This guy will be called a blashphemer and accused of being in the pocket of Big Oil or Big Coal, I’m sure
Temperatures on Earth have stabilized in the past decade, and the planet should brace itself for a new Ice Age rather than global warming, a Russian scientist said in an interview with RIA Novosti Tuesday.
“Russian and foreign research data confirm that global temperatures in 2007 were practically similar to those in 2006, and, in general, identical to 1998-2006 temperatures, which, basically, means that the Earth passed the peak of global warming in 1998-2005,” said Khabibullo Abdusamatov, head of a space research lab at the Pulkovo observatory in St. Petersburg.
According to the scientist, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere has risen more than 4% in the past decade, but global warming has practically stopped. It confirms the theory of “solar” impact on changes in the Earth’s climate, because the amount of solar energy reaching the planet has drastically decreased during the same period, the scientist said.
Interesting, if true. Something to think about. Especially since a rise in CO2 generally follows a rise in temperature. Perhaps Time Magazine will republish their 1974 issue saying that a new ice age is coming.
He also said that in 2008, global temperatures would drop slightly, rather than rise, due to unprecedentedly low solar radiation in the past 30 years, and would continue decreasing even if industrial emissions of carbon dioxide reach record levels.
By 2041, solar activity will reach its minimum according to a 200-year cycle, and a deep cooling period will hit the Earth approximately in 2055-2060. It will last for about 45-65 years, the scientist added.
You mean that the temps have stabilized? Well, hell, that wopping one degree of temp change over the past 100 years is a real killer, eh?
Maybe the climahysterics will take their own advice and stop driving those fossil fuel burners, so we do not have to listen to their whining anymore. And perhaps we could divest real environmental concerns from the silly global warming meme. That way, we could actually do something, rather then “making people aware.” Liberals: all talk, no action.
Short term temperature comparisons are flawed since they compares long term climate change to short term weather variability.
There’s an excellent article at RealClimate.org about this:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/01/uncertainty-noise-and-the-art-of-model-data-comparison/
WOWIE !! A Russian scientist said that ?
Well I guess that must mean conclusively that Global Climate Change is a complete HOAX !!!
OOOOPS!
Maybe that one “Russian scientist” is wrong.b because the American Geophysical Union the world’s largest society of Earth and space scientists seems to strongly disagree.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7207335.stm
So let’s see on one hand we have a “Russian scientist” on the other we have the world’s largest society of Earth and space scientists representing 50,000 scientists. This is really confusing isn’t it Teach ??
OK let’s try to simplify it. Which is the biggest number: 50,000 ? or 1 ?
Teach the number of scientists who do not agree with the theory of global climate change seems to be just about the same number of scientists that agree with the theories of science that are stated ion the bible. Theories like God created all of the animals on one day, day #6. And that the entire earth was covered by a flood the same one that made the Grand Canyon.
John, the Russian scientist’s data could be right but his conclusions are wrong. Short term temperature comparisons are flawed since they basically compare long term climate change to short term weather variability.
There is a good article about this at RealClimate.org. I hope you read it, Teach.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/01/uncertainty-noise-and-the-art-of-model-data-comparison/
For some reason my comment has not made it through the last two times. I’m going to try again…
John, the Russian scientist’s data could be right but his conclusions are wrong. Short term temperature comparisons are flawed since they basically compare long term climate change to short term weather variability.
There is a good article about this at RealClimate.org
Where did you get the 50,000 to 1, Out of your a$$ like all the facts from Algorabge and the left? There is and has never been an agreement by the weather experts. The only fact we have is that the liberal media has teamed with the left wing nuts to run the greatest con in history on the American people, and Algorabe has made over $100 million off of you suckers. Now that the Clintons have been outed for what they are, cons, liars and killers, maybe Algorabe will be next.
Sorry for the duplicate comments.
SF author and BYTE magazine writer Jerry Pournelle (www.jerrypournelle.com) notes that while temperatures have increased dramatically in the last 400 years, it is still cooler now that it was in Roman times or during the “Global Climate Optimum” of the 1200’s.
For example: in Roman Britain, it was warm enough to grow wine grapes, but that hasn’t been true recently. On the other hand, Gen. George Washington’s troops dragged cannon across the frozen Hudson River during the Revolution. The Hudson has rarely frozen over the last century.
Pournelle’s reading suggests that the climate gradually warms over centuries, and then cools quickly over a few decades.
The one thing that we can be sure of is that the climate is cyclical, and that Chicken Little-ish panic about how “The Sky Is Falling!” is generally unwarranted.
Scraprion
If you had used the link that I provided you would have seen where that number came from. It is the number of members of the American Geophysical Union. That union DOES support the theory of global climate change. Also evolution which you are probably also skeptical of
And yes Silke there have been large climate changes in the past. Some of which had very negative implications for a variety of life forms on the planet.
But now for the first time we have 6+ billion humans alive. I for one do not wish to see their population decimated.
I think what we should exercise great care in preventing global climate change. There are some things that we can do to reduce the chance of global climate change.
John Ryan; we CANNOT prevent climate change; the climate does change, and always has. Someday we may be able to prevent it, through weather control techniques that are now only science fiction. But we humans didn’t cause this warming, and we cannot now prevent it.
When the Vikings settled Greenland in the 900’s, they established dairy farms; you can see the ruins even now, below the glacial ice. Some of those structures are being revealed even now, as the Greenland ice retreats. Lief Erikson established settlements on the North American continent, and called it “Vinland” for the grape vines that grew there. We now know that those settlements were in Nova Scotia, a place not recently known for its wines.
The scientists who wrote the IPCC report didn’t include the scary numbers like a 2-meter rise in sea levels; that’s because they didn’t predict that. A 10 CENTI-meter (3 inch) rise in global sea levels was the most probable number. That wasn’t scary enough for the politicians, who made it more a novel than a report.
History tells us that in addition to the annual cycle of the seasons, there’s a millennium-long cycle of warming and cooling. Rome and the Vikings enjoyed moderate temperatures; the Middle Ages and the 1500s were pretty chilly. Toss in a couple of big “Nuclear Winter”-sized volcanoes – like Krakatoa or Mount St. Helens every few centuries – and we really CAN’T predict with much certainty what the weather will bring. But I’d bet good money against Florida disappearing beneath the waves in my lifetime or yours.
Will it happen? Sure. It nearly happened today, as a matter of fact. A Tunguska-sized asteroid missed Earth by 1.5 lunar distances just this evening. In cosmic distances, that’s like a bullet that trims your sideburns but doesn’t break the skin. We’ve been hit before; we’ll be hit again. When it does, all the global-warming exaggerations in the world will seem like a mother’s kiss on a baby’s cheek.
Asteroid impacts have wiped out 90% of all life on earth at least twice. 13,000 years ago, an asteroid hit Canada and sterilized most of North America. If the 1908 Tunguska asteroid had hit 4 hours earlier or later, it would have blasted Paris or Tokyo instead of Siberia. We need to get a portion of humanity OFF of this rock, and not keep all of our eggs in one planetary basket. Because if we all STAY here, we’ll all DIE here.
And it won’t be caused by “global warming”.