1. Carl Nemo

    To me, anthroprogenic signals = Big $$ for scheming, oligarchs and their political running dogs with an agenda. Carbon tax anyone?! / : |

    Carl Nemo **==

  2. Carl Nemo

    Recently I posted this to Blue Ridge Muse and have also expressed similar content in the past on CHB.

    The answer lies not in the wind my friends, but in the deep currents of our oceans.


    Climate change is more influenced by the “thermohaline circulation” of ocean currents. We have surface currents and mighty subsea much slower one’s that act like a conveyor belt on a worldwide basis. The recent warming caused by mankind’s technology, resulting in polar cap melt especially the Greenland glacier will cause massive amounts of fresh water to eventually slow the Gulf Stream to a standstill due to dilution of the heavier cold freshwater causing Europe to plunge into a cold as found in northern Canada and Siberia. So nested within the current warming cycle is the seed for the next “ice age”. In addition cold water can absorb greater amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere.

    The wild and wooly weather is a function is a function of greater atmospheric moisture being present due to cap and glacial melt. There’s also many smaller nestings of both hot an warm periods within the greater climatalogical cycles such as the “Medieval Warm Period” that lasted from about 950-1250 A.D. and the “Little Ice Age” to follow from 1300 to the mid 1800′s in Europe.
    At this time we are enjoying a period of warmth between major glaciations; ie., “Ice Ages”.

    Plate tectonics, the movement of continents upon the earth’s mantle also change the shape of these aforementioned currents and therefore the cycles of the ice ages themselves. If the continents are clumped as in an ancient Gondwanaland configuration there are no ice ages per se except as a function of solar output. Continents have been arranged in the past where there were minimal currents and the earth became either very warm or cold as a function of solar output and the outgassing from surface and subsea volcanoes, currently 20,000 oceanwide.

    At this time the outgassing of methane found in the frozen regions of Siberia and Canada are causing concern because methane is one thousand times more effective in terms of trapping long wave, heat related radiation causing the “greenhouse effect. What is disconcerting is that if the “thermohaline circulation” is changed in our lifetimes as mentioned concerning the Gulf Stream we could find ourselves plunged into endless winters and a new mini ice age would be upon us within ten years or less. So we best enjoy the heat while its here. My paternal grandfather once said: ” It’s one thing to be poor, but to be both poor and cold is not good.” : |


    Carl Nemo **==

    • griff

      Interesting. I recently saw a special on one of the educational channels concerning the Great Lakes actually becoming shallower. How could this be, what with all the glacier melt going on? Aren’t the Great Lakes fed mostly by glacier melt?

      Some scientists believe it’s because the land is rising, and not that the lakes are losing water due to evaporation.

      Another thing to consider is that most of the glacial ice is already under water. Only a comparatively small percentage is above the surface. Since water expands when it freezes, the melting of glaciers would have negligible effect on overall water levels, considering the former ice-turned-water would take up less volume.

      So the entire argument that we’re all going to drown because of global warming is complete bunk. The midieval warming was much warmer than now, and the polar bears and other species not only survived, but they flourished. Polar bear numbers actually decline when it gets colder because their food supply can’t surface.

      There’s a reason even polar bears hibernate. It’s because there are no breaks in the ice for them to get their food, so they sleep through the coldest part of winter until the ice starts to break up and seals begin to surface.

      Another thing that’s largely ignored by the fearmongers is that a warmer climate means more food production. More CO2 (again, a product of warming, not the cause) means faster-growing, healthier plant life.

      Even the scientists exposed as frauds by their own e-mails concluded that water vapor (clouds and trapped particulate), and not CO2, is the main driver for the greenhouse effect. They also concluded that they couldn’t ignore the sun (which they tried to do) as a primary driver of global temperature.

      Living in the Northeast, one learns quickly that a cloudless winter night is much colder than an overcast one. Clouds trap heat. Greenhouse Effect.

      Furthermore, none of their sophisticated modeling programs took into account the giant, glowing, heat-producing orb we see in the sky every day.

      Excerpts from the e-mails…

      “Attachment 4 shows the original Sydney data overlaid against the 11-year periodicity. It would appear that the solar cycle does indeed affect temperature.”


      “Nonetheless, the findings should serve as a warning, Barnett says, that “the current models cannot be used in rigorous tests for anthropogenic signals in the real world”. If they are they “might lead us to believe that an anthropogenic signal had been found when, in fact, that may not be the case.” Barnett knows how easily this can happen.”

  3. griff

    These f**king people never give up, they’re like a damned cult at your front door peddling salvation, if you only feed the beast more of your money. Give up all your earthly possessions (so the cult leader lives like a king, rapes your women and children) and follow us to the promised land!

    They already squander enough of my money already. Thanks, but no thanks.

  4. logtroll

    I took a look at some of the articles in the link. I can assure you there is no junk science contained in them… because they contain no science.

    As for the ice-age guy, I’d like to ask him to define an ice-age. I think it is where seasonally durable ice sheets grow and cover more of the earth’s surface over a long term period. Right now the trend is that ice sheets are shrinking, which is a statistically more meaningful piece of data than individual winter storms can be.

    Regarding the solar activity vs human activity comparison in determination of the root causes(s) for “global warming” or “climate change”, I believe both are being currently analyzed. The whole CO2 theory is based upon scrutinizing the geologic record, primarily though the chemical analysis of cores from ice sheets and doing comparative alignments with other sources of historical climate information (tree ring analysis, sediment cores, etc.) to get a picture of what was going on when. Any substantial correlation can be used to support or weaken various theories.

    Not being a climate scientist myself, I place a good deal more weight upon scientific documentaries, such as the excellent animations produced by Disney and Pixar. I especially like the one where the dinosaurs are marching to their collective doom to the tune of “Bolero”.