Happening's

Loading...
Loading...

Friday, December 28, 2012

Why no really believes in man made global warming




Some dude who is ashamed to reveal his moniker wrote this in response to my post, “Snowy weather comes from global warming” posted on 12/28.
“UK tabloids and Tim Ball, the former geography professor (not a climatologist)? Do you actually know who you're citing? If so, why would you cite them? is that really the best you can do for an "expert"?”

He takes the bait beautifully, eh??

A geography professor???
Why he is almost as qualified as the rail road engineer who run's the UN's IPCC...lol

"Pachauri was born in Nainital, India. He was educated at La Martiniere College in Lucknow[4] and at the Indian Railways Institute of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering in Jamalpur, Bihar. He belongs to the Special Class Railway Apprentices, 1958 Batch, an elite scheme which heralded the beginning of mechanical engineering education in India.[5] He began his career with the Indian Railways at the Diesel Locomotive Works in Varanasi. Pachauri was awarded an MS degree in Industrial Engineering from North Carolina State University, Raleigh, in 1972, as well as a joint Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering and Economics in 1974.[6]  and partly because of the impact of meat-production on the environment.[8]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajendra_K._Pachauri

What does Ball say?

"Everyone knows that information is power, but it’s exploitation of power that has allowed a few to control and exploit people. Exploitation can be financial, but more disturbing and controlling is the exploitation of power"
snip

"The other issue I discussed was that climatology is a generalist discipline in a world of specialization. Even a basic understanding requires integration of everything from cosmic radiation from space to volcanic heat on the bottom of the ocean and everything in between.
Knowledge is valuable but only if it improves the human condition. As a consequence, beyond understanding the generalist nature of climate I am especially interested in how it affects all aspects of human existence. This website will examine a wide variety of topics about the way the environment affects humans and the way humans affect the environment."


Now, I have no way of knowing if CO2 leads, lags or just hold hands.

 

 
So let's look further...

"Data from Antarctic ice cores reveals an interesting story for the past 400,000 years. During this period, CO2 and temperatures are closely correlated, which means they rise and fall together. However, based on Antarctic ice core data, changes in CO2 follow changes in temperatures by about 600 to 1000 years, as illustrated in Figure 1 below. This has led some to conclude that CO2 simply cannot be responsible for current global warming.

This statement does not tell the whole story. The initial changes in temperature during this period are explained by changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, which affects the amount of seasonal sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface. In the case of warming, the lag between temperature and CO2 is explained as follows: as ocean temperatures rise, oceans release CO2 into the atmosphere. In turn, this release amplifies the warming trend, leading to yet more CO2 being released. In other words, increasing CO2 levels become both the cause and effect of further warming."


So we get an excuse, eh?? You know, every time this shit gets exposed a bit, there's another excuse as to why it stinks. Why not just say, “It’s shit and it stinks!”
We all know why. Money and power.

This time the excuse is  changes in the earth's orbit with amplification… except know one knows what the real amplification factor is… if it is actually the cause…
Jan. 28, 2010 — A new estimate of the feedback between temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration has been derived from a comprehensive comparison of temperature and CO2 records spanning the past millennium.

The result, which is based on more than 200,000 individual comparisons, implies that the amplification of current global warming by carbon-cycle feedback will be significantly less than recent work has suggested.

 
Climate warming causes many changes in the global carbon cycle, with the net effect generally considered to be an increase in atmospheric CO2 with increasing temperature -- in other words, a positive feedback between temperature and CO2. Uncertainty in the magnitude of this feedback has led to a wide range in projections of current global warming: about 40% of the uncertainty in these projections comes from this source.

 
Recent attempts to quantify the feedback by examining the co-variation of pre-industrial climate and CO2 records yielded estimates of about 40 parts per million by volume (p.p.m.v.) CO2 per degree Celsius, which would imply significant amplification of current warming trends.

 
In this week's Nature, David Frank and colleagues extend this empirical approach by comparing nine global-scale temperature reconstructions with CO2 data from three Antarctic ice cores over the period ad 1050-1800. The authors derive a likely range for the feedback strength of 1.7-21.4 p.p.m.v. CO2 per degree Celsius, with a median value of 7.7.

 
The researchers conclude that the recent estimates of 40 p.p.m.v. CO2 per degree Celsius can be excluded with 95% confidence, suggesting significantly less amplification of current warming."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100127134721.htm

Get that??? Instead of 40 the figure is 7.7...with a 95% confidence factor.

 Now, what does this explain? Well, it is possible that it tells us why the increase has stopped and been level for the past 15 years or so.

 "The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released last week.

The figures, which have triggered debate among climate scientists, reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.

This means that the ‘plateau’ or ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. Before that, temperatures had been stable or declining for about 40 years.
Some climate scientists, such as Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, last week dismissed the significance of the plateau, saying that 15 or 16 years is too short a period from which to draw conclusions.

Others disagreed. Professor Judith Curry, who is the head of the climate science department at America’s prestigious Georgia Tech university, told The Mail on Sunday that it was clear that the computer models used to predict future warming were ‘deeply flawed’.

 Even Prof Jones admitted that he and his colleagues did not understand the impact of ‘natural variability’ – factors such as long-term ocean temperature cycles and changes in the output of the sun. However, he said he was still convinced that the current decade would end up significantly warmer than the previous two.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html#ixzz2GPhI14SS

May I point out that Georgia Tech ain’t a two  year state junior college?? And may I point out that Dr Jones, who admitted in an email that man made global warming had not happened, says they don’t understand??? But he has an OPINION.
An opinion?? That’s damned thin gruel to base a public policy on that has resulted in sky high energy prices and plans to make them go even higher so that Obama’s crony capitalist friends can get rich!

So color me as an unbeliever of the first order, dear dude.
And next time grow a set of balls and tell us who you are.

 

 

 

 


"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." - Karl Popper

“It’s the presumption that Obama knows how all these industries ought to be operating better than people who have spent their lives in those industries, and a general cockiness going back to before he was president, and the fact that he has no experience whatever in managing anything. Only someone who has never had the responsibility for managing anything could believe he could manage just about everything.” - Thomas Sowell in Reason Magazine

Snowy weather comes from global warming



Well, we have had bit of nasty weather and I have already heard that the snow and cold is caused by climate change caused by manmade global warming... I got to thinking and remembered a letter in the Tennessean I responded to last summer.... said summer was dry and very hot so naturally it was caused by manmade global warming.


I have long felt that the best way to understand what people are writing is to carefully deconstruct something they have published. Such is the case of Pam Jones who has a lengthy opinion piece in the Tennessean.
First, let me note that we have no knowledge of Ms Jones’ background. She may be a highly educated scientist or she may be just another person with a cause and time to spare.

 Jones writes: The atmosphere is changing — not just the one that creates our weather, but the one in which we’re talking about climate change. For years, fossil fuel interests made global warming such a charged political issue that people avoided the topic. But as the effects of a warming planet multiply, the freeze on climate conversation is thawing as fast as the glaciers.
Jim replies: Right off the bat she mixes climate change and manmade global warming in a manner that shows she wants to mislead us or else she is unaware that climate change has happened since the earth was created. The issue is MANMADE global warming, or, as was claimed in the 70’s and 80”s, manmade global cooling.

 As for her erroneous claim that people have avoided the subject I guess she has never heard of Google. Well, I have. I Googled “global warming” and received 270,000,000 hits. Perhaps someone will call and tell her. Perhaps not.
As far as those fast thawing glaciers, well she seems to have never heard of Vinland and the Medeival Warming Period.

And then we have this:

“The revelation will cause fresh embarrassment for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which had to issue a humiliating apology earlier this month over inaccurate statements about global warming. ……….

 In its most recent report, it stated that observed reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and Africa was being caused by global warming, citing two papers as the source of the information.

 However, it can be revealed that one of the sources quoted was a feature article published in a popular magazine for climbers which was based on anecdotal evidence from mountaineers about the changes they were witnessing on the mountainsides around them”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7111525/UN-climate-change-panel-based-claims-on-student-dissertation-and-magazine-article.html

 Jones writes: This summer, I’ve overheard more people discussing climate change than ever before — in restaurants, coffee shops, and grocery store lines. You can see a change in the media coverage, too. Stories aren’t just reporting weather catastrophes; they’re making the connection to our fossil fuel addiction. The June Associated Press story entitled “This U.S. summer is ‘what global warming looks like’” actually ran in a newspaper in tiny Cullman, Ala. You wouldn’t have seen that a year ago.

 Jim replies:

I suppose if the Culman News reported the Second Coming Ms Jones would be on I65 heading south.

 But that aside, she makes the mistake of thinking something in the popular press is actually real.

 Jones writes: The reason for the shift, of course, is that the dramatic effects of CO2 emissions have become part of everyone’s personal experience. Here in Nashville, we’re still talking about the searing 109 degrees we hit on June 29 — along with 3,214 other U.S. communities that broke or tied their high-temperature records that month. The conversation among Tennessee’s farmers is about the devastation of this year’s corn crop from the drought that has now spread to two-thirds of the country.
Jim replies:

Uh, Ms Jones. We now know that global warming isn’t caused by CO2. 

Jones writes: This is what a 1-degree Centigrade increase in global temperatures feels like. As the climate conversation develops, we need to focus on how to avoid even hotter temperatures in the future. Scientist warn that we must act now to keep the increase to only 2 degrees — beyond which we would be facing conditions we don’t want to think, much less talk, about. This is what a 1-degree Centigrade increase in global temperatures feels like. As the climate conversation develops, we need to focus on how to avoid even hotter temperatures in the future. Scientist warn that we must act now to keep the increase to only 2 degrees — beyond which we would be facing conditions we don’t want to think, much less talk, about.

 Jim replies: No, what is being talked about is called weather. Anecdotal observations that it is hot and dry. Wow. What powers of observation we do have here. James Taylor says it better:
 "Every few months or so, global warming alarmists revise their talking points and march like lemmings off a cliff with a new media catch phrase. The Official Global Warming Catch Phrase of Summer 2012 is “This is what global warming looks like.” Illustrating the reality that the entire global warming movement contains only enough intellectually productive brain cells to create but a single sentence that all the so-called big brains can remember and recite…… Global warming alarmists point to wildfires in the western United States and say, “This is what global warming looks like.” They are right. This is what global warming looks like. According to a recently published paper in the peer-reviewed Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, wildfires in the western United States are currently at a 3,000-year low…….. Global warming alarmists point to drought in the western United States and say, “This is what global warming looks like.” They are right. This is what global warming looks like. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reports, “A number of tree-ring records exist for the last two millennia which suggest that 20th century droughts may be mild when evaluated in the context of this longer time frame.”

Jones writes: Climate activist Bill McKibben has documented how much more CO2 we can pour into the atmosphere if we want to stop at 2 degrees: 565 gigatons. The fossil fuel industry holds assets that, if burned, will emit 2,795 gigatons — five times that maximum. One thing’s for sure: The oil, natural gas and coal industries are not interested in leaving those assets in the ground.

Jim replies: Best I can tell McKibben is a prolific contributor to the magazine, “Rolling Stone.” Now that is a source that I am sure we would like to use for something like… say.. What pop culture hoodoo is interesting…. But not the life and or death of modern civilization.
Jones writes:ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson has admitted the reality of global warming and what’s causing it, but glibly says we just need to adapt. He said this the very week Nashville cooked at 109 degrees and Colorado Springs lost hundreds of homes to a fire fueled by drought- and insect-ravaged trees.

Maybe he can explain that to Tennessee farmers whose corn has been ruined. That’s a conversation I’d love to hear.
Jim replies: I know some farmers and the ones I know are very intelligent hardworking people. They’d laugh at the nonsense Ms Jones is spewing. But I digress.

The fact is that Tillerson is not an expert and he is news worthy now because of whom he is, not what he knows or his education. And that he agrees with the hoaxers.
Jones writes: What I’m talking about now — at work, in the bookstore, and over the fence when it’s finally cool enough in the evening to water my surviving tomato plants — is how putting a price on carbon can stop global warming. A carbon fee and dividend that returns revenue to the public would wean us off fossil fuels without damaging our economy.

It’s an idea that’s gaining support even among conservatives, notably former Reagan economic adviser Arthur Laffer and former U.S. Rep. Bob Inglis. Perhaps our senators, Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker, should have a chat with them about this common-sense solution.
And what of the fossil-fuel companies who will howl that a carbon fee will hurt them? Maybe they should start their own conversation about how to adapt

Jim writes: Ah, now we come to the real reason for her claims. Like most Left wingers she  want s a tax to modify behavior.  And like all Left wingers she thinks that you can take money from the economy, give it to government, etc….
The question is, how much should we take and what will it cost?? Should we increase the tax on gasoline by a dollar?? That would sure slow down drivers. Should we charge a 30% tax on our utility bills? Well, that would cause to be hot in the summer and cold in the winter.

But, would it stop global warming? No. That is not something we can do.
As I started this deconstruction I noted that I did not know anything about Ms Jones.  What I do know is that she is the President of the local chapter of an organization that 99.999% of Americans know nothing or little about yet she thinks she should lecture us?

I don’t think so Ms Jones.  Please “fly away home.” Your children are overheating and shouldn’t be alone.

"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." - Karl Popper
 
“It’s the presumption that Obama knows how all these industries ought to be operating better than people who have spent their lives in those industries, and a general cockiness going back to before he was president, and the fact that he has no experience whatever in managing anything. Only someone who has never had the responsibility for managing anything could believe he could manage just about everything.” - Thomas Sowell in Reason Magazine