flipper (1,556) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 8:39 am
Russian Scientists say period of global cooling ahead due to changes in the sun
(bumped up due to interest) From Radio Voice of Russia:
Russia’s Pulkovo Observatory: “we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years”
Scientists at Russia’s famous Pulkovo Observatory are convinced that the world is in for a period of global cooling.
flipper (1,553) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 8:39 am
—————————-
May 1st, 2013 at 8:39 am
—————————-
Too be honest Flipper – I don’t think the scientists actually know. I believe because science has produced so much knowledge historically we have given science a superior position in society, and therefore expect and seek answers from it – thus putting it under pressure to produce answers to extreme phenomena.
I think the reason we are getting so many contradictory answers is because – they actually don’t really know as much as many believe. One set of data produces certain perceived expectations, another produces something different. Due to the many variables involved – I say forget the heavy science – use commonsense (don’t pollute the marine environment if you like fish and chips – obviously don’t fill the air we breath with crap – and lets try not to kill of every other species on earth, if possible) but exactly where we are heading regarding warming/cooling appears to me to not yet be an exact science. Let’s concentrate on the things we can do something about. I don’t believe that in a long run there is anything much we can do to prevent whatever is going to happen, even if it is the end of the planet. We just ain’t that smart!
Judith 9:00 am
Science rocks. That covers everything. Science is everything. Computers. Electricity. Cars. Modern society. The whole shi-bang.
Science means…. ‘knowing shit’.
web says: Science (from Latin scientia, meaning “knowledge”)
Left Right and Centre (647) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 9:16 am
May 1st, 2013 at 9:16 am
——————————————
Yes, I am aware of how we got science, and how we perceive scientific endeavour – but the question I raise is ‘are we giving it too much power’. At first scientific endeavour had much to work with. We didn’t know why apples fell off trees and not zoom off into the sky. However, I believe the current disputes among scientists is because the material they now investigate is far more complex that their ability – and in fact, they no longer ‘know’ but are instead have fallen into the habit of using their presumptions as fact – hence the variations in data produced. (Or at least, they allow others for various reasons to use their presumptions as fact – especially for financial benefit)
There is no dispute among scientists on AGW Judith only rubbish from web sites like WUWT.
You are a intelligent person I suggest you read both open mind and WUWT on this story.
You are a intelligent person I suggest you read both open mind and WUWT on this story.
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/not-just-the-facts-the-wrong-conclusions-too/#more-6639
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/14/a-big-picture-look-at-earths-temperature-the-pause-update/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/14/a-big-picture-look-at-earths-temperature-the-pause-update/
Then make up your mind how scientific WUWT is to allow such blatant manipulation of the rubes who read it.
Judith 9:28 am are we giving science too much power?
Very broad question…. in regards to scientists predicting the future climate of Earth?
No idea. What power do they have now compared to any other time?
The human race has never been more educated. I’m not too worried about someone doing something really dumb because the nerds advised them to. By really dumb I mean… say… the overlords introduce petrol rationing for 2014. 10 litres per week per person. We’re trying to keep emissions down people!! That level of stupidity. Well… it might not be such a bad thing if it saved the human race I suppose. At least we live in a country where not all people just bend over. There’s debate and freedom to speak.
I don’t know how you measure the power or influence of scientists exactly and then decide if they’ve got too much or not. I know what you mean though. Climate change issue has certainly been done to death. Like a stadium full of journos with a dead horse flogging fetish and a solitary dead horse.
It’s tangent time: Apparently the most eco-friendly thing any person can do is die/kill themselves. Then you stop using up resources. Sort of defeats the purpose though. It’s a bit lose-lose. 7B people. That’s a lot of resources. Forget the climate… aren’t the resources just going to run out first before we’re cooked?
Left Right and Centre (649) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 10:20 am
May 1st, 2013 at 10:20 am
————————————————
The reason I made that point was people constantly ask (including myself) for proof. We request scientific verification on most things and whatever is supplied, is generally accepted as being the answer. By doing this, we give science power.
But I’m really not sure that science (knowledge) is quite up to it. Pierre Bordieu and other theorists suggested that education is responsible for the reproduction of knowledge, in which regardless of method and in each ‘age’, facets of that knowledge is merely passed down, determining our culture, and what/how we think – parts of which are then passed down again. And so knowledge always possesses facets of previous knowledge and method. That is we continue to conduct research, investigation and learn from the same space – my argument is that ‘space’ is now so full of old cultural knowledge, that we are just regurgitating – when what in fact is required is a completely new ‘knowledge’, completely new methods, completely separate from the past. Problem being – it is virtually impossible to achieve, because all we know, is based in part, from what we have learned. We cannot establish anything new, without incorporating at least some – even if only method, from what we already know. Hence we will continue to ‘chase our tails’ IMO.
Hi Judith..
Yours was a thoughtful comment on the DAGW BS. The only problem is that not ONE, not one single scientist of world repute, subscribes to the DAGW scam.
Yours was a thoughtful comment on the DAGW BS. The only problem is that not ONE, not one single scientist of world repute, subscribes to the DAGW scam.
Moreover, not a single shred of evidence has yet been produced to substantiate the specious claim that there is a link between carbon dioxide and climate change. There have been half-baked papers (often based on NGO and student activist claims), but none that have ever been subject to proper peer review.
I could go on, but instead defer to my friend and colleague in the UK, Rupert. C. E. Wyndham, who just last month admonished the President of the UK Royal Society in no uncertain terms. I quote from his letter to Paul Nurse:
” You write that you ‘understand very well the importance of reliable observation, experiment and consistent rational argument’ sic. Good, and so you should! After all, to borrow Prof. Lindzen’s elegant and succinct definition, “Science is the continuing and opposing dialectic between theory and observation”. In principle, nothing in science is ever “settled”, so long the contra-scientific contention of anthropogenic global warming consensus proselytisers, conspicuously amongst them The Royal Society. Against this backdrop and of your assurance in particular, perhaps you would care then to explain why such propagandists:
• decline to publish empirical evidence;
• usually with insolence, refuse to offer their raw data, their algorithms and their methodology to the scrutiny of the scientific community at large;
• manipulate and misrepresent the data they claim to possess;
• refuse to validate or have validated their general circulation models, even though these are known to be flawed;
• decline to engage in any form of debate [ Recall Monckton's recent criticism of VUW's Boston, Frame and Renwick?] which might expose them even to questioning, let alone to constructive criticism;
• who, in substitution thereof, prefer instead to smear and defame any who challenge their dogmatic orthodoxy, with many amongst the dissenters being scientists of immense distinction, equal at least to your own, and often experts in disciplines far more directly relevant than yours to matters in hand. “
• usually with insolence, refuse to offer their raw data, their algorithms and their methodology to the scrutiny of the scientific community at large;
• manipulate and misrepresent the data they claim to possess;
• refuse to validate or have validated their general circulation models, even though these are known to be flawed;
• decline to engage in any form of debate [ Recall Monckton's recent criticism of VUW's Boston, Frame and Renwick?] which might expose them even to questioning, let alone to constructive criticism;
• who, in substitution thereof, prefer instead to smear and defame any who challenge their dogmatic orthodoxy, with many amongst the dissenters being scientists of immense distinction, equal at least to your own, and often experts in disciplines far more directly relevant than yours to matters in hand. “
flipper (1,554) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 10:38 am
——————————–
May 1st, 2013 at 10:38 am
——————————–
Thanks for that Flipper.
It’s not a subject I know much about, but I’ll do some reading – sounds interesting, and very much along the lines of what interests me – the manner in which scientific endeavor, is now actually used (misused) to authenticate knowledge – without any governance.
Judith 10:35 am aah… we’ve moved to philosophy of science/ knowledge/ learning now? Good to know.
That’s all a bit too academic wafflish for me. Science determines culture. Science is culture. Culture is science. Everything determines everything. You’ve lost me- but I’m glad you know what you’re talking about.
You want to re-invent science and that will benefit mankind? By starting again? Do we need to find a new way to learn to make fire?
I’m reading your post but it’s just some broad general academic metacrap about science… it didn’t make a lot of sense to me.
So… modern science no longer works because they’ve got to throw everything out and try to start fresh before it will work?
• decline to publish empirical evidence;
often claimed by the wingnuts who drive scientists to distraction with repeated request for even un published research leaving no time for any thing else.
• usually with insolence, refuse to offer their raw data, their algorithms and their methodology to the scrutiny of the scientific community at large;
That is the whole point of publishing peer reviewed papers
• manipulate and misrepresent the data they claim to possess;
sorry that does not make sence.• refuse to validate or have validated their general circulation models, even though these are known to be flawed;
If so publish dont just complain its wrong prove it.
• decline to engage in any form of debate [ Recall Monckton's recent criticism of VUW's Boston, Frame and Renwick?] which might expose them even to questioning, let alone to constructive criticism; monckton is not a scientist if he has valid science publish it.
• decline to engage in any form of debate [ Recall Monckton's recent criticism of VUW's Boston, Frame and Renwick?] which might expose them even to questioning, let alone to constructive criticism; monckton is not a scientist if he has valid science publish it.
• who, in substitution thereof, prefer instead to smear and defame any who challenge their dogmatic orthodoxy, with many amongst the dissenters being scientists of immense distinction, equal at least to your own, and often experts in disciplines far more directly relevant than yours to matters in hand. “
massive misrepresentation of the climate denial echo chamber most of those who are involved have no scientific training or clue.
FFS this is who flipper is claiming are wrong who his “experts” at the gwpf know more than.
American Association for the Advancement of Science
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
United States National Research Council
Royal Society of New Zealand
The Royal Society of the United Kingdom
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
European Science Foundation
InterAcademy Council As the representative of the world’s scientific and engineering academies
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
American Geophysical Union’
American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of London
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
American Meteorological Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
World Meteorological Organization
American Quaternary Association
International Union for Quaternary Research
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Society for Microbiology
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Medical Association
American Public Health Association
Australian Medical Association
World Health Organization
etcetcetc
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
United States National Research Council
Royal Society of New Zealand
The Royal Society of the United Kingdom
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
European Science Foundation
InterAcademy Council As the representative of the world’s scientific and engineering academies
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
American Geophysical Union’
American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of London
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
American Meteorological Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
World Meteorological Organization
American Quaternary Association
International Union for Quaternary Research
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Society for Microbiology
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Medical Association
American Public Health Association
Australian Medical Association
World Health Organization
etcetcetc
Griff, you can make all the arguments from authority you like, but the climate is not warming.
Kea – the climate is warming, or not, or it is, or not, depending on the period one looks at. People like Griff have believed the lie that mankind is responsible. Fortunately evidence trump theory, and those who continue to believe the lie are increasingly looking like fools. Their choice.
krazykiwi, it is quite likely that mans activities do influence climate. It is also likely that the effect is a warming one, maybe. What is not demonstrated is that mans tiny contribution has over ridden the natural cycle of climatic variations.
“What is good in life ? To hear the lamentations of the eco-hippies” 
Australian Medical Association, American College of Preventive Medicine… etc
Griff you do not seem to understand that not all “scientists” know about climate. A medical doctor can not claim to know any more about these things than a plumber or carpet layer. That includes the retired Indian railroad engineer who heads the IPCC. You are really pretty naive for someone who claims to be so well informed about things.
I listen to suitably qualified professionals in the field, who do not rely on “proving” AGW for their sole source of income.
Fortunately evidence trump theory,
Arctic ice retreat, Antarctic and Iceland ice cap melt, glacier melt, ocean and surface temperatures, archeological finds,satellite data Argo buoys, Drought, Heatwaves Flooding.
Fact trumps bullshit supports theory.
They are all the science experts ie a qualified to evaluate the validity of science.
Typical wingnut conspicy idealization focus on the one point where you think you can cast doubt and ignore the rest
Severe cold snap keeps Europe in its icy grip, bringing record low temperatures
A cold snap is keeping Europe in its icy grip, pushing the death toll to 160 as countries from Italy to Ukraine struggled to cope with temperatures that plunged to record lows in some places. Many tourism hotspots in Europe are experiencing low temperatures, with minus 14C in Berlin, minus 17Cin Prague, minus 8C in Paris, minus 13C in Stockholm and minus 20C in Warsaw. Serbia, Ukraine and Poland all recorded fatalities as the mercury sank as low as minus 32.5C.
“Berlin Freezes In 100-Year Winter”…”Record Snow” Blankets Germany, Bitter Cold Grips Europe
By P Gosselin on 22. März 2013
By P Gosselin on 22. März 2013
UPDATE: “This March could be the coldest of the last 100 years,” says meteorologist Dominik Jung
Berlin freezes in 100-year winter.
Lots of snow and bitter cold until the end of March – Berlin hasn’t seen this in more than 100 years.”
Forget the tall tales spread by Mojib Latif. We haven’t forgotten what real winters are. We just haven’t seen anything like this since measurements began in 1895!
Forget the tall tales spread by Mojib Latif. We haven’t forgotten what real winters are. We just haven’t seen anything like this since measurements began in 1895!
The Tagsspeigel writes:
‘There has never been anything like this in Berlin in the last third of March since snow measurements began in 1895,’ says weather expert Friedemann Schenk of the Meteorological Institute for the Freien Universität
They are all the science experts ie a qualified to evaluate the validity of science.
Well I will trust people qualified in the field over retired Indian railroad engineers and proctologists.
Poor Griff
Yes yes yes
We all can see the weather is highly unstable (waits for some fuckwit to deny even that).
Can’t you weather / climate change (or not) proponents get a room?
It’s getting old
Lance, thanks for your constructive comments. We all tried to teach Griff the difference, between weather and climate, when he ranted daily about it being a bit hot in the Aussie desert during summer and some what draughty in the hurricane belt during the hurricane season.
But the guy who used to tap train wheels in India said hot weather was global warming, and so was cold weather, and windy weather, and stable weather…
Lance – Fair enough. I wonder, do you understand that every cent you spend today, tomorrow and, well, until the climate change madness is truly outed, includes a tax justified by the junk science? That’s what pisses me off. Being lied to, and then taxed on the basis of those lies.
suitably qualified professionals in the field, who do not rely on “proving” AGW for their sole source of income.
conspirowhacky again kea
The experts agree to 97%
Proving agw is not the point any more kea we are well past that little hurdle as endorsed by EVERY MAJOR SCIENTIFIC BODY IN THE WORLD.
The experts agree to 97%
Proving agw is not the point any more kea we are well past that little hurdle as endorsed by EVERY MAJOR SCIENTIFIC BODY IN THE WORLD.
keep up with the Nutjob arguments please. you know it keeps me amused for hours.
conspirowhacky again kea
Griff, tell us how BIG OIL and the “Carbon Industry” are conspiring to hide the terrible truth and how they are “conducting a secret experiment” on the planet earth ?
Tell us how they have paid off all those scientists who question AGW, even folks like David Bellamy (that well know right wing oil executive)
The experts agree to 97%
Griff, why do you continue to lie?
I have previously pointed out where this supposed “97%” came from. Here it is again:
The small number of climate scientists actually supporting the Al Gore/IPCC claims of catastrophic global warming and the actual AGW “predictions” has always been a major embarrassment. As a result, the left/liberal/greens have been forced to fabricate bogus support that can’t stand up to any form of scrutiny.First, it was the claim that 2,500 IPCC-related scientists agreed with the 2007 IPCC report. Soon afer it was discovered that the actual number of scientists who actually agreed with the report contents was only 25.Next, when the 2,500 shrunk to 25, a couple of University of Illinois researchers conjured up a 2-minute online, anonymous survey that they hoped would deliver some big numbers to crow about. Theysolicited 10,257 earth scientists and only 77 chose to answer the online survey (yes, only 77). 75 of those “climate scientists” agreed with the survey’s two questions (yes, only 2 questions).Voila, the infamous and widely publicized “97%” of climate scientists (75 divided by 77) who thought man was the cause of global warming turned out to be a numeric joke.As a side note, in order to assure an initial high survey percentage, the two researchers did not ask major segments of the scientific world to participate. Those would be the segments that were known to be critical of the AGW theory, including: solar scientists, space scientists, cosmologists, physicists, meteorologists and astronomers.
The very dishonesty that’s caused hundreds of millions to feel guilty is itself toppling the whole climate change scam. I’d suggest it’s time to wake up, Griff. But it’s too late for you.
Harriet (1,587) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 1:38 pm
Griff (4,657) Says: Harriet (1,587) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 1:38 pm
“…..keep up with the Nutjob arguments please. you know it keeps me amused for hours….”
It’s you that keeps us amused Grief!
14,460,000,000 yrs ago earth was created.
Condense that into just one year, and at 15min to midnight on Dec 31 saw the end of the last Ice Age.
At about 15 sec to midnight saw the rise and fall of the Roman Empire.
Global warming science ‘measurements’, are as just as good as ‘evidence’ as Griff getting out of bed this morning, still half asleep, and putting his feet on the floor and declaring “It’s a fair bit warmer today than yesterday!”
Seriously Griff! 
May 1st, 2013 at 2:05 pm
Actually i was hoping you would find something new kea
A study that finds oil engineers do not support global warming in particular the higher up the management they are the less they support it is not a review of scientists views on global warming.
They are not scientist even wing nut fucking oil industry management.
As usually the rubes read something without applying any critical skills.
The paper you quote even says in its conclusion it does not prove any thing except the bias of the oil industry.
http://oss.sagepub.com/content/33/11/1477.full
A study that finds oil engineers do not support global warming
in particular the higher up the management they are the less they support it is not a review of scientists views on global warming.They are not scientist even wing nut
fucking oil industry management.As usually the rubes read something without applying any critical skills.
The paper you quote even says in its conclusion it does not prove any thing except the bias of the oil industry.
http://oss.sagepub.com/content/33/11/1477.full
They are not scientist even wing nut fucking oil industry management.
No they are not. Many opponents are well known scientists who established their reputations long before AGW became fashionable. Unlike the warmists, they do not rely on AGW for their income. They rely on solid science. The only people making money out of this are the warmists and they are in panic mode as the house of cards falls around them.
http://oss.sagepub.com/content/33/11/1477.full
read it wingnut
read it wingnut
Many opponents are well known scientists who established their reputations long before AGW became fashionable. Unlike the warmists, they do not rely on AGW for their income. They rely on solid science.
Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($5,000 plus expenses per month), geologist Robert M. Carter ($1,667 per month) and a pledge of $90,000 to meteorologist Anthony Watts.
Dear Dear haven’t we seen Watts and Bob Carter both quoted today by the usual wingnuts. Singer and Idso feature regularly as well
And who is paying them to “do science”?
Who would guess seems the oil industry pays your non biased scientists
By the way you are the one arguing from authority except your authority is not actually an expert.
Did we here that before somewhere ?
These wingnuts went to court remember
The result was the court says …….
you dont know jackshit wing nuts
Griff is to the climate scam what Lt. Hiroo Onoda was to WWII
http://www.damninteresting.com/the-soldier-who-wouldnt-quit/
Kea (3,877) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 9:06 pm
May 1st, 2013 at 9:58 pm
Kea (3,877) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 10:07 pm
Kea (3,877) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 9:06 pm
Griff, here was a real “weatherman”
Augie Auer.
(Professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Wyoming for 22 years, Chief Meteorologist for the Meteorological Service of New Zealand Limited from 1990 to 1998)
In 2006, he helped found the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition in order to argue claims about man-made global warming
“Climate change will be considered a joke in five years time, meteorologist Augie Auer told the annual meeting of Mid Canterbury Federated Farmers in Ashburton this week.
Man’s contribution to the greenhouse gases was so small we couldn’t change the climate if we tried, he maintained.
“We’re all going to survive this. It’s all going to be a joke in five years,” he said.”
Here is another example of someone who is part of the BIG OIL conspiracy
David Bellamy OBE, environmental campaigner and botanist
” In 2004, he wrote an article in the Daily Mail in which he described the theory of man-made global warming as “poppycock”. A letter he published on 16 April 2005 in New Scientist asserted that a large percentage (555 of 625) of the glaciers being observed by the World Glacier Monitoring Service were advancing, not retreating.”
In October 2006 the New Zealand Herald reported that Bellamy had joined the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition,
BIG OIL got to old Bellamy too a Griff …. LOL
Its speculation on a sun activity cycle that does not exist in the data.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Solar_vs_Temp_basic.gif
As you can see the sun declines yet temperatures still rise. AGW is a basic energy imbalance measured and quantified by satellite data The earth is radiating less energy than it is absorbing. Increasing levels of co2 are the only variable that can account for this change in energy flux. You need to find an alternative to co2 to find a true rebuttal of co2 as the warming influence over the last fifty years. That the heat is not showing on the surface record does not mean no warming. The melting of the worlds frozen water , The rise in sea level Ocean heat content are all indicators of increasing energy being absorbed by the biosphere.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Solar_vs_Temp_basic.gif
As you can see the sun declines yet temperatures still rise. AGW is a basic energy imbalance measured and quantified by satellite data The earth is radiating less energy than it is absorbing. Increasing levels of co2 are the only variable that can account for this change in energy flux. You need to find an alternative to co2 to find a true rebuttal of co2 as the warming influence over the last fifty years. That the heat is not showing on the surface record does not mean no warming. The melting of the worlds frozen water , The rise in sea level Ocean heat content are all indicators of increasing energy being absorbed by the biosphere.
Of course that’s not science from a reputable source ether its only Griff so tryhttp://www.climatechange.govt.nz/science/what-is-climate-change.html
To the wing nuts our government must be part of the conspirowhacky as well
Fossils kea not climate scientist a retired meteorologist /weather man and a old tv botanist
Why do you find it strange that if you follow a wing nut theory you dont get respect in science circles?
Have you ether considered that is because the science you quote is so bogus that its a joke.
Why do you find it strange that if you follow a wing nut theory you dont get respect in science circles?
Have you ether considered that is because the science you quote is so bogus that its a joke.
Kea (3,877) Says:Because they are so sens itive to temperature fluctuations, glaciers provide clues about the effects of global warming (Oerlemans, J. 2001). The 1991 discovery of the 5,000 year-old “ice man” preserved in a glacier in the European Alps fascinated the world, yet the discovery meant that this glacier had reached a 5,000-year minimum. With few exceptions, glaciers around the world have retreated at unprecedented rates over the last century. Some ice caps, glaciers, and even an ice shelf have disappeared altogether. Many more are retreating so rapidly that they may vanish within decades.
May 1st, 2013 at 9:58 pm
Fossils kea not climate scientist a retired meteorologist /weather man and a old tv botanist
The professor of Atmospheric Science ( climate scientist) is dead actually Griff.
I note the head of the IPCC is a retired railroad engineer. I also note you quoted the “World Bank” & various medical associations who support AGW.
Keep going. You are doing more than me to erode your obsession. How are you going with those questions anyway ?
(1. Can you tell us what the annual funding is for the IPCC and how much the individual weathermen receive ?
2. I have asked for this information many times. Why will you not provide it ?
3. Would your weathermen have any income if AGW funding were to stop ?)
Kea (3,877) Says:
May 1st, 2013 at 10:07 pm
So you want to talk about glaciers Griffy. Good.
Himalayan glaciers advancing, despite global warming’everal glaciers in the greater Himalayas are either advancing or are stable, American and German researchers have found, corroborating India’s stand against a controversial prediction by the UN’s climate change agency that the glaciers would vanish by 2030.More than 50% of the glaciers in the Karakoram region of the northwest Himalayas are stable or are advancing, the scientists have reported in this week’s Nature Geoscience journal.Dirk Scherler and Manfred Strecker from Potsdam University, Germany and Bodo Bookhagen from the University of California Santa Barbara used remoter sensing images to track frontal changes and surface velocities of glaciers in the greater Himalaya between 2000 and 2008.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Himalayan-glaciers-advancing-despite-global-warming/Article1-654581.aspxPublished: April 5, 2013at 2:24 PMSTOCKHOLM, Sweden, April 5 (UPI) — A late-season freeze in the Baltic Sea has created a record spread of ice cover, crews of ice-breakers navigating the frozen waters report.“Since record keeping began in the ’60s, we’ve never encountered anything like this before,” ice-breaker Ulf Gulldne said.Almost 70,000 square miles of the Baltic Sea was covered in ice March 29, a record for the time of year,
No comments:
Post a Comment