Home Ciencia Debate sobre el "estado del planeta". Cambio Climático en mayo 2008

Debate sobre el "estado del planeta". Cambio Climático en mayo 2008

escrito por Luis I. Gómez 12 mayo, 2008

Zeitspirale.jpg1) El océano se está enfriando! Los científicos desconcertados ante el misterio del calor desaparecido” (enlaceí)

2) Los nuevos datos del satélite de la NASA “Aqua ” muestran que los modelos basados en CO2 son obsoletos” (enlace)

3) El climatólogo Dr. Roy Spencer, ex-consultor de la NASA, sigue buscando un “peer-reviewed paper” que demuestre que el calentamiento reciente no se deba a causas naturales. (enlace)

4) Los miembros del IPCC entran en “Panic Mode” la tierra ya no se calienta. (enlace)

5) Rajendra Pachauri, director del IPCC confirma que estamos “ante una estabilización de temperaturas en este siglo” (enlace)

6) Nuevo trabajo científico muestra cómo el Sol “probablemente contribuya en al menos un 69% en el aumento de temeraturas en nuestro planeta” (enlace y otro enlace)

7) La ausencia de polvo en la atmósfera es responsable de un calentamiento entorno a los .36 F (enlace)

8) Los últimos trabajos publicados en Quaternary Science Reviews muestras que los períodos fríos -y no los cálidos- son los que van acompañados de un aumento en las hambrunas, tormentas, epidemias… (enlace)

9) El New York Times lamenta el tratamiento sensacionalista que la prensa da al calentamiento global y sus consecuencias (enlace)

10) El Dr. Richard Lindzen, del MIT nos cuenta, comentando los datos del Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office de Marzo, que la tierra “no muestra un calentamiento estadísitcamente significante desde 1995.”-(enlace)

11) Un nuevo informe muestra como los hielos marinos amentan: ‘World sea ice in April 2008 reached levels that were ‘unprecedented’ for the month of April in over 25 years.’ (enlace)

Quieren seguir leyendo? No hay problema:

1) Dr. Roger A. Pielke, Jr. Professor in the Environmental Studies Program at the University of Colorado reacted to this study in the journal Nature by declaring: “Climate models are of no practical use.” Pielke, who is not a climate skeptic, said on April 30, “There is in fact nothing that can be observed in the climate system that would be inconsistent with climate model predictions. If global cooling over the next few decades is consistent with model predictions, then so too is pretty much anything and everything under the sun. This means that from a practical standpoint climate models are of no practical use beyond providing some intellectual authority in the promotional battle over global climate policy”. (enlace)

2) Former Harvard University Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl, a string theorist who is currently a professor at Charles University in the Czech Republic said on May 1: “Wow. So the refutation of a prediction of a dangerous warming by the world’s top 2,500 scientists 😉 does not come as a surprise. Note that with no global warming since 1998, the paper predicts 20 years of no warming. Recall that Al Gore has predicted global destruction in less than 8 years from now. […] The whole validation of all existing climate models is (or should be) mostly based on the data from the previous decades or centuries. If an effect that is argued to be as strong as the greenhouse effect has been neglected while it has the power to change 60-70 years of the temperature dynamics, it implies the existence of a critical flaw in the whole picture.” (enlace)

3) UK Astronomer Dr. David Whitehouse, who authored the 2004 book The Sun: A Biography, said on May 1, 2008: “Isn’t it curious that over the next decade man-made global warming will be cancelled out by natural cycles. It’s nice that Mother Nature (not the journal) is helping us this way but it does beg the question as to whether the man-made effect was all that significant if it can be nullified this way.”