Monday, March 24, 2008
A New Source of Global Warming Debunking Facts
There are plenty of reasons to read this article from Australia, not only for the admission from the IPCC that the Earth has been cooling this past decade, but also for the news, little reported, of the data from a 2002 satellite called Aqua, which shows that the clouds do not react as the climate modelers predict. But there's more.
Money quotes:
Childish nonsense indeed.
Money quotes:
"Is the Earth still warming?"
"No, actually, there has been cooling, if you take 1998 as your point of reference. If you take 2002 as your point of reference, then temperatures have plateaued. This is certainly not what you'd expect if carbon dioxide is driving temperature because carbon dioxide levels have been increasing but temperatures have actually been coming down over the last 10 years."
"Is this a matter of any controversy?"
"Actually, no. The head of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has actually acknowledged it. He talks about the apparent plateau in temperatures so far this century. So he recognises that in this century, over the past eight years, temperatures have plateaued ... This is not what you'd expect, as I said, because if carbon dioxide is driving temperature then you'd expect that, given carbon dioxide levels have been continuing to increase, temperatures should be going up ... So (it's) very unexpected, not something that's being discussed. It should be being discussed, though, because it's very significant."
Just what I was thinking.
And then there is this coup de grace prediction.
...What this great data from the NASA Aqua satellite ... (is) actually showing is just the opposite, that with a little bit of warming, weather processes are compensating, so they're actually limiting the greenhouse effect and you're getting a negative rather than a positive feedback."
"The climate is actually, in one way anyway, more robust than was assumed in the climate models?"
"That's right ... These findings actually aren't being disputed by the meteorological community. They're having trouble digesting the findings, they're acknowledging the findings, they're acknowledging that the data from NASA's Aqua satellite is not how the models predict, and I think they're about to recognise that the models really do need to be overhauled and that when they are overhauled they will probably show greatly reduced future warming projected as a consequence of carbon dioxide."
A great many founts of authority, from the Royal Society to the UN, most heads of government along with countless captains of industry, learned professors, commentators and journalists will be profoundly embarrassed. Let us hope it is a prolonged and chastening experience.
With catastrophe off the agenda, for most people the fog of millennial gloom will lift, at least until attention turns to the prospect of the next ice age. Among the better educated, the sceptical cast of mind that is the basis of empiricism will once again be back in fashion. The delusion that by recycling and catching public transport we can help save the planet will quickly come to be seen for the childish nonsense it was all along.
Childish nonsense indeed.
Labels: Global Warming Hoax
# posted by Roger Fraley @ 6:33 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Um, No. The IPCC did NOT admit any such thing. And let's be very careful. First Jennifer Marohasy stated that the head of IPCC acknowledged a plateau. Whether he did or didn't, I can find no reference to it. Second, there is no such admission from the IPCC that the globe is cooling.
Next, and this goes back to my thesis from before that you regularly engage in a comedy routine, is the quote from her stating that there has been cooling. The hottest global temperature EVER was in 1998. That means if you take that as the reference, every other temperature is COOLER! That's why no one, other than people who are joking or trying to pull the wool over people's eyes, take 1998, or any other SINGLE YEAR, as a reference.
So, your next task is to graph data from any reputable ( I know a contentious word in and of itself) group who has been collecting global temperature readings, and produce a graph that shows a downward trend. I know that most of the data sets that have been produced don't fit your needs, so I'll try to be open minded when you come up with something.
Finally, I'm slowly realizing that I am a regular in your stand-up audience. I keep volunteering so that you can continue to deliver your global cooling punchline. That would be the definition of insane because I think this time I can get you to see. I just still can't believe that you're still arguing against the evidence that for the last 10, 20, 50, or 100 years the trend is ever warmer temperatures.
Next, and this goes back to my thesis from before that you regularly engage in a comedy routine, is the quote from her stating that there has been cooling. The hottest global temperature EVER was in 1998. That means if you take that as the reference, every other temperature is COOLER! That's why no one, other than people who are joking or trying to pull the wool over people's eyes, take 1998, or any other SINGLE YEAR, as a reference.
So, your next task is to graph data from any reputable ( I know a contentious word in and of itself) group who has been collecting global temperature readings, and produce a graph that shows a downward trend. I know that most of the data sets that have been produced don't fit your needs, so I'll try to be open minded when you come up with something.
Finally, I'm slowly realizing that I am a regular in your stand-up audience. I keep volunteering so that you can continue to deliver your global cooling punchline. That would be the definition of insane because I think this time I can get you to see. I just still can't believe that you're still arguing against the evidence that for the last 10, 20, 50, or 100 years the trend is ever warmer temperatures.
Better comments, Andy, but still twinged withad hominem beginning to end.
The flux density is up, the sun has sunspots. Things seem normal. That's good.
Can we agree, before I answer your requests, on a measure, so we're always talking about the same thing? I like RSS but I'll go with anything you choose. Let me know.
The flux density is up, the sun has sunspots. Things seem normal. That's good.
Can we agree, before I answer your requests, on a measure, so we're always talking about the same thing? I like RSS but I'll go with anything you choose. Let me know.
Oh yes, that's right. Ad hominem not allowed in comments, but your posts seem to be exempt from that rule ;-)
Use RSS or anything else that you like, just don't be dishonest about it. In other words don't do what this person did. It is what Marohasy did and it's cherry picking at its worst, taking a 10 year time series and pick the warmest year on record as your starting point. Yep, there's a plateau. The more you zoom into the temp. graph, the more you can establish your own "trends".
Everyone is all excited because the last 15 months or so have shown cooler temperatures. Imagine the uproar in the 80's & early 90's when there were not one but two "cool-downs" that lasted a couple years - or in the 60's that lasted about 7 years - or in the 40's that lasted about 9 years. We would have to have one of those types of cooling periods for it to reverse the current trend. Time frames of less than 15 years are useless to look at in terms of trends.
A couple more points.
Again, I should have stated that 1998 was the warmest temperature on record, not EVER.
Apparently the head of the IPCC did use the word "plateau". It could mean a "rest", or it could mean a cooling period. That's a long way from saying that temperatures have been coming down for the last 10 years, especially since many of them have been record warm years.
Use RSS or anything else that you like, just don't be dishonest about it. In other words don't do what this person did. It is what Marohasy did and it's cherry picking at its worst, taking a 10 year time series and pick the warmest year on record as your starting point. Yep, there's a plateau. The more you zoom into the temp. graph, the more you can establish your own "trends".
Everyone is all excited because the last 15 months or so have shown cooler temperatures. Imagine the uproar in the 80's & early 90's when there were not one but two "cool-downs" that lasted a couple years - or in the 60's that lasted about 7 years - or in the 40's that lasted about 9 years. We would have to have one of those types of cooling periods for it to reverse the current trend. Time frames of less than 15 years are useless to look at in terms of trends.
A couple more points.
Again, I should have stated that 1998 was the warmest temperature on record, not EVER.
Apparently the head of the IPCC did use the word "plateau". It could mean a "rest", or it could mean a cooling period. That's a long way from saying that temperatures have been coming down for the last 10 years, especially since many of them have been record warm years.
OK, RSS it is. I think it's reliable, but it only goes back to when the satellites were launched beginning around 1979. I'll do a posting on why the ground weather stations around the globe are often unreliable.
Post a Comment
<< Home
