Are we in a "Global cooling"cycle?

[freezerman2000]

Read this and ponder which side of the argument is correct.
Global warming? No, actually we're cooling, claim scientists - Telegraph

 

[TheBeardedDude]

The Earth should be entering a cooling phase, but this seems to be in jeopardy due to greenhouse emissions and the given warming trend.

It is possible that the warming could lead to a longer term cooling event though. This would be attained after enough warming has depleted the Greenland Ice Sheet so much so that the flood of freshwater swamps the Atlantic Conveyor Belt and shuts down thermohaline circulation. This would disturb global circulation and could lead to rapid (geologically) cooling.

This would still mean a warming trend (and sea level rise) in the coming decades.

 

[Heissonear]

The Earth should be entering a cooling phase, but this seems to be in jeopardy due to greenhouse emissions and the given warming trend.

It is possible that the warming could lead to a longer term cooling event though. This would be attained after enough warming has depleted the Greenland Ice Sheet so much so that the flood of freshwater swamps the Atlantic Conveyor Belt and shuts down thermohaline circulation. This would disturb global circulation and could lead to rapid (geologically) cooling.

This would still mean a warming trend (and sea level rise) in the coming decades.

Typical geologist about being clueless but educated: "this could", "it is possible", "it appears", .....................

 

[freezerman2000]

Typical geologist about being clueless but educated: "this could", "it is possible", "it appears", .....................

Please don't derail a perfectly good thread..
Try to discuss the article,not attacking the qualifications of fellow posters.

 

[Michael]

Read this and ponder which side of the argument is correct.
Global warming? No, actually we're cooling, claim scientists - Telegraph

If you look at ice age plots for the past several hundred thousand years, you'll notice that the temperature increase of the warm phase is almost always directly upwards until it hits it's peak temperature, and then the downside of the cooling trend kicks in, with all sorts of small ups and down as it drifts back to a temperature minimum.

We're actually past the peak of the last global warming trend and in a 'general' sense, we're probably headed for another ice age. The fact we have more C02 in the atmosphere however may actually work to our advantage to "slow down" that slow cooling trend.

Most folks that talk about global warming are basing their beliefs on the rise in C02, and the slight upward trend we're seeing in temps. That tendency of slight increases during the cooling phase is actually "normal" however if you look what happened during the last cooling phase. The temps went up slightly at various points, even though the general trend was toward lower temps.

In short it's pretty hard to say one way or the other. One thing we can say for sure however is that C02 is simply 'off scale' compared to other points in Earth's history.

 

[Michael]

FYI, the other key point to note in that graph is that the temperature peak in Antartica was actually between 3 and 5 degrees *cooler* at it's high point than previous peaks before starting it's trend back down. If humans really have had a dramatic impact in temperatures on Earth, it's not obvious from the temperature data.

It is obvious from that same graph however that humans have dumped more C02 into the atmosphere than has existed in our atmosphere for the past 300 thousand years.

 

[TheBeardedDude]

Antarctica is not representative of global conditions due to the circumpolar current. It is an isolated portion of the system (which is why it is typically considered to be a stable ice sheet that is difficult to melt at all. Because it's circumpolar current "protects" it).


It goes through temperature change that is not representative of global averages. (if you look at just the last 100 or so years, it's overall temperature change has been negligible or even to decrease)

 

[CarlosTomy]

Don't worry the current "pause" in global warming ISN'T a cooling yet (last I heard), and the causes of global warming are continuing apace.

A recent study by researchers at Scripps Oceanography have found that a cooler Pacific may be behind the current "pause" (HERE)

So unless the LAWS OF PHYSICS are in danger completely collapsing, I think we don't have anything to worry about in regards to our ability to really mess up the climate.

Or did we suddenly stop pumping gigatons of C into the atmosphere and no one told me?

 

[Michael]

Don't worry the current "pause" in global warming ISN'T a cooling yet (last I heard), and the causes of global warming are continuing apace.

A recent study by researchers at Scripps Oceanography have found that a cooler Pacific may be behind the current "pause" (HERE)

So unless the LAWS OF PHYSICS are in danger completely collapsing, I think we don't have anything to worry about in regards to our ability to really mess up the climate.

Or did we suddenly stop pumping gigatons of C into the atmosphere and no one told me?

Sea-level records reveal surprising choppiness : Nature News

FYI, sea level changes (and the corresponding temperature changes) are actually more common than we realized.

 

[CarlosTomy]

Sea-level records reveal surprising choppiness : Nature News

FYI, sea level changes (and the corresponding temperature changes) are actually more common than we realized.

Interesting. Of course it doesn't change anything about our current global climate change which we are likely the primary player, but it is interesting.

I don't think anyone with even a first year geology class is surprised by the variability in the earth's natural systems. But it doesn't change basic physics and chemistry.

If I heat up water it's going to expand, no matter what causes the heating.

If I heat up land ice it will melt above a certain point and it will increase sea level.

Guess the most interesting thing we have in the 19th and 20th century is a brand new player in the game. Humans. And we've dumped enough of our carbon into the atmosphere that we have left a big giant HUMAN FINGERPRINT on the atmosphere!

Chemistry is cool. But it often means we can't hide from our deeds.

 

[Michael]

Interesting. Of course it doesn't change anything about our current global climate change which we are likely the primary player, but it is interesting.

IMO it's still just a wee early to claim that humans are the "primary player" in global climate change. I have no doubt that we are *a* player, but ruling out solar influences and galactic plasma density issues isn't necessarily as simple as it sounds.

I don't think anyone with even a first year geology class is surprised by the variability in the earth's natural systems. But it doesn't change basic physics and chemistry.

The point of that article is that we *are surprised* by the variability even without a lot of C02 pouring into the atmosphere. We could certainly exacerbate the variability, but the variability has always been there.

If I heat up water it's going to expand, no matter what causes the heating.

If I heat up land ice it will melt above a certain point and it will increase sea level.

Guess the most interesting thing we have in the 19th and 20th century is a brand new player in the game. Humans. And we've dumped enough of our carbon into the atmosphere that we have left a big giant HUMAN FINGERPRINT on the atmosphere!

I agree that we're definitely leaving a large fingerprint, but you might ask yourself a question. Assuming we really are headed for another ice age, will that amount of C02 be enough to prevent glaciers from forming over North America this time?

Chemistry is cool. But it often means we can't hide from our deeds.

We may even be able to benefit from our actions assuming that we'd prefer not have New York buried under ice in another 10,000 years.

The sun's current solar cycle has been *far* less active and intense on EUV wavelengths than the last solar cycle, much to my personal dismay.

I do think it's likely that humans are having an effect on the climate. I'm less convinced human activity is *the single most important* effect on global warming/cooling.

I personally do however see the danger of continuing to dump that kind of C02 into the atmosphere in an unabated fashion, and we're dumping a lot more than just C02 into the atmosphere. The health fallout in China has been dramatic in fact, almost as dramatic as it was here in Pittsburgh and cities here in the US during the early industrial age.

 

[Michael]

Earth Gains A Record Amount Of Sea Ice In 2013 — ‘Earth has gained 19,000 Manhattans of sea ice since this date last year, the largest increase on record’ | Climate Depot

 

[Justatruthseeker]

IMO it's still just a wee early to claim that humans are the "primary player" in global climate change. I have no doubt that we are *a* player, but ruling out solar influences and galactic plasma density issues isn't necessarily as simple as it sounds.

Agreed, that would be like assuming the Sun isn't likely affecting the Earth...

Scientists discover surprise in Earth's upper atmosphere / UCLA Newsroom

UCLA atmospheric scientists have discovered a previously unknown basic mode of energy transfer from the solar wind to the Earth's magnetosphere. The research, federally funded by the National Science Foundation, could improve the safety and reliability of spacecraft that operate in the upper atmosphere.

"It's like something else is heating the atmosphere besides the sun. This discovery is like finding it got hotter when the sun went down," said Larry Lyons, UCLA professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences

...in the same way the sun is affecting Venus.

Venus' howling winds inexplicably get stronger - NBC News.com

This does not mean we cannot affect things, but does not mean we are the primary cause of anything either. The sun has cycles, as I am sure the galaxy has cycles, and the universe has cycles. It is all interconnected and all comes into the calculations.

As we know lush vegetation once covered every spot on this Earth we have investigated. We also believe ice once covered most of the planet. Apparently this has happened over and over in almost every geological epoch. And this change, this cycle, cannot be on the verge of starting because man himself must be the cause? Like you I think it much more likely that the events we see on Venus and the events we observe on Earth are interconnected.

Are we affecting the outcome? Maybe, maybe not in the long run? Ice Age, Desert, or Tropical Paradise, The real question is are we heading into Desert, or Tropical? Or merely holding off the coming Ice Age?

 

[CarlosTomy]

Earth Gains A Record Amount Of Sea Ice In 2013 — ‘Earth has gained 19,000 Manhattans of sea ice since this date last year, the largest increase on record’ | Climate Depot

So many RECOVERIES! I'm curious why we aren't celebrating more!

 

[freezerman2000]

Hows about this?
Arctic Ice Thickness Makes A Huge Gain – Global Warming Freezes More Ice!

 

[Justatruthseeker]

So many RECOVERIES! I'm curious why we aren't celebrating more!

Love the graph

But yet the data does not show man is the cause, as some realists claim. Not saying we don't contribute, but I also do not believe we are the cause of the increased weather on Venus. Increase in winds, increase in temperature. Related? Ain't saying it's fact, but it is a distinct possibility and the most probable result. Being that our storms have also intensified, such as hurricane wind speeds.

 

[Michael]

I think what annoys me the most is the blatant attempt to "dumb it down" on both sides of the aisle. Proponents of global warming tend to simply ignore the fact the Earth has cycles of it's own, and they *assume* man is the sole cause of any change we observe.

The other side tends to ignore the CO2 and pollution problems.

Neither side wants to talk about how to save New York from the next global cooling event, and keep it from being buried under ice in another 10,000 years.

 

[freezerman2000]

This also...
Top climate scientists admit global warming forecasts were wrong - Telegraph

 

[freezerman2000]

I think what annoys me the most is the blatant attempt to "dumb it down" on both sides of the aisle. Proponents of global warming tend to simply ignore the fact the Earth has cycles of it's own, and they *assume* man is the sole cause of any change we observe.

The other side tends to ignore the CO2 and pollution problems.

Neither side wants to talk about how to save New York from the next global cooling event, and keep it from being buried under ice in another 10,000 years.

Remember that back in the 70's,the same person who first came up with "global warming",first attempted to pull a similar stunt..called "global cooling".
His remedy for that? Start dumping more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere.
I guess he was on both sides of the fence!
FLASHBACK: Global Cooling -1970's Environmental Hysteria | Peace . Gold . Liberty
Hubert Lamb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Michael]

Dialing Back the Alarm on Climate Change - WSJ.com