It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Unless you are prepared to actually realize WHY we cannot make a perfect world, no sense at all in feeding the FEAR FACTOR, that is run by BILLIONAIRES.
originally posted by: LDragonFire
The heat is building in the Oceans while parts of North American had a mild summer.
Yet again more scientist confirm the Earth is getting warmer. Climate change is still on the march.
As our oceans turn to acid, standing by for Koch Brothers deniers.
originally posted by: DAZ21
Hold on didn't you guys just have one of the coldest winters in decades?
Oh also they are predicting another freezing winter this year. So which is it global warming or cooling, you can't pick and choose.
originally posted by: eriktheawful
a reply to: Rezlooper
You have a lot of good ideas, most of them have been out there for quite a while now.
One of them, however, you're not going to sell very easily:
The days of Suburbia need to end. We need to stop urban sprawl and find ways to eliminate the need for so many cars on the road. "Green" hybrid buses need to be the new carpool. There needs to be major investment in downtowns for more living space versus more sprawl into the countryside. For example, Atlanta and Barcelona, Spain are the same size cities, but Atlanta has 10 times the GHG emissions because Atlanta sprawls out over 4,280 square miles while Barcelona sits inside 162 miles. Over 5 million people living within 162 square miles. Think about it, energy demands would be much lower, infrastructure costs much less and much less human fatalities due to crashes. And think about the immediate jobs created if a massive plan was put in place.
A lot of people, like me, refuse to be packed into the concrete and steel jungle, like sardines. Especially those of us that are used to having yards, gardens and being able to see most of the sky and horizon.
I've lived in all three: Mega cities, suburbia, and now the country.
The worst was the cities. Loud. Noisy. Crowded. Stank, and was just depressing as hell to be surrounded by mostly glass, concrete and steel.
Suburbia was better. I had a yard, trees and a garden. My kids were able to play in their yards. They were able to walk to school and home. I was able to use my telescopes and star gaze, something that was almost impossible for me to do in the cities.
Now here in the country is even better. Acres of land, large areas for gardens, my own chickens for eggs. Any trees I cut down I plant new ones. Wild life is all about, and the well water is so good it makes the best darn coffee, tea and beer that I've ever made.
You couldn't DRAG me back to living in a city.
So you'll have a hard time selling that idea.
originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite
a reply to: Rezlooper
What are your ideas on how these ideas can translate to reality in a world where everyone who would affect these good changes just wants to be left the hell alone?
originally posted by: dogstar23
Feel free to argue the reason (s) for warning, but let's stop calling thermometers liars, shall we?
Obviously, the ability to do good research depends upon good data with known provenance. At the time WMO Resolution 40 was widely hailed in the atmospheric sciences community as a major step forward in data sharing and availability in support of both operations and research.
Thus it is with some surprise to observe CRU going through bizarre contortions to avoid releasing its climate data to Steve McIntyre. They first told him that he couldn't have it because he was not an academic. I found this to be a petty reason for keeping data out of the hands of someone who clearly wants to examine it for scholarly purposes. So, wanting to test this theory I asked CRU for the data myself, being a "real" academic. I received a letter back from CRU stating that I couldn't have the data because "we do not hold the requested information."
I found that odd. How can they not hold the data when they are showing graphs of global temperatures on their webpage? However, it turns out that CRU has in response to requests for its data put up a new webpage with the following remarkable admission (emphasis added):
We are not in a position to supply data for a particular country not covered by the example agreements referred to earlier, as we have never had sufficient resources to keep track of the exact source of each individual monthly value. Since the 1980s, we have merged the data we have received into existing series or begun new ones, so it is impossible to say if all stations within a particular country or if all of an individual record should be freely available. Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data.
Say what?! CRU has lost track of the original data that it uses to create its global temperature record!? Can this be serious? So not only is it now impossible to replicate or reevaluate homogeneity adjustments made in the past -- which might be important to do as new information is learned about the spatial representativeness of siting, land use effects, and so on -- but it is now also impossible to create a new temperature index from scratch. CRU is basically saying, "trust us." So much for settling questions and resolving debates with empirical information (i.e., science).
What the Russian papers say
Russia affected by Climategate
Controversy arose after various allegations were made including that climate scientists colluded to withhold scientific evidence and manipulated data to make the case for global warming appear stronger than it is.
Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.
The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.
Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country's territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.
Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.
The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.
Veteran Meteorologist Joe Bastardi On NASA November Temperature: “A Fraudulent Report… Tampering With Data”By P Gosselin on 22. Dezember 2013 Joe Bastardi at his Saturday Summary here tells us what’s already known: The claim that November 2013 was the hottest month ever is fraudulent. He slams NASA and NOAA for picking data that solely suits an agenda. At the 6-minute mark Bastardi shows the GISS temperature trend from 1999.
originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: WhiteAlice
My view of coming glaciation is that it is coming...just a matter of when.
Given the duration of this current interglacial, we could see the beginning of a long term cooling trend at any time. Unfortunately, it could also mean 1000 years from now. Well...not unfortunately lol Global cooling would be very bad. The doomsayers crying about global warming have no idea how benign warming is compared to cooling.
Well, considering that glaciation has repeated over and over again, saying that we're going to be headed for another glaciation is pretty much a safe bet and the only relatively unknown is when, lol. What I've been chewing in my head is along the lines of NOAA's warm oceans, cool continents idea. That we could actually knock ourselves into a sort of Little Ice Age in the Northern hemisphere due to warming.
originally posted by: CranialSponge
So are we all finally in agreement then ?
Climate scientists really haven't got a clue and can't predict a damn thing because the system is far too dynamic to be able to do so.
Therefore, the simple answer is for us to clean up our act either way (and taxation is NOT the answer), as well as learning to work within mother nature rather than trying to fight against it... and learn to adapt accordingly.
This planet has never promised us an easy ride, so why the hell are we expecting it to ??
It's time to stop with the manmade-global-warming-is-going-to-kill-us-in-50-years panic fear mongering crap.
Although the mega-ENSO and AMO are primary sources of the interdecadal variations of the NHSM, one cannot rule out the influence of the global warming. Fig. 3 shows that the NH 2-m air temperature has warmed more than the Southern Hemisphere (SH) counterpart by 0.36 °C over the past 32 y. The NHSM intensity is significantly linked to the hemispheric thermal contrast (HTC) defined by the 2-m air temperature difference between the NH (0°–60°N) and Southern Hemisphere (60°S–0°) (r = 0.63; Fig. 4C). Dynamically, the enhanced hemispheric thermal contrast can generate meridional pressure gradients that drive low-level cross-equatorial flows from the SH to the NH (Fig. 2C) and converge into the NHSM trough regions. We note that the “NH warming faster than the SH” or “warm NH–cold SH” pattern is a characteristic of the projected warming under increasing greenhouse gases forcing.