Global Warming In Thailand

[david96]

The world needs to reduce its population from 7B down to 3B or less in the next 50 years for a start.

Less demand on resources, phase out coal and oil for transport and electricity generation over the next

50 years. LNG, Nuclear for base stations, develop alternative energy sources.

Carbon Trading is a scam set up by Politicians and Business leaders who are going to make a lot of money out of it.

Stabilise population at 2.5 to 3 B and keep it there.

[teatree]

Narachon how did you get a picture of me? Are you following me?

Thought was a picture of teabags in a tree.........huuummmm.

Anyway, this is interesting and concerns this person, Dr. Madhav L. Khandekar, who TeaTree says is a respectable scientists doing fair and balanced research.........turns out Dr. Khandekar is a member of FoS:

The Friends of Science Society (FoS) is a Canadian non-profit group based in Calgary, Alberta, that is "made up of active and retired engineers, earth scientists and other professionals, as well as many concerned Canadians, who believe the science behind the Kyoto Protocol is questionable." [1]

In an August 12, 2006, article The Globe and Mail revealed that the group had received significant funding via anonymous, indirect donations from the oil industry, including a major grant from the Science Education Fund, a donor-directed, flow-through charitable fund at the Calgary Foundation. The donations were funnelled through a University of Calgary trust account research set up and controlled by U of C Professor Barry Cooper. [2] [3] The revelations were based largely on the prior investigations of Desmogblog.com, which had reported on the background of FoS scientific advisors and Cooper's role in FoS funding. [4] [5]

In the course of an internal review and audit begun in March of 2007, the University determined that some of the research funds accepted on behalf of the Friends of Science "had been used to support a partisan viewpoint on climate change" and had returned unspent grant money on September 10, 2007, according to a Calgary Foundation statement.[6]

For those who would like to look up the lunatics behind the global warming is a conspiracy propaganda machine, go here:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=SourceWatch

"If you are a research scientist and want a grant to research the feeding habits of the badger, you may get your money you may not. IF you put on your application that the research is on the feeding habits of the badger WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO GLOBAL WARMING, you will get your money."

Nigel Calder

former editor New Scientisit

What about the billions being spent by government desperately trying to prove AGW? That doesn't count I suppose. Money flows to everything climate change - the scientists, the politicians, the media. It is a big gravy train for a lot of people.

If jumping on the AGW train actually led to a disuse of fossil fuels then I would grit my teeth, pretend that CO2 is a toxic waste and go along with it. If there were initiatives towards getting everyone on solar power, everyone an electric car - FREE energy for ALL - then what the hel_l I would be a supporter.

BUT, what are we going to get? TAX. We may get a token smattering of wind turbines etc, but the solutions being put forward are all about TAX and control.

Do you think the AGW movement is heading towards free energy? Do you really think your government wants you to have the liberation that comes with being totally self sufficient? Don't be so naive. There is no reason why everyone couldn't be self sufficient with their OWN source of power - all it takes is the will to make it happen. But THIS train isn't going there. Our next stop is $10 a gallon at the pump and remote controlled thermostats so that you don't use up too much energy.

You guys are being co-opted. Suckered into a phony environmental cause, sucking resources away from the REAL environmental problems that we face.

p.s. I thought the head in the sand pic was of the AGW crowd who just cannot accept that there is no consensus.

[JR Texas]

The world needs to reduce its population from 7B down to 3B or less in the next 50 years for a start.

Less demand on resources, phase out coal and oil for transport and electricity generation over the next

50 years. LNG, Nuclear for base stations, develop alternative energy sources.

Carbon Trading is a scam set up by Politicians and Business leaders who are going to make a lot of money out of it.

Stabilise population at 2.5 to 3 B and keep it there.

Yes, we need to reduce population levels.......absolutely............I think we should strive for 1 billion tops!

But we need to make the transition to a new system of energy rapidly...........we can't wait 50 years.

Given the current rate of population growth and massive poverty worldwide, the need to accelerate economic growth if an unfortunate reality.

The only way to do that and not contribute to "the problem" is with a totally new system. Lacking that system, at the very least we can do the things already talked about on this thread.

Carbon trading is not a scam and is absolutely vital to protect things like, tropical forests. These are the "lungs of the earth" and if we don't protect them now, CO2 levels will continue to skyrocket out of control.

Deforestation is a major problem...........population growth is another...........

[teatree]

The world needs to reduce its population from 7B down to 3B or less in the next 50 years for a start.

Less demand on resources, phase out coal and oil for transport and electricity generation over the next

50 years. LNG, Nuclear for base stations, develop alternative energy sources.

Carbon Trading is a scam set up by Politicians and Business leaders who are going to make a lot of money out of it.

Stabilise population at 2.5 to 3 B and keep it there.

Yes, we need to reduce population levels.......absolutely............I think we should strive for 1 billion tops!

But we need to make the transition to a new system of energy rapidly...........we can't wait 50 years.

Given the current rate of population growth and massive poverty worldwide, the need to accelerate economic growth if an unfortunate reality.

The only way to do that and not contribute to "the problem" is with a totally new system. Lacking that system, at the very least we can do the things already talked about on this thread.

Carbon trading is not a scam and is absolutely vital to protect things like, tropical forests. These are the "lungs of the earth" and if we don't protect them now, CO2 levels will continue to skyrocket out of control.

Deforestation is a major problem...........population growth is another...........

I see eugenics is alive and kicking on this forum.

How do you suggest we carry out this culling? Perhaps the swine flu will do the trick.

Interesting fact - The population of the whole world could live in comfort, with reasonable sized housing, with roads and parks etc, in the lower half of Alberta in Canada.

[bonobo]

Interesting fact - The population of the whole world could live in comfort, with reasonable sized housing, with roads and parks etc, in the lower half of Alberta in Canada.

Depends on what you mean by living in comfort.  WIth 255,285 square miles in Alberta, half of that would be 127, 643.  With a world population of approximately 6.8 billion, that would give a population density of 53, 274 per square mile, give or take.  New York City has a population density of 26,403 per square mile, so that would mean essentially doubling the population density of NYC in this crowded lower half of Alberta.

Technically, yes, it could be done, but I would harldy call this "living in comfort."

[Narachon]

Interesting fact - The population of the whole world could live in comfort, with reasonable sized housing, with roads and parks etc, in the lower half of Alberta in Canada.

Depends on what you mean by living in comfort. WIth 255,285 square miles in Alberta, half of that would be 127, 643. With a world population of approximately 6.8 billion, that would give a population density of 53, 274 per square mile, give or take. New York City has a population density of 26,403 per square mile, so that would mean essentially doubling the population density of NYC in this crowded lower half of Alberta.

Technically, yes, it could be done, but I would harldy call this "living in comfort."

I've actually been to Alberta.

And I agree with bonobo. I extremely doubt that 6 Billion people would live very comfortably there, given a choice - even if we were able to build Super - Ultra - Mega - City type Arcologies from Cardston up to Edmonton...

But this is besides the point..... Pre - arrival of Europeans, the natural carrying capacity of the entire Canada/America region of North America for the Native American population was 18 million people.

Something to think about.

[Narachon]

Narachon how did you get a picture of me? Are you following me?

Uhmm...Were you in the Pattaya beach area recently?

The world needs to reduce its population from 7B down to 3B or less in the next 50 years for a start.

Less demand on resources, phase out coal and oil for transport and electricity generation over the next

50 years. LNG, Nuclear for base stations, develop alternative energy sources.

Stabilise population at 2.5 to 3 B and keep it there.

How do you suggest we carry out this culling? Perhaps the swine flu will do the trick.

The "culling" will not be voluntary, unfortunately.....

Two centuries ago, before the industrial revolution, the world population was at 2 billion ( the uppper limit of natural carrying capacity of the planet for humans ) .

Then with the Industrial Revolution and later , the "Green Revolution" , aided by the abundance of cheap oil, artifically increased that figure to the current 6 billion plus.

At the current rate , the world population will not willingly stabilize or reduce itself by it's own accord.

And we don't presently have the means or the technology to offload the excess population off-planet ( as was the case in Europe during the past four centuries ).

Question: Guess what's going to happen when all the cheap , easily extractable oil runs out?

Answer: "Overshoot" and massive Die-Off of the global human population...And it may even go down to under 2 Billion...( and that not even factoring the possibility of a future global super pandemic.. )

Here is some info on what is going to happen, not if...

http://dieoff.org/

http://www.paulchefurka.ca/Population.html

Not only will there be far less people than there are now , they will most likely be living in a radically different and environmentally changed world. ( gradual shutdown of thermohaline circulation of the Gulf Stream in the Atlantic due to the massive influx of freshwater from the melted Greenland Icecap, for one....)

Look, the time for filibustering and endless debate is pretty much over. We had Eight years of inaction here in America , eight years that we really could not have afforded to waste.

The time for action is now, before the tipping point is reached. And that is going to be very soon.

It is useless and a waste of time to try to convince the denyers, it will be unavoidable by the time they finally grudgingly admit that there is even a problem.

And then it will be much too late.

Anyway, here some more links about the upcoming Climate Change Conference for those who are interested:

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:

http://www.ipcc.ch/

Conference Cop15 - United Nations Climate Change Conference:

http://en.cop15.dk/

Fortunately, there are many , many people in the world that do not have their "heads in sand", that are now willing to try to fix this problem, in order for upcoming generations to possible have even a halfway decent future.

( As for me, I'll be working at the conference in Copenhagen this December. Never been to Denmark, I'm looking forward to it.... )

[ScubaBuddha]

I have always been a global warming skeptic, because I've never seen any proof that global warming actually exists. So I decided to look at temperature records for Thailand. I chose Chiang Mai because there is data available from 1943 to 2009. I chose April because it is generally one of Thailand's hottest months.

The lowest average April maximum temperature in Chiang Mai was in 1949 (29.9 C)

The highest average April maximum temperature in Chiang Mai was in 1983 (39.2 C)

The average maximum April temperature in Chiang Mai in 1944 was 36.1 C

The average maximum April temperature in Chiang Mai in 2009 was 36.1 C

The average maximum April temperature in Chiang Mai between 1943 and 2009 was 36.1 C

<deleted>,where's the global warming???

Disclaimer: I am not a climatologist so I don't have any qualifications regarding this subject, except some training and a lot of experience in statistics.

It appears that the phenomenon is now preferably referred to as "Global Climate Change". The reason is apparently that the effects will vary greatly in different locations. One of the possible effects that seems to be attracting an amount of current attention is that there is a risk that the Gulf Stream and in particular the North Atlantic drift will weaken, causing cooling and possibly a new Ice Age in the Nordic countries. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutdown_of_t...ine_circulation )

Now to the OP: Quoting yearly averages is rather pointless, as anybody can se from posted graph that variations between individual years are far greater than any trend. However, one can go to the original data and do a trend analysis ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_linear_regression ) to determine the change over the studied period (1943-2009). I have just done that and came up with the following graph (please note that data is missing for several years):

As you can see, the trend line does show an increase over this time period. The temperature trend was at 35.6 degrees in 1943 and had risen to 36.8 degrees in 2009, a rise of 1.2 degrees in 46 years. This of course proves nothing about Global Climate Change, but it does prove that the data the OP based his post on demonstrates the opposite of what he is claiming

/ Priceless

What a great post. Thanks for opening our eyes Priceless.

[ScubaBuddha]

I strongly suggest that people read what these responsible scientists have to say about the pseudo-scientific naysayers........they blow all of their misleading arguments to pieces.

They are not interested, because they do not CARE. It is human nature not to care about strangers 50 years from now. You see where human nature is getting us as a species. As long as there is any chance at all that the mainstream scientists are wrong about where we are headed, they are happy with their rationality about why we don't need to undergo painful change for the sake of our species future on our planet.

Very true. But this is primarily an expat board, and, as I was discussing with a group of expat friends recently, there are a lot of expats in Thailand that have sort of given up on life, and just don't give a shit anymore. Luckily there also seems to be a lot of selfless expats who are really trying to make a difference. I think that is why we see such a heated debate here, pun intended.

[midlifecrisis]

I have always been a global warming skeptic, because I've never seen any proof that global warming actually exists. So I decided to look at temperature records for Thailand. I chose Chiang Mai because there is data available from 1943 to 2009. I chose April because it is generally one of Thailand's hottest months.

The lowest average April maximum temperature in Chiang Mai was in 1949 (29.9 C)

The highest average April maximum temperature in Chiang Mai was in 1983 (39.2 C)

The average maximum April temperature in Chiang Mai in 1944 was 36.1 C

The average maximum April temperature in Chiang Mai in 2009 was 36.1 C

The average maximum April temperature in Chiang Mai between 1943 and 2009 was 36.1 C

<deleted>,where's the global warming???

So called global warming is really ocean warming. The question is if it is natural or man-made. Along the eastern seaboard of the U.S.A., ocean temperatures off of Maine, Massachusets and other northeastern states is much warmer than historical records show. Does it mean it is global warming? Proponents of man-made global warming would have you think so:

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/ocean.html

Others believe it is cyclic.

One thing we know, colder liquids can hold more CO2 (think soft drinks - the colder drink has more carbonic acid bite, as it were, than the warm one where CO2 comes out of solution).

If global warming is man-made, it is obvious that the governments of the world are unable to do anything fast enough to negate this. So we should not panic and learn to live with it.

As to posting temperature averages for one microclimate, that tells us nothing because the tropics may be the last place the change is noticed (think Arctic and Antarctic) and one place on earth may be cooler while 100 others warmer as changes to weather patterns, cloudiness, rainfall, drought and other factors create new tropic zones or new arid zones over time.

What I hate to see is dogma replace healthy scientific debate but as humans that has and always will happen.

This is not the end of the human race.

[Narachon]

So called global warming is really ocean warming.

The problem is not "Global Warming". The problem is Global Climate Change.

Big difference.

The question is if it is natural or man-made.

If global warming is man-made, it is obvious that the governments of the world are unable to do anything fast enough to negate this. So we should not panic and learn to live with it.

The problem is that Millions, if not Billions of people won't be able to live with it.

There are almost SEVEN BILLION people in the world now.

SEVEN BILLION

To think that that number of people having no effect on the global climate at all, in a totally closed ecosystem like Earth is to be delusional.

Humans have altered the climate of the world even before they first deforested and cleared vast areas and diverted rivers and streams for farming.

And as your assumption that world governments are not prepared to do something about it , that is just not the case at all.

Obviously you've already made up your mind and decided to overlook, and not trully read any of the information posted, not to mention probably chosen not to follow the links posted here on this thread in support of evidence of the links of the activities of Man with Global Climate Change.

But, if that is not the case, and you didn't see them the first time:

COUNTDOWN TO COPENHAGEN : United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

COPENHAGEN : SEAL THE DEAL : UN Worldwidewide Campaign on Climate Change

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:

http://www.ipcc.ch/

Conference Cop15 - United Nations Climate Change Conference:

http://en.cop15.dk/

Yes, It's much too late to negate Global Climate Change, as a result of many people in government and industry that have shared your and the other Climate Change Deniers belief . But world governments and many businesses are now prepared to try and mitigate the problem. Now that America is finally taking the lead once more in Climate Change talks, even China and India are now inclined to get involved.

It won't reverse the damage that has occured already, but It's the best that we can do right now, for the beginning.

It's better than doing nothing....Better to bury your head in the sand and pretend that nothing is wrong?

What I hate to see is dogma replace healthy scientific debate but as humans that has and always will happen.

But there is a difference between Dogma and Belief and Actual Quantitative Knowledge.

And most Humans are really not very rational creatures. Never have, and probably never will.

According to Steve Hoffman, a visiting professor of sociology at the University of Buffalo, when confronted with an emotional debate, a totally rational person would lay out - and evaluate objectively - the pros and cons of an issue before choosing to support or oppose a plan of action. He said that most people tend to get deeply attached to their beliefs and form emotional attachments that get wrapped up in our personal identity and sense of morality, irrespective of the facts of the matter.

And in order for people to keep their sense of personal and social identity, many tend to use a backward type of reasoning in order to justify such beliefs.

Dr.Hoffman states that " It's an amazing challenge to constantly break out the Nietzschean hammer and destroy your world view and belief system and evaluate others" .

There is similar research of this nature by a psychology professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign named Dolores Albarracin, who has shown that people who are less confident in their beliefs are more reluctant than others to seek out opposing perspectives.

So these people avoid counter evidence all together.

It was found that many people are vulnerable to the phenomenon of holding onto their beliefs, even in the face of iron-clad evidence to the contrary, because it's usually hard for them to do otherwise.

To do this most deniers and anti - types use a variety of so-called motivated reasoning strategies.

( Motivated reasoning is essentially starting with a conclusion you hope to reach and then selectively evaluating evidence in order to reach that conclusion. Just getting the facts they need to support their argument. ).

The climate change deniers are no exception....

The global climate change issue, as with most imporant issues, whether it is abortion , universial health care in America, ( or even Thaksin Shinawatra influence in Thailand ), is both complex (no single correct answer), emotionally charged and potentially history-changing, with endless debates that often occur with like-minded people.

The result is staunch supporters and just-as-staunch critics who are sticking to their guns.

So logical arguments probably won't be the key to win these kind of debates....Which will have no quick resolution, and only ends when once side finally gives up.

But we can not afford , or have time to have endless debates on the matter.

Now is the time for Deeds, not Words....

This is not the end of the human race.

.....IF we do nothing and go on as Business As Usual , It may not be the end of THE human race, but for the majority of the human race, it will be the END.

But it is useless to go on and continue with this argument, especailly on an internet forum. The fact of the matter is, as much as you and others do not wish to see the evidence in front of you, many more do have their eyes open.

I, and others here on this thread have tried to make the case for Global Climate Change being real , and mostly the result of the effects of human activity though the years, but you and other that share your beliefs do not wish to believe those facts.

Dispite that, I have decided to do my part, however small it may be, to work toward trying to seek a resolution of this global problem, not just for the future welfare of myself and others who share my thinking, but for those that do not.

[midlifecrisis]

Then pull your head out of the sand about this too:

"When the sun sneezes it's Earth that gets sick. It's time for the sun to move into a busier period for sunspots, and while forecasters expect a relatively mild outbreak by historical standards, one major solar storm can cause havoc with satellites and electrical systems here. Like hurricanes, a weak cycle refers to the number of storms, but it only takes one powerful storm to create chaos, said scientist Doug Biesecker of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's space weather prediction center.

A report by the National Academy of Sciences found that if a storm as severe as one in 1859 occurred today, it could cause $1 trillion to $2 trillion in damage the first year and take four to 10 years to recover.

The 1859 storm shorted out telegraph wires, causing fires in North America and Europe, sent readings of Earth's magnetic field soaring, and produced northern lights so bright that people read newspapers by their light. Today there's a lot more than telegraph lines at stake. Vulnerable electrical grids circle the globe, satellites now vital for all forms of communications can be severely disrupted along with the global positioning system. Indeed, the panel warned that a strong blast of solar wind can threaten national security, transportation, financial services and other essential functions."

http://www.armageddononline.org/sunspot-cy...torm-havoc.html

These storms happen and will happen again. ZAP!

[JR Texas]

Then pull your head out of the sand about this too:

"When the sun sneezes it's Earth that gets sick. It's time for the sun to move into a busier period for sunspots, and while forecasters expect a relatively mild outbreak by historical standards, one major solar storm can cause havoc with satellites and electrical systems here. Like hurricanes, a weak cycle refers to the number of storms, but it only takes one powerful storm to create chaos, said scientist Doug Biesecker of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's space weather prediction center.

A report by the National Academy of Sciences found that if a storm as severe as one in 1859 occurred today, it could cause $1 trillion to $2 trillion in damage the first year and take four to 10 years to recover.

The 1859 storm shorted out telegraph wires, causing fires in North America and Europe, sent readings of Earth's magnetic field soaring, and produced northern lights so bright that people read newspapers by their light. Today there's a lot more than telegraph lines at stake. Vulnerable electrical grids circle the globe, satellites now vital for all forms of communications can be severely disrupted along with the global positioning system. Indeed, the panel warned that a strong blast of solar wind can threaten national security, transportation, financial services and other essential functions."

http://www.armageddononline.org/sunspot-cy...torm-havoc.html

These storms happen and will happen again. ZAP!

Narachon's post was excellent........now, about sunspots, which do take place from time to time.

But there is no evidence of any major changes in the sun's intensity over the past 15 years that can account for the warming trend on the planet.

The forcing of the sun has been relatively stable over the past 15 years............what has not been stable is the increase in CO2--the direct result of human environmentally unsound economic activities (e.g., using the internal combustion engine; deforestation).

The debate has already taken place..........real scientists who study the atmosphere for a living won the debate.........now nations are searching for solutions.

Unfortunately, there are still lots of people who have their heads in the sand, largely because they do not understand science or how it works and are being guided by pseudo-scientists who post on the net and who are funded by BIG OIL.

Some crooked politicians are also of a similar mindset only because BIG OIL funds their campaigns.

[midlifecrisis]

Hey!

Read my posted link again. It has nothing to do with global warming!

My link is about a real and different scenario which NASA and others take very seriously.

Please do not usurp what I posted for your own agenda. What I offered is completely different, real, unknown by most and potentially devastating to our way of life. The phenomena has happened before (the last time 1859) it will happen again. It has the potential of wiping out our entire power grid, among other things electronic. Think cosmic (or in ths case solar) electromagnetic pulse (EMP).

Plasma from severe sunspot activities launched toward and hitting the Earth.

For all of you global warming doomsayers there is very bad news. According to the U.N. Secretary General we have less than 4 months to correct the problem:

http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocus/sgspee....asp?statID=557

Governments are not going to fix this problem folks. China and India expect the West to reduce more than they do. The U.S. won't go along. Everybody is expecting someone else to do the heavy lifting.

And the U.N. ? Totally worthless on this issue.

Edited August 29, 2009 by midlifecrisis

[JR Texas]

Hey!

Read my posted link again. It has nothing to do with global warming!

My link is about a real and different scenario which NASA and others take very seriously.

Please do not usurp what I posted for your own agenda. What I offered is completely different, real, unknown by most and potentially devastating to our way of life. The phenomena has happened before (the last time 1859) it will happen again. It has the potential of wiping out our entire power grid, among other things electronic. Think cosmic (or in ths case solar) electromagnetic pulse (EMP).

Plasma from severe sunspot activities launched toward and hitting the Earth.

For all of you global warming doomsayers there is very bad news. According to the U.N. Secretary General we have less than 4 months to correct the problem:

http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocus/sgspee....asp?statID=557

Governments are not going to fix this problem folks. China and India expect the West to reduce more than they do. The U.S. won't go along. Everybody is expecting someone else to do the heavy lifting.

And the U.N. ? Totally worthless on this issue.

As I said, solar flares are real..........nothing we can do about them that I know of.

Given the subject of this thread is global warming in Thailand, I simply confirmed that what you are saying is real........they do occur and moved on to make sure people know that what is happening in terms of the sun's energy output cannot account for the recent rise in temperature.

What can the UN do? The disturbance would likely be temporary........but I don't know enough about it to know for sure.

[Narachon]

Narachon's post was excellent........

Thanks JR Texas!

Please keep up with your own excellent posts on this matter as well ( I think you have the patience to play the "Cassandra" role better than I can! ).

As for me, I've pretty much said all I wanted to say on this subject, We are at the point where it is useless to argue with the deniers on this subject, and I'm not going continue with it, when I can instead try to do something about trying to mitigate this global crisis.

You can either be part of the problem, or try to be part of the solution.

I've also tried to state my case as clearly as possible, so it's now up to the readers of this thread to make their own decisions.

There are TONS of information out there for people to find for themselves to get a clearer understanding of this problem, and I tried to point people in that direction.

The Climate Change issue is also related to Peak Oil, another looming disaster that most people do not know about, and of those that do, many are in denial of ( in no small part from propaganda from - you guessed it .. The Big Oil Industry ).

Both will effect not just only Thailand , but the whole world greatly in the future..... Sooner than later.

Unfortunately, It's going to take a major Climactic / Economic " Black Swan " incident in order for people to wake up though, and actually see it right in front of thier faces .... And by then there will be no option to close your eyes to it, let alone stick your head back into the sand.....

BTW, Today, Saturday, 29 August ( NYC Time ) marks 100 days until the start of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen ( which I'll be a part of ).

The Prime Minister of Thailand, Abhisit Wetchachiwa, the President of Ethiopia, Girma Wolde-Giorgis, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Korea, Dr. Han Seung-soo, and the heads of over six UN agencies are among those who have already signed the Climate Petition.

You can sign it too ...

[teatree]

New Scientist

World's climate could cool first, warm later

17:56 04 September 2009 by Fred Pearce, Geneva

For similar stories, visit the Climate Change Topic Guide

Forecasts of climate change are about to go seriously out of kilter. One of the world's top climate modellers said Thursday we could be about to enter "one or even two decades during which temperatures cool.

"People will say this is global warming disappearing," he told more than 1500 of the world's top climate scientists gathering in Geneva at the UN's World Climate Conference.

"I am not one of the sceptics," insisted Mojib Latif of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at Kiel University, Germany. "However, we have to ask the nasty questions ourselves or other people will do it."

Few climate scientists go as far as Latif, an author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But more and more agree that the short-term prognosis for climate change is much less certain than once thought.

Cold Atlantic

Latif predicted that in the next few years a natural cooling trend would dominate over warming caused by humans. The cooling would be down to cyclical changes to ocean currents and temperatures in the North Atlantic, a feature known as the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO).

Breaking with climate-change orthodoxy, he said NAO cycles were probably responsible for some of the strong global warming seen in the past three decades. "But how much? The jury is still out," he told the conference. The NAO is now moving into a colder phase.

Latif said NAO cycles also explained the recent recovery of the Sahel region of Africa from the droughts of the 1970s and 1980s. James Murphy, head of climate prediction at the Met Office, agreed and linked the NAO to Indian monsoons, Atlantic hurricanes and sea ice in the Arctic. "The oceans are key to decadal natural variability," he said.

Another favourite climate nostrum was upturned when Pope warned that the dramatic Arctic ice loss in recent summers was partly a product of natural cycles rather than global warming. Preliminary reports suggest there has been much less melting this year than in 2007 or 2008.

In candid mood, climate scientists avoided blaming nature for their faltering predictions, however. "Model biases are also still a serious problem. We have a long way to go to get them right. They are hurting our forecasts," said Tim Stockdale of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts in Reading, UK.

The world may badly want reliable forecasts of future climate. But such predictions are proving as elusive as the perfect weather forecast.

ctd....

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1774...ref=online-news

Edited September 7, 2009 by teatree

[JR Texas]

New Scientist

World's climate could cool first, warm later

17:56 04 September 2009 by Fred Pearce, Geneva

For similar stories, visit the Climate Change Topic Guide

Forecasts of climate change are about to go seriously out of kilter. One of the world's top climate modellers said Thursday we could be about to enter "one or even two decades during which temperatures cool.

"People will say this is global warming disappearing," he told more than 1500 of the world's top climate scientists gathering in Geneva at the UN's World Climate Conference.

"I am not one of the sceptics," insisted Mojib Latif of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at Kiel University, Germany. "However, we have to ask the nasty questions ourselves or other people will do it."

Few climate scientists go as far as Latif, an author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But more and more agree that the short-term prognosis for climate change is much less certain than once thought.

Cold Atlantic

Latif predicted that in the next few years a natural cooling trend would dominate over warming caused by humans. The cooling would be down to cyclical changes to ocean currents and temperatures in the North Atlantic, a feature known as the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO).

Breaking with climate-change orthodoxy, he said NAO cycles were probably responsible for some of the strong global warming seen in the past three decades. "But how much? The jury is still out," he told the conference. The NAO is now moving into a colder phase.

Latif said NAO cycles also explained the recent recovery of the Sahel region of Africa from the droughts of the 1970s and 1980s. James Murphy, head of climate prediction at the Met Office, agreed and linked the NAO to Indian monsoons, Atlantic hurricanes and sea ice in the Arctic. "The oceans are key to decadal natural variability," he said.

Another favourite climate nostrum was upturned when Pope warned that the dramatic Arctic ice loss in recent summers was partly a product of natural cycles rather than global warming. Preliminary reports suggest there has been much less melting this year than in 2007 or 2008.

In candid mood, climate scientists avoided blaming nature for their faltering predictions, however. "Model biases are also still a serious problem. We have a long way to go to get them right. They are hurting our forecasts," said Tim Stockdale of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts in Reading, UK.

The world may badly want reliable forecasts of future climate. But such predictions are proving as elusive as the perfect weather forecast.

ctd....

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1774...ref=online-news

Thanks for that post..........if the authors are right, it is critical that we take massive and widespread action now to prevent catastrophic climate change, especially after we move out of the predicted "natural cooling cycle." The cooling cycle will only serve to mask the warming forces that are in place.

[Rionoir]

Anyone else remember when this all used to be blamed on "El Nino" ... that was until the democrats found 60,000 new taxes they can charge if they call it global warming and blame it on corporations...

Anyway ok... the fact is, we live on a giant rock with a molten lava core and are hurtling through space as unbelievable speeds. "Mother nature" is capable of some truly terrible and horrifying events, none of which are controllable by man... I don't know how anyone can think that MAN is controlling the TEMPERATURE of a planet. *chuckle* You can throw all the 'evidence' you want at me, we all know how biased the evidence from BOTH sides is on this issue... there is an equal amount disproving everyone, and when it comes down to it I choose to use common sense. Which, to me, is that the temperature of this planet has fluctuated for millions of years, the glaciers have come and gone many times over for millions of years, and it's GOING to happen again, and the human race WILL be eliminated someday whether it's climate change, an asteroid, nuclear holocost, or whatever else. I'm not entirely sure the human race is worth saving for much longer anyway... maybe it's time some less evil life forms take over. lol

Furthermore, let's say we ARE causing global warming... I can pretty much guarantee that China and India aren't going to buy into it anytime soon and risk loosing their growing economic status in the world, thanks to the rest of us destroying our economies over this issue.

meh...

[JR Texas]

Anyone else remember when this all used to be blamed on "El Nino" ... that was until the democrats found 60,000 new taxes they can charge if they call it global warming and blame it on corporations...

Anyway ok... the fact is, we live on a giant rock with a molten lava core and are hurtling through space as unbelievable speeds. "Mother nature" is capable of some truly terrible and horrifying events, none of which are controllable by man... I don't know how anyone can think that MAN is controlling the TEMPERATURE of a planet. *chuckle* You can throw all the 'evidence' you want at me, we all know how biased the evidence from BOTH sides is on this issue... there is an equal amount disproving everyone, and when it comes down to it I choose to use common sense. Which, to me, is that the temperature of this planet has fluctuated for millions of years, the glaciers have come and gone many times over for millions of years, and it's GOING to happen again, and the human race WILL be eliminated someday whether it's climate change, an asteroid, nuclear holocost, or whatever else. I'm not entirely sure the human race is worth saving for much longer anyway... maybe it's time some less evil life forms take over. lol

Furthermore, let's say we ARE causing global warming... I can pretty much guarantee that China and India aren't going to buy into it anytime soon and risk loosing their growing economic status in the world, thanks to the rest of us destroying our economies over this issue.

meh...

I almost don't have the desire to respond to posts like yours, but just note that we are already paying heavily--directly and indirectly--by supporting BIG OIL. It is costing us huge money and way too many lives. And we are putting both present and future generations at risk of having to face a rapid pattern of destructive climate change worldwide.

If you think we are paying now.......just wait..........if we do nothing now, we will pay and pay and pay and pay and pay...........fortunately most governments have recognized the seriousness of our present situation and are taking action to correct the problem.

Certainly the bulk of mainstream scientists are in full support of taking action to minimize/reduce the impact of climate change related to environmentally unsound human activities.

There is nothing we can do about natural forces that produce climate change. But we can act to not exacerbate those natural forces via our environmentally unsound human actions.

[bonobo]

 

There is nothing we can do about natural forces that produce climate change. But we can act to not exacerbate those natural forces via our environmentally unsound human actions.

This is the main point that seems to be forgotten by the religiously fervent anti-global warming crowd.  If there is any adverse impact made by human activity, whether that contributes 100% or 1% to global warming, then that impact should be mitigated.

And has been posted again and again, even if that impact is somehow actually 0%, the steps taken to lessen global warming have other benefits such as lessening pollution, lowering dependence on foreign supplies of fossil fuels, and pushing out peak oil.

[chuckd]

My post is number 292 in this interminable thread.

Not one person has changed his or her original position.

Seems to be a waste of time and effort by all concerned.

[JR Texas]

My post is number 292 in this interminable thread.

Not one person has changed his or her original position.

Seems to be a waste of time and effort by all concerned.

There are actually only a few posters who have taken positions on different sides of the "fence." What we don't know is what the hundreds of readers are thinking.......what they are deciding based on what they have read. So, perhaps it is not a total waste of time.

But, surely, you are right.......it seems to be a waste of time trying to convince THEM that they are wrong about climate change and what needs to be done about it.

Good post Bonobo.........as always. I am not sure if they understand what you are saying. It may be that they are so entrenched in a myth promulgated by BIG OIL that they can't escape it, no matter what the evidence presented to them reveals.

It is an easy "out" to simply state that the evidence is manufactured; that it is a global plot designed by some people to enrich themselves at the expense of taxpayers........and that all of the major scientific organizations are in on it, including the UN and virtually every country on the planet.

And the world is flat..........really!

And we never went to the moon.........really!

And Kennedy was shot by a lone gunman........really!

And there is nothing that supports the concept of evolution by natural selection........really!

And BIG OIL is our friend..........really!

I am glad that I don't live in that world.

[teatree]

My post is number 292 in this interminable thread.

Not one person has changed his or her original position.

Seems to be a waste of time and effort by all concerned.

There are actually only a few posters who have taken positions on different sides of the "fence." What we don't know is what the hundreds of readers are thinking.......what they are deciding based on what they have read. So, perhaps it is not a total waste of time.

But, surely, you are right.......it seems to be a waste of time trying to convince THEM that they are wrong about climate change and what needs to be done about it.

Good post Bonobo.........as always. I am not sure if they understand what you are saying. It may be that they are so entrenched in a myth promulgated by BIG OIL that they can't escape it, no matter what the evidence presented to them reveals.

It is an easy "out" to simply state that the evidence is manufactured; that it is a global plot designed by some people to enrich themselves at the expense of taxpayers........and that all of the major scientific organizations are in on it, including the UN and virtually every country on the planet.

And the world is flat..........really!

And we never went to the moon.........really!

And Kennedy was shot by a lone gunman........really!

And there is nothing that supports the concept of evolution by natural selection........really!

And BIG OIL is our friend..........really!

I am glad that I don't live in that world.

What about BIG OIL's big brother, BIG GOVERNMENT?

[JR Texas]

My post is number 292 in this interminable thread.

Not one person has changed his or her original position.

Seems to be a waste of time and effort by all concerned.

There are actually only a few posters who have taken positions on different sides of the "fence." What we don't know is what the hundreds of readers are thinking.......what they are deciding based on what they have read. So, perhaps it is not a total waste of time.

But, surely, you are right.......it seems to be a waste of time trying to convince THEM that they are wrong about climate change and what needs to be done about it.

Good post Bonobo.........as always. I am not sure if they understand what you are saying. It may be that they are so entrenched in a myth promulgated by BIG OIL that they can't escape it, no matter what the evidence presented to them reveals.

It is an easy "out" to simply state that the evidence is manufactured; that it is a global plot designed by some people to enrich themselves at the expense of taxpayers........and that all of the major scientific organizations are in on it, including the UN and virtually every country on the planet.

And the world is flat..........really!

And we never went to the moon.........really!

And Kennedy was shot by a lone gunman........really!

And there is nothing that supports the concept of evolution by natural selection........really!

And BIG OIL is our friend..........really!

I am glad that I don't live in that world.

What about BIG OIL's big brother, BIG GOVERNMENT?

Yes, it is a shame the big government is giving big oil big tax breaks............costing us money. And it is a shame that big government is taxing us to pay for wars that serve to make big oil big money..........costing us more money and lives.

[teatree]

New Scientist

World's climate could cool first, warm later

17:56 04 September 2009 by Fred Pearce, Geneva

For similar stories, visit the Climate Change Topic Guide

Forecasts of climate change are about to go seriously out of kilter. One of the world's top climate modellers said Thursday we could be about to enter "one or even two decades during which temperatures cool.

"People will say this is global warming disappearing," he told more than 1500 of the world's top climate scientists gathering in Geneva at the UN's World Climate Conference.

"I am not one of the sceptics," insisted Mojib Latif of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at Kiel University, Germany. "However, we have to ask the nasty questions ourselves or other people will do it."

Few climate scientists go as far as Latif, an author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But more and more agree that the short-term prognosis for climate change is much less certain than once thought.

Cold Atlantic

Latif predicted that in the next few years a natural cooling trend would dominate over warming caused by humans. The cooling would be down to cyclical changes to ocean currents and temperatures in the North Atlantic, a feature known as the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO).

Breaking with climate-change orthodoxy, he said NAO cycles were probably responsible for some of the strong global warming seen in the past three decades. "But how much? The jury is still out," he told the conference. The NAO is now moving into a colder phase.

Latif said NAO cycles also explained the recent recovery of the Sahel region of Africa from the droughts of the 1970s and 1980s. James Murphy, head of climate prediction at the Met Office, agreed and linked the NAO to Indian monsoons, Atlantic hurricanes and sea ice in the Arctic. "The oceans are key to decadal natural variability," he said.

Another favourite climate nostrum was upturned when Pope warned that the dramatic Arctic ice loss in recent summers was partly a product of natural cycles rather than global warming. Preliminary reports suggest there has been much less melting this year than in 2007 or 2008.

In candid mood, climate scientists avoided blaming nature for their faltering predictions, however. "Model biases are also still a serious problem. We have a long way to go to get them right. They are hurting our forecasts," said Tim Stockdale of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts in Reading, UK.

The world may badly want reliable forecasts of future climate. But such predictions are proving as elusive as the perfect weather forecast.

ctd....

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1774...ref=online-news

Thanks for that post..........if the authors are right, it is critical that we take massive and widespread action now to prevent catastrophic climate change, especially after we move out of the predicted "natural cooling cycle." The cooling cycle will only serve to mask the warming forces that are in place.

So, when the Earth warms the cause is man.

But when the Earth cools it is natural???

At least you haven't gone completely Orwellian by saying that the cooling is caused by the warming (some have believe it or not).

[JR Texas]

So, when the Earth warms the cause is man.

But when the Earth cools it is natural???

At least you haven't gone completely Orwellian by saying that the cooling is caused by the warming (some have believe it or not).

You have no idea what you are talking about. Why continue to post?

[Rionoir]

*giggle* JR Texas got more buzz words than Keith Olberman...

[scottyd]

Global warming was made up to give scientists jobs, and to waste all of that excess tax payers money. It has to go somewhere before the tax year is up!

[JR Texas]

*giggle* JR Texas got more buzz words than Keith Olberman...

I don't watch American TV, so I had to look up Keith Olberman.

Teatree does not seem to grasp what he/she is posting or any replies to what he/she is posting.

And Teatree continues to distort my views.

Given that, I will not respond to Teatree again.