Mini Ice Age animals know first

[Galdorf]

Seems arctic birds are showing up in US and birds common to the US and Canada have been showing up in the arctic such as robins this has not been seen for almost 300 years and that was the last mini ice age where 1/3 of world population died.

 

[Galdorf]

More proof huge snow falls in middle east as much as 1 foot of snow this has not been seen in over 100 years yet 2013,2014,2015 snow has been falling, i think the Mayan calendar marked the start of an ice age not end of the world.

 

[seedubya]

I wonder how your logic works - this last year has been the hottest year, globally, since records began. Hotter than the previous hottest year, 2013. Yet you pick a couple of isolated, completely unscientific examples of birds and cold weather to show how we're entering a mini-ice age. It doesn't make sense to me.

 

[seedubya]

-- Mini Ice Age Animals -- They know everything......

 

[NYJimbo]

I wonder how your logic works

Want to have some fun ? Go to the advanced search function of this forum. Search for the word "scary" posted by the user "galdorf", search on all forums.
I think the results are quite telling.

 

[Galdorf]

I wonder how your logic works - this last year has been the hottest year, globally, since records began. Hotter than the previous hottest year, 2013. Yet you pick a couple of isolated, completely unscientific examples of birds and cold weather to show how we're entering a mini-ice age. It doesn't make sense to me.

Hottest year where?, last year was the coldest year where i live in recorded history so cold in fact the leaves did not show til late june and we are in the coldest, most snow ever recorded this year again.
What about New York worst winter storms ever in history.... temps in middle east dropped to sub zero temps if you think this is normal think again do your own research and you will see that article is full BS.

 

[phaZed]

Meanwhile, back on Earth..

2014 Hottest Year Since Records Began, Earth Officially Melting
2014 Was The Hottest Year Since At Least 1880, Government Finds

Meanwhile, in Ontario Canada, Earth, Ontario had it's coldest winter in 18 years... not recorded history. Also, the rest of Canada was not the same as Ontario:

Hottest year on global record was Canada's coolest in 18 years. Despite that, the country was 0.1 C warmer than 'average'

NOAA reported many corners of the Earth experienced record heat last year, including most of Europe, the western U.S., part of interior South America and swaths of the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian oceans.

But in Canada, it was our coolest year since 1996, Phillips said. Of course, that doesn't mean it was cooler than average. "It was tad warmer than normal in Canada, believe it or not," Phillips said. By a "tad," he means the average temperature across the country from December 2013 to November 2014 was 0.1 C warmer than the annual average since Canada started keeping nationwide records in 1947.
Of course, most of the past two decades have been unusually warm, which is how it is possible for the coolest year in 18 years to be warmer than "average."...
....
"We didn't have one warm season – winter was colder than normal, spring was colder than normal, summer was colder than normal, and fall – well it was right on normal."

...However, that was counterbalanced by hotter than normal temperatures in British Columbia, the Arctic and Newfoundland and Labrador.

Ah, the 'ol stick the head in the sand trick, eh?

EDIT:
As far as snowfall, not anywhere near a record snowfall for canada:
http://www.onthesnow.com/british-columbia/whistler-blackcomb/historical-snowfall.html?&y=0&v=graph
http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/atlas/themes.aspx?id=weather&sub=weather_phenomena_records&lang=En

 

[seedubya]

Galdorf - you seem to be conflating weather and climate. They're actually different when taken on a global scale. As for "hotter where?" how about the whole world when taken as one? Your "examples" are like saying my PC is NOT running too hot - look it's really cool here beside the case fan.

It is my personal policy not to listen to what little birds tell me - they're the worst source ever, particularly for climate data (but also gossip).

Here's an article for you to ignore that's based on the reading of some actual science http://www.iflscience.com/environment/humanity-existential-danger-zone-study-confirms-1

 

[Dave1320]

As long as no one in here says the mini-ice age and global warming are man made, I have no issues with any of you. Lol

 

[phaZed]

As long as no one in here says the mini-ice age and global warming are man made, I have no issues with any of you. Lol

Are you being facetious? I can't tell. In case your not..

I'm sure you're aware that CO2 levels are the highest they have been for 800,000 years. I'm also sure your aware that CO2 is a greenhouse gas (and yes, that has been tested in a laboratory and repeated.. and known for some time). I am very interested to see that temperature variations appear to be directly proportional to the earths climate. If CO2 is not the leading cause of global warming, what is? If humans are not the source of that CO2, what is? The rest of the world is awaiting your stimulating research as to what is causing a global rise in CO2 emmissions/global content of CO2.

The debate is over in the scientific community, now we're just waiting for the peons to catch up.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm

In the scientific field of climate studies – which is informed by many different disciplines – the consensus is demonstrated by the number of scientists who have stopped arguing about what is causing climate change – and that’s nearly all of them. A survey of 928 peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject 'global climate change' published between 1993 and 2003 shows that not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused (Oreskes 2004).

A follow-up study by the Skeptical Science team of over 12,000 peer-reviewed abstracts on the subjects of 'global warming' and 'global climate change' published between 1991 and 2011 found that of the papers taking a position on the cause of global warming, over 97% agreed that humans are causing it (Cook 2013). The scientific authors of the papers were also contacted and asked to rate their own papers, and again over 97% whose papers took a position on the cause said humans are causing global warming.

..Or the video version http://bcove.me/c1li8rcl

 

[Dave1320]

Not facetious, but comical. Respectfully, agree to completely disagree. My reply is going to be simple as to not cause a 500 page argument. Your science has been proven to be a fraud. I will not comment any further.

Are you being facetious? I can't tell. In case your not..

I'm sure you're aware that CO2 levels are the highest they have been for 800,000 years. I'm also sure your aware that CO2 is a greenhouse gas (and yes, that has been tested in a laboratory and repeated.. and known for some time). I am very interested to see that temperature variations appear to be directly proportional to the earths climate. If CO2 is not the leading cause of global warming, what is? If humans are not the source of that CO2, what is? The rest of the world is awaiting your stimulating research as to what is causing a global rise in CO2 emmissions/global content of CO2.

The debate is over in the scientific community, now we're just waiting for the peons to catch up.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm


..Or the video version http://bcove.me/c1li8rcl

 

[phaZed]

Respectfully, agree to completely disagree. My reply is going to be simple as to not cause a 500 page argument. Your science has been proven to be a fraud. I will not comment any further.

Absolutely. I respectfully agree to completely disagree as well as appreciate your (and others') points of view and you will get nothing but respect, my friend. It seems you do not care to hold yourself to that standard, however.

I find it troublesome to have someone "take a jab" at others for their point of view while you get to be smug with yours (which is the minority). Then, you go on to say:

My reply is going to be simple as to not cause a 500 page argument. Your science has been proven to be a fraud. I will not comment any further.

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - of which you have provided none and are unwilling to even provide a link to an outside source that would support such a claim. We're not asking for a 500 page set of posts, a link will do. If "my" science has been proven to be a fraud, please, by all means give us a link to the proof, otherwise, you do not get to make such statements of ill merit without experiencing resistance.

These forums are for help and there are plenty here that are logical and willing to do so. It is important not to delude ourselves into thinking something that is not the truth - and I'm generally speaking here.. we do this all the time on the forums. Posts about viruses and weird troubleshooting problems are often to concur our findings with others so we're not deluding ourselves into the wrong course of action.

I would be happy to logically review the evidence, with you, that has led to your understanding of Climate Change. Let's face it, if your RIGHT - I want to know the truth. What's the harm at looking at all sides logically to further strengthen your position? Your not much of a person if you don't want others to know the truth, so, let's hear it!

 

[Dave1320]

Absolutely. I respectfully agree to completely disagree as well as appreciate your (and others') points of view and you will get nothing but respect, my friend. It seems you do not care to hold yourself to that standard, however.

I find it troublesome to have someone "take a jab" at others for their point of view while you get to be smug with yours (which is the minority). Then, you go on to say:


As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - of which you have provided none and are unwilling to even provide a link to an outside source that would support such a claim. We're not asking for a 500 page set of posts, a link will do. If "my" science has been proven to be a fraud, please, by all means give us a link to the proof, otherwise, you do not get to make such statements of ill merit without experiencing resistance.

These forums are for help and there are plenty here that are logical and willing to do so. It is important not to delude ourselves into thinking something that is not the truth - and I'm generally speaking here.. we do this all the time on the forums. Posts about viruses and weird troubleshooting problems are often to concur our findings with others so we're not deluding ourselves into the wrong course of action.

I would be happy to logically review the evidence, with you, that has led to your understanding of Climate Change. Let's face it, if your RIGHT - I want to know the truth. What's the harm at looking at all sides logically to further strengthen your position? Your not much of a person if you don't want others to know the truth, so, let's hear it!

Phazed, take a deep breath. I was being comical because two people had completely opposite views and both thoroughly convinced their version is the correct one.

It's going to get hot and it's going to get cold. I love science. I'm thoroughly sad by which it has been perverted. Again, a simple reply, there are so many lies it's hard to believe anything now a days. Truthfully, I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. I hope you have a good night.

 

[Galdorf]

More proof and remember people though Galileo was thought to be a nut case as well as Nicoli Tesla,Issac newton,Aristotle,Ford and dozens more
http://sputniknews.com/world/20140919/193093969.html
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...turn-of-mini-ice-age/articleshow/45959671.cms
http://germanherald.com/news/Germany_in_Focus/2013-03-31/2331/Prof_Warns_Mini_Ice_Age_has_Started
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/entries/6d50a6bd-779a-32d6-bfca-06e4484d6835
http://www.vocativ.com/world/russia/heating-electricity-20-siberia/
http://iceagenow.info/2015/01/record-snowfall-western-norway-2-3-meters-6-10-feet/
if you think 6-10 feet of snow is normal better check your facts
http://tuoitrenews.vn/society/25313/tropical-snowfall-causes-congestion-in-sa-pa-photos
Ho what snow in a tropical country no has to be global warming
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/287573441.html
and finally the one article that was quoted that 2014 was warmest hahahaha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-year-record-38-sure-right.html#ixzz3PDyxXqU8

Mini ice ages have been happening throughout history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age
If you don't think the sun has anything to do with climate change think again i can list 20 top scientists
that show the sun on a minimum at the moment every time this has happened in past a mini ige age started.
I can show over 600 examples of record cold and snowfall around the world snowfalls of 6-10ft and temps -20 to -30 lower than normal.

 

[Metanis]

I love threads on Global Warming hysteria. The world has been ending soon for some reason or another since the beginning of time. Just another reason for mankind to invent a new religion and the trappings that follow from that.

 

[seedubya]

I love threads on Global Warming hysteria. The world has been ending soon for some reason or another since the beginning of time. Just another reason for mankind to invent a new religion and the trappings that follow from that.

I'm not hysterical. The world's not ending and I don't have or hold any religion. I DETEST religion in all its forms. I change my views when evidence warrants it. But then, I'm skeptical of EVERYTHING. I try to believe nothing without accompanying, peer-reviewed, scientific evidence. I try to be aware of my biases and to examine alternative views to counter that. I was very skeptical of climate change until I put in some real time trying to reach a balanced viewpoint on this issue. If the balance of evidence changes about anthropomorphic climate change then I will change my views accordingly. Right now the balance of evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of a warming world, with humans being responsible for some or all of that. The massive rate of extinctions is real. Ocean temperature rise is real etc. etc. etc.

So with all due respect, Metanis, you're wrong about me and people like me i.e. those who try to base their lives on reason.

 

[Dave1320]

Follow the money

 

[coffee]

 

[phaZed]

Lord Monckton is a fool. Here's a step by step with explanations, the studies and how Monckton uses that data incorrectly (or makes it up entirely!)

http://static.stthomas.edu/jpabraha...dium=Vanity&utm_campaign=Abraham Presentation

https://www.technibble.com/forums/threads/dont-believe-everything-you-read.61064/#post-470411

 

[phaZed]

Follow the money

Yes, and when you do.. where does it lead?