[ukmicky (OP)]

So the UNs World Meteorological Organization says that over the last ten years there has been no warming of the world's climate and that next year it will actually cool.

Shouldn't that fact put an end to the loony multi billion pound global warming industry and place thousands of people who's jobs are based on trying to prove we are destroying the world on the unemployment register and looking for a new cause.

[DoctorBeaver]

Have you got a link?

[ukmicky (OP)]

This is not the original article as it was changed due to complaints by activists.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7329799.stm

This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world.

This important part is halfway down the page, they  fail to point out that we have had 2 warming events "el nino's" in the last decade.

The BBC also fail to point out in the article that the original text was changed due to complaints from activists claiming that the original article  gave to much anumition to te sceptics and even went as far as to say "It would be better if you did not quote the sceptics."

[JimBob]

Then why  - WHY - is all of the global ice cover melting because of rising temperatures? If the minority view is that it is colling because of small changes there would be no massive loss of ice at the poles.

FROM THE ARTICLE CITED:
"But Mr Jarraud insisted this was not the case and noted that 2008 temperatures would still be well above average for the century.

"When you look at climate change you should not look at any particular year," he said. "You should look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.

"La Nina is part of what we call 'variability'. There has always been and there will always be cooler and warmer years, but what is important for climate change is that the trend is up; the climate on average is warming even if there is a temporary cooling because of La Nina."

In the BBC's comment on why the story was changed (bottom of story link:

----------------------------------

This article was the subject of a post on the BBC editors' blog, which you can read here:

Climate change debate - http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/04/climate_change_debate.html

E-mail this to a friend    Printable version)

------------------------------------
it states "The main criticism was not about the revised version of the story itself, which contains the same facts as the original plus extra background - but that we changed the report apparently under pressure and did not signal the changes."

So how does this mean the UN has said global warming does not exist?

[paul.fr]

There is nothing in the referenced article that states "that over the last ten years their has been no warming of the worlds climate". What it does mention is that the present La Nina has (or may have) slightly depressed the last years temperature.

Even then, the years temperature will still be above the last 30 year average. This will happen, we will have years where the average global temperature will drop, but you have to compare that temperature with the 30 year average.

It is also possible, that the solar cycle has been playing a part. We have just about entered a solar minimal sunspot cycle, although according to NASA's James Hanson, the cycles would only have a very small effect. I know this is covered in this weeks podcast, so maybe it could shed more light on it.

What is stated in the article is that "This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world", although it is not clear if this is said by Mr Jarraud, or a comment from the reporter. Two things that are possibly wrong with that statement.

Firstly, it talks about global warming. Global warming is not the same as climate change, and for that matter global warming and the greenhouse effect are not the same thing either.

Secondly, just because temperatures have not risen globally does not mean temperatures have not risen. We in the UK have had (check this) 7 record temperature years out of the last 10, parts of the US have also had year on year record temperatures. Again, this is why we have climate change and not global warming.

Infact The WMO wanted to emphasise M. Jarraud’s view that a slight temperature decrease in 2008 compared with 2007 should not be misinterpreted as evidence of a general cooling.

One last note: Why is it that when watching a science report on the BBC, i expect it to be delivered by one of the teletubbies or a presenter dressed as Einstein with a slippy fake moustache?

[ukmicky (OP)]

Then why  - WHY - is all of the global ice cover melting because of rising temperatures? If the minority view is that it is colling because of small changes there would be no massive loss of ice at the poles.

How do you know that ,from what ive read in the past the mechanisms for the reduction of ice at the poles is not fully understood.

How do you know that the reduction of ice at the  poles at the level it is today has not been happening for 100s maybe thousands of years or runs in cycles