It is no longer global warming because it isn't.

It is climate change because it does.

Men are never so likely to settle a question rightly as when they discuss it freely.

— Thomas B. Macaulay (1800-1859), Essay on Southey's Colloquies

All of us could take a lesson from the weather. It pays no attention to criticism.


About Me

My photo
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.

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Water Vapor is a Coolant

Water vapor is a coolant.


GreenHouse Gases(GHGs) are supposed to TRAP heat are they not?

So how come they don’t?

IF 'greenhouse gases' absorb but do not emit, then they can’t be regarded as radiative heating agents for anything. On the other hand, if greenhouse gases do emit what they absorb, then they can’t be said to “trap” radiation. Alan Siddons

Maybe GHGs don’t trap heat!






Rate of Change

Rate of Change




“Before that sets you off, no one is saying that levels and temperatures weren't higher in the past because scientists openly admit those facts. We are simply pointing out that the rate at which those levels and temperatures changed to those values was MUCH slower and that the rate of change is the biggest issue.”

BUT...

The trends in climate metrics over the last 60 years are either steady, flat, decreasing or we have seen it all before.

If the trend began prior to those 60 years it has not accelerated. Acceleration during the last 60 years would be a human fingerprint on the thermostat.

Temperatures would not have slowed then reversed since 2001 such that there has now been no increase in the global mean temperature(GMT) for over 18 years even as CO2 has continued to rise unabated in the air.

Sea levels have been increasing steadily since the end of the little ice age(LIA) until 2002 when they started to decelerate. A human influence over the last 60 years would have shown an accelerating trend indicative of faster melting glaciers and ice caps.

There has been no increasing trend in extreme weather of any kind over the last 60 years. Either there is no trend or its is negative which is actually a positive. Less severe weather with increasing CO2. Thank-you CO2. Or CO2 has nothing to do with it and the correlations are just incidental and not causal.












Doesn’t this seem like a waste of money in the face of the ‘rate of change’ argument?


However, perhaps the rate of change in scientific findings which contradict the CO2 centric theory has been accelerating.

The rate of greenie hypocrisy shows no signs of slowing down. Are they even aware of their own hypocrisy? Do they care how they appear to their minions? After announcing new bike lanes...

But Leo is the leader of the new HYPPIES.

And has inspired others

The rate of change is such a compelling argument that nothing outside the bounds of natural variability can be highlighted to fan the flames of fear. We have seen it all before. Even the vaunted Arctic sea ice loss can be accounted for via Arctic oscillations.

The rate of change is an imaginary driver of CO2 centric climate change unsupported by Mother Nature who has the only opinion that counts.  





When They Thought They Knew How the Climate Worked

Say hello to Global Cooling back in the 1970s when scientists thought they had spotted a trend. It appears that what they observed was the well known phenomenon that the climate changes continuously and cyclically.


When is the weather NOT wacky?





And now are they flipping back to COOLING?


Perhaps the climate cycles through cycles.

Regardless of the concentration of CO2, it warms, it cools. Mother Nature rules. Any who DENY it are fools.

Government vs Farmers

Alarmists vs Farmers


Who understands the climate better?


No doubt those in government think the farmers are simpletons who don’t know what they are talking about.
           
A farmer purchases an old, run-down, abandoned farm with plans to turn it into a thriving enterprise. The fields are grown over with weeds, the farmhouse is falling apart, and the fences are collapsing all around. During his first day of work, the town preacher stops by to bless the man's work, saying, "May you and God work together to make this the farm of your dreams!"

A few months later, the preacher stops by again to call on the farmer. Lo and behold, it's like a completely different place -- the farmhouse is completely rebuilt and in excellent condition, there is plenty of cattle and other livestock happily munching on feed in well-fenced pens, and the fields are filled with crops planted in neat rows. "Amazing!" the preacher says. "Look what God and you have accomplished together!"

"Yes, reverend," says the farmer, "but remember what the farm was like when God was working it alone!"

Government has a bad habit of collecting know it alls loaded with Phds. They are paid by government and have an incentive to produce and support fearful findings which will drive funding their way. Fearful Findings For Funding should be the name of their lobby group.

But governments forget what farmers have learned. Phds do not come with a direct line to the truth and they stopped handing them out with a guarantee of infallibility.


The comments in the above blog post are worth a read.

The SOP of any National Academy of Science: Fearful Findings For Funding

No research grants flow to those who report all is well. The incentives to find fault, especially POGO fault, pervert the pursuit of truth.
Unlike government funded scientists farmers cannot ignore reality and still make a living.


Well, That was Quick

Well, that was quick!





New movie to be released soon - The Rise of the Climate Skeptics

Popliticians are Complicit

Politicians are complicit and they know it. Politicians have money to dispense and everyone one else is scheming to get their share. They are willingly being played by scientists, NGOs, cronies and the media. Politicians revel in their power. They can step on anyone and make their life miserable.

Will those who pander to the agenda of the powers that be receive preferential treatment?

In some regimes criticism is not tolerated. The DPRK and the ISIS caliphate come to mind. Regulators have power that is to be feared by the regulated.

People have learned that fear releases government money. Every time environmentalists come up with another doomsday scenario the NGOs get on board, cronies line up to ‘solve’ the ‘problem’ and the media hype the new ‘worry’ because, well, the world is just full of them you know. The media love a good scare story because it sells advertising. Do the media have an incentive to keep the scare going rather than to investigate the truth of the claims? If the media find out the ‘scare’ is bogus does the story and the advertising disappear? Is there less value in uncovering the truth and bringing fraudsters to light than in perpetuating the nonsense? Or is the media ideologically tipped toward government complicity? Traditional media in the MSM are also facing competition from the internet world of bloggers, youtubers and alternative news websites. Can kissing the feet of the powers that be lead to preferential treatment in getting a story first? Can kissing the feet of your regulators keep them off your back?

Everyone seems to benefit from the continuation of the scare, real or imagined, except the people who have to pay for it.

Can incentives be that perverted by the money and power available in the political process? Why are you laughing? I hear you.



The Debate is Over


The Debate is Over - only in the minds of the misinformed who don’t read Scientific Journals.

In a 2015 editorial on the dire consequences of human-caused climate change, Marcia McNutt, editor of the journal Science, stated with conviction that “the time for debate has ended.”




So why won’t alarmists publicly debate?


Image result for scaredy cat cartoon imagesImage result for scaredy cat cartoon images



“And, guess what? It’s not when, it’s happening now. You can see it every single day. You just need to get out of that telephone booth where other climate deniers hang out and open your eyes and see what’s happening.”

When hasn’t the climate been changing? The climate changes continuously because it is cyclical. Ice Age - Interglacial - Ice Age - Interglacial - Ice Age - Interglacial etc.

But the changes that are taking place are not being made in accordance with the predictions of the CO2 centric climate models and that is the point that skeptics are trying to get you to see. If you can’t predict you can’t indict!


There has always been extreme weather but even the IPCC realises that it is NOT increasing as CO2 rises. Here is what is going on Gina. Spend some time becoming familiar with how the planet is behaving. As CO2 rises GAIA surprises!

Neither sea level rise or extreme weather is getting worse as CO2 rises. Is this what you expect Gina? It is what Mother Nature is doing. We worry needlessly.  





The Antarctic shows growing surface ice mass and growing sea ice contrary to Global Climate Model expectations. Would you expect this in a GLOBAL warming world?



Precipitation shows a not show an increasing trend as would be expected if CO2 were driving our climate change.    


AS CO2 rises unabated in our atmosphere glaciers are not responding with faster retreat.


As CO2 rises aren’t we supposed to see a greater frequency of hot days? It has not been happening.


The doubts about CO2 as the star of our climate drama are piling up.


The good news continues to shine. We are living in a GREENer and safer world.




The scientific literature is full of such studies. Perhaps you need to spend some time with your head in the Science Journals rather than mindlessly repeating your talking points. Everyone agrees the climate is changing. That DOES NOT MEAN that CO2 is the cause. Separate question.

Gina, IS your staff shielding you from reality? .

SCIENCE tells us that the current concentration of CO2  in our atmosphere is 400 parts per million (ppm). SCIENCE tells us that over the last 600 million years CO2 has nested in our atmosphere in concentrations 10 to 20 times our contemporary 400 ppm. There was NO TIPPING POINT, NO RUNAWAY GLOBAL WARMING. We are here. This fact alone ought to quell the fears of a CO2 guided apocalypse. CO2 had its opportunity over many millions of years to trap heat and toast our planet but took a pass. Did CO2 fail its climate driving test?

SCIENCE tells us that there were many periods in pre-industrial times when temperatures exceeded or equalled those we experience today. Over the last 400,000 years three of the last 4 interglacials, the Holocene Climate Optimum, the Minoan Warm Period, The Roman Warm Period and the Medieval Warm Period all experienced warmth equal to or greater than our own. Since we are told by climate gurus like Al Gore that pre-industrial CO2 levels remained stable for 800,000 years those periods of warmth could not have been a result of changes in CO2 concentration. Does this not imply that the climate changes independently of the amount of CO2 in the air? Does this make Mother Nature a Man Made Climate Change DENIER?

In a 2013 interview in USA Today a NOAA spokesperson said the following.
Screen Shot 2015-11-09 at 8.30.18 AM
The last time the worldwide carbon level probably hit 400 ppm was about 2 million years ago, said Pieter Tans of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
That was during the Pleistocene Era. "It was much warmer than it is today," Tans said. "There were forests in Greenland. Sea level was higher, between 33 to 66 feet."

Would it be impertinent to ask why it isn’t that warm now that we have reached the auspicious milestone of 400 ppm in our air? Why aren’t sea levels 33 to 66 feet higher now like they were 2 million years ago?  Has CO2 lost its MoJo or does it suggest that CO2 has nothing to do with either temperature or sea level rise?

When you understand the above perhaps skeptics will allow you into the phone booth to continue the fight for Truth, Justice and the American Way.

Image result for Superman's phone booth
In our case the ‘S’ is for Skeptic.



Have a good day!



Blog Archive