Mike Mann's global warming = tobacco claims on Al Jazeera

The extreme AGW theory is incorrect.
Polls, holding ones breath, jumping up and down, manipulating data, blocking the publication of papers that do not support the ‘message’, discussion of the history of tobacco, media specials, personal attacks, or any other lame attempt to distract will not change that fact.
Quoting the percentage of scientists that believe something – it is not clear specifically what they believe, any warming as opposed to dangerous warming – does not change the fact that current observations concerning planetary temperature change, the paleo climatic record, and related analysis supports the assertion that the majority of the 20th century warming was caused by solar magnetic cycle changes.
It appears to be a fact that the planet resists (negative feedback) greenhouse gas forcing changes by increasing planetary cloud cover in the tropics. If it is fact that the planet resists rather than amplifies greenhouse gas forcing (any greenhouse gas) then based on the IPCC’s own analysis the warming due to doubling of atmospheric CO2 will be less than 1C. If that is correct, then there is no danger or risk of excessive warming due to a doubling of atmospheric CO2.
In fact, as the majority of the warming due to doubling of atmospheric CO2 will occur at high latitudes the biosphere will expand. There will be an expansion of flora and fauna due to a doubling of atmospheric CO2.
Increases in atmospheric CO2 are beneficial to the biosphere. The optimum level of CO2 for plants is 1200 ppm. There is for example a 40% increase in cereal crop yield for a doubling of atmospheric CO2.
The current level of CO2 is 400 ppm. The forcing due to CO2 is logarithmic. Mathematically based on the fact that CO2 forcing is logarithmic (not a theory a fact) it takes twice the increase in CO2 levels to cause the same forcing. The forcing from 280 ppm to 560 ppm is the same as the forcing from 560 ppm to 1150 ppm.
If we burn all the fossil fuel on the planet atmosphere CO2 will increase to around 1000 ppm. Atmospheric CO2 is currently increasing at 2 ppm per year. At that rate, it would take 300 years to reach 1000 ppm.
However, it is expected CO2 emissions will increase. Based on growing energy use in third world countries we might reach 1000 ppm in roughly 150 years.
The following is a brief over view the facts concerning ‘climate’ change.
1) There is in the paleoclimatic record cyclic warming and cooling which occurs both in the interglacial period and in the glacial period. The paleo climatic specialists call the cyclic warming and cooling a Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle. The late Gerald Bond has able to track 23 of the D-O cycles through the interglacial period and into the glacial period. The D-O cycles have a variable periodicity of 950 years, 1450 years, and 1950 years. The late Gerald Bond and other scientists have found that the D-O cycle correlates with solar magnetic cycle changes.
Greenland ice temperature, last 11,000 years determined from ice core analysis, Richard Alley’s paper.
http://www.climate4you.com/images/GISP2%20TemperatureSince10700%20BP%20with%20CO2%20from%20EPICA%20DomeC.gif
http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/seminars/spring2006/Mar1/Bond%20et%20al%202001.pdf
Persistent Solar Influence on North Atlantic Climate During the Holocene (William: Holocene is the name for this interglacial period)
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2003/2003GL017115.shtml
Timing of abrupt climate change: A precise clock by Stefan Rahmstorf
Many paleoclimatic data reveal a approx. 1,500 year cyclicity of unknown origin. A crucial question is how stable and regular this cycle is. An analysis of the GISP2 ice core record from Greenland reveals that abrupt climate events appear to be paced by a 1,470-year cycle with a period that is probably stable to within a few percent; with 95% confidence the period is maintained to better than 12% over at least 23 cycles. This highly precise clock points to an origin outside the Earth system; oscillatory modes within the Earth system can be expected to be far more irregular in period.
https://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/74103.pdf
The Sun-Climate Connection by John A. Eddy, National Solar Observatory
Solar Influence on North Atlantic Climate during the Holocene
A more recent oceanographic study, based on reconstructions of the North Atlantic climate during the Holocene epoch, has found what may be the most compelling link between climate and the changing Sun: in this case an apparent regional climatic response to a series of prolonged episodes of suppressed solar activity, like the Maunder Minimum, each lasting from 50 to 150 years8.
The paleoclimatic data, covering the full span of the present interglacial epoch, are a record of the concentration of identifiable mineral tracers in layered sediments on the sea floor of the northern North Atlantic Ocean. The tracers originate on the land and are carried out to sea in drift ice. Their presence in seafloor samples at different locations in the surrounding ocean reflects the southward expansion of cooler, ice-bearing water: thus serving as indicators of changing climatic conditions at high Northern latitudes. The study demonstrates that the sub-polar North Atlantic Ocean has experienced nine distinctive expansions of cooler water in the past 11,000 years, occurring roughly every 1000 to 2000 years, with a mean spacing of about 1350 years.
Each of these cooling events coincides in time with strong, distinctive minima in solar activity, based on contemporaneous records of the production of 14C from tree-ring records and 10Be from deep-sea cores. For reasons cited above, these features, found in both 14C and 10Be records, are of likely solar origin, since the two records are subject to quite different non-solar internal sources of variability. The North Atlantic finding suggests that solar variability exerts a strong effect on climate on centennial to millennial time scales, perhaps through changes in ocean thermohaline circulation that in turn amplify the direct effects of smaller variations in solar irradiance.
2) The specific regions of the planet that warm and cool the most during the D-O cycle is the Northern hemisphere and particularly high latitudes in the northern hemisphere.
http://rivernet.ncsu.edu/courselocker/PaleoClimate/Bond%20et%20al%201999%20%20N.%20Atlantic%201-2.PDF
3) The regions that warmed in the 20th century are the same regions that warmed during the past D-O cycles.
4) The greenhouse gas forcing mechanism predicted that the majority of the warming would occur in the tropics as this is the region of the planet where there is the most amount of long wave radiation emitted to space and there is a large amount of water in this region to amplify the CO2 forcing.
5) Lindzen and Choi found by analyzing top of the atmosphere radiation Vs ocean surface temperature changes that the planet resists temperature changes by an increase or decrease in planetary cloud cover in the tropics thereby reflecting more or less radiation off into space. Based on Lindzen and Choi’s results and the fact that there is no observed tropical tropospheric warming (the extreme greenhouse forcing theory requires that greenhouse gas forcing – any greenhouse gas – will cause there to be an increase in water vapor in the tropical troposphere at around 8 km above the surface of the planet. This increase in water vapor will amplify the CO2 forcing. There is no observed tropical tropospheric warming in the last 15 years.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/DOUGLASPAPER.pdf
http://www.johnstonanalytics.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/LindzenChoi2011.235213033.pdf
6) As there is no observed tropical tropospheric and planetary cloud cover increases and decreases to resist warming, the majority of 20th century warming was caused by something
else besides the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere.
http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/uploads/media/Shaviv.pdf
“We examine the results linking cosmic ray flux (CRF) variations to global climate change. …then proceed to study various periods over which there are estimates for radiative forcing, temperature change and CRF variations relative to today. These include the Phanerozoic as a whole, the Cretaceous, the Eocene, the Last Glacial Maximum, the 20th century, as well as the 11 year cycle…
Subject to the above caveats and those described in the text, the CRF/climate link therefore implies that the increased solar luminosity and reduced CRF over the previous century should have contributed a warming of 0.47 +/-0.19C, while the rest should be mainly attributed to anthropogenic causes. Without any effect of cosmic rays, the increase in solar luminosity would correspond to an increased temperature 0.16C +/-C.”
7) There has been 16 years in which atmospheric CO2 has risen and there is not increase in planetary temperature.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/04/global-warming-slowdown-the-view-from-space/
8) The level of solar activity during the past 70 years is exceptional, and the previous period of equally high activity occurred more than 8,000 years ago. In the past 11,400 years the Sun spent only of the order of 10% of the time at a similarly high level of magnetic activity and almost all of the earlier high-activity periods were shorter than the present episode.
http://cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/personal/nature02995.pdf
Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years by S. K. Solanki, I. G. Usoskin, B. Kromer, M. Schussler & J. Beer
Here we report a reconstruction of the sunspot number covering the past 11,400 years, based on dendrochronologically dated radiocarbon concentrations. We combine physics-based models for each of the processes connecting the radiocarbon concentration with sunspot number. According to our reconstruction, the level of solar activity during the past 70 years is exceptional, and the previous period of equally high activity occurred more than 8,000 years ago. We find that during the past 11,400 years the Sun spent only of the order of 10% of the time at a similarly high level of magnetic activity and almost all of the earlier high-activity periods were shorter than the present episode. Although the rarity of the current episode of high average sunspot numbers may indicate that the Sun has contributed to the unusual climate change during the twentieth century, we point out that solar variability is unlikely to have been the dominant cause of the strong warming during the past three decades. (William: The authors considered total solar irradiation TSI which is not the major mechanism by which the sun modulate planetary temperature. The mechanism is modulation of low level and high level clouds. During both Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle and the Heinrich events the mechanism is inhibited as the solar magnetic cycle is interrupted. (i.e. Galactic cosmic rays increase however there is not an increase in planetary clouds.))
9) Solar cycle 24 is an abrupt slow down of the solar magnetic cycle.
At the above site, the following graph, a comparison of the past solar cycles 21, 22, and 23 to the new cycle 24 is provided. That graph is update every six months or so.
http://www.solen.info/solar/images/comparison_recent_cycles.png
This is a graph, that is also located at the above site, that compares solar cycle 24 to the weakest solar magnetic cycles in the last 150 years.
http://www.solen.info/solar/images/comparison_similar_cycles.png
http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.0784v1
When the solar magnetic cycle slows down there is 10 to 12 year delay before there is cooling in the high Arctic regions.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3256
Solar activity and Svalbard temperatures
The long temperature series at Svalbard (Longyearbyen) show large variations, and a positive trend since its start in 1912. During this period solar activity has increased, as indicated by shorter solar cycles.
The temperature at Svalbard is negatively correlated with the length of the solar cycle. The strongest negative correlation is found with lags 10 to 12 years. These models show that 60 per cent of the annual and winter temperature variations are explained by solar activity. For the spring, summer and fall temperatures autocorrelations in the residuals exists, and additional variables may contribute to the variations. These models can be applied as forecasting models.
We predict an annual mean temperature decrease for Svalbard of 3.5 ±2C from solar cycle 23 to solar cycle 24 (2009 to 2020) and a decrease in the winter temperature of ≈6 C.
A systematic study by Solheim, Stordahl and Humlum [15] (called SSH11 in the following) of the correlation between SCL and temperature lags in 11 years intervals, for 16 data sets (William: solar cycles), revealed that the strongest correlation took place 10 to 12 years after the mid-time of a solar cycle, for most of the locations included. In this study the temperature series from Svalbard (Longyearbyen) was included, and a relation between the previous sunspot cycle length (PSCL) and the temperature in the following cycle was determined. This relation was used to predict that the yearly average temperature, which was -4.2 C in sunspot cycle (SC) 23, was estimated to decrease to -7.8 C in SC24, with a 95% confidence interval of -6.0 to -9.6C [15]. SSH11[15] found that stations in the North Atlantic (Torshavn, Akureyri and Svalbard), had the highest correlations.
William: Latitude and longitude of Svalbard (Longyearbyen)
78.2167° N, 15.6333° E Svalbard Longyearbyen, Coordinates
10) Based on points 1 through 9 the planet will now cool.
If and when the high Arctic and the Northern hemisphere starts to cool, the general public and the media will be interviewing the so called ‘skeptics’ to discuss the cooling phase of a Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle or a Heinrich event.