+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 01/21/2018 09:23 AM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  3.643 Visits   4 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
01/04/2008 04:59 PM ID: 67475 Permalink   

Ruskies Call Global Warming Rubbish - Prepare for Global Cooling


Moscow's advice is "Buy felt boots and fur coats." Oleg Sorokhtin of RIA Novosti says that the warming that has taken place is natural and unrelated to greenhouse gases. Scientists say that the Antarctic ice shields aren't shrinking, but growing.

Researcher Habibullah Abdusamatov says that Earth has passed the peak of a warm spell which started in the 17th century. As early as 100,000 years from now, we will be in the throes of a "New Ice Age" with ice dominating Europe and glaciers south of Moscow.

The article goes on to say that the key players in what shapes the earth's weather - solar activity cycles and terrestrial precession among others - make man's impact on the atmosphere "A drop in the ocean" and that we can expect a cold spell by 2012.

    WebReporter: crosimoto Show Calling Card      
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
  I guess we'll know pretty soon  
How inconvenient Al Gore's truth really was.
  by: crosimoto     01/04/2008 05:01 PM     
  Or how  
Truthful his inconveniencing us was
  by: AnsweringQuestions     01/04/2008 05:14 PM     
  I always thought that global warming was only  
a pretext to global cooling. As the oceanic currents slow or reverse due to desalinization, this will cause a global cooling effect which will lead to another ice age. My bet though, is that we are affecting the speed of this natural reaction and will move up the time line considerably with our actions.

However I may not be alive to see it but I do believe that as a whole we will be in for some cold weather over the next 50-100 years from now.
  by: slavefortheman     01/04/2008 06:14 PM     
  This is so stupid  
Thousands of scientists from across the world present tons and tons of evidence that mankind is causing the planet to heat up at a dangerous rate, and all it takes is one skeptic to contradict them for you people to join in on the song and dance routine and start up another round of "Let's Bend Al Gore Over Our Knees and Spank Him, 'Cause We're So F#cking Clever."
  by: l´anglais     01/04/2008 06:36 PM     
I agree. This reads like a National Enquirer article.
  by: Lurker     01/04/2008 07:01 PM     
  Obviously Definitive  
I wish someone could present an infallible position .Neither side is obviously definitive in a way that shows objective truth. Depending on how you feel, there seems to be a position supported by a scientist that proves your point and allows you the lofty heights to call everyone else a bandwagon hopping dweeb.
  by: crosimoto     01/04/2008 07:18 PM     
his not the only one that and his a lot more educated in the matter then owlgore is
"Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, Merited Scientist of Russia and fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, is staff researcher of the Oceanology Institute"
  by: snowman47   01/04/2008 08:10 PM     
  Felt boots and fur coats, huh?  
More than 80% of Russia's exports are oil, natural gas, timber and metals.
Directly after that comes felt boots and fur coats.
j/k... maybe.

"we can expect a cold spell by 2012"
Any scientist/climatologist worth their salt knows climate change doesn't happen overnight. I agree, this does read like a National Enquirer article.

There's so much information out there on GW, and so much of it is biased.
I'd like to provide a quote from a more intellectual source, but really, Homer Simpson said it best:
People can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that.
  by: TarynLondon   01/04/2008 08:23 PM     
  How about NASA?  
Is that a credible source?

"As the world consumes ever more fossil fuel energy, greenhouse gas concentrations will continue to rise, and Earth’s average surface temperature will rise with them. Based on plausible emission scenarios, the IPCC estimates that average surface temperatures could rise between 2°C and 6°C by the end of the 21st century."

"As tropical temperature zones expand, the reach of some infectious diseases like malaria will change. More intense rains and hurricanes, rising sea levels, and fast-melting mountain glaciers will lead to more severe flooding. Hotter summers and more frequent fires will lead to more cases of heat stroke and deaths, and to higher levels of near-surface ozone and smoke, which would cause more ‘code red’ air quality days. Intense droughts could lead to an increase in malnutrition. On a longer time scale, fresh water will become scarcer during the summer as mountain glaciers disappear, particularly in Asia and parts of North America."
  by: l´anglais     01/04/2008 09:27 PM     
  Or ...  
Here's Fortune magazine citing a Pentagon-commissioned report. Is this from the tree-huggers?
  by: l´anglais     01/04/2008 09:40 PM     
  call gore  
He will let us all live in his mansion that consumes about 20 times that of a normal home. Although he recently made the mansion 13% more efficient. Maybe he deserves another award?
  by: hulk   01/04/2008 09:53 PM     
Nasa has been wrong,

about how the hottest years recorded were not in the 90's but in the 30's. and this was because of Nasa and there calculations.
of course they kept it quite, gotta get there funds some how i suppose.

  by: snowman47   01/04/2008 09:55 PM     
  from the article above  
"Four of the top 10 are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999)," he wrote.

"Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900."
  by: snowman47   01/04/2008 09:58 PM     
  Don't bother Gore  
He's busy replying to his Kwanza cards, yet another fabricated event.
  by: mcink2   01/04/2008 10:45 PM     
  Doubt reigns supreme  
Even here in this post it amazes me the number of people that believe one nay sayer over 5 Nobel laureates and over 3000 well known and credible experts. The major oil companies buy off a few scientists to spread doubt and a pack of bloggers to reinforce it and then the fears and doubts are back. The numbers are clear and the outcome is clear. Global warming leads to a drop in ocean salinity and that stops the global conveyor and ultimately to an ice age. The Russians are only talking about half the picture and suddenly let’s jump on Al Gore? What are you people drinking or has mind control become a viable means used by corporations?
  by: starmutt   01/04/2008 10:52 PM     
"believe one nay sayer over 5 Nobel laureates and over 3000 well known and credible experts"

Whom only receive funding if the tow the party line
  by: mcink2   01/04/2008 11:21 PM     
this can go for hours, its funny how the owlgore sheep will follow along buying all of his carbon credits. Whale he lives in his absurdly large house and flies around on his private jet.
if those 3000 you are referring to are the EU scientist, well theres plenty of articles refuting there status.

And its not one nay sayer
  by: snowman47   01/05/2008 12:16 AM     
Ahh the FOX news wanabes have arrived. I thought they would be on here soon. These are worldwide sources of experts not in a US party politics. You guys still stinging from Gore I see. You like the Russian stance so well then go buy your felt lined snow boots, set a keg of beer out and join them. Odd you would turn Commie just to find a few Ruskies that support Global freezing. Good luck.
  by: starmutt   01/05/2008 12:25 AM     
  What really is  
instresting is the date this cold weather supposed to start 2012, which is also the date the mayan's calanders end, and supposed to be this doom date for other religions..
  by: Ph0bia   01/05/2008 12:37 AM     
Sorry, wrong country, wrong news source. Experience is my guide.

Mayan calender, book of I Ching, Merlin - we're done.
  by: mcink2   01/05/2008 12:50 AM     
Seems like the deniers are too busy fighting the possibility of being wrong that they forget what's at stake if they actually are wrong.

Reminds me of the old saying: "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure", scale that up to the controversial issue of GW.

Even if it's a 50/50 coin toss, which side would you rather be on? Prevention or Cure with GW...

Worse case scenario on both sides:
If we do nothing we risk passing on a barren wasteland to our childrens children, or if we do something now we at least tried to prevent it and come out the other side with more efficient power consumption technologies that will benefit even 3rd world nations.

But necessity is the mother of invention. Nothing will happen until there's a push for more efficient energy collection and consumption.

Current conditions as they are, it won't happen until we're either out of cheap fossil fuels or taxes get raised b/c of all the natural disaster recovery with the more volatile weather patterns.

If you think it'll be more costly now to deal with our own pollution then to pass it onto our children, then what do you think the cost of turning around 200+ years of industrial C02 pollution that has a atmospheric life span of 400 years will be in the aftermath of what's projected with GW disaster simulations?

Not a pretty picture for what we're willing to gambling on for future generations. Doesn't say much for human nature.

If the deniers are wrong and the grandkids ask, why we didn't do something? Are you going to reply:
"Well, we knew it was possible, but it wasn't our problem, we thought you kids could come up with a fix. Good luck!"

  by: ukcn001XYZ   01/05/2008 01:10 AM     
From your own source:

"The revelations are likely to be pounced on by the fringe group of researchers and pundits who deny that global warming exists."

And by God, pounce you did! Like a rat on a Cheeto.

"However the Goddard Institute claimed that the differences in the recalculated temperature - at one tenth of a degree in the US and one thousandth of of a degree all over the world - were so insignificant as to have no impact on the overall global warming trend."

Seems we really have to split hairs to say that the '30s were warmer, don't we?

Go ahead, try again.
  by: l´anglais     01/05/2008 01:29 AM     
  Thank God  
Now we can go back to our gas guzzling Humvees, 60 ft Motor Homes, stoke up our Coal Fired Factories, burn as much oil as we like, bring out the old light bulbs. No more small cars, no more hybrids.
We can pollute the rivers again, we can cut down the Rainforests.
"man's impact on the atmosphere "A drop in the ocean"
All thanks to the new Messiahs, Oleg Sorokhtin of RIA Novosti and Habibullah Abdusamatov.
Now wheres those Ugg boots, gotta get ready for the ice age.
  by: BlackWidow   01/05/2008 01:47 PM     
  This is Ridgy Didge  
Oleg say to Habibullah,hey Habibullah, you feets are colt tonight. I know Oleg, they heff bin like dis for ages, I tink another Ice Age cumink.
Habibullah what you tink we vrite paper about New Ice Age.
Good idea Oleg, ven vill da new ice startink you tink. Me tink 2012 vat you tink. Me tink goot.
Now get colt feets off me and go bek to sleepink.
  by: BlackWidow   01/05/2008 02:07 PM     
'As early as 100,000 years from now, we will be in the throes of a "New Ice Age" with ice dominating Europe and glaciers south of Moscow.'

100,000 years from now? Wow. That's quite a specific guess as to the start of another ice-age. Well, considering it's only been about 12,000 years since the end of the last one...

Russia media-- always good for a laugh.
  by: theironboard     01/05/2008 02:32 PM     
I love how conservatives shoot the messenger and immediately thrust their heads back into the sand (or another place) on almost every issue that exists. It's so laughable.
  by: Lurker     01/05/2008 06:23 PM     
I don't see how the degree of change is relevant. If the earlier years were warmer than the later years, and that seems to entirely be the case, then how can you say there even is a warming trend?

So what if the degree is minuscule... it still bears out the fact that the 1930s were generally hotter than later years except 1998-1999 and 2006.

For that matter, the impact of human activity on global warming IS neglible when compared to natural sources. If we are advancing the rate of global warming, it is not significantly. There are more pressing concerns for the elimination of fossil fuel based energy sources, reducing pollution and so on. These things need to be done, but carbon credits is bullshit and Al Gore knows it. Of course Al Gore is going to push the Global Warming angle - he has a business based entirely on buying and selling carbon credits!
  by: soshimaster   01/05/2008 11:18 PM     
  The basic carbon credits scam  
Joe energy user switches to 'green' energy and builds an energy efficient house.

These two actions do the following:

Using green energy is slightly more expensive, the government however earns "carbon credits" when anyone chooses these power sources.

Building an energy efficient house results in a rebate from the government - this is the government purchasing carbon credits that you would receive, from you.

Now, the government takes these carbon credits and sells them to industries that desire to pollute and produce carbon emissions. These companies can then claim to have a low or zero carbon emission footprint.

Net actual change on amount of pollution and carbon emission? Zero or so close to it as to make no difference.
  by: soshimaster   01/05/2008 11:27 PM     
  Going green  
All we have to do is switch to hybrid or electric cars and the planet is safe. Well, what is at the other end of the Plug for your electric car? More nuke plants? Hybrids, nice! But where do those elements for the Lead Acid Batteries come from and where are they produced? What impact does that have on the enviroment? In the 70's if you got 15MPG out of your Domestic you were doing good. Now we're getting 30, and using the A/C which if you put the car on the dyno uses up several HP to run. If you really care, take a bus, walk to the 7-11 for your Slurpie you don't need and does what is done in Europe - *drive a diesel*!!! My 5000lb "aerodynamic as a brick" van gets 25MPG at 75 MPH. Pickup trucks with the same 6.2L NON TURBO diesels got 32 or better. Gutless? Go on YOUTUBE and search up Cummins Diesels: 2000+ HP and your mom can drive it to church. 800HP and you still keep full factory warranty. Try that in a ZR1 Vette.

Easy solutions just like the diet pill that you don't have to change your lifestyle with - look int it and see who is trying to keep you from not seeing what is in the other hand. At the very least watch your local weather report. Todays High, Tonights Low - and the records. More often than not your record highs are set BEFORE 1950, if not 1930.

Its all part of the cycle. Which is the ACTUAL Inconvenient Truth.
  by: mcink2   01/06/2008 03:02 AM     
  Guess we'll know for sure in a few years  
wont we...

There are actualy hundreds of Scientists trying to get the IPCC to remove there names from the list of scientists who support it, and many more who partialy agree with parts of the conclusions, very few strongly agree with all of the findings.

When scientists can come up with a mathematical model that can explain past events, I will give them some credence, until then, they are little better than the christian science network prattling about creationism in my view.
  by: AnsweringQuestions     01/08/2008 12:09 PM     
"When scientists can come up with a mathematical model that can explain past events, I will give them some credence,"

In all fairness, i think coming up with an accurate computer model for the weather is one of the most complex difficult thing to accomplish if it is to cover any sort of long term time frame.

The way i see it, is even if global warming is caused by factors other then carbon emissions, the reduction in pollution would itself be worth the effort. The air would be clean enough to bike in the city and not feel like I've been smoking an exhaust pipe.
  by: tiggyfiggy   01/08/2008 01:44 PM     
Not what I asked for.

Predicting weather is near impossible, but surely getting it fit reasonably well on previous temperatures cant be that hard.
No other "science" would be able to say, "ok, we cant prove it, but it is really difficult."
  by: AnsweringQuestions     01/08/2008 02:05 PM     
  snowman is absolutely right  
What many do not know is that Many prominent scientists are now leaving the IPCC because they do not agree to the politics that cloud the peer review process.
32000 dissenting scientists in the US have petitioned the US Gov too re: the AGW fraud.
Further to that the IPCC's last publication was 2007 annual review and did not include the ammendments that it was forced to correct.
Lord Monkton discovered over 35 very important inaccuracies that were corrected by the IPCC but have not been publicised or published quite simply because it completely removes anthropogenic influence from the equation!
anyway :)
Most of the eco fascists are quite happy eating bigmacs wearing gap jeans and nike trainers and squabbling over the latest media led sensationalist claims - best to leave them to it !!

Heres a factual claim for many of you eco-fascists out there - you are all brain dead and drowning in your layers of illusion. whatever you say - it isn't enough to wake you from your stupor - there you are doomed to remain.

dont you know! with the carbon credits and the taxes they are effectively licencing the weather to us!
wakey wakey !
sleepy heads!
  by: devlinthedetail   10/25/2008 02:12 AM     
Since you'll never listen to my well-reasoned and -sourced argument, I'll just say:

"you are brain dead and drowning in your layers of illusion. whatever you say - it isn't enough to wake you from your stupor - there you are doomed to remain."
  by: l´anglais     10/25/2008 03:00 AM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: