25 2 mins 14 yrs

EarthAS17.jpgInteresting piece by Christopher Booker in the Sunday Telegraph concerning the alarming global cooling trend which has confounded the apostles for global warming!

"The fact is that what has been happening to the world’s climate in recent years, since global temperatures ceased to rise after 1998, was not predicted by any of those officially-sponsored models. The discrepancy between their predictions and observable data becomes more glaring with every month that passes.

 

It won’t do for believers in warmist orthodoxy to claim that, although temperatures may be falling, this is only because they are "masking an underlying warming trend that is still continuing" – nor to fob us off with assurances that the "German model shows that higher temperatures than 1998, the warmest year on record, are likely to return after 2015".

He is right. The punch-line is that "even as the wretched politicians are committing us to spending unimaginable sums on wind farms, emissions trading schemes, absurdly ambitious biofuel targets, and every kind of tax and regulation designed to reduce our "carbon footprint" – the models on which this is all based are providing wholly inadequate data and assumptions – as is being confirmed by the behaviour of nature itself (not least the continuing non-arrival of sunspot cycle 24)".

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

25 thoughts on “CLIMATIC REALITY VERSUS QUASI-RELIGIOUS INCANTATIONS

  1. I congratulate and thank you for not mentioning Gore in that Post. We’ve turned a corner.

  2. There has been no cooling trend since 1998. Also, 1998 was a record because of a record El Nino. The cooling in 2007 is fully attributable to La Nina and a solar sunspot minimum.

    However, AGW sceptics may be on stronger when they predict a cooling as a result of a prolonged solar minimum. Solar cycle 23 ended about a year ago and cycle 24 appears to be late starting, leading to speculation that we may be heading into a prolonged period of minimal sunspot activity. But you guys shouldn’t get too excited – the 11 year solar cycle is reckoned to account for a temperature swing of only 0.2 degrees celsius.

  3. facts mean nothing to people who believe the breath they exhale is destroying the planet…LOL

    tonights forcast Dark continued dark with widely scattered light at dawn… (The only arcurate forcast)

  4. "since global temperatures ceased to rise after 1998"

    And since that didn’t happen there is no need to read the rest.

    "It won’t do for believers in warmist orthodoxy to claim that, although temperatures may be falling"

    Indeed it won’t, because they haven’t.

    The above quotes are so blatantly counterfactual that it would be perfectly in keeping if Booker went on to state that Israel brought down the WTC, and that space aliens stole New York City overnight and replaced it with a perfect replica.

  5. Here’s something we heard from an AGW scientist recently. The fact that we’re entering into a 10 year cooling cycle doesn’t mean that global warming doesn’t exist. It’s getting ridiculous.

    Hey – the girls and I were watching BBC America (there was a marathon of those 2 cleaning ladies – we LOVE them!), and we saw a commercial trotting out the tired old: Poor polar bears are dying and starving crap. This despite the fact that the polar bears are not dying OR starving.

    There is no reason to lie. If you have some data lets here it so we can talk – but there is no reason to lie.

  6. The fact that we’re entering into a 10 year cooling cycle doesn’t mean that global warming doesn’t exist. It’s getting ridiculous.

    No, it’s just science. One trend can offset another.

    "The key to the new prediction is the natural cycle of ocean temperatures called the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), which is closely related to the warm currents that bring heat from the tropics to the shores of Europe. The cause of the oscillation is not well understood, but the cycle appears to come round about every 60 to 70 years. It may partly explain why temperatures rose in the early years of the last century before beginning to cool in the 1940s."

    So what’s ridiculous about that?

  7. So Peter – are we going to die from the cooling or from the warming? Or is the cooling and the warming just part of the natural cycle of things? Are the polar bears dying, or are they increasing in numbers? Are the ice caps melting, or are they thickening?

    What is ridiculous, Peter, is that you continue to insist that AGW is a threat to our survival.

  8. It takes a special mind to render "The Earth’s temperature may stay roughly the same for a decade" as "a decade of cooling".

    Notice also that this is only based on one study and a somewhat controversial one too. It is easy to find the problems with it by reading around but I doubt Troll will do so as he only breathes the air of rightworld.

    As for ‘threat to survival’ anyone interested in the possible outcomes for each additional degree of warming could do worse than read the book ‘six degrees’. It won’t tell you how likely each degree of further warming is, or when it might happen, but it will tell you the likely implications (good and bad) if that warming does happen. The bottom line seems to be that anything over 2 degrees is severe to catastrophic. 2 degrees or less is probably survivable by humans but 2 degrees may still result in a lot of damage to the rest of the biosphere.

  9. Are the ice caps melting, or are they thickening?

    Glaciers are melting all over the world, as you would know if you took the slightest trouble to educate yourself on this.

  10. Low-lying islands are disappearing all over the world which is a consequence of rising seas from melting glaciers: is this so, Peter?

  11. thats not true Peter

    While the news focus has been on the lowest ice extent since satellite monitoring began in 1979 for the Arctic, the Southern Hemisphere (Antarctica) has quietly set a new record for most ice extent since 1979.

    This can be seen on this graphic from this University of Illinois site The Cryosphere Today, which updated snow and ice extent for both hemispheres daily. The Southern Hemispheric areal coverage is the highest in the satellite record, just beating out 1995, 2001, 2005 and 2006. Since 1979, the trend has been up for the total Antarctic ice extent.

  12. I won’t even touch the fact that just last year they were saying the sea was going to rise 3 feet in 15 years, I guess this new info puts that to 25 years

    OR does it just prove they have no f***ing clue what they are talking about.

  13. Penguins Rest Easy Tonight

    From NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center; 15 April 2008 sea ice report:

    here are more FACTS that show your wrong Peter, but as your religous devotion to your faith wont allow you to even read them due to blasphemy against AGW the info shows :

    Meanwhile, the March 2008 Southern Hemisphere sea ice extent was much above the 1979-2000 mean. This was the largest sea ice extent in March (28.6% above the 1979-2000 mean) over the 30-year historical period, surpassing the previous record set in 1994 by 10.9%. Sea ice extent for March has increased at a rate of 4.2%/decade.

  14. Don’t y’all get tired of this subject? Who gives a shit, really? The gov’s will tax us on anything, the weather will be what it will, and we’ll be either hot or cold. They’ll get their money, and we”ll be shopping at walmart for coats or sunglasses.

    The five of you regularly arguing this topic ought to put your brilliant heads together to find a mutually satisfying agreement.

  15. can’t stop not when rev Algore blames all the deaths on Myanmar on Global Warming (he said it today) The mans a crazed loon and so are his followers….

    right Peter

  16. Daphne,

    "we”ll be shopping at walmart for coats or sunglasses."

    You won’t be able to eat or drink coats and sunglasses.

    Also, there is no Walmart in Bangladesh. So where will all the people who actually make the stuff for Walmart go to shop?

    Not that coats and sunglasses will help them much with the flooding, mind you.

  17. Troll

    From your own link on sea ice:
    the March 2008 Northern Hemisphere sea ice extent, which is measured from passive microwave instruments onboard NOAA satellites, was below the 1979-2000 mean, but greater than the previous four years. This was the sixth least March sea ice extent on record. The past four years had the least March sea ice extent since records began in 1979. Sea ice extent for March has decreased at a rate of 2.8%/decade (since satellite records began in 1979) as temperatures in the high latitude Northern Hemisphere have risen at a rate of approximately 0.37°C/decade over the same period.

    Last year the artcic sea was navigable and this summer it could well be ice-free. Also, check out the state of US glaciers at Glacier National Park. In case you can’t be bothered, here’s what they say themselves:

    Did You Know?
    If current trends continue, some scientists have predicted that by the year 2030, there will be no more glaciers in Glacier National Park due to global climate change.

  18. Peter

    If any climate trend continued indefinitely the planet would be uninhabitable. The good news is that they don’t.

  19. Henry,

    "If any climate trend continued indefinitely the planet would be uninhabitable. The good news is that they don’t"

    The bad news is that they don’t need to. You can be living in a disaster movie with less than six degrees C of warming.

  20. What a shame that six degrees C of warming won’t wipe out the idiots and leave the rational beings behind to finally make something of humankind.

    Unfortunately it will lead to the annihilation of the poor-but-brilliant of the third world as well as the less brilliant. We shall never know how many potential oriental Einsteins we snuffed out through our selfishness.

  21. Peter

    Cherry picking data to use out of context Gee what a surprise. You stated that the The ice is NOT growing in the South AND THEN YOU CHANGE and act like you never said the ice was melting every where.

    As usual the FACTS prove that you have no clue and that you are willing to LIE to bolster your point

    Here are both paragrahs in context:

    According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, the March 2008 Northern Hemisphere sea ice extent, which is measured from passive microwave instruments onboard NOAA satellites, was below the 1979-2000 mean, but greater than the previous four years. This was the sixth least March sea ice extent on record. The past four years had the least March sea ice extent since records began in 1979. Sea ice extent for March has decreased at a rate of 2.8%/decade (since satellite records began in 1979) as temperatures in the high latitude Northern Hemisphere have risen at a rate of approximately 0.37°C/decade over the same period.

    Meanwhile, the March 2008 Southern Hemisphere sea ice extent was much above the 1979-2000 mean. This was the largest sea ice extent in March (28.6% above the 1979-2000 mean) over the 30-year historical period, surpassing the previous record set in 1994 by 10.9%. Sea ice extent for March has increased at a rate of 4.2%/decade.

    For further information on the Northern and Southern Hemisphere snow and ice conditions, please visit the NSIDC News page, provided by the NOAA’s National Snow and Ice Data center (NSIDC).

  22. As usual the FACTS prove that you have no clue and that you are willing to LIE to bolster your point

    I can’t be bothered debating with someone who resorts to name-calling.

Comments are closed.