71
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 10:18 pm
@parados,
Parados, I have no interest in playing your lawyerly game of playing dumb, or perhaps you might be the only one that has not yet heard about the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia colluding to manipulate data. That would be just one example at the very least. I have also posted here in recent posts clear evidence of independent researchers exposing weather monitoring stations that are clearly sub-standard and likely delivering bad data, and it would seem entirely logical that any serious researcher that accepts such data as credible would be engaging in fraudulant science.

Parados, it seems obvious that you are not interested in the truth, as supported by sound and credible data, you are more interested in your political idealogy, so of course you are inclined to turn a blind eye to fraudulant science as long as that so-called science continues to support your pre-conceived conclusions and political idealogy.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Jan, 2010 08:15 am
@okie,
I realize your playing dumb isn't lawyerly at all okie.

Now... about that fraud you are claiming.. Can you provide evidence of fraud?
Or are you jumping to the conclusion that data that was destroyed in a move 25 years ago somehow proves fraud?

As for interest in the truth, you don't seem to know what the truth is at all. You have your own ideas about reality and no one is going to shake that truth. You are going to continue to argue that your ignorance trumps the work of thousands of scientists just because you claim to have the "truth".

Now... if you bothered to answer my simple questions about observations about the movements of animals and the times that ice go out on lakes we could start to look at more than your narrow view. Instead you want to focus on one or two things that may or may not be a problem and proclaim that it proves everything else doesn't work. I can only point out that you are like a fool arguing that cars can't ever work because one car had an accident once.
Adanac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Jan, 2010 11:36 am
More scientists with a mind set, but at least they admit the data doesn't support their views.
Quote:
AUSTRALIAN government climate experts have failed to detect an increase in the intensity of tropical cyclones after analysing 26 years of data since the early 1980s.

Climate scientists have warned that Australia should expect to see more intense cyclones in the future fuelled by rising global temperatures caused by greenhouse gases.

But this latest research from seven Bureau of Meteorology scientists shows that so far there is no conclusive evidence to suggest this is already happening.

Graham Readfern: The green blog

Scientists told The Courier-Mail the findings, which will fuel the debate among skeptics of human-caused climate change, did not mean climate change would not cause an increase in the frequency of powerful cyclones in the future.

Appearing in the prestigious Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, published by the American Geophysical Union, the scientific paper analysed satellite data and images for all the tropical cyclone seasons in Australia from 1981 to 2007.

The research concluded: "In the Australia region, no significant trends in the total numbers of Tropical Cyclones, or in the proportion of the most intense TCs, have been found."

Co-author of the research, Dr John McBride, said: "We still expect more intense cyclones but we are comfortable with the fact that you cannot yet see that in the data."

The research did find a positive trend in the numbers of the most intense cyclones in the Southern Indian Ocean region.

But the authors said while it was "possible" that the trend could show climate change at work, this finding could instead be down to "changes in data quality".

In theory, scientists say ongoing rises in ocean temperatures should see the numbers of intense cyclones increase.

Professor David Karoly, a world-leading climatologist at the University of Melbourne, said the research did not change this expectation.

"It's very very difficult with a 20 or 30-year time scale to separate a climate change signal from natural variation. You would not expect to see a signal until about 2030."

Last week Opposition Leader Tony Abbott criticised the Government's proposed emissions trading scheme, saying it should "not politicise events such as floods or cyclones to try to justify a new tax."

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26581533-3102,00.html
0 Replies
 
Adanac
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Jan, 2010 11:51 am
Anyone see the parallels between "global warming" and "swine flu" ?

Quote:
THE swine flu scare was a "false pandemic" led by drugs companies that stood to make billions from vaccines, a leading health expert said. Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe, claimed major firms organized a "campaign of panic" to put pressure on the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare a pandemic. He believes it is, "one of the greatest medicine scandals of the century", and has called for an inquiry."It's just a normal kind of flu. It does not cause a tenth of deaths caused by the classic seasonal flu," Dr Wodarg said."The great campaign of panic we have seen provided a golden opportunity for representatives from labs who knew they would hit the jackpot in the case of a pandemic being declared."We want to know who made decisions, on the basis of what evidence, and precisely how the influence of the pharmaceutical industry came to bear on the decision-making."In an interview with France's L'Humanite on Sunday, Dr Wodarg also raised concerns about swine flu vaccines.

"The vaccines were developed too quickly. Some ingredients were insufficiently tested," he said.

"But there is worse to come. The vaccine developed by Novartis was produced in a bioreactor from cancerous cells, a technique that had never been used until now.

"This was not necessary. It has also led to a considerable mismanagement of public money."We must make sure people can rely on the analysis and the expertise of national and international public institutions. The latter are now discredited, because millions of people have been vaccinated with products with inherent possible health risks."
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Jan, 2010 11:57 am
@parados,
parados wrote:


Now... if you bothered to answer my simple questions about observations about the movements of animals and the times that ice go out on lakes we could start to look at more than your narrow view. Instead you want to focus on one or two things that may or may not be a problem and proclaim that it proves everything else doesn't work. I can only point out that you are like a fool arguing that cars can't ever work because one car had an accident once.

Anecdotal evidence, Parados. I could also point out that it has been colder than ever in many places in the United States, and elsewhere, with records being broken. Fact is, I saw a temperature at my house that was colder than any I've seen for at least ten years, many degrees colder. Based upon anecdotal evidence, I am even more skeptical of the crap they are publishing about climate. In my opinion, it is no warmer than it was more than 50 years ago. When I was a kid aout 10 years old, I can remember it hitting over 110 degrees in the shade during the summer, but if that happens now, the global warmers are going berserk.

Speaking of cars, you would be among those that simply make adjustments to how much gas you put in your tank, after you found out the pump flowmeter was wrong. Just make an estimate, crank in your correction, and expect everyone to believe it down to the tenth of a gallon.
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Jan, 2010 04:22 pm
Quote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html#
The mini ice age starts here
By David Rose
Last updated at 11:17 AM on 10th January 2010
Comments (737) Add to My Stories The bitter winter afflicting much of the Northern Hemisphere is only the start of a global trend towards cooler weather that is likely to last for 20 or 30 years, say some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists.

Their predictions " based on an analysis of natural cycles in water temperatures in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans " challenge some of the global warming orthodoxy’s most deeply cherished beliefs, such as the claim that the North Pole will be free of ice in
summer by 2013.

According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007 " and even the most committed global warming activists do not dispute this.

The scientists’ predictions also undermine the standard climate computer models, which assert that the warming of the Earth since 1900 has been driven solely by man-made greenhouse gas emissions and will continue as long as carbon dioxide levels rise.

More...£150 to get frozen car back: Recovery firm tows away vehicles abandoned the night before, then charges drivers
Can I be sued for ice on paths outside my garden?

They say that their research shows that much of the warming was caused by oceanic cycles when they were in a ‘warm mode’ as opposed to the present ‘cold mode’.

This challenge to the widespread view that the planet is on the brink of an irreversible catastrophe is all the greater because the scientists could never be described as global warming ‘deniers’ or sceptics.

However, both main British political parties continue to insist that the world is facing imminent disaster without drastic cuts in CO2.

This image of the UK taken from NASA's multi-national Terra satellite on Thursday shows the extent of the freezing weather
...
Last week, as Britain froze, Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband maintained in a parliamentary answer that the science of global warming was ‘settled’.
Among the most prominent of the scientists is Professor Mojib Latif, a leading member of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has been pushing the issue of man-made global warming on to the international political agenda since it was formed 22 years ago.

Prof Latif, who leads a research team at the renowned Leibniz Institute at Germany’s Kiel University, has developed new methods for measuring ocean temperatures 3,000ft beneath the surface, where the cooling and warming cycles start.

He and his colleagues predicted the new cooling trend in a paper published in 2008 and warned of it again at an IPCC conference in Geneva last September.

Last night he told The Mail on Sunday: ‘A significant share of the warming we saw from 1980 to 2000 and at earlier periods in the 20th Century was due to these cycles " perhaps as much as 50 per cent.

'They have now gone into reverse, so winters like this one will become much more likely. Summers will also probably be cooler, and all this may well last two decades or longer.

‘The extreme retreats that we have seen in glaciers and sea ice will come to a halt. For the time being, global warming has paused, and there may well be some cooling.’

As Europe, Asia and North America froze last week, conventional wisdom insisted that this was merely a ‘blip’ of no long-term significance.

Though record lows were experienced as far south as Cuba, where the daily maximum on beaches normally used for winter bathing was just 4.5C, the BBC assured viewers that the big chill was merely short-term ‘weather’ that had nothing to do with ‘climate’, which was still warming.

The work of Prof Latif and the other scientists refutes that view.
On the one hand, it is true that the current freeze is the product of the ‘Arctic oscillation’ " a weather pattern that sees the development of huge ‘blocking’ areas of high pressure in northern latitudes, driving polar winds far to the south.

Meteorologists say that this is at its strongest for at least 60 years.
As a result, the jetstream " the high-altitude wind that circles the globe from west to east and normally pushes a series of wet but mild Atlantic lows across Britain " is currently running not over the English Channel but the Strait of Gibraltar.

A composite photograph released last year to highlight the issue of melting ice and global warming
...
However, according to Prof Latif and his colleagues, this in turn relates to much longer-term shifts " what are known as the Pacific and Atlantic ‘multi-decadal oscillations’ (MDOs).

For Europe, the crucial factor here is the temperature of the water in the middle of the North Atlantic, now several degrees below its average when the world was still warming.

But the effects are not confined to the Northern Hemisphere. Prof Anastasios Tsonis, head of the University of Wisconsin Atmospheric Sciences Group, has recently shown that these MDOs move together in a synchronised way across the globe, abruptly flipping the world’s climate from a ‘warm mode’ to a ‘cold mode’ and back again in 20 to 30-year cycles.

'They amount to massive rearrangements in the dominant patterns of the weather,’ he said yesterday, ‘and their shifts explain all the major changes in world temperatures during the 20th and 21st Centuries.

'We have such a change now and can therefore expect 20 or 30 years of cooler temperatures.’

Prof Tsonis said that the period from 1915 to 1940 saw a strong warm mode, reflected in rising temperatures.
Pictures of the snow in Tiananmen Square in Beijing, China, last week show the city is the coldest it has been since 1970
...
But from 1940 until the late Seventies, the last MDO cold-mode era, the world cooled, despite the fact that carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere continued to rise.

Many of the consequences of the recent warm mode were also observed 90 years ago.

For example, in 1922, the Washington Post reported that Greenland’s glaciers were fast disappearing, while Arctic seals were ‘finding the water too hot’.
It interviewed a Captain Martin Ingebrigsten, who had been sailing the eastern Arctic for 54 years: ‘He says that he first noted warmer conditions in 1918, and since that time it has gotten steadily warmer.

'Where formerly great masses of ice were found, there are now moraines, accumulations of earth and stones. At many points where glaciers formerly extended into the sea they have entirely disappeared.’

As a result, the shoals of fish that used to live in these waters had vanished, while the sea ice beyond the north coast of Spitsbergen in the Arctic Ocean had melted.

Warm Gulf Stream water was still detectable within a few hundred miles of the Pole.

In contrast, Prof Tsonis said, last week 56 per cent of the surface of the United States was covered by snow.

‘That hasn’t happened for several decades,’ he pointed out. ‘It just isn’t true to say this is a blip. We can expect colder winters for quite a while.’

He recalled that towards the end of the last cold mode, the world’s media were preoccupied by fears of freezing.

For example, in 1974, a Time magazine cover story predicted ‘Another Ice Age’, saying: ‘Man may be somewhat responsible " as a result of farming and fuel burning [which is] blocking more and more sunlight from reaching and heating the Earth.’

Prof Tsonis said: ‘Perhaps we will see talk of an ice age again by the early 2030s, just as the MDOs shift once more and temperatures begin to rise.’

Like Prof Latif, Prof Tsonis is not a climate change ‘denier’. There is, he said, a measure of additional ‘background’ warming due to human activity and greenhouse gases that runs across the MDO cycles.

'This isn't just a blip. We can expect colder winters for quite a while'But he added: ‘I do not believe in catastrophe theories. Man-made warming is balanced by the natural cycles, and I do not trust the computer models which state that if CO2 reaches a particular level then temperatures and sea levels will rise by a given amount.

'These models cannot be trusted to predict the weather for a week, yet they are running them to give readings for 100 years.’

Prof Tsonis said that when he published his work in the highly respected journal Geophysical Research Letters, he was deluged with ‘hate emails’.

He added: ‘People were accusing me of wanting to destroy the climate, yet all I’m interested in is the truth.’

He said he also received hate mail from climate change sceptics, accusing him of not going far enough to attack the theory of man-made warming.

The work of Profs Latif, Tsonis and their teams raises a crucial question: If some of the late 20th Century warming was caused not by carbon dioxide but by MDOs, then how much?

Tsonis did not give a figure; Latif suggested it could be anything between ten and 50 per cent.

Other critics of the warming orthodoxy say the role played by MDOs is even greater.

William Gray, emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Colorado State University, said that while he believed there had been some background rise caused by greenhouse gases, the computer models used by advocates of man-made warming had hugely exaggerated their effect.

Dr David Viner stands by his claim that snow will become an 'increasingly rare event'

According to Prof Gray, these distort the way the atmosphere works. ‘Most of the rise in temperature from the Seventies to the Nineties was natural,’ he said. ‘Very little was down to CO2 " in my view, as little as five to ten per cent.’

But last week, die-hard warming advocates were refusing to admit that MDOs were having any impact.

In March 2000, Dr David Viner, then a member of the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, the body now being investigated over the notorious ‘Warmergate’ leaked emails, said that within a few years snowfall would become ‘a very rare and exciting event’ in Britain, and that ‘children just aren’t going to know what snow is’.

Now the head of a British Council programme with an annual £10 million budget that raises awareness of global warming among young people abroad, Dr Viner last week said he still stood by that prediction: ‘We’ve had three weeks of relatively cold weather, and that doesn’t change anything.

'This winter is just a little cooler than average, and I still think that snow will become an increasingly rare event.’

The longer the cold spell lasts, the harder it may be to persuade the public of that assertion.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html##ixzz0cRG7B39e

For more on Global Warming:

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=32


0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Jan, 2010 06:57 pm
@okie,
Records of ice out on lakes and bodies of water is hardly anecdotal evidence. It is evidence that is observed and not just by those that keep the records.

160 years of records at Lake Monona
160 years of records at Lake Mendota
Norway Lake

Database of world lakes
A quick search of Russia shows the first lake listed going from 117-157 days of ice in the 1870s to 78-134 in the 1990s.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Jan, 2010 11:24 am
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb
As of December 20, 2007, more than 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries have voiced significant objections to major aspects of the alleged UN IPCC "consensus" on man-made global warming.

Quote:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport#report
350

UK Astronomer Dr. David Whitehouse, who authored the 2004 book The Sun: A Biography, detailed the sun's significant influence on the climate. "Something is happening to our sun. It has to do with sunspots, or rather the activity cycle their coming and going signifies. After a period of exceptionally high activity in the 20th century, our sun has suddenly gone exceptionally quiet. Months have passed with no spots visible on its disc. We are at the end of one cycle of activity and astronomers are waiting for the sunspots to return and mark the start of the next, the so-called cycle 24. They have been waiting for a while now with no sign it's on its way any time soon," Whitehouse wrote on December 5, 2007 in the UK Independent. "Throughout the 20th century, solar cycles had been increasing in strength. Almost everyone agrees that throughout most of the last century the solar influence was significant. Studies show that by the end of the 20th century the sun's activity may have been at its highest for more than 8,000 years. Other solar parameters have been changing as well, such as the magnetic field the sun sheds, which has almost doubled in the past century," Whitehouse explained. "Since [1998] average temperatures have held at a high, though steady, level. Many computer climate projections suggest that the global temperatures will start to rise again in a few years. But those projections do not take into account the change in the sun's behaviour. The tardiness of cycle 24 indicates that we might be entering a period of low solar activity that may counteract man-made greenhouse temperature increases. Some members of the Russian Academy of Sciences say we may be at the start of a period like that seen between 1790 and 1820, a minor decline in solar activity called the Dalton Minimum. They estimate that the sun's reduced activity may cause a global temperature drop of 1.5C by 2020. This is larger than most sensible predictions of man-made global warming over this period," he added. (LINK)

0 Replies
 
Adanac
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Jan, 2010 12:59 pm
United Nations' blunder on glaciers exposed
Quote:
THE peak UN body on climate change has been dealt another humiliating blow to its credibility after it was revealed a central claim of one of its benchmark reports - that most of the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 because of global warming - was based on a "speculative" claim by an obscure Indian scientist.

The 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming, appears to have simply adopted the untested opinions of the Indian glaciologist from a magazine article published in 1999.

The IPCC report claimed that the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish inside 30 years.

But the scientists behind the warning have now admitted it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's report.

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.
Mr Hasnain, who was then the chairman of the International Commission on Snow and Ice's working group on Himalayan glaciology, has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research.
The revelation represents another embarrassing blow to the credibility of the IPCC, less than two months after the emergence of leaked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, which raised questions about the legitimacy of data published by the IPCC about global warming.
One email written by a scientist referred to ways of ensuring information that doubted the veracity of man-made climate change science did not appear in IPCC reports.
Several emails also revealed that some scientists at East Anglia tried to bully colleagues who challenged the theory of man-made climate change.
Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on Himalayan glaciers in the 2007 IPCC report, said on the weekend he was considering recommending that the claim about glaciers be dropped.
"If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, then I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments," Professor Lal said.
When published, the IPCC report gave its source as the WWF study but went further, suggesting the melting of the glaciers was "very likely". The IPCC defines "very likely" as having a probability of greater than 90 per cent.
Some scientists have questioned how the IPCC could have allowed such a mistake into print. Professor Lal admits he knows little about glaciers.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Jan, 2010 08:19 pm
@Adanac,
Quote:
But the scientists behind the warning have now admitted it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's report.

So now the U.N. uses Popular Science articles for their scientific analysis and planning? I thought the U.N. had gone bonkers already, and this certainly removes all doubt of that for sure.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2010 12:40 pm
@okie,
Meanwhile okie, ican, and others ignore the facts that stare them in the face to try to point minor errors.

So.. Okie.. please explain why the ice on lakes all over the world is going out earlier than any time in recorded history? I am anxious to hear your explanation rather than your silly excuses that "scientists are lying".
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2010 01:11 pm
@parados,
Do you have any data to support this remarkable assertion about "lakes all over the world"?
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2010 01:41 pm
@georgeob1,
Good question, George.

By the way, it seems I have seen reports that ice cover in the Arctic grew in 2009, which is contrary to predictions. And that is provided the following source can even be believed that it is that close to the previous year, but even the following source shows a slight increase over the previous year. After all, reports of fraud are not uncommon, and they probably would like to have shown a decrease.

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20100105_Figure2.png
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2010 01:59 pm
@georgeob1,
Presented already with a link.

Do you have anything to contribute?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2010 02:09 pm
@ican711nm,
ican, You're good a cut and paste, but lack the common sense or knowledge to know what you are posting. Showing temperature changes since the mid-eighteen hundreds to now means nothing, because this earth is 4.5 billions years old. Try to grasp that in your brain - if that's possible.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2010 02:22 pm
@okie,
Your chart doesn't show much other than 2009-2010 is well within 2 deviations of 2007-2008 and 2006-2007


The chart says nothing about the "previous year" like you claim.


I guess we should ignore everything you say from now on since you got data wrong, shouldn't we okie? Obviously you are a liar and we should not believe anything you say because you misrepresented data. Isn't that the standard you want us to use?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2010 02:24 pm
@parados,
You'd better watch out, parados; okie puts people on Ignore when he's challenged too often, and he's unable to provide an opinion based on facts, evidence, or history.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2010 03:03 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Even funnier is following okie's link it shows that Dec 2009 was the 3rd or 4th lowest ice cover since 1978. Hardly an argument for an "increase" in the amount of ice. But, one can hardly expect okie to tell the truth when he can spin around three times, touch his nose, pull his ear and proclaim loudly that he knows more than anyone that studies climate.

Without seeing the data, the chart makes it hard to tell whether Dec 2009 had less ice than Dec 2005.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jan, 2010 09:54 pm
Does anyone believe this, while they are freezing their you know whats off around the globe? House of Hansen, the haters of capitalism, says December, 2009 ranked 4th warmest of last 130!!! Is anyone taking these people seriously anymore?

http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Warming_Look.html#GISTEMP

http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/GISSglobal.png
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 10:08 am
@okie,
Quote:
Does anyone believe this, while they are freezing their you know whats off around the globe? House of Hansen, the haters of capitalism, says December, 2009 ranked 4th warmest of last 130!!! Is anyone taking these people seriously anymore?

It is only winter in the northern hemisphere okie.

http://www.weatherzone.com.au/news/scorcher-takes-toll-on-grape-vines/13633
Quote:
Scorcher takes toll on grape vines
Wednesday January 20, 2010 - 14:37 EDT

Grapes vines in the Margaret River region have been destroyed after being burnt during record high temperatures on the weekend.

AHA Viticulture says some growers could lose up to 10 per cent of their vines due to Sunday's heatwave.

Temperatures in the region reached 39.3 degrees (celsius), a record for January.


Do you really expect us to take you seriously when you reference only your local weather when talking about global temperatures?
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 09/20/2024 at 06:15:15