Category Archives: Climate Models

No Global Warming For 18 Years And 3 Months


GoreNo global warming for 18 years and 3 months.   The catastrophic global warming crowd knows this to be true. They have been working very hard at coming up with an explanation for the pause. In fact there are at least 52 (some say up to 70) published competing theories trying to understand why the temperature is not rising even though atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) continues to rise. The chart below, Figure 1, from  a WattsUpWithThat posting  by Christopher Monckton of Brenchley illustrates the flat global temperature:

notempchangeclip_image002_thumb

Figure 1. The least-squares linear-regression trend on the RSS satellite monthly global mean surface temperature anomaly dataset shows no global warming for 18 years 3 months since October 1996

Monckton says:

The Great Pause is a growing embarrassment to those who had told us with “substantial confidence” that the science was settled and the debate over. Nature had other ideas.

Read the full paper by clicking here.

cbdakota

Obama Shutting Down Coal Based Power Plant Based Upon Computer Model Predictions.


Climate models have not demonstrated skill at making climate predictions. Yet, the proponents of man-made global warming cite the model outputs when telling us what the global temperature will be in 2100!!!!

From the Patriot Post, Joe Bastardi’s July 16 2013 posting “Evidence That Demands a Verdict:

Assumed validity of climate models

‘This is almost laughable. Anyone who works in the field every day – as we do in the private sector – knows how bad models can be.”

“But the point is that the models are a mathematical representation of a chaotic field and I can not even fathom that this could be one of their reasons. It shows the ignorance as to the nature of the climate. It also shows the willingness of those that truly don’t understand weather and climate to place trust in a model. It’s flabbergasting.

One picture destroys the whole premise. Dr. John Christy, who testified before congress on this matter, has put this graph together:”

ChristytempvsmodelScreenShot2013-07-16at101433AM_zpsfe6dc649

The chart shows how far off the climate models are from the actual global temperature measurements (Real World).

“The following graph from Dr. Roy Spencer is even more dramatic. While Dr. Christy shows the average, Dr. Spencer shows how the individual predictions of 19 US models are all well above actual observations. And the EPA is trying to base policy on this?”

spencer19usclimatemodelsCMIP5-19-USA-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MTThis shotgun approach (19 models) points out that the alarmists modelers don’t have a clue. In MHO, if the climate model program was worth anything, you would only need one.

“Why anyone would think they could justify EPA’s regulatory plans or suggest a carbon tax as an alternative given the facts presented above is beyond me.

The facts clearly reveal that the EPA and the president do not have a leg to stand on as their policies assault the very energy lifeline of our economy at this critical time in our nation’s history. The EPA’s decisions are based on erroneous ideas.”

The politicians that want to manage our use of fossil fuels are ignoring the facts.   Why wont they look at actual data instead of relying on models that have no skill? Politics, of course, but what are the underlying motives?

The next posting will discuss the cost/benefit for the Obama plan to put coal out of business.

cbdakota

 

 

 

Reposting: “Didn’t Our Media Tell Us That Snow Was A Thing Of the Past?


Some of you may have noticed that I  have not posted since the middle of  November.  This is because I am tied up in a project that should be completed by the end of February.   Even so, I do occasionally find posting that I would normally have posted with comments.   The following is a posting by 21th Century Wire that I believe should be read.
cbdakota
DIDN’T OUR MEDIA TELL US THAT SNOW WAS A THING OF THE PAST?
JANUARY 10, 2014 BY  4 COMMENTS
Andrew McKillop
21st Century WireIt’s like we’re living in ancient pagan Greece or something.Only yesterday, British Prime Minister David Cameron insisted that the storms and floods causing havoc across his countrywere because climate change. Yes, that old chestnut.It’s one things for politicians to try and leverage public approval by flying the flimsy climate banner. You expect that. But no such leeway should be given to the media, as it is supposedly their job to inform the masses of facts, not mythologies.

Politically Correct ScienceLet’s trace this tragic tale to the beginning. Seemingly decades ago, not 13 years, the UK Independent newspaper started the new century with the goal of becoming a world leader in government-approved, corporate-friendly global warming propaganda. Its chief warmist and green scribe, Charles Onians, fired the first climate salvo in a March 20, 2000, in this leading article:“Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain’s culture”.The Independent was soon followed by other UK papers, US papers, and European papers, and their broadcast media, in a permanent propaganda blitz to take “the warming thing” to the ultimate limits of childlike hysteria and stark distortion using the uncertain science of “the CO2 hypothesis”. The propaganda onslaught was stamped with the “warmist” hallmark of elite condescension and smug conviction that ordinary mortals are much too stupid to understand this “scientifically proven” crisis.In what would become a typical example of “warmist” genre material, Charles Onians in 2000 cited David Viner, a researcher at the later-infamous climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia – the Home of the Hockey Stick – who told the unscientific masses that very soon “winter snowfall will become a very rare and exciting event”. And as for homeless sleeping in the gutter, not so many would die in the night – posing an existential crisis for English Middle Class Morality! By 2006, the UK Independent was regularly carrying junk science hysteria from ‘Gaia” author James Lovelock, a key example being his claim that “Billions of persons will die before the end of the century from global warming”. Since 2012, ‘Jim’ Lovelock has completely retracted and denied his warmist convictions, and tiptoed away from the train wreck of elite propaganda.Always Go FurtherAl Gore, chief promoter of the global warming scam with Rajendra Pachauri, always went further. Their propaganda onslaught mixed and mingled pure egoism with a frenetic drive to make millions for themselves and enrich their fellow conspirators, through an ultra-tenacious promotion of  any “carbon-linked” cash-grubbing scheme. Showing what the business press calls “initiative and drive”, they promoted anything ranging from investment and trading scams, through government tax and corporate subsidy scams, to lurid books, films and TV documentaries.THE CHURCH OF CLIMATE CHANGE: Gore and Pachauri guide the mass cult off their intellectual cliff.

Al Gore repeatedly said, in print, “the Arctic will be ice free by 2013”. Gore made this claim in print in 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009.

And it didn’t happen. In fact the Arctic ice cap’s surface area increased by more than 25% in 2012-2013. The much-larger Antarctic ice cap also increased, by about 5% using NASA data. NASA, which is a fully warmist institution peddling the “CO2 hypothesis”, has been forced to admit the Antarctic ice sheet is now at its largest since it started regular satellite monitoring in 1979.

Media spending on the permanent propaganda campaign has been massive, and a fantastic misappropriation of public money where this concerns state-owned media. Obsessionally and expensively filmed summertime-only shots of polar ice melting – which the “climate correct” media has stuffed down our throats for a decade – are however now likely to be retreating to where they belong. To the trashcan of history and to empty film theaters, and late night TV doc boredom for the almost-asleep.

The warmists set up and tirelessly milked the global warming cash cow for all it could yield, but now it is Game Over time. Their great scientific scam may now be what it always scientifically was, a Cuckoo Theory which evicted all other possible theories of why the climate changes.

The Latecomers and Still Hopefuls

As plenty of writers including myself have explained plenty of times, the “CO2 theory” is scientific folk history and was junkscience from the moment it started – in about 1795 with Joseph Priestley and his lurid vision of Phlogiston Terror. To him worse than Al-Qaeda or mustard gas in the trenches of World War I, Priestley thought “phlogiston” could cause a mass dieoff of English industrial workers exposed to woodburning and coalburning fumes!  But nobody had to believe it.

Today, only the most primitive minded and witless “warmists” soldier along, spouting idiocies in the hope the under-informed and the lazyminded will continue to buy their junkscience.

If all goes according to plan, Hollywood icon Leonardo DiCaprio will blast into space on the maiden voyage of Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic “spaceship” this year. Incredibly enough, Messrs. Branson and DiCaprio style themselves as environmentalist celebrities with the elite mission of warning us there is a “coming ecological catastrophe” if we fail to address the carbon crisis.

Simply because they have garnered a large amount of money over the years, one way and another, their “commitment to fighting climate change” is called praiseworthy by brain-dead media, committed to “celeb worship” even as it backs off and away from the Global Warming scam. Richard Branson, despite all his attempts, is still far behind Al Gore in “warmist” cash-grubbing so he is active wherever that might turn a penny.

Branson claims he was “turned on” to Global Warming by ‘Jim’ Lovelock in person – the same Lovelock who has abandoned the scam. Branson is the founder and CEO of the “Carbon War Room”, an outfit advocating punitive-high energy taxes, which therefore has fawning support from Big Energy and Big Government, but his big hope is that “low carbon space travel” can become his new profit center. His one-liner to critics that space travel and carbon hysteria do not seem to mix, is that his brand of space travel is (very) Low Carbon. Cited by Wall Street Journal, 7 January, he has claimed: “We have reduced the [carbon emission] cost of somebody going into space from something like two weeks of New York’s electricity supply to less than the cost of an economy round-trip from Singapore to London”.

As we know, this concerns low-orbital short-period flight in the upper atmosphere, and nothing to do with real space travel, but coming from a “Global Warming ikon” we must accept there is always massive exaggeration and distortion. It is New Normal. On the other hand, we do not need to accept the plain, straight lying.

According to the US FAA-Federal Aviation Administration, also cited by Wall Street Journal, its own environmental assessment of the launch and re-entry of Virgin Galactic’s spacecraft says that one launch-land cycle will emit about 30 tons of carbon dioxide, or about five tons per passenger. That is around five times more than the carbon footprint of a round-trip flight from Singapore to London. When the support and infrastructure energy costs of the entire Virgin Galactic operation are added, including high-atmosphere flights by tracker and support aircraft, the total carbon emissions rise to about seven times more than an average round-trip flight from Singapore to London. The FAA says that for each passenger on a single trip using Virgin Galactic their total energy burn will be at least twice the energy an average American consumes in a year.

When or if Branson’s tacky low-orbital “space” flights backed by the United Arab Emirates and their “low carbon” petrodollars ever get their celebrity cargoes out of the Earth’s gravity field, a trip to Mars will be obligatory.  Here, they will find an atmosphere that is about 96% carbon dioxide (or 960 000 parts per million), and they will be able to smugly gurgle, for the short time they can still breathe: “We told you so!”. Back on Earth however, a little modesty, or at least the prospect of lawsuits for open lying – which is cited by observers as one reason ‘Jim’ Lovelock and his namesake James Hansen have backed away from the Warming scam – call on them to give us a rest and to please pipe down.

Keeping The Baboons Warm

Keeping the warmist gravy train rolling – whatever happens in the real world – is rapidly reverting to whence it came.  Big Government, the UN system, the nuclear power and alternate energy industry, and financial opportunists always looking for a new scam. To this motley crew, we have two major bit-part players – government-friendly media and Mr and Mrs Average Informed Citizen – so well-informed they are both easy prey for the lying propaganda from the Carbon Purists. But neither, in fact, can be counted on by the warmists, as they will soon find out.

Baboons in an English wildlfe park searching hot potatoes (Source/ Guardian)

Any kind of historical perspective on atmospheric science and the origins of the “CO2 hypothesis” was until recently deliberately kept out of the media. Any reference to “alternate theories” was trashed by the media as negative, anti-science, badly-intentioned and probably corrupt. Global Warming of the Al Gore variety was to  the west what Lysenko was to the USSR of Stalin. Any mention of the relatively large, sometimes outright large changes of world average temperatures over the last 1500 years was derided by warmists  – because there was warming in 1980-2000, by a few fractions of 1 degree celsius, we have a crisis. Only “carbon effluent” in the atmosphere could have caused this! What else?

The media, like public opinion is doing what it always does – it moves slowly but surely like a Titanic-crushing iceberg, breaking up as it goes. The media at this moment is packed with scientifically flaky, superficially plausible stories about how global warming causes record cold and massive snowstorms in New York, but also that until the magic date of 2065 global warming will be “net positive” for human beings, while Mr Obama has told us (although we don’t have to believe him) 97 percent of scientists still think crisis-style warming is a reality.

In a late 2013 report, the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism said that most media coverage of climate change now emphasises uncertainty, and an increasing number (25%) focus on the “positive opportunities” global warming could or might bring.  Global cooling, however, remains completely banned from mainstream media, except as  freaky tidbit, despite it being at least as possible that we have cooling, as warming, in a time frame stretching to 2065.

Keeping The Baboons Stupid

Admitting that we don’t know what happens in the Earth’s atmosphere, therefore we can’t know how climate changes is affecting global temperature – is the ultimate blog-material. It is the no-no option and “just in case”, or “simply by precaution”, so we have to reject that possibility. Time is limited and Al Gore needs cash. Propaganda overkill arrived. Now Gore’s pews are empty, and we’re left with hit-and-run street preachers.

One key benefit of the comeuppance for global warming, losing its status of “unquestionable” except by misfits, psychotics and the badly-motivated, is that climate change will be able to emerge as the real subject of interest.

We are likely near the point, now, when the blindest and most faithful cult followers of global warming and the “CO2 hypothesis” will have to admit they’ve been sold a pup. The computer-modeled, science-correct, politically-correct theory of man-made CO2 causing global warming, or its second-best rebranded title of “climate change”, or its third-best of “extreme weather”, was a 10-year trip to oblivion along the well-trod path of Dumbing Down. Global Warming was Dumb with a capital D.

Gore-theory proved nothing at all. The sole benefit of the waltz down Propaganda Lane is that we know climate is changing but we don’t know why. Being able to admit that is difficult for high intellect baboons.

Baboons are in fact a lot more results-oriented, and have much less time to waste on trivial pursuits than human beings. For that reason they do not invent new enemies and they make do with ones they always have had and know well. Who are real. The Global Warming crisis movement – an example of mass hysteria – invented an all-new enemy for Mankind, called Mankind.

Also called misanthropy and being more than a little dated, the warmists pushed the misanthropy button so hard we were asked to think “we” are destroying our planet – unlike Al Gore with his personal Gulfstream 5 jet, his expanding waistline and penchant for fillet mignon and massage parlors with happy endings – and unlike Richard Branson and his Virgin jetliners, because average humans use far too much fossil energy, but Branson and his Hollywood playboy pal are apparently “saving the planet” for those of us who don’t own our own island in the Caribbean.

This mental constipation only has one logical readout – that human beings should operate a mass cull or Die Off, to prevent us from killing the planet – which belongs to very nice persons like Gore and Branson. Even low-IQ baboons would reject the embarked logic inside this mental masturbation. They would much prefer serious endeavors like looking for rapidly-cooling potatoes in the snow.

It’s officially an evolutionary crisis when the feral monkeys start looking smarter than our jet-setting monkeys in suits. Maybe it’s time to put the feral baboons in suits and ties, and let them realize their true Darwinian potential in Westminster, Brussels and Washington.

2020 UN Treaty: US And Europe’s Energy Use To Match The Philippines?


The target of 1 trillion tonnes of CO2 is part of the discussion underway in Poland at COP 19.  The delegates want to get a treaty in place by 2020 which all nations will sign when the Kyoto Treaty expires.  The new treaty will demand two things.  Reparations for the developing nations for the “damage” resulting from global warming that the developed nations are responsible for and an agreement by which CO2 emissions are dramatically reduced. (Click on charts to enlarge.)

Screen Shot 2013-11-14 at 12.38.03 PM

The developed nations had agreed to supply $30 billion in the period of 2010-2012.  Five nations–US, Germany, Norway, UK and Japan—gave a total of $27 billion. The desired treaty will include vast sums of money to be transferred between developed and less developed countries.  There was a study done of how much money would be needed to accomplish the objective of never letting the atmospheric CO2 exceed 1 trillion tonnes and the number was $5.7 trillion.  Not all of this is transfer money.  Much of it would go for changes to the global energy structure.

Continue reading

Let’s Nominate National Geographic For The Hugo Award


The Hugo Awards are presented annually to the best science fiction. Science fiction is defined by Wiki as: a genre of fiction dealing with imaginative content such as futuristic settings, futuristic science and technology, space travel, time travel, parallel universes and extraterrestrial life. Their September 2013 issue featuring “Rising Seas” would probably qualify for the Hugo.

natgeo_statue_liberty_sea_level

The NG cover illustration of the Statue of Liberty waist deep in water resulting from sea level rise was a major, imaginative exaggeration. The statue’s waist is more than 200 feet above sea level at present. Using the actual rate of sea level rise at Battery, NY since 1850 to calculate how long it would take to match the waist water level, resulted in a figure of about 23,500 years or so. (See the calculation by clicking here.)

Continue reading

Global Temperature Data Shows No Rise For 17 Years—Meets Warmist’s Criteria For Proof Of No Man-Made Forcing


A guest posting on WUWT by Werner Brozek says that global temperature has not risen for 17 years.  The 17 years are significant in anyway you think about it, but Brozek makes the point that the warmists are on record as saying that it is sufficient time to determine if there is man-made forcing of global temperatures.  Looking at the satellite global temperature measurements by the Remote Sensing System(RSS) after 204 months (17 years) the slope of temperature anomaly is zero.   Look at this chart from the WoodForTrees org. below:

Continue reading

Skeptical Scientists Effectively Challenge IPCC Climate Change Report


The IPCC has issued the 2013 report on global Climate change.  The skeptic community has effectively challenged the IPCC primary positions.   This post will provide a broad selection of those challenges for the reader to examine.   Each of the 18  entries will give you the title, a brief synopsis, and the link to that document.

The IPCC failed on two major issues.  Their failed to explain why global temperatures have not increased in the past 16 years despite a continued growth of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2).   The second issue is that of climate sensitivity.  They did say that in the past, they had overestimated climate sensitivity but did not tell us what they now believe it to be. This posting will also cover climate model performance and should the IPCC be discontinued.

GLOBAL TEMPERATURES

Continue reading

How Credible Is The IPCC Climate Reporting?


The Non-Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) has issued their 2013 report “Climate Change Reconsidered II-Physical Science”.  This report, a Summary for Policy Makers (SMP), challenges the data within the IPCC’s SMP scheduled for release this month.

Let’s contrasts the two reports.  The NIPCC science is empirical data based.  The IPCC also includes empirical data but their methodology relies heavily  on computer based guesses projections,  the scientific conclusion are revised to satisfy political objectives and the IPCC is not home to scientists that want to submit studies that contradict the message that global warming is man-made.  NIPCC says this about the IPCC: “The hypothesis implicit in all IPCC writings, though rarely explicitly stated, is that dangerous global warming is resulting, or will result, from human-related greenhouse gas emissions.”   They start with a conclusion and look for studies that support the conclusion.  That’s not the the scientific method.

Continue reading

It Is Better To Adapt Than Mitigate CO2 Emission-Mitigation Is 50X More Costly


Paraphrasing Hamlet, “Is it better to mitigate CO2 emissions from sources such as fossil fuels or adapt to global changes that might happen if emissions were not regulated?  Ah that’s the question.”

hamlet220px-Edwin_Booth_Hamlet_1870

Continue reading

Political Class Does Not Care If Climate Science Is Wrong


If you are a skeptic you may think that you are winning the science battle with the warmers.  You probably have always thought that in the end you would win that battle and that would settle things.  You were half right, you are winning the science battle but you have not yet deterred the politicians.   The science has never mattered much to them.  The warmer’s programs to combat  “global warming are really the only things that matter to them.  Whether it is Cap & Trade, Carbon tax, or some other scheme, they are for it.  They tell you they are doing this for your own good.  But in fact most of them want greater control of your life and they can do it through taxes and regulations that are at the heart of these schemes.

Continue reading