Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RUSSIAN SCIENTISTS: ‘WE COULD FACE COOLING PERIOD FOR 200-250 YEARS’
The Voice of Russia ^ | 4/28/2013 | None cited

Posted on 04/29/2013 3:54:22 AM PDT by PreciousLiberty

‘We could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years. The period of low solar activity could start in 2030-2040.’

Global warming which has been the subject of so many discussions in recent years, may give way to global cooling. According to scientists from the Pulkovo Observatory in St.Petersburg, solar activity is waning, so the average yearly temperature will begin to decline as well. Scientists from Britain and the US chime in saying that forecasts for global cooling are far from groundless. Some experts warn that a change in the climate may affect the ambitious projects for the exploration of the Arctic that have been launched by many countries.

Just recently, experts said that the Arctic ice cover was becoming thinner while journalists warned that the oncoming global warming would make it possible to grow oranges in the north of Siberia. Now, they say a cold spell will set in. Apparently, this will not occur overnight, Yuri Nagovitsyn of the Pulkovo Observatory, says.

(Excerpt) Read more at thegwpf.org ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: agw; climate; cooling; globalcooling; globalwarming; solar; sun
This is interesting in that we're already seeing much lower activity than usual from the Sun. I had thought we were in for a few decades of cooling, but 200-250 years would certainly alleviate any concern about warming. ;-)

By the end of that kind of interval, humans should be quite capable of engineering the climate as desired.

For those interested in tracking solar activity, I recommend The Layman's Sunspot Count.

1 posted on 04/29/2013 3:54:22 AM PDT by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

Perhaps this will provide an economic boost to the bean industry.


2 posted on 04/29/2013 3:57:41 AM PDT by Herodes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

“By the end of that kind of interval, humans should be quite capable of engineering the climate as desired.”

Not after the dems take us back to the 7th century.


3 posted on 04/29/2013 3:59:33 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do ithat when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Don’t forget Muslims and Obama’s sons.(aka Holder’s people)


4 posted on 04/29/2013 4:07:35 AM PDT by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

I am fortunate in that my grain of salt supply functions equally well in warm *and* cold climate.


5 posted on 04/29/2013 4:09:00 AM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

I’m gonna need a bigger coat!


6 posted on 04/29/2013 4:20:06 AM PDT by BigCinBigD (...Was that okay?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

Look up “interglacial”

We may be in for 100,000 years of cooling.


7 posted on 04/29/2013 4:30:13 AM PDT by NY.SS-Bar9 (Those that vote for a living outnumber those that work for one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

So why should we find this any more credible than the global warming claims?


8 posted on 04/29/2013 4:31:17 AM PDT by 0.E.O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

>>By the end of that kind of interval, humans should be quite capable of engineering the climate as desired.

Only if we treat the whole process as real science, and not a play for grants, political power, and a means to create massive taxation primarily for the benefit of the political class.


9 posted on 04/29/2013 4:33:22 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty
I predict that the global warming crowd will embrace this, because it gives them an easy out.

If temps are colder, they will say that they are warmer than they should be, given the new colder baseline.

If temps don't change, they will say that they are much warmer than they should be, given the new colder baseline.

If temps get warmer, they will say that they are catastrophically warmer than they should be, given the new colder baseline.

10 posted on 04/29/2013 4:50:56 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 0.E.O
So why should we find this any more credible than the global warming claims?

I have no issue with claims that the Earth is getting warmer or colder and that the climate is changing, as that is normal. My issue is with the notion that after billions of years of constant climatic change, my car and air conditioning are now found to be the cause.

11 posted on 04/29/2013 4:54:51 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

the governments that believe this have already begun moving to control earth access to food and natural and energy sources for their nations

whoever could they be? (not obama)


12 posted on 04/29/2013 4:55:58 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age Takes a Toll: Please Have Exact Change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

Sounds like we should all start driving evil gas-guzzlers again.


13 posted on 04/29/2013 4:59:40 AM PDT by mykroar (Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice.-Thomas Paine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty
Damn you, Montgomery Burns!


14 posted on 04/29/2013 5:02:22 AM PDT by newfreep (Breitbart sent me...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mykroar

What do you mean again? Never stopped. If the eco-wack-a-doodles think warming is bad, wait until they see an extended cool down. Of course this would be more in line with their desire to rid earth of humans. Except them of course. I guess they never planted anything in the Arctic or Antarctic huh? I hear the growing seasons there are pretty short. Me, I’m just doin’ my part to provide food for plants and tryin’ to keep us warm. Hemi style!


15 posted on 04/29/2013 5:10:51 AM PDT by rktman (BACKGROUND CHECKS? YOU FIRST mr. president(not that we'd get the truth!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

The Sun is discussed on Spaceweather.com. There are daily values of the 10.7 cm radiation which relates directly to the Sun’s output.


16 posted on 04/29/2013 5:16:24 AM PDT by Citizen Tom Paine (An old sailor sends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 0.E.O

“So why should we find this any more credible than the global warming claims?”

My initial interest in this related to the 11 year solar cycles, which are a well known phenomena and easily measured. The historical record on those extends back to the 17th century.

There have been two Grand Minima in the 11 year cycle. The first was the Maunder Minimum, the second was the Dalton Minimum (information on these is readily available online). Both were associated with sharply colder temperatures, at least in Europe.

The Sun is currently entering into the first Grand Minimum of the modern era. The current solar cycle (Cycle 24) has much lower sunspot activity than any in the last 100 years. NASA has already forecast that Cycle 25 will be much lower yet.

The Layman’s Sunspot Count site I mentioned in my original post is doing a good job of tracking current sunspot numbers in the same fashion as they were tracked historically, and the current cycle is lining up very well with those of the Dalton Minimum.

If these Russians are right, the cooler temps will extend much longer than the 20-40 years I was already expecting.


17 posted on 04/29/2013 5:20:15 AM PDT by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 0.E.O

Hundreds of years of observation.


18 posted on 04/29/2013 5:23:43 AM PDT by enduserindy (Conservative Dead Head)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

“I predict that the global warming crowd will embrace this, because it gives them an easy out.”

Actually that’s not right, since their strident claim has been that greenhouse gasses trump all other influences, including the Sun.

Further, if temps are going to trend cooler, there is absolutely no urgency in curtailing CO2 emissions in the short term. In the longer term, I believe market forces will drive a gradual shift away from fossil fuel energy production, and the “problem” (if any) will solve itself.

Oil is an excellent precursor of plastic, so it’ll continue to be useful. ;-)


19 posted on 04/29/2013 5:25:19 AM PDT by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 0.E.O

Because one is based on the idea that a flee on the back of an elephant has some control over it, and the other is based on the sun... (you know that big glowing thing in the sky that holds the entire solar system in place)


20 posted on 04/29/2013 5:26:14 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied .. the economy died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Herodes

Cooling periods have historically always been an economic disaster. Of course, we have never had one with modern medicine, heat and electricity so who knows?


21 posted on 04/29/2013 5:34:59 AM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601

We’ve also never had one with radical Marxists steering the most powerful nation on Earth. If there’s economic disaster ahead (and I believe there is), cold weather will be the least of our worries.


22 posted on 04/29/2013 5:57:32 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

This will also mean famine and wars.

The last cooling period wasn’t a very happy time in history.


23 posted on 04/29/2013 6:01:02 AM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

Warming? Cooling? Make up your minds already! (Or just come out and admit everybody but important people have to live like cavemen.)


24 posted on 04/29/2013 6:03:58 AM PDT by jughandle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

I’m sure the folks in Novosibersk were just overjoyed to hear this news.


25 posted on 04/29/2013 6:11:59 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

I agree. The global warming nuts will claim what little changes they have made have now turned the climate in the opposite direction. OH NO! what to do.


26 posted on 04/29/2013 7:01:16 AM PDT by carpenter45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 0.E.O
So why should we find this any more credible than the global warming claims?

Why? At a purely scientific level because relatively simple models of the earth's climate based on solar irradiance, solar magnetism (for which sunspot number is a proxy), and the earth's orbit correctly retrodict the earth's climate on a scale of millenia in fairly fine detail, while the hugely complex computer models used by the AGW crowd to "prove" that human CO2 emissions were (or are) causing "global warming" can't be made to agree with the climatic record on a time scale of centuries.

On a sociological level because predictions based on solar models don't support anyone's political agenda, while the warming predictions predicated on human causation support the left's agenda of extending state control over every aspect of human activity.

27 posted on 04/29/2013 7:01:46 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 0.E.O
"But how was Herschel to back up his hypothesis? Hampered by the lack of precise meteorological records by which to test his theory, he persevered by lateral thinking. Given the effects of lesser or greater quantities of sunshine on vegetation, it struck him that records of good or bad harvests might provide him with the data he needed. Any correlation between these and periods of many or few sunspots would theoretically support his argument. Using Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations as his source, he was able to single out five periods when, due to poor harvests, the price of wheat in England had been particularly high. Comparing these records to those of sunspot activity during those periods, he discovered to his surprise a clear correlation between poorer wheat harvests and a relative lack of sunspot activity. Contrary to what had been thought until then, the presence of sunspots did not reduce the amount of heat from the sun, the opposite was true: greater sunspot activity corresponded to good weather and lower wheat prices, while a lack of sunspots corresponded to high wheat prices, which implied less favourable weather. ‘It seems probable,’ he wrote, ‘that some temporary scarcity or defect of the vegetation has taken place when the sun has been without those appearances which we surmise to be the symptoms of a copious emission of light and heat’. As we now know, the sun emits greater ultraviolet radiation, causing more heating of the Earth’s atmosphere, during periods of greater sunspot activity, or solar maximum. But in Herschel’s time this was a revolutionary idea – and the apparent correlation with Earth’s climate made it more revolutionary still. "
28 posted on 04/29/2013 7:22:35 AM PDT by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty
Actually that’s not right, since their strident claim has been that greenhouse gasses trump all other influences, including the Sun.

Intellectual honesty hasn't exactly been their strong suit. The low information voter just listens to what Jon Stewart and NPR tell them today, they don't care to compare it with what they were told yesterday.

29 posted on 04/29/2013 7:24:15 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

How do you say “Climate deniers” in Russian?


30 posted on 04/29/2013 8:33:19 AM PDT by TauntedTiger (Keep away from the fence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty
A major cooling would cause at least some societal collapse.

Not something to look forward to even if it would shut the greenie-weenies up.

31 posted on 04/29/2013 8:41:56 AM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (Promotional Fee Paid for by "Ouchies" The Sharp, Prickly Toy You Bathe With!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

I think it has started. Pretty chilly here.

http://classic.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=Vostok,%20Antarctica&wuSelect=WEATHER


32 posted on 04/29/2013 9:22:41 AM PDT by kawhill (kawhill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson