Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
AGW continues to unravel but will it matter?
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, October 22, 2008

The two candidates for president have outlined their belief in AGW and how they'd fight it, but thankfully the global climate situation isn't cooperating. From Australia, Andrew Bolt brings us this update:
Last year's summer melt had been so fierce that climate scientists warned that the warmed seas gave us a 50-50 chance of an ice-free Arctic this summer.

"It's hard to see how the system may bounce back," fretted Washington University's Ignatius Rigor.

Countless headlines around the world blared this latest "proof " of global warming (which, sshhh, actually halted in 1998). The ABC and Fairfax flew reporter Marian Wilkinson up to file scary reports from an ice-breaker, declaring: "Here you can see climate change happening before your eyes."

Eco-explorer Lewis Gordon Pugh even announced he'd paddle a kayak all the way to the Pole to draw attention to this terrifying loss of ice.

But, oops. Pugh actually had to quit paddling when he found 1000km more ice in front of him than he'd expected.

Indeed, there was at least 9 per cent more Artic ice this summer than last, and the refreeze so far this autumn is so extraordinary there's a third more ice than there was this time a year ago.
In fact, Lorne Gunter has noticed something:
In early September, I began noticing a string of news stories about scientists rejecting the orthodoxy on global warming. Actually, it was more like a string of guest columns and long letters to the editor since it is hard for skeptical scientists to get published in the cabal of climate journals now controlled by the Great Sanhedrin of the environmental movement.

Still, the number of climate change skeptics is growing rapidly. Because a funny thing is happening to global temperatures — they're going down, not up.
Some of what he noticed included this:
On the same day (Sept. 5) that areas of southern Brazil were recording one of their latest winter snowfalls ever and entering what turned out to be their coldest September in a century, Brazilian meteorologist Eugenio Hackbart explained that extreme cold or snowfall events in his country have always been tied to "a negative PDO" or Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Positive PDOs — El Ninos — produce above-average temperatures in South America while negative ones — La Ninas — produce below average ones.

Dr. Hackbart also pointed out that periods of solar inactivity known as "solar minimums" magnify cold spells on his continent. So, given that August was the first month since 1913 in which no sunspot activity was recorded — none — and during which solar winds were at a 50-year low, he was not surprised that Brazilians were suffering (for them) a brutal cold snap. "This is no coincidence," he said as he scoffed at the notion that manmade carbon emissions had more impact than the sun and oceans on global climate.
And other scientists were filling in intentional blanks left by the AGW crowd which were inconvenient to their argument:

Also in September, American Craig Loehle, a scientist who conducts computer modelling on global climate change, confirmed his earlier findings that the so-called Medieval Warm Period (MWP) of about 1,000 years ago did in fact exist and was even warmer than 20th-century temperatures.

Prior to the past decade of climate hysteria and Kyoto hype, the MWP was a given in the scientific community. Several hundred studies of tree rings, lake and ocean floor sediment, ice cores and early written records of weather — even harvest totals and censuses —confirmed that the period from 800 AD to 1300 AD was unusually warm, particularly in Northern Europe.

But in order to prove the climate scaremongers' claim that 20th-century warming had been dangerous and unprecedented — a result of human, not natural factors — the MWP had to be made to disappear. So studies such as Michael Mann's "hockey stick," in which there is no MWP and global temperatures rise gradually until they jump up in the industrial age, have been adopted by the UN as proof that recent climate change necessitates a reordering of human economies and societies.

Dr. Loehle's work helps end this deception.
So welcome back the Medieval Warm Period to the fullness of climate history.

And CO2?
Don Easterbrook, a geologist at Western Washington University, says, "It's practically a slam dunk that we are in for about 30 years of global cooling," as the sun enters a particularly inactive phase. His examination of warming and cooling trends over the past four centuries shows an "almost exact correlation" between climate fluctuations and solar energy received on Earth, while showing almost "no correlation at all with CO2."

An analytical chemist who works in spectroscopy and atmospheric sensing, Michael J. Myers of Hilton Head, S. C., declared, "Man-made global warming is junk science," explaining that worldwide manmade CO2 emission each year "equals about 0.0168% of the atmosphere's CO2 concentration ... This results in a 0.00064% increase in the absorption of the sun's radiation. This is an insignificantly small number."
Add this as the final nail weather-satellite scientists David Douglass of the University of Rochester and John Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville:
For nearly 30 years, Professor Christy has been in charge of NASA's eight weather satellites that take more than 300,000 temperature readings daily around the globe. In a paper co-written with Dr. Douglass, he concludes that while manmade emissions may be having a slight impact, "variations in global temperatures since 1978 ... cannot be attributed to carbon dioxide."
There's a nice little chart at the link demonstrating their point.

All-in-all, the scientific community seems to be coming to its senses concerning the hoax of AGW. The question, of course, is will special-interest driven politicians take the time to review the new data starting to stream in, or, like the herd driven animals they are, ignore it for a "damn the torpedoes, my mind is made up" approach to expensive and unnecessary "solutions" to a non-existent problem?

Unfortunately, I'm beginning to lean toward the latter because of something I once considered a silver lining in the financial mess. My thinking was that such economy busting solutions would be put on the back burner in times of economic fragility. But now I'm reconsidering that belief.

What will be the entity to establish a "carbon market"? Why the government of course. And what entity stands to reap windfall revenues from such a market? Uh, yeah, the same one.

What entity feels they need more revenues in order to "spread the wealth?"

The perfect economic storm is setting itself up, and if government pursues this "solution" what we've suffered to this point economically may only seem to have been a squall line in comparison.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
The only thing CO2 drives is taxes. Socialism is a code word for stoopid.
 
Written By: bill-tb
URL: http://
I will be eagerly awaiting an apology to all of us from organs like Scientific American for pushing this junk science so hard. Yeah, like that is gonna happen.
 
Written By: kyleN
URL: http://impudent.blognation.us/blog
It is all because of Obama.
"[T]his was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal".
All praise The One, The Lightworker, The Messiah...
 
Written By: Anonymous
URL: http://
It’s part of the electoral cycle. Now that the democrats are ahead, Global Warming is Dead. I’ve always argued that there is no such thing as man made global warming. The population of the earth would have to reach 30billion Carbon Consuming folks in order to even make a dent on climate. Today 6 billion people throw 6 billion tons of carbon into the environment [land, sea and air]. It seems like a lot, but it is 3% of the total 265 billion ton AIR budget only that the Earth spews out.
Oh and by the way, America’s contrbution is 400 million tons, less than 10% of the total output, not bad for a country that represents 20% of world GDP, eh.
 
Written By: Orlando Armaswalker
URL: http://
I will be eagerly awaiting an apology to all of us from organs like Scientific American for pushing this junk science so hard.
Heck, I’m still waiting for one of the founders of this site (Jon) to come to his senses on this issue.
 
Written By: Locke the door
URL: http://
"It’s practically a slam dunk that we are in for about 30 years of global cooling."
This sounds as absurd as all the GW priests.
 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
Perhaps I’m an optimist, but if we head into global cooling instead of global warming, it’s going to be a large and unforgettable black eye for scientists and environmentalists. I don’t think they will easily live it down.

And I for one will not let them.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
The AGW movement in mindspace has crested. Now we have to stop the political inertia before it does real damage to our economy and our freedoms.

As to "carbon offsets" why doesn’t someone offer to balance carbon dioxide emissions with scholarships for nuclear engineering students? That would make a real difference!
 
Written By: Joseph Somsel
URL: http://
Perhaps I’m an optimist, but if we head into global cooling instead of global warming, it’s going to be a large and unforgettable black eye for scientists and environmentalists. I don’t think they will easily live it down.

Or they could claim that AGC is the problem. Yes, they’ll damn industry for creating the cooling. Or am I being a tad too cynical?
 
Written By: Jason Pappas
URL: http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/
Perhaps I’m an optimist, but if we head into global cooling instead of global warming, it’s going to be a large and unforgettable black eye for scientists and environmentalists. I don’t think they will easily live it down.

And I for one will not let them.
Ummm... no.

Because before global warming, there was a ’nuclear winter’ like smog/pollution that was suppose to be causing our cooling.

Then we got on a warming trend and it took less than 10 years for them to being to adapt to Global Warming.

They already have the seeds planted for when we cool again. Its a spin on the above. "Global Dimming". Except this time, since sunlight isn’t actually blocked. Its a chemical thing that you conveniently can’t see, so you have to believe what they tell you.
 
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
Grimshaw -
This sounds as absurd as all the GW priests.
Except there’s actual hard evidence for it, as opposed to fudged databases and models adjusted until they fit the politics but which still can’t predict the recent past from long time periods...

...even slightly.

I hope the hoax called Global Warming(TM) dies before it’s memes cause any more damage.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp

 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
Assuming there was/is persuasive evidence for an AGW problem what would a low tax solution to AGW look like?
 
Written By: unaha-closp
URL: http://warisforwinning.blogspot.com/
"It’s practically a slam dunk that we are in for about 30 years of global cooling."
This sounds as absurd as all the GW priests.
not really the PDO is gone to a cool phase now and the PDO phases usually last between 20 and 30 yeas.
 
Written By: mac
URL: http://
Yes, I’ve read the arguments for global dimming and some AGW proponents are already setting up a fallback position there. However, after all the furor over warming that peaked around Gore’s book and movie, I don’t think they can talk their way around cooling so easily.

Cooling, or even the current ~10 year plateau, was not predicted by their models, just as the current financial crisis was not predicted by the quants’ computer models. Tellingly, Gore shored up the authority of AGW computer models by referring to Wall Street’s computer models.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
... after all the furor over warming that peaked around Gore’s book and movie, I don’t think they can talk their way around cooling so easily.

I agree. The green religion will go on but it won’t have the facade of science. It will setback their cause considerably.
 
Written By: Jason Pappas
URL: http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/
The motives of those seeking political action based on AGW is wise to call into question, actual science behind GW and AGW theorizing less so.

There is a solid theoretical AND emperical basis for concluding that not only is humanity’s activity affecting global climate, but in time, the human influence will also become significant.

Please also remember that individual extreme weather events (one way or the other) are not proof of anything; you cannot make valid general conclusions from singular observations. Plus, extreme cases of fx. snowfall is not a disproof of global warming anyway, as one of the predictions of GW theory is not that the snow goes away, rather that the spectrum of weather events, stretching from fx. drought to extreme precipitation (torrential rains etc.) broadens. As such, extreme snowfall events are not a disproof of AGW.
 
Written By: Peter Bjørn Perlsø
URL: http://titancity.com
There is a solid theoretical AND emperical basis for concluding that not only is humanity’s activity affecting global climate, but in time, the human influence will also become significant.
Thus far all I’ve seen are theories, certainly nothing which I would consider to have ’concluded’ what you claim (or provided conclusive evidence of what you claim). And I’m also seeing much work coming out now which puts those original theories and their methodology in serious doubt.

While it isn’t unimaginable that humans may, at some time, have the influence you forecast, most who follow this have serious doubts about tying it to human activities which put a trace amount (relatively speaking in comparison to that amount nature produces) of a trace gas into the atmosphere.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
Answering McQ:

"Thus far all I’ve seen are theories, certainly nothing which I would consider to have ’concluded’ what you claim (or provided conclusive evidence of what you claim)."

Take it one step at a time then, starting with Arrhenius’ original conjecture that Carbon Dioxide traps IR, which has been verified in countless lab experiments since then, even though his original calculations were quite imprecise. Nevertheless, he got the ball rolling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius#Greenhouse_effect

AS for the "just theories" argument, that only really holds if these stand on their own with no emperic backup. But that exact emperical backup does exist. A good place to get a lot of it with nice viewgraphs is this website:

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/

" And I’m also seeing much work coming out now which puts those original theories and their methodology in serious doubt."

Well, thats the way science works. It’s not unlike a pendulum swinging between initial theories and following rebuttals. But the mere existence of research that calls *some* parts of GW theory/AGW into question is not and cannot be a full disproval of GW/AGW theory; implying so is just too convenient, and not intellectually honest, either.

GW theory is a very large field, some part which are still in its infancy, so don’t expect all of it to be pinpoint precise. Again, thats the way science works.

"While it isn’t unimaginable that humans may, at some time, have the influence you forecast,"

Surely that’s an understatement.

" most who follow this"

I’ve followed the debate for some 13 years.

" have serious doubts about tying it to human activities which put a trace amount (relatively speaking in comparison to that amount nature produces) of a trace gas into the atmosphere."

Please be sure that you do not conflate science with policy. That’s the major problem in debating GW theory with... well, anybody. OTOH, accepting the science as fundamentally correct, despite minor flaws, does not mean that we also have to eat the cake that the redistributionists serve as be be-all and end-all of everything from social injustice to global warming and smelly feet. On the contrary.
 
Written By: Peter Bjrn Perls
URL: http://titancity.com
Very nice resource - thank you.
[URL=http://trump-taj-mahal.zeiter.info]trump taj mahal[/URL] trump taj mahal [URL=http://bergdorf-goodman.zeiter.info]bergdorf goodman[/URL] bergdorf goodman motel6 motel6 lumber liquidators lumber liquidators flagyl flagyl http://touro-college.zeiter.info touro college http://barnes-and-nobel.zeiter.info barnes and nobel http://taxact.zeiter.info taxact http://tila-tequila.schadez.info tila tequila http://nieman-marcus.schadez.info nieman marcus
 
Written By: trump taj mahal
URL: http://trump-taj-mahal.zeiter.info
Keep up this great resource. best greetings.
[URL=http://benicar.schadez.info]benicar[/URL] benicar [URL=http://bobs-discount-furniture.schadez.info]bobs discount furniture[/URL] bobs discount furniture calico corners calico corners carquest carquest coldwatercreek coldwatercreek http://fruitcake-lady.zeiter.info fruitcake lady http://jcpenneys.zeiter.info jcpenneys http://jordans-furniture.zeiter.info jordans furniture http://kay-jewlers.schadez.info kay jewlers http://mccalls-patterns.zeiter.info mccalls patterns
 
Written By: benicar
URL: http://benicar.schadez.info
Thanks for the good site.
www-jang-pk blog yonggirls info online video-n70-porno site blog animal-sxe-com about about imgsrc-galleries info about petsex-world-com info info fake-megan-fox-cum about about analtube-for-you online hard-pthc-no-nude about telivisionx-co-uk about about
 
Written By: analtube-for-you site
URL: http://analtube-for-you.sysake.com/
Keep up this great resource
xxxmovis-porno blog online boys-erected info about www-usher-com blog site porno-arab-hijab site online www-srbija-com blog online vykedirect about online daniela-elger-fotos blog hamada-music-com info orgasme-com-porn blog nudebody-com site site
 
Written By: boys-erected blog
URL: http://boys-erected.fojopy.com/
Good site. Thanks.
arabic-you-tube-xxx blog info ladyboy-mint-tube info online lolli-nude info online fustana-foto about blog hairy-vajinas site online moparscape-links site online www-bnat-agadir site possy-com about about yuporno blog info ghana-porno about about
 
Written By: ghana-porno site
URL: http://ghana-porno.pobima.com/
Hi, nice site design
realtree-layouts info info manifestmen-com about blog korkufilmi info blog decameron-com-co info bollywoodkiss about info password-chicasperu blog online www-naughtyteen-com about blog phim-heo-bao-thy info about sex-18xxx blog site www-xvideos-co-m online
 
Written By: www-xvideos-co-m
URL: http://www-xvideos-co-m.qewahy.com/
foXc7n rbugbstxixzf, [url=http://vouwezefrkmb.com/]vouwezefrkmb[/url], [link=http://apfoneatnicn.com/]apfoneatnicn[/link], http://hiokwelyfhps.com/
 
Written By: ecdbyn
URL: http://yvscqgoxvxoo.com/

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider