The Ice Age Cometh! Forget Global Warming!


FOTCM Member
Climate change: A sea change
By Quirin Schiermeier, a Nature's German correspondent.


News Feature, Nature 439, 256-260 (19 January 2006) | doi:10.1038/439256a

A collapse in ocean currents triggered by global warming could be catastrophic, but only now is the Atlantic circulation being properly monitored. Quirin Schiermeier investigates.

Henry Ellis, captain of the British slave-trader Earl of Halifax, had a scientific bent. While sailing the subtropical Atlantic in 1751, he measured water temperatures at different depths, using a thermometer, a long rope and a bucket fitted with flaps that sealed water inside the vessel when it was raised. Ellis was surprised to find the coldest water in a mid-ocean layer around 1,200 metres below the surface. The Sun, he concluded, did not warm the ocean in proportion to depth.

The discovery proved useful for Ellis's crew: "By its means we supplied our cold bath, and cooled our wines or water at pleasure," he wrote in his notes. But the global significance of the Atlantic's cold depths escaped Ellis and pretty much everyone else for the next two centuries.

He had stumbled upon the generator of a world-girdling system of currents — an enormous flow of water known as the 'global conveyor belt'1, which transports warm surface water towards the poles and cold deep water back to the tropics. Driven by differences in temperature and salinity, this 'thermohaline' circulation has in recent years become infamous as the possible cause of major climatic upheaval. But only in the past year have much-needed automated systems been installed to monitor this circulation almost constantly. "There's a crying need for these data," says Gavin Schmidt, a leading climate modeller at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. "For the first time we'll be able to observe the ocean 'weather' in all its complexity."

The cold water Ellis had found in the Atlantic's depths comes from two regions at the ocean's north end, in the Greenland and Labrador seas. Here, saltier water coming northwards cools and sinks, before reversing south. This great submarine U-turn is peculiar to the waters of the North Atlantic, whose extreme cold temperatures and saltiness give it a higher density than is found in the Indian and Pacific oceans.

Evidence from the ice ages suggests that shifts in the thermohaline circulation have dramatic effects on the temperature in western Europe and beyond; past shutdowns of the conveyor drastically cooled the climate all around the North Atlantic in a matter of years by stalling the currents that bring warm water northwards2. And computer models suggest that, in a seeming paradox, intense regional cooling could be triggered by global warming3. By the beginning of this century, the apparent fragility of the thermohaline circulation had made it by far the best-known exemplar of the surprising, non-linear and potentially catastrophic shifts in climate that makes the prospect of a greenhouse world so scary.

Current affairs

But the flows themselves remain surprisingly unmeasured. Until this year, almost all attempts to monitor what is happening in the Atlantic's depths have relied on some form of Captain Ellis's method — roaming along the surface and dredging up water from various depths as one goes. This year, scientists will have access to continuous measurements collected by 22 moored 'profilers' — sensors that travel up and down wires from buoys to moorings on the sea floor taking measurements as they go. The profilers were set up last year by a UK programme called Rapid Climate Change (RAPID), a £20-million (US$35 million), six-year programme of the Natural Environment Research Council which has installed these profilers as part of a wider scheme to quantify the likelihood and magnitude of rapid climate change in the future.

Climatologists worldwide are anxious to get hold of these data. The most recent shipboard study, published in Nature last year, suggested that the circulation might be yet more fragile than had been thought4. But at the same time, other research suggests that its potential to do harm may be much subtler than images of a Europe thrown into a mini ice age suppose.

The idea that changes in ocean circulation might be a key determinant of climate change dates back to the early twentieth century and to the great American geologist Thomas Chamberlin. In the 1950s, the oceanographer Henry Stommel pioneered scientific understanding of the three-dimensional structure of the Earth's oceans, and of the currents that flow one way on the surface and another way at depth. But the theorizing that brought the North Atlantic branch of the great conveyor to its present fame dates back only to 1984, when Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at Lamont Doherty Geophysical Observatory at Columbia University in New York, attended a talk in Bern by Hans Oeschger, a Swiss climatologist. While Oeschger outlined his latest findings about climate instabilities and large oscillations of atmospheric carbon dioxide during the most recent ice age, it occurred to Broecker that a switching on and off of the thermohaline circulation in the North Atlantic could be the missing link. Temporary failure of the Atlantic conveyor could have wreaked havoc on climate, he thought.

Although the carbon dioxide fluctuations Oeschger wanted to explain later proved to be artefacts, the idea that the conveyor could stop and start with planet-juddering effects took off. In 1985, Broecker and his colleagues published a landmark paper5 drawing on early computer models of the ocean's flow. They proposed that the Atlantic circulation had two distinct stable modes — one with the conveyor on and one with it off — and that it was relatively easy for it to move from one mode to the other. The distinction between the two modes, they suggested, might explain the difference in climate between ice ages and warmer interglacials. Soon thereafter, computer models began to show that an increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere might, by increasing the temperature and thus the supply of fresh water to the North Atlantic, cause just such a shutdown.

The idea of a threshold that, if passed, could cause calamity, or as Broecker termed it, "a nasty surprise in the greenhouse", has played an increasingly important role in predicting the consequences of a greenhouse effect. In the late 1990s, William Calvin brought the idea to a wider audience with his article entitled 'The great climate flip flop,' which graced the cover of The Atlantic — as a neurophysiologist, Calvin had been interested in whether rapid climate change had been a decisive factor in human evolution. A few years later, a 2003 report for the Pentagon, 'Imagining the unthinkable', described how rapid climate change caused by such a shutdown could pose threats to whole societies and the peaceful coexistence of nations. Shortly thereafter, a film called The Day after Tomorrow pictured the citizenry of the United states chased over the Mexican border by an instant ice age; again, the North Atlantic was to blame.

Given the thermohaline circulation's pivotal role in discussions of climate change, there was much excitement when, last November, Nature published evidence suggesting that the system could have slowed down dramatically4. The evidence had been gathered by Harry Bryden, an oceanographer at the University of Southampton, UK, and his team, while on a research cruise that also put the finishing touches to the deployment of RAPID.

Comparing their 2004 measurements with data from 1957, 1981, 1992 and 1998, Bryden and his colleagues found that some of the warm surface water that used to flow northwards now seemed to remain trapped in the subtropical Atlantic, looping east and then returning south rather than heading north. Altogether, the 'overturning' circulation at 25° N — the latitude where Ellis had first probed the ocean 250 years before — seemed to have decreased by about 30%.

In too deep

The result came as a surprise to those in the field. Few scientists had thought that such dramatic slowing of the thermohaline circulation could happen so soon. Models suggest6 that the increase in fresh water needed for a conveyor shutdown would not be expected without a global warming of 4–5°C; warming in the twentieth century is currently put at 0.6°C (ref. 3). The most complex computer models of the climate and oceans, the sort used to make climate predictions for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), suggest that the flow might be expected to slow by an average of 25% by the end of the twenty-first century, but not to shut down completely3.

Running complex models long enough to simulate some sorts of change, however, uses an unfeasible amount of computing power. So for some purposes 'intermediate' models can capture things better. Stefan Rahmstorf, an oceanographer at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) in Germany recently compared the circulation's response to an influx of fresh water in 11 simpler models; all showed a threshold, called the bifurcation point, beyond which the thermohaline circulation cannot be sustained7. The size of the threshold suggests that the possibility of shutdown is real, but not immediate. Rahmstorf says, "It is very unlikely that it will become really critical for the thermohaline circulation within the next 100 years."

This is not to say that freshwater flows are not increasing; they are. The annual runoff of the six mightiest rivers draining into the Arctic Ocean, including Russia's Ob, Lena and Yenisey, is now 128 cubic kilometres greater than it was when routine measurements began 70 years ago8, an increase of about 7%. In addition, rising temperatures are making sea ice melt more rapidly. Perhaps most important, the huge Greenland ice sheet is showing worrying signs of disintegration; it is currently thought to be shrinking by 50 cubic kilometres per year9.

Ruth Curry, an oceanographer at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, has investigated how much of this extra fresh water lingers in the parts of the Greenland and Labrador seas that are critical for the functioning of the thermohaline circulation. Her recent analysis10 of 1950 to 2005 salinity data suggests that 4,000 cubic kilometres — eight times the annual outflow of the Mississippi river — of fresh water have accumulated in the upper ocean layers since the 1960s. "The extra freshwater input is beginning to affect density," she says. But the amount of fresh water needed to shut down the thermohaline circulation in Rahmstorf's comparisons is an order of magnitude greater than the flux reported by Curry, and she agrees that the circulation will not be unduly affected this century. Peter Wadhams, an oceanographer at the University of Cambridge, UK, last year reported a substantial weakening of convection 'chimneys' down which surface water flows in the Greenland sea, but it is unknown how much of the observed effect is due to natural variability.

This is all hard to reconcile with Bryden's findings, which suggest that a strong slowdown is already under way. "Something strange is going on here," says Michael Schlesinger, a climate modeller at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign who views the possibility of a thermohaline circulation shutdown as more likely and more worrying than many of his peers. "If Bryden's findings are real it means that the circulation is much more sensitive to fresh water than any model has ever predicted."

It is not just that the results are unexpected — they also seem hard to reconcile with other data. If the circulation were slowing down as Bryden suggests, one might expect that Europe would already be getting colder. The North Atlantic transports around a petawatt of heat — equivalent to the thermal output of about 500,000 large power stations — towards Europe. Interrupting that flow should have a cooling effect on the climate, but no such change has been seen.

A fragile balance

It may be that the system has a previously unexpected level of natural variation. Or it could be that Bryden recorded noise, rather than a signal — did a set of readings, through coincidence, the presence of ocean eddies and other natural disturbances, make it seem that the circulation was slowing when it wasn't? A statistical artefact cannot be excluded. "The results are based, after all, on just five snapshots of an extremely noisy and under-sampled system," says Carl Wunsch, a physical oceanographer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who harbours long-standing doubts about the significance of the thermohaline circulation and its possible shutdown. "The story is appealing, but it is a very extreme interpretation of the data. It's like measuring temperatures in Hamburg on five random days and then concluding that the climate is getting warmer or colder."

In response to his critics, Bryden points to data on the density of the ocean at various depths gathered at the same time as the flow readings, which provide independent support for the idea that the circulation is slowing. But although other scientists are less harsh than Wunsch, many remain cautious. "Bryden's results are extraordinary," says Schmidt, "but this is exactly why they also require extraordinary evidence."

If Bryden's results are correct, there is another explanation of the lack of cooling in Europe: that a slowdown of the thermohaline circulation will not have the dire effects that have been suggested. It may be that, in today's climate, the role of the thermohaline circulation in warming Europe has been overestimated. A paper published in 2002 suggested that the westerlies, the dominant winds in mid-latitudes that blow from west to east play a much larger role than was long thought11. But much of the heat transported in the atmosphere ultimately comes from the ocean. "It is true that the atmosphere does the heavy lifting," says Jeff Severinghaus, an oceanographer at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, California, who was once a student of Broecker's. "But the ocean exerts the control, just like the driver of a car."

Evidence for the huge effects of past thermohaline shutdowns is near indisputable. The best case is that of a 1,300-year cold period that occurred around 12,000 years ago, known as the Younger Dryas. The carbon isotope ratios in fossilized plankton from the period suggest that the thermohaline circulation was much slower than it is today (slow circulation allows light carbon isotopes to build up near the ocean's surface).

This slowdown coincided with a vast surge of fresh water into the North Atlantic. The melting of the ice-caps as the ice age ended created a vast reservoir of fresh water known as Lake Agassiz. It was far larger than any of today's Great Lakes, over parts of Minnesota, Dakota and Manitoba — Lake Agassiz. To the east, the lake was bordered by a tongue of the Laurentide ice sheet. When the tongue collapsed, a huge amount of water flooded down the St Lawrence River and into the Atlantic.

According to ice cores drilled in Greenland, similarly large temperature oscillations — the Daansgard-Oeschger events that first piqued Broecker's interest in the 1980s — took place throughout the 90,000 years of the most recent ice age. It is likely that they were also caused by the thermohaline circulation stalling.

But in this respect, as in others, the past may not be a straightforward guide to the present. The consequences of a shutdown could depend on the climate at the time the current stalls. Broecker now believes that the cooling in the Younger Dryas and the Daansgard-Oeschger events came about because the shutdown of the thermohaline circulation was exacerbated by a positive feedback, in the form of enhanced winter sea-ice formation. An influx of fresh water at high latitudes encourages the formation of sea ice, because fresh water freezes more easily. Because ice reflects sunlight, and stops heat from the ocean below reaching the atmosphere, spreading sea ice would strongly amplify cooling due to thermohaline slowdown, especially in winter. Studies of moraines in Greenland and Scandinavia show that during the Younger Dryas the cooling in summers was relatively moderate, whereas in wintertime temperatures must have been more than 30°C lower than now.

It is hard to evaluate the amplifying role of sea ice very precisely. Most coupled ocean–atmosphere models include a sea-ice component, but the representation is crude and leads to an unrealistic simulation of sea-ice distributions. If this feedback is as important as Broecker thinks, then the effects of a thermohaline circulation shutdown in a warmed world may be very different from those seen during the ice ages and their immediate aftermath. Today, satellite images show sea-ice cover at a historic low. In a world that had undergone the degree of warming needed to trigger a thermohaline shutdown in most models there would be almost none.

Rahmstorf speaks for many climate researchers when he rejects the idea that a thermohaline shutdown in today's climate would lead to a rerun of the Younger Dryas, in which large parts of Europe were frozen. "You can't just assume a linear relationship and say that everything will happen on a 5° higher level," says Rahmstorf. Broecker still believes that global warming may have surprises in store, possibly including a collapse of the thermohaline circulation, but he agrees that "the notion that it may trigger a mini ice age is a myth".

Earth watch

The fact that a future shutdown might not have the predicted effects on climate might go some way to explaining how Bryden could observe the circulation slowing — or at least fluctuating — without major climatic consequences, at least so far. Although Severinghaus agrees that this may be part of the story, he and many of his peers would rather believe that there was a randomly wrong signal in the data. "It just doesn't quite fit," says Schmidt. "If the circulation has been 30% down for a decade, it should at least have produced a 1–2° drop in sea surface temperature even if it didn't cool Europe. But no such thing has been observed."

Bryden says that the new RAPID system for monitoring flow in the Atlantic should allow them to know within a decade whether they found a long-term slowdown or a natural fluctuation. Other new approaches may also help. The ARGO system, part of the international Global Climate Observing System, is a fleet of robotic floats that monitors temperature, salinity and current in the upper 2,000 metres of the Indian, Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The free-drifting floats sink to pre-established depths and then surface to transmit their data to satellites. ARGO data are invaluable for monitoring changes in remote ocean regions, according to Lynn Talley, a physical oceanographer of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, California. For example, they have already revealed a spectacular warming of the southern ocean surrounding Antarctica, she says.

And in situ monitors are not the only way of keeping an eye on the deep ocean. A weakening of the thermohaline circulation would change the entire topography of the sea surface, says Rahmstorf. Such large-scale changes could be picked up by satellites. A recent simulation12 suggests that the sea level of the North Atlantic could rise locally by up to a metre as a result of adjustments to the density flows below the surface; in some regions the rate of change could be up to 2.5 centimetres per year. Scientists have begun using satellite altimetry to see if such changes are already observable; again, they expect robust results within a decade.

Modellers also have much to do. Most model studies, such as those used by the IPCC, look at how a freshwater-induced shutdown of the thermohaline circulation might change temperatures if everything else remained the same. A harder question is what a shutdown might mean in a world that is, on average, getting warmer. Bryden's findings have caused a stir throughout the climate research community; lead authors of the chapters on ocean physics and circulation in the IPCC's fourth assessment, due in 2007, are reworking their submissions.

Future unknown

Wolfgang Cramer, an ecologist at PIK, predicts complex changes in the climate, with some effects exacerbating each other and some that cancel each other out. For example, Cramer says, meteorological perturbations caused by a thermohaline shutdown could lead to a dramatic increase in the frequency of major floods and storms in large parts of Europe even if overall temperatures do not drop. "It's not the mean, it's the extremes that are most worrying," he says.

One aspect of the problem is that the thermohaline circulation is not just a climatic affair. Its effect on ocean circulations means it influences the rates at which nutrient-rich bottom water rises to the surface all around the world. A recent simulation suggests a shutdown might lead North Atlantic plankton stocks to collapse to less than half their current biomass13. Globally, a decline of more than 20% might be expected thanks to reduced upwelling of nutrient-rich deep water and gradual depletion of upper-ocean nutrient concentrations.

"Plankton builds the base of the marine food web. So a decline in global plankton biomass and productivity can be expected to have consequences for fish, squid and whales as well," says Andreas Schmittner, a climate researcher at Oregon State University in Corvallis. "A weaker Atlantic overturning circulation could result in a reduced fish supply to people living along the shore lines of the Pacific and Indian Oceans."


Some 250 years after Captain Ellis first probed the Atlantic, its depths still hold secrets and threats. Even in a new age of constant monitoring and improved modelling, it will be some time before the likelihood, and the probable effects, of a thermohaline circulation slowdown can be predicted with accuracy. The intricacies of a system that depends on delicate balances between fresh and salt water over vast ocean basins, on the details of atmospheric circulation, wind-driven currents and the topography of deep sea floors will not yield answers quickly. "If you would like to learn how a planet operates you would probably not choose the Earth," remarks Schlesinger. We greenhouse dwellers, alas, do not have a choice.


1. Broecker, W. S. Oceanography 4, 79–89 (1991).
2. Broecker, W. S. Nat. Hist. Mag. 97, 74–82 (1987).
3. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2001).
4. Bryden, H. L. , Longworth, H. R. & Cunningham, S. A. Nature 438, 655–657 (2005). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
5. Broecker, W. S. , Peteet, D. M. & Rind, D. Nature 315, 21–26 (1985). | Article | ISI | ChemPort |
6. Stocker, T. F. & Schmittner, A. Nature 388, 862–864 (1997). | Article | ISI | ChemPort |
7. Rahmstorf, S. et al. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, doi:10.1029/2005GL023655 (2005).
8. Peterson, B. J. et al. Science 298, 2171–2173 (2002). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
9. Schiermeier, Q. Nature 428, 114–115 (2004). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
10. Curry, R. & Mauritzen, C. Science 308, 1772–1774 (2005). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
11. Seager, R. et al. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 128, 2563–2586 (2002). | Article | ISI |
12. Levermann, A. et al. Clim. Dynam. 24, 347–354 (2005). | ISI |
13. Schmittner, A. Nature 434, 628–633 (2005). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |


The Living Force said:
Climate of Fear
Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence.

Wednesday, April 12, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT




If you want to read the rest the link is right here:

Amusing enough, when i googled the author's name i got this:
From MITs Faculty webpage said:

Professor Lindzen is a dynamical meteorologist with interests in the broad topics of climate, planetary waves, monsoon meteorology, planetary atmospheres, and hydrodynamic instability. His research involves studies of the role of the tropics in mid-latitude weather and global heat transport, the moisture budget and its role in global change, the origins of ice ages, seasonal effects in atmospheric transport, stratospheric waves, and the observational determination of climate sensitivity. He has made major contributions to the development of the current theory for the Hadley Circulation, which dominates the atmospheric transport of heat and momentum from the tropics to higher latitudes, and has advanced the understanding of the role of small scale gravity waves in producing the reversal of global temperature gradients at the mesopause. He pioneered the study of how ozone photochemistry, radiative transfer and dynamics interact with each other. He is currently studying the ways in which unstable eddies determine the pole to equator temperature difference, and the nonlinear equilibration of baroclinic instability and the contribution of such instabilities to global heat transport. (cut, rest available here:
And then wikipedia:

wikipedia said:
Richard Siegmund Lindzen (born February 8, 1940) is an atmospheric physicist and a professor of meteorology at MIT renowned for his research in dynamic meteorology - especially atmospheric waves. He is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences and has held positions at the University of Chicago, Harvard University and MIT.

He was a lead author of Chapter 7 [1] of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third Assessment Report of 2001.

He frequently speaks out against the IPCC position that significant global warming is caused by humans (see global warming) although he accepts that the warming has occurred, saying global mean temperature is about 0.6 degrees Celsius higher than it was a century ago [2].

Lindzen's criticism of the IPCC is one of the main reasons he is widely known outside his professional circle.

His position with regard to the IPCC can be summed up in this quote: "Picking holes in the IPCC is crucial. The notion that if you're ignorant of something and somebody comes up with a wrong answer, and you have to accept that because you don't have another wrong answer to offer is like faith healing, it's like quackery in medicine - if somebody says you should take jelly beans for cancer and you say that's stupid, and he says, well can you suggest something else and you say, no, does that mean you have to go with jelly beans?" [3].
(cut, rest available here:
and then i found this: said:
In 1993 documents appeared in secret tobacco conspiracy file cabinets about a fake science conference organized by the documented corrupt S. Fred Singer. This meeting in Washington, DC, was facetiously titled "Scientific Integrity in the Public Policy Process", funded by two lung-killer industries tobacco and asbestos, and Lindzen was a prominant hoaxer at this event. Lindzen has been paid in a CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY to defraud the public on the immanent dangers of Global Warming, just as he participated with co-conspirators to aid Singer's science hoaxes on behalf of tobacco and asbestos SERIAL MURDERER CORPORATIONS.

Every single fact below can stand up in court in the trial of Lindzen for FELONY CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. Much more incriminating evidence will be adduced at trial. (cut, available:
Personally i think climate change is definately a measurable and evident phenomena. In my 23 years on earth i've definately noticed the weather acting strange in the last 5 or so. Where i live, in the northeast US, it's been expressed as milder winters, with hot days popping up in oct/nov march/april intersperced with cold snaps in the same period. So we'll have a hot week and then a cold week, and the temp diff can be up to 30 degrees. This didn't happen when i was younger, we used to have a slow transition from one season to the next, none of this bouncing back and forth business. Throw in tsunami causing earthquakes (or just increased incidence of earthquakes in general) and nasty hurricanes/tornado's and i think one has a pretty strong argument that the climate is changing and it's most likely man-made.

I'm not a weather expert, just a kid with a gut feeling and an open mind.


Jedi Master
Link here

The thing that really gets my attention here, is how this article is very, very close to the sort of information the C's transcripts were talking about in terms of abrupt Global Climate change occuring in our near future. Velikovsky also hints at such abrupt and massive upheaveals.

For me the only details really missing form this article are that our Big Blue Marble isn't the only planet in the solar system to be affected by global warming. Which makes me wonder "How could us pesky lil humans be doing all this"? I don't think we can, and Im leaning more and more to believing through study and observation the infromation presented by Laura in The Wave series and her articles on site that hint at all of this warming activity is a precursor to the coming Wave of Hyperkinetic-sensate (I hope I got the spelling right).

My current thinking is that there seems to be a flood of new energy entering our planet which is affecting both the global climate, and tectonic movemements (meaning earthquake activity as well as volcanic and magmatic activity). The only explanation for this new energy entering our solar system would be one of four possibilities as far as my research seems to suggest.

1- A large influx in potential energy coming from the swarming of comets in close vacintiy to our Solar system and imparting massive amounts of energy (though this would have to be a huge number of comets as I don't belive they can account for the sheer amounts of new energy bombarding our planet system if unless their numbers are scarily high).





Jedi Master
A very fine article Appollynon. The new ice age is coming fast, the Wave is coming, the comets are coming . And our scientists yet don't have a reliable weather model that takes into account all the variables and their effects on our world, let alone other planets (or our twin sun) of our solar system and the other solar syatems or galaxies beyond. Times are changing and changing fast.


Jedi Master
aurura said:
Maybe some scientists can claim ignorance of the objective and easily seen facts as they are due to social programming or by being pressured or coerced into looking in different areas for lack of funding in these distinct areas of research.



In fact thinking about it more, I could see how such programming could be used by our Space Brothers to make us feel guilty and responsible for the cataclysm and chaos to come (and the death and chaos of our past). In this way they could come down and say "Hey, all this death and earth upheaval is the fault of you pesky little humans interfering where you ought not to be. But hey we forgive you and have a plan to rescue you from it all before it's to late for you. So take us by the hand and follow us to the new hen houses we wish to keep you in untill were ready to consume you".

That may sound to some very a absurd thought I know, but it would explain all this programming vis-a-vis the MSM about how we are all at fault for not doing enough to save our planet. I will give this some more thought, but at the moment it almost to me seems like a logical step to take for those with advanced knowledge of whats to come, and to use it to further their own deception.

Does anyone have any other theories on why there is so much of a hullabaloo being made about human induced global warming? Id be gratefull for any ideas or critiques. :D


The Living Force
Appollynon said:

yeah, i don't think its absurd at all. I was already considering the same possibility myself. The 'guilt tripping' bit is right out of the psychopath manipulator's handbook.


FOTCM Member
Well, let's face it, back before 911, we were having a good time on Saturday night drinking coffee and eating cookies and chatting with the C's talk about this stuff; it wasn't real, it was all just theoretical. Of course we were pretty sure that dark and ugly deeds were being done behind the scenes, there was enough evidence for it, but the scenario the C's presented - that things would be like they were in Nazi Germany, only golbally - was just "out there."


But we sure know NOW how they did it. It was all over in a couple of hours, all the rest is just detail.



The thing is, the evidence that it has happened (and more than once) is available all around us not only in the geological and archaeological record, in the myths and legends. BUt for most people, it is so easy to just brush all that off and interpret it bass-ackwards, and that's what they do. The problem is, I don't believe that the "experts" are that stupid.


Laura said:
This is the perspective and attitude that will be most helpful as we experience the upcoming shocks, I think. We have to be a little like the Ponerologist, observing the phenomenon from a somewhat detached perspective so that we can remain objective and not be overcome by our emotions. Just a thought.

Or perhaps the perspective of, "Life is an adventure! Hold on, it's a great, wild ride!" will help.

I don't know for sure, but maybe some good cold weather gear in the closet may come in handy as well!


Jedi Master
Laura said:
I have read The Secret History of the World and almost had a fit when I was reading through the undeniable evidence of this type of glacial rebound occuring. The sheer weight of numbers of animal carcasses found over the northern hempishpere is mind boggling.

Speaking personally I have always been an individual who has suffered from intense heat coursing through my body whenever I exert myself physically or mentally. I have suffered from this since I was an infant and as a by product tend to sweat profusely. The reason I am sharing this is that I also seem to be very, very sensitive to the cold as a result of all this heat.

This in itself is a little odd as I was born in Scotland on the west coast a little north west of Glasgow, and one would think that being born in a country such as scotland I should have some level of resistance to the cold weather there. Luckily for me I know live in what has been the hottest part of the UK over the past decade (I know live in East Anglia, England). Part of me belives this sensitivity to cold may be due to the make up of my physical body, as the veins of my body run very close to the surface (giving off a hue not unlike turqoise stones, and in the heat seeming to bulge out like small snakes under the surface, most people find it rather unsightly to look upon). So I have thought that maybe my sensitivity to cold is because the blood in my veins is so close to the surface, that I loose a lot of heat, and the blood is cooled quicker when in a cold environment due to not having much skin or muscle between the cold air and the veins.

In the past this had not really been much of a problem for me, as I was either well wrapped up in clothing, and if still cold I could warm myself up as soon as I got home and flicked the central heating on.

However this year was very different. We here in the UK suffered from a mild bout of cold weather (mild compared to the cold weather that affected part of mainland Europe, whihc experienced temps between -5degrees to -25degrees celcius). This cold snap lasted for almost three to three and a half weeks in my immediate area. Things should have been fine you would think, but coincidental to this cold snap our central heating system at home had broken down completely, and we were starved of any hot water or heat for the period of the cold weather (owing to my lack of money to repair the system and my mothers insistence that it wasn't so bad and would be over soon). With me being so sensitve to the cold I got really ill fast. I had to take a week off from my job as I had become cold to the core of me, and had thought that this may have been the start or precursor of the Glacial rebound I had read about. No matter what I had tried to do to get myself warm again I could not even feel warmth from the sporadic times I was able to get some hot water to bathe in.

The idea of sudden glacial rebound is you might say, one of my worst knightmares, as I have always had a knawing feeling since my youth that I would meet my demise in freezing cold weather. I don't know where this feeling or thought came from, or why it kept recurring to me. But when I read The Secret Histroy it all seemed to make a kind of sense, almost as if my own feeling over the years was simply an indicator to point to the veracity and likelihood of the information about a coming Ice Age I was reading a few years later is a being true.

Im not sure what the future has in store for any of us, and I'd rather not know. I belive all things are still fluid, and the possibilities are infinite as to what may, or may not happen. But as Laura says, there is strong evidence to suport an increasing in global temperatures is often followed by a a rapid cooling.

Yossarian said:

I hope to be able to face the future with the kind of attitude mentioned in your post Yossarian, and thankyou for your point of view.

I already have some plans to invest in some extra warm clothing and thermals just in case we have a repeat of the smae or similar cold conditions this winter.

The heating system has been working perfectly since this time, without fault or flaw. Although it made me think that maybe it was just saving itself to break down again the next time we have a period of prolonged cold weather. So next time hopefully I'll be prepared.


Jedi Master
FOTCM Member

'Mammoth' Maine find; Mass. boat pulls up tusk
January 5, 2007

CUSHING, Maine --A fisherman pulled up what appears to be the tusk of a wooly mammoth from Georges Bank off the Maine coast.

The Maine State Museum is examining the dark, curved and pointed specimen, which was dredged up in a load of shells by the New Bedford, Mass.-based scallop dragger Celtic.

Fisherman Tim Winchenbach of Cushing brought the piece home to his wife Michelle, who began researching to see if it could be from a wooly mammoth.

"I was looking for some different pictures to compare it to, and there's been a couple it looks very similar to," she told WCSH-TV in Portland. "So it kind of reinforced our thoughts it could be (a mammoth)."

Remains of the extinct breed of elephant, which had a covering of long hair, have been found in North America, Europe, Africa and Asia. They lived from 1.6 million years ago to around 10,000 years ago.

The tusk of an elephant unearthed in 1959 by a man digging in a pit in Scarborough, Maine, was first believed to be that of a circus elephant that was destroyed in 1816. However, after the tusk was acquired by the Maine State Museum, carbon dating indicated that it was a mammoth's.

Professor Bill Glanz of the University of Maine's Department of Biological Sciences said a wooly mammoth or mastodon could have lived in the Georges Bank area 13,000 years ago. The animals survived the ice age when that area was dry land and New England was covered by thick ice, he said.

Michelle Winchenbach is waiting for answers about her husband's find, but she already feels the thrill of holding something so old.

"Just the thought that I've held something that's potentially 10,000 years old or older, that nobody else in the world touched before us, I find it really fascinating," she said.


FOTCM Member

He has a website here:


So there is at least one person going with this idea, and I think I have heard other comments here and there about it, too.


FOTCM Member
Followed a couple of the "iceagenow" guy's links, I found the following:

Global-warming skeptics continue to punch away

By Joel Achenbach

The Washington Post


But he's also outraged.


Which is this: Global warming is a hoax.







The case for warming







The skeptics' view










There are all these ... anomalies.


Normal, natural?




The skeptics have a final trump in the argument: Climate change is actually good. Growing seasons will be longer. Plants like carbon dioxide. Trees devour it. This demonized molecule isn't some kind of toxin or contaminant or pollutant — it's fertilizer.

Politicized debate

The controversy about global warming resides all too perfectly at the collision point of environmentalism and free-market capitalism. The divisive nature of global warming isn't helped by the fact that the most powerful global-warming skeptic (at least by reputation) is President Bush, and the loudest warnings come from Al Gore.



Gray has the honor of delivering the closing remarks at the National Hurricane Conference in Orlando, Fla. "I think there's a lot of foolishness going on," Gray says. Hurricanes aren't getting worse — we're just in an uptick of a regular cycle. But the alarmists won't let anyone believe that.






The news media are self-interested.

"Media people are all out for Pulitzer Prizes!"

The IPCC is elitist.


"People in the fringes"

Of all the skeptics, MIT's Richard Lindzen probably has the most credibility among mainstream scientists, who acknowledge that he's doing serious research. Lindzen contends that water vapor and clouds, which will increase in a warmer world because of higher rates of evaporation, create "negative feedbacks" that counter the warming trend.


But Isaac Held, a NOAA modeler, says Lindzen is jumping the gun, because the greenhouse gases take time — decades, centuries — to have their full impact. Indeed, we've already made a "commitment" to warming. We couldn't stop global warming at this point if we closed every factory and curbed every car.

Held studied under Lindzen years ago and considers him a friend and a smart scientist — but highly contrarian.






In Orlando, Gray has the honor of closing the hurricane conference with a speech. He talks of global-warming foolishness, untrusty numerical models, underappreciated ocean circulation, overly dramatized CO2 increases, the crazy complexity of the weather.

"It becomes an absolute can of worms!"


Is time running out?


Moreover, we don't even know all the things that we don't know. James Hansen, the prominent NASA scientist, points out that the models don't realistically include ice sheets and the biosphere — all the plants and animals on Earth. The global climate surely has more surprises for us.




Curry, who thinks the skeptics have mounted a "brilliant disinformation campaign," says climate change is being held to a different standard from other societal threats: The skeptics want every uncertainty nailed down before any action is taken.



Or as an excuse to do nothing.

Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company
Of course, one has to wonder about Global Warming when the right-wing Washington Post is pushing it.

I notice that the "iceagenow" guy writes a comment about this article accusing the Post writer of being a LEFTY!!!

Unfortunately - and despicably - this article, which supposedly reports the
ignores the fact that 60 international climate-change experts recently signed

Anyway, then there is this:

scenario for years.

Here's what Dr. Landscheidt had to say:

New Little Ice Age by 2030!



declining trend in solar activity and global temperature should become manifest long
frequent and strong.

Sun's ultraviolet radiation by at least 16 percent. There is “a clear connection between
solar eruptions and a strong rise in temperature.�

Lake bottom cores from the Yukatan Peninsula covering more than 2,000 years
show a similar correlation between recurrent droughts and the Sun's eruptional
the importance of the Sun's eruptional activity on climate.



warming, droughts, and cold snaps.

* * *


Here's what I published in 2003






* * *

Landscheidt's forecasts include the end of the great Sahelian drought; the last five extremes in global temperature anomalies; the last three El Niños; and the course of the last La Niña. He predicted extreme River Po discharges beginning in October 2000, some seven months before they began.

warming in the latter half of the 20th century.

Here are more references and links:

Landscheidt, T. (1976): Beziehungen zwischen der Sonnenaktivität und dem Massenzentrum des Sonnensystems. Nachrichten der Olbersgesellschaft 100, 2-19.

Landscheidt, T. (1983): Solar oscillations, sunspot cycles, and climatic change. In: McCormac, B. M., ed.: Weather and climate responses to solar variations. Boulder, Associated University Press, 293-308.

Landscheidt, T. (1986 a): Long-range forecast of energetic x-ray bursts based on cycles of flares. In: Simon, P. A., Heckman, G. und Shea, M. A., eds.: Solar-terrestrial predictions. Proceedings of a workshop at Meudon, 18.-22. June 1984. Boulder, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 81-89.

Landscheidt, T. (1986 b): Long-range forecast of sunspot cycles. In: Simon, P. A., Heckman, G. und Shea, M. A., eds.: Solar-terrestrial predictions. Proceedings of a workshop at Meudon, 18.-22. June 1984. Boulder, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 48-57.

Landscheidt, T. (1987): Long-range forecasts of solar cycles and climate change. In: Rampino, M. R., Sanders, J. E., Newman, W. S. und Königsson, L. K., eds.: Climate. History, Periodicity, and Predictability. New York, van Nostrand Reinhold, 421-445.

Landscheidt, T. (1988): Solar rotation, impulses of the torque in the Sun's motion, and climatic variation. Climatic Change 12, 265-295.

Landscheidt, T.(1990): Relationship between rainfall in the northern hemisphere and impulses of the torque in the Sun's motion. In: K. H. Schatten and A. Arking, eds.: Climate impact of solar variability. Greenbelt, NASA, 259-266.

Landscheidt, T.(1995): Global warming or Little Ice Age? In: Finkl, C. W., ed.: Holocene cycles. A Jubilee volume in celebration of the 80th birthday of Rhodes W. Fairbridge. Fort Lauderdale, The Coastal Education and Research Foundation (CERF), 371-382.

Landscheidt, T. (1998 a): Forecast of global temperature, El Niño, and cloud coverage by astronomical means. In: Bate, R., ed.: Global Warming. The continuing debate. Cambridge, The European Science and Environment Forum (ESEF), 172-183.

Landscheidt, T. (1998 b): Solar activity : A dominant factor in climate dynamics.

Landscheidt, T. (1999 a): Solar activity controls El Niño and La Niña.

Landscheidt, T. (1999 b): Extrema in sunspot cycle linked to Sun's motion. Solar Physics 189:413-424.

Landscheidt, T. (2000 a): Solar forcing of El Niño and La Niña. European Space Agency (ESA) Special Publication 463, 135-140.

Landscheidt, T. (2000 b): River Po discharges and cycles of solar activity. Hydrol. Sci. J. 45:491-493.

Landscheidt, T. (2000 c): Sun's role in the satellite-balloon-surface issue.

Landscheidt, T. (2000 d): New confirmation of strong solar forcing of climate.

Landscheidt, T. (2000e): Solar wind near Earth: Indicator of variations in global temperature. ESA-SP 463,497-500.

Landscheidt, T. (2001 a): Solar eruptions linked to North Atlantic Oscillation.

Landscheidt, T. (2001 b): Trends in Pacific Decadal Oscillation subjected to solar forcing.

Landscheidt, T. (2002): El Niño Forecast Revisited.
Notice above that Landscheidt says:

The current 11-year sunspot cycle 23 with its considerably weaker
on the basis of solar motion cycles two decades ago.
I was under the impression that the last sunspot cycle was considerably stronger and more active than predicted. Anybody got any input on that?


FOTCM Member
And then, there is this:

Antarctic Ice Sheet Mass Balance



What was done


What was learned


What it means


Reviewed 8 November 2006
And this:

Global warming boost to glaciers







Water resources






FOTCM Member

Antarctic Temperature Trend 1982-2004


This image shows trends in skin temperatures—temperatures from roughly the top millimeter of the land or sea surface—not air temperatures. The data were collected by the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) sensors that were flown on several National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) satellites. The data come from the AVHRR’s thermal infrared channel—a portion of the light spectrum we can sense as heat but that human eyes cannot see. This image shows temperature trends for the icy continent from 1982 to 2004. Red indicates areas where temperatures generally increased during that period, and blue shows where temperatures predominantly decreased.





FOTCM Member

East Antarctica puts on weight

This map (left) shows key areas of Antarctica, including the vast East Antarctic ice sheet. The image on the right shows which areas of the continent's ice are thickening (coloured yellow and red) and thinning (coloured blue).

19 May 2005
Increased snowfall could slow sea-level rise.

Mark Peplow






Remote view




Thick skin




Top Bottom