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.
(visit the link for the full news article)
PASADENA, Calif. – A team of NASA and university scientists has detected an ongoing reversal in Arctic Ocean circulation triggered by atmospheric circulation changes that vary on decade-long time scales. The results suggest not all the large changes seen in Arctic climate in recent years are a result of long-term trends associated with global warming.
reply to post by Roland Deschain
I've always been a bit skeptical about global warming... Is it man made?
reply to post by SimiusDei
Though, I seriously doubt we are capable of any long term (in terms of Universal time) damage to mommy Earth.
Originally posted by plumranch
Hi Rolend,
This research supports the theory that global changes are not anthropogenic (man caused) but a planet/ solar system relationship. Perhaps we will see more supportive data as it comes in.
Morison cautioned that while the recent decadal-scale changes in the circulation of the Arctic Ocean may not appear to be directly tied to global warming, most climate models predict the Arctic Oscillation will become even more strongly counterclockwise in the future. "The events of the 1990s may well be a preview of how the Arctic will respond over longer periods of time in a warming world," he said.
"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation in the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by global warming," said Morison.
Originally posted by apc
The implication is indeed made that these changes may not be linked to global warming:
"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation in the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by global warming," said Morison.
Originally posted by apc
Are you ignoring the last half of the quoted statement?
I'm not talking about other evidence for climate change, nor do I deny the fact that the climate is changing. The only thing being implicated here is that this specific observation can not be associated to Global Warming as it has been in the past
dismantling yet another aspect of the man-made Global Warming lie.
Originally posted by apc
Although you're absolutely right. The alleged relationship never had substance, which this study shows.