Posted on 05/20/2008 7:44:34 AM PDT by Clive
You may have heard earlier this month that global warming is now likely to take a break for a decade or more. There will be no more warming until 2015, perhaps later.
Climate scientist Noel Keenlyside, leading a team from Germany's Leibniz Institute of Marine Science and the Max Planck Institute of Meteorology, for the first time entered verifiable data on ocean circulation cycles into one of the U. N.'s climate supercomputers, and the machine spit out a projection that there will be no more warming for the foreseeable future.
Of course, Mr. Keenlyside-- long a defender of the man-made global warming theory -- was quick to add that after 2015 (or perhaps 2020), warming would resume with a vengeance.
Climate alarmists the world over were quick to add that they had known all along there would be periods when the Earth's climate would cool even as the overall trend was toward dangerous climate change.
Sorry, but that is just so much backfill.
There may have been the odd global-warming scientist in the past decade who allowed that warming would pause periodically in its otherwise relentless upward march, but he or she was a rarity.
If anything, the opposite is true: Almost no climate scientist who backed the alarmism ever expected warming would take anything like a 10 or 15-year hiatus.
Last year, in its oft-quoted report on global warming, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted a 0.3-degree C rise in temperature in the coming decade -- not a cooling or even just temperature stability.
In its previous report in 2001, the IPCC prominently displaced the so-called temperature "hockey stick" that purported to show temperature pretty much plateauing for the thousand years before 1900, then taking off in the 20th Century in a smooth upward line. No 10-year dips backwards were foreseen.
It is drummed into us, ad nauseum, that the IPCC represents 2,500 scientists who together embrace a "consensus" that man-made global warming is a "scientific fact;" and as recently as last year, they didn't see this cooling coming. So the alarmists can't weasel out of this by claiming they knew all along such anomalies would occur.
This is not something any alarmist predicted, and it showed up in none of the UN's computer projections until Mr. Keenlyside et al. were finally able to enter detailed data into their climate model on past ocean current behaviour.
Less well-known is that global temperatures have already been falling for a decade. All of which means, that by 2015 or 2020, when warming is expected to resume, we will have had nearly 20 years of fairly steady cooling.
Saints of the new climate religion, such as Al Gore, have stated that eight of the 10 years since 1998 are the warmest on record. Even if that were true, none has been as warm as 1998, which means the trend of the past decade has been downward, not upward.
Last year, for instance, saw a drop in the global average temperature of nearly 0.7 degrees C (the largest single-year movement up or down since global temperature averages have been calculated). Despite advanced predictions that 2007 would be the warmest year on record, made by such UN associates as Britain's Hadley Centre, a government climate research agency, 2007 was the coolest year since at least 1993.
According to the U. S. National Climatic Data Center, the average temperature of the global land surface in January 2008 was below the 20th-Century mean for the first time since 1982.
Also in January, Southern Hemisphere sea ice coverage was at its greatest summer level (January is summer in the Southern Hemisphere) in the past 30 years.
Neither the 3,000 temperature buoys that float throughout the world's oceans nor the eight NASA satellites that float above our atmosphere have recorded appreciable warming in the past six to eight years.
Even Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, reluctantly admitted to Reuters in January that there has been no warming so far in the 21st Century.
Does this prove that global warming isn't happening, that we can all go back to idling our SUVs 24/7? No. But it should introduce doubt into the claim that the science of global warming is "settled."
lgunter@shaw.ca
-
-
Ok, so the trend is going to take a break for a bit. That’ll buy some time so they don’t have to keep answering such pesky questions about why the current data doesn’t support the theories. Maybe it’ll give them enough time to answer the fact the the previous years data doesnt support the theory either. They might even be able to come up with the answer to the nagging question of when the ‘trend’ actually began in the first place and why there’s no data to support whether or not it ever actually began in the first place.
Not adding circulation is the same thing that fooled the cold fusion junk science kooks too. Circulation doesn't cool anything though, just moves the heat. So if Earth is getting warmer where did the heat get moved to? Where is it hiding? If they can't account for it some place then it doesn't exist.
If the sea freezes over, reducing the number of patches of open water, the bears will not be able to hunt. Their population will decline.
Polar bears trapped beneath thick Arctic ice may drown, and their bodies will pollute the delicate marine environment beneath the sea ice.
I offer to perform a study for merely costs plus a humble per diem to determine how many holes we need to blast in the ice to save the bears. I will conduct the study on site from a suitable vessel. I will compare the Arctic environment in the Northern summer to the winter environment in the Caribbean or in the Sea of Cortez near Muleje or La Paz.
The UN can use my data to develop effective nonjudgmental policies to save the bears. I will need a Freeper crew, too.
I love how the Dems refused to do anything about Social Security, because 2018 was so far away. Now, Global Warming won’t even “start again” until 2015 and it might already be too late to act.
Bookmark for later viewing.
I am in for just a meager stipend that equals the cost of Jet-A fuel that Al Gore burns each year in his travels.
I am not amused as I sit here in my climate-controlled home with the furnace pumping “warm” air to keep out the freezing cold on this 20th day of May.
Were it not for Iran, Global Warming, and Evolution there wouldn’t be much traffic on this BBS.
In the spirit of your offer, I think we need a global conference to review the data. Let's not be extravagent. Let's keep within the confines of the UN IPCC and hold our conference for a month in Bali with appropriate per diems all around.
So how long until the next round of global cooling alarmism starts? Any predictions, FReepers? Especially from those of you old enough to remember (as I do) being subjected to global cooling scare stories in elementary school.
The UN needs to average in Al Gore’s temperature to average in to their data. Anyone got a huge rectal thermometer?
Yes. But don't get too excited yet. His prominent place in the MSM headlines and school brainwashing programs will be taken by John Edwards, who, as we post, is realizing the great opportunity this all presents to promote himself as the new savior of humankind. He will proudly sermonize to the adoring MSM from the steps of his energy-guzzling 28,000 square foot home, nestled in several acres of frequently mowed lawn that he helpfully had cleared of the dense forest of pesky carbon dioxide-consuming trees that formerly lived there. It will be plain for all to see that he is making a great personal effort to tailor his lifestyle around the urgent need to stave off the horror of global cooling.
Liberal idiots certainly have this argument to use for consumption by the simpleton left.
To support your efforts, I propose to start a nonprofit whose goal is educating the public on your activities. We’ll do public service announcements, hold celebrity fundraising events to raise awareness, all the usual. We’ll do a full length documentary of your efforts. I might even share my Oscar with you. I’m going to need a staff, an Escalade, a helocopter, and a film crew, so I can video document your rescue efforts. Oh, and of course, I’ll need this “reasonably” funded.
I’l type up a white paper and get a proposal off to US EPA, UN Climate council, Kresge Foundation, Carnegie, and Algor’s foundation.
What type of boat do we want (named Robinson of course). A single hull sail/diesel will be best for ice and arctic, but a trimaran is better over coral.
And how big? 80 ft?
I'll pick Steely Dan and Tom Petty for music, anyone with other suggestions?
SAVE THE BEARS 2008
Just as long as we don’t put One-Sheet Sheryl on Port-a-Potty duty. We want people opening their wallets and giving us their money, and I’d like to be able to safely count it!
But I don't know why you're limiting yourself to one ship. After all the fate of polar bears is at stake. What could be more important?
We'll just use our poster bear (see below) and the funds will come rolling in.
Think someone can photoshop a tear?
I told my lib MIL that she shouldn’t worry whether Global Warming had stopped - the same people will soon be warning us about Global Cooling and they’ll have the same answer -
reduced lifestyle, more government control, less freedom.
Don’t worry.
Ah... what a cute little soon to be vicious killer.
Ahaa, you found it! I was wondering where I left it!
100’ at least - I write computer simulations for a living, and my computers take up a lot of space.
Never done one on climate change, but I did do one on cooling of canons - it predicted the breach temperature at the start of rifling.
Canon cooling, global cooling - what’s the diff?
You are right, a few of these will do just fine. We can hire someone to airbrush a polar bear cub face on the sails for a few hundred grand.
The poster bear is adorable, I’d click the paypal “donate now” link if I saw that on line.
We need a supermodel too, I think Angela Lindvall would look good in a shot with that polar bear. The pair will look great on our TV ads, which will air as PSAs and be mandatory on school in-house video nets.
Come to think of it, we need a supermodel per exploration vessel, add maybe Giselle B and Lily Cole? Lindsay Ellingson?
It's good to see that the supercomputers are FINALLY being fed some actual data as opposed to merely verifying the garbage-in, garbage-out law.
More specifically, given that the oceans cover 66-70% of the earth's surface, it's no surprise that ocean temperatures are regarded as a major indicator of global warming activity. So the slight decrease in ocean temperatures indicated by the Argo System oceanic temperature probes over the last several years reflects on the politically correct foundation of AGW alarmism, in my opinion.
Argo System ocean temperature probesOf course, Mr. Keenlyside-- long a defender of the man-made global warming theory -- was quick to add that after 2015 (or perhaps 2020), warming would resume with a vengeance.
Argo System web site
Hopefully scientists will have more of the bugs ironed out of their global climate software by that time. ;^)
We'll need a computer modeler, models are much more tractable than actual climate data. Real data sometimes is not alarming enough.
Can you plot up how many more polar bear cubs will die of starvation if we continue to buy Gorebulbs (CFLs) that will stop global warming?
60 Minutes (tic tic tic): If global warming continues to stop, the critical open-ice feeding sites will ice over and the cubs will die. The following computer simulation done by the award wining patton shows what will happen if we continue our non-sustainable lifestyle of irresponsible environmental stewardship [cut to graphic] ...the more Gorebulbs we buy, the more the ice continues its crushing advance on polar bear cubs [cut to graphic 2]. Here's Angela Lindvall, spokesperson for Save the Bears 2008, to explain what you can do [dissolve to Studio 2].
LOLOLOLOL - I see you have worked in this industry.
Apropos, the sails will never do - we need a pebble bed reactor for propulsion, that we may warm our share of sea water.
Computer output is frequently regarded as being true, just because it's a computer. I heard “computer designed” as a marketing slogan many times.
When you couple this with politicians or high-level management (with business degrees, not science) you get this:
Garbage In, Gospel Out
Especially if the result fits the current program. NASA's 100,000 error-free shuttle launch calculation is an example.
My scientists can beat up your scientists.
120 ft. and although I get seasick I would certainly be willing to suffer for science ( for a humble per diem and some time on sunny beaches, and also the chance to play with dynamite.)
I've also done some neutronics, some thermal, and some rolling sphere lightning models. Gamma/Xray transport.
If the model shows everything is as the customer expects/wants, usually there are few questions. But show that the new box with the new LCD screen may emit more than FCC will allow for hospital equipment, and expect every premise to be challenged (and a change-of-scope quote for an actual test!).
I'm going to keep the sails, so that by day they'll show the poster cub's face. at night, we'll light them up with projectors, part light show, part “informative graphics” about the plight of the bears and what we can all do to help and send money.
We'll put your ongoing sims on a bright digital projector so people in NY harbor can see your critical work flowing in process. Unless it's so windy we'd break anchor.
I think the pebble bed reactor is a great idea!
OK, 120 at least.
I was thinking CL-20 instead of dynamite, we’d need development work to see if it would be suitable.
But yes, we will have a charity Boomershoot on the ice to save the bears and you can be the Boommeister. A celebrity charity boomershoot on the ice.
My work has been more along the Bonder-Farrel DiffEQ lines.
But hey, a job offer that doesn’t include “must be willing to bear arms and wear a uniform at the government’s discretion” is one I am willing to listen to!
BTW, I used to drive Seth Bonder home, and plow his driveway (I was the only scientist at the office with a snowplow).
And Bob Farrell was the scariest dude I ever met - I felt like an idiot whenever I talked to him, and after EVERY conversation, I ran down the hall and hit the books, to see what the heck he just said to me.
LOL.
Excellent point!
IMHO, the UN is a bigger threat than global warming.
Did I mention that the Swedish Bikini team wants to come? Also, a well stocked wine cellar would be nice. I am starting to like this govenment work a lot. :)
“Did I mention that the Swedish Bikini team wants to come? “
It will be cold in the Arctic! Maybe a fur bikini, chinchilla?
Global warming on Free Republic
Preach it, brother!!!! It sure AIN’T settled!
About two feet in diameter and fifteen feet long? That would do it. And one proper probe would make any further checks unnecessary!
Permission to come aboard Sir?
(Mind if I bring my fishing tackle?)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
