WASHINGTON (AP) —The relentless, weather-gone-crazy type of heat that has blistered the United States and other parts of the world in recent years is so rare that it can’t be anything but man-made global warming,says a new statistical analysis from a top government scientist.
The research by a man often called the “godfather of global warming” says that the likelihood of such temperatures occurring from the 1950s through the 1980s was rarer than 1 in 300. Now, the odds are closer to 1 in 10, according to the study by NASA scientist James Hansen. He says that statistically what’s happening is not random or normal, but pure and simple climate change.
“This is not some scientific theory. We are now experiencing scientific fact,” Hansen told The Associated Press in an interview.
In a blunt departure from most climate research, Hansen’s study —based on statistics, not the more typical climate modeling —blames these three heat waves purely on global warming:
—Last year’s devastating Texas-Oklahoma drought.
—The 2010 heat waves in Russia and the Middle East, which led to thousands of deaths.
—The 2003 European heat wave blamed for tens of thousands of deaths, especially among the elderly in France.
In a landmark 1988 study, Hansen predicted that if greenhouse gas emissions continue, which they have, Washington, D.C., would have about nine days each year of 95 degrees or warmer in the decade of the 2010s. So far this year, with about four more weeks of summer, the city has had 23 days with 95 degrees or hotter temperatures.
Hansen says now he underestimated how bad things would get.
[
link to www.salon.com]
Excuse me but...
was global warming the cause of the 1936 Dustbowl?
How about the Great Fire of 1910.
If you want me to go back in history farther to even worse situations I can.
So now is special somehow in your deluded mind?
Three (3) things are changing the weather:
1- The Sun
2- Chemtrails
3- HAARP
The last 2 are man-made for the purpose of "Owning the Weather by 2025". Look. It. Up.
Yeah the other planets are also being heated more by the Sun but...
so-called chemtrails are an internet myth.
If you actually knew anything about HAARP (which is primarily used in a passive mode) when they do put energy into the upper atmosphere the actual amount of energy used amounts to less than the average lightning bolt. Not global climate changing by any means.
As for as that paper you mentioned?
That was just a think tank "think piece".
They write papers on bizarre shit all the time...
it doesn't mean they put it into practice.
And that's my last comment on the matter.
It's YOUR choice to be a delusional fuck head, it's what GLPer's do.
Not a myth, shill.
The exact side effects predicted from chemtrails are happening.
They are spraying this crap, and at the same time telling us that we need to start paying money for our carbon use.
Obviously they want the climate change to happen so they can pass the carbon tax legislation.
This is the list of possible side effects from a spray program from a wiki link on geoengineering.
If you use just a little deductive reasoning you can figure it out.
"Geoengineering in general is a controversial technique, and carries problems and risks, such as weaponisation. However, certain problems are specific to, or more pronounced with this particular technique.
Drought, particularly monsoon failure in Asia and Africa is a major risk.
Ozone depletion is a potential side effect of sulfur aerosols; and these concerns have been supported by modelling.
Tarnishing of the sky: Aerosols will noticeably affect the appearance of the sky, resulting in a potential "whitening" effect, and altered sunsets.
Tropopause warming and the humidification of the stratosphere.
Effect on clouds: Cloud formation may be affected, notably cirrus clouds and polar stratospheric clouds.
Effect on ecosystems: The diffusion of sunlight may affect plant growth. but more importantly increase the rate of ocean acidification by the deposition of hydrogen ions from the acidic rain.
Effect on solar energy: Incident sunlight will be lower, which may affect solar power systems both directly and disproportionately, especially in the case that such systems rely on direct radiation.
Deposition effects: Although predicted to be insignificant, there is nevertheless a risk of direct environmental damage from falling particles.
Uneven effects:
Aerosols are reflective, making them more effective during the day. Greenhouse gases block outbound radiation at all times of day.
[
link to en.wikipedia.org]
