Is the climate REALLY getting warmer or is this just a natural cycle?

[Ottakee]

I ask as I heard on the weather thatn 2012 was the warmest year on record for the US overall. Our milder winters also seem to fit with the "global warming" thing.

 

I wonder though as YEARS ago---as in hundreds of years ago (and therefore before modern pollution) Greenland was GREEN and Iceland was more inhabited. Those areas WERE warmer and had much milder climates than they do now.

 

Could this just be a natural cycle of change?

 

I also wonder as the land of Israel was described in OT times as the land flowing with milk and honey and huge crops, etc...........and now it looks much more like a desert.

[MomtoCandJ]

I'm not sure but I don't like it raining in January in Michigan. Dd don't like it either she wants lots of snow

[Parrothead]

Natural cycle.

[Parrothead]

I'm not sure but I don't like it raining in January in Michigan. Dd don't like it either she wants lots of snow

 

I was wondering were all this snow came from. We must have gotten what was meant for you.

[Cassy]

It's really getting warmer.

[pdalley]

Natural cycle.

 

 

Two years ago we had the coldest winter on record for our region. Right now we're having typical temps for our area - maybe more rain this year than the last.

 

I have two that are obsessed with meteorology. They have me fairly convinced we're in a cycle based on the records they pour over.

 

ETA: I remember when I was young - in the 70's - we were told the earth was cooling and we were having another ice age soon. Of course that was also when the rumor went around that if all the planets lined up then the world would end, etc.

[Parrothead]

It's really getting warmer.

 

There is little doubt that it is getting warmer. But this has happened before. We will cool back off in a few hundred years then everyone will be wondering if we did too much to cool things off.

[Momof3littles]

I'm sure you know this, but climate scientists urge us to not confuse weather and climate. Lots of people manage to confuse the two.

 

WHen we talk about climate, yes, I think the overall pattern is warming, ice is melting at rates even faster than predicted, etc. The overwhelming amount of scientists who specialize in the field feel it is warming. Many of the scientists who don't feel it is warming have taken money from the oil industry, etc. and it isn't always disclosed before publication. Several of these so-called scientists have been called out through the years, so be aware of that when looking at research and other publications.

 

editing since you cleared up what you are looking to hear. I would say man is contributing significantly.

 

Another interesting thing is that even if we get more snowstorms, it doesn't mean a lack of global warming. The two aren't contradictory. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123671588 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/20/uk-snow-global-warming

[Julie Smith]

From what I read and watched (Documentaries are my friends)

 

It is getting warmer. It's part of a natural cycle.

 

We might be having an affect on the natural cycle. But we aren't sure which way we are affecting the cycle. Meaning we might be making it get warmer very slightly faster or slower than the natural cycle. One thing for sure is if we are having an affect it is Very Very small.

[PrincessMommy]

I think the question needs to be asked a bit better (sorry). It is getting warmer - but is the Natural Cycle or Man made - or even both.

 

I think it's a mixture of many factors, of which man made is one. I think that it's part of the natural cycle of the earth (millions of years worth). We had a little ice age in the middle ages through the 1800's. It didn't just go away suddenly.

 

Also, I've read that scientists consider lack of volcanic action to be a contributing factor in the warming of the atmosphere - When Mt. Tambora erupted in 1815 it caused the "year without a summer" worldwide. Lakes still had ice on them in July in PA and crops failed worldwide. I can't remember some of the other factors I've read about that probably contribute to the over warmth of the earth. Of course, we really can't do anything about the natural causes . We can't legislate sun-spot activity ;) we can only change how man (gov'ts really) are contributing to it.

[Remudamom]

Natural cycle. And I'm enjoying it. Hate the cold.

[Ellie]

It is a natural cycle.

 

It is my understanding that there has been no actual rise in the earth's temperature since 1997. I don't know how one takes the earth's temperature, lol, but the whole global-warming scenario has been debunked multiple times. And substituting "climate change" instead of "global warming" doesn't change things, and certainly, to believe that humans could have any real affect on the climate of the earth is just silly.

[Ellie]

II also wonder as the land of Israel was described in OT times as the land flowing with milk and honey and huge crops, etc...........and now it looks much more like a desert.

 

I haven't been to Israel, but I understand that it does not, in fact, look like a desert since the Israelis have returned and replanted what was destroyed by others.

[Parrothead]

I'd just like to note that so far this discussion has been much more pleasant than the last time I entered a climate discussion. I've always been in the natural cycle camp, but at the height of the global warming frenzy I got my a$$ handed to me after stating my position. :lol:

[Cassy]

I'd just like to note that so far this discussion has been much more pleasant than the last time I entered a climate discussion. I've always been in the natural cycle camp, but at the height of the global warming frenzy I got my a$$ handed to me after stating my position. :lol:

 

 

When even the experts can't agree I'm not going to put my 'a$$' on the line!

 

I do, however, happen to believe that climate change is influenced by man-made activities. And from reading all the threads on religion, you just can't argue with belief :D .

[Elizabeth in MN]

I'm a firm believer that Global Climate change is a reality, and that it is a result of humanity and our over use of fossil fuels. I use to read a lot about it, and now I watch a variety of documentaries.

[gardenmom5]

considering the mideval warm period was warmer than it is now, *the majority* of "noaa approved" weather stations are in urban heat islands (e.g. airports where you have acres of tarmac and jet exhaust, even next to HVAC vents) thus compromising their readings - it's a natural cycle.

 

remember in the 70's some of the VERY same scientists were screaming "Ice Age".

[Mrs Mungo]

I ask as I heard on the weather thatn 2012 was the warmest year on record for the US overall. Our milder winters also seem to fit with the "global warming" thing.

 

I wonder though as YEARS ago---as in hundreds of years ago (and therefore before modern pollution) Greenland was GREEN and Iceland was more inhabited. Those areas WERE warmer and had much milder climates than they do now.

 

Both are cases of global warming. That cycle of global warming was caused by intense periods of volcanic activity. We know what happens during global warming because of previous warm periods that resulted from "natural" causes. This round isn't being caused by volcanic ash in the atmosphere. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=climate-change-disinformation-campaign

[Parrothead]

considering the mideval warm period was warmer than it is now, *the majority* of "noaa approved" weather stations are in urban heat islands (e.g. airports where you have acres of tarmac and jet exhaust, even next to HVAC vents) thus compromising their readings - it's a natural cycle.

 

remember in the 70's some of the VERY same scientists were screaming "Ice Age".

Funny. I remember when they started screaming global warming in the early70s.

[Paige]

Natural cycle. And I'm enjoying it. Hate the cold.

 

:iagree: It's getting warmer in general. For now. Who knows how long it will last? We were just watching a documentary on Iceland today and the narrator was talking about how it used to be warmer and how the Vikings could sail between Iceland and Greenland without getting trapped in ice like would happen today. So, it was warmer, then it cooled off, and now it is warming up again.

[lailasmum]

From what I understand the current weather this past year or so is a result of three separate natural cycles coinciding at a certain point. It happens every few hundred years. I also believe in global warming in the bigger picture.

[Mrs Mungo]

considering the mideval warm period was warmer than it is now, *the majority* of "noaa approved" weather stations are in urban heat islands (e.g. airports where you have acres of tarmac and jet exhaust, even next to HVAC vents) thus compromising their readings - it's a natural cycle.

 

remember in the 70's some of the VERY same scientists were screaming "Ice Age".

 

 

They still are. Periods of global warming lead to the ocean currents stopping. That's what leads to an Ice Age.

 

While there have been warmer and colder periods of Earth's history, scientists have a pretty good idea of what caused them then and what is causing it now.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2003/nov/13/comment.research

 

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Global-Warming

[mumto2]

ETA: I remember when I was young - in the 70's - we were told the earth was cooling and we were having another ice age soon. Of course that was also when the rumor went around that if all the planets lined up then the world would end, etc.

 

dh and I both remember being afraid that glaciers were going to suddenly appear and scoop up Michigan again in elementary school. Both of us had nightmares at one point about it. Different school systems and did not meet til we were 14. Obviously the world cooling and ice age coming was taught to us in a most convincing manner. I see lots of data and it is very hard to convince me that much of it is accurate. From second ice age to warming in about 40 years is pretty dramatic.

considering the mideval warm period was warmer than it is now, *the majority* of "noaa approved" weather stations are in urban heat islands (e.g. airports where you have acres of tarmac and jet exhaust, even next to HVAC vents) thus compromising their readings - it's a natural cycle.

remember in the 70's some of the VERY same scientists were screaming "Ice Age".

 

[Mergath]

The earth is definitely getting warmer. No one with any sense disputes that. My opinion is that there very well could be a natural cycle that has been greatly exacerbated by our actions. I think it's a bit naive to think that all the chemicals we've pumped into the atmosphere aren't going to have any effect. We thought for a long time that dumping all that garbage into the ocean wasn't going to hurt anything because the ocean is so big, but now we're finding out that isn't true. Animals are dying, plants are dying, and we have a giant island of plastic floating around in the Pacific Ocean.

[MomtoCandJ]

Gah! Dd is driving me nuts, this rain needs to turn to snow so she can play in it!!!!

[elfgivas]

I'm sure you know this, but climate scientists urge us to not confuse weather and climate. Lots of people manage to confuse the two.

 

WHen we talk about climate, yes, I think the overall pattern is warming, ice is melting at rates even faster than predicted, etc. The overwhelming amount of scientists who specialize in the field feel it is warming. Many of the scientists who don't feel it is warming have taken money from the oil industry, etc. and it isn't always disclosed before publication. Several of these so-called scientists have been called out through the years, so be aware of that when looking at research and other publications.

 

editing since you cleared up what you are looking to hear. I would say man is contributing significantly.

 

Another interesting thing is that even if we get more snowstorms, it doesn't mean a lack of global warming. The two aren't contradictory. http://www.npr.org/t...-global-warming

 

 

:iagree: this is part of what my dh, the scientist, studies. he uses the analogy of a marble in a bowl. with climate change, the marble goes higher and higher up the sides, all the sides. so there will be larger rainstorms and snow storms and more severe droughts and sand storms. there will be uncharacteristically cold events some place, uncharacteristically hot events other places. overall, the temperature is getting warmer. all of the rest comes from that.

 

he was right about the hotspots after 9/11 (which one of his instruments found). he was right about water on the moon (which another of his instruments found). he has measured various climate things for the past 15 years. i reckon he's right about this, too. certainly all my reading, quite aside from my relationship with him, leads me to the same conclusion, unfortunately.

 

i don't "believe" it or disbelieve it. we've observed a lot of things. those observations show us things. we draw conclusions from those things. there is nothing to believe or disbelieve.

 

and fwiw, there is not one of his colleagues, nationally or internationally, who challenge the observations and results. not one. and believe me, they are incredibly cautious and take many, many measurements. i will never forget the time right after 9/11, where the looking at data happened non stop in many places and came thru our house. nor the months and months after several of them independently found the tell tale signature for water on the moon. extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. climate change is one of those. the data really is irrefutable. there are a few folks with science degrees in a few places who make a fair bit of money challenging it, but the ones in the field doing the work are increasingly horrified by what they are seeing. me, too.

 

ann

[Lady Florida.]

 

 

:iagree: this is part of what my dh, the scientist, studies. he uses the analogy of a marble in a bowl. with climate change, the marble goes higher and higher up the sides, all the sides. so there will be larger rainstorms and snow storms and more severe droughts and sand storms. there will be uncharacteristically cold events some place, uncharacteristically hot events other places. overall, the temperature is getting warmer. all of the rest comes from that.

 

he was right about the hotspots after 9/11 (which one of his instruments found). he was right about water on the moon (which another of his instruments found). he has measured various climate things for the past 15 years. i reckon he's right about this, too. certainly all my reading, quite aside from my relationship with him, leads me to the same conclusion, unfortunately.

 

i don't "believe" it or disbelieve it. we've observed a lot of things. those observations show us things. we draw conclusions from those things. there is nothing to believe or disbelieve.

 

and fwiw, there is not one of his colleagues, nationally or internationally, who challenge the observations and results. not one. and believe me, they are incredibly cautious and take many, many measurements. i will never forget the time right after 9/11, where the looking at data happened non stop in many places and came thru our house. nor the months and months after several of them independently found the tell tale signature for water on the moon. extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. climate change is one of those. the data really is irrefutable. there are a few folks with science degrees in a few places who make a fair bit of money challenging it, but the ones in the field doing the work are increasingly horrified by what they are seeing. me, too.

 

ann

 

 

:001_wub:

[MistyMountain]

There is a natural warming and cooling cycle but our actions are causing a greenhouse effect. It simple science that putting gases in the atmosphere that we can measure being there contribute to warming. The majority of scientists and all peer reviewed journal articles pretty much agree that human actions are contributing to a warming cycle. There is debate about how much and what it means but there is consensus on lots of aspects of it. It isn't a debate or something to be believed like people make it out to be. It is what happens and is observed.

[Ipsey]

I ask as I heard on the weather thatn 2012 was the warmest year on record for the US overall. Our milder winters also seem to fit with the "global warming" thing.

 

I wonder though as YEARS ago---as in hundreds of years ago (and therefore before modern pollution) Greenland was GREEN and Iceland was more inhabited. Those areas WERE warmer and had much milder climates than they do now.

 

Could this just be a natural cycle of change?

 

I also wonder as the land of Israel was described in OT times as the land flowing with milk and honey and huge crops, etc...........and now it looks much more like a desert.

 

There are natural cycles of change.

 

This is not one.

 

A very strong majority of climate-based scientists around the world (over 90%, worldwide, and over 97% in the US) are convinced that this warming is man-made.

 

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.abstract

 

When I was religious, I found it much easier to laugh this off. To scorn the science. To pretend that there was some greater understanding, some special magic that was just reducing scientists to fools. Now, I understand science, and I accept it over my wants, wishes, hopes, fears, etc.

 

I don't understand all of science, and neither does anyone else, but thousands of people who are the most educated in this area of research have come to a consensus, and I'm going to go with them.

 

I'd be a dummy to pretend I knew their field better than they did.

[Ewe Mama]

Natural cycle.

[linders]

While I believe that the climate has certainly cycled in the past, I also believe that the latest warming trend is happening at an accelerated rate, due in part to human activities. The result is that animals and plants cannot always adapt quickly enough. We will lose species nand habitats, and the impacts are difficult to forecast.

[Reya]

Every time the East Coast is warm, the newscasters scream about global warming. Every time it's cold, they talk about how it is a fluke.

 

When I lived in NM and had a TERRIBLE, bitter winter when the East Coast was warm, I wanted to march over to New York and beat them all to death with my snow shovel.

 

I'm not even sure there is ANY real warming trend over the past century, once you get past the manipulated--excuse me, ADJUSTED--figures, much less that it's caused by humans.

[justamouse]

The university professors I've asked have emphatically and foamingly stated it's a natural cycle. I really wasn't expecting how passionate about the whole thing they were but, there you go.

 

So. Natural cycle.

[elfgivas]

The university professors I've asked have emphatically and foamingly stated it's a natural cycle. I really wasn't expecting how passionate about the whole thing they were but, there you go.

 

So. Natural cycle.

 

hi -

 

could you pm me who you've been talking to?

 

thanks,

ann

[Reya]

 

When I was religious, I found it much easier to laugh this off. To scorn the science. To pretend that there was some greater understanding, some special magic that was just reducing scientists to fools. Now, I understand science, and I accept it over my wants, wishes, hopes, fears, etc.

 

I don't understand all of science, and neither does anyone else, but thousands of people who are the most educated in this area of research have come to a consensus, and I'm going to go with them.

 

I'd be a dummy to pretend I knew their field better than they did.

 

I understand the science, which is why I scorn it. And no, there isn't a consensus. Those who disagree are suppressed, if not simply ejected. And the most prominent "scientist" in the UK has been caught talking about how they need to manipulate data before people find out that their predictions were so wrong. Where is the science in that?

 

Just because there is a consensus doesn't mean it's right, either. There was a scientific consensus for 2,300 YEARS that women could only get pregnant if they have an orgasm. They had all kinds of evidence. They were WRONG.

 

There was a consensus for nearly as long that bad air or fumes was the major cause of sickness. Germ theory was a REVOLUTION, and it faced enormous contempt and opposition because the CONSENSUS was that it was bunk. Tiny animals? You have to be joking.

 

You clearly haven't had many close ties with academia, to buy into the idea that scientists are above mere mortals in their lack of bias and self-interest.

 

Man-made global warming is POSSIBLE, but no great amount from CO2. We're near the saturation point above which CO2 CAN'T do anything more. There are WAY scarier things that we really, really, REALLY do need to keep an eye on these things. But they're going to lose everyone's trust over this CO2 nonsense, and no one will listen when the physics actually is there to back them up.

[Reya]

The university professors I've asked have emphatically and foamingly stated it's a natural cycle. I really wasn't expecting how passionate about the whole thing they were but, there you go.

 

So. Natural cycle.

Yup. Same here.

[BrookValley.]

Global warming is a misleading term. Yes, the earth is getting warmer (I believe it is caused by human impact, or at the very least a natural cycle exacerbated by human impacts, because I believe in science), but this causes climate change, which is the term that actually describes what we see happening. The fact that some areas had colder, snowier winters does not mean global warming does not exist; it is evidence toward the fact that it does. The greenhouse effect causes weather extremes, including colder than average temperatures in some places, precipitation changes, droughts, more powerful storms (tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.). I thought this was all common knowledge at this point? The scientific evidence is pretty overwhelming to this affect.

[Reya]

While I believe that the climate has certainly cycled in the past, I also believe that the latest warming trend is happening at an accelerated rate, due in part to human activities. The result is that animals and plants cannot always adapt quickly enough. We will lose species nand habitats, and the impacts are difficult to forecast.

 

Like the poor polar bears?

 

Who are now more numerous than since we began recording population data for them?

[twoxcell]

It sure isn't getting warmer in Oregon. ;) The last 3 years have been the coldest in awhile. I'm still waiting for last Summer to start. Ok only half kidding. I think it is all part of natural cycles.

[Reya]

It sure isn't getting warmer in Oregon. ;) The last 3 years have been the coldest in awhile. I'm still waiting for last Summer to start. Ok only half kidding. I think it is all part of natural cycles.

 

 

You don't live on the East Coast, so anything that happens there isn't real.

[swimmermom3]

When even the experts can't agree I'm not going to put my 'a$$' on the line!

 

I do, however, happen to believe that climate change is influenced by man-made activities. And from reading all the threads on religion, you just can't argue with belief :D .

 

 

I always find it difficult to pick out exactly what people are asking or what they are looking at in these types of conversations.

 

For example, I can believe that we are in a natural warming cycle, but I also believe that man-made activities can create some really messy results. A local manufacturing plant in our lovely state pumps a level of Benzene into the air. This is not the greatest thing to breath, but hey, they are a major employer and tax-benefit recipient, so that's cool. Literally. The Benzene combined with other chemicals create a "frost zone" around the plant where when the temperatures become lower, the area around the plant frosts over or freezes earlier than the adjacent areas. To my mind, that is "climate change-artificially induced."

 

I thought I would add this into the mix as well. I remember Richard Muller from before he believed in global warming. He was a very outspoken critic.

 

I am correcting myself. What I remembered was the 2004 article that caused a bunch of backlash. Muller was a critic of the methodology used to measure and predict global warming.

[Mrs Mungo]

Global warming is a misleading term. Yes, the earth is getting warmer (I believe it is caused by human impact, or at the very least a natural cycle exacerbated by human impacts, because I believe in science), but this causes climate change, which is the term that actually describes what we see happening. The fact that some areas had colder, snowier winters does not mean global warming does not exist; it is evidence toward the fact that it does. The greenhouse effect causes weather extremes, including colder than average temperatures in some places, precipitation changes, droughts, more powerful storms (tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.). I thought this was all common knowledge at this point? The scientific evidence is pretty overwhelming to this affect.

 

 

I agree.

 

I also agree that man is contributing to what has only happened in the past due to natural phenomena. I think implying that it is just part of a cycle is also misleading. Previous warm periods (that warmed the oceans, leading to ice ages) were due to phenomena like heavy volcanic activity, not a "cycle."

 

From what I am reading here, many people don't remotely what it is that scientists even believe. I encourage you to read the articles I posted. They are all from well-regarded sources.

[Carol in Cal.]

I find the scientific data in support of a significant human contribution to this particular global warming to be convincing. Certainly there is an aspect that is contributed to by natural cycles in the mix as well.

[fraidycat]

Natural cycle.

[elfgivas]

 

I understand the science, which is why I scorn it.

 

 

Man-made global warming is POSSIBLE, but no great amount from CO2. We're near the saturation point above which CO2 CAN'T do anything more. There are WAY scarier things that we really, really, REALLY do need to keep an eye on these things. But they're going to lose everyone's trust over this CO2 nonsense, and no one will listen when the physics actually is there to back them up.

 

 

hi reya -

 

which data have you been looking at? i started several years ago with the vostok ice core.... the raw data is available on line.

 

you lost me at "no one will listen when the physics actually is there to back them up". can you say more?

 

thanks,

ann

[Mrs Mungo]

Question: can any of you on the "only a natural cycle" side of things provide scientific evidence from a reliable source to back up your opinion? I can hold the opinion the Dick Cheney is a robot. But without evidence for my opinion? People are going to think I am crazy/uninformed/ignorant/a kook, which is fair, IMO.

[Parrothead]

It sure isn't getting warmer in Oregon. ;) The last 3 years have been the coldest in awhile. I'm still waiting for last Summer to start. Ok only half kidding. I think it is all part of natural cycles.

 

We didn't have a summer here in 2012. Or maybe we had 3 days of summer. Seemed everyone I talked to said their gardens failed.

[Reya]

Vostok ice core data showed CO2 trailing warming--cause and effect are backward.

 

I'm talking about things like this. Simple, stupid, elementary mistakes. http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=195

 

The model for the earth is flat wrong. The earth should be modeled as a black body. In the IPCC models, it is modeled such that its temperature does not change the amount of radiation it emits--radiation is constant in all IPCC models. If I used the same assumption for my wood stove, it'd work just as well without a fire in it as with.

 

Basically, in terms of explaining problems that other chemicals can cause, in simple terms, any element can only absorb and then release energy at certain wavelengths. Once that element is absorbing all the available energy at the wave lengths it can absorb, it's done. That's saturation. Oxygen is at saturation. Carbon is close. Lots of elements are NOT usually found in our atmosphere, so their warming potentials are really, really high if they are released in a gaseous form at sufficient quantities.

[ktgrok]

It is a natural cycle.

 

It is my understanding that there has been no actual rise in the earth's temperature since 1997. I don't know how one takes the earth's temperature, lol, but the whole global-warming scenario has been debunked multiple times. And substituting "climate change" instead of "global warming" doesn't change things, and certainly, to believe that humans could have any real affect on the climate of the earth is just silly.

 

 

 

I don't understand how it is silly. If we clearcut forrests that used to absorb certain gasses, if we pave over ground and build buildings that retain much more heat than dirt/natural ground cover, if we throw all sorts of chemicals into the air, how could those things NOT effect the climate in some way or another?

[fraidycat]

I couldn't get the full article on the TIME website, because I am not a subscriber - but here is an article from 1974.

 

http://www.freerepub...s/1663607/posts

 

As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.