Death knell for AGW
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
I don't know... maybe because I was all excited about going to the beach this morning saw the snow still on the ground. There is supposed to be this Global Warming thing whereas the ocean will be right up to my doorstep.
In 12 more weeks global warming will melt the frozen ocean at my door and cause global warming puddles in the streets, followed by global warming mud and then global warming drying of said global warming mud into global warming dirt which will get global warming rained on now and again until it the global warming ocean falls as snow on my doorstep yet again.
via Zip
Washington: 200 “Global Warming” Protesters Greeted With Freezing Weather And Snow As They Descend On Capitol…
Assploding irony stalks these people like a ninja.
Via Bellingham Herald:
Washington: 200 “Global Warming” Protesters Greeted With Freezing Weather And Snow As They Descend On Capitol…
Assploding irony stalks these people like a ninja.
Via Bellingham Herald:
Freezing weather with light snow flurries greeted about 200 climate activists gathered on the steps of the state Capitol noon Monday to demand the state Legislature get serious about climate change.
The climate rally unfolded four hours after the highest predicted tide of 2013 in Budd Inlet. Climate activists draw attention to the winter high tides, calling them a precursor of a future shoreline under siege from sea-level rise.
The irony of Monday’s cold weather compared to a global climate that is heating due to a carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere was not lost on the crowd, or some of the speakers.
“Climate and weather are two different things,” Olympia-area environmentalist Paul Pickett was quick to remind the bundled-up crowd. Climate is long term and weather is what happens daily, he said.
Urgency embroidered with anger and despair permeated the so-called Climate Crisis Rally timed to the first day of the 2013 legislative session.
Urgency because the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continue to build: Roughly two-thirds of the carbon dioxide spewed into the atmosphere the past 100 years is still there. The rest is in the ocean, Pickett said.
Keep reading…
:lol:
The climate rally unfolded four hours after the highest predicted tide of 2013 in Budd Inlet. Climate activists draw attention to the winter high tides, calling them a precursor of a future shoreline under siege from sea-level rise.
The irony of Monday’s cold weather compared to a global climate that is heating due to a carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere was not lost on the crowd, or some of the speakers.
“Climate and weather are two different things,” Olympia-area environmentalist Paul Pickett was quick to remind the bundled-up crowd. Climate is long term and weather is what happens daily, he said.
Urgency embroidered with anger and despair permeated the so-called Climate Crisis Rally timed to the first day of the 2013 legislative session.
Urgency because the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continue to build: Roughly two-thirds of the carbon dioxide spewed into the atmosphere the past 100 years is still there. The rest is in the ocean, Pickett said.
Keep reading…
:lol:
The five-year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slow down in the growth rate of net climate forcing. - James Hansen et al
Jim Hansen et al. have written a remarkable document titled Global Temperature Update Through 2012.
Excerpts:
An update through 2012 of our global analysis reveals 2012 as having practically the same temperature as 2011, significantly lower than the maximum reached in 2010. These short-term global fluctuations are associated principally with natural oscillations of tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures summarized in the Nino index in the lower part of the figure. 2012 is nominally the 9th warmest year, but it is indistinguishable in rank with several other years, as shown by the error estimate for comparing nearby years. Note that the 10 warmest years in the record all occurred since 1998.
The current stand-still of the 5-year running mean global temperature may be largely a consequence of the facr that the first half of the past 10 years had predominantly El Nino conditions, and the second half had predominantly La Nina conditions.
The approximate stand-still of global temperature during 1940-1975 is generally attributed to an approximate balance of aerosol cooling and greenhouse gas warming during a period of rapid growth of fossil fuel use with little control on particulate air pollution, but quantitative interpretation has been impossible because of the absence of adequate aerosol measurements.
Climate change expectations. The continuing planetary imbalance and the rapid increase of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel assure that global warming will continue on decadal time scales. Moreover, our interpretation of the larger role of unforced variability in temperature change of the past decade suggests that global temperature will rise significantly in the next few years as the tropics moves inevitably to the next El Nino phase.
JC comments: Perhaps ‘standstill’ is a euphemism for ‘pause’, but recall all the flack that David Rose received a few months ago for writing about the ‘pause’. It is good to see Hansen paying more attention to unforced variability.
However Hansen’s simplistic reasoning about what can be expected in the next decade is, well, simplistic. GWPF reports on the latest decadal simulation from the UKMO, which predicts basically no warming for the next 5 years. Should we believe the UKMO model prediction? Well, I have more confidence in the UKMO prediction than in Hansen’s back of the envelope reasoning.
JC’s ‘forecast’ for the next 5 years: It looks like the AMO may have peaked, and we remain in the cool phase of the PDO with a predominance of La Nina events expected (unlikely to see a return to do El Nino dominance in the next decade). I predict we will see continuation of the ‘standstill’ in global average temperature for the next decade, with solar playing a role in this as well.
Hansen on the ‘standstill’ | Climate Etc.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2013/20130115_Temperature2012.pdf
Jim Hansen et al. have written a remarkable document titled Global Temperature Update Through 2012.
Excerpts:
An update through 2012 of our global analysis reveals 2012 as having practically the same temperature as 2011, significantly lower than the maximum reached in 2010. These short-term global fluctuations are associated principally with natural oscillations of tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures summarized in the Nino index in the lower part of the figure. 2012 is nominally the 9th warmest year, but it is indistinguishable in rank with several other years, as shown by the error estimate for comparing nearby years. Note that the 10 warmest years in the record all occurred since 1998.
The current stand-still of the 5-year running mean global temperature may be largely a consequence of the facr that the first half of the past 10 years had predominantly El Nino conditions, and the second half had predominantly La Nina conditions.
The approximate stand-still of global temperature during 1940-1975 is generally attributed to an approximate balance of aerosol cooling and greenhouse gas warming during a period of rapid growth of fossil fuel use with little control on particulate air pollution, but quantitative interpretation has been impossible because of the absence of adequate aerosol measurements.
Climate change expectations. The continuing planetary imbalance and the rapid increase of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel assure that global warming will continue on decadal time scales. Moreover, our interpretation of the larger role of unforced variability in temperature change of the past decade suggests that global temperature will rise significantly in the next few years as the tropics moves inevitably to the next El Nino phase.
JC comments: Perhaps ‘standstill’ is a euphemism for ‘pause’, but recall all the flack that David Rose received a few months ago for writing about the ‘pause’. It is good to see Hansen paying more attention to unforced variability.
However Hansen’s simplistic reasoning about what can be expected in the next decade is, well, simplistic. GWPF reports on the latest decadal simulation from the UKMO, which predicts basically no warming for the next 5 years. Should we believe the UKMO model prediction? Well, I have more confidence in the UKMO prediction than in Hansen’s back of the envelope reasoning.
JC’s ‘forecast’ for the next 5 years: It looks like the AMO may have peaked, and we remain in the cool phase of the PDO with a predominance of La Nina events expected (unlikely to see a return to do El Nino dominance in the next decade). I predict we will see continuation of the ‘standstill’ in global average temperature for the next decade, with solar playing a role in this as well.
Hansen on the ‘standstill’ | Climate Etc.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2013/20130115_Temperature2012.pdf
I've seen the AGW industry putting out co-ordinated news releases... in the midst of a cold winter.. about this being... the 10th hottest year on record.. however they came up with that (the news media never questions the figures).. or that Australia is having a hot summer (big surprise). They save their most breathless hysteria and fear mongering for the summer however.. timed to correspond with a heat wave.
It's pretty pathetic.. you have to be a damn fool to believe this after the litany of lies and unrealized predictions in their past.
It's pretty pathetic.. you have to be a damn fool to believe this after the litany of lies and unrealized predictions in their past.
via Zip
You’d think one of the World’s most prominent global warming alarmists admitting there has been no global warming over the last decade would be newsworthy, and you’d be wrong.
James Hansen (NASA) Admits Global Temperature Standstill Is Real
The GWPF has been right all along. In a new report Hansen, Sato and Ruedy (2013) acknowledge the existence of a standstill in global temperature lasting a decade. This is a welcome contribution to the study of global temperature. When others reached the same conclusion they have been ridiculed; so this admission should provide some pause for reflection by those who have attacked the very idea of a recent temperature standstill, often without understanding the data, focusing on who was making the argument and their alleged non-scientific motives. The bottom line is that the recent global temperature standstill is a real event. David Whitehouse, The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 17 January 2013
The five-year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slow down in the growth rate of net climate forcing. --James Hansen et al., 15 January 2013
James Hansen (NASA) Admits Global Temperature Standstill Is Real
You’d think one of the World’s most prominent global warming alarmists admitting there has been no global warming over the last decade would be newsworthy, and you’d be wrong.
James Hansen (NASA) Admits Global Temperature Standstill Is Real
The GWPF has been right all along. In a new report Hansen, Sato and Ruedy (2013) acknowledge the existence of a standstill in global temperature lasting a decade. This is a welcome contribution to the study of global temperature. When others reached the same conclusion they have been ridiculed; so this admission should provide some pause for reflection by those who have attacked the very idea of a recent temperature standstill, often without understanding the data, focusing on who was making the argument and their alleged non-scientific motives. The bottom line is that the recent global temperature standstill is a real event. David Whitehouse, The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 17 January 2013
The five-year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slow down in the growth rate of net climate forcing. --James Hansen et al., 15 January 2013
James Hansen (NASA) Admits Global Temperature Standstill Is Real
via sda:
The Sound Of Settled Science
Video Lecture: Solar vs. Anthropogenic--Better Understanding of 20th Century Climate Change
Prof Dr Nir Shaviv - YouTube
Video Lecture: Solar vs. Anthropogenic
The Sound Of Settled Science
Video Lecture: Solar vs. Anthropogenic--Better Understanding of 20th Century Climate Change
Prof Dr Nir Shaviv - YouTube
Video Lecture: Solar vs. Anthropogenic
via sda
The Gore Effect
Now is the time at SDA when we juxtapose!
January 2nd, 2013 - Al Gore pockets $100 million in oil money.
January 23, 2013 - US sets 662 all-time low temperature records over past 22 days
The Gore Effect
Now is the time at SDA when we juxtapose!
January 2nd, 2013 - Al Gore pockets $100 million in oil money.
January 23, 2013 - US sets 662 all-time low temperature records over past 22 days
Come on Sherman...let's take a ride in the Wayback Machine to 2009.
Solar Cycle 24 has ended according to NASA | Watts Up With That?
Unhappy Sun and Happy Sun
And then.
The magnetic poles or dip pole are computed from all the Gauss coefficients using an iterative method. Magnetic poles derived in this fashion are more closer to the experimentaly observed poles. Based on the current WMM model, the 2010 location of the north magnetic pole is 84.97°N and 132.35°W and the south magnetic pole is 64.42°S and 137.34°E. The Google map below illustrates the movement of the magnetic poles during 1590 to 2010 derived from the GUFM (1590 – 1980) and IGRF (1981 – 2010) models. The GUFM model (Jackson et al., 2000, Four centuries of geomagnetic secular variation from historical records, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A, 358, 957- 90.) covers the period 1590 -1990 and is based on ship log data. The path reflects the chaotic and independent movement of magnetic poles. For example, the present rate of progression of the north magnetic pole (55 km/year) is significantly higher than that of the South Pole.
Wandering of the Geomagnetic poles | ngdc.noaa.gov
B
At coffee this afternoon with another retired old co-worker, we were recalling a winter in the late '75s, when we had a two week cold snap that lasted two weeks with night time temps ranging from -30 to -50 F.
Not trusting just the block heater, I also had a 150 light bulb next to the battery, (but not touching it), and a thick felt blanket over the motor to keep as much of the heat.
One morning, one guy who's car wouldn't start an I had to boost, asked me about the light he had seen under my car.....I told him about it and warned him about not letting the bulb touch the battery...
The next morning, when his car still wouldn't start and since he didn't have a blanket, he hadn't taken the light out yet...
When we lifted up the hood we found out the stupid plick had used a flood light and had melted the battery side.
The new battery he had to put in didn't give him any more starting problems:smile:
Not trusting just the block heater, I also had a 150 light bulb next to the battery, (but not touching it), and a thick felt blanket over the motor to keep as much of the heat.
One morning, one guy who's car wouldn't start an I had to boost, asked me about the light he had seen under my car.....I told him about it and warned him about not letting the bulb touch the battery...
The next morning, when his car still wouldn't start and since he didn't have a blanket, he hadn't taken the light out yet...
When we lifted up the hood we found out the stupid plick had used a flood light and had melted the battery side.
The new battery he had to put in didn't give him any more starting problems:smile:
via sda
The Sound Of Settled Science
More deniers;
:lol:
The Sound Of Settled Science
More deniers;
After the planet's average surface temperature rose through the 1990s, the increase has almost leveled off at the level of 2000, while ocean water temperature has also stabilized, the Research Council of Norway said in a statement on its website. After applying data from the past decade, the results showed temperatures may rise 1.9 degrees Celsius if Co2 levels double by 2050, below the 3 degrees predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Elizabeth May could not be reached for comment.
:lol:
:lol:
Heh, unpublished research. I wouldn't get too excited about unpublished output from one climate model yet. When they use the 250 years of data up to 2000, they get a climate sensitivity of 3.9°C for a doubling of carbon dioxide. But adding just 10 more years drops it to 1.9°C. Ten years of variability drops the estimate by half? That's very suspect. It seems their model is overestimating the effects of noise. Though it's not far off the range of sensitivities reported by the IPCC:
Although SDA seems to think any climate news is worthy of a settled science moniker, I'm unaware of any climate scientists saying that there is a firm climate sensitivity estimate and that further work is unwarranted. Meta-analysis of climate sensitivity studies shows large support at low and high values of 2 and 4.5 °C respectively. That is the why the range is often listed as 2 to 4.5°C. What is settled? Human activities are impacting climate. That's clear and unambiguous.
Heh, unpublished research. I wouldn't get too excited about unpublished output from one climate model yet. When they use the 250 years of data up to 2000, they get a climate sensitivity of 3.9°C for a doubling of carbon dioxide. But adding just 10 more years drops it to 1.9°C. Ten years of variability drops the estimate by half? That's very suspect. It seems their model is overestimating the effects of noise. Though it's not far off the range of sensitivities reported by the IPCC:
The equilibrium climate sensitivity is a measure of the climate system response to sustained radiative forcing. It is defined as the equilibrium global average surface warming following a doubling of CO2 concentration. Progress since the TAR enables an assessment that climate sensitivity is likely to be in the range of 2 to 4.5°C with a best estimate of about 3°C, and is very unlikely to be less than 1.5°C. Values substantially higher than 4.5°C cannot be excluded, but agreement of models with observations is not as good for those values. {WGI 8.6, 9.6, Box 10.2, SPM}
Another tidbit, their model is producing some skew. If the data were distributed normally, the mean and median would be the same. However, the mean and median differ by almost 0.5°C.
Although SDA seems to think any climate news is worthy of a settled science moniker, I'm unaware of any climate scientists saying that there is a firm climate sensitivity estimate and that further work is unwarranted. Meta-analysis of climate sensitivity studies shows large support at low and high values of 2 and 4.5 °C respectively. That is the why the range is often listed as 2 to 4.5°C. What is settled? Human activities are impacting climate. That's clear and unambiguous.