Global Warming Page 7
Home     Back

-- Monster snowstorm in Colorado forces postponement of climate change & global warming rally - 4/30/17
-- A new study shows Antarctica is in the midst of a cooling period - 4/30/17
-- Heavy Snow in Siberia Could Make for Tough US Winter - 11/08/15
-- Top Physicist Bolts from Global Warming ‘Consensus’ Obama Backed ‘Wrong Side’ - 10/18/15
-- A new low in science: Criminalizing climate change skeptics - 9/28/15
-- Where Does the Carbon Dioxide Really Come From? - Posted 9/09/15

 Monster snowstorm in Colorado forces postponement of climate change & global warming rally

Chris Enloe Apr 30, 2017 6:12 pm

A mid-spring snowstorm in Colorado over the weekend postponed a rally that sought to bring attention “climate change” and “global warming,” as well as protest President Donald Trump’s climate policies.

A march slated to take place in Colorado Springs on Saturday had to be cancelled after weather forecasters predicted heavy snowfall and blizzard-like conditions. Only a few inches of snow fell in the Colorado Springs area, but more than a foot of snow fell on other parts of the state.

“Sometimes Mother Nature throws you a curveball! We know we aren’t in the business of risking anyone’s safety. Dangerous conditions and wet heavy snow in the forecast for tomorrow,” a local climate change organization wrote on their Facebook page.

The rally and march was rescheduled for Sunday afternoon.

The freezing weather and snow, however, was unable to postpone a similar rally in Denver, where pictures of a snowman at the global warming rally made rounds on Twitter.

As well as an ironic sign:

In other parts of the country where similar marches and rallies took place, the weather was a little kinder to the liberal climate alarmist narrative. In Washington D.C., the temperature was in the upper 80’s to near 90 as people gathered to protest Trump’s climate policies.

The People’s Climate March, which was supported by hundreds of thousands across the country and tens of thousands in Washington, was sponsored by environmental groups, labor unions and social justice groups.

Video showed thousands marching in the streets of Washington, where former Vice President Al Gore, Hollywood superstar Leonardo DiCaprio and Virgin Atlantic owner Richard Branson showed up to protest as well.

 A new study shows Antarctica is in the midst of a cooling period.

Warming on the Antarctic Peninsula has long been touted by supporters of the theory man is destroying the planet by using fossil fuels as proof of the dangers of global warming. Al Gore, the face of the world-is-going-to-end climate movement, has visited Antarctica on at least two occasions to highlight the alleged problem.

“This prediction has proven true,” Gore wrote about the claim Antarctica would warm faster than the global average. “Today, the West Antarctic Peninsula is warming about four times faster than the global average.”

Alarmists say the melting of ice sheets in Antarctica will cause massive problems for the rest of the world. For example, left-wing website ThinkProgress wrote in 2012, “Although the vast ice sheets of the frozen continent are remote from almost all of human civilization, their warming has drastic implications for billions of people. With the melting of those almost inconceivable reserves of ice, the planet’s sea levels are rising. Scientists now expect 21st-century sea level rise — on the scale of three to six feet or more — will be dominated by the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps.”

Climate realists have rightfully pointed out the evidence shows total ice accumulation on Antarctica has outweighed losses, a claim bolstered by a 2015 NASA study, which found, “An increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.” But even many climate change skeptics have accepted some significant parts of Antarctica are warming.

All that is about to change.

A study published in the journal Science of the Total Environment in February is now getting the attention of prominent climate change skeptics. The study claims the Antarctic Peninsula is cooling and that the previous warming in the second half of the 21st century is “an extreme case.” The researchers also found the recent cooling trend, which they say began in 1998-99, has already had a significant impact on the Antarctic Peninsula’s cryosphere, slowing down “glacier recession.”

“The Antarctic Peninsula (AP) is often described as a region with one of the largest warming trends on Earth since the 1950s, based on the temperature trend … recorded at Faraday/Vernadsky station. Accordingly, most works describing the evolution of the natural systems in the AP region cite this extreme trend as the underlying cause of their observed changes. However, a recent analysis (Turner et al., 2016) has shown that the regionally stacked temperature record for the last three decades has shifted from a warming trend of 0.32 °C/decade during 1979–1997 to a cooling trend of − 0.47 °C/decade during 1999–2014. … We show that Faraday/Vernadsky warming trend is an extreme case, circa twice those of the long-term records from other parts of the northern AP. Our results also indicate that the cooling initiated in 1998/1999 has been most significant in the N and NE of the AP and the South Shetland Islands (> 0.5 °C between the two last decades), modest in the Orkney Islands, and absent in the SW of the AP. This recent cooling has already impacted the cryosphere in the northern AP, including slow-down of glacier recession, a shift to surface mass gains of the peripheral glacier and a thinning of the active layer of permafrost in northern AP islands.”

  Heavy Snow in Siberia Could Make for Tough US Winter [or not]

By Todd Beamon    08 Nov 2015

[An article of this kind leaves nothing certain and everything speculative - prepare for the worst but hope for the best].

Record snowfall in Siberia last month could mean a tough winter in the northeastern United States this year.

Huge amounts of snow fell on Siberia last month, including nearly 16 inches overnight during one of the country's worst blizzards in a decade, USA Today reports.

Meteorologists believe the heavy snow affects the polar vortex — and that could send bitterly cold temperatures across the Northeast.

Temperatures could also be affected by the strong El Niño that is being experienced globally, along with other factors, USA Today reports.

Judah Cohen, a scientist at Atmospheric and Environmental Research in Lexington, Mass., is expecting to have a better idea of this winter's weather after checking key changes in the climate pattern this month, according to the report.

But in the short term, Cohen is forecasting mild weather this winter.

Related Stories:

Foreign Countries Altering Weather Data to Show warming

Govt Scientists Often Change Weather Data for US

Top Physicist Bolts from Global Warming ‘Consensus’ Obama Backed ‘Wrong Side’

October 19, 2015    By Michael Hausam and Kyle Becker | Science

MUNICH, GERMANY - JANUARY 22:  Freeman Dyson speaks during the Digital Life Design conference (DLD) at HVB Forum on January 22, 2012 in Munich, Germany. DLD (Digital - Life - Design) is a global conference network on innovation, digital, science and culture which connects business, creative and social leaders, opinion-formers and investors for crossover conversation and inspiration.  (Photo by Nadine Rupp/Getty Images)
Getty - Nadine Rupp

Freeman Dyson is a 91-year-old theoretical physicist who was a contemporary of Einstein at Princeton, has received multiple international awards for his scientific efforts, and has published numerous books and papers on a wide range of topics.

Dyson is criticizing scientists who advance what he describes as an ‘agenda-driven’ perspective on global warming.

In an interview with The Register, Dyson responded to questions about the forward he just wrote for a scientific paper that confronts the “overrated” concerns about CO2 in the atmosphere:

“That is to me the central mystery of climate science. It is not a scientific mystery but a human mystery. How does it happen that a whole generation of scientific experts is blind to obvious facts?”

Dyson, who describes himself as 100% Democrat, strongly disagreed with President Obama:

“It’s very sad that in this country, political opinion parted [people’s views on climate change]. I’m 100 per cent Democrat myself, and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on this issue, and the Republicans took the right side.”

Part of the issue, according to the interview and the CO2 paper, is that the scientific models that have been used to predict climate outcomes have been wrong:

“What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies between what’s observed and what’s predicted have become much stronger. It’s clear now the models are wrong, but it wasn’t so clear 10 years ago. I can’t say if they’ll always be wrong, but the observations are improving and so the models are becoming more verifiable.”

For example, NASA has admitted that it is unable to explain a 17-year hiatus in an average global temperature increase, which has led to 95% of manmade global warming projections being false.

Explaining why this refusal of scientists to adjust their opinions when confronted with facts that seemingly refute their manmade global warming hypothesis, Dyson gives a couple of reasons.

He suggests that there has been a confusion between “pollution,” something definitely man-made and solvable, and “climate change,” a feature of nature and mostly beyond the control of humanity.

Furthermore, he also asserts that there’s not only a “large community of people who make their money by scaring the public,” but an element of groupthink at play, as well:

“Real advances in science require a different cultural tradition, with individuals who invent new tools to explore nature and are not afraid to question authority. Science driven by rebels and heretics searching for truth has made great progress in the last three centuries. But the new culture of scientific scepticism is a recent growth and has not yet penetrated deeply into our thinking. The old culture of group loyalty and dogmatic belief is still alive under the surface, guiding the thoughts of scientists as well as the opinions of ordinary citizens.”

Dyson concluded with an assertion and an appeal to dispassionately evaluating facts:

“Climatic effects observed in the real world are much less damaging than the effects predicted by the climate models, and have also been frequently beneficial. I am hoping that the scientists and politicians who have been blindly demonizing carbon dioxide for 37 years will one day open their eyes and look at the evidence.”

If anything, Dyson’s disputation of manmade global warming just adds to the list of scientific voices who are bucking the received “consensus” on temperatures.

You can go here for the original:

 A new low in science: Criminalizing climate change skeptics

September 28, 2015 By Judith Curry Published

Scientists have many important roles to play in preparations for the upcoming UN Conference on Climate Change in Paris. Some are working hard to clarify uncertainties in the science, others on developing and evaluating alternative climate policies.

One group of climate scientists is trying a different approach. Dismayed by what they see as a lack of progress on the implementation of climate policies that they support, these 20 scientists sent a letter to the White House calling for their political opponents to be investigated by the government.

In particular, they are voicing their support of a proposal by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) for a RICO investigation of fossil fuel corporations and their supporters, who the scientists allege have deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, with the consequence of forestalling America’s response to reducing carbon emissions.

RICO, short for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, is a federal law enacted in 1970 as a crime-fighting tool for use against the Mafia. It includes prison sentences of up to 20 years and seizure of financial assets for those found guilty of such “racketeering.”

What these 20 scientists have done with their letter is the worst kind of irresponsible advocacy. Attempts by powerful people to silence other scientists, especially in this brutal fashion, is a recipe for stifling scientific progress and for making poor policies.

Senator Whitehouse singled out one climate scientist, Willie Soon, a solar physicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics who argues that changes in solar radiation, rather than carbon emissions, are the major force behind global warming.

Seven other climate scientists were the targets of a recent McCarthyite ‘witch hunt’ by Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.). I was one of the seven. Rep. Grijalva indicated that I was investigated because of my recent Congressional testimony summarizing peer-reviewed research indicating that the magnitude and impacts of expected warming could be less than generally believed.

None of the Grijalva 7 was found to have engaged in wrongdoing of any sort, yet there have been significant career consequences for some.

The demand by Senator Whitehouse and the 20 climate scientists for legal persecution of people whose research on science and policy they disagree with represents a new low in the politicization of science.

The role of these 20 scientists is particularly troubling. The consequence of this persecution, intended or not, is to make pariahs of scientists who are doing exactly what we expect of researchers: to critically evaluate evidence and publish that work in the scientific literature.

Minority perspectives have an important and respected role to play in advancing science, as a mean for testing ideas and pushing the knowledge frontier forward. While President Obama bows to no one in attacking climate ‘deniers’, he recently made an important statement in a town hall meeting at the University in Iowa on the importance of challenging received knowledge in a university setting:

"Because there was this space where you could interact with people who didn’t agree with you and had different backgrounds from you … I started testing my own assumptions, and sometimes I changed my mind," he said. "Sometimes I realized, maybe I’ve been too narrow-minded; maybe I didn’t take this into account; maybe I should see this person’s perspective. That’s what college, in part, is all about."

That’s even more what real science is about. It is important for scientists to engage the public and to work with policy makers to assess the impacts and unintended consequences of policy options. However, it has become ‘fashionable’ for academic scientists to advocate for certain political outcomes, without having much understanding of the policy process, economics, or the ethics of such advocacy.

What these 20 scientists have done with their letter is the worst kind of irresponsible advocacy. Attempts by powerful people to silence other scientists, especially in this brutal fashion, is a recipe for stifling scientific progress and for making poor policies.

Climate policy has been limited by an overly narrow set of narratives and policy options. Expanding the frameworks for thinking about climate change and climate policy can lead to developing a wider choice of options in addressing the risks from it.

That is how democracy is supposed to work. We search for solutions that can garner a critical mass of support. We don’t try to criminalize our political opponents, and especially should not try to criminalize scientists who have a different view.

Judith Curry is Professor and former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, and President of Climate Forecast Applications Network. Follow
Judith Curry on twitter @curryja.

 Global warming – Takes an Australian to tell it like it is!!!

September 09, 2015    Ian Rutherford Plimer is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, Professor of Mining Geology at the University of Adelaide, and the Director of Multiple Mineral Exploration and Mining Companies. He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology.

Where Does the Carbon Dioxide Really Come From?

Professor Ian Plimer said it better! If you've read his book you will agree, this is a good summary.

PLIMER: "Okay, here's the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland recently. Since its first spewing of volcanic ash , in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.

Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - it’s that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life on this planet.

I's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad!!!

Nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs.... well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days. The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days - yes, FOUR DAYS - by that volcano in Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud into the atmosphere - EVERY DAY of the year I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.

Yes, folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over one year - think about it. Of course, I shouldn't spoil this 'touchy-feely tree-hugging' moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.

And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.

Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the bogus 'human-caused' climate-change scenario. Hey, isn’t it interesting how they don’t mention 'Global Warming' anymore, but just 'Climate Change' - you know why? It’s because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming ‘BS’ artists got caught with their pants down.

Just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed
on you, that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer.

It won’t stop any volcanoes from erupting, that’s for sure!!
But, hey, relax...... and have a nice day mate !"



Home     Back