> "Robert Cohen" msn.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e545e91e-94a8-497a-9a73-70cef6b31b1e@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 26, 4:41 am, "Shrikeback" hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

>>> "Bret Cahill" aol.com> wrote in message

>

>>>news:7b7b492f-6a7e-434f-a174-ab7a9fc56900@q1g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

>

>>>  >> via studies of DNA------> revisions of paradigms = science marches
>>> on

>

>>>>>http://news.aol.com/story/_a/study-says-humans-neared-extinction/2008...

>

>>>>> i suppose the apparent global warming and/or drought then was caused
>>>>> by unual active volcanoes

>

>>> Volcanos cause global cooling. Severe volcanic events are known
>>> to precede ice ages.

>

>>>> Maybe it was political, or rather, lack of politization.
>>>> Politicization saves lives.

>

>>> Yeah, because if the stone age had only been a little greener?
>>> But what's greener than the stone age, really?

>> What about this as explanation of cooling/warming:
>> When the natural ordinary changings occur in clinate, they're over
>> long (ceturies, millenia, eons, whatever) of time, and
>> animal and plant life thus have time to change or adapt

>
> This is not really generally true, although we see it written by
> greens a great deal.  Here is an interesting article on the NOAA
> site about abrupt climate changes.:
>
> http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html
>

>> When there is nuclear winter (instantaneous) type of change, then...
>> horrors, chaos,
>> I'm suggesting volcanos and eathquakes may change climates relatively
>> rapidly.

>
> I'm dubious about whether earthquakes, in themselves would cause
> much climate change.
>

>> Mankind's pollution is seemingly more comparable to catastrophic
>> change rather than  slow change
>> Therefore, the results of massive natural or manmade catastrophe are
>> variable in extremes--hot 'n cold

>
> The issue is that the atmosphere itself is a chaotic system,
> with positive and negative feedbacks and is variable in its
> behavior regardless as to changes in initial inputs.  A chaotic
> system is one that is "sensitive to changes in initial conditions."
> What this means is that the relationship to the variation in an
> input is not proportional to the output.  It is a non-linear
> feedback system.  It is not amenable to predicition by the
> creation of software simplifications of the system.
>
> "Software climate models are like Ouija boards."
> -Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of
> Atmoshperic Science at MIT
>

>> As I vaguely recall, before there was fear of warming, there was fear
>> of another ice age, both seemingly oppositesand  in my brief 63 years
>> of lifetime

>
> To be sure, the "corp-whore" media amplifies the sensational and
> hysterical.  But that's to the benefit of the green agenda, which is
> based on fear.
>

>> Catastrophes may radically change climates, weathers, sunlight
>> amounts, winds, gulf streams, rainfalls, snowfalls, and ocean waves.

>
> Actually, the climate feeds back on itself.  Note that clouds, which
> are fractal and chaotic and completely unmodelable anyway have
> in impact on the albedo of the planet.  No external catastrophe is
> required to change the climate suddenly (see the NOAA article
> above) or extremely.  As the article says, the causes of abrupt
> climate changes remain unknown.  All we got is hypotheses.
>
> uncrapyright 2008 RobtCohen, a wannabe member of the american
> meteorological socirty- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -