Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Cooling World (Blast From The Past Archived Newsweek Article Warning About "Global Cooling")
Newsweek ^ | April 28, 1975

Posted on 10/02/2003 10:21:17 AM PDT by presidio9

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last
To: cogitator; presidio9

"The time series shows the combined global land and marine surface temperature record from 1856 to 2002."

And the following time series are representative of the change in global temperature record across the last 500 thousand years, note the minor uptick(i.e. 1856 to 2002 identified as "global warming") to a median temperature in an overall downtrend for the last 2400 years,

One's trend all depends on the time frame one wants to use to make a political point with.

 

Ice Ages & Astronomical Causes
Brief Introduction to the History of Climate
by Richard A. Muller

Figure 1-2 Climate of the last 2400 years

 

Figure 1-3 Climate of the last 12,000 years

Figure 1-4 Climate of the last 100,000 years

Figure 1-5 Climate for the last 420 kyr, from Vostok ice


21 posted on 10/02/2003 1:12:25 PM PDT by ancient_geezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ancient_geezer
You've missed the point of my posting, AG. The thread began with a Newsweek article that discussed "global cooling" (notwithstanding that there was not really any peer-reviewed science during that period that suggested an actual cooling trend). I posted the graph to show that the global cooling suggestions were made due to a short period of time during the 20th century when the warming trend that commenced at about the turn of the century moderated. There have been suggestions that global temperatures during this time, particularly in the Northern Hemisphere, were influenced by sulfate aerosols as industrial production, commencing with the war effort in the early '40s and continuing into the "Baby Boom" post-war economy, was very strong with few emissions controls. There is also a possible relationship suggested with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation mode.

I have no intention of getting into a broader discussion of "global warming" on this thread. I know you're out there. I have had some distractions in my personal life that have temporarily detracted from my ability to post topics and discuss them fully on FR. This "condition" may persist for a few more weeks. But as time allows, I will be glad to continue discussion on the topic. Just not here, and not now.

22 posted on 10/02/2003 1:56:50 PM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kleon
So, yes, there has been a warming trend. What exactly is this thread supposed to prove?

See post 22, my reply to ancient_geezer.

23 posted on 10/02/2003 1:58:08 PM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Victoria Delsoul; PatrickHenry; Quila; Rudder; donh; VadeRetro; RadioAstronomer; Travis McGee; ...

((((((growl)))))


24 posted on 10/02/2003 1:58:54 PM PDT by Sabertooth (No Drivers' Licences for Illegal Aliens. Petition SB60. http://www.saveourlicense.com/n_home.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9; Sabertooth; *Global Warming Hoax
Yeah, yeah ... I know. Not 'Global Warming', but I think they'd like/WANT to see this one ...


25 posted on 10/02/2003 2:09:38 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
Don't we all just love cop-outs in the form of cryptic indications of deeper knowledge that can not be revealed at this time...
26 posted on 10/02/2003 2:12:51 PM PDT by presidio9 (Countdown to 27 World Championships...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Drammach
Lest we not forget ... Soylent Green!
27 posted on 10/02/2003 2:53:08 PM PDT by capitan_refugio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
I remember this article from when it was printed and repeat it to everyone who agonizes over Global Warming.
28 posted on 10/02/2003 2:55:40 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (Leave, Pat, Leave!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: m1911
You said:

"That global climate science is nowhere near advanced enough to form a basis of sound policy decisions, but agenda-driven studies are being used anyway."

How advanced must it be? Unfortunatly, science will never be able to tell us exactly what will happen and when, but it can help gauge the risks. To me, the risks are great and the data sound. Policy needs to change. I'm with Arnold on this on, one of the only left-wing issues I do applaud him for.

I'm sorry, but the "global cooling" business is a typical strawman, often held up as a counter to pro-environment policy. The fact is, scientists disagree. And just because they disagree doesn't mean they are all wrong. Global cooling as a theory was wrong, and that is one of the reasons there was no enormous outcry in the scientific community when it was published.
29 posted on 10/02/2003 3:01:11 PM PDT by Kleon (You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
I think it's safe to say that the climate in the future will be different than it is today. If it happens to be the same, go to future + 1.
30 posted on 10/02/2003 3:03:06 PM PDT by gitmo (Zero Tolerance = Intolerance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kleon

Unfortunatly, science will never be able to tell us exactly what will happen and when, but it can help gauge the risks. To me, the risks are great and the data sound.

What data??

The only thing the global warming alarmism is riding on are cluged up computer models that don't agree with real world measurement and predict neither future not past Climates, nor do those models even agree when compared to each other.

refer: Global Warming Score Card

 

What risks are there of global warming within the capacity of man to effect a difference?

Mankind's impact is only 0.28% of Total Greenhouse effect

" There is no dispute at all about the fact that even if punctiliously observed, (the Kyoto Protocol) would have an imperceptible effect on future temperatures -- one-twentieth of a degree by 2050. "

Dr. S. Fred Singer, atmospheric physicist
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia,
and former director of the US Weather Satellite Service;
in a Sept. 10, 2001 Letter to Editor, Wall Street Journal

 

Anthropogenic (man-made) Contribution to the "Greenhouse
Effect," expressed as % of Total (water vapor INCLUDED)

Based on concentrations (ppb) adjusted for heat retention characteristics  % of All Greenhouse Gases

% Natural

% Man-made

 Water vapor 95.000% 

 94.999%

0.001% 
 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 3.618% 

 3.502%

0.117% 
 Methane (CH4) 0.360% 

 0.294%

0.066% 
 Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 0.950% 

 0.903%

0.047% 
 Misc. gases ( CFC's, etc.) 0.072% 

 0.025%

0.047% 
 Total 100.00% 

 99.72

0.28% 

 

CO2-Temperature Correlations

  • "(1) correlation does not prove causation, (2) cause must precede effect, and (3) when attempting to evaluate claims of causal relationships between different parameters, it is important to have as much data as possible in order to weed out spurious correlations.

    ***

    Consider, for example, the study of Fischer et al. (1999), who examined trends of atmospheric CO2 and air temperature derived from Antarctic ice core data that extended back in time a quarter of a million years.  Over this extended period, the three most dramatic warming events experienced on earth were those associated with the terminations of the last three ice ages; and for each of these climatic transitions, earth's air temperature rose well in advance of any increase in atmospheric CO2.  In fact, the air's CO2 content did not begin to rise until 400 to 1,000 years after the planet began to warm.  Such findings have been corroborated by Mudelsee (2001), who examined the leads/lags of atmospheric CO2 concentration and air temperature over an even longer time period, finding that variations in atmospheric CO2 concentration lagged behind variations in air temperature by 1,300 to 5,000 years over the past 420,000 years."

[ see also: Indermuhle et al. (2000), Monnin et al. (2001), Yokoyama et al. (2000), Clark and Mix (2000) ]

  • "Other studies periodically demonstrate a complete uncoupling of CO2 and temperature "

[see: Petit et al. (1999), Staufer et al. (1998), Cheddadi et al., (1998), Raymo et al., 1998, Pagani et al. (1999), Pearson and Palmer (1999), Pearson and Palmer, (2000) ]

  • "Considered in their entirety, these several results present a truly chaotic picture with respect to any possible effect that variations in atmospheric CO2 concentration may have on global temperature.  Clearly, atmospheric CO2 is not the all-important driver of global climate change the climate alarmists make it out to be."

 

Global warming and global dioxide emission and concentration:
a Granger causality analysis

http://isi-eh.usc.es/trabajos/122_41_fullpaper.pdf

  •  "We find, in opposition to previous studies, that there is no evidence of Granger causality from global carbon dioxide emission to global surface temperature. Further, we could not find robust empirical evidence for the causal nexus from global carbon dioxide concentration to global surface temperature."

Here Comes the Sun

"Carbon dioxide, the main culprit in the alleged greenhouse-gas warming, is not a "driver" of climate change at all. Indeed, in earlier research Jan Veizer, of the University of Ottawa and one of the co-authors of the GSA Today article, established that rather than forcing climate change, CO2 levels actually lag behind climatic temperatures, suggesting that global warming may cause carbon dioxide rather than the other way around."

***

"Veizer and Shaviv's greatest contribution is their time scale. They have examined the relationship of cosmic rays, solar activity and CO2, and climate change going back through thousands of major and minor coolings and warmings. They found a strong -- very strong -- correlation between cosmic rays, solar activity and climate change, but almost none between carbon dioxide and global temperature increases."

 


 

Indeed just what precise risks at all?

Petition Project: http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p357.htm

During the past 2 years, more than 17,100 basic and applied American scientists, two-thirds with advanced degrees, have signed the Global Warming Petition.

Specifically declaring:

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."

Signers of this petition so far include 2,660 physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental scientists (select this link for a listing of these individuals) who are especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide on the Earth's atmosphere and climate.

Signers of this petition also include 5,017 scientists whose fields of specialization in chemistry, biochemistry, biology, and other life sciences (select this link for a listing of these individuals) make them especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide upon the Earth's plant and animal life.

Nearly all of the initial 17,100 scientist signers have technical training suitable for the evaluation of the relevant research data, and many are trained in related fields.


31 posted on 10/02/2003 4:11:02 PM PDT by ancient_geezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Kleon
I'm sorry, but the "global cooling" business is a typical strawman

Do you even know what a strawman is?

32 posted on 10/03/2003 6:42:32 AM PDT by presidio9 (Countdown to 27 World Championships...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
No, I just used it because it sounds nice--of course I do. global cooling is an easily refutable claim that is used to discredit global warming, the definition of a strawman.
33 posted on 10/03/2003 7:22:55 AM PDT by Kleon (You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Kleon
Incorrect. Since we have no significant time-scale measures of Global Warming, Global Cooling is equally valid. They are both speculative, and I rightly treat them with the same level of seriousness.
34 posted on 10/03/2003 7:25:48 AM PDT by presidio9 (Countdown to 27 World Championships...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
In the absence of time-scale measures, I think we can look at data concerning the greenhouse effect and see some merit in the theory. We know the greenhouse effect exists, otherwise, the heat escaping from the earth would cause the planet to be inhospitable. Also, there is good data suggesting that pollutants caused by humans hold more heat than what is in the atmosphere naturally. I think the most serious problem is the concentration of methane, which has alomst doubled in the last decade.

I understand your position on this, and share concern over policy influenced by alarmists (who I think are overreacting) affecting production and capitalism. It is this dilema that motivated me to study policies concerning emissions. I'm neither a climatologist or an economist, but there are some options that could limit emissions while benefiting producers, namely creating a market for emmision permits, which can be traded and sold.



35 posted on 10/03/2003 7:50:11 AM PDT by Kleon (You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Kleon
Those liberal alarmists have their hooks into you, that's for sure! There is plenty of evidence proving that nothing man does short of nuclear weapons can change the global enviornment. Nature takes care of itself.
36 posted on 10/03/2003 7:54:25 AM PDT by presidio9 (Countdown to 27 World Championships...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Don't we all just love cop-outs in the form of cryptic indications of deeper knowledge that can not be revealed at this time...

My father was hospitalized with a serious condition. Give me a break! When I have the time (and I expect it to be sooner than later), I'll load my cannons with all the grape they can handle.

37 posted on 10/03/2003 7:58:35 AM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
"We have met the enemy...and they are us."
(Pogo)
38 posted on 10/03/2003 8:08:50 AM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
My father was hospitalized with a serious condition. Give me a break!

Prayers for your father.
I know better than to kick a man when he's down.

39 posted on 10/03/2003 8:18:09 AM PDT by presidio9 (Countdown to 27 World Championships...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Kleon
"...To me, the risks are great and the data sound. Policy needs to change...."

What do you think about the temperature date for the last 400,000 years from the Vostok ice core samples ?

BP = BEFORE PRESENT


40 posted on 10/03/2003 8:20:06 AM PDT by gatex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson