The "new science"...
Jan. 27th, 2011 10:11 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alexpgpA report on the cold weather on ABC last Friday contained this gem as part of an explanation of the unusually cold weather:
global warming climate change climate challenge, I'd be rolling on the floor.
If something is happening in an unpredictable manner, that basically means you either don't know why it's happening, or that what's happening is the result of some random process. The latter is, by definition, not a dog that'll hunt in the "climate challenge" discussion.
The only other alternative is might make sense of the quoted statement is a situation in which weather patterns were known to shift in predictable ways before global warming, becoming unpredictable after global warming was introduced. But that's emphatically not the case, because global warming was "discovered" long after it had begun. Indeed, for quite some time, the major concern among climate scientists (I remember reading a cover story on the subject in Time magazine) was the possibility of the planet entering a new Ice Age, not becoming too hot.
Meanwhile, NASA predictions for the number of sunspots expected to occur in the current sunspot cycle continue to be revised downward, from 130-140 in early 2008, to 80-90 by mid-2009, to 60-70 last October, to less than 60 just recently. This would appear to replicate the level of sunspot activity during the Maunder Minimum of 1675-1715, during what is referred to as the "Little Ice Age."
Cheers...
Global warming is playing a role by shifting weather patterns in unpredictable ways.I find this mildly amusing. In fact, if it weren't for the fact that major government players (and their well-paid scientific minions) are pushing for wide-sweeping regulation—with its concomitant expansion of power—to take action against
If something is happening in an unpredictable manner, that basically means you either don't know why it's happening, or that what's happening is the result of some random process. The latter is, by definition, not a dog that'll hunt in the "climate challenge" discussion.
The only other alternative is might make sense of the quoted statement is a situation in which weather patterns were known to shift in predictable ways before global warming, becoming unpredictable after global warming was introduced. But that's emphatically not the case, because global warming was "discovered" long after it had begun. Indeed, for quite some time, the major concern among climate scientists (I remember reading a cover story on the subject in Time magazine) was the possibility of the planet entering a new Ice Age, not becoming too hot.
Meanwhile, NASA predictions for the number of sunspots expected to occur in the current sunspot cycle continue to be revised downward, from 130-140 in early 2008, to 80-90 by mid-2009, to 60-70 last October, to less than 60 just recently. This would appear to replicate the level of sunspot activity during the Maunder Minimum of 1675-1715, during what is referred to as the "Little Ice Age."
Cheers...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-01-27 06:17 pm (UTC)Anthropomorphic effects on climate will always be insignificant compared to Natural events. Its pretty arrogant of humans to think we have the power to make such changes. Even if we did manage it, a Natural phenomenon would either reverse the change, or make it hugely worse (for example, a major volcanic eruption will change the global temp at by at least a degree). That said, I'm happy to see us reduce emissions, build public transport, move to clean coal technologies. Even if these don't have climate consequences, they do enhance our quality of life.