Global warming 'undeniable,' report says

reply to post by C0bzz


There is an exact alignment.

Also never forget. This is the small cycle within the big cycle.

It's basically like this: 12131423242534353635343524232413121. There ups and downs within those ups and downs and those are within other upps and owns. Don't forget that the sun has to last for billions of years. This maxes the maximum pattern length 1/3 billion years. and the minimum as much as needed. Listen to the sounds of the sun. There is a pattern in there. But it is a pattern within a larger pattern.


As I recall, that's only a few months of recordings.

Originally posted by TheBandit795
Check out these previous ATS threads. There is no consensus about climate change IMO. There are probably as much scientists anti global warming as there are pro. And there have been numerous errors and scandals exposed about 6 months ago. This list is not complete. I know that there are members who have listed all the scandals and errors of late 2009/ early 2010 here on ATS.. Can't find them though.



UN Blowback: More Than 650 Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims


World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

Its Conclusive: CRU Climate Data Manipulation At Its Worst!

More Climate Fraud Uncovered

IPCC Says Climate Prediction Impossible

There has been no global warming since 1995

The Latest IPCC Scandal - AMAZONGATE!

The majority of the links you have proven show absolutely nothing, by the way. I could come up with a similar (and actually accurate) list about anti-AGW fallacies.

There is an exact alignment.

(red is temperature, black is solar energy hitting the earth)

No, there is not. If there was then the gradients over time should be identical - they are not.

[edit on 30/7/2010 by C0bzz]

reply to post by C0bzz


There's a tiny blob in the late 90s off track and the 2000s are freaked up. But the rest aligns. Now I'm not going to say I know what on Earth, or off Earth, is going on, but what I do know is that it aligns pretty dang well until the 2000s. Nothing special happened up until then. So that's the mystery.

Couldn't the sun just as well be the biggest factor in play here? It seems to have been acting up lately just as temperatures in a lot of areas on the globe (not all) have been increasing and breaking records. Maybe a more appropriate term to describe what is starting to take place is "Sun Warming"?

[edit on 30-7-2010 by SinkingSun]

[edit on 30-7-2010 by SinkingSun]

reply to post by C0bzz


Those two charts, when overlayed like that, look almost identical to the hysteresis vs temperature curves on the welding plates we use at my office.

Hmm...I should see if I have a saved analysis lying around.

Would explain why we have an almost sinodal wave producing a constant temperature effect.

Edit it to add, not quite sure why my company labels it as histeresis, when it's actually pulsed current...

[edit on 30-7-2010 by peck420]

Originally posted by SinkingSun
Couldn't the sun just as well be the biggest factor in play here? It seems to have been acting up lately just as temperatures in a lot of areas on the globe (not all) have been increasing and breaking records.

Well we're currently in a prolonged solar minimum which some have said means we're heading for a new ice age. I guess that's why the USA has just had the hottest month on record? And Moscow is burning .....

'This winter is just a little cooler than average, and I still think that snow will become an increasingly rare event.’

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...


That makes me snicker. What makes him so sure it's not "this summer is just a little warmer than average"?

In 2006, Sweden (at least so rumors had it, as I was in the military then, sleeping in tents) went through its coldest winter since 1950-something. It might just as well be a global iceage coming as a global warming. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by David_Reale]

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by SinkingSun
Couldn't the sun just as well be the biggest factor in play here? It seems to have been acting up lately just as temperatures in a lot of areas on the globe (not all) have been increasing and breaking records.

Well we're currently in a prolonged solar minimum which some have said means we're heading for a new ice age. I guess that's why the USA has just had the hottest month on record? And Moscow is burning .....

Imagine what will happen when the sun wakes up.



Seems like evidence that humanity might have held off an ice age?

I don’t think many people are disputing a slight temperature increase. They are disputing whether it is man-made, or natural; and whether it is a fact of science or a product of speculation that the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere is causing it.

What gets me is that of all the poisons and rubbish released into the atmosphere by humans, TPTB have to pick on the only compound we release which is actually beneficial to the world.

Carbon dioxide is essential for the perpetuation of life. If the atmosphere were to become depleted of CO2, plants could not grow, and the animals that fed on the plants would starve.

Animals and plants are complementary to each other in that animals breathe carbon dioxide out, and plants breath it in. But if animals were the only source of co2 life would become less abundant over time, because other processes, such as rain, quickly remove co2 from the atmosphere and convert it into forms not usable by life.

Luckily, or maybe by divine plan, volcanoes release large quantities of co2 that constantly replenish atmospheric co2 and allow life to continue.

Plants can breath in co2 faster than animals can breath it out, so in the absence of a volcano, the concentration of co2 in the atmosphere is naturally low. Since the beginning of the industrial era we have resurrected vast quantities of long-gone life by putting their carbon back into living circulation. The reason why the amount of co2 in the atmosphere has only risen by a minute quantity as a result is that co2 is constantly being removed from the atmosphere, mostly to the inorganic world, but some also to the living world, increasing the total biomass of the Earth.

Humans have considerably increased their biomass since the beginning of the industrial era. Human population has increased from a billion to more than six billion. Ironically, much of the carbon that is 20% b.w. of you, me, and everyone else was once fossil fuel that was converted to carbon dioxide, taken up by crop plants, and eaten by us.

If we stopped burning fossil fuel the atmosphere would quickly become depleted of co2, and this might have grave repercussions in agriculture and attempting to feed the 6000000000+ people that now inhabit the globe.

The co2 causes global warming argument is ridiculous, because the most potent greenhouse gas of all, water vapour, exists in the atmosphere in vastly greater quantities, and always has.
A minute increase in a trace greenhouse gas is not going to modify the large greenhouse effects already produced by water vapour.

reply to post by whatsup


I am amazed at how many people (especially ATS) are so recalcitrant to accept any evidence of man made global warming due to their ideology

Well the "man = GW" flock should have picked a more credible poster boy than a pusillanimous elite hypocrite liar: al gump. He's made a career of belching poo poo, I don't believe him or anything he's remotely involved in at face value. He is one of "them", a filthy rich elitist with shady DC mafia friends / agendas.

I'm no expert, and don't play one on TV, but my basic understanding of weather comes from MOS 0847 training... reading what I consider more objective POVs not motivated by profits / peeps with nothing to gain or tainted with elite stench, imo... the whole "who is responsible" issue is far from settled and wide open for debate.

I also don't see many "right" or "wrong" answers either but unfortunately with polarizing figures like al gore in the mix, people are quick to take sides.. admittedly I'm guilty of that to an extent by regarding gore as a clown, even a broken clock is right 2x a day and perhaps I ignore gore to my peril / ignorance.. I'll accept that... I trust my instincts / gut feeling over the words spewed forth by a career liar.

reply to post by metamagic


Here's my 'before I read the thread' response:

Wake me up when they work it back up to the 'man made global warming deniers belong on the dock at Nuremberg' level.

It's important to remember your media history. Especially the media's recent history.

Their weapons and words can be used against them, if you can remember what they did, and said.

Is now a really bad time to say that Europe had one of the coldest winters last winter (2009/2010) on record, and that Peru is currently in a state of emergency due to extremely cold temperatures not seen for decades????

If the world was truely warming, these records could not be made.

www.bbc.co.uk...

The cold front moving up from Antarctica has caused temperatures to plunge across the southern cone region of South America.

It recorded minimum temperatures of minus 14C in Patagonia and central Argentina and between 0C and 3C in the north.

The unusually cold winter weather in South America follows one of the coldest winters for years in many parts of the northern hemisphere.

In 2007: news.bbc.co.uk...

Argentina's capital, Buenos Aires, has seen snow for the first time in 89 years, as a cold snap continues to grip several South American nations.

Temperatures plunged to -22C (-8F) in parts of Argentina's province of Rio Negro, while snow fell on Buenos Aires for several hours on Monday.

Yup - the world is definitely warming.

Strange there are no reports that the world is also getting much colder. Can't imagine why.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by mirageofdeceit]

Does anyone here realise the stupidity in comparing two different curves by simply looking at them?

If you're going to try to find a correlation, it has to be done in a STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT manner, otherwise it means nothing. This is common knowledge for ALL scientists. No one promoting denial ever mentions significance levels.

Another gripe: anyone who claims that there are equal numbers of scientists in both for and against the CC theory are clearly not scientists, and probably don't even know any. The debate in the scientific community revolves largely around predicted impacts and probabilities.

Out of about 20,000 people at my university, I know of about 3 people who do not believe in climate change. Yes, 3.

Finally, I would just like to add that posting online news sources is inadequate when trying to present scientific debate. It introduces a lot of bias into the topic. Get the source material or you will be reading someone elses interpretation or agenda.

Heres my take on climate change:
1. We are facing serious changes that will affect the quality of life of all people on the planet.
2. People know that this is coming and are trying to make a profit.
3. People that are currently in big business want to keep profiting, so they are actively distorting public perception.
4. People are believing the propoganda, and helping big business screw the planet and everyone over by propogating this drivel.

Just because people are trying to take advantage of a situation, does not mean that it is based on lies. This leap of logic seems to be common.

@mirage

It is about global mean temperatures, and extremes in both hot and cold temperatures. Global warming is not a very useful term, it just confuses people when there are extreme cold weather events.

All of the literature makes this distinction abundantly clear. News websites however do not.

It is part of the distortion.

@GovtFlu

I study climate change and related issues at a postgraduate level. I have never heard people talking about Al Gore during my studies. Hes just a guy that picked the material up and ran with it. I couldn't give a rats arse about Al Gore.

@aethron

I think you were in the yes men? That line about perpetuating life comes straight from an oil industry advertising campaign. If we didn't burn fossil fuels then the atmosphere would become depleted of CO2? LOL! Ever hear of the carbon cycle? Where did all the CO2 come from previous to human civilisation?

[edit on 31-7-2010 by seenitall]

reply to post by __rich__

In Canada, if we get one hot day out of 365 that breaks an all time high for that one day... they always say, "Record breaking temperatures" and heat advisories all over the news. But if we get a cold snap of several cold days out of 365 that break all time lows we don't hear a peep. The most they will say is "below seasonal averages". They save the "Record breaking" propaganda for the highs only.

reply to post by seenitall


If you're so confident in what you say, How about editing your post, to where it says "Climate Change" put "Anthropogenic Global Warming" instead ?

And i see it a lot from posters here, (Covering their asses).

Everyone knows that the Climate Changes, that's not the issue.

If you believe man-made CO2 is warming the planet, be a man and stand by your conviction and put AGW.....Not whimper behind the term "Climate Change" that can mean a Natural cycle is happening too.

If global means the entire solar system, then yes. There are changes to all the planets in our solar system. There is even changes to the moons of these planets. Its not related to the activities of human beings.



[edit on 31-7-2010 by Copernicus]

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by SinkingSun
Couldn't the sun just as well be the biggest factor in play here? It seems to have been acting up lately just as temperatures in a lot of areas on the globe (not all) have been increasing and breaking records.

Well we're currently in a prolonged solar minimum which some have said means we're heading for a new ice age. I guess that's why the USA has just had the hottest month on record? And Moscow is burning .....

The Sun and climate are moving in opposite directions.

www.skepticalscience.com...

Even though the data is from NASA, which I dont trust, I think its probably accurate in this case. Lets hope so anyway. Would be nice to not be reliant on NASA to find things like this out.



[edit on 31-7-2010 by Copernicus]

Record highs and lows are consistent with AGW.

It is forcing greater temperature amplitudes, or swings.

Like a pendulum moving back and forth.

Thing is , the high records outnumber the lows.

www.skepticalscience.com...