Global cooling

[mac]

Ignoring the exagerations about diet, this part of mrgybe's statement is true:

[nw30]

Here is one of the reasons that predictions really have fallen by the wayside.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Flashback: ABC News Envisioned Apocalyptic 2015 Triggered By Climate Change [VIDEO]

Kerry Picket
Reporter 1:53 PM 08/29/2015

ABC News ran a news special in 2009 called Earth 2100, a program warning its viewers about the dangers of climate change.

ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff says the show “puts participants in the future and asks them to report back about what it is like to live in this future world. The first stop is the year 2015.”

A Harvard University professor says, “We’re going to see more floods, more droughts, more wildfires.”

Other voices can be heard saying that “Flames cover hundreds of square mile” and “We expect more intense hurricanes.” Another voice says, “Well, how warm is it going to get? How much will sea level rise? We don’t know really know where the end is.”

Describing dangerous temperature levels and dropping agricultural production, the news package brings in The Weather Channel’s Heidi Cullen, who says, “There’s about one billion people who are malnourished. That number just continually grows.”

The doomsday predictions for 2015 go further and include $12.00 for a gallon of milk and $9.00 a gallon for gasoline, if there is any gas at all that is left.

Newsbusters notes that then ABC anchor Chris Cuomo, who teased the special at the time, said to Woodruff of the predictions, “I think we’re familiar with some of these issues, but, boy, 2015? That’s seven years from now. Could it really be that bad?”

Woodruff replies, “It’s very soon, you know. But all you have to do is look at the world today right today. You know, you’ve got gas prices going up. You got food prices going up. You’ve got extreme weather. The scientists have studied this for decades. They say if you connect the dots, you can actually see that we’re approaching maybe even a perfect storm. Or you have got shrinking resources, population growth. Climate change. So, the idea now is to look at it, wake up about it and then try to do something to fix it.”

For the vid~
http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/29/flashback-abc-news-envisioned-apocalyptic-world-triggered-by-climate-change-video/

And how is that latest hurricane "Erica" doing? Yet another fizzle.

[mrgybe]

The are thousands of similar articles that could be quoted. The real "deniers" are those who simply can't bring themselves to admit that they might have been wrong and that the dire warnings over the last two decades were unscientific alarmism. It's false to say that predictions have fallen by the wayside they squawk. Those are just Koch talking points. All nonsense. OK, so we've had to lower the level of alarm, and increase the error bands (to encompass any possible outcome) but we're right, and always have been, so there! And we'll just keep shifting the goal posts to prove how dumb you all are. Anyway, no matter what happens, it's all the Republican's fault.

[mac]

There have always been alarmists on both sides. Having followed the science on this since 1983, I have never believed the most dire predictions as to the pace of change--but the trend is clear, and the costs will be tremendous. The most sensible thing to do, as it has been since the Carter administration, is support energy efficiency and develop alternatives to carbon and economic signals that accelerate the movement of the economy away from carbon as the largest building block of economic growth.

Mrgybe's industry has consistently fought those measures, resorting to lies when hyperbole was not sufficient. Sackcloth and ashes will be the result if we don't maximize profits for big carbon. Can you smell the odor of manure? Carbon alarmists at work.

[swchandler]

Predictions of dire consequences aside, it's pretty hard to discount and argue against global warming and climate change when looking at actual photographs of glaciers taken in 1937 in contrast with the same shots today. To say the very least, the amount of change in such a relatively short period of time is astounding. Those that want ignore such realities would have a hard time convincing me that nothing is really wrong, and that global warming is a big hoax promoted by leftist scientists looking grant money.

[J64TWB]

Just go back and google "windsurfing at the North Pole". Actual time lapse satellite video loop of the North Pole from 1980 to 2009. You clearly see all the ancient (10,000 year old sea ice) melting. The light blue regions are young sea ice that ebbs and flows seasonally. Pretty cool stuff. The white stuff is thick and thousands of years old. Interestingly you can also see the huge dump of monitoring buoys deployed around 2007 when the they realized the shit was hitting the fan. Sad.

[GURGLETROUSERS]

Frederick. Geologists, even in the ignorant 1950's, have always understood that the earths atmosphere has traditionally been hotter than that of our present post recent Ice-Age times, AND, with higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations to match!

For those who rely on Google for their facts, check 'Climate and the Carboniferous Period', where a graph is presented. (Global temps and CO2 concentrations over time.)

Quote, from 'Similarities with our Present World.'

'Earths atmosphere today contains about 380pp (perhaps needs updating) CO2. (0.038%) Compared to former geological times, our present atmosphere is CO2 IMPOVERISHED. In the last 600 million years of earth history, only the later Carboniferous period and our present Quaqternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 400pp.'

Perhaps nature will have its way whatever we do! (But that is hard for some to accept.) As I keep asking, What IS the 'normal' ice and glacier coverage we should expect this tradiotionally hotter earth to support?

[mac]

Current CO2 levels, 401.3 ppm and rising. Rapidly. Measures at Moana Loa. Charles Keeling, who started the record in 1956 was the first scientist to tell me about Global Warming and rising CO2. I was skeptical.

GT--your article rightly notes that CO2 levels were higher--thousands of years ago--and that climate cycles, writ large, are about 100,000 years long. We won't survive the 100,000 year cycle, we will survive the warming from CO2 as a race, but not everyone will. The cost will be tremendous.

[NickB]

From our wind guy today: http://www.iwindsurf.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=30373

[GURGLETROUSERS]

To reduce the problem to simple terms -

1) The geological record indicates that the majority of the earths geological history (600+ million years) had atmospheric temperatures and CO2 levels, with the sole exception of the later Carboniferous period, in excess of those of today. This state of affairs can therefore be considered to be the earth norm, given our distance from the sun. (Venus a furnace - Mars frigid.)

2)Our current Quaternary period, following the recent Ice-Age which could be said to have declined about 100,000 years ago, is stated to be cooler, and CO2 impoverished compared to the norm of the last 600+ million years.

3) The climate change lobby insist the earth is warming, with rising CO2 levels, and rising sea levels, along with melting ice-caos..

To me, with my geological hat on, this indicates that the earth is bouncing back to its default condition, or NORM.

The obvious point, to me, is, if the ice caps are going to disappear, and the sea levels rise as a result of this reversion to the norm, how could it have been any different for the previous 600+ million years? Logically it couldn't have been.

Humans will have to adapt and cope with the natural forces of nature. After all, life evolved and flourished on earth throughout the whole 600+ million years of far hotter temperatures.