How the GW myth is perpetuated


Walter
#631
Rex Murphy

Toronto is having a Newfoundland summer.
Now I don't mean, even though it would be a wonderful idea, that there are bake-apple festivals at Bloor and Yonge. Or that the Bay Street stockbrokers are out jigging codfish on “food fish” weekends. Though that, too, would be an encouraging, even edifying, spectacle.
No, what I mean is that, for most of July, temperatures in the Ontario capital and beyond are in that sweet temperate zone of the low 20s, and there seem to be as many grey and rainy days as sunny ones. With a great heave of homesickness, I've even seen fog obscuring the shoreline of Lake Ontario and the nether parts of the metropolis itself. I know it's odd, but when I see the Royal York hotel clouded by mist, I immediately think of Twillingate.
For Toronto, a Newfoundland summer in 2009 is a godsend. Because as all of Canada and a good portion of the world knows, this city is caught in the turmoil of a garbage strike. Its citizens are doing the best they can with the ever-growing heaps of garbage, but it's been a hard go.
For a city that so much prides itself on its environmental credentials - Toronto professes to be green with evangelical fervour - it really hurts to be seen as a giant litter box. Nightly news shots of rats making a buffet of the mountains of mess are a blow to civic pride, as well as a health hazard. And the smell: As Maclean's magazine put it so delicately on its recent cover, Toronto Stinks.
Which is one reason why having a Newfoundland summer in Toronto this year has been such a great piece of luck. The strike has been - just - bearable because the city has been cool, grey and rainy. Just like home.
I find it curious, though, that the city is so ambivalent in its response to this cooler-than-normal summer. Curious because it's very obvious that, if the weather were hotter, what now “stinks” would be rancid, what is barely tolerable would be utterly unendurable. Yet, night after night on most of the city's TV news shows, you hear in the faux hearty chatter that is now obligatory in the weather segment great moaning and whining about “where has our summer gone?”
Personally, I don't know what it is they're yearning for. More days of blistering mid-30-degree saunas during a garbage strike? Surely not. But gurgle on they do, hoping or promising for hotter days yet to come.
What we do not hear from them, from any one of them, is the slightest indication of puzzlement over how or why so suddenly, in this age of the greatest emergency our planet has ever faced - global warming - things have gotten cool. Not a furrowed brow among the lot over the consideration that, contrary to the visions of Al Gore and David Suzuki or NASA's own anti-global warming Nostradamus, James Hansen, the great trend line of an ever-warming world is being contradicted nightly in their own forecasts.
I do recall, however, when, during the few periods Toronto was experiencing higher-than-normal temperatures - there was that period, remember, almost coincident with Stéphane Dion's election as federal Liberal leader, when Ontario warmed up more than usual - no weathercast was complete without some reference to global warming. That the then current conditions were “proof” or “another sign” or an “indication” that global warming was upon us. When every weathercast was incomplete without some pointed reference to how “unusual” such weather was.
I bring this up merely to make a single point. Not that these studio meteorologists were making the elementary mistake of confounding weather with climate, for this is a distinction familiar now even to kindergartners. Rather, to point out how “accepted” the vague, soft, but relentlessly propagandized theory of global warming has become. That being on the “right” side of the global warming argument is so very much the politically correct place to be. It's the “virtuous” side to be on, so naturally our supper-hour meteorologists, even if unconsciously, were eager to encourage virtue.
Now, however, Toronto in July is cool and I am waiting in vain for the lips of just one forecaster to ask how can this be. Waiting just once to hear the familiar phrase “global warming” in a sentence that even hints that the theory behind it is so much more tentative than we have been urged with such fervour to believe.
And while I'm waiting, perhaps I could recommend to people who study or report on the weather a wonderfully comprehensive and fearless book on the subject by Australian geologist Ian Plimer called Heaven and Earth: Global Warming - The Missing Science. If there are any willing to hear some truly inconvenient truths on the stampeding advocacy of global warming, Mr. Plimer's book is a collection of some of the sternest.
 
Tonington
#632
Debunking Ian Plimer’s “Heaven and Earth”

This is a collection of scientific assessments and commentaries on Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science, a book by Ian Plimer which attempts to deny that human activities are responsible for potentially dangerous climate change.
Kurt Lambeck, earth scientist and president of the Australian Academy of Science, comments on ABC Radio National’s “Ockham’s Razor” about Heaven and Earth. Audio with transcript. (Short link: Ockham's Razor - 7 June 2009 - Comments on Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science)
To give his arguments a semblance of respectability the book is replete with references. But the choice is very selective. Plimer will quote, for example, a paper that appears to support his argument, but then he does not mention that the conclusions therein have been completely refuted in subsequent papers. Elsewhere, he refers to a specific question raised in published work but does not mention that this issue has subsequently been resolved, has been incorporated in subsequent analyses, and is no longer relevant. Or he simply misquotes the work or takes it out of context. An example of this is a reference to my own in the Mediterranean where he gives quite a misleading twist to what we actually concluded.

Other examples can be identified in this section, and throughout the book. Together they point to either carelessness, to a lack of understanding of the underlying science, or to an attempt to see the world through tinted spectacles.
Climate scientist Barry Brook has a page of notes on Heaven and Earth , including links to other commentaries. (Short link: Ian Plimer – Heaven and Earth « BraveNewClimate.com )
Ian Plimer’s book is a case study in how not to be objective. Decide on your position from the outset, and then seek out all the facts that apparently support your case, and discard or ignore all of those that contravene it. He quotes a couple of thousand peer-reviewed scientific papers when mounting specific arguments. What Ian doesn’t say is that the vast majority of these authors have considered the totality of evidence on the topic of human-induced global warming and conclude that it is real and a problem.
[i]t may well be held up as an example for the future. An example of just how deluded and misrepresentative the psuedo-sceptical war against science really was in the first decade of the 21st century.
Mathematician Ian Enting has produced Ian Plimer’s ‘Heaven + Earth’—Checking the Claims, a 31-page document listing the errors and problems in Heaven and Earth. (Short link: bit.ly/entingplimer )
Overall:
• it has numerous internal inconsistencies;
• it often misrepresents the operation of the IPCC and the content of IPCC reports;
• in spite of the extensive referencing, key data are unattributed and the content of references is often mis-quoted.
Most importantly, Ian Plimer fails to establish his claim that the human influence on climate can be ignored, relative to natural variations.
Earth scientist Andrew Glikson responds with Plimer wants to talk science? OK, here goes… in Crikey (Short link: Plimer wants to talk science? OK, here goes… - Crikey )
Plimer’s book claims current global warming is a natural event consistent with climate variability through time and attributed primarily to the sun.
The book negates the well documented consistent relations between climate and carbon gases, which through the Earth’s history resulted in temperature changes in the range of several degrees C , including abrupt climate changes and related mass extinction of species .
Climate scientist David Karoly reviews Heaven and Earth (audio with transcript):
Given the errors, the non-science, and the nonsense in this book, it should be classified as science fiction in any library that wastes its funds buying it. The book can then be placed on the shelves alongside Michael Crichton’s State of Fear, another science fiction book about climate change with many footnotes. The only difference is that there are fewer scientific errors in State of Fear.
No science in Plimer’s primer by astronomer Michael Ashley in The Australian. (Short link: No science in Plimer's primer | The Australian )
Plimer has done an enormous disservice to science, and the dedicated scientists who are trying to understand climate and the influence of humans, by publishing this book. It is not “merely” atmospheric scientists that would have to be wrong for Plimer to be right. It would require a rewriting of biology, geology, physics, oceanography, astronomy and statistics. Plimer’s book deserves to languish on the shelves along with similar pseudo-science such as the writings of Immanuel Velikovsky and Erich von Daniken.
The science is missing from Ian Plimer’s “Heaven and Earth” by computer scientist and climate change commentator Tim Lambert. (Short link: The science is missing from Ian Plimer's "Heaven and Earth" : Deltoid )
He accepts any factoid that supports his conclusion and rejects any evidence that contradicts his conclusion.
A review by geologist and planetary scientist Malcolm Walter on The Science Show, ABC Radio National. Audio. (Short link: Heaven + Earth - review by Malcolm Walter - Science Show - 6 June 2009 )
He has done a disservice to science and the community at large.
Mike Pope does a nice job at Online Opinion of debunking Plimer’s central claims in Heaven, Earth and science fiction, concluding:
To avoid following the polar bear to extinction, homo sapiens would do well to reject the science fiction espoused by Plimer. That may be a bit harsh on science fiction writers whose work is often prescient, even plausible. No such claims can be made for Ian Plimer’s book.
Short link for this post: to be precise » Blog Archive » Debunking Ian Plimer’s “Heaven and Earth”
 
Walter
#633
Quote: Originally Posted by Tonington View Post

Mike Pope does a nice job at Online Opinion of debunking Plimer’s central claims in Heaven, Earth and science fiction, concluding:

To avoid following the polar bear to extinction, homo sapiens would do well to reject the science fiction espoused by Plimer. That may be a bit harsh on science fiction writers whose work is often prescient, even plausible. No such claims can be made for Ian Plimer’s book.


 
ironsides
#634
Climate change has always been involved with man's development throughout history. For example there was global warming between 800 - 1200 A.D. We cannot blame that on man. Climate change has always brought about change, and there is nothing we can do to stop it. We either adapt or become extinct.

Vikings During the Medieval Warm Period - Influence of Dramatic Climate Shifts on European Civilizations: The Rise and Fall of the Vikings and the Little Ice Age
 
AnnaG
#635
It rained a little while ago. Temperature dropped about 12 degrees. Must be that global cooling I've heard about. lol
 
JLM
#636
Quote: Originally Posted by AnnaG View Post

It rained a little while ago. Temperature dropped about 12 degrees. Must be that global cooling I've heard about. lol

Absolutely, albeit a small part of the globe and temporary as well.........
 
ironsides
#637
TUKTOYAKTUK, Northwest Territories – The Arctic Ocean has given up tens of thousands more square miles (square kilometers) of ice in a relentless summer of melt, with scientists watching through satellite eyes for a possible record low polar ice cap.

Vast expanses of Arctic ice melt in summer heat - Yahoo! News
 
AnnaG
#638
Quote: Originally Posted by ironsides View Post

TUKTOYAKTUK, Northwest Territories – The Arctic Ocean has given up tens of thousands more square miles (square kilometers) of ice in a relentless summer of melt, with scientists watching through satellite eyes for a possible record low polar ice cap.

Vast expanses of Arctic ice melt in summer heat - Yahoo! News

Maybe sometime, north of 60 and in the Antartic may be the only habitable places on the planet to live. The rest will be just too hot or humid or both.
 
Walter
#639
Nothing to see here; move along. We've got more ice than last year.

 
Tonington
#640
Quote: Originally Posted by Some hypothetical economist in August 2008 View Post

Nothing to see here; move along. We've got more value than last year.

Now, wouldn't that sound stupid knowing what we know now? I guess some people do all their thinking in straight lines, though. Gotta feel sorry for the ole sods.
 
AnnaG
#641
Perhaps the area increased but the depth decreased. NASA reveals dramatic thinning of Arctic sea ice

This is interesting.
Sea Ice : Weather Underground
 
petros
#642
Quote:

Maybe sometime, north of 60 and in the Antartic may be the only habitable places on the planet to live. The rest will be just too hot or humid or both.

Rain used to come to the prairiesin the summer from the west as violent thunderstorms now it's coming from the north and packs no punch. I remember hearing this pattern shift being predicted 20 years ago and now here it is raining on the prairies from the tundra melting and drying.

So if it's not raining in BC and the prairies are getting water from the north, then where is the Pacific moisture going?
 
ironsides
#643
Debbie Stabenow a Democrat Senator from Michigan, and she's oh-so-concerned about (gasp!) global warming. (I don't have to tell you that she is a Democrat, do I?) Stabenow is so special that she can actually feel the global warming when she's flying! Yup! She's that good!
 
AnnaG
#644
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Rain used to come to the prairiesin the summer from the west as violent thunderstorms now it's coming from the north and packs no punch. I remember hearing this pattern shift being predicted 20 years ago and now here it is raining on the prairies from the tundra melting and drying.

So if it's not raining in BC and the prairies are getting water from the north, then where is the Pacific moisture going?

We get rain from the coast. It's the Okanagan that needs it, though.
 
Stretch
#645
Greenpeace Leader Admits Organization Put Out Fake Global Warming Data

Tags: SCIENCE/HEALTH/CLIMATE/NATURE
Greenpeace leader Gerd Leipold has been forced to admit that his organization issued misleading and exaggerated information when it claimed that Arctic ice would disappear completely by 2030, in a crushing blow for the man-made global warming movement.
In an interview with the BBC’s Stephen Sackur on the “Hardtalk” program, Leipold initially attempted to evade the question but was ultimately forced to admit that Greenpeace had made a “mistake” when it said Arctic ice would disappear completely in 20 years.
Alex Jones’ Prison Planet.com » Greenpeace Leader Admits Organization Put Out Fake Global Warming Data
 
TenPenny
#646
Quote: Originally Posted by Stretch View Post

Greenpeace leader Gerd Leipold has been forced to admit that his organization issued misleading and exaggerated information when it claimed that Arctic ice would disappear completely by 2030, in a crushing blow for the man-made global warming movement.

Hardly a 'crushing blow', since any rational person on either side of the debate doesn't believe anythign Greenpeace says anyway.
 
Tonington
#647
And coal lobbyists hire a PR firm to send out forged letters to Senators. Delivering a crushing blow to deniers everywhere. Not really though. You would need to be a rational person to find that embarrassing enough to smarten up. But that doesn't describe the ACCCE, who still are trying to get away with it.

LMAO
 
Tonington
#648
And while we're on the topic of astroturf:

Houston’s Energy Citizens Company Picnic « TexasVox: The Voice of Public Citizen in Texas
 
Walter
#649
UN Climate Report Confuses Arctic and Antarctic

Harold Ambler on October 6, 2009
Things get stranger and stranger with the United Nations’ climate change science compendium published two weeks back.
First , it was learned that the graph indicating temperature for the past 1,000 years had been taken from Wikipedia, where it had been deposited by a non-climatologist. Now, it comes to light that the report features a photograph purporting to show Arctic icebergs melting, when the actual image is of Antarctica.
As I looked through the updated report yesterday, in which the Wikipedia graph has been removed, I noticed that an image looked to have been misidentified. Fortunately for me, the UN had purchased the image on Shutterstock.com , where about an hour’s worth of sleuthing revealed that indeed this was not a picture from the top of the world, but rather from the bottom.
Some will say that it doesn’t matter. I think it does. The United Nations claims to be the steward of the best science on the planet. Wouldn’t one hope that it would have staff capable of differentiating between Antarctica and the Arctic? Of course, global warming alarmists, including those employed at the United Nations, have been using both polar ice caps’ supposed melt as evidence of runaway global warming for years now. Meanwhile, though, Antarctic sea ice has continued to increase in extent throughout the satellite era, and temperatures at the South Pole have slowly fallen .
Nonetheless, the fear-mongers in the media and at the United Nations strive to frighten the credulous into believing that Earth’s southernmost continent is on the verge of catastrophic melt. As for the Arctic misrepresented by the UN’s photograph, how many of the report’s editors even know that sea ice increased in 2009 in the Arctic for the second year in a row? At the United Nations Environment Program, the answer is evidently: none. A map with a list of “climate anomalies” from the last year indicates that 2009 was the second most significant melt in the Arctic. In fact, it was the third lowest melt and may very well represent a turnaround. Only time will tell. Even The New York Times has an article today addressing the seeming good news.
 
ironsides
#650
A noted geologist who coauthored the New York Times bestseller Sugar B usters has turned his attention to convincing Congress that carbon dioxide emisions are good for the Earth and don't cause global warming. Leighton Steward is on Capitol Hill this week armed with studies and his book Fire, Ice and Paradise in a bid to show senators working on the energy bill that the carbon dioxide cap-and-trade scheme could actually hurt the environment

by reducing CO2 levels.
"I'm trying to kill the whole thing," he says. "We are tilting at windmills." He is meeting with several GOP lawmakers and has plans to meet with some Democrats later this week.
Much of the global warming debate has focused on reducing CO2 emissions because it is thought that the greenhouse gas produced mostly from fossil fuels is warming the planet. But Steward, who once believed CO2 caused global warming, is trying to fight that with a mountain of studies and scientific evidence that suggest CO2 is not the cause for warming. What's more, he says CO2 levels are so low that more, not less, is needed to sustain and expand plant growth.


Scientist: Carbon Dioxide Doesn't Cause Global Warming - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)


So much for what we should be believing in. Make any living changes you want in your life because you want to, not because you will effect anything, the Earth can still support you. The whole idea of 'Global Warming" is becoming like a religion, believe in it or not.
 
Tonington
#651
What a moron. I guess he's fine with dead oceans...

And newsflash for the geologist, he may want to check out plant science. Plenty of agrologists are studying future scenarios, and when more CO2 is in the air, with higher temperatures and less moisture, (as projected for much of the world's currently arable croplands) plant growth is stunted. It's not nearly as simple as he figures the Senators and American people are.
 
ironsides
#652
The dead oceans are the scary part, climates shift, deserts where lush land used to be. N. America will look like the dry parts of Australia. Not a nice scenario.
 
AnnaG
#653
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

Hardly a 'crushing blow', since any rational person on either side of the debate doesn't believe anythign Greenpeace says anyway.

Well, to some people if you don't agree with them, you're an extremist. lol
 
AnnaG
#654
Funny, I thought higher temps meant more moisture in the air and plants would grow like crazy.
 
Tonington
#655
Quote: Originally Posted by AnnaG View Post

Funny, I thought higher temps meant more moisture in the air and plants would grow like crazy.

Higher temperatures means increased evaporation, doesn't necessarily mean more moisture in the air, just how much the air can hold. The soil becomes dry and compacted. What you end up with is more desert, and the rainfall events tend to be larger. With compacted soil, that doesn't do much for vegetation, and actually means the chances of severe floods increase.

It means better conditions for some areas, for frontier regions. Canada and Russia are probably going to do quite well.
 
AnnaG
#656
Quote: Originally Posted by Tonington View Post

Higher temperatures means increased evaporation, doesn't necessarily mean more moisture in the air, just how much the air can hold. The soil becomes dry and compacted. What you end up with is more desert, and the rainfall events tend to be larger. With compacted soil, that doesn't do much for vegetation, and actually means the chances of severe floods increase.

It means better conditions for some areas, for frontier regions. Canada and Russia are probably going to do quite well.

I have to get my mind around this.
 
Walter
#657
PM warns of climate 'catastrophe'

The UK faces a "catastrophe" of floods, droughts and killer heatwaves if world leaders fail to agree a deal on climate change, the prime minister has warned.
Gordon Brown said negotiators had 50 days to save the world from global warming and break the "impasse".
He told the Major Economies Forum in London, which brings together 17 of the world's biggest greenhouse gas-emitting countries, there was "no plan B".
World delegations meet in Copenhagen in December for talks on a new treaty.
'Rising wave' The United Nations (UN) summit will aim to establish a deal to replace the 1997 Kyoto treaty as its targets for reducing emissions only apply to a small number of countries and expire in 2012.

Once the damage from unchecked emissions growth is done, no retrospective global agreement, in some future period, can undo that choice
Gordon Brown


Mr Brown warned that negotiators were not reaching agreement quickly enough and said it was a "profound moment" for the world involving "momentous choice".
"In Britain we face the prospect of more frequent droughts and a rising wave of floods," he told delegates.
"The extraordinary summer heatwave of 2003 in Europe resulted in over 35,000 extra deaths.
Grim warning "On current trends, such an event could become quite routine in Britain in just a few decades' time. And within the lifetime of our children and grandchildren the intense temperatures of 2003 could become the average temperature experienced throughout much of Europe."

ANALYSIS
Richard Black, BBC News
During his term as chancellor, environmental groups often accused Gordon Brown of not paying enough attention to climate change, and the Treasury of blocking "green" policies. He was sometimes compared unfavourably to Tony Blair.
However, Mr Brown promoted the inclusion of developing countries in climate finance during the UK's term as G7 president in 2005. And this year, his involvement has become much more overt.
He was the first head of government to commit to attending December's UN summit in Copenhagen; and his recent call to establish a $100bn (£61bn) per year fund for climate adaptation is widely seen as giving impetus to those negotiations. Whether current scientific understanding warrants his warning of "catastrophe" for the UK if greenhouse gas levels rise unchecked is perhaps open to question. A recent report by Kofi Annan's Global Humanitarian Forum found the UK was one of 12 nations least likely to be affected by climate impacts.


The costs of failing to tackle the issue would be greater than the impact of both world wars and the Great Depression combined, the prime minister said.
The world would face more conflict fuelled by climate-induced migration if a deal was not agreed, he added.
He told the forum, on the second day of talks in the capital, that by 2080 an extra 1.8 billion people - a quarter of the world's current population - could lack sufficient water.
Mr Brown said: "If we do not reach a deal at this time, let us be in no doubt: once the damage from unchecked emissions growth is done, no retrospective global agreement, in some future period, can undo that choice.
"So we should never allow ourselves to lose sight of the catastrophe we face if present warming trends continue."
Agreement at Copenhagen "is possible", he concluded.
"But we must frankly face the plain fact that our negotiators are not getting to agreement quickly enough. So I believe that leaders must engage directly to break the impasse."
In recent days there have been a number of warnings that progress is stalling.
Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, told Newsweek magazine "the prospects that states will actually agree to anything in Copenhagen are starting to look worse and worse".
The Major Economies Forum is not part of the formal UN process and so firm commitments are unlikely to come from the meeting. It is seen instead as a gathering where countries can explore options and positions in a less pressured environment.
BBC News

What a twit. No wonder his party will be voted out next election with piffle like this dribbling from his gob.
 
Kakato
#658
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Rain used to come to the prairiesin the summer from the west as violent thunderstorms now it's coming from the north and packs no punch. I remember hearing this pattern shift being predicted 20 years ago and now here it is raining on the prairies from the tundra melting and drying.

So if it's not raining in BC and the prairies are getting water from the north, then where is the Pacific moisture going?

It would take many years for the permafrost to melt,the tundra drys up every summer but its such a good insulator that allmost everything under it stays frozen.Thats one of the reasons spring breakup only lasts a week northwest of hudsons bay,the water cant go into the ground and when it hits the lakes that ice also melts very quickly.

As long as they keep getting the 24 hours of darkness each winter I dont think we have to worry too much about the arctic becoming a tropical paradise.
 
petros
#659
Quote: Originally Posted by Kakato View Post

It would take many years for the permafrost to melt,the tundra drys up every summer but its such a good insulator that allmost everything under it stays frozen.Thats one of the reasons spring breakup only lasts a week northwest of hudsons bay,the water cant go into the ground and when it hits the lakes that ice also melts very quickly.

As long as they keep getting the 24 hours of darkness each winter I dont think we have to worry too much about the arctic becoming a tropical paradise.

Come drill on a lake just past the tree line with me sometime. 20 years ago we rarely sniffed a hole for methane, these days you can toss a match in and make coffee. The summer time off gassing of Tundra is up from the longer hotter warm streches...waaaaaay up.
 
petros
#660
You like You Tube don't you?

YouTube - Burning Methane from Frozen Lake
 

Similar Threads

42
History or Myth
by darkbeaver | Aug 2nd, 2009
0
The Shortage Myth
by darkbeaver | Dec 5th, 2007
35
How the Myth of Jesus came about
by Dreadful Nonsense | Oct 27th, 2007
17
The Myth of Zarqawi
by vista | Oct 24th, 2004