Posted on 01/30/2013 7:37:52 PM PST by hiho hiho
Spiegel has finally gotten around to conceding that global warming has ended, at least for the time being.
Yesterday Spiegel science journalist Axel Bojanowski published a piece called: Klimawandel: Forscher rätseln über Stillstand bei Erderwärmung (Climate change: scientists baffled by the stop in global warming).
We’ve been waiting for this admission a long time, and watching the media reaction is interesting to say the least. Bojanowski writes that “The word has been out for quite some time now that the climate is developing differently than predicted earlier”. He poses the question: “How many more years of stagnation are needed before scientists rethink their predictions of future warming?”
Bojanowski adds (emphasis added):
15 years without warming are now behind us. The stagnation of global near-surface average temperatures shows that the uncertainties in the climate prognoses are surprisingly large. The public is now waiting with suspense to see if the next UN IPCC report, due in September, is going to discuss the warming stop.”
The big question now circulating through the stunned European media, governments and activist organisations is how could the warming stop have happened? Moreover, how do we now explain it to the public? To find an answer, Bojanowski contacted a number of sources. The result, in summary: scientists are now left only to speculate over an entire range of possible causes. Uncertainty in climate science indeed has never been greater. It’s back to square one.
One explanation Spiegel presents is that the oceans have somehow absorbed the heat and are now hiding it somewhere. Yet, Bojanowski writes that there is very little available data to base this on: “There is a lot of uncertainty concerning the development of the water temperature. It has long appeared that also the oceans have not warmed further since 2003.” Spiegel then quotes Kevin Trenberth concerning NASA’s claim that they’ve detected a warming of the oceans: “The uncertainties with the data are too great. We need to improve our measurements“.
Spiegel also writes that the missing heat may be lurking somewhere deep in the oceans. But here Bojanowski [Spiegel] quotes Doug Smith of the Met Office: “This is very difficult to confirm“. Jochem Marotzke of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (MPI) suspects that energy has been conveyed to the ocean’s interior, but there’s a dire lack of data to confirm this. Bojanowski writes over the current state of ocean data measurement: “Without intensifying the data measurement network, we are going to have to wait a long time for any proof“.
Scientists also suspect that the stratosphere may have something to do with the recent global temperature stall. Susan Solomon says the stratosphere has gotten considerably drier, and so warming at the surface may have been reduced by a quarter. But Bojanowski reminds us that under the bottom line, the scientists are pretty much without a clue; he writes:
‘However, climate models do not illustrate stratospheric water vapour very well,’ says Marotzke. The prognoses thus remain vague.”
Well then, maybe it’s due to aerosols from China and India blocking out the sun, some scientists are speculating, and ”thus weakening warming by one third“. Spiegel writes that “If the air were cleaner, then climate warming would accelerate.” But aerosols have always been used a convenient joker in climate models to explain unexpected cooling, such as from 1945 to 1980.
In fact, all the explanations presented by Bojanowski above have already been thoroughly looked at in a book- one year ago – by a pair of scientists: Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt and Dr. Sebastian Lüning. Last year much of the media massively ostracised them for floating “crude theories”. A year later it’s indeed strange to see that their “crude theories” are now completely in vogue.
How does Bojanowski sum it up? “The numerous possible explanations do show just how imprecisely climate is understood.”
Trenberth is left with only anecdotes, isolated singular events
Yet, as Bojanowski points out, some scientists refuse to give up on the AGW theory. He writes:
Under the bottom line, there are a number of various ominous signs of warming: rising sea levels, Arctic sea ice reduced by a half in the summertime, melting glaciers. At some locations there are signs that extreme weather events are increasing. ‘There are many signs of global warming,’ emphasizes Kevon Trenberth, “near surface air temperatures is only one of them.’”
Sorry, but isolated singular events do not constitute trends, let alone science. Prof. Trenberth really ought to know that. This is pathetic. The observed data and measured trends have stopped showing global warming. So are scientists now claiming that singular events are robust signs? This would be only one step away from astrology!
Bojanowski reminds us again that the science is poorly understood and that a number of factors are at play. He writes:
Indeed new surprising data keep popping up. Recently a new study appeared showing that soot particles from unfiltered diesel engine exhaust and open fires have had an impact on warming that is twice as high as what was first thought.”
Bojanowski also tells his readers that “Computer simulations have shown that warming has made tropical storms more seldom.”
He also mentions other factors that are poorly understood, such as: solar radiation’s impact on clouds, water vapour cycles, and natural and man-made aerosols.
Short term prognoses remain “especially uncertain”. But longterm ones are sure?
Spiegel at the end of the article seems to be duped into thinking that short-term prognoses are uncertain, but longterm ones are rather sure. Spiegel quotes warmist Jochem Marotzke of the MPI:
Climate prognoses over time periods of a few years still remain especially uncertain. ‘Our forecasting system in this regard still lets us down,’ says MPI director Marotzke. “But we’re still working on it.”
This to me appears to be an attempt to have readers believe that although they’ve botched the short-term projections completely, they are likely still right about the longterm projections of warming. Now take five minutes to get your laughing under control. … If the models failed for the first 15 years, then they are no good! Period! They’re crap, and you cannot rely on them for projecting the long-term. They belong in one place only: the dustbin! How long must we wait before climate scientists return to science?
Don’t get me wrong, at least this article, admitting something is terribly amiss, is a very encouraging step in the right direction. But it’s difficult to remain hopeful when climate scientists continue demonstrating that they do not even know what proper scientific methodology is.
Lastly, I like they way Bojanowski ends his piece:
Current prognoses warn of a 5°C warming if CO2 emissions continue as before. But it is not now well-known just how much natural climate impacts are able to change the temperature development – the new NASA data have revealed this as well.”
Spiegel science writers would be well-advised to read Fritz Vahrenholt’s and Sebastian Lüning’s “Die kalte Sonne“. Practically every question brought up by Bojanowski has been answered there – one year ago. Moreover, Lüning”s and Vahrenholt’s temperature model for the next 100 years so far has been dead on.
Their models/predictions didn't work the first time, but maybe if they work the next time, we're in big trouble! /s
After having spent an entire life time, following, not just world history, ancient history, fairly recent current history, such as the Decline of the Anasazi Culture back in ? ought 1200-1400 A.D. or is it the newer politically correct time stamp?
There have always been cycles of droughts and wet spells, changing climates, long before we had factories, pollution breathing coal fired plants, etc.
Just read some of the translated treastises from Ancient Egypt, Babylonia, Mayan, and other assorted cultures through time.
Let us get real!!!
A rise, centuries and eons ago, of CO2 emissions, occurred, AFTER a GLOBAL WARMING.
NOT BEFORE!!!
AND NOT THE CAUSE!!!
Possibly brought on by a meterorite that detonated on the surface of our planet, or perhaps, the widespread fires created by another major meterorite, or perhaps, Nobody really knows!!!
KEYWORD: NOBODY REALLY KNOWS!!!
Live in an area where there are folks coming through complaining about health problems related to cowsies’ flatulance.
Perfectly serious about their facts.
The rise in CO2, Methane Gas, etc.
For thousands of centuries, since the cow was domesticated, children, and other folks have lived off their bounty.
My simple REALITY CHECK!!! Back in the 50’s in a basic elementary school science lesson, taught the basics of Human Breathing.
We breathe in Oxygen, it circulates through the lungs, goes through a complicated exhange of whatever, and is expelled as, ooops!!!! CO2.
The CO2 is then absorbed by plants, who utilize it in their photosynthesis, to not only produce chlorophill? (Green up the plant, provide valuable nutrients, especially for human and animal consuption)but produce oxygen as a byproduct.
NOT CO2!!! or METHANE!!!
The Eco movement began back in the 60’s and promoted an UNBALANCED VIEW OF NATURE.
Whatever happened to the balanced Native American View of Nature?
Whatever happened to Informed Facts, Substantiated, Facts???
As in Factual???
Disappeared, somewhere along the rise of technology for Techno Zombies, Unrestrained Cell Phone Usage, and the latest Craze of Text Messaging.
Goodbye Critical Thinking Skills, Rationality, Responsibility.
However, just to live up to my moniker of Polly Anna, will provide you with some options for balance through humor.
If you want a HUMOROUS TAKE ON GLOBAL WARMING, just visit the MINNASOTANS FOR GLOBAL WARMING (on U-Tube).
Additional links on their site will lead you to more scientific thoughts from Lord Mockington, a British Scientist who is doing what he can to Debunk the Global Warming Model.
And other concerned parties who whole heartedly believe in Promoting and Encouraging Critical Thinking Skills, not to mention, COMMON SENSE!!!
Polly Anna G. Clay
Good post IMO. BTTT
Working at Pizza Hut and Jiffy Lube requires a basic knowledge of science and analysis. The global warming advocates have not demonstrated this ability.
They ask “How should scientists explain this to the public.”
Instead, they should be asking “Why should the public believe anything these scientists say?”
“The Science is settled” “Denialists should be prosecuted” I hope this means our spell in the Warmists re-education camps has been postponed.
Polly: WELCOME TO FR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Develop a thick skin quickly, as some of us are still trying to get a passing grade in Manners 101, follow Jim Robinson’s Rules, and donate when you can.
_________________
Great thoughtful comments Polly, thanks! Few of us recognize cycles in our 3 score and 10, but as you pointed out, History is replete with cycles.
IMHO, we live in an age of zero accountability. GW is an excellent example as follows:
1.) The popular speculation is that there is a Cause-and-Effect relationship between the concentration of CO2 and the temperature in the atmosphere.
2.) In the discipline of SCIENCE, all ideas are objectively tested REPEATEDLY! To the best of my knowledge, there have been NO published Scientific tests of ANY Cause-and Effect relationship between Temp and CO2.
3.) Without objective testing the GW idea remains a pure speculation supported by junk scientists.
4.) A cross-plot of Temp and CO2 concentration with time does show a rough correlation between the two, but with significant cyclical deviations, such as in the mid-1940’s.
5.) Scientific Cause-and-Effect testing of ideas has been replaced by statistical INFERENCE “testing” in the published high-quality Scientific Literature.
6.) The GW Speculation currently has over 200 dependent and independent variables, and thus is securely impervious to Scientific Testing.
7.) We are thus in the age of NO Accountability, in junk science, or in National Politics. Well, unless one is from the “show me” State of Missouri !
BTW, for Scientists and Politicians, the most difficult thing for them to say is the following: “I don’t know.” As a result ideas are held onto for long periods of time, even though there is no proof known to support those ideas.
Be the first on your block to holler “PROVE IT!”
However, be prepared for all sorts of cheap, verbal abuse, as junk scientists, and junk politicians hate to be held accountable for their actions and inactions.
Woa, woa, woe there bud,
not so fast...
Just b/c it appears the Sun is the center of our solar system 2 things still remain:
a. Michelson-Morley experiments could find no solar wind and no one has repeated these experiments afaik. But even Einstein said both sun-centered and Earth-centered solar systems are supported by the math. Earth centered just makes he math much more complicated - heck I get dizzy just thinking about it - pun intended.
b. We could very well be the center of the universe! In fact it make the big bang and Einstein’s gravitational time dilation and relativity much more palatable for true believers.
Lastly though it could just be that we, mankind, are the central primary focus and attention of God. Afterall, He did say [and show somewhat] that we are created in His image.
Not too mention if they truly understood Earth’s climate change then they’d be much better at forecasting accurate weather for more than 1-2 days/weeks. Instead it appears they are just more likely to predict the more extreme models to pacify the masses when they get the good news that the local expert was wrong in our favor...
THAT we can fix. Just add some SF6 (sulfur hexafluoride) to the stratosphere. Very stable molecule.....HUGE greenhouse enhancer (I think it either one of, or THE strongest greenhouse gas known...23,000 x that of CO2).
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.