Climate Change: A Cycle Not a Trend?

Fri, 2006-01-06 10:26Jim Hoggan
Jim Hoggan's picture

Climate Change: A Cycle Not a Trend?

Those who deny the reality of climate change like to point out that dramatic weather events have occurred in the past; they argue that we may be in the midst of a cycle we don't understand, rather than a trend caused by human activity.

New research from the U.S. National Science Foundation looks at a previous “cycle” – one that occurred 55 million years ago and that resulted in warming-induced changes in sea circulation that appear similar to what are currently occurring in the northern hemisphere.

For those who would take comfort in the cyclical argument, consider that on the earlier occasion, the “cycle” took 20,000 years to reverse itself – a little beyond our current planning horizon.

Previous Comments

To read the Blog “Climate Change: A cycle not a trend”, you would think that the earth’s climate has been perfectly constant for the last 20,000 years or more. Nothing could be further from the truth. We had a warm period about a 1000 years ago when the Vikings were farming in Greenland - can’t do that now. The Romans had a wine industry in Northern England 2000 years ago - can’t do that now. Etc Etc. I would prefer to see sound Scientific reasoning behind Global Warming, not smear tactics on people who are trying to put this whole climate change in perspective. Thereason why a number of scientists have not had articles published is because the Climate Maffia won’t accept them. They bar sceptics from climate conferences. What sort of message does that send me? That they are on shakey ground and can’t defend their position, so they resort to smear tactics. Mikem
Must be difficult for a journalist to comment on science. I have trouble with only a basic undergrad degree in science. But from the foggy recesses of my Geography 101 course it seems that N.America had experienced a number of ice ages and warming periods during a time period much less than 55 million years.
“you would think that the earth’s climate has been perfectly constant for the last 20,000 years or more.” This line comes up over and over from armchair deniers who only now are “discovering” what every climate scientist learned either in high school or possibly first-year University. Congratulations.

Or maybe we do understand it.

 The Chandler’s wobble theory explains the increase in earthquakes, volcanos, the start of the overdue pole reversal of the earths magnetic pole, El Nino and increases in hurricanes and changes in Northern Lights which are all being observed as well as global warming.

 The fact is, in the last 30 years the earth’s magnetic poles have started to reverse.  Long overdue as it is about 750,000 yrs since last time and it is somewhere in the region of 250,000 years normally (haven’t looked up exact fugure so please don’t quote the 250,000 one).

 This involves a reversal in the direction of circulation of the earth’s molten magnetic core and the North Pole is shifting steadily toward Siberia quite fast having never moving in a consistent direction ever before in human history.

 So folks, things are bound to happen and the graphs of the increase in volcanic activity, earthquake activity, El Nino, hurricanes hitting America, and increase in global sea temperature all match each other. The changes in all these phenomena are linked.

 Greenhouse gases cannot affect volcanic action, earthquakes or even El Nino and associated hurricanes, but the start of the magnetic pole reversal can explain all including global warming.

 Wake up people.  Forget all the revenue that will be lost in Europe etc if all taxation based on carbon was suddenly debunked;  Or don’t bother wake up, because there is nothing we can do about it.  It will happen and that’s that.  Life on earth continued through the last pole reversal and will no doubt survive this one, but we need to prepare to expect some CHANGES to take place.

Is temperature the only consideration in Climate Change? What about the changing composition of the atmosphere and biosphere, and their possible effects on normal weather patterns? What about the clouding of the atmosphere by increased air traffic? The Ozone Layer? Seems like serious climate change could be occurring that has nothing to do with the temperature of the oceans or the shifting of the poles. Obviously, cyclic change is happening as always, but I think it is foolish to think that humans have nothing to do  with the extreme weather phenomenon of recent, such as drought in the Southwest.  Intuition tells me El Nino/Nina are scapegoats for the much more subtle and complicated factors introduced by humans in the last century. Perhaps the pole switch will affect our minds. From space we can see brown clouds billowing from our cities, like smoke from campfires, slowly compromising  the air everything breathes. We can see unnatural blankets of airplane contrail clouds spread across the globe, indifferent to normal climate conditions and patterns. But still our minds won’t look further into the future than one or two generations to see what is inevitably tragic about what we do everyday. Imagine a comparison photo of the Earth from space in fifty years. I predict it will look noticably different. But just like now, will people look the other way and blame everything but themselves for the state of their increasingly turbulant world?

Christy Clark at LNG Canada announcement

The B.C. government’s claim that LNG exports offer the “greatest single step British Columbia can take to fight climate change” is inaccurate in the absence of stronger global climate policies according to a new report released today by the Pembina Institute and the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions.

Natural gas does have a role to play in a world that avoids two degrees Celsius in global warming, but only if strong emissions reduction policies are put...

read more