CNN's Jack Cafferty asks for climate feedback

Happy to help Jack. WUWT readers you have less than 30 minutes h/t to John Goetz

FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:

As the debate continues about global warming, the month of December was the 14th coldest in 115 years in the United States… and some scientists insist the earth is entering a cooling trend.

  • Wind chills brought temperatures in the Dakotas to 50 degrees below zero, while record cold in parts of Florida is damaging some of the orange crops, and South Carolina called an early end to shrimping season.
  • Parts of Canada have seen actual temperatures of 30 below zero… And freezing temperatures and record snowfalls are pounding parts of Asia and Europe too.
  • Britain has experienced the worst snowfalls in half a century.
  • In India – it’s estimated at least 100 people have died due to the cold temperatures… with dozens more killed in Bangladesh.
  • In China and South Korea, heavy snow and unusually cold weather have brought chaos to travelers – blocking roads and trains, canceling flights. After one recent blizzard in Beijing – officials had more than 300-thousand people clearing the streets.

Meanwhile some of the world’s top climate scientists suggest this winter is only the start of a worldwide trend toward cooler weather, which could last for 20 to 30 years. They base their predictions on changes in water temperatures in the oceans.

The scientists say much of the global warming in the last century was actually caused by these oceanic cycles when they were in a “warm mode”… as opposed to the current “cold mode.” They suggest there will be cooler summers ahead too.

It’s the kind of research that could undermine lots of what we’ve been told about the warming of the Earth being caused only by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

Here’s my question to you: How has this winter affected your belief in global warming?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 6pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

RESPOND HERE

Advertisements

154 thoughts on “CNN's Jack Cafferty asks for climate feedback

  1. If this new trend in global cooling does continue as predicted by some, I expect that in just a few short years any AGW alarmists that still want to continue the hoax should be arrested for fraud. Al Gore hopefully with be the first. I can’t wait.

  2. Dont get me wrong, they were knowing it would come to this.. Together with codex alimentrius this codex can kill a lot of people..
    *starting to harvest long lasting canned food*

  3. He will actually be using these things as talking points? It would be amazing to hear this said on CNN, especially this:
    Meanwhile some of the world’s top climate scientists suggest this winter is only the start of a worldwide trend toward cooler weather, which could last for 20 to 30 years
    Mother Nature and ClimateGate are giving a one-two punch to ‘global warming’.
    And I am enjoying it.

  4. AGW is non-scientific nonsense, but our recent “northern” weather is just that, “Weather.”
    UAH has January (Globally) coming in “sizzling” hot.

  5. This was predicted in 2005 by scientists at the Russian Academy of Sciences and warned by others. Actual observations have confirmed their analysis while adding yet another example of the failure of the anthropogenic global warming models. At some point, reality will carry the day over complex models influenced by agendas.
    Benicia, California

  6. This colder winter confirms my expectations of long term cooling as predicted by Prof. Don Easterbrook in 2001 due to the Pacific Ocean Oscillation changing from its hot to cold phase. The record snow is likely due to the very low and long solar cycle transition. Global warming models must incorporate ocean oscillations and solar cycles to achieve even seasonal accuracy. Chaotic ocean and atmospheric variations prevent accurate decadal and century long predictions.

  7. It hasnt influenced me the slightest.
    If someone believes that CO2, which is approx. 0.04% of the athmosphere can have a dominant effect, while you have approx. 95% watervapor out there, which is a stronger “greenhouse” gas….If you additionally believe there is a forcing factor, which is proven almost non-existant…..and additionally dont believe in negative feedback…
    And dont believe that CO2 is pretty fast absobed by sinks in nature…
    And additionally believe you can model a chaotic system in a computer….with multivariable variables…with unknown couplings….hundreds of years into the future, while you cannot even predict 10 years ahead….
    AND look away from the urban heat effect in ground-station plots…
    AND dont take into consideration the suns influence…
    Then , okay.
    But I dont.
    Its a tax scam.
    From Norway

  8. My submission:
    “While my own scientific understanding of this winter’s cold has simply been reinforced it has helped to persuade the general public and politicians that our weather and climate is not determined by mere climate prediction models that have been proven wrong in the past.
    Recent historically low solar flux also greatly influences our climate and should also indicate decadal cooling.”

  9. Wind chill is not temperature. While the snow line is meaningful, amount of snowfall is not linear with temperature (it rarely snows much after -15). On the Canadian prairies nightly lows of sub -30 are pretty common and have certainly happened every year for the last 200.
    That said this has indeed been a pretty dramatic and far reaching winter so far. It hasn’t changed my opinion on AGW though – it seemed like BS posing as science before, and still does now. What has changed is people seem to be furiously painting out the word ‘warming’. ‘Climate Instability’ is the latest I’ve heard. People, it gets hotter, it gets colder. This is unrelated to your karma.

  10. Time will tell if the planet has now gone into a cooling phase.
    Needless to say, being how the alarmists have hedged their bets by way of claiming there will be periods of cooling amidst an overall warming trend… thus any sort of cooling, whether it lasts 2 years or 20 years, will not alter their dogmatic belief that the planet will continue to heat up via manmade GHG’s.
    How is it possible for any natural cycle/force to trump the ‘ever-powerful primary driver’ known as CO2 ? No doubt they will invent a ‘scientific’ answer for that as well when the time comes…
    *sigh*

  11. It’s a puff piece intended to show that john q public is an imbecile who can barely remember how to get home from work. If nobody believes in AGW then they’re vapid sheep who get distracted by a short bout of cold. (e.g.)
    Can’t win. This is CNN we’re talking about, with made up minds and settled science. This cannot end well. (sigh.)

  12. I didn’t believe the Coming Ice Age of the 1970’s, I expected a reversion to the mean, I got it. Didn’t believe in AGW I expected a reversion to the mean, I’m getting that now.

  13. I tend to try not to “believe in” things like this. It is fairly obvious at this point that climate is not stable. It can vary dramatically both warmer and cooler over very short periods of time. There are also some more periodic cycles associated with ocean conditions. We had such a warming cycle until the 1940’s, then had cooling until the late 1970’s, then warmed again until the 2000’s, and we are now cooling again.
    The problem was assuming that the latest phase would simply continue forever and it would always warm. It is like riding a roller coaster and assuming it is going to climb forever and never return to Earth.
    There has been nothing about this latest cycle that was extraordinary.

  14. It hasn’t changed or made my view stronger and because of the confusion, its still not made it easier to talk about.
    But then I don’t think any change how ever drastically bending towards cold would sway the majority… my question to him is ‘what would have to happen to bring the truth to light?’, ‘What could sway someone from this religion?’
    I believe the science is now irrelevent, it could be totally, unquestionably and truthfully disproven, and it would just get ignored.
    – The person who has disproven it, or somewhere they have worked can be linked to an oil company, therefore it can’t be taken seriously.

  15. radun (14:51:37) :
    Strong earthquake in Haiti, magnitude 7.

    Start the countdowns.
    Linkage to Climate Change made on the news in 30… 29… 28… 27…
    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton promising disaster relief aid, for this impoverished nation that has already been devastated by the catastrophic effects of Climate Change, in 23… 22…21… 20… 19…
    Hey wait a minute. Will the earthquake news override the CNN climate piece? How suspicious!
    And 15… 14… 13…

  16. This was my offering to CNN’s call for opinions:
    Thomas McKinzie January 12th, 2010 7:05 pm ET
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    I’m an individual with technician training in both Aircraft Maintenance and Avionics Maintenance which has afforded me employment with such companies from 3M, Northwest Airlines to Jacobs Technology working at the Kennedy Space Center, which clearly puts me in the laic, however, AGW has been of interest to me for at least a decade. However, as someone that reads articles and opinions from a broad spectrum of sources, I have not ever been comfortable with the “facts” proving AGW. This summer/winter, if anything, only re-enforced what I already know, there was a political and monetary greed pushing this doctrine. It was elitist and condescending in nature, not worthy of sound scientific principles, that at 57 years of age, I was accustomed to in my education.
    Thanks for listening.

  17. It bothers me that the letter from CNN’s Jack Cafferty began: “Wind chills brought temperatures in the Dakotas to 50 degrees below zero…..” No, Jack, the wind has zero effect on temperature. Temperature is only what is measured with a thermomenter. “Wind chill” is a pseudo-measure of , or of heat transfer. Strong wind will speed up the rate of cooling, but the final temperature achieved will always be what the thermometer shows.
    This is a very common mistake that pops up regularly in the media, but it is still wrong.
    IanM (in cool but sunny southern New Brunswick)

  18. I would be careful with things like this. It may be that they select only the least intelligent comments for publishing. Seems a favored tactic of the AGW crowd.

  19. Natural climate cycles such as ocean state can all line up to produce a lot of warming, and cooling, as the case may be. If the majority of them concur to a warming or positive state, you get global warming. If concur negative, global cooling.
    There are many differing and contrary thesis as to how Earth climate phases can shift, but for the last 20 or so years, they have been held under water by an unscrupulous lot.
    Now, it’s time for the Alarmists to sit down and zip it.
    They had thier day, they were wrong and didn’t play by the rules.
    Give them thier pinks slips. “You’re fired”.
    Cooler heads (no pun intended) have to prevail, and let’s get this OMG it’s blah blah blah catastrophic emergency slam on the brakes, shut it all down hysteria into the proper waste receptacle.
    Yes, I did somewhat believe it at first, but then I started looking for myself.
    That’s when I found out how rotten AGW was.

  20. I never believed in global warming. The recent cooling has both delighted and concerned me. It delighted me because it made me hope that record-breaking cold would cause people in general to spend more time looking at the evidence themselves instead of allowing themselves to be told what to think. And it concerned me because a colder Earth is going to make it more of a challenge to raise food and conduct business as usual. I am a computer professional in Oklahoma.

  21. Here’s what I put in…
    I look at what’s going on – and if it’s a ‘crisis’ it’s remarkable how raising taxes on fuel of all kinds is going to fix it. I don’t see any sort of leadership worldwide that is acting like it’s a crisis – all I see are folks looking to glom onto my money through more taxation. And I wouldn’t mind it if they were actually BEHAVING like it’s a crisis – like building nuclear power plants, solar plants, and wind plants to drop our carbon emissions – but they’re not. Solar plants get cancelled, nuclear power plants get stalled, and the enviros go nuts over wind because it chops up birds.
    And THIS winter’s the coldest one in a long time. So – tell me again why I should believe them when they insist there’s a crisis and the only thing that they do to fix it is try to raise my taxes?
    —————-
    Funny how that ‘crisis’ stuff works, isn’t it?

  22. The GC Models did not forecast cooling even up to the last second and probably still couldn’t account for it in hindsight. AGWers are missing a great opportunity to vindicate the abilities of the models to make enlightened prognostication. All they’d need to do is show where this cooling was forecast (while it was still future of course) in anything “peer” reviewed. Like a stopped clock I suppose they could be right once in a while…but why 20-30 years from now? Snake oil salespersons: all stock now selling at bargain prices.

  23. Wow The Economist really is looking for punishment – what rubbish they published on Jan 11th 2010.
    The Economist says that those who doubt the REALITY of man-made climate change are “foolish and facile”. Actually, in my case, I have a degree in Physics and studied graduate level atmospheric phsyics but I am still a fool because I don’t understand how anyone can conclude that CO2 is a big factor in climate change. According to the “facile” math and physics I studied, CO2 clearly has a negligible effect.
    In this article they state “In the case of the bitter easterlies that have brought Britain colder, snowier weather than has been seen for a couple of decades, the proverbial benefit has been felt by the more foolish and facile of those who doubt the reality or likelihood of man-made climate change.”
    http://www.economist.com/world/international/displayStory.cfm?story_id=15262021
    I suggest that all you other “fools and facile” people write to The Economist and complain over this insult – there is a LINK where you can comment on the nonsense that is this article.

  24. “Kum Dollison (14:56:53) :
    UAH has January (Globally) coming in “sizzling” hot.”
    They really need to get a new PR firm.
    Announcing this winter as anything “warm” will be a PR nightmare.
    Just like when they discovered the “decline” and immediately ramped up
    their propaganda for a few years, and got caught at that too.
    Has anyone kept up with exactly how many “tipping points” we have seen
    come and go?

  25. “How has this winter affected your belief in global warming?”
    Not a bit, as I never believed in global warming.
    Paul

  26. Meanwhile some of the world’s top climate scientists suggest this winter is only the start of a worldwide trend toward cooler weather, which could last for 20 to 30 years. They base their predictions on changes in water temperatures in the oceans.
    This is exactly the effect that woudl be expected if Svensmark theories are correct – more low cloud cover over the oceans and therefore a cooling of ocean surface temperatures.

  27. Look at the last month and last year temperature anomalies. Even now, some places in the northern hemisphere are warm. This just adds to my suspicion that the proxy temperature reconstructions flatline outside of the calibration period because they are averaging noise. Climate is stable it does seem to wander around a mid-point, sometimes high, sometimes low. We tend to have very short memories, and have a tendency to worry about things (probably a survival instinct)

  28. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Jack:
    Amatuer “Meteorologist” here. Been that for about 5 years. I began predicting this in September/October.
    Reflected VISIBLE LIGHT started going up…87 watts per square meter in Sept., 97 in October, 114 in November and 120.4 in December.
    This is commensurate with Dr. Svensmark’s “Cosmic Ray/Cloud Cover” theory. (The data comes from the NASA: NEO site.)
    Rather than let ANECDOTAL approaches rule my logic, I’m trying to use HARD DATA. But I will go out on a limb and say this: We haven’t seen the “end” of this winter, by 1/2…yet! End of January can, and may well bring a set of NEW TEMPERATURE LOW records. February and March, due to the seasonal zonal humidity/jet stream balances probably will bring some WHOPPER snow storms, here and in Europe.
    But, then as the saying goes: “What do I know?”..
    Yours,
    Mark Hugo, B.S. Chemical Engineering
    B.S. Metallurgy, M.S. Mechanical (Heat Transfer/Radiation Heat Transfer emphasis), P.E. Electrical, P.E. Mechanical
    20 Years Nuclear Power, 4 years Medical Devices..

  29. ‘Climategate’ professor Michael Mann protected ‘to maximum extent’ by Penn State policy
    Henry “Hank” Foley, the new vice president for research and dean of the graduate school, will hold professor Michael Mann’s academic future in his hands if an internal inquiry, now under way, sparks an investigation that finds Mann broke university policy…
    So, the team consists of Foley, plus William Brune, Mann’s boss, who has headed Penn State’s meteorology department for about a decade, and Candice Yekel, director of the Office of Research Protections, who reports to Foley.
    If the committee feels the allegations warrant further scrutiny, Foley will appoint another committee — this time five tenured professors who have “no conflicts of interest and are competent to evaluate the issues objectively.”..
    http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/12/climategate-professor-michael-mann-protected-to-maximum-extent-by-penn-state-policy/

  30. Hello WUWT:
    Here is what I wrote to Jack Cafferty (scientist: please don’t be critical of my technical errors-hopefully my explanation is close enough for CNN viewers):
    “Hello Jack Cafferty,
    The recent northern hemisphere cold-snap has not altered my opinion regarding Anthropegenic Global Warming. What we have lived through in the last 50 years is nothing more than natural variability in our climate. Humans may have the ability to slightly exacerbate natural variability; however, we cannot create or alter climate change greatly.
    The Earth’s only major source of climate energy is the Sun (cosmic rays and other deep space energy forms may affect our climate to a small degree).
    Unfortunately, the Sun’s burn rate is variable. The magnetic field that shields the Earth is affected by sunspots, coronal mass ejections, and other energy forms emitted by our star. Our Earth travels an eliptical orbit around the Sun and our Earth’s axis point wobbles which causes precession; both of these things affect our climate. Don’t forget that the obliquity of the ecliptic is also dynamic.
    The dynamics that affect our ocean’s currents are not understood. Cosmic rays from outer space may affect cloud formation, thus altering total solar irradience.
    Volcanoes…remember Pinatubo in the early 1990s?
    Any human being thinking himself brilliant enough to predict the enourmous number of factors that affect our climate, and extrapolate any climate trend, is fool enough to fall for a religion called Anthropenic Global Warming.
    Thanks, MarkM”
    Thanks for the education Anthony, and everybody else that participates on this site.
    markm

  31. Here’s my question to you: How has this winter affected your belief in global warming?
    That the earth warmed in the last half of the 20th century is not in question.  If you mean how has this winter affected my belief in Anthropogenic Global Warming, I never accepted the premise that the warming was due to increased CO2.  Last fall I was talking to some parents at my son’s high school and mentioned that because both the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation (AMO) and Pacific decadal oscillation(PDO) had flipped into their cold phase that this winter, and the winters for the next 20-30 years, were going to be colder.  I got some very cold stares in return.  Oh well.
    And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
    Gaithersburg, MD
    Mike Ramsey

  32. During the last Maunder Minimum (mid-1600’s to early 1700’s), there was a marked increase in earthquake and volcanic activity…it’s true, look it up.

  33. “L Nettles (15:06:25) :
    I didn’t believe the Coming Ice Age of the 1970’s, I expected a reversion to the mean, I got it. Didn’t believe in AGW I expected a reversion to the mean, I’m getting that now.”
    Reversion to the mean of the last 1 million years, or even 100,000 years is actually reversion to ice age conditions. Interglacials such as today occur only 10% of the time, the other 90% or so has been glacial periods ( ice age), when glaciers extend to Pennsylvania and sea levels are 100 meters lower, and there is a land bridge to Asia, and the British isles are part of the European mainland. The last interglacial maximum was actually 3-5 deg C warmer than today, and sea levels were much higher (at least 6 meters IIRC).
    So we may very well have more warming before the next ice age. Point being, man is unlikely to be responsible for it, it’s part of the natural cycle. In fact, as far as climate goes, the last 600,000 years are considered to be quite stable despite the extremes, so you can imagine what unstable is.
    Thats why 99.9% of all species that ever existed are extinct, they could not adopt. Given our dependence on agriculture, I am not sure man will be able to either.
    Good book on climate history called Heaven and Earth (unfortunate title) by Ian Plimer.

  34. The GC moded based forecasters got the long-range wrong. They didn’t just miss it by a little bit, they got it totally backwards. NOAA, Met Office, GISS etc. struck out at the plate.
    Do we really need to wait 30 years for these impostors and thier phony models that can’t predict the past or future to get lucky? In the meantime, there are 30 winters, springs, summers and falls at risk. There is no room here to suffer fools gladly.
    Clean house.
    There is something to be said for private enterprise who depend on accuracy for survival as opposed to those in government-funded institutions that are allowed to flunk repeatedly and remain standing.
    Whom do you trust?

  35. I’m in Eastern Canada. This is the warmest winter I can remember. Wonder why there’s a warm spell here and everywhere else is getting hit by record cold. Heck, it’s gonna above freezing this weekend in the middle of January. Crazy!

  36. Hi.
    I read this blog daily but have never posted a comment.
    I just left a comment on the CNN thing; this is about. But being in the UK I’m not sure what 6pm is in real money???
    Can anyone give me some help. Like how far ahead or behind they are?
    thanks

  37. We could just send Jack Cafferty the URL to WUWT and have him spend a week or two getting up to speed.
    Or would that be too easy?

  38. Here’s my question to you: How has this winter affected your belief in global warming?
    January 12th, 2010 8:25 pm ET
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    No the winter didn’t…. The CRU Scientists and friends that were caught red handed fudging data, deleting or “losing” the original raw temperature data, denying any debate whatsoever about the “settled science” and most importantly the media’s complicit behaviour of ignoring “Climategate” for weeks, while shoving Copenhagen down our throats day and night, did.

  39. sorry to be OT but (A) may what to look at this .See-sawing temperatures characterised New Zealand’s weather in 2009, according to National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research’s annual climate summary. but look at this >The years 2000-2009 were a warm decade overall, with a 10-year average temperature of 12.6°C, 0.1°C above the 1971-2000 normal. (0.1C ABOVE THE 1971-2000 A.V.G).THEY SAY IT WAS THE WARMEST DECADE ON RECORD.
    http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/6673329/weather-a-mixed-bag-in-2009/

  40. Neil McEvoy……Take a look at the chart you linked to again. The scale has the coldest temps at the top. It is COLDER now than last year.

  41. Having been raised in North Dakota during the 60s and 70’s, I’ve been a global warming skeptic. I think this in part because of the harsh winters (yes we played outdoor street and ice hockey when it was 15 to 20 degrees below zero Fahrenheit during the DAY in January) and the knowledge that where I grew up was once covered by glacial ice 10,000 years ago. The impact of the advance and retreat of glaciers was evident, from rock piles in farmers fields, rocks that were moved and buried by glaciers and subsequently moved to the surface by annual frost heave, to living next to Minnesota, land of 10,000 lakes, most of which were formed by the glacial age, to the aquifers in Eastern North Dakota and Northwestern Minnesota formed by ancient Lake Agassiz.
    We were taught that the climate had cooled dramatically during the ice age, and somehow had managed to warm again in modern time, all without the benefit of man.
    No, the harsh winter of 2009-2010 has not changed my view/disbelief in global warming.

  42. This is what I wrote. Sorry if it posts twice, but I am not seeing it anywhere.
    Dear Jack Cafferty,
    Thank you for asking this question.
    This winter does not change my mind about anthropogenic global warming – I’ve never believed it because no one has ever shown any independently verifiable proof of it. The main so-called climate scientists have shown that they are willing to lie, cheat, and steal in order to push AGW. The whole movement is based on a fraud.
    Authentic scientist invite critical review of their research and data. Climate scientists refuse to release their data and methods and simply say, “trust us, we’re the experts.”
    Let me ask you a question, Jack. If a drug company told you their drug would cure whatever ill you had but would not tell you anything about their research and methods would you take their drug? Do you think the FDA would even approve such a drug? Of course not to both questions. So, why should we blindly trust these so-called scientists?
    They have thrown away their lab coats for political activism because it brings millions of dollars of research money to them – not because their science is valid. It is the biggest fraud of the century and makes Bernie Maloff look like an amateur.
    Thank you for taking the time to read my comments.
    Sincerely,
    my name – removed on WUWT
    New Hampshire

  43. Neil McEvoy (15:04:21) :
    windows won’t allow Spencer’s active X to be installed as it’s unsigned by microsoft so it won’t draw the chart – does anyone else have this problem??

  44. pft
    good book on climate history called heaven and earth.
    I read that but found a much better book called “The real global warming disaster” by Christopher Booker. A well researched and written book.
    A very interesting programme from channel 4 in the U.K. recently was called “Man On Earth”. I thought it was another global warmmongers bs, but after about 10 minutes I realised that it was about catastophic climate change in history. It shows how peoples died out including american Indians, The Maya, Egyptians and how the norse and inuits lived side by side in Greenland;but the Norse or vikings died out but the inuits survived.
    It was produced by channel 4 who also showed The Global Warming Swindel.
    Its worth watching.
    If you google man on earth channel 4 It should come up. presented by Tony Robinson

  45. pft,
    “Thats why 99.9% of all species that ever existed are extinct, they could not adopt.”
    Adopt? Now maybe you are on to something here. I’ll have to give this some more thought…
    Jim, too.

  46. Kum Dollison (14:56:53) :
    AGW is non-scientific nonsense, but our recent “northern” weather is just that, “Weather.”
    The earth is cooling. The Arctic blast is a product of that cooling. It is climate.

  47. The cooling over the past 10+ years and the current freezing in winter just proves that the IPCC climate models are wrong. They can’t use the excuse that one is weather and the other is climate. Any half decent and semi-accurate climate model must be able to predict the medium term and even the shorter term fluctuations. Otherwise, it’s modeling a fictitious world, not the real world we live in. A few more years of cooling would seal the fate of the IPCC and force them to either come clean and admit they are totally wrong, or be proven in a court of law of committing fraud. Their choice.

  48. Mike U.K. (16:24:05) :
    Hi.

    Greetings!
    (…) But being in the UK I’m not sure what 6pm is in real money???
    Can anyone give me some help. Like how far ahead or behind they are?

    Eastern Standard Time (EST) unless a US broadcast mentions otherwise (See US section). That’s UTC (GMT?) minus 5 hours, when we are not on Daylight Saving Time. Often a second time may be given, PST (Pacific time zone, UTC – 8), for which they may just say “on the West Coast.”

  49. It looks like the Haitian 7.0 earthquake (and the now five 4.0+
    aftershocks) took up nearly all of this Tuesday night’s Situation Room
    telecast.

  50. I think were all missing the intention of his question. What I think he really wants are the reactions of everyday non technical people who have formed their opinions from various non technical sources. They are the ones most likely to be influenced by personal experiences rather than scientific abstracts.
    They are an important segment of the political debate over AGW. In this sense, it doesn’t really matter if Siberia is consistently a ‘hot spot’, this group will blur global temperatures with local ones so all these cold winters will chill the credibility of AGW alarmists in their minds and will likely conclude that nothing other than normal climate change is occurring.

  51. Why is it that I feel so sad for those who died from cold weather while I’m untouched by the fates of those predicted to die because of Global Warming?

  52. G.L. Alston (15:05:36) :
    Can’t win. This is CNN we’re talking about, with made up minds and settled science. This cannot end well. (sigh.)
    CNN’s ratings have been steadily falling for years. FOX News ratings are doing well. I would guess it’s because the are less biased than CNN and will actually allow differing viewpoints on their shows without demeaning those differing points. I know CNN will insert bias at some point. But what is great is that they are giving the other side of the story.
    For years this did not happen.

  53. January 12th, 2010 9:03 pm ET
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    My belief in AGW or AGCC has changed not a whit from the recent weather being experienced worldwide.
    Weather is not climate, and vice versa.
    The best evidence available, the best climate models available at this point in the evolution of science are insufficient to more than lightly suggest much less produce proof that there is any such climate forcing on other than local basis that is caused by man.
    The Climategate scandal just hilights how very weak the evidence is, when the most prestigious bodies in the field have to collude to block publication of papers that are antithetical to their viewpoint, when they have to attack in public and private those who are skeptical of much less antagonistic to their views, when the programming that was released with the emails and data is so filled with artificial (the programmer’s notes) adjustments to the data, and with so much extrapolated (made up) data due to lack of real measurements.

  54. Mark.R (16:47:34) :

    Heres the link were the say it was the hotest decade on record .The findings were in line with a World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) prediction that the 2000s would be the warmest decade on record for worldwide average temperatures, he said.

    Its funny how if you point out that temperatures have flatlined or even decreased over the last decade then you are told “10 years is weather not climate”. And yet “hotest decade on record” is supposed taken as climate not weather.

  55. janama (16:46:54) :
    windows won’t allow Spencer’s active X to be installed as it’s unsigned by microsoft so it won’t draw the chart – does anyone else have this problem??

    It’s working fine for me, chats are being drawn nice and fast.
    I have (Debian) Linux.

  56. NIWA is made up of prevaricating Warmists. Their homogenization and pure alteration of temperature data is a crime to science. Nothing they say should be believed.

  57. I’m not sure what 6pm is in real money??? Can anyone give me some help. Like how far ahead or behind they are?

    IIRC, the UK is 5 hours ahead of ET (east coast of US). So when it’s 6 PM in NYC, it’s 11 pm in the UK. (And 3 PM n our west coast.)

  58. As soon as it becomes apparent to everyone that it’s no longer possible to make a buck pushing AGW most of its followers will switch to their back-up plan: Anthropogenic Contentenial Drift.

  59. My submission:
    As a medical researcher, I’m trained to look at what study numbers are saying without prejudice. Being very concerned about global warming, I began to look at the science and available information as objectively as possible almost a decade ago. I was disappointed to realize that global warming predictions were based solely on rudimentary models and backed by very little collaborating observational data. What data it was backed by would be considered too coincidental and confounding to pass as acceptable proof of anything in medical research.
    Overall, the quality of historical climate data is poor for many reasons and the instrumental measurement history far too short to be suitable for long range forecasting. For this reason, I became skeptical of the alarmist view. With the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s failure to predict the last decade’s cessation of warming, and with the past several winters of colder and wetter weather, I remain convinced that the global warming of the past three decades was attributable to mostly long term natural cycles. With those cycles now transitioning to a negative phase, I feel confident that the now emerging scientific opinion which has identified cause for two or three decades of global cooling will be accurate.
    Hank W. Hancock
    Las Vegas, Nevada

  60. ‘Climategate’ professor Michael Mann protected ‘to maximum extent’ by Penn State policy
    It ultimately falls to one man to decide if we ever see headlines that shout: “Penn State Climate Prof Fudged Facts to Fetch Funding”, or perhaps “Nittany Lyin’: Penn State’s Mann on the Street.”
    Henry “Hank” Foley, the new vice president for research and dean of the graduate school, will hold professor Michael Mann’s academic future in his hands if an internal inquiry, now under way, sparks an investigation that finds Mann broke university policy.
    But results of Penn State’s internal Climategate probe may not come until Mann’s part of the globe really warms up, in May or June. In addition, you may never learn what really happened between Mann and other leading lights in the global warming movement. That’s because Penn State, like other universities, treats such inquiries as confidential personnel matters, protected by policy “to the maximum extent possible.”
    More surprising, the initial probe involves a committee of just three, all of whom are Penn State employees with a clear interest in preserving the reputation of a university ranked ninth in the nation in receiving government research and development grants. It may raise some eyebrows to know that no outsiders will monitor the proceedings.
    The stakes couldn’t be higher. The perception of integrity in the climate research community will likely determine whether trillions of dollars are pumped into less-developed nations in the form of virtual reparations to atone for 150 years of unequal occupation of the so-called “carbon space” by more prosperous nations.
    Still, the public is asked to trust the findings of a secret probe conducted by the colleagues of the accused.” (more)
    http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/12/climategate-professor-michael-mann-protected-to-maximum-extent-by-penn-state-policy/

  61. One NH winter how severe it is shall not be considered to prove or disprove global warming. However one NH winter such as this one, taken in context of increasing mid-latitudes storms, colder SH winters in Peru, Argentina setting earlier as a continuing trend, then it takes a different meaning.
    maz2, thanks for the article on Mann. With a bit of luck, a whistleblower will be among these funding agencies, someone sufficiently P.O. with the use of funds to leak the results of the investigation.

  62. Winter has had no effect on my opinion of AGW. It’s nice to see that God, natural variability, and the potential for snow hasn’t been overwhelmed by the power of the SUV. But is any sane person surprised?
    CO2 warms the earth, but it’s probably a heck of a lot less than scientists expect and natural trends are probably a heck of a lot bigger than the team would like to admit.
    You guys have been very patient with these links. After a year, it’s time to announce voting for the most extreme predictions of 2009.
    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/time-to-vote-2009-most-extreme-predictions-round-1/

  63. Kum Dollison (14:56:53) :
    Even if the January anomaly finishes up a little that does not mean the earth is warming.

  64. “”Will (15:31:23) :
    The GC Models did not forecast cooling even up to the last second and probably still couldn’t account for it in hindsight.””
    Will it was a little worse than that.
    The models were still predicting warming, after the lag in warming and cooling had begun.
    Even when it was obvious that temps were dropping, the models were still showing warming.
    That was the travesty.
    “”The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.””
    Lack of warming is code for it’s getting cooler.

  65. Steve Goddard (16:37:35) :
    Apparently, Putin wants to be remembered for having been ahead of the curve. Good.

  66. MrX, I am in Southwestern Ontario. It is -12 right now. Not exactly sitting outside temperatures. Even if it above freezing this weekend, it is still not sitting outside temperature. Nor is it going to be warm enough to turn the furnace off. Remember we have not had a summer for two years so my furnace has been running straight for close to 3 years.

  67. And there the man stood, his pockets full of holes and nothing else; the sweat-stained unsold tickets drifting slowly from hands to feet.
    He watched the last car turn and leave the stadium as the life left the lights above and the echoes from the streetlamps below bade them goodnight.

  68. My question is this: how difficult is it to shift from anthropogenic global warming to anthropogenic global cooling? The leftists and conspiracy theorists will simply change the “W” to a “C,” and the insanity will continue.

  69. Parts of Canada have seen actual temperatures of 30 below zero???
    How much AGW kool-aid did these clowns drink? One of the first things I learned when Canada switched from Imperial to metric was -40C equals -40F and anything below -15C was chilly.

  70. Human GHG emissions (mainly CO2) could not have been a climate forcing factor before c 1940.
    http://photos.mongabay.com/09/0323co2emissions_global.jpg
    The AGW hypothesis, as dreamt up in the early 1980s, before any significant post-war warming was apparent, is based on 20 years of warming c 1980 – c 2000 and, particularly in its catastrophist mode, is failing – maybe has failed.
    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/mean:25/plot/hadcrut3vgl/mean:25/plot/uah/mean:25

  71. Adelaide and Melbourne down here have been having record breaking heatwaves. I’m wondering if that is linked to the same ocean cycle that is causing the cold winter up over?

  72. The warming and cooling of the Oceans has been studied by people like Dr. Bill Gray from CSU Tropical Meteorology Project. This is nothing new. Active and non-active hurricane seasons occur with the warming or cooling of the Oceans.
    Concerning your question on how this Winter has affected my belief in Global Warming?
    It hasn’t changed my mind at all. There is no such thing as man made Global Warming.
    We have been experiencing a normal fluctuation of the climate. We can not depend on data that is scattered across the face of the planet. Nor can we depend on data that is located in areas of rapid industrial development. But, this is the same type of data that has been used by the scientists that claim we were all doomed by man made Global warming.
    Now, we’re expected to believe that Global Cooling is now going to be the issue. Next we’re all going to freeze to death if the governments of the planet do not act soon.
    This winter is not unusual. We have had a number of planetary oscillations occur and have become favorable of deep arctic air to be mixed southward in the Northern Hemisphere. We’re experiencing a moderate El Nino, a positive Pacific Decadal Oscillation, as well as during the arctic outbreak a strong negative North Atlantic Oscillation. The positive PDO enhanced El Nino, while the negative NAO which normally brings colder temperatures southward into the Northern Hemisphere was enhanced due to the strong forcing of the NAO.
    So there is nothing real about man made global warming or cooling. This is all made up by certain scientists and governments to remain in control and make money. It also keeps third world countries from developing their economies. This scares some governments. Why, I don’t know.
    We need to speak out, let our governments know we’re not fools.
    I am half a century old. I have seen winters like this, I have seen sweltering summers. I have experienced them and I have survived.
    Problem with the warming we have seen, being it may have been warmer then the medival period of the 1400 – 1600’s. We could see a cooler period. As we did from the late 1960’s to the early 1990’s. That’s about 30 or so years isn’t it.
    Sounds like a natural variation of the Earth’s climate and atmosphere to me.
    What do you think?

  73. Thanks Jack for expressing an interest in climate feedback.
    I urge you to return to basics and read a 2009 paper in E&E on “Earth’s Heat Source- the Sun.”
    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Emeritus Professor
    Nuclear & Space Science
    Former NAA PI for Apollo

  74. Photon, it’s not up a “little bit;” it’s up a Lot. And, a little snow in the Winter doesn’t mean the earth is “cooling.”
    I just can’t stand inconsistency of thought. I would just like the players on “My” team to be a little smarter than the players on the other.

  75. “The longer the sun remains quiet, the higher the chances of a prolonged series of cold winters and shorter summers. This is the quietest sun we have seen in almost a century. The current solar cycle, which began in 1996, was expected to reach a minimum and transition to a new solar cycle in January 2007, post 11 years. It did not, although we have crossed 13+ years and are still counting in January 2010. We are experiencing an historically deep solar minimum! For those who study the sun, the length of the solar cycle, lasting an average of 11 years, has proven to be the best historical indicator of short-term climate. At the end of these solar cycles, sunspot activity first declines, and then picks up markedly, typically indicating the beginning of a new cycle. However, the slow return to the next phase of the solar cycle at present may portend a general decline in solar activity. 2008 was a sunspot “bear market” and 2009 was no better according to NASA. There were no sunspots observed on 78% of the days in 2008. To find a year with more blank suns, we have to go all the way back to 1913. Sunspots for 2009 dropped even lower: there were no sunspots on 90% of the days by April. ”
    New Solar Minimum Ushers In Extreme Cold Climate?
    http://www.mi2g.com/cgi/mi2g/frameset.php?pageid=http%3A//www.mi2g.com/cgi/mi2g/press/120110.php
    “A frozen northern world and new heat records in the southern hemisphere are suddenly making the impact of a deep solar minimum on the world’s weather a politically correct topic.
    Yet a year ago I was attacked in Crikey by global warming experts for daring to suggest, in Crikey, that something odd was happening on the sun.
    It should emphasised, science has not yet linked the big freeze to the “quietest sun” since 1913 but the historical coincidences between supposedly insignificant deep solar minimums and cold weather are under review and references to them as being factors in very cold winters are appearing in places where they were previously dismissed out of hand.”
    Weather extremes equal the sun of their parts … or do they?
    http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/01/12/weather-extremes-equal-the-sun-of-their-parts-or-do-they/

  76. Kum Dollison (19:46:40) :
    Photon, it’s not up a “little bit;” it’s up a Lot. And, a little snow in the Winter doesn’t mean the earth is “cooling.”
    I figured you’d say something along those lines.
    It is a little snow? Have you checked the data?
    It’s a little cold?
    —————————————-
    Cooling since 2004:
    http://lh4.ggpht.com/_4ruQ7t4zrFA/Sy0GNXuxT1I/AAAAAAAADqY/90Z472zMWPg/uah-temperatures-1995-2009.JPG
    ———————————————
    Do you have data that shows warming?
    Also, January data is not in. It will be so warm this month as to wipe out all cooling since 2004?
    We may not be on the same ‘team’.

  77. Kum Dollison (19:46:40) :
    Photon, it’s not up a “little bit;” it’s up a Lot. And, a little snow in the Winter doesn’t mean the earth is “cooling.”
    I did not make any claim about snow and cold.
    Could you explain why you said this about me?

  78. photon without a Higgs (18:32:41) :
    Kum Dollison (14:56:53) :
    Even if the January anomaly finishes up a little that does not mean the earth is warming.
    ————————————————————-
    That is what I wrote. You read a lot in to it.
    The warming of one month does not describe climate, does it?

  79. From Oxford Dictionary;
    climate
    • noun 1) the general weather conditions prevailing in an area over a long period.
    Looks like the prevailing weather conditions are changing Again.

  80. Photon, perhaps I’m just tired, and misread your intention. We appear to agree that “weather” is not Climate. An El Nino doesn’t mean the Earth’s “Climate” is heating up, and a snowstorm in England doesn’t mean the Ice Age is upon us. But, bed-time is upon “Me.” 🙂 G’nite. Have a Good One.

  81. Kum Dollison (20:40:56) :
    It’s easy to jump the gun and misread a comment. I’ve done it before too.

  82. It’s the kind of research that could undermine lots of what we’ve been told about the warming of the Earth being caused only by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.
    The ENTIRE issue here boils down to: can here-to-for climate alarmists, admit they MAY be WRONG?? Nothing to do with science. Or politics. But the ability to admit error. Can alarmists do what evolved-even illuminated people really do? This is all that “climate science” is all about now.

  83. doug newton (21:01:49) :
    Northern California has been getting elevated snowlevels in the series of storms ever since the Big Chill hit here early December.
    Now, we have 10-14 days of rain forecast. Snow levels 5000-6000 feet.
    Perhaps this will finally silence the drought alarmists. We are so sick of hearing them cry doom. To hear them go on, you’d think the whole State had been turned into Death Valley.

  84. Whether it’s weather or whether it’s climate is a silly arguement.
    Did we not take measurements of weather to determine climate?
    Do we not say weather is too chaotic and short term to be predictable but then we go on to measure this chaotic unpredictable weather and deduce from it “climate” 100yrs hence?
    It’s inane, illogical and outright stoooopid.
    In the end, IT”S THE SUN and the OCEANS reaction to the sun.
    We ought to support research into this area by people like
    Oliver K. Manuel (19:40:41) : then we may have a chance to get a grip on reality.

  85. I very, very concerned about this cooling trend. This might be anthropogenic. We need to start holding conferences and figure out what’s going on. We might have got a sign wrong in some of our earlier models. I’ve something somewhere about inverted charts. The consequences of global cooling are even worse than global warming. Government help us!

  86. Here’s my question to you: How has this winter affected your belief in global warming?
    That’s the wrong question. I have always known (not “belief”; by doing the science, I’m an astrophysicist by training) that this GW thingy is a nonsense. So
    my “belief” is non-existent, and my analysis has not changed. It has been vindicated instead.

  87. I was asked in April 1990, by the CEO of a ski business, what my thoughts were on ‘global warming’, which had just hit the news.
    My answer then was this: ‘I think it’s warming, but it’s one hell of a lot more complicated than they’re making out…’
    If someone now asks, is my position on ‘global warming’ affected, I’d say ‘No, because I always saw the earth’s atmosphere as a dynamic, self-regulating entity which will therefore oscillate about means on different timescales.’
    I saw incredibly odd climate in the hot, dry summer of 1976, the cold, cold winter of 1979, the ‘winters’ of 1988 and 1989 which started in Scotland in March after winter months more akin to spring and the ‘winter without snow’ in 1990 in the Alps.
    My life has been 12 years in PDO cool phase, a cycle of PDO warm phase and now we’re starting a new cool phase. There’s been cold winters and cool summers; mild winters and cool summers; cold winters and hot summers; and mild winters and hot summers. Now maybe we’re starting on a few more colder winters and cooler summers.

  88. I keep seeing the phrase, “warmest decade on record” stated as if that proves anything. Does it not occur to anyone that our “record” is pitifully short in comparison to the age of our planet? So we have satellite records for the past few decades and have pieced together sporadic climate records from other sources spanning back a few million years…on a planet that is some 4.5 BILLION years old.
    As for the winter affecting my belief that AGW is a total fraud perpetrated by scamsters, not a bit. The so-called scientists, politicians and corporate interests behind this should all be arrested for the crimes they have committed against the rest of us.

  89. I currently live in suburban London, where snow is usually experienced very infrequently . The current snowfall has not changed my belief or otherwise of CAGW as I feel that attempting to understand weather and climate is not an area where faith should be a relevant concept. Up until a few weeks ago I was a mere long-term lay observer of weather with the assistance of my own very rudimentary measuring equipment, with the understanding that the earth’s climate has always fluctated within a quite narrow range of parameters. Until I asked a serious question about standards for land-based weather stations on a blog run by the UK’s Guardian newspaper. I was immediately attacked as a troll by a regular poster, and his very intemperate response belied his self-description as a scientist. My reaction was to begin serious digging for information from that point and have been apalled by the outpourings of aggressive and ignorant bile by ‘warmists’; The actions of Al Gore and MR Choudry, the chair of the IPCC, actually disgust me, as it has becoome very obvious that those two, and many others, are nothing more than totally corrupt snake-oil salesmen of the very worst kind. I have also been quite dismayed by both the attitude of the print and broadcast media and the almost lunatic faith in warmism expressed by the majority of the world’s politicians. The spectacle of Mugabe being welcomed as a hero at the recent Copenhagen conference, and his ridiculous claims that ‘climate change had wrecked his country’s economy’ really underscored, for me at least, the very odd agenda the warmists and the Greens are pursuing. The logic of giving up our reliance on producing CO2, which is an essential world plant food, and winding economies back to almost a cave-dwelling level escapes me completely.
    When one adds the ‘Climategate’ scandal to the mix and understands the depth of deception exposed, CAGW seems a non-starter.

  90. Global temperatures (UAH) have actually been high for the last 6 months – no doubt due to the El Nino. This seems slightly anomalous with the generally cold winter reported in the Northern Hemisphere. Here in the UK it’s certainly the coldest winter (thus far) for decades. It’ll be interesting to see the satellite temperature trend when la nina conditions set in. For temperature trends it’s best to stick to satellite-derived time-series, otherwise you fall into the same trap as the AGW alarmists. I recall a picture in the Daily Mail some years ago offering a man walking on a beach in short-sleeves in winter as ‘proof’ of global warming; I guess it must have been a pretty big beach. Sadly I think that the jury is out at to whether we will see a persistent cooling trend (as opposed to a few decades with PDO cycles) in our lifetimes. It looks as if mother earth has been warming since 1850, and probably since 1650, due to the ‘little ice age’ ending. I have no idea as to whether the 3% or so of the “greenhouse effect” casused by C02 (significantly topped up my mankind) makes much difference. Common sense would suggest it’s marginal. I wouldn’t worry too much about missing the next ice age though; a wee bit parky methinks.

  91. Max Hugo (15:44:09)
    Max, it looks to me that you have just averaged the figures from the reflected sw radiation matrix. I don’t think you can do this without weighting the matrix “squares” by their diminished size as they approach the poles.
    To minimise the bias I just averaged the 60N to 60S entries in the matrix – still an increase but not so “way out”. I got 92.1, 98.2, 100.6, 100.1 watts/m2 for the last four months. For comparison last Jan09 was 99.8 for the same lattitude range.
    It would be interesting to apply some correct spherical geometry weighting to this matrix of reflected shortwave radiation from NASA (but my maths is a few decades out of practice :-))

  92. Craig James (16:36:14) :
    Neil McEvoy……Take a look at the chart you linked to again. The scale has the coldest temps at the top. It is COLDER now than last year.
    No Craig, you are mistaken. On the Celcius scale the temperatures are below zero so the lower numbers to the top are less cold. If you still don’t get it, click on the Kelvin scale.

  93. CLIMATE CHANGE defined …
    The dominant cause of global warming for the past several decades is greenhouse gas forcing (source: IPCC). Total GHG forcing increased from 1998 to 2009, but there was no corresponding global warming. Instead, what the globe experienced for the last 11 years was CLIMATE CHANGE, which was caused by something that dominated the dominant cause of global warming.
    Hence, we can now define CLIMATE CHANGE as: the suppression of global warming by a cause (or causes) that dominates the dominant cause of global warming.

  94. rbateman (22:38:33) :
    “Increased Volcanoes are to be expected in times of solar minimum, and it has little to do with climate.
    http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/SSNvsVOL.JPG
    And since Earthquakes and Volcanoes are both Tectonic movement phenomenon, I suspect Earthquakes are likely increased as well in times of solar minimum.”

    Don’t want to worry you, or anyone else, but the first solar eclipse of 2010 is on January 15, and here’s the path according to NASA:-
    The path of the Moon’s antumbral shadow begins in Africa and passes through Chad, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Kenya, and Somalia. After leaving Africa, the path crosses the Indian Ocean where the maximum duration of annularity reaches 11 min 08 s. The central path then continues into Asia through Bangladesh, India, Burma (Myanmar), and China. A partial eclipse is seen within the much broader path of the Moon’s penumbral shadow, which includes eastern Europe, most of Africa, Asia, and Indonesia.
    Folk-lore has it that tectonic events occur a few days after the crossing?

  95. My response:
    This winter’s weather has no impact on my belief that climate change is almost entirely natural. Even weather patterns over decades may not really tell us much about any significant changes in our climate. We best focus our attention and resources on the real problems that mankind is facing: character, hunger, disease, poverty, war, etc.

  96. @ KenB (04:31:46) :
    Hence, we can now define CLIMATE CHANGE as: the suppression of global warming by a cause (or causes) that dominates the dominant cause of global warming.
    Well, since the natural state of the Earth over the last several million years seems to be one of glaciation, I think we have the answer.

  97. To CNN’s Jack Cafferty:
    I don’t trust anyone with their hand in my pocket. Ergo – global warming is a hoax (regardless of the temperatures in the Deep South lately).

  98. Mr. Jones:
    Interesting comment you have made.
    If you are correct, then the Java Applet supplied on the NEO site would have a serious error in it. Would you be willing to communicate this info to NEO?
    That would be very helpful. Alas, I was having complete faith in that tools ability to analyze their data correctly. It should be noted that the mapping they do use is a “latitude/longitude” plot, therefore although it appears as a Mercator projection…the sizes of the continents are distorted and “correct” in terms of the area they subtend.
    Again, if your assesment of the data is correct, the “tool” they provide to do it automatically, is in error and needs to be corrected.
    THANKS!
    Max

  99. MrX (16:20:48) WROTE: “I’m in Eastern Canada. This is the warmest winter I can remember. Wonder why there’s a warm spell here and everywhere else is getting hit by record cold. Heck, it’s gonna above freezing this weekend in the middle of January. Crazy!”
    I, too, am in “eastern canada”. Unfortunately, Canada is such a large place that “eastern Canada” covers a BIG swathe of territory. Are you in Ontario? Quebec? (doubtful if it’s going to be mild!) New Brunswick? Nova Scotia? etc.
    I am in southern New Brunswick, maybe 25 km from the Bay of Fundy Glenwood, if you have a really detailed map!). This locale is slightly cooler than along the coast, but noticeably milder in winter than Fredericton, which is about 100 km away. (OTOH, Fredericton is markedly hotter in summer.) In the NE of the province, where NB, Quebec, and Maine meet, it is significantly colder than any of the above, and it’s only about 300 km away from here (my guess- don’t get out a map to prove me wrong!)
    The reason for this picayune quibbling is that the weather can be quite different only a hundred km away, so saying that “eastern Canada” is going to be above freezing can be misleading. In southern NB we can expect at least one “January thaw” that melts a lot of the snow. Last year there was none. Last week we had several days that crept just above freezing in the day. Now we are back around normal, which is cool.
    The point? There is a lot of variation within short distances. Among other things, on a global scale this makes the interpolation methods used to “average” temperatures over large distances all the more doubtful. And it is risky to generalize for a large geographical area, as in “eastern Canada”.
    IanM

  100. Q: “How has this winter affected your belief in global warming?”
    Key word…”belief”.
    Like using “scientific basis” and “tooth fairy” in the same sentence.

  101. Mike U.K. (16:24:05) wrote (in part): “…..being in the UK I’m not sure what 6pm is in real money??? Can anyone give me some help. Like how far ahead or behind they are?”
    Mike, if you are using Outlook Express, you can click on the time shown at the bottom right of your screen, then click on “time zone”, then on the check mark at the right of the bar showing your time zone. You can then find a listing of places and time zones relative to GMT. I believe that all of the UK is on GMT.
    IanM

  102. @ kwik (15:00:40) :
    “It hasnt influenced me the slightest.
    If someone believes that CO2, which is approx. 0.04% of the athmosphere can have a dominant effect, while you have approx. 95% watervapor out there, which is a stronger “greenhouse” gas….If you additionally believe there is a forcing factor, which is proven almost non-existant…..and additionally dont believe in negative feedback…
    And dont believe that CO2 is pretty fast absobed by sinks in nature…
    And additionally believe you can model a chaotic system in a computer….with multivariable variables…with unknown couplings….hundreds of years into the future, while you cannot even predict 10 years ahead….
    AND look away from the urban heat effect in ground-station plots…
    AND dont take into consideration the suns influence…
    Then , okay.
    But I dont.
    Its a tax scam.
    From Norway”
    Let me add:
    If there is ANY reduction in the level of CO2, there will be a reduction in crops, and an increase in starvation deaths.
    So AGW or ACC is really a DEATH TAX SCAM.

  103. Michael (19:52:44) :
    Don´t generalize, southern hemisphere it is not only Australia and New Zealand.

  104. I see mention of the 7.0 quake in Haiti.
    I notice a nearly complete absence of reinforcing steel in the collapse photos.
    A sad but predictable outcome.
    Also the descriptions seem to imply the use of beach sand, another bad idea.
    The loss of life is especially dis-heartening when the outcome could be expected.
    Perhaps it is time to lock up the TEAM so we can get onto the real issues of the world.

  105. “How has this winter affected your belief in global warming?”


    Translation: “Does this make AGW look bad?”
    Yes. If any politician comes out presenting a hockey stick and an IPCC weather prediction, and breathing the word “sustainable,” he will get the chart wrapped around his neck.
    Better wait for some nice sexy hurricanes before you try Ration and Tax again.

  106. leading climate experts say the oceans are cooling while our experts say they are warming it is very confusing.this winter is not over yet wait until march before looking back on it.It is snowing again here in the the uk.

  107. anon,
    I’m not seeing where any comments show up on Jack’s site? I submitted my comment, but not in a blog format like this one, and saw no other comments from viewers posted. Perhaps I am looking in the wrong place?

  108. Anthony
    I just checked out Cafferty’s page. He has comments for every other post (check out “Recent Posts”), except for the Climate Feedback post. He has allowed comments to be shown for even more recent posts. Either he has been inundated or CNN is stifling the comments? Did perhaps CNN stick their head above the parapet, as it were, by allowing Cafferty to post this and they didn’t like it being shot off?

  109. Jack Cafferty asked:
    “Here’s my question to you: How has this winter affected your belief in global warming?”
    Maybe a comment or two answering that question on the other CNN blogs might wake them up. Can’t hurt. Might help.
    And the “belief” in global warming [by which he presumably meant AGW] is held by the AGW believers. Entirely natural global warming and global cooling happens in cycles, with a slight upward trend that began way before the SUV era.

  110. azcIII (15:47:46) : — if you look on his home page (http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/) at the end of each of his events, there is a shaded area where there two links:
    xxx Comments | Permalink
    But on the GlobalWarming question, it just says “Permalink”. See below.
    And if you open the page for the global warming item (just by clicking on the title) the page you are taken to doesn’t show any comments, where as all his other events do.
    ———————-
    How much were banks to blame for the financial collapse?
    Posted: 01:42 PM ET
    FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:
    Congress is trying to get to the b …

    Filed under: Bailout • Goldman Sachs • Homeownership • Spending • US Economy • US Government Bailouts
    77 Comments | Permalink
    ———————-
    Has this winter affected your belief in global warming?
    Posted: 12:37 PM ET
    FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:
    As the debate continues about gl…

    Filed under: Global Warming
    Permalink

  111. “How has this winter affected your belief in global warming?”
    Considering the hysteria from Al Gore and other politicians, I sensed it was a scam from waaaaay back. The only thing I know now that I didn’t know before is that it’s a scam of huge proportions – money, power, corruption – involving all kinds of global groups, corporations, politicians and bankers who’ll profit from carbon trading while binding us with taxes for all our carbon output (as they fly in private jets and live in mansions… reminding me of Orwell’s Animal Farm quote: Some animals are more equal than other animal.)
    Before this climate science scandal, I just thought it was a few hysterical blowhards (ie Gore and pals) who were trying to feel important while scaring school children into believing their futures are doomed. But no! They scare school children for profit!

  112. Meanwhile some of the world’s top climate scientists suggest this winter is only the start of a worldwide trend toward cooler weather, which could last for 20 to 30 years. They base their predictions on changes in water temperatures in the oceans.
    The scientists say much of the global warming in the last century was actually caused by these oceanic cycles when they were in a “warm mode”… as opposed to the current “cold mode.” They suggest there will be cooler summers ahead too.
    I believe this as much as I believe AGW
    Scientists still do not appear to have all the data required for mathematical modelling predictions
    The current weather conditions … and in the UK …. this has been for at least 12 months with the Met Office getting it wildly wrong with predicitions only over 2 or 3 months…. indicate a significant change in the weather predicted. I predict that there will be little change in the volume of new predictions getting it wrong. After all warm against cool is a 50/50 prediction anyway.
    I also predict a new wave of AG COOLING messiahs
    Don’t get me wrong, science is wonderful and most scientists are intelligent human beings from either side of the debate contributing in their own way, but I don’t think they have this planetary climate thing cracked, there are too many unkown variables.
    Dr Richard Feynman once said that , and I am not quoting verbatim, a scientist has to identify all the unkowns before he/she can be 100% sure of the experiments success. I suggest we haven’t checked all the unknowns when it comes to planetary climate conditions

  113. AGW was sloppy politicized science before.
    It still is.
    The real question is can we halt those trying to “solve” the CO2 problem before they destroy our economy, loot the treasury, and consolidate their political power.

  114. Stephen Lewis:
    Don’t get me wrong, science is wonderful and most scientists are intelligent human beings from either side of the debate contributing in their own way, but I don’t think they have this planetary climate thing cracked, there are too many unknown variables.
    Dr Richard Feynman once said that , and I am not quoting verbatim, a scientist has to identify all the unknowns before he/she can be 100% sure of the experiments success. I suggest we haven’t checked all the unknowns when it comes to planetary climate conditions.

    This rush to judgment was an indication of their arrogance.
    One such unknown, CFCs, has recently been indicted. (See below.) The case the author makes is at least as persuasive as the case against CO2. Therefore, a scientist would (or should) say that expensive CO2 mitigation measures are unjustified at this point, and that we should wait and see if temperatures begin to fall in accordance with the CFC-did-it theory, right? So why aren’t they saying it? Chicken?

    tonyc (21:30:19) :
    A friend posted this note that about a recent peer reviewed paper in Physics Reports detailing that CFC’s are to blame for warming observed in 20th century.
    http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2010/01/09/the-ozone-hole-did-it.aspx
    The abstract for the paper:
    http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2010/01/09/the-ozone-hole-did-it.aspx
    Cosmic-ray-driven electron-induced reactions of halogenated molecules adsorbed on ice surfaces: Implications for atmospheric ozone depletion
    by Qing-Bin Lua

  115. It seems once trapped into an ice ace, there is a add-on effect, like a trap. Maybe it is the ice and snow reflecting the sunlight, hence no heat on earth for long periods of time.
    I am now more and more convinced that we are entering a cooling period.
    I noticed another turning point here at 2003 at the most recent solar post here:
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/07/suns-magnetic-index-reaches-unprecedent-low-only-zero-could-be-lower-in-a-month-when-sunspots-became-more-active/
    This coincides with the cooling period envisaged by Easterbrook:
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/12/29/don-easterbrooks-agu-paper-on-potential-global-cooling/
    But now…which one of the three roads to take? Is there anyone who can figure that out?

  116. PS: on my first quote, note the line with the smoothed monthly values, it shows the tipping point at 2003.

  117. 47 deg. and buy at malwart raining on Jan. 25th in upstate NY. buy at malwart, No wonder you all think GW is a hoax (I still think he was, bought to you buy a corporation near you) Now I see why 3rd grade science buy at malwart was so hard for all of the Right, buy at malwart they’re still waiting to be told the answers to the test. buy at malwart. Have a great day, God is a happy face for, buy at malwart, you

Comments are closed.