16 Signs That “Global Warming” Was A Lie And That We Have Now Entered A Period Of Global Cooling

Share on Facebook734Tweet about this on TwitterPin on Pinterest1Share on Google+0Share on StumbleUpon189Print this pageEmail this to someone

Record Events

Back in 2009, Al Gore boldly declared that “the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years.”  Well, it turns out that was a lie along with almost everything else that Al Gore has been peddling.  The truth is that the polar ice cap is actually growing.  It is about 50 percent larger than it was at this time last year.  And as you will read about below, a shocking UN report that was recently leaked shows that the planet has actually not been warming for the past 15 years.  So if you are breathlessly anticipating that “global warming” will soon bring on the apocalypse, you can stop waiting.  On the other hand, there is rising concern about what “global cooling” will soon do to the planet as we suffer through the beginning of the coldest winter in decades.  Thanks to an unusually quiet solar cycle and an unusually high number of volcano eruptions, global temperatures have been falling.  And if this cold weather persists, that could lead to massive global problems.  Periods of very low temperatures throughout history have resulted in mass crop failures and widespread famines.  Could that soon happen to us?  The following are 16 signs that “global warming” was a lie and that we have now entered a period of global cooling…

1. According to a leaked UN report that absolutely rocked the “global warming” believers, the earth has not gotten any warmer for the past 15 years.

2. The amount of ice covering the Arctic is up by 50 percent compared to this time in 2012.

3. In just one week in late November, a combined total of more than 1000 new cold temperature and snowfall records were set in the United States.

4. In just one week in December, a combined total of more than 2000 new cold temperature and snowfall records were set in the United States.

5. On December 15th, 53 percent of the United States was covered in snow.  That was the highest level on this date in 11 years.

6. A snowstorm that spanned more than 1,000 miles slammed into New England on Sunday.

7. Some areas of upstate New York were hit with about six feet of snow a few days ago.

8. Chicago just experienced that coldest temperatures that it has seen in December in nearly 20 years.

9. On December 7th, Eugene, Oregon recorded the lowest temperature that it has seen since December 11th, 1972.

10. A few days ago, three feet of snow closed roads in Jerusalem.  It was the worst snow storm in Israel since 1953.

11. Heavy snow also fell on parts of Saudi Arabia.  That was considered to be extremely unusual.

12. The recent snowfall in Turkey was so bad that it closed 900 roads.

13. Temperatures have dropped so low that some Syrian war refugees are actually dying from the cold.

14. Cairo, Egypt just had the first snowfall that it has experienced in 100 years.

15. It was so cold in Canada recently that the Arctic Winter Games biathlon trials were forced indoors.

16. According to NASA satellite data, a temperature of minus 135 degrees Fahrenheit was recorded in Antarctica back in July.

So why is all of this happening?

Well, the number one factor affecting our climate is the giant ball of fire called the Sun that our planet revolves around.  As I detailed in a previous article, solar activity has dropped to a 100 year low.  The following is how a Space.com article recently described what we are currently experiencing…

The sun’s current space-weather cycle is the most anemic in 100 years, scientists say.

Our star is now at “solar maximum,” the peak phase of its 11-year activity cycle. But this solar max is weak, and the overall current cycle, known as Solar Cycle 24, conjures up comparisons to the famously feeble Solar Cycle 14 in the early 1900s, researchers said.

“None of us alive have ever seen such a weak cycle. So we will learn something,” Leif Svalgaard of Stanford University told reporters here today (Dec. 11) at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union.

Another factor that is causing all of this cold weather is a dramatic rise in volcanic activity.  Throughout human history, volcanic eruptions have produced some of the coldest winters ever recorded, and in 2013 we have witnessed a record number of volcanic eruptions.  Something appears to be happening to the crust of the earth, and that is one of the reasons why I included the future eruption of Mt. Rainier in my new novel.  The mainstream media does not talk about this much, but right now we are seeing a stunning rise in volcanic activity all over the planet.

The truth is that volcanoes can influence our climate far more than normal human activity ever possibly could.  When a tremendous amount of volcanic debris gets ejected into the atmosphere, it can have a huge impact on global temperatures and the consequences can be quite dramatic.  The following historic examples come from Wikipedia

The effects of volcanic eruptions on recent winters are modest in scale, but historically have been significant.

Most recently, the 1991 explosion of Mount Pinatubo, a stratovolcano in the Philippines, cooled global temperatures for about 2–3 years.

In 1883, the explosion of Krakatoa (Krakatau) created volcanic winter-like conditions. The four years following the explosion were unusually cold, and the winter of 1887-1888 included powerful blizzards.  Record snowfalls were recorded worldwide.

The 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora, a stratovolcano in Indonesia, occasioned mid-summer frosts in New York State and June snowfalls in New England and Newfoundland and Labrador in what came to be known as the “Year Without a Summer” of 1816.

A paper written by Benjamin Franklin in 1783 blamed the unusually cool summer of 1783 on volcanic dust coming from Iceland, where the eruption of Laki volcano had released enormous amounts of sulfur dioxide, resulting in the death of much of the island’s livestock and a catastrophic famine which killed a quarter of the Icelandic population. Northern hemisphere temperatures dropped by about 1 °C in the year following the Laki eruption.

In 1600, the Huaynaputina in Peru erupted. Tree ring studies show that 1601 was cold. Russia had its worst famine in 1601-1603. From 1600 to 1602, Switzerland, Latvia and Estonia had exceptionally cold winters. The wine harvest was late in 1601 in France, and in Peru and Germany, wine production collapsed. Peach trees bloomed late in China, and Lake Suwa in Japan froze early.

So are we now heading for a similar period of time?

Will lower temperatures lead to mass crop failures and widespread global famine?

Please feel free to share what you think by posting a comment below…

About the author: Michael T. Snyder is a former Washington D.C. attorney who now publishes The Truth.  His new thriller entitled “The Beginning Of The End” is now available on Amazon.com.

The Beginning Of The End - The New Novel About The Future Of America By Michael T. Snyder
Share on Facebook734Tweet about this on TwitterPin on Pinterest1Share on Google+0Share on StumbleUpon189Print this pageEmail this to someone
  • DJohn1

    So we are having a lot of snow. Gee, that sounds like water ending the drought. I think we could all use some water increasing the water tables all over the place.

    The problem I have is that no one knows why the Sun has suddenly gotten less active. Suppose for instance it is the calm before a really enormous storm that will heat things up a lot more than they are right now.
    As for that storm, it could do a lot worse than a few blizzards. It could trash most of our electrical equipment. An electromagnetic field generated by the Sun could burn up most of our alternators in our cars and the generators in our power plants.

    One of the problems I have with that is we are not set up to deal with life without electricity! A 150 years ago, maybe, we would consider it a minor distraction. Today we are all dependent on electricity for everything in our lives.
    Only the Amish are set up to handle something like this. That is because they are not so dependent on electricity as we are.
    The volcanic activity indicates a possible pole change in our near future. That only happens over an enormous amount of time. I don’t think anyone has seen that in historical times.
    Pole changes happen gradually over a lot of time. For instance, the last pole change was 100s of thousands of years ago. No one really knows the exact time it happened or the time before that. Geological changes are a natural outcome of a pole change. Geologists are divided on this issue. Some think we are long overdue for polarity change.
    Such an event might lead to an ice age.
    But by then the survivors might be few and far between.

  • K

    Yes 1816 was the worst year, the year without summer. But from 1815 through 1818 many crops were lost due to abnormal cold temperatures. And yes it was mostly due to volcanic activity.You know something is up by the sheer size of some of these storms. Just a little over a week ago,there was an ice storm stretching from Maine to the Texas border with Mexico. Sorry that is just not normal.

    • windy2

      There is a paleoclimate record of a 100 year drought in the 12th century in the Southwestern USA and yet I read people who claim after 1 year of drought that the drought they are going through is not normal. Rather than base your view on a single event you should look at all evidence which is what scientists are doing, and as of the 2013 IPCC AR5 report there is no evidence that hurricanes, tornadoes, storms, droughts or floods, are getting worse than they were in the past.

      • K

        That was just the one incident I mentioned. I find little use for many of these so called scientific reports. What constitutes worse? I know from a lifetime of experience, that hurricanes are fewer than they used to be. I also know when we have one, the size of it is immense. I went through Andrew, in my area it never exceeded 1 hundred miles in size. Yet Sandy and several others since, were more than 5 hundred miles in size. Just remember for many years scientist said cigarettes were perfectly safe. Coffee has been good, and then bad for you, more times than I can count. I have often found scientific reports, are more controlled by who paid for them. Then the research actually done.

  • Kim

    Like all things, time will tell. It’s too soon to draw conclusions.

  • Not impressed

    The quickest and easiest way to become a climate expert is to deny any and all claims of global warming. I read something about the jet stream having a different pattern when the temperature difference between the arctic and equator is lessened. It is colder, wetter, hotter, drier depending on how the jet stream is situated. Of course, since I do not deny global warming, I can hardly be expected to know anything about climate. I forgot to mention that one can also become a solar expert as well, since denying global warming imparts a deep understanding of sun spots. As a bonus, denying global warming imparts an alluring air of sophistication and worldliness to the deniers. Am I the only one who finds it ironic that the status quo the deniers defend is visibly poisoning and killing our only planet. Oh wait, it is only the need to burn fossil, fuel (the basis of the status quo) the deniers defend; deniers are actually quite anti-establishment. “Something appears to be happening to the crust of the earth.” Yes, I see it too — it’s getting warmer!

    • Perplexed

      IF Global Warming was truly “the issue” why was the fact that the Earth hasn’t warmed since 1998 absent from most people’s knowledge? On top of that, why aren’t the Global Warming people cheering the fact that the Earth has cooled since 2002?

      The only deniers we have are those that deny that Global Warming is a hoax.

      • Not impressed

        I can see why the deniers say global warming is a hoax. The status quo uses global warming to justify their latest power grabs and the warming is not a straight line trend. However, the deniers’ case is really nit-picking. You can selectively pick climate data to prove any point, but relying on scientific data is a very weak position for the deniers because then they have no basis for rejecting the data that shows warming. Since I am definitely not a climate expert, I just have to say the deniers cannot see the forest for the trees. They spend a lot of time on clever criticisms and totally miss the main point that environmental degradation leads to bad outcomes. The deniers are, in effect, defending the status quo, defending pollution, and helping to ruin our only planet. If global warming is a hoax, the deniers are actually helping it to succeed. It would be far better for the deniers to focus on ways to live without pollution and actually helping the environment.

        • StandUpAmerica59

          Follow the money. There’s a reason Al Gore pushes his environmental themes. IF he truly believed it, and had an ANY INTEGRITY, he would live much more frugally.

          If the US Gov’t truly believed we need to change, we would stop importing from the biggest polluter in the world: China.

          The hard truth is it’s all about the $$$.

        • Don Hignite Jr

          Subjective to pretending to be a deity in your pagan religion that promotes failed ideas. Your salvation is a lie!

    • jaxon64

      Not Impressed..I must hand it to you. You are an expert at the “rules for radicals” tactics that Saul Alinsky outlined.
      Your entire post is mocking–ridiculing of proven facts and offering absolutely no evidence to the contrary. You reduce the oppositions insights and observations of empirical and real science with a quick quip or insult.
      You belittle your opponenmt instead of offering a scintilla of any factual rebuttal and then end it with a bold statement and exclamation–all that’s missing are the voice tonal inflections and the hand movements and gestures that so many of the charlatans use to hypnotize the masses…
      Sorry but we are of a higher group of developed frontal cortexes around here—your snide ruminations would be better spent on the dumbed down generation who have been spoon-fed the anthropogenic global warming fantasies since kindergarten ( of which you are most likely a product of.)
      I understand it is not your fault that you can only parrot what has been programmed into your head since your formative years. It takes a great mind to break away and learn to look at evidences and admit and see that what you are told to believe is often not true. You will make a good serf and I’m sure you will gladly and willingly give away the fruits of your labor in carbon taxes to “save the world from rising oceans”

  • windy2

    It is easy to be ideological and deny that 31,000 people more than average died from cold weather last year just in the UK alone due to inability to afford energy. Whilst it has come to the public’s attention that 4 of 9 environmental ministers in the UK have been proponents of raising energy prices to subsidize green energy companies that they have financial ties to, people are dying from the cold.

    This same scenario played out in Germany the Netherlands, and Spain and energy costs have skyrocketed to 30-40 cents/kWh. This has led to 600,000 German families unable to heat their houses last winter.

    So here’s a challenge for the ideological types who write just so they can throw the word “denier” around and act like sanctimonious little twits. Show me that you can survive through the winter in Chicago without energy because that is what you are forcing on the poor in the rest of the world with your ideology.

  • Jack M. Hoff

    Sorry, I didn’t read past the title.

  • Anthony Stamford

    There is sufficient evidence to argue that climate change isn’t a lie and that Murdoch and other media cartels have been trying to hide it for years (http://www.clipling.com/news/the-daily-mail-is-wrong-the-earth-keeps-warming). What should worry us even more though is nuclear energy.

  • Rufus T Firefly

    “Global warming causes more snowfall”.
    “Temperature is not climate…except when it is”

    The globaloney pond scum have an idiotic excuse for everything.

    • seth datta

      Globallists want to make us their slaves whilst they own ALL the planet’s resources; and they will say and DO anything to achieve this end.

      Ending them before they end us seems to be a logical solution.

      • Hammerstrike

        youtube.c om/watch?v=ROGTV7GkWAE
        There might not be much to own in the near future.

  • DaBilk

    So, if we stop adding CO2 to the atmosphere…the climate will not change?
    The farce is strong with this one.

  • Jackson

    From what I understand, as a result of examining ice core samples, glaciologists do claim that the earth is presently due for another ice age. As well, the top soil (which is laid down by glaciers), has been depleted of minerals for some time now (perhaps a major cause for modern foods being less nutrient dense than in the past). If the planet is heading towards another ice age (even a mini), it may be time to head south.

  • Mike Howard

    The ocean over the years has picked up 15 degrees in warming for mostly man made causes. That has changed ocean and wind currents. Global warming is followed by extreme climate shifts which include radically cold weather. In that Art Bell movie even he as able to correctly state years ago Global Warming is followed by Global Co

    • Is there anything that would disprove anthropogenic “climate change”?

      In order for this to be science, there has to be some mechanism, following the Scientific Model, that would cause the hypothesis to be disprovable. What, exactly, would be the conditions that would disprove AGW?

  • Wait, wait, you forgot that, according to Warmist “climate change” doctrine, snow and cold is entirely consistent with their hypothesis. Heck, everything you mentioned is consistent with their hypothesis. Even earthquakes and volcanoes. All because someone drove a fossil fueled vehicle.

  • Hayrick

    I have been around for a while. 50 years ago the ice age was due but when will it happen?. We barely live to 80yrs – and have barely been around for 80,000yrs, probably only 50,000 yrs as a sentient being, so have only barely experienced one small ice age out of many – measure that against evolution. I despair at the degradation I have seen in my lifetime caused by us, this accelerates killing off many species that evolved over millennia as we foul the nest. Climate change is an affect not the cause. Most of the causes are bigger than us but we are working diligently to destroy natures options to recover from the inevitable disasters that surely will come. By the way reducing the options together with the burgeoning many tonnes of humanity make us a big target for other organisms that cannot find food anywhere else. The adaptable and hardy (natural or manmade) will find a way to live that we might find very uncomfortable, and maybe even a death sentence.

  • reversedObject

    One thing to keep in mind is that in our current system, lots of raw science is funded by the state. This means that its very beneficial and expedient for scientists to take on political stances that guarantee them more funding and give the government more power and leeway into peoples lives. Even a scientist as renowned as Neil deGrasse Tyson is part of this power and money seeking clique.

    I’m not 100% certain about global warming yet, but I’m certain that if the government tries to create a grand program to fight it, it’ll be as successful as the war on drugs or terrorists or whatever nonsense they come up with next to take our liberties.

  • John Paul Jones

    I once considered the elements of Global Warming and the myriad of other climate change as truth due to scientific methodology; however, as I began to actually research the data regarding its developments the holes in the hypothesis began to show. One central issue is the temperature readings that have been the long share of the mythos regarding the eventual warming of the planet. The vast majority of the temperature data is collected near and around major urban areas, where the primary area is covered by human contributions, such as glass buildings and concrete. This helps create a heat bubble around the central region, increasing the overall heat retention of the area. Granted, not all measuring data is corraled to these singular densities, but when viewed from a more rural point the temperature rise becomes negligible, well within the margin of error. Furthering this precept, it the reactive nature of the hypothesis that continues to evolve in response to the data. This is in stark contrast to actual scientific method, where the theory is supported by the evidence not where the hypothesis must be subjected and changed due to the evidence. If we had to change the tenets of Special Relativity to address the physics that were wrong with the theory, Einstein would have lost his credibility a long time ago. I do believe that we ought to be better stewards of our planetary home, but I believe that this method is a strongarm approach to doing the right thing.

  • StandUpAmerica59

    Yes, and Obama came out of nowhere, with no history to assemble the largest campaign war chest in history. He campaigned not on real issues, but on vague feel-good terms to reach the unschooled, and made promises he never intended to keep. He is a mere puppet. We are all being fed a line to control us. You are falling in lock-step with the controllers as you were told. Of course it makes sense to you.

  • StandUpAmerica59

    Science is a religion, and scientists are political animals, performing for grants (follow the money). So before you take your long list of statistics from various “scientific organizations” as the absolute truth, you might want to vet them for accuracy and integrity. Follow the money. More and more of these organizations have been found to be following political agendas, and not hard science.

  • RonitaM

    Weather or not, climate remains changing.

  • Captain Canuck

    98% of the global scientific community agree that global warming is in fact here.

    This posts on this blog, from angel sightings to the flat rejection of global scientific fact, negates the work you do on ECB.

    I would fold the tent poles up on this blog. Reading it makes me think I’m in the checkout line at the supermarket.

    • Don Hignite Jr

      After reading your post I suspect you merely hated fighting for a seat on that 1/2 size school bus that picked you up every morning .

  • hansimaus

    We have the warmest winter in.. I dont know.. Northern Europe.. Cold.. Warm, media buzz. It’s nature 😉

  • I Question Everything

    Global warming, global cooling, the terms are confusing and ultimately meaningless because the subjective effect of current climate change is totally dependant on location. The only thing we can correctly say is “global weather change,” which has been an ongoing process for billions of years. When there is a huge influx of fresh water from melting glaciers and poles, it slows and weakens the Gulf Stream, which destabilizes global weather. Once this begins to falter, as it has, we see greater extremes of temperatures at different latitudes, which causes more powerful weather systems. However, many other factors, such as volcanism, solar cycles, and even out gassing at plate boundaries can have a far greater effect in a single year than all of mankind’s pollution combined. There is no question that much of the reason that we are dependant on fossil fuels is due to a relatively small group of sociopathic men and their dynastic families, who see the entire world as their resource to be exploited without any consideration for future generations. The sociopaths always champion the centralized “top down” model as they are always at the top, but this is a house of cards, which is destine to failure caused by any number of natural and/or man-made events. The only reasonable solution seems to be a “bottom up” model, which happens to be the one we used to have in this country before the industrialists took over a century ago. In the modern adaptation of this model, each home, and each building becomes both part of the grid, utilizing whatever sustainable energy source is available, as well as stand alone should the need arise. Of course, since the world is run by powerful, dynastic families of sociopaths, change will only be allowed to happen when it profits them.