Via NWC: Forget the missing heat – the real story is the present cooling.
Related, Lorne Gunter.
While the senior members of the IPCC insist their latest report be every bit as gloomy and alarmist as the past four, a growing number of scientists are unwilling to claim the world is going to hell in a handbasket unless we all stop using fossil fuels.
Hold on there. There just isn’t enough data to call this ‘cooling’. Lets not make the same mistakes as the warmists.
Racist denier!
“We may have missed interrupted the effects of CO2 and it turns out to cause cooling rather than warming but there is no DENYING that CLIMATE CHANGE is man made.” Al Gore/David Suzuki at the 2016 Climate Change Summit.
As I’m typing this my coworker is listening to the CBC who are stating that the Northern Gateway should not be built because it will increase greenhouse gas production. Leftards.
I, for one, am enjoying this break in the ice ages. I am far more concerned about what to do when the ice returns than how I would decide between oranges, mangos, and pineapples to grow in the backyard.
And in case there are any catastrophists in the crowd, neither one would happen within my lifetime.
Temperatures have leveled off, contrary to the theory, and that’s sufficient evidence to break the IPCC scientific model. It’s no longer possible for the IPCC to claim that human emissions are the dominant effect on climate as the past three assessment reports have stated.
You’re right about the leveling off and the useless models. It is possible that there is a natural cooling force that is only counteracting man’s CO2/man’s other climate influences (CFCs? Soot?). Otherwise it seems the potency of CO2 is far less than claimed and certainly we are not going into a positive feedback cycle.
So, the climate models and the theories about AGW are all wrong….because of magic fairy dust?
Climate model failure . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zxFStRC913I
Still waiting for a downside to global warming in Canada. When we can grow bananas in Edmonton we can celebrate mother natures natural transition. Until then, paying a carbon tax for the privilege of freezing our asses off in the winter seems rather silly. So why are Calgary taxpayers giving the Pembina(tree huggers R us ) institute 340 thousand dollars to encourage more carbon tax ? Oh….I know….because they’re STUPID , and just like Vancouver they have a STUPID moonbat Mayor. Farmers Almanac predicting the coldest winter in 85 years. Heh.
Learn to read Lance. I recommend finishing high school like you’ve always dreamed of.
What is this magical spell you have, LAS, that causes people’s reading comprehension skills to nip down the local for a pint or three every time you post? Can I learn it? It seems like I ought to be able to make money with it somehow.
“…There just isn’t enough data to call this ‘cooling’. Lets not make the same mistakes as the warmists….”
All the “mistakes” the liars made were intentional. There certainly is enough data to call it cooling…however, unlike the liars, there is no chance that we deniers will be using the words “irreversible” and “catastrophic” and apocalyptic.
Well, unless the troops have to come in and scrape three inches of snow from Bloor Street.
Human emissions are trivial compared to natural sources:
Annual human emissions: 30 BT
Biosphere emissions: 800 BT
Annual Ocean-Atmosphere exchange: 15,000 BT
And the biosphere responds relatively rapidly to changes in CO2 concentration, hence increasing the absorption. One of the big flaws with IPCC was to assume the CO2 sinks were relatively constant.
As to cooling trends, the current solar cycle is the weakest in more than a century. Current indications are that it may have peaked, and at a level lower than the 18th C Dalton Minimum. On a longer general timeframe, our current interglacial period is now several thousand years older than the average of previous interglacials during the Holocene.
Human emissions are trivial compared to natural sources:
Annual human emissions: 30 BT
Biosphere emissions: 800 BT
Annual Ocean-Atmosphere exchange: 15,000 BT
And the biosphere responds relatively rapidly to changes in CO2 concentration, hence increasing the absorption. One of the big flaws with IPCC was to assume the CO2 sinks were relatively constant.
As to cooling trends, the current solar cycle is the weakest in more than a century. Current indications are that it may have peaked, and at a level lower than the 18th C Dalton Minimum. On a longer general timeframe, our current interglacial period is now several thousand years older than the average of previous interglacials during the Holocene.
There certainly is enough data to call it cooling
No there isn’t. You don’t understand statistics. You can’t just draw a trend line through a bunch of data and say ‘tada it’s cooling’.
CGH: the human emissions are one-way, those other things are part of 2-way exchanges.
And the biosphere responds relatively rapidly to changes in CO2 concentration, hence increasing the absorption. One of the big flaws with IPCC was to assume the CO2 sinks were relatively constant.
The IPCC sees catastrophic positive feedback loops under its bed.
As to cooling trends, the current solar cycle is the weakest in more than a century.
If we’re not cooling due to a sleepy sun, isn’t that evidence that we are subject to some warming force? If it is human CO2, then we should be thankful because the next ice age-even if it’s one of the ‘mild’ ones-will involve my current location being buried under hundreds of meters of ice. And I WILL get my damage deposit back.
If LAS were to be entombed in hundreds of meters of ice, there would be less stupid in the world, so much less, in fact, the poles might flip due to the sudden imbalance.
“No there isn’t. ”
Yes there is!
“You can’t just draw a trend line through a bunch of data and say ‘tada it’s cooling’.”
Oh, I don’t draw trend lines. My methodology is much better than that.
LAS may get a bit abrasive but I’d be less concerned meeting him/her in a dark alley than some of the holy rollers around here. Besides, without LAS and the 1 or 2 other contrarians this blog would have about as much diversity of opinion as a university faculty party or rabble babble.
A statistically significant cooling trend following “the pause” would strengthen the case that natural cycles dominate not anthro CO2. I don’t think that the question regarding what is the main climate driver(s) is anywhere near being settled yet but natural cycles is gaining more traction as the IPCC CAGW models fail.
Dear LAS
If you are a climate scientist you can draw any trend line regardless of the data and call it Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming and get paid for it. The facts not only don’t matter they are deliberately and misleadingly ignored by the warmists.
My dear LAS, I would say that your guesses are as good as those of any “climatologist”. As CGH says, it is now demonstrated that the computer models don’t work. Why they don’t work may take a long time to figure out, if anyone can be bothered.
For myself, I am almost as little convinced that the Earth is cooling as I was that it was warming. I do know three things, the first of which I stated above. The second is that it is difficult to sort out a trend that is smaller than fluctuations; and the third is that nearly all climatologists are fourth-rate scientists who, even when they are honest, are not up to the above task.
No, the human emissions, indeed all emissions of CO2, are not one-way. The level in the atmosphere is an equilibrium between CO2 entering the system and CO2 being sequestered or leaving the atmosphere. The principal source of the level of CO2 entering the atmosphere or leaving it is a change in ocean temperature, which is why the ocean-atmosphere exchange number is so large and so important. As the world cools, CO2 declines, as the world warms, it increases.
This is because CO2 is a consequence, not a cause of temperature change. And this in turn is why even the natural CO2 emissions are a rounding error of the ocean-atmosphere exchange (let alone the human emissions.) Making matters worse, the warming effect of CO2 is virtually nil because at anything over about 150 ppm the effect of CO2 in atmosphere absorbing and reradiating infrared is essentially at saturation.
The ocean and the atmosphere don’t care where the CO2 comes from. It’s all treated the same.
John, I cannot give you THE reason why they are wrong, but I can give you A reason why. No model is any stronger than its weakest assumption. All the climate models which have failed so dramatically assume that the earth’s atmosphere is driven by positive feedback effects.
This is wrong simply by inspection. If the dynamic is positive feedback, then the earth would inevitably at some point have been driven into one of two end states: either a furnace like Venus or a frozen ball of ice. Instead geologic history has shown that earth’s atmosphere over time is more like a standing sine wave: occasional and frequent fluctuations but a generally constant average temperature with changes mostly affecting land based records only as a function of continental drift (land masses have migrated towards the poles over the last 300+ million years. This is the main reason why we have ice ages whereas the early dinosaurs largely did not.)
A standing sine wave would be one driven by negative feedbacks: something happens and something else results to damp out the change. So, if a central assumption of the models is wrong, their output can only be varying degrees of garbage.
well put cgh, and L-ass won’t “git” what you just posted:-)))
LC Bennett, sorry to have to disagree with you, BUT, Lass is not a contrarian per say, he’s completely out of his depth. He quacks about “statistics” and then goes on to prove he doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about. To invoke discussion is good, but atleast one should be “in” the conversation, or atleast be aware of their own comprehention and knowledge limits
It’s warming, it’s cooling, it’s dry, it’s wet, it’s weather patterns that have been with us since time began. The only problem is with charlatans like Gore and Suzuki who have become rich telling us we’re all to blame for climate fluctuations when it cannot be proven to be true.
Most of us in this northern climate would love to have longer summers, more time to grow our own produce, save money on utilities which have become overpriced due to the eco nut theologists,but alas, this year so-called global warming missed most of this country, summer was cooler and wetter in many parts of the country.
Where were the eco-nuts when rail lines were being torn up which will result in more gas fuming monster trucks on the roads?
Where are the eco-nuts protesting land fill dumps instead of pollution free incinerators for garbage disposal?
Yes, I’m sure it had nothing to do with the psychological/social phenomenon of proving loyalty to the group by attacking X whereby lower ranking members seek to please and ingratiate themselves to higher ranking members. LAS says a lot less ridiculous things than others but because s/he is not desperately seeking group approval s/he is the preferred target. I get why it happens, it just looks like a bizarre ritual if you’re not part of it. On the plus side, a character like LAS keeps the zombies from canablizing their own less like-minded members which, IMO, had driven some interesting and moderate commenters off the blog.
And despite the Goracle’s pronouncement that hurricanes would be more frequent AND more intense, the opposite has happened.
This year, is one of the latest seasons “on record”, for the first hurricane of the season, and having said that, its path will keep it in the mid-Atlantic until it powers out.
Funny how the opposite becomes true, whenever the Goracle speaks. Yet the left gets ADD when things go wrong………..
http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/humberto-may-defend-hurricane-record/17586208