456 replies to this topic

[biknut]

2007 Warmest year on record? Second warmest? Try 6 th warmest. Looks like we're going to have to knock the global average down another notch. They're going to have to hurry up and do something about global warming while there's still something to do anything about. Like I said, it's not getting any warmer.


2007 cools, set to be 6th warmest year on record

28 Nov 2007 15:56:11 GMT
Source: Reuters

By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

OSLO, Nov 28 (Reuters) - This year is set to be the sixth warmest since records began 150 years ago, cooler than earlier predicted which means a slight respite for European ski resorts or bears trying to hibernate. "2007 will likely be near equal with 2006, so joint sixth warmest year," Phil Jones, head of the Climatic Research Unit at Britain's University of East Anglia, told Reuters.

The unit, which provides global data for the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), had predicted a year ago that 2007 could be the warmest worldwide since reliable records began in the 1860s. It cut the prediction to number 2 in mid-year.

A sizzling start to 2007, blamed on a combination of global warming and an El Nino warming of the Pacific Ocean that meant an abnormally warm winter in the northern Hemisphere, tailed off as the El Nino ended early.

Jones predicted that 2007 would be beaten by 1998, warmest ahead of 2005, 2003, 2002 and 2004. The U.S. space agency NASA says that 2005 was fractionally warmer than 1998.

The unusually warm start to the year was partly blamed for heating the Atlantic and cutting the extent of Arctic sea ice to a record low in summer. It also disrupted crop growth.

Many of Europe's Alpine ski resorts -- starved of snow a year ago -- have opened. In Switzerland 48 resorts, or more than half the total, opened about 10 days ago after good early snows and freezing temperatures.

In northern Europe, resorts such as Hafjell have opened weeks before last year, when temperatures were too high even for snow-making machines.

DOZING OFF

And bears in a Bulgarian conservation park are starting to doze off for winter hibernations, around the normal time, after last year's mild winter badly disrupted their sleep.

"Four of the bears are sleeping already. The weather was a bit warm but last week it became colder and it snowed so they have fallen asleep," said Raya Stoilova of the "Four Paws" foundation of 24 bears in a conservation park.

The U.N. climate panel has blamed human activities, led by burning fossil fuels in power plants, factories and cars for stoking global warming. Eleven of the 12 years from 1995 to 2006 were among the 12 warmest years on record, it says.

The world's environment ministers will meet in Bali, Indonesia, from December 3-14 to seek ways to widen the fight against climate change.

They will aim to launch two years of talks on a new climate deal to succeed the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol and seek more involvement by Kyoto outsiders such as the United States and big developing nations led by China and India.

http://www.alertnet....k/L27734670.htm

Edited by biknut, 28 November 2007 - 05:10 PM.

[biknut]

I find this report to be highly questionable, however considering that the climate is not warming as much as many have predicted they've got to come up with some kind of BS to save face. If the temperature starts going down soon I'm sure a report will come out saying it's because CO2 levels are falling and that proves they were right all along.

I doubt very much that the US has cut overall emissions.


US reduces greenhouse-gas emissions in 2006

Nov 28 04:34 PM US/Eastern

The United States reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 1.5 percent in 2006 in the fight against global warming, the first decline since 2001, the Department of Energy said Wednesday.
The US pumped 7.076 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases into the environment last year, the DoE said.

That represented only the third decline in annual emissions since 1990, the department said. Since then, US greenhouse-gas emissions have increased at an average annual pace of 0.9 percent.

Emissions of carbon dioxide from energy consumption and industrial processes fell by 1.8 percent in 2006, after rising at an average pace of 1.2 percent per year from 1990 to 2005, according to a report by the DoE's Energy Information Administration.

The second-leading decliner was emissions of man-made gases with high global warming potentials, or "high-GWP gases," which fell by 2.2 percent.

Methane emissions dropped by 0.4 percent, while nitrous oxide emissions rose by 2.9 percent.

The DoE explained the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions was due to a 0.5 percent decline in overall energy demand and a decrease in the carbon intensity of electricity generation, driven by increased use of natural gas and greater reliance on on non-fossil fuel energy sources.


http://www.breitbart...;show_article=1

Edited by biknut, 28 November 2007 - 10:56 PM.

[platypus]

I find this report to be highly questionable, however considering that the climate is not warming as much as many have predicted they've got to come up with some kind of BS to save face. If the temperature starts going down soon I'm sure a report will come out saying it's because CO2 levels are falling and that proves they were right all along.

CO2 level will not be falling in a long time.

[platypus]

I just walked out of a presentation where a top-notch scientist had estimated the flows and mass-losses of Antarctic glaciers:

- Estimated Antarctic mass-loss increased from 112 Gigatons/year in 1996 to 196 Gt/yr in 2006
- This was caused almost entirely by the large speedup of glaciers in the Pine Island Bay and Antarctic Peninsula
- The ice-shelf of the Pine Island Glacier shows signs of getting unstable and might be getting closer to breaking up

[biknut]

Skeptical Scientists Urge World To ‘Have the Courage to Do Nothing' At UN Conference

BALI, Indonesia - An international team of scientists skeptical of man-made climate fears promoted by the UN and former Vice President Al Gore, descended on Bali this week to urge the world to "have the courage to do nothing" in response to UN demands.

Lord Christopher Monckton, a UK climate researcher, had a blunt message for UN climate conference participants on Monday.

"Climate change is a non problem. The right answer to a non problem is to have the courage to do nothing," Monckton told participants.

"The UN conference is a complete waste of our time and your money and we should no longer pay the slightest attention to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,)" Monckton added. (LINK)

Monckton also noted that the UN has not been overly welcoming to the group of skeptical scientists.

"UN organizers refused my credentials and appeared desperate that I should not come to this conference. They have also made several attempts to interfere with our public meetings," Monckton explained.

"It is a circus here," agreed Australian scientist Dr. David Evans. Evans is making scientific presentations to delegates and journalists at the conference revealing the latest peer-reviewed studies that refute the UN's climate claims.

"This is the most lavish conference I have ever been to, but I am only a scientist and I actually only go to the science conferences," Evans said, noting the luxury of the tropical resort. (Note: An analysis by Bloomberg News on December 6 found: "Government officials and activists flying to Bali, Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause as much pollution as 20,000 cars in a year." - LINK)

Evans, a mathematician who did carbon accounting for the Australian government, recently converted to a skeptical scientist about man-made global warming after reviewing the new scientific studies. (LINK)

"We now have quite a lot of evidence that carbon emissions definitely don't cause global warming. We have the missing [human] signature [in the atmosphere], we have the IPCC models being wrong and we have the lack of a temperature going up the last 5 years," Evans said in an interview with the Inhofe EPW Press Blog. Evans authored a November 28 2007 paper "Carbon Emissions Don't Cause Global Warming." (LINK)

Evans touted a new peer-reviewed study by a team of scientists appearing in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society which found "Warming is naturally caused and shows no human influence." (LINK)

"Most of the people here have jobs that are very well paid and they depend on the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. They are not going to be very receptive to the idea that well actually the science has gone off in a different direction," Evans explained.

[Inhofe EPW Press Blog Note: Several other recent peer-reviewed studies have cast considerable doubt about man-made global warming fears. For most recent sampling see: New Peer-Reviewed Study finds 'Solar changes significantly alter climate' (11-3-07) (LINK) & "New Peer-Reviewed Study Halves the Global Average Surface Temperature Trend 1980 - 2002" (LINK) & New Study finds Medieval Warm Period '0.3C Warmer than 20th Century' (LINK) For a more comprehensive sampling of peer-reviewed studies earlier in 2007 see "New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears" LINK ]

‘IPCC is unsound'

UN IPCC reviewer and climate researcher Dr. Vincent Gray of New Zealand, an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports since its inception going back to 1990, had a clear message to UN participants.

"There is no evidence that carbon dioxide increases are having any affect whatsoever on the climate," Gray, who shares in the Nobel Prize awarded to the UN IPCC, explained. (LINK)

"All the science of the IPCC is unsound. I have come to this conclusion after a very long time. If you examine every single proposition of the IPCC thoroughly, you find that the science somewhere fails," Gray, who wrote the book "The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of "Climate Change 2001," said.

"It fails not only from the data, but it fails in the statistics, and the mathematics," he added.

‘Dangerous time for science'

Evans, who believes the UN has heavily politicized science, warned there is going to be a "dangerous time for science" ahead.

"We have a split here. Official science driven by politics, money and power, goes in one direction. Unofficial science, which is more determined by what is actually happening with the [climate] data, has now started to move off in a different direction" away from fears of a man-made climate crisis, Evans explained.

"The two are splitting. This is always a dangerous time for science and a dangerous time for politics. Historically science always wins these battles but there can be a lot of causalities and a lot of time in between," he concluded.

Carbon trading ‘fraud?'

New Zealander Bryan Leland of the International Climate Science Coalition warned participants that all the UN promoted discussions of "carbon trading" should be viewed with suspicion.

"I am an energy engineer and I know something about electricity trading and I know enough about carbon trading and the inaccuracies of carbon trading to know that carbon trading is more about fraud than it is about anything else," Leland said.

"We should probably ask why we have 10,000 people here [in Bali] in a futile attempt to ‘solve' a [climate] problem that probably does not exist," Leland added.

‘Simply not work'

Owen McShane, the head of the International Climate Science Coalition, also worried that a UN promoted global approach to economics would mean financial ruin for many nations.

"I don't think this conference can actually achieve anything because it seems to be saying that we are going to draw up one protocol for every country in the world to follow," McShane said. (LINK)

"Now these countries and these economies are so diverse that trying to presume you can put all of these feet into one shoe will simply not work," McShane explained.

"Having the same set of rules apply to everybody will blow some economies apart totally while others will be unscathed and I wouldn't be surprised if the ones who remain unscathed are the ones who write the rules," he added.

‘Nothing happening at this conference'

Professor Dr. William Alexander, emeritus of the University of Pretoria in South Africa and a former member of the United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, warned poor nations and their residents that the UN policies could mean more poverty and thus more death.

"My message is specifically for the poor people of Africa. And there is nothing happening at this conference that can help them one little bit but there is the potential that they could be damaged," Alexander said. (LINK)

"The government and people of Africa will have their attention drawn to reducing climate change instead of reducing poverty," Alexander added.

Related Links:

New UN Children's Book Promotes Global Warming Fears to Kids (11-13-2006)

Scientists Counter AP Article Promoting Computer Model Climate Fears

New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears

Newsweek Editor Calls Mag's Global Warming 'Deniers' Article 'Highly Contrived'

Newsweek's Climate Editorial Screed Violates Basic Standards of Journalism

Latest Scientific Studies Refute Fears of Greenland Melt

EPA to Probe E-mail Threatening to ‘Destroy' Career of Climate Skeptic

Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics

Senator Inhofe declares climate momentum shifting away from Gore (The Politico op ed)

Scientific Smackdown: Skeptics Voted The Clear Winners Against Global Warming Believers in Heated NYC Debate

Global Warming on Mars & Cosmic Ray Research Are Shattering Media Driven "Consensus'

Global Warming: The Momentum has Shifted to Climate Skeptics

Prominent French Scientist Reverses Belief in Global Warming - Now a Skeptic

Top Israeli Astrophysicist Recants His Belief in Manmade Global Warming - Now Says Sun Biggest Factor in Warming

Warming On Jupiter, Mars, Pluto, Neptune's Moon & Earth Linked to Increased Solar Activity, Scientists Say

Panel of Broadcast Meteorologists Reject Man-Made Global Warming Fears- Claim 95% of Weathermen Skeptical

MIT Climate Scientist Calls Fears of Global Warming 'Silly' - Equates Concerns to ‘Little Kids' Attempting to "Scare Each Other"

Weather Channel TV Host Goes 'Political'- Stars in Global Warming Film Accusing U.S. Government of ‘Criminal Neglect'

Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics

ABC-TV Meteorologist: I Don't Know A Single Weatherman Who Believes 'Man-Made Global Warming Hype'

The Weather Channel Climate Expert Refuses to Retract Call for Decertification for Global Warming Skeptics

Senator Inhofe Announces Public Release Of "Skeptic's Guide To Debunking Global Warming"

http://epw.senate.go...03-68f67ebd151c

[platypus]

Greenland is starting to look really worrisome. If this trend continues, the current IPCC forecasts of sea level rise will have to be thrown out of the window:

http://www.timescall...ory.asp?ID=5125

The melting increased by about 30 percent for the western part of Greenland from 1979 to 2006, with record melt years in 1987, 1991, 1998, 2002, 2005 and 2007, said CU-Boulder Professor Konrad Steffen, director of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences.

http://ap.google.com...Oi-jwwD8TFEQ200

Edited by platypus, 12 December 2007 - 12:30 AM.

[biknut]

Interesting article, biknut, and thank you for posting to this thread. I hadn't looked in here and had temporarily lost its location since the forum snafu.

Why is that news article published on a government congress committee web-site? I take every stance of our so-called government with a large grain of salt.

That's probably a wise position to take. I might add that NASA also falls into that category, and the UN (as in IPCC report) is even worse.

[platypus]

Interesting article, biknut, and thank you for posting to this thread. I hadn't looked in here and had temporarily lost its location since the forum snafu.

Why is that news article published on a government congress committee web-site? I take every stance of our so-called government with a large grain of salt.

That's probably a wise position to take. I might add that NASA also falls into that category, and the UN (as in IPCC report) is even worse.

Well, stick to peer-reviewed scientific journals then.

[biknut]

This is what global warming is really all about.


Global Carbon Tax Urged at UN Climate Conference

BALI, Indonesia – A global tax on carbon dioxide emissions was urged to help save the Earth from catastrophic man-made global warming at the United Nations climate conference. A panel of UN participants on Thursday urged the adoption of a tax that would represent “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.”

“Finally someone will pay for these [climate related] costs,” Othmar Schwank, a global tax advocate, told Inhofe EPW Press Blog following the panel discussion titled “A Global CO2 Tax.” Schwank is a consultant with the Switzerland based Mauch Consulting firm

Schwank said at least “$10-$40 billion dollars per year” could be generated by the tax, and wealthy nations like the U.S. would bear the biggest burden based on the “polluters pay principle.”

The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to tax coal.”

The UN was presented with a new report from the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment titled “Global Solidarity in Financing Adaptation.” The report stated there was an “urgent need” for a global tax in order for “damages [from climate change] to be kept from growing to truly catastrophic levels, especially in vulnerable countries of the developing world.”

The tens of billions of dollars per year generated by a global tax would “flow into a global Multilateral Adaptation Fund” to help nations cope with global warming, according to the report.

Schwank said a global carbon dioxide tax is an idea long overdue that is urgently needed to establish “a funding scheme which generates the resources required to address the dimension of challenge with regard to climate change costs.”

'Diminish future prosperity'

However, ideas like a global tax and the overall UN climate agenda met strong opposition Thursday from a team of over 100 prominent international scientists who warned the UN that attempting to control the Earth's climate was "ultimately futile."

The scientists wrote, “The IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions." The scientists, many of whom are current or former members of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), sent the December 13 letter to the UN Secretary-General. (See: Over 100 Prominent Scientists Warn UN Against 'Futile' Climate Control Efforts – LINK)

‘Redistribution of wealth’

The environmental group Friends of the Earth, in attendance in Bali, also advocated the transfer of money from rich to poor nations on Wednesday.

“A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth. (LINK)

Calls for global regulations and taxes are not new at the UN. Former Vice President Al Gore, who arrived Thursday at the Bali conference, reiterated this week his call to place a price on carbon dioxide emissions. (LINK)

In 2000, then French President Jacques Chirac said the UN’s Kyoto Protocol represented "the first component of an authentic global governance." Former EU Environment Minister Margot Wallstrom said, "Kyoto is about the economy, about leveling the playing field for big businesses worldwide." Canadian Prime Minster Stephen Harper once dismissed Kyoto as a “socialist scheme.” (LINK)

'A bureaucrat's dream'

MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen warned about these types of carbon regulations earlier this year. "Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life," Lindzen said in March 2007. (LINK)

In addition, many critics have often charged that proposed tax and regulatory “solutions” were more important to the promoters of man-made climate fears than the accuracy of their science.

Former Colorado Senator Tim Wirth reportedly said in 1990, "We've got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing — in terms of economic policy and environmental policy." (LINK)

http://epw.senate.go...s...6&Issue_id=

[platypus]

The scientists wrote, "The IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions."

I would be more worried about the possibility that cutting greenhouse gas emissions is politically/practically impossible. The cost of large climate change is at least an order of magnitude greater than the cost of mitigation attempts. Apparently some folks want humanity to take huge risks with the climate without consideration of future prosperity.

[ilanso]

Ready to take the test?


http://www.globalwar.../Testindex.html

[niner]

Ready to take the test?

http://www.globalwar.../Testindex.html

Why bother? It's a denialist site. Time Waste.

[platypus]

Current Melting Of Greenland Ice Mimics 1920s-1940s Event




Recent warming around the frozen island actually lags behind the global average warming pattern by about 1-2 degrees C but if it fell into synch with global temperatures in a few years, the massive ice sheet might pass its "threshold of viability" - a tipping point where the loss of ice couldn't be stopped.

"Once you pass that threshold," Box said, "the current science suggests that it would become an irreversible process. And we simply don't know how fast that might happen, how fast the ice might disappear."

http://www.terradail..._Event_999.html

[biknut]

Ready to take the test?


http://www.globalwar.../Testindex.html

Interesting test. I'm embaressed to say I only scored 7 of 10. I thought I would do better than that.

I think the test questions are very fair, but you need to read them more carefully than I did. Of the 3 I missed, 2 questions I just flat didn't know the answer, and 1 I didn't read the question well enough.

Edited by biknut, 16 December 2007 - 02:46 AM.

[platypus]

Ready to take the test?


http://www.globalwar.../Testindex.html

Interesting test. I'm embaressed to say I only scored 7 of 10. I thought I would do better than that.

I think the test questions are very fair, but you need to read them more carefully than I did. Of the 3 I missed, 2 questions I just flat didn't know the answer, and 1 I didn't read the question well enough.

I got 9 out of 10 - the question where the "right" answer is orbital eccentricity and changes in solar output is wrong. Also it's pretty misleading to say that a 500-year natural cycle may be the cause of temperature changes...of course a cycle of any length may be the cause, but where's the evidence?

Edited by platypus, 16 December 2007 - 01:24 PM.

[platypus]

Rising Seas to Beat Predictions

http://news.bbc.co.u...ure/7148137.stm

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change proposes a maximum sea level rise of 81cm (32in) this century. But in the journal Nature Geoscience, researchers say the true maximum could be about twice that: 163cm (64in).

This is what I've been trying to emphasize, all is not well in Greenland or Antarctica. Now it's entirely possible, even probable that global warming will ultimately lead to a sea-level rise of 5 metres for example. Not the end of the world but massively expensive as a lot of current infrastructure in coastal cities will be lost. Now, even if the current warming might be caused by something else than human activity (unlikely), should we still not try to stop the impeding sea level rise in order to save trillions of euros?

Here's the link to Nature Geoscience:

http://www.nature.co...eo.2007.28.html

Edited by platypus, 18 December 2007 - 08:14 AM.

[biknut]

Japan Mines `Flammable Ice,' Flirts With Environmental Disaster

By Shigeru Sato

Dec. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Fifty-five million years ago the world's climate was catastrophically changed when volcanoes melted natural gas frozen in the seabed. Now Japan plans to drill for the same icy crystals to end its reliance on imported energy.

Billions of tons of methane hydrate, frozen chunks of chemical-laced water buried in sediment some 3,000 feet under the Pacific Ocean floor, may help Japan win energy independence from the Middle East and Indonesia. Japanese engineers have found enough ``flammable ice'' to meet its gas use demands for 14 years. The trick is extracting it without damaging the environment.

Japan is joining the U.S. and Canada in test drilling for methane even as scientists express concerns about any uncontrolled release of the frozen chemical. Some researchers blame the greenhouse gas for triggering a global firestorm that helped wipe out the dinosaurs.

``Methane hydrate was a key cause of the global warming that led to one of the largest extinctions in the earth's history,'' says Ryo Matsumoto, a University of Tokyo scientist who has studied frozen gas since 1987. ``By making the best use of our wisdom, knowledge and technology, we should be able to utilize this wisely as a new energy.''

If successful, the gas drilling project could help Japan reduce a liquefied natural gas import bill that last year was 2.66 trillion yen ($23.3 billion). The country's LNG imports totaled 62.2 million metric tons, equivalent to 3.03 trillion cubic feet, according to the Ministry of Finance's trade report.

``We are closely watching the government's methane hydrate project, expecting some day to start receiving gas via pipelines from the continental shelf,'' says Toshiharu Okui, deputy general manager of gas resources at Tokyo Gas Co., the country's largest distributor of natural gas.

500 Meters Thick

Trapped within sheets of ice up to 500 meters (1,640 feet) thick is an estimated 40 trillion cubic feet of crystalline methane encased in an ocean trench called the Nankai Trough, 30 miles (50 kilometers) off the coast of the main Honshu Island.

``Reserves aren't as much as Saudi Arabia's or Russia's, but they will contribute to us cutting our heavy dependence on imports,'' says Yoshifumi Hashiba, deputy director of the trade ministry's petroleum and natural gas division.

Exploiting the Nankai Trough depends on developing technical know-how through a test project in Canada's frozen north, says Kenichi Yokoi, team leader of the methane hydrate research project at state-controlled Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corp., known as Jogmec.

``Test production in Canada's permafrost is the key to provide clues and determine how methane hydrate can be tapped for mass production,'' says Yokoi. ``Conventional drilling technologies won't be applied for methane hydrate exploitation.''

Test Drilling Results

The most efficient method has proved ``depressurizing,'' which requires deep bore holes being drilled into the ice sheets. Pressure within the chamber is reduced by a pump, causing gaseous methane to separate from the water and ascend to the well head.

A first round of drilling was completed in April by Jogmec and the Canadian government and a second set of tests are scheduled for early 2008. The two governments won't disclose results due to a confidentiality agreement, Jogmec's Yokoi says.

Commercial exploitation of methane hydrate is economically viable when oil trades above $54 a barrel, Japan's government estimated two years ago. The trade ministry is targeting 2016 to start production, corresponding with the scheduled completion of the 16-year government-led test project.

While governments are attracted to an abundant clean fuel, drilling risks disturbing the seabed and triggering an uncontrolled release, says Matsumoto of the University of Tokyo.

``A mass release of methane into the sea and the atmosphere is a risk for global warming,'' he says. ``Massive landslides at the ocean floor must be avoided when drilling at the Nankai Trough.''

Undersea Landslides

Undersea landsides triggered by volcanoes that occurred more than fifty million years ago resulted in the release of methane hydrate, contributing to global warming that lasted tens of thousands of years, says Matsumoto.

Japan's government is promising rigorous environmental controls with gas-leakage detectors and monitoring systems in place before the scheduled test drilling in as early as 2009.

``Energy security and environment protection cannot be apart from each other,'' says the trade ministry's Hashiba. ``We need a comprehensive assessment.''

Among other concerns are that the separation of sea water and colder fresh water will cause ocean temperatures in the Nankai Trough to fall, says Hashiba. The area is a habitat for red sea bream, a fish delicacy.

Fishing Bank Threat

``We're worried that drilling work might harm our fishing banks out there and eventually reduce our catches of red sea bream,'' says Hironori Watanabe at the Katsuura City fishery association.

A bigger worry is evidence that the undersea ice may already be melting. In September, Matsumoto joined a research party in the Sea of Japan to follow up on a 2006 discovery by his university colleagues of methane gas bubbles rising from the ocean floor.

``It's ironically recurring,'' Matsumoto says. ``Extinction of living organisms has repeatedly taken place in the earth's history, and dead bodies were accumulated in soil and under the sea bed, and turned to oil and natural gas.''
To contact the reporters on this story: Shigeru Sato in Tokyo at ssato10@bloomberg.net ;

Last Updated: December 25, 2007 11:13 EST

http://www.bloomberg...id=aiUsVKaqDA7g

[forever freedom]

Goddam.... it's hot today I just took a cold water shower and i'm already sweating. Damn brazilian summer.

[platypus]

The American Geophysical Union (a VERY prestigious group of scientists) says:

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming

http://www.agu.org/s...hange2008.shtml
http://news.bbc.co.u...ure/7207335.stm

"Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850."

So much for your misconceptions about the warming trend, Biknut.

"In the next 50 years, even the lower limit of impending climate change—an additional global mean warming of 1°C above the last decade—is far beyond the range of climate variability experienced during the past thousand years and poses global problems in planning for and adapting to it. Warming greater than 2°C above 19th century levels is projected to be disruptive, reducing global agricultural productivity, causing widespread loss of biodiversity, and—if sustained over centuries—melting much of the Greenland ice sheet with ensuing rise in sea level of several meters."

The case of the global warming denialists is getting weaker month by month, the best scientists on the planet think that the planet is warming up and that humans are to blame.

[biknut]

The American Geophysical Union (a VERY prestigious group of scientists) says:

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming

http://www.agu.org/s...hange2008.shtml
http://news.bbc.co.u...ure/7207335.stm

"Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850."

So much for your misconceptions about the warming trend, Biknut.

"In the next 50 years, even the lower limit of impending climate change—an additional global mean warming of 1°C above the last decade—is far beyond the range of climate variability experienced during the past thousand years and poses global problems in planning for and adapting to it. Warming greater than 2°C above 19th century levels is projected to be disruptive, reducing global agricultural productivity, causing widespread loss of biodiversity, and—if sustained over centuries—melting much of the Greenland ice sheet with ensuing rise in sea level of several meters."

The case of the global warming denialists is getting weaker month by month, the best scientists on the planet think that the planet is warming up and that humans are to blame.

Everyone knows there's been a warming trend going on for many years. It started way before man can be blamed on it. What you're overlooking is that there's evidence now that the warming may have peaked way back in 1998. Now we've leveled off since, and even seem to be starting to cool. The next few years will tell the tale.