What is Digg?88 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+31I predict global stupidity...so far so good
- KenMo, on 10/12/2007, -14/+43Hmmm.
Seems to me, all of this warming and cooling is NORMAL!!!!
Now shut up and get out of the way before I run you over with my Hummer!. - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24"Watch the idiots in America loot their stores for TV's as if that will save them :)"
WTF? Why drag America into this? If we were really looking at global extinction, I'm pretty confident that crazy ***** would be going on in every country. Holy crap you made a really a stupid remark. - xpaladin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18@stinknugget,
While the pole shift is up for debate, your attitude is not. Point blank, you're an *****. Thus you get modded down.
Welcome to Digg. - manifestdata, on 10/12/2007, -6/+22We can mod down an idiot who spits out the dumbest crap with no evidence to back his case. Especially one who writes like a child. "THIS IS FACT and IS GOING TO HAPPEN as it is a natural event."
- scsikool, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21Yahoo! Looking forward to great ski seasons in the coming decades!
- freebirdpat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14They are calling it Global Climate Change now.... It could be cooling and warming for different areas, but the climate is supposedly changing.
Take the Gulf Stream, if that gets moved, England and Europe will experience much colder winters, and not so warm summers. - Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11The only problem, I think, is that the cycles are so long that all the people crying about global warming now will be dead and replaced by self-righteous, latte-sipping global cooling folk, who will think that they are the pinnacle of enlightenment; much like those who advocate global warming do today.
They won't have any egg on their face in the future, because they will think we were idiots and they have it all figured out. Pretty much the same attitude all the activists, of whatever cause, think today. - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16"vs virtually the rest of the scientific community"
Really? I've read papers by other scientist that believe man-made global warming is a bunch of bull, and it's really part of a natural cycle. So to say "rest of the scientific community" is a stretch.
Those poor Russians. The things they've done in the past have discredited them for a very long time. It seems anytime a story starts with "Russian scientist", or "Russian inventor", people are ready to call it baloney. - FotoMalo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11This isn't the first scientist to have the same theories. But I guess that it doesn't matter because the issue has become polarized to the point that neither side wants to listen to the arguments of the other side.
Just look at what is occurring this summer. Originally all the hurricane predictions models looked like 2006 to be the worse hurricane season ever. Now? Everything downgraded because the waters in between South American and Africa are significantly cooler than expected.
http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/Forecasts/2005/dec2005/
Latest predictions are:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Atlantic_hurricane_season
"They noted that conditions have become less favorable than they were earlier in the year. The sea level pressure and trade wind strength in the tropical Atlantic are above normal, while sea surface temperatures are on a decreasing trend."
To me the important thing is to pay attention to the facts and details. All the doomsday people are using models and forecasting tools that are proven incorrect every year. How is it then to become fact that they are true 30 to 100 years from now? And all the people that believe that global warming is a "democrat" political strategy are full of it also. Everyone can contribute to help reduce environmental impacts.
But as long as people make science a political game, more and more people are going to NOT pay attention and we will be in a worse direction than ever. - KissTheRing, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14The consensus was on peer reviewed science. Sure there are going to be those who say differently, but most of those are being paid off by the oil companies to say such. Which is why peer reviewed science is the only science to trust on this matter. It's like open source science.
- sedo1800, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Wow were back to the 60's and 70's where the everyone was so worried that the world was getting colder.... Of course before that people in the 30's and 40's were worried that the gene pool was breaking down.... If you want to jump ship from the global warming scare to jump on on the global cooling go on ahead... the science is no more sound.
- Ramble, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"They think otherwise. It is the magnetic field that protects you from solar radiation."
A few kilometers of dense atmosphere also helps. - Bob042, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9After reading this in your own posted article, I have to give you a big "WTF are you talking about?"
They've also learned what happens during a magnetic flip. Reversals take a few thousand years to complete, and during that time--contrary to popular belief--the magnetic field does not vanish. "It just gets more complicated," says Glatzmaier. Magnetic lines of force near Earth's surface become twisted and tangled, and magnetic poles pop up in unaccustomed places. A south magnetic pole might emerge over Africa, for instance, or a north pole over Tahiti. Weird. But it's still a planetary magnetic field, and it still protects us from space radiation and solar storms. - Dakoman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9typical russians, everyone saying "we need to cool the world" then some russian comes along and says "in russia, world cool YOU!"
- irieKEN, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Yep, many scientists are predicting it, but not in a good "Global Warming is busted" kind of way:(
Apparently since everything has been getting warm, rain forests have been experiencing drought, and rainfall has increased in regions not generally known for high precipitation levels. When the climate swings back the other way, it will supposedly set off the domino effect that will lead to another major ice age after a few cycles.
Don't know if its true, but maybe I should go marry an Eskimo just in case;) - emorphien, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@Herolint
Agreed. However that doesn't mean we as a race shouldn't learn ways to leave less of an environmental footprint. I think that's the point most people are missing. You get extremists spouting death and destruction and you get the naysayers that think we should just continue to make messes at the same pace we've been going at.
As usual, perhaps the best approach is somewhere in the middle for the meantime. - willangle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7why would anyone listen to someone who calls him/herself STINKNUGGET?
- axiomflash, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11you'd have to be an idiot to eat up this story where in is only 3 paragraphs and the last paragraph says "The Kyoto initiatives to save the planet from the greenhouse effect should be put off until better times."
If you can't see the real aim here...wow.
Ignoring our pollution right now would be like not treating a tumor because it doesn't hurt very much. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Of course. The Democrats are extremely effective at jumping on political issues just after their peak.
- Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12@sedo1800
But at least there is historical data to support a cyclical warming/cooling of the Earth rather than the data used by the Global Warming Fascists, who only go back far enough to "prove" their point.
Our world is full of various cycles, so to pretend that this particular one is a one-way ticket to burning death is more than a little silly, I think. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"all the people crying about global warming now will be dead and replaced by self-righteous, latte-sipping global cooling folk"
And thusly does History repeat itself.
Check the papers of the mid-70s, when "The COMING ICE AGE that is going to FREEZE your __CHILDREN__!!!!!OMG!1!!" was the big headline and you'll see we've been there and done that -- in living memory. Books written about it, Time magazine articles, politicians jumping on various expedient bandwagons, et cetera. The whole tired circus. - Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10This just goes to show that at least some scientists are willing to use their training for more than political grandstanding.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Warming; Cooling. Whatever.
What I want to see is all the eco-fascist whackjobs who cannot tell the difference between weather and climate who were yipping and yowling at the beginning of the year about how last year's hurricane season was just an appetizer compared to how bad this year's was going to be.
So, tell me again how badly this year's hurricane season is going? - Koosebane, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10IN OTHER NEWS:
Al Gore personally flies a jumbo, fossil fuel burning jet all the way to Russia in order to show these doubting scientists his compelling new movie about ManBearPig and save the day for activists everywhere!
"GWODE!" - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Sorry, replied to the wrong comment before -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._Fred_Singer
http://www.lomborg.com/
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=26&objectid=3516830
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Stott
I guess you've never heard of Google? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5looking up this guy found interesting things..
HE BELIEVES in global warming, he just thinks the sun is going to go through a quiet cycle and will ofset global warming for quite sometime.
My opinion of this man just improved slightly. - MrTea, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Global cooling? Like the Little Ice Age? Sound nice; I've always wish for a summer with winter temperature. No, really.
- DeusMachinae, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5In Soviet Russia....
- Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@Hermitwise
You haven't looked then.
All those who HAVE read such articles/papers could hold your hand through the Google process, but my experience with people in denial has always been even when you show them what they asked to see, they simply discredit it and go on claiming that they've never seen it.
Why waste the time? - Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8@emorphien
I think we should keep the world clean for no other reason that I like to breath clean air and swim in clear water. However, if that's what is wanted, then why not simply ask for that instead of cloaking your desires behind some highly debatable doctrine that we are all going to burn up if we don't start walking everywhere and feasting on granola?
Why bury a legitimate desire behind a bunch of nebulous crap? - bakagaigin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8That's a pretty stylin' tin-foil hat you got there. If you want people to acknowledge you, don't say it like a street preacher, give a link or two to back up your evidence.
- vegasbright, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Russia == bizarro world
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4neone heard of global dimming?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Whether or not the global environment heats up or cools down, the air will continue getting dirtier, the water will continue getting more contaminated, and thousands of species of animal and plant life will die off.
If you think this exponentially increasing man-made assault on the environment will have no consequences for the human species in the short term, you're deranged. - Doofy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I believe Newsweek. "The Cooling World" (April 28, 1975)
http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf - drog, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._Fred_Singer
Did you read this headzoo?
"His most recent peer-reviewed publication on global warming was a letter about other scientists' research which appeared in Eos, December 16, 1997."
"Furthermore, Singer cited a report of the Congressional Research Service that supported the position of the tobacco industry. It attacked the US Environmental Protection Agency for their study about the cancer risks of passive smoking and called it "junk science". "
His most recent peer reviewed publication on global warming is a decade old letter, and he's been sticking up for the tobacco industry? Why should I believe a word he says? - iggee85, on 10/12/2007, -9/+12So a group of Russian scientists saying there's going to be global cooling means there's no more consensus on globabl warming?
I'm sorry, but until I see this report or any report denying global warming published in a peer-reviewed journal, I'll have to disagree with you. - B0jangles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3*Rolls down window* We didn't listen!
- blackjack75, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The title is a bit misleading. He actually predicted it was going to be a bit cooler, in the coming winter than it is now.
- bobdole42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2IMO, this whole global warming/cooling debate is a load of bull. First, we probably produce more heat from being confined in large cities than we do by producing so-called 'greenhouse gases.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_heat_island_effect This may have the temperature of a certain area rise a few degrees, but not affect the whole of the world. Now it may when most of the world is nothing but a giant metropolis, but I think we will be gone long before that time occurs.
So, we have melting ice too right? It gets hotter, the cooler stuff melts away I would assume. And rising water levels around the world will cause cities and islands to washed over in the next hundred years. Oh noes! It don’t work that way on a global scale. Global warming actually supports an increase in the total mass of ice in Antarctica. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_ice_sheet Crap, sucks that we won’t all have a house on the beach here in Ohio :( - rebrad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I'm so confused. Which is it? Cold or Hot? What does Al say? You can't trust those Commie Bastards. Is this another inconvenient truth?
- Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Yep, many scientists are predicting it, but not in a good "Global Warming is busted" kind of way:("
This is why most scientists refer to it as global climate change, instead of global warming - Tsujigiri, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Same here. For completely selfish reasons this wouldn't be too bad for me, personally.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@drog - I was responding to the statement "Really? What papers? I have yet to find any." I found some, and showed him. I'm not sticking up for their accuracy.
- mntbikeracer1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Easy, I believe we are currently in a warming trend. Do I believe the warming trend is caused or intensified by human activities? NO. If you look at historical data the earth naturally goes through cyclical warming/cooling periods. How would earth have gone into and come out of an ice age? Were the mammoths driving H2's around?
If our activities were causing the world to warm we should be seeing a downtrend, as we are currently putting out less polution then we have in the last 60 years. Industry is cleaner, cars are using less and less gas and cleaner forms of it, lead is no longer a fuel additive, etc... - vegasbright, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Lamarckian evolution, anyone?
- annonimality, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It seems Stinknugget doesn't read his own references, if you read the article posted at: http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/ask/RevScience.html
You'll find this...
So, what will happen when the field reverses?
The fossil record, and other geological records, seem to say 'Not much!'
And this...
"The magnetic field of Earth shields us from cosmic rays, so losing this shield may seem like a big deal, but it really isn't. Cosmic rays are not the same kind of radiation as light, instead it consists of fast-moving particles of matter such as electrons, protons and the nuclei of some atoms. Our atmosphere is actually a far better shield of cosmic radiation than Earth's magnetic field. Losing the magnetic field during a reversal would only increase our natural radiation background exposure on the ground by a small amount - perhaps not more than 10%. The long term result might be a few thousand additional cases of cancer every year, but certainly not the extinction of the human race." - Hermitwise, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Yeah that's really scary because it supposedly dampens the effects of global warming, so we don't worry about it as much until we're screwed completely. The whole pan evaporation thing is interesting too.
- h00ligan, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7wow, a non american climate scientist didn't jump on the bandwagon of global warming! Who would have thought that someone would actually think there are warming and cooling trends intrinsic to our ecosystem?!?
-
Show 51 - 88 of 88 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is