The fight deepens over the Carbon Tax in Australia

John M says:
August 13, 2011 at 12:50 pm
Canada did not import any wheat back in the cold 1970s. It started in the warming 1980s and it has been increasing every year, despite warmer weather. Go figure that.
And yet yields for all crops, including wheat have steadily increased.
Go figure that.
It’s because the land is being converted to vinyards John.

John-in-Oz says:
August 13, 2011 at 3:35 am
I earlier recommnded to lazy teenager that he review the ‘climate fail’ pages. I was so certain that the hundreds of documented examples would be listed there, that I didn’t think to look. Oops, there’s only the one example; the 50 to 200 million climate refugees due by last year.

Here are a few posts from WUWT on the topic:
Jimbo says:
January 24, 2011 at 7:50 am
What you people don’t understand is that all science researchers, no matter what field, are jumping on the global warming bandwagon in a wild feeding frenzy of funds. Here is where some of the research funding went.
Warmer Northern Hemisphere winters because of global warming
Colder Northern Hemisphere winters because of global warming
Global warming to slow down the Earth’s rotation
Global warming to speed up the Earth’s rotation
North Atlantic Ocean has become less salty
North Atlantic Ocean has become more salty
Avalanches may increase
Avalanches may reduce
Plants move uphill due to global warming
Plants move downhill due to global warming
Declining coral calcification on the Great Barrier Reef due to global warming
Increasing coral calcification on the Great Barrier Reef due to global warming
Jimbo says:
April 3, 2011 at 5:03 am
Based partly on the models it’s much worse than we thought!
Amazon drought may be caused by cleaner air
Antarctica ice growth not linked to ozone
Arctic sea ice may not be in death spiral
Fisheries in Australia to thrive? or maybe not.
Great Barrier Reef boomed after bleaching
Natural disasters have not been increasing
Worldwide methane concentrations flattening?
Water scarcity has triggered peace treaties
[See also Geographical perspectives]
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/03/new-video-global-warmings-effects-a-to-z/
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
A Complete List Of Things Supposedly
Caused By Global Warming

@ur momisugly John-in-Oz: Here’s more:
Slabadang (18:42:24) :
AGW theories total collapse!
The gulf stream were slowing down……WRONG!
Antarctic ice melting…………………………WRONG!
Arctic ice in a “death spiral…………………WRONG!
The earth is warming…………………………WRONG!
More severe storms and hurricanes……..WRONG!
More flooding…………………………………..WRONG!
The sealevels are raisng more rapidly…WRONG!
Glaciers melting faster than previous….WRONG!
Amazonas……………………………………….WRONG!
Kilimanjaro………………………………………WRONG!
Dutch area under water……………………..WRONG!
Scientific consensus about global W/co2…Thats more a joke??? WRONG!
Winter snow a thing of the past…. another joke!!! WRONG!
“Barbecue summer” ………another joke!!! WRONG!
There will be a hotspot in the atmospfere….WRONG!
When co2 inreases warming accours…. WRONG!
African harvests …………………………WRONG!
Polarbears dying by global warming……a pure lie by WWF………WRONG!
Low summer ice extent arctic 2007 =global warming …WRONG!
Mediaval coooler than today ……oh yeah? say that to the vikings and the 400 published papers on the matter……an embarrasing intellectual insult..WRONG!
The hockeystick…….falsification in its bluntest form …WRONG!!!
A C Osborn (06:44:27) :
Slabadang (18:42:24) :
I agree with your list except I think this
The earth is warming…………………………WRONG!
Should have been
The earth is showing Unprecedented warming……WRONG!
Also you missed –
Coral dying from Heat – (actually dying from cold) …..WRONG!
More Animals dying from Heat – (actually dying from cold) …..WRONG!
More Collateral Damage from weather extremes…WRONG!
US Lakes Drying up…………………………WRONG!
Spring Coming earlier…………………………WRONG!
More Humans dying from Heat – (actually dying from cold) …..WRONG!
Frogs extinct from AGW – (actually a virus) …..WRONG!
—————–
Grant says:
June 28, 2011 at 4:50 pm
Seems like 10 years is a good number for harbingers of doom.
Ted Danson The “seas will be unhabital in 10 years”,
“The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.”
More from http://www.richardabarrett.com/?p=195
1990 Actress Meryl Streep ”By the year 2000–that’s less than ten years away–earth’s climate will be warmer than it’s been in over 100,000 years. If we don’t do something, there’ll be enormous calamities in a very short time.”
January 1970 Life Magazine ”Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support …the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”
July 9, 1971, Washington Post “In the next 50 years fine dust that humans discharge into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuel will screen out so much of the sun’s rays that the Earth’s average temperature could fall by six degrees. Sustained emissions over five to ten years, could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.”
June 30, 1989, Associated Press U.N. OFFICIAL PREDICTS DISASTER, SAYS GREENHOUSE EFFECT COULD WIPE SOME NATIONS OFF MAP–entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of “eco-refugees,” threatening political chaos, said Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program. He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect.
1991 Edward Goldsmith, 5000 Days to Save the Planet ”By 2000, British and American oil will have diminished to a trickle….Ozone depletion and global warming threaten food shortages, but the wealthy North will enjoy a temporary reprieve by buying up the produce of the South. Unrest among the hungry and the ensuing political instability, will be contained by the North’s greater military might. A bleak future indeed, but an inevitable one unless we change the way we live….At present rates of exploitation there may be no rainforest left in 10 years. If measures are not taken immediately, the greenhouse effect may be unstoppable in 12 to 15 years.”
April 22, 1990 ABC, The Miracle Planet “I think we’re in trouble. When you realize how little time we have left–we are now given not 10 years to save the rainforests, but in many cases five years. Madagascar will largely be gone in five years unless something happens. And nothing is happening.”
March 29, 2001, CNN ”In ten years time, most of the low-lying atolls surrounding Tuvalu’s nine islands in the South Pacific Ocean will be submerged under water as global warming rises sea levels.” [Next year we’ll know if this extremely unlikely prediction comes true.]
on and on and on………kinda rolls off the tongue, that ten years.
———-
Jordan says:
June 19, 2011 at 11:49 pm
THC shutdown was predicted s few years ago. A tipping point caused by freshwater influx in the North Atlantic that would, ironically, cause NW Europe to become much colder – so the AGW catastrophe theory was shown to not cause uniform warming.
That one had lots of gullible people running around in circles, worrying.
Now quietly forgotten.
———–
Jimbo says:
June 18, 2011 at 4:15 am
Dr. Ray Pierrehumbert
“……………then the next decade we had unusually cold winters,………”
This is a sign that he knows that their initial AGW speculation about milder NH winters is utter bull. He is setting up the escape route for when NH winters get colder. In 1998 Real Climate’s Gavin Schmidt ‘speculated’ in a peer reviewed Letter To Nature about milder NH winters as a result of the greenhouse effect. Now Dr. Ray Pierrehumbert is speculating about colder winters as a result of global warming.
These people will do anything to protect their religion, even up to the extent of making it UNfalsifiable. Sickening!
———-
jazznick says:
June 13, 2011 at 6:17 am
Another IPCC cock-up – Osvaldo Canziani, the then deputy head of the IPCC, had warned that “Venice is destined to disappear” within decades. Er NOT !
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/13/venice_not_in_peril/
———–
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/09/comparing-ipcc-1990-predictions-with-2011-data/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/03/the-big-self-parodying-climate-change-blame-list/
[list of contradictory peer-reviewed predictions]
————–
EternalOptimist says:
June 10, 2011 at 1:17 am
Isn’t life funny.
We get told that the science is settled, the models are verified, the data is not fiddled , snow will soon be a rare event and there is a consensus.
When we say ‘but this isnt like the lab and simple lab approaches miss the point and the complexity’, we get villified, called deniers and they make videos of children deniers exploding in bloody tatters.
Then when the original predictions are out by a mile, Steve says ‘ this isnt like the lab and simple lab approaches miss the point and the complexity.’
maybe, just maybe, we were right all along.
——–
Some of Tim’s Predictions
The water problem is so severe for Adelaide that it may run out of water by early 2009.”
Current Adelaide dam levels – 84%
In June 2007, Flannery prophesied “Brisbane’s water supplies are so low they need desalinated water urgently, possibly in as little as 18 months”.
Current Brisbane dam levels – 87%.
(The $1.3 billion desalination plant at Tugun Queensland advocated by Flannery is now in mothballs):
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/tugun-desalination-plant-to-be-mothballed-20101205-18l30.html
In 2005, Flannery predicted Sydney’s dams could be dry in just two years.
Current Sydney dam levels – 72%
2004, Flannery said global warming would cause such droughts that “there is a fair chance Perth will be the 21st century’s first ghost metropolis”.
Perth to-day:
http://www.escapelocally.com.au/images/stories/perth-wa.jpg
(Although Perth dam levels are presently definitely low. Getting warm Tim.)
In 2008 he stated “This may be the Arctic’s first ice-free year”.
Sorry, Tim missed again. Even the Catlin Arctic Survey and the international conservation group WWF, believe that the Arctic will be ice free in the summer in about 20 years. I suspect even that may be wishful thinking. But the main question is why and what about the Southern Hemisphere?
What is Tim doing right now?
Tim is right at this moment in Adelaide as the Government’s Climate’s Commissioner preaching to the masses why a carbon tax is going to be good for us. I guess that this year we are stopping floods rather than droughts.
————
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/wheres_that_indian_crop_failure_the_warmists_predicted
Michael in Sydney says:
February 18, 2011 at 12:27 pm
Here is a good news story on the environment.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/recovery-in-full-flow-for-murray/story-fn59niix-1226008395465
It is about the Murray river in Australia coming back to life after a decade of drought. A good reminder that natural systems are often more resilient than we give them credit for.
————
johnb says:
February 12, 2011 at 10:00 am
Daily Caller has an article up (not by you) that shows the contradictions between the IPCC and Al Gore’s claim that global warming means more snow. From the article.
* “Snow season length and snow depth are very likely to decrease in most of North America … except in the northernmost part of Canada where maximum snow depth is likely to increase (Christensen et al., 2007).” (EPA)
* “Decreases in snowcover and increases in winter rain on bare soil will likely lengthen the erosion season and enhance erosion intensity.” (EPA)
* “Rising temperatures have generally resulted in rain rather than snow in locations and seasons where climatological average temperatures for 1961 to 1990 were close to freezing (0 °C).” (EPA)
* “As temperatures rise, the likelihood of precipitation falling as rain rather than snow increases, especially in autumn and spring at the beginning and end of the snow season, and in areas where temperatures are near freezing. Such changes are observed in many places, especially over land in middle and high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, leading to increased rains but reduced snowpacks.” (IPCC)
http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/11/is-al-gore-wrong-on-the-environment-global-warming-is-not-to-blame-for-snow/#ixzz1Dlj4HVDL
———–
Urederra says:
February 4, 2011 at 10:28 am
“But no one who argues against the science of climate change has ever provided an alternative scientific theory that adequately satisfies the observable evidence or conforms to our understanding of physics, chemistry, and climate dynamics.”
And we don’t have to provide any alternative theory. A theory is bad when there is empirical data that cannot be explained by the current theory, and so far there is plenty of data that doesn’t fit with CAGW models:
-Temperatures are not rising as fast as CAGW predicts.
-Number of cyclones/hurricanes are not growing as CAGW predicts.
-Sea level rise is not accelerating as CAGW predicts.
-Ice caps are not melting as CAGW predicts, specially the south one.
-Glaciers are not melting as CAGW predicts.
-Winters are not milder as CAGW predicts.
… and on top of that, there is poor correlation between CO2 levels and temperature.
————
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_the_alarmists_have_taxed_our_creduility_once_too_often/
————-
http://joannenova.com.au/2011/01/busted-predictions-from-brazen-prophets/#more-12595
————-
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/i_dont_think_the_warmists_models_are_working/
—————–
James Sexton says:
December 30, 2010 at 9:51 am
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/12/30/botched-environmental-forecasts/
Eight botched climate catastrophe predictions, with a couple of statements from Ehrlich and Oppenheimer. Its a fun read, and perhaps some jewels to find in Ehrlich’s and Oppenheimer’s statements, and a possible template for a future post on WUWT?
——–
Verity Jones says:
December 19, 2010 at 3:33 am
There needs to be a reminder that AGW has been saying that the trend towards a Positive NAO (with mild winters in UK and Europe) was probably anthropogenic in origin and that models predicted a continuation of this tendancy. IF we revert to negative NAO dominance they cannot suddenly change their tune.
http://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2010/12/18/nao-is-the-winter-of-our-discontent/
————-
http://www.c3headlines.com/predictionsforecasts/
Hilarious!
————–
richcar 1225 says:
November 22, 2010 at 5:25 pm
The latest paper from Koutsoyiannis et al., compares GCM models with actual measurements of temperature history and precipitation for regional areas of the US and finds the models have failed miserably. This is what the scientific method is about.
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a928051726&fulltext=713240928
————–
matt v. says:
November 4, 2010 at 8:20 am
Don Gardner wrote another interesting article called “Foredoomed is not forewarned” about the flaws of alarmist forecasts.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/health/Foredoomed+forearmed/3663193/story.html
—————
Bob (Sceptical Redcoat) says:
October 22, 2010 at 2:20 pm
Climate Science (Roger Pielka Sn) reports on a new study by a group of hydrologists that compares climate models results with observations:
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/
The abstract of their paper says:
We compare the output of various climate models to temperature and precipitation observations at 55 points around the globe.We also spatially aggregate model output and observations over the contiguous USA using data from 70 stations, and we perform comparison at several temporal scales, including a climatic (30-year) scale. Besides confirming the findings of a previous assessment study that model projections at point scale are poor, results show that the spatially integrated projections are also poor.
———–
Bill Illis says:
October 22, 2010 at 6:06 am
I guess everyone recognizes this is just a GISS ModelE climate model output. It is based on calculations that James Hansen would have put into the model.
So generally, one either accepts James Hansen view of the world or one would ask for additional empirical data to be measured to back up the theoritical calculations (ie what we used to call the scientific method).
What does the empirical data tell us (with regard to this paper’s and the theory’s proposition that GHGs control 85% of the water vapour levels as well).
– Total specific humidity water vapour levels are completely FLAT (according to the NCEP reanalysis since 1948) or, (according to Hadcruh – Willet et al 2008 – at the highest estimate), there is an increase at about the levels expected by the theory. There is also annual variation tied closely to the ENSO. GISS ModelE would be calculating about a 1/2oth increase in specific humidity (and more-or-less constant relative humidity) over the period covered by this data.
http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/7908/specifichumidity.png
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/3537/relativehumidity.png
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcruh/CRUBLENDNEWjul08_ts_q_global7303.png
– Global Precipitation Levels are essentially FLAT since 1979 and precipitation on land is FLAT since 1950. GISS ModelE would be predicting about a 1.5% increase over the time period covered by this data.
http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/8974/trenberthprecipitation.png
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/2026/riverdischargeandprecip.png
– And there has been a general decline in the level of cloudiness according to the ISCCP project – GISS ModelE would be predicting about a 1% increase in cloudiness over the period covered by this data.
http://isccp.giss.nasa.gov/zD2BASICS/B8glbp.anomdevs.jpg
http://isccp.giss.nasa.gov/climanal7.html
So, on the whole, the theory and ModelE is not matching up to the empirical data.
———–
Andrew30 says:
October 3, 2010 at 5:23 pm
Someone replied to one of my comments of a MSM site with the following:
“Well you do realize that evidence is essentially just a successfully observed prediction.”
And directed me to http://www.skepticalscience.com.
So I bring you:
http://www.skepticalscience.com (2008) VS. http://www.skepticalscience.com (2010)
(A view from the wayback Machine.)
2008:
web.archive.org/web/20080507024314/
http://www.skepticalscience.com/ocean-and-global-warming.htm
“If the ocean was feeding atmospheric warming, the oceans would be cooling.”
“The other consequence of the warming ocean is it means there is additional “warming in the pipeline”. Even if CO2 emissions were to start falling now, we already face further global warming of about another half degree by the end of the 21st century”
2010:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/cooling-oceans.htm
“Claims that the ocean has been cooling are correct. Claims that global warming has stopped are not.”
What to make of this:
“If the ocean was feeding atmospheric warming, the oceans would be cooling.”
“Claims that the ocean has been cooling are correct.”
–
2008:
http://web.archive.org/web/20080502163611/
http://www.skepticalscience.com/satellite-measurements-warming-troposphere.htm
“Climate models predict the troposphere should show greater warming than the surface”
2010:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/satellite-measurements-warming-troposphere.htm
“At least two other groups keep track of the tropospheric temperature using satellites and they all now show warming in the troposphere that is consistent with the surface temperature record.”
Hmmm, falsified prediction?
2008: “Climate models predict the troposphere should show greater warming than the surface”
2010: “warming in the troposphere that is consistent with the surface temperature record.”
–
Hurricane intensity as Evidence of global warming.
2008
web.archive.org/web/20080719031424/
http://www.skepticalscience.com/hurricanes-global-warming.htm
Strong links between Global Warming and hurricanes.
“While the empirical evidence linking global warming and hurricane intensity seems robust, it has no bearing on the central question of whether human CO2 emissions are causing global warming.”
2010:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Hurricanes-And-Climate-Change-Boy-Is-This-Science-Not-Settled.html
“And to cap it off, two recent peer-reviewed studies completely contradict each other. One paper predicts considerably more storms due to global warming. Another paper suggests the exact opposite – that there will be fewer storms in the future.”
The data that was presented in the 2010 page ends in 2007, which is Not as expected (sort of)
Hmmm,
In 2008 the Empirical Evidence was the ‘robust’ connection ‘linking global warming and hurricane intensity’.
In 2010: No correlation whatsoever.
It was fun to be able to post using only the http://www.skepticalscience.com website and still show the Global Warming Believers’ falsified predictions, non-correlations, blatant contradictions, etc. There are more wayback sites for http://www.skepticalscience.com. I just don’t have the time to write them all up.
It was fun though.
—————
climatepatrol says:
June 25, 2010 at 3:19 am
@ur momisuglyJeff Green
June 23, 2010 at 5:01 pm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?a=13
Other results successfully predicted and reconstructed by models
My answers are in capital letters. No offense.
•Cooling of the stratosphere OK
•Warming of the lower, mid, and upper troposphere
THE LOWER TO MID TROPOSPHERE IS SUPPOSED TO WARM 1.2 TIMES FASTER THAN THE SURFACE, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE. LOWER TROPOSPHERE WARMS ABOUT THE SAME OVER THE SEA BUT LESS OVER CONTINENTS. TYPICALLY UHI. AND UPPER TROPOSPHERE SURPRISINGLY COOLS FROM THE STRATOSPHERE.
•Warming of ocean surface waters (Cane 1997)
AND NO WARMING SINCE 2000 (Lymann 2010) OWING TO A LACK OF WATER VAPOR FEEDBACK (Pielke S.R.
•Trends in ocean heat content (Hansen 2005)
STOPPED SINCE 2003
•An energy imbalance between incoming sunlight and outgoing infrared radiation (Hansen 2005).
SURE, NOT ALL RADIATION ENERGY WILL RAISE TEMPERATURE AND AS TO THE MISSING AGW-SUBMARINE, SCIENTISTS ARE STILL SEARCHING THE OCEANS .
•Amplification of warming trends in the Arctic region (NASA observations)
THEY DIDN’T PREDICT THAT, IT HAPPENED BEFORE.
—————-
Jimbo (12:58:06) :
Here are some IPCC predictions / forecasts / scenarios against ‘observations’.
http://www.ianschumacher.com/img/TempsvsIPCCModelsWM.jpg
http://deepclimate.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/ar4-a1b-a2.gif
http://joannenova.com.au//globalwarming/graphs/akasofu/akasofu_graph_little_ice-age.gif
Here are some general failed predictions and forecasts from warmists.
http://www.c3headlines.com/predictionsforecasts/
————
Pompous Git:
AGW theory has made a number of testable predictions, such as the existence of a hotspot in the equatorial troposphere, decreasing summer soil moisture in Asia where most of the warming has occurred, continuing increase in atmospheric methane etc. that have been falsified by observation. It behooves the AGW proponents to explain these difficulties adequately. They don’t; they claim these observations are “consistent with” the theory. Thus AGW is metaphysical, rather than hard science as an engineer, chemist, geologist etc would define their sciences.
————–
Continental temp trends vs. predicitions:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/when-results-go-bad/
—————
M. Simon (13:18:50) :
Causal relationships don’t require the dependent variable to change in lock step with one independent variable with other independent variables are involved.
So true. Except lock step was the prediction.
Less snow in winter was predicted. Nothing about a chance of the snowiest winter ever.
———–
aMINO aCIDS iN mETEORITES (18:49:24) :
Increased snow and global warming predictions fit hand in glove—so global warming advocates like Al Gore would say—i.e., warmest decade on record has produced the greatest snowfall on record. But this theorized increase in snow from global warming is supposed to be in an ever smaller and smaller circle in the Northern Hemisphere with the circumference of that diminishing circle around the world approaching closer, year by year, to the North Pole.
But that isn’t happening. The area of snow cover is not retreating towards the north but it is covering a greater area heading south. The area of snow cover at wintertime around the world in the Northern Hemisphere is growing bigger not smaller.
————
Ed Forbes (14:19:59) :
DR (09:34:14) :
“..Does anyone have the link to Boxer, Byrd et al preaching about the lack of snow for previous recent years in the U.S. as proof positive of global warming catastrophe?..”
Try this one:
Breitbart TV looks back on Byrd, Boxer, Klobuchar blaming lack of snow on AGW
http://www.looktruenorth.com/limited-government/climate-change/11244-breitbart-tv-looks-back-on-byrd-boxer-klobuchar-blaming-lack-of-snow-on-agw.html
————
Eric Gisin (17:54:48) :
Long before the Goracle’s Inconceivable Truth, there was After the Warming with James Burke on TV in 1990. Even more alarmist, it made the following predictions (from Amazon):
1997-1999, Massive drought in Ukraine and US: American grain failure, hundreds of thousands die of starvation
2000, sea levels up 1′ since 1994 (in reality, it was about 1″)
2007, no water in Mexico City, 3rd world coastal regions destroyed by hurricanes, causing mass migration
2008, Major nuclear power plant accidents, and 100’s of thousands dead from hurricanes in Miami and other places
2010, millions more dead from starvation… and 3 degrees warming in the last 15 years (there has been only about 0.45 degrees, and no warming in the last 10 years)
You would think anyone watching it recently would rate it poorly. Not so! 7.9/10 on IMDB.
The disconnect between reality and green apocalypse is unbelievable. Just wait 20 years and see how wrong Gore was.
http://www.amazon.com/After-Warming-VHS-James-Burke/product-reviews/B00004CMBT/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0334827/
————-
Genghis (18:47:02) :
Didn’t anyone read this report? http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/19/north-america-snow-models-miss-the-mark/
All nine of the models predicted decreasing snow extent. Gore is claiming increasing snow extent, after the fact.
————–
Peer reviewed papers such as Paltridge’s “Trends in middle- and upper-level tropospheric humidity from NCEP reanalysis data” and Solomon’s “Contributions of Stratospheric Water Vapor to Decadal Changes in the Rate of Global Warming” show that specific humidity in the radiative zone has gone down as CO2 has gone up; a negative feedback in contradiction to the assumptions built into all of the IPCC climate models.
A key requirement of AGW has been contradicted by the data.
Mike Ramsey
————
John Blake (18:51:24) :
Back in mid-January 2009, GISS/NASA’s benighted James Hansen issued a pronunciamento to effect that ‘09 would register as “the hottest year on record.” Of course he said the same for 2006, 2007, and 2008, all of which tumbled out-of-bed on the downside.