Scientists Challenge UN and Gore

[Saipan]

Well with the Gulf Loop broken, the warmer water is not getting circulated as much northward as before when the loop was not broken. So that will have some drastic and immediate effects on weather on the east coast of the US/Canada and the cold weather we see in the eastern part of Europe.

Maybe it will fix itself soon. If that continues and does not correct itself, expect more colder weather those areas currently affected.

Was the Gulf Stream here when America and Africa were connected?

The planet suvived!

Many ice ages and interglacial periods.......long before the human, animal, and economic sacrifices and rain dances.

[GostHacked]

Was the Gulf Stream here when America and Africa were connected?

The planet suvived!

Many ice ages and interglacial periods.......long before the human, animal, and economic sacrifices and rain dances.

Just do a little searching online for the ocean currents and you will get information on them and how they work.

[wyly]

Well with the Gulf Loop broken, the warmer water is not getting circulated as much northward as before when the loop was not broken. So that will have some drastic and immediate effects on weather on the east coast of the US/Canada and the cold weather we see in the eastern part of Europe.

Maybe it will fix itself soon. If that continues and does not correct itself, expect more colder weather those areas currently affected.

we'll wait and see...this could a normal event like el Niño's and la Nina's, how far back do measurements of gulf stream go?...

[Saipan]

Just do a little searching online for the ocean currents and you will get information on them and how they work.

I don't have to, I have (3 lbs) manual on world sailing and navigation. It's all there and more.

[GostHacked]

we'll wait and see...this could a normal event like el Niño's and la Nina's, how far back do measurements of gulf stream go?...

That is what I am trying to dig up. According to these scientists, it has broken before, which seemed to correspond with the last mini ice age .... don't hold me to that just yet.

[GostHacked]

I don't have to, I have (3 lbs) manual on world sailing and navigation. It's all there and more.

So why did you need to ask me about it then?

[wyly]

That is what I am trying to dig up. According to these scientists, it has broken before, which seemed to correspond with the last mini ice age .... don't hold me to that just yet.

I'm sure it has changed before but how do you go about to prove that, ocean temps have only been taken for 200 yrs and even then were they done often enough to confirm it?....I really doubt there is anyway to definitively tie the little ice age to it...past solar radiation and atmospheric gases leave traces behind, what traceable evidence can water temps leave behind?...

[Saipan]

So why did you need to ask me about it then?

To prove it has nothing to do with any "global warm up".

[wyly]

To prove it has nothing to do with any "global warm up".

...wow

[Saipan]

...wow

Wow, wow, wow

[Wild Bill]

Well with the Gulf Loop broken, the warmer water is not getting circulated as much northward as before when the loop was not broken. So that will have some drastic and immediate effects on weather on the east coast of the US/Canada and the cold weather we see in the eastern part of Europe.

Maybe it will fix itself soon. If that continues and does not correct itself, expect more colder weather those areas currently affected.

You're leading to something that always seems to get ignored. Does Mother Earth have correction factors?

When I was very young I read a story that featured an engineering term named "homeostat". It was the idea of a regulator that adjusted things one way or the other to try to maintain a status quo. Later when I began to study electronics I learned about negative and positive feedback loops, where a tiny portion of an output signal is fed back to an earlier point in the circuit in order to keep the circuit stable, reducing the gain if things became too energetic and opening it up if things weakened.

Surely a system as complicated as a planet's climate would have homeostats! There must be corrective factors, so that if things overheat it will melt more snow to bring more cooling rain, or whatever. Others more well-versed in the science than I could probably name and describe them much better but it's enough if they exist.

For if they exist then we should not be too quick to make extrapolations of present trends with the assumption that nothing will ever buck them! As I said, Mother Earth is a powerful lady! Surely her systems would have some inbuilt resistance to tampering...

[GostHacked]

You're leading to something that always seems to get ignored. Does Mother Earth have correction factors?

When I was very young I read a story that featured an engineering term named "homeostat". It was the idea of a regulator that adjusted things one way or the other to try to maintain a status quo. Later when I began to study electronics I learned about negative and positive feedback loops, where a tiny portion of an output signal is fed back to an earlier point in the circuit in order to keep the circuit stable, reducing the gain if things became too energetic and opening it up if things weakened.

Surely a system as complicated as a planet's climate would have homeostats! There must be corrective factors, so that if things overheat it will melt more snow to bring more cooling rain, or whatever. Others more well-versed in the science than I could probably name and describe them much better but it's enough if they exist.

For if they exist then we should not be too quick to make extrapolations of present trends with the assumption that nothing will ever buck them! As I said, Mother Earth is a powerful lady! Surely her systems would have some inbuilt resistance to tampering...

You would hope so. But time and time again, man has messed with the environment in many ways, which have proven devastating effects. We are consistently messing with those natural fail safes by doing all the things to the environment combined. Pollution (air, water and land), deforestation for farmlands, sprawling cities, ect ect ect .......

If we mess with one of those homeostats, what happens then? Would it correct itself over time, how long would that take? This seems to be unprecedented for this Gulf Loop to stop working the way it should. All supposedly due to the oil spill in combination with the Corexit compound sprayed in the water to collect the oil creating this sludge that could slow the water flow.

It seems the break happened in July of this year, and we see the effects 5-6 months later. That can't be ignored. Sure there might be other factors that are contributing to the cold weather, but this breaking of the Gulf Loop seems to be major factor in the cold weather.

[dre]

You're leading to something that always seems to get ignored. Does Mother Earth have correction factors?

When I was very young I read a story that featured an engineering term named "homeostat". It was the idea of a regulator that adjusted things one way or the other to try to maintain a status quo. Later when I began to study electronics I learned about negative and positive feedback loops, where a tiny portion of an output signal is fed back to an earlier point in the circuit in order to keep the circuit stable, reducing the gain if things became too energetic and opening it up if things weakened.

Surely a system as complicated as a planet's climate would have homeostats! There must be corrective factors, so that if things overheat it will melt more snow to bring more cooling rain, or whatever. Others more well-versed in the science than I could probably name and describe them much better but it's enough if they exist.

For if they exist then we should not be too quick to make extrapolations of present trends with the assumption that nothing will ever buck them! As I said, Mother Earth is a powerful lady! Surely her systems would have some inbuilt resistance to tampering...

Maybe our extinction is a corrective factor. It would make sense for the planet to kill off organisms that lay waste to the eco system.

If I was the planet... Id try to kill us

[Bryan]

So far, the most common red herrings on AGW are:

1 ) 70s ice age

2 ) Quoting today's weather as proof of anything

3 ) Anonymous 'scientists' objecting to proven concepts, en masse

This thread has 2 of 3 ~

#s 2 and 3 are the hallmarks of the pro-AGW hysterians.

[Saipan]

If I was the planet... Id try to kill us

You are killing us.

[Guest TrueMetis]

we'll wait and see...this could a normal event like el Niño's and la Nina's, how far back do measurements of gulf stream go?...

A few decades IIRC, there was I study I read a while back that talked about the gulf stream slowing. It of course flatly stated they didn't have enough data to show whether this was natural variation or not. Of course the tabloids then start running stories of Europe freezing and then blamed the scientists when they pointed out this was wrong.

[Saipan]

Of course the tabloids then start running stories of Europe freezing and then blamed the scientists when they pointed out this was wrong.

Forget the tabloids. Check real weather news.

[Michael Hardner]

#s 2 and 3 are the hallmarks of the pro-AGW hysterians.

I don't think so. Certainly the AGW climate scientists are known because the smear campaigns against them have made them famous. I think people on both sides make the mistake of using weather in their arguments, though.

[Saipan]

this breaking of the Gulf Loop seems to be major factor in the cold weather.

Where did that Gulf acquired the heat? It has to come from somewhere.

[Bryan]

I don't think so. Certainly the AGW climate scientists are known because the smear campaigns against them have made them famous. I think people on both sides make the mistake of using weather in their arguments, though.

It's not as big of a mistake as some try to claim though.

Weather is the point on a graph, climate is the whole graph. The problem is, the pro-AGW crowd doesn't stick to using the real observed numbers. Last winter we had month after month of record cold temperatures all over the world, thousands of records were broken. At the end of the winter, the pro-AGW crowd proclaimed that it had been the HOTTEST winter on record, and their graph didn't look anything like the real weather that we actually had. The real numbers didn't give them the results they liked, so they just changed them. We've got the coldest winter ever already going on AGAIN right now, how much do you want to bet the AGW guys claim warming again at the end of the winter?

[Smallc]

The real numbers didn't give them the results they liked, so they just changed them.

Other than your own anecdotes, do you have any evidence of this?

[dre]

Other than your own anecdotes, do you have any evidence of this?

Hahahhaa. Good one!

[Michael Hardner]

It's not as big of a mistake as some try to claim though.

Weather is the point on a graph, climate is the whole graph. The problem is, the pro-AGW crowd doesn't stick to using the real observed numbers. Last winter we had month after month of record cold temperatures all over the world, thousands of records were broken. At the end of the winter, the pro-AGW crowd proclaimed that it had been the HOTTEST winter on record, and their graph didn't look anything like the real weather that we actually had. The real numbers didn't give them the results they liked, so they just changed them. We've got the coldest winter ever already going on AGAIN right now, how much do you want to bet the AGW guys claim warming again at the end of the winter?

"AGW guys" ? Actually, it's NASA that is making that claim. It's not gangs of people in donut shops saying this.

Cold weather records are still set, it's true, but at half the rate of warm weather records being set.

[dre]

"AGW guys" ? Actually, it's NASA that is making that claim. It's not gangs of people in donut shops saying this.

Cold weather records are still set, it's true, but at half the rate of warm weather records being set.

This particular argument is really tedious. I mean... if people cant tell the difference between a peak or valley in a jagged line, and the trend of that line over time, that sorta kills the debate right there. Carrying on would be sorta like beating up a newborn child.

[Bonam]

Weather is the point on a graph, climate is the whole graph. The problem is, the pro-AGW crowd doesn't stick to using the real observed numbers. Last winter we had month after month of record cold temperatures all over the world, thousands of records were broken.

What about the world's southern half, where it wasn't winter?