See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Br-r-r! Where did global warming go?
Source:
Boston Globe
URL Source: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/e ... r_where_did_global_warming_go/
Published: Jan 6, 2008
Author: Jeff Jacoby
Post Date: 2008-01-06 20:34:22 by farmfriend
Ping List: *Agriculture-Environment* Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*
Keywords: None
Views: 669
Comments: 86
By Jeff Jacoby THE STARK headline appeared just over a year ago. "2007 to be 'warmest on record,' " BBC News reported on Jan. 4, 2007. Citing experts in the British government's Meteorological Office, the story announced that "the world is likely to experience the warmest year on record in 2007," surpassing the all-time high reached in 1998. But a funny thing happened on the way to the planetary hot flash: Much of the planet grew bitterly cold. In South America, for example, the start of winter last year was one of the coldest ever observed. According to Eugenio Hackbart, chief meteorologist of the MetSul Weather Center in Brazil, "a brutal cold wave brought record low temperatures, widespread frost, snow, and major energy disruption." In Buenos Aires, it snowed for the first time in 89 years, while in Peru the cold was so intense that hundreds of people died and the government declared a state of emergency in 14 of the country's 24 provinces. In August, Chile's agriculture minister lamented "the toughest winter we have seen in the past 50 years," which caused losses of at least $200 million in destroyed crops and livestock. Latin Americans weren't the only ones shivering. University of Oklahoma geophysicist David Deming, a specialist in temperature and heat flow, notes in the Washington Times that "unexpected bitter cold swept the entire Southern Hemisphere in 2007." Johannesburg experienced its first significant snowfall in a quarter-century. Australia had its coldest ever June. New Zealand's vineyards lost much of their 2007 harvest when spring temperatures dropped to record lows. Closer to home, 44.5 inches of snow fell in New Hampshire last month, breaking the previous record of 43 inches, set in 1876. And the Canadian government is forecasting the coldest winter in 15 years. Now all of these may be short-lived weather anomalies, mere blips in the path of the global climatic warming that Al Gore and a host of alarmists proclaim the deadliest threat we face. But what if the frigid conditions that have caused so much distress in recent months signal an impending era of global cooling? "Stock up on fur coats and felt boots!" advises Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences and senior scientist at Moscow's Shirshov Institute of Oceanography. "The latest data . . . say that earth has passed the peak of its warmer period, and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by 2012." Sorokhtin dismisses the conventional global warming theory that greenhouse gases, especially human-emitted carbon dioxide, is causing the earth to grow hotter. Like a number of other scientists, he points to solar activity - sunspots and solar flares, which wax and wane over time - as having the greatest effect on climate. "Carbon dioxide is not to blame for global climate change," Sorokhtin writes in an essay for Novosti. "Solar activity is many times more powerful than the energy produced by the whole of humankind." In a recent paper for the Danish National Space Center, physicists Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen concur: "The sun . . . appears to be the main forcing agent in global climate change," they write. Given the number of worldwide cold events, it is no surprise that 2007 didn't turn out to be the warmest ever. In fact, 2007's global temperature was essentially the same as that in 2006 - and 2005, and 2004, and every year back to 2001. The record set in 1998 has not been surpassed. For nearly a decade now, there has been no global warming. Even though atmospheric carbon dioxide continues to accumulate - it's up about 4 percent since 1998 - the global mean temperature has remained flat. That raises some obvious questions about the theory that CO2 is the cause of climate change. Yet so relentlessly has the alarmist scenario been hyped, and so disdainfully have dissenting views been dismissed, that millions of people assume Gore must be right when he insists: "The debate in the scientific community is over." But it isn't. Just last month, more than 100 scientists signed a strongly worded open letter pointing out that climate change is a well-known natural phenomenon, and that adapting to it is far more sensible than attempting to prevent it. Because slashing carbon dioxide emissions means retarding economic development, they warned, "the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it." Climate science isn't a religion, and those who dispute its leading theory are not heretics. Much remains to be learned about how and why climate changes, and there is neither virtue nor wisdom in an emotional rush to counter global warming - especially if what's coming is a global Big Chill.
Br-r-r! Where did global warming go?
Globe Columnist / January 6, 2008
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-4) not displayed.
.
.
.
#5. To: Critter (#4)
On Dec. 3, 2006, it was 73 degrees at 3 am in Chicago. It beat the previous record by 40 degrees. If you seriously think we are not in global climate change, good luck. The whole concept is that the disruption of the climate by any number of things, mainly man-made, will cause things to pogo up and down, but the eventual result is an irreversible trend to warming. The Great Lakes have lost a foot of water, the glaciers are melting, California first got wildfires from drought and now is getting mudslides from a foot of rain a day...this whole thing means extreme weather. Cold, hot, wet, dry. Turn off Rush. This sounds like those MORONS who put out a thing about getting 8 feet of snow and not having to call in the Fed Gov to help them, unlike New Orleans. I asked them, how much of that snow made it indoors up to the second floor. Gee, no fucking reply from those nazi squatholes.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Okay, I get your point. Global warming is happening. We all recognize Global Warming is happening ( except for the retard under Darth Cheney's thumb) But are we in the midst of a predictable natural cycle that happens every 200 years? Or is this something new, man made or man enhanced?
I was riding my motorcycle here on Jan 7th 2007. It was 70 degrees. So what? Two weeks later it was 10 below.
Tag Line For Rent (M, 48, NY)
In Chicago? OK, you seriously believe global warming does not exist. Along with a whopping 1 percent of scientists. Deal with it.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
No, in NY, near Albany. Of course global warming exists, If it didn't, this place would still be covered by a glacier. It's just a natural cycle.
Tag Line For Rent (M, 48, NY)
I guess that depends on if you believe CO2 makes a difference. If you do, the evidence is overwhelming. If you don't, I have no idea what you believe. The previous global warming events have been caused by natural releases of carbon, but we have not had things like Krakatoa in over a hundred years.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
It's kinda funny how political views somehow affect one's views on science. Everyone, everyone sane at least, wants science to rule. It's just when scientists start fucking with the oil industry or the tobacco industry, that suddenly the right wing gets all agitated. Can anyone remind me of a scientific finding that got the left wing as riled as the wingers screeching about Algore and FatMike and shit? No, you cannot. Us lefties believe in science and we are perfectly happy to be proven wrong.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Of course global warming exists, If it didn't, this place would still be covered by a glacier. My brothers live nearby, in Danby, Vt. That is not the point. We have gone through many cycles of warming and cooling, when the earth was younger. But we have never, in human history, had anything like this. Chicago, for over a hundred years, was ice cold in winter. I came here for trade shows throughout the 80s, and it was FREEZING. Now it's pretty much mild. We get a few cold days, but on the whole, the weather is like where I grew up, in Maine, but like Portland, Maine is NOW, not then. We used to have to climb out my window to shovel snow off our roof back in the 60s. Now, most ski slopes have to manufacture snow...they're delighted to have this much snow recently because it is the first time in 20 years they have had a great snow cover. Yeah, Lake Saranac is being clobbered. Right now, it's so warm in Chicago that I have to keep my doors open. That is not even a possible argument against global warming. But whatever gets you hot.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
You lefties are all artsie fartsies. What do you lefties know about science unless you think that pretending you know something will get you a government grant to pursue further investigation? Let's get real.
You are not paying attention to the science. The small amount of warming we had recently was do to the huge amount of solar activity we have had. Not to mention the fact that the warming we had was not close to the midieval warm period which is called climate optimum for a reason. And you know that period they call the little ice age? That was caused by a lack of sun spots. The glaciers are not melting. The recent loss of ice in the Arctic, which has recovered btw, was caused by a change in ocean circulation, a natural cycle according to NASA. The melting that has taken place in Greenland was do to volcanic activity warming the ice from below. The Antarctic has record levels of ice, South America had its coldest winter in 100 years. Temperatures have flat lined or dropped just about everywhere.
No. The science has shown that CO2 levels follow temperature. Cause doesn't not follow effect. Man only contributes 2-3% CO2 to the atmosphere. The largest source of CO2 is the ocean. It is also the largest absorber creating a net sink. The oceans outgas less CO2 when they are cooler, and they are cooling down. I would expect to see a net drop in CO2 levels.
what. ever.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
As opposed to 0.1 percent a hundred years ago. Significant? I, as a SANE person, think so.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Implying that anyone who does not believe in AGW is not sane. If you can't win on the science, resort to personal attacks. Works every time.
When 99 percent of the scientists are on my side, and a few fruitcakes are on yours, give up. No one sane claims that global warming is not happening. Even that nut Bush gave up, although Cheney is still hanging in there. So you're on Cheney's side, I am on the sane side. Have a nice life.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
LOL! The old consensus argument. And you believe that UN line?
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Scientists are stoopit and anyone who studies something, apart from Michael Chrichton and a few moonies, are idiots. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Go ahead, be stupid. (You do know who owns the Washington Time, right? Sadly, you probably have no clue.)
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Record snowfall in New England last month. ICE cold in the southeast last week. Record cold in Florida. This week? Warming up. It's called weather. Scientists have no idea what the weather is going to be like this coming Saturday. Global warming? So what...it's not like we can go anywhere, and I know how to swim.
Fuck you, you Cook County commie cocksucker. Go sell your ass on a southside street corner for your pimp, Todd Stroger.
Mark If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
The money that backs the Sierra Club and other green groups that don't want drilling in places like ANWR is the same money that is behind AGW. They are trusts and NGOs that make money on energy invenstment by controlling resources through regulations. This is why they want to regulate CO2. Drives prices up and eliminates smaller less expensive competition. It's an old game and one they have learned to play well.
I love how nazis argue rationally. Please see my comments about Todd Punkboy Stroger. You are too stupid to be believed. I think you must be a performance artist, pretending to be a nazi cuntboy.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
73 degrees in Chicago today. In January. Gimme a break. Broke the record by 40 degrees.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Warmed up to 70 about a thousand miles a little south of east of you today...some snow by Saturday.
The good part is, my homies in NH can go out and vote for Obama tomorrow. After growing up there, having to wade through 20 feet of snow seems to depress voter turnout.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Snicker. You really have hammer damage. Notice that the Northwest Passage is now open, after centuries of hope? Anyway, I hope you live in some place like Arizona, where you can't steal our water anymore. You really should start reading more.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
You might avail yourself of that sage advice. I recall in the past that you were unaware that this country once had a Jewish president. Not too good for a self styled genius that still believes there are two political parties in this country.
And that Jew is? Jesus, you are nuts. Roosevelt was a Dutch burgermeister. You know you're nuts, I hope.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
You demonstrate you level of intelligence here quite often and now you reveal your memory is faulty and you learned nothing.
Name the "Jew", idiot.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Perhaps you went to Harvard law school, thats good, but it seems they failed to pass on to you proper manners and civility. Shame, all that money.
I'm not a lawyer, I never went to Harvard, and what the HELL do you mean about MY civility? Just give up, you are wrong, you attacked Obama unfairly, and refused to admit you were wrong.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
I care not to wade thru the entire thread, hell...few read mine so what the fuck however: Here in mid-michigan we broke the all time recorded high temp record for this date of 70 degrees. Further, we are currently under a tornado watch (in michigan, in january?). Lived around these parts for some 50 years and never recall such an event. Of course, I like the Oleg Sorokhtin scenario that "A cold spell soon to replace global warming". I think I might have posted that article here...or not. Look for it if interested.
Never swear "allegiance" to anything other than the 'right to change your mind'!
Forget it Brian. She listens to Pigboy and OReally and she knows better than anyone else, particularly scientists. See, to here way of thinking, if 99 percent of scientists back a theory, they must be wrong, because they're limp-wristed liberal fags.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
The melting that took place this last year is normal and has happened several times in recorded history.
Your articles are terrific, Brian - I always read them and usually there's a good response to them. Now the RP articles seem to be getting most of the long thread attention but it doesn't mean your other articles are not read.
I'm always interested.
And a Russian one at that... /chuckle
Never swear "allegiance" to anything other than the 'right to change your mind'!
Care to name them? You can't, of course. Every ship that tried to go through the Northwest Passage either turned back or got ice-locked.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Maybe your readers do so because they know what you post is worthy and compelling. That's what I think. Cartoons are nice and I enjoy a few..............
"Satan / Cheney in "08" What a rude ignorant poster you are. What do you know of farmfriend's reading habits or her academic qualifications. She has added more factual commentary to this thread than you. And fyi, there are a number of scientific groups who are hestitant to say that this cycle of Global Warming we are experiencing is anything more than a natural cycle that has happened since earth had life. So put your irritating baseless authoritative sounding nothingness and blow it out your ear.
No, I listen to climatologist and other science experts. Want me to point out which ones? So Scholfield is wrong to claim that there is a “consensus” that the modern warming is man-made and will be catastrophic. Like so many others who are confused by the current debate, he relies heavily on the claims of a United Nation’s agency, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which says its reports represent the views of some 2,000 scientists. But the great majority of those scientists only comment on or contribute to a few pages of the much larger report. They expressly do not endorse the overall reports or the claims that appear in the “Summary for Policymakers,” which they do not help write or approve. Many of the scientists who participate in the IPCC process are, in fact, outspoken skeptics of man-made global warming. There is only one empirical study ever done that appeared to support the claim of a consensus that global warming is man-made. It is a widely cited (but seldom examined) study by Naomi Oreskes, a professor of gender studies at the University of California - San Diego. Oreskes examined abstracts of 928 articles published from 1993 to 2002 and found “none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position” that the recent warming of the Earth was due to human activities. Note that she didn’t claim a consensus in support of the idea that warming would be severe or harmful, or even that all of the papers agreed with the consensus position. No survey of the literature or of scientists has ever shown consensus on those claims. When other researchers tried and failed to replicate Oreskes’ findings, she was forced to admit she had mis-identified the search terms used in her study. One scientist, Benny Peiser, reported that his own analysis of the scientific abstracts supposedly studied by Oreskes found only 13 (1 percent) explicitly endorse what she called the “consensus view” while 470 (42 percent) of the abstracts include the keywords “global climate change” but do not find or endorse any link to human activities. On the day I’m writing this, DailyTech.com is reporting that new research by Klaus-Martin Schulte, accepted for publication by the journal Energy and Environment, finds no consensus on global warming in academic journal articles appearing between 2004 and early 2007. Nearly as many articles explicitly refute the theory of man-made global warming as endorse it, while most articles are simply silent on the issue. In light of all this, is it any wonder that many people are skeptical of predictions of climate catastrophe? Most people can sense when something is being hyped and oversold. But I do wonder why journalists, who really ought to know better, ignore the evidence in front of them and simply read from scripts provided by environmental advocacy groups and ambitious politicians. You don’t suppose it’s because they have an ideological agenda, do you?
Comments (46 - 86) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#6. To: Mekons4 (#5)
#7. To: Mekons4 (#5)
#8. To: Critter (#7)
#9. To: Mekons4 (#8)
#10. To: scrapper2 (#6)
ut are we in the midst of a predictable natural cycle that happens every 200 years? Or is this something new, man made or man enhanced?
#11. To: All (#10)
#12. To: Critter (#9)
No, in NY, near Albany.
#13. To: Mekons4 (#11)
No, you cannot. Us lefties believe in science and we are perfectly happy to be proven wrong.
#14. To: Mekons4, critter (#8)
Along with a whopping 1 percent of scientists.
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#15. To: Mekons4, scrapper2, critter (#10)
The previous global warming events have been caused by natural releases of carbon, but we have not had things like Krakatoa in over a hundred years.
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#16. To: farmfriend (#14)
The glaciers are not melting
#17. To: farmfriend (#15)
No. The science has shown that CO2 levels follow temperature. Cause doesn't not follow effect. Man only contributes 2-3% CO2 to the atmosphere.
#18. To: Mekons4 (#17)
I, as a SANE person, think so.
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#19. To: farmfriend (#18)
#20. To: Mekons4 (#19)
When 99 percent of the scientists are on my side, and a few fruitcakes are on yours, give up.
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#21. To: farmfriend (#20)
#22. To: Critter (#9)
Remember...G-d saved more animals than people on the ark. www.siameserescue.org
#23. To: Mekons4 (#19)
#24. To: Mekons4, Critter, who knows what evil, Kamala (#21)
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#25. To: Kamala (#23)
Fuck you, you Cook County commie cocksucker. Go sell your ass on a southside street corner for your pimp, Todd Stroger.
#26. To: who knows what evil (#22)
#27. To: Mekons4 (#26)
Remember...G-d saved more animals than people on the ark. www.siameserescue.org
#28. To: who knows what evil (#27)
#29. To: scrapper2 (#13)
You lefties are all artsie fartsies. What do you lefties know about science unless you think that pretending you know something will get you a government grant to pursue further investigation? Let's get real.
#30. To: Mekons4 (#29)
You really should start reading more.
#31. To: Cynicom (#30)
#32. To: Mekons4 (#31)
#33. To: Cynicom (#32)
#34. To: Mekons4 (#33)
(Edited)
#35. To: Cynicom (#34)
#36. To: farmfriend (#0)
#37. To: Brian S (#36)
#38. To: Mekons4 (#29)
Notice that the Northwest Passage is now open, after centuries of hope?
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#39. To: Brian S (#36)
I care not to wade thru the entire thread, hell...few read mine so what the fuck however:
#40. To: Brian S (#36)
Look for it if interested.
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
#41. To: Mekons4 (#37)
See, to here way of thinking, if 99 percent of scientists back a theory, they must be wrong, because they're limp-wristed liberal fags.
#42. To: farmfriend (#38)
The melting that took place this last year is normal and has happened several times in recorded history.
#43. To: Brian S (#36)
..few read mine so what the fuck however:
#44. To: Mekons4, farmfriend, Brian S (#37)
Forget it Brian. She listens to Pigboy and OReally and she knows better than anyone else, particularly scientists. See, to here way of thinking, if 99 percent of scientists back a theory, they must be wrong, because they're limp-wristed liberal fags.
#45. To: Mekons4, Brian S (#37)
Forget it Brian. She listens to Pigboy and OReally and she knows better than anyone else, particularly scientists.
See, to here way of thinking, if 99 percent of scientists back a theory, they must be wrong, because they're limp-wristed liberal fags.
Global Warming Consensus Does Not Exist Among Scientists
~snip~
My spelling is Wobbly. It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. -- Winnie the Pooh
.
.
.