Sunspot activity has not resumed up after hitting an 11-year low in March last year, raising fears that — far from warming — the globe is about to return to an Ice Age, says an Australian-American scientist.
One thing we know for sure, this latest scientist to declare this won't be getting any more funding even though he's a scientist and NASA astronaut.
Physicist Phil Chapman, the first native-born Australian to become an astronaut with NASA [he became an American citizen to join up, though he never went into space], said pictures from the U.S. Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) showed no spots on the sun.
Rest of story here.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
You Know That Global Warming Thing? Not So Fast.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
But please, by all means feel free to ignore the final portion of that very short article:
"Critics quickly pointed out that Chapman may have been "cherry-picking" the data. A strong La Nina formation in the Pacific pushed down January temperatures over much of the Northern Hemisphere from where they had been a year earlier, but average global temperatures are still much higher than the 20th-century average, and the NOAA said last week that last month was the warmest March on record.
It's called CLIMATE CHANGE.
How is it that right wingers get so caught up on the term "warming?" It's much more complex than that, and anyone who denies that we are facing an increasingly unstable climate has got their head up their ass.
As I always say to the deniers: Hmm... you and your junk science from Fox "News" or hundreds of credible scientists who actually study this for a living... hmmm... wonder who I'll listen to?
Denial and actively seeking misinformation never saved anyone.
No.It's global warming. Well, at least Fox talked about the other side without calling them "Deniers."
Climate change is not a slogan; it's what happens naturally all the time.
You can't declare Unstoppable Man Made Global Warming and then, when the data come out showing you're exaggerating BIG TIME, change your nomenclature and call it climate change.
I won't let you.
I will push back at every turn.
They claimed the mantle of Global Warming. They've politicized it. They've lied about it. They're stuck with it.
"Global warming is happening, it is a serious problem, and humans are causing it... If we fail to start substantially reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the next couple of years, we risk bequeathing a diminished world to our grandchildren". CRAZY LIBERAL TALK?
Actually that is a quote from JOHN MCCAIN. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/02/13/the_turning_point_on_global_warming/
As for the FOX report, Surprisingly, they admit in the article that Chapman "cherry-picked" the data, and that researchers say "the sun has a negligible effect on climate change"- (which exposes Chapmans report as quack science).
Yes, They called it Global Warming, but the model is NOT (and NEVER was) a static continued warming everywhere, with NO cooling involved in specific areas and/or phases.
Yes Its called Global Warming
my children.
Al
How can we predict a long term climate change when we cannot even predict next weeks weather.
Raised in the Country where you started work when you could walk, vegetables came from bushes and meat came from the animal, we all knew that the weather varied and ran in cycles. My Grandmother explained this to me.
Besides how can carbon dioxide be bad? Without it plants do not grow.
who determines we have to much. What about large areas of dust that we pass through as we circle the sun and our solar system moves through the galaxy. Our planet and solar system are not a static environment. It is changing every second of every day.
The sun also has changes and cycles that greatly affect us.
I guess we should be sure and enact a ban on SUV's on the sun.
JohnB
Jonny said,
"Surprisingly, they admit in the article that Chapman "cherry-picked" the data, and that researchers say "the sun has a negligible effect on climate change."
No Fox did NOT say he cherry picked data. They quote Global Warming Alarmists as saying THEY believe he cherry picked data. Small wonder.
I'll give Fox an atta boy: at least they had BOTH SIDES OF THE STORY WITHOUT SNEERING.
John McCain is wrong.
Wow. Call the New York Times.
One of the best statements I heard about climate change was this: "Even though science is still debating the exact cause and causes, our air, soil and waters are polluted and need cleaning up."
I believe it's a variety of factors, including the Sun and human-made CO2.
Kinda hard to find people who are open to viewing it from a middle of the road perspective. Most say it either doesn't exist, or if it does it's solely due to the Sun or solely due to human-made CO2. I've flipped and flopped myself before coming to the conclusion it's a variety of factors.
It started out as Global Warming (because in reality, that was what science founded--rising average temps. of the earth's core) until a lot of people started crying "foul" when temps were at record lows in the winter. The media (and political figureheads) seemed to make the switch to calling it Global Climate Change. How much we can do about it to slow it down or stop it altogether (highly unlikely) remains to be seen.
My concern is the government (both parties) using this to further tax and/or control our personal lives. I want to see focus on solar, wind, ocean/wave energy. Maybe dig up Tesla's papers on free energy, although uncle sam would likely have a shit cow over that. I also want to see emphasis on electric, water and solar powered vehicles. The possibilities are virtually endless.
Did anyone notice the "global warming" that was being shown on the news a couple of nights ago? They showed scenes from the Sioux Falls, SD are where they were getting a later-then-usual blizzard that put many cars in the ditches and visibility was down to 1/4-mile, if that.
And, has anyone here figured out that AlGore is nothing but a huckster and charlatan intent on only two things: To get his name and face in the media and to line his already bulging coffers with more money from his stupidly "adoring" syncphants and various and sundry toadies around the country.
Does the name "Bill Bradbury" come to mind?
Post a Comment