|
Item Info
|
Link to Further Info
|
|
North & South Hemispheres don't jive on climate?? From Discover.com: "A steady drop in water levels in Lake Michigan/Huron over the first half of this decade resulted from natural causes, not man-made ones, according to U.S. and Canadian researchers, noting that the past 18 months of rising waters could be an indication the lakes are headed back to normal levels." Well, isn't this special! Further, "Chester Kolascz [one of the researchers] said he remembers the ice jams created on the St. Clair River in 1984 and isn't surprised it may have played a role. But after 32 years in the area, he has seen the water levels rise and fall and doesn't allow his concerns to move with them." |
Detroit News; May 04, 2009 |
|
Glaciers ADVANCING? Tell me it AIN'T so!! From Discover.com: "Perched on the soaring Karakoram mountains in the Western Himalayas, a group of some 230 glaciers are bucking the global warming trend. They're growing." Hmm... let me see... The Goracle and his army of Alarmists have been preaching the ultimate doom of the world because of receeding glaciers EVERYWHERE. Well, the facts are
|
Discover Mag; May 05, 2009 |
Well now! Seems the NSIDC (Nat'l Snow & Ice Data Center) had bad data about shrinking Arctic ice...Quoting thier website: "Upon further investigation, we discovered that starting around early January, an error known as sensor drift caused a slowly growing underestimation of Arctic sea ice extent. The underestimation reached approximately 500,000 square kilometers (193,000 square miles) by mid-February."193,000 sq miles? That's the size of CALIFORNIA, fer cryin' out loud! How can you miss that much ice? |
NSDIC Website; Feb 18, 2009 |
Sea-level rises by earlier predictions are just WRONG!Quoting NASA news release: ""The gist of the study is that very simple, physical considerations show that some of the very large predictions of sea level rise are unlikely, because there is simply no way to move the ice or the water into the ocean that fast," said Pfeffer." Further, "Despite projections by some scientists of global seas rising by 20 feet or more by the end of this century as a result of warming, a new University of Colorado at Boulder study concludes that global sea rise of much more than 6 feet is a near physical impossibility." So, who used those bad predictions? None other than the Goracle himself and his co-Nobel Prize winning IPCC compatriots... Well, to me this is another nail in Gore's credibility coffin... |
NASA's Earth Observatory News; Sept 16, 2008 |
FINALLYThe APS, American Physical Society, the pre-eminent group of physicicts, has finally opened debate on AGW and has soundly denied that the 'consensus' even exists!!According to the Editor's notes in the July 2008 issue of Physics & Society, "There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution." It's about time. Maybe folks will actually sart thinking about this instead of just blindly believing what the hear and see through the media and the utter crap shoved down our throats by the Goracle and the IPCC... |
Physics & Society; July 2008 |
|
Sorry, been busy with real work.... Thought Gore's power consumption was bad last year (20 times consumer average)? Well, seems he's actually increased it by 10% this year! Can you say 'hypocrit'? According to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, the ones who disclosed last year's bombshell about Gore's outragious enery consumption, "Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month. Gore’s personal electricity consumption up 10%, despite “energy-efficient” home renovations." Further. "In the past year, Gore’s home burned through 213,210 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity... at a cost of $16,533 [per month]. By comparison, the average American household consumes 11,040 kWh in an entire year." |
Tennessee Center for Policy Research; June 17 2008 |
|
I couldn't have said it better myself; without alot of 'F'-Bombs... Alaskan senator Ted Stevens has some nasty things to say about the farce of placing the polar bear on the endangered list inspite the fact that there are three (3) times more polar bears now than 40 yrs ago. According to Senator Stevens, "Never before has a species been listed as endangered or threatened while occupying its entire geographic range. This decision was made without any research demonstrating dangerously low population levels in polar bears, but rather on speculation regarding how ice levels will affect Arctic wildlife. Worse yet, today’s decision cannot and will not do anything to reverse sea ice decline." Further, "The manipulation of the Endangered Species Act was highlighted by Kassie Siegel, the lawyer who wrote the legal petition for the Center for Biological Diversity. Ms. Siegel made no attempt to disguise her group’s intent when she said that the effort to list the polar bears was to ‘try to make the point that global warming is not some future threat’. This statement confirms that these fringe environmentalists are simply using the polar bears to advance their extreme agenda." |
National Review Online; May 16 2008 |
|
Piggyback on the above: Graphical analysis definitively shows northern sea ice is NORMAL or ABOVE AVERAGE!! So, can we stop the lies?? This article highlights the utter stupidity and blatant agenda of the environmental groups who sued for polar bear protection. Contrary to the alarmists screams, there is no sea ice drop (in fact, it's at a 50 yr high), the warming (if any) stopped 10 yrs ago, and polar bear populations (19 sub-groups) are NOT shrinking! Indeed, the polar bear populations are exploding!! According to the author, "My guess is that most of the alarmists are hoping and praying for a significant meltdown in the Arctic this summer. Without such a meltdown it won’t be polar bears that are endangered, but their credibility." |
Climate Sanity; May 16 2008 |
|
Just a good article / Opinion about the polar bear farce. Includes a transcript of an emotional dialogue between Oprah and Gore... weep weep... sob sob... Thos poor little bears. Gore says, "They live on the ice." Not true... |
Financial Post; May 16 2008 |
|
Just a reminder: MARS HAS WARMED, TOO! "Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory." Earlier this year, I dropped my 30+ year long subscription to Nat Geo because of their one-sided views of AGW. After they ran a cover story claiming 'proof' that polar bears are suffering because of AGW written by a frikkin' photographer and against all real data and the protests of real polar bear scientists (Taylor, et al...), I had to. Note that even in this report of a scientific report published by NASA scientists who claim, "NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row", Nat Geo even calls it a "controversial theory"!! Cut me a break... |
National Geographic; Feb 28 2007 |
|
OH MY GOD!!!, and that's a mouth full for an atheist... The Gore-acle has blamed the Burma Cyclone on AGW! "Last year a catastrophic storm . . . hit Bangladesh. The year before, the strongest cyclone in more than 50 years hit China, and we're seeing consequences that scientists have long predicted might be associated with continued global warming." In an interview on America's NPR on Tuesday, Gore claimed Cyclone Nargis was actually part of a pattern. Now, is anyone else paying attention here? Let me recap the real science for you just in case you have been in a drug-induced coma for the last 50 years...
|
Herald Sun, Australia; May 10 2008 |
|
Scientists urge IPCC to admit mistakes! "We are writing to you and others associated with the IPCC position – that man’s CO2 is a driver of global warming and climate change – to ask that you now in view of the evidence retract support from the current IPCC position [as in footnote 1] and admit that there is no observational evidence in measured data going back 22,000 years or even millions of years that CO2 levels (whether from man or nature) have driven or are driving world temperatures or climate change." |
CO2 Skeptic; April 24 2008 |
|
Coffman interview with Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, Professor Emeritus Geology Some GREAT excerpts:
|
Junkscience Reprint; April 24 2008 |
|
Sam Champion gets it wrong again... Yesterday on GMA (ABC's Ultra-Liberal morning news show with some sort of agenda...), Sam Champion, their All-American blonde big smile perfect teeth 'weather guy', upon finishing the nat'l weather report, gave a quick blurb on a new NOAA report on the amount of new atmospheric CO2 and methane. Unfortunately, he got everything wrong except the fact that NOAA did release a press thing. Sam even claimed that the 'record amounts of CO2 were released by us and the methane, also reord amounts, must be coming from the melting Arctic'. The report says none of that. Sam should really take a science reading course or a stats course before he opens his mouth again about things he obviously doesn't understand. Here's the NOAA data and synopsis: CO2 "rose by 0.6 per cent, or 19 billion tonnes last year." (metric ton = 1000kg) This 0.6% increase is a smaller increase that in 8 of the last 10 years! Yes, the total amount, IF IT STAYS IN THE ATMOSPHERE, is a record every single year since more goes in. However, for Sam to say that we put more in the air last year than any other year is simple wrong. Also: "The amount of methane increased by 0.5 per cent, or 27 million tonnes, after nearly a decade of little or no change, according preliminary figures to scientists at the government’s Earth System Research Laboratory in Colorado. Methane’s greenhouse effect is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide’s..." Hmmm, where does the NOAA say this methane, a much more potent greenhouse gas, comes from the melting Arctic? Especially since the Arctic ain't melting, huh? See a blog and the real data charts used at the below link... |
Junkscience Blog; April 24 2008 |
|
Sorry, been busy the last month or so... NASA astronaut, Geophysicist Phil Chapman, says the same solar phenomenon that doomed Napoleon's army may soon stop Al Gore's march to glory cold. Prepare for the big chill. Kenneth Tapping, a solar researcher and project director for Canada's National Research Council, oversees the operation of a 60-year-old radio telescope that he calls a "stethoscope for the sun." Tapping reports no change in the sun's magnetic field so far this cycle and warns that if the sun remains quiet for another year or two, it may indicate another repeat of that period of drastic cooling of the Earth, bringing massive snowfall and severe weather to the Northern Hemisphere. |
IBD Editorials; April 24 2008 |
|
If this one doesn't give the alarmists pause, nothing will... The 4 major global temp trackers have ALL shown drastic temp decreases lately! Following re the actual graphical anomaly charts published by each of the 4 "Big Guys"; HADCRUT (Raw Data here), |
Tyler Paper; Feb 13 2008 |
|
In her lecture series, "Warming Up to the Truth: The Real Story About Climate Change," astrophysicist Dr. Sallie Baliunas shared her findings Tuesday at the University of Texas
Dr. Baliunas' work with fellow Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics astronomer Willie Soon suggests global warming is more directly related to solar variability than to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, an alternative view to what's been widely publicized in the mainstream media. |
Tyler Paper; Feb 13 2008 |
|
Are you buying that stuff about US melting the Arctic? Then take a look at this! The article is forthcoming in Climate Dynamics, and the work was conducted by Håkan Grudd of Stockholm University’s Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, and despite the results, the research was not funded by industry. The focus here is the Torneträsk area in northern Sweden near 68.5°N (within the Arctic Circle) where Scots pines have been growing for millennia. “The late-twentieth century is not exceptionally warm in the new Torneträsk record: On decadal-to-century timescales, periods around AD 750, 1000, 1400, and 1750 were all equally warm, or warmer. The warmest summers in this new reconstruction occur in a 200-year period centred on AD 1000. A ‘Medieval Warm Period’ is supported by other paleoclimate evidence from northern Fennoscandia, although the new tree-ring evidence from Tornetraäsk suggests that this period was much warmer than previously recognised.” (emphasis added) Further, “The new Torneträsk summer temperature reconstruction shows a trend of -0.3°C over the last 1,500 years.” 
|
Climate Dynamics, DOI 10.1007/s00382-007-0358-2; Feb 06 2008 |
|
Contrary to the media and AGW alarmists like Gore, NASA is connecting violent storm patterns to El Nino, not AGW! China is under the largest snow storm in 50 years! FIFTY years! It's being blamed on Global Warming... sigh... "http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NasaNews/2008/2008012826143.html" HALF-A-MILLION people stranded in ONE train station??? |
NASA News Archive; Jan 30 2008 |
|
NOAA publishes yet another paper that contradicts the IPCC on hurricanes! As NOAA has been studying and stating since the 90's, warmer waters will NOT increase the numbers of or the severity of hurricanes. In fact, again, ths new tudy finds the opposite: warmer water causes less number adlower energy hurricanes! Duh! According to a paper published Wednesday in Geophysical Research Letters, "One group of climate scientists has linked increases in the strongest hurricanes -- just those with winds greater than 130 mph -- in the past 35 years to global warming. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said "more likely than not," manmade global warming has already increased the frequency of the most intense storms. But hurricane researchers, especially scientists at NOAA's Miami Lab, have argued that the long-term data for all hurricanes show no such trend. And Wang's new research suggests just the opposite of the view that more intense hurricanes result from global warming. The Miami faction points to a statement by an international workshop on tropical cyclones that says "no firm conclusion can be made on this point." |
Discover News Online; Jan 25 2008 |
|
Not a real science paper, but a pretty good OpEd. Growing numbers of global warming science skeptics are making their opposition known. They include experts in climatology, oceanography, geology, biology, environmental sciences and physics, among others. They are affiliated with prestigious institutions worldwide, including Harvard, NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Center for Atmospheric Research, MIT, the International Arctic Research Center, the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute and many others. Many shared a portion of IPCC's 2007 Nobel Peace Prize (co-won with Mr. Gore), and others have won previous Nobel Prizes for their research. For example, physics professor emeritus Dr. Howard Hayden of the University of Connecticut said, "You think SUVs are the cause of glaciers shrinking? … Don't believe what you hear out of Hollywood and Washington, D.C. … [C]limate history proves that Gore has the relationship between carbon dioxide concentration and global warming backward. A higher concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere does not cause the Earth to be warmer. Instead, a warmer Earth causes the higher carbon dioxide levels." Climatologist Robert Durrenberger, past president of the American Association of State Climatologists, said, "because of all the misinformation that Gore and his army have been spreading about climate change I have decided that real climatologists should try to help the public understand the nature of the problem." As Swedish geologist Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, professor emeritus at Stockholm University, wrote, "Newspapers should think about the damage they are doing to many persons, particularly young kids, by spreading the exaggerated views of a human impact on climate …. As far as I can see the IPCC 'Global Temperature' is wrong. Temperature is fluctuating but it is still most places cooler than in the 1930s and 1940s … it will take about 800 years before the water level has increased by one" meter. |
Orange County Register; Jan 03 2008 |
|
Enough already! Now the NOAA reports that there actually is no overall (net) sea ice loss, so AGW can't be doing what isn't there! HUH??? According to NOAA data presented on the web site of Bill Chapman of the Polar Research Group at the University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign), the level of sea ice has reached about the same level as it was in 2003. Check out the red line at the bottom of this graph. 
The blue line at the top is the "Daily Sea Ice Area" and the red graph at bottom is the "Global Sea Ice Anomaly" (which means 'deviation from normal'). Looks to me like each are the same given the yearly cyclic changes from winter to summer... The current change in global sea ice coverage is a positive 1 million square kilometers -- a gain of 1.8 million square kilometers in the Southern Hemisphere netted against a loss of 800,000 square kilometers in the Northern Hemisphere. So, where the heck can anyone get off by claiming the poles are shrinking? They, collectively, are growing!!! |
Science Express Online (Science Magazine); Jan 03 2008 |
|
North Atlantic warming tied to natural variability, study says -A Duke University-led analysis of available records shows that while the North Atlantic Ocean’s surface waters warmed in the 50 years between 1950 and 2000, the change was not uniform. In fact, the subpolar regions cooled at the same time that subtropical and tropical waters warmed. This striking pattern can be explained largely by the influence of a natural and cyclical wind circulation pattern called the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), wrote authors of a study published Thursday, Jan. 3, in Science Express, the online edition of the journal Science. Winds that power the NAO are driven by atmospheric pressure differences between areas around Iceland and the Azores. “The winds have a tremendous impact on the underlying ocean,” said Susan Lozier, a professor of physical oceanography at Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences who is the study’s first author. Other studies cited in the Science Express report suggest human-caused global warming may be affecting recent ocean heating trends. But Lozier and her coauthors found their data can’t support that view for the North Atlantic. “It is premature to conclusively attribute these regional patterns of heat gain to greenhouse warming,” they wrote. “The take-home message is that the NAO produces strong natural variability,” said Lozier in an interview. “The simplistic view of global warming is that everything forward in time will warm uniformly. But this very strong natural variability is superimposed on human-caused warming. So researchers will need to unravel that natural variability to get at the part humans are responsible for.” In research supported by the National Science Foundation in the United States and the Natural Environment Research Council in the United Kingdom, her international team analyzed 50 years of North Atlantic temperature records collected at the National Oceanic Data Center in Washington, D.C. To piece together the mechanisms involved in the observed changes, their analysis employed an ocean circulation model that predicts how winds, evaporation, precipitation and the exchange of heat with the atmosphere influences the North Atlantic’s heat content over time. They also compared those computer predictions to real observations “to test the model’s skill,” the authors wrote. Her group’s analysis showed that water in the sub-polar ocean –- roughly between 45 degrees North latitude and the Arctic Circle –- became cooler as the water directly exchanged heat with the air above it. By contrast, NOA-driven winds served to “pile up” sun-warmed waters in parts of the subtropical and tropical North Atlantic south of 45 degrees, Lozier said. That retained and distributed heat at the surface while pushing underlying cooler water further down. The group’s computer model predicted warmer sea surfaces in the tropics and subtropics and colder readings within the sub-polar zone whenever the NAO is in an elevated state of activity. Such a high NAO has been the case during the years 1980 to 2000, the scientists reported. “We suggest that the large-scale, decadal changes...associated with the NAO are primarily responsible for the ocean heat content changes in the North Atlantic over the past 50 years,” the authors concluded. “But in the North Atlantic, any anthropogenic (human-caused) warming would presently be masked by such strong natural variability,” they wrote. |
Science Express Online (Science Magazine); Jan 03 2008 |
|
MIT researcher finds past climate shifts more rapid than previously believed. A Massachusetts Institute of Technology researcher has discovered that for at least the last 1.5 million years, the Earth has undergone rapid and dramatic climate changes similar to those observed in ice cores from more recent times. These climate swings are so dramatic that if we lived through one today, it would be like New England taking on Miami-like weather within a 25-year period. "Ten years ago, we had no idea that climate could change this quickly," said Maureen E. Raymo, associate professor of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT. Publishing their results for the first time in today's (April 16) issue of Nature, Raymo and her colleagues at MIT and at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute report that millennial-scale climate instabilities--swings of as much as 10 degrees Celsius within a few decades--are not restricted to the large glacial periods of the last 700,000 years but existed much further back in time. Their work has turned up some unexpected results. "Our results suggest that such millennial-scale climate instability may be a pervasive and long-term characteristic of Earth's climate, rather than just a feature of the strong glacial-interglacial cycles of the past 800,000 years," the authors wrote. Raymo and her colleagues also show that these climate changes are tied to changes in the conveyor-like circulation of ocean waters that delivers tropical heat to the northern Atlantic in surface currents while exporting salt-heavy deep waters cooled by Greenland's winds to the south. But while scientists know that climate changes are linked to the changes in the ocean circulation and heat transfer, they don't know what causes these climate and circulation variations in the first place."What causes climate variations on this time scale is a black box for scientists right now," Raymo said. |
Massachusetts Institute Of Technology (1998, April 20). MIT Researcher Finds Evidence Of Ancient Climate Swings. ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 30, 2007 |
|
Team of Scientists Question Validity Of A 'Global Temperature' The study was published in Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics. Excerpt from a March 18, 2007 article in Science Daily: "Discussions on global warming often refer to 'global temperature.' Yet the concept is thermodynamically as well as mathematically an impossibility, says Bjarne Andresen, a professor at The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, who has analyzed this topic in collaboration with professors Christopher Essex from University of Western Ontario and Ross McKitrick from University of Guelph, Canada." The Science Daily article reads: "It is impossible to talk about a single temperature for something as complicated as the climate of Earth", Bjarne Andresen says, an expert of thermodynamics. "A temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system. Furthermore, the climate is not governed by a single temperature. Rather, differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc. which make up the climate." He explains that while it is possible to treat temperature statistically locally, it is meaningless to talk about a global temperature for Earth. The Globe consists of a huge number of components which one cannot just add up and average. That would correspond to calculating the average phone number in the phone book. That is meaningless. Or talking about economics, it does make sense to compare the currency exchange rate of two countries, whereas there is no point in talking about an average 'global exchange rate.'" The article concludes: "Thus claims of disaster may be a consequence of which averaging method has been used, the researchers point out." |
University of Copenhagen (2007, March 18). Researchers Question Validity Of A 'Global Temperature'. ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 22, 2007 |
|
Paleoclimate scientist Bob Carter testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works on June 18, 2007 Dr. Carter stated in an essay that global warming has stopped. “The accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998. Oddly, this eight-year-long temperature stasis has occurred despite an increase over the same period of 15 parts per million (or 4 per cent) in atmospheric CO2. Second, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements, if corrected for non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, show little if any global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 %).” |
See full transcripts - 12/22/07 |
|
An April 2007 study revealed the Earth's climate "seesawing" during the last 10,000 years, according to Swedish researchers Svante Björck, Karl Ljung and Dan Hammarlund of Lund University.
During the last 10,000 years climate has been seesawing between the North and South Atlantic Oceans. As revealed by findings presented by Quaternary scientists at Lund University, Sweden, cold periods in the north have corresponded to warmth in the south and vice verse. These results imply that Europe may face a slightly cooler future than predicted by IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. We can identify a persistent "seesaw" pattern. When the South Atlantic was warm it was cold in the North Atlantic and vice versa. This is most certainly related to large-scale ocean circulation in the Atlantic Ocean. The main current system - "the Great Ocean Conveyor" - is driven by sinking of dense, relatively cold and salty water in the northern North Atlantic. This results in southward-flowing deep-water that is replaced by warm surface water brought to high northern latitudes from the tropics and ultimately from the South Atlantic, says Svante Björck. Our results from Nightingale Island in the Tristan da Cunha island group, between South Africa and Argentina, for the first time give evidence of warming of the South Atlantic associated with cooling in the north. This is a major breakthrough in palaeoclimate research. |
Swedish Research Council (2007, April 30). Earth's Climate Is Seesawing, According To Climate Researchers. ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 22, 2007. |
|
Finally! US Senate released report of 400 promient scientists who dispute anthropogenic global warming! With links to the scientists own peer-reviewed works! According to the Senate report, "Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called 'consensus' on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore." This is a significant difference when considering that, "The over 400 skeptical scientists featured in this new report outnumber by nearly eight times the number of scientists [52] who participated in the 2007 UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers. The notion of "hundreds" or "thousands" of UN scientists agreeing to a scientific statement does not hold up to scrutiny. Recent research by Australian climate data analyst Dr. John McLean revealed that the IPCC's peer-review process for the Summary for Policymakers leaves much to be desired." |
See full report : US Senate Reports (Committe on Environment) - 12/21/07 |
| Just for fun... Are you old enough to remember the Global Cooling consensus of the 70's? I am... Here's a few links to remind you or introduce you to the fears 30 years ago about freezing to death. |
Time Magazine - Another Ice Age? 06/24/74 Newsweek Magazine - The Cooling World 04/28/75 Business & Media Magazine - Fire & Ice Review of 70's science reporting |
|
Yet, ANOTHER peer-reviewed scientific paper refuting anthropogenic GW... Climate warming is natural, not human caused, says new study International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society [DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651] (December 2007) Climate scientists at the University of Rochester, the University of Alabama, and the University of Virginia report that observed patterns of temperature changes ('fingerprints') over the last thirty years are not in accord with what greenhouse models predict and can better be explained by natural factors, such as solar variability. Therefore, climate change is 'unstoppable' and cannot be affected or modified by controlling the emission of greenhouse gases, such as CO2, as is proposed in current legislation. These results are in conflict with the conclusions of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and also with some recent research publications based on essentially the same data. However, they are supported by the results of the US-sponsored Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). The report is published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society [DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651]. The authors are Prof. David H. Douglass (Univ. of Rochester), Prof. John R. Christy (Univ. of Alabama), Benjamin D. Pearson (graduate student), and Prof. S. Fred Singer (Univ. of Virginia). The fundamental question is whether the observed warming is natural or anthropogenic (human-caused). Lead author David Douglass said: "The observed pattern of warming, comparing surface and atmospheric temperature trends, does not show the characteristic fingerprint associated with greenhouse warming. The inescapable conclusion is that the human contribution is not significant and that observed increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases make only a negligible contribution to climate warming." Co-author John Christy said: "Satellite data and independent balloon data agree that atmospheric warming trends do not exceed those of the surface. Greenhouse models, on the other hand, demand that atmospheric trend values be 2-3 times greater. We have good reason, therefore, to believe that current climate models greatly overestimate the effects of greenhouse gases. Satellite observations suggest that GH models ignore negative feedbacks, produced by clouds and by water vapor, that diminish the warming effects of carbon dioxide." |
InterScienceNews 12/12/07 |
|
Meteorologist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, recently compared scientists who promote computer models predicting future climate doom to unlicensed "software engineers."
"I am of the opinion that most scientists engaged in the design, development, and tuning of climate models are in fact software engineers. They are unlicensed, hence unqualified to sell their products to society," Tennekes wrote on February 28, 2007. |
ClimateSci Colorado University - 06/07/07 |
|
Top New Zealand Government and IPCC contributor admits that climate predictors get it right only about half the time, not just in New Zealand , but elsehwere around the world.
"“The open admission by a climate scientist of the New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), Dr Jim Renwick, that his organisation achieves only 50 per cent accuracy in its climate forecasts, and that this is as good as any other forecaster around the world, should be a wake-up call for world political leaders,” said Rear Admiral Jack Welch, chairman of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition." |
Press Release - 06/07/07 |
|
Global Warming is Universal? How can the UN Secretary General expect us to buy into his TRILLION dollar plans to stop climate change when it is happening all over the solar system? Are we causing that, too, or are Martians driving SUVs to work? Here's just a short list of science reports ignored by the media that indicate that the earth is just one of the 'victims' and that we humans can't be responsible...
|
Various stated sources - 12/13/07 |
|
Peer-reviewed scientific paper refuting AGW alarmist claims of record heat by Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics... "20th Century not so hot...", says new study International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society [DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651] (December 2007) Cambridge, MA - A review of more than 200 climate studies led by researchers at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics has determined that the 20th century is neither the warmest century nor the century with the most extreme weather of the past 1000 years. The review also confirmed that the Medieval Warm Period of 800 to 1300 A.D. and the Little Ice Age of 1300 to 1900 A.D. were worldwide phenomena not limited to the European and North American continents. While 20th century temperatures are much higher than in the Little Ice Age period, many parts of the world show the medieval warmth to be greater than that of the 20th century. |
CfA Press Release 12/12/07 |
|
What diminishing sea ice??? Well, looks like those folks who have been claiming a shrinking ice shelf of Antarctica are, well um, how should I say, wrong? Take a look at this yearly chart of sea ice in the Southern hemispere by NASA satellites. Looks like it's at a record high! Go figure... 
|
NSIDC - 12/03/07 |
|
ABC Global Warming reporter admits he stays away from 'balance' in his reporting! Burlington, VT - ABC News Reporter Bill Blakemore declared "I don't like the word 'balance' much at all" in global warming coverage at a journalism conference in Vermont over the weekend. Blakemore, who reported on August 30, 2006, "After extensive searches, ABC News has found no such [scientific] debate" on global warming, (http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=2374968) said he rejects 'balance' in order to justify excluding any skeptics of manmade catastrophic global warming from his reporting. He made his remarks at Friday's panel discussion at the Society of Environmental Journalists annual conference in Burlington. This is the same nut case who has compared Lord Gore to Shakespeare and Frost for his literary talents and pulled an incomplete reporting job when reporting NASA's Jim Hansen was being censored! He failed to inform viewers that Hansen had received a quarter of a million dollars from Teresa Heinz Kerry's foundation, the Heinz Foundation, and subsequently endorsed her husband Democrat John Kerry for President in 2004 [http://www.abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1555183]. In addition, Michael Oppenheimer, another Blakemore 'source', is a paid partisan of the group Environmental Defense. |
US Senate Minutes - 10/30/07 |
|
Chinese scientists Lin Zhen-Shan, and Sun Xian’s 2007 study, published in the peer-reviewed Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, noted that CO2’s impact on warming may be “excessively exaggerated.” “The global climate warming is not solely affected by the CO2 greenhouse effect. The best example is temperature obviously cooling however atmospheric CO2 concentration is ascending from 1940s to 1970s. Although the CO2 greenhouse effect on global climate change is unsuspicious, it could have been excessively exaggerated. It is high time to reconsider the trend of global climate change,” the two scientists concluded. |
Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics 95: 115-121. - 10/02/07 |
|
Danish National Space Center Study concludes: “The Sun still appears to be the main forcing agent in global climate change.” Several other recent scientific studies and scientists have debunked a media hyped UK study alleging there has not been a solar-climate link in the past 20 years. UK Astrophysicist Piers Corbyn confirmed the Danish study and also debunked the “No Solar-Climate Link Study” on July 14, 2007. Excerpt: “[The study claiming to prove a] ‘refutation’ of the decisive role of solar activity in driving climate is as valid as claiming a particular year was not warm by simply looking at the winter half of data. The most significant and persistent cycle of variation in the world’s temperature follows the 22-year magnetic cycle of the sun’s activity,” Corbyn, who heads the UK based long-term solar forecast group Weather Action, wrote. |
Danish National Space Center - 03/07 |
|
New study claims UN IPCC peer-review process is "an illusion." A September 2007 analysis of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) scientific review process entitled “Peer Review? What Peer Review?” by climate data analyst John McLean, revealed very few scientists are actively involved in the UN's peer-review process. According to the analysis, “The IPCC would have us believe that its reports are diligently reviewed by many hundreds of scientists and that these reviewers endorse the contents of the report. Analyses of reviewer comments show a very different and disturbing story.” The paper continued: "In [the IPCC's] Chapter 9, the key science chapter, the IPCC concludes that 'it is very highly likely that greenhouse gas forcing has been the dominant cause of the observed global warming over the last 50 years.' The IPCC leads us to believe that this statement is very much supported by the majority of reviewers. The reality is that there is surprisingly little explicit support for this key notion. Among the 23 independent reviewers just 4 explicitly endorsed the chapter with its hypothesis, and one other endorsed only a specific section. Moreover, only 62 of the IPCC’s 308 reviewers commented on this chapter at all." The analysis concluded: “The IPCC reports appear to be largely based on a consensus of scientific papers, but those papers are the product of research for which the funding is strongly influenced by previous IPCC reports. This makes the claim of a human influence self-perpetuating and for a corruption of the normal scientific process.” |
Science & Public Policy Institute - 09/30/07 |
|
Brookhaven Labs report “Anthropogenic (man-made) global warming bites the dust,” declared astronomer Dr. Ian Wilson after reviewing the new study which has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Geophysical Research. Another scientist said the peer-reviewed study overturned “in one fell swoop” the climate fears promoted by the UN and former Vice President Al Gore. The study entitled “Heat Capacity, Time Constant, and Sensitivity of Earth’s Climate System,” was authored by Brookhaven National Lab scientist Stephen Schwartz. “Effectively, this (new study) means that the global economy will spend trillions of dollars trying to avoid a warming of ~ 1.0 K by 2100 A.D.” Dr. Wilson wrote in a note to the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee on August 19, 2007. Wilson, a former operations astronomer at the Hubble Space Telescope Institute in Baltimore MD, was referring to the trillions of dollars that would be spent under such international global warming treaties like the Kyoto Protocol. “Previously, I have indicated that the widely accepted values for temperature increase associated with a doubling of CO2 were far too high i.e. 2 – 4.5 Kelvin. This new peer-reviewed paper claims a value of 1.1 +/- 0.5 K increase for a doubling of CO2,” |
Brookhaven Nat'l Labs - 09/17/07 |
|
New peer-reviewed study counters global warming theory, finds carbon dioxide did not end the last Ice Age.
"Deep-sea temperatures rose 1,300 years before atmospheric CO2, ruling out the greenhouse gas as driver of meltdown, says study in Science. Carbon dioxide did not cause the end of the last ice age, a new study in Science suggests, contrary to past inferences from ice core records. “There has been this continual reference to the correspondence between CO2 and climate change as reflected in ice core records as justification for the role of CO2 in climate change,” said USC geologist Lowell Stott, lead author of the study, slated for advance online publication Sept. 27 in Science Express. “You can no longer argue that CO2 alone caused the end of the ice ages.” Deep-sea temperatures warmed about 1,300 years before the tropical surface ocean and well before the rise in atmospheric CO2, the study found. The finding suggests the rise in greenhouse gas was likely a result of warming and may have accelerated the meltdown – but was not its main cause. “The climate dynamic is much more complex than simply saying that CO2 rises and the temperature warms,” Stott said. The complexities “have to be understood in order to appreciate how the climate system has changed in the past and how it will change in the future." |
Eureka Alert - 09/27/07 |
|
New Report from the international group Institute of Physics’ finds no “consensus” on global warming. As world leaders gathered in New York for a high-level UN meeting on climate change, a new report by some of the world's most renowned scientists urges policymakers to keep their eyes on the "science grapevine", arguing that their understanding of global warming is still far from complete. Recognizing that powerful computer-based simulations are a key element in predicting climate change, a new Institute of Physics (IOP) report, published on 26 September 2007, shows that leading climate-physicists' views on the reliability of these models differ. The IOP is also urging world leaders "to remain alert to the latest scientific thought on climate change". |
IOP (Institute of Physics) - 09/26/07 |
|
New peer-reviewed study finds that the solar system regulates the earth’s climate
The paper, authored by Richard Mackey, was published August 17, 2007 in the Journal of Coastal Research - Excerpt: “According to the findings reviewed in this paper, the variable output of the sun, the sun’s gravitational relationship between the earth (and the moon) and earth’s variable orbital relationship with the sun, regulate the earth’s climate. The processes by which the sun affects the earth show periodicities on many time scales; each process is stochastic and immensely complex. |
Journal of Coastal Research - 08/17/07 |
|
New peer-reviewed study on Surface Warming and the Solar Cycle
The study found that times of high solar activity are on average 0.2 degrees C warmer than times of low solar activity, and that there is a polar amplification of the warming. This result is the first to document a statistically significant globally coherent temperature response to the solar cycle, the authors note. Authors: Charles D. Camp and Ka Kit Tung: Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, U.S.A. Source: Geophysical Research Letters (GRL) paper 10.1029/2007GL030207, 2007 |
Geophysical Research Letters - 08/02/07 |
|
An August 2007 NASA temperature data error discovery has lead to 1934 -- not the previously hyped 1998 -- being declared the hottest in U.S. history since records began.
Revised data now reveals four of the top ten hottest years in the U.S. were in the 1930's while only three of the hottest years occurred in the last decade. Excerpt: "NASA has yet to own up fully to its historic error in misinterpreting US surface temperatures to conform to the Global Warming hypothesis, as discovered by Stephen McIntyre at ClimateAudit.org." |
As reported in CanadaFreePress - 04/25/07 |
|
New peer-reviewed study finds global warming over last century linked to natural causes
Published in Geophysical Research Letters: Excerpt: “Tsonis et al. investigate the collective behavior of known climate cycles such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the North Atlantic Oscillation, the El Nino/Southern Oscillation, and the North Pacific Oscillation. By studying the last 100 years of these cycles' patterns, they find that the systems synchronized several times. Further, in cases where the synchronous state was followed by an increase in the coupling strength among the cycles, the synchronous state was destroyed. Then a new climate state emerged, associated with global temperature changes and El Nino/Southern Oscillation variability. The authors show that this mechanism explains all global temperature tendency changes and El Nino variability in the 20th century. Authors: Anastasios A. Tsonis, Kyle Swanson, and Sergey Kravtsov: Atmospheric Sciences Group, Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, U.S.A. See August 2, 2007 Science Daily – “Synchronized Chaos: Mechanisms For Major Climate Shifts” |
Science News - 08/02/07 |
|
Belgian weather institute’s (RMI) August 2007 study dismisses decisive role of CO2 in warming
"Brussels: CO2 is not the big bogeyman of climate change and global warming. This is the conclusion of a comprehensive scientific study done by the Royal Meteorological Institute, which will be published this summer. The study does not state that CO2 plays no role in warming the earth. "But it can never play the decisive role that is currently attributed to it", climate scientist Luc Debontridder said. "Not CO2, but water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It is responsible for at least 75 % of the greenhouse effect. This is a simple scientific fact, but Al Gore's movie has hyped CO2 so much that nobody seems to take note of it." said Debontridder. "Every change in weather conditions is blamed on CO2. But the warm winters of the last few years (in Belgium) are simply due to the 'North-Atlantic Oscillation'. And this has absolutely nothing to do with CO2," he added. " |
New Zealand Climate News - 08/07 English abstract here - 08/07 |
|
A July 2007 analysis of peer-reviewed literature thoroughly debunks fears of Greenland and the Arctic melting and predictions of a frightening sea level rise. "Research in 2006 found that Greenland has been warming since the 1880’s, but since 1955, temperature averages at Greenland stations have been colder than the period between 1881-1955. A 2006 study found Greenland has cooled since the 1930's and 1940's, with 1941 being the warmest year on record. Another 2006 study concluded Greenland was as warm or warmer in the 1930’s and 40’s and the rate of warming from 1920-1930 was about 50% higher than the warming from 1995-2005. One 2005 study found Greenland gaining ice in the interior higher elevations and thinning ice at the lower elevations. In addition, the often media promoted fears of Greenland’s ice completely melting and a subsequent catastrophic sea level rise are directly at odds with the latest scientific studies." |
Space Daily - 07/29/07/07 |
|
A physicist has a few nasty words to say about the 'popular' views of CO2 greenhousing... Excerps here: The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier 1824, Tyndall 1861 and Arrhenius 1896 and is still supported in global climatology essentially describes a fictitious mechanism in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system. According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist. (Emphasis added.) Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and in a widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation. In this paper the popular conjecture is analyzed and the underlying physical principles are clarified. By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 C is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified." |
Icecap - 07/26/07 |
|
New study shows "Human Activity Changes Global Rains" Unfortunately, this study has no empirical data linking rainfall and GW, too many anecdotes, has several studies contadicting their findings:
|
News.com (Australia) - 07/24/07 |
| England seeing "60-yr high water levels" due to GW! Hmmm. Anyone want to make a guess on when 60 years ago was? Hint : 1947! Just a little before the GW hysteria... | Planet Ark - 07/24/07 |
|
Damn Gore-Bull Warming! Let's blame the COLD on it, too! Record cold in Brisbane after pundits predicted the warmest winter ever... Hmmm |
Brisbane Times - 07/19/07 |
| So, you think Katrina was the worst / costliest storm of all time? Take a peek at this new study... | Houston Chronicle - 07/13/07 |
|
How NOT to measure surface temperature! Seems the NOAA / NWS has some problems with basic science when it comes to 'control' issues at their surface temperature sites! Be sure to link backwards to "Part 20"; a God-Awful example of where these surface temperatures are coming from. No wonder some data sets claim a temp rise... Worst one I've found is at the Press Democrat newspaper building in Santa Rosa, CA. (from same website). Here's a picture:  But, don't worry! There's absolutely no 'heat island' effect caused by that acre of roofing and the 5 industrial-strength AC units surrounding the sensor. Nah... |
Watt's Up With That? blog - 07-12-07 |
|
A July 6, 2007 study published in the journal Science about Greenland by an international team of scientists found DNA "evidence that suggests the frozen shield covering the immense island survived the Earth's last period of global warming," according to a Boston Globe article. According to the article, the study indicates "Greenland's ice may be less susceptible to the massive meltdown predicted by computer models of climate change, the main author (Eske Willerslev, professor of evolutionary biology at University of Copenhagen) said in an interview. "This may have implications for how the ice sheets respond to global warming. They may withstand rising temperatures," Willerslev said. The article explained, "The discovery of organic matter in ice dating from half –a-million years ago offers evidence that the Greenland ice sheet remained frozen even during the Earth's last 'interglacial period' – some 120,000 years ago – when average temperatures were 9 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than they are now." Willerslev addressed scary computer model predictions of a massive Greenland melt. "[The study] suggests a problem with [computer] models" that predict melting ice from Greenland could drown cities and destroy civilizations, Willerslev said. The study found "Greenland really was green, before Ice Age glaciers enshrouded vast swaths of the Northern Hemisphere…somewhere between 450,000 and 800,000 years ago," according to the article. |
Science Mag via Boston Globe - 07/06/07 |
|
A June 29, 2007 critique by Gerd Burger of Berlin’s Institute of Meteorology in the peer-reviewed Science Magazine challenged a previously touted study claiming the 20th century had been unusually warm.
“Burger argues that [the 2006 temperature analysis by] Osborn and Briffa did not apply the appropriate statistical tests that link the proxy records to observational data, and as such, Osborn and Briffa did not properly quantify the statistical uncertainties in their analyses. Burger repeated all analyses with the appropriate adjustments and concluded “As a result, the ‘highly significant’ occurrences of positive anomalies during the 20th century disappear.” Burger's technical comments in Science Magazine state: “Osborn and Briffa (Reports, 10 February 2006, p. 841) identified anomalous periods of warmth or cold in the Northern Hemisphere that were synchronous across 14 temperature-sensitive proxies. However, their finding that the spatial extent of 20th-century warming is exceptional ignores the effect of proxy screening on the corresponding significance levels. After appropriate correction, the significance of the 20th-century warming anomaly disappears." |
Science Magazine - 06/29/07 |
| Rough hurricane season NOT linked to global warming! | Discovery News - 06/07/07 |
| Monsoons linked to 155,000 yrs of climate change! | NASA News - 06/07/07 |
|
A June 6, 2006 peer-reviewed study published in Journal of Geophysical Research concluded: “The warmest year in the extended Greenland temperature record is 1941, while the 1930s and 1940s are the warmest decades.” The paper, entitled “Extending Greenland temperature records into the late 18th century,” was authored by B. Vinther, K. Andersen, P. Jones, K. Briffa, and J. Cappelen. The report examined temperature data from Greenland going back to 1784. |
JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 111, D11105, doi:10.1029/2005JD006810, 2006 - 06/06/07 |
|
Physicist Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu, the former director of both University of Alaska Fairbanks' Geophysical Institute and International Arctic Research Center who has twice been named one of the "1000 Most Cited Scientists," told a Congressional hearing in 2006 that highly publicized climate models showing a disappearing Arctic were nothing more than "science fiction."
"All the papers since (the advent of satellites) show warming. That's what I call 'instant climatology.' I'm trying to tell young scientists, 'You can't study climatology unless you look at a much longer time period.'" |
As reported om Anchorage News - 04/01/07 |
|
Ivy League geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack of the University of Pennsylvania rejected fears of a catastrophic 20 foot sea level rise.
"Sea level is rising," Giegengack said, but it's been rising ever since warming set in 18,000 years ago, he explained according to a February 2007 article in Philadelphia Magazine. But the Earth's global ocean level is only going up 1.8 millimeters per year -- less than the thickness of one nickel, Giegengack further explained. “At the present rate of sea-level rise it’s going to take 3,500 years to get up there (to a rise of 20 feet) So if for some reason this warming process that melts ice is cutting loose and accelerating, sea level doesn’t know it. And sea level, we think, is the best indicator of global warming," he said. (LINK) Giegengack also noted that the history of the last one billion years on the planet reveals "only about 5% of that time has been characterized by conditions on Earth that were so cold that the poles could support masses of permanent ice." (LINK) |
Interview transcripts - 03/16/07 |
|
NEW DATA: Mars' gobal warming!! Man-Made??? Seems Mars has heated up a bit in the last 40 years just like us! Will Gore say WE DID IT??? |
National Geographic - 02/28/07 |
|
Another problem for predictions of catastrophic sea level rise due to polar ice melt is Antarctica is not cooperating with the man-made catastrophic global warming models.
“A new report on climate over the world's southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models,” reads the February 15, 2007 press release announcing the findings of David Bromwich, professor of professor of atmospheric sciences in the Department of Geography, and researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University. (See: Antarctic temperatures disagree with climate model predictions LINK) "It's hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now,” Bromwich explained. The release explains that Bromwich’s research team found “no increase in precipitation over Antarctica in the last 50 years. Most models predict that both precipitation and temperature will increase over Antarctica with a warming of the planet.” |
Eureka Alert - 02/15/07 |
|
Climatologist Dr. Patrick Michaels of University of Virginia and the Virginia State climatologist wrote the scenario promoted by former Vice President Al Gore and others showing Greenland’s ice melting and raising sea levels by 20 feet is not supported anywhere in scientific literature, not even by the United Nations.
“Where is the support for this claim? Certainly not in the recent [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)] Policymakers Summary from the United Nations. Under the [IPCC’s] medium-range emission scenario for greenhouse gases, a rise in sea level of between 8 and 17 inches is predicted by 2100. Gore’s film exaggerates the rise by about 2,000 percent,” Michaels wrote in a February 23, 2007 article. (LINK) “According to satellite data published in [the journal] Science in November 2005,” Michaels wrote, “Greenland was shedding ice at 0.4 percent per century.” “Nowhere in the traditionally [peer-reviewed] refereed scientific literature do we find any support for Gore’s [Greenland melt] hypothesis,” Michaels concluded. |
National Review article - 02/23/07 |
|
Scientists conclude an increase in Solar activity over last century! Kinda makes you flinch over all this Gore-Bull Warming crap, eh? |
Space.com - 09/27/06 |