It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Unusual cold & snow around the world, global cooling?

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 03:00 PM
link   




posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I think that can be answered simply yet TO answer it is complex. The percentage of human fault in climate change is directly connected to our CO2 emissions per person. And you cant just blanket apply a value to the Earths population becuase people in developed countries are much bigger carbon emitters than people in the 3rd world. That is the amount of CO2 each person on earth generates due to their activities which is variable contingent on where they live and their standard of living. Its not just driving in your car, its the food we eat, our energy usage, our consumerism, all are related to carbon emissions. So its a complex number, but I know there are studies that give a value to human contribution, and that's what the assertion that its man made is based.
edit on 9-11-2015 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: jjkenobi

1. Snow will be rare by end of the century.

2. Al Gore's comment was snipped and continues to be wrongly quoted.

3. More ski towns across the US are having problems with snow and warmth than enjoyed the ridiculous amount of snow we got last year and in 2010 (In the North-East and Mid-West). Snow sports across the globe are dealing with snow shortages and temperatures too warm, too frequently, to use snow machines.

Your google is broken.
edit on 11/9/2015 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Everybody, consider the difference between snow and temperature.

You can have large snowfalls, because that's increased precipitation, with global warming as your atmosphere has more energy overall and warmer air can absorb more water. Snow comes from advection of moisture and intersection with colder air.

For a ski resort, what they care about is keeping snow previously deposited, and that requires sustained cool weather. And here, increased average winter temperatures makes the critical difference.

So global warming is completely compatible with observations of big blizzards, and yet snow sticking less in high-altitude mountain regions which traditionally held snow for months. Antarctica center is very dry and snows very little even though it's extremely cold. Now it's warming and snowing more from a paper I've heard.

And high altitude regions is exactly where you would expect, from the theory and mechanism, increases in greenhouse effect to be more important in warming. Firstly, they're at higher altitude and naturally dry, so there is less low-level atmosphere (which can be humid) between them and space. So the baseline greenhouse effect at altitude is less than in other places. Therefore the contribution from increased CO2 and other greenhouse gases (CO2 is just slightly over half of total anthropogenic global warming forcing by some estimates) makes more of a relative difference to the climate.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 08:40 PM
link   
It is always darkest and coldest just before the dawn. I think we are approaching the dawn of a new age, yet it will get much darker and colder before the dawn is reached.
edit on 9-11-2015 by KEACHI because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu



Regardless of whether it is getting warmer or colder, I do not think mankind is a major driver.


I don't understand statements like that. I always wonder about this sort of thing Tonkatsu. I just read all the rest - about graphs and fudged data - blah, blah, blah...

When people say I don't think... that's just an opinion

Interesting



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyMayhew
a reply to: Domo1

In the UK and some other countries (Japan is one) you need a TV licence if you have apparatus capable of receiving live TV transmissions. This is used to pay for the "State" TV service (the BBC in our case).


No! That is not true!
Read your tv license and you will see that it states "Receive while being broadcast". You can have a hundred tv sets and you do not need a license unless you use one of them to tune in to a tv station.
Dont buy a license and you will be visited by the company employed to police the system, they will demand to be let into your home to check that you don't have a tv set. Personally I always invite them to go have sex with them selves, but I've been present at a friends house when they've called and I've pulled them up on that exact point because they always say "You've got a tv, you need a license".
A simple read of the license confirms that you do not.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: VoidHawk

Would I have to have a license to use my antenna in the UK?

Do you need a license to listen to radio stations in your car?


No to both.
As I explained to another poster above. You only need to purchase a license if you watch tv while its being broadcast. You do not need a license to own a television. If you switch that tv on and watch a program while its being broadcast then yes you will require a license.
For example, you can have a tv and use it to watch dvd's or even a recording of a tv program and you will not need a license.
A video recorder is capable of receiving tv signals, if you use it to record those signals you will need a license, if you dont use it to record those signals you do not need a license.



How old are you?
Just hit Sixty.



The UK seems like it's it's getting creepier and creepier, but people seem to get mad at the US instead of fighting their own govt. You're paying a tax to hear ads, but you're worried about GMO.

In many ways there's not a lot of difference between the US and the UK.
I'm not one of those who hates on the US, I've written posts and even a thread stating as such.
A tax hurts the pockets, GMO hurts ones health!



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk

Okay, technicality. I agree. But I guess this isnt the thread for further discussion



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: openminded2011

I think I can illustrate the frustration of those who know it's warming, but aren't ready to subscribe to the "it's all our fault" camp just yet.

Can you answer this one simple question with citations?

What percentage do humans have in the climate change equation?

*remember, "I don't know" is an acceptable answer, but it brings to light all the other "known" issues associated with climate change. Some folks think we just don't know much about this as of yet and aren't quite ready to make empirical statements.



During what time period?

From the birth of the planet to about 1850? About none, at least globally.

Global effects from humans equalling to dominating other effects started getting serious around 1940's-1950's. There were both cooling and warming influences from fossil fuel combustion. The cooling was from smog & soot (which can go both ways), which was hazardous to health and is being cleaned up, but that means the greenhouse effect from CO2 and CH4 is becoming more important.

The professionals have been studying this very issue for many decades and are able to make quantitatively backed estimates, and the conclusion is that modern observations cannot be explained without including human-introduced global warming as the major changed driver.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: openminded2011

I think I can illustrate the frustration of those who know it's warming, but aren't ready to subscribe to the "it's all our fault" camp just yet.

Can you answer this one simple question with citations?

What percentage do humans have in the climate change equation?

*remember, "I don't know" is an acceptable answer, but it brings to light all the other "known" issues associated with climate change. Some folks think we just don't know much about this as of yet and aren't quite ready to make empirical statements.



During what time period?

From the birth of the planet to about 1850? About none, at least globally.

Global effects from humans equalling to dominating other effects started getting serious around 1940's-1950's. There were both cooling and warming influences from fossil fuel combustion. The cooling was from smog & soot (which can go both ways), which was hazardous to health and is being cleaned up, but that means the greenhouse effect from CO2 and CH4 is becoming more important.

The professionals have been studying this very issue for many decades and are able to make quantitatively backed estimates, and the conclusion is that modern observations cannot be explained without including human-introduced global warming as the major changed driver.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 05:38 AM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk

From the TV licence website: It is an offence to watch or record television programmes as they are being shown on any channel and on any broadcast platform (terrestrial, satellite, cable and the internet) without a valid TV Licence.

So sorry old chum but you are wrong about that.

As for the OP, your suggestion is ridiculous. In the UK, unseasonably warm temperatures during November have broken all records. From experience, the only people still using the term "Global warming" are the woefully ignorant, everyone else has learned to use the correct term "climate change" for some time. So to try and get to grips with this not-so-new idea here is a really quick quiz:

Unusually cold = climate change?

Unusually warm = climate change?


Makes more sense now right?

Climate change deniers will still be arguing whether it's man-made or not as their houses are falling into the sea. Looking to the left and right in big letters it says DENY IGNORANCE...yet so many on this site seem to wear their ignorance like a badge of moronic pride.



posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 06:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Robotswilltakeover

Winter is coming




posted on Nov, 13 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: casinoed
a reply to: VoidHawk

From the TV licence website: It is an offence to watch or record television programmes as they are being shown on any channel and on any broadcast platform (terrestrial, satellite, cable and the internet) without a valid TV Licence.

So sorry old chum but you are wrong about that.

Wrong about what?
Another poster wrote "You need a license to own receiving equipment" or something very similar!
I was simply stating the fact that so long as a person does not watch anything while its being broadcast they do not need a license. They can own as many receivers as they like, just mustn't use them to watch live broadcast. Your own post confirms as such.
You should always study very carefully anything from the bbc concerning the tv license, they are masters of deception when it concerns license money.



As for the OP, your suggestion is ridiculous. (


The OP was not mine! What was that about ignorance!



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Its the second week in my island in Hellas (greece) that snows and its FREEZING! If we open the refrigerator you feel warmth..!

All schools and public sector is shut and in most cases because of the freezing, not because of the snow.

Also my island is one of the welcoming hotspots for the illegal immigrants in the EU.
edit on 26-1-2016 by Ploutonas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Robotswilltakeover

Weather != Climate



new topics




 
18
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join