By Matt Vooro
For decades we have been urged by IPCC and various AGW supporting scientists to urgently prepare for unprecedented global warming. Yet only few years after the issue of their 2007 or latest report, exactly the opposite is happening. The entire planet is cooling and significantly. Some governments have implemented carbon tax and most are proposing more ‘back door taxes’ through the ‘cap and trade’ mechanism to fight even more global warming.
Sounds to me like another groundless search for weapons of mass destruction that never ever existed. Good taxpayer money is again being wasted for what purpose.
Global cooling is projected to last for another 20- 30 years and the future is likely one of alternating cycles of cooling and warming rather than unprecedented warming for 100years. (Don Easterbrook)
How Come The Media Is Giving IPCC A Free Ride Despite The Flawed Results?
Recent Global And Canadian Evidence Of Global Cooling
1] Global air temperature anomalies have been dropping for 3 years from 0.482C in 2005 to 0.325C in 2008.
2] Global sea surface temperature anomalies have been dropping for 5 years from 0.383C in 2003 to 0.274C in 2008
3] Southern hemisphere sea surface temperature anomalies have been dropping for 6 years from 0.372C in 2002 to 0.287C in 2008
4] The northern hemisphere sea surface temperature anomalies have been dropping for 5 years from 0.479C in 2003 to 0.261C in 2008
5] Canadian national annual temperature departures from the 1948 -2008 trend have been declining for two years from 2.4C in 2006 to 0.7C in 2008
6] Canadian west coast annual temperature departures from the 1948-2008 trend have been declining for four years from 1.5C in 2004 to -0.1 in 2008
7] Canadian national winter temperature departure from 1948-2009 trend has been dropping for 3 years from 3.9C in 2006 to 0.3C in 2009
8] The average winter temperature anomalies from the 1948-2009 trend for the three Canadian prairie provinces have dropped some 6.6 to 7.1 degrees C in only three years since 2006
IPCC projected decadal increases of 0.2 C degrees for each of the next 2 decades and 2 to 6 C by 2100. The observed historical trend is closer to 1.5 C per century during the last several years since 2005 actual temperatures are cooling at – 0.157 C per three years or equivalent of -0.52 C per decade per CRUtem 3 global air temperatures. Read more on how Matt ties the changes to the PDO and uses that to project ahead here.
By Andrew Pierce, UK Telegraph
Tim Nicholson’s commitment to green causes was enshrined in law by an employment tribunal as a “philosophical belief” under the Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations.
The landmark ruling could now pave the way for hundreds more discrimination claims against companies who have ridden roughshod over employees’ support for climate change. Mr Nicholson, 41, was made redundant while head of sustainability at Grainger, Britain’s biggest residential property investment company, in July last year.
In the first case of its kind he has been given permission to sue his former employers for unfair dismissal, arguing that his beliefs on the environment prompted clashes with other senior executives, and led to his sacking. Mr Nicholson said that his frustrations were underlined when the Rupert Dickinson, the chief executive, “showed contempt for the need to cut carbon emissions by flying out a member of the IT staff to Ireland to deliver his BlackBerry that he had left behind in London”.
Mr. Nicholson also fell foul of his colleagues when he tried establish a carbon management strategy for the company which had been listed as a target in its annual report. But when he tried to calculate the firm’s carbon footprints the information was refused to him by the personnel department. He said that Grainger’s executives would turn up for meetings in “some of the most high polluting cars on the road”.
Grainger sought to have Mr Nicholson’s case struck out arguing that his views on climate change were based on fact and science, not on philosophical belief. At a pre-hearing review at an employment tribunal in London chairman David Sneath ruled on a point of law that Mr Nicholson’s stance was a genuine philosophical position. “In my judgment, his belief goes beyond a mere opinion.”
Mr Nicholson, a marred father of one, told the hearing the green beliefs affected every aspect of his life “including my choice of home, how I travel, what I buy, what I eat and drink, what I do with my waste and my hopes and fears”. He said: “I no longer travel by aeroplane. I have eco-renovated my home. I have reduced my consumption of meat, I compost my food waste.” The full employment hearing will take place on June 4. See full story here.
By Doug L. Hoffman, The Resilient Earth
Historical records for the western Antarctic Peninsula (WAP) show that it is particularly prone to rapid climate change-change that occurs in cycles of ~200 years and ~2500 years. By studying major transitions in plankton productivity in the western Antarctic, scientists have shown that “spectacular” ice-cover losses have happened many times in the past. In other words, the “unprecedented rapid loss of ice” from parts of Antarctica that global warming alarmists make so much of are a normal part of nature’s cycles.
According to the latest report in the journal Science, this is how it works: Less ice in the northern zone causes more cloud cover, reducing the amount of light reaching the plankton. A loss of light, together with less ice-melt freshwater and stronger winds means fewer large plankton blooms. By contrast, in the south, the skies stay cloudless for longer and the Antarctic current increases its flow rate, pulling up more nutrients. Both factors contribute to greater primary productivity. These physical changes explain the striking shifts recently observed in krill and the vertebrate communities of the western Antarctic.
In a paper titled “Productivity cycles of 200-300 years in the Antarctic Peninsula region: Understanding linkages among the sun, atmosphere, oceans, sea ice, and biota,” Leventer and colleagues report the results of a multiproxy record from a sediment core retrieved from a deep basin on the western side of the Antarctic Peninsula. The report reveals “a dramatic perspective on paleoclimatic changes over the past 3700 yr. Analyses completed include measurement of magnetic susceptibility and granulometry, bed thickness, particle size, percent organic carbon, bulk density, and microscopic evaluation of diatom and benthic foraminiferal assemblages and abundances.” Their conclusion was that “variability of these parameters demonstrates the significance of both short-term cycles, which recur approximately every 200 yr, and longer term events (~2500 yr cycles) that are most likely related to global climatic fluctuations.”
In other words, ice in the Antarctic region undergoes periodic episodes of rapid melting - and it is all entirely natural, not because of human activity. The new paper echos these findings: “Paleo-records show that analogous climate variations have occurred in the past 200 to 300 years, and over longer 2500-year cycles, with rapid (decadal) transitions between warm and cool phases in the WAP. In this study (~30 years), the Chl a trend evidenced in the southern subregion of the WAP presented similar characteristics to those trends detected during typical interneoglacial periods (~200 to 300 years) (i.e., high phytoplankton biomass, and presumably productivity, due to less area covered by permanent sea ice).”
Science is marvelous, it never rests and never accepts any simple answer at face value. Here we see confirmation of an alternate explanation for rapid ice melting in Antarctica. The latest paper cites thirty supporting references and cross referencing the older paper provides links to eighteen others - this paper’s conclusions are not from a single group of “fringe” scientists. Yet have you heard this well documented explanation for rapid ice melting from any media outlet reporting on global warming? Of Course not! What is reported is “more unprecedented melting!”
To have reported that the melting ice could be explained more accurately by a scientific theory other than anthropogenic global warming would muddy the water, not to mention confuse the news anchor doing the reporting. This is what makes other scientists, myself included, so angry about the climate change clique - their lack of open mindedness, their willful disregard for any facts counter to their preconceived ideas, their out right lies. When the dust finally settles on the great global warming debate there will be a number of climate scientist with much to account for. Meanwhile, enjoy the interglacial and stay skeptical. Read more here.