Leading Ipcc Scientist Now Calling For Mini Ice Age

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Don't worry Sun, when Fox News new Commentator- Sarah Palin, starts presenting facts that man walked with Dinosaurs, you will have all the data you crave.

 

Regards Mike

 

If the IPCC release more studies about a pending ice age she will probably misinterpret and assume they are talking about a pending bar fridge to keep the beer chilled after a day shooting wolves from copters and having a stare down with their Russian neighbours.

[bhurt]

Here is all I have to say about the ocean currents changing and effecting the weather.

 

1) What about all the open seweage that is pumped back into the oceans by other nations?

 

2) What about the mass merduer of all the sharks in Costa Rico and the Gollapogos Islands (Watch Sharkwaters for more info)

 

3) Talking about the poler ice shelfs melting, then why are you driving on the ice highways or any of the roads out there, the exhaust, and heat generated by vechicles are melting them faster then the weather.

 

4) What about all the open buring of plastics and what not doen by other nations are doing?

 

In retrospec I think there are other nations then N. America that needs to straighten up their act, but hey oil is view as the evil in the world so the oilsands is the prime cause (which by the way is less then 1% of the popultion in the world) and if you haven't got it yet my whole thing about the oil sands is sarcasm.

[trailhead]

Still...all theories aside...so far none of the IPCC's theory or models have worked or proven correct. They keep changing them yearly. That says...the model theory is seriously flawed. When would you agree to surgery when the range of complications could be a headache to a painful death without more information?

 

Yeah well what about the earthquake in Haiti?

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Yeah well what about the earthquake in Haiti?

 

It just seems there has been a rash of earthquakes lately. Sure glad I live in Alberta

 

[trailhead]

And Global Warming is to blame, same for H1N1, SARS, Mad Cow and all the volcanoes erupting. It's prophesized by Nostradamus, the Mayans, Revelations and the Book of the Dead.

[Guest Sundancefisher]

The BBC is considered pro global warming

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8462890.stm

 

Met Office's debate over longer-term forecasts

By Roger Harrabin

Environment analyst, BBC News

 

Met Office (SPL)

The Met Office's seasonal forecasts rely partly on statistical projections

 

The UK Met Office is debating what to do with its long-term and seasonal forecasting after criticism for failing to predict extreme weather.

 

Some experts say the Met Office should stop longer-term forecasting because it damages the organisation's reputation.

 

Others maintain that communication of the forecasts must be improved.

 

The Met Office has been criticised for failing to predict in its seasonal forecasts the UK would suffer this cold winter or the last three wet summers.

 

After being rapped for its now notorious "barbecue summer" press release, the winter forecast was expressed in probabilistic terms, with a 66% likelihood that the winter would be warmer than average and a one in seven chance that it would be colder.

 

The Met Office has now admitted to BBC News that its annual global mean forecast predicted temperatures higher than actual temperatures for nine years out of the last 10.

 

This "warming bias" is very small - just 0.05C. And the Met Office points out that the variance between the forecast and the actual temperature is within its own stated margins of error.

 

These annual forecasts are not awful - they accurately predicted two of the cooler years, for instance. But they are not great, either

Professor Andrew Watson, UEA

 

Paul Hudson: Long-range forecasts

 

Professor Chris Folland from the Met Office said a re-analysis of weather science might even show that the actual temperature measurements have under-recorded recent warming - making the Met Office forecast even more accurate than it appears.

 

But some scientists contacted by BBC News say the organisation needs to discover why there is a consistent bias towards warming, however slight.

 

Andrew Watson, a Royal Society environment fellow from the University of East Anglia's school of environmental sciences, said: "These annual forecasts are not awful - they accurately predicted two of the cooler years, for instance. But they are not great, either.

 

"The warming bias is admittedly very small - but the Met Office has to address why it is there. It will certainly be very difficult to get rid of - they can't just knock a bit off their forecast - that would be totally unscientific."

 

Rain or shine?

 

Professor Watson said the warming bias - first mooted on Paul Hudson's BBC weather blog - should not affect trust in the Met Office's climate projections, which are based on a different methodology.

 

But he said the medium-term projections were undermining public faith in the Met Office overall.

 

"I don't know why the Met Office bothers with these annual forecasts - [these forecasts] have a very low reputation in meteorology and climatology. No one really believes them anyway. They should just stop doing them," he said.

 

The climate scientist Mike Hulme - respected in many quarters of the climate debate - agreed on the need for change.

 

"These sorts of seasonal forecasts are of dubious value to the public," Professor Hulme, also of UEA, explained.

 

"It would probably be much better if the Met Office didn't attempt to persuade the public that it can forecast annual temperature to two decimal places given uncertainties in forecasting and in the measurements themselves," he said.

 

Long and short of it

 

But Professor Stephen Mobbs, director of the National Centre for Atmospheric Science at Leeds University, said the warming bias in the annual prediction was a red herring.

 

"All models have biases and these are very small. It may be, as the Met Office suggests, that the observations are wrong, not the model."

 

But Professor Mobbs criticised the Met Office's communication of its forecasts. "The Met Office is a truly world-class organisation - we are lucky to have it," he said.

 

The University of Leeds researcher added: "They need to say that these longer-term forecasts are experimental and not use ridiculous phrases like 'barbecue summer' dreamed up by the communications people."

 

"When you see Met Office people on TV now they have a look of panic - and they dig themselves deeper into a hole. The short term forecasts are excellent. They should say the longer-term ones are highly uncertain, then keep modifying them.

 

"For some reason, the Met Office isn't telling the public what it knows about the weather for the next week - and what we ourselves can tell from looking at the Met Office data."

 

Weather and climate

 

Professor Mobbs agreed that the experimental nature of annual forecasting should not undermine climate forecasting.

 

'If you run the (computer) model one year it might not come out right but over 50-100 years you will be able to predict that the climate is getting warmer on average but not if, say, 2031 will be a warmer or a colder year.'

 

Some staff at the Met Office itself are angry that seasonal forecasting is damaging its reputation. Sources confirm that the organisation is debating how to react to public criticism on the issue.

 

In recent years the Met Office has increasingly expressed its forecasts in probabilistic language, hedged with error bars.

 

But Matt Huddlestone, who deals with public understanding at the Met Office, told me that the media constantly over-simplified the forecasts to remove the probabilities. "I actually think the public are capable of understanding probabilities much more than some of the papers think," he said.

 

Others see the problem as one of forecasting rather than communication. Piers Corbyn, the independent weather forecaster, predicted the winter cold many months ago, to the surprise of many meteorologists. He says the Met Office failed to warn of extreme events in their seasonal forecasts because they are employing a computer model based on the assumption of man-made climate change.

 

Public confidence

 

But the Met Office's seasonal and annual forecasts rely partly on statistical projections, not just computer modelling.

 

And many other meteorologists mistrust Mr Corbyn himself because he refuses to publish his scientific methods. I have been asking him for several months to offer independent corroboration of his forecasting successes but none has been supplied.

 

Some other forecasters say he has major forecasting successes but equally large failures which he does not mention.

 

I have been discussing with the Royal Statistical Society, the Royal Meteorological Society and the Public Weather Service whether an index can be created comparing the records of all reputable forecasters making weather projections in the UK.

 

A weather index could allow the public to see over the years who is really getting it right over long-term weather.

 

In the meantime, the Met Office has to make difficult decisions. Some commentators say that if they stay in the long-term weather game and trip up again, they may be pilloried. If they withdraw, they may be accused of losing faith in their methodology - and public confidence in science could be eroded - whether that is fair or not.

 

Many researchers are likely to feel that they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

 

 

[daxlarsen]

One of the most amusing aspects of global warming is the hypocrasy of it all. for example. the govt. makes regulations on CO2 emissions and other gases into the atmosphere. major corporations are faced with 2 options (unless it is a new facility that they already invested millions possibly hundreds of millions on new equipment.

 

option 1 : spend millions and millions on upgrading current factory floor to meet current regulations on emissions and efficiency.

 

option 2 : close factory and and open a new one in china for 1/10th the cost it would to upgrade old facility, and work force over there is way cheaper and there are NO regulations on emissions and they polute the piss out of everything in the area and now there are no troutskies in any of their rivers (i dunno if there ever was actualy)

 

Now I'm not ignorant and I'm not gonna sit here and say humans have no affect on the environment. Absolutely we do, but I am not ignorant enough to jump on board the latest fear mongering population controlling media headline. (btw has anyone heard anything about global warming on television ever since swine flu?) uhm there is a storm raging on jupiter that is 3 times the surface area of earth and it's been going on estimated for hundreds of years. humans have been monitoring weather for like 50-60 years and suddenly they're saying that is a wierd trend in the weather? I'de like to see the time machine they used to monitor the weather for the all the other hundreds millions of years that earth has been around and then show me the trend because that might be worth looking at. even 500 years of monitoring would be a mere eyeblink in the lifespan of this planet, and I'm seriously more worried about a giant asteroid hitting the earth and ending us all and even the trouts would die, but the whitefish would probably still live I think cause there are so many.

[daxlarsen]

Don't worry Sun, when Fox News new Commentator- Sarah Palin, starts presenting facts that man walked with Dinosaurs, you will have all the data you crave.

 

Regards Mike

 

Ok seriously do not hesitate and please go to http://creationmuseum.org/ i know what you're thinking, this is a REAL museum somewhere in a redneck state that actually has exhibits of man walking with dinosaurs (because you know 4000 years ago when god created the earth dinosaurs were still around right) it's worth a laugh and my god, people ACTUALLY buy this stuff it's priceless.

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Ok seriously do not hesitate and please go to http://creationmuseum.org/ i know what you're thinking, this is a REAL museum somewhere in a redneck state that actually has exhibits of man walking with dinosaurs (because you know 4000 years ago when god created the earth dinosaurs were still around right) it's worth a laugh and my god, people ACTUALLY buy this stuff it's priceless.

 

I know a number of geologists (that are good) that believe in creationism. Don't know how...but they do.