‘Forget global warming, prepare for Ice Age.’
I’ve never really been on the global warming train. That’s not to say that I don’t believe in living an environmentally more sustainable life, I just don’t buy the scaremongering. In 2006, Antarctic ice was closer to South America than ever before, apparently. Sydney’s harbour used to be much further inland, or the water level much higher. These are all little facts like the ones we are bugged with on a daily basis, telling us to stock up on rafts for when the flood comes, but damn, make it a raft with a small footprint.
I can’t help but think there must be more tangible evidence that we are ruining the planet. Perhaps, though, people need to feel that their homes are under threat before they will take action. It would explain the scaremongering.
Anyway, personally, I’ve always found the theory that we are on the edge of a new Ice Age much more plausible. Research into past ice ages has shown that temperatures seem to rise before the inevitable chilling downfall. Now an Australian researcher has shown that after the 11 years long sun cycle that concluded last year, sun spot activity hasn’t flared back up, and between January 2007 and 2008, temperatures have gone down 0.7C, which apparently puts us back to 1930s temperatures, rather than on the brink of global warming catastrophe.
There is a good explanation of how sun spots influence temperatures on earth (it’s kind of counter-intuitive, so I’ll let quote it):
A sunspot is a region on the sun that is cooler than the rest and appears dark.
Some scientists believe a strong solar magnetic field, when there is plenty of sunspot activity, protects the earth from cosmic rays, cutting cloud formation, but that when the field is weak - during low sunspot activity - the rays can penetrate into the lower atmosphere and cloud cover increases, cooling the surface.
Sun cycles have been known for ages, are well-researched, and visible. And according to austronaut and geophysicist Phil Chapman, something is off with them. In an article in The Australian, he writes:
It is time to put aside the global warming dogma, at least to begin contingency planning about what to do if we are moving into another little ice age, similar to the one that lasted from 1100 to 1850.
There is no doubt that the next little ice age would be much worse than the previous one and much more harmful than anything warming may do.
[…]
The bleak truth is that, under normal conditions, most of North America and Europe are buried under about 1.5km of ice. This bitterly frigid climate is interrupted occasionally by brief warm interglacials, typically lasting less than 10,000 years.
The interglacial we have enjoyed throughout recorded human history, called the Holocene, began 11,000 years ago, so the ice is overdue. We also know that glaciation can occur quickly: the required decline in global temperature is about 12C and it can happen in 20 years.
I’d say we’re in for a bigger surprise than man-made mayhem.
I like the factuality of his article. I enjoy the lack of theatrics, with Chapman simply stating the facts and concluding that:
We cannot really know, but my guess is that the odds are at least 50-50 that we will see significant cooling rather than warming in coming decades. The probability that we are witnessing the onset of a real ice age is much less, perhaps one in 500, but not totally negligible.
As expressed in the quote above, Chapman may be wrong. What’s more, he realises it. I think we ought to keep in mind his closing statement, though. ‘In the famous words of Oliver Cromwell, “I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.”‘ I find it refreshing that a scientist (who’s actually studied to talk about these kind of things, instead of just having a random MSc and calling it a day) is putting forth an article that shows open mindedness as far as the issue of global warming goes. These days, it’s not PC to have doubts about global warming theories, but I’m glad there are still people out there subscribing to a proper, unprejudiced scientific notion.
Now, I am no geophysicist or meteorologist, so my opinion is worth about as much as the American dollar at present, but have a look at these two articles and see what you think. I think it’s chillingly convincing.
Before I resume the Italy Adventures, I want to link to a performance by the Sydney Theater Company featuring Cate Blanchett and Joseph Fiennes (found through 
I decided to post two pictures in Karen Cheng’s Facebook group