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.


Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren involved in unwinding “Climategate” scandal

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 11:09 PM

Originally posted by rizla

Originally posted by suicydking
This is great news. To celebrate, I'm going to burn some tires in my yard while my Hummer idles in the driveway.

Originally posted by JayinARGood idea. I'll start by burning my neighbor's eyesore of an old fiberglass boat as well.
And then I'll go to cityhall and take down the american flag and burn it. Etc.

Are you two serious? Is this truly your attitude, that you can foul the environment and waste resources? For the sake of it?

Is this your reason for attacking GW science? So that you can waste and foul?

Are you serious?

[edit on 27-11-2009 by rizla]

I think that these individuals are simply celebrating the exposure of some truth, and to some degree, being facetious as well.

I am hardened against the AGW crowd as of now, but I for one would never think about littering or trashing the environment around me. I do often joke though, that I would love to drive right through a Jim Hansen protest with a Ford F-350 billowing black smoke, and revving the engine while doing burnouts. It kind of floats my fancy to snub alarmist radicals such as he.

posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 12:12 AM
Perhaps with the decoupling of CO2 from the list of *actual* enviromental problems will allow said *actual* problems to be addressed.

CO2 = plant food!

posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 07:09 PM

Originally posted by rizla

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

You're half-right. Here in America it's only a "scandal" if it's committed by a Republican. If the scandal is committed by a Democrat it's not called a "scandal", it's called a "right-wing conspiracy".

What? You mean like Bill Clinton's sex scandals were not scandals? You are so blinkered it is scary.

Clinton got his cigar played with and was nearly impeached, and Bush murdered millions and bankrupted the country, but there was no impeachment process against him. Now that's a scandal

Again, you are so blinkered, it is scary.

This thread has become a nice little camp-fire chat for the loony right on this board. Marshmellows anyone?
Are you kidding me?? Hillary has said NUMEROUS times that the impeachment of her husband was a "right wing conspiracy".

Secondly, why did you say Bill Clinton was "nearly impeached"? Bill Clinton WAS impeached on December 19th, 1998 and ACQUITTED by the Senate. Was no "nearly impeached" with the matter. Bill Clinton WAS impeached. Bill Clinton's impeachment was only the 2nd time in our nation's history that a president was impeached.

Save the marshmallows and try doing your homework.

[edit on 28-11-2009 by NOTurTypical]

posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 08:26 PM

Originally posted by rizla
How many separate threads does this story require? Spam, anyone? You are reading way too much into all this. "Yer got nothing."

The only ones that got nothing are people like your Rizla... I have never seen you contribute ANYTHING good to the website about the claims of AGW, most of your posts are from NEWSPAPERS like the BBC who hid this story for a month.

You have tried to stop, and suppress any, and every information that debunks your religion.. Yes, it has become a religion for people like you, because you rather believe the lies, and ignore the hundreds of research, and thousands of scientists who disagree with the AGW claim...

You should be ashamed of yourself, but of course, all you are going to do is keep denying closing your eyes, and your ears to anything, and everything that denies YOUR RELIGION....

Why don't you do yourself, and everyone else a favor, GROW UP, and WAKE UP!!!....

[edit on 28-11-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 10:01 PM

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Are you kidding me?? Hillary has said NUMEROUS times that the impeachment of her husband was a "right wing conspiracy".

Yeah. So what?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Secondly, why did you say Bill Clinton was "nearly impeached"? Bill Clinton WAS impeached on December 19th, 1998 and ACQUITTED by the Senate. Was no "nearly impeached" with the matter. Bill Clinton WAS impeached. Bill Clinton's impeachment was only the 2nd time in our nation's history that a president was impeached.

So what is your point? So you are a Democrat? You are supporting Clinton, and my point. Clinton WAS impeached for having sex, while Bush was not impeached for dragging the country into an illegal war based on falsified evidence. Now that's a SCANDAL.

This is all partisan hackery. Wanna marshmellow? You guys only like the red ones, but the blue ones taste exactly the same. DOH!

posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 10:02 PM

They claim to have thrown away the raw data in the 1980s, and this is what they told Roger Pielke when he asked for it through the Freedom of information Act just recently....

So the raw data from 1850 until the 1980s was thrown away by CRU....

[edit on 28-11-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 10:07 PM
reply to post by rizla

A worse scandal is people like you derailing threads like this one just to keep justifying your RELIGION...


[edit on 28-11-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 12:49 AM

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

NO WAY! Melatonin declared that ALL of the data dumped is found at local Met officies. Timesonline wasted bandwidth reporting that story for no reason whatsoever. Nothing to see here move on.

posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 04:54 AM

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

NO WAY! Melatonin declared that ALL of the data dumped is found at local Met officies. Timesonline wasted bandwidth reporting that story for no reason whatsoever. Nothing to see here move on.

Don't forget that Mann, et al also mention that they don't want to give the raw data, and the original programs because all they have given is the data that is rigged which of course confirms their results...

In other words, ALL they have given so far is just the RIGGED data...not the original raw data, and the original programs...

I wonder why it hasn't gotten HOTTER like they claimed it would?.... They wonder that too in some of the emails and they find that infuriating that NATURE is not in with them on the SCAM/HOAX.....

[edit on 1-12-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 08:18 AM

this link has the email address for the bbc environment correspondent at the bottom.....write him and tell him what you think of the bbc and the IPCC etc...

posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 02:33 PM

Quick Fact: Baier falsely suggested allegedly hacked emails dispute global warming science.

On Special Report, host Bret Baier falsely suggested that a series of emails reportedly stolen from the UK's Climate Research Unit (CRU) creates a "basis for disputing global warming." In fact, the validity of climate science is not hinged on the contents of these emails, some of which conservative media have taken out of context; reports from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the leading scientific body for assessing climate change research, are the product of thousands of scientists worldwide.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:09 AM
reply to post by suicydking

That's what they CLAIM, but it is not true...

We have had threads in the past about the REAL scientists who were part of the IPCC. They state the policymakers of the IPCC don't care about science, but have made "AGW/GW/CH" into a political tool, and an economic tool.

We have had even some of the scientists clarify that MOST of the "thousands of scientists in the IPCC" were only POLICYMAKERS, and REPRESENTATIVES OF NATIONS WHO HAD NO REAL SCIENTIFIC EXPERIENCE ON CLIMATE CHANGE. (I am not yelling, just emphasizing a point)

There weren't "THOUSANDS OF SCIENTISTS", of the 2,500 people who participated on the IPCC report MAYBE 50-60 had any real background, and experience in the study of Climate Change, and were REAL SCIENTISTS.

The other "so called scientists" who were part of the IPCC and were about 2,450 - 2,460 were chosen by governments because they were environmentalists, and policymakers who will push for the agenda of global governance in their claim that they will "combat Climate Change."


The AGW elitists had to increase the number of the people participating in the IPCC report to CLAIM "THOUSANDS OF SCIENTISTS AGREE WITH US."

The following excerpts and links show what at least some of the REAL scientists who were part of the IPCC have to say about this topic.

Chris Landsea Leaves IPCC

This is an open letter to the community from Chris Landsea.

Dear colleagues,

After some prolonged deliberation, I have decided to withdraw from participating in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). I am withdrawing because I have come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized. In addition, when I have raised my concerns to the IPCC leadership, their response was simply to dismiss my concerns.

Real report under wraps


We are told hundreds of scientists played a role in writing the UN climate science report released last week. We are also told it proves that scientists agree -- human release of carbon dioxide is the primary cause of climate change and a catastrophe looms.

Fortunately, this is nonsense.

The report just released is merely the 'Summary for Policymakers,' an executive summary of the main report that no one outside a select group sworn to secrecy knows the contents of until May.

Why would the main report and its summary not be issued together?

According to official IPCC procedures, the main science report shall be modified after publication of the summary, so as to "ensure consistency with" the summary. But surely it is the summary that should be edited to reflect the contents of the science report it is supposedly summarizing.
To understand why the IPCC does this, Canadians need to appreciate that the summary is not a scientifically neutral document. It is written to fulfill political objectives in support of carbon dioxide-reduction negotiations.
IPCC lead author and NRSP Allied Scientist Prof. Richard Lindzen, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, explains: The summary "represents a consensus of government representatives (many of whom are also their nations' Kyoto representatives), rather than of scientists."

Lindzen also reveals that the summary had the input of not hundreds of IPCC scientists, but only about 30. The creation of the final version was conducted by a plenary session composed primarily of bureaucrats and representatives of environmental and industrial organizations.

This unorthodox reporting procedure led to the "Chapter 8 controversy" in 1995, in which significant and unwarranted modification of the IPCC science report was known to have been made before it was issued, so as to conform to the summary.

The fact many scientists were involved in reviewing the science report to be released in the spring does not necessarily mean these scientists agree with the report. NRSP Allied Scientist Dr. Madhav Khandekar was an official reviewer of parts of the document that related to his specialty (extreme weather) and has revealed the IPCC ignored his comments entirely.

NRSP Science Advisory Committee member, Dr. Vincent Gray, also an official IPCC reviewer, speaks about his own experience: "They sometimes take notice of your comments. They don't take much notice of mine because most of the time I don't agree with what they are saying. It is not like the scientific press, where you are supposed to answer objections; they don't bother to answer objections; they go their own way."

February 11, 2007

An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change
Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, says the orthodoxy must be challenged

When politicians and journalists declare that the science of global warming is settled, they show a regrettable ignorance about how science works. We were treated to another dose of it recently when the experts of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued the Summary for Policymakers that puts the political spin on an unfinished scientific dossier on climate change due for publication in a few months’ time. They declared that most of the rise in temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to man-made greenhouse gases.

The small print explains “very likely” as meaning that the experts who made the judgment felt 90% sure about it. Older readers may recall a press conference at Harwell in 1958 when Sir John Cockcroft, Britain’s top nuclear physicist, said he was 90% certain that his lads had achieved controlled nuclear fusion. It turned out that he was wrong. More positively, a 10% uncertainty in any theory is a wide open breach for any latterday Galileo or Einstein to storm through with a better idea. That is how science really works.

Climate Change is ALWAYS happening, and I am amazed at the illogical claims, if not how naive the AGW proponents are to make illogical comments they make about those of us who see that the Cliamte change is natural, yet the AGW proponents/zombies/fans claim we are "the deniers of Climate Change....."

NO ONE of us who doubt the AGW claims deny Climate Change... What we deny is the fact that mankind is not the cause of the ongoing Climate Change.

The AGW proponents also love to claim all the time that "the WEATHER doesn't make the GLOBAL CLIMATE" yet they don't see how ironic their statement is, because this sort of statement in itself should tell them the truth...

Just like the WEATHER doesn't make the GLOBAL CLIMATE, the ENVIRONMENT doesn't make the GLOBAL CLIMATE.

Why is it that us, the people, and scientists who know for a fact we are not the cause of Climate Change?

Because thhe proponents want to base their claim ON ONE GAS CO2 as being the cause. When there is no real evidence that supports the claims that CO2 causes the warming claimed by the AGW proponents.

Climate Change is CONSTANT. There is no "magical point of equilibrium of the climate that we must maintain..."

October 4, 2006

Sudden decreases in temperature over Greenland and tropical rainfall patterns during the last Ice Age have been linked for the first time to rapid changes in the salinity of the north Atlantic Ocean, according to research published Oct. 5, 2006, in the journal Nature. The results provide further evidence that ocean circulation and chemistry respond to changes in climate.

Using chemical traces in fossil shells of microscopic planktonic life forms, called formanifera, in deep-sea sediment cores, scientists reconstructed a 45,000- to 60,000-year-old record of ocean temperature and salinity. They compared their results to the record of abrupt climate change recorded in ice cores from Greenland. They found the Atlantic got saltier during cold periods, and fresher during warm intervals.

"The freshening likely reflects shifts in rainfall patterns, mostly in the tropics," Howard Spero of the University of California at Davis said. "Suddenly, we're looking at a record that links moisture balance in the tropics to climate change. And the most striking thing is that a measurable transition is happening over decades."

Spero, who is currently on leave at the National Science Foundation's Marine Geology and Geophysics Program, worked with lead author Matthew Schmidt of the Georgia Institute of Technology and Maryline Vautravers of Cambridge University in the United Kingdom to conduct the research.

During the Ice Age, much of North America and Europe was covered by a sheet of ice. But the ice records the scientists reconstructed show repeated patterns of sudden warming, called Dansgaard-Oeschger Cycles, when temperatures in Greenland rose by 5 to 10 degrees Celsius over a few decades.

[edit on 3-12-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:17 AM
About the claims that sea levels were rising exponentially because of increase atmospheric CO2...

Nonlinear trends and multiyear cycles in sea level records

S. Jevrejeva

Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory, Liverpool, UK

A. Grinsted

Arctic Centre, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland

J. C. Moore

Arctic Centre, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland

S. Holgate

Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory, Liverpool, UK

We analyze the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL) database of sea level time series using a method based on Monte Carlo Singular Spectrum Analysis (MC-SSA). We remove 2–30 year quasi-periodic oscillations and determine the nonlinear long-term trends for 12 large ocean regions. Our global sea level trend estimate of 2.4 ± 1.0 mm/yr for the period from 1993 to 2000 is comparable with the 2.6 ± 0.7 mm/yr sea level rise calculated from TOPEX/Poseidon altimeter measurements. However, we show that over the last 100 years the rate of 2.5 ± 1.0 mm/yr occurred between 1920 and 1945, is likely to be as large as the 1990s, and resulted in a mean sea level rise of 48 mm. We evaluate errors in sea level using two independent approaches, the robust bi-weight mean and variance, and a novel “virtual station” approach that utilizes geographic locations of stations.

The increase in sea level was higher when there was less atmospheric CO2...

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 34, L01602, doi:10.1029/2006GL028492, 2007

On the decadal rates of sea level change during the twentieth century

S. J. Holgate

Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory, Liverpool, UK

Nine long and nearly continuous sea level records were chosen from around the world to explore rates of change in sea level for 1904–2003. These records were found to capture the variability found in a larger number of stations over the last half century studied previously. Extending the sea level record back over the entire century suggests that the high variability in the rates of sea level change observed over the past 20 years were not particularly unusual. The rate of sea level change was found to be larger in the early part of last century (2.03 ± 0.35 mm/yr 1904–1953), in comparison with the latter part (1.45 ± 0.34 mm/yr 1954–2003). The highest decadal rate of rise occurred in the decade centred on 1980 (5.31 mm/yr) with the lowest rate of rise occurring in the decade centred on 1964 (−1.49 mm/yr). Over the entire century the mean rate of change was 1.74 ± 0.16 mm/yr.

Received 17 October 2006; accepted 21 November 2006; published 4 January 2007.

Like the two above "peer-reviewed research papers" there are hundreds more which show the same thing.

Sea levels change, and they have changed many times in the past without ANY help from mankind or even atmospheric CO2...

There have also been many times when there were devastating, and dramatic changes which affected civilizations "that were not driving around in suvs, and other cars, yet the ancient people of the world had to adapt the the CONSTANT Climate Changes...

Nearly 1,700 years ago, devastating tempests associated with sea-level rise destroyed villages of the Calusa Indians on the southwest Florida coast, near present-day Fort Myers, forcing the native fishermen to move inland to relative safety, said UF anthropologist Karen Walker.

Walker's clues to storms, sea-level rise and migration include village remains buried by storm-surge sediment, and other village deposits found at higher elevations than where they should be. In addition, the modest shells and fishbones left behind by the Indians, she said, show ecological correlations between rising sea levels and global warming periods documented in the historical record of ancient Europe.

"As we enter into a modern warming period, which seems to be the case, Florida is likely to experience flooded shorelines and an increase of intense storms," Walker said. "I think that it's not a coincidence that there were major storms recorded at some of the archaeological sites that I study and that those storms happened during the warm Roman Optimum period. I have the storms closely dated to the fourth century AD."

Global warming is not new, said Walker, explaining that a variety of evidence points to a global episode of warming, dubbed the Roman Optimum, which occurred roughly from 200 B.C. and about A.D. 400, and a later episode, the Medieval Optimum, which took place from about A.D. 800 to A.D. 1200. A cooling episode named the Vandal Minimum occurred roughly between the two warmings.

"By studying many archaeological deposits from many locations, I see a picture showing that sea-level fluctuations in Florida correlate to these climate fluctuations known from European history," she said.

You do know that for example, at one time the valley of the Nile river was green and prosperous...but climatic changes made it what it is today...without the help of cars, AC, or factories....

Originally the Nile Valley and surrounding countryside was green and productive but due to climatic changes the rainfall stopped. Now due to the annual floods, a strip of fertile green land land runs along the river edge whilst the remaining countryside which the flood water is unable to reach, is dry desertland.

large climate changes in Europe/Near East during the last 15,000 calendar years (note that these dates are in 'real' years not radiocarbon years).

14,500 y.a. - rapid warming and moistening of climates. Rapid deglaciation begins.

13,500 y.a. - climates about as warm and moist as today's

13,000 y.a. 'Older Dryas' cold phase (lasting about 200 years) before a partial return to warmer conditions.

12,800 y.a. (+/- 200 years)- rapid stepwise onset of the intensely cold Younger Dryas. Much drier than present over much of Europe and the Middle East, though wetter-than-present conditions at first prevailed in NW Europe.

11,500 y.a. (+/- 200 years) - Younger Dryas ends suddenly over a few decades, back to relative warmth and moist climates (Holocene, or Isotope Stage 1).

11,500 - 10,500 y.a. - climates possibly still slightly cooler than present-day.

9,000 y.a. - 8,200 y.a. - climates warmer and often moister than today's

about 8,200 y.a. - sudden cool phase lasting about 200 years, about half-way as severe as the Younger Dryas. Wetter-than-present conditions in NW Europe, but drier than present in eastern Turkey.

8,000-4,500 y.a. - climates generally slightly warmer and moister than today's.

(but; at 5,900 y.a. - a possible sudden and short-lived cold phase corresponding to the 'elm decline').

Since about 4,500 y.a. - climates fairly similar to the present

2,600 y.a. - relatively wet/cold event (of unknown duration) in many areas

(but; 1,400 y.a. [536-538 A.D.] wet cold event of reduced tree growth and famine across western Europe and possibly elsewhere).

(Followed by 'Little Ice Age' about 700-200 ya)

In the above they forgot the Medieval warm event, which started around 800 A.D. and ended in the 1300s.

In fact recent research from Europe and elsewhere has found that temperatures were warmer during the Medieval warm even than today...

The five scientists determined that the mean temperature of the Medieval Warm Period in northwest Spain was 1.5°C warmer than it was over the 30 years leading up to the time of their study, and that the mean temperature of the Roman Warm Period was 2°C warmer. Even more impressive was their finding that several decadal-scale intervals during the Roman Warm Period were more than 2.5°C warmer than the 1968-98 period, while an interval in excess of 80 years during the Medieval Warm Period was more than 3°C warmer.

A team of scientist from Austria and Germany located three stalagmites in the Spannagel Cave located around 2,500 m above sea level at the end of the Tux Valley in Tyrol (Austria) close to the Hintertux glacier. The temperature of the cave stays near freezing and the relative humidity in the cave is always at or near 100%. The stalagmites grew at a rate between 17 and 75 millionths of a meter per year and are nearly 10,000 years old.
The stalagmite is screaming to us that many periods in the past 9,000 years were warmer than present-day conditions!

[edit on 3-12-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:13 AM
The AGW proponents also LOVe to CLAIM there has been no increase in other geophysical events on Earth, when that is not true.

In fact magmatic, and seismic activity has been on the rise at the same time that the climate has been changing.

Press release September 22, 2005

Signs of magmatic activity in Central Europe observed for the first time
Scientists find a new explanation for earthquake swarms in the Vogtland region

Beneath the Cheb Basin on the German-Czech border there is an increase in the movement of magma towards the earth’s surface. This is the conclusion drawn by scientists from the UFZ Centre for Environmental Research (Umweltforschungszentrum Leipzig-Halle) and Germany’s national research centre for geosciences, the GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (GFZ). The verdict was reached after scientists undertook studies of rising gases in the mofettes and mineral springs in the area. Measurements taken over a period of 12 years showed that the ratio of two helium isotopes in these gases was changing. “The measurements produced the highest values in Europe north of the Alps – such as are usually only associated with active volcanic areas”, explained Dr Karin Bräuer of the UFZ.
“In the Bublák mofette near the border with Saxony we have measured an isotope ratio which is as much as 6.2 times that found in helium in the air”, says Karin Bräuer. “This is the highest ever recorded in Central Europe. Values like this are otherwise only associated with active volcanoes, such as Mount Etna.” The comparative measurements from the Laacher See in the East Eifel showed no changes. To the researchers this means that something is happening underground in the area around the Cheb Basin. This is now the region with the highest proportions of mantle helium in Central Europe.
The last volcanic eruptions around what is now the border area between Saxony, Bohemia and Bavaria probably took place around 300,000 years ago.

Hydrothermal "Megaplume" Found in Indian Ocean
Brian Handwerk
for National Geographic News

December 12, 2005
An enormous hydrothermal "megaplume" found in the Indian Ocean serves as a dramatic reminder that underwater volcanoes likely play an important role in shaping Earth's ocean systems, scientists report.

The plume, which stretches some 43.5 miles (70 kilometers) long, appears to be active on a previously unseen scale.

"In a nutshell, this thing is at least 10 times—or possibly 20 times—bigger than anything of its kind that's been seen before," said Bramley Murton of the British National Oceanography Centre.

Scientists reported the finding last week at the fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in San Francisco. Researchers also announced newly discovered deep-sea hydrothermal fields in the Arctic Ocean and the south Atlantic.

The appearance of hydrothermal vents around the world suggests that they are a far more common part of the ocean system than once believed and could be a major influence on circulation patterns and ocean chemistry.

The Fiery Face of the Arctic Deep

Results from a German-American Arctic expedition to the Gakkel Ridge have implications for the understanding of the generation of new seafloor

The Gakkel ridge is a gigantic volcanic mountain chain stretching beneath the Arctic Ocean. With its deep valleys 5,500 meter beneath the sea surface and its 5,000 meter high summits, Gakkel ridge is far mightier than the Alps. This is the site of seafloor spreading that is actively separating Europe from North America, and was the goal of the international expedition AMORE (Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge Expedition) with two research icebreakers, the "USCGC Healy" from USA and the German "PFS Polarstern". Aboard were scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry and other international institutions. The scientists had expected that the Gakkel ridge would exhibit "anemic" magmatism. Instead, surprisingly strong magmatic activity in the West and the East of the ridge and one of the strongest hydrothermal activities ever seen at mid-ocean ridges were found. These results require a fundamental rethinking of the mechanisms of seafloor generation at midocean ridges (Nature, January 16 and June 26).

Current theories of oceanic crustal production predict that volcanic activity deminishes as the spreading rate of the tectonic plates decreases and only little or no hydrothermal activity. Instead, the scientists found high levels of volcanic activity. "We expected the volcanic activity to gradually decrease from West to East as the magmatic systems shut down. Instead, approximately in the middle of the survey area, the magmatism shut down completely, then dramatically increased," says Dr. Jonathan Snow, the leader of the research group from the Max Planck Institute. This group was responsible for the petrological and geochemical investigations.

Scientists Discover Undersea Volcano Off Antarctica
Science Daily — ARLINGTON, Va. -- Scientists working in the stormy and inhospitable waters off the Antarctic Peninsula have found what they believe is an active and previously unknown volcano on the sea bottom.
He noted that there has been "no previous scientific record of active volcanoes in the region" where the new peak was discovered and that it is north of an existing boundary where volcanic activity is known to occur in the region.

The volcano, which has yet to be named, also is unusual, Domack said, in that it exists on the continental shelf, in the vicinity of a deep trough carved out by glaciers passing across the seafloor.

Anyway, the fact of the matter is..

Global Warming: A Geological Perspective
By John P. Bluemle

Conclusions. A review of research on past temperatures and variations led us to the following conclusions:

1. Climate is in continual flux: the average annual temperature is usually either rising or falling and the temperature is never static for a long period of time.

2. Observed climatic changes occurred over widespread areas, probably on the global scale.

3. Climate changes must be judged against the natural climatic variability that occurs on a comparable time scale. The Little Ice Age, Medieval Warm Period, and similar events are part of this natural variability. These events correspond to global changes of 1O - 2OC.

4. Global temperatures appear to be rising, irrespective of any human influence, as Earth continues to emerge from the
Little Ice Age. If the temperature increase during the past 130 years reflects recovery from the Little Ice Age, it is not unreasonable to expect the temperature to rise another 2 to 2.5 degrees Celsius to a level comparable to that of the Medieval Warm Period about 800 years ago. The Holocene Epoch, as a whole, has been a remarkably stable period with few extremes of either rising or falling temperatures, as were common during Pleistocene glacial and interglacial periods. Nevertheless, the Holocene has been, and still is, a time of fluctuating climate.

5. Climatic changes measured during the last 100 years are not unique or even unusual when compared with the frequency, rate, and magnitude of changes that have taken place since the beginning of the Holocene Epoch. Recent fluctuations in temperature, both upward and downward, are well within the limits observed in nature prior to human influence.

[edit on 3-12-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in