input and wishful programming to conjure a runaway warming scenario. I'm against people polluting the atmosphere or depleting forests for greedy purposes, but based on my background on atmospheric science, I don't buy this while it's being served on a plate for me.

are you talking about this, or did you not know what the Vostok correlation is?

historical02.gif

here a zoom of the last 2000 years:

little-ice-age-temps.jpg

Edited by questionmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here in Victoria, BC Canada.... summer was short... one warm period ....

Today woke up to the first -1 degree celsius morning..(first frost)

You all do understand what 1) Global and 2) Climate mean don't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already received notification from my electricity provider stating that if cap & trade passes, our monthly rates would definitely increase.

Your going to pay more because the north east uses coal and thats were your going to see prices really go up I know thats whats going to happen in MA, here in NC we use nuclear so it won't be that bad. your going to pay more plus I think its going to be a cold winter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, if only the independent analysts listened to politicians more instead of describing the economic effects things would actually have.

A bill exists. A team of policy analysts has quantified the likely economic effects of that bill. They don't match your doom-and-gloom outlook (and that's without the analysis taking into account any possible benefit of the legislation).

Waxman-Markey was introduced on May 15 (an earlier discussion draft had been available since the end of March). The floor vote was on June 26. Anyone who didn't read it didn't want to. It's that simple.

You're wrong. Nothing that's been proposed "destroys the economy." The fact that you think the opposite isn't particularly relevant in the world of facts.

Evidence from the past proves that whenever man tries to control something through governmental means it not only costs more money

but becomes overly politicalized and actually creates more problems.

DDT is one prime example... Yellowstone National Park is another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are you talking about this, or did you not know what the Vostok correlation is?historical02.gifhere a zoom of the last 200 years:little-ice-age-temps.jpg

graphs again, Do not want to see more graphs, they are getting boring :sleepy: , Show us the proof global warming is down to man. show it, debate over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You all do understand what 1) Global and 2) Climate mean don't you?

No... we're all dumb Matt... we don't know how to think rationally at all.

Edited by acidhead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The planet has a fever?

Open wide, stick your tongue out and say ahhhh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No... we're all dumb Matt... we don't know how to think rationally at all.

:D

this whole debate could be settled very easily in the Law courts.

Erm, this is an issue of science, not the law. These get settled in journal articles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D

Erm, this is an issue of science, not the law. These get settled in journal articles.

This is where people like me act even more dumb.... I begin to use logic over ideology.

Censuses do not reveal truth. Facts are facts. Facts can be proven in a court of law.

The whole AGW debate should be debated in a court of law.... not through politicians who side with one particular side of the debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is where people like me act even more dumb.... I begin to use logic over ideology.

Censuses do not reveal truth. Facts are facts. Facts can be proven in a court of law.

The whole AGW debate should be debated in a court of law.... not through politicians who side with one particular side of the debate.

Erm no, scientific standards for evidence are greater than those in law and I'm sorry but judges are in no position to make any decision on this, this is science and it should stay in a scientific theatre, where evidence, not consensus rules. This is nothing to do with politicians either. Science! This is well founded and I have posted plenty of papers on the subject.

Edited by Mattshark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm no, scientific standards for evidence are greater than those in law and I'm sorry but judges are in no position to make any decision on this, this is science and it should stay in a scientific theatre, where evidence, not consensus rules. This is nothing to do with politicians either. Science! This is well founded and I have posted plenty of papers on the subject.

This has nothing to do with politicians...?

For starters...

Who shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007...? even after his film was found to contain many mistakes and reeked of fear mongering?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

graphs again, Do not want to see more graphs, they are getting boring :sleepy: , Show us the proof global warming is down to man. show it, debate over.

Quick question: why do you refuse to accept global warming? Refusing to accept responsibility for it until you have absolute, undeniable proof slapped in front of your face?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has nothing to do with politicians...?

For starters...

Who shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007...? even after his film was found to contain many mistakes and reeked of fear mongering?

Its the seriousness of the charge that matters, even if its bassed on lies and biased interpitations of science and whats really going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm no, scientific standards for evidence are greater than those in law and I'm sorry but judges are in no position to make any decision on this, this is science and it should stay in a scientific theatre, where evidence, not consensus rules. This is nothing to do with politicians either. Science! This is well founded and I have posted plenty of papers on the subject.

by those same 'scientific standards' are you not required to have all the necessary information before coming to an educated conclusion?

we don't have the knowledge or the data to do so. that's only going by your usual scientific standards though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Global warming is a multi million $ industry fortune's and careers have been forged on it's back, it's the fastest growing sector, no matter what evidence is found it will continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Global warming is a multi million $ industry fortune's and careers have been forged on it's back, it's the fastest growing sector, no matter what evidence is found it will continue.

I think you're right.

Edited by Michelle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really, we just had the coolest summer I can remember. We hit 90 like 3 times the whole damn summer. We are well below temp average and have been for awhile.

Indeed, the US has been cooling.

climate+2.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm no, scientific standards for evidence are greater than those in law and I'm sorry but judges are in no position to make any decision on this, this is science and it should stay in a scientific theatre, where evidence, not consensus rules. This is nothing to do with politicians either. Science! This is well founded and I have posted plenty of papers on the subject.

Where is the freedom...? where is the referendom or debate..?

freedom to choose...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong, you are confusing media with science. Only one of them has been shown by science and that is warming. Sorry but you do not know what you are talking about.

Wrong, back in the 1970s, TIME magazine among many news sources ran an article about the coming Ice Age. We had a ton of atmospheric scientists supporting the claim too as the United States came to grips with some of the lowest mean temperatures ever recorded, shortest summer lengths and prolonged winter periods with blistering colds and record low temperatures. I personally back this one up myself as I had to reconstruct the climate data for a number of cities during that period and in short, it was ridiculously low and filled with blue colors.

So we had science too to back global cooling back then, but...well, like I've said, how much can we count on to dish forward a global cooling reality? If we're looking at about 20-30 year period from 1960-1990, which is roughly the same way we're viewing global warming right now, then we do have global cooling. However, once we expand our scopes to a more larger, fairer frame (which is why we have climatology), then we'll see an oscillation instead. We must understand that global cooling and global warming are both real (we've seen, known, recorded them down), but are we responsible for that? If so, how? And that "how" alone has many, many ways of explaining it...we just have to be careful about which ones are right or wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.