Rules: Read Me!
Admin: sue943
Legal / Conditions of Use

Page 10 of 11 < 1 2 ... 8 9 10 11 >
Topic Options
#959132 - Thu Jan 03 2013 08:17 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
I would say this new study, collecting more datasets than any before, has to be the best news for everyone concerned about global warming on both sides, as it appears to have found it has gone, and probably wasn't ever there at all.

“…We show that although these anthropogenic forcings share a common stochastic trend, this trend is empirically independent of the stochastic trend in temperature and solar irradiance. Therefore, greenhouse gas forcing, aerosols, solar irradiance and global temperature are not polynomially cointegrated. This implies that recent global warming is not statistically significantly related to anthropogenic forcing. On the other hand, we find that greenhouse gas forcing might have had a temporary effect on global temperature.”

“…our rejection of AGW is not absolute; it might be a false positive, and we cannot rule out the possibility that recent global warming has an anthropogenic footprint. However, this possibility is very small, and is not statistically significant at conventional levels.”

How many of these actually need to be done before people take any notice of them?

No significant man made warming found

M. Beenstock1, Y. Reingewertz1, and N. Paldor2
1Department of Economics, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mount Scopus Campus, Jerusalem, Israel
2Fredy and Nadine Institute of Earth Sciences, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Edmond J. Safra campus, Givat Ram, Jerusalem, Israel
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#959575 - Sun Jan 06 2013 08:36 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
queproblema Offline
Mainstay

Registered: Mon Sep 25 2006
Posts: 868
Loc: Kenny Lake Alaska USA     
Here are excerpts from a report you'll like:

The overwhelming majority of Alaska is getting colder and has been since 2000, according to a study by researchers with the Geophysical Institute at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. But the authors stop short of saying the lower temperatures contradict that idea that the earth, and Alaska in particular, is warming. Instead, they conclude that the findings show a temporary variation.

The report, produced by a team headed by professor emeritus of geophysics Gerd Wendler, is titled "The First Decade of the New Century: A Cooling Trend for Most of Alaska." It was published in The Open Atmospheric Science Journal, 2012.

The authors looked into sunspot activity and determined that it was not related to the trend. They did find a correlation with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, or PDO, a shift in warm waters from the eastern to the western side of the Pacific Ocean not unlike the El Nino warming pattern. But while El Nino shifts over months, the PDO moves much more slowly, staying put for years or decades.

Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2013/01/05/2743379/study-shows-alaska-got-colder.html#storylink=cpy


At the same time, CNN explains why Shell can drill in Alaskan waters--far less sea ice:

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates more than 90 billion barrels of oil and nearly 1,700 trillion cubic feet of natural gas may be recoverable by drilling in the North Slope. And the shrinking of the region's sea ice -- which hit record lows in 2012 -- has created new opportunities for energy exploration in the region.

Climate researchers say that a decrease in sea ice is a symptom of a warming climate, caused largely by the combustion of carbon-rich fossil fuels. The science is politically controversial but generally accepted as fact by most scientists.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/05/us/alaska-drilling-rig/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Top
#959678 - Mon Jan 07 2013 05:54 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
It is indeed such a mixed picture people are able to take almost the same material and present it in opposing ways. So far the general requirements of science, observable, repeatable and predictable are yet to be fulfilled, and with the entire complexity of the climate adding a small amount of CO2 to the existing part will probably never be quantifiable, with so many known and unknown drivers of all its aspects.

However, manipulating the new data before and after it arrives does not help their cause one bit, that is illegal outside science and would have expected it to be inside as well although at present a retraction is the worst they can expect (which I've detailed elsewhere).

But back to Alaska, it is a micro representation of the big picture, and deciding how and where it fits in is a fool's errand, as the theories one puts forward are contradicted by another, and pretty much the same whichever events they pick. I keep saying if a doctor or investor had such a wide margin of uncertainty you'd stop using them, so why should the climate be any different just because the losses from errors aren't directly apparent in deaths or financial losses? But I'm very pleased to see something which is showing both sides as very few people on either side acknowledge there is a second at all, which again is far from scientific.
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#959901 - Tue Jan 08 2013 06:15 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
queproblema Offline
Mainstay

Registered: Mon Sep 25 2006
Posts: 868
Loc: Kenny Lake Alaska USA     
It's a big world. Alaskan land has gotten significantly cooler in the past decade, but its waters have warmed significantly. Meanwhile, on average, the USA has gotten hotter: "2012 is officially in the books as the hottest year on record for the continental United States." http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/08/us/extreme-weather/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

"The average combined global land and ocean surface temperature for November 2012 was 0.67°C (1.21°F) above the 20th century average of 12.9°C (60.4°F). This is the fifth warmest November since records began in 1880. Including this November, the 10 warmest Novembers have occurred in the past 12 years." http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

You can google the months ("global temperature average 2012") and find August, 2012, was the 4th warmest August since 1880, May was the second warmest May, etc.

Top
#959926 - Tue Jan 08 2013 07:43 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
I can only observe the material produced as not a scientist, and does look like you may appear to be actively looking for trouble with this latest set. Short term records are firstly not enough to form a trend, and secondly the record is since when exactly? Since we started measuring, since satellite usage, since proxy records began?

This is not science, but media speak. I've waded through over a decade of these shrill headlines, and when you fit them into the total they seem to vanish in the noise of the wider variability. What about the amount of change? If two million people have cancer in an area and a million more have it the next year, that's a heck of a lot of people, and a 50% increase. If one person has a particular form of cancer in an area and the next year two does, that's a 100% increase.

Those are media tricks, and not science. These quotes are meaningless without the sort of context I have mentioned, and for every single one someone can provide I can do exactly the same with the opposites. Neither will be any more meaningful than the other, and if possible means such quotes are not part of any evidential value. Even the IPCC have set the lion's share of global warming in the period 2050-2100, long after most of us will have left the planet and totally unobservable as a result. Even they are not certain of the degree or existence of man made warming, let alone the temperature next year. So unless we have a pretty sharp rise or fall in the next decade or two nothing we have yet indicates a lot as whatever has been claimed is virtually all potential, these are just the foreshocks which require vast amounts of inference to assign any significance to at all, and with a growing period of flat temperatures the likelihood of any significant rise by 2050 or 2100 becomes less and less, and diverges more and more from the models.
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#960133 - Wed Jan 09 2013 05:35 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
NASA have just announced a new set of reports which demonstrate a large correlation between solar variation and climate/temperature

NASA report

This is not a single study, but a complete collaboration required by experts in all areas, as it was acknowledged how hard it was for any single discipline to have enough knowledge alone to contribute enough. As such this is the most comprehensive of all studies into solar activity and NASA have now been compelled to accept the sun does indeed drive the climate in a major way after all.

"One of the participants, Greg Kopp of the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado, pointed out that while the variations in luminosity over the 11-year solar cycle amount to only a tenth of a percent of the sun's total output, such a small fraction is still important. "Even typical short term variations of 0.1% in incident irradiance exceed all other energy sources (such as natural radioactivity in Earth's core) combined," he says.

Of particular importance is the sun's extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation, which peaks during the years around solar maximum. Within the relatively narrow band of EUV wavelengths, the sun’s output varies not by a minuscule 0.1%, but by whopping factors of 10 or more. This can strongly affect the chemistry and thermal structure of the upper atmosphere."


And like buses I just came across a report showing how CO2 levels in the IPCC literature appear to have been basically made up by ignoring everything over 300 (and boy, were there a lot!). I'll dig a little more but this graph alone pretty well kills off the entire debate if correct as it was close to double the official pre-industrial levels during those levels. I always wondered why my 1961 book (when we were still expecting an ice age) had CO2 at 200-400ppm, which the maximum is still below today's 390ppm.

Selective measurements influence world policy

The entire report


Edited by satguru (Wed Jan 09 2013 07:57 PM)
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#960916 - Sun Jan 13 2013 05:23 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
queproblema Offline
Mainstay

Registered: Mon Sep 25 2006
Posts: 868
Loc: Kenny Lake Alaska USA     
I'm in Anchorage right now, where all three of my adult children live.

Last year was one of the coldest Januaries on record, and broke all records for snowfall. (If I remember, the records go back to 1888. Could disremember.) http://www.adn.com/2012/01/27/2287406/anchorage-on-track-to-set-record.html

This year is unseasonably warm and with very little snowfall. Yesterday it was 39 degrees F. and raining! Whoever heard of a flood watch in the middle of January? http://paom.arh.noaa.gov/zonefcst.php?zone=101

I'm just reporting these pertinent facts on wild weather swing. I know I can't see the whole global picture from here. Heck, I can't even see Russia from my back porch! smile

Top
#960920 - Sun Jan 13 2013 06:07 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
All reports are welcomed, and you being in Alaska particularly relevant. And also appear to show what our winters do in England, no two are the same, except the ones that are. That's been the same in living memory and two of the coldest were in the last few years.

Meanwhile a study on top of the thorough assessment by Hebrew University has also discovered:

"Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 11–12 months behind changes in global sea surface temperature. Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 9.5–10 months behind changes in global air surface temperature. Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 9 months behind changes in global lower troposphere temperature. Changes in ocean temperatures explain a substantial part of the observed changes in atmospheric CO2 since January 1980. Changes in atmospheric CO2 are NOT tracking changes in human emissions"

Global and Planetary Change
Volume 100, January 2013, Pages 51–69

Ole Humlum, Kjell Stordahl, Jan-Erik Solheim

The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature

Summary here

I think the rest is a pay service but by some fairly eminent scientists for those who are familiar.


Edited by satguru (Sun Jan 13 2013 06:11 PM)
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#960921 - Sun Jan 13 2013 06:49 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
Trigger7 Offline
Forum Adept

Registered: Sat Nov 17 2007
Posts: 109
Loc: Morden Manitoba Canada       
http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/report-global-warming-changing-daily-life-in-u-s-1.111469
Please read the above article which has some up to date pertinent information compiled by app. 200 Scientests

Top
#961000 - Mon Jan 14 2013 08:24 AM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
The start of the article "Global warming is already changing America from sea to rising sea and is affecting how Americans live, a massive new federally commissioned report says."

pretty well almost killed it for me from the start, and had to accept it was the poor journalism rather than anything in the study which related to the rising sea, which is rising at a rate of around 7 inches a century as it did the last one. That over, the next hurdle was the same as always, 'in the future'. We only get the future a long time after the present, stating the obvious but one these guys appear to have forgotten. In the early 90s the IPCC combined the best available models and made a graph of potential future temperatures by 2010 with different emissions, come 2010 and we were below the lowest one. And no apologies were made.

"and climate change is more than hotter temperatures, the report said."

Really? Climate change from global warming is about more than higher temperatures which drive, er, climate change? Poor grammar at best, misleading at worst.

"The report uses the word "threat" or variations of it 198 times and versions of the word "disrupt" another 120 times."

Doesn't mean a single one will happen.

"Climate change threatens human health and well-being in many ways, including impacts from increased extreme weather events,"

The current position is extreme weather events are not likely to increase in frequency but possibly in intensity.

"the report details 13 airports that have runways that could be inundated by rising sea level."

7 inches a century?

Before I read this I was expecting a bunch of decent data showing actual causes and effects which would have demonstrated if nothing else there was some uncertainty, with other 2013 reports already presented appearing to be finding things had settled down and may never have even been happening at all. The combination of the alarmist and careless reporting and the lack of physical data makes this a propaganda piece of the worst kind, and as such does exactly the opposite intended, if read by anyone not already convinced of the case.




Edited by satguru (Mon Jan 14 2013 10:56 AM)
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#963951 - Mon Jan 28 2013 11:01 AM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
Al Gore and John Kerry have both said there are no peer reviewed studies disputing any aspect of man made warming. I have a list made of over 1,100 right here.

If you can't trust them on something as important as that, what else can you trust them on?

Where's the consensus?
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#964532 - Wed Jan 30 2013 07:49 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: queproblema]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
The great thing about sea ice is its short term nature. This means unlike the sea level or solid land based glaciers the swings are fast and wide. And due to the inherent balance throughout the climate system a fast melt is usually followed by a fast freeze, the latest figures show a record for 2013 already, which most neutral bystanders would say is very good news, much like the halt in temperature rise for the partisan (as I would prefer a rise, as history shows a higher temperature of a couple of degrees causes more food production and fewer deaths from cold). But if people think warmer is worse then both are good news, and certainly if taxes were connected to the temperature rise it would be good news for me as well as it hits me as hard as any.

Record Arctic freeze
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#965076 - Sat Feb 02 2013 02:10 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
Possibly the best news for the world for decades. A new study from the Department of Geology, Western Washington University, has studied 650,000 year's worth of ice cores in more detail than before, and found huge rises in temperature throughout history, totally unrelated to CO2. According to the conclusion any rise in CO2 would be most likely from the rise in temperature releasing it from the ocean, but finds absolutely no connection between the short and minor current temperature rise and the clear rise in CO2.

This is science at the highest level and would need a great deal of errors to be proved wrong in the slightest.

Ice core analysis

In the past century, each of the two warm periods (1915–1945 and 1978–1998) and each of the two cool periods (1880–1915 and 1945–1977) resulted from cyclic changes of Pacific sea surface temperatures (the Pacific Decadal Oscillation). In 1999, the NE Pacific changed abruptly from its warm mode to its cool mode, bringing the 1978–1998 warming to a close. Projection of the pattern of cyclic warming and cooling over the past 500 years strongly suggests that the climate will continue to cool for the next several decades.

When I've been accused time and time again of being anti science here, my point is that science has to follow scientific method. Using only weak computer models to imitate a climate as complex as a human mind, and base it purely on assumptions how they think it ought to work, and then project it beyond our lifespans before anything happens is anti science. This study here is real science, I can see the difference at least.


Edited by satguru (Sat Feb 02 2013 03:04 PM)
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#967726 - Sat Feb 16 2013 01:24 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
mehaul Online   content
Forum Champion

Registered: Wed Feb 03 2010
Posts: 5235
Loc: Florida USA
I wonder how long it will take for the asteroids and meteoroids to be blamed on global warming? Meteorology is based on meteor showers, isn't it? Did you see the clouds of Carbon that one over Russia left in its wake? Does Russia have to pay the Carbon Tax on it, I wonder? It was reported to have broken up some of winter's ice cap (on a lake). The asteroid was here last year too. Isn't that a trend to add to the models?


Edited by mehaul (Sat Feb 16 2013 01:26 PM)
_________________________
If you aren't seeing Heaven while you dream, you're doing something wrong.
Dreams allow escape from the passage of Time.

Top
#967787 - Sat Feb 16 2013 08:40 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
I've read a few pieces already by scientists blaming it for all geological activity- earthquake/tsunamis and volcanic. I am hoping this diversion from what most people have learnt in school may start turning heads of those currently accepting their veracity and capability and realise they are losing it.

Meanwhile CNN have also blamed the meteorite on it so the blame is widening to infinite proportions. I suspect if the USA bomb out of the next World Cup finals a few scientists will say they couldn't train enough as the weather wasn't right. They seem to use every opportunity they can to do so and people just accept it and carry on, but they are going too far now for even the most trusting types.

CNN story
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#967811 - Sun Feb 17 2013 02:24 AM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
mehaul Online   content
Forum Champion

Registered: Wed Feb 03 2010
Posts: 5235
Loc: Florida USA
All our storms are now termed "record setters" and then we come to find out it is the fifth lowest pressure or tenth deepest snowcover... I ask, "Where's the record?" Answer: "There isn't one!" It just makes for attractive segues and keeps the viewer tuned in to be told the news their hearing about has set a record of some sort.

Edit addition: Three months post event, the "SuperStorm Sandy", which did much damage to the NJ, NY and CT areas, has been downgraded to not having been even a Hurricane when it came ashore! We won't hear the news of that going on for weeks like we did when it was considered a Hurricane. Nor'easter Nemo was stated to be the worst of that type ever and now it's known that mid-century, fifty years ago, there were a series of Nor'easters that were more devastating and dumped in the range of 3-4 ft of the white stuff. Nemo mostly only dropped 2 ft. A record Nor'easter? Hardly.


Edited by mehaul (Sun Feb 17 2013 10:33 AM)
_________________________
If you aren't seeing Heaven while you dream, you're doing something wrong.
Dreams allow escape from the passage of Time.

Top
#968061 - Mon Feb 18 2013 05:29 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: mehaul]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
Even I was caught by surprise by this one, but looking back logically it isn't surprising at all. Last century the sea level rose 1.7mm a year on average (7 inches a century) which is not enough to register on any level of significance. Then it's meant to have reached 3.1mm a year (still under a foot a century), but the satellites which generated this result have been questioned for being calibrated wrongly and reading the same amount too high. Now the NOAA, the US national organisation collecting the measurements directly through tide gauges have actually found the rise has fallen to 0.7mm a year since 2000, almost guaranteeing the satellites to be bogus as it's a darn sight easier to use a tide gauge and check it manually than go up and check every single satellite.

Tide gauge measurements

Now logically this makes perfect sense. We've had no warming in the 21st century, so as ice can't melt (50% of the cause) or sea expand without a rise, it's physically impossible for the sea levels to rise without a rise in temperature. In most organisations besides the mafia such inconsistencies would cause immediate suspensions of the satellite measurements until the problems were checked and sorted out, but even though they are partly shared by the same organisation, all they have done is make the sort of excuses for the difference a child would for losing their homework. Even the general public aren't that stupid had the papers taken the effort to let them know. A five times exaggeration of such vital measurements (Tuvalu has applied for billions of aid as they claim it's going underwater) is something unseen before in science outside the climate (glaciers would be gone by 2035, no sorry, that should have been 2350, and the Himalayan glaciers lost 40 billion tons of ice per year, oh no, sorry, they didn't lose any), but getting an entire sea level wrong for over a decade has easily outdone every single ricket since the hockey stick was invented.
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#970758 - Wed Mar 06 2013 09:23 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
Having by far the best resources in space I tend to hope people will trust the direct (as opposed to inferred) findings of NASA, and they have appeared to find the only cause of 'dangerous' warming (ie that which would amplify CO2) to not only be absent, but actually fallen dramatically. This is the upper atmosphere, where CO2 both fills in the spaces in the air which would otherwise let the heat through, and the major (almost total) cause of amplification, the water evaporating from the oceans, would have to lodge to cause it.

It is the upper atmosphere which is meant to act as the main barrier to outgoing heat, and the area the CO2, water vapour and heat would all end up, doubling or way more the 1C from doubling CO2, albeit beyond our capacity to ever know. These satellites began in 1979 with basic temperature measurements, and have slowly been increased to measure many other parameters, and this is nowhere near the first to totally contradict their models. Secondly the greatest unknown was the negative feedback from oceanic evaporation, the effect on cloud cover. Total cloud cover (ie water vapour in the lower atmosphere) is a cooling effect as it creates shade, and blocks the incoming heat by reflecting it back to space. There is no current knowledge on the amount of increased evaporation can have on cloud cover simply as that is admitted to be beyond even their best algorithms, and can only observe to draw any conclusions, which technically ought to apply across the climate board.

Now NASA's direct observations have shown the official line, that CO2 and water vapour collect in the upper atmosphere, greatly increasing the weak power of CO2 alone, to be redundant. I said long ago the small rise in temperature after a 50% increase was more than enough to see the absence of feedback, simply because it was expected to be steady and besides a small potential for retention of heat in the oceans (which can also be measured and is not there either) the vapour has to evaporate and stay in the upper atmosphere to have any effect whatsoever, and has now been shown not to. And with no feedback there is no global warming, yes, it's really that simple. CO2 would need to be over 1000ppm just to reach 2C, where the benefits of warming (all in the IPCC report, not my own imagination) are balanced by possible problems. It would then need 2000ppm to reach 3C which isn't even possible and would take a thousand years even if it was.

Read it here

It gets pretty technical after that but doesn't affect the bottom line and for anyone qualified is fairly conclusive that's what needs to happen and if it isn't then it probably never can.
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#971884 - Tue Mar 12 2013 02:26 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
Here's a little calm in a sea of chaos

Correlation between natural cycles and temperature

Looking at not the first similar diagram, any warming can be seen to be clearly consistent with a far longer and fully natural trend for over 200 years.
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#972763 - Sat Mar 16 2013 05:45 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
Modern technology now means unlike verbal or written communication, electronic means leave traces all over the system and can be retrieved by equipped individuals just like fingerprints at a crime scene. Now there's absolutely no need to accuse anyone of cheating and not be believed if they are happy to admit it among themselves thinking no one else will ever see it.

But we have now:

Phil Jones and Michael Mann compete for the gold medal in cheating.
---------------------------------

date: Tue Aug 31 11:17:33 2004
from: Phil Jones
subject: Fwd: On the Role of Statistics in Climate Research, Tim Lambert, Phil Jones et al?
to: Rasmus Benestad
Rasmus and Mike,

In the email below, Mike seems to have won the gold medal for statistical abuse and I have the silver. I seemed to have tried too hard to explain my techniques. I tried really hard to get the gold medal – Mike has a degree in maths/stats ! I’ll have to redeem myself in AR4 and switch the places for the 2008 Olympiad – the AR4 coming out in 2007 should put me well in the lead.
I clearly didn’t allow for the knowledge of the judges – I think I’ll appeal!

Cheers
Phil

---------------------------------
Michael Mann created global warming personally by altering the 20th century temperatures to form a hockey stick although many others could not demonstrate them. Phil Jones runs the university department which provides the data to much of the UN, so besides these being the main players in climate science (sic) they were not actually joking as they weren't saying it to entertain the public.


Edited by satguru (Sat Mar 16 2013 06:30 PM)
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#972997 - Mon Mar 18 2013 07:23 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
News to me and presumably everyone else. The UN chose 1979 to start their Arctic ice coverage figures which turns out to have been an errant maximum. Last year's dip was exactly the same as it was in 1974, when everyone was still worried about global cooling. Context appears to be quite important even in science.

Arctic- panic over!
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#974654 - Wed Mar 27 2013 05:19 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
In case anyone hadn't checked my training is in law and psychology, and as such have recognised over the years when it comes to facts people would normally rather accept the person than the material they present, meaning if someone has the correct authority status then most people switch off the critical button and accept them on trust.

Even though everyone makes mistakes, and the bigger the role the bigger the potential mistakes, the culture of trusting ones betters is inherent in society, so whatever the facts if a peer says the identical thing to a professor then the professor will always win, even if you disagreed beforehand, while the peer will only be agreed with if you agree already, or dismissed as unqualified.

I fight this prejudice every day in presenting not my data but those of professors, but simply by passing this data on secondhand loses almost all its value in the process. So today I just discovered this quote from the actual godfather of global warming, the man who singlehandedly addressed US congress in 1988 and was so well prepared he convinced president Clinton to pass the issue up to the UN and take the entire issue up as a global priority. Without Hansen global warming probably would never have been more than a trivial and obscure scientific observation with little funding to do no more than extrapolate from the sparse data available (measuring world levels of anything is almost impossible with any amount of resources, most fill in the gaps with equations).

It is now 25 years later, none of the expected warming took place, peaked in around 1998 and has now pretty well settled. It has been observed and backpedalled now by a number of top universities, and even Fritz Varenholt who was a lead author for the UN IPCC, who has been the first working non-independent expert to break from the pack and write an entire piece claiming the expectations from the 80s and 90s were now obsolete and no longer an issue. While not going that far, we now have the creator himself stating very directly:

A paper published today by James Hansen has some startling admissions, including:

the effect [forcing] of man-made greenhouse gas emissions has fallen below IPCC projections, despite an increase in man-made CO2 emissions exceeding IPCC projections

the growth rate of the greenhouse gas forcing has "remained below the peak values reached in the 1970s and early 1980s, has been relatively stable for about 20 years, and is falling below IPCC (2001) scenarios (figure 5)."

the airborne fraction of CO2 [the ratio of observed atmospheric CO2 increase to fossil fuel CO2 emissions] has decreased over the past 50 years [figure 3], especially after the year 2000

Hansen believes the explanation for this conundrum is CO2 fertilization of the biosphere from "the surge of fossil fuel use, mainly coal."

"the surge of fossil fuel emissions, especially from coal burning, along with the increasing atmospheric CO2 level is 'fertilizing' the biosphere, and thus limiting the growth of atmospheric CO2."

"the rate of global warming seems to be less this decade than it has been during the prior quarter century"


Bearing in mind the 25 year tirade on the threats of future warming, this is a turnround of epic proportions. There is literally (if that is the criterion) no higher authority on the planet on global warming as James Hansen. He started this on his own, set the system in motion, and spent the next 25 years keeping it going. But you can't fly in the face of reality, and in 2013 there is a totally different reaction by the temperature to what they expected, and without his acknowledgment now he would clearly have started looking out of touch with reality and would not want to be the last man standing.

Here it is

Anyone closely familiar with the personnel involved will probably think this is a hoax. Remember April 1st (no, it's next week) last year, and previously, there were always the odd hoax headline about Hansen saying there was no more global warming and he apologised for all the unnecessary trouble he had caused around the world as a result. And then today it happened on one of the other 364 days, yes, it is real, and there is no person higher to say otherwise. He is the man standing at the peak of the pyramid alone, that is where the buck of global warming has stopped.

Edit, I am both truly amazed and impressed, this has actually just been reported by a major outlet, The Economist. That both allows many more people to know it and in a way endorses it as an important piece of news as till now only one paper I know of reported a single opposite scientific opinion from an actual official source.


Edited by satguru (Wed Mar 27 2013 07:02 PM)
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#974668 - Wed Mar 27 2013 08:08 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
Worth it's own entry. Check out this hockey stick. It follows the IPCC's one closely.

Graph here

Except it's the solar activity record (something the UN claim has barely any effect on the temperature).
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#975076 - Fri Mar 29 2013 05:25 PM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
I don't think I saw this last year but even if I'd posted it then it's the first time a working IPCC member (as opposed to retirees or independent researchers) has turned his back on global warming. He has summarised the entire position in around a single page, and at that level of authority and knowledge would find it fairly hard to question as I'd been saying everything myself for years beforehand for one.

Fritz Vahrenholt, IPCC author

"Rather than being largely settled, there are more and more open climate questions which need to be addressed in an impartial and open-minded way."

That pretty well sums up his position, and explained covering every single aspect why. The governments and activists worldwide need to read this to make a genuine assessment of the position they will never see elsewhere unless from outside the existing climate community.
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
#976057 - Thu Apr 04 2013 11:41 AM Re: Alaskan ice ignores global warming [Re: satguru]
satguru Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Feb 17 2000
Posts: 6498
Loc: Kingsbury London UK           
Ex-professor tells senators climate data manipulated

Professor Don Easterbrook

"A retired Western Washington University professor testified to a Republican-controlled state Senate committee Tuesday that climate change stopped in 1998 and that human-caused greenhouse gases are not responsible for fluctuations in the Earth's temperatures or melting polar ice caps."

I can't see this happening in Britain or many other countries.
_________________________
"The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."

UN IPCC

Top
Page 10 of 11 < 1 2 ... 8 9 10 11 >

Moderator:  bloomsby