There's a mini ice age coming, says man who beats weather experts

About Us

Tour

FAQ

Signup

Login

Welcome to our New Political Community - Take a Quick Tour of our Features including our Discussion Forums custom designed for U.S. politics. SIGN UP today to join in the discussion.

Forums > All Posts > There's a mini ice age coming, says man who beats weather experts

Displaying all 8 Forum Posts

You must be logged in to reply to a post.

01-18-2011, 06:49 PM

LLBarry
Beverly, MA
Posts: 299

All the predictions of warmer winters, higher temps, did they miss something as we observe the transcontinental record lows and frigid weather shutting down travel around the globe?

Piers Corbyn not only predicted the current weather, but he believes things are going to get much worse.

"Back in November, when the Met Office was still doing its "mild winter" schtick, Corbyn said it would be the coldest for 100 years. Indeed, it was back in May that he first predicted a snowy December, and he put his own money on a white Christmas about a month before the Met Office made any such forecast. He said that the Met Office would be wrong about last year's mythical "barbecue summer", and he was vindicated. He was closer to the truth about last winter, too.

He seems to get it right about 85 per cent of the time and serious business people - notably in farming - are starting to invest in his forecasts. In the eyes of many punters, he puts the taxpayer-funded Met Office to shame. How on earth does he do it? He studies the Sun...

Piers Corbyn believes that the last three winters could be the harbinger of a mini ice age that could be upon us by 2035, and that it could start to be colder than at any time in the last 200 years. He goes on to speculate that a genuine ice age might then settle in, since an ice age is now cyclically overdue."

So what if we were able to interdict the natural climate variations and "cool" the planet and then a natural ice age hits and because of our efforts temps drop even more?

12-27-2011, 09:57 AM

Cracam
Not Selected
Posts: 63

Ice caps at both polars are expanding, water on shorelines has actually receded , yet wing-nuts like David Suzuki and Al Gore are still trying to convince everyone Santa is getting flooded out in the Noth Pole. And yes the climat has been changing since the beginning of time, it was warmer in the middle ages when therewas no carbon output.

12-28-2011, 07:52 AM

Schmidt
Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 1058

Reference: NASA Finds Polar Ice Adding More to Rising Seas, March 8, 2011

The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are losing mass at an accelerating pace, according to a new NASA-funded satellite study. The findings of the study -- the longest to date of changes in polar ice sheet mass -- suggest these ice sheets are overtaking ice loss from Earth's mountain glaciers and ice caps to become the dominant contributor to global sea level rise, much sooner than model forecasts have predicted.

The nearly 20-year study reveals that in 2006, a year in which comparable results for mass loss in mountain glaciers and ice caps are available from a separate study conducted using other methods, the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets lost a combined mass of 475 gigatonnes a year on average. That's enough to raise global sea level by an average of 1.3 millimeters (.05 inches) a year. (A gigatonne is one billion metric tons, or more than 2.2 trillion pounds.)

The pace at which the polar ice sheets are losing mass was found to be accelerating rapidly. Each year over the course of the study, the two ice sheets lost a combined average of 36.3 gigatonnes more than they did the year before. In comparison, the 2006 study of mountain glaciers and ice caps estimated their loss at 402 gigatonnes a year on average, with a year-over-year acceleration rate three times smaller than that of the ice sheets.

Hey, never let a few facts like those above get in the way of the anti-climate change narrative. And just who is Piers Corbyn? He's a meteorologist, not a climatologist. And he's not that good of a weather predictor either. He was a bit lucky in a couple of predictions in 2007 but then batted zero in 2008. Furthermore he won't let anyone peer review his analyses...and after his failure in 2008, "Piers Corbyn banned the use of any extracts of them in any articles unless they were approved by Corbyn. In addition newspapers and any publication which carried articles by Paul Simons were also explicitly forbidden from quoting them."

So there are some out there that like to refer to the Piers Corbyn's of this world to discredit or create doubt on Climate Change (and there are more like him that feed the Fox News channel narrative). But I'll put my trust in the NASA scientists, the National Academy of Scientists and other scientists in the IPCC that have carefully measured, analyzed and documented their findings to be extensively peer reviewed by other scientists worldwide.

12-28-2011, 08:53 AM

that guy in Arizona
Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 158

Schmidt:

A December 16 article in the New York Times covered this topic at length:

www.nytimes.com/2011/12/17/science/earth/warming-arctic-permafrost-fuels-climate-change-worries.html

It appears that the global warming in Alaska is causing the release of methane gas, which
(by itself ) accelerates global warning. One paragraph that really caught my eye was on page 4, which described how a lightning strike in northen Alaska in 2007 SET FIRE TO the tundra, something that hasn't happened for 5000 years
According to the EPA (which Governor Perry feels needs to be rebuilt), more than 50% of worldwide methane production is from human activity. The breakdown by category is listed in the chart below:

www.epa.gov/outreach/sources.html

If you add up the totals from enteric fermentation (essentially, cows belching) and manure management, you'll get to the second highest overall total. Although my wife and I are carnivores, our children have been vegetarians for a long time. The blunt truth is that global warning would decrease significantly if we all stopped eating beef. Realistically, that's not going to happen anytime soon, but it's definitely going to make your next quarter pounder with cheese a lot less appealing.

12-28-2011, 10:33 AM

Schmidt
Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 1058

Arizona,

Thanks for the two articles. While I was aware of the tundra thawing effect, the NYT article brings additional clarity to a sometimes difficult to comprehend aspect of Climate Change that is not often covered in the media. And while I agree that there certainly are some uncertainties about the magnitude of GRG effect on the future climate predictions, I don't see how anyone can be dismissive of the science as a whole...call it willful ignorance. They will demand exactitude, and any uncertainty is cherry picked out of the larger narrative and mocked.

Of course, as we know, the denial of Climate Change has been an orchestrated campaign by the polluters to spread misinformation and create doubt. They know that people are not going to take time to read scientific reports.

On the topic of cattle, my daughter is a vegetarian and has lectured us on that very point. I suppose I'm still guilty of contributing to the problem.

12-28-2011, 01:21 PM

Zach F
Denton, TX
Posts: 939

Though it has been no secret that the Earth is heading into a new ice age. Scientists aren't sure when it will began but it should reach it's peak in about 80,000 years or so. All of human civilization has taken place since the last ice age ended 10,000 years. We are currently in a warm period called a Holocene. Holocene's have actually been fairly rare. The last holocene lasted only around 10,000 years or so with the one before that lasting 30,000. So the next ice age could begin tomorrow or 20,000 years from now.

Scientists are still unsure on whether or not humanity's footprint will delay the oncoming freeze.

12-31-2011, 04:36 PM

Veronica
Not Selected
Posts: 205

There are 3 things happening which seem to be ignored by the media & even many scientists.

(1) the large number of "particle colliders" being in use around the world, & what they do.
(2) the HAARP project up in Alaska, run by many branches of the military.
(3) oil pipelines (above ground in Alaska) carry hot fuel, which melts the permafrost.

(1) Slamming atoms around in long tunnels underground at enormous speed, & then crashing them
into one another, for the stated purpose of trying to re-create the "big bang." Some of them claim to
have stored "anti-matter" which is like a "black hole in space". A few scientists think this could have
a potential to destroy the earth, by a cataclysmic chain reaction. Particle colliders in many nations.

(2) HAARP is composed of 180 arrayed antennas (in Alaska) which conducts research for many
branches of the US military. It is described as an "ionic heater" for the upper atmosphere, & may
influence foreign communications from satellites or submarines. It also kills intelligent species of
dolphins and whales. As an "ionic heater" it is responsible for some global warming up in the area
of the polar icecaps, causing them to melt. Since these antennae have been operating for years, it
could be reasonably assumed to have caused much harm, adversely affecting climate change.

(3) Oil comes out of the ground at a high temperature, & flows along miles of pipeline held up above
the ground with stilts. The heat from those pipes can actually melt the permafrost along the route. It
may affect the climate by changing the temperatures by several degrees in various areas of Alaska.

01-01-2012, 10:09 AM

that guy in Arizona
Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 158

Veronica:

You have raised some very interesting points, and I feel that there IS some validity to all three of the items you mentioned. I'm not a scientist, so couldn't begin to give you an opinion as to the degree that each of these three items affects global warming. I lived within 5 miles of Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois for close to 20 years without suffering any ill effects, but I have to admit that I'm STILL not sure what they do at their accelerator lab.

However, I WILL say that HAARP was (no pun intended) a little "under my radar".

I found the Wikipedia article about HAARP to be very interesting reading:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program

My first thought on reading about HAARP was that it would be a great topic for another James Bond film. Strangely enough, there HAVE been books and television shows about the topic, perhaps because its operation has attracted some conspiracy theroists (one of whom is former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura).

I somehow managed to get on Al Gore's mailing list, and thought that you might find the details of The Climate Reality Project interesting reading:

climaterealityproject.org/about-us/

And that's the inconvenient truth.

You must be logged in to reply to a post.

About Us

FAQ

Advertise

Links

Login

Sign Up

Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy

OBAMA ACCOMPLISHMENTS - REPUBLICAN DIVORCES - REPUBLICAN INFIDELITY & AFFAIRS - REPUBLICAN SCANDALS & CONTROVERSIES