At my homepage www.rolf-martens.com I've added today, under "News with
brief
comments":
Tuesday, 08 January 2008 (NWBC 336) A cold spell soon to replace global
warming
(Sorokhtin, Ru; SSRC, Florida)
2008-01-08, 23:00 GMT:
This is the conclusion both of Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, Russia, according to a
RIA
Novosti article on 03.01, and of the Space and Science Research Center
(SSRC)
in Orlando, Florida, the USA, as said in a press release by that institute
on
02.01.
[http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080103/94768732.html
http://www.spaceandscience.net/id16.html]
This finding of course very much contradicts a concerted propaganda by all
the
arch-reactionary ruling cliques of the imperialist bourgeoisie in the
world,
which has grown particulary loud, shrill and desperate precisely in the
last
few months.
According to that propaganda, there is a "most dangerous global warming",
"due
to human activities", "about which everybody agrees" and "about which
there can
be no possible doubt", and "therefore, everybody must accept" the
arch-reactionary governments' now making all energy even more extremely
expensive and scarce, so that the "rich" countries shall get even more
deindustrialized and many millions more there made unemployed and further
tens
of thousands poorer people in these countries caused to freeze to death
each
winter, and above all so that hundreds of million people in the
internationally-exploited countries shall be kept down in undervelopment
as
particularly low-paid labour power to an even greater extent and even many
more
among them get killed too beacuse of energy costs which they have no
chance of
meeting.
Factually, this mendacious propaganda, an im****tant part of what since
long is
a "green" warfare by the ruling imperialist cliques against practically
everybody on earth, has stood completely refuted since a long time back
too -
see for instance several articles at my homepage and several scientific
websites linked to from it.
And it's very clear too that those already ongoing mass destructive and
mass
murdering actions which the ruling cliques are engaging in, which are
"motivated by" it and which pur****tedly are intended to "prevent the
planet's
surface from getting too hot", do not and will not even have any
measurable
effects whatosoever on that surface temperature.
Even more obvious to everybody must it be, that those actions pur****tedly
for
"cooling-down the planet" in reality are just viscious attacks on
pratically
every inhabitant of it, now when it also turns out:
Not only was there never any "warming" problem whatsoever (in recent
decades),
not even one due to natural causes - the slight warming of some 0.6ºC in
the
century from approximately 1880 on was quite favourable for mankind, and
from
1998 on there has been no warming at all - but, quite on the contrary,
what
actual problems there may arise for humanity in the near future on account
of
fluctuations of the climate, the abovementioned recent two studies both
say,
those will be of its getting colder.
As for the ruling small reactionary cliques however, they should not be
allowed
to continue their cold-blooded actions of mass destruction and mass murder
at
all. People instead should team up so as to make things much too hot for
comfort for of them everywhere, and in the end for their entire rule on
earth.
Here I'm reproducing in full the two articles mentioned above.
[QUOTE:]
A COLD SPELL SOON TO REPLACE GLOBAL WARMING
13:54 | 03/ 01/ 2008
MOSCOW. (Oleg Sorokhtin for RIA Novosti) – Stock up on fur coats and felt
boots! This is my paradoxical advice to the warm world.
Earth is now at the peak of one of its passing warm spells. It started in
the
17th century when there was no industrial influence on the climate to
speak of
and no such thing as the hothouse effect. The current warming is evidently
a
natural process and utterly independent of hothouse gases.
The real reasons for climate changes are uneven solar radiation,
terrestrial
precession (that is, axis gyration), instability of oceanic currents,
regular
salinity fluctuations of the Arctic Ocean surface waters, etc. There is
another, principal reason—solar activity and luminosity. The greater they
are
the warmer is our climate.
Astrophysics knows two solar activity cycles, of 11 and 200 years. Both
are
caused by changes in the radius and area of the irradiating solar surface.
The
latest data, obtained by Habibullah Abdusamatov, head of the Pulkovo
Observatory space research laboratory, say that Earth has passed the peak
of
its warmer period, and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by
2012.
Real cold will come when solar activity reaches its minimum, by 2041, and
will
last for 50-60 years or even longer.
This is my point, which environmentalists hotly dispute as they cling to
the
hothouse theory. As we know, hothouse gases, in particular, nitrogen
peroxide,
warm up the atmosphere by keeping heat close to the ground. Advanced in
the
late 19th century by Svante A. Arrhenius, a Swedish physical chemist and
Nobel
Prize winner, this theory is taken for granted to this day and has not
undergone any serious check.
It determines decisions and instruments of major international
organizations—in
particular, the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention
on
Climate Change. Signed by 150 countries, it exemplifies the impact of
scientific delusion on big politics and economics. The authors and
enthusiasts
of the Kyoto Protocol based their assumptions on an erroneous idea. As a
result, developed countries waste huge amounts of money to fight
industrial
pollution of the atmosphere. What if it is a Don Quixote’s duel with the
windmill?
Hothouse gases may not be to blame for global warming. At any rate, there
is no
scientific evidence to their guilt. The classic hothouse effect scenario
is too
simple to be true. As things really are, much more sophisticated processes
are
on in the atmosphere, especially in its dense layer. For instance, heat is
not
so much radiated in space as carried by air currents—an entirely different
mechanism, which cannot cause global warming.
The temperature of the troposphere, the lowest and densest ****tion of the
atmosphere, does not depend on the concentration of greenhouse gas
emissions—a
point proved theoretically and empirically. True, probes of Antarctic ice
****eld, taken with bore specimens in the vicinity of the Russian research
station Vostok, show that there are close links between atmospheric
concentration of carbon dioxide and temperature changes. Here, however, we
cannot be quite sure which is the cause and which the effect.
Temperature fluctuations always run somewhat ahead of carbon dioxide
concentration changes. This means that warming is primary. The ocean is
the
greatest carbon dioxide depository, with concentrations 60-90 times larger
than
in the atmosphere. When the ocean’s surface warms up, it produces the
“champagne effect.” Compare a foamy spurt out of a warm bottle with wine
pouring smoothly when served properly cold.
Likewise, warm ocean water exudes greater amounts of carbonic acid, which
eva****ates to add to industrial pollution—a factor we cannot deny.
However,
man-caused pollution is negligible here. If industrial pollution with
carbon
dioxide keeps at its present-day 5-7 billion metric tons a year, it will
not
change global temperatures up to the year 2100. The change will be too
small
for humans to feel even if the concentration of greenhouse gas emissions
doubles.
Carbon dioxide cannot be bad for the climate. On the contrary, it is food
for
plants, and so is beneficial to life on Earth. Bearing out this point was
the
Green Revolution—the phenomenal global increase in farm yields in the
mid-20th
century. Numerous experiments also prove a direct pro****tion between
harvest
and carbon dioxide concentration in the air.
Carbon dioxide has quite a different pernicious influence—not on the
climate
but on synoptic activity. It absorbs infrared radiation. When tropospheric
air
is warm enough for complete absorption, radiation energy passes into gas
fluctuations. Gas expands and dissolves to send warm air up to the
stratosphere, where it clashes with cold currents coming down. With no
noticeable temperature changes, synoptic activity skyrockets to whip up
cyclones and anticyclones. Hence we get hurricanes, storms, tornados and
other
natural disasters, whose intensity largely depends on carbon dioxide
concentration. In this sense, reducing its concentration in the air will
have a
positive effect.
Carbon dioxide is not to blame for global climate change. Solar activity
is
many times more powerful than the energy produced by the whole of
humankind.
Man’s influence on nature is a drop in the ocean.
Earth is unlikely to ever face a temperature disaster. Of all the planets
in
the solar system, only Earth has an atmosphere beneficial to life. There
are
many factors that account for development of life on Earth: Sun is a calm
star,
Earth is located an optimum distance from it, it has the Moon as a massive
satellite, and many others. Earth owes its friendly climate also to
dynamic
feedback between biotic and atmospheric evolution.
The principal among those diverse links is Earth’s reflective power, which
regulates its temperature. A warm period, as the present, increases
oceanic
eva****ation to produce a great amount of clouds, which filter solar
radiation
and so bring heat down. Things take the contrary turn in a cold period.
What can’t be cured must be endured. It is wise to accept the natural
course of
things. We have no reason to panic about allegations that ice in the
Arctic
Ocean is thawing rapidly and will soon vanish altogether. As it really is,
scientists say the Arctic and Antarctic ice ****elds are growing. Physical
and
mathematical calculations predict a new Ice Age. It will come in 100,000
years,
at the earliest, and will be much worse than the previous. Europe will be
ice-bound, with glaciers reaching south of Moscow.
Meanwhile, Europeans can rest assured. The Gulf Stream will change its
course
only if some evil magic robs it of power to reach the north—but Mother
Nature
is unlikely to do that.
Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, Merited Scientist of Russia and fellow of the Russian
Academy of Natural Sciences, is staff researcher of the Oceanology
Institute.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not
necessarily
represent those of RIA Novosti.
[END OF QUOTE]
[QUOTE:]
In advance of a press conference for later this month, the first press
release
for 2008 is issued today:
PRESS RELEASE: SSRC 1-2008
CHANGES IN THE SUN'S SURFACE TO BRING NEXT CLIMATE CHANGE
January 2, 2008
Today, the Space and Science Research Center, (SSRC) in Orlando, Florida
announces that it has confirmed the recent web announcement of NASA solar
physicists that there are substantial changes occurring in the sun’s
surface.
The SSRC has further researched these changes and has concluded they will
bring
about the next climate change to one of a long lasting cold era.
Today, Director of the SSRC, John Casey has reaffirmed earlier research he
led
that independently discovered the sun’s changes are the result of a family
of
cycles that bring about climate ****fts from cold climate to warm and back
again.
“We today confirm the recent announcement by NASA that there are historic
and
im****tant changes taking place on the sun’s surface. This will have only
one
outcome - a new climate change is coming that will bring an extended
period of
deep cold to the planet.
This is not however a unique event for the planet although it is
critically
im****tant news to this and the next generations.
It is but the normal sequence of alternating climate changes that has been
going on for thousands of years. Further according to our research, this
series
of solar cycles are so predictable that they can be used to roughly
forecast
the next series of climate changes many decades in advance. I have
verified the
accuracy of these cycles’ behavior over the last 1,100 years relative to
temperatures on Earth, to well over 90%.”
As to what these changes are Casey says, “The sun’s surface flows have
slowed
dramatically as NASA has indicated. This process of surface movement, what
NASA
calls the “conveyor belt” essentially sweeps up old sunspots and deposits
new
ones. NASA’s studies have found that when the surface movement slows down,
sunspot counts drop significantly.
All records of sunspot counts and other proxies of solar activity going
back
6,000 years clearly validates our own findings that when we have sunspot
counts
lower then 50 it means only one thing - an intense cold climate, globally.
NASA says the solar cycle 25, the one after the next that starts this
spring
will be at 50 or lower. The general opinion of the SSRC scientists is that
it
could begin even sooner within 3 years with the next solar cycle 24. What
we
are saying today is that my own research and that of the other scientists
at
the SSRC verifies that NASA is right about one thing – a solar cycle of 50
or
lower is headed our way.
With this next solar minimum predicted by NASA, what I call a “solar
hibernation,” the SSRC forecasts a much colder Earth just as it has
transpired
before for thousands of years. If NASA is the more accurate on the
schedule,
then we may see even warmer temperatures before the bottom falls out. If
the
SSRC and other scientists around the world are correct then we have only a
few
years to prepare before 20-30 years of lasting and possibly dangerous cold
arrive.”
When asked about what this will mean to the average person on the street,
Casey
was firm. “The last time this particular cycle regenerated was over 200
years
ago. I call it the “Bi-Centennial Cycle” solar cycle. It took place
between
1793 and 1830, the so-called Dalton Minimum, a period of extreme cold that
resulted in what historian John D. Post called the ‘last great subsistence
crisis.’ With that cold came massive crops losses, food riots, famine and
disease.
I believe this next climate change will be much stronger and has the
potential
to once more cause widespread crop losses globally with the resultant ill
effects. The key difference for this next Bi-Centennial Cycle’s impact
versus
the last is that we will have over 8 billion mouths to feed in the next
coldest
years where as we had only 1 billion the last time. Among other effects
like
social and economic disruption, we are facing the real prospect of the
‘perfect
storm of global food shortages’ in the next climate change. In answer to
the
question, everyone on the street will be affected.”
Given the im****tance of the next climate change Casey was asked whether
the
government has been notified. “Yes, as soon as my research revealed these
solar
cycles and the prediction of the coming cold era with the next climate
change,
I notified all the key offices in the Bush administration including both
parties in the Senate and House science committees as well as most of the
nation’s media outlets.
Unfortunately, because of the intensity of coverage of the UN IPCC and man
made
global warming during 2007, the full story about climate change is very
slow in
getting told.
These changes in the sun have begun. They are unstoppable. With the word
finally starting to get out about the next climate change, hopefully we
will
have time to prepare. Right now, the newly organized SSRC is the leading
independent research center in the US and possibly worldwide, that is
focused
on the next climate change. Some of the world’s brightest scientists, also
experts in solar physics and the next climate change have joined with me.
In
the meantime we will do our best to spread the word along with NASA and
others
who can see what is about to take place for the Earth’s climate.
Soon, I believe, this will be recognized as the most im****tant climate
story of
this century.”
More information on the Space and Science Research Center is available at:
www.spaceandscience.net
The previous NASA announcement was made at:
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10may_longrange.htm
_____________________
Message posted by:
Rolf Martens
Malmö, Sweden
Phone and fax:
+46 - 40 - 124832;
rolf.martens@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
