1974: National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado: 'In February of 1972 earth-orbiting artificial satellites revealed the existence of a greatly increased area of the snow and ice cover of the north polar cap as compared to all previous years of space age observations. Some scientists believe that this may have presaged the onset of the dramatic climate anomalies of 1972 that brought far-reaching adversities to the world’s peoples.'
'There are strong signs that these recent climate disasters were not random deviations from the usual weather, but instead signals of the emergence of a new normal for world climates'
Excerpt from 1974 NCAR report:
Climate Change and its Effect on World Food
by Walter Orr Roberts Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, and National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
In February of 1972 earth-orbiting artificial satellites revealed the existence of a greatly increased area of the snow and ice cover of the north polar cap as compared to all previous years of space age observations. Some scientists believe that this may have presaged the onset of the dramatic climate anomalies of 1972 that brought far-reaching adversities to the world’s peoples. Moreover, there is mounting evidence that the bad climate of 1972 may be the forerunner of a long series of less favorable agricultural crop years that lie ahead for most world societies. Thus widespread food shortages threaten just at the same time that world populations are growing to new highs. Indeed, less favorable climate may be the new global norm. The Earth may have entered a new “little ice age”
There are strong signs that these recent climate disasters were not random deviations from the usual weather, but instead signals of the emergence of a new normal for world climates
Rojay at least you are starting to get it. It is long term tends not individual events that point where we are going. And when I say long term I mean Loooooooooonggggg term. Look at figures over the last 100-years.
We're so much smarter now Rojay. We understand complex atmospheric conditions completely. Our experts are so much more expert. We couldn't possibly be incorrect about our recent "global warming/climate change dire predictions.
Pollution is good for us, let's not reduce it for any reason. At the least, let's not do anything that could be construed as support for a crazy theory like global warming or climate change. People in China in big cities are wearing masks, but hey, their economy is booming. That's what we need here, clouds of pollution er, I mean clouds of prosperity swirling in the air.
Max.......Typical reply,glad you have all the answers.
Could be that the climate on this planet is governed by something other than pollution.
There are increasing signs that this planet is starting to cycle into a cooling phase,but I know the religion and money of "Climate Change" is the only answer. Further more NO group of scientist would ever prostitute themselves in order to continue to receive grant money from our Federal Government.
In the spirit of friendly banter Rojay, are you not posting to tell all us lefties definitively how wrong we are? I honestly don't have an emotional stake in global warming or climate change. To me, it makes sense on paper that as populations grow, and as energy consumption goes up this means heat goes up. It's not a myth that some big glaciers and ice sheets are melting. The exact cause of that and what it means is where all the debate lies and with the internet, it is quite possible to find diametrically opposing views. I see it less a matter of scientists prostituting themselves and more a matter of people coming to different conclusions. The definitive answer is not my greatest interest.
My greater interest is rising levels of pollution, shitty air, and shitty water. For many people, it seems impossible to have discussions on this without invoking their favorite dogma of whether there is or isn't global warming. That kind of thinking is the shit I will always make fun of. Like everything else, the answer is, "We can't do that because it's too expensive". This is only true from one angle, namely the angle of profit. We can conserve and still generate profits. What we can't do is conserve, protect and endless consume cheap shit that we mindlessly use and discard to a landfill a few years later when the next new thing comes along.
You should know by now Rojay, what I mock is absolutism.
"but don't think for a moment that global cooling is a far greater threat to humankind than the lie of global warming."
That's a little tortuous, but I'll respond to what I think you mean. If it's called global something or other, whether cooling or warming, the effect should be literally global. I have to admit I find it ironic that conservatives not only believe global warming is a hoax, but also that the exact opposite is true. Liberals can't just be wrong, they have to be 180 degrees wrong.
Anyhow TD, what are the global effects of cooling that we have seen? What changes are we seeing top to bottom that go with a cooling phenomenon? As for the clever comment about don't move to China if we don't like their pollution, do you genuinely believe that their pollution does not ultimately effect us?
Snow in Egypt, first time in 100 years. -132 degrees in the Arctic, just a couple of examples. I'm sure you are aware of these two, however, the main point is that it was a hoax dreamed up by folks that live off grants and scholarships, and the facts never bore out, but still you argue the facts, and the facts are it was a scam.
So because it got cold somewhere that is historically not cold, this is proof of global cooling, but waves of record heat and droughts are proof of....nothing. Like I said before here TD, I don't have an emotional investment in making people believe that man is causing global warming. Conversely, you seem QUITE emotionally invested in making sure we all come to the conclusion that global warming, as a hypothesis, is bullshit. Meh, hold tight to your donkey Don Quixote, sometimes the windmill bites back.
For the bazillionth time, I am not here to argue for global warming, pollution is my thing. Interesting that you are in despair about the financial mess being left to your twins but don't seem to care much about pollution. Maybe you do care about it, but not if it means agreeing with liberals who might also believe in global warming.
Here in NC in 1917-1918 it was so cold that the Albemarle and Pamlico sounds froze over. Here we are about 100 years later we are having a Christmas where the temps will push towards 80 on Monday and Tuesday. Guess we had our global cooling last century.
1974: National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado: 'In February of 1972 earth-orbiting artificial satellites revealed the existence of a greatly increased area of the snow and ice cover of the north polar cap as compared to all previous years of space age observations. Some scientists believe that this may have presaged the onset of the dramatic climate anomalies of 1972 that brought far-reaching adversities to the world’s peoples.'
ReplyDelete'There are strong signs that these recent climate disasters were not random deviations from the usual weather, but instead signals of the emergence of a new normal for world climates'
Excerpt from 1974 NCAR report:
Climate Change and its Effect on World Food
by Walter Orr Roberts Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, and National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
In February of 1972 earth-orbiting artificial satellites revealed the existence of a greatly increased area of the snow and ice cover of the north polar cap as compared to all previous years of space age observations. Some scientists believe that this may have presaged the onset of the dramatic climate anomalies of 1972 that brought far-reaching adversities to the world’s peoples. Moreover, there is mounting evidence that the bad climate of 1972 may be the forerunner of a long series of less favorable agricultural crop years that lie ahead for most world societies. Thus widespread food shortages threaten just at the same time that world populations are growing to new highs. Indeed, less favorable climate may be the new global norm. The Earth may have entered a new “little ice age”
There are strong signs that these recent climate disasters were not random deviations from the usual weather, but instead signals of the emergence of a new normal for world climates
DOES ANY OF THIS SOUND FAMILIAR ??
yeah how bout the statement "beating a dead horse"? That sound familiar?
ReplyDeletericky.....Great reply. Love it
DeleteOnly the Liberal mind knows.
Did you buy that crap the first time ?
Rojay at least you are starting to get it. It is long term tends not individual events that point where we are going. And when I say long term I mean Loooooooooonggggg term. Look at figures over the last 100-years.
DeleteWe're so much smarter now Rojay. We understand complex atmospheric conditions completely. Our experts are so much more expert. We couldn't possibly be incorrect about our recent "global warming/climate change dire predictions.
ReplyDeleteWe just couldn't.
William...
DeleteExpert..= Drip under pressure.
Pollution is good for us, let's not reduce it for any reason. At the least, let's not do anything that could be construed as support for a crazy theory like global warming or climate change. People in China in big cities are wearing masks, but hey, their economy is booming. That's what we need here, clouds of pollution er, I mean clouds of prosperity swirling in the air.
ReplyDeleteMax.......Typical reply,glad you have all the answers.
DeleteCould be that the climate on this planet is governed by something other than pollution.
There are increasing signs that this planet is starting to cycle into a cooling phase,but I know the religion and money of "Climate Change" is the only answer.
Further more NO group of scientist would ever prostitute themselves in order to continue to receive grant money from our Federal Government.
In the spirit of friendly banter Rojay, are you not posting to tell all us lefties definitively how wrong we are? I honestly don't have an emotional stake in global warming or climate change. To me, it makes sense on paper that as populations grow, and as energy consumption goes up this means heat goes up. It's not a myth that some big glaciers and ice sheets are melting.
DeleteThe exact cause of that and what it means is where all the debate lies and with the internet, it is quite possible to find diametrically opposing views. I see it less a matter of scientists prostituting themselves and more a matter of people coming to different conclusions. The definitive answer is not my greatest interest.
My greater interest is rising levels of pollution, shitty air, and shitty water. For many people, it seems impossible to have discussions on this without invoking their favorite dogma of whether there is or isn't global warming. That kind of thinking is the shit I will always make fun of. Like everything else, the answer is, "We can't do that because it's too expensive". This is only true from one angle, namely the angle of profit. We can conserve and still generate profits. What we can't do is conserve, protect and endless consume cheap shit that we mindlessly use and discard to a landfill a few years later when the next new thing comes along.
You should know by now Rojay, what I mock is absolutism.
People in China wearing masks has nothing to do with the hoax of global warming.
ReplyDeletewhich is exactly what Max said. It's pollution and we don't want to have to live like that.
ReplyDeleteSo don't move there, but don't think for a moment that global cooling is a far greater threat to humankind than the lie of global warming.
Delete"but don't think for a moment that global cooling is a far greater threat to humankind than the lie of global warming."
DeleteThat's a little tortuous, but I'll respond to what I think you mean. If it's called global something or other, whether cooling or warming, the effect should be literally global. I have to admit I find it ironic that conservatives not only believe global warming is a hoax, but also that the exact opposite is true. Liberals can't just be wrong, they have to be 180 degrees wrong.
Anyhow TD, what are the global effects of cooling that we have seen? What changes are we seeing top to bottom that go with a cooling phenomenon? As for the clever comment about don't move to China if we don't like their pollution, do you genuinely believe that their pollution does not ultimately effect us?
http://www.thegwpf.org/
Deletehttp://www.thegwpf.org/global-sea-ice-extent-highest-level-1994/
DeleteSnow in Egypt, first time in 100 years. -132 degrees in the Arctic, just a couple of examples. I'm sure you are aware of these two, however, the main point is that it was a hoax dreamed up by folks that live off grants and scholarships, and the facts never bore out, but still you argue the facts, and the facts are it was a scam.
ReplyDeleteSo because it got cold somewhere that is historically not cold, this is proof of global cooling, but waves of record heat and droughts are proof of....nothing. Like I said before here TD, I don't have an emotional investment in making people believe that man is causing global warming. Conversely, you seem QUITE emotionally invested in making sure we all come to the conclusion that global warming, as a hypothesis, is bullshit. Meh, hold tight to your donkey Don Quixote, sometimes the windmill bites back.
DeleteFor the bazillionth time, I am not here to argue for global warming, pollution is my thing. Interesting that you are in despair about the financial mess being left to your twins but don't seem to care much about pollution. Maybe you do care about it, but not if it means agreeing with liberals who might also believe in global warming.
Here in NC in 1917-1918 it was so cold that the Albemarle and Pamlico sounds froze over. Here we are about 100 years later we are having a Christmas where the temps will push towards 80 on Monday and Tuesday. Guess we had our global cooling last century.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete