Skiing on the stuff kids may never see

No snow in Canada by 2020

Mt. Norquay Kicks Off Ski Season in Canada Oct. 25 - OnTheSnow - earliest ever opening Oct 25 2012 Banff

Nakiska opening early - Calgary

Snowing on Mt Washington, B.C. - Oct 24, 2012

Ski resorts in California open early

The Science Show

On Australia’s The Science Show hosted by Robyn Williams entitled Attitudes to Climate Change Stephan Lewandowsky was interviewed by RW. The description to the show ran as follows:

“If 95, 96 or 97% of scientists say that human activity is driving the world temperature higher, why is it that some people reject the view of the overwhelming majority? Stephan Lewandowsky  has studied scepticism. In the field of climate science the so-called sceptics he says are not sceptical, they are rejecting the evidence for ideological reasons, and a personal world view.  He says extremist market ideology leads people to reject climate science. They are rejecting the enlightenment, and all that has been achieved over hundreds of years. He says there is a false consensus effect and the media has done a terrible job at representing climate science. News Limited publications in Australia systematically misrepresent climate science. Denial is a way of wishful thinking. He says solutions need to be highlighted along with new entrepreneurial opportunities as climate changes and the challenges increase.”

In answer to the first question is it perhaps that people do not believe the most often quoted 97% figure? Has RW or the Science Show’s staff ever researched where that number came from? Would they continue to quote it if they did? I will now redo the comments above attributed to Lewandowsky as he should have responded if he was aware of what was really going on and was himself of a different ideological bent.

“In the field of climate science the so-called warmists he says are not sceptical, they are  rejecting the evidence for ideological reasons, and a personal world view. He says extremist socialist ideology leads people to reject climate science. They are rejecting the enlightenment, and all that has been achieved over hundreds of years. He says there is a false consensus effect and the media has done a terrible job at representing climate science. News Limited publications in Australia systematically misrepresent climate science. Alarmism is a way of wishful thinking. He says solutions will be identified along with new entrepreneurial opportunities to allow the market to respond as climate changes to meet any challenges as they arise.”

There you go Stephan. Now you got it. All it takes is the eyes to see the evidence does not point to CAGW. Not even close. But you have to check your ideological proclivities at the door and allow your mind to work like a parachute.

RW went off the rails on this episode of The Science Show which perhaps would present Stephan an opportunity to practice his profession and examine RW’s psychological attitudes(aberrations) in likening skeptics to pedophiles, asbestos promoters and drug pushers. Name calling tends to be used as a retort to being called a name or as a curtain covering the ignorance behind. In this case, it does serve to highlight the paucity of evidence possessed by the self proclaimed wizards of climate knowledge. In light of the light evidence for CAGW RW’s invocation of some of the most vile characters imaginable is perhaps understandable as an expression of the frustration of a lost cause even as it is inaccurate. Does RW need apocalyptic angst to make him happy? Is there a support group for that? We don’t want him to suffer alone with his cark.

The image from AIT that is on the site could be labeled: Image: Al Gore incorrectly demonstrating changing atmospheric carbon dioxide and its relationship to temperature in An Inconvenient Truth.  This was one of the 11 errors identified by a judge in a British court case that resulted in the requirement that AIT be shown only if students were apprised of the errors beforehand.

But why bring that to anyone’s attention?

The restraint shown in my response should not be misconstrued as nonchalance toward highly objectionable content that would not likely be expressed face to face with another human being. Would it RW?

Trouble with the Consensus

“The vast majority of climate scientists say human activity — primarily emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation — is to blame for the rise in global temperatures seen in recent decades.”

Well, not for the last decade and a half.

Tom Nelson: Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met …

But this is the party line trumpeted ad nauseum by CAGW alarmists.

“One is the overwhelming scientific consensus. Every scientific academy in the world supports the scientific consensus, but the press is still not reporting concretely enough on the scientific consensus.” says Donald Brown, Climate Ethicist

Strange. Maybe the press has wizened up and now realize that the consensus is not all it is cracked up to be. Maybe the press is still looking for the polls conducted with the memberships of the scientific academies. Who was the independent polling agent? What were the questions that were asked? How many were polled? What was the return rate? Are the raw data available for anyone to examine? When those poll results are made available perhaps the press will report on them and be convinced that they were something other than political statements by organizations that do PAID work for their governments.

Here are some recent cracks in the solidarity of the so-called ‘consensus’ on CAGW.

Financial Post Open Letter by 125 scientists

Top British Science Body in Revolt over Global Warming Censorship

MURDOCK: Spacemen to NASA: Cool it on global warming - Washington Times

Here is an older one that details the many scientists who object to CAGW.

But most importantly, Mother Nature continues to report disagreement with the CAGW theory. Is anybody listening? And hers is the only voice that counts.

New paper finds no increase in extreme weather in Europe over past 250 years -- Paper published in European Physical Journal

The Climate Scam Of The Day – Melting Permafrost: We've heard it all before

Analysis: US Climate Becoming Much Less Extreme -- 'Both record maximums & record min have been on decline...The year 1936 was by far the most extreme year in US history'

EPA Say Heatwaves Much Worse in 1930's: 'Heat waves occurred with high frequency in the 1930s, and these remain the most severe heat waves in the U.S. historical record'

BBC Confirms That Polar Melt Has Almost No Effect On Sea Level

Gore effect timed to UN climate summit in Qatar: Globe Seized By Bitter Cold – Arctic Sees Record Refreeze – UK Faces 100-Year Winter – Snow In New Zealand!

Global warming still stalled since 1998, WMO Doha figures show: 'There is now some admission even from the hardest climate hardliners that something may be going on which is not understood'

New paper finds Arizona droughts were less frequent and less extreme during 20th century -- Paper published in Climatic Change -- 'Reconstructs droughts in NE Arizona over past 400 years'

New paper shows a large increase of solar radiation in Spain since 1985, dwarfs alleged effect of CO2 -- Published today in Global and Planetary Change

Climate Claim Fail: UN claims of 'sea levels are rising 60% faster' taken apart -- Using Their Own Numbers, Sea Level Rise Actually Slowed Down 3%!

12 Straight Months Of Above Normal Antarctic Sea Ice: 'Today marks 365 consecutive days of above normal Antarctic sea ice'

The 2012 Arctic sea ice reaches a record low due to an August polar cyclone and the press jump all over this like it is the canary in the coal mine. The record refreeze in the Arctic has been completely ignored. Why? It is not scary therefore it is not news. The press fail to point out that according to the CAGW theory both poles are supposed to be melting. Antarctic sea ice has been above normal for 12 months straight which blows the theory out of the water and it is not news? It should be good news. We still don’t understand what is going on at the poles but whatever it is, it is not CAGW.

The evidence continues to mount that there is no climate crisis and all that we have been doing to reduce CO2 emissions has been unnecessary. What a waste of time, effort and taxpayer money.

From the Mountain of Consensus

And the department of climate comedy:

The consensus isn’t so amicable it seems

Kevin Trenberth thinks global warming will be at the high end of estimates.

Michael Schlesinger thinks global warming will be at the low end of estimates.

What is a lay person to think?

That the scientists are FoS and do not know what they are talking about?

After 16 years of temperatures flatlining perhaps they should abandon their models and try another theory.

Climate science is turning into an oxymoron where nothing is settled.

Recent Science Does Not Support AGW

December 2012


Special Report on Extreme Weather - trending down  

Global Warming Produces A Significant Reduction In North American Wildland Fires

NOAA Verifies That Warmer 2012 Temperatures In U.S. Cause A Decline In Severe Weather

Confirmed: Climate Models & Experts Unable To Predict Global Temperatures, Climate Research Fails

Once again, reality trumps models – Pacific SST’s are flat

New science upsets calculations on sea level rise, climate change: 'Ice sheet melt massively overestimated, satellites show'

Heavy Snowfall Rejuvenates Himalayan Glaciers: 'New Evidence Undermines Climate Alarmism' -- 'The abundance of snow on mountains has rejuvenated nearly one thousand Himalayan glaciers'

New paper finds an accelerating increase of snow accumulation on Greenland -- Published in The Journal of Climate

German Meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls: Sea Level Rise Has Slowed 34% Over The Last Decade!

Prof. Pielke Jr.: 'There were 40% more intense hurricane landfalls 1950-1969 in NATL+WPAC as compared to 1970-2012 (ann avg)'

Pielke Jr.: 'Anyone who'd like to argue that the world is experiencing a 'new normal' with respect to tropical cyclones is simply mistaken. Over the past 4 years, the world is actually in the midst of a very low period in tropical cyclone landfalls -- at least as measured over the past 43 years'

New Record: 'Remarkable ongoing US 'intense hurricane drought' -- 'Such a prolonged period without an intense hurricane landfall has not been observed since 1900'

Prof. Pielke Jr.: 'The fashionable talk these days of a 'new normal' is of course utter bullsh*t. Just wait until we return to the 'old normal'

New media touted study of 'clear evidence' of man-made global warming 'falls apart for lack of a stable reference for the data'

New paper finds a significant decrease in Pacific tropical cyclones -- Published in The Journal of Climate

CoR End Times

“The acceleration of critical trends and cross-impacts among them indicates that the ‘window of opportunity’ for pulling out of the present global crisis and breaking through to a more peaceful and sustainable world is likely to be no more than four to five years from the end of 2008. This is close in time to the Mayan 2012 prophecy for the end of the current world. The period around the end of 2012 is likely to be a turbulent one for this and other reasons. Predictions coming from the physical sciences foresee disturbances in the geomagnetic, electromagnetic and related fields that embed the planet causing significant damage to telecommunications and impacting many aspects of human activity and health. For the esoteric traditions the end of 2012 will be the end of the known world, although the more optimistic interpretations speak of a new world taking the place of the old.” Club of Rome

Well, here we are at the end of 2012. It is December 1st 2012.

Still here. Let’s see how the month goes and how the prognostications above play out.

My own belief is that it is nonsense written by deluded people who are megalomaniacs. Does the CoR really expect us to take them seriously? If our leaders do we are all in big doo-doo.

When isn’t the world full of turbulence. Look at the recent Palestinian-Israeli dustup.

I predict we will still be here on Jan 1, 2013 in a world that looks very much like the one on Dec. 1st, 2012.

Mysteries of CO2

We are told that CO2 is a heat trapping gas and that accumulations of CO2 in the atmosphere due to accelerating human emissions are warming the planet. This is bad because we could all become human fricassee if we don’t curtail and even reverse our emissions. A limit of 2C temperature rise is seen as the absolute maximum that we can tolerate. My trip to florida is now cancelled.

Ben Freeman tweeted:
To all those who think global warming is a hoax made up by tree-hugging liberals: it's 80 degrees on Dec 3rd & you're an idiot. . .carry on.

And so Oklahoma Ben thinks he has just proven those skeptical of man made climate change to be stupid wrong.

We might want to ask Ben how he reconciles the 80F in Oklahoma on Dec 3rd with the -30C in Fairbanks Alaska in November. People in Fairbanks are burning wood to try and stay warm.

80F in Oklahoma on Dec 3rd = global warming?
-30C in Fairbanks Alaska in November = global cooling?

Fairbanks kinda takes the GLOBAL outta GLOBAL warming don’t it?

How does CO2 do that? And why do some people think where they are is what it is like everywhere else?

Does Fairbanks not have any CO2 in their air? Is their CO2 the transparent kind that lets heat through?

Do we need a CO2 index to tell us how much CO2 is in the air at different locations? Would this help us to understand how one place can be so warm while another is so cold at the same time of year? How come meteorologists don’t report the CO2 concentration in their forecasts? Isn’t it an important number?

The residents of Fairbanks can be excused for wondering why their CO2 is not working while that in Oklahoma is turning winter into summer. Perhaps Oklahoma can ship some of their heat trapping CO2 to Fairbanks. That seems fair.

The idiotic discussion above demonstrates that CO2 has no effect on the weather and therefore it has no effect on the climate. CO2 is a trace gas essential to life on Earth. We shouldn’t forget it. Meteorologists will have separate explanations for the conditions in Alaska and Oklahoma.

Hot here; cold there. Heat distribution not so rare. Have a look around, Ben. Oklahoma is not the center of the universe.

CO2 has been exhaled during the creation of this post. No living thing was harmed. Some even liked it.