# I'm sick of this Global Warming! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 16, 2013, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440 "2013-08-16T18:57:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 220
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2015, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4381 "2015-07-17T18:57:32Z")
For anyone actually interested in learning about climate, climate change, global warming and related issues, the amazing work by Fleming is available for free online. [Historical Perspectives on Climate Change](http://library.uniteddiversity.coop/Climate_Change/Historical_Perspectives_on_Climate_Change.pdf) Pages 132 and 133 are most educational, and might even dispel some of the insipid ignorance promoted by modern idiots who don’t actually know much about the issues. The serious threat of global cooling (illustrated and explained on those pages) is such a well known factual event, the efforts of modern prophets to sell us on the idea it didn’t happen is ludicrous in the extreme. It was in fact the fears and grave concerns of leading scientific bodies at the time, that we faced a possible nightmare of global cooling, that directly led to the massive amount of scientific inquiry and instruments now used to worry so many about global warming. Irony indeed. But before then, there was the global warming of 1910-1950 (which Callendar attributed to CO2 fwiw) > [@](#): > > The Arctic icepack was reported to be twelve percent smaller and forty percent thinner in 1958 than it had been fifteen years before, and the U. S. Geological Survey estimated that sea level was rising at a rate of two feet per century (their former estimate had been six inches per century). They predicted coastal flooding, beach erosion, and possibly the loss or abandonment of some cities. Learning the history of climate change science does much to gain perspective on the current hysteria, especially when you seer it has happened so many times before. Especially concerning the rapid decrease in polar ice, that each time resulted in much running about and great shouting of coming disasters. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2015, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4382 "2015-07-17T19:51:37Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > Which is, of course, how scientific inquiry works. You develop your entire theory, write it down on a piece of parchment, and lock it away in a vault. There it sits, immutable for all eternity. Nothing is ever updated, nobody changes their position, everything is set in stone. This sacrosanct tradition is what has given us all of our technological and medical advances. > > We see it on full-color display in this thread. **FX** has developed (to put it charitably) his “theory” (feeling especially generous today), and despite the embarrassment of evidence to the contrary, he’s chained to it. Sad, really, but that’s science. I think you mean **SCIENCE!** 😃 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2015, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4383 "2015-07-17T20:29:30Z")
I think the problem with science developing is the gold standard of falsifiability, proof by experiment and data. To paraphrase Some Guy, many a beautiful theory has been murdered by a single ugly fact. That shit works, and works well, and many are the wonders. But climate science doesn’t fit, we can’t take the planet into the lab. We are stuck with a more generalized theory, without the neat and tidy borders we prefer. Kind of like the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning. That’s why I find the general consensus of scientists on this issue to be so convincing. That, and the fact that the consensus emerged from being widely discounted to being widely accepted, as more and more data becomes available. **FX** seems to believe that if we cannot prove it in the manner we would prefer we are free to believe that it just ain’t so, not proven. We do that at our peril. I say “seems to believe” because I’m not entirely sure just what it is he _does_ believe. But whatever it is, he believes it with great certainty and belligerence. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2015, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4384 "2015-07-17T23:30:51Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > But climate science doesn’t fit, we can’t take the planet into the lab. Many things fall into that situation, and we do not let it hinder us. You could say the same thing about almost all astronomy, and of course solar physics, even the entire Universe. The oceans, deep underground, the core of the planet, this is not a barrier to science, especially theory. A key prediction of the greenhouse theory (global warming) is that an increase in warming from **an enhanced greenhouse effect** will show up. And we can recognize the signal at some point. [http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es00045a001](http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es00045a001) The night time lows (or minimum daily temp -Tmin) should increase if the cause is added GHGs. This is theory, and we look for observational data to see if the theory is correct. > [@](#): > > Thus, nights warm more than the days, and this is exactly what climate models predict. In fact, this is a good example of climate models making a prediction (warmer nights), and then having the prediction born out by the data. [http://www.climatecentral.org/blogs/record-warm-nighttime-temperatures-a-closer-look](http://www.climatecentral.org/blogs/record-warm-nighttime-temperatures-a-closer-look) When they say “models” they are talking about computer models that use **the greenhouse theory** as a basis. > [@](#): > > The most probable causes of the rise in night-time temperatures are: an increase in cloudiness owing to natural changes in the circulation patterns of oceans and the atmosphere; increased cloud cover density caused by industrial pollution; urban heat islands, generated by cities, which are strongest during the night; irrigation which keeps the surface warmer at night and cooler by day; and anthropogenic greenhouse gases. > **[Night-time warming and the greenhouse effect|INIS](https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:25021958)** > > Studies of temperature data collected mainly from rural stations in North America, China, the Commonwealth of Independent States, Australia, Sudan, Japan, Denmark, Northern Finland, several Pacific Islands, Pakistan, South Africa and Europe suggest... Because there are other reasons for seeing an increase in the Tmin, it’s not that easy to know if the theory is correct, just based on observations. But this does not mean we can’t try. If we see winter temps rising, and the reason is an increase in the Tmin, this would increase confidence in the CO2 theory (basic global warming theory). For the same reason, if winter temps are falling, and it is because of lower Tmin, it means the data is bad, or theory is faulty. This does not mean the physics is wrong. Those who mistake the two are using woo woo science, that isn’t how science works. Hell, it could also mean the solar influence is far greater than the consensus believes. Or that Cohen is right. It’s complicated. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4385 "2015-07-18T00:38:55Z")
Looks like you are trying to hedge your bets and pretend that’s what you were saying all along. I congratulate you on arriving at a more reasonable opinion and only regret it took you 87 pages to do it. But so it goes. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4386 "2015-07-18T00:53:46Z")
From NOAA: “[International report confirms: 2014 was Earth’s warmest year on record](http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2015/071615-international-report-confirms-2014-was-earths-warmest-year-on-record.html).” ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4387 "2015-07-18T02:15:21Z")
It’s not the heat, it’s the humidity. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4388 "2015-07-19T22:00:41Z")
I usually ignore a troll, but “God give me strength to face a fact though it slay me”. (As quoted in Nature Vol. 149 (Jan-Jun) 1942 p. 291, and A Philosophy for Our Time (1954) by Bernard Mannes Baruch, p. 13.) > [@elucidator](#): > > To paraphrase Some Guy, many a beautiful theory has been murdered by a single ugly fact. “The great tragedy of Science: the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact” - [Huxley 1870](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Henry_Huxley#1870s) ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2015, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4389 "2015-07-21T18:40:10Z")
I would start a Pit thread for “wolfpup”, but of course some Mod would become angry, and insist one Pit thread is quite enough. This walking bag if ignorance is a good example of what one encounters online, smug self proclaimed experts that don’t actually have a clue, but rather seem to get their science from some idiot blog, rather than lifting a finger to actually check anything out. > [@The next Ice age has been postponed, or not?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-next-ice-age-has-been-postponed-or-not/725007/2): > > The thing that you quoted is not a “news source”, and some lone Russian quack doesn’t equal “solar scientists”. OMG can you be any dumber? How fucking long does it take to put the lead researchers name into Google? The very first link is [her page at an English University](https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/about-us/our-staff/z/professor-valentina-zharkova/). Where we can see as well as being an expert in Applied Mathematics and Astronomy, she actually has a Ph.D. in Astrophysics, and is the lead researcher for an entire team of experts. But this ignorant shitbag writes about her as “some lone Russian quack”, and even when it’s obvious he is a pus filled boil of bias and confusion, he doubles down in his next post, further cementing his reputation as ignorance personified. > [@The next Ice age has been postponed, or not?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-next-ice-age-has-been-postponed-or-not/725007/6): > > I’ve never heard of Zharkova although I closely follow climate science, which is not surprising as she appears to be a math prof with a sideline in some type of solar research and in no way a climate scientist. Why would anyone put forth such idiocy? Because GLOBAL WARMING!, that’s why. Because with out doing any research, any fact checking, the global warmist starts to spew ignorance and bile as soon as anything appears that they might have to think about. Instead of thinking, they shit out their half baked opinion, and even when faced with the horrific scenario of being wrong, as we see in this case, there is no doubt, they learn nothing. In fact, it just somehow makes them even more sure of their own perfect understanding of it all. > [@The next Ice age has been postponed, or not?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-next-ice-age-has-been-postponed-or-not/725007/6): > > Moreover it seems clear that Zharkova’s work, if it has any validity at all, You see? I usually ignore this shit, since there is absolutely with out a doubt no chance of making the smallest dent in that heavy Armour of Ignorance, that sort of alarmists mind set that is 100% sure, and will not even consider learning something new. [Here is some science shit from the thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18530992&postcount=54), not that it will matter at all of course. I never planned on starting a Pit thread, and certainly not about the various fools and idiots that swoop down on any and all threads, if there is the slightest mention of anything about GLOBAL WARMING! That just gives them even more attention, and what would be the point? Noting that some shitstain idiot calls an actual University solar expert “some lone Russian quack”, it just feeds their tiny narcissistic bullshit mind, and nobody wants that. It’s far more interesting to note that Professor Valentina Zharkova has over 200 published papers, and is an expert and a notable researcher, employed by a University, and that she presented the teams findings at the most prestigious meeting of experts. People who actually know shit, rather than making shit up, and acting like a damn fool on the internet. You put her name into [Google Scholar](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22VV+Zharkova%22&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C10) and there are over 440 hits, and we can see she is published in everything from Nature to Science, The Astrophysical Journal to Astronomy & Astrophysics, Solar Physics, Journal of Plasma Physics, the papers go on and on. But some fucking nobody will spew ignorance like a fire hose, rather than take even the slightest moment to do any research first. It is enough to make one sick. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2015, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4390 "2015-07-21T19:31:25Z")
Don’t sugar-coat it, trying to be nice. Just tell us how you really feel. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4391 "2015-07-22T01:48:56Z")
Zharkova discovered that the sun has some manner of “double dynamo” effecting the magnetic field, certainly quality science and perhaps a significant breakthrough in the field of solar physics. It does seem silly and immature to say “it’s wrong because I don’t understand it”. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4392 "2015-07-22T02:17:32Z")
> [@](#): > > There is a fact, or if you wish, a law, governing all natural phenomena that are known to date. There is no known exception to this law—it is exact so far as we know. The law is called the conservation of energy. It states that there is a certain quantity, which we call energy, that does not change in manifold changes which nature undergoes. That is a most abstract idea, because it is a mathematical principle; it says that there is a numerical quantity which does not change when something happens. It is not a description of a mechanism, or anything concrete; it is just a strange fact that we can calculate some number and when we finish watching nature go through her tricks and calculate the number again, it is the same. > > . —The Feynman Lectures on Physics Notwithstanding the sun … ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4393 "2015-07-22T02:17:38Z")
It’s the stupidity that rankles, since this is all pretty easy to find, and learn about. When some fuckhead describes a leading researcher and her team of top scientists as “some lone Russian quack”, he is echoing the idiocy that permeates blogs and the internet like a disease. For example > [@](#): > > it is clear that we are discussing about something that might happen in two decades from now on the basis of **an untested model, not even published in a refereed journal**. > **[Cassandra's Legacy](https://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/)** > > A blog about collapse as caused by depletion of mineral resources and climate change > [@](#): > > **The unpublished study** extends the conclusions of other solar physicists’ who believe the solar cycle is caused by a dynamo generated by convecting fluid deep within the Sun. [http://sciblogs.co.nz/news/2015/07/15/mini-ice-age-media-sensation-reality/](http://sciblogs.co.nz/news/2015/07/15/mini-ice-age-media-sensation-reality/) The slant is of course to try and dismiss it, because it’s some lone crank who hasn’t even published in a peer reviewed scientific outlet. The paper about this [was published last year](http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/795/1/46). When you point this out to the typical warmist fuckhead, it simply won’t matter. Because they have already decided it means nothing, so they just go into the usual attack and spew ignorance mode, that characterizes their level of science. Why do they decide in advance like this? Because they are not actually working from a scientific point of view, they have a firm conclusion, and anything that seems to go against what they believe, is either ignored, or attacked. That’s politics, or religion. It’s not science. Pointing this out won’t make any difference, but it does make one feel better. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4394 "2015-07-22T02:25:37Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > It does seem silly and immature to say “it’s wrong because I don’t understand it”. Even worse, the fuckhead alarmist will handwave it away, claiming “she isn’t a climate scientist”, like that actually means something. It’s even more ironic that of course, the person making this idiot claim isn’t any kind of scientist, much less a climate expert. [As I pointed out here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18530992&postcount=54), the expert scientist wrongly predicted a grand maximum. The alarmist fuckhead doesn’t care about that, nor did they dismiss it because they aren’t climate scientist. And you just know in your heart, if we were seeing a grand maximum, and global temperatures were going through the roof, the alarmist would be fucking happy about it. Instead, the alarmist is sad and angry, because it might get cold instead. Fucking hell, from the way they go on and on about certain doom and a lack of time to do anything about it, you might think they would be happy to find the quiet sun might counter the rapid and dangerous warming. I mean, a normal sane person would be fucking ecstatic to find the sun is predicted to counter the warming we have seen. Plus, it’s such a short time period, we can actually know if it happens. Just stay alive for the next 15 years and see what happens. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4395 "2015-07-22T06:31:32Z")
But “experts” say it’s so !!! Fucking dogma … Rude too … if they want to debate, open a thread in debates … ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4396 "2015-07-22T12:07:45Z")
There was once a debate thread. It was closed and we were told to go play outside because the weather was nice. It’s probably the biggest story climate wise at the moment, but in a debate the alarmists always “lose”, because even having a debate means losing to them. Note the attempts to handwave away the entire premise of the story, by the leading alarmists. > [@](#): > > “It’s complete garbage,” said Gavin Schmidt, the director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. “(The research is) not uninteresting, but it’s like people worrying about the cost of their latte when they can’t pay their mortgage payments." > **[Scientists dispute 'ice age' warnings](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/07/16/scientists-dispute-ice-age-warnings/30257409/?AID=10709313&PID=3865083&SID=iceont7bl50004p600dth)** > > “It’s complete garbage,” Gavin Schmidt said. This is no doubt due to the actual belief that the alarmists has, a belief that flies in the face of science. They have actually convinced themselves that the sun does not matter. The hubris is actually that strong. > [@](#): > > Jason Funk, a senior climate scientist for the climate and energy program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the ice age premise flies in the face of a much more compelling body of scientific evidence: global warming. It’s some sort of actual madness. But unlike the idiot predictions of runaway global warming, the time period is such that we can actually observe reality, to see what happens. How is it possible that seemingly intelligent top level scientists would deny there even was a little ice age? (LIA) It’s actually possible to know this as well. > [@](#): > > How is this astronomy story related to an impending ice age? The period of low solar activity in the 17th century, known as the Maunder minimum, lasted about 70 years and roughly coincided with the “Little Ice Age”, a era characterised by an abnormally high number of harsh winters across the UK and Europe. > **[No, we aren’t heading into a ‘mini ice age’](https://theconversation.com/no-we-arent-heading-into-a-mini-ice-age-44677)** > > Any drop in solar activity will be dwarfed by the impact of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. What has happened is Mann and others have tried to convince the world **that the LIA wasn’t really a real event** , that it was limited to Europe, and it wasn’t a global event. itThey actually believet wasn’t even that cold really. Along with the attempts to dismiss the MWP, **it’s a main theme of alarmists science** , which resist the very idea that climate has changed a lot in the not so distant past. > [@](#): > > But the real issue is just how strong this influence is compared to other factors. The total solar irradiance, a measure of the power produced by the sun in the form of electromagnetic radiation, varies by only about 0.1% over the course of the 11-year solar cycle. Climate scientists have understood this effect for some time and it is already built into the computer models that are used to try and forecast our climate. > **[No, we aren’t heading into a ‘mini ice age’](https://theconversation.com/no-we-arent-heading-into-a-mini-ice-age-44677)** > > Any drop in solar activity will be dwarfed by the impact of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Fucking bloody hell, there’s the bottom line right there. The models. The expert climate scientist actually thinks they know more about the sun than anyone else. > [@](#): > > But there are still some uncertainties. Changes in the ultraviolet portion of the Sun’s output over a solar cycle can be much greater and can deposit energy in the stratosphere – at altitudes above 10km. How this energy influences our weather and climate in the lower atmosphere is still not clear, And yet in the previous paragraph it was claimed we have it accounted for. It’s “already built into the computer models that are used to try and forecast our climate”. And the person who wrote that probably doesn’t grasp what they said. Meanwhile, back to the first link: > [@](#): > > Zharkova disagreed with the global warming argument. She said that although she did not intend to suggest an ice age is coming, she doesn’t dispute it. She maintains the decline in solar activity will reduce solar irradiance, which heats the sun. > **[Scientists dispute 'ice age' warnings](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/07/16/scientists-dispute-ice-age-warnings/30257409/?AID=10709313&PID=3865083&SID=iceont7bl50004p600dth)** > > “It’s complete garbage,” Gavin Schmidt said. Being an actual real scientists who does science all the time, it’s possible she really is unaware of the rabid and constant idiocy swirling about her at the moment. I can only imagine her disgust if she were to learn of the non-solar IPCC idiots who would tell her the LIA wasn’t really real, or that it was limited to Europe, and mostly due to volcanoes. Like Dyson, she would probably laugh in your face. > [@](#): > > The fact that the Little Ice Age (about A.D. 1500 to 1900) stands out as a significant climatic event in the oxygen isotope and electrical conductivity records confirms the worldwide character of this event. [http://www.sciencemag.org/content/234/4774/361.short](http://www.sciencemag.org/content/234/4774/361.short) > [@](#): > > These results support the hypothesis that the increase in atmospheric carbon-14 at about 1700, and possibly the temperature change as well, was caused by a decrease in solar activity (Maunder sunspot minimum). [http://www.sciencemag.org/content/218/4567/13.short](http://www.sciencemag.org/content/218/4567/13.short) > [@](#): > > Three main periods of moraine development are recognised (i) 1500-1700 A.D., represented by small fragments of poorly dated moraines, (ii) early 1700’s when about one-third of the glaciers show a maximum advance, (iii) mid-to-late-nineteenth century when major readvances built moraines close to or beyond (i) and (ii). In addition to these periods, 14C dates from overridden trees indicate a 12th/13th century glacial advance to within 400 and 1400 m of the Little Ice Age Maximum positions at Robson and Kiwa (Premier Range) Glaciers respectively. > **[Reconstruction of Little Ice Age Events in the Canadian Rocky Mountains –...](https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/gpq/1986-v40-n1-gpq1946/032619ar/)** > > Un article de la revue Géographie physique et Quaternaire, diffusée par la plateforme Érudit. > [@](#): > > The well-marked warm period evident from ca. A.D. 1000 to 1200 was the last time when temperatures were about equal to the 1931–1960 mean. \*\*A prolonged longed cooling occurred after A.D. 1200 and reached 1°C below the 1931–1960 mean by the 1700s. \*\*A warming of 0.5°C is indicated from ca. A.D. 1750 to 1850. The estimated temperatures for the 1830s at Marion Lake agree with the instrumental data for that period and this provides some validation of the calibration-function results. > **[Quantitative estimates of temperature changes over the last 2700 years in...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0033589481901010)** > > Temperatures for the past 2700 yr are estimated using well-dated pollen data from northwestern lower Michigan. The pollen data were sampled from sedim… The recent global warm and cold periods are the best known climatic variations, since the evidence is so abundant. Since the alarmists tried to dismiss both, and actually believes his own bullshit, it’s understandable the dismay and denial they would exhibit when faced with a maunder type solar minimum. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4397 "2015-07-22T12:25:17Z")
The efforts to change the facts about the LIA is actually visible, and none other than the supreme fuckhead of Wikipedia is of course obviously a driving force. 20 October 2003 > [@](#): > > The Little Ice Age was a period of global cooling lasting from the mid-14th through mid-19th centuries. This cooling, which has been confirmed by derived temperature readings from tree rings and ice cores as well as from historic data, brought an end to an unusually warm era known as the Medieval Warm Period, during which wine grapes were grown in England. > **[Little Ice Age](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Little_Ice_Age&oldid=1595005)** > > The Little Ice Age (LIA) was a period of regional cooling, particularly pronounced in the North Atlantic region. It was not a true ice age of global extent. The term was introduced into scientific literature by François E. Matthes in 1939. The period has been conventionally defined as extending from the 16th to the 19th centuries, but some experts prefer an alternative time-span from about 1300 to about 1850. > The NASA Earth Observatory notes three particularly cold intervals. One began about ... This was changed to > [@](#): > > The Little Ice Age was a period of cooling lasting from the mid-14th through mid-19th centuries. > **[Little Ice Age](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Little_Ice_Age&direction=next&oldid=1595005)** > > The Little Ice Age (LIA) was a period of regional cooling, particularly pronounced in the North Atlantic region. It was not a true ice age of global extent. The term was introduced into scientific literature by François E. Matthes in 1939. The period has been conventionally defined as extending from the 16th to the 19th centuries, but some experts prefer an alternative time-span from about 1300 to about 1850. > The NASA Earth Observatory notes three particularly cold intervals. One began about ... Yep, none other than fuckhead William M. Connolley just dove right in and tried to change the past on Wikipedia. > [@](#): > > It was initially assumed that the LIA was a global phenomenon. It is now less clear that this is true [1]; for example the reconstruction of temperature in the northern hemisphere over the last 1000 years [2] does not show a pronounced period of cooling. There’s the Hockey stick at work, and yes, he is still at it as I type these words. He couldn’t stand that the previous version said “It has been widely found that the LIA was a global phenomenon. One popular study claims otherwise [1]; for example the reconstruction of temperature in the northern hemisphere over the last 1000 years [2] does not show a pronounced period of cooling.” Like a true fuckhead, [he has to tell you how it was](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Little_Ice_Age&type=revision&diff=1672675&oldid=1595005), and in case you don’t know already, after he became an Admin at Wikipedia, he actually banned thousands of users because they argued with him over his changes to any and all global warming topics there. While this eventually led to his loss of Admin abilities, and his being banned (for like a year) from editing any climate topics, [he’s back at it again of course](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/William_M._Connolley). But you know what? It won’t matter. Even if we see clear evidence of solar influence, even if the winters in the NH become much colder, the global warmer will never ever learn anything, much less humility before nature. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4398 "2015-07-22T12:29:56Z")
Sorry, I nodded off. Were you saying something? ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4399 "2015-07-22T12:35:43Z")
That pretty much sums up most people’s reaction to anything global warming. I’m not kidding. ---
**Author:** ![statij](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c2a13f/32.png) [@statij](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/statij)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440/4400 "2015-07-22T15:53:19Z")
No, actually it’s just most people’s reaction to you. Nobody except your one remaining toady gives a fuck what you think. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440.md?page=219) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sick-of-this-global-warming/666440.md?page=221)