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.

 

New Ice Age 'to begin in 2014

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   

New Ice Age 'to begin in 2014


www.wnd.com

A new "Little Ice Age" could begin in just four years, predicted Habibullo Abdussamatov, the head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia.
Abdussamatov was speaking yesterday at the Heartland Institute's Fourth International Conference on Climate Change in Chicago, which began Sunday and ends today.

The Little Ice Age, which occurred after an era known in scientific circles as the Medieval Warm Period, is typically defined as a period of about 200 years, beginning around 1650 and extending through 1850.
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 19-5-2010 by TheAmused]




posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
He is the head of hte space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia.
So if i was yall i would perk ya ears up..cause this could explain why the here in kentucky we have such cold weather this year.

www.wnd.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
his wiki en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 19-5-2010 by TheAmused]

[edit on 19-5-2010 by TheAmused]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Now this the type of Climate change that is more believable. The Earth is going through its cooling trend. Climates have fluctuations but they also have cycles. An Ice Age is more probable, not the doom and gloom the cap trade cons are pushing.

[edit on 19-5-2010 by prionace glauca]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   
This is a million times more believable than man-made climate change. Even more so since the weather this year compared to last has been a lot colder, noticably so.

If we are going into a colder spell, then more energy will be consumed trying to keep people warm, so even though I'm anti-global warming, I think this would be a prime opportunity to get in about cleaner energy research and implementation.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAmused

So if i was yall i would perk ya ears up..cause this could explain why the here in kentucky we have such cold weather this year.



I've noticed that here in L.A. this year also. I've been mentioned to people how very cool it's been. This is the longest "sweater/jacket" season I think I recall seeing. Here it is the last half of May and it's still definitely sweater weather!



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I read some weeks ago that a short ice age is coming and it's really more believable than all the manmade climate change bull#.
Though the later would be better for me. I like the sun and warm weather. It's been cold the last two weeks....middle of may but we barely have more than 10-12° C, it's like in Autumn - in the middle of May



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   
This is why we need more scientific studies for the sake of science itself. When people start telling everyone it is their fault the world is changing, no one is going to listen. If scientists just state matter-of-factly what is happening, the information is received much better by the general public, and we could start doing what we need to do:
Prepare for change, not try to stop it.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:00 AM
link   
I will be interested to see how the global warming crowd spins it, if in fact we do have another ice age in 2014.

Maybe they can find a way to blame it on CO2?

Or maybe they will have made their money off of that scam by that time and find some other way to con the masses out of their money!



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   
It is good to see that climatology has become such as exacting science. Pity trhat all predictions to date have proven to be wrong. I am certainly not going to put money on this type of prediction.

It would certainly cause the global warmers a few red faces!

Regards



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
I will be interested to see how the global warming crowd spins it, if in fact we do have another ice age in 2014.

Maybe they can find a way to blame it on CO2?

Or maybe they will have made their money off of that scam by that time and find some other way to con the masses out of their money!


They have already found the spin..

"The global warming causes melting of Polar Ice and more water is converted into clouds, the air now holds more moisture, and that moisture is now deposited further away from the normal depository regions. Since the atmosphere now holds more water vapor, more voluminous rain fall and snow fall will result, all because it is warmer.
"



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   
George Carlin - Saving the Planet




posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Personally this news sucks lemons (tho very believable) I really wanted the Global Warming thingy, so I could start to grow some more exotic plants and not be a very pale blue/white when I go on holiday

to mini ice ages..



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAmused
 


I've noticed that it has stayed cooler longer here also.I'm at an elevation of 5,000 ft. and we're still getting nights in the mid 40's. It's not a drastic change but it's noticable.

I noticed that his findings are still a bit inconclusive. My main question is how much colder might it be getting? Will different elevations be affected differently? Will it be colder in Death Valley as opposed to Denver? Or vice versa. Or does that matter at all?

I know that the earth itself is a great insulater from the outside elements. If you go down far enough, the temperature will remain the same regardless of whether it's 10 degrees or 210 degrees outside.



Peace



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAmused

New Ice Age 'to begin in 2014




Great.. More bloody doomsday speculation..

Luckily enough, the World is apparently going to end in 2012 so we'll miss it by two years.. Phew!



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAmused
 


What if global warming is intentional to offset the mini ice age?

What if this BP disaster and the incredible amount on methane gas that will contribute to global warming is also intentional and timed perfectly to add enormous amounts of methane into the atmosphere to help minimize the effects of the ice age?

What if we were not being told the real reason because sheeple would panic?

Just some thoughts...



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Well, if this is true, we'll burn through all of the oil and gas and coal that much quicker, then we might finally get the benefit of some of these free energy solutions that the government has been hoarding. Yay!!!



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Well if the ice age does hit I wonder how Mexico will handle the flood of illegal immigrants flooding across there boarder from all over north America ?

I like many of you do not like the idea of an ice age one bit but whatever happens will happen regardless of what I want , dam


I just can't help but wonder what new colorful graph Al Gore will come up with then ? Will he and others of his movement claim victory over Global warming ?



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Blaming Butterflies


A small butterfly, resting atop a tree in the rain forests of Brazil, suddenly spreads its silk-like wings and takes flight. As it does so, the force of its wings against the air around it sets off a chain reaction, culminating two months later in the form of a hurricane along the eastern coasts of Florida.

The "Butterfly Effect," is a term commonly used to imply that, "a small change at one place in a complex system can have large effects elsewhere" (WordNet). The exact location of the butterfly and the effect its actions will have vary from story to story, but the general premise is the same: That the flight of a small butterfly is somehow to blame for a major storm half-way across the globe. Peter Dizikes of The Boston Globe, however, points out that most people interpret the theory all wrong. Dizikes states, "The larger meaning of the butterfly effect is not that we can readily track such connections, but that we can't. To claim a butterfly's wings can cause a storm, after all, is to raise the question: How can we definitively say what caused any storm, if it could be something as slight as a butterfly?" ("The Meaning Of").

At this time, the popular scientific opinion is that we, human beings, are mostly to blame for the phenomenon known as global warming ("Humans Blamed For"). While it is widely accepted that the planet has been going through a recent period of warming, some scientists have found good reason to doubt the claims that humans are at fault. These scientists point out that there are other variables, such as the Earth's long history of climate change, the irrelevance of carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, and the influence of the sun's solar cycles on our climate, that are equally deserving of serious examination. With these factors and others taken into consideration, it becomes clear that we are neither truly responsible for the warming, nor, in any way capable of preventing it.

Research has shown that throughout its history, Earth has undergone many numerous and dramatic periods of climate change. According to the EPA, "The Earth's climate has changed throughout history. From glacial periods (or 'ice ages') where ice covered significant portions of the Earth to interglacial periods where ice retreated to the poles or melted entirely - the climate has continuously changed" ("Past Climate Change"). Of key interest here is the fact that, "ice retreated to the poles or melted entirely" during interglacial periods. So, what exactly is an interglacial period? According to AbsoluteAstronomy.com, "An interglacial is a geological interval of warmer global average temperature that separates glacial periods within an Ice Age" ("Interglacial") For the last 11,400 years, mankind has been enjoying life within the warm and cozy confines of an interglacial period known as the Holocene ("Interglacial"). Perhaps then, based on what we know about past interglacial periods, it shouldn't be so surprising that the polar ice caps are currently melting. Even within this relatively stable interglacial period, however, there have been instances of sudden climate change. The EPA cites that during the last two-thousand years, there have been three recorded changes in the Earth's climate: The Medieval Climate Anomaly, The Little Ice Age, and, of course, the current Industrial Era. The Medieval Climate Anomaly, which occurred around 900-1300AD was a warming period and the Little Ice Age, which occurred around 1500-1850AD was a cooling period ("Past Climate Change"). So what could have caused these periods of global warming and global cooling?

According to presently prevailing theories about our current warming trend, carbon dioxide, or CO2, released into the air from the burning of fossil fuels, coal and other industrial processes is the primary cause of global warming (O'Driscoll and Vergano). Scientists point out that since the start of the Industrial Revolution, CO2 levels in the Earth's atmosphere have quickly risen from 275 parts per million to 383 parts per million (McKibben). Certainly, the industrialization that has occurred over the last thirty plus years has contributed its fair share towards this rise. However, such an increase should neither be completely unexpected nor blamed entirely on mankind. As stated previously, the Earth is currently in an interglacial, or warm, period. Interestingly, the EPA finds a correlation between interglacial periods and rising CO2 levels:

The heating or cooling of the Earth's surface can cause changes in greenhouse gas concentrations. For example, when global temperatures become warmer, carbon dioxide is released from the oceans. When changes in the Earth's orbit trigger a warm (or interglacial) period, increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide may amplify the warming by enhancing the greenhouse effect. When temperatures become cooler, CO2 enters the ocean and contributes to additional cooling. During at least the last 650,000 years, CO2 levels have tended to track the glacial cycles...that is, during warm interglacial periods, CO2 levels have been high and during cool glacial periods, CO2 levels have been low. ("Past Climate Change")

One of the most commonly used tools scientists have utilized for determining past climatic changes is ice core data. Ice core samples are used for collecting a wide range of statistics about past climates, including atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Ice core samples have their limits however, and may be providing scientists with an incomplete picture or even false data. Christopher Readinger, of CSA, writes, "The primary sources of ice cores have been the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets due to their immense size, extreme thickness, and relatively undisturbed ice. Their thickness makes them ideal for extracting long cores representing time spans that can exceed 100,000 years before the present in Greenland and 400,000 years in Antarctica" ("Ice Core Proxy"). While 400,000 years sounds like a very long time, it is actually quite the opposite with regards to the Earth and climate change. For example, no data collected from ice core samples has ever shown CO2 levels above 300 parts per million ("Past Climate Change"). This number is commonly used to point out that the current level of 383 parts per million is unprecedented and a cause for alarm ("Climate Fear As"). However, ice core samples dating back more than 750,000 years simply don't exist. Considering the fact that Earth is estimated by geologists as being around 4.5 billion years old, ice cores leave a lot of questions unanswered (Alden). Some scientific studies using fossils and quartz sandstone deposits have put estimates for atmospheric CO2 levels at amounts up to twelve times that of current levels, with no resulting increase in global temperatures (Hieb). Other research calls into question the accuracy of the CO2 levels measured using ice core samples. Lawrence Solomon, of the National Post, cites Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski:

'The IPCC relies on icecore data -- on air that has been trapped for hundreds or thousands of years deep below the surface,' Dr. Jaworowski explains. 'These ice cores are a foundation of the global warming hypothesis, but the foundation is groundless -- the IPCC has based its global-warming hypothesis on arbitrary assumptions and these assumptions, it is now clear, are false'. ("The Ice-Core Man")

As quoted by Solomon, Jaworowski goes on to say:

'Ice, the IPCC believes, precisely preserves the ancient air, allowing for a precise reconstruction of the ancient atmosphere. For this to be true, no component of the trapped air can escape from the ice. Neither can the ice ever become liquid. Neither can the various gases within air ever combine or separate. This perfectly closed system, frozen in time, is a fantasy. Liquid water is common in polar snow and ice, even at temperatures as low as -72C...and we also know that in cold water, CO2 is 70 times more soluble than nitrogen and 30 times more soluble than oxygen, guaranteeing that the proportions of the various gases that remain in the trapped, ancient air will change. Moreover, under the extreme pressure that deep ice is subjected to -- 320 bars, or more than 300 times normal atmospheric pressure -- high levels of CO2 get squeezed out of ancient air. Because of these various properties in ancient air, one would expect that, over time, ice cores that started off with high levels of CO2 would become depleted of excess CO2, leaving a fairly uniform base level of CO2 behind. In fact, this is exactly what the ice cores show'. ("The Ice-Core Man").

All of this attention being placed on carbon dioxide might lead some unsuspecting people to believe that it makes up a large part of the Earth's atmosphere, thus having a tremendous impact on the greenhouse effect. Not only that, but we as humans must be responsible for the fact that there's so much of it up there. According to Monte Hieb of GeoCraft.com, they couldn't be any further from the truth:

Of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter earth's atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth's oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants...At 368 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth's atmosphere-- less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. (GeoCraft.com)

What all of this indicates, is that the cause and effect relationship between atmospheric CO2 levels and global temperatures is likely being looked at incorrectly by those who believe that an excessive level of CO2 can cause global warming. Chances are, CO2 levels are merely a symptom of climate change, not the cause. So what is the cause?
The sun, which has a diameter that is 109 times the size of the Earth and a volume equal to that of 1.3 million Earth's, has a definite, if not completely understood, impact on our climate (Cain). A mixture of hydrogen and helium, the sun is like a giant nuclear reactor whose energy warms the earth, controls our seasons, and provides the energy needed for life on our planet (Arnett). Research has proven that the sun goes through regular changes, or solar cycles, that effect the amount of energy it puts out (Dr. Hathaway). Similarly, research has shown numerous links between these cycles and changes in the Earth's climate. Although it is the opposite of what we're seeing now, historical data on solar minimum cycles show just what kind of impact the sun can have on our climate. Dr. David Whitehouse, science editor for BBC News, writes on the findings of a research study conducted by scientists at the Institute for Astronomy in 2004:

In particular, it has been noted that between about 1645 and 1715, few sunspots were seen on the Sun's surface. This period is called the Maunder Minimum after the English astronomer who studied it. It coincided with a spell of prolonged cold weather often referred to as the "Little Ice Age". Solar scientists strongly suspect there is a link between the two events - but the exact mechanism remains elusive. ("Sunspots Reaching 1000")

Further acknowledging the idea that a solar minimum cycle may have been responsible for Earth's last major cold spell is NASA's Dr. David Hathaway:

Early records of sunspots indicate that the Sun went through a period of inactivity in the late 17th century. Very few sunspots were seen on the Sun from about 1645 to1715. Although the observations were not as extensive as in later years, the Sun was in fact well observed during this time and this lack of sunspots is well documented. This period of solar inactivity also corresponds to a climatic period called the "Little Ice Age" when rivers that are normally ice-free froze and snow fields remained year-round at lower altitudes. There is evidence that the Sun has had periods of inactivity in the more distant past. The connection between solar activity and terrestrial climate is an area of on-going research. ("The Sunspot Cycle")

The other side of this relationship, is that, intuitively, it would stand to reason that if a reduction of solar activity could lead to lower temperatures on Earth, the opposite would also hold true: that an increase of solar activity could lead to warmer temperatures on Earth. Solar activity during the Medieval Climate Anomaly seems to reinforce this. Randy Russell, of Windows to the Universe at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, states:

There have also been periods of enhanced solar activity in terms of greater sunspot counts. The Medieval Maximum lasted from about 1100 to 1250, and roughly corresponds to an extended warm period of Earth's climate called the Medieval Warm Period that lasted from the 10th to the 14th century...further fueling speculation about possible links between solar activity and Earth's climate. (Windows to the Universe)

With that in mind, the same study previously cited by Dr. Whitehouse, also concluded that, "the Sun is more active now than it has been at anytime in the previous 1,000 years" and that, "over the last century the number of sunspots rose at the same time that the Earth's climate became steadily warmer" ("Sunspots Reaching 1000"). Further strengthening the theory that the sun has a strong impact on global warming is the fact that many other planets in the solar system have been heating up right along with Earth (Than). Perhaps most interestingly, Mars has seen a reduction in the size of its polar ice caps for three consecutive years (Ravilious). This information was the basis for an article written by Kate Ravilious, of National Geographic, regarding the studies of scientist Habibullo Abdussamatov. In her article, Ravilious writes on Abdussamatov's findings, saying:

Abdussamatov believes that changes in the sun's heat output can account for almost all the climate changes we see on both planets. Mars and Earth, for instance, have experienced periodic ice ages throughout their histories. 'Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance,' Abdussamatov said. ("Mars Melt Hints")

Ironically enough, we may soon find ourselves wishing we had spent less time arguing overglobal warming, and more time finding a way to accelerate or amplify it. Per their press release, in January of 2009, the Space and Science Research Center sent a letter to, "President-elect Barrack Obama’s nominated science adviser Dr. John Holdren and nominated NOAA administrator Dr. Jane Lubchenco clearly stating that '…global warming is over; a new cold climate has arrived' " ("Obama Climate Change"). John Casey, directer of the SSRC, explained the need for a press conference, saying:

There can no longer be any doubt that the Sun has entered an historic period of dramatically reduced activity which will bring us many long years of deep cold weather. This was predicted by me and a few other scientists around the globe but of course we were not taken seriously because of the politics of global warming and the refusal of many media outlets to print or telecast alternatives to the now discredited man made global warming concept. According to national and international sources that monitor the Sun, what is happening on and in the Sun is nothing short of record setting, astounding, and at the same time worrisome. The solar wind is at its lowest level in fifty years. The surface movement on the Sun has slowed to record rates and according to NASA’s previous announcements is ‘off the bottom of the charts.’ Most telling is the current prolonged lack of sunspots between the normal 11 year solar cycles 23 and 24 which is about to set a one hundred year record for time without sunspots. NASA also has long since forecast that cycle 25 will be ‘one of the weakest in centuries.' All of these events in combination leave little doubt that a ‘solar hibernation’ lasting several decades
delivering the coldest weather in over two centuries has in fact arrived. ("Obama Climate Change")

There's something almost romantic about blaming the butterfly for the hurricane; to think that something so small and insignificant can have an effect on something so huge and so powerful. Both realistically and scientifically, however, most people would agree that there are much larger, more meaningful forces at work than the butterfly. Yet, with regard to global warming, we seem ready to discard all of the information that points to forces much larger than ourselves. Interestingly, it would seem that we actually want to be responsible for global warming. This idea puts us in control of the situation, a prospect far less frightening than the alternative. After all, if we are the ones at fault, we can simply make some changes and the problem will go away. Unfortunately, it appears more likely that we are no more responsible for global warming than a butterfly is for a hurricane; and equally incapable of doing anything to stop it.



Alden, Andrew. "Earth's Formation In A Nutshell." About.com. 3 March 2009.
.

Arnett, Bill. "The Sun". NinePlanets.org. 25 Jan 2009. 2 March 2009
.

Black, Richard. "Humans Blamed For Climate Change." BBC News. 2 Feb. 2007. 1 March 2009.
.

Brown, Paul. "Climate Fear As Carbon Levels Soar." The Guardian. 11 Oct. 2004. 3 March 2009.
.

Cain, Fraser. "Interesting Facts About The Sun." UniverseToday.com. 1 March 2009.
.

Dizikes, Peter. "The Meaning of The Butterfly." The Boston Globe. 8 June 2008. 1 March 2009.
.

Dr. Hathaway, David. "The Sunspot Cycle." NASA. 12 Feb. 2009. 2 March 2009
.

Dr. Whitehouse, David. "Sunspots Reaching 1,000 Year High." BBC News. 6 July 2004.
2 March 2009 .

Hieb, Monte. GeoCraft.com. 19 Sept. 2006. 4 March 2009.
.

"Interglacial." AbsoluteAstronomy.com. 2009. 3 March 2009.
.

McKibben, Bill. "Remember This: 350 Parts Per Million." The Washington Post. 28 Dec. 2007. 3 March 2009.
.

O'Driscoll, Patrick and Dan Vergano. "Fossil Fuels Are To Blame, World Scientists Conclude." USA Today. 1 March 2007. 4 March 2009.
.

"Past Climate Change." EPA. 24 March 2008. 3 March 2009.
.

Ravilious, Kate. "Mars Melt Hints At Solar, Not Human, Cause For Warming." National Geographic. 28 Feb. 2007. 2 March 2009
.

Readinger, Christopher. "Ice Core Proxy Methods For Tracking Climate Change." CSA. Feb. 2006. 2 March 2009
.

Russell, Randy. Windows.ucar.edu. 19 April 2007. 4 March 2009
.

Than, Ker. "Sun Blamed For Warming Of Earth And Other Worlds." LiveScience. 12 March 2007. 2 March 2009. .

"Obama Climate Change Advisers Holdren and Lubchenco Are Told Global Warming Is Over Time to Prepare the US for the New Cold Era." Space and Science Research Center.
8 Jan. 2009. 4 March 2009 .

WordNet. 1 March 2009. .



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
I once had a long and powerful dream that I was in the future, here in NE Oklahoma. My city had fewer people for some reason. And cars were not used much for some reason I'm not clear on. I was working with others, we considered ourselves kind of ad-hoc leaders of the city, to deal with the enormous constant influx of people from the North.

It was getting colder, too cold for food or practical living, and the cold was moving downward. The great lakes states were uninhabitable now, and even the slightly lower states were about arctic. Our goal was to get people fed and moved south as quickly as possible so they did not stay, incredible quantities of people with children on foot constantly washing in. Everyone was heading toward equator regions or as close as they could get.

The problem we were discussing during my dream was that we (Oklahoma) were about to go to war with Texas. They had enacted literal fencing and armed people all over to keep out the giant flood of refugees and we couldn't have them backing up in the possibly millions eventually from the border in our state either obviously or we'd just have everyone south of Tulsa starving to death in anarchy. So we had to do something else. We talked about re-routing them to other states. The biggest problem was that it really wasn't safe for us indefinitely either. We already had a problem having enough food locally for our own territories and feeding refugees, we could barely give them a little to shepherd them through quickly. It was heartbreaking to see the little kids and the desperate parents. I was really concerned about our negotiations with Texas and was trying to figure out what the hell we could DO to stop this turning into the war that seemed to be coming at the southern border; we really just couldn't compete in terms of arms.

I woke up and really hoped that wouldn't ever be a reality. I certainly wasn't thinking of anything like that, this was eons ago. When I see stuff like this though, I kind of laugh a little and think of that dream. It would figure that even in my dreams the Texans are better armed than everyone else.


RC



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
I wonder what all them Global 'warming' fearmongers would say if we entered a Global 'cooling'. They would lose all credibility.


That's like mother nature saying, "Quit trying to profit from lies saying I am going into a cycle of Global Warming. I'm sick of it, I will punish you by sending earth into global cooling, that will show you to profit from lies about me again".




top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join