The Science is settled. Or was.

www.foxnews.com...

Upside-down "rivers" of warm ocean water may be one of the causes of Antarctica's ice shelves breaking up, leading to a rise in sea levels. But a new study suggests an increase in sea ice may lead to a much more devastating change in the Earth's climate — another ice age.

Using computer simulations, the research suggests that an increase in sea ice could significantly alter the circulation of the ocean, ultimately leading to a reverse greenhouse effect as carbon dioxide levels in the ocean increase and levels in the air decrease.

“One key question in the field is still what caused the Earth to periodically cycle in and out of ice ages,” University of Chicago professor and the study's co-author, Malte Jansen, said in a statement. “We are pretty confident that the carbon balance between the atmosphere and ocean must have changed, but we don’t quite know how or why."

I'm not here to claim AGW isn't real, or that we aren't warming. What I am here to do is explain why I feel we may not know every damn thing, as we have been told previously. Remember "the science is settled"? I do. We are and were made to feel stupid for questioning the narrative. HOW DARE WE!!!! Yet, here we have an admission that we don't quite know what drives these cycles. The one's that make drastic changes in our climate. Now, I'm not a scientist, and I don't know much, but I have come to understand that there is a giant amount about a lot of things that we don't know. And if we waltz around as if we are superior and omnipotent, thinking that we know all about this, and we are going to shame the world into fixing it by transferring wealth, we aren't helping anyone or anything.

It's time to admit that global warming is a theory, not a fact, and there may be more to this than we previously thought. Much like life on other planets. We just don't know. So attack the messenger if you feel froggy, but at the end of the day (in about 30 years) when things aren't all on fire, and you are looking for your winter coat, remember this thread.

a reply to: network dude

This is nothing new really. It's long been said that melting glaziers could shut down the gulf stream and create an ice age.

Fry or freeze? I think I'd prefer to freeze!

a reply to: network dude

Contrary to your right wing delusional superstitions, the scientists at NASA have a different consensus:

Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate is Warming

a reply to: dfnj2015

TLDR huh. I am still pushing for the crayon font, but I'm getting resistance. I'm fighting for you though.

Science is NEVER settled. If someone finds new evidence, the theory will change. The current science is like democracy, the majority decides what is true.
The science about the flat earth was definitive once... But now we think it is round(ish). Still, some thinkit isn’t.

Science must be an endless debate with arguments and facts.

My point is: AGW is not a science at this moment, it is a religion. That is just wrong.

From my limited knowledge on the subject it has always been likely that global warming or climate change could cause another ice age.
The desalination of the northern atlantic due to melting polar ice would cause an interruption of the gulf stream causing an ice age in europe.
I heard this years ago.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: network dude

Contrary to your right wing delusional superstitions, the scientists at NASA have a different consensus:

Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate is Warming

You did read Network Dudes opening sentence was that he believed in global warming, did you not.
I mean, his opening statement quote
“I'm not here to claim AGW isn't real”
Should I repeat if for hi,
“I'm not here to claim AGW isn't real”
And you throw a smarmy comment?

Slow down, calm down, read and comprehend
It seems the cause might not be based solely on humans and our pollutants

“I'm not here to claim AGW isn't real”

Amazing

a reply to: dfnj2015

I just gave you a star for using the word "consensus". I love that word.

a reply to: network dude

We're already heading for another mini ice age. Whether it's because of this or a solar minimum that's shaping up to be the worst in 12,500 years, we're definitely not going to melt or die from global warming like they've been trying to sell us since Al Gore.

a reply to: Raggedyman

thanks, but that is just typical. When all you have is a hammer, all you see is nails.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
From my limited knowledge on the subject it has always been likely that global warming or climate change could cause another ice age.
The desalination of the northern atlantic due to melting polar ice would cause an interruption of the gulf stream causing an ice age in europe.
I heard this years ago.

It's just that what we have been told, isn't that. Which is why I wrote the OP.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Ok, you go out there and prepare yourself for extreme global warming and let the rest of us prepare for extreme global cooling. Cool?

a reply to: network dude

I saw a movie about this.

The Day After Tomorrow

So it must be true.

a reply to: Raggedyman

They don't read that far. He saw "Network Dude" and "The Science is Settled. Or is it?" and immediately got offended. He loves global warming and wants it to be real so he can say "I told ya so."

a reply to: network dude

It's just that what we have been told, isn't that. Which is why I wrote the OP.

Andy Marshall's office [Office of Net Assessment] wrote a paper about a decade ago on what to expect if a little ice age hit. It caused a minor media sensation and was then promptly forgotten. I believe some sober thinkers have been entertaining outcomes other than continued warming, but it is hard to realize that given the spin and cheerleading accorded to the idea of AGW.

Cheers

Could somebody tell me what taking money off everybody does to the environment. It's not money that's needed, it's actions and not by the man in the street. And man being the minor problem to the Earth as the land mass (which man lives on) is only roughly a third of the Earth which man himself only takes up a small proportion, why are we so arrogant to believe that we are the governing factor in the Earths natural fluctuating climate.

a reply to: dfnj2015

If there is a 'consensus', then it isn't true science.

Consensus = politics.

originally posted by: crayzeed
Could somebody tell me what taking money off everybody does to the environment. It's not money that's needed, it's actions and not by the man in the street. And man being the minor problem to the Earth as the land mass (which man lives on) is only roughly a third of the Earth which man himself only takes up a small proportion, why are we so arrogant to believe that we are the governing factor in the Earths natural fluctuating climate.

Do you remember the carbon tax levied on the energy companies some years ago? It made no difference at all to the suppliers behaviours, other than to pass the tax on to the customers. This of course raised an outcry and the tax was scrapped.

Science is NOT settled.
See AAAS article referencing Smithsonian 500 million average earth temperature chart
HERE

Check out Perot Museum of Natural History credited chart in this LINK

Regardless of how anyone feels about this issue, the Facts are NOT settled.
My personal opinion that the modeling is inept and predictions therefrom are ridiculous - is completely irrelevant in re above.

ganjoa

a reply to: dfnj2015

Contrary to your right wing delusional superstitions

I don't think he is superstitious, but he is stitious.