The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Global warming debunked, again.

As T-Rexx has pointed out if we stopped using energy tomorrow the climate would continue to warm for another 50-100 yrs.

The first thing we need to do is use less energy which few americans, both those who believe in global warming and those who think it a hoax, are currently doing.

Gas costs almost twice as much in 2006 as in did in 2001 yet we purchased more of it in 06 than we did in 01.

We americans are energy gluttons and until that changes its all just a bunch of chatter.

We like large houses, big cars and lots of AC, again both those who believe in global warming and those who don't.

The last president who suggested that we might need to scarifice a bit was Jimmy Carter and we all know how well that worked out for him.

One thing science can't tell us is how quickly this will happen. If it happens slowly we'll adapt. If it happens quickly (and by that I mean in 10yrs) we'll have a big problem.

But if we're willing to do all that is necessary except changing our lifestyles then I don't expect we'll achieve much.
 
Henny Penny? Oh, she's a beast! (I used to write under the moniker O. Sheeza-Beast, but not today).

Once again,
Generalissimo Alfalfa,
unable to come up with any actual data in rebuttal,
resorts to that old lefty favorite dance,
the sidestep.

Way to go.
 
I thought he was a sock puppet at first, but

to be honest

the person that usually creates those in this forum usually does a better job of it

soooo....

i'll just keep an open mind

for now;)

A lefty with an open mind!!!!!!!!!! I feel the earth move under my feet.
 
The closer we examine the claims made by Academy Award winner, Algore, the more holes in those claims we seem to be finding. I was wondering at what point will he be intellectually honest and at least acknowledge that he has been wrong on many of these points? Or will he simply continue to demonize any who dare to disagree with the new religion of environmental socialism?



http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article

http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=264777

Majority Press Release
Contact: MARC MORANO (202) 224-5762 (marc_morano@epw.senate.gov), MATT DEMPSEY (202) 224-9797 (matthew_dempsey@epw.senate.gov)

Renowned Scientist Defects From Belief in Global Warming – Caps Year of Vindication for Skeptics

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 17, 2006
Washington DC - One of the most decorated French geophysicists has converted from a believer in manmade catastrophic global warming to a climate skeptic. This latest defector from the global warming camp caps a year in which numerous scientific studies have bolstered the claims of climate skeptics. Scientific studies that debunk the dire predictions of human-caused global warming have continued to accumulate and many believe the new science is shattering the media-promoted scientific “consensus” on climate alarmism.

Claude Allegre, a former government official and an active member of France’s Socialist Party, wrote an editorial on September 21, 2006 in the French newspaper L'Express titled “The Snows of Kilimanjaro” (For English Translation, click here: http://epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=264835 ) detailing his newfound skepticism about manmade global warming. See: http://www.lexpress.fr/idees/tribunes/dossier/allegre/dossier.asp?ida=451670 Allegre wrote that the “cause of climate change remains unknown” and pointed out that Kilimanjaro is not losing snow due to global warming, but to local land use and precipitation changes. Allegre also pointed out that studies show that Antarctic snowfall rate has been stable over the past 30 years and the continent is actually gaining ice.

“Following the month of August experienced by the northern half of France, the prophets of doom of global warming will have a lot on their plate in order to make our fellow countrymen swallow their certitudes,” Allegre wrote. He also accused proponents of manmade catastrophic global warming of being motivated by money, noting that “the ecology of helpless protesting has become a very lucrative business for some people!”

Allegre, a member of both the French and U.S. Academy of Sciences, had previously expressed concern about manmade global warming. "By burning fossil fuels, man enhanced the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere which has raised the global mean temperature by half a degree in the last century," Allegre wrote 20 years ago. In addition, Allegre was one of 1500 scientists who signed a November 18, 1992 letter titled “World Scientists' Warning to Humanity” in which the scientists warned that global warming’s “potential risks are very great.” See: http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~sai/sciwarn.html

Allegre has authored more than 100 scientific articles, written 11 books and received numerous scientific awards including the Goldschmidt Medal from the Geochemical Society of the United States.

Allegre's conversion to a climate skeptic comes at a time when global warming alarmists have insisted that there is a “consensus” about manmade global warming. Proponents of global warming have ratcheted up the level of rhetoric on climate skeptics recently. An environmental magazine in September called for Nuremberg-style trials for global warming skeptics and CBS News “60 Minutes” correspondent Scott Pelley compared skeptics to “Holocaust deniers.” See: http://www.epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=264568 & http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/03/22/publiceye/entry1431768.shtml In addition, former Vice President Al Gore has repeatedly referred to skeptics as "global warming deniers."

This increase in rhetorical flourish comes at a time when new climate science research continues to unravel the global warming alarmists’ computer model predictions of future climatic doom and vindicate skeptics.

60 Scientists Debunk Global Warming Fears

Earlier this year, a group of prominent scientists came forward to question the so-called “consensus” that the Earth faces a “climate emergency.” On April 6, 2006, 60 scientists wrote a letter to the Canadian Prime Minister asserting that the science is deteriorating from underneath global warming alarmists.

“Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future…Significant [scientific] advances have been made since the [Kyoto] protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary,” the 60 scientists wrote. See: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=3711460e-bd5a-475d-a6be-4db87559d605

“It was only 30 years ago that many of today's global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas,” the 60 scientists concluded.

'Climate Change is Nothing New'

In addition, an October 16, 2006 Washington Post article titled “Climate Change is Nothing New” echoed the sentiments of the 60 scientists as it detailed a new study of the earth’s climate history. The Washington Post article by reporter Christopher Lee noted that Indiana University geologist Simon Brassell found climate change occurred during the age of dinosaurs and quoted Brassell questioning the accuracy of computer climate model predictions.

“If there are big, inherent fluctuations in the system, as paleoclimate studies are showing, it could make determining the Earth’s climatic future even harder than it is,” Brassell said. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/15/AR2006101500672.html

Global Cooling on the Horizon?

In August, Khabibullo Abdusamatov, a scientist who heads the space research sector for the Russian Academy of Sciences, predicted long-term global cooling may be on the horizon due to a projected decrease in the sun’s output. See: http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060825/53143686.html

Sun’s Contribution to Warming

There have also been recent findings in peer-reviewed literature over the last few years showing that the Antarctic is getting colder and the ice is growing and a new 2006 study in Geophysical Research Letters found that the sun was responsible for up to 50% of 20th-century warming. See: http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/2006GL027142.shtml

“Global Warming” Stopped in 1998

Paleoclimate scientist Bob Carter has noted that there is indeed a problem with global warming – it stopped in 1998. “According to official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the UK, the global average temperature did not increase between 1998-2005. “…this eight-year period of temperature stasis did coincide with society's continued power station and SUV-inspired pumping of yet more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere,” noted paleoclimate researcher and geologist Bob Carter of James Cook University in Australia in an April 2006 article titled “There is a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998.” See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...0907.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/04/09/ixworld.html

“Global?" Warming Misnamed - Southern Hemisphere Not Warming

In addition, new NASA satellite tropospheric temperature data reveals that the Southern Hemisphere has not warmed in the past 25 years contrary to “global warming theory” and modeling. This new Southern Hemisphere data raises the specter that the use of the word “global” in “global warming” may not be accurate. A more apt moniker for the past 25 years may be “Northern Hemisphere” warming. See: http://motls.blogspot.com/2006/09/southern-hemisphere-ignores-global.html

Alaska Cooling

According to data released on July 14, 2006 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the January through June Alaska statewide average temperature was “0.55F (0.30C) cooler than the 1971-2000 average.” See: http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases2006/jul06/noaa06-065.html

Oceans Cooling

Another bombshell to hit the global warming alarmists and their speculative climate modeling came in a September article in the Geophysical Research Letters which found that over 20% of the heat gained in the oceans since the mid-1950s was lost in just two years. The former climatologist for the state of Colorado, Roger Pielke, Sr., noted that the sudden cooling of the oceans “certainly indicates that the multi-decadal global climate models have serious issues with their ability to accurately simulate the response of the climate system to human- and natural-climate forcings.“ See: http://climatesci.atmos.colostate.edu/2006/09/

Light Hurricane Season & Early Winter

Despite predictions that 2006 would bring numerous tropical storms, 2006’s surprisingly light hurricane season and the record early start of this year’s winter in many parts of the U.S. have further put a damper on the constant doomsaying of the global warming alarmists and their media allies.

Droughts Less Frequent

Other new studies have debunked many of the dubious claims made by the global warming alarmists. For example, the claim that droughts would be more frequent, severe and wide ranging during global warming, has now being exposed as fallacious. A new paper in Geophysical Research Letters authored by Konstantinos Andreadis and Dennis Lettenmaier finds droughts in the U.S. becoming “shorter, less frequent and cover a small portion of the country over the last century.” http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2006/10/13/where-are-the-droughts

Global Warming Will Not Lead to Next Ice Age

Furthermore, recent research has shown that fears that global warming could lead to the next ice age, as promoted in the 2004 Hollywood movie “The Day After Tomorrow” are also unsupportable. A 2005 media hyped study “claimed to have found a 30 percent slowdown in the thermohaline circulation, the results are published in the very prestigious Nature magazine, and the story was carried breathlessly by the media in outlets around the world…Less than a year later, two different research teams present convincing evidence [ in Geophysical Research Letters ] that no slowdown is occurring whatsoever,” according to Virginia State Climatologist Patrick Michaels, editor of the website World Climate Report. See: http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2006/10/13/overturning-ocean-hype

‘Hockey Stick’ Broken in 2006

The “Hockey Stick” temperature graph’s claim that the 1990’s was the hottest decade of the last 1000 years was found to be unsupportable by the National Academy of Sciences and many independent experts in 2006. See: http://www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257697

Study Shows Greenland’s Ice Growing

A 2005 study by a scientist named Ola Johannessen and his colleagues showed that the interior of Greenland is gaining ice mass. See: http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V8/N44/C1.jsp Also, according to the International Arctic Research Institute, despite all of the media hype, the Arctic was warmer in the 1930’s than today.

Polar Bears Not Going Extinct

Despite Time Magazine and the rest of the media’s unfounded hype, polar bears are not facing a crisis, according to biologist Dr. Mitchell Taylor from the Arctic government of Nunavut. “Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present,” Taylor wrote on May 1, 2006. See: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...le&cid=1146433819696&call_pageid=970599119419

Media Darling James Hansen Hypes Alarmism

As all of this new data debunking climate alarmism mounts, the mainstream media chooses to ignore it and instead focus on the dire predictions of the number-one global warming media darling, NASA’s James Hansen. The increasingly alarmist Hansen is featured frequently in the media to bolster sky-is-falling climate scare reports. His recent claim that the Earth is nearing its hottest point in one million years has been challenged by many scientists. See: http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N39/EDITB.jsp Hansen’s increasingly frightening climate predictions follow his 2003 concession that the use of “extreme scenarios” was an appropriate tactic to drive the public’s attention to the urgency of global warming. See: http://naturalscience.com/ns/articles/01-16/ns_jeh6.html Hansen also received a $250,000 grant form Teresa Heinz’s Foundation and then subsequently endorsed her husband John Kerry for President and worked closely with Al Gore to promote his movie, “An Inconvenient Truth.” See: http://www.heinzawards.net/speechDetail.asp?speechID=6 & http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/dai_complete.pdf

American People Rejecting Global Warming Alarmism

The global warming alarmists may have significantly overplayed their hand in the climate debate. A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll this August found that most Americans do not attribute the cause of any recent severe weather events to global warming, and the portion of Americans who believe that climate change is due to natural variability has increased over 50% in the last five years.

Senator Inhofe Chastises Media For Unscientific & Unprincipled Climate Reporting

Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, commented last week on the media’s unfounded global warming hype and some of the recent scientific research that is shattering the so-called “consensus” that human greenhouse gas emissions have doomed the planet.

“The American people are fed up with media for promoting the idea that former Vice President Al Gore represents the scientific ‘consensus’ that SUV’s and the modern American way of life have somehow created a ‘climate emergency’ that only United Nations bureaucrats and wealthy Hollywood liberals can solve. It is the publicity and grant seeking global warming alarmists and their advocates in the media who have finally realized that the only “emergency” confronting them is their rapidly crumbling credibility, audience and bottom line. The global warming alarmists know their science is speculative at best and their desperation grows each day as it becomes more and more obvious that many of the nations that ratified the woeful Kyoto Protocol are failing to comply,” Senator Inhofe said last week. See: http://www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=264616

“The mainstream media needs to follow the money: The further you get from scientists who conduct these alarmist global warming studies, and the further you get from the financial grants and the institutions that they serve the more the climate alarmism fades and the skepticism grows,” Senator Inhofe explained.

Eco-Doomsayers’ Failed Predictions

In a speech on the Senate floor on September 25, 2006, Senator Inhofe pointed out the abject failure of past predictions of ecological disaster made by environmental alarmists.

“The history of the modern environmental movement is chock-full of predictions of doom that never came true. We have all heard the dire predictions about the threat of overpopulation, resource scarcity, mass starvation, and the projected death of our oceans. None of these predictions came true, yet it never stopped the doomsayers from continuing to predict a dire environmental future. The more the eco-doomsayers’ predictions fail, the more the eco-doomsayers predict,” Senator Inhofe said on September 25th. See: http://epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759

Related Links:

For a comprehensive review of the media’s embarrassing 100-year history of alternating between promoting fears of a coming ice age and global warming, see Environment & Public Works Chairman James Inhofe’s September 25, 2006 Senate floor speech debunking the media and climate alarmism. Go to: (epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759)

To read and watch Senator Inhofe on CNN discuss global warming go to: (http://www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=264308 )

To Read all of Senator Inhofe’s Speeches on global warming go to: (http://epw.senate.gov/speeches.cfm?party=rep)

“Inhofe Correct On Global Warming,” by David Deming geophysicist, an adjunct scholar with the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs (ocpathink.org), and an associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma. (http://epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=264537)


# # # #
 
A lefty with an open mind!!!!!!!!!! I feel the earth move under my feet.

don't count your sarcastic chickens before they hatch

one little doggy in the window was sent packing just about forty days before your austere appearance here

and he posted about alot of things that are apparently of great interest to you

i could offer you a link to his ideas on this topic if you would like to reread it

until then

tsk tsk

your article?

it was penned in 2006.... that means that all the information in the thread presented supercedes it

your article is OLD news and OLD ideas

you know

like dinoaurs in the dessert
 
thats the big joke of the tread that the guys on the right arent getting

i think they would argue that the world was flat if they thought there was political gain to be had

the thread title that announces global warming is debunked is ludicrous

a political editor took a shot at Gore and the right wingnuts believe that there are new scientific developements

naaa

some twit just rewrapped the old crap political hatchet job on real science and our guys here wanted us to believe it

What you fail to understand that there is no "real science" involved in the hysteria.

There is not one scientific test that can be conducted either in the laboratory or in the field which demonstrates that global warming is caused by man. Not one.

Moreover, the "most" scientists believe claim is equally bogus.

Note that "most" scientists do not say that they can prove gobal warming is man made. No, they hedge a tad, and say that they believe it.

Guess what. The late, unlamented Jerry Falwell "Believed" that the earth was created in six 24 hour days. Sadly for him, he was never able to prove it.

Scientists used to "believe" that the sun revolved around the earth, right up until Galileo proved them wrong.

What can be proven is that the sun grows warmer and colder in 900 or so year cycles, and temperatures follow. It's also happening on Mars (maybe the martians should get rid of all their polluting SUVs).

What can be proven is that 96% or so of greenhouse gasses consist of water vapor.

Oh, By the way, 30 years ago, these same fools were predicting a new ice age, using much the same greenhouse effect data.

There was (I believe), a Newsweek cover story trumpeting the alleged problem. 30 years later, Newsweek retracted the article.

Fact of the matter is, Al (chicken little) Gore is a fool and a fraud. Period.

As for the Kyoto accords, its proponents only claimed that it would reduce emissions by four tenths of one percent. China, which is well on its way to becoming earth's biggest polluter, is exempted. The Senate, under Clinton, voted it down 95 to 0 or 95 to 1.
 
don't count your sarcastic chickens before they hatch

one little doggy in the window was sent packing just about forty days before your austere appearance here

and he posted about alot of things that are apparently of great interest to you

i could offer you a link to his ideas on this topic if you would like to reread it

until then

tsk tsk

your article?

it was penned in 2006.... that means that all the information in the thread presented supercedes it

your article is OLD news and OLD ideas

you know

like dinoaurs in the dessert

Same tired old tactic. No data in refutation, then belittle the source.
That may impress gullible children, perhaps.
Being neither gullible, nor a child, I am not impressed with your nonsense.
 
I am just going to make a short post and hope not to be flamed.

I do agree with the fact that the earth is warming [summer is getting hotter and hotter every year]. I do agree that we should be careful about what we are putting into our environment. However, it is my impression that during several parts of history, the climate was warmer and wetter than it is now [think dinosaurs]. So, because I am not a scientist, but I know that things were [maybe] warmer at one period in time, then my initial [but not final] conclusion is that this warming spell we are undergoing is natural.

But, until I specifically see that either a: average temperatures world wide are marginally higher than they have ever been in history [as in millions of years], or B: the average temperature world wide goes down marginally over time, I am not making a true conclusion either way.

However, regardless of whether or not global warming is man made or natural, we do need to cut down the amounts of chemicals released into the environment. What goes around comes around, and if we keep sending pollutants into mother nature.... she is likely to send things back that are nastier than ever...
 
don't count your sarcastic chickens before they hatch

one little doggy in the window was sent packing just about forty days before your austere appearance here



t

I take that to indicate that you shouted him down, as your side, lacking either reason or responsibility, always does.
 
I am just going to make a short post and hope not to be flamed.

I do agree with the fact that the earth is warming [summer is getting hotter and hotter every year]. I do agree that we should be careful about what we are putting into our environment. However, it is my impression that during several parts of history, the climate was warmer and wetter than it is now [think dinosaurs]. So, because I am not a scientist, but I know that things were [maybe] warmer at one period in time, then my initial [but not final] conclusion is that this warming spell we are undergoing is natural.

But, until I specifically see that either a: average temperatures world wide are marginally higher than they have ever been in history [as in millions of years], or B: the average temperature world wide goes down marginally over time, I am not making a true conclusion either way.

However, regardless of whether or not global warming is man made or natural, we do need to cut down the amounts of chemicals released into the environment. What goes around comes around, and if we keep sending pollutants into mother nature.... she is likely to send things back that are nastier than ever...


Of course we need to cut down on really harmful stuff going into the atmosphere.
Nobody is arguing otherwise.
 
I take that to indicate that you shouted him down, as your side, lacking either reason or responsibility, always does.

nope

a mod found out he was a phony that had a fake sign on and multiple jub acounts

interesting, no?
 
you are the one that asked about a specific time period, martha reardon

and as for crighton, i tell ya what

when we start talking about cloning dinosaurs and time travel, we will consult him as the expert

until then...

shall we stick to science fact instead of science fiction?

The trouble, you don't seem to be able to distinguish between fact and fiction.
 
The trouble, you don't seem to be able to distinguish between fact and fiction.

is that right?

lol

you are using a science fiction writer as a source and you think I am the one with the issue as to who cant tell fiction from fact

interesting and amusing

not much i can say if you cant see the problem with your comment
 
is that right?

lol

you are using a science fiction writer as a source and you think I am the one with the issue as to who cant tell fiction from fact

interesting and amusing

not much i can say if you cant see the problem with your comment

That is sooooo disingenuous of you. Not very clever, however.
 
Of course, back in 1975, "scientists" were singing a different tune:

http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm










The Cooling World
Newsweek, April 28, 1975

www.denisdutton.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Here is the text of Newsweek’s 1975 story on the trend toward global cooling. It may look foolish today, but in fact world temperatures had been falling since about 1940. It was around 1979 that they reversed direction and resumed the general rise that had begun in the 1880s, bringing us today back to around 1940 levels. A PDF of the original is available here.

A fine short history of warming and cooling scares has recently been produced. It is available here. — D.D.



There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.

The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.

To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather. The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”

A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-72. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972.

To the layman, the relatively small changes in temperature and sunshine can be highly misleading. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin points out that the Earth’s average temperature during the great Ice Ages was only about seven degrees lower than during its warmest eras – and that the present decline has taken the planet about a sixth of the way toward the Ice Age average. Others regard the cooling as a reversion to the “little ice age” conditions that brought bitter winters to much of Europe and northern America between 1600 and 1900 – years when the Thames used to freeze so solidly that Londoners roasted oxen on the ice and when iceboats sailed the Hudson River almost as far south as New York City.

Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. “Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data,” concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. “Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions.”

Meteorologists think that they can forecast the short-term results of the return to the norm of the last century. They begin by noting the slight drop in overall temperature that produces large numbers of pressure centers in the upper atmosphere. These break up the smooth flow of westerly winds over temperate areas. The stagnant air produced in this way causes an increase in extremes of local weather such as droughts, floods, extended dry spells, long freezes, delayed monsoons and even local temperature increases – all of which have a direct impact on food supplies.

“The world’s food-producing system,” warns Dr. James D. McQuigg of NOAA’s Center for Climatic and Environmental Assessment, “is much more sensitive to the weather variable than it was even five years ago.” Furthermore, the growth of world population and creation of new national boundaries make it impossible for starving peoples to migrate from their devastated fields, as they did during past famines.

Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.

[end]
 
this tread is alot to absorb. charts. talks on the different government parties irresponsibilities when it comes to accepting the effects of co2 emissions, etc.

what is the skinny to all this?

One thing i gathered from the original article is that we are headed for an ice age. that the onset of the ice age is a naturally occurring event. and with it's coming produces changes in the earth's climate and atmosphere similar to conditions that arise from the escalation of greenhouse gases/co2.

Could it be that both of these factors are attributable to the changes that are happening in world climates today? Even with similar effects, I wouldn't have thought that the onset of an ice age would have Debunked the thoery of global warming.

Does that weigh in with anyone else's thinking?
 
this tread is alot to absorb. charts. talks on the different government parties irresponsibilities when it comes to accepting the effects of co2 emissions, etc.

what is the skinny to all this?

One thing i gathered from the original article is that we are headed for an ice age. that the onset of the ice age is a naturally occurring event. and with it's coming produces changes in the earth's climate and atmosphere similar to conditions that arise from the escalation of greenhouse gases/co2.

Could it be that both of these factors are attributable to the changes that are happening in world climates today? Even with similar effects, I wouldn't have thought that the onset of an ice age would have Debunked the thoery of global warming.

Does that weigh in with anyone else's thinking?

Nobody said that it did. The fact of the matter is, that extremists have been trumpeting doom from both cooling and heating, using pretty much the same set of data, for decades.
 
Reid Bryson, considered the father of scientific climatology, says man made global warming is hooey. He concludes the earth is getting warmer and has been for 300 years as we've been coming out of "The Little Ice Age." Dr. Bryson is a well educated man with impeccable credentials. Maybe some of the lefty kooks around here might try to accept the fact that there is legitimate doubt as to the cause of the Earth's warming and stop worshipping at the altar of that idiot, Gore.

http://www.madison.com/tct/mad/topstories/197613
 
Back
Top