For centuries, there have been cycles of changes in the weather. In the 1880's there were predictions of another ice age....Whatever will get the media to hype up the public
I'll own up. I don't know the answer, and nor I suspect do you. But having read your linked article and the online activity around it, I'm persuaded to vote 'no':
1. Oleg Sorokhtin's article is highly editorial in its style: no citations, no scientific detail to speak of, just rather woolly prose.
2. He seems to have some associations with a paper by University of Southern California scientists L.F. Khilyuk and G. V. Chilingar entitled: “On global forces of nature driving the Earth’s climate. Are humans involved?”. This paper has been soundly rubbished by climatologists.
Back to messing with time scales, according to the solar cycle, we have been cooling slightly the past several years, and will 'soon' begin to warm up again -- this is yet another situation in which I have clicked the mental 'unvote' button.
Discussion (14)
For centuries, there have been cycles of changes in the weather. In the 1880's there were predictions of another ice age....Whatever will get the media to hype up the public
the DeVries cycle;
Only now we have much better data than before. Time will tell, in any case, eh?
data is every upward supposedly; in ten years, our data will be stone age material.
btw: 500 comments; this is comment #500!!!
(I apologize in advance for the "!"'s.
), and apparently, my profile says that was #501, I always seem to miss the important moments in my jyte-life.
I feel honored to be your 500th claim!!!!!!
Than I take it back....!!!!!
If we expand 'soon' to be on a galactic scale, the sun isn't gonna be here forever, people.
soon is an awesome word, isn't it? It can mean almost any length of time, from nanoseconds to billions of milennium.
I referenced in tags by 2012...when speaking of global trends, 4 years is a blink of an eye....
I'll own up. I don't know the answer, and nor I suspect do you. But having read your linked article and the online activity around it, I'm persuaded to vote 'no':
1. Oleg Sorokhtin's article is highly editorial in its style: no citations, no scientific detail to speak of, just rather woolly prose.
2. He seems to have some associations with a paper by University of Southern California scientists L.F. Khilyuk and G. V. Chilingar entitled: “On global forces of nature driving the Earth’s climate. Are humans involved?”. This paper has been soundly rubbished by climatologists.
The Khilyuk/Chilingar paper is rebutted here, though unfortunately, as I write, the Harvard site in question is down.
In the meantime, here's another more oblique commentary.
I'll get back to you with a better counter when I can.
Back to messing with time scales, according to the solar cycle, we have been cooling slightly the past several years, and will 'soon' begin to warm up again -- this is yet another situation in which I have clicked the mental 'unvote' button.
Oh, by 2012? No, your source is probably on the crack rocks, then.
I think it's saying that an evil wizard is going to cast a cold spell on the earth rendering global warming moot.