One prediction about climate change challenges another

One prediction about climate change challenges another

Summary: Remember the ozone hole? Well, the CFCs that were apparnetly causing the ozone hole to grow, have been reduced in human industry and releases are waning.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Tech Industry
16

Remember the ozone hole? Well, the CFCs that were apparnetly causing the ozone hole to grow, have been reduced in human industry and releases are waning. The ozone hole over the South Pole is slowly diminishing. A new projection about climate change says the reduction of the ozone hole will actually REDUCE WARMING TRENDS in the Antarctic. The research predicts the warmings winds over the Antarctic will be reduced as the ozone itselfis reduced.

Thus this new rersearch directly challenges findings of the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change and its conclusions about ice melt in the Antarctic.

Topic: Tech Industry

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

16 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • When myths collide

    There never was a hole. It was a thinning of the ozone layer.

    Any first year chem student could tell you it's impossible for
    ozone to disappear in the presence of sunlight, since ozone is
    created by the bombardment of short UV with molecular
    oxygen. Ozone then absorbs mid UV, breaking back down into
    molecular oxygen and an oxygen radical, which then re-creates
    more ozone or molecular oxygen.

    And, of course, the fact that the data once AGAIN contradicts
    all the climate models put out by various global warming
    groups shall be promptly ignored when the next call for
    'reducing carbon footprints' comes out after the same
    climatologists make another apocalyptic prediction. Meanwhile,
    the author will continue to moan about how global warming
    deniers don't trust science.
    frgough
  • So...um...Big Al, can we have that "Peace Prize" back???

    Ahem...not that he *deserved* it anyway...with his 5 houses...walking the talk in a big way, right? I've long said that "Global Warming" is as yet unproven, and eventually the light will shine on all of this as the *cyclical* trends naturally reverse and fluctuate. You want global warming? Come see me here in WI in winter!
    Techboy_z
    • Yep, he deserved it.

      Since he didn't start or perpetuate a war to "protect allies such as Israel and access to much of the world's oil" (PNAC open letter to Bill Clinton signed by Dick Cheney, 1998, calling for war to kill Saddam Hussein), yeah, he deserved it.
      mykmlr@...
  • Avoid eye contact and back away slowly

    Gee you're a climate scientist? Perhaps you think the sun revolves around the earth, which is flat, smoke a lot and do your own doctoring, repair your own car and worry about "them" a lot in your survivalist shelter or perhaps I'm wrong. You obviously don't need research or experience or anyone to tell you what to do.

    If 95% of climate scientists say it's happening and they have the experience and the research, what qualifies you to suggest they're wrong? And please no anecdotes about WI, how about 20 years of research you worked on?

    Just remember, if you're the only one in the room that's calm when everyone else is losing their head, then perhaps you've misunderstood the situation.
    tonymcs@...
    • Ummm...

      Except if you read or listen around all over the place, scientific "research" saying global warming exists is being discredited all of the time. The science isn't being held up for some of these "scientists".
      safesax2002
      • Wrong

        No it is not being "discredited".
        Discrediting of research is vetted in peer reviewed formal journals applicable to the discipline in question.
        Which is exactly where the Oil Company Paid Shills are NOT publishing!
        mykmlr@...
    • 95% of Statistics are Completely Made Up

      Where did you get the idea that 95% of climate scientists say global warming is happening? From your rear end? You need to get off of Big Al's Boat Ride and join us here in the real world...

      There are many sources of more credible information on this topic than I can list, and most of them refute Big Al's money / power grab scheme. The whole idea that man is capable of changing the global climate is not only ludicrous but also egotistical. We just don't have that kind of power or influence over nature.

      The earth has been warming and cooling for billions of years. Where I'm sitting right now was covered with a glacier 1 mile thick 10,000 years ago. I guess the cave-man's fires caused global warming to melt the glacier... It had to be the cave-man, because it couldn't have been something like, oh, say, the SUN!!!

      Watch this movie and tell me more about global warming: http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swindle/index.html

      Tom
      TallTomD
      • The name "Gore" is a hint

        As soon as you hear someone invoke the name Al Gore when "proving" that global warming doesn't exist, you know they are basing their views on blind, irrational hatred.

        When they spit out the name Al Gore like he is the epitome of evil, you know their credibility is shot.

        This is just proof that partisanship destroys one's abiltiy to think and reason objectively.
        Stoshie
    • Herd mentality

      95% of climate scientists want funding for their projects. Wasn't it the minority 5% back in the day that said the earth was round????
      HeyRoss
  • Another misinformed individual

    "Thus this new rersearch directly challenges findings of the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change and its conclusions about ice melt in the Antarctic."

    Nope, it does not.

    First of all, the most recent IPCC report goes out of its way to NOT make any predictions on the rate of ice sheet loss in either Greenland or Antarctica. In very conservative style, they withheld comment pending further data, but they were also required to rely only on older published research (2001 and earlier). Research since then on ice sheet behavior is what's producing estimates of ice sheet loss.

    Second, a temporary REGIONAL cooling thanks to the closing of the ozone hole does not mean that GLOBAL warming isn't happening. On a hot day, you may stand outside under an umbrella and feel a little cooler because you're in the shade, but does that change the fact that the rest of the area not under your umbrella is hot? No.

    What a sorry excuse for a "newsman." You ought to be ashamed at spreading such misinformation.
    sunfish9
  • Try reading carefully, computer 'scientists'!

    The research on ozone doesn't say "there never was a warming trend"-- it just says the mitigation of CFCs and other ozone degraders will reduce the trend in one area of the globe. This brief report on the research doesn't say that the warming trend will be reduced to zero-- it doesn't even vaguely specify by how much the trend will be reduced-- after reading this little blurb you don't know if the warming trend will be reduced from 2% annually to .000009% annually, or from 2% annually to 1.9999999% annually.
    Sure, the research 'challenges' other predictions about future ice cap melt in the Antarctic, but the loss of the Antarctic ice cap has already been underway for years and is well-documented, not to mention Greenland and the loss of the Arctic ice cap. Yes, different researchers make equally well-founded but different predictions about just how quickly the ice loss will proceed.This could lead a reasonable person to conclude that it might proceed more slowly than even the most optimistic prediction projects, but that reasonable person would also have to admit that for the same reason it's just as likely that it will proceed more quickly than even the most pessimistic predictions project.
    This is just 'controversy journalism'-- trying to make a big stir out of an extremely minor 'contradiction' between two facts. Really, there is no contradiction at all. There is a huge problem with global warming, and thanks to successful, massive, internationally coordinated efforts to CUT EMISSIONS of a pollutant that was previously causing a different huge problem, our current huge problem will be a little less severe. So let's hear it for massive, internationally coordinated efforts to CUT EMISSIONS OF CO2!!!
    Fulicasenia
    • Not Quite

      If you read more than the headlines, you discover that the Antarctic ice cap isn't even shrinking, its moving around, and if anything growing. Now the Arctic ice cap has shrunk some, but there are still many times on the official record when it was smaller.
      abear4562
      • Please show those times that you claim

        If there were that many times on record, why are we hearing so much about the northwest passage opening up just now?
        ITLeader
  • RE: One prediction about climate change challenges another

    Challenge or refines it in some aspect? In which measure one more mechanism adds knowledge to a cenario or change it all ?
    Ok, go ahead, hapilly nuke Iran, oil will peak at 400, the word will be saved by military spending.
    ed.londero
  • Warming and cooling.

    I wonder how many of the people raising the alarm about global warming have a vested interest in what they are advocating? I'm old enough to remember back in the 70s when the concern was about global cooling and there was a fear the a nuclear war would cause a 'nuclear winter'!

    There are also some scientists that say the polar melting could create enough fresh water in the polar regions to shut down the gulf stream which could trigger another ice age! It all makes you wonder new crisis will be threatening the world in another 30+ years.. I suspect that global warming will be out of fashion by then.

    In the mean time, I'm all for energy saving ideas like making building more efficient to operate and encouraging the use solar and wind power. Just be careful about taking any drastic actions like signing treaties that will damage our economy and reduce our personal and national rights.
    dadown
  • Cigarettes!

    They don't cause cancer!
    This was scientifically proved.
    Just pour in enough money and you will get someone to agree with you.


    Hey people! Follow the money! Who loses out most with climate warming!?

    Answer: The big rich (old technology) (can't work out how to monetize green energy) energy companies. They have enough money and lobbyists to stall this till we all burn up in an unseasonal wild fire!
    I am Gorby