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.


Climate Cycle is Primary Factor in Global Warming, Cooling; New NCPA Study

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 03:19 AM
Here's an interesting story, a new study by the NCPA (National Center for Policy Analysis) shows that a 1,500 yr cycle is causing global warmin and cooling.

Climate Cycle is Primary Factor in Global Warming, Cooling; New NCPA Study Shows Human Activities Have Little If Any Impact

September 30, 2005 — By National Center for Policy Analysis

DALLAS — Human activities have little to do with the Earth’s current warming trend, according to a study published today by the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA). In fact, the study concludes that global warming and cooling seem to be part of a 1,500-year cycle of moderate temperature swings.

“The geographic range and variety of evidence supporting a 1,500- year cycle is too great to dismiss,” said S. Fred Singer, co-author of the study, professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia and president of the Science and Environment Policy Project. “Evidence from every continent and ocean confirms the 1,500-year cycle,” added Dennis Avery, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and co-author of the study.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Read the entire article...

-- No surprize here, it's all a natural cycle...

posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 03:45 AM
At the bottom of the article,

About the National Center for Policy Analysis
The NCPA is a non-profit, nonpartisan research institute with offices in Dallas and Washington, D. C. that advocates private solutions to public policy problems. We depend on the contributions of individuals, corporations and foundations that share our mission. The NCPA accepts no government grants.


NCPA is a member of the State Policy Network, a right wing think tank.

It looks like I have another group to add to this thread.
Backgrounds of Scientists and Organizations Who are Skeptic of Global Warming

The National Center for Policy Analysis has received $315,900 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

NCPA is just another group looking out for Exxon's agenda.

They are also being funded by the DaimlerChrysler Corporation Fund and El Paso Energy Foundation.

Just another disinfo group to add to my list. Thanks for the post.

posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 09:34 AM
There are very few organizations that are nonpartisan.
Anyway, that doesn't disprove the 1,500yr cycle. Has anyone ever heard of that cycle? it's the first time I've heard about it, very interesting.

posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 09:38 AM
whether cyclical or not, can anyone really disagree that humans haven't affected the environment in this past 1,500 year cycle than in the 1,500 year cycle prior to that???

why do humans have such issues when it comes to admitting fault?

posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 10:00 AM

Originally posted by Zion Mainframe

...that doesn't disprove the 1,500yr cycle. Has anyone ever heard of that cycle? it's the first time I've heard about it, very interesting.

Evidence published in the 1970's showed that our earth has 6 identifiable climate cycles - the largest around 2 million years (I think), one around 66 thousand, and a minor one at 1500 years or so.

The key point is that climate change is more severe when the cycles overlap - and the most extreme effects occur when all six cycles come together, or "converge."

Research at the time also addressed geophysical cycles (ie., earthquakes, volcanic activity), and was investigating the relationships between the two.

I only have found old printed materials - nothing on the net - and nothing current. My print sources include reports from the world Geophysical Society.

...These 30 year-old reports predicted an imminent major ice age, to be preceded and triggered by global warming. Human activity clearly has accelerated the changes, and worsened the impacts by releasing various contaminants that, in combination with climate stressors, seriously impact life's ability to survive.

...IMO - the whole "global warming debate" is a red herring. The most critical question is being ignored:

Given the proven imminence of radical geophysical and climate change, what is being done to ensure the survival of the human species, and human culture?

Also IMO, the scientific research and information has been appropriated by the international corporate community, and the situation is being used as a business opportunity, rather than to serve mankind as a whole.


posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 03:42 PM
There are other shorter local cycles too. The west coast of North America has the Pacific Decadal Cycle,which lasts 50-75 years or so alternating wetter/dryer patterns. For example, the 70 year period from 1920 to 1990 was the wettest 70 year period in the last 1,000 years. We are apparently heading into a decades long dryer than normal period that is independent of global warming. Researchers have tracked this cycle back well over 25,000 years.

Of course, the baseline used for comparison and all the water rights, water law, and allocations are based on the abnormally wet cycle we are just leaving. Many will blame the upcoming western drought on global warming, when in fact it has nothing to do with humans, it is normal.

posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 05:15 PM

Originally posted by Zion Mainframe

Anyway, that doesn't disprove the 1,500yr cycle.
Has anyone ever heard of that cycle?
it's the first time I've heard about it,
very interesting.

there are a few non-mainstream scientists & orgs. which have published some of these unfamiliar weather cycles

...Also, we are approaching the climax of a 1000-year weather cycle that will produce record high temperatures during the first half of the 21st century...

Wheeler Weather Cycle 20+ centuries of known weather data
compiled since the 1930s and published in a tome 'The Big Book'
housed at the cycles research institute since the 1990s.

i 1st came across Wheeler Weather Cycles thru
but their on-line archives doesnot seem to exist, anymore
....i'll look in the Wikipedia,
i wish youse guys/gals, soficrow & dave_54,
whould have maybe directed us readers to your sources......

posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 09:45 AM
St. Udio - Sorry - as I said, my original sources were print materials in old science magazines. I am addicted to reading and sifting through garage sale boxes - but my storage is limited and I restrain my actual purchases, so can't cite source details. Here's a quick overview of what's on the Net.


1. "Climate is influenced by a host of factors, not all of which are well understood." Major factors known to influence climate change are "astro-ecological" - includes impacts on the earth by sun variations/cycles (heat, magnetic, radiation, orbital tilt, etc.); changes in dust and meteor exposure as we orbit through the solar sytem (Milankovich, Muller); and various exposures as the earth and solar system orbit through the Milky Way (soficrow). In addition, responses and changes on the earth itself create domino-like cascades that influence weather, then larger climate - and arguably, speed or slow "natural" variations (general).

2. "Climate, like geological time, has it's own subdivisions to distinguish episodes of different climate. In descending order of duration, these are known as "Eras," "Epochs," "Ice-Ages," and "Periods." Scientists do not know what causes these climate changes to begin, nor what causes them to end. Changes occur fairly abruptly in Earth's history.

3. Computer models of climate and climate change, while complex and sophisticated have several fatal flaws. First, the science of climate change is not well enough understood to model accurately (this is a very important factor to consider). Second, even if the science were sufficiently well understood to model, the computer modeling capabilities would be severely taxed. Third, and perhaps most important, if we understood the science and could model it accurately, we simply do not have the capacity to collect sufficient data to drive the computer model."
Main Source, 1-3:

4. Climate change theories recognize the major impacts of earth's astro-ecological relationship to the sun and/or solar system. According to the Milankovitch theory, changes in the incident solar radiation, called insolation, in the Northern Hemisphere provide the driving force for global glacial cycles. Rich Muller has shown that orbital inclination is a better fit to the climate data than is the standard (Milankovitch) theory. No climate change theory as yet purports to be a 'unifying theory,' or accommodates the many factors influencing climate change. Computer modeling tries, but fails.

5. While the two main theories regarding Ice Age "forcings" acknowledge the larger astro-environment, neither address our solar system's orbit through the Milky Way - nor acknowledges this orbit's potential impacts. It takes the sun (and our solar system) roughly 200-250 million years to orbit once around the Milky Way - and the astro-environment likely changes dramatically from one section to the next - which may help explain the variations in climate cycles that current theories do not accommodate.
The Milky Way Galaxy
Our Solar System's Location in the Milky Way Galaxy

Policy-makers know that the earth is up for some radical changes. But public policy is driven by business interests committed to keeping the public uninformed. The issue is manipulated to keep voters out of the real debate - and policy is designed to provide business opportunities, NOT to serve ordinary peoples' best interests.

The current debate being served up to the public is a distraction. And the question, "Is human activity causing global warming?" - as framed for public consumption - is a red herring.

The important question is: "What is being done to ensure the survival of the human species, and human culture?"

A second distraction is prepared for those who don't buy the standard global warming debate. Contemporary science shows that rapid warming will spark an ice age; the counterspin says no, we now are entering longer warming period.

Join the fray, or ask your politicians the important question: "What is being done to ensure the survival of the human species, and human culture?"



Ice Ages

QUOTE: "...regular recurring epochs of glaciation have dominated the planet for the past million years. Ten times, glaciers have advanced and then retreated with the duration of retreat (and corresponding warmth) frequently lasting not more than 10,000 years. The Earth has been in a warm period for about 10,000 years now. (Which means we're due for an ice age. ed) ...Said Muller, "The mechanism proposed by Milankovitch could be adjusted to explain the cycles of glaciation that occurred prior to one million years ago. However, for the past million years the glacial record is an excellent match to the cycle of tilt." "
Muller: Astronomical theory offers new explanation for ice ages

4.1 The ice ages and the Earth's climate

Muller: A New Theory of Glacial Cycles

Muller: brief introduction to the history of climate

Orbital Variations and Glacial Cycles: Student Orientation

See: Milankovich Theory

Milankovitch Cycles in Paleoclimate

The Pacemaker of the Ice Ages: Milankovich Cycles in Climate

Basic: The Ice Ages

Climate Change and the Oceans


Basic Paleoclimatology: Data, Modeling and Theory

Climate Change Information Sheet 8: The evidence from past climates

Evidence from U-Th dating against Northern Hemisphere forcing of the penultimate deglaciation. PMID: 10716440

Wikipedia - Climate Change

Beyond the Cycle


Abrupt Climate Change

Will global warming trigger a new ice age?
Also see:

Innovative Research Proves Gulf Stream Slowed During Last Ice Age

PDF: Collapse of the California Current During Glacial Maxima
Also see: Abstract


"Dr. Gaspar explains how the Mayan Calendar is based on the two most prominent ice age cycles, thus its 2012 end date will herald in an ice age. Nostradamus, Revelations, and Native American and other animal symbologies will line up in a perfectly constructed theory to show that the ancient sages knew about these apocalyptic recurrent cycles. A possible polar axis shift is waiting for us in the next 5-12 years to end global warming."

Also, the "I Ching" may be unravelled to provide a calendar of geophysical and climate cycles, clearly based on ancient, detailed, and relatively scientific observations and records. (soficrow, unpublished)

INTERESTING COMMENTARY]Outlines Warming and Cooling Periods, Epochs, and Eras. Conclusions flawed; most info good, but incomplete[/url]


"It is not possible to understand the present or future climate unless scientists can account for the enormous and rapid cycles of glaciation that have taken place over the last million years, and which are expected to continue into the future. A great deal has happened in the theory of the ice ages over the last decade, and it is now widley accepted that ice ages are driven by changes in the Earth's orbit. The study of ice ages is very inter-disciplinary, covering geology, physics, glaciology, oceanography, atmospheric science, planetary orbit calculations astrophysics and statistics."
Ice Ages and Astronomical Causes
Data, spectral analysis and mechanisms
Series: Springer Praxis Books
Subseries: Environmental Sciences
Muller, Richard A., MacDonald, Gordon J.
1st ed. 2000. 2nd printing, 2002, Hardcover
ISBN: 3-540-43779-7

posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 03:01 PM
Thanks for all those sources! I'll check them out when I have more time.

posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 05:13 PM

posted on Oct, 8 2005 @ 06:03 AM
The 1,500 year cycle is based on the frequency of Dansgaard-Oescher events during the last ice age. Whether the same pattern continues through interglacials is still being debated. For example. this paper (large pdf file) proposes a 900 year cycle:-

Abstract: Holocene oxygen isotope data from the GISP2 ice core reveal temperature oscillations in
Greenland with a periodicity of ~900 y, which can be correlated to climate perturbations in northern
and central Europe. We suggest that the 900-y climate fluctuations are generated within the climate
system, and are probably triggered by negative salinity anomalies in the North Atlantic. A simple
template is used to show that two such triggering events centered at ~8.3 and 4.7 ky BP are required
to explain temporal evolution of 900-y climate cycles between ~3.5–8.5 ky BP as sequence of damped
oscillations. Although pacing of the 900-y cycles by changes in the Earth’s orbit cannot be ruled out,
we regard this scenario as unlikely. We show that the existing paleoceanographic evidence for
~1400–1500-y climate oscillations during the Holocene is questionable. Instead we suggest that
deep-sea records from the North Atlantic may be reconciled with 900-y climate oscillations during
this period.

Which would actually tie in more closely with the observed changes over the past few thousand years.

Notwithstanding which, CO2 levels are rising. Whether the theory that says such increases must lead to increased tempertures is correct or not is another matter. But many parts of the globe have been warmer than they are today during the Holocene, and those higher temperatures were not linked with changes in CO2.

new topics

top topics


log in