The scientific finding that does not settle the climate-change debate
S. Fred Singer Letter to WashPost Oct 25, 2011**
Before you write off Bachmann, Cain, and Perry as cynical diehards, deniers, idiots, or whatever, [WashPost Oct 24] consider this:
Why are you surprised by the results of the Berkeley Climate Project? They used data from the same weather stations as the Climategate people, but reported that one-third showed cooling — not warming.
They covered the same land area – less than 30% of the Earth’s surface – with recording stations that are poorly distributed, mainly in US and Western Europe. They state that 70% of US stations are badly sited and don’t meet the standards set by government; the rest of the world is likely worse.
Unlike the land surface, the atmosphere showed no warming trend, either over land or over ocean — according to satellites and independent data from weather balloons. This indicates to me that there is something very wrong with the land surface data. And did you know that the climate models, run on super-computers, all show that the atmosphere must warm faster than the surface. What does this tell you?
And finally, we have non-thermometer temperature data from so-called “proxies”: tree rings, ice cores, ocean sediments, stalagmites. They don’t show any global warming since 1940!
The Berkeley results in no way confirm the scientifically discredited Hockeystick graph, which had been so eagerly adopted by climate alarmists. In fact, the Hockeystick authors have never published their temperature results after 1978. The reason for hiding them? It’s likely that their proxy data show no warming either.
One last word: In their scientific paper, submitted for peer review, the Berkeley scientists disclaim knowing the cause of the temperature increase reported by their project. However, their research paper comments: “The human component of global warming may be somewhat overestimated.” I commend them for their honesty and skepticism.
********************************************************************
S. Fred Singer is professor emeritus at the University of Virginia and director of the Science & Environmental Policy Project. He is a Senior Fellow of the Heartland Institute and of the Independent Institute. His specialty is atmospheric and space physics. An expert in remote sensing and satellites, he served as the founding director of the US Weather Satellite Service and, more recently, as vice chair of the US National Advisory Committee on Oceans & Atmosphere. He is co-author of Climate Change Reconsidered [2009 and 2011] and of Unstoppable Global Warming [2007]
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
#
#
Ben Blankenship says:
October 26, 2011 at 10:05 am
And on the adoration front, this just in, from Al Gore, in Huffington Post:
“With the evidence reconfirmed (again), I would hope that skeptics would rethink their position and join me in pushing our government, and governments around the world, to take steps to solve the climate crisis.”
How, Al? Like EPA closing down our coal generating plants at the same time China is building twice as many?
______________________________________________________-
No by paying Al (president of New Forest Co.) and the World Bank(financier) to push more Africans off their land so they can plant an invasive tree.
Al Gore and the World Bank have invented a new weapon, Genocide by Eucalyptus and want tax payers the world over to foot the bill.
“It creates virtual monocultures and can rapidly take over surrounding compatible areas, completely changing the ecosystem. That monoculture creates a loss of habitats for many species that relied on the previous system. Due to its great capacity for taking over a wide variety of habitats, the Blue Gum eucalyptus could possibly spread to a great range of systems where there is enough water content and create huge monocultures.” http://www.hear.org/pier/wra/pacific/eucalyptus_globulus_htmlwra.htm
“…..Most dense bluegum eucalyptus stands in California and Hawaii are almost devoid of understory vegetation, except for a few hardy grasses….
The leaves of bluegum eucalyptus release a number of terpenes and phenolic acids. These chemicals may be responsible for the paucity of accompanying vegetation in plantations [4]. Natural fog drip from bluegum eucalyptus inhibits the growth of annual grass seedlings in bioassays, suggesting that such inhibition occurs naturally [10,34]. At least one leaf extract has been shown to strongly inhibit root growth of seedlings of other species…
PALATABILITY :
Bluegum eucalyptus foliage is unpalatable to cattle, sheep, and goats
http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/tree/eucglo/all.html#7
The grass “fogged” with eucalyptus oil is also “unpalatable” and if even a goat won’t eat it….
Bart says:
October 26, 2011 at 12:02 pm
I still want to know what the H-E-double-hockey-sticks the straight average of an intensive variable like temperature means.
_________________________________________
That’s easy!
Remember Anthony’s article (New York Times) on They had to burn the village to save it from global warming
“…In 2005, the Ugandan government granted New Forests a 50-year license to grow pine and eucalyptus forests in three districts, and the company has applied to the United Nations to trade under the mechanism. The company expects that it could earn up to $1.8 million a year.
But there was just one problem: people were living on the land where the company wanted to plant trees. Indeed, they had been there a while….”
The president of New Forests is Al Gore and investors include the World Bank and the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, HSBC. See Global Land Grab other for similar projects)
This is the World Bank Press announcement:
“Cancun, Mexico, December 8, 2010–Developing countries wanting to use market instruments to scale up their mitigation efforts will soon have access to financial and technical support arising from a new global partnership launched today.
World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick announced the establishment of the Partnership for Market Readiness at an event on the sidelines of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change conference in Cancun.
The Partnership received pledges of more than $20 million by Australia (A$10m), the European Commission (€5m) and the United States ($5m) in Cancun today, which builds on an early pledge of $5 million from Norway. In addition, Germany, Japan and the UK announced their intention to support the initiative financially.
The Partnership is aiming for a total capitalization of $100 million. It is expected to become operational in early 2011 and will support a range of carbon market readiness initiatives ranging from technical to policy to institutional interventions…..”
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:22785667~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html
Just think it is YOUR tax dollar that was invested in New Forests and resulted in Friday Mukamperezida death by burning, but you will never see a dime of income only people like Al Gore will. All you get is the guilt.
Gail Combs says:
October 26, 2011 at 3:01 pm
—
Last time I checked, the satellite-atmospheric data started in 1979. So Singer cannot have been referring to any of the longer-timescales that you mention. Since the data don’t support his statement, he was indulging in bafflegab.
Environment: Ron Paul on eliminating the EPA
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?322556-Ron-Paul-on-elimitating-the-EPA
I see the skeptics have switched to a “God of the gaps” approach.
Al Dorman says:
October 27, 2011 at 7:41 am
Gee, Al, don’t you think the Alarmist position “It’s got to be CO2! We can’t think of anything else!” better fits that approach?
Drive-by snark. Gotta love it.