Radar readings: Image shows a British Antarctic Survey aircraft conducting the survey. Credit: Carl Robinson/British Antarctic Survey.
PARIS: A powerful volcano erupted under the icesheet of Antarctica around 2,000 years ago and it might still be active today, a finding which raises questions about ice loss from the white continent.
The explosive event – rated “severe” to “cataclysmic” on an international scale of volcanic force – punched a massive breach in the icesheet and spat out a plume some 12 kilometres into the sky, said British scientists behind the find.
Occasional volcanism
Most of Antarctica is seismically stable. But its western part lies on a rift in Earth’s crust that gives rise to occasional volcanism and geothermal heat, occurring on the Antarctic coastal margins.
This is the first evidence for an eruption under the ice sheet itself – a slab of frozen water, hundreds of metres thick in places, that holds most of the world’s stock of fresh water.
Reporting in the journal Nature Geoscience this week, the investigators from the British Antarctic Survey (BAS), In Cambridge, England, describe the finding as “unique.”
It extends the range of known volcanism in Antarctica by some 500 km and raises the question whether this or other sub-glacial volcanoes may have melted so much ice that global sea levels were affected, they said.
The volcano, located in the Hudson Mountains, blew around 207 BC, give or take 240 years, according to their paper.
Anomalous radar readings
Evidence for this comes from a British-American airborne geophysical survey completed between 2004 and 2005. This used radar to delve deep under the ice sheet to map the terrain beneath. The team spotted anomalous radar reflections over 23,000 square kilometres – an area bigger than Wales.
They interpret this signal as being a thick layer of ash, rock and glass, formed from fused silica, that the volcano spewed out in its fury.
The amount of material – 0.31 cubic kilometres – indicates an eruption of between three and four on a yardstick called the Volcanic Explosive Index (VEI).
By comparison, the eruption of Mount St. Helens in 1980, which was greater, rates a VEI of five, and that of Mount Pinatubo in 1991 is a VEI of six.
Melting ice
“We believe this was the biggest eruption in Antarctica during the last 10,000 years,” said lead author Hugh Corr. “It blew a substantial hole in the icesheet and generated a plume of ash and gas that rose around 12 km into the air.”
The eruption occurred close to the massive Pine Island Glacier, an area where movement of glacial ice towards the sea has been accelerating alarmingly in recent decades.
“It may be possible that heat from the volcano has caused some of that acceleration,” said co-author David Vaughan, who stresses though that global warming is by far still the most likely culprit.
Volcanic heat “cannot explain the more widespread thinning of West Antarctic glaciers that together are contributing nearly 0.2mm (0.008 of an inch) per year to sea-level rise,” he adds. “This wider change most probably has its origin in warming ocean waters.”
Please leave a comment
Please comply with our Community rules.
Perhaps The Climate Change Models Are Wrong
Lorne Gunter, National Post
Published: Monday, March 24, 2008
Bob Strong, Reuters
They drift along in the worlds’ oceans at a depth of 2,000 metres — more than a mile deep — constantly monitoring the temperature, salinity, pressure and velocity of the upper oceans.
Then, about once every 10 days, a bladder on the outside of these buoys inflates and raises them slowly to the surface gathering data about each strata of seawater they pass through. After an upward journey of nearly six hours, the Argo monitors bob on the waves while an onboard transmitter sends their information to a satellite that in turn retransmits it to several land-based research computers where it may be accessed by anyone who wishes to see it.
These 3,000 yellow sentinels –about the size and shape of a large fence post — free-float the world’s oceans, season in and season out, surfacing between 30 and 40 times a year, disgorging their findings, then submerging again for another fact-finding voyage.
It’s fascinating to watch their progress online. (The URLs are too complex to reproduce here, but Google “Argo Buoy Movement” or “Argo Float Animation,” and you will be directed to the links.)
When they were first deployed in 2003, the Argos were hailed for their ability to collect information on ocean conditions more precisely, at more places and greater depths and in more conditions than ever before. No longer would scientists have to rely on measurements mostly at the surface from older scientific buoys or inconsistent shipboard monitors.
So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys’ findings? Because in five years, the little blighters have failed to detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters’ hypotheses, must be wrong.
In fact, “there has been a very slight cooling,” according to a U.S. National Public Radio (NPR) interview with Josh Willis at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a scientist who keeps close watch on the Argo findings.
Dr. Willis insisted the temperature drop was “not anything really significant.” And I trust he’s right. But can anyone imagine NASA or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — the UN’s climate experts — shrugging off even a “very slight” warming.
A slight drop in the oceans’ temperature over a period of five or six years probably is insignificant, just as a warming over such a short period would be. Yet if there had been a rise of any kind, even of the same slightness, rest assured this would be broadcast far and wide as yet another log on the global warming fire.
Just look how tenaciously some scientists are prepared to cling to the climate change dogma. “It may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming,” Dr. Willis told NPR.
Yeah, you know, like when you put your car into reverse you are causing it to enter a period of less rapid forward motion. Or when I gain a few pounds I am in a period of less rapid weight loss.
Reader DiscussionMost PopularRead
E-Mailed
Subscribe to RSS
now that we see a volcano with these possible results over time, maybe now we can connect this situation i learned about a few years ago. A Canadian scientist has discovered a lost city in the early 2000 off the coast of Cuba and has ruins under water they think predates the pyramids….see this link below…..i wondering if modern man is a lot older than what the bible says(6000 yrs)…you draw you own conclusions:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1697038.stm
James Heroux
Canada
Earth is a lot older. Read Genesis carefully. After Noah and the flood, God said replenish the earth. Replenish means to plenish again. Go to the part in the beginning about adam and eve. They were told to replenish the earth, meaning that there was something there before them. Also in ancient prophecies from the mayans, and hopis, they speak of the world being destroyed 3 or 4 times. The last one was by water and this next destruction will be fire.
Actually, according to Mayan elders, their prophecy indicates that the next renewal (due 2012 (ish)) is renewal by ether, not fire.
As for the Volcano under the ice, well that would also fit in with the earth quake data that showed an earth quake happening March 17th on the Antarctic Ridge. That could provide the energy required to neatly crack a huge chunk of a weakened ice shelf. An ice shelf weakened by a whole summer’s warming (normal annual event), volcanic heating and the previous century’s modest warming.
I really would not worry about this, The south pole has spent times in the past without any ice whatsoever. In the medieval warm period some 800 years ago, the ice cover would have been significantly less than today.
Sea levels in some parts of the earth are not even rising. According to Dr Vincent Gray, the sea levels in some places are falling. Dr. Gray is one of the 2,000 to 2,500 top scientists from around the world whom the IPCC often cites as forming the basis of its findings. No one has been a more faithful reviewer than Dr. Gray over the years he has been an IPCC expert almost from the start, and perhaps its most prolific contributor, logging almost 1,900 comments on the IPCC’s final draft of its most recent report alone.
But Dr. Gray, who knows as much about the IPCC’s review processes as anyone, has been troubled by what he sees as an appalling absence of scientific rigour in the IPCC’s review process.
“Right from the beginning, I have had difficulty with this procedure. Penetrating questions often ended without any answer. Comments on the IPCC drafts were rejected without explanation, and attempts to pursue the matter were frustrated indefinitely.
“Over the years, as I have learned more about the data and procedures of the IPCC, I have found increasing opposition by them to providing explanations, until I have been forced to the conclusion that for significant parts of the work of the IPCC, the data collection and scientific methods employed are unsound. Resistance to all efforts to try and discuss or rectify these problems has convinced me that normal scientific procedures are not only rejected by the IPCC, but that this practice is endemic, and was part of the organization from the very beginning.”
Dr. Gray has detailed extensively the areas in which global warming science falls down. One example that this New Zealander provides comes from his region of the globe: “We are told that the sea level is rising and will soon swamp all of our cities. Everybody knows that the Pacific island of Tuvalu is sinking. Al Gore told us that the inhabitants are invading New Zealand because of it.”
“Around 1990 it became obvious that the local tide-gauge did not agree there was no evidence of ‘sinking.’ So scientists at Flinders University, Adelaide, were asked to check whether this was true. They set up new, modern, tide-gauges in 12 Pacific islands, including Tuvalu, confident that they would show that all of them are sinking.
“Recently, the whole project was abandoned as there was no sign of a change in sea level at any of the 12 islands for the past 16 years. In 2006, Tuvalu even rose.”
Other expert reviewers at the IPCC, and scientists elsewhere around the globe, share Dr. Gray’s alarm at the conduct of the IPCC. An effort by academics is now underway to reform this UN organization, and have it follow established scientific norms. Dr. Gray was asked to endorse this reform effort, but he refused, saying: “The IPCC is fundamentally corrupt. The only ‘reform’ I could envisage would be its abolition.”
That is fairly unequivocal. The outright abolishment of the IPCC. An organisation that is politically motivated. An organisations whose central goal is NOT saving the planet, or establishing truth about climate change. The central IPCC mission is to prove that mankind’s activity is the cause of a global increase in temperature that is unstoppable and catastrophic. Once it has done this, it is up to the Governments of the world to come together and control all of mankind’s activities to “reduce carbon output”.
Unfortunately, how can the IPCC prove that mankind’s activities are creating a global warming that is unstoppable and catastrophic, if the globe has actually been cooling slightly for the past decade?
The Argo Ocean Probes, the Nasa Aqua satellites and other global temperature monitoring organisations ALL show that there has actually been a rather inconvenient global COOLING over the last decade. These measurements are coming from high-level altitudes, to surface level and sub sea level. All show a cooling. Where was that predicted with the ‘sophisticated’ computerised models?
How can the IPCC provide a motivation for global governments submitting to a global authority to control humanity, if the earth is now cooling slightly? Well that is highly inconvenient to the globalists, isn’t it?
Ah well I suppose that it is a good job that the mainstream media is bought off then, and that they willingly censor all contradictory evidence to prevent people from becoming aware of the inconvenient truth of the current cooling trend and that they also over-hype anything that can be spun to support the thoroughly debunked hypothesis of human induced climatic warming.
They are now calling it human induced climate disruption, to allow for natural cooling and blame mankind for that too.
As it turns out the Antarctic Ice mass has increased past previous records by some 86,000km2 in the last year and ice cover has exceeded 30 yr mean levels. The same goes with the Arctic ice cap and sea ice. Record cold spells are more and more frequent around the globe. Put simply Global Warming…er… Climate Change…….sorry! “Human Induced Climate Disruption” is a crock and anyone who swallows it is a mindless cretin or a globalist shill.
- “Human Induced Climate Disruption” is a crock and anyone who swallows it is a mindless cretin or a globalist shill.”
Why are you so angry? Why insult people? Climate change or not, no one is out to steal your piggy bank or make you wear clean undershorts…
Geez, lighten up. Try a Valium even.
Ah! But someone IS trying to rob my piggybank! That fat moron Al Gore, part owner of Occidental Petroleum, major energy waster in his huge mansion, and private jetsetter. All his buddies are playing little games to enrich themselves, and cause workers worldwide to passively accept lower living standards in the name of Gaia. As rejuvenated Communists, they massaged the “Party Line” to a new tune, but to the same end. THEY get the goodies, and the workers pay.
I totally agree with you that anybody who swallows this global warming hoax is a moron. It makes me also angry ‘cos of the zionist controlled world media. btw i don’t take any valiums , ‘cos i don’t use any drugs.
A volcano under the ice was discussed in 91 in a talk at McMurdo Station. They found three of them that were the cause of ice streams feeding into the Ross Ice Shelf.
The global warming morons will continue to advance the fraud as long as there are morons who will believe it. They are fear mongers who seek financial gain. It`s all about money and influence.
Lighten Up-
All around the world Governments are using the climate change as a justification to raise taxes on everything from plastic bags to car tax – so yes they are robbing my piggy bank.
The sooner mainstream media starts asking these governments questions regarding what evidence there is of human produced climate change the better.
in NYC Bully Bollomberg is using global warming as one reason to enact his travel tax if you want to drive into Manhattan – which in turn results in a total surveillance system being erected in NYC so EVERY movement is recorded for Bloomie and his ex-CIA boyfrinds to gloat over.
A more active and warming Earth’s core would explain the increase in worldwide volcanic acivity, tundra frost melts,earthquake activity and now Antarctic breakaway icesheets. Lets have an open discussion about this and other theories without the heavy handedness from monied interests!!
You should note that there is a good reason for this too. Read http://www.thunderbolts.info and check out the new paradigm that explains these mysteries.
The equator had less water around it due to the water beind held up at the poles by the gravitational attraction of “a god”. Which, the ancients called ‘planets’. Mythology is literally the drawings of Plasma (like the Northern Lights, but a million times more intense) and Planet’s which had plasma effects around them.
%100 of cosmology ignores Electro magnetic effects. We should not as plasma makes up %99.98 of the observable universe. And magnetic fields and electric fields affect plasma significantly more than gravity.
One factor I have not seen mentioned by people discussing ocean levels is the quantities of matter washed into the seas constantly. This seems as if it would add up over time.
How can any intelligent person argue against decreasing our burning of fossil fuels, especially scientists? This is clearly a separate issue that does not involve global warming but does involve wars, pollution and economics. Think about that.
Well I couldn’t have said it better myself, BOLLOCKS!!! just about cover’s the whole subject, well done mate
Not meaning climate, but the discussion of it. Assorted experts were discussing in a variety of sources (books, radio, TV, newspapers)in the early ’70s, and a lot of them said, we don’t know what the result will be in the long term. Ice age, toasted by the sun and our own technology, but something will happen. They weren’t calling it “global warming,” they were predicting global climate change, and saying that what happened in one area might not be what happened in another. Monsoons in eastern USA, drought in SE Asia. But serious changes, because a change in one place would create other changes elsewhere.
Which in fact, we are seeing. Thousands die from a heatwave in Europe, out of season tornados in America, flooding where there historically never has been flooding, increased hurricane activity. Drought spreading to many new parts of the globe.
What I find troubling is our reaction to it all, both the discussion and the events. Most troubling are self-styled pundits who seem to be saying no changes are occurring, just ignore the weird weather, or who point to the shrinking Mars icecaps and say see? It’s not just us. So go ahead and burn all the fossil fuels you want, raise more beef, go back to sleep, the cause is sunspots, natural forces.
Which is sorta like saying you can’t stop a hurricane, it’s a natural force. So just stand around on a street corner and wait to get skewered by a stop sign. As though there is nothing we can or should be doing.
That’s just insane. If you’re in a boat being swamped by a storm, do you ignore it? Do you scoop more water out of the sea and pour it onto the deck? Or do you bail?
Hurricane activity has NOT increased. Check with NOAA. The historical flooding is for how many years? 100, 200, 2000. 20,000? How about the sun?
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html
Ah, there it is,. The reason for all of the rage and anger is that Gore and others have more money than “Visitor”, despite their being supposed “communists”. Typical of the stupider members of the right.
http://www.climateark.org/blog/2006/08/oregons_ocean_dead_zone.asp
this one is far from Oregon,
http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Ocean/Moore-Trashed-PacificNov03.htm
You clearly fit into the mindless hordes category,You can only be insulted if you fit into one or the other category hmmm? “no one is out to steal your piggy bank” What do you think they are doing with regard to incresing energy costs, carbon credits, climate based rip off scams???? I AM angry and so should everyone be, that is unless you are happy to be ripped off blind due to your ignorance and gullibility?
So called global warming is a scam of global proportions, anyone who follows any data on real climate fluctuations knows this already. In the last 12/12 the 4 world bodies monitoring global temperatures have to the “warmers” dismay recorded a precipitious drop in global temperatures. Sea ice and ice mass has increased past 30yr means in both the arctic and antarctic. The Antarctic has increased in area by some 86,000km2 over previous records. China has it’s coldest winter in a century, Snow in Baghdad first time in living memory, snow in Argentina, Britains coldest easter in 40yrs, coldest summer since the 1950′s in Sydney, Brisbane records coldest day on record??? Get the idea? The warmest year in the last century was in 1998 and the temp has been falling since, so yes I am angry at being fed a constant diet of lies and distortions which all lead to me and my family being screwed over by huge corporations and those behind the ridiculous and assinine assertion that the world is warming when the exact opposite is the fact of the matter.
If you only knew the real reasons behind the GW agenda you too would be angry…………..then again? Maybe you should cut back on the Valium??
You sir have the picture clear and the culprits in hand, Globalists (CFR, Trilateral Commission, Club of Rome, Bilderbergers,Rothschilds & Rockefellers). One World Govt, population control, the haves and the have nots, the end of the middle class, the end of private ownership of property. Orwells 1984 and Aldous Huxleys Brave New World were prophetic to the point of being astounding with regard to our current predicament.
The reason why this is coming together is because the valium popping mindless hordes are willing to swallow the agenda hook line and sinker, they will soon give up anything in order to “save the earth” even if their tiny little brains are trying to tell them that this summer was bloody freezing when the talking heads on the tube are telling them it is really hotter??
And that twat wonders why I am angry??
http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm
Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming
Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile — the list goes on and on.
No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA’s GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.
A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year’s time. For all four sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.
Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases. The dramatic cooling seen in just 12 months time seems to bear that out. While the data doesn’t itself disprove that carbon dioxide is acting to warm the planet, it does demonstrate clearly that more powerful factors are now cooling it.
Let’s hope those factors stop fast. Cold is more damaging than heat. The mean temperature of the planet is about 54 degrees. Humans — and most of the crops and animals we depend on — prefer a temperature closer to 70.
Historically, the warm periods such as the Medieval Climate Optimum were beneficial for civilization. Corresponding cooling events such as the Little Ice Age, though, were uniformly bad news.
So all this is verifiable fact, AND YET everytime I turn to the tube or a MSM newspaper, or my Govt!! some &^^%$*@ talking head is trying to convince me of the exact opposite? AND YOU WONDER WHY I AM ANGRY YOU DOLT!!
Man made global warming is a scam. Al gore is not a scientist , he’s a politician. Politicians lie , and make us pay taxes for breathing in the name of saving the environment. Scientists do not all agree with Al Gore.
I covered this article when it first hit the news wires back in January. Antarctica is the global warming crowd’s Achilles Heel – ice is growing on three sides of the continent and satellite images show more ice in just the last 20 years. Unfortunately for skeptics, little media attention is given to those scientific bits that contradict the popular view of global warming.
Click here to learn more about Global Warming.
A man and his family buy a nice little house on a piece of land overlooking the coast. They immediately decide they need an addition. They figure the addition would make more sense on the back of their house, but the building inspector warns them that building the addition in the back is more risky because it’s getting awfully close to the cliff at the back of their yard. He suggests building it in the front of the house. They nonetheless build it out back. Several years later they decide on another addition, and once again the building inspector warns them of building it in the back. He tells them their plan is to build the addition right on the edge, and asks them why they would tempt fate when they have a huge area out front….
Does it really matter who is right here? Maybe the guy can build a third addition, perhaps even a fourth, but one of these days part of his house is likely going down the cliff…and all he had to do was build in a different direction.
Now it was asked: How can any intelligent person argue against decreasing our burning of fossil fuels, especially scientists?
Scientists said that lead in gasoline was perfectly safe.
Scientists said smoking is harmless.
Scientists said asbestos was fine.
Scientists today tell us that aspartame and fluoride and genetically modified foods are safe.
Scientists are just as greedy as everyone else, that’s how.
Scientific data can often be used to prove both sides of an argument, so be careful of statistics and such that are obviously biased towards corporate interests.
Look around. Since 1992, there has been a steadily increasing amount of scientific warnings and sense of urgency regarding the environment. There has been a rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature. Fisheries around the world have collapsed. We bear witness to species destruction, extinction and habitat destruction, toxic pollution of air, water and soil, and lack of clean fresh water. And at the same time, we see poverty and inequity on a massive scale. While production increases, while trade and commerce increase, while wealth increases, so does poverty, because you see wealth and poverty don’t just live together shamefully in contrast; they’re there in a dynamic interrelationship, because it is wealth that creates poverty. And so we see a world where the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Environmentalists struggle rightly to protect endangered species and threatened habitats and ecosystems but when half the world struggles to survive on two dollars or less a day, the obscenely wealthy nations of North America, Europe and East Asia continue to demand more and more steady growth.
We are now approaching that cliff face rapidly, and we’ll be hanging over it soon enough, ready to tumble at any moment. It is well past the time to begin building in a new direction. And that new direction must surely be sustainable and ecologically sound, unlike the hydrocarbon economy we have built now.
what are the facts
co2 is a greenhouse gas accounting for some 10 or more % of the 30C greenhouse warming that keeps our planet from being an ice cube … that translates to about 3c or 4C of the warming … it stands to reason that an increase in co2 should have some effect on climate … the 25% increase in co2 over the last 50 or so years would mean an increase of a degree or so … i believe that this is what has actually been measured
another fact is that we have developed a lot of climate computer models … the models indicate some global temperature increase based on current co2 production levels … the results from some models in replicating the world’s temperature over the last 1000 years look awfully good but i don’t think that they are good enough to be totally convincing … the “system” – the earth-sun system is way too complex … but the efforts are worthwhile because they are at least indicative and will get better with time
the “precautionary principle” states that we should err on the side of caution … the possible outcomes of atmospheric co2 increases range from nothing to possible catastrophic changes due to tipping points/triggers being breached such as large scale methane releases … the geologic record indicates that such events have happened … do you really want us to to do this uncontrolled experiment?
then, what is the cost of reducing and eventually eliminating our reliance on fossil fuels? … cleaner air? … getting rid of our dependence of the middle east in 20 years? … achieving energy sustainability, say in 100 years? … mitigating the effect of a disappearing resource (oil) over the next 50 years? … creating new business opportunities right away? … never mind slowing down the rate of climate change
this last point means that whatever you think, or i think … that the course is set … we will see climate change … the best we can do is to slow it down and prevent a run-away collapse … that is why a global program is the right thing to do although fraught with difficulty
i’m 66 and don’t expect this to effect me much … and i live in canada so a warmer winter is ok … but i have kids and grandkids so i do care
a final word … the only short term solution to a massive switch in energy from fossil fuels is nuclear … unfortunately … longer term we could and should, as a planet, switch to solar based energy (biomass, pv, solar concentrators, wind, waves & tides, geothermal, etc.) … and we need to be more conservative and efficient in our use of energy
and i don’t want to hear anymore about hydrogen … it’s not an energy source … free hydrogen doesn’t exist on our planet, or at least not for long … it’s just one of many energy storage and transport mechanisms and will possibly be useful in some way or another, or not
Those supposedly “super accurate” Argo buoys had instrument errors which biased the result to give readings which were colder than the actual temperatures.
http://oceans.pmel.noaa.gov/Pdf/heat_2006.pdf
“Correction to “Recent Cooling of the Upper Ocean” Josh K. Willis , John M. Lyman , Gregory C. Johnson and John Gilson
Revised and Resubmitted 10 July 2007 to Geophysical Research Letters
Abstract. Two systematic biases have been discovered in the ocean temperature data used by Lyman et al. [2006]. These biases are both substantially larger than sampling errors estimated in Lyman et al. [2006], and appear to be the cause of the rapid cooling reported in that work.”
Those who deny global warming keep clutching at this erroneous result, ignoring Lyman’s retraction identifying that thousands of Argo buoys all had the same design defect.
They never mention that the Argo result were at odds with temperature values obtained from other methods. They cherry pick results known to be bogus, because those false results give a message they want to hear.
This is an unfortunate, but all too common situtation.
I recently watched a documentary on the National Geographic Channel. It was about a scientist that drills thousands of feet down into arctic ice to examine ice layers, and determine how our past climate were like.
To his astonishment, he concluded that the last 10,000 years has been abnormal in terms of calmer climate. This in turn might have given rise to the growth of mankind in a much stable environment where we didn’t have to expend too much energy just to survive, and could involve ourselves in other creative endeavors that increased our knowledge, and intelligence.
What we are seeing now with all the crazy weather, is probably the climate moving to a more normal state.
There’s global warming, then there’s global cooling, then there’s global warming, then there’s global cooling. What we should all do is relax, and know that this is all just part of the norm!
I prefer global warming because I heard that plants, and animals thrive when the climate is warmer, and I could use a tan if I said so myself!
There’s the Argos, those damn satellites, the stupid people who spent 100 years misreading thermometers. Bloody good thing we have all those computer modellers to tell us how it really is, right? That white stuff in the Australian hills – not snow at all, it’s dandruff from trees suffering in the heat.
That heat wave in January in Melbourne? Concentrate on how hot is is & ignore those comments about ‘hottest day in 100 years’ and ‘most hot days in a row for 105 years’ – if you think too hard you might realise it means that it was hotter 100 years ago & they had more hot days in a row 105 years ago.
Oh, & don’t bother looking at the Bureau of meteorolgy – once the fires distracted everyone they promptly modified DOWN the temperatures they trumpeted – that way next year, in Summer, in a country renowned for hot weather, that it is ‘hotter than last year’ & everyone will remember how hot it was then & get all scared about the heating of the planet.
Those who deny ANTHROPOGENIC Global Warming do not necessarily deny the changes we see. It’s interesting how us sceptics used to be accused of being deniers of AGW but now they drop the A off the front because blind freddy can see that CO2 is not a causative factor in GW.
Yeah, right: quote a story from 2003, because you don’t agree with the evidence of 2009. Your defence is as outdated as the article.
Leave a Reply