Agricoltura, Global Warming or a New Ice Age: Documentary Film
agricoltura | info | prezzo | dati | produzione
Global cooling was a conjecture during the 1970s of imminent cooling of the Earth's surface and atmosphere along with a posited commencement of glaciation. More on this topic: https://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&tag=tra0c7-20&linkCode=ur2&linkId=d5efc8b59353d775d70007da8af41fce&camp=1789&creative=9325&index=books&keywords=global%20cooling
This hypothesis had little support in the scientific community, but gained temporary popular attention due to a combination of a slight downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s and press reports that did not accurately reflect the scientific understanding of ice age cycles. In contrast to the global cooling conjecture, the current scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth has not durably cooled, but undergone global warming throughout the twentieth century.
Concerns about nuclear winter arose in the early 1980s from several reports. Similar speculations have appeared over effects due to catastrophes such as asteroid impacts and massive volcanic eruptions. A prediction that massive oil well fires in Kuwait would cause significant effects on climate was quite incorrect.
The idea of a global cooling as the result of global warming was already proposed in the 1990s. In 2003, the Office of Net Assessment at the United States Department of Defense was commissioned to produce a study on the likely and potential effects of a modern climate change, especially of a shutdown of thermohaline circulation. The study, conducted under ONA head Andrew Marshall, modelled its prospective climate change on the 8.2 kiloyear event, precisely because it was the middle alternative between the Younger Dryas and the Little Ice Age. The study caused controversy in the media when it was made public in 2004. However, scientists acknowledge that "abrupt climate change initiated by Greenland ice sheet melting is not a realistic scenario for the 21st century".
Currently, the concern that cooler temperatures would continue, and perhaps at a faster rate, has been observed to be incorrect by the IPCC. More has to be learned about climate, but the growing records have shown that the cooling concerns of 1975 have not been borne out.
As for the prospects of the end of the current interglacial (again, valid only in the absence of human perturbations): it isn't true that interglacials have previously only lasted about 10,000 years; and Milankovitch-type calculations indicate that the present interglacial would probably continue for tens of thousands of years naturally. Other estimates (Loutre and Berger, based on orbital calculations) put the unperturbed length of the present interglacial at 50,000 years. Berger (EGU 2005 presentation) believes that the present CO2 perturbation will last long enough to suppress the next glacial cycle entirely.
As the NAS report indicates, scientific knowledge regarding climate change was more uncertain than it is today. At the time that Rasool and Schneider wrote their 1971 paper, climatologists had not yet recognized the significance of greenhouse gases other than water vapor and carbon dioxide, such as methane, nitrous oxide, and chlorofluorocarbons. Early in that decade, carbon dioxide was the only widely studied human-influenced greenhouse gas. The attention drawn to atmospheric gases in the 1970s stimulated many discoveries in future decades. As the temperature pattern changed, global cooling was of waning interest by 1979.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
Commento
-
Here is my theory, the causes are ocean currents, every glacier cycle they stop every time the ice cores melt(warm period). This leads to colder winters and hotter summers in the polar regions, think of it like a pendulum that continuously gains energy where heat(summer) and cold(winter) will oscillate until either one of them completely takes over, if heat takes over we get dinosaur era climate, if the cold takes over then we enter a ice age. What we are seeing is hotter summers and colder winters in the polar regions, so I think it is already happening... the earth's axis can stop this cycle by breaking the pendulum effect between winter and summer. If either ice age or dinosaur era climate takes over it isn't going to end well for us.
-
I think my hair is catching fire at this very moment
-
what is not equated is that when the pressures of water weight is redistributed geotechnical movement and volcanism are the result...thus adding to a thirty year long blackout and thus a new ice age
-
Hillary Obama/Silicon Valley Wall Street Globalist = Global Warming
Donald Trump/ Brexit/ Nationalist = Ice Age
-
Pure speculation, zero proof.
-
Is Andrew Marshall funded by Koch??? http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Andrew_Marshall
-
Search Google scholar or just google for the words "glacial inception".
-
How comforting; ofically , we don't know anything.
-
Science has evolved a lot. Today scientists use many proxies to study surveys of the ocean and ice sheets. The ocean also absorbs many co2 of the Atmosphere.
-
Within 2 minutes it's already wrong
-
early climate speculation... says only the tropics will heat up with the ice caps not being effected??? uhhuh... sure sounds like an authoratative buffoon pre- NASA's James Hanson... trash this
-
Mineralization is the answer
-
Became lost when it said the tropics were warmed more than the poles, but neglected to mention any reason for the deviation in sun light. .. :0)
-
Funny When I was in school in the mid 70's my family went to Canada to see the glaciers and how fast they were growing. They went as far as saying they could reach the united states by the 1990's. And at the sights they had the 100 year chart and pictures showing its grow as proof. Yes Pictures showing their growth. And now they have the same time frame in the opposite direction. Go figure
-
Humans have this stupid perpensity that anything they cannot control must create this huge guilt trip making all other humans to blame for whatever happens they cannot control. This alarmist film, like them all, is caused by YOU not being in control of "them" who think you should live in a mud hut and eating berries until it kills you, not them of course.
-
Okay so, finely ground rock dust obviously helps soil to regain lost minerals, but that still harms the environment. How? The mining process in order to get the gravel and the manufacturing plants that grind it up into dust release air pollution, contribute to deforestation, and the process destroys natural ecosystems. Tell me again how it's so wonderful.
Also, if we just stop cutting down all trees, then what will tree huggers use to make books that spread their opinions?
-
Sorry, not allowed to comment.
-
The subtitles in German are absolutely hilarious not to say complete rubbish. Why bother at all?
-
The most important thing missing from this documentary is the sun cycle which is the most important factor for the end of the Holocene period. Missing part of the jigsaw
-
thank you for posting this, i remember this, it made me aware since then I have made changes in my life style. Many pple think global warming is only about the planet warming up. It will change climates all over the world. The melting north pole will stop the Gulf stream which in turn will drop the temperatures of the countries around the English Channel. New desert will appear, many ares will be flooded. Extreme temps all over
Global cooling was a conjecture during the 1970s of imminent cooling of the Earth's surface and atmosphere along with a posited commencement of glaciation. More on this topic: https://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&tag=tra0c7-20&linkCode=ur2&linkId=d5efc8b59353d775d70007da8af41fce&camp=1789&creative=9325&index=books&keywords=global%20cooling This hypothesis had little support in the scientific community, but gained temporary popular attention due to a combination of a slight downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s and press reports that did not accurately reflect the scientific understanding of ice age cycles. In contrast to the global cooling conjecture, the current scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth has not durably cooled, but undergone global warming throughout the twentieth century. Concerns about nuclear winter arose in the early 1980s from several reports. Similar speculations have appeared over effects due to catastrophes such as asteroid impacts and massive volcanic eruptions. A prediction that massive oil well fires in Kuwait would cause significant effects on climate was quite incorrect. The idea of a global cooling as the result of global warming was already proposed in the 1990s. In 2003, the Office of Net Assessment at the United States Department of Defense was commissioned to produce a study on the likely and potential effects of a modern climate change, especially of a shutdown of thermohaline circulation. The study, conducted under ONA head Andrew Marshall, modelled its prospective climate change on the 8.2 kiloyear event, precisely because it was the middle alternative between the Younger Dryas and the Little Ice Age. The study caused controversy in the media when it was made public in 2004. However, scientists acknowledge that "abrupt climate change initiated by Greenland ice sheet melting is not a realistic scenario for the 21st century". Currently, the concern that cooler temperatures would continue, and perhaps at a faster rate, has been observed to be incorrect by the IPCC. More has to be learned about climate, but the growing records have shown that the cooling concerns of 1975 have not been borne out. As for the prospects of the end of the current interglacial (again, valid only in the absence of human perturbations): it isn't true that interglacials have previously only lasted about 10,000 years; and Milankovitch-type calculations indicate that the present interglacial would probably continue for tens of thousands of years naturally. Other estimates (Loutre and Berger, based on orbital calculations) put the unperturbed length of the present interglacial at 50,000 years. Berger (EGU 2005 presentation) believes that the present CO2 perturbation will last long enough to suppress the next glacial cycle entirely. As the NAS report indicates, scientific knowledge regarding climate change was more uncertain than it is today. At the time that Rasool and Schneider wrote their 1971 paper, climatologists had not yet recognized the significance of greenhouse gases other than water vapor and carbon dioxide, such as methane, nitrous oxide, and chlorofluorocarbons. Early in that decade, carbon dioxide was the only widely studied human-influenced greenhouse gas. The attention drawn to atmospheric gases in the 1970s stimulated many discoveries in future decades. As the temperature pattern changed, global cooling was of waning interest by 1979. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
Commento
Donald Trump/ Brexit/ Nationalist = Ice Age
Also, if we just stop cutting down all trees, then what will tree huggers use to make books that spread their opinions?