Global Warming Update

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: KeithE

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby David Flick » Mon Apr 07, 2014 8:31 pm

.
.
        ........................................Source...

        Image
.
..
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7932
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby David Flick » Wed Apr 09, 2014 5:23 am

.
.....................................................................................
Interesting Comparison

Two years ago, this interesting article by W. A. Beatty appeared in the American Thinker. The quote box below contains an excerpt of the article.
W.A. Beatty wrote:Man-made global warming is an earth-worshiping religion. The essential feature of any religion is that its pronouncements are to be accepted on faith, as opposed to hard evidence. And as with most religions, it is susceptible to the earthly temptations of money, power, politics, arrogance, and deceit.

Global warmists have an unshakable faith that man-made carbon emissions will produce a hotter climate, causing natural disasters. Their insistence that we can be absolutely certain that this will come to pass is based not on science, but on faith.

All the trappings of religion are here:
  • Original sin: Mankind is responsible for the prophesied disasters, especially those of us who live in suburbs and drive our SUVs to strip malls and chain restaurants.
  • The need for atonement and repentance: We must impose a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system, which will raise the cost of everything and stunt economic growth.
  • Rituals: We must observe Earth Day, and we must recycle.
  • Indulgences: Private jet-fliers like Al Gore and sitcom heiress Laurie David can buy carbon offsets to compensate for their carbon-emitting sins.
  • Prophecy and faith in things unseen: Advocates say we must act now before it is too late.

Some sects of religions publish elaborate charts to explain their prophesies of future events. They very often became quite popular and gained wide followings. One such example is Clarence Larkin. Larkin was a Dispensationalist who fell in the line of J.N. Darby (the father of modern Dispensationalism) and C. I . Scofield. The Dispensationalist claimed to have the last word of truth concerning future of how the end times would occur.

My "Father in the Ministry" (first pastoral mentor) was a diehard Scofield Bible Premillennial Dispensationalist. He would often have what he called, "Premilennial Revivals" in our church. A "Premilennial Revival" is one wherein the entire week of preaching is devoted proclaiming the events and nuances the end times for Christains. As far as "results" are concerned, such revivals can be quite effective when it comes to scaring the hell out of lost souls and reprobates. I cut my "ministerial teeth" that branch of eschatology. I learned all the charts by heart along with the appropriate proof texts to support the doctrines associated with Premil Dispensationalism. In other words, in those days, I had virtually all the answers about the future.

One of the key features of Premillennial Dispensationalism is that it very often, in fact most often, becomes a test of fellowship. Dispensationalists tend to judge faithfulness and orthodoxy on whether or not others agree with them. When I entered the ministry in 1964, a large number of Oklahoma Southern Baptist pastors, my mentor included, were strong Dispensationalists. Herschel Hobbs was an Amillennialist. Although Hobbs was pastor of the most prominent Southern Baptist church in Oklahoma, he was always looked on with derision because he was not a Premillennialist. But that another story for another time and not germaine to this post.

Back to Clarence Larkin... His charts were very elaborate and convoluted. The chart below (enlarged here) is but one of about 20 of his most popular charts. All of His charts can be found here. The heyday of Dispensationalism is long past.
Image
        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the world of religious Global Warming Alarmism, Kevin Trenberth is the present day "Clarence Larkin." In the March 2009 issue of the publication of the AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY, he and a couple of other AGWers (John T. Fasullo & Kiehl), wrote a paper entitled "EARTH’S GLOBAL ENERGY BUDGET." The theology is all worked out to the "T." Contained therein is a nice very detailed, elaborate, and colorful image. (Below)
Image

I'll not attempt to debunk the AGW Rev. Trenberth's article. I'm incapable of even understanding his Global Warming theology other than to say that it can't possibly be true inasmuch as it's a well documented fact that there has been no global warming at all over the past 17 years and 8 months. I will, however, post a link to Steven Wilde's tongue-in-cheek shot at it. (‘Correcting’ Trenberth et al.).

Like Dispensationalism, the heyday of the religion of Global Warming Alarmism will one day be a thing of the past. The game is up for climate change believers.
.
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7932
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby KeithE » Wed Apr 09, 2014 9:48 am

David,

Thanks for the paper by Trenberth, etal.
EARTH’S GLOBAL ENERGY BUDGET

If you had bothered to read it and been truthful (less sure of yourself and more cool headed) you would have seen that all the measurement sources are given, and the error sources are discussed. Not like that of a goofball/fanciful religion (Darby’s dispensationalism) that would not dwell on possible “errors”. In fact here is the last statement in Trenberth's paper:
Accordingly, as well as providing our best estimate of the Earth’s energy balance (Figure 1), we have provided a discussion of problems and issues that can hopefully be addressed in the future.


Figure 1 is not held up as any iconic motivator, or a religious diagram/icon. In fact the paper is not making any claim about AGW (past, present or future). It is an attempt at forming an Earth Energy Balance- nothing more, nothing less. Certainly not a religious-fevered call to reduce ghg’s or an attack on any group, just a scientific attempt at summarizing flows of energy and their approximately magnitude.

Truth is the plot below (truncated as it is beginning at 1997 and bereft of any mention of the ocean heating)
Image
is becoming an oft-repeated icon of the denialist religion (which gets its energy from those that disagree with them and refuses to use data that does not support their desired conclusion - kinda like Fundamentalism). This oft-repeated temp plot is only about 6% of the time span of all the available DATA and chosen to begin just after a sharp rise from 1979-1996 (look particularly at the Global Land-Ocean plot down 4 plots for the clearest view).

Incidentally your plot immediately above is a derived temperature plot from the MSU/AMSU satellite sounding data from its TLT (Temp Lower Troposphere) channel.
Image
Sounding data uses backscattered microwave radiation of varying wavelengths/frequencies along a line-of-sight from satellite to ground to infer temperature over a band of altitudes and is not a direct temperature measurement. Details here. This means it is not strictly speaking surface air temperature but represents a reconstructed temperature proxy over a weighted range of altitudes from 0km- 10km. I believe it is a useful proxy data for near surface temperature data and tracks direct surface air temperature rather well be it the UAH data analysis (corrected from a mistaken negative trend in 2005) or the RSS data analysis.
Image
Its global coverage is good, but it is not the only (or most direct) measure of surface air temperature and only began in 1979.

Here’s is the untruncated temperature dataset for directly measured surface (alt ~ 0km) air temperature over all land (since measurements began in 1750) analyzed by 4 different groups:
Image
and here is the global data over land and ocean areas:
Image
These data show the temperature (5 year averaging to take out noise - the red line in plot above) being level for only the last 11 years (2003-2013) - not "17 years 8 months". The denialists (as usual) are stretching the truth. They searched hard to find data (literally picked from thin air) that stretched the so-called 11 year “pause” (which I readily agree with) to 17 years/8 months and they refuse to mention counter evidence. (Contrast that with Trenberth’s frank discussion of problems and issues. Denialists fall in line with the worse of dogmatic religious purveyors/prooftexters while Trenberth is in the ranks of genuine scientists.)

Speaking of counter evidence, below is the global ocean’s heat content (since measurements began in 1950) as analyzed by 5 different researchers:
Image

The big picture truth is:
- (1) The ocean heat content (where 90%+ of the CO2 goes) continues to rise and shows no signs of not increasing causing already evident degregations to marine environments. Thermal expansion of this heated ocean (accompanied by glacial/sea ice melting) will slowly flood coast lines as well (not significantly in our lifetimes but within several centuries if we do not reverse our present course).
Image

- (2) The surface air temperature is temporarily stuck on a high value (whose total effects have not yet been felt) but thought to continue to increase by virtually all climate scientists (I hope they are wrong).

- (3) When these two datasets (ocean and surface air) drop to pre-industrial levels, then we can do what the industrial fossil fuel titans want - ignore the threat of global warming. Right now they have a gravy train to protect and have co-opted the free marketeer and the anti-UN mindframes (not to mention the GOP), and have undue influence on FoxNews
Cable Coverage of GW.

- (4) The much more prudent approach is to increasingly utilize wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, nuclear (with improved safety measures), and carefully chosen biofuels (not ethanol) for energy sources in place of the higher ghg-emitting energy sources (fossil fuels - oil, coal, natural gas, tar sands) and to control energy usage. Costs Down, Profits Up at least for wind and solar. Iceland uses geothermal, Brazil uses hydro and sugar cane biofuel, Europe uses nuclear, China is attempting to turn from coal to solar, and the US remains mostly reliant on fossil fuel at the insistence of those on the ghg gravy train who (btw) we have been subsidizing to the tune of $70B (2002-2008) or $10B/year.
Image
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6192
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby David Flick » Mon Apr 14, 2014 4:45 pm

.
.
              Image
      4/14/14: Global Warming hits Oklahoma City in the Spring.
      (Screen shot from my cell phone while taking my wife to the doctor)

    Image
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7932
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby KeithE » Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:32 pm

David Flick wrote:.
.

Keith wrote:Again I believe this change from last winter to this winter is abnormally high (let’s hope so at least).


.
.


To complete this storyline David started back on March 13 (post above) when he linked a plot claiming “the US is having the coldest 6-month period since 1912” (but March data report had not been finished yet - obviously could not be on 13 March and usual homogenization of data had not been conducted). Well here is the data (Oct-March with the whole month of March - homogenized as it must be, to be consistent with prior years) from the same data source- NOAA’s GHCN (Global Historical Climatology Network).

Image

Here is NOAA’s GHCN website where you can plot the completed data to your hearts content.

Instead of being the lowest since 1912, Oct 2013-March 2014 is the 21st highest out of the 102 years since 1912 and the overall trend is obvious at about 2.5F/century = 1.4C/century = .14C/decade. This happens to be fairly typically to the Global trend (although is is only for the Contiguous US) of about 0.1C/decade but noisier (more variable).

Image

David’s denialist sources took an incomplete data set (not processed like the other years) and told a big fib.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6192
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby David Flick » Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:22 am

David Flick wrote:.
.
              Image
      4/14/14: Global Warming hits Oklahoma City in the Spring.
      (Screen shot from my cell phone while taking my wife to the doctor)

    Image

      ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          .........Next day Followup • 4-15-14

              Image
    Oklahoma City sets record low Tuesday

    The record low for April 15 was recorded early Tuesday in Oklahoma City.

    FROM STAFF REPORTS • Modified: April 15, 2014 at 6:09 pm • Published: April 15, 2014

    It may be spring, but Oklahoma City hit a record low temperature Tuesday.

    The city’s new record for lowest temperature on April 15 was set when the thermometer dipped to 28 degrees Tuesday, the National Weather Service reported.

    The old record for April 15 — 30 degrees — was set in 1928.

    Temperatures rebounded during the day, climbing into the mid-60s. The projected high for Wednesday is 70 degrees, the Weather Service reported. (Source...)

.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7932
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby David Flick » Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:24 am

.
.

KeithE wrote:Again I believe this change from last winter to this winter is abnormally high (let’s hope so at least).
David Flick wrote:

Responding to the above comment, Keith wrote:To complete this storyline David started back on March 13 (post above) when he linked a plot claiming “the US is having the coldest 6-month period since 1912” (but March data report had not been finished yet - obviously could not be on 13 March and usual homogenization of data had not been conducted). Well here is the data (Oct-March with the whole month of March - homogenized as it must be, to be consistent with prior years) from the same data source- NOAA’s GHCN (Global Historical Climatology Network).

    Propaganda Alert: Keith's feeble attempt to discredit the graphs in this article fall woefully short of reality. His blind loyalty to alarmist propaganda leads him to false conclusions. His graph (below) is a classic a attempt to skew reality to fit the the false alarmist view. Below the graph Keith posted the following comment:
    Keith wrote:Here is NOAA’s GHCN website where you can plot the completed data to your hearts content.

    As per his suggestion I went to the website and plotted to my heart's content. Guess what... Using the website, the identical same parameters, and considering his graph as a starter, I am able to show how Keith has truncated the truth. It's quite interesting that he accuses me of truncating facts when he is the one who does the truncating. I will show that global warming is virtuallly nonexistent at the present time. Furthermore, there has been no global warming at all over the past two decades. Proof will be observed below his graph.


Image

First, let's examine the graph he posted. Notice that the graph (above: Contiguous U.S., Temperature, October-March, 1901-2000) seems to show a marked rise over the last two decades. And it does show a rise. But it doesn't reveal the complete story. Below is the identical same graph (from the same website) with the plot smoothed (green line) Secondly, notice that the graph is plotted from 1901 to 2000.
    Image

Now observe the graph below: (Contiguous U.S., Temperature, October-March, 1901-2014) Add just 14 years to the graph and the bold truth becomes very clear. It's quite clear that Keith either truncated the data or wanted to give a false impression of reality. The current temperature level is almost identical to temperature level of 1980. There is absolutely no way that Keith can use the NOAA data to prove the existence of global warming. It' simply doesn't exist other in the fantasy world of AGW alarmism.

    Image

So what happens if one were plot the data, using the same parameters, of just the last two decades? (Contiguous U.S., Temperature, October-March, 1994-2014 ) Answer: Clearly no global warming at all over the over the past two decades. None... Nada... Zilch...
    Image
I had a fine time plotting to my heart's content. The fact of the matter is that the notion that global warming is real is false. Certainly there's nothing resembling a catastrophic sort of warming. Keith can propagandize to his heart's content, but he will never be able to honestly prove or show that global warming is continuing. And that includes his posting of Joe Romm's fear-mongering propaganda piece over on the ClimateProgress website.

The alarmists are going crazy these days trying to prove something that doesn't exist. Algore is losing his mind over the fact that he and his alarmist friends can't seem to make any headway with their fear-mongering. In an impassioned speech over in Hawaii, he declared that skeptics are "immoral, unethical and despicable." He's losing the battle on this and hasn't a clue of what reality really is. Poor guy, he's become a virtual laughing stock on this matter.

.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7932
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby KeithE » Fri Apr 18, 2014 8:26 am

David Flick wrote:.
.

KeithE wrote:Again I believe this change from last winter to this winter is abnormally high (let’s hope so at least).
David Flick wrote:

Responding to the above comment, Keith wrote:To complete this storyline David started back on March 13 (post above) when he linked a plot claiming “the US is having the coldest 6-month period since 1912” (but March data report had not been finished yet - obviously could not be on 13 March and usual homogenization of data had not been conducted). Well here is the data (Oct-March with the whole month of March - homogenized as it must be, to be consistent with prior years) from the same data source- NOAA’s GHCN (Global Historical Climatology Network).

    Propaganda Alert: Keith's feeble attempt to discredit the graphs in this article fall woefully short of reality. His blind loyalty to alarmist propaganda leads him to false conclusions. His graph (below) is a classic a attempt to skew reality to fit the the false alarmist view. Below the graph Keith posted the following comment:
    Keith wrote:Here is NOAA’s GHCN website where you can plot the completed data to your hearts content.

    As per his suggestion I went to the website and plotted to my heart's content. Guess what... Using the website, the identical same parameters, and considering his graph as a starter, I am able to show how Keith has truncated the truth. It's quite interesting that he accuses me of truncating facts when he is the one who does the truncating. I will show that global warming is virtuallly nonexistent at the present time. Furthermore, there has been no global warming at all over the past two decades. Proof will be observed below his graph.


Image

First, let's examine the graph he posted. Notice that the graph (above: Contiguous U.S., Temperature, October-March, 1901-2000) seems to show a marked rise over the last two decades. And it does show a rise.

Ahhhh, David - the plot above is for Contiguous U.S., Temperature, October-March, 1901-2013 not 1901-2000. You have confused the data extent (given along the x-axis) with what was used for the baseline (the gray horizontal line given in the legend).

Now I made an innocent mistake by not plotting the last data point that for Oct 2013- March 2014 which you have done in your second to last plot below. I’ll discuss what we learn from that plot (not much globally speaking) below after the rest of David’s post.

The plot immediately below is not identical (but with a smoothed green line added) to the one above since the one immediately below last data point is Oct 2000-March 2001 while the above last data point was Oct 2012-March 2013.

David Flick wrote:
But it doesn't reveal the complete story. Below is the identical same graph (from the same website) with the plot smoothed (
green line) Secondly, notice that the graph is plotted from 1901 to 2000.
    Image

Now observe the graph below: (Contiguous U.S., Temperature, October-March, 1901-2014) Add just 14 years to the graph and the bold truth becomes very clear. It's quite clear that Keith either truncated the data or wanted to give a false impression of reality. The current temperature level is almost identical to temperature level of 1980. There is absolutely no way that Keith can use the NOAA data to prove the existence of global warming. It' simply doesn't exist other in the fantasy world of AGW alarmism.

    Image

So what happens if one were plot the data, using the same parameters, of just the last two decades? (Contiguous U.S., Temperature, October-March, 1994-2014 ) Answer: Clearly no global warming at all over the over the past two decades. None... Nada... Zilch...
    Image
I had a fine time plotting to my heart's content. The fact of the matter is that the notion that global warming is real is false. Certainly there's nothing resembling a catastrophic sort of warming. Keith can propagandize to his heart's content, but he will never be able to honestly prove or show that global warming is continuing. And that includes his posting of Joe Romm's fear-mongering propaganda piece over on the ClimateProgress website.

The alarmists are going crazy these days trying to prove something that doesn't exist. Algore is losing his mind over the fact that he and his alarmist friends can't seem to make any headway with their fear-mongering. In an impassioned speech over in Hawaii, he declared that skeptics are "immoral, unethical and despicable." He's losing the battle on this and hasn't a clue of what reality really is. Poor guy, he's become a virtual laughing stock on this matter.

.
.

If one wants to limit the discussion to the Oct-Mar (roughly winters) in the lower 48 states (1.58% of the earth’s surface area) , David’s plot 2 up is the most complete. We note the green line (a “smoothed time series”) is generally upward at a slope of about +0.6C/century.

But if one wants to look at the whole year and the whole earth over land and sea, here is the data for the last 133 years (ever since we had anything approaching global coverage)
Image

I do note (as I always have) that the whole earth’s surface air temp has been relatively flat since 2003 (10 - 11 years depending on how you count) - look at red smoothed data line above. From 1994 to 2003 there was considerable warming (about 0.2C in that decade = 2C/century = 3.6F/century)

The denialists found one area of the earth (the Contiguous US) that has been relatively flat for 20 years (as David’s last plot shows) and ballyhooed it throughout the networks. But that is fundamentally dishonest to stretch the 10-11 years to 17 or 20 years if you are speaking about "global warming" since that is over such a small percentage of the earth (1.58%).

It is also dishonest not to mention that the ocean’s temperature (or heat content) has been rising unabatedly since about 1975. That is where the CO2 is settling to (and that is a multi-decade process).
Image

David - go ahead and focus solely on surface air temps during winters in 1.58% of world’s area if it tickles your “It’s all a hoax” dreamland. And if you must keep up your name calling: “Algore” is a “laughing stock”; Joe Romm a “fear mongering propagandist”; you could have at least included me. :( .

Real scientists are speaking in near unanimity that AGW is real and we as a global community must be aggressively lowering our ghg emissions and increasing energy conversion to renewables to avoid the ever increasing harmful effects of GW/CC we have already begun to experience.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6192
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby David Flick » Wed Apr 23, 2014 4:50 am

User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7932
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby David Flick » Mon Apr 28, 2014 1:17 am

.
.

    Image
..............................................................................................................Source...
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7932
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby David Flick » Wed Apr 30, 2014 5:07 am

.
.
              Image

On Thu Feb 20, 2014 9:23 pm, Keith wrote: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). <--(Source...) -->(My reply to this and other comments Keith made...)


    Keith and other alarmists have continually droned on and on with the nonsensical notion that there is grave danger to humanity due to melting Arctic sea ice. While there indeed has been a decline in Arctic sea ice extent over the past 3 decades, the decline was nothing approaching catastrophic or dangerous levels.

    For several years Algore has been wetting his pants over the threat of a completely ice free Arctic. Six years ago he boldly predicted that the arctic would be completely ice free in five years.. In his blog, he declared that the Arctic was in a "Death Spiral" There are literally hundreds of articles and youtube videos that document the Gore generated nonsense..

    A couple of articles that appeared this week reveal just how silly the notion of an ice free Arctic has become. Both prove how far off the mark Gore and his true believer acolytes were with the prediction. (►Alaskan Polar Bears Threatened…By Too Much Spring IceToo Much Spring Ice Threatens Alaskan Polar Bears)

    So much for the wild and crazy notion that the Arctic sea ice is melting dangerously away. Even if the Arctic were to become completely ice free, there would be no serious threat to humanity. None whatsoever. As I've documented on numerous occasions the earth is experiencing no catastrophic GW/CC. Furthermore, neither Keith nor his so-called 97% of alarmist climatologists can prove or document that (the nonexistent) GW/CC is being caused by human activity. It's nothing more than classic fear mongering.
.
.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7932
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby KeithE » Wed Apr 30, 2014 8:47 am

Image
The sea ice volume in September 2013 is 20% that of September 1979.

The sea ice volume in April 2013 is 65% that of April 1979.

David should listen to his own posted You Tube links where Gore said in Dec 2009 that:
'some of the models project that there is a 75% chance that during some of the summer months the Arctic would be completely free of ice within 5 to 7 years. Others (Bob) says it will be 2030. We will find out’. By single quotes ( ‘ ‘) I mean approx quotes: could not find transcript.

David’s translation :" Six years ago he [Al Gore] boldly predicted that the arctic would be completely ice free in five years”. Errors in David’s statement includes:
- Dec 2009 is 4 years 5 months ago - not six years.
- Al Gore mentioned 5-7 years- not 5 years (that 5-7 years would be Dec 2014 - Dec 2016 {or really Sept 2015 - Sept 2017 in context of the next minimum} none of which we have reached yet)
- Gore discussed two predictions (one from “some models” and the other from “Bob") giving a range of scientific projections for an ice free Arctic - David mentions only 1 prediction (5-7 years) and does not mention 2030 (21 years).
- The first prediction was 75% chance- not a certainty.
- The first prediction was for “some summer months” - not “completely free" the whole year.
- Gore ends up with “we will find out” - not “boldly predicted”.

So come Sept 2017, if the sea ice volume is not zero, Gore’s most dire prediction would be falsified and by Sept 2030 if the sea ice volume is still not down to zero, David’s sarcasm would be justified. Actually I don’t think sarcasm is ever justified on such an important topic.

What is certain is that the Arctic Sea Ice Volume has already shrunk a great deal (80% reduction in Septembers).

David is just as bad at listening as he is in data analysis and science.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6192
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Update

Postby David Flick » Thu May 01, 2014 5:31 am

KeithE wrote:Image
The sea ice volume in September 2013 is 20% that of September 1979.
    So what? Where is the catastrophic danger of Arctic sea ice volume in September 2013 being 20% that of September 1979? There is none. That's a completely meaningless piece of datum.
The sea ice volume in April 2013 is 65% that of April 1979.
    So what? Where is the catastrophic danger of Arctic sea ice volume in April 2013 being 65% that of April 1979? There is none. That also is a completely meaningless piece of datum. Either way, whether it be from Sept '79 - Sept '13, or Apr ''79 - Apr '13, there is nothing to fear. To declare that there's a dire threat to humanity in melting Arctic sea is fear mongering at its best. You obviously completely missed the point my my post. Granted, I was mistaken with specific time spans, but that was not the point. The point was simply that Algore and his alarmist cohorts were drumming up false sense of fear about Arctic sea ice. I'll discuss this further below...
David should listen to his own posted You Tube links where Gore said in Dec 2009 that:
'some of the models project that there is a 75% chance that during some of the summer months the Arctic would be completely free of ice within 5 to 7 years. Others (Bob) says it will be 2030. We will find out’. By single quotes ( ‘ ‘) I mean approx quotes: could not find transcript.

    David’s translation :" Six years ago he [Al Gore] boldly predicted that the arctic would be completely ice free in five years”. Errors in David’s statement includes:
    - Dec 2009 is 4 years 5 months ago - not six years.
    - Al Gore mentioned 5-7 years- not 5 years (that 5-7 years would be Dec 2014 - Dec 2016 {or really Sept 2015 - Sept 2017 in context of the next minimum} none of which we have reached yet)
    - Gore discussed two predictions (one from “some models” and the other from “Bob") giving a range of scientific projections for an ice free Arctic - David mentions only 1 prediction (5-7 years) and does not mention 2030 (21 years).
    - The first prediction was 75% chance- not a certainty.
    - The first prediction was for “some summer months” - not “completely free" the whole year.
    - Gore ends up with “we will find out” - not “boldly predicted”.

      Again, setting aside my time frame mistakes, my original point stands. It is an indisputable fact that on Dec. 10, 2007, Gore made a clear (and bold) prediction that that the Arctic would be ice free in 5 years. His words, verbatim were “Five years is the period of time during which it is now expected to disappear.” The original video wherein he made that failed prediction has been scrubbed. However, I managed to locate the link in another source. This article contains the cached version that hasn't been scrubbed (first video). The MO of AGW alarmists is to always obfuscate the truth. Anything that debunks their theory will be deleted.

      I should have posted documentation on this point. My mistake. So, along with pertinent paragraphs, I'll document my point by posting excerpts of three articles...
      Article #1:
      The great bloviator has been pwned again, by the actions of nature itself. In Germany, five years ago this past Saturday, Al Gore claimed that the “Entire north polar ice cap will be gone in 5 years”. <--(This link goes to another article which contains a link the original video, but the reader will note that the video has been scrubbed. Obviously the Gore gang attempted delete it, but failed. More about this in the next article.)

      Also, in Gore’s Dec. 10, 2007 “Earth has a fever” speech, Gore referred to a prediction by U.S. climate scientist Wieslaw Maslowski that the Arctic’s summer ice could “completely disappear” by 2013 due to global warming caused by carbon emissions.
      [...]
      While we had a new record low in 2012 for the summer minimum, the 2013 rebound made Gore’s predictions a certain failure.
      .....................................................................Graph
      Now, on the 5 year anniversary of his prediction on December 14th, 2008, the Arctic sea ice is within a standard deviation of the “normal” line, and global sea ice is actually above normal:
      Article #2:
      Self-styled “global-warming” guru Al Gore and a gaggle of supposed “climate scientists” have egg all over their faces — big time. In 2007, 2008 and 2009, Gore publicly and very hysterically warned that the North Pole would be “ice-free” by around 2013 because of alleged “man-made global warming.” Citing “climate” experts, the government-funded BBC hyped the mass hysteria, running a now-embarrassing article under the headline: “Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’.” Other establishment media outlets did the same.

      Well, 2013 is almost over, and contrary to the alarmist “predictions” by Gore and what critics refer to as his “doomsday cult,” the latest satellite data show that Arctic ice cover has actually expanded 50 percent over 2012 levels. In fact, during October, sea-ice levels grew at the fastest pace since records began in 1979. Experts predict the expansion to continue in the years to come, leaving global-warming alarmists scrambling fiendishly for explanations to save face — and to revive the rapidly melting climate hysteria.

      In September, meanwhile, data also showed that sea ice levels in Antarctica had expanded to record levels for the second year in a row. Of course, by now, virtually everyone who has been following news about “global warming” — now more often referred to as “climate change” owing to public-relations concerns — also knows that global temperatures have not risen for some 17 years. The spectacular lack of warming demolished all 73 of the “climate models” used by the United Nations to push its controversial theories.
      Article #3:
      Five years ago – Al Gore predicted the North Pole could be ice-free in 5 Years

      Instead, satellite measurements show Arctic sea ice coverage up 50 percent!

      ...........................................................................Video

      Gore made the prediction to a German audience on 14 Dec 2008. He told them that “the entire North ‘polar’ cap will disappear in 5 years.”

      Former Vice President Al Gore references computer modeling to suggest that the north polar ice cap could lose virtually all of its ice within just a few short years.

      However, he chose his words carefully: “SOME of the models SUGGEST that there is a 75 percent CHANCE that the entire north polar ice cap, during SOME of the SUMMER months, COULD be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years,” said Gore in his deceptive lawyerly way.

      What actually happened?

      Today, Arctic sea ice is still there…and growing.

      Data collected by Europe’s Cryosat spacecraft shows that Arctic sea ice coverage was nearly 9,000 cubic km (2,100 cubic miles) by the end of this year’s melting season, up from about 6,000 cubic km (1,400 cubic miles) during the same time last year, reports BBC News.

      “The bounce back in the extent of sea ice in the Arctic this summer was reflected also in the volume of ice.”

      “This is good news for the Arctic, but presents somewhat of a tough problem for environmentalists and some climate scientists who have been pummeled with evidence this year contradicting the theory of man-made global warming,” says the Daily Caller.

      “Scientists have been struggling to explain away the 15-year pause in rising global temperatures. Some have turned to solar activity or natural climate cycles to explain the hiatus in warming.”

      These recent headlines probably also present “somewhat of a tough problem for environmentalists.”

      The three articles above confirm my point that Gore did, in fact, make a prediction that the Arctic sea ice would be completely gone in five years.
    So come Sept 2017, if the sea ice volume is not zero, Gore’s most dire prediction would be falsified and by Sept 2030 if the sea ice volume is still not down to zero, David’s sarcasm would be justified. Actually I don’t think sarcasm is ever justified on such an important topic.

      Gore's prediction has already been falsified. We won't have to wait until 2017 or 2030 to prove him incorrect. Any thought of the Arctic region being being completely ice free by is nothing more than Gorey fear mongering. Call it sarcasm all you wish, but with the present trend of absolutely no global warming/climate change, neither Keith nor I will ever live to see the Arctic region ice free even for a few months in the summer. Sarcasm has nothing to do with this. It's nothing more than common sense sans all the silly alarmism

    What is certain is that the Arctic Sea Ice Volume has already shrunk a great deal (80% reduction in Septembers).
      On the contrary. What is certain, however, Arctic sea ice is steadily on the increase. No sarcasm whatsoever associated that that fact. Just common sense and following the research of legitimate climate science.
    David is just as bad at listening as he is in data analysis and science.
      David may have gotten his time frames slightly off the mark, but he's spot on with facts documenting Algore's bogus predictions. Data analysis and science of legitimate climate scientists will always prove the alarmists wrong. Every time. Always. David will never fall for the bogus science of global warming fear mongers.
    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby KeithE » Thu May 01, 2014 8:49 am

    The bad effects of polar sea ice loss are plentiful according to
    Scientific American
    Science Daily
    NOAA (explains the Polar Vortex effect that increasingly plays into the weather at mid-latitudes)
    Institute of Physics Science (IOPScience)
    American Meteorological Society
    National Science Foundation

    and the scientists at:
    Weather Underground
    Oceans North
    University of Washington (my alma matter)
    Marine Science Today (10,000 dead walruses photographed in just one area)
    Carbon Brief
    This last article is particularly good, and easy to understand with links that back up assertions.

    I guess if humans are safe in Enid OK, that is all David cares about. The effects are plentiful, read up!

    Well David found a video snippet that quoted Al Gore saying
    the entire North ‘polarized’ cap will disappear in 5 years.

    and it appears 5 years are up .

    But really David shouldn’t you be more careful - these words were spoken on Dec 13 2008 (as you own “cached video” link says) not Dec 2007 (as you say in post above).

    Gore obviously misspoke - "North 'polarized' cap" (must be thinking about the ‘polarized’ GW/CC debate). But we have no indication of what else he said in that video - it was just a “gotcha snippet”. He may have clarified that the disappearance would be in the summer months or that it was a certain scientists view, etc.

    Gore's prediction (if not nuanced elsewhere in briefing) was wrong. But who can blame him for being “alarming” given the Arctic Sea Ice Loss of Volume (minimums) history (see plot below) as of Dec 13, 2008? (I guess the answer to that question is hyper-denialists who can’t see the big picture)

    Image

    Gore may have been influenced by the nosedive from Sept 2007 to Sept 2008 (Septembers are the minimums); reasonable projections could have been made to say that the Arctic Sea Ice minimum would disappear within 5 years. As of last Sept, 80% of the volume of Sept 1979 has disappeared.

    Hysteresis effects will probably mean there will be some Arctic Sea Ice left even in Septembers for some time. But 80% loss is significant. Unless we change our emissions habits, the Arctic Sea Ice will be asymptotically approaching zero in Septembers with other summer months to follow within decades and the winter months within centuries. I have hope we will change our emitting ways before the Arctic is ice free the entire year. The sooner we own up to these undeniable signs, the sooner earth’s habitat (humans and animals) can be rescued.

    Two other things to note about the plot above:
    - The y-axis starts at 3,000 KM cubed (so it is not as bad as it might first appear)
    - 1979 was the first measurement of the volume and probably was higher earlier at the dawn of the industrial era. Thus 80% loss at the minimums (35% loss at the maximums) is understated in terms of man’s effect.

    Al Gore is far more correct than David Flick. Al says "be concerned, do something about it - like ghg controls and alternative energy"; David says “So what?, I see no consequences, keep on spewing ghg's”.
    Informed by Data.
    Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
    Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
    User avatar
    KeithE
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 6192
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
    Location: Huntsville, AL

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby David Flick » Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:02 am

    .
    .
                Irrefutable
    June 4, 2014 12:24 PM

    Global Temperature Update: Still no global warming for 17 years 9 months – Since Sept. 1996

    'The 213 months without global warming represent more than half the 425-month satellite data record since January 1979. No one now in high school has lived through global warming.'

    According to the RSS satellite data, whose value for May 2014 has just been published, the global warming trend in the 17 years 9 years since September 1996 is zero (Fig. 1). The 213 months without global warming represent more than half the 425-month satellite data record since January 1979. No one now in high school has lived through global warming.

        Image
        Figure 1. RSS monthly global mean lower-troposphere temperature anomalies (dark blue) and trend (thick bright blue line),
        September 1996 to May 2014, showing no trend for 17 years 9 months.
    The hiatus period of 17 years 9 months is the farthest back one can go in the RSS satellite temperature record and still show a zero trend. But the length of the pause in global warming, significant though it now is, is of less importance than the ever-growing discrepancy between the temperature trends predicted by models and the less exciting real-world temperature change that has been observed.

    [...]

    Key facts about global temperature
    • The RSS satellite dataset shows no global warming at all for 213 months from September 1996 to May 2014. That is more than half the entire 425-month satellite record.

    • The fastest measured centennial warming rate was in Central England from 1663-1762, at 0.9 Cº/century – before the industrial revolution. It was not our fault.

    • The global warming trend since 1900 is equivalent to 0.8 Cº per century. This is well within natural variability and may not have much to do with us.

    • The fastest warming trend lasting ten years or more occurred over the 40 years from 1694-1733 in Central England. It was equivalent to 4.3 Cº per century.

    • Since 1950, when a human influence on global temperature first became theoretically possible, the global warming trend has been equivalent to 1.2 Cº per century.

    • The fastest warming rate lasting ten years or more since 1950 occurred over the 33 years from 1974 to 2006. It was equivalent to 2.0 Cº per century.

    • In 1990, the IPCC’s mid-range prediction of the near-term warming trend was equivalent to 2.8 Cº per century, higher by two-thirds than its current prediction.

    • The global warming trend since 1990, when the IPCC wrote its first report, is equivalent to 1.4 Cº per century – half of what the IPCC had then predicted.

    • In 2013 the IPCC’s new mid-range prediction of the near-term warming trend was for warming at a rate equivalent to only 1.7 Cº per century. Even that is exaggerated.

    • Though the IPCC has cut its near-term warming prediction, it has not cut its centennial warming prediction of 4.7 Cº warming to 2100 on business as usual.

    • The IPCC’s prediction of 4.7 Cº warming by 2100 is more than twice the greatest rate of warming lasting more than ten years that has been measured since 1950.

    • The IPCC’s 4.7 Cº-by-2100 prediction is almost four times the observed real-world warming trend since we might in theory have begun influencing it in 1950.

    • Since 1 January 2001, the dawn of the new millennium, the warming trend on the mean of 5 datasets is nil. No warming for 13 years 4 months.

    • Recent extreme weather cannot be blamed on global warming, because there has not been any global warming. It is as simple as that.
    [...]

    Read entire article here...

    .
    .
    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby David Flick » Tue Jun 10, 2014 4:20 pm

    .
    .
      NOAA shows ‘the pause’ in the U.S. surface temperature record over nearly a decade

      Posted on June 7, 2014 by Anthony Watts

      After years of waiting, NOAA has finally made a monthly dataset on the U.S. Climate Reference Network available in a user friendly way via their recent web page upgrades. This data is from state-of-the-art ultra-reliable triple redundant weather stations placed on pristine environments. As a result, these temperature data need none of the adjustments that plague the older surface temperature networks, such as USHCN and GHCN, which have been heavily adjusted to attempt corrections for a wide variety of biases. Using NOAA’s own USCRN data, which eliminates all of the squabbles over the accuracy of and the adjustment of temperature data, we can get a clear plot of pristine surface data. It could be argued that a decade is too short and that the data is way too volatile for a reasonable trend analysis, but let’s see if the new state-of-the-art USCRN data shows warming.

      A series of graphs from NOAA follow, plotting Average, Maximum, and Minimum surface temperature follow, along with trend analysis and original source data to allow interested parties to replicate it.

      Continue reading...

    .
    .
    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby KeithE » Thu Jun 12, 2014 9:33 am

    I thought you were going to be non-participatng, David. So I have not responded. But I can no longer let these misleading plots from the Lord (not true) Monckton and Anthony Watts go unchallenged.

    As to this plot (from a Monckton storyline):
    Image
    This is not the corrected Temperature in the Lower Troposheric (TLT) data from he MSU/AMSU satelites that UAH’s John Christy and Roy Spencer do the data analysis on. Below is right off of Roy Spencer blog:
    Image
    Note the red line shows a positive slope over the 1997-2014 period (just like the direct surface measurements plotted below)
    Image
    where Monckton’s plot does not.

    They (Christy and Spencer) had their satellite positions wrong giving a false trend (they were not looking at the same area of the earth from day to day or the longer term orbit drifts) leading them to declare the earth was cooling before this error was corrected. Once corrected in 2005 the satellite data looked very much like the global ground surface temperature trends from direct thermometer readings in terms of trends and temporal ups and downs. See plot above.

    Further explanation about the error they made.

    Monckton has gone through great lengths to perpetuate bad data as well as falsely using the title “Lord” despite a cease and desist order.
    ---------------------------

    Now onto Watts’s misleading storyline:
    His data is correct and from reputable sources - NOAA/NCDC - as far as it goes:
    Image

    But :
    1) it is CONUS only (that’s 1.5% of the earth’s area : CONUS is 7.6 million sqkm while the earth’s area is 510 million sqkm).
    2) the starting spot (Dec 2004) is picked just after the well known “pause” started in 2003 which has been about 11 years in duration (not 17 years as Monckton mocks or 2 decades as David has stretched it to). That is ignoring the 100+ year rise in surface air temperature and the fact that we are “stuck on high” causing a bevy of harmful effects - glacier melting, sea level increasing, water resource draining, coral reef bleaching, sea food chain interruptions, extreme Arctic heating, biodiversity diminishment, disease promotion, ..... that exist now and the trend is not good even if the temp stays the same.

    Image


    BTW, there are signs of a El Nino effect which may spell the end for the “pause”. April 2014 was 0.26C greater than April 2013. http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
    But it is too early to declare the “pause” over for certain.

    As pointed out frequently, but David has not acknowledged or tried to refute, the ocean temperatures continue to rise during this “pause"
    Image

    and that is where 90% of man-caused global heat content is currently settling.

    Furthermore Watt's inferences that only the US thermometer sites are
    state-of-the-art ultra-reliable triple redundant weather stations placed on pristine environment As a result, these temperature data need none of the adjustments that plague the older surface temperature networks, such as USHCN and GHCN, which have been heavily adjusted to attempt corrections for a wide variety of biases.

    is a bunch of nationalistic bull. They all need calibrations and homogenizations as is done uniformly by GHCN for all data collected across the globe. Read about it here.

    Sorry David, but I just had to correct the grossly misleading story lines from Monckton and Watts. Hope things are going well.
    Informed by Data.
    Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
    Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
    User avatar
    KeithE
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 6192
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
    Location: Huntsville, AL

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby David Flick » Sun Jun 22, 2014 5:35 pm

    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby David Flick » Sun Jun 29, 2014 12:22 am

    .
    .
    Here are nine inconvenient (and irrefutable) truths that irritates the stuffing out of the raging extremists alarmists...
      CO2 GOOD; CLIMATE CHANGE BUNK; GREENS ARE RAGING EXTREMISTS, SAYS GEENPEACE CO-FOUNDER

      by James Delingpole | 19 Jun 2014

      "Climate change" is a theory for which there is "no scientific proof at all" says the co-founder of Greenpeace. And the green movement has become a "combination of extreme political ideology and religious fundamentalism rolled into one."

      Patrick Moore, a Canadian environmentalist who helped found Greenpeace in the Seventies but subsequently left in protest at its increasingly extreme, anti-scientific, anti-capitalist stance, argues that the green position on climate change fails the most basic principles of the scientific method.

        "The certainty among many scientists that humans are the main cause of climate change, including global warming, is not based on the replication of observable events. It is based on just two things, the theoretical effect of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, predominantly carbon dioxide, and the predictions of computer models using those theoretical calculations. There is no scientific "proof" at all."
      Moore goes on to list some key facts about "climate change" which are ignored by true believers.

        1. The concentration of CO2 in the global atmosphere is lower today, even including human emissions, than it has been during most of the existence of life on Earth.

        2. The global climate has been much warmer than it is today during most of the existence of life on Earth. Today we are in an interglacial period of the Pleistocene Ice Age that began 2.5 million years ago and has not ended.

        3. There was an Ice Age 450 million years ago when CO2 was about 10 times higher than it is today.

        4. Humans evolved in the tropics near the equator. We are a tropical species and can only survive in colder climates due to fire, clothing and shelter.

        5. CO2 is the most important food for all life on earth. All green plants use CO2 to produce the sugars that provide energy for their growth and our growth. Without CO2 in the atmosphere carbon-based life could never have evolved.

        6. The optimum CO2 level for most plants is about 1600 parts per million, four times higher than the level today. This is why greenhouse growers purposely inject the CO2-rich exhaust from their gas and wood-fired heaters into the greenhouse, resulting in a 40-80 per cent increase in growth.

        7. If human emissions of CO2 do end up causing significant warming (which is not certain) it may be possible to grow food crops in northern Canada and Russia, vast areas that are now too cold for agriculture.

        8. Whether increased CO2 levels cause significant warming or not, the increased CO2 levels themselves will result in considerable increases in the growth rate of plants, including our food crops and forests.

        9. There has been no further global warming for nearly 18 years during which time about 25 per cent of all the CO2 ever emitted by humans has been added to the atmosphere. How long will it remain flat and will it next go up or back down? Now we are out of the realm of facts and back into the game of predictions.
      Moore makes his remarks in the foreword to a new book by bestselling Australian geologist Dr Ian Plimer called Not For Greens. The book describes the various, complex industrial processes which go into the making of just a single teaspoon, starting with the mining of various metals.

      If Greenpeace's membership remained true to their principles they would have to eat with their bare hands because, as Moore notes, they are opposed to mining in all its forms.

        "If you ask them for the name of any mine that is operating in an environmentally acceptable standard you will draw a blank. They have become so cornered by their own extremism that they must deny their daily use of cell phones, computers, bicycles, rapid transit, and yes, the simple teaspoon."
      Source...

    .
    .
    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby David Flick » Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:29 pm

    .Today's global warming cartoon...
      Image
    .
    .
    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby David Flick » Thu Jul 10, 2014 10:51 pm

    .
    .
    .
            Image

    .
    .
    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby David Flick » Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:27 am

    .
    .




    .
    .
    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby David Flick » Fri Jul 11, 2014 4:37 pm

    .
    .
                ICCC Keynote Address #1
            Image
      I watched the first session of the 9th Nongovernmental International Conference on Climate Change (NIPCC ) in Las Vegas last night. Joe Bastardi gave the opening Keynote address, which I though was outstanding. I enjoyed listening to him. No doubt about it, he commanded the attention of all who heard him.

      Joe is one of America's best-known and respected weather forecasters, having served 32 years at Accuweather, including a chief forecaster. He is now chief long-range forecaster at Weatherbell analytics where (as he likes to point out) his income depends entirely on the accuracy of his forecasts. He graduated from Pennsylvania State Uniersity and holds a bachelor's degree in meteorology.

      Interjecting humor galore, Joe destroyed the CAGW (Catastrophic Anthrorphic Global Warming) propaganda, specifically that of Michael Mann, who is professor of AGW propaganda at Penn State University, which happens to be Joe's alma mater.

      The title of his address is: "When the Truth is Found.. To Be Lies"

    .
    .
    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby David Flick » Fri Jul 11, 2014 8:00 pm

    .
    .
        Yes, Virginia, there is no Global Warming...

        Image

    Polar vortex arrives for mid-July
    Jerry Shields
    July 9th, 2014 at 9:45am | Last Updated July 10th, 2014 at 7:41pm

    Many of the cold weather outbreaks this past winter were attributed to something called a Polar Vortex. This is where a flow pattern establishes in the upper atmosphere that draws cold arctic air down across the Canadian Prairies and down into the American mid-west and the Great Lakes region. The summer-time version of the Polar Vortex is about to arrive next week, bringing unusually cold air to the Great Lakes and much of central North America.

    Climatologically the middle part of July is usually the warmest time of year in Northern Ontario. Temperatures typically climb into the mid 20s during the warmest time of the day, while overnight lows remain above +10°C.

    So this Polar Vortex couldn’t arrive at a worse time. Instead of warm summer-like conditions it will feel more like fall. Temperatures are likely to be 5-10°C below normal. This will keep daytime highs buried in the teens with overnight lows in the single digits. This cold air is expected to move as far south as Texas where record low temperatures could be broken.

    Continue reading...

    .
    .
    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 7932
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: Global Warming Update

    Postby Ed Pettibone » Sat Jul 12, 2014 10:20 am

    Ed: I love this line from the comments section below David's link.

    Ricky Michael · Top commenter · Texas A & M University
    Edward Owen If it wasn't for Global Warming we would all freeze to death.
    User avatar
    Ed Pettibone
     
    Posts: 11185
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:46 pm
    Location: .Burnt Hills, New York, Capital Area

    PreviousNext

    Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

    cron