Little Ice Age was GLOBAL not regional

mkpdavies · 22-04-2008, 12:24 PM

World Climate Report » Little Ice Age in Southern South America?

Quote:

The research team concludes “The major contribution provided by the documentary evidence has been to confirm the occurrence of a cold period in the Laguna San Rafael area, which would be within the temporal window defined for the European LIA.” Furthermore, they conclude that “the sole historical evidence suggests that warm conditions prevailed around 1675, a date in which the front of the San Rafael glacier did not extend beyond the eastern shoreline of the lake. Later, a cooling period occurred from 1766 to 1898, with a peak between 1857 and 1871, during which the glacier advanced up to 8 km into the interior of the Laguna San Rafael. This cooling period declined after 1898, as evidenced by the decrease of the San Rafael glacier, which had retreated 1 km by 1904.” Most importantly to us at World Climate Report, they clearly state at the end “The recognition of the LIA in Northern Patagonia, through the use of documentary sources, provides important, independent evidence for the occurrence of this phenomenon in the region.”
There are those who will insist that the Little Ice Age was not a global event, but somehow, just as the Northern Hemisphere cooled during the Little Ice Age, glaciers were expanding in southern South America? Starting to sound global to us!

Another MMGW cult myth debunked.

Clippo · 22-04-2008, 06:40 PM

You should have purchased the Independent today and got their free science booklet on Global Warming. (And you might have learned some facts).

In it, it clearly says the scientific consensus is that the so-called Little Ice Age was regional, not global.

C_steam · 22-04-2008, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clippo

You should have purchased the Independent today and got their free science booklet on Global Warming. (And you might have learned some facts.

bwah ha ha. 'Free booklet' in the independant? And you quote this as an unbiased source?

I suspect you think naivety is a celebration of Christs birth.

Clippo · 22-04-2008, 07:30 PM

C_Steam,
Rather than shooting from the lip, you should have been a bit more circumspect before you exposed your paranoia.

The Independent has been giving out free booklets on many science topics over the last week or so - on topics like The Earth, The Elements, Evolution, Newtonian physics, Cosmology etc etc etc. - so all of these are biased as well?

Each booklet is is a condensate of science topic books based on the 'Very Short Introductions to' theme published by Oxford University press. So, if there is bias, perhaps you should take it up with them.

(Oh, I also remember the Independent giving away similar booklets a few months ago on the major Philosophers - did you blame the Independent for their differing views then? - Unfortunately, I didn't collect any of those because I am, by preference, a Telegraph reader. However, this doesn't prevent me from having an open mind tho' and reading other papers.)

Smackdown !!!!

C_steam · 22-04-2008, 07:36 PM

No paranoia. Just reflection. IF anyone else had put forward evidence for lack of global warming based on a free newspaper book, you would have been the first to discredit it.

The fact that the indie has given away booklets on other topics makes no jot of difference and does nothing to prove or disprove the veracity of the publication in question.

Clippo · 22-04-2008, 07:57 PM

C_Steam wrote:-

Quote:

IF anyone else had put forward evidence for lack of global warming based on a free newspaper book, you would have been the first to discredit it.

No I wouldn't - with all assertions I try to go back to the original source, especially with scientific papers. This practice invariably exposes the mistakes of climate sceptics.
&

Quote:

The fact that the indie has given away booklets on other topics makes no jot of difference and does nothing to prove or disprove the veracity of the publication in question.

Of course not - but the original books are written by specialist scholars based on consensus thinking.
You were claiming that the content of these booklets was biased because they were published by the Independent.

Smackdown again.

g hall · 22-04-2008, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C_steam

I suspect you think naivety is a celebration of Christs birth.

Far to subtle but I like it

g hall · 22-04-2008, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clippo

The Independent has been giving out free booklets on many science topics over the last week or so - on topics like The Earth, The Elements, Evolution, Newtonian physics, Cosmology etc etc etc. - so all of these are biased as well?

Each booklet is is a condensate of science topic books based on the 'Very Short Introductions to' theme published by Oxford University press. So, if there is bias, perhaps you should take it up with them.

Clippo has collected these and is now the planets premier expert

tito · 22-04-2008, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clippo

C_Steam,
Rather than shooting from the lip, you should have been a bit more circumspect before you exposed your paranoia.

The Independent has been giving out free booklets on many science topics over the last week or so - on topics like The Earth, The Elements, Evolution, Newtonian physics, Cosmology etc etc etc. - so all of these are biased as well?

Each booklet is is a condensate of science topic books based on the 'Very Short Introductions to' theme published by Oxford University press. So, if there is bias, perhaps you should take it up with them.

(Oh, I also remember the Independent giving away similar booklets a few months ago on the major Philosophers - did you blame the Independent for their differing views then? - Unfortunately, I didn't collect any of those because I am, by preference, a Telegraph reader. However, this doesn't prevent me from having an open mind tho' and reading other papers.)

Smackdown !!!!

As far as I recall, the philosphy ones were all disgusting men.
I can't quite remember, but I distinctly remember Kant and Plato being there.

tito · 22-04-2008, 10:52 PM

I take it back, upon research there is quite broad coverage.

It was just the ones advertised on television that were awful.

22-04-2008, 07:36 PM	#5 (permalink)
C_steam Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Paddling up 5hit creek..... Posts: 7,501	No paranoia. Just reflection. IF anyone else had put forward evidence for lack of global warming based on a free newspaper book, you would have been the first to discredit it. The fact that the indie has given away booklets on other topics makes no jot of difference and does nothing to prove or disprove the veracity of the publication in question. __________________ -------------------------------------------------- Users on ignore list: None. I've got to have people to laugh at. Cowardly Posters* list: BobFM, Bellatrix.*People who post personal insults then refuse to reply .

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

22-04-2008, 06:40 PM	#2 (permalink)
Clippo Uber Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Cheshire Posts: 2,089	You should have purchased the Independent today and got their free science booklet on Global Warming. (And you might have learned some facts). In it, it clearly says the scientific consensus is that the so-called Little Ice Age was regional, not global.

22-04-2008, 07:30 PM	#4 (permalink)
Clippo Uber Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Cheshire Posts: 2,089	C_Steam, Rather than shooting from the lip, you should have been a bit more circumspect before you exposed your paranoia. The Independent has been giving out free booklets on many science topics over the last week or so - on topics like The Earth, The Elements, Evolution, Newtonian physics, Cosmology etc etc etc. - so all of these are biased as well? Each booklet is is a condensate of science topic books based on the 'Very Short Introductions to' theme published by Oxford University press. So, if there is bias, perhaps you should take it up with them. (Oh, I also remember the Independent giving away similar booklets a few months ago on the major Philosophers - did you blame the Independent for their differing views then? - Unfortunately, I didn't collect any of those because I am, by preference, a Telegraph reader. However, this doesn't prevent me from having an open mind tho' and reading other papers.) Smackdown !!!!