And the paradigm keeps crumbling

Higher temperatures in Pacific attributable to natural wind shifts, not global warming.

A new study released Monday found that warming temperatures in Pacific Ocean waters off the coast of North America over the past century closely followed natural changes in the wind, not increases in greenhouse gases related to global warming.

The study compared ocean surface temperatures from 1900 to 2012 to surface air pressure, a stand-in for wind measurements, and found a close match.

“What we found was the somewhat surprising degree to which the winds can explain all the wiggles in the temperature curve,” said lead author Jim Johnstone, who did the work while a climatologist at the Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean at the University of Washington.

“So clearly, there are other factors stronger than the greenhouse forcing that is affecting those temperatures,” he added.

The study released by the online edition of the peer-reviewed journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences does not question global warming, but argues there is evidence that in at least one place, local winds are a more important factor explaining ocean warming than greenhouse gases.

It was greeted with skepticism by several mainstream climate scientists, who questioned how the authors could claim changes in wind direction and velocity were natural and unrelated to climate change.

Johnstone and co-author Nathan Mantua, a research scientist with the NOAA Fisheries Service in Santa Cruz, California, pointed to the fact that one steep ocean warming period from 1920 to 1940 predates the big increases in greenhouse gases, and an ocean cooling period from 1998 to 2013 came while global average temperatures were at or near all-time highs.

They also noted that the wind changes consistently preceded the ocean surface temperature variations by about four months, showing the wind was causing the changes to temperature, not the other way around.

James Overland, a research oceanographer at the NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, said the study reinforced findings that the North Pacific has a lot of natural variability in 5- to 20-year time scales, and he reached the same conclusions on changes in the Bering Sea.

“Natural variability cannot be ruled out as an important mechanism,” he said in an email.

During the entire period from 1900 to 2012, there has been an increase of about 1 degree Fahrenheit in ocean surface temperatures in the area from Hawaii to Alaska, and down the coast to British Columbia, Washington, Oregon and California, according to the study.

The wind acts to change temperature through speed and direction. When the wind blows faster across the water, evaporation increases, and like sweat drying on the skin, cools the water surface. Winds from the south drive warmer air and water to the region. Winds from the north drive in colder air and water.

“It just seems to us it’s a pretty simple story,” Mantua said. “Yet it’s going to take people by surprise, because it is ingrained in our minds that if the climate warms up in the course of the century, it’s probably because of global warming, the increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases and other things humans have done that have pushed it in a warming direction.”

All of which explains the global warmists’ increasing hysteria. They sense the consensus the concocted is falling apart, and they are afraid.

UPDATE: Today the LA Times reports on this story, straight up. When global skepticism breaks through the media’s wall of silence, you know something is seriously afoot.

Psst! Wanna buy a magazine?

As the “settled science” crumbles

Remember this?

WSJ: Whatever happened to global warming?

On Sept. 23 the United Nations will host a party for world leaders in New York to pledge urgent action against climate change. Yet leaders from China, India and Germany have already announced that they won’t attend the summit and others are likely to follow, leaving President Obama looking a bit lonely. Could it be that they no longer regard it as an urgent threat that some time later in this century the air may get a bit warmer?

In effect, this is all that’s left of the global-warming emergency the U.N. declared in its first report on the subject in 1990. The U.N. no longer claims that there will be dangerous or rapid climate change in the next two decades. Last September, between the second and final draft of its fifth assessment report, the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change quietly downgraded the warming it expected in the 30 years following 1995, to about 0.5 degrees Celsius from 0.7 (or, in Fahrenheit, to about 0.9 degrees, from 1.3).

Even that is likely to be too high. The climate-research establishment has finally admitted openly what skeptic scientists have been saying for nearly a decade: Global warming has stopped since shortly before this century began.

First the climate-research establishment denied that a pause existed, noting that if there was a pause, it would invalidate their theories. Now they say there is a pause (or “hiatus”), but that it doesn’t after all invalidate their theories.

Alas, their explanations have made their predicament worse by implying that man-made climate change is so slow and tentative that it can be easily overwhelmed by natural variation in temperature—a possibility that they had previously all but ruled out.

When the climate scientist and geologist Bob Carter of James Cook University in Australia wrote an article in 2006 saying that there had been no global warming since 1998 according to the most widely used measure of average global air temperatures, there was an outcry. A year later, when David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation in London made the same point, the environmentalist and journalist Mark Lynas said in the New Statesman that Mr. Whitehouse was “wrong, completely wrong,” and was “deliberately, or otherwise, misleading the public.”

We know now that it was Mr. Lynas who was wrong. Two years before Mr. Whitehouse’s article, climate scientists were already admitting in emails among themselves that there had been no warming since the late 1990s. “The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998,” wrote Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia in Britain in 2005. He went on: “Okay it has but it is only seven years of data and it isn’t statistically significant.”

If the pause lasted 15 years, they conceded, then it would be so significant that it would invalidate the climate-change models upon which policy was being built.

Well, the pause has now lasted for 16, 19 or 26 years—depending on whether you choose the surface temperature record or one of two satellite records of the lower atmosphere. That’s according to a new statistical calculation by Ross McKitrick, a professor of economics at the University of Guelph in Canada.

And so on. None of this is news to the skeptics and atheists, but to fully-committed members of the Church of Mother Gaia, the loss of their bedrock will be as shattering as sunrise the day after the predicted end of the world. Those with the most to lose from the collapse of the paradigm: “green” businesses, and social progressives, will become the new deniers, but eventually the sheeple will grow immune to their heat mongering and when that happens, the media will also lose interest and return to covering the Kardashians. Less media hype, less fear, less interest, less media hype: it will be a downward spiral into indifference.

Of course, since the goal of the two groups behind this bullshit was never saving the earth but control of the people on it and profiting from that control, the progressives will drum up a new scare story and their business partners will move swiftly to refocus their products (I’m guessing snowblowers to fight the coming ice age, but it could be anything). It would nice if the sheeple remembered this entire trumped-up scam before deciding to go along with the next one, but why should human nature and gullibility change now?

We can at least hope for a brief hiatus between the final end of this hoax and the world-wide acceptance of the next one.

 

And the bunkum continues

 

The science is settled, Barry: we’re liars, and the public’s too damn dumb to catch us at it. Sooee!

After falsely claiming that July, 2012 was the hottest month since the beginning of the world (well, 1895, actually – records don’t go beyond that,but neither does the collective memory of the global warmists – NOAA has now conceded that in fact July, 1936 was hotter. This data manipulation has ben going on since NOAA joined in the global warming scam, and the lying is not limited to our government’s “objective scientists”. In fact, the hottest decade since 1895 was the 30s, and the earth has been cooling since then. But that would be an inconvenient truth for the bunkum artists.

“Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been ‘adjusting’ its record by replacing real temperatures with data ‘fabricated’ by computer models,” writes Christopher Booker for the Telegraph.

“The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data,” Booker writes. “In several posts headed ‘Data tampering at USHCN/GISS,’ Goddard compares the currently published temperature graphs with those based only on temperatures measured at the time.”

“These show that the US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record; whereas the latest graph, nearly half of it based on ‘fabricated’ data, shows it to have been warming at a rate equivalent to more than 3 degrees centigrade per century,” Booker adds.

When asked about climate data adjustments by the DCNF back in April, NOAA send there have been “several scientific developments since 1989 and 1999 that have improved the understanding of the U.S. surface temperature record.”

Our current government is attempting to shut down the First World’s economy, transfer wealth in the trillions to the poor of the earth and condemn Americans and western Europeans to a return of the peasant existence of their ancestors, and justifies this reversion to the middle ages by cooking up phony data. So far, a slight majority of Americans has bought into the plan – that’s changing, and exposure of fraudulent science like this will hasten the process; or I hope so – the idea of living in a cave gnawing on sticks and dirt repels me.

UPDATE: Oops! Another disruption of the “settled science”: Gigantic ocean vortexes may force changes to climate models. When the authorities cut off debate, especially scientific debate, it’s a safe bet that they’re up to something.

Tell us something new

Prehistoric Swiss villagers display their catch

Study concludes that things were warmer in Roman, medieval times.

If you think the Earth is hot now, try wearing plate armor in the Middle Ages.

A Swedish study found that the planet was warmer in [the Roman era] and the Middle Ages than today, challenging the mainstream idea that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are the main drivers of global warming.

The study, by scientist Leif Kullman, analyzed 455 “radiocarbon-dated mega-fossils” in the Scandes mountains and found that tree lines for different species of trees were higher during the Roman and Medieval times than they are today. Not only that, but the temperatures were higher as well.

…

All other things being equal, adding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere will have a warming effect on the planet,” Judith Curry, a climatologist at the Georgia Institute of Technology, told the Los Angeles Times. “However, all things are never equal, and what we are seeing is natural climate variability dominating over human impact.

At least as far back as 2005 (and actually, far earlier) scientists were discovering entire prehistoric villages in the Swiss Alps as glaciers retreated: The Alps had far less ice from 5,000 – 850 BC., then froze up again until Roman Times and stayed open through the medieval period. 

None of this is news to the scientific community; all of it is ignored and suppressed, however. The science is settled, alright: the earth’s temperature fluctuates over time, independent of human activity.

 

”

Are sea levels really rising?

Dennis Savageau’s vision for 521 Round Hill Road

Not around here; not much. Mike Finkbeiner recently was hired by NYC to compare the 1811 sea level to now. His conclusion? High tide then was 4′ over mean low, 4.73 feet higher now.

In 1811 the Commissioner’s of the City of New York laid out the street grid system, and established an extensive series of elevation monuments at corner intersections, based on high tide of the era at zero.   EarthImage was asked to calibrate that system in relation to the modern determination of tidal level and land elevations.   Our conclusion was that the City Elevation Zero of 1811, now known as Manhattan Borough Datum, is 4.03 ft over modern mean lower low tide (the average daily low from 1978 to 2001.)  As the daily high today is 4.73 ft higher than that, one can speculate that tides have risen 0.70 feet (8.4 inches) since 1811.

What’s going on (I say, not Finkbeiner) is that the gummint is changing the methodology to achieve its political goals. Here in Greenwich, Diane Fox, Katie Blankley Deluca (whose father is now on our BET) and Denise Savageu, the triad responsible for forcing residents from their homes, are only too willing to go along with that process.

The science is unsettled

What happened to the hurricane season? It was a complete bust, despite dire predictions from the “experts”.

Over here on the rationalist side we’ve always thought that weather was weather and questions about long term warming were an entirely different matter. But in the Church of Gaia, every weather phenomenon is global warming – related, if it’s bad, and unrelated if it’s good. So when Al Gore, among other profiteers, states that global warming is directly responsible for the severity and frequency of hurricanes, it’s fair to point out this season’s lack of storms as a direct contradiction, indeed disproof of what he and his media friends claim are settled truths.

Same thing for tornadoes, which the media promised would be horrendous this year because of global warming,then completely dropped the subject when the tornadoes disappeared.

Storms and hurricanes will be back and when they are, Al Gore and company will be too.

Al Gore lives his beliefs

Don’t your DARE do this to me!

You’d think that as the world’s expert on global warming the man would cheer on those who want to shut down the world’s economy and stop further production of CO2, so it is at first blush confusing that he’s so angry about it instead. Here he is just a few days ago:

“Why does partisanship have anything to do with such a despicable and dishonorable threat to the integrity of the United States of America?  It cannot be allowed. But it can only be stopped if people in both parties independents as well say, ‘look, I might not agree with everything that’s in the Affordable Care Act, but it did pass, it was upheld by the Supreme Court, it is the law of the land. You didn’t succeed in the constitutional process by which this was considered, and now you want to threaten to not only shut down our government, but blow up the world economy?….How dare you! How dare you!”

But no, his anger is really just proof that he truly believes what he’s been saying since 2006, when he promised that the world would cross an irreversible barrier in 2016 if we didn’t stop our wicked ways. Irreversible means it can’t be undone, and now, eight years on from his science is settled pronouncement, it’s obvious that nothing has been done or can be done in the next 24 months to avoid terminal catastrophe. It’s over, baby.

So no wonder the guy’s pissed: he wants to spend the declining days of the earth in the luxury to which he’s become accustomed to since discovering the profitability of Cassandraism, and anything that threatens his 110′ houseboats, his private jets and his 15,000 sq.ft. mansions on both coasts is really, really inconvenient. Shut down the world’s economy just as he’s clawed, kicked and bitten his way to the top? As he says, “how dare you!”

The man’s put his mouth where his money is, and you have to admire a politician like that.

When religion replaces reason

University of California truth squad

University of California San Francisco fundraiser Stephanie Handlerr: Non-believers must die.

“@shandlerr: @BarackObama …deny #Obamacare nonbelievers access to care at all. Let them eat their McDonalds…”

Politicized death panels.

Same church, different pew for global warmers.

Professor Richard Parncutt: “Death penalty for global warming deniers”.

UPDATE: Libertarian Advocate draws our attention to the Sacramento Democrat Chairman and homosexual “civil rights advocate” Allan Brauer demonstrating his feminine side to a Ted Cruz staffer: “May all your children all [sic] die from debilitating, painful and incurable diseases”. Apologetic when people objected? Ha – he’s a Democrat, and thus unassailable on moral issues.

Allan Brauer, Democrat Chairman

Cognitive dissonance, or just a plain old plot to destroy the country?

In the name of Mother Gaia, I salute you – let us pray.

Obama begins the shut down of coal plants today with his new EPA rules. No one (except miners) loves coal, and this will doubtless be greeted with hosannas from the president’s base, but there’s the inescapable fact to deal with: coal provides 40% of our electricity – how will we replace it?

We could use natural gas, of course: the switch from coal to cheaper gas has lowered  energy costs (estimated savings $1,400 per family, per year; far more than any increase than the Obama administration has achieved with his “laser-like focus” on the economy these past five years) and cut the CO2 emissions he’s so worried about 20% (a reduction at least twice that achieved by any other country).

But Obama opposes natural gas, and has done everything he can to prevent its use, from banning pipelines to prohibiting exploration or fracking on federal lands. His alternative is propeller beanies and solar panels, neither of which is producing any significant amount of energy and won’t, if it ever does at all, for decades. What do we do until then?

“Return to the Garden of Eden”, says the leader of the Free World and the crazed members of his congregation.

Tough times ahead.

But the science is settled!

 

Well it’s bound to be one or the other!

Lack of solar activity defies earlier predictions, sets off war between warmists and ice age worriers.

LONDON: Predictions that 2013 would see an upsurge in solar activity and geomagnetic storms disrupting power grids and communications systems have proved to be a false alarm. Instead, the current peak in the solar cycle is the weakest for a century.

Subdued solar activity has prompted controversial comparisons with the Maunder Minimum, which occurred between 1645 and 1715, when a prolonged absence of sunspots and other indicators of solar activity coincided with the coldest period in the last millennium.

The comparisons have sparked a furious exchange of views between observers who believe the planet could be on the brink of another period of cooling, and scientists who insist there is no evidence that temperatures are about to fall.

New Scientist magazine blasted those who predicted a mini ice age, opening a recent article on the surprising lack of sunspots this year with the bold declaration: “Those hoping that the sun could save us from climate change look set for disappointment”.

“The recent lapse in solar activity is not the beginning of a decades-long absence of sunspots, a dip that might have cooled the climate. Instead it represents a shorter, less pronounced downturn that happens every century or so,” (“Sun’s quiet spell not the start of a mini ice age” July 12).

The unusually low number of sunspots in recent years “is not an indication that we are going into a Maunder Minimum” according to Giuliana DeToma, a solar scientist at the High Altitude Observatory in Colorado.

But DeToma admitted “we will do not know how or why the Maunder Minimum started, so we cannot predict the next one.”

Many solar experts think the downturn is linked a different phenomenon, the Gleissberg cycle, which predicts a period of weaker solar activity every century or so. If that turns out to be true, the sun could remain unusually quiet through the middle of the 2020s.

But since the scientists still do not understand why the Gleissberg cycle takes place, the evidence is inconclusive. The bottom line is that the sun has gone unusually quiet and no one really knows why or how it will last.

Why isn’t our energy consumption dropping during Connecticut’s heat wave?

Greenwich Democrat Bill Gaston sweats in solidarity with the polar bears

State utilities are urging residents to cut down on their electricity use while temperatures remain over 90 this week, but I’m confused: by an overwhelming percentage, people here in the Nutmeg State want restrictions on energy production in order to spare us from global warming, so shouldn’t they be sweating in their homes and offices with their air conditioners shut down? Our electricity use should be lower this week, surely not higher.

I wonder whether Greenwich Conservation Director Denise Savageu and Planning & Zoning head, “We’re All Gonna Drown” Diane Fox are sitting in dark, hot offices today over at town hall – should we look?

UPDATE: Parents, tired of your little high school brat nagging you about recycling plastic water bottles? Here’s a chance to save on energy bills while joining them in their passion: shut down that a/c, go to the movies and leave the child at home to deal with it.

Well of course

 

Good bye to all that?

Climate scientists admits, “our global warning models could be fundamentally wrong”.

In an interview with the German news publication Der Spiegel, meteorologist Hans von Storch said that scientists are so puzzled by the 15-year standstill in global warmingthat if the trend continues their models could be “fundamentally wrong.”

“If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models,” Storch told Der Spiegel. “A 20-year pause in global warming does not occur in a single modeled scenario. But even today, we are finding it very difficult to reconcile actual temperature trends with our expectations.”

….

“There are two conceivable explanations — and neither is very pleasant for us,” said Storch. “The first possibility is that less global warming is occurring than expected because greenhouse gases, especially CO2, have less of an effect than we have assumed. This wouldn’t mean that there is no man-made greenhouse effect, but simply that our effect on climate events is not asgreat as we have believed.”

“The other possibility  is that, in our simulations, we have underestimated how much the climate fluctuates owing to natural causes,” Storch added.

Did you get that? The collapse of the global warming “would be very unpleasant for us” – he’s talking about negative consequences for the global warming industry, not human kind. That says all you need to know about the “settled science” of global warming.

UPDATE: Chris R sends along this from the Economist, which says it far more clearly than I can: this is devastating to the climate control industry. Do read it.

 

But…but…but, Dollar Bill told us the science was settled!

There’s got to be a pony in here somewhere!

Warmists admit what has been known all along: the globe hasn’t warmed in the past twenty years

DEBATE about the reality of a two-decade pause in global warming and what it means has made its way from the sceptical fringe to the mainstream.

In a lengthy article this week, The Economist magazine said if climate scientists were credit-rating agencies, then climate sensitivity – the way climate reacts to changes in carbon-dioxide levels – would be on negative watch but not yet downgraded.

Another paper published by leading climate scientist James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, says the lower than expected temperature rise between 2000 and the present could be explained by increased emissions from burning coal.

For Hansen the pause is a fact, but it’s good news that probably won’t last.

International Panel on Climate Change chairman Rajendra Pachauri recently told The Weekend Australian the hiatus would have to last 30 to 40 years “at least” to break the long-term warming trend.

But the fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.

Research by Ed Hawkins of University of Reading shows surface temperatures since 2005 are already at the low end of the range projections derived from 20 climate models and if they remain flat, they will fall outside the models’ range within a few years.

“The global temperature standstill shows that climate models are diverging from observations,” says David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

“If we have not passed it already, we are on the threshold of global observations becoming incompatible with the consensus theory of climate change,” he says.

Whitehouse argues that whatever has happened to make temperatures remain constant requires an explanation because the pause in temperature rise has occurred despite a sharp increase in global carbon emissions.

And so on.  Deniers like Hansen and Dollar Bill may squawk, but their hopes to destroy modern civilization are dimming. More here, if you wish. And if you’d like to read of yet another debunking of “the hockey stick” graph, perhaps the most grievous fraud foisted on a gullible public by the warmists, read here.

Could the settled science of the 1970s have been right?

 

Don’t blame Bush

Swedish scientists say that only CO2 emissions are preventing an ice age. “Baloney!” Cry the school children of America, “our teachers have told us we’re doomed to drown!” Maybe so, but these Swedes aren’t the first to predict an ice age and perhaps: just a suggestion here, we might want to take a deep breath before implementing Obama’s stated intention to shut down our economy. Perhaps.

Scientists:
Global Cooling is Here (Don J. Easterbrook, Ph.D. Professor of Environmental Geology)
Global warming freeze? (David Deming, Ph.D. Professor of Geology and Geophysics)
Read the sunspots: Prepare now for dangerous global cooling (R. Tim Patterson, Ph.D. Professor of Earth Science)
Sorry to ruin the fun, but an ice age cometh (Philip K. Chapman, B.S. Physics and Mathematics, M.S., Ph.D. Instrumentation, MIT)
The Coming Ice Age (David Deming, Ph.D. Professor of Geology and Geophysics)
There IS a problem with global warming… it stopped in 1998 (Robert M. Carter, Ph.D. Professor of Environmental and Earth Science)
While the sun sleeps (Henrik Svensmark, Ph.D. Director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research, Danish National Space Center)
World is getting colder (David J. Bellamy, B.Sc. Ph.D. C.Biol. FIBiol. Professor of Botany)
Year of Global Cooling (David Deming, Ph.D. Professor of Geology and Geophysics)

Historic:
1895 – Prospects of another Glacial Period (PDF) (The New York Times)
1912 – Sees Glacia Era Coming; Prof. Schmidt Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age (The New York Times)

1969 – New Ice Age Threat Seen (St. Petersburg Times, January 15, 1969)
1969 – Worrying About a New Ice Age (The New York Times, February 23, 1969)
1969 – Ice Age Biggest Threat According to Archeologist (The Hartford Courant, November 21, 1969)
1970 – Colder Winters Held Dawn of New Ice Age – Scientists See Ice Age In the Future (The Washington Post, January 11, 1970)
1970 – Is Mankind Manufacturing a New Ice Age for Itself? (L.A. Times, January 15, 1970)
1970 – New Ice Age May Descend On Man (Sumter Daily Item, January 26, 1970)
1970 – Pollution Could Cause Ice Age, Agency Reports (St. Petersburg Times, March 4, 1970)
1970 – Pollution Called Ice Age Threat (St. Petersburg Times, June 26, 1970)
1971 – U.S. Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming (The Washington Post, July 9, 1971)
1971 – Ice Age Around the Corner (Chicago Tribune, July 10, 1971)
1971 – New Ice Age Coming – It’s Already Getting Colder (L.A. Times, October 24, 1971)
1972 – Air pollution may cause ice age (Free-Lance Star, February 3, 1972)
1972 – Scientist Says New ice Age Coming (The Ledger, February 13, 1972)
1972 – Scientist predicts new ice age (Free-Lance Star, September 11, 1972)
1972 – British expert on Climate Change says Says New Ice Age Creeping Over Northern Hemisphere (Lewiston Evening Journal, September 11, 1972)
1972 – Climate Seen Cooling For Return Of Ice Age (Portsmouth Times, ‎September 11, 1972‎)
1972 – New Ice Age Slipping Over North (Press-Courier, September 11, 1972)
1972 – Ice Age Begins A New Assault In North (The Age, September 12, 1972)
1972 – Weather To Get Colder (Montreal Gazette, ‎September 12, 1972‎)
1972 – British climate expert predicts new Ice Age (The Christian Science Monitor, September 23, 1972)
1972 – Scientist Sees Chilling Signs of New Ice Age (L.A. Times, September 24, 1972)
1972 – Another Ice Age? (Time Magazine, November 13, 1972)
1973 – The Ice Age Cometh (The Saturday Review, March 24, 1973)
1973 – Weather-watchers think another ice age may be on the way (The Christian Science Monitor, December 11, 1973)
1974 – New evidence indicates ice age here (Eugene Register-Guard, May 29, 1974)
1974 – Another Ice Age? (Time Magazine, June 24, 1974)
1974 – 2 Scientists Think ‘Little’ Ice Age Near (The Hartford Courant, August 11, 1974)
1974 – Ice Age, worse food crisis seen (The Chicago Tribune, October 30, 1974)
1974 – Believes Pollution Could Bring On Ice Age (Ludington Daily News, December 4, 1974)
1974 – Pollution Could Spur Ice Age, Nasa Says (Beaver Country Times, ‎December 4, 1974‎)
1974 – Air Pollution May Trigger Ice Age, Scientists Feel (The Telegraph, ‎December 5, 1974‎)
1974 – More Air Pollution Could Trigger Ice Age Disaster (Daily Sentinel – ‎December 5, 1974‎)
1974 – Scientists Fear Smog Could Cause Ice Age (Milwaukee Journal, December 5, 1974)
1975 – Climate Changes Called Ominous (PDF) (The New York Times, January 19, 1975)
1975 – Climate Change: Chilling Possibilities (Science News, March 1, 1975)
1975 – B-r-r-r-r: New Ice Age on way soon? (The Chicago Tribune, March 2, 1975)
1975 – Cooling Trends Arouse Fear That New Ice Age Coming (Eugene Register-Guard, ‎March 2, 1975‎)
1975 – Is Another Ice Age Due? Arctic Ice Expands In Last Decade (Youngstown Vindicator – ‎March 2, 1975‎)
1975 – Is Earth Headed For Another Ice Age? (Reading Eagle, March 2, 1975)
1975 – New Ice Age Dawning? Significant Shift In Climate Seen (Times Daily, ‎March 2, 1975‎)
1975 – There’s Troublesome Weather Ahead (Tri City Herald, ‎March 2, 1975‎)
1975 – Is Earth Doomed To Live Through Another Ice Age? (The Robesonian, ‎March 3, 1975‎)
1975 – The Ice Age cometh: the system that controls our climate (The Chicago Tribune, April 13, 1975)
1975 – The Cooling World (Newsweek, April 28, 1975)
1975 – Scientists Ask Why World Climate Is Changing; Major Cooling May Be Ahead (PDF) (The New York Times, May 21, 1975)
1975 – In the Grip of a New Ice Age? (International Wildlife, July-August, 1975)
1975 – Oil Spill Could Cause New Ice Age (Milwaukee Journal, December 11, 1975)
1976 – Worrisome CIA Report; Even U.S. Farms May be Hit by Cooling Trend (U.S. News & World Report, May 31, 1976)
1976 – The Cooling: Has the Next Ice Age Already Begun? (Book, 1976)
1977 – The Big Freeze (Time Magazine, January 31, 1977)
1977 – The Weather Conspiracy: The Coming of the New Ice Age (Book, 1977)
1977 – We Will Freeze in the Dark (Capital Cities Communications Documentary, Host: Nancy Dickerson, April 12, 1977)
1978 – The New Ice Age (Book, 1978)
1978 – Little Ice Age: Severe winters and cool summers ahead (Calgary Herald, January 10, 1978)
1978 – Winters Will Get Colder, ‘we’re Entering Little Ice Age’ (Ellensburg Daily Record, January 10, 1978)
1978 – Geologist Says Winters Getting Colder (Middlesboro Daily News, January 16, 1978)
1978 – It’s Going To Get Colder (Boca Raton News, ‎January 17, 1978‎)
1978 – Believe new ice age is coming (The Bryan Times, March 31, 1978)
1978 – The Coming Ice Age (In Search Of TV Show, Season 2, Episode 23, Host: Leonard Nimoy, May 1978)
1978 – An Ice Age Is Coming Weather Expert Fears (Milwaukee Sentinel, November 17, 1978)
1979 – New ice age almost upon us? (The Christian Science Monitor, November 14, 1979)

Stubbornly ignorant and arrogant too

Doomsday, 1975

Rather than wait around for the power to be restored (which it now is) I went up to Maine today to help out my son John. The drive up gave me an opportunity to listen to various people express shock and surprise at the effect of a major storm on beachfront properties. Governor Christie exclaimed that he’d never have imagined such devastation, NPR rang up the usual empty heads to discuss global warming – induced severe weather and on and on and on. New York Governor Cuomo,speaking of river waters flooding the new World Trade Center site, sums up our governing class’s grasp of reality and science neatly:  ““When this space was built, there was no assumption that the river could overcome the bank,” he said. “We’ve just ignored it. We’ve just been blind to it.”

Duh.

To be surprised at this damage is to admit to a lifetime of deliberate ignorance. In 1973 a geology professor of mine used to rail against the insanity of building homes on barrier islands and emergency facilities like hospitals and fire stations on fault zones and flood plains. This was long before global warming was invented; in fact, it was even before the “settled science” told us we were doomed to suffer an ice age. Common sense and a knowledge of geology dictated that you don’t build where destruction is certain.

Warmists ridicule creationists for believing that the earth is just 7,000 years old, but to a warmest, 7,000 years is as irrelevant as 7 billion. A warmist refuses to look beyond 100 years, and therefore any storm, tidal surge, temperature rise or global climate change at all that exceeds what happened in the past century is, within their world, unprecedented, in the literal sense that it has never happened before.

How else can one explain the decision of New York Hospital, located in lower Manhattan in the lowest part of the island and flanked by two rivers and the ocean, to place its sole emergency generator in its basement? “Gee, it never flooded before, and if it weren’t for this darned global warming it would never have happened this time.” Various public officials used the same reasoning today to explain why the subways flooded, railroad tracks were washed away and homes swept into the sea: “who’d have expected that?”

Well my professor did, and so did everyone who’s ever even cracked a geology textbook. There’s no way to move an entire infrastructure out of harms way in an instant, but if our various governments had used the past 40 years to move things up as the original equipment wore out, there would be less damage today. Instead, we get a prescription to spend trillions, shut down the western world’s economy and impoverish the globe, all because the pointy-heads are worried about seeing weather that hasn’t occurred since the dawn of creation: 1938.

Let’s concede the modern rationalists their point about the age of the earth and date it as billions of years old. Only the most arrogant sort of person could claim that a mere century’s worth of time establishes the benchmark for what we’re entitled to expect from our globe – it’s larger, much larger, than we are. To pretend surprise or, worse, to actually be surprised when that is brought home is ridiculous.

If it’s Sunday, it must be time for another doomsday prediction from the warmists

Emergency barrier island

We’re all gonna drown if we don’t reduce CO2 levels to 32 bln tons, worldwide, by 2017. Like all previous such deadlines announced with great solemnity by “experts”, this one is absolutely, really truly, the tipping point – “we mean it, this time!”. Well, we crossed all those earlier irreversible tipping points: 2009, 2010, 2012 yet somehow when the deadline wasn’t met it was simply replaced by a new one. The latest, until today’s, is 2014 which was promised to be 100% accurate some years ago by no less an authority than the Prince of Wales.

We’re not going to reduce CO2 to the level the experts demand by 2014 and we aren’t going to do it by 2017. It’s too much to hope that the media hyenas who repeat these nonsensical warnings can remember even a few years back to the last “tipping point”, but that doesn’t mean the rest of us can’t.

Again: if these tipping points are really (a) accurate and (b) irreversible, then why haven’t we just thrown our hands up and gone about our business? There is, we’ve been promised, nothing we can do about it now.

UPDATE: In response to an earlier post a reader sent along this video Of George Carlin – fabulous.

Ronald Reagan proved right again

Yale School of Forestry study: Trees emit deadly amounts of global – warming methane gas. Clear cut this scourge before it kills again.

If you think this will make the eco-nuts finally shut up, you don’t know your ass from your Prius

Useful idiots march in Copenhagen

AP: CO2 emissions drop to their lowest level in 20 years.

In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years, and government officials say the biggest reason is that cheap and plentiful natural gas has led many power plant operators to switch from dirtier-burning coal.

Many of the world’s leading climate scientists didn’t see the drop coming, in large part because it happened as a result of market forces rather than direct government action against carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere.

In a little-noticed technical report [The blog, “Whatsupwiththat” noticed and wrote about all this July 2, but he’s just a blogger and thus doesn’t count- ED] , the U.S. Energy Information Agency, a part of the Energy Department, said this month that energy related U.S. CO2 emissions for the first four months of this year fell to about 1992 levels. Energy emissions make up about 98 percent of the total. The Associated Press contacted environmental experts, scientists and utility companies and learned that virtually everyone believes the shift could have major long-term implications for U.S. energy policy.

While conservation efforts, the lagging economy and greater use of renewable energy are factors in the CO2 decline, the drop-off is due mainly to low-priced natural gas, the agency said.

A frenzy of shale gas drilling in the Northeast’s Marcellus Shale and in Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana has caused the wholesale price of natural gas to plummet from $7 or $8 per unit to about $3 over the past four years, making it cheaper to burn than coal for a given amount of energy produced. As a result, utilities are relying more than ever on gas-fired generating plants.

Market forces instead of government action – who could possibly have thought that might be a solution? I blame Cheney.

Read the entire article, if you must, for the knee-jerk, obligatory squawking from people who see their jobs going up in (clean) smoke. But here’s a sampling:

The question is whether the shift is just one bright spot in a big, gloomy picture, or a potentially larger trend.

Also, while natural gas burns cleaner than coal, it still emits some CO2. And drilling has its own environmental consequences, which are not yet fully understood.

“Natural gas is not a long-term solution to the CO2 problem,” Pielke warned.

And this:

“The Sierra Club has serious doubts about the net benefits of natural gas,” said Deborah Nardone, director of the group’s Beyond Natural Gas campaign.

“Without sufficient oversight and protections, we have no way of knowing how much dangerous pollution is being released into Americans’ air and water by the gas industry. For those reason, our ultimate goal is to replace coal with clean energy and energy efficiency and as little natural gas as possible.”

Gee, who could we possibly persuade to take on the onerous duty of providing “oversight and protection”?

Speaking of suicide, Obummer’s goal to destroy the economy to save the world from global warming is futile

Dollar Bill has a great pain between his ears

Not the destroying the economy part – he’s determined to join Europe in its suicide and he’s aided and abetted by the media and the useful idiots on the left. But futile because China, which is building a new coal-fired power plant a week, is going to dwarf all of western civilization in CO2 emissions soon, very soon. The increase in cars in that country is predicted to be “insane”.  In fact, by 2030, its CO2 production is likely to equal the entire world’s production of that fatal gas today. (For the mathematically challenged, that’s 18 years away).

India’s CO2 emissions will triple by 2030.

A drought in the Amazon in 2010 produced as much CO2 as India produced that year.

“Experts” like Al Gore say that global warming will be irreversible by 2017 at present levels.

In view of all this and not surprisingly, China has told the EU that it won’t buy their friggin’ Airbus if it involves paying that organization’s punitive carbon tax. It also refused to sign the Kyoto treaty, as did we, back when even Democrats had a few brain cells still functioning.

Finally, and as the ultimate Polish joke, Poland has vetoed its participation in “mandatory” EU carbon emission cuts, thus depriving the union of the unanimous consent required from all members if those cuts are to be imposed. It’s a sad day (not really) when Poles have more common sense than the brightest, “the science is settled” thinkers of the rest of Europe and the United States combined.

Global Warming doom sayers

 Last year on this blog I collected a bunch of warnings post – 1997′ s Coyote protocol, all predicting the tipping our climate past the reversal point by 2006, at latest. Since that year came and went without the world doing what these experts knew was best, they’ve revised their absolute certain knowledge and now concede we have a little more time, but by golly, not much! It astonishes me that otherwise intelligent people act like Charlie Brown when Lucy offers her football, yet again. What part about sucker don’t you get?

2006: 10 years or it’s all too late

2007: It’s already too late!

2008: 100 months, and we really,really mean it this time!

Prince Charles, 2009: less than 100 months. Ooh, the clock is ticking! 88 months now, Prince Charlie!

James Hansen, 2009. every single coal powered plant in the world must be shut down by 2029 or we’re doomed. Dr. Hansen, employed at taxpayers’ expense at NAASA, also advocates the jailing of all power plant executives and the use of the Global Warming “crisis” to redistribute our wealth to the Third World, but those are different issues.