22” of Global Warming in Iran kills 21

TEHRAN, Iran — The heaviest snowfall in more than a decade has left at least 21 people dead in Iran — some buried under avalanches, some frozen to death and others killed in traffic accidents, state media reported Monday.

As much as 22 inches of snow has fallen in areas of northern and central Iran since Saturday, said meteorologist Ali Abedini. The storm has forced schools and government offices to close, blocking major roads and leading to the cancellation of all domestic and international flights.

"At least 21 people have been killed and 88 others injured ... as a result of heavy snow," state-run radio reported. "Some died of the severe cold, some were buried under avalanches and others died after their cars overturned on snow-covered roads."

The cold weather has caused problems for residents in western Iran, with about a dozen towns suffering from gas cuts due to a surge in demand and a cut in gas exports from Turkmenistan.

Government officials have urged citizens to reduce their notoriously high consumption of gas to ensure there are no further cuts or shortages.

Authorities have also urged Iranians to cancel unnecessary travel and warned that the snowfall would continue in the coming days.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,320800,00.html

My daughter is so funny, Sam. I said to her, "did you hear about the 2' of global warming in Iran?" Her response?

"Well you know that fits right into the global warming theory. Of course everything fits right into the global warming theory."

The UK's top 10 warmest years on record (in order) are 2006, 2007, 2003, 2004, 2002, 2005, 1990, 1997, 1949 and 1999.

Globally, there is a similar trend - the top 10 being 1998, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2001, 1997 and 1995.

That's OK. If we stick our fingers in our ears, the problem will just go away.

TerryRC wrote:The UK's top 10 warmest years on record (in order) are 2006, 2007, 2003, 2004, 2002, 2005, 1990, 1997, 1949 and 1999.

Globally, there is a similar trend - the top 10 being 1998, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2001, 1997 and 1995.

That's OK. If we stick our fingers in our ears, the problem will just go away.

I believe the Earth is warming. I don't believe it entirely, or even primarily, because of human activity. The Earth goes through cycles. It will cool again.

I worry more about the toxins being spewed into the air we breath and the water we drink etc. I believe we need to be kinder to "Mother Earth", RC. However, all these scare tactics and gloom & doom prophecies don't work me into a frenzy.

I worry more about the toxins being spewed into the air we breath and the water we drink etc. I believe we need to be kinder to "Mother Earth", RC. However, all these scare tactics and gloom & doom prophecies don't work me into a frenzy.

They should.

A google on ecoestrogens. When one looks at the disturbing rise in things like hypospadias (failure of the male urinary tract to close) and cryptorchidis (failure of the testicles to drop), you should be in a frenzy, at least for your grandkids to be.

I believe the Earth is warming. I don't believe it entirely, or even primarily, because of human activity. The Earth goes through cycles. It will cool again.

Fine. Don't point to a freak snowfall and act like the earth isn't getting warmer, then. It makes you look wishy-washy.

Yes, the cycle HAS swung back before. Consider that we are spewing more into the air, globally, than ever before. Perhaps this time, the cycle WON'T swing back.

Just because the sun rose today, doesn't mean it will tomorrow.

TerryRC wrote:The UK's top 10 warmest years on record (in order) are 2006, 2007, 2003, 2004, 2002, 2005, 1990, 1997, 1949 and 1999.

Globally, there is a similar trend - the top 10 being 1998, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2001, 1997 and 1995.

That's OK. If we stick our fingers in our ears, the problem will just go away.

Yhen why is all the record temp. days we seem to be breaking lately from the 1930's TC?

Yhen why is all the record temp. days we seem to be breaking lately from the 1930's TC?

The first thing that should be pointed out is that we are breaking them. We have had a great deal of record temps this year.

Secondly, averages, act different that individual data points. Twenty warm winter days in 1930 don't mean much if temps that summer never got above 75 degrees F.

TerryRC wrote:I worry more about the toxins being spewed into the air we breath and the water we drink etc. I believe we need to be kinder to "Mother Earth", RC. However, all these scare tactics and gloom & doom prophecies don't work me into a frenzy.

They should.

A google on ecoestrogens. When one looks at the disturbing rise in things like hypospadias (failure of the male urinary tract to close) and cryptorchidis (failure of the testicles to drop), you should be in a frenzy, at least for your grandkids to be.

I believe the Earth is warming. I don't believe it entirely, or even primarily, because of human activity. The Earth goes through cycles. It will cool again.

Fine. Don't point to a freak snowfall and act like the earth isn't getting warmer, then. It makes you look wishy-washy.

Yes, the cycle HAS swung back before. Consider that we are spewing more into the air, globally, than ever before. Perhaps this time, the cycle WON'T swing back.

Just because the sun rose today, doesn't mean it will tomorrow.

I am not being wishy-washy at all. I am just not going to allow myself or my children to live in fear of some theory that many in the scientific community disagree with. The Earth will cool because that is what our Earth does and we can't stop it.

I also find it impossible to get myself too worked up over global warming and all the fear and terror those who espouse it are trying to instill in us when the very people yelling the loudest don't walk the walk. If Al Gore were as concerned about global warming as he professes to be, he would reduce the size of his carbon footprint by using less fossil fuel in his home etc. If I had Gore's wealth and believed what he claims to believe I'd be doing more to reduce my carbon output and paying for trees etc.

I am not all that concerned about carbon. I am very concerned about things like mercury in fish and pesticides, antibiotics, and hormones used in commercial farming than I am global warming. The ecoestrogens thing is pretty nasty business, btw.

I also find it impossible to get myself too worked up over global warming and all the fear and terror those who espouse it are trying to instill in us when the very people yelling the loudest don't walk the walk. If Al Gore were as concerned about global warming as he professes to be, he would reduce the size of his carbon footprint by using less fossil fuel in his home etc. If I had Gore's wealth and believed what he claims to believe I'd be doing more to reduce my carbon output and paying for trees etc.

The Sheik made a good point about judging a concept by some of the people that embrace it.

The fact is that the planet IS getting warmer. If we can slow or halt that process by living more conscientiously, it behooves us to do so.

What gets me the most is the total deniers (and I don't necessarily rank you among them).

Regardless of the causes, we are going to have some problems. One of the first things I believe we will see is malaria, again, in this country, and soon. When one of your kids comes down with tertiary malaria because the warmer environment favors tropical mosquitoes, you will realize that global warming can strike closer and sooner than you may think.

The last decade or so I spent living in RI we had to deal with EEE and West Nile Virus. Mosquitos are gross. So are ticks, Lyme disease is also prevalent there. Both my daughter and I have been treated for it. Our chocolate lab almost died as a result of it about a dozen years ago. I can't even think about fleas without getting itchy.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if insects spread more disease here during our warming spell.

The last decade or so I spent living in RI we had to deal with EEE and West Nile Virus. Mosquitos are gross. So are ticks, Lyme disease is also prevalent there. Both my daughter and I have been treated for it. Our chocolate lab almost died as a result of it about a dozen years ago. I can't even think about fleas without getting itchy.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if insects spread more disease here during our warming spell.

Plan on seeing more of it. CDC released a risk assessment of this very thing.The White House squelched because it mentioned "rising global temperatures".

Much of my education revolved around medical entomology. Lyme, Triple E, WNV and LaCrosse can be nasty. Severity tends to be low with the various encephalites - most WVians would probably test positive for, say, WNV antibodies and likely were asymptomatic.

Malaria (and I speak from experience) is a terribly dehabilitating disease and the cure is expensive and painful. Not only that, it can spread much faster.

There will be other diseases, also. The one that spooks me is leishmaniasis. It is spread by sand flies and will attack your mucus membranes, eating your face from the inside out.

It couldn't hurt to take some precautions. It has to be better than "lie, deny, cry".

TerryRC wrote:The UK's top 10 warmest years on record (in order) are 2006, 2007, 2003, 2004, 2002, 2005, 1990, 1997, 1949 and 1999.

Globally, there is a similar trend - the top 10 being 1998, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2001, 1997 and 1995.

That's OK. If we stick our fingers in our ears, the problem will just go away.

And if you keep closing your eyes to everything that is not PC, you will forever remain as ignorant as the insects you study and merilly a "creature of nurtured habit".

Here Terry RC, I’ll repost it from this National News thread to see if you will address it this time …… or whether you will ignore it again.

TRC, prove to me that you are "an educated scientist" capable of making critical and intelligent judgments on the subject of "Human Caused Global Warming" that will DISCREDIT the following quoted material. To wit:

SamCogar wrote:

You are just trying to bug me Terry ........ but I guess you think of yourself as an expert on that.

Here TRC, read what a real scientist has to say. I'll post the entire article and you can tell me if you find any "bugs" in it, to wit:

ST. PETERSBURG, January 15 (RIA Novosti) - Rising levels of carbon dioxide and other gases emitted through human activities, believed by scientists to trap heat in the Earth's atmosphere, are an effect rather than the cause of global warming, a prominent Russian scientist said Monday.

Habibullo Abdusamatov, head of the space research laboratory at the St. Petersburg-based Pulkovo Observatory, said global warming stems from an increase in the sun's activity. His view contradicts the international scientific consensus that climate change is attributable to the emission of greenhouse gases generated by industrial activities, such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.

"Global warming results not from the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but from an unusually high level of solar radiation and a lengthy - almost throughout the last century - growth in its intensity," Abdusamatov told RIA Novosti in an interview.

"It is no secret that when they go up, temperatures in the world's oceans trigger the emission of large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. So the common view that man's industrial activity is a deciding factor in global warming has emerged from a misinterpretation of cause and effect relations."

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a UN panel of thousands of international scientists, widely regarded as an authority on climate change issues, established a consensus many years ago that most of the warming experienced over the last half-century has been attributable to human activities.

However, scientists acknowledge that rises in temperatures can potentially cause massive increases of greenhouse gases due to various natural positive feedback mechanisms, for example the methane released by melting permafrost, ocean algae's reduced capacity to absorb carbon at higher water temperatures, and the carbon released by trees when forests dry up. (TRC, THAT ONE CLUE YOU SHOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH.)

Abdusamatov, a doctor of mathematics and physics, is one of a small number of scientists around the world who continue to contest the view of the IPCC, the national science academies of the G8 nations, and other prominent scientific bodies.

He said an examination of ice cores from wells over three kilometers (1.5 miles) deep in Greenland and the Antarctic indicates that the Earth experienced periods of global warming even before the industrial age (which began two hundred years ago).

Climate scientists have used information in ice cores, which contain air samples trapped by snow falling hundreds of thousands of years ago, providing an ancient record of the atmosphere's makeup, to establish that throughout the numerous glacial and interglacial periods on record, temperatures have closely tracked global CO2 concentrations.

The fact that background atmospheric CO2 levels, shown for example by the famous Keeling curve, displaying precise measurements going back to 1958, are now known to be well above concentrations experienced in hundreds of millennia, as displayed by the ice cores, is considered by most of the scientific community as incontrovertible proof of mankind's influence on greenhouse gas concentrations.

However, Abdusamatov even disputed the greenhouse effect, claiming it fails to take into account the effective transmission of heat to the outer layers of atmosphere.

Scientists have known about the greenhouse effect since the 19th century. The phenomenon by which gases such as methane and CO2 warm the troposphere by absorbing some of the infra-red heat reflected by the earth's surface has the effect of a global thermostat, sustaining global temperatures within ranges that allow life on the planet to thrive.

But Abdusamatov insisted: "Ascribing ‘greenhouse' effect properties to the Earth's atmosphere is not scientifically substantiated. Heated greenhouse gases, which become lighter as a result of expansion, ascend to the atmosphere only to give the absorbed heat away."

Abdusamatov claimed that the upper layers of the world's oceans are - much to climatologists' surprise - becoming cooler, which is a clear indication that the Earth has hit its temperature ceiling already, and that solar radiation levels are falling and will eventually lead to a worldwide cold spell.

"Instead of professed global warming, the Earth will be facing a slow decrease in temperatures in 2012-2015. The gradually falling amounts of solar energy, expected to reach their bottom level by 2040, will inevitably lead to a deep freeze around 2055-2060," he said, adding that this period of global freeze will last some 50 years, after which the temperatures will go up again.

"There is no need for the Kyoto Protocol now, and it does not have to come into force until at least a hundred years from now - a global freeze will come about regardless of whether or not industrialized countries put a cap on their greenhouse gas emissions," Abdusamatov said.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070115/59078992.html

TRC, prove to me that you are "an educated scientist" capable of making critical and intelligent judgments on the subject of "Human Caused Global Warming" that will DISCREDIT the following quoted material. To wit:

Luckily, I don't have to prove anything to you, Sam.

I wouldn't discredit the scientist because what he says may be true, to some extent.

What he is saying is, that as the earth warms up, carbon is released. I'll bet it took him the blue beads on the abacus to figure that one out.

Your pet scientist does mention that this trend is about a century old. Funny how that seems to be when the Industrial Revolution was kicking into full swing.

It could be that man did have something to do with it, after all. I can't say for sure.

Regardless, my argument is that the trend IS happening, for whatever the reason.

Deniers, like yourself, point to a freak snowstorm and say "it's all a lie". Realists, like myself, start laying some ground plans

OK if you're going to keep giving me icky diseases to learn about I'm not going to be able to chat with you. I am easily freaked out by such things and a bit of a hypochondriac. Perhaps there's another name for what I do.

When I first hear or read about an affliction I'm unfamiliar with, I get some of the symptoms. In any event, it's not a lot of fun, even though I know it's all in my oddly wired brain.

TerryRC wrote:TRC, prove to me that you are "an educated scientist" capable of making critical and intelligent judgments on the subject of "Human Caused Global Warming" that will DISCREDIT the following quoted material. To wit:

Luckily, I don't have to prove anything to you, Sam.

Of course you don't, TRC, ..... you got a big ole Masters Degree ..... and you don't have to "lower yourself" to explain anything to anybody.

I wouldn't discredit the scientist because what he says may be true, to some extent.

What he is saying is, that as the earth warms up, carbon is released. I'll bet it took him the blue beads on the abacus to figure that one out.

OOOOHHH, that sure was a Masterly response.

Your pet scientist does mention that this trend is about a century old. Funny how that seems to be when the Industrial Revolution was kicking into full swing.

Is that the only thing you can fault? Silly boy, if you were actually educated you would know "this trend" has actually been occuring since the end of the Little Ice Age over 200 years ago.

It could be that man did have something to do with it, after all. I can't say for sure.

TRC, you can't say for sure because you don't know a damn thing about climate, weather or cyclic changes in global temperatures. All you can do is "hitch your wagon" to the "Al Gore horse" and mimic whatever they claim.

Regardless, my argument is that the trend IS happening, for whatever the reason.

Which "trend" big boy, ..... which "trend"? The "natural cycle" or the "human cause"?

Deniers, like yourself, point to a freak snowstorm and say "it's all a lie". Realists, like myself, start laying some ground plans

Realists my arse, ........ "religionist" is more like it.

And your "ground plans" are based on ........ fear and ignorance, ..... like all other religions..

Its the Sun stupid.

The more Solar energy the earth gets, ....... the warmer it gets.

When one half of the earth is heating up, ...... the other half is cooling down ......... as the earth "cycles" on its axis every 24 hours. Just like trying to stay warm on a cold night at a camp fire, ..... ya gotta turn round n' round or you will freeze on one side and burn on the other.

Just like your house in winter time, .... only your furnance is "cycling" and not your house.

You can set the thermostat and your furnace will "cycle" keeping your house between say 48 and 54 degrees.

Or you can crank the thermostat up and your furnace will "cycle" keeping your house between 68 and 72 degrees.

Even "bug people" with a Masters Degree should understand the "heating principle" of furnaces, ........ be they wood, oil, gas or hydrogen fueled.

Its the Sun stupid.

The more Solar energy the earth gets, ....... the warmer it gets.

When one half of the earth is heating up, ...... the other half is cooling down ......... as the earth "cycles" on its axis every 24 hours. Just like trying to stay warm on a cold night at a camp fire, ..... ya gotta turn round n' round or you will freeze on one side and burn on the other.

Of course. I should have known it was that simple. Us smart notherners, however, build TWO fires and sleep between them.

So global warming is all related to sunspots. The fact that the trend, at least as far as what your scientist stated (he did say the past century, did he not, your snark aside), started during the Industrial Revolution is irrelevant - nothing to see here, folks.

Are you saying, Sam, that we can't make a natural cycle more extreme? Why does it have to be one or the other?

Do you not think it foolish to stifle scientific research because it mentions global warming without making mention of any causes, like the recent CDC findings?

Keep drinking that beer, perhaps it will keep the malaria away. Too late for the blinders, though, I think they are stuck to you.

You can set the thermostat and your furnace will "cycle" keeping your house between say 48 and 54 degrees.

By the way, where is the Earth's thermostat? Is it a mercury switch? Can we stop this trend by just turning it down? How big is the switch? Will we need heavy equipment to turn it?

You fail at analogy.