Posted by
Catmman on Thursday, May 01, 2008 10:10:03 AM
You knew it was coming.
It was inevitable.
Global temperatures have not risen, and have indeed been declining for ten years. Other evidence has shown that "global warming", at least as the alarmists portray it, has stopped.
But the grants and fear mongering and alarmism must NOT stop!
The alarmists must be able to spin the new climate evidence. To brush it off. To keep the fires of fear burning, or at least keep the embers glowing.
I won't quote any of the article, but I will make some observations about it.
1. If you read the article, you will see "natural fluctuations" several times. What? Let me get this straight - "natural fluctuations" in climate are responsible for global cooling, but they play no role whatsoever in global warming?
2. This guy in this study says temps will cool for the next ten years at least - he admits it. But there is no mention that maybe if the planet enters a period of cooling for such a time frame, maybe we'll need another period of "global warming" to keep our butts from freezing and starving to death?
3. This guy says the planet cannot take a global rise of temps higher than two degrees celsius. But a period of cooling of at or near that predicted for warming would precipitate much deadlier consequences, yet no feeling of alarm whatsoever. We must still be afraid of global warming, but global cooling? Meh, not so much it seems.
4. Also, no apparent thought about what a global cooling trend may portend for climate. Colder temps would mean - more ice, more snow, more sunlight reflection back into space leading to less radiational heating, leading to more cooling, etc. The climate record shows that there is indeed evidence for runaway cooling. Much more evidence than that for runaway global warming.
5. Additionally, the "natural fluctuations" of the planet will be able to offset the continued increases of manmade CO2 into the atmosphere for only a decade? Even if it is a solid decade, if the planet has the ability to "offset" the "damage" caused by man, then perhaps the dangers of CO2 have been just a bit exagerated? Maybe? Just a little? I mean if CO2 can have such a dramatic, detrimental affect on the entire planets climate systems (over such a short period of time geologically), and something as mundane as ocean currents can offset the CO2 (even as it continues to increase) are the dangers of CO2 really that...dangerous?
6. And exactly how can such emphasis on "natural fluctuations" like ocean currents be so influential on the planets climatology, yet still no thought is given to the frickin Sun? I do not doubt ocean currents influence climate, it is proven. But still no thought whatsoever is given to the influence of the Sun?
Anyone who thinks for one minute that this is anything but alarmists doing damage control and trying the CYA is a moron.
UPDATE:
I thought of this just a moment ago and wish I had put it in this post earlier:
If the global warming alarmists couldn't predict (and in fact didn't and haven't predicted) this new period of "global cooling", or this period where "global warming is taking a break", then why in the hell are we giving them, their message, or their models any more credence or credibility? It's only been what, 2 years since An Inconvient Truth came out? I don't recollect any mention of a pending "10 year cooling trend" anywhere in the film.
And if there models are that wrong, what business do they still have telling us their models are right?
Their models have operated under the assumption that the globe is warming. There has been no mention from Al Gore or any other activists about a cooling period up to this point. If their damn models and predictions are so accurate (as they constantly harangue us that they are), why couldn't they predict this period of cooling?
More proof isn't needed that these people are full of crap!