Global Cooling or Global Warming?

Discussion in 'The Natural World' started by nivek, Aug 17, 2017.

  1. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
    Journal 'Nature' retracts ocean-warming study

    The journal Nature retracted a study published last year that found oceans were warming at an alarming rate due to climate change.


    The prestigious scientific journal issued the formal notice this week for the paper published Oct. 31, 2018, by researchers at the University of California, San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

    They released a statement published on the journal's website that read in part:

    "Shortly after publication, arising from comments from Nicholas Lewis, we realized that our reported uncertainties were underestimated owing to our treatment of certain systematic errors as random errors.

    "Despite the revised uncertainties, our method remains valid and provides an estimate of ocean warming that is independent of the ocean data underpinning other approaches."

    Lewis, a mathematician and critic of the scientific consensus supporting the climate crisis, posted a critique of the paper shortly after its publication.

    Co-author and climate scientist Ralph Keeling at Scripps has taken the blame for the mistake.

    The report used a new approach to measure the ocean's temperature based on measuring the amount of oxygen and carbon dioxide rising off the oceans' plants. Much of the data on ocean temperatures currently relies on the Argo array, robotic devices that float at different depths.

    The retraction of the article came on the same day that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its latest report on the impacts warming on oceans and ice-covered regions.

    The findings were some of the most dire to date, warning that if emissions continue, sea level rise could reach 3 feet by the end of the century, a more than 10% increase from 2013 predictions. At the same time, the report found that in some cities and islands hundred-year floods will become yearly events.

    .
     
  2. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
    OMG, talk about being out of touch, this is the result of fear mongering, watch this:

     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  3. Kchoo

    Kchoo At Peace.

    Messages:
    2,482
    Okay... I would classify her as a weirdo, and just move on. I like how the lead speaker just moved past it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
    That weirdo is the result of the works of that lead speaker lol, compounded by the travesty of nonsense coming from the UN...

    ...
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  5. Kchoo

    Kchoo At Peace.

    Messages:
    2,482
    Our planet is going theough changes, and many of them are scary.

    The Earth is going to change but how much and how big of an impact it will have on our survival is uncertain to me.

    I am not sure any action we take will stop or even change what is happening.

    We could improve our habits though... it certainly wouldn't hurt, and if we can avoid this type of insanity everything will probably workout in the long run.
     
  6. spacecase0

    spacecase0 earth human

    Messages:
    1,177
    agricultural runoff will badly mess with the new method of data collecting they plan on using.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
    Have to agree...

    EGuiUBQWkAECK7D.png
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. baleeber

    baleeber Adept

    Messages:
    78
    Two points I want to make:
    1. "Eat the babies" may ... MAY ... be a reference to Jonathan's Swift's "A Modest Proposal", in which Swift satirically suggested that the Irish sell their children to be eaten by the rich.

    2. Greta Thunberg makes an analogy to a house being on fire, and says "I want you to panic." But doesn't everyone know what nonsense advice that is? In an emergency, such as a fire, you should never panic, but stay calm. What lunacy is this?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
    What the alarmists fail to mention, or actually what they choose to ignore, is in earth's geological history its evident that there is a heating and that is followed by a cooling, I mean an ice age, whether a mini event or a full blown century long freeze...I think the extent of ice ages are determined by the rate and peak of the warming prior...In this case, of what we have been experiencing in recent times, there are many research papers estimating a mini ice age, one that would last a few decades...

    The use of Greta Thunberg is a ridiculous joke and an insult to every intelligent individual on this planet...We do not need puppets like her used in propaganda campaigns, its obviously a ploy to gain greater control over our society by those in power...

    ...
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
    The Next Great Extinction Event Will Not Be Global Warming – It Will Be Global Cooling

    By Allan M. R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., August 2019

    CATASTROPHIC GLOBAL WARMING IS A FALSE CRISIS – THE NEXT GREAT EXTINCTION WILL BE GLOBAL COOLING

    Forget all those falsehoods about scary global warming, deceptions contrived by wolves to stampede the sheep. The next great extinction event will not be global warming, it will be global cooling. Future extinction events are preponderantly cold: a glacial period, medium-size asteroid strike or supervolcano. Humanity barely survived the last glacial period that ended only 11,500 years ago, the blink-of–an-eye in geologic time.

    Cold, not heat, is by far the greater killer of humanity. Today, cool and cold weather kills about 20 times as many people as warm and hot weather. Excess Winter Deaths, defined as more deaths in the four winter months than equivalent non-winter months, total over two million souls per year, in both cold and warm climates. Earth is colder-than-optimum for humanity, and currently-observed moderate global warming increases life spans.

    “Cold Weather Kills 20 Times As Many People As Hot Weather”

    By Joseph D’Aleo and Allan MacRae, September 4, 2015

    https://friendsofsciencecalgary.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/cold-weather-kills-macrae-daleo-4sept2015-final.pdf

    However, Excess Winter Deaths are not the worst threats to humanity. The glacial cycle averages about 100,000 years, consisting of about 90,000 years of the glacial period, when mile-thick continental glaciers blanketed much of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres including Canada, Russia, Northern Europe and Northern USA, and about 10,000 years of interglacial, the warm period of the present. Earth is now 11,500 years into the current warm interglacial, and our planet may re-enter the glacial period at any time.

    “Glacial-Interglacial Cycles”

    https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/abrupt-climate-change/Glacial-Interglacial%20Cycles

    https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/716px_width/public/glacial-interglacial.jpg?itok=19bwFcU9

    [​IMG]

    The re-entry into the glacial period will be a major extinction event for humanity, possibly the end of modern civilization. Not only will our land surface be devastated by glaciers, but CO2 concentrations will drop so low that C3 crop photosynthesis, the source of almost all our foods, will be barely sustainable.

    GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISTS HAVE NEGATIVE CREDIBILITY – NOBODY SHOULD BELIEVE THEIR FALSEHOODS

    One’s predictive track record is probably the best objective measure of scientific competence. The IPCC and its acolytes have been consistently wrong in their predictions of catastrophic global warming. Their climate computer models run too hot, and observed global warming has actually been moderate and beneficial. Global warming alarmists have proven negative scientific credibility – nobody should believe their wild exaggerations.

    In fact, increasing atmospheric CO2 causes significantly improved crop yields due to enhanced photosynthesis, and may cause minor, beneficial global warming.

    In 2002 we confidently published the following statements, which are still demonstrably correct:

    “Climate science does not support the theory of catastrophic human-made global warming – the alleged warming crisis does not exist.”


    “The ultimate agenda of pro-Kyoto advocates is to eliminate fossil fuels, but this would result in a catastrophic shortfall in global energy supply – the wasteful, inefficient energy solutions proposed by Kyoto advocates simply cannot replace fossil fuels.”

    “Debate on the Kyoto Accord”

    Published by APEGA in the PEGG, and in The Globe and Mail, La Presse, and professional journals.

    By Sallie Baliunas, Tim Patterson and Allan MacRae, November 2002

    http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/KyotoAPEGA2002REV1.pdf

    Increased atmospheric CO2, driven by fossil fuel combustion and/or other causes, will have little impact on the onset of future glaciation. Climate is not highly sensitive to increasing atmospheric CO2. Paradoxically, CO2 concentrations are not alarmingly high; in fact, atmospheric CO2 concentrations are alarmingly low – too low for the long-term survival of terrestrial life. Photosynthesis of C3 food crops ceases at 150ppm – CO2 starvation.

    “CO2, Global Warming, Climate and Energy”

    By Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., June 15, 2019

    CO2, GLOBAL WARMING, CLIMATE AND ENERGY

    “(Plant) Food for Thought”

    By Allan MacRae, December 18, 2014 and January 31, 2009

    ICECAP

    CO2, Temperatures, and Ice Ages

    In the near term, there is a significant probability of moderate global cooling. Similar global cooling happened from about 1940 to 1977, even as fossil fuel consumption accelerated rapidly at the onset of WW2. Global warming did not occur as CO2 increased. In fact, Earth cooled significantly for over 30 years – strong evidence that increasing atmospheric CO2 does not cause catastrophic global warming.

    Even moderate global cooling is harmful to humanity and the environment. We predicted the return of moderate global cooling in an article published September 1, 2002 in the Calgary Herald, as follows:

    “If [as we believe] solar activity is the main driver of surface temperature rather than CO2, we should begin the next cooling period by 2020 to 2030.”

    Our 2002 global cooling prediction is still probable. In the past five years, I’ve stated that moderate cooling will probably start closer to 2020, driven by the low activity of Solar Cycle 24. Humanity suffered during past cold periods that coincided with solar lows, such as the Maunder and Dalton Minimums circa 1700 and 1800.

    Last year there was a very late, cold spring and crops were planted one-month late in the American Midwest, but warm summer weather resulted in a good grain crop. This year, cold wet weather in the Midwest reportedly prevented about 30% of the USA corn crop from being planted – the ground was too wet for farm equipment. Were the last two years of late planting in the North American grain belt early signs of global cooling? Hope not.

    I predicted in 2013 that winter deaths would increase in the UK, where energy costs are much higher than in North America. Sadly, this has proved correct. Excess Winter Deaths in England and Wales in the winter of 2017-2018 totaled over 50,000 souls, the highest since 1976, as compared to an annual average of about 100,000 in the USA. The population of England and Wales is about one-sixth that of the USA, so the United Kingdom had an Excess Winter Death Rate three times the USA average – a terrible, preventable tragedy.

    Blind faith in climate models

    Excess winter deaths in England and Wales highest since 1976

    If the Sun does primarily drive temperature, as I believe, then foolish politicians have brewed the perfect storm. They have adopted dysfunctional climate-and-energy policies to “fight global warming” and have crippled energy systems with intermittent, expensive “green energy” schemes that destabilize the electric grid, at a time when catastrophic global warming is not happening and moderate global cooling may be imminent.

    GREEN ENERGY IS NOT GREEN; IT IS DESTRUCTIVE AND PRODUCES LITTLE USEFUL (DISPATCHABLE) ENERGY

    Despite trillions of dollars in squandered subsidies, “green energy” has increased from 1% in 2008 to only 4% of global primary energy in 2018. Fossil fuels provide fully 85% of global primary energy, essentially unchanged in decades, and unlikely to change in decades to come. The remaining 11% is hydro and nuclear.

    “Statistical Review of World Energy”
    Statistical Review of World Energy | Energy economics | Home

    Eliminate fossil fuels tomorrow as radical green activists insist, and almost everyone in the developed world would be dead in a few months from starvation and exposure.

    “Green energy” schemes are not green and produce little useful (dispatchable) energy, because they require almost 100% conventional backup from fossil fuels, nuclear or hydro when the wind does not blow and the Sun does not shine. Intermittent energy from wind and/or solar generation cannot supply the electric grid with reliable, uninterrupted power. There is no widely-available, cost-effective means of solving the fatal flaw of intermittency in grid-scale wind and solar power generation.

    “Wind Report 2005” – note Figures 6 & 7 on intermittency.
    http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/wp-content/uploads/eonwindreport2005.pdf

    Vital electric grids have been destabilized, electricity costs have soared, and Excess Winter Deaths have increased due to grid-connected green energy schemes.

    CONCLUSION

    This paper discusses real threats, specifically global cooling, including imminent moderate global cooling and later re-entry into another glacial period, in order to shift the climate discussion from popular scary-fantasies of runaway global warming, to cold events that actually do threaten the future of humanity and the environment.

    .
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. spacecase0

    spacecase0 earth human

    Messages:
    1,177
    for anyone getting ready for all this,
    the C3 plants have a minimum of 160PPM of CO2,
    as pointed out 150, is to low
    for anyone getting ready, C4 plants can deal with lower levels,
    and you will also be needing plants that can deal with frost.
    thankfully there are frost tolerant C4 plants, the Brassica family.
    and when you look at what people ate in the mini ice age, there was lots of Brassica plants being used.
    they have some issues with needing large populations or they get inbreeding depression, so they are kind of a pain to grow in a garden. but after seeing this low CO2 issue in an ice age, I get why people bothered to keep growing them.
     
  12. baleeber

    baleeber Adept

    Messages:
    78
    It's funny to read articles from the 1980s. I can't talk about this on social media because being a climate-change "denier" in today's world is on par with barbecuing kittens, apparently.

    U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked

    I would quote this, but there's just too much worth quoting. Just read the whole thing. It's hilarious.

    SWIFTER WARMING OF GLOBE FORESEEN

     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389

    Earth Is About To Enter A 30-Year ‘Mini Ice Age’ As A 'Solar Minimum' Grips The Planet


    Earth is bracing for a solar minimum: a dormant period in which the Sun radiates less energy or heat at our planet than usual. Scientists have warned that as a result of the Sun’s inactivity, Earth is likely to witness a ‘mini ice age’ that could bring extreme winters and chilly cold storms over.

    According to NASA, the Sun will reach its lowest activity in over 200 years in 2020. As it further goes into its natural hibernation phase, Earth will experience extremely cold spells which will trigger food shortages across the planet. The average temperatures could drop as much as one degree Celsius in a period lasting about 12 months. That might not sound a lot but a whole degree fall would have a significant impact on global average temperatures.

    Solar minimums are part of the Sun's natural life cycle and occur once every 11 years. However, 2020's minimum is going to be a special case. That's because it marks the start of a rare event known as a Grand Solar Minimum, in which energy emitted from the Sun plummets down even more than usual. These only occur once every 400 years or so.

    As per Northumbria University expert Valentina Zharkova, the icy spells and wet summers could be around until 2053, when solar activity picks up again. She told The Sun that the onset of the Grand Solar Minimum is already evident in Canada and Iceland, "We will possibly get big frosts as is happening now in Canada where they see [temperatures] of -50 degree Celsuis.”

    The last Grand Solar Minimum, according to the report, was the Maunder Minimum which lasted from 1645 to 1715. The cruel cold decades saw the Thames and Amsterdam canals to freeze from time to time, something which is quite unusual today. This cold spell was likely set off by a number of factors including a slew of massive volcanic eruptions. In the forthcoming GSM, scientists are expecting a shift in the global temperatures caused due to human activity like rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.


    .
     
  14. Standingstones

    Standingstones Celestial

    Messages:
    2,419
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  15. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
  16. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
    Reduced activity on the solar surface has sparked fears of a doomsday mini ice age.

    Big news this week about the giant, burning, boiling, spinning thermonuclear reactor which lies 93 million miles away from Earth but is our primary source of life-giving heat and light. And one might be forgiven for hoping — after weeks of lockdown, far too many deaths, a largely hobbled workforce and an economy spiralling deep into recession — that it might be good news. Forecasts of a lovely, long, blueskied barbecue summer to perk up our enforced staycations, perhaps? Or, at the very least, a spot of predictable, settled weather to keep our battered spirits afloat. Sadly, not.


    [​IMG]

    The activity on the Sun's surface has fallen dramatically, and its magnetic field has become weaker prompting a period of 'solar minimum'. Because it turns out that even the Sun has gone into a lockdown 'recession'. Or, more accurately, a deep period of 'solar minimum'.

    Which means that the activity on the Sun's surface has fallen dramatically, and its magnetic field has become weaker, letting into the environment more of the sort of cosmic rays that cause dramatic lightning storms and interfere with astronauts and space hardware.

    They can also can lead to the explosion of 'sprites' — clusters of orange and red lights that shoot out of the top of thunderstorms like 60-mile-high palm trees in the sky. Oh yes, and on top of all that, theoretically it could cause the temperature on Earth to drop to potentially catastrophic new lows.


    While the Met Office and members of the Royal Astronomical Society are urging us not to panic and reminding us that this is just nature, nothing to worry about and the sort of thing that happens every 11 years or so as the Sun passes through its activity cycle, some doom-and-gloomers are much less optimistic.

    Perhape they're haunted by the extreme 'solar minimum' thought to have contributed to the so-called Little Ice Age in Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries, when the temperatures fell so low the River Thames froze over, crops failed, lightning storms lit up the skies, and — in 1816 — the weather was so crazy that it snowed in July.

    As we all know, the Sun — which is 4.5 billion years old and more than a million times bigger than the Earth — is not only a source of cheer when it finally pops out from behind the clouds, it also keeps us all alive. Which means that the teeniest change in its activity levels can have extraordinary consequences — triggering lightning storms, the appearance or disappearance of the Northern Lights and those amazing sprites.


    [​IMG]

    An extreme 'solar minimum' is thought to have contributed to the so-called Little Ice Age in Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries, when the temperatures fell so low the River Thames froze over. But the Sun's activity is changing constantly as it passes through its regular cycle, from solar maximum (hottest and most active) to solar minimum (quieter and cooler).

    Since the 17th century, scientists have been measuring the depth of a solar minimum by counting the 'sunspots' — areas of magnetic activity on the solar surface which show up as relatively dark spots — and solar flares, large explosions that hurl charged particles into space. The general rule is the fewer the sunspots, the more severe the minimum and the higher the chances of lightning storms, sprites and disruption on Earth.

    So far this year, the Sun has been 'blank' — with no sunspots — 76 per cent of the time. A figure surpassed just once since the Fifties, last year, when it was 77 per cent blank. So could we be heading for a grand solar minimum, a sustained period — decades, even centuries — of particularly weak solar cycles? Are we now — on top of everything else — facing another mini ice age?


    .
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  17. spacecase0

    spacecase0 earth human

    Messages:
    1,177
    I think it might be worse than just an ice age
    took lots of convincing, and this is what did it.
    this is suppose to be a play list, but it posts here as a video...


    maybe this works better
    Suspicious0bservers
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  18. dlw

    dlw Saved by grace

    Messages:
    485
    If you constantly feed only on earthly things which cannot satisfy ,you will fill your heart and mind with cares and worries.
     
  19. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
    Cause or Effect of 2020 Problems? Earth’s Poles are Shifting 10 Times Faster Than Expected

    Did 2020 cause the Earth’s magnetic poles to shift ten times faster than experts were predicting … or is the shifting of the poles causing the problems of 2020? Whichever ever it is, it’s probably not good. Want to go back to the chicken and the egg and try again?

    “We have incomplete knowledge of our magnetic field before 400 years ago. Since these rapid changes represent some of the more extreme behavior of the liquid core, they could give important information about the behavior of Earth’s deep interior.”

    In a press release from Leeds University, Dr Chris Davies, an Associate Professor from the School of Earth and Environment, and Professor Catherine Constable, from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, in California, explain the technique they used in their new study, published this week in Nature Communications, to both fill in the gaps of the last 400 years and attempt to figure out what’s been going on with the Earth’s magnetic field over the past 100,000 years. Unlike past researchers, they had the benefit of new historical data on time variations in the Earth’s magnetic field and the most sophisticated software ever for modeling the planet’s field generation process.

    “Since these rapid changes represent some of the more extreme behavior of the liquid core they could give important information about the behavior of Earth’s deep interior.”

    If Sir Ringo Starr were part of this team, at this point he would join in with a chorus of “It Don’t Come Easy.” The direction and movements of the Earth’s magnetic field start in the planet’s liquid core. Just as the liquid core sloshes and swirls, so does the surface magnetic field – with areas moving independently rather than in unison like a hard outer shell. While satellites can show this movement today, historical movements were seen using geological records of actions like lava flows and sedimentary changes. Davies and Constable felt modeling based on time variations would be more accurate. To prove it, they took field shifts shown in the models and tried to match them up to known anomalies.

    “The clearest example of this in their study is a sharp change in the geomagnetic field direction of roughly 2.5 degrees per year 39,000 years ago. This shift was associated with a locally weak field strength, in a confined spatial region just off the west coast of Central America, and followed the global Laschamp excursion – a short reversal of the Earth’s magnetic field.”

    Armed with correlations like this, they felt confident in their statement that the magnetic field is changing much faster than the accepted one degree per year. In fact, it’s shifting up to 10 times faster. We already know that the magnetic poles are moving, with the magnetic north pole now somewhere in Siberia, while the magnetic south pole is off the coast of Antarctica somewhere outside of the Antarctic Circle. What is the end result of all of this magnetic pole and field shifting at such a fast rate? A common word in the study is “flux.”

    “Flux” is also a good word to describe the year 2020. Are these fluxes related? As expected, the model doesn’t look at this. Should it? Would it make any difference if we knew the answer?

    One thing we can agree on … 2020 has been one fluxed up year.


    .
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    27,389
    If some scientists think the poles will shift continually degree by degree across the equator and back up and down to the poles I think they are mistaken...I don't think events like this work that way in nature...In my opinion there is a threshold, a breaking point, where the poles will move to a certain degree and all at once will shift all the way, completely and quickly...If this is so we could be very close to that threshold already with forces at work about hit a breaking point and accelerate this cycle even faster and faster (as is possibly evidenced by the previous post contents), then all at once a full and complete shift...

    ...
     

Share This Page