Gator

Plummeting temperatures could send the world into a 'mini ice age' in 2030 and could OVERRIDE global warming, claim mathematicians Temperatures will start dropping in 2021, according to a mathematical model This, they say, will lead to a phenomenon known as the 'Maunder minimum' This was previously known as a mini ice age when it hit between 1646 and 1715 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5215575/Plummeting-temperatures-cause-mini-ice-age-2030.html

Haha. This dolt is calling others a "nutcase" !! Given your background it's understandable.

Who is going to fund organisations to disprove man is warming the planet dangerously when governments all around the world are funding organisations to prove the opposite ? I suppose you think the fossil fuel industry is going to pay millions upon millions setting up science organisations ? There are countless eminent scientists who have written widely on why CO2 is either not dangerously warming the planet or not warming it at all. But you're not interested in doing research. You're only interested in parroting Leftist views. You don't even know why you believe it. You simply know you're told to. How moronic is that ?

You didn't answer the question. How much CO2 is naturally occurring and how much is man-made ? Let me help you out. 97% of CO2 occurs naturally and 3% is attributed to man. So in essence man-made CO2 is 0.0012%. We're spending trillions of dollars to reduce our 0.0012% emissions. Australia's contribution is 0.000018%. In other words, nothing. Future generations won't believe it. Jara, there are hundreds of scientists around the world, including ex NASA scientists that don't agree that the planet is warming dangerously and some don't believe CO2 is a driving force. There's also no such thing as a 97% consensus. As for your analogy about taipans and a further one about CFCs ? Please. We're talking about plant food. We're talking about a natural trace element gas we need just to survive. We're talking about human contributions of 0.0012%. We've even got a Leftist on here citing "big business". Have you ever heard of anything as funny ? You also need to understand that climate science is a very narrow field that not many specialise in, which is why plenty of scientists who don't buy the global warming hype can be ridiculed by people such as yourself as not a real climate scientist. How many do you think there are ? Sceptics, such as Willie Soon, Richard Lindzen, Dr Roy Spencer, Bjorn Lomborg, John Christy, Judith Curry, Ian Pilmer, Murry Salby, and others just have their reputations besmirched by the Left and anyone else who makes their living from this scare. Appalling things are said about these people, whose only crime isn't to buy the alarmism hook line and sinker. If you're a Leftist it's your duty to be a climate alarmist. Some on the right believe it too, but it's not part of their dogma. There are organisations who don't believe the alarmism, such as the Heartland Institute. They're not hard to google. But I can promise you that they will all be ridiculed as misinformers, deniers, or other such nouns. I've read and listened to as much as I can so as to be able to form by own views. I've read and heard enough to know that the scare is simply not reliable. The climate models have been wrong. NASA has altered data because the models were inconveniently wrong. You ? You just believe what you're fed. As for your final question... This is a very minor hobby for me. I'm a footy fan. I also have a small business. I have no interest in joining other forums to debate something where there will be no winners. A minor contribution on here read by nobody is enough to sate my minor appetite.

Boom. This trace element gas that is known as "the gas of life" represents a tiny element of the earth's atmosphere. It's 4 one hundredths of one percent. It's the equivalent of 4 cents in $10,000, yet it supposedly drives the planet's temperature if you believe the alarmists. Do you know what percentage of this 0.04% occurs naturally and what percentage is man-made ? Two more questions. Did you know CO2 was 10 times higher during an ice age ? How could that be if it is such a significant driver of temperature ? Did you know life on earth is unsustainable if CO2 falls below 150 parts per million volume ? Jara, it's an utter nonsense to claim that the best scientists in the world think the planet is warming "dangerously". Some scientists agree that CO2 contributes to warming, but many don't. My extensive reading, listening and watching over the last decade leads me to believe that CO2 plays zero part in the earth's rise and fall of temperatures and that the trillions spent is the greatest fraud in human history. The poor around the world should have access to cheap energy and they don't. Solar activity, cloud forcing and ocean circulation drives temperature, not an essential trace element gas that is a tiny 0.04% of Earth's atmosphere. Who'd have thought it was the sun, you know, that massive beast of solar activity in the sky, after all.

The question is what percentage of the atmosphere is CO2 ? You're right in that CO2 is now approx. 400 parts per million volume., so what percentage of the atmosphere does that make it ? The second part of the question is what percentage of CO2 occurs naturally without any human involvement and what percentage is man-made ?

Well done. Baby steps. One of the questions is answered in the body of the text, but not the other. I'm not even convinced you know which is the answer

No.

Jara, What percentage of the atmosphere is CO2 ? What percentage of CO2 is man-made and what percentage is natural ?

Bzzz. Wrong answer. I do know the answers. Anyone who has shown a predilection for the climate has learnt the basics. I know what proportion of the atmosphere is CO2 and I know what percentage is natural and what percentage is man-made. Your only contribution is as a fanboy for climate porn.

^^^ Lines 3 and 4 should read "What is not beyond doubt". This inability to edit or delete after a short time frame is horrible.

It's beyond doubt that man is increasing CO2. It's beyond doubt that the climate is changing and always will. What is beyond doubt is whether CO2 is driving temperature. What is beyond doubt is whether the earth is warning "dangerously". When CO2 was 10 times higher than what it is now we had an ice age, so how can CO2 be driving temperature ? Jara, do you know what percentage of the atmosphere is CO2 ? And do you know what percentage is natural and what percentage is man-made ? NASA alter there own graphs, because temperature hasn't risen as their models predicted. Because we're in a pause. Have you read the climate-gate emails ? Huge funding has been given to scientists around the world to link CO2 with global warming. It started with Thatcher, who didn't want to be beholden to the middle east and because she was at war with the coal miners. She said she'd pay them to find a link. Guess what ? They did. For various other political reasons the funding has continued. If you're a scientist who doesn't believe in AGW guess how much government funding you'll receive ? Zero, nada, zilch, nothing, not a zac. Solar activity (sun spots), cloud forcing, and ocean circulation dictates climate, not a trace element gas that is essential for our survival.

In the spirit of Christmas, (Leftists don't get too offended if I use the term Christmas ?) I will remove my ignore function when it comes to you. Unfortunately, you get quoted so often I occasionally see your responses, which defeats the purpose of having you on ignore. naturally, if you carry on like a moron it will be restored. The article you linked is hardly new. Fund addicted scientists all over the world believe the climate is warming and that man is largely responsible. However, many reputable scientists do not. Some believe CO2 is contributing to warming, but it's not dangerous, and others believe CO2 isn't a warming factor at all. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, so by its very nature it will store some heat, but I've seen enough evidence that leads me to believe CO2 either has so little effect it's a non-issue, or has no effect at all. And certainly not the miniscule amount mankind contributes. Hundreds of things affect climate, but in the main solar activity, cloud forcing, and ocean circulation are the dominant forces of climate. A trillion dollars has been spent on a non-issue. Btw, if those addicted to climate porn really wanted to have carbon-free electricity they'd embrace nuclear. The fact that they don't tells me that they don't really believe their doomsday predictions, because nuclear gives them the carbon-free solutions they crave.

After over two years I thought it was time for an update. No. of deaths attributed to radiation from Japan's Fukushima nuclear disaster ? Zero. This is good news, right ? Probably not for some.

50 years ago Stanford climate expert said we were all going to starve to death. Thankfully, there was no internet then. The Lefties on here would be mewing themselves to sleep.

I highly recommend you read every word of this including the comments section. http://landscapesandcycles.net/polar-bear-gate-a-picture-is-worth-a-thousand-lies.html

5 New Papers: Climate And Weather Events Become LESS Erratic And Severe During Warming Periods Significant Decreasing Trend In Severe Weather Since 1961 Abstract Understanding the trend of localized severe weather under the changing climate is of great significance but remains challenging which is at least partially due to the lack of persistent and homogeneous severe weather observations at climate scales while the detailed physical processes of severe weather cannot be resolved in global climate models. Based on continuous and coherent severe weather reports from over 500 manned stations, for the first time, this study shows a significant decreasing trend in severe weather occurrence across China during the past five decades. The total number of severe weather days that have either thunderstorm, hail and/or damaging wind decrease about 50% from 1961 to 2010. It is further shown that the reduction in severe weather occurrences correlates strongly with the weakening of East Asian summer monsoon which is the primary source of moisture and dynamic forcing conducive for warm-season severe weather over China. Read more here: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep42310 Most Frequent Climate Instability During Global Cooling/Reduced CO2 Periods Abstract Climatic variabilities on millennial and longer time scales with a bipolar seesaw pattern have been documented in paleoclimatic records, but their frequencies, relationships with mean climatic state, and mechanisms remain unclear. Understanding the processes and sensitivities that underlie these changes will underpin better understanding of the climate system and projections of its future change. We investigate the long-term characteristics of climatic variability using a new ice-core record from Dome Fuji, East Antarctica, combined with an existing long record from the Dome C ice core. Antarctic warming events over the past 720,000 years are most frequent when the Antarctic temperature is slightly below average on orbital time scales, equivalent to an intermediate climate during glacial periods, whereas interglacial and fully glaciated climates are unfavourable for a millennial-scale bipolar seesaw. Numerical experiments using a fully coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation model with freshwater hosing in the northern North Atlantic showed that climate becomes most unstable in intermediate glacial conditions associated with large changes in sea ice and the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. Model sensitivity experiments suggest that the prerequisite for the most frequent climate instability with bipolar seesaw pattern during the late Pleistocene era is associated with reduced atmospheric CO2 concentration via global cooling and sea ice formation in the North Atlantic, in addition to extended Northern Hemisphere ice sheets. Read more here: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/2/e1600446.full Hurricane Activity Is ‘Subdued’ During Warm Periods (1950-2000) Abstract Long-term data are needed to properly assess the influence of anthropogenic climate change on Atlantic hurricane frequency, however hurricane records are inconsistent prior to the development of modern monitoring techniques. Paleolimnological investigations from coastal Caribbean lagoons can be used to track changes in Atlantic hurricane activity because coastal lagoons can become inundated with seawater during hurricane events, which leaves distinct biological and geochemical signals in their sediments. This study analyzes changes in fossil diatom assemblages and chlorophyll-a (chl-a) concentrations of a ~1,500 year old sediment core from Grape Tree Pond, a coastal lagoon located in southern Jamaica. The diatom and chl-a profiles were used to evaluate overall changes in salinity and primary production, as well as to identify potential periods of enhanced hurricane activity. The results of this research identified three periods of pronounced hurricane activity around 1350, 1725-1785, and 1900-1925 CE, which were indicated by mixed-salinity diatom assemblages and distinct changes in chl-a concentrations. Additionally, two periods of drought occurring during 1650-1725 and ~1785- 1900 were identified by low diatom abundance and decreased chl-a concentrations. These changes in the diatom assemblage and chl-a concentrations show that climate variability has increased following the onset of the Little Ice Age (~1450-1850 CE), however it is difficult to distinguish the impacts of recent anthropogenic climate warming on hurricane activity from those of natural Atlantic climate regimes, such as ENSO. This study is one of the first to report on the diatom species found in Jamaica, and demonstrates the potential of using fossil diatoms from coastal lagoons to track past storm activity. Read more here: http://qspace.library.queensu.ca/bitstream/handle/1974/15658/ensc_502_Heller.pdf Surface Warming Weakens Cyclone Activity Abstract By using an objective identification and tracking algorithm of the cyclone, the statistics of midlatitude cyclone activity in East Asia during summer for the period 1979–2013 were analyzed. The impact of the midlatitude summer cyclone anomalies in East Asia on the decadal mode of East Asian summer monsoon (EASM) was investigated and possible mechanisms were proposed. The possible reasons for the anomalous cyclone activity from the perspective of land surface thermal forcing were also explored. Results indicate that the midlatitude summer cyclone activity over East Asia exhibits decadal changes in the period of 1979–2013 and is significantly weakened after early 1990s. Further analysis indicates that there is a close relationship between the midlatitude summer cyclone activity over East Asia and the decadal variation of EASM; when the midlatitude summer cyclone activity over East Asia is strong (weak), EASM tends to be intensified (weakened), and the weak cyclone activity after 1993 generally coincides with the decadal weakening of EASM. Moreover, there is a close linkage between the weakening of cyclonic activity after the early 1990s and the nonuniform surface warming of the Eurasian continent. Significant warming to the west of Mongolia tends to weaken the north–south temperature gradient and the atmospheric baroclinicity to its south and eventually can lead to weakening of the midlatitude cyclone activity over East Asia. Read more here: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0155.1 Little Ice Age climatic erraticism as an analogue for future enhanced hydroclimatic variability across the American Southwest Abstract The American Southwest has experienced a series of severe droughts interspersed with strong wet episodes over the past decades, prompting questions about future climate patterns and potential intensification of weather disruptions under warming conditions. Here we show that interannual hydroclimatic variability in this region has displayed a significant level of non-stationarity over the past millennium. Our tree ring-based analysis of past drought indicates that the Little Ice Age (LIA) experienced high interannual hydroclimatic variability, similar to projections for the 21st century. This is contrary to the Medieval Climate Anomaly (MCA), which had reduced variability and therefore may be misleading as an analog for 21st century warming, notwithstanding its warm (and arid) conditions. Given past non-stationarity, and particularly erratic LIA, a ‘warm LIA’ climate scenario for the coming century that combines high precipitation variability (similar to LIA conditions) with warm and dry conditions (similar to MCA conditions) represents a plausible situation that is supported by recent climate simulations. Our comparison of tree ring-based drought analysis and records from the tropical Pacific Ocean suggests that changing variability in El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) explains much of the contrasting variances between the MCA and LIA conditions across the American Southwest. Greater ENSO variability for the 21st century could be induced by a decrease in meridional sea surface temperature gradient caused by increased greenhouse gas concentration, as shown by several recent climate modeling experiments. Overall, these results coupled with the paleo-record suggests that using the erratic LIA conditions as benchmarks for past hydroclimatic variability can be useful for developing future water-resource management and drought and flood hazard mitigation strategies in the Southwest. Read more here: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0186282

To save the alarmists trouble, I'll link criticisms of the author of Twenty reasons not to worry about polar bears (Susan Crockford), which can be found here: http://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/study-finds-climate-denier-blogs-ignore-polar-bear-sea-ice-science There's a balanced response to that criticism by an impartial author here: http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-canadian-finds-polar-bears-are-doing-fine-and-gets-climate-mauled And there's a very detailed and compelling retraction request by Susan Crockford here: https://polarbearscience.com/2017/12/05/retraction-request-to-bioscience-foia-emails-document-another-harsh-criticism-of-amstrups-2007-polar-bear-model/

Predictably, the climate porn addicts, who must believe in tragedy are the ones who take this kind of rubbish hook, line and sinker. There could be a number of reasons this solitary bear fell ill, including cancer, but what we do know is that a solitary bear does not mean bears are starving. If bears were starving there'd be a landscape filled with dying bears, and not just one as depicted in the video. But this tactic is not new to the Left or those with an agenda. Twenty reasons not to worry about polar bears, the 2017 update Posted on November 6, 2017 https://polarbearscience.com/2017/11/06/twenty-reasons-not-to-worry-about-polar-bears-the-2017-update/

You don't hold out much hope due to something you admit is "hearsay" ? Even if it is true that mere fact would mean nothing. New players live together at all clubs. Living with someone doesn t mean you endorse, or are even privy to their activities.

I'll be snorkeling at the outer reef today with a small tour group of marine biologists. I look forward to asking them about the state of the reef, as well as witnessing our incredible marine life.

Dennis Prager, a conservative Jew I greatly admire, often tells of how he grew up a Democrat. He says, "I was a Jew, who grew up in Brooklyn, what choice did I have ?". He regularly laments that most Jews are to the Left when it comes to social issues and politics.

In truth, I was mainly referencing American politics. I should add, I'm a pragmatist too. It's what we conservatives do.

*Prager