Investors Business Daily

Global warming? Don’t worry about it. It’s over. No longer does Al Gore have to fly around the world in private jets emitting greenhouse gases to save the world from - greenhouse gases. The United Nations World Meteorological Organization is reporting that global temperatures have not risen since 1998. That would be the same temperatures that models from the U.N.’s Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change said would be scorching the earth into an unlivable wasteland except for those coastal areas flooded by seas gorged with water from melting ice sheets.

Of course the IPCC spins the news. “You should look at trends over a pretty long period,” said WMO Secretary-General Michael Jarraud, “and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.” His explanation for the cool spell is the effect of the Pacific Ocean’s La Nina current, “part of what we call ‘variability.’ “ If that’s the case, then why can’t the Pacific’s El Nino current, which played a large part in the warm reading for 1998, simply been seen as a “variability” and not part of a greater warming trend? Because it doesn’t fit the agenda? Were the IPCC not dedicated to spreading fear, it would admit its climate models, on which much of the global warming madness is based, are flawed.

This is not some gas-guzzler’s fantasy but the finding of a credible study published last year in the International Journal of Climatology. Looking at the data, four researchers (Douglass, Christy, Pearson, Singer) concluded “the weight of the current evidence supports the conclusion” there is no agreement between the models and the observation temperatures. That means that projections of future warming are too high, that the entire global warming assumption is suspect, and that Gore should find something more productive to do with his time.

It also proves that Howard Hayden, physics professor emeritus at the University of Connecticut, was correct in describing the machinery of the climate model-hysteria industrial complex as one that takes “garbage in” and spits “gospel out.” Read more here.

Myron Ebell, Director, Energy and Global Warming Policy, CEI

One of the main reasons it’s going to take a 300 million dollar advertising campaign to try to convince Americans to support mandatory reductions in their own energy use is because former VP Al Gore and his Hollywood elite supporters are not providing leadership.  Instead they continue to preach using less energy while using enormous amounts of energy in their own lives on frequent private jet flights and the electricity to run huge houses.

When CEI and others have challenged Gore over his hypocrisy, the reply has been, “We buy carbon offsets to take care of it.” But that misses the point. Most Americans are having trouble buying gasoline and paying their electric bills at current prices. Most people can’t afford to pay for the energy they need and then buy carbon offsets, too.  If the kind of mandatory reductions in emissions that Gore is promoting are enacted, the resulting higher energy prices will force most Americans to use a lot less energy, while wealthy people including Gore will continue to be able to afford to use the colossal amounts of energy required to support their opulent lifestyles.

Another factor that I think is pushing this 300 million dollar effort is a sense of desperation.  Environmental pressure groups have been spending several hundred million dollars a year since the early ‘90s to promote global warming alarmism, and they have very little to show for it.  The whole effort is near collapse. And to top it all, global warming has stalled, at least for the moment. Global mean temperatures are flat since Kyoto was negotiated in 1997, even though atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have increased around 4 per cent.  This contradicts all the model predictions.  In my view, the global warming bubble is ready to burst, so a 300 million dollar propaganda campaign may be the alarmists’ last chance.  Gore and the alarmists have all the money, but reality is not on their side. Read more here.

By Roger Harrabin, BBC Environmental Correspondent

Global temperatures this year will be lower than in 2007 due to the cooling effect of the La Nina current in the Pacific, UN meteorologists have said. The World Meteorological Organization’s secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer. This would mean global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory. But experts have also forecast a record high temperature within five years.

La Nina and El Nino are two great natural Pacific currents whose effects are so huge they resonate round the world. El Nino warms the planet when it happens; La Nina cools it. This year, the Pacific is in the grip of a powerful La Nina. It has contributed to torrential rains in Australia and to some of the coldest temperatures in memory in snow-bound parts of China. Mr Jarraud told the BBC that the effect was likely to continue into the summer, depressing temperatures globally by a fraction of a degree. This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world.

A minority of scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked and argue the Earth has proved more resilient to greenhouse gases than predicted. But Mr Jarraud insisted this was not the case and noted that 1998 temperatures would still be well above average for the century. “When you look at climate change you should not look at any particular year,” he said. “You should look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.” “La Nina is part of what we call ‘variability’. There has always been and there will always be cooler and warmer years, but what is important for climate change is that the trend is up.” Experts at the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre for forecasting in Exeter said the world could expect another record temperature within five years or less, probably associated with another episode of El Nino. Read more here.

Icecap Note: After originally posting this story with the above headline, the BBC changed the headline to “Global warming ‘dips this year’"perhaps after pressure from editors or others. Later in the day reverted back to original.