Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Forget global warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age

mrplunkey

New member
Forget global warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age
Lorne Gunter, National Post Published: Monday, February 25, 2008

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.
 
MightyMouse69 said:
Al Gore - Nobel Prize Winner

Talk about deflating the value of an award, who is next - Farakhan
Nope, Guthey Rinker. But he does have far more street cred that wooden Al.
 
redguru said:
Ahmadinejad or Chavez

I'd almost put money on this bet (the NK).
ph2006101001133.jpg
 
I thought that the point was more 'extreme' weather rather then 'warmer' weather. If that is true, then doesn't this support the idea?
 
EnderJE said:
I thought that the point was more 'extreme' weather rather then 'warmer' weather. If that is true, then doesn't this support the idea?
The whole point of them saying it would result in "extreme" weather was so that they could blame anything...literally anything...on global warming.

More hurricanes? Global warming.
Less hurricanes? Global warming.
Warmer than last year? Global warming.
Cooler than last year? Global warming.
 
You know, if you don't believe, that's fine. I don't believe in God either and think that the whole things is a crock of shit. But, is it necessary to continue to bash on the other person's ideals...oh wait...this is EF C/C.
 
lol.

I am sure the people arguing against global warming would have all been good friends with people that argued that the earth was the center of the solar system even after galleleio told them otherwise.
 
Lestat said:
lol.

I am sure the people arguing against global warming would have all been good friends with people that argued that the earth was the center of the solar system even after galleleio told them otherwise.
Yeah, but they merged with the group that believed no sex or masturbation leads to pedophilia and that built their numbers back-up until they could get the Christmas Ball going again.
 
Lestat said:
lol.

I am sure the people arguing against global warming would have all been good friends with people that argued that the earth was the center of the solar system even after galleleio told them otherwise.
Uh, no. It would probably be the kind of people who believed in evolution over God.

You know...they like stuff to be backed up by things called facts, as opposed to simply hearsay.
 
Lestat said:
lol.

I am sure the people arguing against global warming would have all been good friends with people that argued that the earth was the center of the solar system even after galleleio told them otherwise.
And you know, for someone who is obviously so dead-set against organized religion, it's ironic that you have become one of the many to take global warming as gospel.

Lets see, no one is to question as to whether or not it is a fact, lest they be labeled a "moron" or "evil." Upon being questioned, a member of the global warming religion will either refuse to debate the subject or simply say "well its common sense that all scientists agree." Faith is defined as the belief in something for which there is no proof. You can apply that to global warming as much as you can apply it to God.

Global Warming is nothing more than a euphemism for redistribution of wealth from the rich, development nations to jealous dictatorships who refuse to allow their citizens the right to gain their own wealth through free markets. It's about political redistribution from strong, independent sovereign nations into the hands of a power-hungry global elite cowering in the United Nations. These are the same cowardly scoundrels who used to try to rule the world through global communism. Today they pretend that the same lies have something to do with protecting the environment.
 
Global warming is happening.......that's a fact. What the "discussion" is about it what the reason is. Is it a natural cycle or is it something humans have contributed to. Some of you are so fucking clueless you don't even know that the argument has passed you right on by.

I for one would really really really like someone to figure out if it's natural or if it's people. Than I would like someone to be able to accurately predict what the fuck is going to happen to the globe so we can start making preparations now "IF" need be. And the people that need to be having this discussion are the smart people.........not the dumb fucking clueless doucheknucks here at EF.......and I include myself in that by the way. Nobody in this thread is even REMOTELY qualified to debate the science on this.........nobody, especially not the progenitor of said post...I'm circling you plunkey.......

But what all of us are capable of doing is telling the appropriate folks to figure it the fuck out and do it right. And if enough of the "smart people" start to point in one direction..........than that has to mean something. It just won't do for an economist to poo poo the research of a dedicated proffessional in the scientific field.........he's simply not qualified.

And in case people didnt' realize this..........yes it is possible for the earth to experience a "mini ice age" in some areas "despite" rising global average temps. The earth is a system and likes to be in balance. It will seek to balance itself.
 
It's funny actually. Even with all this snowfall in Toronto this year which is quite unusual, we have still had warmer than normal temps. I read somewhere yesterday that we are several degrees above normal for the winter so far.
 
bluepeter said:
It's funny actually. Even with all this snowfall in Toronto this year which is quite unusual, we have still had warmer than normal temps. I read somewhere yesterday that we are several degrees above normal for the winter so far.

Lake effect snows in the Eastern US increase if it takes longer for Lake Erie to freeze or it doesn't freeze at all.
 
Top Bottom