Global Cooling for the next 20 years starts now!

[Swilly]

DangerousMike said:

subwayandoreos said:

WTF?
global warming
global cooling
scientists, if your so clever and know everything.
MAKE YOUR F*****G MIND UP IF IM GOING TO FREEZE OR BURN TO DEATH!

Such beautiful reasoning, such iron-clad arguments, such wonderful rhetoric. I think I can safely speak on behalf of all scientists when I say I dont suppose it matters too much which particular fate you undergo.

DangerousMike, you named yourself 'DangerousMike' and on that basis alone you should step back from the high-horse of intellect and reason

Edited by Swilly on Monday 11th January 15:44

[turbobloke]

I can see an AMSU-A plot linked to by kerplunk about a page back, and accepting I'm late to the party on this one may I ask what and where is the 1960- graph?

The AMSU chart 'off to a good start' as kerplunk claims, simply shows the impact of the current El Nino building to a strenghtening moderate episode from July last year. Is a bet going to rest on the intensity and duration of a natural phenomenon?

[turbobloke]

Guam said:

There is also this on the same site

"A recent study from the University of Bristol (UK) by Wolfgang Knorr suggests that the airborne fraction of man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) has not increased during the past 150 years.

Knorr reanalyzed atmospheric CO2 and emissions data since 1850 and considers uncertainties in the data, according to ScienceDaily.

It is shown that with those uncertainties, the trend in the airborne fraction since 1850 has been 0.7 +/- 1.4% per decade, or close to and not significantly different from zero (no trend). I would like to know what those uncertainties are.

Only 40-45% of emitted CO2 stays in the atmosphere, according to the Knorr report. But, other recent studies suggest the possibility that the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems have started loosing part of their ability to sequester a large proportion of the anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

Climate models currently assume that the amount of airborne CO2 from man-made emissions is increasing and will continue to do so, which is a key part of their long term predictions.

The research is published in Geophysical Research Letters.

Yes, as you appreciate this - the paper rather than the commentary - was on the CC Great Debate (or Climate Cat?) thread, and supports the Essenhigh partition equilibria result while slapping one in the eye of the IPCC boy scouts.

[kerplunk]

turbobloke said:

I can see an AMSU-A plot linked to by kerplunk about a page back, and accepting I'm late to the party on this one may I ask what and where is the 1960- graph?

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2010/pr20100106b.html

turbobloke said:

The AMSU chart 'off to a good start' as kerplunk claims, simply shows the impact of the current El Nino building to a strenghtening moderate episode from July last year. Is a bet going to rest on the intensity and duration of a natural phenomenon?

I would have had volcano clause if it was my bet, but as far as enso goes how can you configure a bet that excludes that factor?

[kerplunk]

Guam said:

Well if we are going to play yet another game of spot the decline and other bks with an accolyte lets play with this lot

http://global-warming.accuweather.com/


Cut and paste comment to whet the appetite

"The phase of the AO is described in terms of an index value. In December 2009 the AO index value was -3.41, the most negative value since at least 1950, according to data from the NOAA Climate Prediction Center"

HO Hum, frankly stuff the experts wander outside and decide for yourself if anywhere in the Northern Hemisphere right now

My neighbour has just come back from tenerife - with a sun-tan the bd.

If we're getting arctic weather it begs the question what weather is the arctic getting and it looked like this in december...



(If you're looking for the UK it's upside down at 12-o-clock)

sea ice extent currently bumping along on the 2007 low:

Edited by kerplunk on Monday 11th January 16:12

[turbobloke]

All of which (including the sun tan) is very interesting but of no more than passing weather-type relevance as there is no causality established for any of the anomalies described, all of which are well within natural limits on extent and rate.

Edited by turbobloke on Monday 11th January 16:16

[deeps]

Guam said:

In Other words the Arctic Sea Ice has STOPPED Declining then? Indeed there are those intimating its increasing again, (bit like Polar Bears then)

Yes there's a nice graph below which shows about a 30% increase in summer Arctic ice extent over the last couple of years. I would screenprint the graph but tea's nearly ready, don't want it getting cold

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent...

[deeps]

kerplunk said:

If we're getting arctic weather it begs the question what weather is the arctic getting and it looked like this in december...

Here's what it looks like now, Jan 11th...

ARCTIC LOCATIONS

TUKTOYAKTUK, NWT, CANADA
Weather report as of 50 minutes ago (17:00 UTC):
The wind was calm in Tuktoyaktuk, Canada. The temperature was -39 degrees Celsius (-38 degrees Fahrenheit). Air pressure was 1,029 hPa (30.40 inHg). Relative humidity was 58.6%. The sky was clear. The visibility was 24.1 kilometers (15.0 miles). Current weather is .

IGLOOLIK, NUNAVUT, CANADA
Weather report as of 50 minutes ago (17:00 UTC):
The wind was blowing at a speed of 6.2 meters per second (13.8 miles per hour) from West/Northwest in Igloolik, Canada. The temperature was -29 degrees Celsius (-20 degrees Fahrenheit). Air pressure was 1,011 hPa (29.86 inHg). Relative humidity was 75.0%. There were a few clouds at a height of 7315 meters (24000 feet). The visibility was 24.1 kilometers (15.0 miles). Current weather is .


POND INLET, NUNAVUT, CANADA
Weather report as of 4 minutes ago (17:46 UTC):
The wind was blowing at a speed of 3.6 meters per second (8.1 miles per hour) from South in Pond Inlet, Canada. The temperature was -28 degrees Celsius (-18 degrees Fahrenheit). Air pressure was 1,008 hPa (29.77 inHg). Relative humidity was 61.9%. There were a few clouds at a height of 2347 meters (7700 feet). The visibility was 9.7 kilometers (6.0 miles). Current weather is .

BARROW, ALASKA, USA
Weather report as of 57 minutes ago (16:53 UTC):
The wind was blowing at a speed of 7.2 meters per second (16.1 miles per hour), with gusts to 11.3 meters per second (25.3 miles per hour), from North/Northeast in Barrow, Alaska. The temperature was -6 degrees Celsius (21 degrees Fahrenheit). Air pressure was 989 hPa (29.21 inHg). Relative humidity was 92.6%. There were overcast at a height of 335 meters (1100 feet). The visibility was 16.1 kilometers (10.0 miles). Current weather is .

THULE, GREENLAND
Weather report as of 4 minutes ago (17:46 UTC):
The wind was blowing at a speed of 3.6 meters per second (8.1 miles per hour) from East in Thule, Greenland. The temperature was -21 degrees Celsius (-6 degrees Fahrenheit). Air pressure was 1,004 hPa (29.65 inHg). Relative humidity was 76.6%. There were broken clouds at a height of 427 meters (1400 feet) and overcast at a height of 1829 meters (6000 feet). The visibility was >11.3 kilometers (>7 miles). Current weather is .

HAMMERFEST, NORWAY
Weather report as of 30 minutes ago (17:20 UTC):
The wind was blowing at a speed of 4.6 meters per second (10.4 miles per hour) from North in Hammerfest, Norway. The temperature was -3 degrees Celsius (27 degrees Fahrenheit). Air pressure was 1,014 hPa (29.94 inHg). Relative humidity was 86.0%. There were vertical visibility clouds at a height of 122 meters (400 feet). The visibility was 0.5 kilometers (0.3 miles). Current weather is Snow .

MURMANSK, RUSSIA
Weather report as of 20 minutes ago (17:30 UTC):
The wind was blowing at a speed of 3 meters per second (6.7 miles per hour) from West/Northwest in Murmansk, Russia. The temperature was -4 degrees Celsius (25 degrees Fahrenheit). Air pressure was 1,012 hPa (29.88 inHg). Relative humidity was 79.5%. There were scattered clouds at a height of 610 meters (2000 feet) and broken clouds at a height of 2438 meters (8000 feet). The visibility was >11.3 kilometers (>7 miles). Current weather is .

TISKI, RUSSIA
Weather report as of 50 minutes ago (17:00 UTC):
The wind was blowing at a speed of 17 meters per second (38.0 miles per hour), with gusts to 20 meters per second (44.7 miles per hour), from West/Southwest in Tiski, Russia. The temperature was -20 degrees Celsius (-4 degrees Fahrenheit). Air pressure was 1,021 hPa (30.15 inHg). Relative humidity was 76.8%. There were vertical visibility clouds at a height of 30 meters (100 feet). The visibility was 0.2 kilometers (0.1 miles). Current weather is Blowing Snow .

PEVEK, RUSSIA
Weather report as of 830 minutes ago (04:00 UTC):
The wind was blowing at a speed of 2 meters per second (4.5 miles per hour) from West/Northwest in Pevek, Russia. The temperature was -28 degrees Celsius (-18 degrees Fahrenheit). Air pressure was 1,026 hPa (30.30 inHg). Relative humidity was 82.8%. There were broken clouds at a height of 335 meters (1100 feet) and overcast at a height of 3048 meters (10000 feet). The visibility was 3.3 kilometers (2.1 miles). Current weather is Light Snow .

[groucho]

deeps said:

hairykrishna said:

We should have a bet. I'd be willing to wager a tenner that 2010 has a higher average global temperature than 2009. Possibly we could 'double or nothing' at the end of the year. I say UAH satellite data should be the guide.

What do you base your confidence on Hairy?

Wishful thinking.

[turbobloke]

Faith, hope...not so much charity as Greenpeas plus Fiends of the Earth and the World Wetneck Fund have that tied up.

Over such a short timescale it's partly on El Nino and the other part is akin to tossing a coin.

[chris watton]

"'This will be the warmest winter in living memory' – defiant Met Office staffer"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100...

[BliarOut]

chris watton said:

"'This will be the warmest winter in living memory' – defiant Met Office staffer"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100...

You couldn't make this up...

[Tangent Police]

Journalists in the old days had a good education and intelligence.

Very Nu Skool.

[turbobloke]

BliarOut said:

chris watton said:

"'This will be the warmest winter in living memory' – defiant Met Office staffer"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100...

You couldn't make this up...

[Jasandjules]

BliarOut said:

chris watton said:

"'This will be the warmest winter in living memory' – defiant Met Office staffer"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100...

You couldn't make this up...

Actually, I think you'll find that they can, and will.............

Simply eliminate from the data all readings which are below average and hey presto, instant warming.

[F i F]

Jasandjules said:

BliarOut said:

chris watton said:

"'This will be the warmest winter in living memory' – defiant Met Office staffer"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100...

You couldn't make this up...

Actually, I think you'll find that they can, and will.............

Simply eliminate from the data all readings which are below average and hey presto, instant warming.

Yes they are making it up. And what's more they don't deny making it up.

Geoff Jenkins who was head of climate change prediction at the Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, writes to Phil Jones:

Jenkins in mail 0848679780 said:

Remember all the fun we had last year over 1995 global temperatures, with the early release of information (via Australia), “inventing” the December monthly value, letters to Nature, etc., etc.?

I think we should have a cunning plan about what to do this year, simply to avoid a lot of wasted time.

John Costella's excellent analysis of this is

John Costella said:

Again, selling the public message—before the actual end of the calendar year—is of primary importance for these senior scientists. .... Jenkins was more interested in getting “headline” numbers out to the general public, than in ensuring an *accurate and* impartial release of information to all members of the press at the same time.

- * EFA


:Writes to MP once again...:

PS as an aside :Still getting stuff deleted by Tories: I hate to use the denial word but... the Conservatives really are in full 'lalala we're not listening' mode.

PPS Been reading some of Ben Santer's stuff. Having difficulty to know where to file it, under "O" for Obnoxious, or "C" for Cock. Any tips?

[turbobloke]

Forget the debate over Dalton Minimum and Maunder Minimum destinations...the 70s are back!

http://english.pravda.ru/print/science/earth/10692...

11.01.2009 Source: Pravda

The earth is now on the brink of entering another Ice Age, according to a large and compelling body of evidence from within the field of climate science. Many sources of data which provide our knowledge base of long-term climate change indicate that the warm, twelve thousand year-long Holocene period will rather soon be coming to an end, and then the earth will return to Ice Age conditions for the next 100,000 years.

Ice cores, ocean sediment cores, the geologic record, and studies of ancient plant and animal populations all demonstrate a regular cyclic pattern of Ice Age glacial maximums which each last about 100,000 years, separated by intervening warm interglacials, each lasting about 12,000 years.

Most of the long-term climate data collected from various sources also shows a strong correlation with the three astronomical cycles which are together known as the Milankovich cycles. The three Milankovich cycles include the tilt of the earth, which varies over a 41,000 year period; the shape of the earth’s orbit, which changes over a period of 100,000 years; and the Precession of the Equinoxes, also known as the earth’s ‘wobble’, which gradually rotates the direction of the earth’s axis over a period of 26,000 years. According to the Milankovich theory of Ice Age causation, these three astronomical cycles, each of which effects the amount of solar radiation which reaches the earth, act together to produce the cycle of cold Ice Age maximums and warm interglacials.

Elements of the astronomical theory of Ice Age causation were first presented by the French mathematician Joseph Adhemar in 1842, it was developed further by the English prodigy Joseph Croll in 1875, and the theory was established in its present form by the Serbian mathematician Milutin Milankovich in the 1920s and 30s. In 1976 the prestigious journal “Science” published a landmark paper by John Imbrie, James Hays, and Nicholas Shackleton entitled “Variations in the Earth's orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages,” which described the correlation which the trio of scientist/authors had found between the climate data obtained from ocean sediment cores and the patterns of the astronomical Milankovich cycles. Since the late 1970s, the Milankovich theory has remained the predominant theory to account for Ice Age causation among climate scientists, and hence the Milankovich theory is always described in textbooks of climatology and in encyclopaedia articles about the Ice Ages.

In their 1976 paper Imbrie, Hays, and Shackleton wrote that their own climate forecasts, which were based on sea-sediment cores and the Milankovich cycles, "… must be qualified in two ways. First, they apply only to the natural component of future climatic trends - and not to anthropogenic effects such as those due to the burning of fossil fuels. Second, they describe only the long-term trends, because they are linked to orbital variations with periods of 20,000 years and longer. Climatic oscillations at higher frequencies are not predicted... the results indicate that the long-term trend over the next 20,000 years is towards extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation and cooler climate."

During the 1970s the famous American astronomer Carl Sagan and other scientists began promoting the theory that ‘greenhouse gasses’ such as carbon dioxide, or CO2, produced by human industries could lead to catastrophic global warming. Since the 1970s the theory of ‘anthropogenic global warming’ (AGW) has gradually become accepted as fact by most of the academic establishment, and their acceptance of AGW has inspired a global movement to encourage governments to make pivotal changes to prevent the worsening of AGW.

The central piece of evidence that is cited in support of the AGW theory is the famous ‘hockey stick’ graph which was presented by Al Gore in his 2006 film “An Inconvenient Truth.” The ‘hockey stick’ graph shows an acute upward spike in global temperatures which began during the 1970s and continued through the winter of 2006/07. However, this warming trend was interrupted when the winter of 2007/8 delivered the deepest snow cover to the Northern Hemisphere since 1966 and the coldest temperatures since 2001. It now appears that the current Northern Hemisphere winter of 2008/09 will probably equal or surpass the winter of 2007/08 for both snow depth and cold temperatures.

The main flaw in the AGW theory is that its proponents focus on evidence from only the past one thousand years at most, while ignoring the evidence from the past million years -- evidence which is essential for a true understanding of climatology. The data from paleoclimatology provides us with an alternative and more credible explanation for the recent global temperature spike, based on the natural cycle of Ice Age maximums and interglacials.

In 1999 the British journal “Nature” published the results of data derived from glacial ice cores collected at the Russia’s Vostok station in Antarctica during the 1990s. The Vostok ice core data includes a record of global atmospheric temperatures, atmospheric CO2 and other greenhouse gases, and airborne particulates starting from 420,000 years ago and continuing through history up to our present time.

The graph of the Vostok ice core data shows that the Ice Age maximums and the warm interglacials occur within a regular cyclic pattern, the graph-line of which is similar to the rhythm of a heartbeat on an electrocardiogram tracing. The Vostok data graph also shows that changes in global CO2 levels lag behind global temperature changes by about eight hundred years. What that indicates is that global temperatures precede or cause global CO2 changes, and not the reverse. In other words, increasing atmospheric CO2 is not causing global temperature to rise; instead the natural cyclic increase in global temperature is causing global CO2 to rise.

The reason that global CO2 levels rise and fall in response to the global temperature is because cold water is capable of retaining more CO2 than warm water. That is why carbonated beverages loose their carbonation, or CO2, when stored in a warm environment. We store our carbonated soft drinks, wine, and beer in a cool place to prevent them from loosing their ‘fizz’, which is a feature of their carbonation, or CO2 content. The earth is currently warming as a result of the natural Ice Age cycle, and as the oceans get warmer, they release increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Because the release of CO2 by the warming oceans lags behind the changes in the earth’s temperature, we should expect to see global CO2 levels continue to rise for another eight hundred years after the end of the earth’s current Interglacial warm period. We should already be eight hundred years into the coming Ice Age before global CO2 levels begin to drop in response to the increased chilling of the world’s oceans.

The Vostok ice core data graph reveals that global CO2 levels regularly rose and fell in a direct response to the natural cycle of Ice Age minimums and maximums during the past four hundred and twenty thousand years. Within that natural cycle, about every 110,000 years global temperatures, followed by global CO2 levels, have peaked at approximately the same levels which they are at today.

Today we are again at the peak, and near to the end, of a warm interglacial, and the earth is now due to enter the next Ice Age. If we are lucky, we may have a few years to prepare for it. The Ice Age will return, as it always has, in its regular and natural cycle, with or without any influence from the effects of AGW.

The AGW theory is based on data that is drawn from a ridiculously narrow span of time and it demonstrates a wanton disregard for the ‘big picture’ of long-term climate change. The data from paleoclimatology, including ice cores, sea sediments, geology, paleobotany and zoology, indicate that we are on the verge of entering another Ice Age, and the data also shows that severe and lasting climate change can occur within only a few years. While concern over the dubious threat of Anthropogenic Global Warming continues to distract the attention of people throughout the world, the very real threat of the approaching and inevitable Ice Age, which will render large parts of the Northern Hemisphere uninhabitable, is being foolishly ignored.

[Tangent Police]

Off we go, I imagine.

Heads you lose, Tails they win.



Why can't we accept this is normal noise in the normal variation rather than some doom mongering fatal scenario. Surely it can't just be a weak control grab by bloody world socialists

Edited by Tangent Police on Tuesday 12th January 10:46

[G_T]

Hell of a difference between weather and climate though.

Seems to be some confusion about that....

[turbobloke]

Tangent Police said:

Why can't we accept this is normal noise in the normal variation rather than some doom mongering fatal scenario. Surely it can't just be a weak control grab by bloody world socialists

Ask the proponents...Pravda might be keener to respond than the BBC

Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 12th January 10:55