Guest Post by Steven Goddard
Last weeks’ top Antarctic AGW story was :
due to CO2, of course.
This week the #1 story is :
but the increase in size is due to “stratospheric ozone depletion” which is of course also caused by man-made gases.
So Antarctic ice is disappearing faster than expected due to man, and it is also expanding in size due to man. Meanwhile, the early autumn temperature in Vostok, Antarctica is a toasty -95F, a nice warm up from the -104F temperatures earlier this week.
Oh, and one minor problem with the ozone hole theory “The ozone hole occurs during the Antarctic spring, from September to early December” – but the positive ice anomaly occurred during the autumn and winter (March through July) as represented by the red line below.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.south.jpg
And while the ozone hole was present, ice was normal. So the ice excess probably has nothing to do with the ozone hole.
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/polar/polar.shtml
The AGW standard for broad acceptance of new theories seems to be “not completely implausible – if you avoid actually looking at the body of data or what you might have said last week.“
You can see what part of the year the Antarctic ice extent is increasing through these two charts.
September anomalies trend.
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/Sep/S_09_plot.png
March anomalies trend.
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/Mar/S_03_plot.png
This is what happens when everything can be laid at the feet of AGW.
Pretty soon, all sorts of contradictory things are a result of the same thing.
Ice increase=AGW
Ice decrease=AGW
More hurricanes=AGW
Less hurricanes=AGW
More snow=AGW
Less snow=AGW
Fortunately, there is a Computer Model for every iteration and possible scenario.
If they’re not cooking the books, they’re spinning the facts.
And of course, it is the minor trace gas CO2 that causes the AGW.
That’s why the alarmists can not let go of CO2, despite the clear lack of causation.
AGW is like BEER… It’s the cause of, and the solution to, all of mankind’s problems.
-Homer Simpson (except for the “AGW is like” part)
I remember during the Clinton Gore campaign the quote: “Everything that should be up is down and everything that should be down is up”.
This applies here.
And notice the solution is always more government in some way. New programs, new regulation, more spending.
During the boom times we could afford to spend so government expands. When the economy contracts the government has to spend because “no one is will” so government expands. When the AGW crowd manages to get enough politicians onboard to further the climate hysteria, government expands.
I’m beginning to notice a pattern here!
Based on climate models, ozone forcing should cause no change in polar lower troposphere temperature:
http://joannenova.com.au/globalwarming/hot-spot/Fingerprints%20of%20warming%20v5%20flat.jpg
Latest experiment by NASA has also found, that speed of the chemical reaction between the freon molecules with ozone in simulated “real” conditions is by magnitude lower than expected. A bit humble conclusion was “we do not have mechanism for some 60% of the ozone depletion”. This freon-ozone chemistry was much simpler than climatic stuff and still “science is not settled”.
I have my own model to predict what the AGWholics will do next…
It is shaped like a little cube and has dots on each face (i.e. 1, 2, 3, etc). In order to do the right prediction of how many degrees the earth will warm up in the next few years, you throw the little cube in the air and wait until it stops once on the table (or ground, or whatever horizontal flat surface). The you count the number of dots facing the face facing up, et voila! You now have a number with high confidence of the temperature rise.
That is certainly a robust method. And a good proxy for their approach.
Hey! Let’s give Julienne Stroeve some respect here! (weeks #1 story)
What’s not to believe when dealing with concise, articulate comments (spin) like this:
” . . . but there’s regional differences that are quite different from different regions and we have to deal with what we know about . . .”
Pathetic.
They could be arguing that the Ozone Hole increases the polar vortex year-round so that there is less melting in the sea ice minimum period (February-March) but there is no increase during the sea ice maximum period (September) since the ice extends well beyond the vortex at that time of year.
But if the polar vortex has increased since the Ozone Hole formed (didn’t really get going till around 1980) then it should have expanded to cover the Antarctic Peninsula as well and we shouldn’t have seen increased warming and increased ice-shelf melt in the Peninsula (which is just at the edge – sometimes in – sometimes outside of the vortex).
Ozone Hole trend since 1979.
http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/statistics/meteorology_annual.png
“So Antarctic ice is disappearing faster than expected due to man, and it is also expanding in size due to man.”
What if everything stayed the same? Nothing changed?
It would be really weird for them to blame mankind for that?
I feel like I’d have to agree with them.
What a twist.
I guess they’d be warning of dire consequences of no change?
The AGW crusade has the world so screwed up I can’t tell whether to laugh or cry. I tried doing both at the same time but I felt nuts.
Good topic, as I am reading the April 4 edition of New Scientist,in particular an article ‘Fuming-Is the anti-smoking lobby going too far’ in which the medical science of second hand and third hand(lingering smoke particles) smoke is departing from extremist attitudes……..sound familiar?
Meanwhile in the same edition,the esteemed Editor reviewed two books,one on the Natural History of Unicorns and another on the life and times of Bigfoot. Nothing to do with AGW I would have thought….but wait. It appears that belief in Bigfoot dwells in ‘white working class men’ that hunt and ‘the hunters desire to be scientific while simultaneously disparaging the scientific establishment makes for thought provoking reading:there are obvious parallels with the attitudes of intelligent design enthusiasts and climate change sceptics’.
So scepticism is a cultural attitude rather than a scientific position. How on earth do you counter that typecasting?
F. Scott Fitzgerald said that “the true test of a first-rate mind is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time.”
I think that F. Scott may have been right if he was talking about the creative mind. In fact the creative mind probably can hold even more than two or three contradictory ideas. But I don’t want a novelist, or an actor, or an artist or any person of a creative bent handling scientific enquiry, data or other real things like my money.
I guess that’s why there is such a gulf between the liberal arts and the hard sciences. Sadly, it seems that the gulf has frozen over and the creatives have skated into a new and exciting universe where they believe anything is possible…
Cognitive dissonance is expected when paradigms shatter. What saddens me is that this hoax of exquisite climate sensitivity to CO2 couldn’t be repudiated by honest science, without a perilous period of cooling intervening. Why, oh why has science been so inadequate to the task good policy demands of it? We need to answer that question, and soon, because climate isn’t going to be the only example of science becoming perverted.
======================================
The Global Warming Emperor is beyond naked . . .more like a porn star.
I’m waiting for the press release that says “Temperatures have been dangerously close to average this year. Man made global warming may be to blame.”
Based on ERSSST.v3b data, the majority of the Southern Ocean appears to have a ~100 year cycle.
http://i41.tinypic.com/qsjwwp.jpg
The portion of the Southern Ocean south of the Southeast Pacific (red curve) represents about 20% and is impacted by ENSO. The remaining 80% (green curve) has what appears to be a long cycle.
Somewhat on topic, the SSTs of the Southern Ocean surrounding the Wilkins Ice Shelf has a negative trend for the past 150+ years.
http://i44.tinypic.com/a331xv.jpg
The rest of that post on the ERSST.v3b data of the Southern Ocean is here:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/04/closer-look-at-ersstv3b-southern-ocean.html
Regards
“Antarctic ice is disappearing faster than expected due to man, and it is also expanding in size due to man.”
So that could equal something close to zero net effect… just like it was thousands and millions of years ago.
So, they have found the solution… emit more CO2 to get more snow and emit more CFCs to get less ozone. Why are we cutting emissions again?
Here is a good advice:
Ignore the press! Why? Because all the evil and disasters that would happen to man kind predicted thirty years ago, did not happen.
http://www.ihatethemedia.com/earth-day-predictions-of-1970-the-reason-you-should-not-believe-earth-day-predictions-of-2009
Mike Bryant (16:32:19), that is a thoughtful quote but new ideas in science have to come from somewhere and I guess that distillation of ideas collected in ones scientific study could be called creativity.
Think of Henrik Svensmark’s creative leap after years of data observation to form an hypothesis connecting TSI, cosmic rays and cloud formation.
Acceptance of new ideas comes later after multiple testing, peer approval and the passage of time, but the seed is creativity.
Off topic and at the other end, but has anyone looked at the “tale of the tape” recently?
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/sea.ice.anomaly.timeseries.jpg
Is that a tipping point I see? Is it just a matter of time before something is said about pollution causing more ice in the Arctic as well?
kim (16:39:41) :
“Cognitive dissonance is expected when paradigms shatter. What saddens me is that this hoax of exquisite climate sensitivity to CO2 couldn’t be repudiated by honest science, without a perilous period of cooling intervening. Why, oh why has science been so inadequate to the task good policy demands of it? We need to answer that question, and soon, because climate isn’t going to be the only example of science becoming perverted.”
Actually, Eisenhower warned us in his last speech about the dangers of the MIC which most people remember, but he also he warned us in the same speech about the danger of government funding of science which was increasing and could result in the perversion of science you now see. DDT, CFC’s, AGW are all examples of promoting unwarranted fears to regulate beneficial products or emissions. Peak Oil, Vaccine safety, GM food safety, etc., are examples where government funding of research controlled by regulators who have a conflict of interest and are pro-industry help promote that which is harmful to people.
It all leads to more government control, and lower living standards, and what will soon be shorter life expectancy rates, and fewer social security checks.
Anyways, George Orwell says hi. Winston says the memory hole is filling up and he is working way too much and Big Brother won’t let him retire, since if you don’t work, you won’t eat.
I had totally forgotten about the ozone hole! It’s so 1980ish. Well time to revive it! And here to think that there was a time when I actually built ozone generators (for water treatment)
Oh Steve, Steve, Steve,
You said:
“Oh, and one minor problem with the ozone hole theory ”The ozone hole occurs during the Antarctic spring, from September to early December” – but the positive ice anomaly occurred during the autumn and winter (March through July) as represented by the red line below.”
Isn’t it obvious that this was due to “cooling in the pipeline”?
Try to keep up.
/sarc
Bill Illis, interesting. Those graphs say the sea ice increase is a summer phenomena, ie less melt when the ice margin is closer to Antarctica. Note, there is no sea ice around the peninsula in summer. Which says it is probably caused by a colder Antarctica.
Kim, I agree completely. It is indeed shocking that it is taking a period of natural cooling to puncture the CO2 hoax. Imagine what would have happened if we had continuing natural warming?
It’s amazing that the one story expects us to be alarmed that the Antarctic Peninsula has lost 27,000 km of ice over 50 years while the other story essentially dismisses 100,000 km per decade of ice growth (over 30 years) as inconsequential.
Well, we had better do something soon before everybody figures out that we really don’t have to do anything. If the AGW goes away, it’ll prove we were right and if it doesn’t go away, it’ll prove we haven’t done enough and we have to do more before it’s too late again.
BAS press release:
http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_release.php?id=838
Anthony, Steve,
Thanks for this site. Your work here rests at the forefront of awareness on this issue critical to economies worldwide. As this site grows in popularity, it educates everyone. It’s one of the most important sites on the web in my opinion. I’m armed to the teeth for any discussion on AGW because of data presented here.
So Global Warming causes everything and everything causes Global Warming.
The Perfect Feedback.
Grab a Duff today. It causes Global Warming which causes more Duff beer.
You can get really drunk on AGW.
You know, the more paranoid people believe that hoaxes such as global warming pushed by government agencies such as a the UN are a pretext to controlling the thoughts and actions of the global population so that they can establish a global monetary system and global government
As far as we know the “ozone hole” has always been there and always will be. Discovered in the mid 1950s, there was a step change in the min 1980s, which sure doesn’t look like a slow increase in CFCs, and then virtually no change since then, regardless of the banning of CFCs.
http://junkscience.com/Ozone/plot9552.gif
There’s no evidence that CFCs are the cause of the “hole”. And why would CFCs concentrate on the southern pole anyway?
And…do you know how is it called the left hand in latin? Sinistra (the one sinister)
Kim
is so on target in his post about how amazing it is that science is being used by the AGW believers to impose on society a falsehood no less preposterous than phrenology and bloodletting to treat illness. Apparently at least a good section of modern mankind is not so enlightened after all. Even with an array of arguments disproving to any rational person that CO2 causes global warming presented on websites like this one and an obviously cooling climate over the past several years they still can’t get to the truth on this issue.
I wonder if the AGW crowd in government will be able to enforce their beloved carbon emission limits assuming the climate cools due to solar influences over the next several decades. It may be akin to the Prohibition era.
And the next story on the front page would be breathing causes Global Warming or yo-yo’ing a yo-yo causes Global Warming, just stating the belief that CO2 is the magic gas that can cause your pencil to sharpen by itself.
Enough of the silly talk, Arctic Ice extent remains higher than 2003, Antarctic ice is above average, and there’s the possible implications of the SOI now about at +9 after rising since April 1st and should hit +10 tomorrow at the current rate. NOAA’s SST chart hasn’t been updated today, breaking the 3-4-3-4 day pattern of updates (they were kind of late with their last update too), I wonder what’s going on?
Skeptic tank
“Well, we had better do something soon before everybody figures out that we really don’t have to do anything”
Unfortunately that won’t be the case regardless of how AGW goes.
Waiting in the wings is ocean acidification they can still blame on human CO2 emissions.
And there’s peak oil, endangered species, habitat loss, public health, reliance on foreign energy, public health and safety, land use and transportation agenda’s and about 50 other causes to cling to and to promote nearly all of the same sweeping policies.
It’s a tyranny of left wing activism run wild. All feeding off each other’s cause while emitting a disdain for human beings enjoying a modern world.
Here in Portland, Oregon we get it all. And the whole state is on the brink of being diagnosed as insane.
Other than that things are looking up. 🙂
layne Blanchard,
Thanks for the kind words.
Suffice it to say, anyone in the running for Miss America (or Vice-President of the US) would be well advised not to answer any global warming questions based on information gathered at WUWT. Real Climate would be a much better site for aspiring beauty queens and politicians to study up on this important issue.
———————————————————–
Q. If it was in your power, what would you do to stop Global Warming?
A. First, I feel so badly for all the Polar Bears and Penguins that are drowning. We all need to drive hybrids and use those new curly light bulbs. If I win, I will fly all over the world and bring the important message that we need to stop making so much carbon – which is killing our planet. I want to leave a carbon-free planet for my grandchildren. It is the only planet we have.
Thunderous applause from the audience
Hmmmm so why is the hole bigger now? We’ve banned CFCs for over 20 years, we should be seeing some attenuation in the ozone hole by now if that was the cause.
If she weighed the same as a duck… she’s made of wood.
If everything anti-correlates…Climate is man-made.
And therefore…
And therefore anthropogenic global warming…
…A witch!
…Is settled science
Jeff, its not that the CFCs are concentrating over the pole, they aren’t, it is that the south pole has the coldest high altitude temperatures. Ozone depletion is a function of temperature AND chlorine concentrations. Some folks have argued that greenhouse effects keep heat low in the troposphere and makes the stratosphere, where the ozone is, colder than normal. Increased cold in the stratosphere causes increased ozone depletion with the same CFC concentrations. So expect to see the AGW cultists claiming CO2 is making the ozone hole worse than it would otherwise be.
Oh BTW: MY personal pet theory for why CO2 is increasing: bigger ozone hole allows more UV to hit the oceans, which kills plankton, reducing the amount of CO2 being sequestered by plankton and incidentally reducing the krill food source for many ocean species, which is why various fisheries have crashed in recent years. Also, increased UV in Antarctica would explain why the penninsula is warming.
Good comments all. Would someone get to Ms. Stroeve and tell her she sounds like a junior high valley girl with all those “you know”s? Even in casual conversation it’s irritating. From someone who’s suppose to be a scientist, it’s downright disturbing. But I guess that’s par for the course.
Anthony, Sweetheart-you know I love you.
But this repetitive insistance of yours that modern scientists must have some credibility is just…. sad.
Anthony
And fellow travelers,
A bit tangential to the topic yet pertinent to subject at hand, is an insightful piece by James V. DeLong 04/21/2009 at The American; http://www.american.com/archive/2009/april-2009/the-coming-of-the-fourth-american-republic. Mr. DeLong Contemplates the under the radar conflict (war?) brewing among the special interest entities that influence the governance of our (US) society. Specifically, The Climate Changers v Financiers v Industrial Interests.
Meanwhile the natural world pays scant attention the scurrying about of emotion driven fools.
Truly, we live in interesting times. More fun ahead.
I nominate Goddard for quote of the week.
Steven Goddard (18:27:24) :
“Suffice it to say, anyone in the running for Miss America (or Vice-President of the US) would be well advised not to answer any global warming questions based on information gathered at WUWT. Real Climate would be a much better site for aspiring beauty queens and politicians to study up on this important issue.”
Steven Goddard, AGW Global Warming has become so debased that it is little more than what people say to get jobs/grants/elected and fulfill their need to conform, which in this day and age means to be PC.
I’ve conclude that 9 out of 10 AGW believers are either plain ignorant like our Miss America or paying lip service.
Which is not to say there aren’t capable scientists that believe in AGW (as a problem serious enough to require action). Although, I think there are far less than claimed.
April (17:39:06) : Wrote “It’s amazing that the one story expects us to be alarmed that the Antarctic Peninsula has lost 27,000 km of ice over 50 years while the other story essentially dismisses 100,000 km per decade of ice growth (over 30 years) as inconsequential.”
Money!
Also…Julienne Strove, by her embarrassing American colloquial English: Scientist or MTV hostess??
Like” well, she like, you know, did not say very much…..you know…..like full on..OMG….you know I don’t now…..I know, right?
Your TAX dollars at work folks.
When will this AGW heist of science end??
Will they be squashed in a darwinian whimper in the name of better science, or will Mother Nature do something more drastic?
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
“Keith Minto (17:04:26) :
Mike Bryant (16:32:19), that is a thoughtful quote but new ideas in science have to come from somewhere and I guess that distillation of ideas collected in ones scientific study could be called creativity.”
True, to look at all the data that everyone else has looked at and to come to a different conclusion is creative. The proving of the hypothesis is the hard part. The new science gets the star on the report sans proof. If it makes you feel good, it’s gotta BE good enough! 🙂
SSSailor, fascinating article that you linked to. Thanks.
The Sun will expose them for the polyscience agenda they are running.
You can’t hide the Sun.
You cannot remodel it’s output that is seen & felt globally.
You cannot pass legislation or policy to force it to do something else.
You cannot blame the Sun on man.
You cannot explain the Sun’s behavior by CO2 levels on Earth.
You cannot squeeze blood out of a turnip any more than you can create Green Energy out of nothing while the Sun threatens to drop it’s output.
It’s the Sun, stupid.
Even the ancients knew better.
SSSailor,
That was a great article, plenty of food for thought and some cause for optimism.
“It is not unusual for decadent political arrangements to blaze brightly before their end.” -James V. DeLong
Bill Illis,
Do you have a website where I can download various ocean sst data that you’ve collected? Seems like the poles have longer cycles, but the data is too recent.
It’s pretty damn obvious to me that if you subtract the ocean sst cycles from the temp data, you’re left with primarily the solar signature (regardless of correlation or lack thereof as implied by others)…either way, certainly not the CO2 signature.
Hard to find ocean sst data that goes far enough back to cover more than 1/2-1 cycle though (other than PDO/AMO). Any links would be much appreciated.
Ed
Yeah and the sun will be part of that darwinian “squashing”….as it has done for billions of years BEFORE homo sapiens ever climbed out of the trees.
Well said, Rob.
From the essay linked by SSSailor, my favorite passage:
“Thus environmentalists claim not just a few million dollars for endangered species protection, but total control over all land use, and, most recently, over the entire economy in the interests of protecting the polar bear.”
Don Owen, from the same essay:
Despite 0bama’s slender majority, he clearly could not care less about what President Jefferson thought.
What was that I studied in Early Astronomy?
Oh, yes, the Mayan Rulers and their priests practiced a religion of control claiming to appease and guide the Sun & crops & Hero Twins with their sacrifice. Until they fouled up the very ecosystem they depended upon for thier bounty of Maize by overuse of fuels to make thier shiny lime plaster.
Nobody told them about energy conservation.
Nobody told them to stop doing things to the land.
It wasn’t the C02 from burning that destroyed them, it was the ecological system they wasted.
AGW is blowing smoke up tailpipes.
Go back to your superfund thing, it was working.
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
Very enlightening article SSSailor. I bookmarked it for printing out and more careful reading tomorrow. But I like what I see already.
Slightly off topic but we can add Steve Benen’s ‘Political Animal’ at the Washington Monthly to the dishonest boards like Real Climate, Tamino’s Open Mind, Joe Romm’s Climate Progress, and Pharyngula. I’ve just had comments deleted over there. Pitiful. Interestingly, so far, Matt Yglesias has let my stuff stand. Kudos for that.
=======================================
Keith Minto (16:26:47) :
and a number of others of the faith
I see another climate trend in that as the twists and turns of desperation and model patching go on in the face of a cooling planet, the faithful at such posts as this avoid reference to the inconvenient mounting data of a cooling phase in the face of rising CO2 and avoid scientific debate of issues, perferring to adopt a derisive snarkiness as a diversion. Indeed, I never expected on this blogsite to be hearing about the psychosocial fantasies of “white working class (science hating) hunter’s” feeling the need to create unicorns and big foots etc… and associating this with skeptical scientists. Wow! I hope this elitist and racist swipe at white hunters and skeptics doesn’t get out of hand. Maybe this is what happens when good models go bad.
Com’on – I know you used to believe in CO2 and a warming planet but I know from your invoking of unicorns and the like that you don’t believe all this malarky about AGW causing record ice development in Antarctica, farting lazy fat people (another elitist notion) exacerbating the AGW, etc. In fact I believe many of the less zealous among the establishment are downright embarassed and the rest are like the emperor penguin, clustering together in the dark antarctic cold with egg on feet and backs to the wind.
Ooh, look, a CO2 meteor !
The Ocean of model Earth is rising.
The melting ice is spreading ever farther and thicker.
Psst… hey buddy…want to buy a draft horse?
“Meanwhile, the early autumn temperature in Vostok, Antarctica is a toasty -95F, a nice warm up from the -104F temperatures earlier this week.”
Wow! That’s mind-numbingly cold!! Interestingly, CO2 freezes at -110F. That must be why the ice extent is increasing in antarctica – all of the CO2 is turning into dry ice…
I’ve also been pondering why we see so many inane and conflicting AGW alarmist stories in the media. It seems that some group or other has a global warming-based press release almost every day. Well, I’ve concluded that it is all due to the *** billions *** of dollars being poured into the Global Warming Industry by governments (i.e. your tax money) and private benefactors. It has become the modern academic/scientific gravy train. The antics of the Catlin Survey stunt team are a prominent example this connection between the money and the AGW industry…BTW, guess who’s going to get rich when Cap and Trade is enacted…
With reference to pft (17:07:20), here is the full passage from Eisenhower’s Farewell Address – read and weap for science.
“Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Also, I believe the capture of government/science/media by the left has advanced to the point where cognitive dissonance among the AGW crowd is creating the sort of incoherence displayed in Steve Goddard’s example at the top of the post, and especially in Ms Stroeve’s remarks. It’s as if people like Stroeve only understand one thing: the consensus must be preserved no matter how ridiculous it may sound to folks like readers of WUWT.
Smokey (20:59:21) :
Don Owen, from the same essay:
As Thomas Jefferson said, “Great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities.”
Despite 0bama’s slender majority, he clearly could not care less about what President Jefferson thought.
******************************
While I am not a fan of young Barack due to his complete lack of experience (President of the USA seems a rather big step for his first real job), I am very concerned because:
1. He will ultimately be humiliated by all this climate alarmist foolishness, and this is not good for the Office of the President, the USA or the American people.
2. His foray into CO2 reduction could drag the US economy down to great depths, such that it will take a decade or more to recover. It also seems probable that the USA will never regain its global prominence. Raising the cost of energy, the lifeblood of any economy, based on bogus climate science will pretty well seal this fate. If other countries become the dominant global powers, don’t expect the world to become a kinder, gentler place. Even those who suffer from Pavlovian Anti-American Syndrome will long for the “good old days” of Pax Americana.
******************************
A President is no better these days than his advisers.
Still, he seems a lot smarter than most we’ve had in a long time.
Perhaps if we keep up the WUWT AGW lid prying, it will come off with sufficient force to capture the attention of our President.
He’s got to know something is up.
What’s Up With the Sun is a powerful argument, Mr. President.
It Eclipses everything, including global warming.
And that’s What’s Up With That.
Unless the cold dip gets stronger this winter, freezing lakes not frozen since the LIA, I see no way to stop this runaway cover for political decisions. Logic and scientific proofs are not at the intelligence level of mobs, and people are being manipulated into a mob. The people who are doing the manipulation ( manipulators believe their spin, otherwise they would be no good ) have to awake, and they will not, unless they hit something drastic.
I relax taking the long view. Western society is developing according to Darwin filling up the niches available. If it comes up to a survival of the fittest test, as this AGW stampede is, and fails, it is all for the good of humanity. The Chinese and the rest of the 5billion humans are there to pick up the slack and fill the niches. Humanity survives and will be better longterm for the lesson.
I propose a balanced ice budget. Let’s move ice from the South Pole to the North Pole. Except that the North Pole doesn’t need any more ice.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
Perhaps we can send the extra 630,000km2 of global ice to Venus? They need it more than we do.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/iphone/images/iphone.anomaly.global.png
Ice seems to be the only thing running a surplus these days. No wonder governments choose to focus on the imaginary ice economy – instead of something real.
Ah… anyone want to place bets as to what day next week the Arctic daily ice graph for this month will intersect and exceed the average? It’s getting reeeeeeeeeally close! …and the recovery of ice is doing just fine since the cyclic 2007 melt (just like previous times like the 1930s, etc.) Check it out at the NSIDC. http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/daily.html
Yeah! Hah! Can’t wait to send those graphs to the EPA for their hearings on CO2 as a pollutant.
You can not stop the intersection…the Arctic Ice is now part of the sea ice collective and the Ice Borg!
The ultimate Ponzi ripoff, $50B has nothing on the AGW crowd.
Allan M R MacRae (21:31:49) : “It also seems probable that the USA will never regain its global prominence.”
The people of the USA — via government, non-gov organizations, private labors and donations – have made a tremendous effort since the end of WW2 to improve the well being of many people and their countries. Much of this effort has been wasted but much has worked. It should be no surprise if the US is not quite as primary over the next 30-50 years as it was in the past 50. We call some of these countries friends. They and others need to share more of the burden of raising standards all over the world. Instead there seems to be a collective rush to the 1800s.
slowtofollow (17:41:41) :
BAS press release:
http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_release.php?id=838
Thanks for posting this. The BAS scientists are clearly clutching at straws. If as they say the Antarctic cooling is due to the ozone hole, why not the Arctic also? (there’s no hole at the north but the ozone layer is considerably thinner).
Oooo this is something important I haven’t seen mentioned here previously:
Apr 21, 2009. The Fraser Institute: New Report Details Over-Looked Scientific Evidence Against Simplistic Climate Alarmism
VANCOUVER, BC—A 110-page report by an international team of climate experts published today by the independent Fraser Institute examines critically-important scientific evidence that has been overlooked or omitted in government reports that blame climate change on carbon dioxide emissions.
The new peer-reviewed report’s seven chapters investigate published scientific literature on issues such as the effects of ocean oscillations and solar variations on climate, historical climate variability, statistical challenges in climate analysis, uncertainties in climate modeling, and quality problems in temperature measurement systems. The report leaves no doubt that the science is far from “settled” on climate change.
For the complete article: http://www.fraserinstitute.org/newsandevents/news/6629.aspx
http://www.geosc.psu.edu/~pwinberr/Site/J%20Paul%20Winberry_files/WinAnanGeology.pdf
Interesting reading about the Antartic rift.
The EcoInquirer had posted a funny article about this increase and decrease of Antarctic ice some time ago…
http://www.ecoenquirer.com/antarctic-ice.htm
Now it is predicting the conclusions of the 10th Bali Conference on Global Warming (2027). Some bits are just priceless… “Today, we have continued the long tradition of cooperation that has maintained agreements enabling negotiations which provide a basis for future talks” lol
http://www.ecoenquirer.com/Bali-global-warming-2027.htm
I hope the links pass the filter…
Thankyou so much, Steven Goddard.
Its really brilliant you take up all these pseodu science things.
Obviously, this new convenient ozone explanation for the ice growth was manufactured, and its a grreat help for debaters around the world that you guys do these analyses.
Heres a little simple graphic, if you can use it:
http://www.klimadebat.dk/forum/vedhaeftninger/peer1.gif
I’m sure I heard somewhere that ‘the science is settled’ on AGW.
Even if we accept that these new ‘discoveries’ can be laid at the feet of mankind, how do you rationalise all of these new ‘facts’ with settled science?
So much spin even the pro-AGW crowd must be getting dizzy.
“the pro-AGW crowd” is too much of a mouthful. It should be “the AGWAs.” (The 2nd A stands for “Alarmist.”)
Mike Lorrey
“we should be seeing some attenuation in the ozone hole by now if that was the cause.”
Can you attenuate a hole?
Nylo,
Thanx for those funny links! A sample:
“Marring the Bali conference for the first time this year [2027] were thousands of arrests for alleged anti-green hate speech crimes. Many conference observers expected this as the inevitable result of last year’s U.N. Global Court ruling that classified anti-green rhetoric in public as a hate crime.”
And:
“As Mr. Gore boarded Green-1, the high efficiency Boeing 797 hybrid jet (sporting a smaller version of the standard heated swimming pool)…”
As usual, they are exploiting the public’s general ignorance of scientific issues. As long as they can keep combining causes and effects, they can continue to extend the AGW gravy train.
Re: SSSailor (19:22:40) : 23 4 2009
“Mr. DeLong Contemplates the under the radar conflict (war?) brewing among the special interest entities that influence the governance of our (US) society. Specifically, The Climate Changers v Financiers v Industrial Interests.”
This is starting to happen. There is a lot of money in energy generation and the competition is intense and costly. Some new entrants fail on thir own, but enter the picture propped up by large subsidies. Now, the competitors who get no subsidies, or worse, an emissions tax, have long memories and like to even the playing field. Not many planners take their analyses to this point, but here is what has happened in Scandanavia.
“Denmark trades power in the Nord Pool, which has announced that from October the spot floor price for surplus power will drop from zero to minus EUR 20 cents/kWh. In other words, wind generators producing power in periods of low demand will have to pay the network to take it. Nord Pool said that “A negative price floor has been in demand for some time – especially from participants trading Elspot in the Danish bidding areas. … Curtailment
of sales may give an imbalance cost for the affected seller and thus creates a willingness to pay in order to deliver power in the market.” This is likely to have a negative effect on the economics of wind power in the region, since a significant amount of Denmark’s wind power
production is affected. World Nuclear News 1/4/09, Nord Pool 4/2/09.”
The lesson is that huge subsidies to get wingless birds to fly are just a start. The real test comes when the predators drop in.
Hello, America
I read WUT everyday.Here in UE,there is absolutely nothing too conterpart the religion.I’m Belgian citizen,and there is nothing too discuss here,in the media, off even by the neighbors.Science is definitively settled, just open your wallet and let politicians robe your money.They subsidie even with taxpayer money solar panel,and let me say, you not often see the sun light here.
But about the argument/I will post that in french, soo You will be able too learn a bit about this wonderfull language.Sorry for that.
Le trou dans la couche d’ozone, dont on attribue l’origine erronément aux CFC,chose que en son temps j’ai combattu en vain(déjà AlGor était au devant de la scène?) créerait,du fait du refroidissement provoqué, ce qui reste encore à prouver,des hautes pressions,ce qui entraînerait un changement des vents.ceux-ci provoqueraient des cassures dans la banquise, et la mer ainsi libérée gèlerait aussitôt ce qui expliquerait l’augmentation de la surface de celle-ci?
Faut-il être “scientifique” pour écrire de telles âneries?Lorsque la banquise se brise, et que les morceaux sont libérés et poussés au large,cela s’appelle des icebergs,et ceux-ci n’attendent pas gentiment que la glace se reforme pour se recoller à la banquise, ils partent au large, et vont embêter les hardis navigateurs sous des latitudes plus hautes.
De plus,si des hautes pressions régnaient sur le pole sud,il n’y neigerait pas abondamment comme cela s’observe.Parfois je me demande si ces “scientifiques” ne sont pas en réalité hébergés dans une clinique psychiatrique?
It would seem that if one had a quest (say, to reduce global warming) that one would have both an objective (an optimal temperature) and a means of measuring when that objective has been reached.
Has anyone seen an AGW scientist even posit an optimal Global Mean Temperature, or what they would do if the temperature fell beneath that? Would they start promoting CO2? Does the lack of thought on this issue indicate that they never intend to actually solve climate issues?
I recently had a brief blog discussion with a climate professor at the University of Washington, who said he was attempting to reach out to non-scientists. There were probably 2 dozen good, solid questions (like the one above) asked of him by several non-scientists. The poor guy never had a chance. Once he saw how hard it was outside his insulated little world, he, dumbfounded, refused to even acknowledge most of them, and the answers he did give had largely been dismissed years ago, showing an alarming degree of ignorance of the world outside academia. If anyone else wonders why they keep pumping out the same stuff, it’s because each unfounded claim they accept as truth serves as an unquestioned baseline for the next step. It was as if he couldn’t comprehend why the rest of us didn’t accept his beliefs as proven fact. I weep for science, too.
It is fascinating, philosophically, that there is little or no debate regarding what earth temperature is optimal. The objective to keep everything “as is” presumes that we have the ability to do this AND that it is the right thing to do. Maybe it is better for the planet as a whole to be warmer(or colder). After all, humans have flourished in this climate and human activities are cited(amongst warmers) as the cause.
Jim, Rick,
This (from 2007) should answer your question:
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/10/03/al-gore-getting-rich-spreading-global-warming-hysteria-media-s-help
And in response to the Global Optimum Temperature question posed by Rick: if it falls below a stated optimum then you sell carbon ‘debits’ instead of ‘credits’ (god, I hope I didn’t just give one of these sycophants an idea!). What do they really care about their credit endowment to aboriginal tribes to buy better sandals (and windmills) instead of an improved standard of living ayway?
Make them give the sandals back (and shut off the windmill), then allow industry to increase Co2 to compensate. I await the day, with a sickening knot in my gut, when we are told how great the cap&trade system is working and how we are actually able to control polar ice extent. Win + win, and happy joy, joy…barf.
The new and flourishing carbon market makes money on both sides of the graph. Fits in rather nicely with the, ‘black is white’, ‘up is down’, etc mindset.
We need to get someone in the MSM to administer a major slapdown, is there no one up to the task?
Sorry, 2nd paragraph, last word = anyway. This keyboard sucks, I’d go get a new one but am concerned about the expansion of my carbon footprint. 😉
Look, all they have to do is to create some climate model that shows rate X of Antarctic cooling, or warming or melting. It doesn’t matter if the model is junk, just that it shows X.
Next, conduct some measurements, (or make up data ala Steig) that shows the rate is actually Y. If Y is greater than X, then just proclaim it worse than expected!
Does it matter that X was wrong? No. Does it matter that Y may also be wrong? No. It only matters that Y is greater than X.
If Y had been less than X, you never would have heard about it.
John Galt (10:50:05) :
“Look, all they have to do is to create some climate model that shows rate X of Antarctic cooling, or warming or melting. It doesn’t matter if the model is junk, just that it shows X.
Next, conduct some measurements, (or make up data ala Steig) that shows the rate is actually Y. If Y is greater than X, then just proclaim it worse than expected!
Does it matter that X was wrong? No. Does it matter that Y may also be wrong? No. It only matters that Y is greater than X.
If Y had been less than X, you never would have heard about it”.
John, why don’t you make a long story short:
They cheat, lie and manipulate.
That’s what they do.
Steven Goddard (22:24:02) :
“I propose a balanced ice budget. Let’s move ice from the South Pole to the North Pole. Except that the North Pole doesn’t need any more ice.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
Perhaps we can send the extra 630,000km2 of global ice to Venus? They need it more than we do.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/iphone/images/iphone.anomaly.global.png
Ice seems to be the only thing running a surplus these days. No wonder governments choose to focus on the imaginary ice economy – instead of something real”.
Start an advertising campeign immediately!
Eat more ice, eat more ice!
Of course everyone here knows that God controls the climate. when will those silly scientists stop being so silly ?
The Charlotte Tea Party Speech
by John Lewis (April 20, 2009)
The Charlotte Tea Party Speech by Dr. John David Lewis, Dept. of Political Science, Duke University was first first delivered on April 15, 2009, Charlotte, North Carolina. This is a slightly revised version by Dr. Lewis for printed publication. Permission is given to read this in full, wherever defenders of liberty may gather.
It is high time for a tea party in America!
But to do this right, we need to understand what it means. So I want to think back for a moment to what happened over 200 years ago, at the time of the original Boston Tea Party.
The Founders of this nation brought forth a radical idea. It was truly radical, practiced nowhere before this time.
This idea was the Rights of Man. The Founders saw each of us as endowed with certain inalienable rights, rights that may not be separated from our nature as autonomous beings.
These inalienable rights are:
· The Right to Life–the right to live your own life, to choose your own goals, and to preserve your own independent existence.
· The Right to Liberty, which is the right to act to achieve your goals, without coercion by other men.
· The Right to the Pursuit of Happiness, to act to achieve your own success, your own prosperity, and your own happiness, for your own sake.
· And the Right to Property—the right to gain, keep, and enjoy, the material products of your efforts.
Unless I’m mistaken I don’t see anything here about a right to happiness. I see a right to the pursuit of happiness: the right to take the actions needed to attain one’s own happiness. Nor do I see any rights to things at all—no rights to food, clothing, healthcare or diapers. There is only a right to act to achieve those things. This is called freedom.
These rights to act—the rights to life, to liberty, and to the pursuit of happiness—are founded on a certain view of man. Each of us is an individual, autonomous, moral being, with the right to choose his own values and capable of directing his own life.
Look at the person next to you, and look in the mirror—do you see the individual sovereign human being, existing for his own sake, with the right to live, to love, and to act?
This idea—the Founders’ idea of the individual Rights of Man—led to a radical view of government. Government was not to be inherited by the force of an entrenched aristocracy as in Europe, imposed by the divine right of kings through generations of oppression, or enforced by the force of a club.
Government in America was to be designed and instituted by thinking men, for a single purpose: to protect and defend the Rights of Man.
This is what the American Declaration of Independence says: “To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.” Thinking men, armed with the idea of rights, created a government limited to the protection of individual rights.
For centuries in Europe, the relationship between the people and the government had been that of serf to master: everyone was a servant of the ruling elite. In America, this was turned upside down: government became the servant of the individual. The very reason for a government–and its purpose–is to secure our inalienable, individual rights.
The results in America speak for themselves: the greatest most prosperous nation the world has ever seen. I here quote the writer Ayn Rand (and if you want to understand what is happening today, read her novel Atlas Shrugged). Ayn Rand, speaking to the graduating class at West Point, said that the United States was the first and only moral nation in the history of man, the first nation founded on a moral principle, the Rights of Man, and with a moral purpose, to secure these rights for all men.
This principle of rights is so strong that over years the Americans were able to correct the original shortcomings that the Founders’ could not overcome. Slavery and the denial of women’s suffrage both fell when the principle of rights was properly applied to all men. To correct the original errors did not require the Americans to overthrow the principle, but rather to strengthen and to deepen it, to apply it to everyone, and to renew their commitment to it.
And that is what we must do today.
Because something very bad has happened in America over the last century. A cancer has implanted itself in the land of the free. A cancer has grown in our government and in our society. The cancer is the idea that government is no longer to be the defender of our rights, but rather the grantor of wishes.
Over the past century the idea took hold that government’s purpose was not to secure our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but rather to satisfy our needs, whims and wants. That idea has been implanted in our schools, our media, and our government.
Do you wish for a better house? There’s a government housing agency to give it to you, with taxes extorted from those who buy their own house. Do you wish for health care? There is a government agency who will extort it from others and give it to you. Do you need food? There is a welfare agency to grab the wealth needed to give you food stamps.
And who will provide these handouts? The government, many people say, the all-powerful being that looms over us and grants our wishes. But who is to provide the goods that government hands out? Every person who works and produces, and whose property, gained by the sweat of his efforts, is taken from him by force.
The government has, once again, become a ruling aristocracy, set up as our masters, disposing of our lives.
This cancer has now grown to the point where this ruling elite controls a budget of over four thousand billion dollars a year—more money than can be conceived by the human mind. The government had to grow this big—and it will continue to grow until it destroys this nation—because it is acting according to the idea that it is morally right to take the wealth from those who produce it, and to give it to those who want it.
At the root of this idea is a view of man that is totally at odds with the vision of the Founders: the modern vision of man as a whining dependent, who begs for the needs of life from an all-powerful governing aristocracy. This ruling elite claims the moral right to distribute the wealth of those who earn it to those who wish for it.
If we are going to challenge this monstrosity, if we are going to expunge this cancer, then this is what we must reject. We need to regain the vision of ourselves held by the American Founders. We need to stand up, and assert ourselves as autonomous moral beings, with the right to our own life, liberty and the pursuit of our own happiness. We need to reject the claim that we are weak and dependent beggars, and to assert our own competence to run our own lives.
It is going to take as great a commitment to destroy this cancer as it took to build it. We’re going to have to be strong, we’re going to have to be independent in our thinking, and we are going to have to reject handouts when they are offered to us. And we’re going to have to speak out.
At its heart, the economic and political crisis is a deeper problem—a moral problem. The cause of the crisis today is the worship of need, and the view of man as too stupid to act for his own sake, and worthy of being milked of all his values, to provide for others. This is what we must reject.
Do you think that this is a conspiracy to seize your wealth? It is far worse than that. As Ayn Rand wrote, “It is not your wealth that they’re after. Theirs is a conspiracy against the mind, which means: against life and man.”
This is an attempt to seize your life, to destroy your sense of self as an independent human being, and to replace it with a being with no self-esteem and no capacity for individual action—a being doomed to beg for sustenance from an all-powerful ruling elite.
This ruling elite, looking down on us right now, cannot understand gatherings such as these, in which free people gather to defend liberty. They think that this must be orchestrated by a vast conspiracy, because they cannot understand how autonomous human beings might gather by their own choice, to affirm their commitment to liberty.
Our so-called leaders think this because they don’t see autonomous moral beings at all. They see only serfs, sniveling and whining, begging their masters for the scraps needed to survive, acting as a collective mob rather than as thinking individuals.
Look at yourselves again. Do you see in your face, and in the face of the person next to you, the slave of a group, with no moral status, no rights and no liberties, who is bound from birth to serve? Or do you see an autonomous being with the right to live for his own sake?
Will you knuckle under and become a helpless dependent? Or will you stand tall, and defend your right to your own life, your own liberty, your pursuit of your own individual happiness, and your own property?
It is time to stand up, to say no to the creed of dependence, to assert ourselves, to assert our own moral status, to defend our right to our own lives and property, and to make our voices heard.
Thank you very much.
John David Lewis
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5505
Jim (07:47:42) :
For me, 1 – 2ºC warmer than now would be fine.
The Sahara would probably be greener, increased growing seasons, fewer tropical cyclones and my arthritis may not bother me so much.
Great stuff but the catastrophe merchants would of course claim the opposite would happen.
DaveE
John F. Hultquist (23:04:04) :
Allan M R MacRae (21:31:49) : “It also seems probable that the USA will never regain its global prominence.”
The people of the USA — via government, non-gov organizations, private labors and donations – have made a tremendous effort since the end of WW2 to improve the well being of many people and their countries. Much of this effort has been wasted but much has worked. It should be no surprise if the US is not quite as primary over the next 30-50 years as it was in the past 50. We call some of these countries friends. They and others need to share more of the burden of raising standards all over the world. Instead there seems to be a collective rush to the 1800s.
***********************************
Agreed John. I do not expect other countries to be nearly as generous as the USA has been since 1945 – in fact, some of these countries are run by criminal thugs, and life with them at the controls could become quite difficult.
Thanks for sharing that America is like Nineveh/assyria….
And it will be judged like em.If they were juged then,we will
never escape!
I’m no conspiracy fan, but I see a great many educated people being quite persistent on expanding the AGW agenda, and a sickening amount of cash being thrown at the “problem”. I can NOT believe that all (or any) of them believe what they’re saying to us. And even a fool like me knows that periods of lowered global temps cause extinctions every time. I also know a bit about basic survival preparations. Preparation for extreme cold translates fairly in a hot spot, but high-temp prep to cold environs, not so well. What I’m looking at here is population control. These people are not nice. They’re talking us into killing ourselves, our kids and grandkids, and most are making a nice living doing it. A frozen human sacrifice to the gods of Elitism.
Jim (07:47:42) :
It is fascinating, philosophically, that there is little or no debate regarding what earth temperature is optimal. The objective to keep everything “as is” presumes that we have the ability to do this AND that it is the right thing to do. Maybe it is better for the planet as a whole to be warmer(or colder). After all, humans have flourished in this climate and human activities are cited(amongst warmers) as the cause.
Jim, that is a very good point. If the powers that be seem to feel that they can control the climate with a bit of CO2 modification, why not a global discussion of the optimum temp.,……must be pretty easy just to ‘dial it in’.
Keith & Jim,
Before the debate can begin there has to be a little reflection on the part of the debaters.
Since there’s no such thing as an average climate of the Earth, we’d have to pose the question: “what would be the optimum climate for where you live and what would be the optimum climate for all the other places, where other people live but you like to visit or at least watch travel shows about?”
To be democratic we would have to record everybody’s reply then feed the data into a powerful computing machine.
Some of the responses would clearly be unbelievable, so they would have to be adjusted from their raw state, but it would be a bit undemocratic to only adjust some people’s replies.
Obviously, all opinions would need to be approriately tuned.
I suspect that very few in the inhabited world would want it much cooler in general than it is now and we’ve heard already they’re not keen (except me and most other Canadians) on having more warmth.
There is really only one conclusion; the optimum climatic conditions for the Earth are those that existed from the putative Little Ice Age until just prior to the Industrial Revolution.
Once carbon capture and containment have been perfected we should be able to judiciously release precise amounts of CO2 in regional doses to keep the measurements in line with the forecasts. Given that convection is proven insignificant (not worth modeling) , the warming could be localized and reversible.
I have noticed that my own tastes in weather vary constantly. I often complain about it.
Oliver,
“warming localised and reversible”is a good idea it sounds a little like the Urban Heat Island effect.
These GW,CC, carbon sequestration and other manipulations sounds like a politicians utopian dream to control climate, they seem to be able to control (or imagine they do) every thing else.
As for the optimum climate,I live in a hot summer,cold winter inland Australian climate,I can adapt, but my wife wants to live in the tropics.
So why not leave the world as it is so there is one less thing to argue about.
The real cause for the “global warming effect” is all the hot air coming from the United Statas Democratic Party, Obama, and his congressional SS. Of course Al Gore will go down as the biggest con man in history—enough said!
And then there is Henry Waxman, the man with pig nostrils that would do a better job as a chimney sweep, rather than his current job as Californias Nazi on congress.
Apparently the weather does not know either. Two days ago record highs were being reported all throughout the northwest part of the US. Yesterday record lows were recorded. Wind differences and alternating weather fronts are to blame in both cases. I just love weather.
Just checked the water vapor levels and jet stream out over the northern Pacific. With this same Arctic loop reaching WAY down and the jet stream rotation we have off shore, mixed with a higher water vapor picking up moisture from a warmer ocean temp, we would be in an April blizzard. But, the ocean is cold just off shore, the cold air rotating over it is dry, and thus we are cold and dry when it gets to us. However, this is a fairly good scenario for occasional precip. That would mean local showers, hail and snow, depending on elevation, and with partly sunny weather to boot. So I went to my local NWS forecast and bingo. That’s what it said.
http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?map.x=295&map.y=198&minlon=-122.11&maxlon=-116.45&minlat=43.57&maxlat=47.67&mapwidth=354&site=pdt
If this were published research, it would be one, very damned short paper. And with very few calculations.
By the way, the dust that was kicked up around here in the wind storm is heading out to the Pacific and is full of Iron. Fish food. Well, actually plankton food. The salmon will be very happy.
In our city AGW is being used by a coterie of out of control city officials, a government minister enthralled by Gore and a small group of landowners out for themselves, to build a wind farm, which will ruin the environment, leave our water catchment exposed to a catastrophic fire and destroy property and amemity values. Check out
http://palmerston-north.info
More craziness…
http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/security/stop-the-spam-and-save-the-planet/2009/04/25/1240684317710.html
I can’t believe all you idiots!!!! Who cares if global warming is a farce? Does it really matter that we change our way of life to lessen our impact. Have any of you ever thought for a second that all the other life on earth is just as import as humans and has a right to be here? How about some critical thinking? Have any of you been to either of the poles lately? Perhaps you could compare it with your last visit? No wonder the planet is completley screwed. Don’t worry though, as long as you keep your collective heads in the sand you won’t have to do anything about it. Just keep plugging away at business as usual. As long as you have your suburbia you’ll be ok.
REPLY: Ah yes, another anonymous angry person who gives a false name and false email address, (afraid@gmaicl.com) telling us how our views are so wrong, but not having the courage to stand behind his/her own posted opinion. Drive by cowardice at its finest. BTW we haven’t been to the poles lately, but the US NAVY visits the north pole pretty regularly, have a look. – Anthony
I just read some more of your posts!!! OMG, why did I even bother – first your Americans and secondly your all nuts!! The good old nutty yank never fails to surpirse me – hows your redneck agenda going? Actually now that I think of it – America would be the first country to be affected by climate change due to its huge population, so bring on the burn baby. The rest of the world can actually do without you lot and once you’re all gone there’ll probably be a climate reversal anyway. So I guess in retrospect you are all right – theres not a thing to worry about!
REPLY: How’s the weather down there in Brisbane, getting colder is it?
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25388810-29277,00.html
A little early don’t you think? Ok I’ve had my fun but if you want to continue to post here you have to provide a valid email address, otherwise snip snip – Anthony
You moron – is it any wonder I don’t give my name!!! You guys all have guns.
REPLY: And computers too, and English skills, and the ability to post coherent thought. Again, last chance, valid email address required. Please see the blog policy tab above. – Anthony
[snip – blog policy violation, no valid email address]
[snip – blog policy violation, no valid email address]
[snip – blog policy violation, no valid email address]
[snip – blog policy violation, no valid email address]
In relations to the BAS article I presume there is some lag between the ozone hole and the effect on the ice extent.
In the Antarctic summer the ice would be melting so the main effect of the winds blowing from the cold south and making more ice would be negated by the ice melting at that point. When the ice stops melting the cold winds would help increase the area ( positive anomaly as we see) of ice.
Regards
Andy
[Let us know when you have something you would like to contribute ~ charles the moderator]
Steven Goddard
Would it be accurate to say that Antarctic Sea Ice Extent is currently on the verge of record territory?
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png
Makes sense that the MSM is pushing a new Antarctic ice melt story, i.e. sea level rise will be 3 meters instead of 5 or 6:
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLE883983
http://news.google.com/news?ned=us&hl=en&ncl=dKOGTQFC-UIC7HMtrklq4saa1Fz2M&cf=all
If the Antarctic Sea Ice trend continues, a similar article/press release to yours above, titled something like, Antarctic Sea Ice Hits A Record High and including:
– The charts from NSIDC and UIUC
– Links so that people can verify NSIDC’s and UIUC’s credibility http://nsidc.org/about/sponsors.html and http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/ view the charts on their websites
– Several easily readable paragraphs on the science, 30 year up trend and a layman’s refutation of the ozone hole cause claim,
– A concluding paragraph highlighting the recent misleading Wilkins Shelf and West Antarctic ice sheet scare studies and articles, and questioning the motivations of their authors,
might just be one of the daggers that will help us put a fork in all of this…