Global Cooling?

Del Boy

Active member
UK NEWS


GLOBAL WARMING? IT’S THE COLDEST WINTER IN DECADES

ICE-AGE: Frost coated much of Britain yesterday
By Tony Bonnici


NEW evidence has cast doubt on claims that the world’s ice-caps are melting, it emerged last night.
Satellite data shows that concerns over the levels of sea ice may have been premature.

It was feared that the polar caps were vanishing because of the effects of global warming.

But figures from the respected US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that almost all the “lost” ice has come back.

Ice levels which had shrunk from 13million sq km in January 2007 to just four million in October, are almost back to their original levels.

Figures show that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than is usual for the time of year.

The data flies in the face of many current thinkers and will be seized on by climate change sceptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming.

A photograph of polar bears clinging on to a melting iceberg has become one of the most enduring images in the campaign against climate change.

It was used by former US Vice President Al Gore during his Inconvenient Truth lectures about mankind’s impact on the world. But scientists say the northern hemisphere has endured its coldest winter in decades.

They add that snow cover across the area is at its greatest since 1966.

The one exception is Western Europe, which has – until the weekend when temperatures plunged to as low as -10C in some places – been basking in unseasonably warm weather. The UK has reported one of its warmest winters on record.



However, vast swathes of the world have suffered chaos because of some of the heaviest snowfalls in decades.

Central and southern China, the USA and Canada were hit hard by snowstorms.

Even the Middle East saw snow, with Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman and northern Saudi Arabia reporting the heaviest falls in years and below-zero temperatures. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan snow and freezing weather killed 120 people.

In Britain the balmy February weather came to an abrupt halt at the weekend as temperatures plunged to -10C in central England.

Experts believe that this month could end up as one of the coldest Februaries in Britain in the past 10 years.
 
Ahhhh,... the weather.... Everybody whinges about it, but no one will get off their big fat duff and do anything about it.

I guess it's up to me then????
 
so? what exactly does this prove either way? I believe global warming states more severe weather, not just warmer weather.
 
so? what exactly does this prove either way? I believe global warming states more severe weather, not just warmer weather.


See theres your problem you are looking at the whole picture rather than selectively taking the bits you want, its like claiming the dark ages never existed because the sun still came up as it does today.

I tend to think of the climate process as a sine wave with increasing amplitude, for the most part weather is unchanging however it continually reaches new extremes.
 
See theres your problem you are looking at the whole picture rather than selectively taking the bits you want, its like claiming the dark ages never existed because the sun still came up as it does today.
ah, so that's that I'm doing wrong :roll:
 
Don't know about UK, but we had warmest winter ever...

Hehe we have had the longest summer in a long time, half the country still has fire bans and a sizable chunk of the north island is under "extreme' drought conditions.

I agree...

The problem is that no one as yet knows for certain what percentage if any of that extreme weather has been influenced by mans actions.
 
Last edited:
I'm still with the "proven climactic cycles over time" crowd- since the industrial revolution the mean average temperature of the earth has risen .5 degrees. Sure, I'm concerned about the environment, but I don't buy the global warming fuss.
 
I'm still with the "proven climactic cycles over time" crowd- since the industrial revolution the mean average temperature of the earth has risen .5 degrees. Sure, I'm concerned about the environment, but I don't buy the global warming fuss.

Oddly enough when the mean moves by that much I would say there is something to be concerned about but as I said earlier no one as yet can say how much of that 0.5 degrees (I actually thought it was closer to 0.68 but I am not sure) can be attributed to the natural cycle and how much is mans influence and we are not likely to know until the next cycle.
 
Five or six ice ages, years of drought and then torrential flooding, on and off years for hurricanes- even though I pay careful attention to the weather, I'm no meteorologist, but I still believe it's a cyclic condition.
 
Five or six ice ages, years of drought and then torrential flooding, on and off years for hurricanes- even though I pay careful attention to the weather, I'm no meteorologist, but I still believe it's a cyclic condition.

There is no doubt that it is cyclic that is not what is being argued though.

As I said earlier I think of it as a sine wave with "Hot" being the peak and "Cold" being the trough and weather patterns generally fall somewhere in between this is the natural cycle of weather.

However the problem is that those peaks and troughs are getting closer together and varying in there extremity and it is this variation that we are debating, we do not know whether this variation is an abnormal natural phenomenon or man made, my personal belief is that it is a little of both.
 
I know that man is not kind to the planet, however I feel that the pollution of the atmosphere as a result of our being here is barely noticeable when compared with naturally occurring phenomena.

Several years ago, the hole in the ozone layer was of great concern here in the southern hemisphere, and it was touted as being the result of the man's use of CFCs etc. The quotation that I always remember being that "if all use of CFCs and radical chlorinated hydrocarbons were completely stopped now, it would take 50 years to slow down the growth of the hole.

Last year, the hole was the smallest it has been in 30 years. Prior to which it's existence was not documented. This huge reduction occurred within 12 months without any input by man.

My personal opinion is that the beatup was bought about by scientists jumping on the bandwagon wanting to make a name for themselves as having been the people to predict this "Disaster". They fell on their collective butts.

The climate debate is being similarly "used" by various groups with agendas of their own.
 
I know that man is not kind to the planet, however I feel that the pollution of the atmosphere as a result of our being here is barely noticeable when compared with naturally occurring phenomena.

Hard to say after all it only takes a couple of grams acrylamide to make a reservoir of water lethal, when you have a finely balanced ecosystem small changes are very dangerous.
On the other hand the Earth is an enclosed system its not like we are adding or subtracting anything from it.

Several years ago, the hole in the ozone layer was of great concern here in the southern hemisphere, and it was touted as being the result of the man's use of CFCs etc. The quotation that I always remember being that "if all use of CFCs and radical chlorinated hydrocarbons were completely stopped now, it would take 50 years to slow down the growth of the hole.
Last year, the hole was the smallest it has been in 30 years. Prior to which it's existence was not documented. This huge reduction occurred within 12 months without any input by man.

True as well although everything I read at the time said 20 years and oddly enough that was about 20-25 years ago that we greatly reduced our CFC usage.


My personal opinion is that the beatup was bought about by scientists jumping on the bandwagon wanting to make a name for themselves as having been the people to predict this "Disaster". They fell on their collective butts.

I certainly think that it has been over played in certain areas but I am less inclined to write off the entire process, there is a lot of data going back millions of years that has been used to formulate current predictions and while they may not be 100% accurate I think they are at least making educated guesses.


The climate debate is being similarly "used" by various groups with agendas of their own.

Very true and it seems to have become politicised to the point that nothing will happen good or bad until it is too late, its kind of reached the same impasse that oil has reached where everyone says that we need to change yet no one actually does we just look for new ways of making a limited resource go further than finding a replacement.
 
The usage of CFCs was tapered off over that period, beginning very slowly and it didn't really start in earnest until the late 90s, some users still have permission to use refrigerant gasses such as R12 and R22, my last ship being an example. Also in that time the use of these gasses in third world countries, particularly China has skyrocketed. All of this bearing in mind that it was only surmised that they were the culprits anyway.

It is for reasons such as this that I don't think our input has had much, if anything, to do with this sudden and totally unforeseen reduction in the size of the hole in the ozone layer. I'm absolutely convinced it was a second agenda driven beatup.

I am always highly sceptical of "educated guesses" from the academics. To me, this case is typical of the standard of their "guesses",.... little if any, better than you or I. The term "educated guesses" being somewhat of an oxymoron.
 
Back
Top