moonbattery.gif


« Charity Begins at Home for the Breck Girl | Main | $50,000 the Easy Way »


June 22, 2007

Scientist Predicts Global Cooling

Don't throw away your winter clothes. Despite the ridiculous hype coming from the Left about global warming, we might be in for some cold weather ahead.

R. Timothy Patterson, director the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Centre, Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, is aghast at the absurdity and hubris of bureauweenies who think they can legislate the temperature. As Patterson notes:

The fact that science is many years away from properly understanding global climate doesn't seem to bother our leaders at all. Inviting testimony only from those who don't question political orthodoxy on the issue, parliamentarians are charging ahead with the impossible and expensive goal of "stopping global climate change." Liberal MP Ralph Goodale's June 11 House of Commons assertion that Parliament should have "a real good discussion about the potential for carbon capture and sequestration in dealing with carbon dioxide, which has tremendous potential for improving the climate, not only here in Canada but around the world," would be humorous were he, and even the current government, not deadly serious about devoting vast resources to this hopeless crusade.
Climate stability has never been a feature of planet Earth. The only constant about climate is change; it changes continually and, at times, quite rapidly. Many times in the past, temperatures were far higher than today, and occasionally, temperatures were colder. As recently as 6,000 years ago, it was about 3C warmer than now. Ten thousand years ago, while the world was coming out of the thousand-year-long "Younger Dryas" cold episode, temperatures rose as much as 6C in a decade — 100 times faster than the past century's 0.6C warming that has so upset environmentalists.

Patterson reports that as politicians shriek about carbon emissions causing the sky to fall, scientists are finding ever-stronger correlations between our climate and fluctuations in the sun's brightness. This could be bad news for those of us who prefer warm weather:

Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting into its weakest Schwabe solar cycle of the past two centuries, likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth. Beginning to plan for adaptation to such a cool period, one which may continue well beyond one 11-year cycle, as did the Little Ice Age, should be a priority for governments. It is global cooling, not warming, that is the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada. As a country at the northern limit to agriculture in the world, it would take very little cooling to destroy much of our food crops, while a warming would only require that we adopt farming techniques practiced to the south of us.

Here's an even better idea: since "the science of global climate change is still in its infancy," and bureaucrats know far less than scientists do, maybe government should stop worrying about future weather altogether and stick to things they understand, like how to make us more dependent on them by strangling economic growth. But then, that's what the global warming hoax is all about, isn't it?

sun.jpg
This controls the climate, not grasping bureaucrats.

On a tip from Bergbikr.

Posted by Van Helsing at June 22, 2007 12:31 PM

Comments

If liberals thought that the solar cycles could somehow be blamed on mankind, they would embrace this global-cooling idea.

But as it is, they'll simply dismiss Patterson as a denier.

Posted by: NudeGayWhalesForJesus at June 22, 2007 5:16 PM

Ahh, but you see, this is why they just use the term "climate change" now.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 22, 2007 6:28 PM

Buy your winter clothes before the rush and get a good deal. Invest in South Texas real estate. Plan ahead.

Posted by: Master Baiter at June 22, 2007 6:42 PM

I guess Bush's weather machine doesn't just make hurricanes, it can lower the temperature too. Sweet.

Posted by: Chris at June 22, 2007 7:13 PM

Cooling is gonna boot a whole passel of us off the evolutionary ladder when it causes mass famine. While we could better adapt than our ancestors, the resources to do so quickly (if cooling occurs) will have been squandered by jackasses in our government that slurped down the Anthropogenic Kool-Aid.

Posted by: Brooklyn Red Leg at June 22, 2007 7:33 PM

Am still waiting for someone to blame global warming/cooling or Bush for the mysterious disappearance over a few months of a 5 mile-wide, 100 ft. deep lake in Chile:

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2007/06/23/2003366506

Posted by: fellowes at June 23, 2007 1:45 PM

What happened to this "consensus" Algore (PBUH)keeps telling us about? I thought the debate was over...

Posted by: Nigel at June 23, 2007 8:57 PM

Thanks very much for promoting our Science Advisory Committee member Professor Patterson's article. I have followed his research for years, having visited his lab and even done some coring with him. I can assure you it is first class research that turned me from a Kyoto supporter into someone who now believes we should continue to work on controlling pollution better (CO2 is not pollution of course) and conserve energy but the idea that we can have a significant effect on global climate through twiddling with our CO2 emissions seems very far fetched indeed.

I invite you to hear more from the scientists we work with at the Natural Resources Stewardship Project by visiting www.nrsp.com, especially the news page.

Sincerely,

Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (thermofluids)
Executive Director
Natural Resources Stewardship Project
P.O. Box 23013
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2

Canada

Web: www.nrsp.com

Posted by: Tom Harris at June 23, 2007 11:26 PM

Thanks for the link, Mr. Harris.

Posted by: Kevin at June 24, 2007 10:22 AM

As that NASA scientist said the other day, before he was "approached" by the Owlgores who hold his purse-strings, and he recanted (slightly): Who among us is to say that this climate, this temperature, and these humidity conditions prevalent on the planet today are the "ideal" climate parameters for all of mankind over the last three million years or so of our existence?

It can certainly be argued that conditions during the Little Climatic Optimum, or "LCO" (~ 10th through the early 13th Centuries) were far more favorable than conditions now: vinyards in northern England, Scotland, Greenland, and Newfoundland/Labrador ["Vinland," as the Vikings who discovered it called it, no less!]; explosive population growth throughout this period; scientific, industrial and agricultural progress that made the previous 1,000 years truly look like a "Dark Age;" and on and on.

As BRL noted, above, should we really start cooling in a genuine way, a whole lot of people are going to die (sort of like the mid- to late 13th Century, the end of the LCO, when the weather "shut down," rains and cold returned with a vengeance worldwide, and the Black Plague reigned supreme).

Posted by: jc14 at June 24, 2007 5:42 PM