Full Version: Global Cooling
QUOTE
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....
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." ...
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.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the planetary hot flash: Much of the planet grew bitterly cold....
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." ...
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.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editoria...bal_warming_go/
Questions for Debate:
If 2007 was a "cool" year then
Is the global warming "phenomenon" a way to shift resources and wealth from developed to developing nations?
Is the global warming "phenomenon" a way to institute trading carbon credits to enhance the wealth of those who will make this market?
Is the global warming "phenomenon" a backhanded way to create what might be termed "global economic justice"?
QUOTE(quick @ Mar 19 2008, 02:34 PM) 
QUOTE
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....
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." ...
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.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the planetary hot flash: Much of the planet grew bitterly cold....
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." ...
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.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editoria...bal_warming_go/
Questions for Debate:
If 2007 was a "cool" year then
Is the global warming "phenomenon" a way to shift resources and wealth from developed to developing nations?
Is the global warming "phenomenon" a way to institute trading carbon credits to enhance the wealth of those who will make this market?
Is the global warming "phenomenon" a backhanded way to create what might be termed "global economic justice"?
This seems to me to be an apples and oranges thread. The lead in is a discussion about cooling or moderating temperature in relation to global warming theory. On the other hand your questions are about carbon credits and secret conspiracies to shift resources and impose a just economic order on nations.
Just a thought on your earlier point. I suggest you go back to 1940 and check what happened then. People for some reason act like AGW theory projects a straight temperature line parallel with CO2 rise. It just aint so. And as far as some scientist projecting a record high global temperature for 2007, I take that to being little more than an educated guess by a particular scientist. And I would like for once when one of these folks say the warming is all solar that they peer review the basis for that view and give us a nice neat readable paper full of statistics and graphs.
I might also suggest that the temperature plateau that we have been on for 10 years is at an historically very high level. I'm certainly interested in the forcings involved, whether we go up down or level out.
QUOTE(Dingo @ Mar 19 2008, 05:24 PM)
This seems to me to be an apples and oranges thread. The lead in is a discussion about cooling or moderating temperature in relation to global warming theory. On the other hand your questions are about carbon credits and secret conspiracies to shift resources and impose a just economic order on nations.
Just a thought on your earlier point. I suggest you go back to 1940 and check what happened then. People for some reason act like AGW theory projects a straight temperature line parallel with CO2 rise. It just aint so. And as far as some scientist projecting a record high global temperature for 2007, I take that to being little more than an educated guess by a particular scientist. And I would like for once when one of these folks say the warming is all solar that they peer review the basis for that view and give us a nice neat readable paper full of statistics and graphs.
I might also suggest that the temperature plateau that we have been on for 10 years is at an historically very high level. I'm certainly interested in the forcings involved, whether we go up down or level out.
Just a thought on your earlier point. I suggest you go back to 1940 and check what happened then. People for some reason act like AGW theory projects a straight temperature line parallel with CO2 rise. It just aint so. And as far as some scientist projecting a record high global temperature for 2007, I take that to being little more than an educated guess by a particular scientist. And I would like for once when one of these folks say the warming is all solar that they peer review the basis for that view and give us a nice neat readable paper full of statistics and graphs.
I might also suggest that the temperature plateau that we have been on for 10 years is at an historically very high level. I'm certainly interested in the forcings involved, whether we go up down or level out.
Are you talking about all of history, or just since we have had a thorough understanding of climate and the technology to accurately track and record it? There is a several billion years difference between the two, you know!
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.