Lest readers think I’m the only TV meteorologist to speak my mind on climate issues, there are others, such as Jym Ganahl in Columbus Ohio.
The Daily Kos posted an article here calling for this:
Columbus Weatherman is a Kooky Global Warming Denier
Contact NBC4 and urge them to send weatherman Jym Ganahl to some climate change conferences with peer-reviewed climatologists. Let NBC4 know that they have a responsibility to have expert climatologists on-air to debunk Ganahl’s misinformation and the climate change deniers don’t deserve an opportunity to spread their propaganda:
NBC 4 phone # 614-263-4444
NBC 4 VP/GM Rick Rogala email: rrogala(ATSIGN)wcmh.com
And it was all over this story in a minor weekly newspaper in Columbus, OH., reprinted below. Jym could probably use a little support right now. His email: jganahl [at] wcmh dot com
From “The Other Paper” MEDIA MORSELS: Ganahl debunks the global warming
 |
| Be afraid of the sun, not carbon: Ganahl, seen here with what appears to be some sort of glacier, doesn’t buy the hype |
Just when you thought it was safe to assume that everyone had pretty much accepted climate change and moved on, here comes rogue NBC 4 chief meteorologist Jym Ganahl to blow your freaking mind.
“Just wait 5 or 10 years, and it will be very obvious. They’ll have egg on their faces,” Ganahl said this week of global warming advocates.
The “global warming hoax” is an obvious fallacy, Ganahl said in a YouTube video posted Jan. 23.
In the video, taped at a meet-up of the Ohio Freedom Alliance, Ganahl chats with Dave, the self-proclaimed No. 1 biker talk show host on radio, and—still odder—Robert Wagner, a former candidate for the 15th congressional district.
Although global warming is clearly “a fallacy,” Ganahl told the dudes, “It is remarkable how many people are being led like sheep in the wrong direction.”
Evoking Orwellian mind-control power of the media, Ganahl said it’s remarkable how easy it is to panic the unwashed masses.
Ganahl continued to evangelize offline this week.
Sunspots—and not carbon emissions—are to blame for the slow warming of the globe, Ganahl said. “It has nothing to do with us.”
“When there are sunspots, like freckles on the sun—dark spots—these are like turning on a furnace and the earth warms. When there are no sunspots, it is like the furnace is in standby and the earth cools.
“I have always thought we should celebrate and be thankful we live in a time when it is warmer, not curse it,” Ganahl said. “It allows us to grow food and feed the population—and the warming is slow and we can adapt to it.”
Cold, on the other hand, is to blame for a whole host of worldly disasters, including death of the Aztecs, the Vikings, and who knew?— the bubonic plague.
“Instead of screaming global warming, we should be preaching global cooling,” he said.
But with a new president who apparently buys into the whole carbon emission demonizing scam, Ganahl said, “It’s very scary,” and admittedly “very difficult,” to fight the mob mentality.
“Carbon dioxide is what we, as people, exhale. Enough said. Unless you eliminate people, you have it. It’s food for the plants and trees,” he said.
Our local Al Gore antithesis risked his career on his wild weather heresy—sort of.
Back in 2007, the take-no-prisoners field of meteorology was split over the issue of climate change. Prominent Weather Channel meteorologist Heidi Cullen called for those who deny the so-called truth about global warming to be stripped of their American Meteorological Society credentials.
Ganahl, who just celebrated 30 years at NBC, became the youngest person to be granted the AMS Seal of Approval, by the way, back in 1970.
Cullen’s call has thus far gone unheeded, but it stirred up a mini-schism among TV weather types.
“Meteorologists are among the few people trained in the sciences who are permitted regular access to our living rooms,” Cullen said in a column written for the Weather Channel.
“And in that sense, they owe it to their audience to distinguish between solid, peer-reviewed science and junk political controversy.”
Ganahl says he has kept his anti-global warming propaganda out of your living room, but he is prepared to sell on sunspots, and their relation to warming cycles, if you ever ask.
Asked if he’s worried that he’ll take a hit among the sheep for his climate thinking, he said he’s not concerned.
“Just tell them to wait five or 10 years, and I’ll have history to back me up.”
“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism”
So they tell me. It’s easy to pick out the true patriots. They’re the ones carrying the “%$^& AMERIKKKA THE BABYKILLER” signs.
Meanwhile, all the climate skeptics need to be silenced before they multiply.
(“Free-dom? It is a Yang worship-word. You will not speak it.”)
Reply: I’m not sure if Star Trek references are a violation of blog policy, but perhaps they should be. Anthony? ~ charles the moderator
REPLY: I draw the line at Tribbles. – Anthony
Leif Svalgaard (08:12:55) wrote: “… But as for AGW and astrology, it is hopeless to argue as the limitless, self-deceptive ignorance cannot be penetrated by reason, and the whole thing is politics anyway. This is sad.”
Sadder still, Leif, that your words express a truth that applies far beyond just “AGW and Astrology”.
Ken Hall (03:09:40) wrote: “Re the ferocious forest fires in OZ… I believe that these fires are not caused by AGW, but actually by sick and insane people with matches…”
You must qualify that statement with some Ken. There is hysteria abroad regarding these fires. It appears arson may be the cause in some, but not in others, and there were many, many fires in this three-day period.
Note, also, that going back as far as 1851, Victoria has recorded major bushfires, aka wildfires, of massive destruction.
Psi, thanks for the kind words, but the Scot in me refuses to buy The Chilling Stars. I find it no tribble at all to download and read the A&G Cosmoclimatology article for free, getting the science direct from the manufacturer.
http://www.spacecenter.dk/research/sun-climate/Scientific%20work%20and%20publications/resolveuid/86c49eb9229b3a7478e8d12407643bed
http://www.spacecenter.dk/research/sun-climate/Scientific%20work%20and%20publications
re svalgaard: I tend to disagree with his views but I would have to concede that he would know much more about this than I would after all he has published in this area and he is not a fanatic about anything he simply describes what he has seen and learned. However.. this little snippet from him (above)
“If I read the Pavlakis paper you cite correctly, they find that 7 months before El Nino, the clouds have cleared and more sunlight reaches the applicable equatorial region, leading to several degrees heating. I’m not sure [don’t know – but wouldn’t think so] that the global ratio applies locally to that region.”
In any way this is a concession that yes the sun does influence climate “indirectly” (my quotes) (by heating that region a few degrees ect” ), a bit of nitpicking. Anyway I admire his tenacity to all the attacks he gets from us fellows and gals. It is as many bloggers have said, a combination of solar activity that neither can be shown or proved or dissproved at this time (which is his point I do believe) LOL
Following on previous VG: it seems both Svalgard and Archibald may be spot on max sunspot numbers (Svalgaard I think 70, Archibald 50-70?, That is judging by flux if it is relevant
http://www.solarcycle24.com/ see graphs
The sun(and maybe Jupiter) tugs at the earth, it holds it in orbit and every other planet in our solar system. It even pulls in other passerby, including our own moon that faces the sun and pulls away 1cm a year.
No sun= no life,no earth. Just a frozen dirty blob busted up from collisions in it’s own solar system like our poor demoted planets/debree at the edge of our heliosphere. Maybe busting off as a projectile to seed another hospitable young solar system coming up behind us in the big galactic pinwheel we’ve been released from. We are entering the outskirts of our milky way. A cold energy(sun) draining area away from our birth in this galaxy. No matter how you slice it we will be cast out, getting colder, as our mother sun burns out.
actuator (19:04:26) :
Despite all you say about the planet’s interior, tides, etc. , when I’m outdoors on a sunny day in July visiting South Florida, I get the unscientific perception that somehow the Sun is heating things up. I guess I must be wrong.
I can understand the confusion for people who just enter the debate. Of course the sun is the main source of energy of the planet. This is not what is being discussed. It is climate that is being discussed. Let us make the analogy of an open pot of water on the fire. The sun is the heating pad and after a while the only “climate” in the pot is “boiling”. Suppose the thermostat is kept just below the boiling point. There will be currents in the pot, water circulating , ready to bubble but not enough. Put a cover on. The water starts boiling. What changed the pot climate? The heating pad? The heating pad heats steadily, but we get a drastic change in the “climate” of the pot because of the cover and the changes in pressure/temperature it induces.
The statement ” the sun plays a small role in the observed warming” is similar. Studies have shown that the small variations of the sun intensity reaching the stratosphere are not enough to generate the changes in climate we see. Other physical factors have to be considered, and this is what is being discussed.
OT, I know…. but sunspot 1012 is emerging… and it’s cycle 23!
p.s to my above anna v (20:48:37) :
After a year of reading up on the global warming/not issue I have concluded for myself that it is the PDO, ENSO etc ocean and air currents together with the induced from them changes in albedo that are responsible for earth’s climate and any changes we see.
Of course these currents, like the currents in the boiling pot above, are the result of the steady heating of the sun and the periodic annual variations of where this heating applies and how the heat is stored. CO2 is a bit player in this.
A cycle 23 spot has come up on the east.
Ed Scott (17:06:55) :
I am unfamiliar with meaning of climate tugger, so I can not comment.
You only pretend to be unfamiliar. You have undoubtedly heard about Milankovich Cycles of glaciations. These are caused by the planets tugging gently at the Earth and altering its orbital parameters.
Silly me for believing that the Sun’s gravitational “tug” on the Earth maintains the Earth in its orbit around the Sun.
Silly me for believing that the Sun does provide the energy that sustains life on Earth.
Silly me for believing that the Sun is the predominate driver of climate on Earth, apparently a view with which you agree judging by your saying “Even if all these other effects only shuffle around energy originally coming from the Sun.”
Yes, indeed, silly, if you believe that these things have anything to do with the climate.
My concern is, and always will be, that the global warming/climate change is not by man-made CO2 emissions. That is the only climate issue that will have a long term detrimental economic and political effect on the futures of my great grandchildren.
So, you are saying that the solar effects will have a long term detrimental economic and political effect on the futures of my great grandchildren and AGW will not. Well, if solar cooling is really coming, we better do something about it, like try to increase AGW if we possibly can.
nobwainer (Geoff Sharp) (17:43:39) :
So what are the official sunspot numbers for January 2009?, I have read in forums that SC23 spots out numbered SC24?
Don’t believe all you read in forums. In January, there was a SC23 region on a single day, the 19th, and a SC24 region on 9 through 13 January, thus a 5-to-1 favor of SC24.
BTW… its official we have another SC23 spot, further backing up David Archibald’s statements.
It is normal to have old cycle spots continuing well into the new cycle, so this is backing up nobody’s statements in particular.
R John (18:13:02) :
Question – if the Sun is less 0.1% responsible for climate, then if we changed our star from a yellow one to say a white dwarf would our climate remain the same? What about a Red Giant (assuming our distance was maintained)?
I assume that you mean all with the same luminosity, otherwise your question answers itself. But even with exactly the same total luminosity [emitted energy], the effects on climate would be different because the spectra would be different: the white dwarf giving out much more UV, for instance.
actuator (19:04:26) :
So, if the Sun was to suddenly go dark, are you saying the effect on our climate would be minimal?
Perhaps not worth an answer…
Despite all you say about the planet’s interior, tides, etc. , when I’m outdoors on a sunny day in July visiting South Florida, I get the unscientific perception that somehow the Sun is heating things up. I guess I must be wrong.
Perhaps NASA should just hire you to go outside now and then rather than sending up expensive spacecraft to measure the Sun’s heat…
idlex (19:23:13) :
I went back to the Oulu Cosmic Ray Station to have a look at the cosmic ray count since 1968.
Different stations have slightly different cosmic ray counts because of 1) different changes of the Earth’s magnetic field and 2) the difficulty of keeping the monitor stable. There are about 100 stations in the world and most show a variation similar to Moscow: http://cr0.izmiran.rssi.ru/mosc/main.htm select year 1958 and resolution one day. You will generate a plot similar to the plot here: http://www.leif.org/research/CosmicRayFlux.png
The Thule station [almost at the geomagnetic pole with least influence of the geomagnetic field] gives you this: http://www.leif.org/research/thule-cosmic-rays.png
What to note in all these plots is that [especially in http://www.leif.org/research/CosmicRayFlux.png ] A) the cosmic ray flux is maximal when sunspot are minimal [lower green ‘mountains’], B) the dips in cosmic rays are at sunspot maxima following the solar cycle strength [stronger cycles have deeper dips], C) the cosmic ray maxima [at sunspot minima] have the same level with the exception of an alternation between cycles, every other maxima is a bit higher than the surrounding maxima. This effect has to do with ‘drift’ of the cosmic rays with changing polarity of the Sun’s magnetic field [well-understood]. But apart from that, the cosmic ray intensity at solar mimima is indeed ‘rock steady’, with no long-term trend [Oulu notwithstanding].
I’ve not seen a website that provides a graphic display of the Earth’s albedo (is there one?), so I can’t comment.
On my website I have Figures from Enric Palle’s papers on albedo measured by looking at the Moon [‘Earthshine’]: http://www.leif.org/research/albedo.png
You may ask why Svensmark and Co. have not shown albedo plots since they are so central to their thesis.
On the topic of notable climate sceptics, please don’t forget the current EU president, Vaclav Klaus! He is a constant irritant to alarmists.
There are other alarmists and doomsayers that need to receive their share of irritation, namely those whoe are trying to get you to believe we’ll all freeze to death because of too few sunspots.
Lance (20:42:31) :
No matter how you slice it we will be cast out, getting colder, as our mother sun burns out.
Before the Sun burns out, the Earth will have been burned to a crisp as the Sun late in life swells up and increases it luminosity thousands of times.
idlex (19:23:13) :
I went back to the Oulu Cosmic Ray Station to have a look at the cosmic ray count since 1968.
This paper has more on long-term trends of cosmic rays and what might influence the trend:
http://neutronm.bartol.udel.edu/reprints/2007bieber.pdf
Also a good comparison of several different polar stations.
Leif Svalgaard (21:28:20) :
I am unfamiliar with meaning of climate tugger, so I can not comment.
You only pretend to be unfamiliar. You have undoubtedly heard about Milankovich Cycles of glaciations. These are caused by the planets tugging gently at the Earth and altering its orbital parameters.
There is a good study on this
SUCCESSIVE REFINEMENTS IN LONG-TERM
INTEGRATIONS OF PLANETARY ORBITS
F. Varadi et al
ABSTRACT
We report on accurate, long-term numerical simulations of the orbits of the
major planets in our solar system. The equations of motion are directly integrated
by a Stormer multi-step scheme, which is optimized to reduce round-o
errors. The physical models are successively re ned to include corrections due to
general relativity and the nite size of the lunar orbit. In one case, the Earth{
Moon system is resolved as two separate bodies and the results are compared
to those based on analytically averaging the lunar orbit. Through this comparison,
a better analytical model is obtained. The computed orbits are in good
agreement with those of previous studies for the past ve million years but not
for earlier times. The inner planets exhibit chaotic behavior with a Lyapunov
time of exponential separation of nearby orbits equal to about 4 million years.
Modeling uncertainties and chaos in the inner solar system restrict the accuracy
of the computations beyond the past 50 million years. We do not observe marked
chaos in the motion of the Jovian planets in our 90-million year integration, and
infer that the Lyapunov time for those planets is at least 30 million years.”
Interesting last sentence.Brings up thoughts on Nemesis.
Re Kos:
I used to post on Kos occasionally. One day, a couple of years ago, I showed up after a long absence, and noticed something about global warming and – since I’d just started to become sceptical about it (I’m immediately sceptical the moment anyone declares that “The debate is over.”) – I posted something mildly sceptical of it.
I returned an hour or two later to find that my sceptical post had been impounded, and that I was under investigation by several ‘investigators’, who had been digging through all my prior posts over the previous 3 or 4 years to find out more about me. Eventually, after they found out that I’d been posting for years, and had pondered over some remarks I’d made about Dick Cheney (who’d just shot a friend of his in the face) worrying they may have been excessively sympathetic towards him, it was eventually determined by this ‘people’s court’ that my post could be published after all. I was then subjected to attack by another bunch of goons for expressing such unwarranted scepticism.
The whole experience was a bit like being stopped by police and put up against a wall, and questioned closely with my hands behind my back. “So what are you doing here, punk? Eh? Eh?!” It was a shocking experience. I realised that if you stepped out of line on Kos, expressed the wrong opinions, this is what you could expect.
I haven’t been back. I don’t see a future for any blog which attempts to force people to adhere to a ‘party line’. People are going to drift away when that happens. Two or three years ago, Kos was the biggest blog in America. I bet it isn’t any more.
????????
Despite all you say about the planet’s interior, tides, etc. , when I’m outdoors on a sunny day in July visiting South Florida, I get the unscientific perception that somehow the Sun is heating things up. I guess I must be wrong.
Leif Svalgaard
Perhaps NASA should just hire you to go outside now and then rather than sending up expensive spacecraft to measure the Sun’s heat…
Leif, So why waist Billions of dollars on stereo, soho,etc. when the sun changes less than 0.00000000001% …. WHY? DR. WHY?
Perhaps NASA should just go outside now and then rather than sending up expensive spacecraft!!!!!!!!!!!!
Leif Svalgaard (21:28:20) :
Don’t believe all you read in forums. In January, there was a SC23 region on a single day, the 19th, and a SC24 region on 9 through 13 January, thus a 5-to-1 favor of SC24.
You have to be careful what you read in here too. I am not interested in days….more the amount of spots. From what I have found sunspot 1010 was the first spot for the year and was SC24 on the 9th, followed by 1011 which was SC23 on the 19th, then today with 1012 which is SC23.
REPLY: Please repost your comments on the new thread for spot 1012 – Anthony
On the topic of notable climate sceptics, please don’t forget the current EU president, Vaclav Klaus! He is a constant irritant to alarmists. – idlex
re are other alarmists and doomsayers that need to receive their share of irritation, namely those whoe are trying to get you to believe we’ll all freeze to death because of too few sunspots. – Leif Svalgaard
Klaus is a global warming sceptic, and asks that alternative theories be considered. That seems quite reasonable to me. But I’ve yet to read anything in which Klaus has pinned his colours to the Svensmark or Fairbridge or Landscheidt theories.
I hope that I’m as sceptical of Svensmark and Landscheidt as I am of AGW. The missing piece of Svensmark is the cosmic-rays-form-clouds idea, as far as I can see (not the Earth’s albedo). And Landscheidt was indeed an astrologer, which sorta queers things a bit…
Thanks for your other advice. I’ll take a look.
Apparently, some subjects are now so important that we have to give up our Freedom of Thought and Freedom of Speech. All I’m asking for is a list of these subjects and an explanation of how an idea gets on this list and gets off it. Do we vote or is it a vote of all the former vice-presidents of the US? Or what?
Ah yes, the Gatekeepers that are the peer-reviewed scientists. Rest assured they will look out for their own while at the same time keep any modicum of sense out of room. I had an hour long conversation with my ecology professor, vehemently defending my position that global warming is nothing more than a global power grab facilitated by those who would let themselves be led so willingly. I showed him satellite pictures of the frozen polar sea ice and temperature data that supported my positions. Here is the quote he emailed me the next morning. “Thanks for this, but as I said I’m skeptical of any such claims–verbal or visual–that aren’t tied to some type of published measurement or record.” Meaning, peer reviewed. Then he called me a global warming denier. That’s when I reached nirvana. But I’m sure my grade is hosed now.
Tim L (22:46:38) :
Leif, So why spend Billions of dollars on stereo, soho,etc. when the sun changes less than 0.1% …. WHY? DR. WHY?
I corrected a few things as you can see. The reason is that much of our infrastructure: GPS, communications, etc, and damage to power stations, to the lives of astronauts, etc, and our military intelligence depends on monitoring SPACE WEATHER. Why spend money on monitoring hurricanes and thunderstorms and winter blizzards?
“Before the Sun burns out, the Earth will have been burned to a crisp as the Sun late in life swells up and increases it luminosity thousands of times.”
We are but molten slag or more important, gas-liquid-solid chromatography, like distilling alcohol. Different elements/gases are released at different temperatures and pressures from the sun to create our earth.
abstract- I believe earth and Venus were once swirling side be side vortexes at the beginning .
Both spinning a reverse to each other like out at the mouth of a river and then spinning for a billion years, like sleeping YOYO’s giving birth to our moon.
Questions,
How will the sun gain energy at it’s last dying million years?
How could we get crisped spinning into a dead sun, does the sun get a more magnetic pull as it gets older?
Lets go ask poor Pluto.
Dying stars gaining energy or even being able to attract orbiting objects after losing it’s magnetic control doesn’t make sense to me, it can’t even keep Pluto in it’s orbit. lol ! ; )
Collapsing stars, blackholes, dark matter,etc. are but mental masturbation for smart folks, like other hypotheses of a big bang or string theory. It’s but science fiction.
And so on …the Hansen quotes speak for themselves so we should perhaps watch our criticism of him lest we be accused of crimes against humanity.
Re: the vandals being found “not guilty” … doesn’t mean they were innocent. OJ was found not guilty also. Juries sometimes, and for a variety of reasons, make mistakes.
Of course different countries, different customs and maybe different shades of meanings.
idlex (22:59:22) :
And Landscheidt was indeed an astrologer, which sorta queers things a bit…
Perhaps you should inform yourself before passing judgment. May I suggest you start here….. allow yourself a couple of days.
http://landscheidt.auditblogs.com/