Daily Mail
Not all experts agree with the latest United Nations report on global warming, some are even amused by its findings. A
climate scientist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
has come out blasting the report for blaming humans for a global warming
trend that appears to have cooled in recent decades – and then glossing
over the warming slowdown. ‘I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence,’ Dr. Richard Lindzen told Climate Depot – a site known for questioning the theory of global warming. Dr Linzen’s amusement from the lack of correlation between predictions and actual conditions. ‘They
are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the
discrepancies between their models and observations increase,’ Dr Linzen
continued. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change asserted in the report that it is 95 per cent sure humans’ use of fossil fuels is the cause of global warming.The report also provided what Dr Linzen felt was a shoddy explanation for the lack of warming over the past 17 years. ‘Their
excuse for the absence of warming over the past 17 years is that the
heat is hiding in the deep ocean,’ the amused scientist said. ‘However,
this is simply an admission that the models fail to simulate the
exchanges of heat between the surface layers and the deeper oceans.’ This slapdash explanation for the
lack of warming, Dr Linzen stressed, is proof the IPCC knows little
about what is actually happening. ‘They now, somewhat obscurely, admit that their crucial assumption was totally unjustified,’ said the amused scientist. Dr Linzen’s derision of the IPCC
report comes amid evidence that warming hasn’t occurred over the past 17
years, and that polar ice caps are even expanding. Despite
strong evidence that global warming may be on hold, the IPCC still
insisted that the report’s findings should alarm anyone denying the
theory.
Monday, 30 September 2013
Physicist explains why increased CO2 has a trivial effect upon climate
The Hockey Schtick
"...In fact, the IPCC has numerous fundamental problems. The sun is about 4.5 billion years old and while we have been observing it for thousands of years, we have only in the last few years had the tools available to study it seriously. Now that we have the tools, every few months a new discovery is made and our superficial understanding of the sun takes one baby-step towards maturity. The IPCC may wish upon a star that our nearby star does not contribute significantly to our climate, but that is so fanciful that even Disney would not buy it. "
"...In fact, the IPCC has numerous fundamental problems. The sun is about 4.5 billion years old and while we have been observing it for thousands of years, we have only in the last few years had the tools available to study it seriously. Now that we have the tools, every few months a new discovery is made and our superficial understanding of the sun takes one baby-step towards maturity. The IPCC may wish upon a star that our nearby star does not contribute significantly to our climate, but that is so fanciful that even Disney would not buy it. "
IPCC AR5 full final report released – full access here
WUWT
" From the comments: The IPCC AR5 is pure pseudoscience intended to provide information to justify political actions; i.e.Lysenkoism.
" From the comments: The IPCC AR5 is pure pseudoscience intended to provide information to justify political actions; i.e.Lysenkoism.
IPCC in denial. “Just-so” excuses use ocean heat to hide their failure.
JoNova (Australia)
"In answer to the excuse du jour: “The Ocean ate my Global Warming”. Now that the plateau in temperatures has lasted for 15 years, everyone, even IPCC lead authors, can see the “90% certain” models were 98% wrong. So the IPCC now claims the heat went into the deep abyss, which they didn’t predict, can’t measure accurately, and, even by the best estimates we have, has not been anywhere near enough warming to explain the missing energy. They predicted the surface air temperature would increase, but they didn’t. (The 1990 IPCC predictions about temperatures were so wrong the trends have come in below their lowest possible estimate.) They predicted the oceans would warm more than twice as much as they actually have (as best as we can tell). They did not predict the air temperature would level out for 15 years, and the oceans would suddenly start producing “natural cooling”.
"In answer to the excuse du jour: “The Ocean ate my Global Warming”. Now that the plateau in temperatures has lasted for 15 years, everyone, even IPCC lead authors, can see the “90% certain” models were 98% wrong. So the IPCC now claims the heat went into the deep abyss, which they didn’t predict, can’t measure accurately, and, even by the best estimates we have, has not been anywhere near enough warming to explain the missing energy. They predicted the surface air temperature would increase, but they didn’t. (The 1990 IPCC predictions about temperatures were so wrong the trends have come in below their lowest possible estimate.) They predicted the oceans would warm more than twice as much as they actually have (as best as we can tell). They did not predict the air temperature would level out for 15 years, and the oceans would suddenly start producing “natural cooling”.
Sunday, 29 September 2013
Inconvenient truths quietly brushed aside
Christopher Booker,Telegraph
"When the BBC and Channel 4 News crank their spin machines into action, as they did last week in trying to plug the latest attempt by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to flog the dying horse of the global-warming scare, one wonders: do they actually do any homework, or do they just recycle a pile of old clichés in the hope that their audience will be fooled? In light of the IPCC’s last-minute removal from its new report of any reference to the 15-year “pause” in rising global temperatures, it was nevertheless entertaining to hear that the latest consequence of global warming is that we here in Britain can now expect “cooler” temperatures for years to come."
"When the BBC and Channel 4 News crank their spin machines into action, as they did last week in trying to plug the latest attempt by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to flog the dying horse of the global-warming scare, one wonders: do they actually do any homework, or do they just recycle a pile of old clichés in the hope that their audience will be fooled? In light of the IPCC’s last-minute removal from its new report of any reference to the 15-year “pause” in rising global temperatures, it was nevertheless entertaining to hear that the latest consequence of global warming is that we here in Britain can now expect “cooler” temperatures for years to come."
Analysis: UN IPCC Hides The Decline:
Climate Depot
"‘They are comparing a statistically insignificant amount of warming since 1998, with three decades of cooling. The result is to make this small trend sound much more significant than it is’ – ‘By this dodgy use of statistics and the 1998 red herring, they have also tried to distract attention from the clear fact that temperatures really have flatlined since 2001′
"‘They are comparing a statistically insignificant amount of warming since 1998, with three decades of cooling. The result is to make this small trend sound much more significant than it is’ – ‘By this dodgy use of statistics and the 1998 red herring, they have also tried to distract attention from the clear fact that temperatures really have flatlined since 2001′
Sir David King, the UK's extreme weathervane
Quadrant Online
"King continues to promote the silly notion that we can somehow regulate atmospheric carbon dioxide and control the Earth’s climate by reducing the extremely low levels of carbon dioxide produced by human activity. Was he aware of, or did he choose to ignore, the 97% input of carbon dioxide from natural processes such as ocean venting, decomposition of organic matter and volcanism. Sir David might get a shock if he finds out how much carbon dioxide and methane is produced by termites."
"King continues to promote the silly notion that we can somehow regulate atmospheric carbon dioxide and control the Earth’s climate by reducing the extremely low levels of carbon dioxide produced by human activity. Was he aware of, or did he choose to ignore, the 97% input of carbon dioxide from natural processes such as ocean venting, decomposition of organic matter and volcanism. Sir David might get a shock if he finds out how much carbon dioxide and methane is produced by termites."
Why the IPCC should never be taken seriously
Quadrant Online
"In summary, many uncertainties emerge from a careful assessment of claims that a danger exists of ever increasing temperatures. No substance can be established for that claim because no definitive causal correlation can be established between past changes in temperatures and in atmospheric concentrations of CO2. "
"In summary, many uncertainties emerge from a careful assessment of claims that a danger exists of ever increasing temperatures. No substance can be established for that claim because no definitive causal correlation can be established between past changes in temperatures and in atmospheric concentrations of CO2. "
Just How Incompetent Is NOAA?
Real Science
"NOAA shows that 2012 was the most extreme weather year in US history, despite the fact that there was little extreme weather last year – other than Sandy which isn’t included in the index. According to their fake index, 2012 was almost three times as extreme as the very extreme year of 1936. Their claim is almost entirely based on very mild temperatures during the winter and spring of 2012. which they are trying to pass off as “extreme.”
"NOAA shows that 2012 was the most extreme weather year in US history, despite the fact that there was little extreme weather last year – other than Sandy which isn’t included in the index. According to their fake index, 2012 was almost three times as extreme as the very extreme year of 1936. Their claim is almost entirely based on very mild temperatures during the winter and spring of 2012. which they are trying to pass off as “extreme.”
UN IPCC claim: ‘Since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia’ — Real Science Rebuttal: ‘The IPCC has now abandoned any attempt to base their claims on facts. Historical data shows that the climate has gotten better since the 1950s’
Climate Depot
"US droughts were the worst in the 1950s Violent tornadoes are down since the 1950s Major hurricane landfalls peaked in the 1950s, and are down to historic lows in the current decade Record daily temperatures have declined in the US since Here is what newspapers had to say about the UN IPCC 'normal' weather in 1950: ..."
Real Science
"US droughts were the worst in the 1950s Violent tornadoes are down since the 1950s Major hurricane landfalls peaked in the 1950s, and are down to historic lows in the current decade Record daily temperatures have declined in the US since Here is what newspapers had to say about the UN IPCC 'normal' weather in 1950: ..."
Real Science
Saturday, 28 September 2013
IPCC more sure about less
Andrew Bolt,Herald Sun (Australia)
"On the IPCC report… A significant mistake may have been made. Doug Keenan writes to the Met Office Chief Scientist about this problem: ....and
... Brilliant take, from Professor Ross McKitrick: SPM in a nutshell: Since we started in 1990 we were right about the Arctic, wrong about the Antarctic, wrong about the tropical troposphere, wrong about the surface, wrong about hurricanes, wrong about the Himalayas, wrong about sensitivity, clueless on clouds and useless on regional trends. And on that basis we’re 95% confident we’re right.
"On the IPCC report… A significant mistake may have been made. Doug Keenan writes to the Met Office Chief Scientist about this problem: ....and
... Brilliant take, from Professor Ross McKitrick: SPM in a nutshell: Since we started in 1990 we were right about the Arctic, wrong about the Antarctic, wrong about the tropical troposphere, wrong about the surface, wrong about hurricanes, wrong about the Himalayas, wrong about sensitivity, clueless on clouds and useless on regional trends. And on that basis we’re 95% confident we’re right.
Models Fail: Land versus Sea Surface Warming Rates
WUWT
"In Climate Models Fail, using a number of different datasets, I illustrated how the climate models used by the IPCC for their 5th Assessment Report could not simulate climate variables such as surface temperatures (land surface air, sea surface and combined land+sea surface), precipitation and sea ice area. There’s another splendid way to present the model failings (that wasn’t presented in the book): by comparing the warming rates of global land surface air temperatures with the warming rates of global sea surface temperatures. It’s astounding that the models perform so poorly."
"In Climate Models Fail, using a number of different datasets, I illustrated how the climate models used by the IPCC for their 5th Assessment Report could not simulate climate variables such as surface temperatures (land surface air, sea surface and combined land+sea surface), precipitation and sea ice area. There’s another splendid way to present the model failings (that wasn’t presented in the book): by comparing the warming rates of global land surface air temperatures with the warming rates of global sea surface temperatures. It’s astounding that the models perform so poorly."
Vahrenholt’s UN IPCC-Science Critical Book ‘The Neglected Sun’ Soars To No. 1 At Amazon UK!
NoTricksZone
"The UN IPCC AR5 completely neglected discussing the reason why we have climate to begin with: THE SUN. There’s a reason why they did."
"The UN IPCC AR5 completely neglected discussing the reason why we have climate to begin with: THE SUN. There’s a reason why they did."
’97% consensus’ apparently doesn’t exist at the IPCC
WUWT
"Consensus? What Consensus? You’d think they’d be able to agree on this most important number. They did for AR4. ....Yet, they are 95% certain."
"Consensus? What Consensus? You’d think they’d be able to agree on this most important number. They did for AR4. ....Yet, they are 95% certain."
MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen Rips UN IPCC Report:
Climate Depot
‘It is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going’ "I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence. They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase."
‘It is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going’ "I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence. They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase."
Friday, 27 September 2013
IPCC Fails To Come Clean Over Global Temperature Standstill
WUWT
"The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) is criticising the IPCC for its deliberate attempt to obscure the reality of an ongoing temperature standstill and its failure to come clean about the failure of its models. The IPCC has decided to discount the global warming standstill since 1997 as irrelevant and has deleted from its final document its original acknowledgement (in its 7 June draft) that climate models have failed to ’reproduce the observed reduction in surface warming trend over the last 10-15 years.’ Not only has the IPCC failed to predict the ongoing temperature standstill, its climate models actually predicted accelerated warming due to the increase of CO2 emissions."
"The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) is criticising the IPCC for its deliberate attempt to obscure the reality of an ongoing temperature standstill and its failure to come clean about the failure of its models. The IPCC has decided to discount the global warming standstill since 1997 as irrelevant and has deleted from its final document its original acknowledgement (in its 7 June draft) that climate models have failed to ’reproduce the observed reduction in surface warming trend over the last 10-15 years.’ Not only has the IPCC failed to predict the ongoing temperature standstill, its climate models actually predicted accelerated warming due to the increase of CO2 emissions."
Climate change is on ice: UN scientists reveal the world's barely got any hotter in the last 15 years - but say they are now 95% certain man is to blame for global warming
Daily Mail
"UN scientists said today they are '95 per cent' certain that climate change is man made, but still could not explain why the world has barely got any hotter in the last 15 years. .......Temperature rises have dropped from 0.12°C per decade since 1951 to just 0.05°C per decade since 1998. This slowdown has been seized upon by climate sceptics who claim carbon dioxide is not as damaging as has been suggested. IPCC scientists, however, believe the pause is temporary and a return to 'substantial warming' is expected in coming decades. The report only made a brief mention of the issue, stressing that short-term records are sensitive to natural variability. ......But there are concerns about the computer models used to calculate the data. Professor Peter Wadhams, professor of Ocean Physics at the University of Cambridge, said: 'There are serious deficiencies in the modelling."
"UN scientists said today they are '95 per cent' certain that climate change is man made, but still could not explain why the world has barely got any hotter in the last 15 years. .......Temperature rises have dropped from 0.12°C per decade since 1951 to just 0.05°C per decade since 1998. This slowdown has been seized upon by climate sceptics who claim carbon dioxide is not as damaging as has been suggested. IPCC scientists, however, believe the pause is temporary and a return to 'substantial warming' is expected in coming decades. The report only made a brief mention of the issue, stressing that short-term records are sensitive to natural variability. ......But there are concerns about the computer models used to calculate the data. Professor Peter Wadhams, professor of Ocean Physics at the University of Cambridge, said: 'There are serious deficiencies in the modelling."
IPCC report: very confident our gasses weren’t so bad
Andrew Bolt,Herald Sun (Australia)
" Bottom line: the IPCC’s latest report is even more confident that man is to blame for, er, less global warming than you were once told to expect. And, yes, there has been an unexpected pause in warming of the atmosphere, with the IPCC blaming the deep ocean for hiding the missing heat where it can’t easily be found. The full report won’t be released until Monday while you are sold the more heavily politicised Summary for Policy Makers. .."
" Bottom line: the IPCC’s latest report is even more confident that man is to blame for, er, less global warming than you were once told to expect. And, yes, there has been an unexpected pause in warming of the atmosphere, with the IPCC blaming the deep ocean for hiding the missing heat where it can’t easily be found. The full report won’t be released until Monday while you are sold the more heavily politicised Summary for Policy Makers. .."
IPCC: “We don’t need no stinking climate sensitivity!”
Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
"The newly-released Summary for Policymakers of the IPCC’s Working Group I for the AR5 report reveals a dogged attempt to salvage the IPCC’s credibility amidst mounting evidence that it has gone overboard in its attempts to scare the global public over the last quarter century. The recent ~15 year lull in warming is hardly mentioned at all (nothing to see here, move along). A best estimate for climate sensitivity — unarguably THE most important climate change variable — is no longer provided, due to mounting contradictory evidence on whether the climate system really cares very much about whether there are 2, or 3, or 4, parts of CO2 per 10,000 parts atmosphere. ...."
"The newly-released Summary for Policymakers of the IPCC’s Working Group I for the AR5 report reveals a dogged attempt to salvage the IPCC’s credibility amidst mounting evidence that it has gone overboard in its attempts to scare the global public over the last quarter century. The recent ~15 year lull in warming is hardly mentioned at all (nothing to see here, move along). A best estimate for climate sensitivity — unarguably THE most important climate change variable — is no longer provided, due to mounting contradictory evidence on whether the climate system really cares very much about whether there are 2, or 3, or 4, parts of CO2 per 10,000 parts atmosphere. ...."
Reactions to IPCC AR5 Summary for Policy Makers
WUWT
"My first reaction was: That IPCC had a golden opportunity, and blew it due to being unable to adapt to reality."
"My first reaction was: That IPCC had a golden opportunity, and blew it due to being unable to adapt to reality."
Thoughts on the SPM
Bishop Hill
"Ducking, diving, bobbing and weaving are the general themes of the Summary for Policymakers, just released this morning. ....The general theme of obscurantism runs across the document. Whereas in previous years the temperature records have been shown unadulterated, now we have presentation of a single figure for each decade; surely an attempt to mislead rather than inform. And the pause is only addressed with handwaving arguments and vague allusions to ocean heat."
"Ducking, diving, bobbing and weaving are the general themes of the Summary for Policymakers, just released this morning. ....The general theme of obscurantism runs across the document. Whereas in previous years the temperature records have been shown unadulterated, now we have presentation of a single figure for each decade; surely an attempt to mislead rather than inform. And the pause is only addressed with handwaving arguments and vague allusions to ocean heat."
Desperate times in climate alarmism
WUWT
"The Real Climate Change Deniers are the alarmists who deny that natural forces still dominate weather and climate events, and refuse to acknowledge that thousands of scientists do not agree with IPCC proclamations and prescriptions."
"The Real Climate Change Deniers are the alarmists who deny that natural forces still dominate weather and climate events, and refuse to acknowledge that thousands of scientists do not agree with IPCC proclamations and prescriptions."
Sorry IPCC – How You Portrayed the Global Temperature Plateau is Comical at Best
WUWT
"They’re still misleading the public. Everyone knows (well, many of us know) their models can’t simulate the natural processes that cause surface temperatures to warm over multidecadal timeframes, yet they insist on continuing this myth."
"They’re still misleading the public. Everyone knows (well, many of us know) their models can’t simulate the natural processes that cause surface temperatures to warm over multidecadal timeframes, yet they insist on continuing this myth."
We need to cool things down over climate change
Telegraph
"Rather than issuing prophecies of doom, policy-makers must start afresh, with a serious, realistic conversation with the public about what is happening, and what is to be done. In particular, it is far from clear that taking an axe to advanced economies will do anything to make matters better, not least since the developing world will not deny itself prosperity in the name of environmental extremism. Instead of issuing quixotic calls for a complete decarbonisation of the economy, politicians should foster investment in innovations that can wean us off fossil fuels without damaging growth, and research sensible, cost-effective ways to adapt to a changing climate. The last thing the planet needs is more hot air."
"Rather than issuing prophecies of doom, policy-makers must start afresh, with a serious, realistic conversation with the public about what is happening, and what is to be done. In particular, it is far from clear that taking an axe to advanced economies will do anything to make matters better, not least since the developing world will not deny itself prosperity in the name of environmental extremism. Instead of issuing quixotic calls for a complete decarbonisation of the economy, politicians should foster investment in innovations that can wean us off fossil fuels without damaging growth, and research sensible, cost-effective ways to adapt to a changing climate. The last thing the planet needs is more hot air."
Is this the evidence all those green taxes are cash down the drain? The world's hardly got any hotter in the past 15 years!
Daily Mail
"Global warming has been put on ice, the world’s leading experts are expected to confirm today. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is set to reveal world temperatures have barely risen in the past 15 years, despite growing amounts of greenhouse gases being pumped into the atmosphere. Critics say this shows carbon dioxide is not as damaging as had been claimed. Indeed, the report is expected to admit that computer models of climate change were too pessimistic."
"Global warming has been put on ice, the world’s leading experts are expected to confirm today. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is set to reveal world temperatures have barely risen in the past 15 years, despite growing amounts of greenhouse gases being pumped into the atmosphere. Critics say this shows carbon dioxide is not as damaging as had been claimed. Indeed, the report is expected to admit that computer models of climate change were too pessimistic."
Tuesday, 24 September 2013
Hans von Storch On Warming Pause: “…Fellow Scientists Are Very Hard-Pressed For An Explanation”
NoTricksZone
"SWR German Public radio had a segment today featuring the warmist director at Germany’s Ministry of Environment, Harry Lehmann, climate scientist Hans von Storch and Spiegel science reporter Axel Bojanowski."
"SWR German Public radio had a segment today featuring the warmist director at Germany’s Ministry of Environment, Harry Lehmann, climate scientist Hans von Storch and Spiegel science reporter Axel Bojanowski."
95 per cent of intelligent people know the new IPCC report is utter drivel
Telegraph
"........ If there is one overriding prerequisite of every new IPCC Assessment report, it's to sound even more scary and urgent and certain than its predecessor. .......As Christopher Booker and others have often noted, the IPCC's reports are essentially political artefacts rather than scientific ones. This is why some governments – including Germany's and Belgium's – have been manoeuvring behind the scenes to have the new IPCC report "sexed up". The scientific reality – that global warming has paused for 15 years; that climate sensitivity appears to be far smaller than the scaremongering computer models predicted – cannot be allowed to derail all the expensive and intrusive programmes (from wind farms to green investment banks to hideous, flickery, dull low energy light bulbs) which have been introduced in order to "combat climate change."
"........ If there is one overriding prerequisite of every new IPCC Assessment report, it's to sound even more scary and urgent and certain than its predecessor. .......As Christopher Booker and others have often noted, the IPCC's reports are essentially political artefacts rather than scientific ones. This is why some governments – including Germany's and Belgium's – have been manoeuvring behind the scenes to have the new IPCC report "sexed up". The scientific reality – that global warming has paused for 15 years; that climate sensitivity appears to be far smaller than the scaremongering computer models predicted – cannot be allowed to derail all the expensive and intrusive programmes (from wind farms to green investment banks to hideous, flickery, dull low energy light bulbs) which have been introduced in order to "combat climate change."
IPCC AR5 Admits They Have No Clue What Caused the 15 Year Pause in Warming
sunshine hours
From the leaked AR5 Summary:
“The observed reduction in warming trend over the period 1998–2012 as compared to the period 1951–1 2012, is due in roughly equal measure to a cooling contribution from internal variability and a reduced trend in radiative forcing (medium confidence). The reduced trend in radiative forcing is primarily due to volcanic eruptions and the downward phase of the current solar cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of changes in radiative forcing in causing this reduced warming trend. {Box 9.2; 10.3.1; Box 10.2}”
Translation: It was the sun. Or super secret volcanoes. Or something.
From the leaked AR5 Summary:
“The observed reduction in warming trend over the period 1998–2012 as compared to the period 1951–1 2012, is due in roughly equal measure to a cooling contribution from internal variability and a reduced trend in radiative forcing (medium confidence). The reduced trend in radiative forcing is primarily due to volcanic eruptions and the downward phase of the current solar cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of changes in radiative forcing in causing this reduced warming trend. {Box 9.2; 10.3.1; Box 10.2}”
Translation: It was the sun. Or super secret volcanoes. Or something.
Monday, 23 September 2013
Not waving, but drowning
Bishop Hill
"A couple of journalists seem to have shown some interest in Nic Lewis's critique about the UKCP09 climate projections. This may explain why the Met Office has suddenly issued a response a week after Nic's report came out: ......"
"A couple of journalists seem to have shown some interest in Nic Lewis's critique about the UKCP09 climate projections. This may explain why the Met Office has suddenly issued a response a week after Nic's report came out: ......"
Met Office global warming figures 'are fatally flawed and could result in millions being squandered'
Daily Mail
"The Met Office’s global warming predictions are flawed and could result in millions of pounds being squandered, it is claimed. A report for a think tank led by former Tory chancellor Lord Lawson says a computer programme behind figures that shape climate change policy is biased in favour of higher temperatures. Large sums of public and private sector money could be ‘malinvested’ in everything from wind farms to heat-proof road surfaces as a result, it claims. Lord Lawson, chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, said: ‘The Government’s policy of abandoning cheap conventional energy and moving to expensive (and unreliable) renewable energy has always been of dubious merit. 'The fact that it now emerges this policy has been based on projections by a computer model which has been found to be fatally flawed means that an independent expert review of the model and its projections is both essential and urgent.’
"The Met Office’s global warming predictions are flawed and could result in millions of pounds being squandered, it is claimed. A report for a think tank led by former Tory chancellor Lord Lawson says a computer programme behind figures that shape climate change policy is biased in favour of higher temperatures. Large sums of public and private sector money could be ‘malinvested’ in everything from wind farms to heat-proof road surfaces as a result, it claims. Lord Lawson, chairman of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, said: ‘The Government’s policy of abandoning cheap conventional energy and moving to expensive (and unreliable) renewable energy has always been of dubious merit. 'The fact that it now emerges this policy has been based on projections by a computer model which has been found to be fatally flawed means that an independent expert review of the model and its projections is both essential and urgent.’
Chaos theory explains why weather & climate cannot be predicted beyond 3 weeks
The Hockey Schtick
"According to the originator of chaos theory, Edward Lorenz, you must know all the current conditions of the atmosphere, everywhere within it, to predict what the atmosphere will be doing in the distant future. “In view of the inevitable inaccuracy and incompleteness of weather observations, precise very-long-range forecasting would seem to be nonexistent,” Lorenz concluded. So even if the molecules in the air all interacted nonrandomly, in a totally cause-and-effect (deterministic) manner, you still couldn’t predict with certainty what they would do or what the weather would be."
Lorenz "was studying the equations that describe the atmosphere, trying to figure out how well math could be used to forecast the weather. He found that even if you had all the right equations for describing changes in the atmosphere, you couldn’t predict the weather very far into the future."
"When Lorenz ran [a crude weather model] using the rounded numbers, he found dramatic differences from the forecast using the full six-digit data. He had discovered the key concept behind chaos: sensitive dependence on initial conditions."
"According to the originator of chaos theory, Edward Lorenz, you must know all the current conditions of the atmosphere, everywhere within it, to predict what the atmosphere will be doing in the distant future. “In view of the inevitable inaccuracy and incompleteness of weather observations, precise very-long-range forecasting would seem to be nonexistent,” Lorenz concluded. So even if the molecules in the air all interacted nonrandomly, in a totally cause-and-effect (deterministic) manner, you still couldn’t predict with certainty what they would do or what the weather would be."
Lorenz "was studying the equations that describe the atmosphere, trying to figure out how well math could be used to forecast the weather. He found that even if you had all the right equations for describing changes in the atmosphere, you couldn’t predict the weather very far into the future."
"When Lorenz ran [a crude weather model] using the rounded numbers, he found dramatic differences from the forecast using the full six-digit data. He had discovered the key concept behind chaos: sensitive dependence on initial conditions."
IPCC AR5 Admits They Have No Clue About the Arctic and the Antarctic
sunshine hours
From the leaked AR5 Summary:
“There is robust evidence that the downward trend in Arctic summer sea ice extent since 1979 is now better simulated than at the time of the AR4, with about one-quarter of the models showing a trend as large as, or larger than, the trend in the observations. Most models simulate a small decreasing trend in Antarctic sea ice extent, albeit with large inter-model spread, in contrast to the small increasing trend in 30 observations. {9.4.3}“
“one-quarter of the models showing a trend as large as, or larger than, the trend in the observations”
Translation: 75% of the models were wrong about Arctic Sea Ice. But we’ll claim we got it right when we only got it right 25% of the time.
“Most models simulate a small decreasing trend in Antarctic sea ice extent
Translation: None of the models got Antarctic Sea Ice right.
What a joke.
From the leaked AR5 Summary:
“There is robust evidence that the downward trend in Arctic summer sea ice extent since 1979 is now better simulated than at the time of the AR4, with about one-quarter of the models showing a trend as large as, or larger than, the trend in the observations. Most models simulate a small decreasing trend in Antarctic sea ice extent, albeit with large inter-model spread, in contrast to the small increasing trend in 30 observations. {9.4.3}“
“one-quarter of the models showing a trend as large as, or larger than, the trend in the observations”
Translation: 75% of the models were wrong about Arctic Sea Ice. But we’ll claim we got it right when we only got it right 25% of the time.
“Most models simulate a small decreasing trend in Antarctic sea ice extent
Translation: None of the models got Antarctic Sea Ice right.
What a joke.
“Honey, I shrunk the consensus” — Monckton takes action on Cooks paper
JoNova (Australia)
"Please withdraw the gravely misleading paper, Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature (May 15, Environment Research Letters). The paper claimed a 97.1% “scientific consensus” among the abstracts of 11,944 climate change papers published from 1991-2012. The true “consensus” was not 97.1%. It was 0.3%."
"Please withdraw the gravely misleading paper, Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature (May 15, Environment Research Letters). The paper claimed a 97.1% “scientific consensus” among the abstracts of 11,944 climate change papers published from 1991-2012. The true “consensus” was not 97.1%. It was 0.3%."
Sunday, 22 September 2013
The ice is not melting, yet still the scaremongers blunder on
Telegraph, Christopher Booker
"The news that hundreds of scientists and officials from all over the world are this weekend converging on Stockholm to discuss the next 2,000-page report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) again highlights what is the most terrifying political conundrum facing our country today. Emerging in instalments over the next seven months, this report will try to convince the world, without a shred of hard evidence, that the prospect of catastrophic man-made global warming is “extremely likely”. The air is already thick with familiar claims and counterclaims, President Obama quotes yet another laughably silly paper trying to make out that “97 per cent of scientists” support the IPCC “consensus”. Sceptics point out yet again that the lack of global warming over the past 17 years makes a nonsense of all those computer-model projections on which the IPCC has been basing its case for 23 years. And we can only look on this endlessly sterile non-debate with a suffocating sense of déjà vu. ..... Nothing has changed except that the IPCC itself, as the main driver of the scare, has been more comprehensively discredited than ever as no more than a one-sided pressure group, essentially run by a clique of scientific activists committed to their belief that rising CO2 levels threaten the world with an overheating which is not taking place. ........The political leaders of the Western world, from President Obama to our own in the EU, are still as firmly locked into the alarmist paradigm as ever, quite impervious to all the evidence."
"The news that hundreds of scientists and officials from all over the world are this weekend converging on Stockholm to discuss the next 2,000-page report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) again highlights what is the most terrifying political conundrum facing our country today. Emerging in instalments over the next seven months, this report will try to convince the world, without a shred of hard evidence, that the prospect of catastrophic man-made global warming is “extremely likely”. The air is already thick with familiar claims and counterclaims, President Obama quotes yet another laughably silly paper trying to make out that “97 per cent of scientists” support the IPCC “consensus”. Sceptics point out yet again that the lack of global warming over the past 17 years makes a nonsense of all those computer-model projections on which the IPCC has been basing its case for 23 years. And we can only look on this endlessly sterile non-debate with a suffocating sense of déjà vu. ..... Nothing has changed except that the IPCC itself, as the main driver of the scare, has been more comprehensively discredited than ever as no more than a one-sided pressure group, essentially run by a clique of scientific activists committed to their belief that rising CO2 levels threaten the world with an overheating which is not taking place. ........The political leaders of the Western world, from President Obama to our own in the EU, are still as firmly locked into the alarmist paradigm as ever, quite impervious to all the evidence."
Cook’s 97% consensus is a case study of Agnotology – ignorance and misinformation
JoNova (Australia)
"Agnotology is the study of how ignorance grows through repetition of misleading misinformation. You might never have heard of it, but it’s the perfect term for the climate science “debate”. Predictably its use began when those convinced of man-man global warming claimed fossil fuel groups were funding misinformation. But as per usual, unskeptical scientists opened a promising new front only to got burned by the evidence. In the latest volley, from Legates et al 2013, John Cook’s “97% consensus” survey has become the case study in agnotology. Based on incorrect results, a flawed method, and a logical fallacy, it kept key facts hidden while sloppily blending vague language into a form that is easily and actively misinterpreted. That it passed peer-review is another damning indictment of peer review. Cook still refuses to provide about half the data, but the data that has been made public shows (after some digging) that a mere 41 papers out of 12,000 was called a 97% consensus. The trick is that Cook et al interchangeably use different definitions of consensus."
"Agnotology is the study of how ignorance grows through repetition of misleading misinformation. You might never have heard of it, but it’s the perfect term for the climate science “debate”. Predictably its use began when those convinced of man-man global warming claimed fossil fuel groups were funding misinformation. But as per usual, unskeptical scientists opened a promising new front only to got burned by the evidence. In the latest volley, from Legates et al 2013, John Cook’s “97% consensus” survey has become the case study in agnotology. Based on incorrect results, a flawed method, and a logical fallacy, it kept key facts hidden while sloppily blending vague language into a form that is easily and actively misinterpreted. That it passed peer-review is another damning indictment of peer review. Cook still refuses to provide about half the data, but the data that has been made public shows (after some digging) that a mere 41 papers out of 12,000 was called a 97% consensus. The trick is that Cook et al interchangeably use different definitions of consensus."
The Eruption Over the IPCC AR5
WUWT
"Since there is almost no cooling that follows large volcanic eruptions … whatever the models are doing, they’re doing it wrong. You can clearly see the volcanic eruptions in the model results … but you can’t see them at all in the actual data."
"Since there is almost no cooling that follows large volcanic eruptions … whatever the models are doing, they’re doing it wrong. You can clearly see the volcanic eruptions in the model results … but you can’t see them at all in the actual data."
Saturday, 21 September 2013
Global warming lobby has got it completely wrong
Express
"It is a fascinating debate that would not impact on most people's lives were it not for the fact that governments around the world - particularly our own - have picked upon a narrative of worst-case scenarios spun by an aggressive lobby demanding drastic changes to energy policy and to Western economies. The climate change lobby is an unholy alliance. For some on the Left and in the green movement climate change is a morality tale: they want it to happen because they see it as the comeuppance for evil global capitalism. For others climate change is a source of riches: huge fortunes have been made from green energy. We are always being told that climate change sceptics are on the wrong side of science but it is remarkable how many of the most prominent voices in the climate change lobby are themselves not scientists."
"It is a fascinating debate that would not impact on most people's lives were it not for the fact that governments around the world - particularly our own - have picked upon a narrative of worst-case scenarios spun by an aggressive lobby demanding drastic changes to energy policy and to Western economies. The climate change lobby is an unholy alliance. For some on the Left and in the green movement climate change is a morality tale: they want it to happen because they see it as the comeuppance for evil global capitalism. For others climate change is a source of riches: huge fortunes have been made from green energy. We are always being told that climate change sceptics are on the wrong side of science but it is remarkable how many of the most prominent voices in the climate change lobby are themselves not scientists."
Whatever Happened to Global Warming?
TrendingCentral
"When does a trend stop being a trend? Put another way, when does a “pause” in a trend become a new trend? Okay, let’s cut to the chase: Whatever happened to global warming now that global cooling is here? A good question, you may think, given the billions of government dollars which are supporting a climate alarmist industry. An industry rooted entirely in what turn out to be a battery of entirely incorrect predictions, according to the latest leaked version of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change’s (UNIPCC) Fifth Assessment to be published on September 27. The same incorrect predictions used to justify ubiquitous green taxes as well as subsidies to costly renewable energy projects. .......Don’t expect coherent answers. The shambolic, politicised bureaucracy that is the UN IPCC doesn’t deal in coherence."
"When does a trend stop being a trend? Put another way, when does a “pause” in a trend become a new trend? Okay, let’s cut to the chase: Whatever happened to global warming now that global cooling is here? A good question, you may think, given the billions of government dollars which are supporting a climate alarmist industry. An industry rooted entirely in what turn out to be a battery of entirely incorrect predictions, according to the latest leaked version of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change’s (UNIPCC) Fifth Assessment to be published on September 27. The same incorrect predictions used to justify ubiquitous green taxes as well as subsidies to costly renewable energy projects. .......Don’t expect coherent answers. The shambolic, politicised bureaucracy that is the UN IPCC doesn’t deal in coherence."
Meaningless consensus on climate change
Financial Post,Andrew Montford
"It is the very basis of the scientific method that data trumps hypothesis: as the Nobel laureate Richard Feynman put it, “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.” And a wealth of new empirical and semi-empirical evidence is now suggesting that any warming is likely to be far, far less than has been predicted by the vast electronic hypotheses that are the climate models."
"It is the very basis of the scientific method that data trumps hypothesis: as the Nobel laureate Richard Feynman put it, “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.” And a wealth of new empirical and semi-empirical evidence is now suggesting that any warming is likely to be far, far less than has been predicted by the vast electronic hypotheses that are the climate models."
Friday, 20 September 2013
Real climate science the IPCC doesn’t want you to see
WUWT
"Once again, it’s the NIPCC versus the IPCC – facts versus gloom-and-doom assertions. Earth’s average atmospheric temperatures haven’t increased in almost 17 years. It’s been eight years since a Category 3 hurricane hit the United States. Tornado frequency is at a multi-decade low ebb. Droughts are shorter and less extreme than during the Dust Bowl and 1950s. Sea ice is back to normal, after one of the coldest Arctic summers in decades. And sea levels continue to rise at a meager 4-8 inches per century.
Ignoring these facts, President Obama continues to insist that “dangerous” carbon dioxide emissions are causing “unprecedented” global warming, “more extreme” droughts and hurricanes, and rising seas that “threaten” coastal communities. With Congress refusing to enact job-killing taxes on hydrocarbon energy and CO2, his Environmental Protection Agency is preparing to unleash more job-killing carbon dioxide regulations, amid an economy that is already turning full-time jobs into part-time jobs and welfare. America and the world desperately need some sound science and common sense on climate change."
"Once again, it’s the NIPCC versus the IPCC – facts versus gloom-and-doom assertions. Earth’s average atmospheric temperatures haven’t increased in almost 17 years. It’s been eight years since a Category 3 hurricane hit the United States. Tornado frequency is at a multi-decade low ebb. Droughts are shorter and less extreme than during the Dust Bowl and 1950s. Sea ice is back to normal, after one of the coldest Arctic summers in decades. And sea levels continue to rise at a meager 4-8 inches per century.
Ignoring these facts, President Obama continues to insist that “dangerous” carbon dioxide emissions are causing “unprecedented” global warming, “more extreme” droughts and hurricanes, and rising seas that “threaten” coastal communities. With Congress refusing to enact job-killing taxes on hydrocarbon energy and CO2, his Environmental Protection Agency is preparing to unleash more job-killing carbon dioxide regulations, amid an economy that is already turning full-time jobs into part-time jobs and welfare. America and the world desperately need some sound science and common sense on climate change."
IPCC models getting mushy
Financial Post, Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics and Chair of Graduate Studies, Department of Economics, University of Guelph.
"There has been a lot of talk lately about the upcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, and whether it will take into account the lack of warming since the 1990s. Everything you need to know about the dilemma the IPCC faces is summed up in one remarkable graph. ......The IPCC must take everybody for fools. Its own graph shows that observed temperatures are not within the uncertainty range of projections; they have fallen below the bottom of the entire span. Nor do models simulate surface warming trends accurately; instead they grossly exaggerate them. (Nor do they match them on regional scales, where the fit is typically no better than random numbers.)"
"There has been a lot of talk lately about the upcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, and whether it will take into account the lack of warming since the 1990s. Everything you need to know about the dilemma the IPCC faces is summed up in one remarkable graph. ......The IPCC must take everybody for fools. Its own graph shows that observed temperatures are not within the uncertainty range of projections; they have fallen below the bottom of the entire span. Nor do models simulate surface warming trends accurately; instead they grossly exaggerate them. (Nor do they match them on regional scales, where the fit is typically no better than random numbers.)"
Thursday, 19 September 2013
World's top climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years
Daily Mail
"Scientists working on the most authoritative study on climate change were urged to cover up the fact that the world’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years, it is claimed. A leaked copy of a United Nations report, compiled by hundreds of scientists, shows politicians in Belgium, Germany, Hungary and the United States raised concerns about the final draft. Published next week, it is expected to address the fact that 1998 was the hottest year on record and world temperatures have not yet exceeded it, which scientists have so far struggled to explain. ......But leaked documents seen by the Associated Press, yesterday revealed deep concerns among politicians about a lack of global warming over the past few years. Germany called for the references to the slowdown in warming to be deleted, saying looking at a time span of just 10 or 15 years was ‘misleading’ and they should focus on decades or centuries. The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has changed its tune after issuing stern warnings about climate change for years The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has changed its tune after issuing stern warnings about climate change for years Hungary worried the report would provide ammunition for deniers of man-made climate change. Belgium objected to using 1998 as a starting year for statistics, as it was exceptionally warm and makes the graph look flat - and suggested using 1999 or 2000 instead to give a more upward-pointing curve. ......"
"Scientists working on the most authoritative study on climate change were urged to cover up the fact that the world’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years, it is claimed. A leaked copy of a United Nations report, compiled by hundreds of scientists, shows politicians in Belgium, Germany, Hungary and the United States raised concerns about the final draft. Published next week, it is expected to address the fact that 1998 was the hottest year on record and world temperatures have not yet exceeded it, which scientists have so far struggled to explain. ......But leaked documents seen by the Associated Press, yesterday revealed deep concerns among politicians about a lack of global warming over the past few years. Germany called for the references to the slowdown in warming to be deleted, saying looking at a time span of just 10 or 15 years was ‘misleading’ and they should focus on decades or centuries. The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has changed its tune after issuing stern warnings about climate change for years The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has changed its tune after issuing stern warnings about climate change for years Hungary worried the report would provide ammunition for deniers of man-made climate change. Belgium objected to using 1998 as a starting year for statistics, as it was exceptionally warm and makes the graph look flat - and suggested using 1999 or 2000 instead to give a more upward-pointing curve. ......"
Tuesday, 17 September 2013
A Turning Point for the IPCC…and Humanity?
Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
"My main point is that nothing stands in the way of a popular theory (e.g. global warming) better than failed forecasts. We are now at the point in the age of global warming hysteria where the IPCC global warming theory has crashed into the hard reality of observations. A few of us are not that surprised, as we always distrusted the level of faith that climate modelers had in their understanding of the causes of climate change.
I continue to suspect that, in the coming years, scientists will increasingly realize that more CO2 in the atmosphere is, on the whole, good for life on Earth. Given that CO2 is necessary for life, and that nature continues to gobble up 50% of the CO2 we produce as fast as we can produce it, I won’t be that surprised when that paradigm shift occurs, either.
"My main point is that nothing stands in the way of a popular theory (e.g. global warming) better than failed forecasts. We are now at the point in the age of global warming hysteria where the IPCC global warming theory has crashed into the hard reality of observations. A few of us are not that surprised, as we always distrusted the level of faith that climate modelers had in their understanding of the causes of climate change.
I continue to suspect that, in the coming years, scientists will increasingly realize that more CO2 in the atmosphere is, on the whole, good for life on Earth. Given that CO2 is necessary for life, and that nature continues to gobble up 50% of the CO2 we produce as fast as we can produce it, I won’t be that surprised when that paradigm shift occurs, either.
Monday, 16 September 2013
Suzanne Goldenberg: Eco Activist Disguised as a Journalist
Donna Laframboise (Canada)
"Evidently, Goldenberg thinks her job is to defend the IPCC from those who are trying to damage its credibility. She couldn’t be any more one-sided if she herself were on the IPCC’s payroll."
"Evidently, Goldenberg thinks her job is to defend the IPCC from those who are trying to damage its credibility. She couldn’t be any more one-sided if she herself were on the IPCC’s payroll."
German 'green revolution' may cost 1 trillion euros - minister
(Reuters) - Germany's transition to renewable energy may cost up to 1 trillion euros ($1.34 trillion) in the next two decades, the environment minister said on Wednesday, piling pressure on his opponents to back plans to cap power price rises before the election.
Lomborg: climate models are running way too hot
WUWT
"The current climate models are running way too hot. Over the past 30 years, they are at least predicting 71% too much heat. Maybe 159%. (see graph) .....The European Union will pay $250 billion for its current climate policies each and every year for 87 years. For almost $20 trillion, temperatures by the end of the century will be reduced by a negligible 0.05ºC."
--------------------------------------------------
"Bjorn Lomborg covers up for dodgy science
Bjorn Lomborg is doing his best to help the IPCC by (as usual) knowing nothing about the science, pretending to be a critic, but half his message is just saying exactly what the IPCC would want him to say. He ought stick to discussing the economics (which he does so well) and stay right out of the science debate, where he helps to protect and ensure funding to corrupt, low standard institutions that have been captured by lobbyists. (JoNova)
"The current climate models are running way too hot. Over the past 30 years, they are at least predicting 71% too much heat. Maybe 159%. (see graph) .....The European Union will pay $250 billion for its current climate policies each and every year for 87 years. For almost $20 trillion, temperatures by the end of the century will be reduced by a negligible 0.05ºC."
--------------------------------------------------
"Bjorn Lomborg covers up for dodgy science
Bjorn Lomborg is doing his best to help the IPCC by (as usual) knowing nothing about the science, pretending to be a critic, but half his message is just saying exactly what the IPCC would want him to say. He ought stick to discussing the economics (which he does so well) and stay right out of the science debate, where he helps to protect and ensure funding to corrupt, low standard institutions that have been captured by lobbyists. (JoNova)
Global warming advocates may be more Nostradamus than Galileo
AL.com
"The advocates of global warming theories, however, style themselves as unbiased observers who form their beliefs through the scientific method and remain immune from personal perspectives, political influences or simple mistakes. They're the enlightened Galileo, while we're his ignorant and superstitious inquisition. But if their observations change – if the facts change – would these unbiased observers change their theories as well? .......Still, maybe the changing facts will eventually have an impact and the theories will be updated. Otherwise, if global warming advocates ignore data that challenge their models and stick to their predictions regardless of the facts, they'll become less like Galileo peering through a telescope and more like Nostradamus staring down into a bowl of water."
"The advocates of global warming theories, however, style themselves as unbiased observers who form their beliefs through the scientific method and remain immune from personal perspectives, political influences or simple mistakes. They're the enlightened Galileo, while we're his ignorant and superstitious inquisition. But if their observations change – if the facts change – would these unbiased observers change their theories as well? .......Still, maybe the changing facts will eventually have an impact and the theories will be updated. Otherwise, if global warming advocates ignore data that challenge their models and stick to their predictions regardless of the facts, they'll become less like Galileo peering through a telescope and more like Nostradamus staring down into a bowl of water."
We got it wrong on warming, says IPCC
The Australian
"After several leaks and reports on how climate scientists would deal with a slowdown in the rate of average global surface temperatures over the past decade, the IPCC was last week forced to deny it had called for crisis talks."
"After several leaks and reports on how climate scientists would deal with a slowdown in the rate of average global surface temperatures over the past decade, the IPCC was last week forced to deny it had called for crisis talks."
German Professor: “IPCC Science Finds Itself In A Serious Jam…5AR Likely To Be The Last Of Its Kind”
NoTricksZone
"..And: “Extreme weather is the only card they have left to play.”
"..And: “Extreme weather is the only card they have left to play.”
Sunday, 15 September 2013
Global warming is just HALF what we said: World's top climate scientists admit computers got the effects of greenhouse gases wrong
Daily Mail
"A leaked copy of the world’s most authoritative climate study reveals scientific forecasts of imminent doom were drastically wrong. The Mail on Sunday has obtained the final draft of a report to be published later this month by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the ultimate watchdog whose massive, six-yearly ‘assessments’ are accepted by environmentalists, politicians and experts as the gospel of climate science. They are cited worldwide to justify swingeing fossil fuel taxes and subsidies for ‘renewable’ energy. Yet the leaked report makes the extraordinary concession that the world has been warming at only just over half the rate claimed by the IPCC in its last assessment, published in 2007. Back then, it said that the planet was warming at a rate of 0.2C every decade – a figure it claimed was in line with the forecasts made by computer climate models. But the new report says the true figure since 1951 has been only 0.12C per decade – a rate far below even the lowest computer prediction. ....The British Met Office has issued ‘erroneous statements and misrepresentations’ about the pause in global warming – and its climate computer model is fundamentally flawed, says a new analysis by a leading independent researcher."
"A leaked copy of the world’s most authoritative climate study reveals scientific forecasts of imminent doom were drastically wrong. The Mail on Sunday has obtained the final draft of a report to be published later this month by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the ultimate watchdog whose massive, six-yearly ‘assessments’ are accepted by environmentalists, politicians and experts as the gospel of climate science. They are cited worldwide to justify swingeing fossil fuel taxes and subsidies for ‘renewable’ energy. Yet the leaked report makes the extraordinary concession that the world has been warming at only just over half the rate claimed by the IPCC in its last assessment, published in 2007. Back then, it said that the planet was warming at a rate of 0.2C every decade – a figure it claimed was in line with the forecasts made by computer climate models. But the new report says the true figure since 1951 has been only 0.12C per decade – a rate far below even the lowest computer prediction. ....The British Met Office has issued ‘erroneous statements and misrepresentations’ about the pause in global warming – and its climate computer model is fundamentally flawed, says a new analysis by a leading independent researcher."
Friday, 13 September 2013
The '95% certainty' is that the IPCC can't be trusted
Quadrant Online
"A leaked draft from the IPCC report, due for release in September, demonstrates yet again that the organisation makes a travesty of science and should be disbanded. The report claims that scientists are "95% sure" humans are to blame for climate change, and it blames the past 15 years' absence of warming on three factors: volcanic ash, less heat from the sun, and more heat being absorbed by oceans. The statement is such a conglomeration of fraud, denial and lack of logic that the quest for a grain of truth is daunting exercise made more so by the way in which the reports are written, edited, re-written and then, at the very end, apt to be recast all over again in the interests of politics and political expedience."
"A leaked draft from the IPCC report, due for release in September, demonstrates yet again that the organisation makes a travesty of science and should be disbanded. The report claims that scientists are "95% sure" humans are to blame for climate change, and it blames the past 15 years' absence of warming on three factors: volcanic ash, less heat from the sun, and more heat being absorbed by oceans. The statement is such a conglomeration of fraud, denial and lack of logic that the quest for a grain of truth is daunting exercise made more so by the way in which the reports are written, edited, re-written and then, at the very end, apt to be recast all over again in the interests of politics and political expedience."
Global warming? No, the planet is getting cooler
Express
"MORE than a million square miles of Arctic seas have frozen in the past year as a new environmental trend takes hold, dubbed “global cooling”.The extraordinary “reverse” of global warming has led to a 60 per cent rise in ice-covered ocean. Just six years ago, some scientists were predicting that all of this ice would have melted away by 2013. The big chill has persuaded some experts that temperatures will keep falling for decades and throws fresh doubts on claims that global warming will devastate the planet. Details of the latest twist in the debate emerged in a secret memo to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change."
"MORE than a million square miles of Arctic seas have frozen in the past year as a new environmental trend takes hold, dubbed “global cooling”.The extraordinary “reverse” of global warming has led to a 60 per cent rise in ice-covered ocean. Just six years ago, some scientists were predicting that all of this ice would have melted away by 2013. The big chill has persuaded some experts that temperatures will keep falling for decades and throws fresh doubts on claims that global warming will devastate the planet. Details of the latest twist in the debate emerged in a secret memo to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change."
No Warming Left To Deny…Global Cooling Takes Over…CET Annual Mean Temperature Plunges 1°C Since 2000
NoTricksZone
"Looking at the data for the last decade or so, one thing stands clear: Global temperatures have been showing many more signs of cooling than warming. Already we are sensing that global temperature has lost the battle to stay up. The HadCrut data series above shows that cooling has gained the upper hand. Indeed warming is now in the history books, having died some 15 years ago."
"Looking at the data for the last decade or so, one thing stands clear: Global temperatures have been showing many more signs of cooling than warming. Already we are sensing that global temperature has lost the battle to stay up. The HadCrut data series above shows that cooling has gained the upper hand. Indeed warming is now in the history books, having died some 15 years ago."
Tuesday, 10 September 2013
Terrifying Flat Global Temperature Crisis Threatens To Disrupt U.N. Climate Conference Agenda
Forbes
"Bummer! Now, just before members of the U.N.’s Church of the Burning Planet are scheduled to finalize their latest hellfire and brimstone sermon, a chilling development has occurred. A flood of blasphemous reports circulated among ranks of former faithful parishioners are challenging human-caused climate crisis theology. ......You certainly know the jig is up when the New York Times finally recognizes that the feverish climate fervor is overheated. They reported on June 6 that “The rise in the surface temperature of Earth has been markedly slower over the last 15 years than in the 20 years before that. And that lull in warming has occurred even as greenhouse gases have accumulated in the atmosphere at a record pace.” Reporter Justin Gillis went on to admit that the break in temperature increases “highlights important gaps in our knowledge of the climate system”, whereby the lack of warming “is a bit of a mystery to climate scientists.”
"Bummer! Now, just before members of the U.N.’s Church of the Burning Planet are scheduled to finalize their latest hellfire and brimstone sermon, a chilling development has occurred. A flood of blasphemous reports circulated among ranks of former faithful parishioners are challenging human-caused climate crisis theology. ......You certainly know the jig is up when the New York Times finally recognizes that the feverish climate fervor is overheated. They reported on June 6 that “The rise in the surface temperature of Earth has been markedly slower over the last 15 years than in the 20 years before that. And that lull in warming has occurred even as greenhouse gases have accumulated in the atmosphere at a record pace.” Reporter Justin Gillis went on to admit that the break in temperature increases “highlights important gaps in our knowledge of the climate system”, whereby the lack of warming “is a bit of a mystery to climate scientists.”
Monday, 9 September 2013
Carbon Dioxide: The Gas of Life
Download the article ! "Tiny amounts of this miracle molecu le make life on Earth possible. ....Download HERE
And now it's global COOLING! Record return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 60% in a year
Daily Mail
"Some eminent scientists now believe the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century – a process that would expose computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming as dangerously misleading. The disclosure comes 11 months after The Mail on Sunday triggered intense political and scientific debate by revealing that global warming has ‘paused’ since the beginning of 1997 – an event that the computer models used by climate experts failed to predict. In March, this newspaper further revealed that temperatures are about to drop below the level that the models forecast with ‘90 per cent certainty’. The pause – which has now been accepted as real by every major climate research centre – is important, because the models’ predictions of ever-increasing global temperatures have made many of the world’s economies divert billions of pounds into ‘green’ measures to counter climate change. Those predictions now appear gravely flawed."
"Some eminent scientists now believe the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century – a process that would expose computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming as dangerously misleading. The disclosure comes 11 months after The Mail on Sunday triggered intense political and scientific debate by revealing that global warming has ‘paused’ since the beginning of 1997 – an event that the computer models used by climate experts failed to predict. In March, this newspaper further revealed that temperatures are about to drop below the level that the models forecast with ‘90 per cent certainty’. The pause – which has now been accepted as real by every major climate research centre – is important, because the models’ predictions of ever-increasing global temperatures have made many of the world’s economies divert billions of pounds into ‘green’ measures to counter climate change. Those predictions now appear gravely flawed."
Britain’s Warm, But Unremarkable Summer
WUWT
"As the map indicates, the largest anomalies were in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and the smallest in the South East. The effect of this on the CET series is quite startling, as the summer only ranked 44th warmest, going back to 1659. There were many warmer years prior to 1900. Indeed, while the hottest summer was 1976, the next hottest was 1826!
"As the map indicates, the largest anomalies were in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and the smallest in the South East. The effect of this on the CET series is quite startling, as the summer only ranked 44th warmest, going back to 1659. There were many warmer years prior to 1900. Indeed, while the hottest summer was 1976, the next hottest was 1826!
Sunday, 8 September 2013
WSJ Op-Ed: What changed the Australian political climate was climate change
The Hockey Schtick
" Then along came the failed 2009 Copenhagen summit, which exposed the Rudd agenda as a sham. When the rest of the world refused to endorse the climate enthusiasts' fanciful notions for slashing carbon emissions, Mr. Rudd imploded. Mr. Abbott seized the moment and highlighted the higher energy costs created by Labor's emissions trading scheme. Almost overnight, Mr. Rudd's stratospheric poll figures cratered. Facing a changing (political) climate, he ditched the emissions trading scheme, his government's key-note legislation. .....The upshot here is that Mr. Abbott did the very thing so many U.S. Republicans and British Tories have shied away from in recent years: He had the courage to broaden the appeal of a conservative agenda rather than copy the policies of his opponents. As a result, Australians enjoyed a real choice at the polls this weekend. Mr. Abbott's resounding victory shows that they relished this opportunity to chart a more free-market course."
" Then along came the failed 2009 Copenhagen summit, which exposed the Rudd agenda as a sham. When the rest of the world refused to endorse the climate enthusiasts' fanciful notions for slashing carbon emissions, Mr. Rudd imploded. Mr. Abbott seized the moment and highlighted the higher energy costs created by Labor's emissions trading scheme. Almost overnight, Mr. Rudd's stratospheric poll figures cratered. Facing a changing (political) climate, he ditched the emissions trading scheme, his government's key-note legislation. .....The upshot here is that Mr. Abbott did the very thing so many U.S. Republicans and British Tories have shied away from in recent years: He had the courage to broaden the appeal of a conservative agenda rather than copy the policies of his opponents. As a result, Australians enjoyed a real choice at the polls this weekend. Mr. Abbott's resounding victory shows that they relished this opportunity to chart a more free-market course."
Saturday, 7 September 2013
Australia liberated from their long national green nightmare
WUWT
"Today is a great day not only in Australian history, but also in world history. It marks the day when people of character and sensibility pushed back against an overwrought and pointless green agenda, and pushed back in a big way. They’ve had enough, and they’ve scraped the Krudd off their shoes and are moving forward. Tony Abbot has won the Australian election in a landslide, and vows to abolish the carbon tax as a first order of business. Abbott has declared Australia is “once more open for business” in claiming victory in Saturday’s election."
"Today is a great day not only in Australian history, but also in world history. It marks the day when people of character and sensibility pushed back against an overwrought and pointless green agenda, and pushed back in a big way. They’ve had enough, and they’ve scraped the Krudd off their shoes and are moving forward. Tony Abbot has won the Australian election in a landslide, and vows to abolish the carbon tax as a first order of business. Abbott has declared Australia is “once more open for business” in claiming victory in Saturday’s election."
Thursday, 5 September 2013
New paper in Nature Climate Change says IPCC uses statistical techniques 'out of date by well over a decade'
The Hockey Schtick
"A new paper published in Nature Climate Change finds, "Use of state-of-the-art statistical methods could substantially improve the quantification of uncertainty in [IPCC] assessments of climate change" and that "The forthcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) and the US National Climate Assessment Report will not adequately address this issue. Worse still, prevailing techniques for quantifying the uncertainties that are inherent in observed climate trends and projections of climate change are out of date by well over a decade..."
"A new paper published in Nature Climate Change finds, "Use of state-of-the-art statistical methods could substantially improve the quantification of uncertainty in [IPCC] assessments of climate change" and that "The forthcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) and the US National Climate Assessment Report will not adequately address this issue. Worse still, prevailing techniques for quantifying the uncertainties that are inherent in observed climate trends and projections of climate change are out of date by well over a decade..."
Tuesday, 3 September 2013
Utter insanity: spending $160b to cut the temperature by 0.00005 degrees
Andrew Bolt,Herald Sun (Australia)
"What is the TRUE cost of climate change? Is stopping it early really the cheapest plan in the long run? 50 to 1 explores the costs of stopping climate change vs adapting to it as and if it’s required, and uncovers a simple truth; it’s 50 times more expensive to try and STOP climate change than it is to simply ADAPT to it as and if required."
"What is the TRUE cost of climate change? Is stopping it early really the cheapest plan in the long run? 50 to 1 explores the costs of stopping climate change vs adapting to it as and if it’s required, and uncovers a simple truth; it’s 50 times more expensive to try and STOP climate change than it is to simply ADAPT to it as and if required."
Sunday, 1 September 2013
MIT professor: global warming is a ‘religion’
Daily Caller
"Throughout history, governments have twisted science to suit a political agenda. Global warming is no different, according to Dr. Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “Global climate alarmism has been costly to society, and it has the potential to be vastly more costly. It has also been damaging to science, as scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions,” writes Lindzen in the fall 2013 issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. According to Lindzen, scientists make essentially “meaningless” claims about certain phenomenon. Activists for certain causes take up claims made by scientists and politicians respond to the alarmism spread by activists by doling out more research funding. — creating an “Iron Triangle” of poor incentives."
"Throughout history, governments have twisted science to suit a political agenda. Global warming is no different, according to Dr. Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “Global climate alarmism has been costly to society, and it has the potential to be vastly more costly. It has also been damaging to science, as scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions,” writes Lindzen in the fall 2013 issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. According to Lindzen, scientists make essentially “meaningless” claims about certain phenomenon. Activists for certain causes take up claims made by scientists and politicians respond to the alarmism spread by activists by doling out more research funding. — creating an “Iron Triangle” of poor incentives."
Counter-sceptics
Bishop Hill
"In Bloomberg yesterday, it was announced that governments are asking the IPCC to spend more time on explaining away the pause in the imminent Fifth Assessment Report: .....Which makes it sound as if Ward believes that the IPCC is an overtly political body the objective of which is to win an argument rather than determine the truth. .....So one's suspicion is that the climatological mainstream does indeed see itself as being in the game of providing counter-sceptic talking points. .."
"In Bloomberg yesterday, it was announced that governments are asking the IPCC to spend more time on explaining away the pause in the imminent Fifth Assessment Report: .....Which makes it sound as if Ward believes that the IPCC is an overtly political body the objective of which is to win an argument rather than determine the truth. .....So one's suspicion is that the climatological mainstream does indeed see itself as being in the game of providing counter-sceptic talking points. .."
Can The IPCC Do Revolutionary Science?
WUWT
"In January 2013, the British media reported that the UK Met Office was projecting a 20-year standstill in global warming by 2017. This ‘pause’ had not been predicted by climate models. In February, IPCC chairman Pachauri admitted that the temperature data had already been flat for 17 years, while opining that a standstill of 30 years would be required to rebut the previous consensus. .......The temperature standstill has been apparent in the data for many years, but the tribalism of climate science rendered it unmentionable until the public disclosures of early 2013. Once spoken, it demanded an explanation – and it then became clear there was a great dearth of research on the subject. By the time researchers were ready to fill this gap, the draft SPM had already been dispatched. During August 2013, a flood of highly influential papers have appeared: ......These new papers devastate the IPCC orthodoxy that current and future global temperatures are mostly driven by greenhouse gas emissions, and will reach dangerous levels later this century. On the other hand, all older papers are blindsided by their apparent failure to take account of the recent data (standstill)."
"In January 2013, the British media reported that the UK Met Office was projecting a 20-year standstill in global warming by 2017. This ‘pause’ had not been predicted by climate models. In February, IPCC chairman Pachauri admitted that the temperature data had already been flat for 17 years, while opining that a standstill of 30 years would be required to rebut the previous consensus. .......The temperature standstill has been apparent in the data for many years, but the tribalism of climate science rendered it unmentionable until the public disclosures of early 2013. Once spoken, it demanded an explanation – and it then became clear there was a great dearth of research on the subject. By the time researchers were ready to fill this gap, the draft SPM had already been dispatched. During August 2013, a flood of highly influential papers have appeared: ......These new papers devastate the IPCC orthodoxy that current and future global temperatures are mostly driven by greenhouse gas emissions, and will reach dangerous levels later this century. On the other hand, all older papers are blindsided by their apparent failure to take account of the recent data (standstill)."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)