Global Warming Update

[Neil Heath]

As I read elsewhere: "the occurrence of winter does not disprove global warming".

I have also heard of extreme heat occurring in the southern hemisphere. For example, a major tennis tournament in Australia had trouble with the asphalt courts getting so hot the players shoes were getting sticky. Don't know if it was the asphalt itself softening or the soles of their shoes, but it was said the temps were over 100 degrees, which had never happened.

[David Flick]

[KeithE]

[David Flick]

[David Flick]

[KeithE]

Read that article in the WSJ (not surprising) when I went to dinner tonight. Just leaving work now.

The one thing I already notice is that there is no mention of the ocean warming which is 90%+ of the warming earth has received. Not one mention.

I also notice Christy and cohort (from UAHuntsville) plotted computer model projections as of 1978. They have come a long ways since then. Many modelers understand why the majority of the warming has gone to the oceans which was not understood 25 years ago. My WSJ is out in the car, but they mentioned several other concerns with "models" which seemed more credible at first glance.

The measurement data of the lower atmosphere is said to be from "various" sources. It does not look wrong however from my remembrance. Surprise they don't stick with UAH's satellite data.

I'll look this whole article over this weekend.

But one needs to understand it is the long term trends in past measured data of several parameters (Arctic sea ice volume, glaciers, coral reefs, ocean temps, atmospheric temps, weather extremes) that prove w/o any serious doubt to 97% of climatologists that GW/CC is a man-caused threat to our future habitat and inaction now with cement that threat in. Even w/o computer model projections one has to "hope" these parameters improve so as to avoid more harmful effects. Our track is not good. Positive feedback is also occurring - one study this week mentioned the albedo feedback from melting Arctic sea ice as being responsible for up to 1/4 of the ocean's heating (as I remember).

[David Flick]

[KeithE]

One quickie before bed. McNider and Christy (from UA Huntsville) took some old model predictions done in 1979 and projected over 34 years. Below is a composite model vs measurement done for the AR4 (aka as IPCC 2007) projected out 13 years. Much less of a wild conjecture (13 years not 34 years) and with much improved climate modeling.



You can immediately see that the measurements and models (in gray) are much more inline than the old modeling Christy/McNider found in their archive). So do not be fooled about the state of current modeling of air temperature. It is highly improved. Read about how at . The trend is at about 0.14C/decade or 1.4C per century = 2.5F per century by 2114 (if there is no further feedbacks bending the curve upward some more).

One wonders why Christy didn’t use UAH satellite DATA that they were toting as late as 1998 which said the lower troposphere was ~level before their calculational error was caught by a fellow data analyst. Read about it and subsequent errors . So now McNidier/Christy are gong back to 1979 to make the key figure in this WSJ article. I don’t know who McNider is, other than he now works at the UAH Atmospheric Sciences group, but Christy should know better than trot out some old computer models data when newer and better information is available.

I guess God must be mad ( ) at McNider and Christy (Huntsvillains) as we are seeing a large thunder storm with a tornado sighting about 30 miles away). 70F was the high today after 5” of snow last week.

More to say and plot (especially how computer models have understated ocean data) but it will have to wait.

[KeithE]

[KeithE]

[KeithE]

[KeithE]

[David Flick]

There was never any doubt in my mind that the AGW alarmists would crank up the propaganda to a fever pitch after Richard McNider and John Christy published . Joe Romm over at the radical ClimateProgress website must've wet his pants at least three times while he was reading the article. I would love to have been a fly on the wall as he wrote the alarmist rebuttal to the article. I'll bet after he changed his diaper, he probably sat down to the computer with smoke coming out of his eyes and ears. Here's his article:

Romm begins the article with a severe attack on Christy followed with a regurgitation of the long ago debunked "97% of Climate Scientists belief in catastrophic global warming. (; ; ; ; ; ; Video: ) The bottom line is that there has never been a 97% consensus among climate scientists that global warming is catastrophic or caused by human activity. Nor will there ever be. Such nonsense exists only in the imaginary world of AGW alarmism.

Another alarmist website is the website. Here's their propagandist contribution: . Talk about "Hot Whoppers" on global warming, this site if full of it...

It's a certainty that as long as this debate continues, there will always be alarmists spinning propaganda. I will probably not live long enough to see an end of the propaganda. With people like Al Gore, James Hansen, the IPCC, Michael Mann, et. al. feeding propaganda to Barack Obama & John Kerry, the fear mongering will continue. This despite the fact that there has been no global warming for nearly two decades and counting...
.
.

[William Thornton]

[KeithE]

[David Flick]

[KeithE]

[David Flick]

[David Flick]

[KeithE]

[David Flick]

[David Flick]

[David Flick]

[KeithE]

[David Flick]