Funding in the Climate Wars

AGW alarmists like to make a big deal out of the idea that oil interests are behind AGW skeptics. They decry their influence and blame skeptics for the delay in action to address their favorite passion. If Big Oil is behind the objections than we can safely ignore them as being motivated by special interests - their own profits - and therefore incorrect.

They drop the focus on truth and concentrate on guilt by association.

Will AGW alarmists be so quick to identify where the funding comes from when corporations support AGW protagonists?

Remember Citibank? Just won a Green award.

They also were bailed out by the taxpayer.

We don't hear about this. Government money buys the science it wants.

What will Bank of America do with its government largesse?

Will the blogs that expose oil industry financing do the same for pro-AGW organizations?

"Expect the guys at DeSmog to immediately set up a Bank-of-America-Secrets site to protest at the evil influence large corporates have over democracy."

Hypocritically they won't. Money for our guys, good. Money for the opposition, evil.

CAGW is a non-problem that is wasting so many resources for no good reason. We will be the poorer for it.

Global Cooling

In the Northern Hemisphere we are approaching the first day of summer 2012 which must mean they are approaching the first day of winter in the Southern Hemisphere. With the hysteria over 'the winter that wasn't' and the warm May in the Eastern US and southern Ontario climate change alarmists needed to be reminded of  'the severe winter that was' in Europe, Asia, Alaska and Western US and Canada. It remains unexplained how the heat trapping gas, CO2, worked so well in one part of the word while it totally failed to retain any heat in the bulk of the Northern Hemisphere winter of 2011-2012. Alarmists see only that which bolsters their concerns and exhibit tunnel vision when the universe throws water on their cherished beliefs.

So let's see what is going on in the Southern Hemisphere as the world prepares for the RIO+20 conference on sustainability. Will attendees be greeted by the heat retaining CO2 or will the heat avoiding variety be in attendance at the conference?

Wintry blast in Australia in April

Fast start to winter in Kiwiland

Clear the track  the snow is back in New Zealand.

Air NZ cancels flights

Christchurch is setting records for cold weather.

Cows killed by cold in NZ

Canberra coldest May in 50 years.

Coldest May night in Perth

Cold in Sydney compared to 1923

Rare freezing rain in Brazil in April

Snowing in Chile in April

Gore Effect in Brazil

Record cold in Brazil

Brazil gets Antarctic blast as well as Chile and Uruguay

Ushuaia, Argentina

Frost in Argentina  - emergency declared

South Africa: get out the gloves and coats

Another cool day in Antarctica -111F at Vostok

South Pole on June 24th -100F

This just in. In the N. Hemisphere cool weather and winter is holding on. Check these out.

Utah

Reindeer in trouble in Sweden.

Washington State

Washington and Oregon

Nevada

South Carolina

Montana

Netherlands

Netherlands

New Hampshire

Stockholm, Sweden

Norway

Ontario

Arctic

Wyoming

Germany

Regina

Gillam, Manitoba

French crops hurt by frost

It is snowing in Austria in June

Record cold in South Dakota in June

Record cold in north Florida in June

A little chilly for June in Montana

Idaho potato crop affected by cold in June

Temperatures up to 10C below normal and sunshine down 60 per cent in the UK in June

Snow in Switzerland in June

Mt. Washington on Vancouver Island is open for skiing in June!

Coldest June in records in British Columbia 

Freezing in the summer in Oregon Washington  Colorado and California


Focus on the warm because that supports the theory of man made CO2 induced global warming.

Ignore the cold because that is inconvenient data that spoils the preferred theory.

"The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement" -- Karl Popper

It is the public interplay between confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance that distils the truth.

It remains for the global warming alarmists to explain how the heat trapping gases such as CO2 can work so selectively around the world. If we are dumping CO2 into the atmosphere shouldn't we be warming all over the globe? Isn't that what global warming implies?

Predictions of global cooling

From the Thunderbolts forum a list:

Re: Big drop in solar activity could mean much cooler Earth

by PersianPaladin » Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:53 am

Researchers who have predicted a long term solar minimum or ‘solar hibernation’ and/or a new climate change to a period of long lasting cold weather based upon solar activity.

1. Dr. Habibullo I. Abdussamatov: Russian Academy of Scientists. Head of space research at the Pulkova Observatory, St. Petersburg.
Comment: RIA Novosti, August 25, 2006: “Khabibullo Abdusamatov said he and his colleagues had concluded that a period of global cooling similar to one seen in the late 17th century – when canals froze in the Netherlands and people had to leave their dwellings in Greenland – could start in 2012-2105 and reach its peak in 2055-2060….He said he believed the future climate change would have very serious consequences and that authorities should start preparing for them today….”

2. David Archibald. Summa Development Limited. (Australia).
From his paper: Archibald, D.C., (2006), Solar Cycles 24 and 25 and predicted climate response, Energy and Environment, Vol.17, No.1.
Comment from paper: “Based on a solar maxima of approximately 50 for solar cycles 24 and 25, a global temperature decline of 1.5C is predicted to 2020 equating to the experience of the Dalton Minimum.”

3. Dr. O.G.Badalyan, and Dr.V.N. Obridko, Institute of Terrestrial Magnestism. Russia, Dr.J.Sykora. Astronomical Institute of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Slovak Republic.
From their paper: Balalyan, O.G., V.N. Obridko, and J. Sykora, (2000), Brightness of the coronal green line and prediction for activity cycles 23 and 24, Solar Physics, 199: pp.421-435.
Comment from paper: “ A slow increase in (intensity of coronal green line) in the current cycle 23 permits us to forecast a low-Wolf-number (number of sunspots) cycle 24 with the maximum W~50 at 2010-2011.” (Note: a 50 sunspot level is a Dalton class minimum)

4. Dr. B. P. Bonev, Dr. Kaloyan M. Penev, Dr. Stefano Sello.
From their paper: Bonev, B.P., et. al., (2004), Long term solar variability and the solar cycle in the 21st century, The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 605, pp.L81-L84.
Comment from their paper: “…we conclude that the present epoch is at the onset of an upcoming local minimum in long term solar variability.”

5. John L. Casey, Director, Space and Science Research Center. Orlando, Florida
From the center’s research report: Casey, John L. (2008), The existence of ‘relational cycles’ of solar activity on a multi-decadal to centennial scale, as significant models of climate change on earth. SSRC Research Report 1-2008 – The RC Theory, http://www.spaceandscience.net.
Comments from the research report:
“ As a result of the theory, it can be predicted that the next solar minimum may start within the next 3-14 years, and last 2-3 solar cycles or approximately 22-33 years. …It is estimated that there will be a global temperature drop on average between 1.0 and 1.5 degrees C, if not lower, at least on the scale of the Dalton Minimum. …This forecast next solar minimum will likely be accompanied by the coldest period globally for the past 200 years and as such, has the potential to result in world wide, agricultural, social, and economic disruption.”

6. Dr. Peter Harris. Engineer, retired, Queensland, Australia.
From his analysis of glacial and interglacial cycles he concludes: “…we can say there is a probability of 94% of imminent global cooling and the beginning of the coming ice age.”

7. Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera. Researcher at the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
His comments from his research released in August 2008: “…in two years or so, there will be a small ice age that lasts for 60-80 years.”

8. Dr’s. Y.T.Hong, H.B. Jiang, T.S. Liu, L.P.Zhou, J.Beer, H.D. Li, X.T.Leng, B.Hong, and X.G. Qin.
From their paper: Response of climate to solar forcing recorded in 6,000-year (isotope) O18 time-series of Chinese peat cellulose. The Holocene 10.1 (2000) pp. 1-7.
The Chinese team of researchers observed “…a striking correspondence of climate events to nearly all of the apparent solar activity changes.”
In showing O18 isotope measurements were high during the coldest periods they concluded, “If the trend after AD 1950 continues…the next maximum of the peat O18 (and therefore cold maximum) would be expected between about AD 2000 and AD 2050.”

9. Dr. Boris Komitov, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Institute of
Astronomy, and Dr. Vladimir Kaftan: Central Research Institute of Geodesy, Moscow.
From their paper: Komitov, B., and V. Kaftan, (2004), The sunspot activity in the last two millennia on the basis of indirect and instrumented indexes: time series models and their extrapolations for the 21st century, paper presented at the International Astronomical Union Symposium No. 223.
Comment from paper: “It follows from their extrapolations for the 21st century that a supercenturial solar minimum will be occurring during the next few decades….It will be similar in magnitude to the Dalton minimum, but probably longer as the last one.”

10. Dr. Theodor Landscheidt (1927- 2004), Schroeter Institiute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity, Canada)
Among his comments from many years of research on solar climate forcing include: “Contrary to the IPCC’s speculation about man made warming as high as 5.8(degrees)C within the next hundred years, a long period of cool climate with its coldest phase around 2030 is to be expected.”

11. Dr. Ernest Njau: University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
From his paper: Njau, E., (2005), Expected halt in current global warming trend?, Renewable Energy, Vol.30, Issue 5, pp.743-752.
Comment from paper: “… the mean ‘global temperature variations reaches the next peak about 2005 after which it will expectedly be on a decreasing trend. Finally it is shown that…Greenland is currently in an ongoing cooling trend which is expected to last up to at least the year 2035.”

12. Dr. Tim Patterson: Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton Univ., Can.
From an article in the Calgary Times: May 18, 2007. Indeed, one of the more interesting, if not alarming statements Patterson made before the Friends of Science luncheon is satellite data shows that by the year 2020 the next solar cycle is going to be solar cycle 25 – the weakest one since the Little Ice Age (that started in the 13th century and ended around 1860) a time when people living in London, England, used to walk on a frozen Thames River and food was scarcer. Patterson: “This should be a great strategic concern in Canada because nobody is farming north of us.” In other words, Canada – the great breadbasket of the world - just might not be able to grow grains in much of the prairies.

13.Dr’s. Ken K. Schatten and W.K.Tobiska.
From their paper presented at the 34th Solar Physics Division meeting of the American Astronomical Society, June 2003:
“The surprising result of these long range predictions is a rapid decline in solar activity, starting with cycle #24. If this trend continues, we may see the Sun heading towards a “Maunder” type of solar activity minimum – an extensive period of reduced levels of solar activity.”

14. Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin. Merited Scientist of Russia and Fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences and researcher at the Oceanology Institute.
From recent news articles, regarding the next climate change he has said: “Astrophysics know two solar cycles, of 11 and 200 years. Both are caused by changes in the radius and area of irradiating solar surface….Earth has passed the peak of its warmer period and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by 2012. real cold will come when solar activity reaches its minimum, by 2041,and will last for 50-60 years or even longer.”

15. Dr’s. Ian Wilson, Bob Carter, and I.A. Waite.
From their paper: Does a Spin-Orbit Coupling Between the Sun and the Jovian Planets Govern the Solar Cycle? Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia 25(2) 85-93 June 2008).
Dr. Wilson adds the following clarification:
“It supports the contention that the level of activity on the Sun will significantly diminish sometime in the next decade and remain low for about 20-30 years. On each occasion that the Sun has done this in the past the World’s mean temperature has dropped by ~ 1-2 C.”

16. Dr’s. Lin Zhen-Shan and Sun Xian. Nanjing Normal University, China
From their paper in Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, 95,115-121: Multi-scale analysis of global temperature changes and trend of a drop in temperature in the next 20 years.
“… we believe global climate changes will be in a trend of falling in the following 20 years.”


A lot of people are putting their reputations on the line. Here is Habibullo again.

Will these guys be any more accurate than the global warming alarmists? Have we learned anything about how the SUN affects our climate? Time will tell.

In preparation for RIO+20

The RIO+20  conference in June 2012 will feature biodiversity prominently in its agenda as it seeks to broaden the climate change non-issue into a wider concern with even more dire consequences.

In preparation for the assault on human intelligence some contrary evidence is presented that you won't hear about at the conference. You be the judge.

Here is C3's list of papers on the effects of climate change on biodiversity.

Global warming rescues rare butterfly

Polar bears and Penguins are doing well

Coral Reefs are surviving

Tropical forests like global warming

Flowers love CO2

The news is even better than you thought! Portuguese grapes like CO2

Corn vs Drought   - corn will need less water under elevated conditions of CO2. This has been a general finding for flora.

Global Climate Models are not good for crop predictions. It is better than we think

We won't get this in a warming world. Rats come in out of the cold.

This just in. UN seeks protection from liability prior to RIO+20. Dr Tim Ball asks: “What is going on here? It suggests they are feeling pressure for liability for their activities?” Read the comments. People know what is going on.

WWF and RIO+20 - delusional?

Bjorn on RIO+20

Bjorn Lomborg has once again drawn attention to the opportunity costs of focusing on global warming as a pressing human problem while neglecting death dealing dangers facing the poor.

"So, for each person who might die from global warming, about 210 people die from health problems that result from a lack of clean water and sanitation, from breathing smoke generated by burning dirty fuels (such as dried animal dung) indoors, and from breathing polluted air outdoors.
By focusing on measures to prevent global warming, the advanced countries might help to prevent many people from dying. That sounds good until you realize that it means that 210 times as many people in poorer countries might die needlessly as a result – because the resources that could have saved them were spent on windmills, solar panels, biofuels, and other rich-world fixations."

This will remain the shame of warmist alarmists in perpetuity. 

I hope Bjorn's comments receive wide circulation in RIO next week.

An Answer to Tom Toles' Burning Question

Over at the Washington Post, Tom Toles has a burning question.

"As the west is once again ablaze in what is now politely called “fire season,” perhaps soon to be “conflagration season,”"

Conflagration season? Now that wouldn't be alarmist would it? Come on Tom. Fires have happened in days of yore when CO2 concentration was much lower than now. CO2 has nothing to do with it. Isn't that the correct conclusion?

"Weather increasingly comes in three forecasts: Out of control wildfires, out of control rainfall, and out of control wind"

I don't see a link in there. Any data to support the 'increasingly' adverb? Here is some US data to dispute it. Collected by a government agency not paid for with oil money. The old normal was massive forest fires. Colorado has seen it before even in January.

Some perspective on our warm March and May can be found here.

And Tom, we usually use the “if this is climate change, I’ll take it!” comment with respect to temperatures. But you know that. We don't like forest fires anymore than you do but they are a fact of life and fortunately not getting any worse.

Tom, change is what the climate does. Dispute.

Tom, clouds cool. On a hot day when a cloud moves in front of the sun you feel warmer right? Dispute

Yes, Tom. As the Earth warms forest floors add GHGs to the atmosphere. Same thing with the oceans as the world warms. Warming first, GHGs follow. You got it! Exactly what the Vostok ice cores show. What caused the initial warming? The SUN maybe?? Ocean cycles?? And how do the POSITIVE FEEDBACKS explain the US cooling trend. Could it be that the nefarious effects of CO2 have been overestimated?

It is a sure thing that those who deny what reality is telling them are bound to spend money wastefully on non-problems. This is an intelligent use of our resources. /sarc

Alarmists have reached their own 'tipping point' and have crossed over to the delusional world of Harold Camping. Do alarmists need to be in a perpetual state of alarm in order to feel alive and purposeful? Do they need to dish out FEAR and GUILT with every meal?

And what about the rest of the world that experienced a horrible winter in 2011-2012, where did their POSITIVE FEEDBACK from their CO2 go? How come their CO2 didn't work for them like it did for the Eastern US and southern Ontario? That is the real burning question.

Maybe, just maybe, CO2 has naught to do with it. Yuh think?

And that should be good news.

Natural Climate Change - Consider

Food for thought

Which is it?

Two studies appeared this week (May 7) which attribute global warming to two different causes. So which is it? Sun or Farts?

It is the SUN  in solar minimum that can cause cooling of the planet. And we seem to be headed that way.

It is the FARTS  of dinosaurs that caused the climate change that killed them off. They committed suicide via flatulence. What a joke!           

Polar Bears are thought to be threatened by too little ice.

Here is a study which suggests PB populations crash when there is too much ice.

So which is it?

White, Male and Old

This white male who is aged beyond the grave has some pertinent advice for us. St Thomas Aquinas reminds us to play the ball not the man.

Ask not who made the claim; ask instead if the claim is true.

Suzanne Goldenberg on the Heartland Climate Change conference attendees in Chicago May 21-23 2012:

'Speakers and audience are almost entirely male, white and getting on in years'

SG likes to score points with her audience rather than engage in  meaningful dialogue on the causes of climate change. 

57 warmist scientists were invited to speak at the conference. None appeared. Why? 

Damn white men ruined Australia in 1846

Begin challenging your own assumptions.  Your assumptions are your windows on the world.  Scrub them off every once in awhile, or the light won't come in.  ~Alan Alda

 

 

 

 

 

 

Klimate Kooks

Scientists can reasonably say: Here is what we think we know. This statement sums up the dynamic process that scientific investigation entails. It recognizes the ignorance present in all scientific inquiry. We are not yet omniscient and it is always best to remain humble in the presence of an enigmatic natural environment. When scientists act like all-knowing religious zealots and forget their humility with definite prognostications of the future our skeptical radar should automatically activate as a protective device. Harold Camping of recent 'end of the world' fame was suitably humbled by reality and his religious views were shown to be kooky to all of his admiring sheeple not to mention an ever hopeful media. He did neither himself nor his followers any favors by treating his mistaken non peer reviewed calculations as gospel. Those who claim special knowledge are immediately suspect in the world of the skeptic. Harold removed himself from future seer consideration. His crystal ball was shown to be broken. But that was religion, a realm filled with fanciful opinion and belief and those that have a mind to are free to engage their imaginations without the restraint of reality. We accept that.

However, when scientists similarly step outside the humility of  'this is what we think we know' and offer predictions of the future without humble caveats they proceed into the realm that Harold C. has so ignominiously vacated and will copy his result. This is not good for their reputations as serious scientists nor is it good for the discipline of science itself. It cheapens what otherwise is our road to enlightenment and  makes a mockery out of a serious guide to human betterment. It strengthens the fanciful to be just as reliable as science.

In the realm of global warming/climate change/climate disruption several scientists have in the past and in the present danced in the limelight of tomfoolery without, it seems, any awareness of the damage they are doing to themselves and to their scientific discipline or to the fact that others less inclined to the need for fame are mocking their spotlight appearances. 

In the 1970s Paul Ehrlich of Population Bomb fame predicted mass famine for the human race before the turn of the 20th century. Undeterred and unrepentant by his failed predictions he continues to marginalize himself among a dwindling band of admirers.

James Lovelock of Gaia hypothesis fame famously once said “billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable” by the end of the 21st century.

He, to his credit, has since repudiated his alarmist notions of climate change. This allows him to step back under the scientific umbrella and be a voice heeded once again.

When a scientist steps into the role of activist for a cause rather than remain an impartial seeker of truth the temptation to play the role of omniscient expert can lead to embarrassment when the data don't support the conclusion being pursued or the temptation to manufacture results that support the cause in fraudulent disregard for the truth which will attract nothing but the deserved opprobrium of fellow colleagues uncorrupted by star quality attention.. The latter is a sad ending and betrayal for any scientist.

It appears that James Hansen of NASA's GISS has chosen this road to infamy. First, an apocalyptic prediction: "If Canada proceeds, and we do nothing, it will be game over for the climate." He was talking about Canada's development of its tar sands for oil export. Game over for us too, I suppose. Hysterical talk detected, skeptical radar on. There is no evidence that the burning of fossil fuels is leading to CAGW. In fact, there seems to be ample evidence that the scare is unwarranted. Perhaps, suspecting that that is so,Mr. Hansen has been caught adjusting the temperature records over which he has some control to fulfill his preferred view of the world's climate direction. If Nature won't behave as I want I will make it. It must be true. I have staked my career and life's work on it. Hansen's scary climate predictions have been contradicted by scientists and others with a working brain are dubious.

Reality is no fan either.

CAGW does lead to Conning A Gullible World.

At least, this is what I think I know.

Chill Bill

Bill McKibben of 350.org fame sounds off in an article in Asia Times.

He is rejoicing at the troubles experienced recently by those whom he calls climate change 'deniers'.

His outburst of apocalyptic announcements regarding the state of the planet betrays his political opinions and reassures me that the planet is fine. Doomsayers are never right. The Earth always proves to be more resilient than they give it credit for. Doomsayers like to frighten people into accepting totalitarian solutions to non-problems. Bill's prognostications will find their way into the Hallowed Hall of Failed Predictions just like those of Harold Camping.

Facts are not McKibben's strong point although he does recognize the effective influence of the Climate Depot and Watt's Up With That web sites that keep people informed about the truth concerning the modern global warming scare.

As Anthony Watts comments:

Couple of things Bill, since I know you read WUWT:

1. Where’s the beef?
2. Hansen’s alternate view of cause was swept under the rug, he’s flip-flopped on the causes of global warming back and forth.
3. Climate “Deniers” Winning the War

Bill calls climate deniers planet wreckers and says that if they can delay climate action past the point of no return "they’ll be able to claim one of the epic victories in political history – one that will last for geological epochs."

Not just a political science victory but as Anthony's links show a real science epic victory as well. And we hope that Bill is correct about the geological epochs. It would be nice to rid the world of climate change fear mongers for that length of time. Not holding my breath!

The point of no return, the tipping point - when is that exactly, Bill? Oh yes, there is no consensus on that one for if it were ever unsuccessfully passed the funding would dry up.  Thus the end date always leap frogs from climate conference to climate conference. Even though the world is 'on the brink' there is always time for a new conference to reintroduce the next scary date.

WUWT Commenter KENG succinctly captures the flavor of Bill's article:

"Typical professional alarmist rhetoric, just one long ad hom, no actual science discussed. What was it Lindzen said? “When the science is on your side you argue the science. When it’s not, you attack the messenger”.

McKibben’s article is another perfect example."

Bill swill!