Spot on! If you look at the weather maps,parts of Australia have the highest rainfalls on record while other parts (most) have the lowest on record. And these developments are not particular to Australia.

The link between Mind and Social / Environmental-Issues.

The fast-paced, consumerist lifestyle of Industrial Society is causing exponential rise in psychological problems besides destroying the environment. All issues are interlinked. Our Minds cannot be peaceful when attention-spans are down to nanoseconds, microseconds and milliseconds. Our Minds cannot be peaceful if we destroy Nature.

Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment.

Subject : In a fast society slow emotions become extinct.
Subject : A thinking mind cannot feel.
Subject : Scientific/ Industrial/ Financial thinking destroys the planet.
Subject : Environment can never be saved as long as cities exist.

Emotion is what we experience during gaps in our thinking.

If there are no gaps there is no emotion.

Today people are thinking all the time and are mistaking thought (words/ language) for emotion.

When society switches-over from physical work (agriculture) to mental work (scientific/ industrial/ financial/ fast visuals/ fast words ) the speed of thinking keeps on accelerating and the gaps between thinking go on decreasing.

There comes a time when there are almost no gaps.

People become incapable of experiencing/ tolerating gaps.

Emotion ends.

Man becomes machine.

A society that speeds up mentally experiences every mental slowing-down as Depression / Anxiety.

A ( travelling )society that speeds up physically experiences every physical slowing-down as Depression / Anxiety.

A society that entertains itself daily experiences every non-entertaining moment as Depression / Anxiety.

FAST VISUALS /WORDS MAKE SLOW EMOTIONS EXTINCT.

SCIENTIFIC /INDUSTRIAL /FINANCIAL THINKING DESTROYS EMOTIONAL CIRCUITS.

A FAST (LARGE) SOCIETY CANNOT FEEL PAIN / REMORSE / EMPATHY.

A FAST (LARGE) SOCIETY WILL ALWAYS BE CRUEL TO ANIMALS/ TREES/ AIR/ WATER/ LAND AND TO ITSELF.

To read the complete article please follow either of these links :

PlanetSave

EarthNewsWire

sushil_yadav

Arctic temperatures of the 20th century showed a warming phase to the 1940’s, a cooling phase to the 1970’s and renewed warming to 2003. A recent experiment at the Danish National Space Centre may explain why.

http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Arctic.htm

The temperatures trends in the Arctic reflect the warming and cooling periods seen in the global surface temperature record. These periods mirror shifting phases of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), a natural climate phenomenon that has been traced back in trees and coral for more than 400 years. The divergent climate states were first discerned in arctic fisheries in 1996 but have since been discovered in changing abundances of anchovies and sardines in Monterey Bay (having given rise to John Steinbeck's novel Cannery Row) and in Australian multi-decadal rainfall trends (long periods of persistent droughts or long periods of persistent floods).

http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/

The divergent states are the warm and cool phases of the PDO. A cool phase brings persistent La Nina conditions over a few decades (more summer rainfall in Australia) and reduced global temperatures (fewer El Ninos). The alternating phases last for 20 to 30 years. The last warm phase of the PDO (1975 to 1998) produced between 1976 and 1977 a 0.50C rise in the temperature of the lower atmosphere.

(http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2004/08/09/non-linear-climate-change/ - see Figure 2 especially).

Australia has good flood records going back more than 100 years. It has been known for some time that Australia experiences decades long periods of extended drought and, alternatively, decades long periods of flooding. These periods coincide with the temperature record of the last century. The period of rising temperature to the mid 1940’s saw drought, the period to 1975 was a wet period and then dry again to – well – now.

Recent flood analysis suggests that the phenomenon is a result of long term modulation of both the frequency and intensity La Nina and El Nino events in the El Nino Southern Oscillation. There is a direct relationship between increasing frequency and intensity of El Nino and higher global temperatures.

The indication from increasing negativity of the PDO index since 1998 is that the PDO has shifted phase – this is supported by other observations. The lack of an increase in global temperature since 1998 suggests that the effect of a ‘cool phase’ of the PDO is being felt. The effect will last for decades and will moderate global warming – although I am still waiting for the rain to fall.

This is not to suggest that carbon dioxide does not impose a rising temperature trend on a background of naturally variable climate. Simply, that GHG alone are insufficient to account for climate variation over the last century.

The powerful climate signal of the PDO is not included in the climate models because, quite simply, there is no agreed explanation for the observed phenomenon. Although this seems a trifle theoretical when confronted with real world observations – it was assumed that the background variations were chaotic and unpredictable when in fact they seem to be both cyclical and predictable.

An explanation for the phenomenon might be found in a physical link between cosmic radiation and cloud formation suggested in work done at the Danish National Space Centre and published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society this month (October 2006). The ‘Sky’ (Danish for clouds) experiment appears to show that ionized radiation promotes sulphate nucleation in an atmospheric chamber and, consequently, can enhance cloud formation. More radiation means more low level clouds and a cooler planet and the amount of cosmic radiation reaching the atmosphere is directly linked to solar activity. More solar activity increases magnetic shielding of the earth reducing the amount of radiation hitting the atmosphere and reducing cloud formation.

The connection between solar magnetism and climate remains to be demonstrated conclusively. However, the trends of sunspots and the apparent correlation with past climate change over 400 years and in solar magnetic changes with the climate of the last century, are certainly intriguing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunspots
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/GEOMAG/aastar.shtml

I do not endorse continually increasing the concentrations of GHG in the atmosphere. There are serious problems and risks with this course of action even with a significant moderation of GHG global warming.

Robert,
it seems to me that you highlight the natural processes of climate change at the expense of the social and economic ones. My position is that it is both.

The debate does seem to have moved to what are we going to do about it given the negative consequences of global warming. The issues centre around whether governments need to tackle the problem head-on by cutting emissions; the economic costs of not doing so; and whether investment in low-carbon technologies could stimulate the economy.

The argument is that climate change poses a threat to the world economy and it will be cheaper to address the problem than to deal with the consequences.

Sushil,
My understanding is that the global warming argument seemed a straight fight between the scientific case to act and the economic case not to. Now, it looks as if the economists are urging action.

If you look at sea level rises alone and the impact that will have on global economies where cities are becoming inundated by flooding ... this will cause the displacement of ... hundreds of millions of people.