Posted on 12/17/2007 11:43:27 AM PST by dangus
In 2000, when scientists declared that the Earth's temperature was rising, much anxiety ensued, even though the increase was only half of a degree over sixty years. In just the past year, however, the Earth's temperature has reversed, yielding back one-half of that increase.
The past month's (November's) global oceanic data from the National Climatic Data Center has now been released, and the Earth's oceans surface is .2548 degrees warmer than the 1880-2007 average. That's down from .5250 last year and .5597 roughly a decade ago.
There have been drops of roughly a couple tenths of a degree previously, in spite of the general warming trend. But such drops, blamed on "La Ninas," have occured immediately following temperature spikes. What makes this current La Nina unusual is that the current temperature drop follows an imperceptibly small temperature spike.
As a result, the cold snap is pulling down even the six-year running average of temperatures.
This does not mean that the warming trend has necessarily reversed itself; there have, indeed been declines in running averages even longer than that during this decline. In fact, a cooling trend lasted from the 1940s through the 1970s.
However, unable to justify drastic temperatures with fears of the temperature rising a single degree or less next century, the global-warming doomsday-preachers have been asserting that the surge in global warming in the late 1990s indicated an acceleration of global warming.
The notion of such an acceleration seems difficult to reconcile with the new data: The world's oceans were warmer during warm spells of the 1940s.
That's a real leap of logic. When they measure the ice directly, the ice cap at the South Pole is definitely growing overall. If you can believe those pesky Norwegians (who gave the award to Al Gore), Greenland was growing ice until recently(2005) Rather than postulate an effect of melt water on the Gulf Stream, how about pointing to any current measurements that show a slowed Gulf Stream.
The last time a melt of the northern ice stopped the gulf stream, there was 7000' feet of ice over Wisconsin that was melting. We don't have that quantity of ice to melt today, so I doubt we would see the same effect even if all the ice in Greenland melted away.
There are folks who worry more about an ice age, but they have a more solid reason for doing so - lowered solar output. They don't need to believe strange notions such as the belief that with constant solar input, somehow the world will freeze if one more SUV is produced (in America anyway, apparently SUVs in China and India are exempt from those rules of physics).
That's a real leap of logic. When they measure the ice directly, the ice cap at the South Pole is definitely growing overall. If you can believe those pesky Norwegians (who gave the award to Al Gore), Greenland was growing ice until recently(2005) Rather than postulate an effect of melt water on the Gulf Stream, how about pointing to any current measurements that show a slowed Gulf Stream.
The last time a melt of the northern ice stopped the gulf stream, there was 7000' feet of ice over Wisconsin that was melting. We don't have that quantity of ice to melt today, so I doubt we would see the same effect even if all the ice in Greenland melted away.
There are folks who worry more about an ice age, but they have a more solid reason for doing so - lowered solar output. They don't need to believe strange notions such as the belief that with constant solar input, somehow the world will freeze if one more SUV is produced (in America anyway, apparently SUVs in China and India are exempt from those rules of physics).
GLOBAL COOLING.....GLOBAL COOLING!!!!!
In terms of total impact on the atmosphere, I agree. There is minimal, if any, impact.
On the other hand, overstating the CO2 produced by a factor of ten has a huge impact on the credibility of the person posting it.
Sorry, that should have said “by a factor of twenty”.
Oh, I agree. I was not disagreeing with you in the least. I was just making the point that all this stuff about how much "greenhouse gas" we are putting into the air is what is causing all this "warming". The term "greenhouse gas" is thrown around today like it is something that is bad and to be curtailed. Wrong. We need greenhouse gases to be put into the air lest we freeze to death! I mean that sincerely. The earth has many ways in compensating with the foolishness of man, and volcanos!
less hurricanes~
I am open to any ideas. There was one hypothesis that all the particle pollutants in the atmosphere actually decreased the anount of sunlight reaching the Earth. Another hypothesized that global warming had stopped a bad natural cold spell. I don’t think anyone knows for sure yet.
Only if Polar Bear is some sort of hipster slang for a corrupt socialist bureaucrat...
Not really. It depends on your time scale. Follow the links on this page for a presentation by a geologist show that the long term trend (millions of years) is steadily down, and that our current situation is within normal ranges. There have been higher temps and faster changes recorded many times in the geological record of seafloor cores and ice cores.
And your point is??? Remember, it's "climate change" that the American white Christian male stands accused of -- not "global warming".
We are still guilty as charged!!!
Not lately. Maybe there was Global Warming a decade ago. It isn't happening now.
IPCC Nobel winner calls IPCC report:
“Dishonest Political Tampering with the Science...”
World Affairs Board
Posted on 12/16/2007 7:00:59 AM EST by Bulwinkle
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1940211/posts
Here is an article from today addressing the concerns of a slowing Gulf Stream by British scientists.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1898493,00.html
>>The ultimate measure will be when the seas stop rising.
There are a variety of methods - all over the world for example there are geologically stable tide gauge locations.
For a couple of hundred years in many places the sea level with wind and tide averaged out has been collected.
This is the way that tides are measured - when they say the tide at Savannah beach was a certain number of feet they are using these tide gauges.
There are other kinds of records and measurements - like sattelite readings in recent years. These reading weren’t take for climate change purposed for shipping and aviation and erosion.
All commercial planes for example have to have instrumentation that compares the airplane with sea level.
One reason that global warming extremists don’t like to talk about historical sea level rise is that it is very slow. About 20 centimeters (or 8 inches) over the last 100 years.
Even if this should double or triple we are still talking less than 3 feet in the next hundred years.
But because this is a 100 year trend, this year’s ocean measures don’t mean as much as if and when the sea level stops.
Historically this was recognized by the Reagan administration in 1982 when NOAA designated the National Snow and Ice Data Center who produce the annual state of the cryosphere study that studies the balance of ice versus sea level.
>>You can’t fake it and you can’t change the data because sea level can be measured all over the world by so many different groups.
And it can be faked. If you measure it relative to a piece of land that’s sinking, it seems bigger than it is is. Or you can knock down a tree on low-lying land to falsely claim that it was drowned.<<
A measurement can be faked but with thousands of tide gauges for hundreds of years and cross checking between stations we have pretty confidence that the seas have been rising through the 20th century.
I hate to be a drag on their pity party, but I don't intend to participate in their period of mourning for a lost opportunity to further destroy our traditional American lifestyle, or to alter my own liking for living in a pleasant combination of natural and man made environments that isn't actually threatened by the impending appearance of some imaginary, unproven global disaster.
Your statement needs to be challenged....see the following
From:
***********************EXCERPT*************************
15 Jun 06 - Arctic sea level has been falling more than 2mm a year - a
movement that [supposedly] sets the region against the global trend of rising
waters. A Dutch-UK team made the discovery after analyzing radar altimetry
data gathered by Europe 's ERS-2 satellite.
"We have high confidence in the results; it's now down to the geophysics
community to explain them," said Dr Remko Scharroo, from consultants
Altimetrics LLC, who led the study.
The European Space Agency's (Esa) ERS-2 satellite has been making
observations of the Earth from its 800km-high polar orbit for over 10 years.
Correcting the data to take account of ocean tides, wave heights, air pressure,
and atmospheric effects that might bias the signal, Dr Scharroo and colleagues
established seasonal and yearly sea-level trends in the Arctic (from 60 to 82
degrees latitude) for the period 1995 to 2003. The analysis reveals an average
2.17mm fall per annum.
Taking a global view, ERS-2 still records a sea-level rise. It's interesting,
how each study shows that that study's particular location is the only
location where sea levels are falling.
Analysis of Russian tide gauges by Andrey Proshutinsky from the Woods
Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), US, also hinted at a sea-level fall
during the 1990s. He said this seemed to fit with the phases of the so-called
Arctic Oscillation, a seesaw pattern of change in atmospheric pressure over
the polar region and mid latitudes.
"This is something like decadal variability. Sea level goes up and down, up
and down - but in general, it rises," Proshutinsky explained.
See entire article at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5076322.stm
Thanks to Rick Fanning for this link.
.
Hmmmm. Sea levels are falling in the Pacific Ocean,
sea levels are falling in the Indian Ocean, sea levels are
falling in the Atlantic Ocean, and sea levels are falling
in the Arctic Ocean.
I somehow get the feeling that we’re not getting the full
story here.
.
Sea levels are also falling in the Maldives!
See Sea levels are falling!
.
Sea levels are also falling in Tuvalu
See Falling Sea Levels
.
Sea levels are also falling in the Atlantic Ocean
See Atlantic Sea Level Falling
.
Claim that sea level is rising is total fraud
So says Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, head of the Paleogeophysics and
Geodynamics department at Stockholm University in Sweden.
See Rising Sea Level Claim a Total Fraud
.
.
See also Antarctic Ice Sheet Growing – Sea Levels Falling
8 Nov 06 - Antarctic Ice Sheet Growing – Sea Levels Falling
Why do suppose all these thousands of stations faked all these measurements for a 100 years before the global warming story?
BTW its not at all helpful to deny sea level rise nor global warming.
Its much better to say that 7 inches in 100 years means we have time to study for another 10 or 20 years without any significant risk from sea level rise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.