It's the Sun,you Guys!

Indeed, an oncoming ice age has been predicted.

Now I'm going to ask 'who predicted it, and has their evidence been examined by a third party (preferably unbiased)'.

The end of the world has regularly been predicted by a bunch of religious zealots and let's just say that their evidence (as were those who predicted another ice age were) has been so completely shown flawed that it is beyond a reasonable doubt that they were wrong.

On sea level rise, it's true that for the city of Denver, Colorado, the sea level could rise 500 feet, and the city wouldn't even notice. Except for the massive flood of refugees and the total collapse of civil order as Miami, New York City, something like 90% of the major population centers on this planet and half of LA get wet. The San Fernando Valley would be fine (It's at roughly 800-1000 feet above sea level).

It is also true that the Earth has been warmer and it has been colder in the past. There are two major differences here, one being that in the past the climate changed much slower, and all the organisms had time to evolve into new niches (or go extinct) and the second being that there wasn't a highly stationary civilization on the Earth at the time.

It's easy to walk away from being submerged by a rising tide. It's a lot harder to walk away from your house being submerged by a rising tide. Or your entire country - The President of the Maldives had a council meeting in SCUBA outfits because if sea level rise continued, they'd better practice it.

And finally, climate change. It might be nice to grow pineapples in Calgary, but that won't help if Nebraska and Kansas look like the Sahara Desert. When the breadbasket goes away, there will be lots of unhappy starving people. Some will have guns. It's not just sea level rise that's the problem (incidentally, most of sea level rise comes not from melting ice, but from things getting hotter getting larger, and sea water is no exception) it's crop failure.

Climate change is, beyond a reasonable doubt (there's always unreasonable doubts), here, happening fast, and human-caused. There will be effects, many many people will suffer, and it could lead to the total collapse of human civilization.

I dunno about you, but that's something I'd be a little worried about. It may be impossible to fix it all at once - but I'd say that doing just a little here and there even to merely slow it down is a good idea.

Unless you just want to watch the world burn. In that case, I have nothing further to say to you on this matter.

S.

the doom and gloom predictor...

http://yournewswire.com/sun-is-extremely-quiet-scientists-worry-we-are-entering-ice-age/

The sun is currently experiencing its weakest solar cycle in over a century according to scientists.

“The sun is flatlining. For the 6th day in a row, solar activity remains very low. No sunspots are flaring, and the sun’s X-ray output has flatlined” says spaceweather.com

Scientists say that if the solar flatlining continues it may be an indication we are about to enter into a mini ice-age.

And yet the Earth continues to warm.

Thank you,

S.

And yet the Earth continues to warm.

Thank you,

S.

Moe, you should check your source before claiming "scientific" authority.
The data you posted is known to be biased by leaving out the pole regions and not calculating effects of "El Nino".

From The Royal Meteorological Society
"Abstract

Incomplete global coverage is a potential source of bias in global temperature reconstructions if the unsampled regions are not uniformly distributed over the planet's surface. The widely used Hadley Centre–Climatic Reseach Unit Version 4 (HadCRUT4) dataset covers on average about 84% of the globe over recent decades, with the unsampled regions being concentrated at the poles and over Africa. Three existing reconstructions with near-global coverage are examined, each suggesting that HadCRUT4 is subject to bias due to its treatment of unobserved regions.

Two alternative approaches for reconstructing global temperatures are explored, one based on an optimal interpolation algorithm and the other a hybrid method incorporating additional information from the satellite temperature record. The methods are validated on the basis of their skill at reconstructing omitted sets of observations. Both methods provide results superior to excluding the unsampled regions, with the hybrid method showing particular skill around the regions where no observations are available.

Temperature trends are compared for the hybrid global temperature reconstruction and the raw HadCRUT4 data. The widely quoted trend since 1997 in the hybrid global reconstruction is two and a half times greater than the corresponding trend in the coverage-biased HadCRUT4 data. Coverage bias causes a cool bias in recent temperatures relative to the late 1990s, which increases from around 1998 to the present. Trends starting in 1997 or 1998 are particularly biased with respect to the global trend. The issue is exacerbated by the strong El Niño event of 1997–1998, which also tends to suppress trends starting during those years."

The NASA Earth temperature data is from actual measurement. If one does a quick search on the internet, "data" can be found to make any point, but the data may already have been proven to be "biased"

Your point of view has a bias.