Global Warming Skepticism 101

Global Warming Skepticism 101

Informative summary From Dr. Roy Spenser 12/9/09

A few excerpts from Spenser with [my notes]:
1. [AGW]Skeptics deny global warming.
No, we deny that warming has been mostly human-caused. [Scientists should be skeptical, even of skeptics. Science is not pitch a view, it is to advance understanding].

2. Skeptics are paid by big oil.
The vast majority of skeptics have never been paid anything by Big Oil (me included). [It's not as easy to get a grant as an AGW skeptic. Note: several recent revelations show big oil is pandering to AGW folks.]

3. Skeptics don’t publish in the peer reviewed literature.
Wrong…but it is true we do not have nearly as many publications as the other side does. But it only takes one scientific study to destroy a scientific hypothesis, which is what anthropogenic global warming theory is.

4. Skeptics are not unified with an alternative explanation for global warming. Well, that’s the way science works in a field as immature as climate change science. The biggest problem is that we really don’t understand what causes natural climate variability.........

5. But the glaciers are melting!
Many glaciers which have been monitored around the world for a long time have been retreating since the 1800’s, before humans could have been responsible. A few retreating glaciers are even revealing old tree stumps…how did those get there? Planted by skeptics?

6. But the sea ice is melting!
Well, the same thing happened back in the 1920’s and 1930’s, with the Northwest Passage opening up in 1940. It was just as warm, or nearly as warm, in the Arctic in the 1930’s. Again, this is before humans could be blamed. There were very low water levels in the Great Lakes in the 1920’s too, just as has happened recently. We have accurate measurements of sea ice cover from satellites only since 1979, so there is no way to really know whether sea ice cover is less than it was before.

7. But we just had the warmest decade in recorded history!
Well, if thermometer measurements had started in, say 200, AD (rather than in the 1800’s), and it was now 850 AD, the same thing might well have been said back then. The climate system is always warming or cooling, and the Industrial Revolution (and thus our carbon dioxide emissions) just happened to occur while we were still emerging from the Little Ice Age…a warming period.

8. But the Antarctic ice shelves are collapsing!
Well, sea ice around Antarctica has been expanding since we started monitoring by satellite in 1979….so which do we use as evidence? There is no convincing evidence of warming in Antarctica, except in the relatively small Antarctic Peninsula, which juts out into the ocean. Just as glaciers naturally flow to the sea, ice shelves must eventually break off. It is very uncertain how often this happens through the centuries, and what has been observed in recent years might be entirely normal. Similarly, it was warmer in Greenland in the 1930’s than it has been more recently.

9. But the sea levels are rising!
Yes, and from what we can tell, they have been rising since the end of the last Ice Age. Again, the more recent rise might be just a consequence of our emergence from the Little Ice Age, which bottomed out in the 1600’s.

10. But we keep emitting carbon dioxide, which we know is a greenhouse gas!
But the direct warming effect of moré CO2 is agreed by all to be small…and I predict that when we better understand how clouds change in response to that small warming influence, the net warming in response to more CO2 will be smaller still. This is the “feedback” issue, which determines “climate sensitivity”, the area of research I spend most of my time on. I and a minority of other scientists believe the net feedbacks in the climate system are negative, probably driven by negative cloud feedback. In contrast, all twenty-something IPCC climate models now exhibit positive cloud feedback.

AGW Skeptic Video Summaries

Summaries from 4 skeptics for consideration of alternative views
D'Aleo http://www.kusi.com/home/78477122.html?video=pop&t=a
Coleman http://www.kusi.com/home/78477082.html?video=pop&t=a
Lindzen http://www.kusi.com/home/78477177.html?video=pop&t=a
Soon http://www.kusi.com/home/78477312.html?video=pop&t=a

Climate catastrophe canceled

Finish TV discussion on problems with the Mann hockey stick temperature graphs

Climate catastrophe canceled

A couple excerpts:
Korhola: "Especially now with the Copenhagen conference approaching, one gets the impression that also among scientists, many have lost control. Especially when you compare original studies to how they are presented to the public, in the mass media, there is a huge gap in what comes out. We get a lot of material with terms like dramatic, catastrophic, unprecedented, and among some researchers there is even talk of planetary doom and saving the planet."

Lindzen: "The real question is, why the last few years have seen this huge boost with all these crazy movies - “Inconvenient truth” - nonsense spewed out, hysteria? We are all going to die, if we don't change our light bulbs immediately. I can only say, somebody must have noticed that the temperature has stopped increasing and they had all these agendas by now to make billions of dollars, and do this and do that, get people to pay taxes and feel happy about it, because they are saving the earth and so on. So you have the politicians, the bureaucrats, the scientists and so on, and all felt you know that if the temperature continues this way, this is finished if we don't get it through immediately so the volume has increased.”

This ten-year-old figure, dubbed as the hockey stick, was meant to revolutionize the dominant view of global climate history.

But in the hockey stick graph, the Medieval Warm Period and the little ice age after it have disappeared.

McIntyre: ” It turned out that he had modified a principal components method incorrectly and the modified method produced hockey stick-shaped graphs ninety-nine percent of the time. It also emphasized a class of proxies, strip-bark bristlecone pines that previous authors had said were not actually a temperature proxy”.

In the mid 1990's the American geologist David Deming received an astonishing e-mail, in which one prominent climate researcher announced to his colleagues: "We have to get rid of the medieval warm period."

Kari Mielikäinen, professor of forest research (Metla, Finland): "We have this long series going back over 7,000 years, and there's no hockey stick there."

VO: Briffa's Yamal hockey stick was published in the prestigious journal Science. McIntyre asked for a copy of the raw data from Yamal.
McIntyre: ”Briffa refused. The editors of Science refused to require Briffa to provide the measurement data…”
VO: It took McIntyre three years to get hold of the data, although one of the most important rules in science is that, raw data should be made available to anybody who is interested in checking and replicating a study.
Finally Briffa made a "mistake". He published yet another article based on the Yamal data in a journal of the British Royal Society. The prestigious scientific society held on to the principle of data transparency and forced Briffa to make his raw data public. In September this year, the Canadian climate auditor had his forebodings confirmed.
McIntyre: ”So after, after sort of, three years of frustration and trying to examine the data that Briffa had used and probably four years of people saying that this data supported the Michael Mann -work on other grounds, it was really quite frustrating to find that it was built up on ten trees that had been not randomly selected”.

McIntyre: "An Australian named Warwick Hughes had asked for the data and Warwick Hughes had published some articles that had been critical of how the temperature histories had been prepared, and Jones said 'Why should I send - we have twenty-five years invested in this, why should I send the data to you when your only objective is to find anything wrong with it?”, which is a very unscientific statement."
VO: The CRU database is the most important scientific justification for the demands that the most ambitious treaty in mankind's history should be finalized in Copenhagen in December. In spite of this, there is no way to replicate its' validity.
Recently the CRU director Phil Jones has announced that the original measurement data does not exist anymore because of data storage difficulties. A dog ate the world's most important scientific measurement homework.

Ojala: "Based on these studies it seems that this claim is not quite true, at least for the Northern hemisphere, at least for Scandinavia. We've clearly had much warmer winters here in the Nautajärvi and Korttajärvi area, than what we are experiencing now."

VO: At least two research teams close to the IPCC added the sediment data collected by Finnish researchers as part of their own paleoclimatic model reconstructions. This was done with agreement, but the Finns were surprised to see that in a study published this September, their data and interpretation of its' meaning had been turned upside down.

Atte Korhola: "Some curves and data have been used upside down, and this is not a compliment to climate science. And in this context it is relevant to note that the same people who are behind this are running what may be the world's most influential climate website, RealClimate. With this they are contributing to the credibility of science - or reducing it. And in my opinion this is alarming because it bears on the credibility of the field, and if these kinds of things emerge often - that data have been used insufficiently or even falsely, or if data series have been truncated or they have not been appropriately published (for replication), it obviously erodes the credibility, and this is a serious problem."

Richard Lindzen: "This field is completely sick in that way, I mean, you have models you know that they don't work, you know they don't reproduce a - phenomenon, but you bend data to fit the model. I don’t think this can go on for long without being embarrassing".

VO: It turned out that, cloud cover changes as the surface warms, but it was not getting thicker; it was thinning. In this way, nature prevents the atmosphere from excessive heating. The cloud cover reacts to temperature changes like an eye's iris to changes in light, by contracting or expanding. Lindzen calls this thermostatic behavior the Iris-effect.

3rd Coldest October

From NOAA
Temperature Highlights - October
* The average October temperature of 50.8°F was 4.0°F below the 20th Century average and ranked as the 3rd coolest based on preliminary data.
* For the nation as a whole, it was the third coolest October on record. The month was marked by an active weather pattern that reinforced unseasonably cold air behind a series of cold fronts. Temperatures were below normal in eight of the nation's nine climate regions, and of the nine, five were much below normal. Only the Southeast climate region had near normal temperatures for October.
Precipitation Highlights - October
* The U.S. recorded its wettest October in the 115-year period of record. The nationwide precipitation of 4.15 inches was nearly double the long-term average of 2.11 inches.
* Unusually cold and wet conditions across the middle of the country led to several snowfall records.

Global tropical cyclone energy remains near 30-year lows !

Global tropical cyclone energy remains near 30-year lows !

Florida State University - Ryan N. Maue's Seasonal Tropical Cyclone Activity Update

Global and Northern Hemisphere Tropical Cyclone Activity remains near 30-year historical lows -- three years in a row now of considerably below-average activity globally

Upside Down Mann Hockey Stick

From Climate Audit Oct 29, 2009
Upside Down Mann

The issue with Mann's use of the Tiljander proxies isn't just that he used them upside down (which he did). The problem is worse than that. The Tiljander sediments are the combination of two unrelated processes: a presumably climatically driven process in which narrow sediments are interpreted by the authors as "warm" and thick sediments as "cold" and a nonclimatic process in which sediments are produced by ditches, bridges and farming.

It is definitely and incontrovertibly upside down.

The reason why it is upside down is the spurious correlation between the nonclimatic sediments from bridges and farming and temperature, which confuses the Mannian meatgrinder algorithm.

Perhaps Connolley is gradually realizing that the problem is not just the upside down proxy, but a package of issues including modern contamination and spurious regression.

Dr. Pielke Oct 31, 2009

Excerpts include:
There is an informative post titled Biofuel woes by Katharine Sanderson on the Nature.com/climatefeedback website.
Biofuels derived from the cellulosic, woody parts of plants are not having their greenhouse gas emissions properly accounted
those biofuels would be shown to actually cause more greenhouse gases to be released than fossil fuels.

Timothy Searchinger from Princeton University
They say that the assertion that fuels made from biomass can be counted as carbon neutral is wrong. “

Alternative Energy Sources Offer Minimal Promise

From Environment and Climate News Nov 1, 2009
Discussion of unrealistic expectations of alternative energy sources.

For example:
"A single 555 megawatt gas-fired power plant in California generates more electricity per year than all 13,000 of the state’s wind turbines. The gas-fired plant occupies just 15 acres. The 300-foot-tall wind turbines affect 106,000 acres, destroy scenic vistas, and kill tens of thousands of birds and bats every year, to provide expensive, tax-subsidized, intermittent, insufficient electricity."

Temp Data Glitches

How bad is the global temperature data?
Watts UP With That 10/13/09

Excerpts Include:
The world’s climate data has become increasingly sparse with a big dropoff around 1990. There was also a tenfold increase in missing months around the same time. For many, many stations, you will see the data set in a monthly tabular form has many missing data months mostly after 1990

Most of the stations that dropped out were rural. More of the missing data points are having their missing months filled in with more urban data in the grid boxes.

Numerous peer review papers suggest an exaggeration of the warming by 30%, 50% or even more

One example.. from Maine. Volunteers completed surveys....The survey determined that every one of the stations in Maine was subject to microclimate or urbanization biases.

One station especially surprised the surveyors, Ripogenus Dam, a station that was officially closed in 1995. Despite being closed in 1995, USHCN data for this station is publicly available until 2006!

Part of the USHCN data is created by a computer program called “filnet” which estimates missing values.

How can we trust NOAA/NASA/Hadley assessment of global changes given these and the other data integrity issues? Given that Hadley has destroyed old original data because they were running out of room in their data cabinet, can we ever hope to reconstruct the real truth?

Daring to Question Al Gore

From McIver Institute Oct 9, 2009

"However, the former Vice President of the United States was not in the mood to answer any questions from skeptics of global warming. His appearance was highly scripted, and when one filmmaker dared ask a tough question...well, just watch this report."

Key point at the end of the video is challenging what is the role of journalists? To be cheerleaders or skeptics?

What happened to global warming?

BBC Friday, 9 October 2009

Excerpts include:
For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures. And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

U.N. climate meeting was propaganda: Czech president

U.N. climate meeting was propaganda: Czech president

Reuters Sept 22, 2009

Excerpts include:
Czech President Vaclav Klaus sharply criticized a U.N. meeting on climate change on Tuesday at which U.S. President Barack Obama was among the top speakers, describing it as propagandistic and undignified. "It was sad and it was frustrating," said Klaus.

Klaus said there were increasing doubts in the scientific community about whether humans are causing changes in the climate or whether the changes are simply naturally occurring phenomena.

Klaus said global warming has turned into a new religion, an ideology that threatens to undermine freedom and the world's economic and social order.

Cooling is Beginning

Svensmark: “global warming stopped and a cooling is beginning” – “enjoy global warming while it lasts”
opinion piece from Professor Henrik Svensmark was published September 9th in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten.

From Watts Up With That.com Sept 10,2009

Link to original Danish article

A couple excerpts include:
important to recognize that nature is completely independent of what we humans think about it.

Indeed, global warming stopped and a cooling is beginning. No climate model has predicted a cooling of the Earth, on the contrary. This means that projections of future climate is unpredictable,

solar activity is heading towards its lowest level in about 100 years’. Everything indicates that the Sun is moving into a hibernation-like state,

It is important to note that the Little Ice Age was a global event. It ended in the late 19th century and was followed by an increase in solar activity. Over the past 50 years solar activity has been the highest since the medieval warmth for 1,000 years ago. And now it appears that the sun returns and is heading towards what is called ‘a grand minimum’ as we saw in the Little Ice Age.

In 1996 we discovered a surprising influence of the sun – its impact on Earth’s cloud cover. High energy accelerated particles of exploded stars, the cosmic radiation, are helping to form clouds.

Giant solar flares can have the cosmic radiation on earth to dive suddenly over a few days. In the days after the eruption cloud cover falls by about 4 per cent. And the content of liquid water in clouds (droplets) is reduced by almost 7 per cent.

This means that projections of future climate is unpredictable.

California Wildfires not due to Global Warming

AccuWeather’s Joe Bastardi makes mincemeat of Greenpeace claim that California Wildfires are caused by Global Warming

From WattsUpWithThat.com Sept 10,2009

New Web Site

I found a new interesting web site for consideration in the climate debate. I have only begun to review the information on the site.

Reclaiming Climate Science
http://www.greenworldtrust.org.uk/Science/MyStory.htm

A couple excerpts include:
I was an environmentalist who believed in Global Warming.
I was then challenged by contradictory evidence -
- that there is no science "consensus" - there is no consensus - and any claim that "the debate is over" is at best unscientific, at worst fraudulent

Global temperatures have been falling for ten years, yet CO2 is rising as steadily as ever
Climate Science has been taken over by people with political agendas, headed up by the UN IPCC

Official Climate Science has increasingly abused public trust,

Through slander and silence in the media, many do not even realize of the existence of friendly, informed, active skeptics networks where real science happens.

Climate Change and Ensuring that America Leads the Clean Energy Transformation

EPW Committee Aug 6, 2009 Inhofe comments
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JAMES M. INHOFE
Climate Change and Ensuring that America Leads the Clean Energy Transformation
August 6, 2009

Excerpts include:
....so I think it's appropriate to take stock of what we've learned.
...this committee has held over thirty hearings on climate change.

We learned, for example, from President Obama that under his cap-and-trade plan, "electricity prices would necessarily skyrocket."

We learned from Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) that cap-and-trade is "a tax, and a great big one."

We learned from Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) that "a cap-and-trade system is prone to market manipulation and speculation without any guarantee of meaningful GHG emission reductions. A cap-and-trade has been operating in Europe for three years and is largely a failure."

We learned from Sen. Dorgan (D-N.D.) that with cap-and-trade "the Wall Street crowd can't wait to sink their teeth into a new trillion-dollar trading market in which hedge funds and investment banks would trade and speculate on carbon credits and securities. ..... most of the investment banks have already created carbon trading departments."

We learned from Sen. Cantwell (D-Wash.) that "a cap-and-trade program might allow Wall Street to distort a carbon market for its own profits."

We learned from EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson that unilateral U.S. action to address climate change through cap-and-trade would be futile. She said in response to a question from me that "U.S. action alone will not impact world CO2 levels."

We learned from Sen. Kerry (D-Mass.) that "there is no way the United States of America acting alone can solve this problem. So we have to have China; we have to have India."

We learned from Sen. McCaskill (D-Mo.) that if "we go too far with this," that is, cap-and-trade, then "all we're going to do is chase more jobs to China and India, where they've been putting up coal-fired plants every 10 minutes."

.......Democrats taught us that cap-and-trade is a great big tax that will raise electricity prices on consumers, enrich Wall Street traders, and send jobs to China and India-all without any impact on global temperature.

According to the American Farm Bureau, the vast majority of agriculture groups oppose it;

According to GAO, it will send our jobs to China and India;

According to the National Black Chamber of Commerce, it will destroy over 2 million jobs;

According to EPA and EIA, it will not reduce our dependence on foreign oil;

According to EPA, it will do nothing to reduce global temperature;

Britain facing blackouts for first time since 1970s

Telegraph UK September 1, 2009

Excerpts include:
The looming problem in Britain is caused by the scheduled closure by 2015 of nine oil and coal-fired power plants. They are the victim of an EU directive designed to cut pollution.

In addition, four existing nuclear power plants are set to be shut, adding to the need for new sources of energy. As yet no new nuclear power stations have been put forward for approval by the Government.

Demand for power from homes and businesses will exceed supply from the national grid within eight years, according to official figures.
The gap between Britain’s energy needs and demand throws fresh doubt on the Government’s assertion that renewable energy can make up for dwindling nuclear and coal capabilities
Over the next 10 years, one third of Britain’s power-generating capacity needs to be replaced with cleaner fuels.
Under the plan, 40 per cent of the UK’s electricity will need to come from low-carbon energy sources including clean coal, nuclear and renewables

“Britain faces blackouts because the Government has put its head in the sand about Britain’s energy policy for a decade. Over the next 10 years we need to replace one third of our generating capacity

STILL No Tropical Storms? Must Be Global Warming

STILL No Tropical Storms? Must Be Global Warming

From Dr. Roy Spenser

Excerpt:
So, where are all of the news stories about the fact we’ve had no tropical storms yet this year? As can be seen in the following graphic, as of this date in 2005 we already had 8 named storms in the Atlantic basin. And tomorrow, August 4, that number will increase to 9. In 2005 we were even told to expect more active hurricane seasons from now on because of global warming.

Chicago Sees Coldest July In 67 Years

Chicago Sees Coldest July In 67 Years
From CBS Chicago

The National Weather Service says 2009 has seen the coldest July since the official recording station was moved away from the lakefront in 1942. The average temperature this month in Chicago has been a mere 68.9 degrees.

Even in the years before 1942, when the National Weather Service recorded temperatures at the cooler lakefront, there are only three years that had colder Julys through the 26th.

AGW $79 billion

Transworld News July 22,2009

The US Government has spent more than $79 billion of taxpayers’ money since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, administration, propaganda campaigns, foreign aid, and tax breaks. Most of this spending was unnecessary.

Carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion in 2008. Banks, which profit most, are calling for more. Experts are predicting the carbon market will reach $2 - $10 trillion in the near future. Hot air will soon be the largest single commodity traded on global exchanges.

Waxman Markey bill - HR2454:

The Waxman Markey bill also called - HR2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act (Cap-and-Trade Climate bill)summary can be found at:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.R.2454:

NYC - JUNE IS TIED FOR THE 8TH COOLEST ON RECORD.

PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW YORK NY
455 PM EDT WED JUL 1 2009

...UNUSUALLY WET AND COOL JUNE FOR CENTRAL PARK...

FOR SOME PERSPECTIVE...HERE ARE THE TOP TEN COOLEST AND WETTEST
JUNES ON RECORD SINCE 1869 FOR CENTRAL PARK NY:

COOLEST
AVG.TEMP. YEAR
64.2 1903
65.2 1881
65.7 1916
66.8 1926/1902
67.2 1958
67.3 1927
67.4 1928
67.5 2009/1897
67.7 1878
67.8 1924

WETTEST
INCHES PRECIP. YEAR
10.27 2003
10.06 2009
9.78 1903
9.30 1972
8.79 1989
8.55 2006
7.76 1887
7.58 1975
7.13 1938
7.05 1871

DUE TO THE UNUSUALLY COOL AND WET CONDITIONS IN JUNE...HERE ARE SOME
INTERESTING FACTS TO NOTE:

THIS JUNE IS TIED FOR THE 8TH COOLEST ON RECORD. THE AVERAGE
TEMPERATURE WAS 67.5...3.7 DEGREES BELOW NORMAL...WHICH ALSO
OCCURRED IN 1897.

Global Cooling and Food Shortages

Are we prepared with energy and food for the current global cooling?

For the second time in little over a year, it looks as though the world may be heading for a serious food crisis........None of this has given much cheer to farmers. In Canada and northern America summer planting of corn and soybeans has been way behind schedule, with the prospect of reduced yields and lower quality........In China, the world's largest wheat grower, they have been battling against the atrocious weather
In Europe, the weather has been a factor in well-below average predicted crop yields in eastern Europe and Ukraine.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5525933/Crops-under-stress-as-temperatures-fall.html

Canada’s wheat production may fall 18 percent this year as dry, cool conditions in the western Prairies slow crop development........Cooler temperatures for the past four to six months may curb yields to 33.4 bushels an acre, the lowest initial projection in seven years
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=aLrrq268WnQQ

IPCC Report

From the NIPCC report June 2009, titled Climate Change Reconsidered

Excerpted a few background notes on the IPCC:
"The IPCC is, first and foremost, a political organization and not a scientific one. It’s findings therefore should be understood to be political and not scientific findings.

we are often told about the “2,500 scientists” who contributed to the latest IPCC report, the vast majority of these contributors had no influence on the conclusions expressed by the IPCC and were not asked if they endorsed those conclusions

IPCC’s key personnel and lead authors are appointed by governments, not by scientific organizations.

The full reports of the IPCC are then revised after their executive summaries were written in order to agree with the political documents.

The scientists involved with the IPCC are almost all in careers that rely on government contracts and rely on government grants to support their IPCC activities

The IPCC’s agenda is ...... not to discover the truth about how the world’s incredibly complex and ever-changing climate operates. It is, instead, to justify control of the emission of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide.

IPCC arrives at this conclusion only by ignoring scientific data that were available but were inconsistent with the authors’ pre-conceived conclusions, and has already been contradicted in important parts by research published since May 2006

IPCC fails to consider important scientific issues

It violates the established rules and procedures that should be used when making scientific forecasts

It uses surface-based temperature records known to be inaccurate, and ignores satellite data showing patterns of warming in the atmosphere that are different from what models predict would occur if greenhouse gases were the cause of warming.

The IPCC continues to undervalue the overwhelming evidence that, on decadal and century-long time scales, the Sun and associated atmospheric cloud effects are responsible for much of past climate change.

IPCC’s shortcomings have been hidden from the public and policymakers, leading to an uncritical acceptance of its reports and conclusions"

Feeling More Like April Than June

AccuWeather June 9, 2009
Feeling More Like April Than June
unseasonably chilly air to linger across Montana, the Dakotas and Minnesota. Many locations, including the Canadian Prairies, will have temperatures 10-20 degrees below normal on Tuesday.

Afternoon highs will only reach the upper 50s and lower 60s across much of the region, normal for the end of April. Normal highs across the Dakotas are in the mid-70s. In addition to the continuing cool spell, an area of low pressure coming from the Rockies will bring more wet weather, in the form of a few showers.

Today is likely to be the fourth day in a row in which the temperatures were at least 10 degrees below normal in Minneapolis, Pierre and Billings. Across much of North Dakota, temperatures have remained 10-20 degrees below normal for five consecutive days.

Cooling

North Dakota - KXMC.com
N.D. (AP) Snow has fallen in Dickinson in June, the first time in nearly 60 years the city has seen snow past May.

Wisconsin - Greenbay Press
If it seemed cold to you in Green Bay on Saturday, it was. The high temperature for the day, reached at 9:50 a.m., was 52. That set a record for the lowest high temperature for June 6, according to the National Weather Service.

Similar records were set across Wisconsin today. Manitowoc's high was 54, breaking the record of 56 set in 1935. In central Wisconsin, records were set in Stevens Point, Wisconsin Rapids, Marshfield and Merrill, all breaking marks set in 1935.

Better get used to it. There are showers and thunderstorms in the forecast for Green Bay through Monday night, with highs of 55 on Sunday and 59 on Monday. Things look better for Tuesday, when it’s expected to be partly sunny and 66.

Chapter 1,2,3 of Climate Change Reconsidered

Excerpts from From NIPCC June 2, 2009

Chapter 1
• Today’s state-of-the-art climate models fail to accurately simulate the physics of earth’s radiative energy balance, resulting in uncertainties “as large as, or larger than, the doubled CO2 forcing.”

Chapter 2
• Scientists may have discovered a connection between cloud creation and sea surface temperature in the tropics that creates a “thermostat-like control” that automatically vents excess heat into space.
• Iodocompounds—created by marine algae— function as cloud condensation nuclei, which help create new clouds that reflect more incoming solar radiation back to space and thereby cool the planet.

Chapter 3
• The IPCC ......evidence it cites, including the “hockey-stick” representation of earth’s temperature record by Mann et al., has been discredited and contradicted by many independent scholars.
• A corrected temperature record shows temperatures around the world were warmer
during the Medieval Warm Period of approximately 1,000 years ago than they are
today, and have averaged 2-3ºF warmer than today’s temperatures over the past 10,000 years.
• The IPCC cites as evidence of modern global warming data from surface-based recording stations yielding a 1905-2005 temperature increase of 0.74ºC +/- 0.18ºC. But this temperature record is known to be positively biased by insufficient corrections for the nongreenhouse- gas-induced urban heat island (UHI) effect. It may be impossible to make proper corrections for this deficiency, as the UHI of even
small towns dwarfs any concomitant augmented greenhouse effect that may be present.
• Highly accurate satellite data, adjusted for orbit drift and other factors, show a much more modest warming trend in the last two decades of the twentieth century and a dramatic decline in the warming trend in the first decade of the twentyfirst
century.
• The “fingerprint” or pattern of warming observed in the twentieth century differs from the pattern predicted by global climate models designed to simulate CO2-induced global warming.
All greenhouse models show an increasing warming trend with altitude in the tropics, peaking around 10 km at roughly twice the surface value. However, the temperature data from balloons give the opposite result: no increasing warming, but rather a slight cooling with altitude.
• The average temperature history of Antarctica provides no evidence of twentieth century warming. While the Antarctic peninsula shows recent warming, several research teams have documented a cooling trend for the interior of the continent since the 1970s.

Climate Change Reconsidered

Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) has released an 880-page book challenging the scientific basis of concerns that global warming is either man-made or would have harmful effects.

Climate Change Reconsidered
June 2, 2009

Coauthors Dr. S. Fred Singer and Dr. Craig Idso and 35 contributors and reviewers present an authoritative and detailed rebuttal of the findings of the IPCC.

A couple highlights include:
"We regret that many advocates in the debate have
chosen to give up debating the science and focus
almost exclusively on questioning the motives of
“skeptics,” name-calling, and ad hominem attacks."

"The IPCC continues to undervalue the
overwhelming evidence that, on decadal and centurylong
time scales, the Sun and associated atmospheric cloud effects are responsible for much of past climate
change. It is therefore highly likely that the Sun is
also a major cause of twentieth-century warming,"

"The scholarship in this book demonstrates overwhelming scientific support for the position that the warming of the twentieth century was moderate and not unprecedented, that its impact on human health and wildlife was positive, and that carbon dioxide probably is not the driving factor behind climate change."

"the contributors and reviewers of NIPCC donated their time and best efforts to produce this report out of concern that the IPCC was provoking an irrational fear of anthropogenic global warming based on incomplete and faulty science."

"Seeing science clearly misused to shape public policies that have the potential to inflict severe economic harm, particularly on low-income groups, NIPCC’s team of scientists chose to speak up for science at a time when too few people outside the scientific community know what is happening, and too few scientists who know the truth have the will or the platforms to speak out against the IPCC."

Chapter 1 describes the limitations of the IPCC’s
attempt to forecast future climate conditions by using
computer climate models.

Chapter 2 describes feedback factors that reduce
the earth’s temperature sensitivity to changes in
atmospheric CO2.

Chapter 3 reviews empirical data on past
temperatures. We find no support for the IPCC’s
claim that climate observations during the twentieth
century are either unprecedented or provide evidence
of an anthropogenic effect on climate.

Chapter 4 reviews observational data on glacier
melting, sea ice area, variation in precipitation, and
sea level rise. We find no evidence of trends that
could be attributed to the supposedly anthropogenic
global warming of the twentieth century.

Chapter 5 summarizes the research of a growing
number of scientists who say variations in solar
activity, not greenhouse gases, are the true driver of
climate change.

Chapter 6 investigates and debunks the
widespread fears that global warming might cause
more extreme weather.

Chapter 7 examines the biological effects of
rising CO2 concentrations and warmer temperatures.

Chapter 8 examines the IPCC’s claim that CO2-
induced increases in air temperature will cause
unprecedented plant and animal extinctions, both on
land and in the world’s oceans. We find there little
real-world evidence in support of such claims and an
abundance of counter evidence that suggests
ecosystem biodiversity will increase in a warmer and
CO2-enriched world.

Chapter 9 challenges the IPCC’s claim that CO2-
induced global warming is harmful to human health.............
However, a thorough examination of the
peer-reviewed scientific literature reveals that further
global warming would likely do just the opposite and
actually reduce the number of lives lost to extreme
thermal conditions.............

Disproving The Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) Problem

From Watts Up With That May 24,2009

Disproving The Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) Problem

Excerpts include:
"if the actual data results do not significantly support the theory, it must be reconsidered or even rejected as it stands."

Temperature:
"If the time period from 1850 through 2008 is used as a base, the net increase is just under 0.70C and the average rise is also 0.040C per decade! It is clear that choosing a short selected period of rising temperature gives a misleading result. It is also true that the present trend is down and expected to continue downward for several more years before reversing again."

"models predicted that the lower Troposphere would be significantly warmer than near ground at the lower latitudes, especially in the tropics. This has not occurred! "

The Economic Impact of Waxman–Markey

Heritage Foundation May 13,2009

A couple highlights from there analysis:
Analysis of the economic impact of Waxman-Markey projects that by 2035 the bill will:
* Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $7.4 trillion,
* Destroy 844,000 jobs on average, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by over 1,900,000 jobs,
* Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation,
* Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent,
* Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent,
* Raise an average family's annual energy bill by $1,500, and
* Increase inflation-adjusted federal debt by 29 percent, or $33,400 additional federal debt per person, again after adjusting for inflation.

NOAA: April Temperatures Slightly Cooler Than Average for U.S.

NOAA: April Temperatures Slightly Cooler Than Average for U.S.

May 8, 2009

The April 2009 temperature for the contiguous United States was below the long-term average, based on records going back to 1895, according to an analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, NC.

The average April temperature of 51.2 degrees F was 0.8 degree F below the 20th Century average.

Temperature Stations

A must read for anyone serious about studing global warming SCIENCE.
Anthony Watts, Is the U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable? Chicago, IL: The Heartland Institute, 2009
Link
http://www.heartland.org/books/PDFs/SurfaceStations.pdf

Excerpts include:
"we found that 89 percent of the stations – nearly 9 of every 10 – fail to meet the National Weather Service’s own siting requirements"

"The official record of temperatures in the continental United States comes from a network of 1,221 climate-monitoring stations overseen by the National Weather Service, a department of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Until now, no one had ever conducted a comprehensive review of the quality of the measurement environment of those stations."

"During the past few years I recruited a team of more than 650 volunteers to visually inspect and photographically document more than 860 of these temperature stations. We were shocked by what we found."

"9 of every 10 stations are likely reporting higher or rising temperatures because they are badly sited"

"We observed that changes in the technology of temperature stations over time also has caused them to report a false warming trend."

"We found major gaps in the data record that were filled in with data from nearby sites, a practice that propagates and compounds errors."

"We found that adjustments to the data by both NOAA and another government
agency, NASA, cause recent temperatures to look even higher."

"This report presents actual photos of more than 100 temperature stations in the U.S., many of them demonstrating vividly the siting issues we found to be rampant in the network. Photographs of all 865 stations that have been surveyed so far can
be found at www.surfacestations.org, where station photos can be browsed by state or searched for by name."

"The conclusion is inescapable: The U.S. temperature record is unreliable."

Heroes of Science:
Author:
Anthony Watts is a 25-year broadcast meteorology veteran and currently chief meteorologist for KPAY-AM radio. He got his start as on-air meteorologist for WLFI-TV in Lafayette, Indiana and at KHSL-TV in Chico, California. In 1987, he founded ItWorks, which supplies broadcast graphics systems to hundreds of cable television, television, and radio stations nationwide. ItWorks supplies custom weather stations, Internet servers, weather graphics content, and broadcast video equipment. In 2007, Watts founded SurfaceStations.org, a Web site devoted to photographing and documenting the quality of weather stations across the U.S.

Acknowledgments
The author thanks Gary Boden, for his extensive work in implementing Excel and Google Earth algorithms, plus quality control;
Evan M. Jones, for his untiring assistance in station surveys and quality control checking;
Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr., Colorado State University, for his guidance and assistance in providing resources that enabled this project to become a reality;
Barry Wise, for his assistance in linking Google Earth to the SurfaceStations.org photo gallery;
and the more than 650 volunteers who have tirelessly driven thousands of miles to survey and report stations, with particular thanks to the volunteers who have surveyed 25 or more stations, including Craig Limesand, Eric Gamberg, John Goetz, Don Kostuch, Russell Steele, Kristen Byrnes, and Liz and Don Healey.

I also thank Steve McIntyre, who provided a large measure of assistance in collating station data.

Wind Turbines

Some interesting Videos on wind turbine problems and failures.

Nortank wind turbine failure, Denmark. Note spread of failure?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLInrjUtFGI&NR=1
Slow motion failure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2x7u4GAqPc&feature=related

Oklahoma
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbMO7ufATBc&feature=related

Wind turbine fires:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N4HQv-UyUo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cH-2m4A_6NQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oke5PzwpBiE

Bent blade:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyOiDQGn-6k&feature=related

Delaminated blade:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTraL-lVR0E&feature=related

Turbine fire in Spain
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKkTUY2slYQ&feature=related

UFO hit?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDJpvzoh1Iw&feature=related

Gear box failure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liNIqYNHRXE

Another:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3FZtmlHwcA&feature=related

Fatties cause global warming

Another shoe drops in the global control:

The Sun 2009.04.20

Dr Phil Edwards, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said: “Moving about in a heavy body is like driving in a gas guzzler.” Each fat person is said to be responsible for emitting a tonne more of climate-warming carbon dioxide per year than a thin one. It means an extra BILLION TONNES of CO2 a year is created, according to World Health Organisation estimates of overweight people.

Dr Phil Edwards said: “We need to do a lot more to reverse the global trend towards fatness. It is a key factor in the battle to reduce carbon emissions and slow climate change. “It is time we took account of the amount we are eating.

Scientific Approach

A good reminder on science is posted on WattsUpWithThat.com

Consensus climate science: What would Thomas Huxley say?

A couple excerpts include:
Thomas H. Huxley (1825-1895) was one of the first and most vigorous promoters of modern scientific thinking.

Science is never certain
The pretension to infallibility, by whomsoever made, has done endless mischief; with impartial malignity it has proved a curse, alike to those who have made and it those who have accepted it.
-Science and Hebrew Tradition, Preface, p. ix

Huxley wrote: “No man, nor any body of men, is good enough, or wise enough, to dispense with the tonic of criticism”

Science doesn’t operate by consensus
My love of my fellow-countrymen has led me to reflect, with dread, on what will happen to them, if any of the laws of nature ever become so unpopular in their eyes, as to be voted down by the transcendent authority of universal suffrage.
-Science and Christian Tradition, p. 252

Huxley was worried that citizens would decide to vote against, for example, the laws of gravity. Undoubtedly, he would be equally concerned if scientists declared that a scientific assertion was true because, after a vote, a majority of them had agreed it was so, i.e., proof by “consensus.” Just as a vote of citizens doesn’t make a scientific fact true or false, neither does a vote of scientists make a fact true or false. Only empirical evidence does that.

HERETICAL THOUGHTS ABOUT SCIENCE AND SOCIETY [8.8.07] By Freeman Dyson

HERETICAL THOUGHTS ABOUT SCIENCE AND SOCIETY [8.8.07]
By Freeman Dyson

A few excerpted highlights include:
"I am proud to be a heretic. The world always needs heretics to challenge the prevailing orthodoxies."

"When I listen to the public debates about climate change, I am impressed by the enormous gaps in our knowledge, the sparseness of our observations and the superficiality of our theories. "

"My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models."

"The real world is muddy and messy and full of things that we do not yet understand. It is much easier for a scientist to sit in an air-conditioned building and run computer models, than to put on winter clothes and measure what is really happening outside in the swamps and the clouds. That is why the climate model experts end up believing their own models. "

"So it happens that the experts who talk publicly about politically contentious questions tend to speak more clearly than they think. They make confident predictions about the future, and end up believing their own predictions. Their predictions become dogmas which they do not question. The public is led to believe that the fashionable scientific dogmas are true, and it may sometimes happen that they are wrong. That is why heretics who question the dogmas are needed."

"As a scientist I do not have much faith in predictions. Science is organized unpredictability."

Inhofe Warns of Costs of Massive $6.7 Trillion "Climate Bailout"

Feb 25, 2009
Opening Statement of Senator James Inhofe
Update on the Latest Global Warming Science

Thank you, Madame Chairman, for holding today’s hearing. As you know, no one likes to talk more about climate science than I do. However with this being the first climate change hearing in the 111th Congress, and in the midst of a deep financial crisis and recession, I thought I’d start by quoting Ronald Reagan: “There you go again.” In these turbulent financial times, rather than opening with climate hearings analyzing the issues that concern Americans, such as how cap-and-trade policies and taxes will affect our energy prices and our bottom line, we are here today to focus once again on speculative computer model predictions of 50 to100 years away of a looming climate catastrophe, and the public health and ecological chaos that will result from man’s supposed effect on his climate by the continuing use of fossil fuels.

I don’t need computer models to tell me that people are hurting financially, or that hundreds of thousands of Americans are losing their jobs every month, and I don’t need a degree in science to tell me that the climate will continue to change and challenge us all. I see it everyday. Rather, as lawmakers, it is our duty here in this Committee to analyze the policy issues that affect all Americans, especially in the near term, and I am hopeful that this year we will schedule more hearings that address these types of issues.
Now, before I comment on the science and welcome our distinguished witnesses, I thought I would try and put some of these economic issues in perspective with the science. I will use numbers that Americans are unfortunately getting used to seeing with all of the debate on bailouts. As you can see, this chart represents the costs of the various government bailouts within the last year (Auto Bailout $17 Billion, Housing Bailout $200B, Mortgage Bailout $275B, Bank Bailout, $700B, Economy Bailout $787B). The bottom number represents the amount of money the sponsors of the Lieberman-Warner bill said would be generated under their cap-and-trade bill, which is included in the billions, to keep the numbers in perspective.

What they all have in common is they represent previously unimaginable amounts of money that the government is currently spending or eventually taxing to throw at our problems to try to “boost” our economy. In the cap-and-trade context, this comes in the form of taxes through passed-on higher energy costs. In terms of effectiveness, we learned last week that at least with the auto bailout, the initial offering will be ineffective, with GM and Chrysler both asking for billions more and still leaving bankruptcy options open. Time will tell whether these other bailouts are also proven ineffective.
Now where does climate science come in? It comes in once again in terms of effectiveness, using our tax dollars wisely. Assuming IPCC’s own targets for stabilization of CO2 in the atmosphere at 450 ppm (parts per million), the EPA has confirmed that a U.S. only cap-and-trade carbon policy will be ineffective. These targets are simply not achievable with the approach to climate change that has been the focus of the policy debate for years.

Now my colleagues will argue that we must focus on a new global international policy the U.S. should lead in order to reach such pie-in-the-sky reduction levels. However, these efforts should be contrasted with last month’s Chinese government reports that show China is aiming to increase its coal production by about 30 percent in 2015 to meet its energy needs. In addition, other developing countries state they will not agree to binding caps and that climate funding is an entitlement, not aid, to be paid for by who else but us? It is time for us to get realistic about these policies, and focus on what is achievable, both globally and domestically, to help bring down energy costs to consumers and make us more energy secure.

Now, regarding the science, I welcome all of our witnesses here today, including Dr. William Happer. Dr. Happer is a professor at the Department of Physics at Princeton University and former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy from 1990 to 1993. He is a fellow of the American Physical Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences. I welcome his and all of the witnesses’ testimony.



As you know, I regularly serve as a disseminator of information on the latest science that is not being reported in the mainstream media. I have given over twelve floor speeches documenting the politicization of the global warming science issue. My continuing fear is that objective, transparent, and verifiable science gets lost in the public dialogue.


Contrary to what the media and the UN have promoted, there is a growing body of scientific studies and scientists who are openly rebelling against the so-called “consensus.” Recently, I released a new minority report on climate science which documents many of the studies. That report included over 650 scientists who have challenged man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore. It features the skeptical voices of over 650 prominent international scientists, including many current and former UN IPCC scientists. This updated report includes an additional 250 scientists and climate researchers since the initial release in December 2007. I would note the over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

I would like to insert this report in the record and I look forward to referencing it in questions for the witnesses.

2008 Cooling

Building on prior post, NASA data shows:

Continuing the 10 year trend of declining temperatures, 2008 was significantly colder than 2007. Global temperatures for the year were below the average over the past 30 years. 2008 ranked 14th coldest of the 30 years measured by NASA satellite instruments since they were first launched in 1979. It was the coldest year since 2000.

“The substantial and continuing La Niña cooled the Earth quite a bit in 2008, to the point that it was slightly below the 30-year average [1979-2008] but slightly above the 20-year average [1979-1998],” said John Christy, distinguished professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH).

Harrison Schmitt doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.

Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.

Boston Herald Feb 16, 2009

A couple excerpts:
"Schmitt contends that scientists "are being intimidated" if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels."

"Of the global warming debate, he said: "It’s one of the few times you’ve seen a sizable portion of scientists who ought to be objective take a political position and it’s coloring their objectivity."

Consider Alternative Senarios

Leaders must keep minds open to potential alternatives.

#1 There is a cost trade off to any public choice.
The pie is not unlimited and money spent on one program, limits the funds for other programs.
Would it not be better to use some of the climate change funds to instead fund clean drinking water, that is if saving human lives is a priority?
http://www.wateradvocates.org/
http://www.globalwater.org/

Read the World Health Organization data on deaths per year due to poor drinking water. One example:
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2004/pr58/en/

Another excellent source is a person who does believe in global warming, but wonders about the use of limited resources:
http://www.lomborg.com/
Even if you disagree, one should consider his thoughts and challenges.

#2 Many serious scientists and climatologists challenge global warming.
An interesting example would be John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel:
http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/38574742.html

John Theon
James Hansen’s Former NASA Supervisor Declares Himself a Skeptic

Roy Spenser- Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, previously Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center,
http://www.drroyspencer.com/

For more data and alternative views, you might also consider the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Minority page:
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.WelcomeMessage

Heaviest snow in 20 years brings large parts of Britain to a halt

Times Online Feb 2, 2009

Heaviest snow in 20 years brings large parts of Britain to a halt

Nearly 1M still without power in ice storm's wake

Myway.com Jan 31, 2009

Utility crews renewed work in subfreezing temperatures Saturday in their effort to put the power back on for nearly a million customers left in the dark by an ice storm that crippled parts of several states this week.

Dozens of deaths have been reported and many people are pleading for a faster response to the power outages.

Also from Myway.com
MAYFIELD, Ky. (AP) - Gov. Steve Beshear deployed every last one of his Army National Guardsmen on Saturday, with his state still reeling after a deadly ice storm encrusted it this week.

Czech president attacks Al Gore's climate campaign

Czech president attacks Al Gore's climate campaign

From Breitbart.com Jan 31, 2009

Some excerpts include:
"I don't think that there is any global warming," said the 67-year-old liberal, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the European Union. "I don't see the statistical data for that."

"I'm very sorry that some people like Al Gore are not ready to listen to the competing theories. I do listen to them."

"Environmentalism and the global warming alarmism is challenging our freedom."

"I'm afraid that the current crisis will be misused for radically constraining the functioning of the markets and market economy all around the world," he said.

"I'm more afraid of the consequences of the crisis than the crisis itself."

The Amazing Story Behind Tho Global Warming Scam

The Amazing Story Behind Tho Global Warming Scam
KUSA News
By John Coleman (Weather Channel Founder)
January 28, 2009

A couple excerpts:

"Global Warming. It is the hoax. It is bad science. It is a high jacking of public policy. It is no joke. It is the greatest scam in history."

"But an environmental movement had been established and its funding and very existence depended on having a continuing crisis issue."

".....Maurice Strong. He was looking for issues he could use to fulfill his dream of one-world government. Strong organized a World Earth Day event in Stockholm,......"

James Hansen’s Former NASA Supervisor Declares Himself a Skeptic

From US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 1/27/2009

James Hansen’s Former NASA Supervisor Declares Himself a Skeptic

Washington DC: NASA warming scientist James Hansen, one of former Vice President Al Gore’s closest allies in the promotion of man-made global warming fears, is being publicly rebuked by his former supervisor at NASA.

Retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist Dr. John S. Theon, the former supervisor of James Hansen, NASA’s vocal man-made global warming fears soothsayer, has now publicly declared himself a skeptic and declared that Hansen “embarrassed NASA” with his alarming climate claims and said Hansen was “was never muzzled.” Theon joins the rapidly growing ranks of international scientists abandoning the promotion of anthropogenic global warming fears. [See: U.S. Senate Minority Report Update: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims & See Prominent Scientist Fired By Gore Says Warming Alarm ‘Mistaken’ & Gore laments global warming efforts: 'I've failed badly' - Washington Post – November 11, 2008 ]





“I appreciate the opportunity to add my name to those who disagree that global warming is man-made,” Theon wrote to the Minority Office at the Environment and Public Works Committee on January 15, 2009. “I was, in effect, Hansen's supervisor because I had to justify his funding, allocate his resources, and evaluate his results. I did not have the authority to give him his annual performance evaluation,” Theon, the former Chief of the Climate Processes Research Program at NASA Headquarters and former Chief of the Atmospheric Dynamics & Radiation Branch explained. [Note: Here are the results a Google Scholar search on Theon. - Theon's complete written correspondence to EPW reprinted at the end of this report. ]

“Hansen was never muzzled even though he violated NASA's official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind's effect on it). Hansen thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress,” Theon wrote. [Note: NASA scientist James Hansen who runs NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) has created worldwide media frenzy with his dire climate warnings, his call for trials against those who dissent against man-made global warming fear, and his claims that he was allegedly muzzled by the Bush administration despite doing 1,400 on-the-job media interviews - See: Don’t Panic Over Predictions of Climate Doom - Get the Facts on James Hansen & UK Guardian: NASA scientist calls for putting oil firm chiefs on trial for 'high crimes against humanity' for spreading doubt about man-made global warming – June 23, 2008 & NYT's Revkin chides Hansen for promoting sea level claims that are not 'even physically possible' ]

Theon declared “climate models are useless.” “My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit,” Theon explained. “Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it. They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy,” he added.

“As Chief of several of NASA Headquarters’ programs (1982-94), an SES position, I was responsible for all weather and climate research in the entire agency, including the research work by James Hansen, Roy Spencer, Joanne Simpson, and several hundred other scientists at NASA field centers, in academia, and in the private sector who worked on climate research,” Theon wrote of his career. “This required a thorough understanding of the state of the science. I have kept up with climate science since retiring by reading books and journal articles,” Theon added. (LINK) Theon also co-authored the book Advances in Remote Sensing Retrieval Methods.

Hansen 'is a political activist who spreads fear'

Award-winning NASA Astronaut and Physicist Walter Cunningham of NASA’s Apollo 7 also recently chastised Hansen. “Hansen is a political activist who spreads fear even when NASA’s own data contradict him,” Cunningham wrote in an essay in the July/August 2008 issue of Launch Magazine. “NASA should be at the forefront in the collection of scientific evidence and debunking the current hysteria over human-caused, or Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Unfortunately, it is becoming just another agency caught up in the politics of global warming, or worse, politicized science,” Cunningham wrote.

[Note: Theon joins many current and former NASA scientists in dissenting from man-made climate fears. A small sampling includes: Aerospace engineer and physicist Dr. Michael Griffin, the former top administrator of NASA, Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and is formerly of NASA, Geophysicist Dr. Phil Chapman, an astronautical engineer and former NASA astronaut, Award-Winning NASA Astronaut/Geologist and Moonwalker Jack Schmitt, Chemist and Nuclear Engineer Robert DeFayette was formerly with NASA’s Plum Brook Reactor, Hungarian Ferenc Miskolczi, an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA's Ames Research Center, Climatologist Dr. John Christy, Climatologist Dr. Roy W. Spencer, Atmospheric Scientist Ross Hays of NASA's Columbia Scientific Balloon Facility]

Gore faces a much different scientific climate in 2009 than the one he faced in 2006 when his film An Inconvenient Truth was released. According to satellite data, the Earth has cooled since Gore’s film was released, Antarctic sea ice extent has grown to record levels, sea level rise has slowed, ocean temperatures have failed to warm, and more and more scientists have publicly declared their dissent from man-made climate fears as peer-reviewed studies continue to man-made counter warming fears. [See: Peer-Reviewed Study challenges 'notion that human emissions are responsible for global warming' & New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears ]

“Vice President Gore's and the other promoters of man-made climate fears' endless claims that the 'debate is over' appear to be ignoring scientific reality,” Senator James Inhofe, Ranking Member of the Environment & Public Works Committee.

A U.S. Senate Minority Report released in December 2008 details over 650 international scientists who are dissenting from man-made global warming fears promoted by the UN. Many of the scientists profiled are former UN IPCC scientists and former believers in man-made climate change that have reversed their views in recent years. The report continues to grow almost daily. We have just received a request from an Italian scientist, and a Czech scientist to join the 650 dissenting scientists report. A chemist from the U.S. Naval Academy is about to be added, and more Japanese scientists are dissenting. Finally, many more meteorologists will be added and another former UN IPCC scientist is about to be included. These scientists are openly rebelling against the climate orthodoxy promoted by Gore and the UN IPCC.

The prestigious International Geological Congress, dubbed the geologists' equivalent of the Olympic Games, was held in Norway in August 2008 and prominently featured the voices of scientists skeptical of man-made global warming fears. Reports from the conference found that Skeptical scientists overwhelmed the meeting, with '2/3 of presenters and question-askers hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC' ( See full reports here & here ] In addition, a 2008 canvass of more than 51,000 Canadian scientists revealed 68% disagree that global warming science is “settled.” A November 25, 2008, article in Politico noted that a “growing accumulation” of science is challenging warming fears, and added that the “science behind global warming may still be too shaky to warrant cap-and-trade legislation.” More evidence that the global warming fear machine is breaking down. Russian scientists “rejected the very idea that carbon dioxide may be responsible for global warming”. An American Physical Society editor conceded that a “considerable presence” of scientific skeptics exists. An International team of scientists countered the UN IPCC, declaring: “Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate”. India Issued a report challenging global warming fears. International Scientists demanded the UN IPCC “be called to account and cease its deceptive practices.”

The scientists and peer-reviewed studies countering climate claims are the key reason that the U.S. public has grown ever more skeptical of man-made climate doom predictions. [See: Global warming ranks dead last, 20 out of 20 in new Pew survey. Pew Survey: & Survey finds majority of U.S. Voters - '51% — now believe that humans are not the predominant cause of climate change' - January 20, 2009 - Rasmussen Reports ]

The chorus of skeptical scientific voices grow louder in 2008 as a steady stream of peer-reviewed studies, analyses, real world data and inconvenient developments challenged the UN’s and former Vice President Al Gore's claims that the "science is settled" and there is a "consensus."

On a range of issues, 2008 proved to be challenging for the promoters of man-made climate fears. Promoters of anthropogenic warming fears endured the following: Global temperatures failing to warm; Peer-reviewed studies predicting a continued lack of warming; a failed attempt to revive the discredited “Hockey Stick”; inconvenient developments and studies regarding rising CO2; the Spotless Sun; Clouds; Antarctica; the Arctic; Greenland’s ice; Mount Kilimanjaro; Global sea ice; Causes of Hurricanes; Extreme Storms; Extinctions; Floods; Droughts; Ocean Acidification; Polar Bears; Extreme weather deaths; Frogs; lack of atmospheric dust; Malaria; the failure of oceans to warm and rise as predicted.

Theon’s complete written correspondence to EPW reprinted below:

-----Original Message-----
From: Jtheon [mailto:jtheon@XXXXXXX]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 10:05 PM
To: Morano, Marc (EPW)

Subject: Climate models are useless

Marc, First, I sent several e-mails to you with an error in the address and they have been returned to me. So I'm resending them in one combined e-mail.

Yes, one could say that I was, in effect, Hansen’s supervisor because I had to justify his funding, allocate his resources, and evaluate his results. I did not have the authority to give him his annual performance evaluation. He was never muzzled even though he violated NASA’s official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind's effect on it). He thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress.

My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit. Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it. They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy.

With best wishes, John

# #

From: Jtheon [mailto:jtheon@XXXXXX]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 12:50 PM
To: Morano, Marc (EPW)

Subject: Re: Nice seeing you

Marc, Indeed, it was a pleasure to see you again. I appreciate the opportunity to add my name to those who disagree that Global Warming is man made. A brief bio follows. Use as much or as little of it as you wish.

John S. Theon Education: B.S. Aero. Engr. (1953-57); Aerodynamicist, Douglas Aircraft Co. (1957-58); As USAF Reserve Officer (1958-60),B.S. Meteorology (1959); Served as Weather Officer 1959-60; M.S, Meteorology (1960-62); NASA Research Scientist, Goddard Space Flight Ctr. (1962-74); Head Meteorology Branch, GSFC (1974-76); Asst. Chief, Lab. for Atmos. Sciences, GSFC (1977-78); Program Scientist, NASA Global Weather Research Program, NASA Hq. (1978-82); Chief, Atmospheric Dynamics & Radiation Branch NASA Hq., (1982-91); Ph.D., Engr. Science & Mech.: course of study and dissertation in atmos. science (1983-85); Chief, Atmospheric Dynamics, Radiation, & Hydrology Branch, NASA Hq. (1991-93); Chief, Climate Processes Research Program, NASA Hq. (1993-94); Senior Scientist, Mission to Planet Earth Office, NASA Hq. (1994-95); Science Consultant, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (1995-99); Science Consultant Orbital Sciences Corp. (1996-97) and NASA Jet Propulsion Lab., (1997-99).

As Chief of several NASA Hq. Programs (1982-94), an SES position, I was responsible for all weather and climate research in the entire agency, including the research work by James Hansen, Roy Spencer, Joanne Simpson, and several hundred other scientists at NASA field centers, in academia, and in the private sector who worked on climate research. This required a thorough understanding of the state of the science. I have kept up with climate science since retiring by reading books and journal articles. I hope that this is helpful.

Best wishes, John

Al Gore to Senate Foreign Relations 1/28/09

Preface todays weather news: The storm has been blamed for at least 19 deaths, shuttered government offices and kept kids home from dozens of schools from the Southern plains to the East Coast. With more than a foot of snow forecast for New Hampshire, the Legislature canceled Wednesday's sessions.

The news story
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he asked Gore to testify before the panel so "the message can go out loud and clear that the committee is going to be relentless and super-focused" on preparations for Copenhagen.

Statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee As Prepared Hon. Al Gore Wednesday, January 28, 2009

We are here today to talk about how we as Americans and how the United States of America as part of the global community should address the dangerous and growing threat of the climate crisis.

We have arrived at a moment of decision. Our home – Earth – is in grave danger. What is at risk of being destroyed is not the planet itself, of course, but the conditions that have made it hospitable for human beings.

Moreover, we must face up to this urgent and unprecedented threat to the existence of our civilization at a time when our country must simultaneously solve two other worsening crises. Our economy is in its deepest recession since the 1930s. And our national security is endangered by a vicious terrorist network and the complex challenge of ending the war in Iraq honorably while winning the military and political struggle in Afghanistan.

As we search for solutions to all three of these challenges, it is becoming clearer that they are linked by a common thread – our dangerous over-reliance on carbon-based fuels.

As long as we continue to send hundreds of billions of dollars for foreign oil – year after year – to the most dangerous and unstable regions of the world, our national security will continue to be at risk.

As long as we continue to allow our economy to remain shackled to the OPEC roller- coaster of rising and falling oil prices, our jobs and our way of life will remain at risk.
Moreover, as the demand for oil worldwide grows rapidly over the longer term, even as the rate of new discoveries is falling, it is increasingly obvious that the roller coaster is headed for a crash. And we’re in the front car.

Most importantly, as long as we continue to depend on dirty fossil fuels like coal and oil to meet our energy needs, and dump 70 million tons of global warming pollution into the thin shell of atmosphere surrounding our planet, we move closer and closer to several dangerous tipping points which scientists have repeatedly warned – again just yesterday – will threaten to make it impossible for us to avoid irretrievable destruction of the conditions that make human civilization possible on this planet.

We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet. Every bit of that’s got to change.

For years our efforts to address the growing climate crisis have been undermined by the idea that we must choose between our planet and our way of life; between our moral duty and our economic well being. These are false choices. In fact, the solutions to the climate crisis are the very same solutions that will address our economic and national security crises as well.

In order to repower our economy, restore American economic and moral leadership in the world and regain control of our destiny, we must take bold action now.

The first step is already before us. I urge this Congress to quickly pass the entirety of President Obama’s Recovery package. The plan’s unprecedented and critical investments in four key areas – energy efficiency, renewables, a unified national energy grid and the move to clean cars – represent an important down payment and are long overdue. These crucial investments will create millions of new jobs and hasten our economic recovery – while strengthening our national security and beginning to solve the climate crisis.

Quickly building our capacity to generate clean electricity will lay the groundwork for the next major step needed: placing a price on carbon. If Congress acts right away to pass President Obama's Recovery package and then takes decisive action this year to institute a cap-and-trade system for CO2 emissions – as many of our states and many other countries have already done – the United States will regain its credibility and enter the Copenhagen treaty talks with a renewed authority to lead the world in shaping a fair and
effective treaty. And this treaty must be negotiated this year.

Not next year. This year.

A fair, effective and balanced treaty will put in place the global architecture that will place the world – at long last and in the nick of time – on a path toward solving the climate crisis and securing the future of human civilization.

I am hopeful that this can be achieved. Let me outline for you the basis for the hope and optimism that I feel.

The Obama Administration has already signaled a strong willingness to regain U.S.
leadership on the global stage in the treaty talks, reversing years of inaction. This is critical to success in Copenhagen and is clearly a top priority of the administration.

Developing countries that were once reluctant to join in the first phases of a global response to the climate crisis have themselves now become leaders in demanding action and in taking bold steps on their own initiatives. Brazil has proposed an impressive new plan to halt the destructive deforestation in that nation. Indonesia has emerged as a new constructive force in the talks. And China’s leaders have gained a strong understanding of the need for action and have already begun important new initiatives.

Heads of state from around the world have begun to personally engage on this issue and forward-thinking corporate leaders have made this a top priority.

More and more Americans are paying attention to the new evidence and fresh warnings from scientists. There is a much broader consensus on the need for action than there was when President George H.W. Bush negotiated – and the Senate ratified – the Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992 and much stronger support for action than when we completed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997.

The elements that I believe are key to a successful agreement in Copenhagen include:

• Strong targets and timetables from industrialized countries and differentiated but binding commitments from developing countries that put the entire world under a system with one commitment: to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other global warming pollutants that cause the climate crisis;

• The inclusion of deforestation, which alone accounts for twenty percent of the emissions that cause global warming;

• The addition of sinks including those from soils, principally from farmlands and grazing lands with appropriate methodologies and accounting. Farmers and ranchers in the U.S. and around the world need to know that they can be part of the solution;

• The assurance that developing countries will have access to mechanisms and resources that will help them adapt to the worst impacts of the climate crisis and technologies to solve the problem; and,

• A strong compliance and verification regime.

The road to Copenhagen is not easy, but we have traversed this ground before. We have negotiated the Montreal Protocol, a treaty to protect the ozone layer, and strengthened it to the point where we have banned most of the major substances that create the ozone hole over Antarctica. And we did it with bipartisan support. President Ronald Reagan and Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill joined hands to lead the way.

Let me now briefly discuss in more detail why we must do all of this within the next year, and with your permission Mr. Chairman, I would like to show a few new pictures that illustrate the unprecedented need for bold and speedy action this year.

Thank you Mr.

It's time to pray for global warming, says Flint Journal columnist John Tomlinson

It's time to pray for global warming, says Flint Journal columnist John Tomlinson

MLive.com Monday January 19, 2009, 4:20 AM

A couple highlights:
650 of the world's top climatologists stood up and said man-made global warming is a media generated myth without basis

The earth's temperature peaked in 1998. It's been falling ever since; it dropped dramatically in 2007 and got worse in 2008, when temperatures touched 1980 levels.

University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center released conclusive satellite photos showing that Arctic ice is back to 1979 levels. What's more, measurements of Antarctic ice now show that its accumulation is up 5 percent since 1980.

It turns out CO2 fluctuations follow the change in sea temperature. As water temperatures rise, oceans release additional dissolved CO2 -- like opening a warm brewsky.

Environmental Impact of Google Searches

A recent report by Gartner, the industry analysts, said the global IT industry generated as much greenhouse gas as the world's airlines — about 2 percent of global CO2 emissions.

a typical search generates about 7 grams of CO2.

"Google operates huge data centers around the world that consume a great deal of power," said Alex Wissner-Gross, a Harvard University physicist whose research on the environmental impact of computing is due out soon. "A Google search has a definite environmental impact."

"Data centers are among the most energy-intensive facilities imaginable," said Evan Mills, a scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California.

Others that picked up this story include:
DomainB.com
Google searches generate 1,400 tonnes of CO2 daily

Minnesota sled dog race canceled because of too much snow

From Bemidji Pioneer Jan 8,2009

Minnesota sled dog race canceled because of too much snow

Excerpts include:

"The dogsled race near Frazee, Minn., has been canceled because there’s too much snow.
Too much fluffy snow that keeps drifting and therefore made it impossible to maintain a groomed trail."

Prominent Scientist Fired By Gore Says Warming Alarm ‘Mistaken

From US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
Prominent Scientist Fired By Gore Says Warming Alarm ‘Mistaken

Excerpts include:
“I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken,” Happer, who has published over 200 scientific papers, told EPW on December 22, 2008.

Senator Inhofe said that the continued outpouring of prominent scientists like Happer -- who are willing to publicly dissent from climate fears -- are yet another strike to the UN, Gore and the media’s claims about global warming. “The endless claims of a 'consensus' about man-made global warming grow less-and-less credible every day," Inhofe said.

Happer said this week. “Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science. The earth's climate is changing now, as it always has. There is no evidence that the changes differ in any qualitative way from those of the past,” he added.

Global Warming: Unscientific Science and the Assault on Personal Freedoms

From Concise Conservatism

Global Warming: Unscientific Science and the Assault on Personal Freedoms

Includes summary information and links to follow up articles. Some interesting excerpts include:


Indeed, there is much evidence suggesting a much closer correlation between solar activity and climate change than between CO2 and climate change. As you can see in the chart, the change in solar activity precedes change in temperature. This is a much more logical cause-and-effect relationship than that between CO2 and temperature change.

“Ice cores from Antarctica show that at the end of recent ice ages, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere usually started to rise only after temperatures had begun to climb.”

However, there is a petition, signed by over 31,000 scientists rejecting the theory of man-made global warming.

If we take a closer look at some of the earth’s warm periods, we find that our earth has endured much hotter temperatures, and for much longer than we are experiencing presently.

The plain truth about glorious Carbon Dioxide

An interesting summary from Axcess News

The plain truth about glorious Carbon Dioxide
By Alan Caruba
The paper borrows from a paper on CO2 written by Robert A. Ashworth [http://www.ilovemycarbondioxide.com/pdf/No_Evidence.pdf]

Some excerpts include:
Ashworth notes, "Most scientists do not agree with the CO2 global warming premise. In the United States 31,072 scientists, including the author, have signed a petition rejecting the Kyoto global warming agreement." An additional 1,000 scientists are being verified to be added to the list. Thousands more exist who find the assertion the CO2 will destroy the Earth totally absurd.

Warming and cooling cycles are well known throughout human history, reaching back to the days of ancient Rome.

Dr. Tim Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, recently asked, "How many failed predictions, discredited assumptions and evidence of incorrect data are required before an idea loses credibility? CO2 is not causing warming or climate change. It is not a toxic substance or a pollutant."

Environment minister Sammy Wilson: I still think man-made climate change is a con

From Belfast Telegraph 1/1/09
Environment minister Sammy Wilson: I still think man-made climate change is a Con

Spending billions on trying to reduce carbon emissions is one giant con that is depriving third world countries of vital funds to tackle famine, HIV and other diseases, Sammy Wilson said