Global Cooling

[classicman]

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved

First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flat lining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.

Ever shriller and more frantic has become the insistence of the warmists, cheered on by their army of media groupies such as the BBC, that the last 10 years have been the "hottest in history" and that the North Pole would soon be ice-free – as the poles remain defiantly icebound and those polar bears fail to drown. All those hysterical predictions that we are seeing more droughts and hurricanes than ever before have infuriatingly failed to materialize.

Even the more cautious scientific acolytes of the official orthodoxy now admit that, thanks to "natural factors" such as ocean currents, temperatures have failed to rise as predicted (although they plaintively assure us that this cooling effect is merely "masking the underlying warming trend", and that the temperature rise will resume worse than ever by the middle of the next decade)

Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a "scientific consensus" in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world's most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that "consensus" which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.

Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades, harsh reality at last began to break in on those self-deluding dreams which have for so long possessed almost every politician in the western world. As we saw in this month's Poznan conference, when 10,000 politicians, officials and "environmentalists" gathered to plan next year's "son of Kyoto" treaty in Copenhagen, panicking politicians are waking up to the fact that the world can no longer afford all those quixotic schemes for "combating climate change" with which they were so happy to indulge themselves in more comfortable times.

Very interesting read. Finally someone willing to put it on paper.
However, I must say that the 60 f temp here today broke a record and it has been rather warm. Then again 2008 was a very "cool" summer here as well.

[Undertoad]

I dissected that article and didn't find it convincing. The current cooling is 1-2 years of temps cooler than the average of the last 20 years. If you believe in Hansen's modeling of measured temps that makes 2008 the something like 14th-warmest in the last 100 years.

He says it disproves IPCC predictions, but I can't find any such predictions that just cover one year.

All we have is another interesting data point. We now wait for more data points.

[piercehawkeye45]

I agree with Undertoad, this is just another data point.

The reason why climate is predicted by the mathematical model "Chaos Theory" is because it is determined by a very large number of sensitive variables. Any number of events could have triggered the extreme cold of the recent years.

The article also seemed to base it opinions on extreme temperatures, which is quite possibly the worse possible method for temperatures. Look at record high and lows for this month. The years do not make any sense and you can never make a prediction from those. That is why global averages over a period of decades (preferably centuries or longer) are used. We can find trends in those.

Hell, I bet you can find an extremely hot year in the "Little Ice Age". That doesn't mean that the event ended that year. It just means that there was a very hot year. This could quite easily be the same so the article title is completely ridiculous. But, that also means that he could potentially be right....

Though, if you look at Christopher Booker's history of journalism, you can easily find that it is squeaky clean...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christo...oker#Criticism

[HungLikeJesus]

The stock market is up today.

The recession is obviously over.

[classicman]

EU's new figurehead believes climate change is a myth

The European Union's new figurehead believes that climate change is a dangerous myth and has compared the union to a Communist state.

The views of President Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic, 67, have left the government of Mirek Topolanek, his bitter opponent, determined to keep him as far away as possible from the EU presidency, which it took over from France yesterday.

The Czech president, who caused a diplomatic incident by dining with opponents of the EU’s Lisbon treaty on a recent visit to Ireland, has a largely ceremonial role.

But there are already fears that, after the dynamic EU presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy - including his hyper-active attempts at international diplomacy over the credit crisis and Georgia as well as an historic agreement to cut greenhouse gases - the Czech effort will be mired in infighting and overshadowed by the platform it will give to Mr Klaus and his controversial views.
Czech diplomats in Brussels insist that Mr Klaus is not a big part of their plans and are trying to limit him to one speech to the European Parliament in February and chairing one international summit, either the EU-Canada or EU-Russia meeting.

They are pinning their hopes on a lunch between Mr Klaus and Mr Topolanek on January 5, which they hope will see both parties agree a truce after the President’s unsuccessful attempt to unseat his rival as Prime Minister at a party conference last month.

“What is sure is that there will be at least a little choir of voices coming from Prague that will not be singing the same song,” said Piotr Kaczynski, of the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels.

“It will probably not impact the way the Czechs will manage the work of the EU presidency. It will however have some negative impact on the political leverage of the Czech presidency,” he added.

Tensions recently erupted between Mr Klaus and Brussels when a private meeting with senior MEPs descended into a slanging match after they presented him with an EU flag and said that they were not interested in his Eurosceptic views.

Mr Klaus responded: “No one has spoken to me in this style and tone in my six years here. I thought these methods ended for us 18 years ago. I see I was wrong.”

[piercehawkeye45]

Are you serious Classicman? Do you even read what you post or least do some research behind it? What are you trying to get out of this?

The same goes for the thing you posted in the Gaza/Israel thread? I still can't tell if that was satire or not.

[TheMercenary]

The obvious point is that not everyone buys the notion that things are what they seem when it comes to global warming. Including important people in large important organizations.

[piercehawkeye45]

Yeah, just like Al Gore was an important part to an important organization?

Vaclav Klaus is a crackpot. He is no different from Al Gore except he doesn't believe in global warming instead of believing in it. If anyone posted Al Gore as a legitimate argument for global warming, you and others would laugh them out of the Cellar and then you consider Vaclav Klaus an important figure for something you believe in.

Hell....this guy even tracked down Al Gore so he could debate him in global warming. That must have been a sight.....


What are his arguments? I could find politicians that don't believe in evolution as well. Until this guy can beat environmental scientists in a debate, he has really no authority in the matter.

[TheMercenary]

None of that changes the fact that the issue remains controversial and there are many "experts" that disagree. The difference between you and me and people like Klaus and Gore are that they have access to the political stage and therefore a voice to the masses, regardless of your views as to their capacity to present a rational view you agree with.

[piercehawkeye45]

Do you want me to quote him on global warming?

Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so.

How is that a rational argument? I know everyone on this forum that has said "[insert issue] is [insert stance] and every intelligent person thinks so" is not respected as rational.

It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor.

Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice.

Perhaps only Mr Al Gore may be saying something along these lines: a sane person can't. I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction_event

Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable and this fact scares me.

http://newsbusters.org/node/10773
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1899


These are not rational arguments. I've read his argument and it doesn't give one real argument on how global warming is false.

[TheMercenary]

I never said it was rational, only that he has the ability to speak to large groups of people who want to agree with him. And they will.

[TheMercenary]

Michael Gillard and Mark Olden
A PIONEERING climate change project in Africa run by Robin Birley, the socialite, has been accused by the European commission, its main donor, of making unsubstantiated claims about its environmental impact.

The project has received more than £1m in public grants and money from celebrities in the music and film business. They include Ronnie Wood of the Rolling Stones and Brad Pitt, the actor.

The project attempts to offset an individual’s carbon footprint by paying poor farmers in Mozambique to plant trees, which absorb CO2, and to protect existing forests.

The commission’s criticism comes amid increased concern about the worth of these fashionable but largely unregulated carbon offset schemes. Critics say it is almost impossible to guarantee that the trees will survive the length of time needed to offset any significant carbon emissions.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle5439366.ece

[xoxoxoBruce]

That's OK, as long as there aren't any international or in our case even national plan to do something, I don't see a problem with private projects unless someone can show they are actually doing harm.

Of course I wouldn't want to see Brad & Ronnie bilked.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Vaclav Klaus is a crackpot.

That's not the point. The point is he is in a high profile position and therefore able to expose a shitload of people to his opinion, right or wrong.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Are you serious Classicman? Do you even read what you post or least do some research behind it? What are you trying to get out of this?

Yes, yes & yes. Nothing at all, just some discussion. I think Bruce understood the point completely as he laid out in the previous post.

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

The same goes for the thing you posted in the Gaza/Israel thread? I still can't tell if that was satire or not.

Deal with that issue in that thread.