« Global Warming "Deniers" are now the majority | Dr. Goldstein's Blog | Health Care for All - It works great here in Canada »
Global Warming or Global Cooling ?
Many scientists say we have global warming. They point to some exceptionally hot years and other evidence. Many climatologists are now making the case for global cooling as well. Record low temperatures and record high snowpacks the past 2 years, and decreasing solar activity appear to be their key arguments.
This article will not take sides. After reading this brief article you will have enough knowledge to decide for yourself.
Climate history is fascinating stuff !
Reading this will give you a solid understanding of Earth's main climate history that is currently known and proven.
With this knowledge you can better analyze the competing claims about cooling and warming and put them in perspective.
Let's just call this article...
As you view the climate history graphs you will notice that climate is never 'stable'. You will learn that both global warming and global cooling have happened hundreds of times previously.
Earth is always warming or cooling in somewhat predictable cycles, or it is in a brief transition from one cycle to another.
The Ice Core Data -
Prehistoric snowflakes acted as memory cards:
Several projects have been undertaken that involve drilling extremely deep holes into the Arctic and Antarctic Ice. All of the ice started out as snowflakes, falling through the atmosphere. It is not frozen sea water.
As the snow piles up it compresses into ice. The snow has been piling up and turning into ice for over 500,000 years. Gas bubbles and other particles trapped in the ice have allowed scientists to recreate the atmosphere and temperature history going back over 450,000 years. The two main Ice Core projects were the Vostok and EPICA deep ice core surveys. The temperature data is accurate to better than 1/100th of a degree.
Ocean Sediment Cores:
Ocean sediment cores also trap gases and isotopes, allowing Geologists to create an extremely accurate climate history going back millions of years.
Long Ice Ages and Shorter Warm Intervals:
As you view the climate history charts you will see a clear ongoing pattern of long ice ages (glaciations), separated by comparatively brief warm intervals (interglacials).
We are currently living our lives during a warm interglacial, between ice ages, called the Holocene.
The Holocene started with a massive warming event about 12,000 years ago. That was a good thing because the ice was several kilometers thick and it covered Canada, the UK, Northern Europe, and almost half of the USA.
Climate Of The Last 5 Million Years:
See Graph: 5 Million Years of Climate Change
Note: The present is the right side of the graph.
1.The pattern of ongoing warming and cooling is obvious.
2. The overall trend is downward. The ice ages (glaciations) are getting colder.
Climate of the Last 450,000 Years:
See Graph: Vostok-EPICA Ice Core Data
Note: Everything below the dotted line (Zero degrees C) represents glacial Ice Age Conditions. The warm spikes are so consistent it almost looks like a heartbeat monitor.
1. The spikes on the graph are the warm interglacials.
2. The spike on the right side of the graph shows our current Holocene interglacial.
3. The Ice Ages (below zero degrees C) last about 90,000 years on average.
4. The warm interglacials (above Zero degrees C) last from 6,000 to 12,000 years.
5. Our current Holocene Interglacial is the coldest interglacial recorded in the past 450,000 years.
6. 125,000 years ago during the last interglacial (Eemian interglacial) it got much hotter than today's climate. At that time our early human ancestors were still in the stone age.
Climate Of The Last 12,000 Years:
See graph: Holocene Interglacial Temperature History
1. The climate history shows that Holocene temperatures peaked about 8,000 years ago.
2. The recent temperature rise following the Little Ice Age (1650-1850) is in line with - or less than - the many other global warmings during the Holocene.
3. These interglacials only last 6,000 to 12,000 years.Then Mother Nature will take us into the next ice age glacial which will last about 90,000 years.
Note: The Holocene warming was accompanied by a sea level increase of over 350 feet.
See Graph: Holocene Sea Level Rise
After pondering the ongoing climate cycles the statements "humans cause global cooling" and "humans cause global warming" become questionable at best. How can anybody say such things about warming and cooling cycles that have been ongoing for millions of years, way before humans came along?
Sure, we have trashed out our environment, depleted our oceans, etc., etc., but it is unrealistic to assert that humans can control the climate one way or the other. Some things, like climate change and continental drift, are natural phenomena that are way beyond human control. The belief that "humans can control the climate" is based on both undeserved bravado regarding human capabilities, and complete disregard of the known climate history. Anybody who believes that new taxes will create a stable climate is kidding themselves.
But what about CO2?
see Graph:
600 Million Year CO2 and Temperature History
1. During the late Ordovician Period CO2 levels were 10 times higher than today's CO2 level, but Earth went into a long Ice Age period.
2. Current CO2 levels are at the low end of the scale when viewed in a historical perspective. CO2 is presently only 0.038% of the atmosphere. Natural water vapor causes 95% of the greenhouse effect.
3. Claims that "today's CO2 level is the highest ever" are flat out lies, and they indicate the speaker has no knowledge of Earth's proven climate history.
This article will not take sides. After reading this brief article you will have enough knowledge to decide for yourself.
Climate history is fascinating stuff !
Reading this will give you a solid understanding of Earth's main climate history that is currently known and proven.
With this knowledge you can better analyze the competing claims about cooling and warming and put them in perspective.
Let's just call this article...
..."The 5 minute Climate Scientist"
As you view the climate history graphs you will notice that climate is never 'stable'. You will learn that both global warming and global cooling have happened hundreds of times previously.
Earth is always warming or cooling in somewhat predictable cycles, or it is in a brief transition from one cycle to another.
The Ice Core Data -
Prehistoric snowflakes acted as memory cards:
Several projects have been undertaken that involve drilling extremely deep holes into the Arctic and Antarctic Ice. All of the ice started out as snowflakes, falling through the atmosphere. It is not frozen sea water.
As the snow piles up it compresses into ice. The snow has been piling up and turning into ice for over 500,000 years. Gas bubbles and other particles trapped in the ice have allowed scientists to recreate the atmosphere and temperature history going back over 450,000 years. The two main Ice Core projects were the Vostok and EPICA deep ice core surveys. The temperature data is accurate to better than 1/100th of a degree.
Ocean Sediment Cores:
Ocean sediment cores also trap gases and isotopes, allowing Geologists to create an extremely accurate climate history going back millions of years.
Long Ice Ages and Shorter Warm Intervals:
As you view the climate history charts you will see a clear ongoing pattern of long ice ages (glaciations), separated by comparatively brief warm intervals (interglacials).
We are currently living our lives during a warm interglacial, between ice ages, called the Holocene.
The Holocene started with a massive warming event about 12,000 years ago. That was a good thing because the ice was several kilometers thick and it covered Canada, the UK, Northern Europe, and almost half of the USA.
Climate Of The Last 5 Million Years:
See Graph: 5 Million Years of Climate Change
Note: The present is the right side of the graph.
1.The pattern of ongoing warming and cooling is obvious.
2. The overall trend is downward. The ice ages (glaciations) are getting colder.
Climate of the Last 450,000 Years:
See Graph: Vostok-EPICA Ice Core Data
Note: Everything below the dotted line (Zero degrees C) represents glacial Ice Age Conditions. The warm spikes are so consistent it almost looks like a heartbeat monitor.
1. The spikes on the graph are the warm interglacials.
2. The spike on the right side of the graph shows our current Holocene interglacial.
3. The Ice Ages (below zero degrees C) last about 90,000 years on average.
4. The warm interglacials (above Zero degrees C) last from 6,000 to 12,000 years.
5. Our current Holocene Interglacial is the coldest interglacial recorded in the past 450,000 years.
6. 125,000 years ago during the last interglacial (Eemian interglacial) it got much hotter than today's climate. At that time our early human ancestors were still in the stone age.
Climate Of The Last 12,000 Years:
See graph: Holocene Interglacial Temperature History
1. The climate history shows that Holocene temperatures peaked about 8,000 years ago.
2. The recent temperature rise following the Little Ice Age (1650-1850) is in line with - or less than - the many other global warmings during the Holocene.
3. These interglacials only last 6,000 to 12,000 years.Then Mother Nature will take us into the next ice age glacial which will last about 90,000 years.
Note: The Holocene warming was accompanied by a sea level increase of over 350 feet.
See Graph: Holocene Sea Level Rise
After pondering the ongoing climate cycles the statements "humans cause global cooling" and "humans cause global warming" become questionable at best. How can anybody say such things about warming and cooling cycles that have been ongoing for millions of years, way before humans came along?
Sure, we have trashed out our environment, depleted our oceans, etc., etc., but it is unrealistic to assert that humans can control the climate one way or the other. Some things, like climate change and continental drift, are natural phenomena that are way beyond human control. The belief that "humans can control the climate" is based on both undeserved bravado regarding human capabilities, and complete disregard of the known climate history. Anybody who believes that new taxes will create a stable climate is kidding themselves.
But what about CO2?
see Graph:
600 Million Year CO2 and Temperature History
1. During the late Ordovician Period CO2 levels were 10 times higher than today's CO2 level, but Earth went into a long Ice Age period.
2. Current CO2 levels are at the low end of the scale when viewed in a historical perspective. CO2 is presently only 0.038% of the atmosphere. Natural water vapor causes 95% of the greenhouse effect.
3. Claims that "today's CO2 level is the highest ever" are flat out lies, and they indicate the speaker has no knowledge of Earth's proven climate history.
Advertisement
You lie when you claim that "record low" temperatures have been felt at a global scale for the past 2 years. The past 2 years have been among the warmest ever.
May 17, 2009 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
The article also willfully misrepresents Holocene temperatures with the present. The article states that:
“2. The recent temperature rise following the Little Ice Age (1650-1850) is in line with - or less than - the many other global warmings during the Holocene.”
All you have to do is look at the graphs to see that the 2004 temperature anomaly of +0.4 C is well above anything seen in the previous 12,000 years.
The article should use a 450,000-year temperature chart that also shows levels of carbon dioxide and methane. (For example, see http://www.realclimate.org/epica.jpg
) This would show the correlation between greenhouse gases and temperature. (Note: In the past, temperature changes were initiated by Milankovitch variations in the earth’s orbit with subsequent changes in greenhouse gases providing amplification and feedback effects. This time, greenhouse gases are the initiating factor. They will also contribute further amplification and feedback effects for thousands of years into the future.)
The article’s statement -
“3. Claims that "today's CO2 level is the highest ever" are flat out lies”
- is deliberately misleading. Current carbon dioxide readings are in excess of 380 parts per million, and this ratio is much higher than anything seen in hundreds of thousands of years before the present. (as shown in the chart at the above link) Moreover, this huge rise in carbon dioxide has been much faster than any other previous rise in carbon dioxide.
In summary, the article is another example of “cherry picking” and willful obfuscation by the “Global Warming Deniers”. The article is NOT an honest attempt to tell the whole truth.
May 17, 2009 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
This article is very amusing from the beginning, where is starts out saying
"Many climatologists are now making the case for global cooling as well. Record low temperatures and record high snowpacks the past 2 years..."
with a link to a non-scientific website talking about "Record Low Temperatures in the *United States*".
Global warming deniers need to learn that the global warming theory is about the global average temperature, not the average temperature in some city of the USA for a few days of the year. A little background information: the United States does not constitute the entire earth. In fact, it constitutes a small portion of it. And just because some city had a record temperature some day of the year does not mean that the city has been having record cold temperatures for the entire year!
I know this is difficult stuff to comprehend, but I will advise you on what to do to help your case: quit trying to fabricate the facts and search for data to justify what you want to believe. Instead, listen to what the scientists are saying and stop trying to write the science yourself. For your info, there are a small portion of scientists who do deny the global warming theory, but they are not denying that it is warming. They are instead denying that the warming is substantially do to man.
Have a nice day.
May 18, 2009 1:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
The claim is that increased Co2 in the atmosphere has led to warming across the globe, Well for the theory of "man-made" global warming to work, Most of the warming would have to take place in the stratosphere (5 to 15 miles in the atmosphere), not on the surface. but this is not what is seen across the globe, as a matter of fact there has been almost NO WARMING seen at all in the atmosphere. all warming seems to be taking place on the surface.(which points to solar influence, which makes sense because the ice caps on MARS seem to be melting as well!) so the theory of "man-made" global warming falls on it's face on that point alone. There is another point that needs to be made. the current weather forecast is usually accurate for about 36 hours, and you can tell me that some computer model will tell us that the temperature will rise 5F to 11F. I'm not buying that bunk. really come on people the city I live in in Florida was not wiped off the map by some super fueled global warming hurricane last year, and yesterday we set a record high temp. of a hot 67F,,, "man-made" global warming,,,pffft! this coming from the same scientist that said we were heading to an ice age in the 70's. remember they said we would be under ice by the 90's....
May 20, 2009 7:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I really like the large font on this post. Makes it easier for 8-year olds or global warming denial trolls to read it.
May 18, 2009 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mann's Hockey Stick graph was held up by the IPCC and others as the poster child of proof that humans are indeed causing harmful global warming/climate change. Yet we all know that the data used in the graph was from the northern hemisphere and that the graph was eventually discredited, in part, by reliance on Bristle Cone pine tree data, and partly due to its exclusion of the Medieval Warm Period. In other words, the Hockey Stick graph was used as proof that global warming had to be manmade, yet was based only on regional data.
It strikes me as hypocritical for Warmers (along with the scientific community's "consensus") to accept the Hockey Stick graph as global in nature (when it really wasn't), then chide a skeptic for doing the same thing with recent temperature observations.
May 18, 2009 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Daisym: I repeat "there are a small portion of scientists who do deny the global warming theory, but they are not denying that it is warming. They are instead denying that the warming is substantially do to man."
If you want to look the least bit credible, do yourself a favor and quit questioning whether the earth is really warming or not. In other words, at least try to listen and align yourself with the scientists that are global warming skeptics rather than making up your own reasons for denying it!
May 18, 2009 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Howard:
You said, in part..."Global warming deniers need to learn that the global warming theory is about the global average temperature..."
Then I said..."It strikes me as hypocritical for Warmers (along with the scientific community's "consensus") to accept the Hockey Stick graph as global in nature (when it really wasn't), then chide a skeptic for doing the same thing with recent temperature observations.
Your response to this was to tell me to stop questionning whether the Earth is really warming or not. I didn't question this at all. I said that the Hockey Stick graph was shown by the IPCC as evidence that humans are causing GLOBAL warming/climate change, even though it pertained to the North American hemisphere.
Global Warming is, indeed, about GLOBAL temperatures, not regional (or local) temperatures. The Hockey Stick graph portrayed regional data. The IPCC used the Hockey Stick graph as evidence of GLOBAL warming, even though it was only pertinant to regional temperature reconstructions. They got away with it totally unchallenged on this point. Maybe this was so because it supported the Warmers' orthodoxy. Heaven help a Skeptic who would make the same mistake as the IPCC did with the Hockey Stick graph.
May 20, 2009 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
What grade are you in?
When you get into high school they might teach you about the hundreds of climatologists who now believe in global cooling.
Just click the word "climatologists" in the first paragraph and do some reading. It looks like you just wanted to blow off some steam because Al Gore's sheeple are now the minority - see previous blog post/Rasmussen Poll - Yep, it sucks when your team starts losing popularty, and the "skeptics" become the enlightened majorty
May 19, 2009 4:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Geez... the kool-aid drinkers are out in force. The last two years ARE among the coolest recorded over the last 100 years. Mann's 'hockey stick' has been thoroughly discredited by peer reviewed publications. Over 39,000 scientists, with a higher percentage of PhDs and climatologists than the anthropogenic GW crowd, have signed a petition against there being anthropogenic GW... among which is Dr. Richard Lindzen, PhD, MIT... the 'founder' of the science of climatology. Oh, and before the ad hominem attacks the left is so famous for... Dr. Lindzen is not, nor has ever been, on the payroll of 'big oil'. It's a 'fact' that CO2 has been MUCH higher and when the planet was in an ice age as well.
CO2 has never been 'proven' to be a significant GH gas. It's only because CO2 is produced by man that the left focuses on it as being a 'major' GH gas when, indeed, it is not. Even so, considering that CO2 is .15% of all the planet's gases and man produces only 3% or so of all CO2, nature produces 97%, it's incredible than anyone can deduce that 'our' 3% contribution is the cause of GW. No one seems to be able to think or reason clearly.
What I don't understand is why does the left so 'want' there to be GW caused by man? Wouldn't they be happy if there was no anthropogenic GW? (Evidently not. They can't use it as the club to force us to live by their anti-capitalist agendas.) Warming has always meant more life whereas cooling has always led to less. Maybe they'll be happier, actually the left is 'never' happy as evidenced by the irrational vitriol exhibited above, when the next ice age begins... probably within the next 400 or so years. Then they will see millions die... maybe then they'll be happy.
May 20, 2009 2:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
halfscot is the typical uneducated moronic skeptic who believes anything he reads on a blog without looking into it at all. Example, his first claim:
"The last two years ARE among the coolest recorded over the last 100 years."
Sorry, halfbrainscot, NASA disagrees with you:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/
"In our analysis, 2008 is the ninth warmest year in the period of instrumental measurements, which extends back to 1880 (left panel of Fig. 1)."
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2007/
"The year 2007 tied for second warmest in the period of instrumental data, behind the record warmth of 2005, in the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) analysis. 2007 tied 1998, which had leapt a remarkable 0.2°C above the prior record with the help of the 'El Niño of the century'."
There is no cure for people who insist on being stupid. You have to be downright stupid to think you know more about this science from what you hear on Rush Limbaugh and on your right wing blogs than the top minds who have been studying this their whole lives. Absolutely no common sense!
June 3, 2009 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee I could easily pick apart halfbrainscot's whole post, but I'll just point out two more stupidities of his own. It is not 39,000 global warming scientists that have signed the petition: instead it is a majority of idiots like you who claim to be a scientist of some sort (usually no relation to global warming science) because they have a science degree from some university (which I'm sure you don't have because you're obviously too stupid). The far right has been trying to create credible lists like this for a long time because there are always problems with their lists. Only 2 years ago did they finally come out with a semi-credible list that had about 600 names on it, which is a small minority of the global warming scientists.
As for Lindzen, he is one of the few credible scientists that disagrees with the theory. But he does not agree with you, halfbrainscot, because he admits that the earth is warming (where you somehow think it is cooling based upon your flawed data of the last 2 years). To quote him on April 21st 2007, "It has never been an issue of whether the Earth is warming", and on May 13, 2006: "I think they agree that we've probably warmed about a half-degree centigrade in the last century."
So, halfbrainscot, I repeat this a third time for you because you obviously can't read the first two times:
"If you want to look the least bit credible, do yourself a favor and quit questioning whether the earth is really warming or not. In other words, at least try to listen and align yourself with the scientists that are global warming skeptics rather than making up your own reasons for denying it!"
June 3, 2009 8:54 PM | Reply | Permalink