Michael Klare has penned a misanthropic fear mongering piece at tomdispatch.com. We are told of apocalyptic fantasies because the earth is heating exponentially. Proof please? No reference. After all, it is common knowledge. Who could deny it?
CO2 may be increasing exponentially but temperatures are not. Some long time records indicate recent cooling.
People in Alaska or Antarctica may wish to dispute it.
Kinda takes the GLOBAL outta global warming doesn't it?
Mr Klare mentions the ominously capitalized Great Drought of 2012 but does not admit the far worse Dust Bowl years of the 1930s into evidence. Is that fair?
Mr Klare warns us to expect that drought induced rising food prices will lead to social conflict. This he attributes to global warming inducing more droughts all over the world. And yet, when statistics on droughts are gathered and examined it is learned that droughts around the world are becoming less frequent and severe. It is easy to be misled by your observations, feelings and beliefs when you are making that argument from the midst of the current drought. Scientists have always seemed a bit confused on what causes droughts.
Mr Klare seems unaware that temperatures have cooled over the last 15 years when he asks: "And what can we expect in the future, as the warming gains momentum?"
Mr Klare claims that heatwaves are becoming more frequent due to global warming and cites several references in support of that assertion. Either he is ignorant that there are contravening studies or prefers to ignore the fact. Is Mr Klare unaware?
Contrary to what Mr Klare believes wildfires are not becoming more frequent. 2012 has been particularly quiet.
Rising sea levels are another scary scenario for Mr Klare. He needn't worry.
Mr Klare is wrong about all of his weather concerns: "When we think about climate change (if we think about it at all), we
envision rising temperatures, prolonged droughts, freakish storms,
hellish wildfires, and rising sea levels"
As CO2 concentration rises these instances of severe weather are on the decrease.
Can we stop burning food to power our vehicles now?
That might help to curtail the food riots that Mr Klare is expecting to increase in number as global warming proceeds unabated. Food riots may increase but they will have nothing to do with rising temperatures which aren't. With CO2 on an exponential increase we won't be running out of food.
CO2 is GREEN and we need more of it.
About Me
- JLS
- Copyright Notice © JLS and LensFocus, 2008-present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to JLS and LensFocus with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
Friday, August 24, 2012
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Summer in July is Often Hot
James 'adjust the data' Hansen is making a mockery of Climate Science with his recent PNAS paper and NOAA continues the farce with its claim that July 2012 was hotter than July 1936 in the US. Some predicted it and were ready for it.
This cartoon deserves the widest circulation possible. People who can't see their own folly often get mocked.
Hansen provides a field day for skeptics like cartoonist Josh who has a finely tuned sense of humour and an artistic flair.
Hansen's claims have been addressed in many places around the Net.
See here at Watts Up With That. And here. And here.
See Steven Hayward's column at Powerline here.
Read about Climate Distortion from warmist Cliff Mass here.
Mike Smith compares Hansen's predictions with reality here.
Dr Roy Spencer weighs in here
Dr John Christy of the University of Alabama, Huntsville has this to say.
Dr. Pat Michaels responds here.
It seems that Dr Hansen has mistitled his article in the Washington Post. It should read 'Climate Change Data Manipulation is here-- and worse than we thought'
Hansen provides a field day for skeptics like cartoonist Josh who has a finely tuned sense of humour and an artistic flair.
Hansen's claims have been addressed in many places around the Net.
See here at Watts Up With That. And here. And here.
See Steven Hayward's column at Powerline here.
Read about Climate Distortion from warmist Cliff Mass here.
Mike Smith compares Hansen's predictions with reality here.
Dr Roy Spencer weighs in here
Dr John Christy of the University of Alabama, Huntsville has this to say.
Dr. Pat Michaels responds here.
It seems that Dr Hansen has mistitled his article in the Washington Post. It should read 'Climate Change Data Manipulation is here-- and worse than we thought'
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Harry Kari
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and
hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless
series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. ~ H.L. Mencken
So Harry Reid wants to keep us alarmed about the early cherry blossoms (Sakura in Japan) in Washington this spring. Harry speaks without scrutiny but not without criticism.
It is always fun to witness a pompous politician publicly skewer himself with a display of ignorance and logic befit for a buffoon. Senator Harry Reid graciously, although unintentionally, provided such comic relief with his pronouncement that Nature has shot down those who doubt man-made global warming by insinuating that early blooming cherry blossoms herald the arrival of CAGW in Washington in the spring of 2012. By that logic then the late blooming SAKURA in Japan in spring 2012 must announce anthropogenic global cooling in that country.
In Washington D.C they have bloomed early in March 2012. The Huffington Post has blamed this on global warming.
In Japan, due to a particularly cold winter their famed cherry blossoms will be late bloomers this spring(2012). Is this the climate change canary for global cooling? HuffPo logic would seem to lead to this conclusion.
So, let me get this straight. In different parts of the world in the same year in the same month cherry blossoming is a canary in the coal mine for both global warming and global cooling. And both conditions are supposed be caused by too much human induced CO2 in the atmosphere and nothing else? CO2 is truly a magical gas.
Can we conclude that there was an overabundance of CO2 in Washington and a dearth in Japan? Who arranged for that? Has anyone got the numbers?
CO2 can do to the climate anything, anywhere, anytime. The perfect explanatory variable: CO2 did it!
Or maybe this is a better explanation.
Real-Science.com has found that the cherry trees in Washington bloomed in October back in 1941. Here is the 2011 bloom watch. They were early in 1946 and 1945 as well. (You will have to block the pop-up on Stephen Goddard's co-opted site to see these last 3 links.) Paul Homewood points out the ebb and flow of flora in response to climate change of the recent past. Early or late cherry blossoming is nothing new. Its alarming nature is a figment in the imagination of Harry Reid.
In 2012 they were in full bloom by Mar 20. In 1990 and 2000 Sakura occurred earlier than that.
It seems Washingtonians are used to weird cherry blossom behavior.
Harry's staff have failed to prevent their boss from committing verbal harikari on the CAGW issue.Would Harry like to recant?
So Harry Reid wants to keep us alarmed about the early cherry blossoms (Sakura in Japan) in Washington this spring. Harry speaks without scrutiny but not without criticism.
It is always fun to witness a pompous politician publicly skewer himself with a display of ignorance and logic befit for a buffoon. Senator Harry Reid graciously, although unintentionally, provided such comic relief with his pronouncement that Nature has shot down those who doubt man-made global warming by insinuating that early blooming cherry blossoms herald the arrival of CAGW in Washington in the spring of 2012. By that logic then the late blooming SAKURA in Japan in spring 2012 must announce anthropogenic global cooling in that country.
In Washington D.C they have bloomed early in March 2012. The Huffington Post has blamed this on global warming.
In Japan, due to a particularly cold winter their famed cherry blossoms will be late bloomers this spring(2012). Is this the climate change canary for global cooling? HuffPo logic would seem to lead to this conclusion.
So, let me get this straight. In different parts of the world in the same year in the same month cherry blossoming is a canary in the coal mine for both global warming and global cooling. And both conditions are supposed be caused by too much human induced CO2 in the atmosphere and nothing else? CO2 is truly a magical gas.
Can we conclude that there was an overabundance of CO2 in Washington and a dearth in Japan? Who arranged for that? Has anyone got the numbers?
CO2 can do to the climate anything, anywhere, anytime. The perfect explanatory variable: CO2 did it!
Or maybe this is a better explanation.
Real-Science.com has found that the cherry trees in Washington bloomed in October back in 1941. Here is the 2011 bloom watch. They were early in 1946 and 1945 as well. (You will have to block the pop-up on Stephen Goddard's co-opted site to see these last 3 links.) Paul Homewood points out the ebb and flow of flora in response to climate change of the recent past. Early or late cherry blossoming is nothing new. Its alarming nature is a figment in the imagination of Harry Reid.
In 2012 they were in full bloom by Mar 20. In 1990 and 2000 Sakura occurred earlier than that.
It seems Washingtonians are used to weird cherry blossom behavior.
Harry's staff have failed to prevent their boss from committing verbal harikari on the CAGW issue.Would Harry like to recant?
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Global Warming in Greenland
Jeff Masters over at the Weather Underground noticed that in July 2012 the temperature at the Summit Camp in Greenland blasted above freezing for 5 days in a row. This was some kind of record. The Summit is the coldest place in Greenland and averages -10C in the summer. Warmists like to point out anomalies that support their view that the Earth is warming and 5 days of above zero temperatures at the Summit Camp in Greenland in 2012 when there was a heatwave and drought ongoing in the US apparently is cause for alarm. To their mind's eye it supports the view that the Greenland Ice Sheet is melting due to man made global warming.
The Big House at the Summit Camp was built on stilts so that it could be brought to grade. I wonder how many times the BH has been lowered since its construction. The Ice Sheet adds about a meter of snow each winter. Some WWII planes that went down in Greenland in 1942 were later found in 264 feet of ice. Each summer the periphery of the Greenland ice sheet near sea level melts in the summer sun. Icebergs are often formed as pieces of tidewater glaciers break off at the terminus. In winter the snow accumulates anew atop the ice sheet and pushes the glaciers back into the sea.
Warmists love their hysteria and can't live without it.They manufacture it with tunnel vision that only allows them to see affirming instances of reality. Those events that do not square with their vision are ignored, denied or spun into affirming instances. Reality must conform to their preconceived notion of a warming world.
If unusual warmth in a usually cold place is seen as evidence for a warming world then by that same logic one would suppose that cold in a place where it is usually warm could be interpreted to be evidence of a cooling world. The problem for the warmist is that such events are regular occurrences. Unusual warmth in one place will be offset by colder than normal events somewhere else. Never will you find a time where everyplace on the planet is warming or cooling in unison. In fact, East Antarctica has been cooling for thirty years. Kinda takes the GLOBAL outta of global warming doesn't it? Where's the BEEF?
In 2011, in the driest desert on the planet, the Atacama in Chile, snow dropped from the sky. Evidence of global cooling no doubt. You won't find a warmist blaming heat trapping CO2 in the area for that one. The Sahara received snow in the winter of 2012. That was the first time since 1979. By the logic of the warmist it is more evidence of global cooling. The South Pole on June 24, 2012 set a new record low for that location of -100.8F. Kinda takes the GLOBAL outta of global warming doesn't it? Where's the BEEF?
Warmists were trying to prove something true that cannot be. The whole globe cannot be warming everywhere at once. It doesn't. Look around. Whenever there is a heatwave as in the US in 2012 it is unusually colder elsewhere - UK, Amsterdam, Anchorage, B.C., Washington State, Oregon, Florida, Phoenix. Even winter locations such as Chile, Argentina, N.Z., Australia, Fiji, and South Africa are experiencing a fiercer winter than normal. The cold offsets the heat. Search here.
All facts must be admitted into consciousness in order to formulate a correct theory. That theory must account for all relevant facts.
The theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) assumes the superiority of one factor as the cause of the Earth's weather/climate - carbon dioxide (CO2). And yet the predictions that flow from that theory are not being reflected in reality. Therefore the theory must be wrong.
Since warmists can't prove global warming they switched to climate change as the dependent variable for the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. After all, who could deny that the climate is changing since it always does. Not giving up on their campaign to demonize CO2, a trace gas essential to life on Earth, they claimed that extreme weather events were becoming more frequent and more severe and that CO2 was fueling this trend. Except that humans can count and keep records which can be checked to see if the claim of an increasing trend is true. Most extreme events like severe hurricanes, tornadoes, forest fires, floods, droughts, mudslides, hail and avalanches are trending down. And these downward trends are occurring while the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from soccer Moms driving vans and using plastic bags is on the increase. Disconnect.
So where does this leave warmists? Without a case.
But the damage has been done. 'Green' policies have been pursued by industrialized governments who have been made to feel guilty about their CO2 emissions. Alternative energies have been sought and subsidized as a means to reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere back to what is considered to be an acceptable level. There is even a web site 350.org that is named for the 'safe' target limit. Governments have pursued wind, solar and biofuels as the primary alternatives to fossil fuels. They have launched an attack on the coal industry as the 'worst offender' and forced the closing of coal fired power plants. As a result of these policies governments find their expenses rising because of subsidies, citizens find both their taxes increasing and their energy costs inflating. This is not beneficial to the less wealthy among us. And that is not the end of it. Our food prices skyrocket because of the mandate that 10% of the gas in our cars must be composed of ethanol which is made from corn. So we are paying more for food because we are burning biofuels in our vehicles. This is exacerbated during times of drought. Whose bright idea was it to burn food in our vehicles? That is a crime against humanity. Whose bright idea was it to subsidize sunrays and breezes and mandate they they supply X% of our energy needs by twenty whatever? Think sailboat and nighttime. These alternative sources of energy are unreliable and expensive. Welcome to sweating and shivering. Unless you are a member of the elite who need fossil fuels to carry on their great work. Think North Korea at night. The leaders have light. Everyone else is celebrating Earth Hour throughout the night. I have often thought that Earth Hour was instituted to get us ready for those days ahead.
Not only do warmists see only events that confirm their bias they do not see the benefits of the molecule that they demonize. Trees, plants and crops love CO2 not to mention corals in the sea. Scientists have documented the benefits of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere. They fail to see that CO2 is greening the planet. CO2 is green. In a world of 7 billion people who like to eat, enacting policies that limit plant food is a crime against humanity.
But then 'greens' tend to see humans as evil. There are too many of us that consume too much and we are destroying the Earth. So it is not surprising that population control is on the green agenda. Greens tend to be misanthropes and would not bat an eye if a disease of some sort were to decimate the population. Some, like Prince Philip, even wish for it. Others think eradicating smallpox was a mistake. Could that be why vaccine scares have developed? In the past, finding treatments and cures for the afflictions of humans was seen as a good thing. Anyone who expressed differently would be seen as a monster who wants to commit a crime against humanity. Has something changed?
Greenland is still frozen at the Summit. No golf today.
The Big House at the Summit Camp was built on stilts so that it could be brought to grade. I wonder how many times the BH has been lowered since its construction. The Ice Sheet adds about a meter of snow each winter. Some WWII planes that went down in Greenland in 1942 were later found in 264 feet of ice. Each summer the periphery of the Greenland ice sheet near sea level melts in the summer sun. Icebergs are often formed as pieces of tidewater glaciers break off at the terminus. In winter the snow accumulates anew atop the ice sheet and pushes the glaciers back into the sea.
Warmists love their hysteria and can't live without it.They manufacture it with tunnel vision that only allows them to see affirming instances of reality. Those events that do not square with their vision are ignored, denied or spun into affirming instances. Reality must conform to their preconceived notion of a warming world.
If unusual warmth in a usually cold place is seen as evidence for a warming world then by that same logic one would suppose that cold in a place where it is usually warm could be interpreted to be evidence of a cooling world. The problem for the warmist is that such events are regular occurrences. Unusual warmth in one place will be offset by colder than normal events somewhere else. Never will you find a time where everyplace on the planet is warming or cooling in unison. In fact, East Antarctica has been cooling for thirty years. Kinda takes the GLOBAL outta of global warming doesn't it? Where's the BEEF?
In 2011, in the driest desert on the planet, the Atacama in Chile, snow dropped from the sky. Evidence of global cooling no doubt. You won't find a warmist blaming heat trapping CO2 in the area for that one. The Sahara received snow in the winter of 2012. That was the first time since 1979. By the logic of the warmist it is more evidence of global cooling. The South Pole on June 24, 2012 set a new record low for that location of -100.8F. Kinda takes the GLOBAL outta of global warming doesn't it? Where's the BEEF?
Warmists were trying to prove something true that cannot be. The whole globe cannot be warming everywhere at once. It doesn't. Look around. Whenever there is a heatwave as in the US in 2012 it is unusually colder elsewhere - UK, Amsterdam, Anchorage, B.C., Washington State, Oregon, Florida, Phoenix. Even winter locations such as Chile, Argentina, N.Z., Australia, Fiji, and South Africa are experiencing a fiercer winter than normal. The cold offsets the heat. Search here.
All facts must be admitted into consciousness in order to formulate a correct theory. That theory must account for all relevant facts.
The theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) assumes the superiority of one factor as the cause of the Earth's weather/climate - carbon dioxide (CO2). And yet the predictions that flow from that theory are not being reflected in reality. Therefore the theory must be wrong.
Since warmists can't prove global warming they switched to climate change as the dependent variable for the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. After all, who could deny that the climate is changing since it always does. Not giving up on their campaign to demonize CO2, a trace gas essential to life on Earth, they claimed that extreme weather events were becoming more frequent and more severe and that CO2 was fueling this trend. Except that humans can count and keep records which can be checked to see if the claim of an increasing trend is true. Most extreme events like severe hurricanes, tornadoes, forest fires, floods, droughts, mudslides, hail and avalanches are trending down. And these downward trends are occurring while the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from soccer Moms driving vans and using plastic bags is on the increase. Disconnect.
So where does this leave warmists? Without a case.
But the damage has been done. 'Green' policies have been pursued by industrialized governments who have been made to feel guilty about their CO2 emissions. Alternative energies have been sought and subsidized as a means to reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere back to what is considered to be an acceptable level. There is even a web site 350.org that is named for the 'safe' target limit. Governments have pursued wind, solar and biofuels as the primary alternatives to fossil fuels. They have launched an attack on the coal industry as the 'worst offender' and forced the closing of coal fired power plants. As a result of these policies governments find their expenses rising because of subsidies, citizens find both their taxes increasing and their energy costs inflating. This is not beneficial to the less wealthy among us. And that is not the end of it. Our food prices skyrocket because of the mandate that 10% of the gas in our cars must be composed of ethanol which is made from corn. So we are paying more for food because we are burning biofuels in our vehicles. This is exacerbated during times of drought. Whose bright idea was it to burn food in our vehicles? That is a crime against humanity. Whose bright idea was it to subsidize sunrays and breezes and mandate they they supply X% of our energy needs by twenty whatever? Think sailboat and nighttime. These alternative sources of energy are unreliable and expensive. Welcome to sweating and shivering. Unless you are a member of the elite who need fossil fuels to carry on their great work. Think North Korea at night. The leaders have light. Everyone else is celebrating Earth Hour throughout the night. I have often thought that Earth Hour was instituted to get us ready for those days ahead.
Not only do warmists see only events that confirm their bias they do not see the benefits of the molecule that they demonize. Trees, plants and crops love CO2 not to mention corals in the sea. Scientists have documented the benefits of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere. They fail to see that CO2 is greening the planet. CO2 is green. In a world of 7 billion people who like to eat, enacting policies that limit plant food is a crime against humanity.
But then 'greens' tend to see humans as evil. There are too many of us that consume too much and we are destroying the Earth. So it is not surprising that population control is on the green agenda. Greens tend to be misanthropes and would not bat an eye if a disease of some sort were to decimate the population. Some, like Prince Philip, even wish for it. Others think eradicating smallpox was a mistake. Could that be why vaccine scares have developed? In the past, finding treatments and cures for the afflictions of humans was seen as a good thing. Anyone who expressed differently would be seen as a monster who wants to commit a crime against humanity. Has something changed?
Greenland is still frozen at the Summit. No golf today.
Why We Need Debate, Not Consensus, on Climate Change
Re blogged from Watts Up With That.
NOTE: This op-ed was rejected by the New York Times. It was submitted as a response by The president of The Heartland Institute in reply to Fred Krupp’s Wall Street Journal essay. I reproduce it here in hopes of it reaching a wide audience. Feel free to reproduce it elsewhere. – Anthony
by Joe Bast
Dear Fred,
I read your August 7 opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal, “A New Climate-Change Consensus,” with great interest. As you know, The Heartland Institute is a leading voice in the international debate over climate change. The Economist recently called us “the world’s most prominent think-tank promoting skepticism about man-made climate change.”
Please follow the link to read the balance of this important letter.
The comments are worth a glance as well.
Why the 97% consensus figure is a hoax.
NOTE: This op-ed was rejected by the New York Times. It was submitted as a response by The president of The Heartland Institute in reply to Fred Krupp’s Wall Street Journal essay. I reproduce it here in hopes of it reaching a wide audience. Feel free to reproduce it elsewhere. – Anthony
by Joe Bast
Dear Fred,
I read your August 7 opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal, “A New Climate-Change Consensus,” with great interest. As you know, The Heartland Institute is a leading voice in the international debate over climate change. The Economist recently called us “the world’s most prominent think-tank promoting skepticism about man-made climate change.”
Please follow the link to read the balance of this important letter.
The comments are worth a glance as well.
Why the 97% consensus figure is a hoax.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Mr. Mann
"As the science of climate change becomes increasingly clear and better
understood, the climate science denial machine has become nastier and
dirtier in its misinformation campaign," Mann explains.
Trouble is Mann can't tell misinformation from information. He lives in a world of self-delusion supported by data manipulated to tell the story he wants and needs to believe. He is not alone.
His continued refusal to admit his errors paint him into a corner or dig him a deeper hole but however you want to characterize it he is preparing his own demise as a serious scientist. James Lovelock saw the error of his ways and courageously switched course and went where the data lead. The consequences of not admitting scientific error is ridicule and ultimately, self destruction. Does Mann realize this? It will be a shame for his family but scientific truth is more important than the individual. May his ego not lead him into darkness. You can get lost there.
An example of the exact same thing, 'misinformation', that he accuses CO2 climate change deniers of perpetrating has recently appeared in the news. The news media were awash in the great Greenland meltdown of summer 2012 where the temperature zipped above freezing as it sometimes does during the summer and called it unprecedented in the title only to have the body of the report correct that impression with the news that this type of melt happens about once every 150 years. Therefore, not unprecedented.
Now, Michael, who is engaging in misinformation and trying to leave an impression of 'unprecedented' climate change when no such conclusion is supported by the data?
Mr. Mann is adamant that Big Oil is funding the CO2 climate change skeptics. Rather than focusing on the claims being made by the skeptics he prefers to divert attention to their supposed funders - does he have proof? This is a convenient red herring and allows him to deflect criticism of his own work onto another part of his own delusion. Most critics of CO2 induced climate change will point out his errors without charge.
Let us focus on the facts, Michael.
CO2 is increasing, temperatures are not. But greenery is. Plants love it. CO2 is green!
Extreme weather events are not increasing.
Temperatures have been warmer in the past when CO2 was at lower concentrations.
Neither ice sheet is melting in any unprecedented way.
Sea levels are not accelerating. In many places sea level shows no increase.
Climate models are out of sync with reality.
The evidence supports the skeptics.
CO2 is a minor to non-existent factor in climate change.
We love to scare ourselves to death.
It sells papers and programming so the media love a good scare. High Nielsen ratings attract advertisers.
Some politicians love to save the world and be idolized as heroes. Can't think of anyone in particular. Can you?
Scientists can attract funding by offering to investigate the problem.
Crony capitalists love it. Guaranteed loans and grants and subsidies and bailouts.
Misanthropes can bask in their superiority by bashing humans and their greed.
The truth gets buried and we, the people, get conned.
Until honest people catch onto the scam and fight back. It is a sad state of affairs that such human energy must be expended to combat the lies but the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Long live the internet!
Mr Mann, you have no trump left in your hand.
Trouble is Mann can't tell misinformation from information. He lives in a world of self-delusion supported by data manipulated to tell the story he wants and needs to believe. He is not alone.
His continued refusal to admit his errors paint him into a corner or dig him a deeper hole but however you want to characterize it he is preparing his own demise as a serious scientist. James Lovelock saw the error of his ways and courageously switched course and went where the data lead. The consequences of not admitting scientific error is ridicule and ultimately, self destruction. Does Mann realize this? It will be a shame for his family but scientific truth is more important than the individual. May his ego not lead him into darkness. You can get lost there.
An example of the exact same thing, 'misinformation', that he accuses CO2 climate change deniers of perpetrating has recently appeared in the news. The news media were awash in the great Greenland meltdown of summer 2012 where the temperature zipped above freezing as it sometimes does during the summer and called it unprecedented in the title only to have the body of the report correct that impression with the news that this type of melt happens about once every 150 years. Therefore, not unprecedented.
Now, Michael, who is engaging in misinformation and trying to leave an impression of 'unprecedented' climate change when no such conclusion is supported by the data?
Mr. Mann is adamant that Big Oil is funding the CO2 climate change skeptics. Rather than focusing on the claims being made by the skeptics he prefers to divert attention to their supposed funders - does he have proof? This is a convenient red herring and allows him to deflect criticism of his own work onto another part of his own delusion. Most critics of CO2 induced climate change will point out his errors without charge.
Let us focus on the facts, Michael.
CO2 is increasing, temperatures are not. But greenery is. Plants love it. CO2 is green!
Extreme weather events are not increasing.
Temperatures have been warmer in the past when CO2 was at lower concentrations.
Neither ice sheet is melting in any unprecedented way.
Sea levels are not accelerating. In many places sea level shows no increase.
Climate models are out of sync with reality.
The evidence supports the skeptics.
CO2 is a minor to non-existent factor in climate change.
We love to scare ourselves to death.
It sells papers and programming so the media love a good scare. High Nielsen ratings attract advertisers.
Some politicians love to save the world and be idolized as heroes. Can't think of anyone in particular. Can you?
Scientists can attract funding by offering to investigate the problem.
Crony capitalists love it. Guaranteed loans and grants and subsidies and bailouts.
Misanthropes can bask in their superiority by bashing humans and their greed.
The truth gets buried and we, the people, get conned.
Until honest people catch onto the scam and fight back. It is a sad state of affairs that such human energy must be expended to combat the lies but the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Long live the internet!
Mr Mann, you have no trump left in your hand.
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Pop Goes the Grave Spell
Over at Climate Realists, in a guest post, Carl Brehmer has penned " The “Greenhouse Effect” and Droughts are Mutually Exclusive". This short essay destroys the spell cast by the doomsayers who believe in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW). Alarmists would have us believe that severe weather is proof of CAGW and that if we do not lower our emissions of CO2 immediately the world will become an oven that will cook human fricassee. According to warmists we are destroying our world and ourselves with our pursuit of unchecked growth and consumption. Governments need to act to curtail this wonton depletion of our resources. They blame CO2 emitted via the burning of fossil fuels for this damage.
But, as the article above suggests, alarmists have become trapped in their own hyperbole and missed the simple science that contradicts their misanthropic view of the world. Carl Brehmer succinctly summarizes the dissonance between drought that we are currently experiencing in parts of North America in the summer of 2012 and the necessity for water vapor and other greenhouse gases like CO2, a trace gas essential for life on Earth, to be present in the atmosphere in order for them to be blamed for the arid conditions.
The point is, arid means a dearth of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. He points out the diurnal temperature contrasts in the desert between day and night are larger than those in more humid areas and illustrates this by presenting results for several urban centers that bring demonstrate the temperature differences between more and less humid times in these locations. Have a read.
In fact, he shows that the presence of GHGs moderates the diurnal temperature differences. More humidity means cooler daytime temperatures and no drought. So drought is incompatible with the presence of GHGs. To spell it right out: GHGs cannot cause drought. Alarmist research is sometimes not the best.
It turns out that the weather is behaving as it always has and that the grave spell that global warming alarmists have cast upon the evil human race is without merit. The popping sound you hear is the bubble of CAGW bursting in air.
Alarmists like to talk about how it is a crime against humanity to deny CAGW. Like a boomerang, that accusation comes back to smack them upside the head as they try to associate drought with CO2 induced global warming. To deny that impossibility is akin to a belief in a flat earth.
Can we stop burning food to power our vehicles now? Isn't that a crime against humanity?
But, as the article above suggests, alarmists have become trapped in their own hyperbole and missed the simple science that contradicts their misanthropic view of the world. Carl Brehmer succinctly summarizes the dissonance between drought that we are currently experiencing in parts of North America in the summer of 2012 and the necessity for water vapor and other greenhouse gases like CO2, a trace gas essential for life on Earth, to be present in the atmosphere in order for them to be blamed for the arid conditions.
The point is, arid means a dearth of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. He points out the diurnal temperature contrasts in the desert between day and night are larger than those in more humid areas and illustrates this by presenting results for several urban centers that bring demonstrate the temperature differences between more and less humid times in these locations. Have a read.
In fact, he shows that the presence of GHGs moderates the diurnal temperature differences. More humidity means cooler daytime temperatures and no drought. So drought is incompatible with the presence of GHGs. To spell it right out: GHGs cannot cause drought. Alarmist research is sometimes not the best.
It turns out that the weather is behaving as it always has and that the grave spell that global warming alarmists have cast upon the evil human race is without merit. The popping sound you hear is the bubble of CAGW bursting in air.
Alarmists like to talk about how it is a crime against humanity to deny CAGW. Like a boomerang, that accusation comes back to smack them upside the head as they try to associate drought with CO2 induced global warming. To deny that impossibility is akin to a belief in a flat earth.
Can we stop burning food to power our vehicles now? Isn't that a crime against humanity?
More Settled Science
Time magazine reported in 1975 that global cooling was the cause of drought, floods, dry spells and heatwaves.
This year, 2012, we are told the exact opposite. It is global warming that is the cause of drought, floods, dry spells and heatwaves.
While scientists are trying to settle that one, one thing has become known: GreenHouse Gases (GHGs) like H2O and CO2 are not responsible for droughts.
Whatever you do don't blame CO2.
This year, 2012, we are told the exact opposite. It is global warming that is the cause of drought, floods, dry spells and heatwaves.
While scientists are trying to settle that one, one thing has become known: GreenHouse Gases (GHGs) like H2O and CO2 are not responsible for droughts.
Whatever you do don't blame CO2.
Arctic Fun
Marc Marano over at ClimateDepot.com has been keeping tabs on recent human exploits in the Arctic. Many of these expeditions have been initiated by those who are convinced that Arctic Sea Ice and glaciers and ice sheets are melting due to Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW). Have a look.
Two more missions are currently in the news. It is interesting to witness how they have begun.
Both were hemmed in by Arctic Ice which is supposed to disappear by the summer of 2012.
Warmist 'Students on Ice' trip severely hampered by ice as much as five meters thick -- On trip to 'learn first-hand about climate change, seeing it with our own eyes'
Fears that the Arctic was melting and sea levels would rise were a concern between 1900 and 1940.
How about this from the 1940s:
Still here! Still waiting for the meltdown!
In the past during the Medieval Warm Period Arctic temperatures in some locations were much higher than they are now.
The Arctic is resilient. Perhaps climate change in the Arctic as elsewhere is cyclical.
The hysteria around the Arctic is another example of doomsday fears peddled by scientists who are encouraged to report dire conditions in order to keep the research funding flowing. Politicians and the media love a good scare story. What they have failed to realize is that they are producing a spoof like Scary Movie where everyone laughs at the inanities instead of moistening their underwear from fear.
Where's the BEEF? was a successful commercial because it made is point with humour.
Where's the GLOBAL in global warming also points out the obvious when people realize that when it is hot in the US mid west it is cold in Alaska. Kinda takes the GLOBAL outta global warming don't it?
Hot here; cold there
Heat distribution not so rare.
Two more missions are currently in the news. It is interesting to witness how they have begun.
Both were hemmed in by Arctic Ice which is supposed to disappear by the summer of 2012.
Fears that the Arctic was melting and sea levels would rise were a concern between 1900 and 1940.
How about this from the 1940s:
or this from 1923
Still here! Still waiting for the meltdown!
In the past during the Medieval Warm Period Arctic temperatures in some locations were much higher than they are now.
The Arctic is resilient. Perhaps climate change in the Arctic as elsewhere is cyclical.
The hysteria around the Arctic is another example of doomsday fears peddled by scientists who are encouraged to report dire conditions in order to keep the research funding flowing. Politicians and the media love a good scare story. What they have failed to realize is that they are producing a spoof like Scary Movie where everyone laughs at the inanities instead of moistening their underwear from fear.
Where's the BEEF? was a successful commercial because it made is point with humour.
Where's the GLOBAL in global warming also points out the obvious when people realize that when it is hot in the US mid west it is cold in Alaska. Kinda takes the GLOBAL outta global warming don't it?
Hot here; cold there
Heat distribution not so rare.
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Snow In South Africa
Snow In South Africa has been delighting South Africans during their winter of 2012. While the N. Hemisphere has been sweltering in heat waves this summer the southern hemisphere has been experiencing below normal temperatures. The atmosphere distributes its heat unevenly but if it gets hotter in one area it must get colder in another because there is only so much heat coming from the sun. The atmosphere cannot manufacture heat. It can only redistribute. It is conservation of energy in operation.
So as the US bakes South Africa gets the cold and the snow and more snow.
Those heat trapping CO2 molecules have rushed over to South Africa and produced - snow?
They are working well.
From R.A. Pielke Sr.:
the coldest spot on the globe in July was the South Pole, where winter temperatures averaged 4.5 C (8.1 degrees F) colder than normal. If it isn’t usually the coldest place on Earth in July, seeing temperatures during the deepest part of the Antarctic winter that much colder than normal might move the South Pole into that spot. (Links added).
The South Pole is cooling. Antarctica is not warming. It is cooling.
Nothing out of the ordinary is happening.
Hot here; cold there.
Heat distribution not so rare.
Nothing to do
With plant fertilizer CO2.
So as the US bakes South Africa gets the cold and the snow and more snow.
Those heat trapping CO2 molecules have rushed over to South Africa and produced - snow?
They are working well.
From R.A. Pielke Sr.:
the coldest spot on the globe in July was the South Pole, where winter temperatures averaged 4.5 C (8.1 degrees F) colder than normal. If it isn’t usually the coldest place on Earth in July, seeing temperatures during the deepest part of the Antarctic winter that much colder than normal might move the South Pole into that spot. (Links added).
The South Pole is cooling. Antarctica is not warming. It is cooling.
Nothing out of the ordinary is happening.
Hot here; cold there.
Heat distribution not so rare.
Nothing to do
With plant fertilizer CO2.
Bad Weather Leads to Bad Science
Public Figure, Michael Mann and James Hansen of NASA are giving science a bad name. They are trying to link any instance of bad weather with catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW). Via a recent media blitz they are determined to have the public believe that human emissions of carbon dioxide, a trace gas essential for life on earth is evil incarnate. Human induced CO2 released from its abode by burning fossil fuels is the witch responsible for bad weather, any bad weather. As if bad weather never occurred before humans discovered oil. They say that this year's bad weather would not have happened without CAGW.
Got a drought the cause is CO2 no doubt.
Got a flood must be CO2 from a Bud.
Got a hurricane must be CO2 from a plane.
Got a twister must be from CO2 mister.
Got a fire must be started by an SUV buyer.
There is nothing CO2 can't do to make you blue.
But there is one thing that you can't stop; CO2 is good for any crop.
What evidence has Mann and Hansen got to indict CO2 for the hot?
Not a lot.
Here is Hansen on Hansen in 2006. Flashback 2006: Hansen warned fellow alarmists: 'We don't want the public to hang their hat on a recent storm, recent hurricanes for example, because those will fluctuate from year to year'
Seems his opinion has changed recently. Will the real James Hansen please stand up?
Get ready! Hansen has now decreed all weather caused by humans therefore ---- Thousands of fish die from heat wave as scientist blames climate change
Double M agrees. Michael Mann supports Hansen's claims: 'Given the prescience of Hansen's science, we would be unwise to ignore his latest, more dire warning'
Andrew Weaver concurs: Other warmists give approval to Hansen: The science in Hansen's study is excellent 'and reframes the question,' said Andrew Weaver, of U. of Victoria in B.C.
Reid: Time To Stop Acting Like Climate Change Deniers Have A Valid Point Of View - They Don't
Fear mongering and doomsday forecasting at its best. Scaring people including politicians, hyping the hyperbole fuels the funding. The MSM loves a good scare. It is healthy for sales and Nielsen ratings. Is that the paradigm of climate science? So, is there a consensus or do some scientists disagree with the conclusion that bad weather can be attributed to CO2.
Here are some papers gathered together by Marc Morano at ClimateDepot.com. "Climate Depot's Morano: 'Global warming activists are desperately seeking to tie any and every weather event to global warming. Rest assured, your SUVs do not cause heavy rain'". The linked list is rather long. Enjoy the dissent.
Anthony Watts has this to say:
NASA's James Hansen's latest claims dismantled: 'This is nothing but a political ploy from a man who has abandoned any pretext of professionally done science in favor of activism'
Stephen Goddard at Real Science points out that
Hansen Uses 30 Year Cherry Picked Time Period To Prove That Climate Is The Most Extreme In 10,000 Years
and
'The Godfather' of AGW Challenged: 'It is pure and simple cherry-picking. Had Hansen compared against 1930s he would have seen that recent temperatures have been relatively quite cool'
Steve Goddard has discovered the finger print of man made global warming and it resides at the airport.
Philip Stott observes:
Flashback: UK Prof. Philip Stott: 'From the Babylon of Gilgamesh to the post-Eden of Noah, every age has viewed climate change cataclysmically, as retribution for human greed and sinfulness'
Prof. Roger Pielke Jr. rips claims: 'Hansen's use of science as a political fulcrum encourages over-the-top claims by scientists and an effort to squelch opposing voices'
NOAA's Martin Hoerling calls Hansen's claims 'flawed scientifically'
Hoerling: 'The weather patterns responsible for most of today's heat waves would have happened regardless of human-induced climate change' -- Bringing carbon dioxide down to the level Hansen sees as safe 'would not eradicate heat waves'
UN IPCC Scientist Dr. Madhav Khandekar: 'The record books shows that the hottest period of the 20th century was during the 'dirty thirties'
More dissent can be found at C3Headlines.com and at Bread and Butter science.
European severe weather lowest in 100 years, contrary to IPCC predictions
Severe Weather Increase Prediction Due To CO2 Emissions Proven To Be Severely Bogus
Severe Hurricane Incidents At Record Low, Opposite of IPCC Predictions
New Study Finds EPA & IPCC Climate Model Predictions Wrong About More Droughts For Southwest USA
EU Scientists Discover That Modern Severe Weather Events Are Happening Less, Not More As Predicted
Unequivocal & Irrefutable Empirical Research: No Increase In Hurricane Landfall - IPCC's AGW Prediction Fails Test
Predicted Increase In Severe Windstorms From Global Warming Has Not Happened, New Research Shows
New Tropical Cyclone Research From China Reveals Major IPCC Prediction Fail
Another Day, Another Study, Another Failed IPCC Prediction: Modern Global Warming Has Not Caused Increase of Severe Floods
Severe Cyclones Striking Australia Declines By 60% - Exact Opposite of IPCC Climate Model Predictions
World's Best Scientific Research Determines Zero Connection Between Global Warming and Hurricanes & Cyclones
Australian Study Proves Major IPCC Failure: Climate Models Predicted An Increase In Severe Weather - Didn't Happen
Severe Weather In The Far East & Pacific Regions Has Declined Over The Last 50 Years, Scientists Confirm
Prediction That Global Warming Causes More Storms Fails Empirical Testing - IPCC Climate Models Wrong
Central Siberian Forest Fires Have Declined During The Modern Global Warming Era Say Experts
New Research: Experts Determine German Flooding Has Not Increased From Global Warming As Predicted
Chinese Scientists Find That IPCC Predicted Extreme Rain Events Are Not Happening With Greater Frequency
IPCC's Flood Predictions Found To Be Without Scientific Merit: Major Flooding Appears To Be Declining, Not Increasing
Empirical Evidence From Japan Refutes Climate Model Precipitation Predictions
UN & Leftist Politicians Claim Global Warming Has Increased Severe Weather Disasters: That's Not True For Tornados
A Very Simple Question: Has Huge Human CO2 Increase Caused More Severe Weather? A Simple Answer, Nope
And on and on it goes. There are many more studies at C3 that dispute the rise in severe weather that Mann and Hansen imagine is happening. Saying it is so don't make it so.
Humans can count and have learned to pass on information from generation to generation. That is called recorded history and it does not support a rise in severe weather observations. If one is trying to link CO2 to severe weather the logical correlation is to associate increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration with a DECREASE in severe weather. Things keep getting better.
Or, could it be - deep breath - CO2 has nothing to do with the severity of the weather?
Maybe it is H2O that changes climate. Store it on land. Increase evaporation. Increase rain. Keeps soil moist. Allows grass, plants, trees and crops to grow. Reverses desertification. Increases arable land. Just a thought. And CO2 will aid that new growth.
For scientists like Mann and Hansen to ignore the evidence and try to twist the data into a confirming instance of their personal beliefs is a travesty to both themselves and the truth that they convey to the public. These guys can't be trusted to provide unbiased results to the public or to go where the data lead. They are too dedicated to an agenda which is blinding them to the truth that Nature is clearly presenting to those who choose to observe it.
Severe weather is what Mother Nature has always looked like. And very often she gives us weather to enjoy.
Got a drought the cause is CO2 no doubt.
Got a flood must be CO2 from a Bud.
Got a hurricane must be CO2 from a plane.
Got a twister must be from CO2 mister.
Got a fire must be started by an SUV buyer.
There is nothing CO2 can't do to make you blue.
But there is one thing that you can't stop; CO2 is good for any crop.
What evidence has Mann and Hansen got to indict CO2 for the hot?
Not a lot.
Here is Hansen on Hansen in 2006. Flashback 2006: Hansen warned fellow alarmists: 'We don't want the public to hang their hat on a recent storm, recent hurricanes for example, because those will fluctuate from year to year'
Seems his opinion has changed recently. Will the real James Hansen please stand up?
Get ready! Hansen has now decreed all weather caused by humans therefore ---- Thousands of fish die from heat wave as scientist blames climate change
Double M agrees. Michael Mann supports Hansen's claims: 'Given the prescience of Hansen's science, we would be unwise to ignore his latest, more dire warning'
Andrew Weaver concurs: Other warmists give approval to Hansen: The science in Hansen's study is excellent 'and reframes the question,' said Andrew Weaver, of U. of Victoria in B.C.
Reid: Time To Stop Acting Like Climate Change Deniers Have A Valid Point Of View - They Don't
Fear mongering and doomsday forecasting at its best. Scaring people including politicians, hyping the hyperbole fuels the funding. The MSM loves a good scare. It is healthy for sales and Nielsen ratings. Is that the paradigm of climate science? So, is there a consensus or do some scientists disagree with the conclusion that bad weather can be attributed to CO2.
Here are some papers gathered together by Marc Morano at ClimateDepot.com. "Climate Depot's Morano: 'Global warming activists are desperately seeking to tie any and every weather event to global warming. Rest assured, your SUVs do not cause heavy rain'". The linked list is rather long. Enjoy the dissent.
Anthony Watts has this to say:
NASA's James Hansen's latest claims dismantled: 'This is nothing but a political ploy from a man who has abandoned any pretext of professionally done science in favor of activism'
Stephen Goddard at Real Science points out that
Hansen Uses 30 Year Cherry Picked Time Period To Prove That Climate Is The Most Extreme In 10,000 Years
and
'The Godfather' of AGW Challenged: 'It is pure and simple cherry-picking. Had Hansen compared against 1930s he would have seen that recent temperatures have been relatively quite cool'
Steve Goddard has discovered the finger print of man made global warming and it resides at the airport.
Philip Stott observes:
Flashback: UK Prof. Philip Stott: 'From the Babylon of Gilgamesh to the post-Eden of Noah, every age has viewed climate change cataclysmically, as retribution for human greed and sinfulness'
Prof. Roger Pielke Jr. rips claims: 'Hansen's use of science as a political fulcrum encourages over-the-top claims by scientists and an effort to squelch opposing voices'
Hoerling: 'The weather patterns responsible for most of today's heat waves would have happened regardless of human-induced climate change' -- Bringing carbon dioxide down to the level Hansen sees as safe 'would not eradicate heat waves'
UN IPCC Scientist Dr. Madhav Khandekar: 'The record books shows that the hottest period of the 20th century was during the 'dirty thirties'
More dissent can be found at C3Headlines.com and at Bread and Butter science.
European severe weather lowest in 100 years, contrary to IPCC predictions
Severe Weather Increase Prediction Due To CO2 Emissions Proven To Be Severely Bogus
Severe Hurricane Incidents At Record Low, Opposite of IPCC Predictions
New Study Finds EPA & IPCC Climate Model Predictions Wrong About More Droughts For Southwest USA
EU Scientists Discover That Modern Severe Weather Events Are Happening Less, Not More As Predicted
Unequivocal & Irrefutable Empirical Research: No Increase In Hurricane Landfall - IPCC's AGW Prediction Fails Test
Predicted Increase In Severe Windstorms From Global Warming Has Not Happened, New Research Shows
New Tropical Cyclone Research From China Reveals Major IPCC Prediction Fail
Another Day, Another Study, Another Failed IPCC Prediction: Modern Global Warming Has Not Caused Increase of Severe Floods
Severe Cyclones Striking Australia Declines By 60% - Exact Opposite of IPCC Climate Model Predictions
World's Best Scientific Research Determines Zero Connection Between Global Warming and Hurricanes & Cyclones
Australian Study Proves Major IPCC Failure: Climate Models Predicted An Increase In Severe Weather - Didn't Happen
Severe Weather In The Far East & Pacific Regions Has Declined Over The Last 50 Years, Scientists Confirm
Prediction That Global Warming Causes More Storms Fails Empirical Testing - IPCC Climate Models Wrong
Central Siberian Forest Fires Have Declined During The Modern Global Warming Era Say Experts
New Research: Experts Determine German Flooding Has Not Increased From Global Warming As Predicted
Chinese Scientists Find That IPCC Predicted Extreme Rain Events Are Not Happening With Greater Frequency
IPCC's Flood Predictions Found To Be Without Scientific Merit: Major Flooding Appears To Be Declining, Not Increasing
Empirical Evidence From Japan Refutes Climate Model Precipitation Predictions
UN & Leftist Politicians Claim Global Warming Has Increased Severe Weather Disasters: That's Not True For Tornados
A Very Simple Question: Has Huge Human CO2 Increase Caused More Severe Weather? A Simple Answer, Nope
And on and on it goes. There are many more studies at C3 that dispute the rise in severe weather that Mann and Hansen imagine is happening. Saying it is so don't make it so.
Humans can count and have learned to pass on information from generation to generation. That is called recorded history and it does not support a rise in severe weather observations. If one is trying to link CO2 to severe weather the logical correlation is to associate increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration with a DECREASE in severe weather. Things keep getting better.
Or, could it be - deep breath - CO2 has nothing to do with the severity of the weather?
Maybe it is H2O that changes climate. Store it on land. Increase evaporation. Increase rain. Keeps soil moist. Allows grass, plants, trees and crops to grow. Reverses desertification. Increases arable land. Just a thought. And CO2 will aid that new growth.
For scientists like Mann and Hansen to ignore the evidence and try to twist the data into a confirming instance of their personal beliefs is a travesty to both themselves and the truth that they convey to the public. These guys can't be trusted to provide unbiased results to the public or to go where the data lead. They are too dedicated to an agenda which is blinding them to the truth that Nature is clearly presenting to those who choose to observe it.
Severe weather is what Mother Nature has always looked like. And very often she gives us weather to enjoy.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
Droughtflood
In the summer of 2012 there is a drought in North America. Crops are thirsty, forests catch fire, food prices rise and it is all because of man-made global warming. This is what global warming looks like we are told by those in the know. Clearly, we must reduce our emissions of CO2 or we will become human fricassee. Fan the hysteria!
So, if the droughts are due to man-made global warming as predicted then the rest of the Northern Hemisphere should also be experiencing drought n'est-ce pas?
Is it?
In the British Isles, site of the 2012 summer Olympics, it has been raining cats and dogs. Well, they invented the phrase!
In Russia there are floods and China has been trying to hide the fact of their floods. Japan got 20 inches of rain in one day.
So, no global drought. And by inference, no global flooding either. There is not one climate on Earth. There are many. Some are drier(desert) and some are wetter (rainforest).
The same thing happens with temperature. If it is hotter than normal in N. America you can be sure to find areas where it is cooler than normal like Sweden, Amsterdam, Fiji, Washington state, and Alaska. Not to mention that it is winter in the Southern Hemisphere and they are enjoying the cold and snow down there.
Kinda takes the GLOBAL out of global warming doesn't it? Where's the BEEF?
It appears that climate conditions portrayed in the media as GLOBAL, aren't. Does the additional heat trapping CO2 that humans have added to the atmosphere congregate in certain areas? Sometimes the same area that endured drought in one year is inundated the following year. Ask the Aussies. How does the CO2 decide which it will do? Or maybe CO2 has nothing at all to do with it.
The climate of the Earth seems to have a kind of Balance to it. Hot here, cold there. Dry here, wet there. Early cherry blossoms here; late cherry blossoms there. The Earth in Balance. Is that a problem or any different than the climate of the past? It is the way of our world.
Why the hysteria? Could it be for political reasons that have nothing to do with the climate?
"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose." ~ Club of Rome
We have met the enemy and he is us! ~ Pogo
Ahhhhh! All becomes clear. A ploy for world domination run by misanthropic mice!
Pinky: Gee, Brain, what do you want to do tonight?
Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky - try to take over the world!
And when the fear of climate change subsides they will move on to the next great crisis caused by those evil humans. With each new crisis people give up more of their freedom as restrictions, taxes and regulations are passed to deal with the issue. Undaunted they plot on.....
Brain: Come, Mindy, it's time for us to conquer the world.
Mindy: Why?
Brain: By right of superior intelligence, I am best suited to guide the destiny of this planet.
Mindy: Why?
Brain: My empirical powers give me the mandate.
Mindy: Why?
Brain: Because it's something I want to do!!
So, if the droughts are due to man-made global warming as predicted then the rest of the Northern Hemisphere should also be experiencing drought n'est-ce pas?
Is it?
In the British Isles, site of the 2012 summer Olympics, it has been raining cats and dogs. Well, they invented the phrase!
In Russia there are floods and China has been trying to hide the fact of their floods. Japan got 20 inches of rain in one day.
So, no global drought. And by inference, no global flooding either. There is not one climate on Earth. There are many. Some are drier(desert) and some are wetter (rainforest).
The same thing happens with temperature. If it is hotter than normal in N. America you can be sure to find areas where it is cooler than normal like Sweden, Amsterdam, Fiji, Washington state, and Alaska. Not to mention that it is winter in the Southern Hemisphere and they are enjoying the cold and snow down there.
Kinda takes the GLOBAL out of global warming doesn't it? Where's the BEEF?
It appears that climate conditions portrayed in the media as GLOBAL, aren't. Does the additional heat trapping CO2 that humans have added to the atmosphere congregate in certain areas? Sometimes the same area that endured drought in one year is inundated the following year. Ask the Aussies. How does the CO2 decide which it will do? Or maybe CO2 has nothing at all to do with it.
The climate of the Earth seems to have a kind of Balance to it. Hot here, cold there. Dry here, wet there. Early cherry blossoms here; late cherry blossoms there. The Earth in Balance. Is that a problem or any different than the climate of the past? It is the way of our world.
Why the hysteria? Could it be for political reasons that have nothing to do with the climate?
"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose." ~ Club of Rome
We have met the enemy and he is us! ~ Pogo
Ahhhhh! All becomes clear. A ploy for world domination run by misanthropic mice!
Pinky: Gee, Brain, what do you want to do tonight?
Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky - try to take over the world!
And when the fear of climate change subsides they will move on to the next great crisis caused by those evil humans. With each new crisis people give up more of their freedom as restrictions, taxes and regulations are passed to deal with the issue. Undaunted they plot on.....
Brain: Come, Mindy, it's time for us to conquer the world.
Mindy: Why?
Brain: By right of superior intelligence, I am best suited to guide the destiny of this planet.
Mindy: Why?
Brain: My empirical powers give me the mandate.
Mindy: Why?
Brain: Because it's something I want to do!!
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Just as it Came so it shall Pass
One day it is hot and then it is not. While the American Press have been going hysterical over the recent early summer heatwave in the mid-west and eastern states and claiming that it was due to global warming saner heads were pointing out that not all areas of the world were warmer than 'normal'. It is winter in the Southern Hemisphere after all. Kinda takes the GLOBAL out of global warming. Reminds me of the Wendy's commercial: Where's the Beef? Where's the GLOBAL?
In the newspaper archives and temperature records of cities we can find examples of US summer heatwaves which put the recent (June/July 2012) in perspective. 1921, 1934 and 1936 were particularly nasty. And those were years when the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was below Bill McKibben's 'safe' level of 350ppm. So it would seem that the level of CO2 in the atmosphere is irrelevant to heatwaves. They will come and go no mater what level of CO2 presides at the time. Something else is causing the heatwaves.
For those who insist on implicating that invisible trace gas, CO2, that is essential to life on Earth, an explanation of the mechanism by which CO2 causes heatwaves would be an advancement in human knowledge. So how does CO2 work to create heatwaves? We are told that CO2 is a GHG or heat trapping gas. So, did the molecules of CO2 decide to congregate in the US mid west and east for their annual summer convention thus leaving other areas with a dearth of CO2 so that they went cooler than 'normal'? How does CO2 do that? And why Russia two years ago and the US this year? Like the IPCC who schedule its Climate Change conferences in different parts of the world so too does CO2 spread the joy of heat around the globe. Oh no, now where will the CO2 go? Who will get the next heatwave?
If we could only monitor the migration of CO2 in the atmosphere we could predict where the next heatwave will be! Good luck with that!
But, in the real atmosphere, heat here, cool there. That's the way it works. Look around the world when there is a heatwave or a drought and see if it isn't true. One hemisphere has summer while the other has winter. Who's to say if we had as many thermometers recording temperatures in the Antarctic as we do in the smaller US that there wouldn't be daily record cold temperatures set in the same proportion as we had hot ones set in the US this year. But we don't have those temperature records so we don't know. But it seems likely doesn't it? The South Pole set a record cold temperature in June 2012 of -100.8F. How many other places in Antarctica had record cold at the same time. We don't know. The South Pole temperature has also been trending down for the last 30 years. Kinda takes the GLOBAL out of global warming doesn't it? And how come we didn't have the MSM going ballistic over that?
When the MSM ignore contrary evidence they are advocates and not reporters. They are interested in advancing an agenda or in just being right or not having to admit they are wrong rather than being an impartial bearer of all viewpoints. The truth be damned!
In July there is still lots of snow on Whistler in B.C. There is great skiing on Mt Baker in Washington State in July 2012. Phoenix had its coldest July 4th in 100 years. In July they are still shoveling snow in Anchorage. Seattle had its 3rd coldest June on record. Argentina got more snow in two weeks than it usually does all winter. Aren't these unusual 'cold' events newsworthy? Not if you are trying to sell GLOBAL warming cause it kinda takes the GLOBAL out of global warming. It reminds people of the ying and yang of life. The back and forth, the to and fro, the up and down, the more and less. We live in a world of opposites. That applies to the climate as well.
Look around the world even on the same latitude and you will find different climates. Climate change is local or regional. Even the last ice age was NOT a global phenomenon. We don't need to rearrange our standard of living because some area that got drought last year is getting floods this year. Such a reorganization won't stop the ying and yang. Then what? CO2 has nothing to do with causing severe weather.
Disasters happen and they are always local. And many can be happening in different places all at the same time. Take a look at 1917. When has there been a year when the destructive forces of nature have taken a holiday? We live in a dynamic, ever changing atmosphere that is sometimes uncaring and unforgiving. It's the way it is. It is the planet we live on. We learn to adapt. We're smart that way. Change is what the climate does.
And so it shall pass. Rain is forecast for the corn belt this week Aug 1- Aug 8.
In the newspaper archives and temperature records of cities we can find examples of US summer heatwaves which put the recent (June/July 2012) in perspective. 1921, 1934 and 1936 were particularly nasty. And those were years when the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was below Bill McKibben's 'safe' level of 350ppm. So it would seem that the level of CO2 in the atmosphere is irrelevant to heatwaves. They will come and go no mater what level of CO2 presides at the time. Something else is causing the heatwaves.
For those who insist on implicating that invisible trace gas, CO2, that is essential to life on Earth, an explanation of the mechanism by which CO2 causes heatwaves would be an advancement in human knowledge. So how does CO2 work to create heatwaves? We are told that CO2 is a GHG or heat trapping gas. So, did the molecules of CO2 decide to congregate in the US mid west and east for their annual summer convention thus leaving other areas with a dearth of CO2 so that they went cooler than 'normal'? How does CO2 do that? And why Russia two years ago and the US this year? Like the IPCC who schedule its Climate Change conferences in different parts of the world so too does CO2 spread the joy of heat around the globe. Oh no, now where will the CO2 go? Who will get the next heatwave?
If we could only monitor the migration of CO2 in the atmosphere we could predict where the next heatwave will be! Good luck with that!
But, in the real atmosphere, heat here, cool there. That's the way it works. Look around the world when there is a heatwave or a drought and see if it isn't true. One hemisphere has summer while the other has winter. Who's to say if we had as many thermometers recording temperatures in the Antarctic as we do in the smaller US that there wouldn't be daily record cold temperatures set in the same proportion as we had hot ones set in the US this year. But we don't have those temperature records so we don't know. But it seems likely doesn't it? The South Pole set a record cold temperature in June 2012 of -100.8F. How many other places in Antarctica had record cold at the same time. We don't know. The South Pole temperature has also been trending down for the last 30 years. Kinda takes the GLOBAL out of global warming doesn't it? And how come we didn't have the MSM going ballistic over that?
When the MSM ignore contrary evidence they are advocates and not reporters. They are interested in advancing an agenda or in just being right or not having to admit they are wrong rather than being an impartial bearer of all viewpoints. The truth be damned!
In July there is still lots of snow on Whistler in B.C. There is great skiing on Mt Baker in Washington State in July 2012. Phoenix had its coldest July 4th in 100 years. In July they are still shoveling snow in Anchorage. Seattle had its 3rd coldest June on record. Argentina got more snow in two weeks than it usually does all winter. Aren't these unusual 'cold' events newsworthy? Not if you are trying to sell GLOBAL warming cause it kinda takes the GLOBAL out of global warming. It reminds people of the ying and yang of life. The back and forth, the to and fro, the up and down, the more and less. We live in a world of opposites. That applies to the climate as well.
Look around the world even on the same latitude and you will find different climates. Climate change is local or regional. Even the last ice age was NOT a global phenomenon. We don't need to rearrange our standard of living because some area that got drought last year is getting floods this year. Such a reorganization won't stop the ying and yang. Then what? CO2 has nothing to do with causing severe weather.
Disasters happen and they are always local. And many can be happening in different places all at the same time. Take a look at 1917. When has there been a year when the destructive forces of nature have taken a holiday? We live in a dynamic, ever changing atmosphere that is sometimes uncaring and unforgiving. It's the way it is. It is the planet we live on. We learn to adapt. We're smart that way. Change is what the climate does.
And so it shall pass. Rain is forecast for the corn belt this week Aug 1- Aug 8.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
