Written by Marc Morano
June 17, 2008
Alert: UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Turns on UN – Sun Slows Down More! - Climate Fear ‘Running out of Gas’ - Spitting = Impact of Doubling CO2? - Round Up – June 17, 2008
[Note: The Sheer volume of scientists dissenting from UN IPCC climate views since 2007 has made it difficult for me to keep the database up to date. To read about the latest scientists to publicly speak out, see below and see: U.S. Senate’s report of now over 500 skeptical scientists (and constantly growing) of man-made global warming fears. See: Senate Report – It appears that man-made climate fears are literally -- as Meteorologist James Spann says below -- “rapidly running out of gas” both in peer-reviewed studies and in the claimed “consensus.” ]
Mythical UN IPCC ‘Consensus’ Continues to Crumble:
Top UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Turns on IPCC.
Calls Warming Fears: 'Worst scientific scandal in the history'
By Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist who specializes in optical waveguide spectroscopy from the Yokohama National University, also contributed to the 2007 UN IPCC AR4 (fourth assessment report) as an expert reviewer. Itoh, a former lecturer at the University of Tokyo, just released his new book Lies and Traps in the Global Warming Affairs (currently in Japanese only).
“We have described many topics in this book, including inaccurate temperature measurements (e.g., A. Watt’s work), ‘observations’ of climate sensitivity, many climate forcings such as colored-aerosol and vegetation (based on 2005 NRC report as Roger has so many times pointed out), and the effect of solar magnetic activity (including my own work),” Itoh wrote on June 17, 2008, on the weblog of former Colorado State Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr. Itoh’s new book includes chapters calling man-made global warming fears “the worst scientific scandal in the history.” “I also cited the opinions of Dr. Akasofu (Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska) in the last part of the book. He sincerely advises us‚ ‘When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists,’ and says, ‘IPCC should make appropriate comments before G8.’ I sincerely think he is correct,” Itoh wrote.
Itoh concludes his book with six points:
1. The global temperature will not increase rapidly if at all. There is sufficient time to think about future energy and social systems.
2. The climate system is more robust than conventionally claimed. For instance, the Gulf Stream will not stop due to fresh water inflow.
3. There are many factors that cause the climate changes, particularly in regional and local scales. Considering only greenhouse gases is nonsense and harmful.
4. A comprehensive climate convention is necessary. The framework-protocol formulism is too old to apply to modern international issues.
5. Reconsider countermeasures for the climate changes. For instance, to reduce Asian Brown Cloud through financial and technical aid of developed countries is beneficial from many aspects, and can become a Win-Win policy.
6. The policy makers should be ‘Four-ball jugglers.’ Multiple viewpoints are inevitable to realize sustainable societies.”
Update: June 15, 2008: More Signs of the Sun Slowing Down - 'We continue to slide into a deeper than normal solar minima, one not seen in decades' By Meteorologist Anthony Watts:
Excerpt: It appears we continue to slide into a deeper than normal solar minima, one not seen in decades. Given the signs, I think we are about to embark upon a grand experiment, over which we have no control [...] I had noted that there was a curios step function in 2005, almost as if something had “switched off” [...] As you can see, the Ap Index has continued along at the low level (slightly above zero) that was established during the drop in October 2005. As of June 2008, we now have 32 months of the Ap hovering around a value just slightly above zero, with occasional blips of noise. [...] What is most striking is that since 1932, there have not been ANY years prior to 2007 that have zero data. [...]
Meteorologist says Man-Made Global Warming Movement ‘Rapidly Running Out of Gas’ In last year (By Meteorologist James Spann) - June 17, 2008
Excerpt: A year and a half ago, James Spann questioned the money and the so-called scientific consensus pushing the idea that mankind is causing global warming. Today, he says it’s losing steam. Two imminent surveys of meteorologists may further complicate the climate debate. […] “[Y]ou know, there was some great power in that movement back in January of 2007,” Spann said. “It’s pretty rapidly running out of gas and it just seems like every day more and more people are coming out with the fact that that’s pretty much a hoax.
And these are Ph.D climatologists that are pretty much saying what I said all along.” In January 2007, Spann received national attention when he wrote a post on his blog challenging a post by The Weather Channel climate expert Dr. Heidi Cullen. Cullen had argued that meteorologists should have the American Meteorological Society (AMS) credentials taken away if they doubt the validity of manmade climate change. “If a meteorologist can't speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn't give them a Seal of Approval,” Cullen wrote for Weather.com on Dec. 21, 2006.
Spann fired back on Jan. 18, 2007: “Well, well,” Spann wrote. “Some ‘climate expert’ on ‘The Weather Channel’ wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent “global warming” is a natural process. So much for ‘tolerance’, huh?” Spann claimed at the time he didn’t know any broadcast meteorologists who were sold on the theory touted by global warming alarmists. […] “Of course, the root of this whole thing is money,” Spann said. “And, there is a vast amount of wealth being generated by this whole issue. And I always recommend to folks – if anyone speaks on the subject, get a disclosure and find out their financial interests in it.” […] “I’m not a politician, don’t understand it – I honestly don’t know,” Spann said. “But, I will tell you that there’s a lot of people who have gotten very, very wealthy – filthy rich off this subject. I think former Vice President [Al Gore] collects a minimum of $200,000 per speech on this and all of this money – it can corrupt anybody, and I just think it’s all about money.”
Sea Level Falling? – By Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo of IceCap.US
Icecap note: Note that sea levels are not accelerating up but appear to be falling in part due to ocean cooling and compression and perhaps part due to record extent of Antarctic ice. Certainly there is no signs of an alarming increase threatening coastal areas as Gore and Hansen have prophesized.
See Latest Sea Level Chart here
RIP: Renowned Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Reid Bryson Dies At 88 – ‘You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.’ LINK
[Note: Dr. Reid Bryson is prominently featured in the U.S. Senate’s report of now over 500 skeptical scientists of man-made global warming fears. (See: LINK ) Senator Inhofe frequently cited pioneering scientist Dr. Bryson and he was always available to answer questions or email with me personally during the climate change battles. Whether it was posting comments on the New York Times blog or emailing data, Bryson was razor sharp to the very end. Bryson also did a fantastic appearance on a live CNBC TV business show in December 2007. One of Bryson’s most cited quotes on his man-made global warming views was his 2007 assertion: "You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.” LINK (New peer-reviewed studies are validating Bryson’s views. See: HERE ) Bryson was a legend in his field and we will be greatly missed and appreciated. God Bless you Dr. Bryson. ]
Dr. Reid Bryson’s entry into U.S. Senate Dissenting Scientist Report of December 20, 2008: See REPORT
One of the "Fathers of Meteorology," Dr. Reid Bryson, the founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at University of Wisconsin (now the Department of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, was pivotal in promoting the coming ice age scare of the 1970s (See Time Magazine's 1974 article "Another Ice Age" citing Bryson: & see Newsweek's 1975 article "The Cooling World" citing Bryson) has now converted into a leading global warming skeptic.
On February 8, 2007 Bryson dismissed what he terms "sky is falling" man-made global warming fears. Bryson was on the United Nations Global 500 Roll of Honor and was identified by the British Institute of Geographers as the most frequently cited climatologist in the world. "Before there were enough people to make any difference at all, two million years ago, nobody was changing the climate, yet the climate was changing, okay?" Bryson told the May 2007 issue of Energy Cooperative News. "All this argument is the temperature going up or not, it's absurd. Of course it's going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we're coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we're putting more carbon dioxide into the air," Bryson said. "You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide," he added. "We cannot say what part of that warming was due to mankind's addition of ‘greenhouse gases' until we consider the other possible factors, such as aerosols.”
Naked cyclists brave 'unseasonably cold weather' in N.H. to demonstrate against global warming (June 15, 2008)
Excerpt: NAKED cyclists braved chilly conditions to demonstrate against climate change and campaign for rights. About 80 brave bikers stripped before taking a short trip across Manchester amid unseasonably cold weather on Friday. The group rode under the slogan 'real rights for bikes', and say they were naked to highlight cyclists' vulnerability on city streets and draw attention to `the destructive effects of car culture'. Their route, part of a global event, took them past bemused commuters in the city centre. Many cheered while others looked on in bewilderment.
University of Mumbai set to offer degree in global warming
Excerpt: Fancy a degree in Global Warming? Varsity plans to start certificate course and, if response is encouraging, a degree course in time to come; subject will deal with environmental issues like pollution and other health hazards of global warming
Science Daily: Scientists not sure why Sun 'continues to be dead' – June 9, 2008
Excerpt: The sun has been laying low for the past couple of years, producing no sunspots and giving a break to satellites. That's good news for people who scramble when space weather interferes with their technology, but it became a point of discussion for the scientists who attended an international solar conference at Montana State University.
Approximately 100 scientists from Europe, Asia, Latin America, Africa and North America gathered June 1-6 to talk about "Solar Variability, Earth's Climate and the Space Environment." The scientists said periods of inactivity are normal for the sun, but this period has gone on longer than usual. "It continues to be dead," said Saku Tsuneta with the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, program manager for the Hinode solar mission. […] The last cycle reached its peak in 2001 and is believed to be just ending now, Longcope said. The next cycle is just beginning and is expected to reach its peak sometime around 2012. Today's sun, however, is as inactive as it was two years ago, and scientists aren't sure why. "It's a dead face," Tsuneta said of the sun's appearance.
Tsuneta said solar physicists aren't like weather forecasters; They can't predict the future. They do have the ability to observe, however, and they have observed a longer-than-normal period of solar inactivity. In the past, they observed that the sun once went 50 years without producing sunspots. That period, from approximately 1650 to 1700, occurred during the middle of a little ice age on Earth that lasted from as early as the mid-15th century to as late as the mid-19th century.
Flashback: National Post: Global Cooling! 'Spotless Sun' prompts scientists to fear 'dramatic turn for the worse' – May 31, 2008
Flashback: Cooling Underway: Global Temperature Continues to Drop in May 2008 - 'Significantly Colder' - 16-month temperature drop of -0.774°C!
Flashback: 'Global Warming Will Stop,' New Peer-Reviewed Study Says - Global Warming Takes a Break for Nearly 20 Years? – April 20, 2008
Excerpt: The UK Telegraph reports on April 30: “Global warming will stop until at least 2015 because of natural variations in the climate, scientists have said.
Statistician Dr. Richard Mackey authored a 2007 peer-reviewed study which found that the solar system regulates the earth's climate. The paper was published August 17, 2007 in the Journal of Coastal Research. Mackey predicted a coming global cooling in 2008. “Other things being equal, a strong geomagnetic field contributes to a warmer climate; a weaker field to a cooler climate. But the effect may not be uniform across the planet. Currently, the geomagnetic field seems to be weakening, contributing to global cooling.,”
Mackey wrote on February 8, 2008. “The science of climate dynamics: continues to publish findings about solar/climate relationships and internal variability of the climate system that invalidate the account of the Earth’s climate dynamics presented by the IPCC; predicts the likelihood of an extended period of global cooling, if the emergent solar cycle 24 has a low amplitude, as seems increasingly likely on the basis of current science,” Mackey explained. “Low amplitude solar activity cycles generally result in a cooler global climate. Two or more such cycles in succession usually result in severe cooling.
In the past such sequences have induced cold epochs referred to as little ice ages. There is increasing evidence that the emergent solar cycle 24 will be low amplitude and followed by one or two more low amplitude cycles,” he added. “If there is a period of severe global cooling over the next several decades as indicated by the science of solar/climate relationships and predictions of the next three solar cycles, there would be a 30 year period of far greater hardship than our ancestors experienced during the last several cycles of the quieter Sun,” he added. (LINK)
U.S. Global Warming Legislation Not Inevitable
Excerpt: On the surface it may seem as though the Senate moved closer to “doing something” about global warming since 54 Senators said they would have voted for cloture on Lieberman-Warner last week compared to only 43 votes in favor in 2003. But as the New York Times points out, 10 senators (including liberal Senators from rust-belt states) said they would not have actually voted for final passage of the bill unless it was amended to help industries sensitive to high energy prices. So in the span of five years, the environmentalists only gained one vote. And looking at the political environment ahead, their case will only get weaker. Environmentalists believe a big reason they lost last week was because the major environmental groups were not united behind the bill. To get more environmentalists on board, new global warming legislation will have to look a lot more like Rep. Ed Markey’s (D-MA) bill, which sets more stringent emissions caps and imposes even higher transitions costs on businesses trying to reduce carbon. Environmentalists seem almost blissfully unaware that energy prices are bound to be even higher next year making a bill that will cost even more jobs than Lieberman-Warner did dead letter. Worse news from the rest of the world increasingly shows that not only would carbon capping hurt the US economy, it would do nothing to stop global warming. Both the BBC and the Guardian have published lengthy reports proving that carbon offsets bought through international markets do nothing to reduce carbon emissions and developing countries like India have been very clear that they will not cut their emissions at the cost of development and poverty alleviation. Without cuts from developing power houses like China and India, US carbon emission reductions are worthless.
China Increases Lead as Biggest Carbon Dioxide Emitter
Excerpt: Beijing, shrouded in smog on Friday, has heavy air pollution, as does much of the rest of China. By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL Published: June 14, 2008 China has clearly overtaken the United States as the world's leading emitter of carbon dioxide, the main heat-trapping gas, a new study has found, its emissions increasing 8 percent in 2007. The Chinese increase accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the year's global greenhouse gas emissions, the study found. The report, released Friday by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, found that in 2007 China's emissions were 14 percent higher than those of the United States. In the previous year's annual study, the researchers found for the first time that China had become the world's leading emitter, with carbon emissions 7 percent higher by volume than the United States in 2006.Many experts had been skeptical of the earlier study, whose results were less clear-cut than those released Friday.
Reality Check: 'People are not stopping each other in the cold June streets to exclaim: 'Oh my God, did you see it's going to be two degrees warmer in 100 years?'
Excerpt: People are not stopping each other in the cold June streets to exclaim: "Oh my God, did you see it's going to be two degrees warmer in 100 years?" What they are really saying is: "If prices get any higher, I don't know how we'll feed the kids tomorrow."
Dissenters of the Day: 'IPCC theory of anthropogenic warming is a hoax' says Env. Canada Meteorologist (June 9, 2008 – Canada’s The Hill Times)
[Note: The scientists keep publicly dissenting. Today’s Dissenter: Patrick Carroll, retired Environment Canada meteorologist.]
Excerpt: Liberal Leader StÃ©phane Dion is a gullible fool in continuing to believe that CO2 emissions drive climate change. He is whistling past a political graveyard if he thinks that Canadians will accept billions more in taxes to reduce and sequester CO2 emissions when there is zero proof that such activities will have any measurable, let alone detectable, effect on global temperatures. In short, Dion has been a victim of the alarmist propaganda emanating from the IPCC and radical environmentalists such as David Suzuki. If Dion had advisers who were keeping up with the latest research and climate data, he would have been informed by now that the IPCC theory of anthropogenic warming is a hoax that is rapidly falling into disfavour among atmospheric scientists. Instead, he continues to blunder along listening to clueless alarmists like Mr. Suzuki.
South African Professor says 'man-made global warming is not real'
Professor Dr. William J.R. Alexander, Emeritus of the Department of Civil and Biosystems Engineering at the University of Pretoria in South Africa and a former member of the United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters.
Excerpt: MAN-MADE global warming is not real, a Professor from the University of Pretoria charged in Windhoek last week. Professor Will Alexander claimed that claims by environmentalists that climate change was real were not true and if the world was warmer now, it was simply caused by natural climatic variability. This is contrary to recent reports by the UN-funded Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and other world scientists that climate change was a reality and people just have to learn to live with it. Alexander said he was involved in a number of studies to see if changes in the atmosphere were being caused by climate change but there was no evidence of that. Alexander was one of the speakers at the national debate on climate change held in Windhoek on Friday. He said while environmentalists claim that rainfall will decrease because of climate change, rainfall has in fact increased during the last century. According to him, it was also not true that the frequency of tropical cyclones, droughts and floods will increase. "There is no evidence on that," said Alexander. He claimed that disasters such as this year's floods in the North were caused by natural climatic variability and people were affected because they were now living in areas prone to natural disasters, whereas before they lived in higher-lying areas.
Geologist: 'Earth has had massive changes in temperature unrelated to carbon dioxide'
(Article features Prize-wining Geologist Dr. Ian Plimer, a professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Adelaide in Australia.)
Excerpt: But University of Adelaide mining geology professor Ian Plimer says all the expense will be for nothing, as climate change cannot be stopped -- and it isn't even caused by human-created carbon dioxide. "There is no relationship between carbon dioxide produced by industry and climate change," he said. Professor Plimer said the scientific community had not reached any kind of consensus that carbon dioxide causes global warming. "There's no such thing as surety in science -- 32,000 North American scientists signed a document saying humans don't create global warming whereas the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change only has 2500 scientists saying it does." Professor Plimer said other factors influenced climate change, such as volcanic eruptions, variations in the Earth's orbit around the sun and the sun's own heat-producing cycle -- none of which had anything to do with human activity. "There's a huge body of evidence showing no correlation between carbon dioxide and global warming," he said. "Through the geological record we can look back in time and show the Earth has had massive changes in temperature unrelated to carbon dioxide." "Why make massive economic decisions when the science is extraordinarily uncertain?"
New Zealand Professor Dr. Ron Smith Says “No Consensus” On Global Warming
Excerpt: As is well-known, there is serious and persistent scepticism in regard to both the magnitude and the direction of climate change and the degree to which it may be said to be anthropogenic. This might be a largely ‘academic’ question were it not for the fact that measures of taxation and regulation are proposed that have the potential to cause significant harm to the economic well-being of New Zealand. Unlike the Wegener case, the consequence of suppressing the deviant view may not be simply that we remain in ignorance. It may be that we embark on policies that are likely to be very damaging to us and only marginally advantageous (if at all) to the wider global community.
Weather Channel Founder: 'I ask Al Gore, where’s the global warming?' – By Meteorologist John Coleman
Excerpt: Mr. Gore and his crowd would have us believe that the activities of man have overwhelmed nature during this interglacial period and are producing an unprecedented, out of control warming. Well, it is simply not happening. Worldwide there was a significant natural warming trend in the 1980’s and 1990’s as a Solar cycle peaked with lots of sunspots and solar flares. That ended in 1998 and now the Sun has gone quiet with fewer and fewer Sun spots, and the global temperatures have gone into decline. Earth has cooled for almost ten straight years. So, I ask Al Gore, where’s the global warming? The cooling trend is so strong that recently the head of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had to acknowledge it.
Pakistan Daily Times - Global warming predictions challenged
Excerpt: John Coleman, the founder of American TV’s Weather Channel, has challenged Al Gore’s dire predictions that the planet is in peril because of global warming.In a speech to the San Diego Chamber of Commerce, Coleman said, “There is no significant man made global warming. There has not been any in the past, there is none now and there is no reason to fear any in the future. The climate of Earth is changing. It has always changed. But mankind’s activities have not overwhelmed or significantly modified the natural forces.” He said for the past ten thousand years the Earth has been in an interglacial period, which might well be called nature’s global warming because the Earth warms up, the glaciers melt and life flourishes. “Mr Gore and his crowd would have us believe that the activities of man have overwhelmed nature during this interglacial period and are producing an unprecedented, out of control warming. Well, it is simply not happening,” Coleman added. […] The cooling trend, he claimed, is so strong that recently the head of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had to acknowledge it. LINK
Climatologist Dr. Tim Ball: Environmentalists Seize Green Moral High Ground Ignoring Science
Excerpt: What is wrong with the CO2 argument? Well most people have no understanding of climate science overall or the facts about CO2. The IPCC have also effectively made it the sole cause of climate change. AGW advocates and governments talk about reducing greenhouse gases, but they mean CO2. Few know it is less than 4% of all the greenhouse gases and the human portion is just a fraction of the 4%. Indeed, the amount we produce is within the error factor of the estimates of three natural sources. [..] The table shows the range of estimates of natural CO2 and human production in 2005 (Gt C/year is Gigatons of Carbon per year). Accuracy has not improved since. Notice the human contribution is within the error range of three (1, 2, & 4) of the natural sources. The total error range is almost 5 times the amount of total human production. If we play the carbon tax game we can reduce that by 50 percent to 3.75 Gt C/year net because we remove half of what we produce through agriculture and reforestation. In other words, if everyone left the planet but one scientist remained to measure the difference in atmospheric CO2 she would not be able to measure any difference. Many problems exist with the AGW theory, but there is one that destroys it completely. The most fundamental assumption of the theory is that an increase in CO2 will cause an increase in temperature. In fact, every record for any time period and any duration shows that exactly the opposite happens - temperature increases before CO2. This assumption is still programmed into the computer models so they continue to show that a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase. They dare not change this because it will take the focus away from CO2.
Dodging devastation of cap-and-trade: 'If you control carbon, you control life'
Excerpt: Even if CO2 emissions are returned to the level of horse-and-buggy days, an increase of 0.013 degree Celsius might be avoided over the next century, says climatologist Patrick Michaels. That's if CO2 increases temperature, which many scientists doubt. So, why go down this path? “Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream,” MIT climate scientist Richard Lindzen said. “If you control carbon, you control life.” Global warming is the perfect big-government issue. First, it's predicated entirely on predicted disasters based on arbitrary data fed into computers. What's fed changes continuously. That's why a few years ago sea levels were predicted to rise 20 feet, but now only 20 inches or less. Garbage in, garbage out. Second, global warming is unscientific because it can't be disproved. When temperatures slightly dropped over the past decade, then were predicted even by alarmists to drop more over the next decade despite ever-rising CO2, rather than admit their theory is wrong, the story line changed. Now we're told the entirely unpredicted 20-year cooling is only temporary. If temperatures go up, it proves global warming. If they go down, voila! It proves global warming.
Global Warming as Religion and not Science By Dr. John Brignell is a UK Emeritus Engineering Professor at the University of Southampton who was awarded the Callendar Silver Medal by InstMC and served on a committee of the Institute of Physics.
Excerpt: Global Warming has become the core belief in a new eco-theology. The term is used as shorthand for anthropogenic (or man made) global warming. It is closely related to other modern belief systems, such as political correctness, chemophobia and various other forms of scaremongering, but it represents the vanguard in the assault on scientific man. The activists now prefer to call it “climate change”. This gives them two advantages: 1. It allows them to seize as “evidence” the inevitable occurrences of unusually cold weather as well as warm ones. 2. The climate is always changing, so they must be right. Only the relatively elderly can remember the cynical haste with which the scaremongers dropped the “coming ice age” and embraced exactly the opposite prediction, but aimed at the same culprit – industry. […] Since then, in science, the debate is never closed. The world might (or might not) have warmed by a fraction of a degree. This might (or might not) be all (or in part) due to the activities of mankind. It all depends on the quality of observations and the validity of various hypotheses. Science is at ease with this situation. It accepts various theories, such as gravitation or evolution, as the least bad available and of the most practical use, but it does not believe. Religion is different. Sin and absolution It is in the nature of religion to be authoritarian and proscriptive.
Dissenter Watch: Two more scientists declare dissent against man-made climate fears. Vincent U. Muirhead, an aeronautical engineer who researched and taught in the area of gas dynamics and Bill McAllister, a practicing professional engineer for more than 30 years. 1) Muirhead Excerpt: There are six equations that describe a gas dynamics problem: the equation of state and five nonlinear differential equations expressing the conservation of mass, momentum and energy. Key to these for the atmosphere are: 1. the future flow of heat from the sun as a function of time and space and 2. the absorbent and reflective nature of the atmosphere as a function of time and space. We don’t have a clue about these. For any computer model to produce answers, many extremely questionable assumptions must be made. As McAllister noted, “why can’t the current scientific models accurately predict next week’s weather?” LINK 2) McAllister Excerpt: 1. Consensus among the scientific community does not exist regarding the amount of the climate warming caused by human activities. 2. Consensus among the scientific community does not exist regarding the amount and impact of climate warming 40 years from now. If environmental zealots want to reduce carbon emissions, try to stop exhaling.
Validation, Evaluation and Exaggeration from the IPCC: A Note from New Zealand Chemist Dr. Vincent Gray
(By New Zealand UN IPCC reviewer and climate researcher and chemist Dr. Vincent Gray, an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990 and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of "Climate Change 2001)
Excerpt: The first United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report had a Chapter headed "Validation of Climate Models". A similar Chapter occurred in the first draft of the Second Report. I commented that since no climate model has ever been validated, the word was inappropriate. The next draft had changed the Title, and the words "Validated" or "Validation" to "Evaluated" or "Evaluation" fifty times. Since then the word "validation" is never used, only "evaluate". No IPCC document has even discussed what measures might be required before a computer model of the climate might be "validated" "Validation" is a term used by computer engineers to describe the process of testing of a computer model before it can be made use of. It has to include a capacity to forecast future behaviour to satisfactory level of accuracy. Since no such procedure has ever been carried out for any climate model they are not only completely unsuitable for future forecasts, but the level of accuracy of any such forecast is unknown. As a result they are unable to place levels of reliability on any of the models, or on any "projection' resulting from them.. The Glossary to the IPCC 4th Report does not contain a mention of either "validation" or "evaluation', but it is plain in the text that "evaluation" includes "attribution" which derives a cause/effect relationship from a "correlation" contrary to the demands of basic logic.
The Chilling Costs of Climate Catastrophism
(By Global warming author and engineer Ray Evans, one of the founders of the Australian Lavoisier Group and publisher of "Nine Facts About Climate Change" in February 2007. )
Excerpt: The first is the childlike, unquestioning belief which Garnaut has in the IPCC story of global warming caused by anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide, which, if not curtailed, will result in climatic and economic disaster for the whole world. Many people have noted the religious-like quality of faith in this story of human sin (particularly of Western mankind); the calamitous consequences following failure to repent; and the possibility of redemption through repentance and sacrifice under the wise guidance of green prophets such as Al Gore, James Hansen, Bob Brown, Peter Garrett, and now Ross Garnaut. The second is the refusal to face the political reality posed by Chinese and Indian “intransigence” in the face of demands from the West, the EU in particular, to decarbonise their economies. India and China are embarked on trajectories of extraordinary and historically unprecedented economic growth. China is commissioning two new coal-fired power stations every week. Both countries are also operating and building nuclear power stations. China has ten operating nuclear power plants, one under construction, and six planned; India has fifteen operating nuclear power stations, eight under construction, and four planned. These are not countries devoid of technological and scientific expertise. The idea that they should give up their dash to modernity has been repeatedly and emphatically rejected by their most senior political leaders. The third is the Orwellian use of the words market and price to persuade people to accept a degree of control over their lives which is unprecedented in the Anglosphere, except in time of war. This control is the necessary consequence of permanent decarbonisation regimes which will dramatically lower living standards. LINK
New Peer-Reviewed Study by Roy Spencer: Has global warming research misinterpreted cloud behavior?
Excerpt: Climate experts agree that the seriousness of manmade global warming depends greatly upon how clouds in the climate system respond to the small warming tendency from the extra carbon dioxide mankind produces. To figure that out, climate researchers usually examine natural, year-to-year fluctuations in clouds and temperature to estimate how clouds will respond to humanity’s production of greenhouse gases. When researchers observe natural changes in clouds and temperature, they have traditionally assumed that the temperature change caused the clouds to change, and not the other way around. To the extent that the cloud changes actually cause temperature change, this can ultimately lead to overestimates of how sensitive Earth's climate is to our greenhouse gas emissions.
This seemingly simple mix-up between cause and effect is the basis of a new paper that will appear in the "Journal of Climate." The paper’s lead author, Dr. Roy W. Spencer, a principal research scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville, believes the work is the first step in demonstrating why climate models produce too much global warming.
Spencer and his co-author, principal research scientist William (Danny) Braswell, used a simple climate model to demonstrate that something as seemingly innocuous as daily random variations in cloud cover can cause year-to-year variation in ocean temperature that looks like -- but isn't -- "positive cloud feedback," a warmth-magnifying process that exists in all major climate models. "Our paper is an important step toward validating a gut instinct that many meteorologists like myself have had over the years," said Spencer, "that the climate system is dominated by stabilizing processes, rather than destabilizing processes -- that is, negative feedback rather than positive feedback." The paper doesn't disprove the theory that global warming is manmade.
Instead, it offers an alternative explanation for what we see in the climate system which has the potential for greatly reducing estimates of mankind's impact on Earth's climate. "Since the cloud changes could conceivably be caused by known long-term modes of climate variability -- such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, or El Nino and La Nina -- some, or even most, of the global warming seen in the last century could simply be due to natural fluctuations in the climate system," Spencer said. LINK
Comic Relief: Alarmist Author Bill McKibben says of global warming - 'Literally it’s the biggest problem humans have ever faced'
Excerpt: At any given moment we face as a society an enormous number of problems: there’s the mortgage crisis, the health care crisis, the endless war in Iraq, and on and on. Maybe we’ll solve some of them, and doubtless new ones will spring up to take their places. But there’s only one thing we’re doing that will be easily visible from the moon. That something is global warming. Quite literally it’s the biggest problem humans have ever faced, and while there are ways to at least start to deal with it, all of them rest on acknowledging just how large the challenge really is. LINK
Environmental group ties floods to global warming
Excerpt: The disastrous floods that ravaged southern Wisconsin this week are consistent with global warming predictions by Clean Wisconsin in a January 2007 report. The report, "Global Warming Arrives in Wisconsin," forecast that global warming would lead to increased instances of severe droughts, more intense floods and increased snowfall, Clean Wisconsin said in a news release. LINK
Boy Scout Tornado Deaths blamed on Global Warming by Center for American Progress!
[Note: The Alarmists are getting really desperate now with global cooling and the resounding defeat of the climate bill in DC. What happened to no single event could be tied to global warming? For mounting evidence of global cooling see here and here: Global Warming Takes a Break for Nearly 20 Years? & Cooling Underway: Global Temperature Continues to Drop in May ]
Boy Scout Tornado Deaths blamed on Global Warming by Center for American Progress!
Excerpt: The evidence for the consequences of global warming is appearing with alarming frequency. This morning's headlines are filled with tales of deadly weather: "At least four people were killed and about 40 injured when a tornado tore through a Boy Scout camp in western Iowa on Wednesday night"; "two people are dead in northern Kansas after tornadoes cut a diagonal path across the state"; "[t]wo Maryland men with heart conditions died this week" from the East Coast heat wave. These eight deaths come on top of reports earlier this week that the heat wave "claimed the lives of 17 people" and the wave of deadly storms killed 11 more: "six in Michigan, two in Indiana and one each in Iowa and Connecticut," as well as one man in New York. Tornadoes this year are being reported at record levels. States of emergency have been declared in Minnesota, California, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Michigan because of floods and wildfires. Counties in Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, South Dakota, and Wisconsin have been declared disaster areas due to the historic flooding that has breached dams, inundated towns, and caused major crop damage, sending commodity futures to new records. The floodwaters are continuing down the Mississippi River, with "crests of 10 feet or more above flood level" for "at least the next two weeks."
Survey: 74 percent of Congressional Republicans doubt man-made global warming
Excerpt: A National Journal survey of members of Congress found that 74 percent of Congressional Republicans do not believe that global warming is caused by humans.
The poll asked 39 Democrats and 39 Republicans if they thought that “it’s been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Earth is warming because of man-made pollution”. The answers are anonymous, except for party affilliation. Only 26 percent of Republicans answered yes, with the rest answering no. Among Democrats, 95 percent answered yes. The survey’s results include some choice anonymous quotes from the deniers: “Reasonable people have doubts. For every Al Gore, there is an intelligent scientist armed with legitimate facts to debunk him.” “In the ’70s, the ‘consensus of scientists’ was that we were beginning global cooling. Now it is global warming. Excuse me if I am skeptical of this newest form of secular religion. Perhaps we should pause and take a breath before we drink the new Kool-Aid!” [Ed. note: As the scientists at RealClimate demonstrate, there was no such consensus on global cooling in the 1970s.] “If there’s one thing poll after poll indicates, it’s that the science is not settled on this issue.” “What has been proven is that a well-targeted pop-culture campaign can trump even the best of science. The bad news is, a very few will get very rich, and the rest of us will foot the bill with mythical creations like cap and trade. The impact of such programs on the environment: Zero. The cost to the American public: Huge. The grin on Al Gore’s very wealthy face: Priceless!”
UK Bishop angers environmentalists for calling man-made warming fears an 'open question'
Excerpt: The ANGLICAN Bishop of Chester’s call to allow science, not emotion, lead the debate on global warming has come under attack from environmental groups. The green activist group, Friends of the Earth, denounced Dr Peter Forster’s statements in the House of Lords last week that the causes of global warming remained a scientific “open question.” The bishop’s remarks come in sharp contrast to statements made by the Bishop of Stafford who argued that failing to act on climate change was criminal. However, Dr Forster’s comments find support from British-born theoretical physicist and mathematician Freeman Dyson, who writing in the New York Review of Books (NYRB), observed that “environmentalism has replaced socialism as the leading secular religion.”
Speaking in the debate on the government’s energy bill, Dr Forster, a scientist by training, noted there was no consensus among climate scientists that “carbon dioxide levels are the key determinant”.
“Climate science is a notoriously imprecise area, because the phenomena under investigation are so large,” he said, making “precision difficult to achieve.”
Nice to see them admit it: 'Current state of global warming modeling has been rather poor'
Excerpt: The current state of global warming modeling has been rather poor, detracting both from research indicating anthropogenic influence and that which contraindicates it. The result is that the debate about climate control, an issue which effects major economic policy decisions, is monopolized by this distraction. Microsoft Research ecologist Drew Purves acknowledges that this problem is one of the largest ones confronting global warming researchers. He and researchers at Princeton University and universities in Madrid, Spain are calling on the international research community to not throw out modeling or focus on the poor current models, but rather to develop new, better models.
Blog deletes skeptical comments - Says skepticism 'not a morally defensible position'
[Note: So much for free and open debate. It is obvious why alarmists are afraid to “debate.”]
Alarmist Blog deletes skeptical comments - Says skepticism 'not a morally defensible position’
Excerpt: Climate "skepticism" is not a morally defensible position. The debate is over, and it's been over for quite some time, especially on this blog.We will delete comments which deny the absolutely overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change, just as we would delete comments which questioned the reality of the Holocaust or the equal mental capacities and worth of human beings of different ethnic groups. Such "debates" are merely the morally indefensible trying to cover itself in the cloth of intellectual tolerance.So, if you're a climate skeptic, you may be well-intentioned and you're certainly welcome to your opinion, but we're not interested. Thanks.
Report ‘Parks in cities are up to 12 degrees centigrade cooler than commercial centers'
Excerpt: Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet reports that parks in cities are up to 12 degrees centigrade cooler than commercial centers. A ten percent increase in green areas reduces the average city temperature by about 4 degrees; offsetting the UN climate committee’s extreme predictions of temperature increases over the next century. Many scientists have criticized the UN predictions for lack of correspondence with real climate data. Al Gore and others have suggested an extreme political agenda in response to the predictions. The political agenda has been criticized for its projected devastating effect on western civilization without any corresponding benefit. Even assuming the UN predictions are correct, new thinking about the problem is demonstrating that there are effective ways to deal with city heat without such extreme political measures.
The Climate Alarmist Manifesto
Excerpt: Just as class struggle forms the nucleus of Marxism, so does it sit at the very core of the Left's climate alarmism. At a glance, the regressive nature of fiscal Carbon control schemes, be they taxation or cap-and-trade, would appear to be antithetical to liberal thinking. But beneath the veneer of both the domestic and international green agenda lies a devious wealth-redistribution plan compared to which all predecessors pale. Take, for instance, the recently tabled Lieberman-Warner Bill. The Act would have empowered government to control key aspects of -- while extracting trillions of dollars from -- our economy by forcing the auction of greenhouse gas (GHG) credits upon industry and power companies. And, while the left lauds penalizing bourgeois "big business" success, advocates for the poor were quick to point out that the inescapable consequent increase in energy costs across the board (electricity, home heating, gasoline, etc) would have placed a disproportionate burden upon proletarian lower wage-earners.
No Drilling. No New Refineries. Get a Horse!
Excerpt: Meanwhile, the only thing that the Greens are pumping is more hot air about global warming. According to the Sierra Club, “climate change is decimating many species” and pushing Congress to pass the Global Warming Wildlife Survival Act. Another name for it might as well be the “Do Not Drill for Oil, Mine for Coal, and Build a Pipeline for Natural Gas Act.” The world is not running out of polar bears, but Americans who have to pay $4 plus for a gallon of gasoline are beginning—at last—to run out of patience. Over at Friends of the Earth, they are very annoyed that America’s high school students studying civics might read a new textbook that raises questions about global warming and/or climate change, based on real science, not the lies they and other Greens have been putting out for decades. FOE is currently flogging something they call “climate equity.” According to them, “The next President must acknowledge that the U.S. has contributed more global warming pollution to our atmosphere than any other nation.” Oh yeah? What about those coal-fired plants that China can’t build fast enough to provide electricity? Or comparable efforts in India to meet the needs of a growing economy? In the end, the Greens are utterly opposed to any development, i.e., modernization, anywhere and they don’t care how many lies they have to tell.
An alarmist's lament: Americans are less concerned about global warming today than they were a year ago
Excerpt: Americans are less concerned about global warming today than they were a year ago.According to a new worldwide study by the Pew Global Attitudes Project. the percentage of Americans who think global warming is a "very serious problem" dropped 5% over the last year, from 47% in 2007 to 42% today.What's more, of the 24 countries surveyed, Americans rank fourth from last on concern over global warming. Only the citizens of China, Jordan, and Egypt are less informed....Yes, I know, if you go to Obama's web site there is a position paper on climate change. And yes, I am aware that Obama speaks occasionally to this issue. But in general he does so briefly and only when asked. Look through YouTube, Google and Obama's on web sites, and you will find that most of Obama's references to global warming happened way early on, even before Iowa and New Hampshire, and have steadily decreased since.
POSTED BY TOM AT 6:34 PM LINK
Claim: Head for the Hills! Creatures Flee Global Warming
Global warming is forcing 30 species of reptiles and amphibians to move uphill as habitats shift upward, but they may soon run out of room to run. The shift could cause at least two toad species and one species of gecko in Madagascar to go extinct by the end of this century, a biologist says. Uphill movement is a predicted response to increased temperatures, researcher Christopher Raxworthy of the American Museum of Natural History says. Earlier studies in Costa Rica have provided evidence of how tropical animals respond to climate change. The new research - based on surveys of Madagascar’s amphibians and reptiles conducted in 1993 and 2003 and announced this week - extends that work, expanding the number and diversity of species that the trend affects, making a stronger link with meteorological changes, dealing with relatively large shifts in elevation, and assessing the extinction vulnerability for tropical communities in the mountains. Nowhere to run.
Icecap reality check: here is the NASA annual temperature plot since the 1880s for Antananarivo, a large city in Madagascar with a population of 452,000. See if you spot any signs of global warming. I always thought for there to be warming, temperatures actually had to rise. The creatures can’t read IPCC reports or model forecasts. Maybe they are moving because of the loss of habitat to population growth or trying to escape those crazy scientists with cameras and probes. GRAPH
'Climate change is never going to rise to the status of a top-tier political issue'
Excerpt: "Climate change is never going to rise to the status of a top-tier political issue" is how one top climate-policy expert recently described the political lay of the land to me. Just take a look at the results of a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. The top issue for voters (27 percent) was job creation and economic growth. Right behind was the war in Iraq (24 percent). Then came energy and gas prices (18 percent). Far down the list were the environment and global warming, at a minuscule 4 percent. So despite all the media attention on global warming as an existential threat to humanity, it still scores a bit below illegal immigration in the hierarchy of voter concerns.
RIP: Renowned Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Reid Bryson Dies At 88 – ‘You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.’ LINK
Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr. Research Group News » Sad News About Professor Reid Bryson
Update: In this story, it looks like Bryson's alarmist colleague Jonathan Foley tried to downplay the true extent of Bryson's AGW skepticism:
Bryson gained fame also as an outspoken skeptic of global warming. He accepted that the climate was changing, but he questioned the prevailing view that human causes are to blame. “I’m not convinced he 100% disbelieved the idea of global warming; he just wanted to make sure we were asking the tough questions,” Foley said. “What was great about Reid is you could trust his motives. Reid’s healthy skepticism was one of integrity and honesty.” An actual quote from Bryson from this May 2007 article: You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide. To me, that sounds like 100% disbelief. Regarding Foley's alarmism, here's a related paragraph from an April 2006 article: The future of a warming world looks bleak, says Foley. After only 0.6 degrees C of warming, we are already seeing major changes in plants, animals, rainfall, ice and sea level. Even the few skeptics of 10 years ago are now silent, and the scientific position is unanimous: "It's pretty much nailed... . You can't read a paper without reading another piece of evidence for global warming. At the edges, there are a few questions, but the scientific score is 1,000 to 0. This is not a big bunch of hooey."
ABC News: 'Are we living in the last century of our civilization?' (Via Newsbusters)
Excerpt: In order to promote a new climate change special airing this fall, Thursday's "Good Morning America" hyped terrifying future predictions of "more floods, more droughts, more wildfires" and, bizarrely, invited viewers to somehow morph into prophets and "report back" about what life is like in the year 2100. Featuring a slate of global warming alarmists, reporter Bob Woodruff previewed "Earth 2100" and touted the show as "a countdown through the next century" that "shows what scientists say might very well happen if we do not change our current path." An online version of this story hyperventilated, "Are we living in the last century of our civilization?" […] Professor John Holdren of Harvard University darkly announced that the future would bring "more floods, more droughts, more wildfires." The segment featured movie-style footage of flames, rioting and general destruction. Added to this were unidentified "reporters" who scarily proclaimed such things as "Flames cover hundreds of square miles."
Of course, these predictions were provided with no context and generally just seemed designed to induce panic. At the end of this montage, even GMA news anchor Chris Cuomo seemed frightened. He asked Woodruff: "I think we're familiar with some of these issues, but, boy, 2015? That's seven years from now. Could it really be that bad?" (The special will look not just at the year 2100, but also the years and decades leading up to it.) Woodruff cited unnamed scientists who believe "if you connect the dots, you can actually see that we're approaching maybe even a perfect storm." Admitting the goal of this special, the journalist opined, "So, the idea now is to look at it, wake up about it and then try to do something to fix it."
-Crap journalism story of the day: Infested fish may bear scars of global warming
Excerpt: Infested fish may bear scars of global warming A new scourge imperils a traditional way of life With a sickening thud, another hefty and handsome salmon lands in the waste barrel, headed for the dogs." See, it's all of the biggest, best-looking fish," said Pat Moore, waving a stogie at the pile of discards. "It breaks my heart. My dogs cannot eat all that. The maggots will get them first. More Alaskan salmon caught here end up in the dog pot these days, their orange-pink flesh fouled by disease that scientists have correlated with warmer water in the Yukon River
Bear attacks St. Bernard in Alaska village, loses fight
Excerpt: A black bear that challenged a St. Bernard in the rural Alaska village of Galena on Friday afternoon evidently bit off more than it could chew. The dog ended up chasing the bear into the woods after what Galena Police Chief John Millan described as “a brief altercation.” “I think the bear pretty clearly lost,” Millan said by phone. “It was last seen running into the woods.” The dog, an adult St. Bernard that Millan described as a “monster of a dog” in terms of size, was uninjured in the encounter. “That’s the friendliest dog in the world but I don’t think he wanted that bear around his family’s house,” the police chief said. “He’s very gentle but evidently very protective of his family.” The incident occurred just after noon Friday on the east side of the village of 700 residents on the middle Yukon River, Millan said. The dog’s owner told the police chief that the bear, described as a medium-sized black bear probably about 2 years old, evidently wandered around the side of the house and came face-to-face with the dog, who was attached to a cable run. The dog chased the bear to the edge of a nearby lake and the two had a brief fight before the bear fled into the woods, Millan reported.
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW)