It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Confirmed! Orbital Cycles Control Ice Ages.. and other 'warming' issues

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 04:28 PM
Many of us here have concerns about global warming. the fact of it being man made or natural is neither here nor there for most of us. We all have some degree of concern as if it gets too hot, we will struggle and if it gets too cold we will struggle also.

No matter which way the temperature goes, we will be in trouble. It wont be the first time and it wont be the last. That is a fact.

Humans far less advanced than us have survived numerous ice ages and continued to survive to bring us to where we are today. Many people still live in temperatures of extreme heat and freezing conditions. So what are we worried about right now?

Some would say that it is of great concern, whilst others would say that it is just another money spinner for greedy corporations. Perhaps both is true.

While the IPCC and global warming alarmists continue to claim climate change is controlled by atmospheric CO2 levels, most knowledgeable scientists will tell you that climate change is caused by variation in Earth's orbit and orientation. These periodic changes in movement and attitude are called the Milankovitch Cycles. A new paper, to be published in Science, confirms that glacial terminations are caused by Earth's orbital cycles, not carbon dioxide.

There are three components that comprise the Milankovitch Cycles: Orbital Eccentricity, Axial Obliquity, and Precession of the Equinoxes. The cycles are named for Milutin Milankovitch, a Serbian engineer, who mathematically theorized that variations in these three orbital parameters determine climatic patterns on Earth.

Earth's orbit goes from measurably elliptical to nearly circular in a cycle that takes around 100,000 years. Presently, Earth is in a period of low eccentricity, about 3%. This causes a seasonal change in solar energy of 7%. The difference between summer and winter is a 7% difference in the energy a hemisphere receives from the Sun.

This report goes on to explain, in detail, how this all works. It then proceeds to hammer more nails into the coffin that will bury the CO2 global warming myth.. It calls for the IPCC to be disbanded and to ensure their nonsense is not spewed across the globe in order to turn a profit..

The sea surface temperature report appears to be a bit misleading as well.. An effort to stop this tirade of false reporting in order to scare-monger Humanity is being carried out as we speak. The new reports that are rising to the surface may be a bit out of date in the way that they are coming up, but it would seem they are more truthful and factual than any of the MSM nonsense.

The Seth Borenstein AP article about the recent high sea surface temperature… misleading. There is a significant difference between what Seth Borenstein reported and what NOAA stated in the July "State of the Climate".

Borenstein does not clarify that it is a record for the month of July, where NOAA does. NOAA writes, “The global ocean surface temperature for July 2009 was the warmest on record, 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 16.4°C (61.5°F). This broke the previous July record set in 1998.” Refer to Figure 1, which is a graph of SST for July from 1982 to 2009 (NOAA’s ERSST.v3b version).

Borenstein readers are told that July 2009 Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) were the highest since records began, but that is false.

Please study these reports and the graphs that they have produced to represent the data.

Even the tree lines are not responding to climate change..

A general premise is that treelines are thought to be more temperature sensitive, and so the rise in summer temperatures due to a warming climate should result in an advance of the treeline position.

A new study from the Bio-Protection Research Centre in New Zealand put that premise to test.

The researchers looked at 166 treeline sites with temperature data taken from the closest climate station to each site during the 20th century.


---52% of the treeline sites advanced while the overall temperature increased during the long-term period.
--47% of the treeline sites remained stable.
--1% receded.

You just gotta read what they say about the Polar Bear Myths and Propaganda

To sum up, I'll leave you with a quote from the linked site;

"The only thing more dangerous than ignorance is arrogance."
—Albert Einstein

Isn't that nice
gives you a warm feeling inside ...

posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 04:44 PM
I have always known since I was a child that it was all a hoax for money due to my family has similar viewpoints to those expressed on ATS. But it is brilliant to hear of an actual method that the Earths Climate Operates. It will be interesting to see how this is taken though. A brillant find and a S + F for you.

[edit on 21/8/2009 by Persicoana]

posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 05:46 PM
I am going to hijack you thread with a bunch of information about "global warming" I have collected.

First Follow the Money ”:


Fig 2.1 (pg 6) is the Spectrum of incident solar radiation at the top of the atmosphere and at sea level. “Because UV radiation is absorbed in the stratosphere, the temperature increase in this altitude range. Located at about 50 km altitude, the stratopause is the top boundary of this layer. ” graph pg 3 fig 1.1 Atmospheric temperature profile and layering

The above graphs shows why I can not understand why any one would think CO2 is the main driver of climate. If someone told me it was oxygen, water (Atmospheric and seas) and the sun, I would be more inclined to believe them. CO2 is such a small blip on the energy absorption scale you can barely see it. Also as you proceed from left to right the energy per unit wavelength decreases. This makes CO2 contribution even less chart

There is no more energy to be absorbed at the CO2 wavelengths. Which agrees with Fig 2.1 graph showing CO2 log response: The greenhouse effect of atmospheric CO2 follows a logarithmic curve with CO2 concentration. As CO2 levels continue to rise, the greenhouse temperature boost from CO2 flattens out. Far from being a "tipping point" the climate effects from rising CO2 fade out.

This image, courtesy of Dr. Judith Lean at the US Naval Research Laboratory, shows the same graph as Fig 2.1 with energy variability overlaying the spectrum of solar radiation from 10 to 100,000 nm (dark blue). The variability between Solar Maximum and Solar Minimum is in green and the relative transparency of Earth's atmosphere at sea level is in light blue. Source:

UV can vary up to 10% and effects the ozone and stratosphere: “UV variability between 200 and 400 nm is almost a factor of 10 larger than was estimated from earlier satellite data.”

“Computer Processing of Remotely Sensed Images” Graph of Sun and Earth black body showing relationship:

The NASA graph is a complete and utter lie. Why this is a lie is covered in a new peer reviewed paper published in the International Journal of Modern Physics. By G. Gerlich,  R. D. Tscheuschner:
Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics.
Paper, and yes I have read the entire paper

Dr. Gerlich’s rebuttal to alarmists

Abstract The Spectral Irradiance Monitor (SIM) on-board the Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) satellite provides the first multi-year continuous measurements of solar spectral irradiance (SSI) variability from 200–2400 nm, accounting for about 97% of the total solar irradiance (TSI). In addition to irradiance modulation from active region passage, the SSI values for wavelengths with a brightness temperature greater than 5770 K show a brightening with decreasing solar activity, whereas those with lower brightness temperatures show a dimming. These results demonstrate that different parts of the solar atmosphere contribute differently to the TSI with the behavior in the deep photospheric layers giving an opposing and nearly compensating trend to that in the upper photospheric and lower chromospheric layers. These findings need to be incorporated into Earth-climate assessments since the solar forcing induced by these differential trends are inherently different from the relatively flat spectral contributions employed in the IPCC assessments.

Even David Hathaway of NASA agrees the UV and X-ray are more variable than TSI. Of course there is the required blurb on man made CO2.

“The Sun is a powerful and highly variable source of ultraviolet and X radiation, which has major effects on our environment.” Hathaway

“While total solar irradiance changes by 0.1 percent, the change in the intensity of ultraviolet light varies by much larger amounts, scientists have discovered. Research shows such variations in the Sun's emissions can affect the ozone layer and the way energy moves both vertically and horizontally through the atmosphere.”

“This is the quietest Sun we’ve seen in almost a century,” says NASA solar scientist David Hathaway. But this is not just a scientific curiosity. It could affect everyone on Earth and force what for many is the unthinkable: a reappraisal of the science behind recent global warming.”

A good correlation exists between the long-term smoothing of the sunspot cycle, and Greenland temperatures – with cool temperatures corresponding to long-term sunspot minima..... We acknowledge valuable discussion with R. W. Decker, J. E. Hansen [James Hansen] and J. E. Sanders. Work was supported by NASA.”

It looks like Nigel Weiss was correct when he wrote:

“If you look back into the sun’s past, you find that we live in a period of abnormally high solar activity. Periods of high solar activity do not last long, perhaps 50 to 100 years, then you get a crash. It’s a boom-bust system, and I would expect a crash soon.” –Nigel Weiss, University of Cambridge, 16 September 2006

An article has appeared in a recent issue of Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics with a curious title “Multi-scale analysis of global temperature changes and trend of a drop in temperature in the next 20 years."

Despite the increasing trend of atmospheric CO2 concentration, the components IMF2, IMF3 and IMF4 of global temperature changes are all in falling…

the effect of greenhouse warming is deficient in counterchecking the natural cooling of global climate change in the coming 20 years. Consequently, we believe global climate changes will be in a trend of falling in the following 20 years.…

The global climate warming is not solely affected by the CO2 greenhouse effect. The best example is temperature obviously cooling however atmospheric CO2 concentration is ascending from 1940s to 1970s. Although the CO2 greenhouse effect on global climate changes is unsuspicious, it could have been excessively exaggerated. It is high time to re-consider the global climate changes.
Reference Zhen-Shan, L. and S. Xian. 2007. Multi-scale analysis of global temperature changes and trend of a drop in temperature in the next 20 years. Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, 95, 115-12

posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 05:59 PM
Here is information about the oceans contribution to climate.

Peer-Reviewed Study Rocks Climate Debate!

'Nature not man responsible for recent global warming...little or none of late 20th century warming and cooling can be attributed to humans': 'Surge in global temps since 1977 can be attributed to a 1976 climate shift in the Pacific Ocean'

Pacific Decadal Oscillation: papers listed

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) is a temperature pattern in the Pacific Ocean that spends roughly 20-30 years in the cool phase or the warm phase. In 1905, PDO switched to a warm phase. In 1946, PDO switched to a cool phase. In 1977, PDO switched to a warm phase. In 1998, PDO showed a few cool years. Note that the cool phases seem to coincide with the periods of cooling (1946-1977) and the warm phases seem to coincide with periods of warming (1905-1946, 1977-1998). (source: The Reference Frame)

Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature

“The results showed that SOI accounted for 81% of the variance in tropospheric temperature anomalies in the tropics. Overall the results suggest that the Southern Oscillation exercises a consistently dominant influence on mean global temperature, with a maximum effect in the tropics, except for periods when equatorial volcanism causes ad hoc cooling. That mean global tropospheric temperature has for the last 50 years fallen and risen in close accord with the SOI of 5–7 months earlier shows the potential of natural forcing mechanisms to account for most of the temperature variation.”

Then there is CO2 and heat from the earth its self. Wether the contribution is significant is just now being investigated and debated.


“....The true extent to which the ocean bed is dotted with volcanoes has been revealed by researchers who have counted 201,055 underwater cones.

This is over 10 times more than have been found before. The team estimates that in total there could be about 3 million submarine volcanoes, 39,000 of which rise more than 1000 metres over the sea bed....” Better source:

Volcano Outgasing of CO2.

The primary source of carbon/CO2 is outgasing from the Earth's interior at midocean ridges, hotspot volcanoes, and subduction-related volcanic arcs....”

Seismic activity in 2008 is apparently FIVE TIMES what it was twenty years ago. The global annual energy of earthquakes on Earth began increasing very fast since 1990.

It was not until the late 1970s that scientists discovered the existence of vast plumbing systems under the oceans called hydrothermal vents. The systems pull in cold water, superheat it, then spit it back out from seafloor vents--a process that brings up not only hot water, but dissolved substances from rocks below. Unique life-forms feed off the vents' stew, and valuable minerals, including gold, may pile up.

Undersea Volcanoes may be affecting ice at both poles.

Research on collapse of the Larson B ice shelf in Antarctica resulted in the discovery of an undersea volcano in the vicinity.

Other recently discovered mud volcanoes are in the Arctic Ocean.

Any heating of the water under ice could increase melting because water melts ice faster than air and ice is a good insulator. Heat under the ice would not move through the ice to be lost upon coming in contact with the cold air above the ice.

Here’s a recent article by Emile-Geay and Madec on the role of geothermal heating in the deep oceans. The authors find the mixing effect underestimated and of the same order of magnitude of mixing due to diapycnal (density) differences.

They write, for example: “Prescribing a realistic spatial distribution of the heat ?ux acts to enhance this temperature rise at mid-depth and reduce it at great depth, producing a more modest increase in overturning than in the uniform case. In all cases, however, poleward heat transport increases by ~10% in the Southern Ocean. The three approaches converge to the conclusion that geothermal heating is an important actor of abyssal dynamics, and should no longer be neglected in oceanographic studies.” Geothermal heating, diapycnal mixing and the abyssal circulation (Disclosure: that’s my profession).

Indeed, I would go so far as to say that you can’t really understand what drives climate without understanding at least a smidgin of earth history. Most climate scientists have no time perspective, hence they can’t see or don’t understand the real demonstrable changes that have occcurred over time without CO2 exerting a major influence. On the discussion of geothermal, it is interesting to note that about 85% of all active volcanoes are located on the sea floor – eg on mid-oceanic ridges. No climate model I am aware of incorporates submarine volcanism, either as a source of heat or various gases. And to be honest, I’m not sure that we understand enough about them to be able to quantify their effects. Joe Earth internal heat flow

posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 06:11 PM

“The average pressure of the solar wind has dropped more than 20% since the mid-1990s … the speed of the million mph solar wind hasn't decreased much—only 3%. The change in pressure comes mainly from reductions in temperature and density. The solar wind is 13% cooler and 20% less dense. The solar wind isn't inflating the heliosphere as much as it used to … That means less shielding against cosmic rays. Ulysses also finds that the sun's underlying magnetic field has weakened by more than 30% since the mid-1990s”.....The magnetic pole in Northern Canada has been weakening as it shifts across the Arctic to Siberia.....The overall intensity of the magnetic field has decreased. “Measurements have been made of the Earth's magnetic field more or less continuously since about 1840. If we look at the trend in the strength of the magnetic field over this time (for example the so-called 'dipole moment' shown in the graph below) we can see a downward trend. ... We also know from studies of the magnetisation of minerals in ancient clay pots that the Earth's magnetic field was approximately twice as strong in Roman times as it is now.”

The Earth’s magnetic field “acts as a shield against the bombardment of particles continuously streaming from the sun. Because the solar particles (ions and electrons) are electrically charged, they feel magnetic forces and most are deflected by our planet's magnetic field. However, our magnetic field is a leaky shield and the number of particles breaching this shield depends on the orientation of the sun’s magnetic field. … Twenty times more solar particles cross the Earth’s leaky magnetic shield when the sun’s magnetic field is aligned with that of the Earth compared to when the two magnetic fields are oppositely directed”

Recent increase in speed of magnetic poles drift is affecting oceans’ conveyor belt circulation.


Abstract The long-term fluctuation of the Schwabe period (LSP) of sunspots number (SSN) has been found to have high correlation with the variation of the length-of-day (LOD) in low frequency by using the data of smoothed monthly mean SSN during 1818–1999 and the method of wavelet transform. Analyses indicate that the maximum correlation coefficient between the series of LSP and LOD during 1892–1997 is about 0.9, with a time lag of about 5 years for the LOD related to the LSP. Though the maximum correlation coefficients between the LSP and the other two LOD series (1818–1997) reduce to about 0.4, they remain over the thresholds of 95% confidence level. This suggests new evidence for possible impact of solar activity on the long-term fluctuation of the earth rotation.

Now CO2 levels are lower than ever.
This would be in agreement with plants response to CO2. Plants prefer much higher CO2 levels and absorb less water at the higher levels (more drought resistance)

"Page 446 of the IPCC 4AR has the following interesting text, “ Ice core records show that atmospheric CO2 varied in the range 180 to 300 ppm over the glacial-interglacial cycles of the last 650kyr …. The quantitative and mechanistic explanation of these CO2 variations remains one of the major unsolved questions in climate research.”

The answer is the level never got to 180 ppm if it had the plant life on the planet would have been died and the animals would have starved. “As CO2 is a critical component of growth, plants in environments with inadequate CO2 levels – below 200 ppm – will cease to grow or produce.” Stomata data by Wagner, Aaby and Visscher prove conclusively that the ice core data is seriously in error. The ice core data can be corrected using J.J.Drake’s correlation, the profile does not change but the ppm values do. actually paper is here

Other information here

Click down three screens to the CO2 graph over geological time.
Climate, CO2 Geology and Ice
CO2 measured up to 640PPM in 1939/1940
CO2 temp chart by beck from 1800's

CO2 graph 1812 to 1961

Paper on accuracy of CO2 levels in the 19th and 20th century.

CO2 FOLLOWS temperature because CO2 is MORE soluble in cold water than in hot. Is it realistic then, that CO2 concentration should have been constant within a 15 ppm band for almost 1000 years? This would require extremely constant temperatures which we know is not the case. This has links to other articles on this subject: We have seen a cooling trend in the last decade and CO2 is following temp.

Do not forget Termites are a very big contributer to CO2! Not to mention as the oceans heated they released CO2 and an increase in temperature increases activity of insects and bacteria in swamps.

Despite the attempts to direct and surpress any science that did not support CO2 as the cause of global warming, there has been scientific studies by scientists more concerned with the truth and science than their jobs or advancement. I applaud them.

posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 05:13 AM
great thread and very informitive , but man isnt helping it either so id have to say that both are causes.

top topics

log in