A Frigid Winter, Part II – Global Cooling

Here is more information and articles discussing the cooling and not the warming of the globe:

• Temperature Monitors Report  Worldwide Global Cooling, A twelve-month long dropin world temperatures erase global warming.

While I would not go so far as to say that it “erases global warming”, 10 year evidence demonstrates a leveling off of global temperatures, with a sudden drop this winter.  Certainly we will need to watch the upcoming winters to see if they are as cold and snow filled as the ’07-’08 winter has been so far.

• Solar Activity Diminishes; Researchers Predict Another Ice Age; Global cooling comes back in a big way

To me and my less than stellar expertise on climate, the temperature and activity of the Sun makes the most sense as having the greatest impact on global temperatures.  In addition to this article, other studies that I have read in the past indicate during previous times of a less active Sun, cold weather and an overall cooler climate ensued.  In the same vein, it makes more sense to me that a more active Sun that produces more heat would be the likely culprit for global warming, with human blame minimal at best.  Here is a Denmark study on cosmic rays and global warming.

• A Cold Spell Soon to Replace Global Warming

OK, so this one is a Russian article, do we still not trust them?  Anyway, it too gives a lot of credence to the impact of the Sun on the climate.

Basically, I put all of this out there not because I hate the environment; I actually love the environment and want to see it protected and conserved.  However, I am also sick and tired of the fear mongering on the part of our press via environmental activists who insist a global catastrophe is on its way because we humans are greedy and are destroying the environment.  The solutions they propose tow the line of Communist ideology (something that our media and politicians conveniently overlook), despite the fact that communist regimes are the biggest polluters and destroyers of the environment.  I am sick and tired of the strong arm tactics that the activists use against anyone who dares suggest different possibilities for climate change.  Things have gotten ridiculous, just 30 years ago the whole rage was global cooling, in the last 15 it has been global warming, and who knows, now we could be to global cooling because of global warming.

One of the things that the activists have been spectacularly successful at achieving is an evolution of what global warming is.  Does anyone else find it interesting that all of the sudden the new catch phrase of fear is climate change and the phrase global warming is becoming fewer and farther between?  This is because the science for global warming is spotty at best. But they have been successful convincing us that any unique or abnormal weather event is the result of global warming.  Even if global temperatures drop by six degrees over the next 10 years, they will claim that it was because of global warming.  It is ridiculous.  And sadly, most Americans, and especially the media, will buy it hook line and sinker.

The fact is, climate change is not really understood and science is wholly inconclusive.  Personally, I attribute the strange weather events to mother nature being mother nature.  Climate and nature have always been unpredictable, the earth regularly gets warmer then gets cooler.  All of this is nothing new, but we Americans apparently love to live in fear so we have to invent stuff to be afraid of.  It would be healthy for us to slow down and really study the issue instead of being reactionary.  Unfortunately, no matter what the issue is – climate, economy, war – our latest trend both as a culture and as a government has been to be reactionary; this is a dangerous path to take.

Global Cooling; Are we headed for a new Ice Age?

The whole topic of global warming is one that I am very interested in, yet have remained very skeptical of.   I think the reason I am so interested in it is because it appears to be difficult to get clear unbiased information. 

It occurred to me early on that there was something fishy about this whole global warming movement.  It just did not fit with the other major real concerns that we face as a planet.  The first red flag that went up was that the theory was accepted as fact from nearly the first time it was announced, despite the fact that 20 years earlier many were fearing global cooling.  

The second red flag was that all of the reports the media released about global warming were supporting the theory.  It appeared (and still does) that any reports questioning the theory or outright disagreeing with it was not only pushed under the rug, but the scientists whom produced the studies were immediately castigated and dismissed as cronies for corporate America and laughed off the stage, while the proponents of global warming were always presented as purer than freshly fallen snow. 

However, my take regarding this issue (after having been bashed over the head with the dangers of global warming) evolved from outright denial that it is actually occurring to accepting the fact that the earth was getting warmer, but that human activity had little to do with it.  Up to that point, I actually did very little research into the issue, so my opinions were questionable at best.

Now, while far from an expert, I am back to a full and outright denial that there is any major change in our climate.  It appears to me that certainly things are different now than 50 years ago, but so what?  The earth throughout its history fluctuates in temperature and climate, and the biggest reason for that fluctuation is activity of the Sun. 

This past week another study was released that is very interesting (of course, I don’t claim it to be the end all be all, science is an evolving study) and I find it important to get it out there if only to try to provide another voice to those whom disagree that man-made global warming is actually occurring.  Some researchers in Canada’s National Research Council have been studying the temperature of the sun and how it correlates to climate on the earth. 

Back in 1991, the Danish Meteorological Institute released a study using data that went back centuries that showed that global temperatures closely tracked solar cycles.

To many, those data were convincing. Now, Canadian scientists are seeking additional funding for more and better “eyes” with which to observe our sun, which has a bigger impact on Earth’s climate than all the tailpipes and smokestacks on our planet combined.

And they’re worried about global cooling, not warming.

There are two initial thoughts I get from these introductory paragraphs in the article: 1. Of course the Sun is going to have a more significant impact than anything else.  2. If journalists and media did not have an agenda, they would promote these findings as much as they do supporting global warming.  Here is more from the article:

Solar activity fluctuates in an 11-year cycle. But so far in this cycle, the sun has been disturbingly quiet. The lack of increased activity could signal the beginning of what is known as a Maunder Minimum, an event which occurs every couple of centuries and can last as long as a century.

Such an event occurred in the 17th century. The observation of sunspots showed extraordinarily low levels of magnetism on the sun, with little or no 11-year cycle.

This solar hibernation corresponded with a period of bitter cold that began around 1650 and lasted, with intermittent spikes of warming, until 1715. Frigid winters and cold summers during that period led to massive crop failures, famine and death in Northern Europe.

Tapping reports no change in the sun’s magnetic field so far this cycle and warns that if the sun remains quiet for another year or two, it may indicate a repeat of that period of drastic cooling of the Earth, bringing massive snowfall and severe weather to the Northern Hemisphere.

Certainly, this one study (though there are many like it) does not disprove or prove anything, it is just one study that happens to be contrary to what the media, many activists, and many scientists want us to believe.  

This current winter that we are in seems to be one of the coldest that I can remember, some family members in Utah reported to me that many of the ski resorts there were already at about 120% snowpack for the entire season, and that was at the end of January; they still have February and March left to go.  Granted, this is all circumstantial and not scientific evidence, but it is telling none the less. 

Now I wonder if eventually the discourse within the environemental movement will move from global warming back to global cooling over the next 25-50 years, here is betting they do.  You see, the environmental movement is only relevant and continues to receive funding when the common man is kept in a state of fear.  The same holds true with many other organizations, we are kept in a similar state of fear from terrorist attacks so that the government can spend more money and keep control; Thus, bringing it back to the environmental movement, environmentalists will do whatever necessary to promote the studies that support what they want to be true.  Does that mean the findings are not true?  No, it just means that the movement is being selective and pushing an agenda.

I would, therefore, argue that a study loses much of its lustre after it has been pushed and promoted too much by the environmentalists (and the same can be said for any study that is overly pushed by anyone).   So my basic point in writing this was to encourage the reader to question the common wisdom and always look for alternative theories.   I used this particular study here to demonstrate that there is conflicting evidence, evidence that I find to be more convincing than claims made by hollywood, but I also recognize that this study is not gospel.  However, it does provide an alternate look into climate change, one that should not be ignored by the media or anyone who honestly is seeking to understand what is really going on as opposed to pushing an agenda.

(May I add an interesting observation?  It seems to me that the environmental movement is already moving away from global warming as the key phrase and are moving to “global climate change.”   Do you see the significance of this change?  Basically, anytime any significant climate event occurs, either in support of warming or cooling, they will be able to claim they were right and, thus, can continue to push their agenda, no matter how radical it may be.   This change also demonstrates that there are cracks in the armor of the warming movement and more and more studies are being released that refute their claim.)