Log In  |  Help  |  Mobile View  
 
Visiting Richard Carr's Shares (account name: richard)
 
 Global Warming articles
  

2011-03-18  Climate High-Sticking  You are not allowed to do this in science.  How they changed the data since 1960

2011-03-02  Global Warming Alarmists Flip-Flop On Snowfall 

2010-12-07  Great powerpoint article on the Sea is NOT rising.  Points out how they change the data.  Observation does not support the models
2010-10-04  THE GLOBAL WARMING HOAX: A SUMMARY
2010-09-14  The Global Warming Establishment Needs More than Cosmetic Fixes  balance review that stresses the need for major reforms of the establishment
2010-07-30  Global Warming is the Earth's fault, by Meterologist Roy Spencer  
2010-02-28  GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD: THE BIG PICTURE  not to lose sight of the most important point: the IPCC's fundamental conclusions, relating to the allegedly unprecedented warming of the past half-century, are based on bad surface temperature data and are contradicted by more-reliable satellite data and by our knowledge of the earth's climate history. We know for a fact, in short, that the computer models that are the only basis for the AGW theory are wrong ... because the data from weather satellites showed little warming trend of the atmosphere since 1979.

2010-02-14  IT'S NOT APOSTASY
    1860-1880: 21 0.163 Yes
    1910-1940: 31 0.15 Yes
    1975-1998: 24 0.166 Yes
    1975-2009: 35 0.161 Yes
---
One need not be a hard-core global warming skeptic to question whether we should alter the way we live in response to predictions based on findings that cannot be checked because the raw data was intentionally destroyed by the outfit that made the findings.
---
Can I read these emails and feel that the scientists involved deserve to be trusted? No, I cannot. These people are willing to subvert the very methods--notably, peer review--that underwrite the integrity of their discipline.
----
If you have to argue your science by using fraud, your science is not valid.

THE CLIMATE CHANGE SCAM: A CONCISE SUMMARY  http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/12/025239.php
December 25, 2009 Posted by John at 4:16 PM

In the wake of Climategate, common sense deniers like to say that there is lots of other evidence for global warming, in addition to that which has been debunked by the East Anglia whistleblower. Actually, however, the scientific evidence for AGW is remarkably weak. At Icecap, Lee Gerhard, geologist and reviewer for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, sums up the key scientific evidence with admirable brevity:

It is crucial that scientists are factually accurate when they do speak out, that they ignore media hype and maintain a clinical detachment from social or other agendas. There are facts and data that are ignored in the maelstrom of social and economic agendas swirling about Copenhagen. Greenhouse gases and their effects are well-known. Here are some of things we know:

• The most effective greenhouse gas is water vapor, comprising approximately 95 percent of the total greenhouse effect.

• Carbon dioxide concentration has been continually rising for nearly 100 years. It continues to rise, but carbon dioxide concentrations at present are near the lowest in geologic history.

• Temperature change correlation with carbon dioxide levels is not statistically significant.

• There are no data that definitively relate carbon dioxide levels to temperature changes.

• The greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide logarithmically declines with increasing concentration. At present levels, any additional carbon dioxide can have very little effect.

We also know a lot about Earth temperature changes:

• Global temperature changes naturally all of the time, in both directions and at many scales of intensity.

The warmest year in the U.S. in the last century was 1934, not 1998. The U.S. has the best and most extensive temperature records in the world.

Global temperature peaked in 1998 on the current 60-80 year cycle, and has been episodically declining ever since. This cooling absolutely falsifies claims that human carbon dioxide emissions are a controlling factor in Earth temperature.

Voluminous historic records demonstrate the Medieval Climate Optimum (MCO) was real and that the "hockey stick" graphic that attempted to deny that fact was at best bad science. The MCO was considerably warmer than the end of the 20th century.

• During the last 100 years, temperature has both risen and fallen, including the present cooling. All the changes in temperature of the last 100 years are in normal historic ranges, both in absolute value and, most importantly, rate of change.

Contrary to many public statements:

• Effects of temperature change are absolutely independent of the cause of the temperature change.

• Global hurricane, cyclonic and major storm activity is near 30-year lows. Any increase in cost of damages by storms is a product of increasing population density in vulnerable areas such as along the shores and property value inflation, not due to any increase in frequency or severity of storms.

• Polar bears have survived and thrived over periods of extreme cold and extreme warmth over hundreds of thousands of years extremes far in excess of modern temperature changes.

• The 2009 minimum Arctic ice extent was significantly larger than the previous two years. The 2009 Antarctic maximum ice extent was significantly above the 30-year average. There are only 30 years of records.

• Rate and magnitude of sea level changes observed during the last 100 years are within normal historical ranges. Current sea level rise is tiny and, at most, justifies a prediction of perhaps ten centimeters rise in this century.

The present climate debate is a classic conflict between data and computer programs. The computer programs are the source of concern over climate change and global warming, not the data. Data are measurements. Computer programs are artificial constructs.

Public announcements use a great deal of hyperbole and inflammatory language. For instance, the word "ever" is misused by media and in public pronouncements alike. It does not mean "in the last 20 years," or "the last 70 years." "Ever" means the last 4.5 billion years.

For example, some argue that the Arctic is melting, with the warmest-ever temperatures. One should ask, "How long is ever?" The answer is since 1979. And then ask, "Is it still warming?" The answer is unequivocally "No." Earth temperatures are cooling. Similarly, the word "unprecedented" cannot be legitimately used to describe any climate change in the last 8,000 years.

SCOTT adds: The direct link to Gerhard's piece is here.


When people fall for the global warming scam, it's usually because they lack a basic understanding of the Earth's modern climate history. Writing for Pajamas Media, Matt Patterson Matt Patterson  provides a succinct history lesson:

Make no mistake -- the earth has warmed. Unfortunately for the climate-change catastrophists, warming periods have occurred throughout recorded history, long before the Industrial Revolution and SUVs began spitting man-made carbon into the atmosphere. And as might be expected, these warm periods have invariably proven a blessing for humanity. Consider:

Around the 3rd century B.C., the planet emerged from a long cold spell. The warm period which followed lasted about 700 years, and since it coincided with the rise of Pax Romana, it is known as the Roman Warming.

In the 5th century A.D., the earth's climate became cooler. Cold and drought pushed the tribes of northern Europe south against the Roman frontier. Rome was sacked, and the Dark Ages commenced. And it was a dark age, both metaphorically and literally -- the sun's light dimmed and gave little warmth; harvest seasons grew shorter and yielded less. Life expectancy and literacy plummeted. The plague appeared and decimated whole populations.

Then, inexplicably, about 900 A.D. things began to warm. This warming trend would last almost 400 years, a well documented era known as the Medieval Warm Period. Once again, as temperatures rose harvests and populations grew. Vineyards made their way into Northern Europe, including Britain. Art and science flourished in what we now know as the Renaissance.

Then around 1300 A.D. things cooled drastically. This cold spell would last almost 500 years, a severe climate event known as the Little Ice Age. Millions died in famine as glaciers advanced all over the world. The plague returned. In Greenland, the Norse colony that had been established during the Medieval Warming froze and starved. Arctic pack ice descended south, pushing Inuit peoples to the shores of Scotland. People ice skated on the Thames; they walked from Staten Island to Manhattan over a frozen New York Harbor. The year 1816 was remembered as the year without a summer, with some portions of the Northern Hemisphere seeing snowfall in June.

But around 1850 the planet began to warm up yet again. Glaciers retreated. Temperatures rose. This is the warming period which we are still enjoying today. And once again, the warmth brought bounty: The last 150 years have seen an explosion in life expectancy, population, and scientific progress like never before.

Of course, even before the appearance of humans, the earth alternated throughout its history between extremes of heat and cold: 700 million years ago the planet was covered entirely in ice; 55 million years ago, a swampy greenhouse.

Why? What drives these ancient cycles? There are a lot of theories. The waxing and waning of solar output; cosmic rays and their role in cloud formation; the earth moving through plumes of galactic dust as it travels up and down through the arm of the Milky Way; plate tectonics redirecting the ocean currents; vulcanism. Perhaps it is a combination of all of these things. Perhaps it is something as yet undiscovered. One thing for sure that it's not: SUVs.

Why, then, do otherwise sensible people believe that we are both causing the current warming and that the warmth is a bad thing? To me it seems some grotesque combination of narcissism and self-loathing, a mentality that says at once "I am so important that my behavior is causing this" and "I am so inherently tainted that it must be bad."

For these self-hating humans who want us to cut our carbs (carbons, not carbohydrates), I say relax and enjoy the warmth while it lasts.

Because it won't. No matter what we do, the ice and the cold and the dark will come again. That should be our worry.

 
2009-02-15  Apocalypse Now? Highly Unlikely  -- George Will talked about Global cooling scare in the 1970's and ends with "according to the U.N.'s World Meteorological Organization, there has been no recorded global warming for more than a decade, or one-third of the span since the global cooling scare.".  Also says "According to the University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center, global sea ice levels now equal those of 1979".
Especially these four quotes
  1. In the 1970s, "a major cooling of the planet" was "widely considered inevitable" because it was "well established" that the Northern Hemisphere's climate "has been getting cooler since about 1950" (The New York Times, May 21, 1975).
  2. According to the University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center, global sea ice levels now equal those of 1979.
  3. An unstated premise of eco-pessimism is that environmental conditions are, or recently were, optimal
  4. according to the U.N.'s World Meteorological Organization, there has been no recorded global warming for more than a decade, or one-third of the span since the global cooling scare.
These are some of the reasons why I'm (and others) are skeptical of 1) Global warming and 2) Man is primarily responsible for the so called "global warming".
  
2008-12-14  Powerline  

This displays a remarkable level of ignorance on the part of the Associated Press. Global temperature records are nowhere near accurate enough to rank years, over a period of centuries, with any confidence. For the recent past, though, we have the world's best data set here in the U.S. And it's true that at one time, it was widely believed that the 1990s were the warmest recent decade. But that was before it was discovered that NASA's James Hansen, Al Gore's chief scientific ally, had been fudging the data, either accidentally or on purpose. NASA was forced to correct its data, with the result that the ten warmest years on record here in the US are as follows: 1934, 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999, 1953, 1990, 1938, 1939.

The AP apparently hasn't gotten the word, perhaps because it is relying on the report of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But the IPCC report was a political document, not a scientific one, which deliberately ignored the most current research in the field.  Finally, the AP's claim that the last 11 years have included all of the 10 warmest "on record" is plausible only if you take a very narrow view of the record. It seems obvious that when we talk about the planet's climate, a broader perspective is necessary. So here is the broader perspectivehttp://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/media/WeatherData190.jpg

 

When we talk about "global warming" it is important to ask the right questions. Is the earth continuing to warm up from the "Little Ice Age"? Yes, it has been, at least until recently. Fortunately. Is the earth continuing to warm up from the last real Ice Age, around 10,000 years ago, when the spot where I am now typing was buried under ice a half mile thick? Yes, thankfully! Is the earth warming up compared to where it was five or ten years ago? No.

Many scientists believe that we are entering an era of global cooling. That may or may not be true; climate science is in its infancy and we cannot predict with any confidence what the weather will be 10, 20, or 50 years hence. What we can say for certain is that the way in which the weather "issue" is covered by the Associated Press and other media outlets is a disgrace.

 
 
2008-05-04 Earth is being to cool and the global warming models are way off on what is happening how  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/05/04/do0405.xml
What the WWF omitted to mention was that by March the ice had recovered to 14 million sq km (see the website Cryosphere Today), and that ice-cover around the Bering Strait and Alaska that month was at its highest level ever recorded. (At the same time Antarctic sea ice-cover was also at its highest-ever level, 30 per cent above normal).


Creation date: Dec 31, 1969 11:00 pm     Last modified date: Mar 18, 2011 10:32 am   Last visit date: Dec 8, 2016 11:43 pm     link & embed ?...
1 / 1000 comments
Dec 26, 2009  ( 1 comment )  
12/26/2009
10:09 pm
Tom Carr (penpaint)
This is great information. Thanks for sharing!!
    Report Objectionable Content   
Select a Color