Year of global cooling panics global warming prophets
What do scientists and the facts say about global warming?
David Deming is a geophysicist, an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis, and associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma. He says: "Global warming has long since passed from scientific hypothesis to the realm of pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo. In 2005, a Canadian Greenpeace representative explained 'global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter." In other words, all weather variations are evidence for global warming.' I can't make this stuff up."
As he explains the scientific facts in the article: "Since the mid-19th century, the mean global temperature has increased by 0.7 degrees Celsius. This slight warming is not unusual, and lies well within the range of natural variation. Carbon dioxide continues to build in the atmosphere, but the mean planetary temperature hasn't increased significantly for nearly nine years.
Antarctica is getting colder. Neither the intensity nor the frequency of hurricanes has increased. The 2007 season was the third-quietest since 1966. In 2006 not a single hurricane made landfall in the U.S." As I remember after hurricane Katrina, we were supposed to destroyed by increased activity and intensity of hurricanes. As of 2008 the opposite has happened.
In April, a killing freeze destroyed 95 percent of South Carolina's peach crop, and 90 percent of North Carolina's apple harvest. At Charlotte, N.C., a record low temperature of 21 degrees Fahrenheit on April 8 was the coldest ever recorded for April, breaking a record set in 1923. On June 8, Denver recorded a new low of 31 degrees Fahrenheit.
Denver's temperature records extend back to 1872. Last January, $1.42 billion worth of California produce was lost to a devastating five-day freeze. In 2008 we had news reports and pictures on TV about massive snowfall in China shutting down whole sections of the country.
"In Buenos Aires (Argentina), snow fell for the first time since the year 1918. Dozens of homeless people died from exposure. In Peru, 200 people died from the cold...(in 2007) Johannesburg, South Africa, had the first significant snowfall in 26 years. Australia...New Zealand...weather turned so cold..."
Extract December 19, 2007 Washington Times
Thirty Years of Warmer Temperatures Go Poof
National Post 10/21/2008(It's no wonder)...the number of climate change skeptics is growing rapidly. Because a funny thing is happening to global temperatures -- they're going down, not up...periods of solar inactivity known as "solar minimums" magnify cold spells on his continent. So, given that August was the first month since 1913 in which no sunspot activity was recorded -- none -- and during which solar winds were at a 50-year low, he was not surprised that Brazilians were suffering (for them) a brutal cold snap. "This is no coincidence," he (Dr. Hackbart) said as he scoffed at the notion that manmade carbon emissions had more impact than the sun and oceans on global climate.
Also in September, American Craig Loehle, a scientist who conducts computer modeling on global climate change, confirmed his earlier findings that the so-called Medieval Warm Period (MWP) of about 1,000 years ago did in fact exist and was even warmer than 20th-century temperatures. Prior to the past decade of climate hysteria and Kyoto hype, the MWP was a given in the scientific community. Several hundred studies of tree rings, lake and ocean floor sediment, ice cores and early written records of weather -- even harvest totals and censuses --confirmed that the period from 800 AD to 1300 AD was unusually warm, particularly in Northern Europe...
Don Easterbrook, a geologist at Western Washington University, says, "It's practically a slam dunk that we are in for about 30 years of global cooling," as the sun enters a particularly inactive phase. His examination of warming and cooling trends over the past four centuries shows an "almost exact correlation" between climate fluctuations and solar energy received on Earth, while showing almost "no correlation at all with CO2."
An analytical chemist who works in spectroscopy and atmospheric sensing, Michael J. Myers of Hilton Head, S. C., declared, "Man-made global warming is junk science," explaining that worldwide manmade CO2 emission each year "equals about 0.0168% of the atmosphere's CO2 concentration ... This results in a 0.00064% increase in the absorption of the sun's radiation. This is an insignificantly small number." Other international scientists have called the manmade warming theory a "hoax," a "fraud" and simply "not credible."
While not stooping to such name-calling, weather-satellite scientists David Douglass of the University of Rochester and John Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville nonetheless dealt the True Believers a devastating blow last month.
For nearly 30 years, Professor Christy has been in charge of NASA's eight weather satellites that take more than 300,000 temperature readings daily around the globe. In a paper co-written with Dr. Douglass, he concludes that while manmade emissions may be having a slight impact, "variations in global temperatures since 1978 ... cannot be attributed to carbon dioxide."
...It may be that more global warming doubters are surfacing because there just isn't any global warming.
Global cooling theories put scientists on guard
May 9, 2008 Reuters (extract)
A new study suggesting a possible lull in manmade global warming has raised fears of a reduced urgency to battle climate change. The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a group of hundreds of scientists, last year said global warming was "unequivocal" and that manmade greenhouse gas emissions were "very likely" part of the problem. And while the study published in the journal Nature last week did not dispute manmade global warming, it did predict a cooling from recent average temperatures through 2015, as a result of a natural and temporary shift in ocean currents...
That was not in any study and that fact has sent them on the defensive. That should not have happened. All the "climate models" claimed a linear progression, but the Medieval Warming Period and now this undermines their claims. Now they claim,
"Let's say there wasn't much of a warming for the next 10 years, how will the public and politicians play this out?" said Bob Watson, former IPCC head and current chief scientific adviser to Britain's environment ministry. He said it was important to explain that fluctuations were an expected part of a general, manmade warming trend...
Now it won't warm up for the next seven years? Excuse me, which crystal ball did they peer into to get seven years? Wasn't there a story in the Bible about seven years? To quote again,
The original Nature article's lead author, Leibniz Institute's Noel Keenlyside, acknowledged on Friday that recent data showed much more warming that he had forecast through 2007, but stood by a "stabilization" of temperatures from 2005-2015. He blamed shifts in ocean currents and temperatures, thought also to be the cause of the plateau in temperatures since 1998...
Now it's oceans? Like religious fundamentalists reading past failed prophecies into the daily news, the secular eco-cultists employ the same tactics when their computer model prophecies fail. The fact is this is political and the science is proving it so.
» General Subjects
» Archive 1 » Archive 2 » Archive 3 » Archive 4
» Archive 5 » Archive 6 » Archive 7
» Archive 8 » Archive 9