silence?

By: HAARP , 06:04 PM GMT am 20. Oktober 2008

Share this Blog
0
+

What is going on with global warming...it seems its a dead topic now?

I thought our exhaling Co2 was going to burn us up in 10 years?

am I missing something?

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 15 - 1

Page: 1 — Blog Index

15. MNTornado
07:42 PM GMT am 12. Februar 2009
Things have not quieted down as you suggest. If you look at the weather goings on all around the world, you will see that many parts of it are having abnormal weather. Things have apparently swung a little back towards normal here in the states, but they are having tremendous heat waves in Australia and rare to unheard of storms in Europe. And to top things off, you may have heard that they are having some serious wild fires in Southeastern Australia that make the California wild fires look like camp fires. One of the folks that I've made friends with in Australia, AKA: OZ, lives in Southern OZ and has told me that the fires to her East are producing so much smoke as to reach her area of the continent. As I understand it, one of the reasons for last year being so active was because of the La-Nina cycle. According to Dr. Master's we may be on our way to another one, but so far it's been a lot quieter as you noted.

By the way, in my humble opinion, the term Global Warming has been misused and abused so badly that most people don't even know what it really means. From what I've studied thus far, Global Warming is a necessary element to our survival on this planet. It's the process of the atmosphere holding in the heat from the planet and the sun so that we don't freeze to death like we would in outer space with out protection. What all the debate by the scientists has been about, and misreported by the media, is whether the increase of CO2 is causes a rise in the average world temperature, AKA global temperature. From what I'm learning, mans activities can and have influenced the temperatures over periods of time, but not just from the release of CO2. Mismanagement of land resources and dumping of pollutants into the water, which goes into the ground also, and air and the excessive clearing of trees and bad farming method have also made major impacts on the climate and temperature. If you check out the period in American history during the 20's and 30's called the Dust Bowl Years, you will find out the the average temperature in much of the Midwest as well as all of America were much higher than we are seeing today. It got so bad that we had temperatures up to 130 degrees in the lower Midwest and major dust storms toward the later part of the Dust Bowel Years, thus how they got their name. This has been brought back under control with changes to land management and farming and with cloud seeding to make it rain where it had stopped raining. Note also that this period was not caused entirely by mans influence. We also had a increase in temperature that occur naturally in cycles during that period. Mans activities just serve to amplify this cycle way out of proportion.

Is CO2 a contributing factor in the current climate patterns we are seeing around the world? I would say that it's probably one of the things that is influencing it. But I also see countries like South America, China, and the Middle East making the same mistakes that we made back in the early 1900's. Those are contributing factors also. Will all this activity by man cause the climate to tip over as some are saying? I really doubt that anyone really knows. Computer Models that some of the climate scientists are running say yes, but from my know of and experience with computers, I now that the results of those computer models are only as good as the data fed into them and the way the computer model was programmed to process the data. Those same computer programs were used to push the idea the monster rouge waves were a one in a million chance of happening. Well new data as well and pictures have proven that those models were dead wrong. Rouge Waves have been proven in the last few years to happen all over the world on a fairly regular basis. In the computer world we have an expression that I think sums it up pretty good. "Garbage In Equals Garbage Out". In other words, if there is an error in the data fed into the computer or an error in the programming of it, that error will appear in the out put of the computers data process. This error can also be amplified many times the size of the original error. At this point, I have to say that no one who is honest really knows for sure what the heck is going on or why. There are a lot of theories and we do have a lot of data, but as one of the lead meteorologists at AccuWeather has stated, the worlds atmosphere is very complex and we still don't know everything we need to know about how the earth and the atmosphere interacts. And despite all the media hype, there appears to not be a 100 percent consensus on the cause of what we are seeing in the weather at this point.
I think we still need to be as aware as possible of what is going on and to learn all that we can. We also need to keep a close eye on our government leaders so that they are not talked into doing anything rash and with out good solid proof of what we need to do and what works. Even Dr. Master's has sounded a word of caution of some of the proposed activities to try to influence the climate away from Global Warming. Until we have all the data, we need to tread softly and carefully so that we don't do something that is worse than what is happening now.
Member Since: Juli 1, 2005 Posts: 154 Comments: 19315
14. ScottieHarm
05:46 PM GMT am 12. Februar 2009
Evidence of the HAARP Super Weapon Ionosphering Heating Causing Tropical Storm Winds and Earthquakes

Original link:

Link
This is a strong example of the highly-classified HAARP (High Altitude Atmospheric Research Project) Facility in Alaska, a facility that can heat the earth's Ionosphere, with over 1 billion watts of energy ! A noted geologist with an 100% rate of oil-field finding success (population size >100)only used 30 watts to peer through solid-rock with a ground penetrating radar, so imagine the potential devastation of 1,000,000,000 watts! The geologist states this for the record in the linked video below.
The. meteorologist suggests preposterously that these high winds were caused by a MAGNETAR 100's of millions of light-years from earth, when in fact this is an obvious example of the work of the HAARP super weapon that can control weather, cause earthquakes, control minds, and cause nuclear size explosions without radiation!
In the linked YouTube video below, take a look at the auroral like effects the super-heating HAARP has on the sky one hour before the quakes in China occur!

Link
13. sunlakedude
04:13 PM GMT am 26. Oktober 2008
Yes, MichaelSTL, the oceans appear to be absorbing large amounts of the excess CO2 that is being added to the atmosphere by human activity. But, as you noted, this is driving the PH of the oceans downward which could become another disaster unto itself. The increasingly acidic ocean water may cause mass extinctions of sea life. No matter what way you look at it, we have to slow down our fossil fuel burning with the aim at completely eliminating it at some point in the future.
One other point; outside of the U.S. where "business interests" aren't nearly as coercive as they are here, global warming is seen as an established fact, not just a "theory" as certain interests in the U.S. are still trying to portray it.
I appreciate the documentation you posted.
Member Since: März 13, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 84
12. MichaelSTL
03:21 PM GMT am 25. Oktober 2008
Interesting paper about CO2 variability in the recent past, which contradicts assumptions that it was relatively stable and thus had little impact on pre-industrial climate, certainly interesting as a contributor (in part) to periods like the MWP and LIA:

A role for atmospheric CO2 in preindustrial climate forcing

Abstract

Complementary to measurements in Antarctic ice cores, stomatal frequency analysis of leaves of land plants preserved in peat and lake deposits can provide a proxy record of preindustrial atmospheric CO2 concentration. CO2 trends based on leaf remains of Quercus robur (English oak) from the Netherlands support the presence of significant CO2 variability during the first half of the last millennium. The amplitude of the reconstructed multidecadal fluctuations, up to 34 parts per million by volume, considerably exceeds maximum shifts measured in Antarctic ice. Inferred changes in CO2 radiative forcing are of a magnitude similar to variations ascribed to other mechanisms, particularly solar irradiance and volcanic activity, and may therefore call into question the concept of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which assumes an insignificant role of CO2 as a preindustrial climate-forcing factor. The stomata-based CO2 trends correlate with coeval sea-surface temperature trends in the North Atlantic Ocean, suggesting the possibility of an oceanic source/sink mechanism for the recorded CO2 changes.


(of course, we know that most, if not all, of the recent rise in CO2 is from anthropogenic sources, the fact the oceans are acidifying is one reason since they wouldn't be if they were releasing CO2)
Member Since: Februar 22, 2006 Posts: 94 Comments: 32744
11. MichaelSTL
02:46 PM GMT am 25. Oktober 2008
Quoting MichaelSTL:
Fact is, I think that virtually every global warming denialist falls into the trap of "Look - this year is cooler, has more ice than last year, [insert anything that contradicts warming] so global warming is fake!!!". These people clearly have no clue as to what "weather" (short-term, minutes to several years) and climate (several decades or more) mean and why they are not the same thing.


To give a couple examples of how "weather" can grossly mislead when somebody tries to attempt to extrapolate a trend from it (many denialists try to do exactly this):

The temperature here was 41 degrees at 7:51 am and is currently 44 degrees at 8:51 am (rose 3 degrees in one hour), so this means that in 56 hours (44 + 56*3 = 212*F), I will be boiled alive.

Or

The temperature at 8:51 am yesterday was 47 degrees and today at the same time it was 44 degrees, so it is getting colder at the rate of 3 degrees per day, thus in a month the temperature at 8:51 am in the morning will be 46 below zero.


I have seen examples where people have actually done something similar (on a yearly basis though), and just as bad is picking two points and drawing a line between them; for example (red line is from early 2007 temperature peak to current minimum; note also that this is a 12 month smoothed average, September was +0.49*C so it should start rising soon, the drop if you are wondering again was from a rather strong La Nina, which typically causes about 0.2*C of cooling, strong El Ninos cause a similar amount of warming, see 1998; the black line and formula you see is a trendline made the correct way):

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

This graph likely also explains the lack of media attention (or at least you perceive it as so since I have seen plenty of articles relating to global warming, though again I prefer to see reports directly from the scientists as the media often hypes things up or selectively picks data), though that will end soon as soon as temperatures recover from La Nina; God forbid we have another 1982-83, 1997-98 type El Nino next year, then the media will go totally nuts over all of the record temperatures, though even the rather weak one in 2006-2007 was enough:

Global temps set record for warmest winter


(should note that they mention El Nino in there so it isn't like they are "all biased" to only man-made global warming, although saying that it was "particularly strong" is a bit of an exaggeration; for example, the JMA doesn't even count an El Nino in 2006-07, period, as well as the one in 2004. January in particular as also the warmest month ever recorded as well)

Also, despite La Nina cooling (mainly the ocean though until this year when the full effect kicked in), we had this:

2007 was the warmest on record for Earth's land areas


In fact even this year has had notable warmth:

Global Land Temperature Warmest On Record In March 2008
Member Since: Februar 22, 2006 Posts: 94 Comments: 32744
10. MichaelSTL
02:06 PM GMT am 25. Oktober 2008
Quoting charlesimages:
It must have died off when everyone saw the Blizzard Warnings in Kansas in October.

Could be that the sea ice is making a big return

Could be a lot of things!



September's Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Extent plot

Some "big" return...

And just how would the slight increase from last year (which by the way is also below the trendline - very important there, even if it was above there are many other years that were above the trend) be any different from any of the other year to year variations, some were also much larger as well; I bet also that people said that same thing after 2006 failed to break the 2005 record. Not to mention, in terms of ice volume and multi-year ice, it was the lowest on record this year.

Fact is, I think that virtually every global warming denialist falls into the trap of "Look - this year is cooler, has more ice than last year, [insert anything that contradicts warming] so global warming is fake!!!". These people clearly have no clue as to what "weather" (short-term, minutes to several years) and climate (several decades or more) mean and why they are not the same thing.


Quoting HAARP:
OK I was actually just wondering why all the media hype is dying down...and its because more and more scientists are jumping off the bandwagon as more data comes out...

I just think politics/money has influenced why immensely and I think the data is skewed as its collected by the people that hold the theory that its ALL man made...

any idea on where to find those charts with the solar variables


Really... First, no scientists, that I know of, are "jumping off the bandwagon" as you suggest. The ones you do mention are ones that have been around for a long time and are recently piping up because of the "cooling" (read: due to ENSO) over the past year, some even try to tell you that it was warmer in the 1930s(!) or some such rubbish (example).


Also, you should know, if you really have any knowledge of climate change science, that nobody says that it is all man-made; everybody acknowledges the existence of natural cycles like solar activity, ENSO (the biggest yearly influence), PDO, AMO, etc, etc.

As for solar activity in particular, the trends are all wrong to explain what is currently happening; here is a graph of temperatures and solar activity since 1954:

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Most calculations, generally agreed upon, also indicate a temperature variation of about 0.1*C for the difference between solar minimum and solar maximum.

Also, regarding any possible early century increase, Leif Svalgaard (who is not affiliated with climate change in any way, just a solar physicist) deals a big blow to that by using data that suggests that nothing of that sort has actually occurred (interestingly, he originally suggested that a doubling had occurred, new data however suggests otherwise), and changes are part of a century long cycle (he does say that Solar Cycle 24 will be the weakest in 100 years, but also shows how Solar Cycle 23 is like Cycle 13 107 years ago; Cycle 14 was much weaker and is the basis for SC 24 - of course it was much cooler back then, but not mostly due to changes in solar activity according to Leif's data).


Oh, and what about the evidence of major climate changes due to greenhouse gasses in the past, like the PETM? Surely you don't suggest that because those occurred naturally that the current increase is also natural (no, we certainly know why levels of CO2 and other GHGs have been rising, some try to say the ocean has been releasing CO2 but then they wouldn't be acidifying). There is even evidence of the opposite too, global cooling due to falling levels of GHGs (ex. Azolla event).


And check this out:



Contrary to your "claim" that the scientists are biased and attribute ALL of the recent warming to man-made greenhouse gasses, this shows many natural influences as well (radiative forcings). Note also that our pollution (aerosols) is even offsetting some of the warming as well.

Also, have you any idea how old the science is, regarding greenhouse gasses? Older than you think (I bet you think global warming was "invented" by Al Gore, who isn't even a climate scientist; if you are wondering, I don't follow anything he says, I haven't seen his movie either, preferring to look at what real scientists say instead, direct from the source). See here for some history.
Member Since: Februar 22, 2006 Posts: 94 Comments: 32744
9. charlesimages
06:11 AM GMT am 25. Oktober 2008
It must have died off when everyone saw the Blizzard Warnings in Kansas in October.

Could be that the sea ice is making a big return

Could be a lot of things!
Member Since: Mai 25, 2006 Posts: 347 Comments: 29278
8. sunlakedude
06:06 AM GMT am 25. Oktober 2008
The only problem with this line of thinking HAARP is that most of the people who are denying that global warming is taking place have an economic or political reason to do so. The oil and coal industry and people beholden to them obviously have a bias associated with this problem and I don't take their statements seriously. What concerns me is that they are willing to risk their children's future for short term economic and politcal gain. I consider that reprehensible. We are putting enormous amounts of these greenhouse gases into the atmosphere that have been trapped in fossil fuels for eons. It makes sense that this would warm the planet. It's why the planet Venus with a 97% CO2 atmosphere has surface temperatures of ~850 degrees fahrenheit. Ouch!
Member Since: März 13, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 84
7. HAARP
03:09 PM GMT am 23. Oktober 2008
OK I was actually just wondering why all the media hype is dying down...and its because more and more scientists are jumping off the bandwagon as more data comes out...

I have been reading a lot of opposing viewpoints and they seem to make sense but who knows...

Link

plus even the NWS is saying arctic sea surface temps are colder than last year...

Link

Why is some data overlooked or not taken into effect when these theories are generated?

on both sides of the equation there is huge amounts of bias and it seems like everyone is afraid to collectively look at all the data on both sides of the fence because they have too much time/money/ego invested in their theory...

Does anyone have a graph showing solar temps/activity compared to any of the other graphs we see like avg global temperature?

Also...where can I find a comprehensive list of where and how this global temperature is taken and how the information is interpreted ?

It is obvious our planet has warmed these last few decades...I just think politics/money has influenced why immensely and I think the data is skewed as its collected by the people that hold the theory that its ALL man made...


any idea on where to find those charts with the solar variables
Member Since: November 1, 2004 Posts: 42 Comments: 482
6. sunlakedude
02:45 AM GMT am 22. Oktober 2008
And an important thing to remember is just because one location has an early onset of fall or winter weather or an unusually cold winter does not mean that global warming is no longer real. Global warming refers to an increase in temperatures over the entire planet. It appears also that this warming is resulting in more frequent episodes of "weird weather" across the planet.
Member Since: März 13, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 84
5. MichaelSTL
12:44 AM GMT am 22. Oktober 2008
Also, I am not sure what you mean by "dead topic" anyway, not like you don't hear about it anymore. Some examples:

Arctic Sea Ice Down to Second-Lowest Extent; Likely Record-Low Volume

(note also what they say about the trend accelerating even though the extent wasn't as low as last year, since it was still far below the trendline, similar to how 2005 set a record but 2006 didn't, more significant is the overall volume of ice at a record low)


Exclusive: The methane time bomb

(I find this much more disturbing; we certainly don't want a repeat of the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, among other events that have been linked to releases of methane and caused abrupt climate change and mass extinctions; we are already well on our was anyway with an even greater rate of greenhouse gas release, plus increasing contributions from sources like methane clathrates; should also be noted that the existence of such past events makes it all the more that we really do have a problem)


Major ice-shelf loss for Canada

Not even the Antarctic winter can save the Wilkins Ice Shelf.

(kind of getting old now, I know, ice shelves everywhere falling apart, something else though when it is winter and it happens or continues to do so)
Member Since: Februar 22, 2006 Posts: 94 Comments: 32744
4. MichaelSTL
12:35 AM GMT am 22. Oktober 2008
What is going on with global warming...it seems its a dead topic now?

I thought our exhaling Co2 was going to burn us up in 10 years?

am I missing something?




Yes you are. First, exhaling CO2 is totally not the reason for rising levels of CO2 - the CO2 you breathe out originally came from the air (I hope you eat plants or animals that ate plants and not fossil fuels... LOL); if anything, the human population has likely sequestered millions of tons of carbon in their bodies (though that is thousands of times less than yearly emissions).

And it is certainly still going on as well; see here (of note is that sea surface temperatures haven't been warming as quickly since around 1998, but land temperatures have made up for it, probably due to a switch in the phase of the PDO and more frequent La Ninas, which contrary to expectations, don't actually lead to overall cooling since the surface cooling from La Nina is due to heat being absorbed into the ocean; El Ninos in contrast release heat, and in fact persistent El Ninos have been linked to ice ages). The past year has been cooler due to a La Nina, which some have hyped as the end of global warming and the start of the next ice age, but people like that don't know how to read trends or understand ENSO, which is responsible for most of the jaggedness you typically see in unsmoothed global temperature anomaly graphs (as in the first link). They also forget that 2006-2007 had the warmest December-February on record globally and January 2007 was the warmest month ever recorded.

Indeed, it seems as if global temperatures are rapidly recovering from the most recent La Nina, although the atmosphere is still exhibiting strong La Nina-like patterns:

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Member Since: Februar 22, 2006 Posts: 94 Comments: 32744
3. outrocket
12:00 AM GMT am 22. Oktober 2008
maybe the site was turned down for a grant!!!!...lol so they let it fade:)
Member Since: Juli 15, 2005 Posts: 104 Comments: 11010
2. sunlakedude
11:58 PM GMT am 21. Oktober 2008
HAARP,
Here's the link to the story I mentioned.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/3226747/Climate-change-is-faster-and-more-extreme-than-fe ared.html
Member Since: März 13, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 84
1. sunlakedude
06:27 PM GMT am 21. Oktober 2008
HAARP,
Global warming is still going on. In fact a report was released over the weekend that said that it is accelerating faster than previously stated. I don't remember what website the story was at, but nothing has changed. The Greenland ice cap is imperiled and is melting much faster than thought just a few months ago.
Member Since: März 13, 2005 Posts: 0 Comments: 84

Viewing: 15 - 1

Page: 1 — Blog Index

Top of Page

About HAARP

Yall will think im crazy but just research yourself some things

HAARP's Recent Photos

Personal Weather Stations

Butterfield West
Glen Ellyn, IL
Elevation: 778 ft
Temperatur: 51.6 °F
Taupunkt: 41.8 °F
Feuchtigkeit: 69%
Wind: 4.0 mph from the Nord-Nordwest
Windböen: 7.0 mph
Updated: 11:27 AM CDT am 21. Oktober 2014
Butterfield West
Glen Ellyn, IL
Elevation: 778 ft
Temperatur: 51.6 °F
Taupunkt: 41.8 °F
Feuchtigkeit: 69%
Wind: 4.0 mph from the Nord-Nordwest
Windböen: 7.0 mph
Updated: 11:27 AM CDT am 21. Oktober 2014

About Personal Weather Stations