Scientific evidence now points to global cooling

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Scientific-evidence-now-points-to-global-cooling-contrary-to-UN-alarmism-52455392.html

It's fun to confuse people with science.

Anyone who has been a guest on the Glen Beck show has zero credibility in my book. It shows a political agenda that is the very antithesis of a neutral scientific method.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byrd_Polar_Research_Center

Ice Cores give solid proof

but we understand so little about the ocean.

here's an article to read on the subject http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=12455&tid=282&cid=10046

and go read the Environment/Energy forum for a while, it will curl your hair

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=115

and welcome to DU, this type of post from a newbie is usually not welcomed, but enjoy your stay....

Assholes.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25348657-401,00.html

Scroll down the page to the "Antarctic Sea Ice."
http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

The denialists lie easily and often.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Last winter had the fifth lowest maximum ice extent on record.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/arctic_thinice.html

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Interesting.



Of course, if it is expanding, it's because the ice is flowing faster, flattening out. And more precipitation is occuring.... because the air is warming and can hold more moisture.

Easterbrook is a specialist in ice cores and global climate changes. From that perspective, he is skeptical of anthropogenic global warming. He has criticized Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth<3> and IPCC temperature projections<4>. He has appeared on the Headline News program Glenn Beck<5> and in the New York Times<3> as a global warming skeptic.



Of course this just took a second and I'm sure I'm only scratching the surface.

Q. What industry provides the most funding for geology departments across the nation?

Any ideas?

The free newspaper that inflates its readership figures to gouge its advertisers? The free newspaper that gave a full throated endorsement to John McCain? That Washington Examiner?

than the current models can explain. It doesn't say that the warming and cooling since then is unexplained. If you're pinning your faith on "something is happening for the first time in 55 million years, but we don't know what", then it's not science, it's wishful thinking.

I remember hearing somewhere that they stuck them next to the outflow of air conditioning and other bad spots that would read hotter than normal temperature for the area they were placed in.

Publsihed NASA figures leave out any stattion that are held to be suspect.

Try again.

before you try to convince people of your complicated scientific theories.

Some headlines

Obama's dropping poll numbers create whiff of failure

Cap-and-trade would trigger a new global trade war

Ken McIntyre: Associated Press outsourcing to Leftist nonprofits is a bad idea

Michael Barone on Fox: Support for the Democratic plans has been dropping like a stone

http://blogs.usatoday.com/sciencefair/2009/07/could-we-be-wrong-about-global-warming.html
How about Australians posted about in Wall Street Journal.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html

or
http://www.globalwarming.org/category/cooler-heads-digest/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byrd_Polar_Research_Center

relate to the greenhouse effect? This is pure crap.

Well, why the fuck should scientists argue with that?

Dr. Easterbrook knows there is money to be made!

I wonder what his payout was/

The climate is still warming.

Easterbrook is a hack.

Director of field excursions for the 2003 International Quaternary Congress.
Associate Editor, GEOMORPHOLOGY (International Journal)
U.S. representative to UNESCO International Geological Correlation Project, Glaciations in the Northern Hemisphere

Member of International Geological Correlation Project, UNESCO
Member of International Quaternary Association
Member, Commission on Quaternary Stratigraphy of North America
Founding member of American Quaternary Association
Associate Editor, Geological Society of America Bulletin

Received national award for "Distinguished service to the Quaternary Geology and
Geomorphology Division, Geological Society of America.”

Elected national chairman of Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division, Geological Society of America

Elected national 1st-vice-chairman of Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division, Geological Society of America

Elected national 2nd-vice-chairman of Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology
Division, Geological Society of America

Elected national secretary of the Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division, Geological Society of America, 6 times (12 years)

Chairman of the Geological Society of America national meeting in Seattle

National Chairman of the Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Panel to select the Kirk Bryan Award for the best paper in geomorphology

Member of national Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division Management Board

Member of national Geological Society of American Committee on Grants and Awards

National council member, American Quaternary Research Association.


Geological Society of America (Fellow)

Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division (past president)

American Geophysical Union

International Quaternary Assoc.

American Quaternary Assoc.

8 NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Research Grants

3 Department of Interior Research Grants

U.S. Geological Survey Research Grant

Council on Governments Research Grant

Which is not to say that climate isn't reflected in the geological record, it is. But the study of geology doesn't make one an expert on the current climate conditions or models.

I've met Geologists (PhD) who are also evangelical Christians. Think about that for a moment... they believe the earth is only about 6000 years old.

Anyway, he may have a number of qualifications in Quaternary Geology, but that doesn't make him a qualified expert in climate science.

I'll stick with the climate scientists I worked with at NASA. And they tell me that the climate of the earth is warming, albeit not in a straight line and not everywhere uniformly, but warming none the less.

you know, the stuff "climate scientists" use to determine historic temps.

Nobel prize winner, invented the transistor. Started Silicon Valley.

Definitely not a "hack".

But, of course, he was a huge racist who believed in eugenics as well. Altogether not a smart or nice person.

So... scientists who are out of their field should keep their traps shut.

This guy is a geologist, not a climate scientist. He should keep his trap shut.

the workings of the brain, & the relevance of IQ tests to "intelligence" as commonly understood.


Easterbrook's degree & training = geology & he's a world-renowned expert on ice.

Thus, not a hack.

Besides which, there's no parallel between climate skepticism & racism, sorry.

geology is NOT climate science. Not even close.

This guy MIGHT be OK for geology. But he knows nothing about atmospheric science. So he should keep his trap shut on things he knows very little about. As Shockley should have (it wasn't that it was racism, it was that he didn't know anything about the field of genetics).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6240624&mesg_id=6241366


Easterbrook, D.J., submitted, Synchronous, late Pleistocene, ice sheet and alpine glacial fluctuations in the Northern and Southern hemispheres—implications for abrupt, global, climate changes, Boreas.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2005, Causes and effects of abrupt, global, climate changes and global warming: Geological Society of America.

Easterbrook, D.J., Evenson, E.B., Gosse, J., Ivy-Ochs,S., Kovanen, D.J., and Sherard, C.A., 2004, Synchronous, Global, Late Pleistocene Ice Sheet And Alpine Glacial Fluctuations, Geological Society of America.

Sherard, C.A., Easterbrook, D.J., Evenson, E.B., Gosse, J., Ivy-Ochs,S., and Kovanen, D.J., 2004, Late Pleistocene alpine glacial oscillations in the North Cascades, WA and Sawtooth Mts., ID and their relationship to global climatic changes, Geological Society of America.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2003, Global, double, younger dryas, glacial fluctuations in ice sheets and alpine glaciers, International Quaternary Association.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2003, Synchronicity and sensitivity of alpine and continental glaciers to abrupt, global, climatic changes during the Younger Dryas, 2003, Geological Society of America.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2002, Implications of Younger Dryas glacial fluctuations in the western U.S., New Zealand, and Europe, Geological Society of America.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2003, Determinaton of 36Cl production rates from the well-dated deglaciation surfaces of Whidbey and Fidalgo Islands, Washington Quaternary Research, v. 59, p.132-134.

Kovanen, D. J., and Easterbrook, D. J., 2002, Radiocarbon reservoir values for late Pleistocene marine shells in the Fraser Lowland of western north America.

Easterbrook, D. J., and Kovanen, D. J., 1998, “Pre-Younger Dryas Resurgence of the southwestern Margin of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet, British Columbia, Canada”—Comments: Boreas, v. 27, p. 229-230, Oslo, Norway.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1994, Chronology of Pre-late Wisconsin Pleistocene the Puget Lowland, Washington: in Lasmanis, R., and Cheney, E. S., Regional Geology of Washington State, Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources, Bulletin 80, p. 191-206.

Berger G. W.,. and Easterbrook, D. J., 1993, Thermoluminescence dating tests for lacustrine, glaciomarine, and floodplain sediments from western Washington and British Columbia: Canadian Journal of Earth Science, vol. 30, p. p. 1815-1828.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1992, Advance and retreat of Cordilleran ice sheets in Washington, U.S.A.: Geographie Physique et Quaternaire, v. 46, no. 1, p. 51-68.

Berger, G. W., Burke, R. M., Carver, G. A., and Easterbrook, D. J., 1991, Test of thermo-luminescence dating with coastal sediments from northern California: Chemical Geology, Isotope Geoscience Section, Elsevier Science Publishers, v. 87, p. 21-37.

etc.

just as Shockley was a HACK on genetics.

When a scientist goes outside his field of expertise, he is no more qualified to speak about things than, say, YOU are.
And we should give such a scientist all of the respect on his/her opinions on the subject outside his field that we would give, say, YOU. Which is to say... not so much.

Geological science does NOT include climate science.

So... you are spiked again.

Paleoclimatology is another well covered subject, involving researchers in the Department of Geological Sciences and the Institute for Geophysics. Studying foraminifera and coral records, Jackson School researchers explore the forcings that initiate climate change and the mechanisms by which climate signals propagate globally. The work synthesizes data and model simulations covering the past 600 million years.

Another set of climate researchers at the Institute for Geophysics has strengths in climate theory and dynamics, ice-sheet dynamics, ocean dynamics, and uncertainties and data inversion.

High-profile climate problems are addressed in these disciplines using quantitative models of the dynamic processes of the atmosphere, cryosphere, ocean, and lithosphere; modern satellite, airborne, and in situ measurements of these components of the Earth system; climate proxy time series (paleorecords); and analytical techniques to assess uncertainties in model predictions and proxy reconstructions of climate.

Carbon sequestration does not fit directly into climate science but is a potentially vital tool for mitigating effects on climate from greenhouse gases. The Bureau of Economic Geology is home to the Gulf Coast Carbon Center, one of the world‚s largest research groups testing the science of sequestration, also known as carbon capture and storage. The center employs a number of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows.

http://www.geo.utexas.edu/grad/programs/Climate-System-Science.html

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=department+of+geological+sciences+climate+

but the opposite is not true. And I know a fair bit about both.

If I want to know the climate of the earth a million years ago, I might consult a geologist. If I want to understand what is happening today with the climate of the earth, I'll ask a climatologist.

degrees in same.

if you think the climate history of the earth is irrelevant to "what's happening today" & human judgements about it, i fear you're mistaken.

what part of that statement did you not understand? How else to understand the historical record of climate? We have precious little to go on for weather patterns or climate past a thousand years previous to now.

However, a geologist does not a climate expert make.

You are giving him the same weight of expertise on CLIMATE matters as, say, James Hansen. Simply because he has published papers in peer reviewed journals... however, that doesn't make his opinions any more informed than a well read science mind from a completely different field. He has no expertise in atmospheric science, or ocean circulation patterns, or the many other sub-specialties that make up modern climatology. He can offer his opinion (expert) on historical geological evidence of ancient climates... fine... and that information may or MAY NOT be relevant to the climate changes happening today. A true climate scientist understands this and takes it into account. A geologist, no matter how well versed in his field, cannot.

They're both doctors, right?

It doesn't. Easterbrook may be able to tell us what happened when there was no industrial activity in the world, and might be able to have an educated guess at what would happen if humans didn't exist; but his speciality has nothing to to with human-influenced climate.

His whole basis is "look at the past - we didn't get global warming before, so we won't get it now". But no-one was burning fossil fuels in the past.

Thus, Easterbrook is a hack - he's ignoring reality in favour of his own political preferences.

Real scientists get their work published in peer-reviewed journals.

http://www.longrangeweather.com/climate_change.htm
Not just him but a long list of Climatologists and research facilities are listed in the op.

he got a journalism degree.



He's not kind of scientist at all.

Or the USA news and the Science examiner. http://blogs.usatoday.com/sciencefair/2009/07/could-we-be-wrong-about-global-warming.html

http://www.globalwarming.org/category/cooler-heads-digest/

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cooler_Heads_Coalition

You're finding a hell of a lot of right wing organisations, typically funded by oil and coal companies. Yes, they lie to us.

If I were you, I'd look for some independent science, rather that what the fossil fuel indistry says. It would educate you.

Exxon/ mobil has been buying off as many scientists as they can. They're desperate to keep profits. Sorry, he may have once have lived up to his credentials, but he's a sellout now, which makes him a hack.

:rofl:

No, he didn't used to be, that is true. But he decided that bullshit was more important than his reputation.

http://chriscolose.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/easterbrook... /

Only a hack could possibly put out the propagandistic crap that Easterbrook stooped to in a vain attempt to deny reality.

grad "with an interest in the atmospheric sciences".

http://www.myspace.com/chrisc24

guess i'll go with the guy with the publication history, fellowships, awards, research grants, unesco experience, etc.

You aren't looking at content. You're looking at degree. Colose is absolutely correct. Easterbrook is knocking down strawmen of his own imagination...and not particularly good ones.

But perhaps you need hay?

21-year-old envi sci grad as your big gun to refute easterbrook; turns out *you* are the *real* big gun.

i have no idea who, if anyone, is right.

but easterbrook is, by any measure, not a hack, & the areas he's speaking on in detail are within his area of expertise.

You're the one hung up Who's Who. The analysis of Easterbrook's nonsense is spot on. I don't care if Donald Duck did the analysis.

If you have no idea who is right, then perhaps you should study the topic before drawing parallels.

ps: for me, this:

"He's trying to knock down a strawman of his own making"

doesn't = "analysis"

I don't give a flying fuck about his credentials. An overwhelming majority of scientists - climatologists, geologists, meteorologists, etc - agree that global warming is REAL. The only thing that is really up for debate is how much is due to mankind, and even then most scientists agree that we've played a huge role.

I'm sorry, but a couple of pseudo-scientists are not going to persuade me that the overwhelming majority of the scientific world is wrong. He would have better luck trying to prove the Hollow Earth theory.

ps: not a pseudo-scientist.

but it's funny how all the science advocates here so quickly label him a flat-earther, hack, etc. simply because he disagrees (in some way, they don't even know how) with their beliefs.

That's why we call him a hack. You admitted yourself you don't know who to believe (thus acknowledging your limited knowledge of science). Many of us here have greater command of the scientific method (and in this case, far deeper CVs) and can see through Easterbrook's bullshit.

He failed.

Is there any goofy bullshit you WON'T believe?

over the next few decades."

Well, if that was true, we might as well all shoot up and die.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Surely you don't tombstone everyone who talks about anything you disagree with.

cheap hogwash, as quoted from a source as reliable as The Protocol of the Elders of Zion, do you?

had your asinine sources been from peer-reviewed articles in reputable scientific publications, your assertions may have had some merit

however, you've shown yourself to be nothing more than a C&P drive-by artist, with NOT ONE example of your own thought process, other than to wax dismayed over the fact that nobody here (save one other C&P halfwit) is stupid enough to play your game

what a surprise

A quote from my post #17 says

So it won't be long before I can pull the article from a scientific journal.

I don't know how to break this to you and the good Professor, but ice is three-dimensional. Do you or the good professor know whether the volume of Antarctic sea ice has increased, decreased, or stayed the same?

http://nsidc.org/seaice/characteristics/difference.html

What is already known about the Antarctic sea ice extent:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2005/sea_ice.html

A Few Selected Geologic Journal Publications

Easterbrook, D.J., submitted, Synchronous, late Pleistocene, ice sheet and alpine glacial fluctuations in the Northern and Southern hemispheres—implications for abrupt, global, climate changes, Boreas.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2005, Causes and effects of abrupt, global, climate changes and global warming: Geological Society of America.

Easterbrook, D.J., Evenson, E.B., Gosse, J., Ivy-Ochs,S., Kovanen, D.J., and Sherard, C.A., 2004, Synchronous, Global, Late Pleistocene Ice Sheet And Alpine Glacial Fluctuations, Geological Society of America.

Sherard, C.A., Easterbrook, D.J., Evenson, E.B., Gosse, J., Ivy-Ochs,S., and Kovanen, D.J., 2004, Late Pleistocene alpine glacial oscillations in the North Cascades, WA and Sawtooth Mts., ID and their relationship to global climatic changes, Geological Society of America.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2003, Global, double, younger dryas, glacial fluctuations in ice sheets and alpine glaciers, International Quaternary Association.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2003, Synchronicity and sensitivity of alpine and continental glaciers to abrupt, global, climatic changes during the Younger Dryas, 2003, Geological Society of America.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2002, Implications of Younger Dryas glacial fluctuations in the western U.S., New Zealand, and Europe, Geological Society of America.

Easterbrook, D.J., 2003, Determinaton of 36Cl production rates from the well-dated deglaciation surfaces of Whidbey and Fidalgo Islands, Washington Quaternary Research, v. 59, p.132-134.

Kovanen, D. J., and Easterbrook, D. J., 2002, Radiocarbon reservoir values for late Pleistocene marine shells in the Fraser Lowland of western north America.

Easterbrook, D. J., and Kovanen, D. J., 1998, “Pre-Younger Dryas Resurgence of the southwestern Margin of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet, British Columbia, Canada”—Comments: Boreas, v. 27, p. 229-230, Oslo, Norway.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1994, Chronology of Pre-late Wisconsin Pleistocene the Puget Lowland, Washington: in Lasmanis, R., and Cheney, E. S., Regional Geology of Washington State, Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources, Bulletin 80, p. 191-206.

Berger G. W.,. and Easterbrook, D. J., 1993, Thermoluminescence dating tests for lacustrine, glaciomarine, and floodplain sediments from western Washington and British Columbia: Canadian Journal of Earth Science, vol. 30, p. p. 1815-1828.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1992, Advance and retreat of Cordilleran ice sheets in Washington, U.S.A.: Geographie Physique et Quaternaire, v. 46, no. 1, p. 51-68.

Berger, G. W., Burke, R. M., Carver, G. A., and Easterbrook, D. J., 1991, Test of thermo-luminescence dating with coastal sediments from northern California: Chemical Geology, Isotope Geoscience Section, Elsevier Science Publishers, v. 87, p. 21-37.

Easterbrook, D. J., Naeser, N. A., and Roland, J., and Carson, R. J., 1988, Application of paleomagnetism, fission-track dating, and tephra chronology to Lower Pleistocene sediments in the Puget Lowland, Washington: in Dating Quaternary Sediments, Geological Society of America Special Paper 227, p 139-165 .

Easterbrook, D. J., 1988, Paleomagnetism of Quaternary sediments: in Dating Quaternary Sediments, Geological Society of America Special Paper 227, 111-122.


Books:

Easterbrook, D. J., 1999 Surface processes and landforms: Prentice Hall Publishing Co., 546 p.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1999, Interpretation of landforms from topographic maps and air photos: Prentice Hall Publishing Co., 193 p.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1993, Surface processes and landforms: Macmillan Publishing Co., 520 p.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1993, Interpretation of landforms from topographic maps and air photos: Western Washington University Press, 185 p.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1982, Potential geologic natural landmarks, Cascade Range, Washington: Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, Dept. of Interior, Wash. D. C., 277 p.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1971, Geology and geomorphology of western Whatcom County, Washington: Western Washington State College Press, 68 p.

Easterbrook, D. J., and Rahm, D. A., 1970, Landforms of Washington: Union Printing Co., 156 p.

Easterbrook, D. J., 1969, Principles of Geomorphology: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 462 p.


Resume:

Director of field excursions for the 2003 International Quaternary Congress.

Associate Editor, GEOMORPHOLOGY (International Journal)

U.S. representative to UNESCO International Geological Correlation Project, Glaciations in the Northern Hemisphere

Member of International Geological Correlation Project, UNESCO

Member of International Quaternary Association

Member, Commission on Quaternary Stratigraphy of North America

Founding member of American Quaternary Association

Associate Editor, Geological Society of America Bulletin .

Received national award for "Distinguished service to the Quaternary Geology and
Geomorphology Division, Geological Society of America.”

Elected national chairman of Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division, Geological Society of America

Elected national 1st-vice-chairman of Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division, Geological Society of America

Elected national 2nd-vice-chairman of Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology
Division, Geological Society of America

Elected national secretary of the Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division, Geological Society of America, 6 times (12 years)

Chairman of the Geological Society of America national meeting in Seattle

National Chairman of the Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Panel to select the Kirk Bryan Award for the best paper in geomorphology

Member of national Quaternary Geology and Geomorphology Division Management Board

Member of national Geological Society of American Committee on Grants and Awards

National council member, American Quaternary Research Association.


Research Grants and Awards

8 NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Research Grants

3 Department of Interior Research Grants

U.S. Geological Survey Research Grant

Council on Governments Research Grant


etc.

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~dbunny/resume.htm

The common assumption is that the guy is a hack you are going to create confusion within the masses if you expose them to dangerous information.

:shrug:

Maybe he knows more about ice than Wayne Gretsky, but there is nothing here about climate that is scientific. Glacier building in Antarctica, by itself, is not an indicator of global climate.

--imm

You gotta have game if you want to hang.

You got no game.

then immediately submit a post that is contrary to a basic tenant of said site you are asking for trouble. You don't really expect folks who have been battling more sophisticated disrupters for nearly a decade to fall prey to such a crude ruse. ...do you?

Jay

I don't post on threads that I agree with, don't see the point.
I have made other posts on threads I've disagreed with.

:eyes:

Jay


ON EDIT: After looking at your newly unhidden profile; I hope their science is better than your math....a few weeks?

I've been here since this forum started (really--I had another ID, never posted but maybe three or four times, and forgot the password AND didn't have the same email address, so I had to start over) and I STILL don't know how to do the HIDE PROFILE trick.

Frankly, I wonder about anyone who would WANT to hide their profile. Hell, just limit the information on it...hiding it is just...odd. Especially when you're brand spanking new--you figure people would want to introduce themselves!

It's not like DU forces you to enter personal information. I'm always skeptical of someone with a hidden profile.

and it does cause people to be suspicious of one another. They ought to give people a one month warning to adjust their profiles if they don't want the info on it broadcasted, and make it a public feature that's at least a bit useful for people (or can be).

This guy is still here, from the look of things.

I can't understand why you want to try to tout discredited theories on a progressive website.

No reason to unhide it either.

a totally fabricated lie in the I/P Forum that Hamas was promoting child rape.

Edit to add: most of the right-wingers there have learned to stay there, where their chance of being tomb-stoned are pretty small.

how?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

the unrecommend feature was made for.

and I can assure you, the OP is one.

that's why I enjoyed unreccing the post.

and by the way... MOST scientists do not agree.

meanshile, check this out, for his/her/its pesky pals whenever they drop by:

How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming

Below is a complete listing of the articles in "How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic," a series by Coby Beck containing responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming. There are four separate taxonomies; arguments are divided by:

Stages of Denial,
Scientific Topics,
Types of Argument, and
Levels of Sophistication.


Individual articles will appear under multiple headings and may even appear in multiple subcategories in the same heading.

Stages of Denial
1.There's nothing happening
a.Inadequate evidence
There is no evidence
One record year is not global warming
The temperature record is simply unreliable
One hundred years is not enough
Glaciers have always grown and receded
Warming is due to the Urban Heat Island effect
Mauna Loa is a volcano
The scientists aren't even sure

b.Contradictory evidence
It's cold today in Wagga Wagga
Antarctic ice is growing
The satellites show cooling
What about mid-century cooling?
Global warming stopped in 1998
But the glaciers are not melting
Antarctic sea ice is increasing
Observations show climate sensitivity is not very high
Sea level in the Arctic is falling
Some sites show cooling

c.No consensus
Global warming is a hoax
There is no consensus
Position statements hide debate
Consensus is collusion
Peiser refuted Oreskes

........

much more:

http://www.grist.org/article/series/skeptics/

Some people say that some scientists are looking into where the sun goes at night.

More to follow.

Tonight's forecast is Dark. Turning to widely scattered light in the morning.

Wonderful WINO radio!!!

nt

Darkness-denier!

from like the 1970s. I used to listen to it on the Dr Demento show.

WINO radio.

"Today it was like HOT at the airport. But I don't know anyone that lives at the airport!"

(done in his best hippie dippy weatherman stoned voice)

I miss George.

Who doesn't like puppies? Their wobbly legs and waggy tails. What's not to love?

...YUMMY!

Another Ice Age?

As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval...when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.

Telltale signs are everywhere — from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest. Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F... When Climatologist George J. Kukla of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory and his wife Helena analyzed satellite weather data for the Northern Hemisphere, they found that the area of the ice and snow cover had suddenly increased by 12% in 1971 and the increase has persisted ever since. Areas of Baffin Island in the Canadian Arctic, for example, were once totally free of any snow in summer; now they are covered year round.

Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world....Paradoxically, the same vortex has created quite different weather quirks in the U.S. and other temperate zones. As the winds swirl around the globe, their southerly portions undulate like the bottom of a skirt. Cold air is pulled down across the Western U.S. and warm air is swept up to the Northeast. The collision of air masses of widely differing temperatures and humidity can create violent storms—the Midwest's recent rash of disastrous tornadoes, for example....

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914,00.html


Gee, it sounds kinda similar to global warming...


People are easily manipulated by the ptb.

The scientific literature and the popular literature, as I understand things, really were moving in different directions in the 1970s. I once read an article analyzing this... sorry, no link, just my memory. And even the popular articles about it largely dried up by the late '70s.

According to their experiments in counting the Sun's neutrino output, there was not enough nuclear fusion going on to explain the Sun's thermal output.

The theory was that the nuclear fusion going on at the Sun's core went through cycles of boom and bust, and we were now in a bust cycle. The Sun's output would eventually fall somewhat, causing an Ice Age.



Howver, further research indicated that there were more kinds of neutrinos than previously thought existed. Further tests found them, and the theory was discredited.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_neutrino_problem

Meanwhile, some scientists are convinced the world is 6000 years old and the Earth stands still at the center of the universe. They must be right.

I don't think so.

Don't you have a town hall meeting to disrupt or something?

Many thanks from sunny Florida!

:hi:

Yeah, riiiiiight.

I'm afraid that my climate change scientist friends in the Antarctic would not agree with his opinion, especially since there's less ice there now than during any time since the ice was first recorded.

This mistaking opinion for facts and publishing it in a right-wing tab-rag is just asking for a banning.

Global temperature anomalies here: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts.txt

1998 anomaly: 70/100 of a degree C.
2005: 75/100
2007: 72/100

There's variation, of course. But the globe is continuing to warm, as the figures show.

But what can you expecet from a blogger who writes articles like this?



He's a RWer obsessed with ACORN. And a liar. That blog isn't worth shit.

K&U

:kick:

the scientific community is better than DU at dealing with dissent. If the guy's wrong, others in the field will calmly show why he's wrong without all the ad hominems.

:rofl:

which he says points to global cooling.

His claims will be evaluated when he gets around to publishing a paper. But a single unpublished claim is not yet evidence of anything.

Sid

Nice thread....

:rofl: :rofl:

:rofl:

:D

My understanding is the time period in which sunspot activity was higher than normal gave the impression that temps were rising. That activity has subsided and therefore temps are going back down some. I want to know how come we are banking on predictions by the same people who can't seem to tell us if it will rain 3 days from now.

Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global warming? Scafetta 2006 says "since 1975 global warming has occurred much faster than ...... Last year, there was a low amount of sunspots, and the earth's global ...
www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm - Cached - Similar

Sun spot cycle impacting global warming and cooling AP The sun has been very quiet, with a decreasing number of sunspots and flarings since January 2002, and predictions of a return to the higher cycle seen ...
www.examiner.com/x-4648-Atlanta-Weather-Examiner~y2009m6d21-Sun-spot-cycle-impacting-global-warming-and-cooling - Cached - Similar

Sunspots Aren't Causes of Global Warming - Sunspots Global Warming ... Jun 20, 2009 ... Why sunspots and solar wind are not likely to blame for global warming on Earth.
www.thedailygreen.com > Home > NEWS > News Articles > Sunspots Aren't Causes of Global Warming... - Cached - Similar

Sunspots, a Crucial Climate Indicator « Global Warming: A Worn-Out ... That is how the bulk of climate change might work, coupled with (modulated by) sunspot peak frequency there are cycles of global warming and ...
hypsithermal.wordpress.com/.../sunspots-a-crucial-climate-indicator/ - Cached - Similar

Sunspots and global warming and cooling - Kirk Mellish's Weather ... Sunspots and global warming and cooling. By. Kirk Mellish. @ June 21, 2009 4:34 PM Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) · Full report here! ...
wsbradio.com/.../sunspots-and-global-warming-an.html - Cached - Similar

Captain Capitalism: Sunspots Cause Global Warming That is how the bulk of climate change might work, coupled with (modulated by) sunspot peak frequency there are cycles of global warming and ...
captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/.../sunspots-cause-global-warming.html - Cached - Similar

Truthdig - A/V Booth - Lou Dobbs Blames Global Warming on 'Solar ... Sure, global warming is affected by sun spots .. CO2 .. animal gas .. El Nino ..ad infinitum. And THAT's the very point: the environment is ...
www.truthdig.com/.../20090107_lou_dobbs_blames_global_warming_on_solar_sun_spot_activity_cycle/ - Cached - Similar

EarthTalk: Do Sunspots Cause Global Warming and How Much Potential ... Jun 22, 2009 ... Some climate change doubters blame global warming on sunspots and/or solar wind. Many climate scientists agree that natural variations in ...
www.globalwarmingisreal.com/.../earthtalk-do-sunspots-cause-global-warming-and-how-much-potential-energy-is-there-in-u-s-oil... - Cached - Similar

The Eclipse Chaser: Those Missing Sunspots - TierneyLab Blog ... Jul 19, 2009 ... To those hanging their denial of anthropogenic global warming on sunspots, etc., isn't it true that changes in solar radiation would result ...
tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/.../the-eclipse-chaser-those-missing-sunspots/ - Cached - Similar

glaciers. Its cooler somewhere, just not at the poles or in the mountains.

environment.

What a bunch of BS.

Pretend that you have a job or something.

doesn't that show we're all worried about nothing

and FUCK those polar bears...they're so fat they need to do a little extra swimming to trim off some of that blubber

fall for it?


Is that the delivery guy from Domino's I hear knocking?

This kind of nonsense should NOT be allowed on the DU.

Go post it on the FR.

Doug D.

Bull. The only people who deny global warming at this stage are corporate or political lackeys and nutjobs. They do have a frightening tendency to misinterpret data though. A planet warming slower than anticipated is not a planet cooling.

This is DEMOCRATIC Underground not Libertarian Underground.

Jay

PUNCTUATION EDIT.

Assuming your post is accurate.

Libertarians are liberals, look at Bill Mahrer.

WHOIS Info For globalwarming.org:



globalwarming.org is owned by the Competitive Enterprise Institute

From the CEI site:


There are some areas where Liberal and Libertarian sensabilities overlap. The environment is not one of those areas.

Jay

They lie for money.

Bill Maher is a misogynist in a big way. He isn't terribly liberal on a number of issues. He's pretty much all over the place. For you to assume he's a "liberal" because he says he's a libertarian and drives a hybird suggests you need to go do a bit of homework. Shake off the cobwebs, let a little 'daylight' in there.

In fact, the planet as a whole has warmed since 1998, sometimes even in the years when surface temperatures have fallen

Science lesson follows:


http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14527-climate-myths-global-warming-stopped-in-1998.html

http://www.google.com/search?q=Record+cold+temperatures&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
and

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=332289

I also have links higher in the thread showing that the earth has gone down in temperature since 1998.

Parts of the globe get warmer, parts get colder, parts get drier (drought stricken) and parts are subject to more flooding.
Would you like to explain why the polar bear is GOING EXTINCT DUE TO LOSS OF HABITAT? Its because the glaciers they live on are melting. And I'm a biologist not a geologist but I know junk science when I see it! And just because the ice is being REDISTRIBUTED in a different way does NOT mean its increasing. In fact, I think thats a pretty good indicator of severe climate change right there.

Edit: you need to read some biology. Climate change is very evident when you look at the distrubution patterns of certain birds and other animals in the last 30 years. I've yet to meet a biologist/ecologist who doesn't think this is an issue..In fact that's where I learned about climate change in ECOLOGY in college in 1990!

a thread like this get so many responses, and to see the climate deniers posting such clearly refutable BS

every single point they've made is dealt with at that 'how to talk to a climate skeptic' link



http://preview.grist.org/article/series/skeptics/

anything to counter actual scientific fact. I LOVE rubbing their faces in their own shit...

succeed wildly with this steamer thread

oops...I did it again

time to stop

Hey dumbass, here's the data:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

Do your own analysis and get back to us. Please show your math.

and I linked to the global temperatures in post #85. Please examine that link. Hottest year: 2005. 2nd hottest year: 2007. Hottest month: Jan 2007 (it the temperature anomaly, so that's compared with a global average for that month of the year, over a 30 year base).

You have not "shown that the earth has gone down in temperature since 1998". Anywhere.

Get in touch with science, and then get back to us, please. ;-)

You are so funny!