Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Wednesday, 3rd December 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sky's the limit as Scotland's fight to save planet wins global support



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 04 July 2008
PEOPLE have called in their thousands for the Scottish Government to stand firm and take a global lead in the fight to tackle climate change.
More than 21,000 individuals from across the world wrote to the government in response to the consultation on the Scottish Climate Change Bill.

This was the second-biggest response ever in Scotland, after the smoking bill consultation.

The va
st majority of responses were sent in the form of postcards, or template letters, in a campaign by environment groups including WWF Scotland, Friends of the Earth Scotland and RSPB Scotland.

The responses, now published, show the vast majority are calling on the Scottish Government to take a rigorous stand, setting an example to the rest of the world.

Dr Richard Dixon, director of WWF Scotland, said: "The public response calling for a strong Scottish Climate Bill was staggering and it shows the strength of support at home and abroad for governments to take meaningful action to tackle climate change. The eyes of the world are on Scotland now.

"This bill may be the most important piece of legislation we will see in our lifetimes."

The bill, due to go before parliament in December, is expected to drive forward the government's ambitious plans to slash damaging emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, a target 20 per cent higher than the equivalent UK draft bill.

But thousands of people who wrote to the Scottish Government say there are crucial elements that must be included for the bill to remain strong.

They call on ministers to:

• Include all six key greenhouse gases, such as methane, rather than just carbon dioxide.

• Stick to the manifesto pledge of setting annual targets of 3 per cent reductions.

• Include emissions from international aviation and shipping.

Duncan McLaren, chief executive of Friends of the Earth Scotland, said he was worried about a "lack of ambition" in the consultation documents, especially as there was no question asking for views on a 3 per cent annual target for reductions.

"If the government doesn't improve on what was in the consultation then these people who responded from around the world won't be satisfied," he said.

"They won't see Scotland taking a lead, they will see Scotland dragging along behind the UK."

Dr Dan Barlow, head of policy at WWF Scotland, said if all these elements were included Scotland could "stand tall and show we are not going to shy away from what we need to do".

The response to the consultation ties in with a poll published this week that showed that voters think taking action against climate change matters more than tackling the global economic downturn.

Asked whether the environment or the economy should be the government's priority, 52 per cent said the environment and 44 per cent said the economy.

Among some groups and energy-intensive businesses that responded to the Scottish Government's consultation there were concerns that its plans were too ambitious.

The Confederation of Paper Industries said: "It is important the proposed measures do not add a financial burden on Scottish industry not faced by competitors in other countries."

And NFU Scotland said of the 80 per cent target: "This appears to be overly ambitious and may put the Scottish economy and agricultural industry at a disadvantage. Any altruistic motivation must be tempered by the fact this is a global issue."

John Swinney, the finance minister, said: "It is encouraging to see the active engagement of so many people on this issue. Climate change is one of the most serious threats we face as a global community and we all need to play our part in tackling it."

Worldwide range of replies reveals genuine depth of feeling

Lawrence Sama Mbiwovi Londi


If every developed country in the world had the ambition that you have, then together across the world we could really tackle climate change.

The effects of climate change are already visible in polar regions where icebergs are breaking up. Average atmospheric temperatures are rising and the effects will be devastating, especially for developing countries that do not have the means to cope with such changes. It is therefore urgent that a developed country takes the lead in this effort.

Margot Ddent

Scotland, as a nation, can and must lead by example if we are serious about encouraging a collective global response to climate change. The Scottish Government must make its fair contribution to limiting the global average temperature increase to not more than 2C above pre-industrial levels. And, in recognition of the natural and economic value of Scotland's environment, with its rich wildlife we must demonstrate that our greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced, our renewable energy potential reached, and impacts of climate change addressed, all without damaging, and indeed by enhancing, our precious wildlife.

Shanthini Fernando

I join with citizens around the world in commending you for demonstrating global leadership in tackling climate change through your proposals for a strong Scottish Climate Change Bill.

Mr and Mrs M W Betts from Edinburgh

We see evidence of warmer winters, wetter summers, increasing storms, and serious reductions in the breeding success of Scotland's seabirds.

These are happening now, and we wonder therefore whether it is enough just to set an overall target?

We believe that there must be annual targets, whereby the process can be regularly and challengingly audited, and that these targets must be at least 3 per cent.

Nadine Henwood

I was delighted when the SNP promised at least 3 per cent a year climate emissions cuts in its manifesto. I am very disappointed to see that the consultation fails to deliver this, and believe that annual targets or annual budgets to deliver at least 3 per cent cuts every year are vital.

BAA

We have been a consistent advocate of the need for a strong policy framework that creates a long-term value for carbon emissions reductions and which consistently supports and incentivises the development of new technologies. As such, we welcome the Scottish Government's commitment to creating a clear, credible and long-term domestic framework.

Friends of the Earth Scotland

Specific annual targets are needed to ensure the cumulative effect of the bill's provisions, and make it hard for ministers to avoid tough decisions on large new emissions sources. Shorter periods make impacts of poor decisions obvious sooner, driving investment decisions towards cleaner technology, and ensuring effective offsets are in place for any policy decisions that might increase emissions.

Confederation of Paper Industries

It is important that the proposed measures do not add a financial burden on Scottish industry not faced by competitors in other countries.

British Energy

The most important greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide, because it emanates from all parts of the economy and society – as such this should be the main focus of attention for government.



The full article contains 1146 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 04 July 2008 12:49 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Climate change
 
1

Nit-Nat,

04/07/2008 00:08:58
Oh my god. Alex Salmond has really embarassed himself this time. Scotland lead the world on climiate with a population of 5million?

How funny is that, America and China need to lead the world they do the most polution.

Do you remember when Alex Salmond wrote to Robert Mugabe and the others, taking a lead on a world issue? No one wrote back because he is an irrelevant distraction and waste of time to all those abroad.

Oh dear, I didn't think the SNP could embarass themselves again on this one. Another day, another issue we lead the world on. LOL. Scotland must be the most important country in the world?
2

,

04/07/2008 00:16:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

ThomasP,

04/07/2008 00:18:49
1 Nit-Nat.

"Do you remember when Alex Salmond wrote to Robert Mugabe and the others, taking a lead on a world issue? No one wrote back."

Idiot. Countries did reply back. It may of effected their relations with the Westminister Government if they supported the Scottish Government though.
4

jerrymanders,

04/07/2008 00:30:22
This is all a pipe dream anyway. More people = more pollution. I don't see the World's population dwindling. "We're doomed, doomed I tell ye".
5

Maisie from Morningside,

04/07/2008 01:17:03
The problem for politicians is that the huge majority which didn't bother replying to this gimmick is the one which will vote them out of office.
6

Mad Jock,

East Lothian 04/07/2008 02:27:36
I agree with Masie. Look at the spread of repondents. Friends of the Earth, RSPB, WWF. Biased opinion, perhaps? How many respondents actually live in Scotland, and will have to pay for all this out of their own pockets? "More than 21,000 individuals" from a round the world are attempting to influence how we Scots live our lives. Anyway, I don't recall being asked.
It's all very well saying that someone has to take a stand on the issue of climate change, but we all know that that someone needs to be either the USA or China. Why not ask Malta to "take a stand"?
People need to see these issues for what they are: a self-justified means of increasing taxes, under the green mantle.
You want to reduce CO2? Tell people to stop breathing in Oxygen and breathing out Carbon Dioxide. Then stop breeding.
7

Alan Reid,

nz 04/07/2008 04:47:53
#1, YOUR A COMPLETE FOOL!
8

Alan Reid,

nz 04/07/2008 04:49:42
This is really good!

http://www.chippynews.com/worldclock.htm
9

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 04/07/2008 06:36:12
The Global Warming hysteria lobby - (sorry - I forgot that since there is massive evidence of 'global cooling' they have now changed their name to 'climate change) are completely ignoring any facts or reality. The truth is that the planet has been cooling ever since 1998 - while CO2 has been steadily rising.

Check out he best weather-science on the web at 'Watts Up With That'

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/

The hysteria is now completely at variance with reality. 2007 was the coldest winter for 50 years; China was buried in snow and ice for 6 months; most American states had their coldest winter for 100 years.

And we are just having the hottest summer on record aren't we? I think not!!!

Never mind, the eco-fascists are all running around getting nice fat salaries with windpower companies - and we are all paying for the insanity with a stealth tax on all our electricity bills.

There is NO global warming. It's a lie. The science says exactly the opposite - long term cooling is what the satellites are showing since 1998.
10

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 04/07/2008 07:01:44
"Global Support"
Aye right! Except from the people of Scotland who are seeing there landscape ravaged with winmills of mass destruction.
Does anyone really give any credence to a postcard campaign by FOE, WWF etc.
Get a grip Scotsman and start representing the views of the people of Scotland and not the puppets of the wind industry.
11

11+failed,

the pans 04/07/2008 07:05:32
"More than 21,000 individuals from across the world wrote to the government in response to the consultation on the Scottish Climate Change Bill."
Wow! that is 0.003% of the population. I guess even Mugabe could muster a lot more support than that!
12

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 04/07/2008 07:11:47
I see oil prices are up yet again.

Good.

It's past high time that we should begin live off income (renewables) instead of capital (fossil) fuels.
13

Alexander,

Edinburgh 04/07/2008 07:26:32
Interestingly Dr Richard Dixon and Alex Salmond both look as though they are eating about three times their share of food resources, not to mention their large detached/multiple homes, gas guzzling cars and annual air miles.
14

spiderman,

argyll 04/07/2008 07:39:59
for heaven's sake, give us some new nuclear power stations before all this green nonsense puts the lights out and before we really can't afford or get oil any more
15

maijabs,

ormiston 04/07/2008 07:51:43
#14 Agreed,but how do we break the stranglehold of the GREEN MILLIONAIRE CLUB
16

Unimpressed one,

04/07/2008 08:49:40
"So what you are saying is, don't bother making a stand even as a representative of a small country.

Don't try to lead on climate change and renerwables.

Let the world go to rack and ruin.

Wait for someone else to take the lead."

Yes. We can't do anything right except back losers. 'Climate change' is the biggest scam foisted on the world since the South Seas bubble and witchcraft laws.
17

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 04/07/2008 09:08:05
#16 Unimpressed 1.

But the climate IS changing! Ask any farmer or observer of nature. Or is yours a different planet?
18

11+failed,

04/07/2008 09:20:07
"But the climate IS changing! Ask any farmer or observer of nature. Or is yours a different planet?"
No doubt about it the questions are why and how.
Global average temperature is currently lower than at any time since 1993. Fifteen years of soaring atmospheric CO2 and no change in temperature.
19

Ike,

Glasgow 04/07/2008 10:09:28
Surely this is all about investment and incubation of future wealth creating technologies and therefore must be a good opportunity for Scotland. No-one could suggest seriously that our small country can alter planetary climate change. But energy production and industrial development everywhere will have to do more with less... less waste, lower toxicity, healthier environments. These are all desirable things and it's right that we develop niche expertise in these areas which we can sell to the world. Get in early. Think "more-from-less" and think of the consultancy fees !!!
20

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 04/07/2008 10:25:31
#7 I'll second that!
21

MisterN,

Scotland 04/07/2008 10:36:27
The UK as a whole generates about 1% of the total world polution so why are we putting so much pressure on our industry to clean up its act when the US India and China are the ones causing all the problems?
It doenst matter what we do if the above countries ignore the problem and spew out their gases and chemicals.
22

MisterN,

Scotland 04/07/2008 10:41:33
1

"Do you remember when Alex Salmond wrote to Robert Mugabe and the others, taking a lead on a world issue? No one wrote back because he is an irrelevant distraction and waste of time to all those abroad."

A perfect description of Scotlands place in the world and another union benefit to take note of.
You are quite right about Scotland place in the world within the union we are nothing just another English region with funny accents colourful skirts and noisy musical instruments. Nothing to take note of at all.
Our union legacy.
And you are one of these cringing self denying f*ckwits who would keep us in this position?
What a joy you must be to your parents.
23

Talorthane,

04/07/2008 10:43:36
11 11+failed,the pans 04/07/2008 07:05:32

(More than 21,000 individuals from across the world wrote to the government in response to the consultation on the Scottish Climate Change Bill.)

"Wow! that is 0.003% of the population. I guess even Mugabe could muster a lot more support than that!"


Tell me, when did you last send a response to anothe5r government about one of their policy consultations.

The impressive thing here is that 21,000 were motivated enough to make a response.


The sad thing is that, rather than acknowledge the possibility that Scotland could have some impact on the world stage (and could, therefore, have even more impact if independent), many posters here would rather find any way to ridicule the the SNP government's actions, regardless of their merits.
24

MisterN,

Scotland 04/07/2008 10:44:19
12

Any idea whats happening to the extra revenue collected as a result? will it be proportionally added to the Barnett formula do you think? will Scotland receive 8 or 10% due to the population ratio?
What do you think?
25

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 04/07/2008 10:45:28
In the Telegraph today:

"Global warming may 'stop', scientists predict"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/04/30/eaclimate130.xml

If you can't be bothered to read the article, its only about the "experts" trying to explain away the lack of warming, but predicting it will start again in 2015 (Aye right!).

Here one of their disciples who was caught fabricating results. Unfortunately for the IPCC, his (fabricated) work was used in their latest report. How embarrassing!

http://www.informath.org/pubs/EnE07a.pdf

He is currently being investigated for "fabrication" by his employer, Albany, State University of New York. Remember, Wang is a respected climate expert for 30 years and is a professor. The mind boggles!
26

,

04/07/2008 11:09:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
27

Rational cynic,

Edinburgh 04/07/2008 11:25:44
Most scientific opinion agrees with the theory that global climate change is happening, and is caused in large part by the huge increase in CO2 concentration in the earth's atmosphere since the industrial revolution.

However, if Scotland stopped all its current greenhouse gas emissions now, it would make next to no difference to the problem. Our top priority should be to do all we can to push for a new international agreement to take over from the Kyoto agreement. We need to take action on a world scale to deal with a worldwide problem.

At a domestic level, we need to target our efforts where they will have the greatest impact - on the methods we use to produce the energy we use to power our lives, for heating, transport, manufacturing, and so on.

This link -- http://www.withouthotair.com/ -- gives access to a free book written by a professor of physics, where he argues for "a plan that adds up". Read the 4 page synopsis for a starter. He brings numbers to the debate and outlines 5 different mixes of energy sources that could meet the energy needs of the country.

This helps clarify the action we should be taking to deal with climate change, and also ensure we meet future energy needs.
28

11+failed,

04/07/2008 11:33:54
#23
"Tell me, when did you last send a response to anothe5r government about one of their policy consultations."

The dedicated green brigade in Scotland represents c.2% of the adult population. That is about 80,000 adults. Seems that at most a quarter, of just the extreme element, were motivated, even if there had been no support from across the world.
When did you not see, "an anti anything constructive" response, from the usual suspects, WWF Scotland, Friends of the Earth Scotland and RSPB Scotland, at our expense?
29

,

04/07/2008 12:40:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
30

An Beal Bacht,

04/07/2008 13:43:23
Top four warmest years since 1890:

1 - 1998
2 - 2002
3 - 2003
4 - 2004

Source: NASA
31

An Beal Bacht,

04/07/2008 13:45:57
March 28, 2006

2005 Hottest Year on Record

Joseph Florence *

The year 2005 was the hottest on record. The average global surface temperature of 14.77 degrees Celsius (58.6 degrees Fahrenheit) was the highest since recordkeeping began in 1880. January, April, September, and October of 2005 were the hottest of those months on record, while March, June, and November were the second warmest ever. (See Figure 1).

In fact, the six hottest years on record have all occurred in the last eight years. After 2005, 1998 was the second warmest, with an average global temperature of 14.71 degrees Celsius. But there was an important difference between 1998 and 2005: the strongest El Niño of the past 100 years lifted the average 1998 temperature 0.2 degrees Celsius, whereas the record warmth last year was not buoyed by such an effect.

These readings, which come from the series maintained by NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, continue a trend of rising global temperatures. During the past century, temperatures rose 0.8 degrees Celsius (1.44 degrees Fahrenheit), 0.6 degrees of which occurred during the last three decades, a rate unprecedented in the last millennium. The average temperature of 14.02 degrees Celsius in the 1970s rose to 14.26 degrees in the 1980s. In the 1990s it reached 14.40 degrees Celsius. And during the first six years of this new decade, global temperature has averaged 14.62 degrees Celsius. (See Table 1.)

http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/Temp/2006.htm
32

An Beal Bacht,

04/07/2008 13:49:02
Melting of permafrost could trigger rapid global warming warns UN
mongabay.com
February 21, 2008

Melting of the Arctic permafrost is a "wild card" that could dramatically worsen global warming by releasing massive amounts of greenhouse gases, warned the U.N. on Wednesday at a meeting in Monaco.

Vast amounts of methane, a greenhouse gas 23-25 times more potent than carbon dioxide, are locked in the deep sea and in the frozen soils of Siberia, Northern Europe, and North America, but warming could trigger rapid thawing that would release billions of tons into the atmosphere.

"Methane release due to thawing permafrost in the Arctic is a global warming wildcard," stated The UNEP Year Book 2008. "The balance of evidence suggests that Arctic feedbacks that amplify warming, globally and regionally, will dominate during the next 50 to 100 years. As warming continues, these feedbacks will likely intensify. We may be approaching thresholds that are difficult to predict precisely, but crossing such thresholds could have serious global consequences."

http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0221-methane.html
33

Unimpressed one,

04/07/2008 16:52:27
#29 Really is aff his fu*ckin heid.
34

,

04/07/2008 17:40:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
35

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 04/07/2008 21:28:28
Climate EFFING change. Climate CHANGE. Whatever happenened to the reports afew years ago about the Earth's magnetic field change reversing and causing birds to lose their sense of direction?

Does it not stand to reason that if such a natural phenomenon as a magnetic change can inflict the Earth then the resultant follow on can be a climate change?

What we have to ask is why has no relevant academic been allowed to publish any paper on such a thesis?

I put it to you all that it all to do with scaremongering from a governmental level and all to do with TAXATION.
36

yoric,

04/07/2008 21:32:07
21,000 out of 5 million, most of them expats, so there's a big demand then?

Does the public really understand the effects of these climate change bills if they go through?

Unreliable electricity supplies from wind farms, power cuts, restrictions on flying, restrictions on driving,and on train journeys, restrictions on shipping.
Shortages of imports of food and consumables, massive increases in unemployment.



Recession, increases in poverty.

Moving Scotland back to the 16th century won't stop the ice caps melting.


37

Jim P,

04/07/2008 21:40:27
An Beal Bacht,04/07/2008

"Top four warmest years since 1890:

1 - 1998
2 - 2002
3 - 2003
4 - 2004

Source: NASA"

WRONG - this data was corrected by NASA.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=8383

The warmest year on record is now 1934.




38

Jim P,

04/07/2008 21:43:39
#32 An Beal Bacht,04/07/2008

Ice used to cover Scotland till about 12000 years ago. Of course the climate is changing, we've just come out of an ice age!

39

Jim P,

04/07/2008 21:46:51
For a readable explanation of what has gone on in the Arctic visit:

http://www.john-daly.com/polar/arctic.htm

40

Jim P,

04/07/2008 21:47:00
"It will without doubt have come to your Lordship's knowledge that a considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been during the last two years, greatly abated.

(This) affords ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened and give us leave to hope that the Arctic Seas may at this time be more accessible than they have been for centuries past, and that discoveries may now be made in them not only interesting to the advancement of science but also to the future intercourse of mankind and the commerce of distant nations."
President of the Royal Society, London, to the Admiralty, 20th November, 1817 [13]
41

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 04/07/2008 21:53:16
Alas, poor Yoric (36), I can think of one benefit of moving Scotland back to the 16th century. And that would have been not having to suffer the dying days of "the benefit of the union".
42

The Former Mr. Angry,

04/07/2008 21:54:45
..."a campaign by environment groups including WWF Scotland, Friends of the Earth Scotland and RSPB Scotland".

And we're expected to fall hook, line and sinker for this one. What's even sadder is this is being presented as "fact" by the Scotsman when the "facts" about GW/CC are at best at odds with each other. Looks like John Swinney has from his statement on the subject. These groups are hell bent on reducing economic activity to the point where it is beyond repair. Green tax and government funding for these bodies is what it's all about. The fact that they conned people into sending postcards and pro-forma letters shows they have an agenda and a none too subtle one at that. Why should this very selective band of 21,000 people have such a disproportionate influence on a nations economic and energy activity?

Just tell the orddinary punter trying to fill his or her car with petrol or diesel that a 3% year on year reduction in the emission of 6 gases(!) now really, really matters. I think Maisie at #5 put it very succinctly - we have been fed this manure long enough and the electorate will have its revenge.
43

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 04/07/2008 21:56:54
Aye, Dr Cemeron, the political clemate hes changed es well.

Better tex it then, Janet.
44

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 04/07/2008 22:28:26
Efterthoucht tae 43

Oh, Dr Cemoren, Dr Cemoren, the political clemate has changed as well.

Aye, Janet, better tex it then.
45

truthsleuth,

04/07/2008 23:49:26
The price of oil is not affected by global warming
The price of raw materials is not affected by global warming
If you deniers can't take your heads out of your exhaust pipes then perhaps the thought of making the Arabs the Russians the Nigerians, The Chinese and the Indians very very rich and us and US very very poor will make you think.

Still there may be other benefits of high resource prices and low western nation wealth in that we will all become illegal immigrants (in reverse) so throw away your passport, get out your rowing boat and join the exodus.
ps Fuel is much cheaper in India and China its subsidised and they have low taxes of course health care and education is rather expensive.
46

Mr A Roy,

05/07/2008 00:27:16
Well im still waiting to see the proof that CO2 is responsible for 'climate change'
As for global warming that stopped in 1998.
Im a great believer in the poles reversing theory, that would explain to me why wales etc lose their bearings and are washed up on shore, as described here,
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1110-06.htm
47

,

05/07/2008 00:30:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
48

An Beal Bacht,

05/07/2008 01:05:39
A summary of the sequence of events for the last 130,000 years ('real' years);

Phases about as warm or warmer than the present are marked in bold.

150,000 y.a. - cold, dry full glacial world

around 130,000 y.a. - rapid warming initiates the Eemian interglacial (Stage 5e)

130,000-110,000 y.a. - global climates generally warmer and moister than present, but with progressive cooling to temperatures more similar to present.

(except for possible global cold, dry event at 121,000 y.a.)

?110,000 y.a. - a strong cooling marks the end of the Eemian interglacial (Stage 5e).

105,000-95,000 y.a. - climate warms slightly but still cooler and drier than present; strong fluctuations.

95,000 - 93,000 y.a. - another cooler phase similar to that at 110,000 y.a.

93,000 - 75,000 y.a. - a milder phase, resembling that at 105,000-95,000 y.a.

75,000 - 60,000 y.a. - full glacial world, cold and dry (the 'Lower Pleniglacial' or Stage 4)

60,000 - 25,000 y.a. - 'middling phase' of highly unstable but generally cooler and drier-than-present conditions (Stage 3)

25,000 - 15,000 y.a. - full glacial world, cold and dry; Stage 2 (includes the 'Last Glacial Maximum')

(This period includes two 'coldest phases' - Heinrich Events - at around 23,000-21,000 y.a. and at 17,000-14,500 y.a.)

14,500 y.a. - rapid warming and moistening of climates in some areas. Rapid deglaciation begins.

13,500 y.a. - nearly all areas with climates at least as warm and moist as today's

12,800 y.a. (+/- 200 years)- rapid onset of cool, dry Younger Dryas in many areas

11,500 y.a. (+/- 200 years) - Younger Dryas ends suddenly, back to warmth and moist climates (Holocene, or Stage 1)

9,000 y.a. - 8,200 y.a. - climates warmer and often moister than today's

about 8,200 y.a. - sudden cool and dry phase in many areas

8,000-4,500 y.a. - climates somewhat warmer and moister than today's

Since 4,500 y.a. - climates fairly similar to the present

(except; about 2600 y.a.
49

Rob in Peru,

Peru 05/07/2008 03:54:16
Thank goodness for some sanity here! Of course climate change is both normal and unavoidable...it´s happened for millions of years and will happen for millions more. We can do nothing to change it and never will be able to do so. The world is going mad , led by politicians and "Green" lunatics who ignore EVERY unbiased scientific observation....What next ? Maybe they will "discover" that it´s all caused by the heavenly constellations and mount a campaign to change our orbit ! Crazy ? No more so than the utter nonsense they are spouting now ! When is it going to end?
50

,

05/07/2008 19:02:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
51

Jim P,

05/07/2008 21:36:12
#50 McMadman

Ref your #29. WTF has a snowy winter in Scotland got tae dae wi global warming? D'ye no ken the difference atween weather, climate and global climate.

You're the diddy.
52

seanie,

06/07/2008 20:36:49
#37 - 1934 is not even close to being the warmest year globally.

The NASA/GISS data for global temperatures;

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

The ten hottest years worldwide since 1880 were:

2005, 2007, 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2004, 2001, 1997, 1995.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.