Facebook Twitter

“However, we’re not noticing it due to the effects of carbon dioxide.”

“We are probably entering a new ice age right now,” Lars Franzen, a professor of physical geography at the university, was cited as saying in an online statement today. “However, we’re not noticing it due to the effects of carbon dioxide.”

Human emissions of fossil carbon into the atmosphere and the resulting increase in temperatures may be holding off the next ice age, according to research from Sweden’s University of Gothenburg.

“It’s certainly possible that mankind’s various activities contributed towards extending our ice age interval by keeping carbon dioxide levels high enough,” Franzen said. “Without the human impact, the inevitable progression toward an ice age would have continued.”

See entire article:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-08/human-carbon-emissions-seen-by-researchers-holding-back-ice-age.html

University of Gothenburg press release:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-11/uog-cd110812.php 

http://phys.org/news/2012-11-carbon-dioxideour-salvation-future-ice.html

Thanks to Thomas Malia and Petsku P for these links

“Hold back Ice Age? Not in their wildest dreams,” says Thomas.

However needless it is to say, I agree with Thomas.

 

38 Responses to “We are probably entering a new ice age right now,” says Swedish professor

  1. Alex says:

    Not the “effects of carbon dioxide” theory again…

  2. prestigio says:

    objection

    what new ice age ?

    we never left the last one
    there still massive glaciers on this planet
    that’s the definition of an ice age
    talk to any geologist

    the last 12k to 30k years
    have merely been a warming period

    we might be slowing coming out of the ice age or we might fall headlong back into it
    THEY DON’T KNOW

    one thing’s for sure
    we are still in the ice age

  3. Mirco Poletto says:

    How long it takes till they realize that there is no relationship between the CO2 trend and the temperature one?

  4. Larry Squire says:

    Looking at the medieval warm period and the little ice age, One sees that warm periods produce gentle rains and mild weather, cooling periods produce, sever storms, droughts and floods. Looking at the present weather…. we entered the begining of this little ice age in 2010 and CO2 is having 0 effect.

  5. Sorin says:

    Well, I agree with “prestigio”…

    “An ice age, or more precisely, a glacial age, is a period of long-term reduction in the temperature of the Earth’s surface and atmosphere, resulting in the presence or expansion of continental ice sheets, polar ice sheets and alpine glaciers. Within a long-term ice age, individual pulses of cold climate are termed “glacial periods” (or alternatively “glacials” or “glaciations” or colloquially as “ice age”), and intermittent warm periods are called “interglacials”. Glaciologically, ice age implies the presence of extensive ice sheets in the northern and southern hemispheres.[1] By this definition, we are still in the ice age that began 2.6 million years ago at the start of the Pleistocene epoch, because the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets still exist.”

    (excerpt from Wikipedia)

  6. John says:

    We are entering a new Dark ages right now!

    • David Kane says:

      Well put, John,

      The last dark age saw a scientific and enlightenment purge led by a certain doctrine – and the Church of Climatoglogy seeks no less.

    • Steven Rowlandson says:

      I agree , we are entering a new dark age.
      Dogma is replacing knowledge and true science. Public morals have declined and the use of real money has disappeared.
      Criminality and gangsterism rules!
      In the previous dark age what little knowledge and learning that there was existed in the monasteries of europe and asia and was preserved during a time when barbarians ruled. Civilization can only exist if there are absolute moral values, the rule of law, learning, property rights, real money, freedom and no bread and circuses. With out that you have nothing and all is at risk.

  7. His statements are meaningless because he is saying co2 is having an impact on the climate, which we know is NOT true.

  8. ShariShark says:

    The poor man will lose his job if he leaves out the “effects of carbon dioxide” bit – everyone knows that.

  9. Chuck L says:

    Wishful thinking, like I posted previously, it is entirely possible we are in an Ice Age, already.

  10. Argiris Diamantis says:

    The CO2 warmists always claim that science is settled. David Viner stated that snow would be a thing of the past, snowfall would be so occasionaly that children wouldn’t know what snow is. CO2 was considered to be a pollutant, now it’s beneficiary to hold back a new Ice Age. Sounds to me as if science is not settled at all, and being a university professor is no guarantee for not talking a whole lot of nonsense and BS.

  11. Bill Gannon says:

    I’ll have a block of dry ice, aka carbon dioxide, frozen. Please, I’d just wish the world despots would stop the propaganda. This professor is from Sweden and they had a hard winter last year. They never learn.

  12. Perdavid says:

    Here in Sweden, every single day there are HARDCORE brainwashing about a ‘humanmade global warming’ on Swedish Radio (SR), Swedish TV (SVT) and Swedish Meterologist sites as SMHI. Sweden doesn’t deserve to hold the Nobel price ceremony!

  13. dman says:

    Maybe all that hot air coming out of Al”the climate” Gore is slowing the cooling cycle?

  14. KellyJ says:

    When do we ask the Followers of Gore (otherwise known as Gorons) that if this assumption is true, shouldn’t we be dumping more CO2 into the air to further stave off the impending Ice Age?
    Should I not be getting a huge Government Tax credit every time I fire up my pick-up truck?

  15. Peter Wardle says:

    Human emissions of fossil carbon into the atmosphere and the resulting increase in temperatures

    Resulting increase in temperatures? Um, no. Not happening. Another panderer to the politically correct consensus.

  16. scizzorbill says:

    He had to throw the CO2 fake warming in to keep the grant money flowing.

  17. nimbunje says:

    So what he is saying Mankind has lucked out and go and burn heaps of carbon to forestall the Ice Age .

  18. ES says:

    With clear skies last night (Nov 11), almost 20 records were shattered in S and Cent. Alta, the coldest being Three Hills at a frigid -31C!

    http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/local-weather

    6+ earthquake in Guatemala and Myanmar today.

    http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_all.php

  19. Harold says:

    A warmist is nobody’s fool.
    He’ll use what he has for a tool.
    And if you get snow,
    Well then don’t you know,
    He’ll still tell you warming is cool!

  20. Robert the Philippino says:

    Let’s not kid ourselves.
    This Ice Age will be deadly to most of us.
    Al Gore couldn’t possible tell us this strait in our face.

    • F. Guimaraes says:

      Not necessarily Robert, not if we prepare in time. We still have a few decades before it manifests full force.
      Time enough for preparation.
      The world changed so much in the last few decades (socially speaking) and we could do it again, but now in a more spiritual and meaningful way.
      One thing seems certain to me, our present lifestyle is about to change very sharply, very soon.

  21. Byron says:

    Q. Have vastly higher concentrations of CO2 EVER stopped earth from entering a full blown glacial period from much warmer conditions than present ?

    http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/PageMill_Images/image277.gif

    A. No .

    So how`s it going to prevent Earth from going from interglacial to glacial ?

  22. Craig Read says:

    That Co2 is one busy little pollutant. The trace chemical 95% emitted by Gaia first ’causes’ warming. Then when that is not true, it ‘holds back’ the ice age. Then when that is proven moronic, it will be ‘changing climate’. No end to the deleterious consequences of a natural chemical necessary for life.
    Can’t wait to hear about water vapor or O2 – and all the carnage they wreak upon little Gaia.

  23. Alex says:

    First it was global warming, then global cooling, then global warming, then global cooling caused by global warming…

    Scient… I mean, politicians, just love to scare people with thier crap.

    Unlike all the eco hysteria, the ice age is real.

  24. Bjorn Sefeldt says:

    he should lose his job , but unfortunately nobody in Sweden gets fired , for ANYTHING….they may lose the job if their job is eliminated… but to say that we are entering an Ice Age is probably his way of agreeing that ‘warming’ is over , but he cannot stop using CO2 in his sentences as he is brainwashed by Swedish Media (esp Karin Bojs at DN) that ‘it is so’.

  25. richard says:

    Couple of years ago Hilary Clinton asked Sweden for a loan of some icebreakers for use in the Antarctic.

    They said sorry we need them ourselves.

  26. Johnthe1st says:

    We aren’t entering a new ice age. We are ending an old interglacial called the Holcene. We never left the Quaternary glaciation, also known as the Pleistocene glaciation, or simply the current ice age. Why can’t people get this right?
    There is no possible way our puny emissions are having any impact on the Pleistocene. None.

    • F. Guimaraes says:

      The greater glacial cycle is much more powerful than the little things humans have done in the last few decades, but if they say that in their “research” they’ll loose their jobs.

  27. Bob Knows says:

    His scientific credibility is destroyed in the last half of his otherwise credible sentence.

  28. TomO says:

    As long as governments fund research, looking for specific information – does carbon dioxide warm the Earth, isn’t cell phone radiation harmless, aren’t GMO foods safe, and the list continues – the specific information WILL BE discovered since it is the source of the funding. To find contrary data only insures that the funding dries up, and goes to those that WILL find the proving data.

    Science isn’t science anymore, it is a politically driven agenda to move society in the direction the political funding is pushing – depopulating the world of its “lower class” human population while preserving the best of everything for the “upper class” human population. The impending cold crisis, whether it is a small or large event, will eliminate billions of the poor, the infirm, and the elderly in the northern hemisphere, and the loss of food production will do the same for the poor in those areas that will be outside the cold extremes.

    I am sure the powers that drive the governments through graft are looking for a far smaller “slave” population to serve them then the unwieldy billions that are here at this stage. The TV is the preferred tool for making everyone stupid enough to accept their propaganda, and the chemicals dumped into the food chain and water supply make them compliant enough not to ask questions.

    There is no stupidity being shown by the “climate crisis crowd.” They will be rewarded for their “service” when enough of the rest of us succumb to freezing, starvation, or the “flu” that will finally do what they want because our immune systems are weakened enough to not resist it.

    Thinking otherwise just shows that you have been indoctrinated by their plans and will keep seeing only what they want you to see. Being a “denier” of “climate crisis” doesn’t mean you are seeing the real picture, only that this bit of science has your attention while they slip the knife a little deeper in your back.

  29. Ken says:

    What I would like to see is where the Earths Orbit and Tilt is in relation to the start of the last Ice Age. I know that we are nearing the end of the 11,500 year warm cycle that exists between Glazier Ice Ages. Anyone know of a site that has that tracking? Seems that is what we should be worried about rather than how much CO2 is accumulating.

  30. F. Guimaraes says:

    The article/research is very biased,
    “…If we accept that rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere lead to an increase in global temperature, the logical conclusion must be that reduced levels lead to a drop in temperature…”
    what if we “don’t accept”, having in sight the large evidence to the contrary.
    Besides, where is the solar radiation in their analysis and why put so much power on human activity to change the climate?
    Looks more like a typical (although not so explicit) GW “research” to me, with all the ingredients and the naturally bogus conclusions.

  31. BK says:

    …and the Nobel in SciCliFi goes to…

  32. Ruairi says:

    Shouldn’t we wait to see what the BBC’s ‘expert’ climate group have to say about a coming LIA before making sceptical anti-warmist comments?

  33. meemoe_uk says:

    To start a new iceage we 1st need to finsh the one we are in, we’ve been in it for 13.5million years.


Hit Counter provided by seo company