New Study Shows that Global Warming would DECREASE Tropical Systems
Once again, HotAir.com is doing the reporting that most of the U.S. media won’t. It’s yet another story shooting big holes in the U.N.’s 2007 IPCC report and the claims made by Al Gore. The latest is a new study done by someone who left the his post at the IPCC because he was not happy with the politicization of the science being done there. Chris Landsea is a lead scientist at the American government’s National Hurricane Center. He co-authored the peer reviewed report that says:
the most likely impact of global warming will be to decrease the frequency of tropical storms, by up to 34% by 2100.
You can read more about it in the U.K. Times Online.
Snowman Mike with a Snowicane Update
EPA Promises to Proceed with “Cap & Trade” Type Regulation
There is so much here, and much of it is upsetting.
The good news is, Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma is fighting the administration at every turn. Today in a Senate hearing, Senator Inhofe plans on exposing the scandals surrounding the IPCC again, even calling for criminal investigations. Ed Morrissey of HotAir.com (CPACs Blogger of the Year!) has an exclusive interview with Senator Inhofe that is must see internet “TV.”
However, one part of Ed’s written intro has me concerned (emphasis mine):
I should add that just before our interview last night, two administrators from the EPA arrived at Inhofe’s Senate office just before me. Inhofe later told me that the pair informed him that they wanted to proceed full steam ahead with their endangerment finding and the enforcement efforts they had planned. Inhofe expressed surprise that the EPA hadn’t reconsidered its position after the exposure of the IPCC’s incompetence and potential fraud — and he plans to demand answers from Jackson today.
Wow! The nerve of some administrations. Senator Inhofe talks about this in part two of Ed’s interview. This administration is still planning on moving ahead with Cap & Trade regulation without the consent of Congress or the American people! Go to about 1:15 in of the part 2 interview for the details. Keep listening through the 3 minute mark as Senator Inhofe explains why he thinks the U.N. is looking for a source of funding via Cap & Trade and how the administration is still planning an end around.
Listen to the whole thing. You’ll be glad you did.
Meanwhile, Pajamas Media had an excellent article yesterday on how Climategate is big news everywhere in the world except in the U.S.
Snowman Mike on England’s COLD Winter
Here’s the article Snowman Mike was talking about. WTG AccuWeather!
Epic Snow Means it’s Warming up! or Something
Al Gore's New Home?
So say the global warming believers, and some climate scientists. Of course weather isn’t climate, but weather over time is. Global warming scoffers (OK, I’m guilty) and other climate scientists point out that more snow now could indeed mean that it’s colder and getting colder, not warmer.
The New York Times has a story this morning that sort of scratches the surface of the discussion swirling around the record snow for the mid-Atlantic. Was more snow predicted by the climate models? Some are saying yes:
Jeff Masters, a meteorologist who writes on the Weather Underground blog, said that the recent snows do not, by themselves, demonstrate anything about the long-term trajectory of the planet. Climate is, by definition, a measure of decades and centuries, not months or years.
But Dr. Masters also said that government and academic studies had consistently predicted an increasing frequency of just these kinds of record-setting storms because warmer air carries more moisture.
They also point out that the Winter Olympics is fixin’ ta start with not much snow in Vancouver, BC.
Most climate scientists respond that the ferocious storms are consistent with forecasts that a heating planet will produce more frequent and more intense weather events.
But some independent climate experts say the blizzards in the Northeast no more prove that the planet is cooling than the lack of snow in Vancouver or the downpours in Southern California prove that it is warming.
However, at least one very prominent global warming advocating climate scientist is quoted as saying that snow would be a rare and exciting event in a few years. He said that 9 years ago!
One more point from today’s article (emphasis mine):
A federal government report issued last year, intended to be the authoritative statement of known climate trends in the United States, pointed to the likelihood of more frequent snowstorms in the Northeast and less frequent snow in the South and Southeast as a result of long-term temperature and precipitation patterns….
Um, its not only record snow this year in the mid-Atlantic, but it’s snowing again for the 3rd time this season in Dallas, Texas. True, one year doesn’t not a cooler planet make, but the planet has been coming off of it’s high’s for the last 7 to 9 years.
This January’s weather pattern in the Northern Hemisphere almost mirrored the ’70′s when many of the same scientists were warning of the coming ice age. AccuWeather also NAILED this Winter’s forecast (released in October) including heavy mountain snow in Arizona (we’ve been hammered), snow in the south (yep), heavy mid-Atlantic snow (you think?), AND even the lack of snow in Vancouver, B.C. for the Olympics.
Depending on who you believe, we are either headed for more warming after this brief cooling pause, or we are still warming and the record piles of snow support that, or it’s getting colder and that is the trend for the next 30 years or so. Since most civilizations do better when it’s warm, better hope it’s not the latter. If it is, we can expect more mocking from folks like me and Senator Inhofe.
As an illustration of their point of view, the family of Senator James M. Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, a leading climate skeptic in Congress, built a six-foot-tall igloo on Capitol Hill and put a cardboard sign on top that read “Al Gore’s New Home.”
The extreme weather, Mr. Inhofe said by e-mail, reinforced doubts about scientists’ conclusion that global warming was “unequivocal” and most likely caused by human activity.
Time to buy a big coat in case Al Gore is wrong. You can’t build bigger glaciers without more snow. Maybe more snowstorms is natures way of bringing us from the brink of devastatingly warm days at the beach and catastrophic meadows and lilies where glaciers once scrapped the ground clean of all life. Whew, that was a close one!
Funny Video, “Let it Snow – Global Warming Farce”
Rudolph Goes Green
A funny Christmas barb from Political Cartoons.com:
Otherwise Al wouldn't let poor Roudolph play in any global government games
Melting Snowcap on Kilimanjaro Not Caused by Man
Mt. Kilimanjaro courtesy BonCherry.com
Just another piece of the puzzle that points to natural variation and changes in solar radiation causing warming and cooling over time on planet Earth. Dutch researchers have concluded that:
“The melting and freezing of moisture on top of Kilimanjaro appears to be part of “a natural process of dry and wet periods.” The present melting is not the result of “environmental damage caused by man.”
Al Gore has repeatedly pointed to the melting ice cap of Mt. Kilimanjaro as evidence of man-made global warming. Apparently it’s just the opposite. Completely normal. So why do we need to tax our economy into oblivion again through Cap & Trade and/or the Copenhagen Climate Treaty???
Climategate: Hackers Expose Prominant Scientists Efforts to Push Global Warming Agenda?
No Worries!
Hackers. I don’t agree with their tactics. Hacking is wrong. However, it may be that an illegal act may blow the global warming debate even wider open. Stolen e-mails exposing a fraud being perpetrated on the world in the name of science?! It appears to be true. If these alleged e-mails are true, then there were scientists who were lying, manipulating data, excluding data and attempting to shut down dissent in order to ‘prove’ their theory of man-made global warming.
What happened? Jame Delingpole explains in a piece published at Telegraph.co.uk:
The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That) When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”.
Delingpole goes on to describe in great detail, detail allegedly provided by the stolen e-mails, how these prominent scientists were basically lying about the true nature of global climate change. Here are a few e-mail snippets cited in the story:
Manipulation of evidence:
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.
Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.
Suppression of evidence:
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):
……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back….
And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.
“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”
“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !”
Amazing ain’t it?! Let’s see if this gets covered tonight on ABC, CBS, NBC or even CNN. The conclusion? I’m afraid I have to agree with Delingpole. The debate isn’t over:
Unfortunately, we’ve a long, long way to go before the public mood (and scientific truth) is reflected by our policy makers. There are too many vested interests in AGW, with far too much to lose either in terms of reputation or money, for this to end without a bitter fight.
But if the Hadley CRU scandal is true,it’s a blow to the AGW lobby’s credibility which is never likely to recover.
UPDATE: HotAir.com has quite a discussion going on about this
30,000 Scientists Want to Sue Al Gore
John Coleman, the Founder of the Weather Channel and currently a Meteorologist in San Diego and 29,999 other scientsists want a debate on so-called “Global Warming,” or “Climate Change.” He appeared on Fox News’ Red Eye to explain why:
