"Last October, on 10/10/10, the activist group 10:10 has become notorious for their No Pressure video in which the lives of climate skeptics and even the lives of insufficiently excited alarmists (including two school kids, three secretaries, a soccer star, and an X-Files actress) were ended. The video opened the eyes of many viewers who hadn’t previously understood that global warming alarmism was the Nazism of our time. What has Al Gore learned from this event?”
Read what from Dr. Lubos Motl. We are back in the Dark Ages.
--------------
A sad and twisted story: Stealing the limelight from real problems in the real world
By Nils-Axel Morner, Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics, Stockholm, Sweden, morner@pog.nu
Ban Ki Moon and the Secretary-General of the Pacific Islands Forum have recently claimed that serious sea level rise problems occur both in Tuvalu and Kiribati. This is what two misguided politicians may say. But what is the reality, we must ask.
The answer is clear and straight forward: the is no sea level rise going on - at least for the last 18 years - either in Tuvalu or in Kiribati.
Over and over again, have I tried to demonstrate (Mörner, 2007; 2010, 2011) that sea is not at all in a rising mode in Tuvalu judging from the only information there is; i.e. the tide gauge records. The same has been done by others, especially Gray (2010). This is illustrated in Figs 1 and 2, where there are no signs of any sea level rise.
Fig. 1. The total tide gauge record from 1978 for Tuvalu (from Mörner, 2010). Since 1985 there are no signs of any sea level rise. Three major ENSO events with significant drops in sea level are recorded in 1983, 1992 and 1998.
Fig. 2. The SEAFRAME tide gauge record from Tuvalu with no sign of any ongoing sea level rise (redrawn from Gray, 2010).
So, if our observational facts say: no rise in sea lever, why are people continuing to drive the sea level rise illusion. It doesn’t become better (rather the opposite) if you are the Secretary-General for the United Nation or Pacific Island Forum. It is simply wrong. But what is worth; it steals the limelight from real problems in the real world.
The same is true for Kiribati. It lies in an area of the SW Pacific where satellite altimetry proposes a sea level rise in the order of 5 mm/year. Gray (2010) showed that this does indeed not concur with the last SEAFRAME tide gauge record from Kiribati (Fig. 3). The record spans 17 years. Still, it does not record any long-term sea level rise; just a stability.
Fig. 3. The SEAFRAME tide-gauge record from Kiribati (redrawn from Grav, 2010) (Enlarged) provides no documentation of any long-tern sea level rise; just a stability of the past 17 years.
Vanuatu is another famous site in the sea level debate. Here, too, there is a total absence of indications of any sea level rise over the past 17-18 years (Mörner, 2007, 2011; Gray, 2010). The list can be enlarged over wider (the Indian Ocean with places like the Maldives and
Bangladesh) and wider (spots all over the globe; not least northwestern Europe where it all can be put at a test; even so in Venice).
Obviously, there is a major clash between scenario based computer simulations and reality in the form of observational based facts and observations in nature itself. Therefore, there are all logical reasons to turn away from the propaganda information and concentrate all attention and interest on observational facts. In this case, those facts give a very clear and irrefutable message; there is no alarming sea level rise either in Tuvalu or Kiribati.
Ban Ki Moon and his friend from the Pacific Islands Forum should both feel ashamed of their claims and statements with respect to Tuvalu and Kiribati.
References
Gray, V., 2010. The South Pacific Sea Level: A reassessment. SPPI Original Paper, p. 1-24.
Morner, N.-A., 2007. The Greatest Lie Ever Told. 1st Edition, 2007, P&G print, Stockholm.Also: What Sea Level Rise? 21st Century Science & Technology, Fall 2007, Front, p. 25-29, 30-34.
Morner, N.-A., 2010. Some problems in the reconstruction of mean sea level and its changes with time. Quaternary International, 221, 3-8, doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2009.10.044
Morner, N.-A., 2011. The great sea level humbug. There is no alarming sea level rise. 21st Century Science & Technology, Winter 2010/11 issue, p. 7-17.
See also this sea level piece in SPPI and Master Resource by Chip Knappenberger.
-------------
Back to Gore and the equally misguided but probably more honest Bill McKibben of 350.org who will rally this month after the Gorathon.
350: The most brain-dead campaign of your life
By Tom Nelson
The stupidity in the campaign mentioned here is absolutely breathtaking. Excerpt:
The most recent science tells us that unless we can reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million, we will cause huge and irreversible damage to the earth.
Take a careful look at the black line in this graph (enlarged):
If you see any reason to panic when CO2 is over 350 ppm, please let me know immediately…
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Contact: Paul Chesser, Executive Director, paul.chesser@atinstitute.org
Dr. Michael Mann, lead author of the discredited “hockey stick” graph that was once hailed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as the “smoking gun” of the catastrophic man-made global warming theory, has asked to intervene in American Tradition Institute’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that seeks certain records produced by Mann and others while he was at the University of Virginia, for the purpose of keeping them hidden from the taxpayer.
Specifically over the weekend ATI’s Environmental Law Center received service from two Pennsylvania attorneys who seek the court’s permission to argue for Dr. Mann to intervene in ATI’s case. The attorneys also filed a motion to stay production of documents still withheld by UVA, which are to be provided to ATI’s lawyers in roughly two weeks under a protective order that UVA voluntarily agreed to in May. Dr. Mann’s lawyers also desire a hearing in mid-September, in an effort to further delay UVA’s scheduled production of records under the order.
Dr. Mann’s argument, distilled, is that the court must bend the rules to allow him to block implementation of a transparency law, so as to shield his sensibilities from offense once the taxpayer - on whose dime he subsists - sees the methods he employed to advance the global warming theory and related policies. ATI’s Environmental Law Center is not sympathetic.
“Dr. Mann’s late-hour tactics offer the spectacle of someone who relies on the media’s repeats of his untrue claims of having been ‘investigated’ and ‘exonerated’ - that is, when he’s not sputtering ad hominem and conspiracy theories to change the subject,” said Christopher Horner, director of litigation for ATI’s Environmental Law Center. “Mann has tried whatever means possible to ensure he remains free of any serious scrutiny, and this just appears to be his last gasp.”
Dr. Mann’s move is therefore gratifying, and ATI will agree to his out-of-state lawyers’ motion to appear. But ATI will ask the court to uphold Virginia’s abundantly clear law, that Dr. Mann has no interest in records that are purely the property of the taxpayer.
ATI will present to the court how Dr. Mann understood, as an unambiguous and agreed-upon condition of his employment, that he had no expectation of privacy when he used UVA’s public email system. ATI therefore looks forward to seeing if, given the opportunity, UVA will defend the idea that any of its own policies be upheld in court. Since Dr. Mann has no property interest in the taxpayer-owned records sought by ATI, he has no standing and therefore should not be entered in the case. Dr. Mann wants, after the fact, for UVA to throw out policies he accepted as a condition of living off of taxpayer dollars, in order to cover up public information and to evade scrutiny.
To the extent Dr. Mann, the university, or their obstructionist backers like Union of Concerned Scientists continue to argue he has been “cleared” or “exonerated,” or that any substantive investigation has taken place, those pleadings are undermined by their persistent efforts to squelch inquiry. As a result, all the public sees is an effort to sweep Climategate revelations under the rug in order to preserve the biggest taxpayer-financed gravy train for science and academia in decades. Hence we see the Rasmussen Reports poll last month that showed a strong majority of the public believes scientists who study climate change have falsified research data in order to support their own theories and beliefs.
“Virginia’s courts do not brook conspiracy theories as the basis for intervention in run-of-the-mill Freedom of Information Act litigation,” said Dr. David Schnare, director of ATI’s Environmental Law Center. “Dr. Mann - having failed to prevail in the court of public opinion - cannot now strut into court, soap box in hand, and expect a warm welcome.”
See case documents, press releases, media coverage, commentary, broadcast interviews, etc. pertaining to ATI v. University of Virginia by clicking here: http://bit.ly/mLZLXC
For an interview with Environmental Law Center director Dr. David Schnare or director of litigation Christopher Horner, email paul.chesser@atinstitute.org or call (202)670-2680.
Follow ATI on Twitter: http://twitter.atinstitute.org
Facebook: http://facebook.atinstitute.org
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, AMS Fellow
Texas A&M’s Andrew Dessler has been flailing away desperately trying to save his failing global warming movement, fast tracking a paper in the GRL attempting to refute the solid Spencer Braswell paper on evidence from satellite for negative feedbacks through cloudiness. And then posting this story in the Texas Eagle claiming this hot droughty summer is definitive proof that global warming is real and actionable.
The Texas drought ranked up with the droughts of the mid 1950s and 1917/18 in Texas. All three had one thing in common. They were all super La Ninas. In terms of the traditional ENSO measure, the Southern Oscillation Index, you can see April to April values of the SOI (positive is La Nina) were only exceeded in 1917/18.
In terms of the Multivariate ENSO Index of NOAA’s Klaus Wolter, the Index was only exceeded by 1954/56 (here negative is La Nina).
Enlarged.
In both cases the drought lagged behind the La Nina peak in the following summer. This drought was not as far north as the 1918 and 1956 as seen by the Palmer Drought Severity index for Julys. In fact the La Nina jet stream was so strong, record rains and floods were the rule in the northern plains.
Enlarged.
The long term temperature trends for summer in Texas show no ‘global warming’ or increased drought, no matter how many professors at how many universities in Texas opine otherwise. One brutal summer does not make the failing climate models suddenly correct. That is weather not climate.
Here are NOAA’s summer temperature trends for the state of Texas since 1895. Through last summer the trend was actually slightly negative. It may flatten when this summer’s value is added.
Enlarged.
Precipitation wise, there is no evidence of increasing drought. Dry periods like the 1930s and 1950s were seen but the wettest year was 2007 and the trend up 0.7 inches per century
Enlarged.
Like in the mid 1950s, this La Nina is likely to persist and that suggests it may be dry next spring and if El Nino does not return, next summer. That still would not indicate greenhouse warming.
You see a cooling Pacific as part of solar driven global cooling should result in more La Ninas just as we saw from 1947 to 1977 when the Pacific and the earth last cooled. The warm Pacific from 1977 to 1997 led to more El Ninos for those decades. Only one significant La Nina occurred in those two decades leading some scientists to speculate a permanent El Nino was ensuing. Since the Pacific began cooling though in 1998, we have had 7 La Nina years and just 3 El Ninos. The earth is in the cooling part of the next cycle. The onset of cooling can explain ALL of the extremes of the past few years.
Weather and climate is all about natural cycles. PDF