Is Global Warming ......Over?

by metatron 27 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  JH

  This winter wasn't that cold, but it snowed 50% more than normal. We will get about 400 cm of snow before the end of the winter compared to a normal winter of 250 -300 cm.

  I found this on the net:

  Un hiver exceptionnel, des mesures spéciales La présente saison hivernale est exceptionnelle par la quantité de neige reçue. En effet, à ce jour, les précipitations cumulatives de neige atteignent 354 cm. Les précipitations moyennes des vingt dernières années, pour une saison complète, est de 297 cm. Il est possible, dépendamment de la météo, que nous recevions encore jusqu’à 100 cm de neige.

  An exceptional winter

  This winter had an exceptional amount of snow. Up to now, we received 354 cm ( 139 inches) of snow. The average of the last 20 years were 297 cm. We could get another 100 cm of snow before the end of the season, which means a possible total of 454 cm (178 inches).
• 

  5go

  I thing I think a lot of AGW people don't understand is the difference between climatology and meteorology. Weather changes to quick to predict accurately, so meteorologist aren't all ways right day to day but they are close. Climate on the hand (whether a forested, tropical, or tundra area turns into a semi-arid or arid desert) is easy to predict and it is happening a lot more than it should under normal circumstances.
• 

  MissingLink

  Wow, I am actually agreeing with 5GO.

  HOWEVER, although I think we need to start going to alternative sources of energy for transportation fuels, to do it on shaky grounds such as Glowball Worming risks delegitimizing the whole enterprise. We DON'T NEED Glowball Worming as a rationale to cut back on petroleum usage.

  Wow, I'm actually agreeing with BurnTheships!

  The problem is that environmentalists are basing their recomendations on GW. If it turns out to be untrue, then everyone will just say - "Aw screw it then, lets keep burning and polluting".
• 

  5go

  The problem is that environmentalists are basing their recommendations on GW. If it turns out to be untrue, then everyone will just say - "Aw screw it then, lets keep burning and polluting".

  GW is about pollution. IF you don't care about GW, you probably didn't care about other forms of pollution either. Other forms like orbital, noise, and visual pollution. Then we can go back to more traditional forms of pollution mainly air pollution (which is caused be the same damn thing producing GW vapor emissions) and water pollution. Which there are some people who think that they weren't and aren't a problem and shouldn't be regulated either.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  GW is the wrong way to sell energy independence IMHO. It needs to be sold as a benefit, and not a guilt trip. If handled right, a transition can be great for business and a real economic boon.Think of the jobs. The exports. All those auto jobs that got shipped out of Michigan may be a blessing in disguise. We don't want to be building those things any more. Would it have been a good idea to be a buggy whip manufacturing global giant in 1920? A smart prez and congress would look at all that unused skilled labor up in Michigan and see a golden opportunity. Create massive tax incentives to open up an alternative energy business up there. Stay Fed tax free for 10 years, or 20. Lithium batteries, electric motors, solar panels, etc. etc. etc. Fund our leading engineering and physics programs for a Nuclear Fusion Manhattan Project. Only call it the Detroit project instead and base it out of U of Mich Engineering school. We would have the excitement of the Apollo moon landing, and a new direction for the country. Kids would go into science and engineering....

  Of course, how likely is that? The opposite of progress is congress. And Congress seems more interested in what some baseball player is shooting into his bloodstream lately. IDIOTS.
• 

  5go

  GW is the wrong way to sell energy independence IMHO.

  Well the oil shortages of the 70's and 80's didn't do anything to spur alternative despite a president ( Jimmy Carter BTW ) tried to warn America it is only going to get worse if we didn't fix it then. As soon as the next president took the office he tore out all the solar panels and said America will just steal or take buy cheaper energy from foreigners instead of conserving and developing new energy technology. Now look what the US is stuck with nowhere to go but down in the world. While other countries who did something are benefiting from the technology and selling it to the US.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Now look what the US is stuck with nowhere to go but down in the world.

  Bah.

  We have nowhere to go but UP.

  Ad astra.

  Burn
• 

  Forscher

  If history is anything to go by,

  Maybe not. The Medieval Warming Period (WMP) was warmer than now. Since the earth appears to warm and cool in cycles it is just possible that things could get a bit warmer before they start a clear downward trend. As somebody else noted a few cooler years don't really indicate a long-term trend.

  In my opinion Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), or man-made global warming, is a simplistic explanation for what is happening to an extremely complicated ecosystem. And it is really stretching credibility to suggest that the entire phenomenon, covering over a hundred years, is completely due to an increase of an extremely minuscule portion of the atmosphere which has occurred in the last thirty years.

  One good thing to look forward to. Scientists out of both Israel and Sweden suggest that the activity of the sun is the most important variable affecting global temperatures. The recent slow down in sunspot activity is providing the perfect opportunity to test that theory.

  Forscher