Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #60 on: April 26, 2014, 06:37:48 am » April 26, 2014, 06:37:48 am » Why It's a Big Deal That Half of the Great Lakes Are Still Covered in Ice



Over the winter, as polar vortices plunged the U.S. Midwest into weeks of unceasing cold, the icy covers of the Great Lakes started to make headlines. With almost 96 percent of Lake Superior's 32,000 miles encased in ice at the season's peak, tens of thousands of tourists flocked to the ice caves along the Wisconsin shoreline, suddenly accessible after four years of relatively warmer wintery conditions.



The thing is, all of that ice takes a long time to melt. As of April 10, 48 percent of the five lakes' 90,000-plus square miles were still covered in ice, down from a high of 92.2 percent on March 6 (note that constituted the highest levels recorded since 1979, when ice covered 94.7 percent of the lakes). Last year, only 38.4 percent of the lakes froze over, while in 2012 just 12.9 percent did  part of a four-year stint of below-average iciness.



And as the Great Lakes slowly lose their historically large ice covers over the next few months, the domino effects could include lingering cold water, delayed seasonal shifts, and huge jumps in water levels.



Already, the impact of this icy blockade can be felt. On March 25, five days after the official beginning of spring, the Soo Locks separating Lake Superior from the lower Great Lakes opened for the season. But after a long and harsh winter, Lake Superior's nearly 32,000 square miles were still nearly entirely covered in ice. It would be another eleven days before the first commercial vessel fought its way across Lake Superior  with the aid of several dedicated ice breakers  and down through the locks.



More than 200 million tons of cargo, mostly iron ore, coal, and grain, travel across the Great Lakes throughout the year. Even a little ice can make a big dent on this total. Only three shipments of coal were loaded up during March  69 percent less, by volume, than last year. Shipments of iron ore from the northern reaches of Minnesota were so low that the U.S. Steel plant in Gary, Indiana, had to scale back production significantly in early April.



A sluggish start to the shipping season is just one of the cascading effects of the Midwest's cold and icy winter. Some are good, and will allow the region to recover from years of historically low water levels. Others, like this delayed shipping season, less so.



Like the shipping troubles, some of the more unexpected things the lakes and their ecosystems could face in the next few months are the direct result of the lingering ice and cold:



Throughout the winter, huge numbers of ducks that feed by diving below the water for fish ended up starving to death. Connie Adams, a biologist in New York's Department of Environmental Conservation, told the AP that the die-off was "unprecedented."

Next in line for concern are a huge number of the Lakes' fish species. Warming water temperature often biologically triggers migration to traditional spawning grounds, and experts expect that Northern Pike, lake sturgeon, steelhead, and rainbow trout could make moves far later this year. As Shedd Aquarium research scientist Solomon David told Michigan Radio, later egg laying could mean younger and far weaker fish come next winter, leading to an even longer impact.



Other changes will come about long after the ice melts, as water levels are predicted to rebound to levels not seen in the last few years. Seasonal shifts in water levels, with winter lows and summer highs, are normal. "If things stayed in sort of a balance, we would see all the lakes water levels going up and then going down. Every year: up, down; up, down," says Drew Gronewold, a scientist with NOAA's Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory. But, "when water levels change a lot over time, something is happening in one of those two parts of the season."



Over the last few years, the summer highs and winter lows have both been well below their long-term average, as climate change produced far more rapid rates of evaporation. In December 2012, the Michigan-Huron system set a new low, breaking a record that had stood since the 1960s, according to Keith Kompoltowicz, the chief of watershed hydrology for the Army Corps of Engineers' Detroit District.



Though Kompoltowicz says the usual March and April rise in water levels is occurring later than usual this year, already the lakes are seeing water levels that they haven't had for several years. This past March marked the first time since April of 1998 that Lake Superior had reached its long-term average. And over the next few months, melting snow will feed the lakes and colder water could lower the rates of summer and fall evaporation. The amount of rain could either add to or subtract from this total. The Army Corps of Engineers and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration generally forecast water levels six months out, and predicted levels for this September, Kompoltowicz says, range from 10 to 13 inches higher than lake levels were a year ago.



Here's what higher lake levels could mean:



Shippers may be hurting now, but higher lake levels will allow them to load more cargo per boat later this year, according to the Chicago Tribune. These higher water lines also mean that those who manage the Great Lakes' harbors won't have to invest huge sums of money in dredging out the bottom. Ships will carry more, at less of a cost, once the ice melts.

Fluctuations in water levels could also help maintain the diversity of plant and animal species along many coastal wetlands, according to Kurt Kowalski, a wetland ecologist at the U.S. Geological Survey's Great Lakes Science Center. Too many years of consistently low water allows certain species, often non-native plants, to take over.

And even far less large-scale ripple effects will matter. Scott Stevenson, the executive vice president of the company that manages Chicago's harbors, told the Tribune that higher water levels will allow them to rent out 100 expensive slips along the lakefront that shallow water took out of commission last year.



Though water level changes even over a several year period are normal, the rebound from record-low water levels is going to be a relief from the hand-wringing of the last few years. But it will likely be a temporary one. A hot summer with little precipitation could mute the effects of the icy winter. And, even if the lakes have more water this year, 2014 could be nothing more than a blip as climate change continues to wreak havoc. "We dont know, as this winter really exemplified, whats going to happen," Gronewold says. "If were going to have three more severe winters, or flip back to three more winters like weve had the past few years."



http://www.theatlanticcities.com/technology/2014/04/why-its-big-deal-half-great-lakes-are-still-covered-ice/8854/ Over the winter, as polar vortices plunged the U.S. Midwest into weeks of unceasing cold, the icy covers of the Great Lakes started to make headlines. With almost 96 percent of Lake Superior's 32,000 miles encased in ice at the season's peak, tens of thousands of tourists flocked to the ice caves along the Wisconsin shoreline, suddenly accessible after four years of relatively warmer wintery conditions.The thing is, all of that ice takes a long time to melt. As of April 10, 48 percent of the five lakes' 90,000-plus square miles were still covered in ice, down from a high of 92.2 percent on March 6 (note that constituted the highest levels recorded since 1979, when ice covered 94.7 percent of the lakes). Last year, only 38.4 percent of the lakes froze over, while in 2012 just 12.9 percent did  part of a four-year stint of below-average iciness.And as the Great Lakes slowly lose their historically large ice covers over the next few months, the domino effects could include lingering cold water, delayed seasonal shifts, and huge jumps in water levels.Already, the impact of this icy blockade can be felt. On March 25, five days after the official beginning of spring, the Soo Locks separating Lake Superior from the lower Great Lakes opened for the season. But after a long and harsh winter, Lake Superior's nearly 32,000 square miles were still nearly entirely covered in ice. It would be another eleven days before the first commercial vessel fought its way across Lake Superior  with the aid of several dedicated ice breakers  and down through the locks.More than 200 million tons of cargo, mostly iron ore, coal, and grain, travel across the Great Lakes throughout the year. Even a little ice can make a big dent on this total. Only three shipments of coal were loaded up during March  69 percent less, by volume, than last year. Shipments of iron ore from the northern reaches of Minnesota were so low that the U.S. Steel plant in Gary, Indiana, had to scale back production significantly in early April.A sluggish start to the shipping season is just one of the cascading effects of the Midwest's cold and icy winter. Some are good, and will allow the region to recover from years of historically low water levels. Others, like this delayed shipping season, less so.Like the shipping troubles, some of the more unexpected things the lakes and their ecosystems could face in the next few months are the direct result of the lingering ice and cold:Throughout the winter, huge numbers of ducks that feed by diving below the water for fish ended up starving to death. Connie Adams, a biologist in New York's Department of Environmental Conservation, told the AP that the die-off was "unprecedented."Next in line for concern are a huge number of the Lakes' fish species. Warming water temperature often biologically triggers migration to traditional spawning grounds, and experts expect that Northern Pike, lake sturgeon, steelhead, and rainbow trout could make moves far later this year. As Shedd Aquarium research scientist Solomon David told Michigan Radio, later egg laying could mean younger and far weaker fish come next winter, leading to an even longer impact.Other changes will come about long after the ice melts, as water levels are predicted to rebound to levels not seen in the last few years. Seasonal shifts in water levels, with winter lows and summer highs, are normal. "If things stayed in sort of a balance, we would see all the lakes water levels going up and then going down. Every year: up, down; up, down," says Drew Gronewold, a scientist with NOAA's Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory. But, "when water levels change a lot over time, something is happening in one of those two parts of the season."Over the last few years, the summer highs and winter lows have both been well below their long-term average, as climate change produced far more rapid rates of evaporation. In December 2012, the Michigan-Huron system set a new low, breaking a record that had stood since the 1960s, according to Keith Kompoltowicz, the chief of watershed hydrology for the Army Corps of Engineers' Detroit District.Though Kompoltowicz says the usual March and April rise in water levels is occurring later than usual this year, already the lakes are seeing water levels that they haven't had for several years. This past March marked the first time since April of 1998 that Lake Superior had reached its long-term average. And over the next few months, melting snow will feed the lakes and colder water could lower the rates of summer and fall evaporation. The amount of rain could either add to or subtract from this total. The Army Corps of Engineers and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration generally forecast water levels six months out, and predicted levels for this September, Kompoltowicz says, range from 10 to 13 inches higher than lake levels were a year ago.Here's what higher lake levels could mean:Shippers may be hurting now, but higher lake levels will allow them to load more cargo per boat later this year, according to the Chicago Tribune. These higher water lines also mean that those who manage the Great Lakes' harbors won't have to invest huge sums of money in dredging out the bottom. Ships will carry more, at less of a cost, once the ice melts.Fluctuations in water levels could also help maintain the diversity of plant and animal species along many coastal wetlands, according to Kurt Kowalski, a wetland ecologist at the U.S. Geological Survey's Great Lakes Science Center. Too many years of consistently low water allows certain species, often non-native plants, to take over.And even far less large-scale ripple effects will matter. Scott Stevenson, the executive vice president of the company that manages Chicago's harbors, told the Tribune that higher water levels will allow them to rent out 100 expensive slips along the lakefront that shallow water took out of commission last year.Though water level changes even over a several year period are normal, the rebound from record-low water levels is going to be a relief from the hand-wringing of the last few years. But it will likely be a temporary one. A hot summer with little precipitation could mute the effects of the icy winter. And, even if the lakes have more water this year, 2014 could be nothing more than a blip as climate change continues to wreak havoc. "We dont know, as this winter really exemplified, whats going to happen," Gronewold says. "If were going to have three more severe winters, or flip back to three more winters like weve had the past few years." Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #61 on: May 27, 2014, 06:39:02 am » May 27, 2014, 06:39:02 am » After Years of Threats, Prominent Climate Alarmists Still Seek to Jail Climate Deniers



Journalists and scientists called for Nuremberg style trials, imprisonment, even death penalty.



Those who say climate change is a threat to the planet continue to call for actions against climate skeptics.



On May 19, PBS Moyers & Company played a clip of scientist, David Suzuki, calling for politicians skeptical of man-made climate change to be thrown in the slammer. On day later, a tweet by well-known alarmist Michael Mann suggested that skepticism could be a crime against humanity. As least far back as 2006, and as recently as March 2014, liberal journalists and radical scientists have advocated punishing people who doubt catastrophic, man-made climate change.



A writer at Grist.org once called for a kind of climate Nuremberg and had to apologize and amend his remarks, while scientists have publicly demanded imprisonment or even the death penalty.



On May 20, Michael Mann, a climatologist who is often interviewed by media outlets to warn about the threat of global warming, tweeted a 2010 article from The Guardian (UK) that asked Is climate science disinformation a crime against humanity? He called that question more relevant today than in 2010.



This article, written by Donald Brown decried climate skeptics as extraordinarily morally reprehensible. Brown even called on the international community to find a way of classifying extraordinarily irresponsible scientific claims that could lead to mass suffering as some type of crime against humanity.



Ironically, Mann is currently embroiled in a lawsuit attempting to conceal email correspondence from his time at the University of Virginia from Freedom of Information Act requests. This lawsuit has been joined by 17 major news groups, though conspicuously not the broadcast networks, CNN or The New York Times.



Even before his recent PBS appearance, Suzuki called for the jailing of skeptics in two major 2008 speeches. Suzuki, who regularly gives media interviews and writes for The Huffington Post, asked a Montreal business conference to see whether theres a legal way of throwing our so-called leaders into jail and called skepticism a criminal act.



But although several of these arguments are recent, this kind of rhetoric goes back years.



On March 28, 2014, the popular website Gawkers Adam Weinstein declared Arrest Climate-Change Deniers. Weinstein explained there was clear precedent to punish the climate-change liars. He was very specific on who should be jailed, as well. Weinstein clarified that the man on the street is innocent but just too stupid. Instead, he focused on Rush and his multi-million dollar ilk and Americans for Prosperity.



James Hansen, a former NASA scientist and prominent climate alarmist, made a speech in 2008 calling for the imprisonment of oil and coal executives. He said these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature before fearmongering over continually shifting shorelines and a more desolate planet.



In 2006, David Roberts of the alarmist website Grist.org called for extreme punishment. Grist, which has featured major interviews with both former Vice President Al Gore and PBS Bill Moyers, called for war crimes trials for [climate denying] bastards. He escalated that threat, calling specifically for some sort of climate Nuremberg.



This call for a climate Nuremberg was a clear reference to the post World War II Nuremberg trials where former Nazis were tried for war crimes, and 11 were sentenced to death. While Roberts later apologized for the Nuremberg comparison, he didnt back off of his desire to jail skeptics.



Others have also suggested skeptics were complicit in genocide. Dr. Robert Nadeau, founder of the George Mason University Global Environmental Network Center, wrote Crimes against Humanity: The Genocidal Campaign of the Climate Change Contrarians on April 5, 2014. In this article, he declared There Ought to Be a Law against climate skepticism and explored two different international laws that ought to be used against climate skeptics. Nadeau embraced this accusation of genocide, dubbing climate skepticism a genocidal campaign.



This sort of language is prevalent amongst liberal academics whove called for the imprisonment of dissenters.



Just recently, on March 13, 2014, philosophy professor Lawrence Torcello called for charges of criminal and moral negligence for climate skeptics. Torcello wasnt alone, with ScienceBlogs anthropologist Greg Laden jumping to his defense in a March 16 post. Laden expressed his desire to call skepticism a criminal act, though he admitted that was just wishful thinking.



Other academics preceded Torcello. In a meeting of Harvards Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs on Feb. 13, 2014, history professor Dr. Naomi Oreskes suggested that skeptics could be arrested under international law, without any outrage from her audience. Only two years earlier, in 2012, University of Graz, Austria musicology professor Richard Parncutt said that the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for influential G[lobal] W[arming] deniers, according to WND.



http://www.mrc.org/articles/after-years-threats-prominent-climate-alarmists-still-seek-jail-climate-deniers Those who say climate change is a threat to the planet continue to call for actions against climate skeptics.On May 19, PBS Moyers & Company played a clip of scientist, David Suzuki, calling for politicians skeptical of man-made climate change to be thrown in the slammer. On day later, a tweet by well-known alarmist Michael Mann suggested that skepticism could be a crime against humanity. As least far back as 2006, and as recently as March 2014, liberal journalists and radical scientists have advocated punishing people who doubt catastrophic, man-made climate change.A writer at Grist.org once called for a kind of climate Nuremberg and had to apologize and amend his remarks, while scientists have publicly demanded imprisonment or even the death penalty.On May 20, Michael Mann, a climatologist who is often interviewed by media outlets to warn about the threat of global warming, tweeted a 2010 article from The Guardian (UK) that asked Is climate science disinformation a crime against humanity? He called that question more relevant today than in 2010.This article, written by Donald Brown decried climate skeptics as extraordinarily morally reprehensible. Brown even called on the international community to find a way of classifying extraordinarily irresponsible scientific claims that could lead to mass suffering as some type of crime against humanity.Ironically, Mann is currently embroiled in a lawsuit attempting to conceal email correspondence from his time at the University of Virginia from Freedom of Information Act requests. This lawsuit has been joined by 17 major news groups, though conspicuously not the broadcast networks, CNN or The New York Times.Even before his recent PBS appearance, Suzuki called for the jailing of skeptics in two major 2008 speeches. Suzuki, who regularly gives media interviews and writes for The Huffington Post, asked a Montreal business conference to see whether theres a legal way of throwing our so-called leaders into jail and called skepticism a criminal act.But although several of these arguments are recent, this kind of rhetoric goes back years.On March 28, 2014, the popular website Gawkers Adam Weinstein declared Arrest Climate-Change Deniers. Weinstein explained there was clear precedent to punish the climate-change liars. He was very specific on who should be jailed, as well. Weinstein clarified that the man on the street is innocent but just too stupid. Instead, he focused on Rush and his multi-million dollar ilk and Americans for Prosperity.James Hansen, a former NASA scientist and prominent climate alarmist, made a speech in 2008 calling for the imprisonment of oil and coal executives. He said these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature before fearmongering over continually shifting shorelines and a more desolate planet.In 2006, David Roberts of the alarmist website Grist.org called for extreme punishment. Grist, which has featured major interviews with both former Vice President Al Gore and PBS Bill Moyers, called for war crimes trials for [climate denying] bastards. He escalated that threat, calling specifically for some sort of climate Nuremberg.This call for a climate Nuremberg was a clear reference to the post World War II Nuremberg trials where former Nazis were tried for war crimes, and 11 were sentenced to death. While Roberts later apologized for the Nuremberg comparison, he didnt back off of his desire to jail skeptics.Others have also suggested skeptics were complicit in genocide. Dr. Robert Nadeau, founder of the George Mason University Global Environmental Network Center, wrote Crimes against Humanity: The Genocidal Campaign of the Climate Change Contrarians on April 5, 2014. In this article, he declared There Ought to Be a Law against climate skepticism and explored two different international laws that ought to be used against climate skeptics. Nadeau embraced this accusation of genocide, dubbing climate skepticism a genocidal campaign.This sort of language is prevalent amongst liberal academics whove called for the imprisonment of dissenters.Just recently, on March 13, 2014, philosophy professor Lawrence Torcello called for charges of criminal and moral negligence for climate skeptics. Torcello wasnt alone, with ScienceBlogs anthropologist Greg Laden jumping to his defense in a March 16 post. Laden expressed his desire to call skepticism a criminal act, though he admitted that was just wishful thinking.Other academics preceded Torcello. In a meeting of Harvards Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs on Feb. 13, 2014, history professor Dr. Naomi Oreskes suggested that skeptics could be arrested under international law, without any outrage from her audience. Only two years earlier, in 2012, University of Graz, Austria musicology professor Richard Parncutt said that the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for influential G[lobal] W[arming] deniers, according to WND. Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #62 on: June 14, 2014, 03:43:53 am » June 14, 2014, 03:43:53 am » Climate McCarthyism has claimed another victim. Dr Caleb Rossiter - an adjunct professor at American University, Washington DC - has been fired by a progressive think tank after publicly expressing doubt about man-made global warming.



Rossiter, a former Democratic congressional candidate, has impeccably liberal credentials. As the founder of Demilitarization for Democracy he has campaigned against US backed wars in Central America and Southern Africa, against US military support for dictators and against anti-personnel landmines. But none of this was enough to spare him the wrath of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) when he wrote an OpEd in the Wall Street Journal describing man-made global warming as an "unproved science."



Two days later, he was sacked by email. The IPS said: "We would like to inform you that we are terminating your position as an Associate Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies...Unfortunately, we now feel that your views on key issues, including climate science, climate justice, and many aspects of US policy to Africa, diverge so significantly from ours."



In the WSJ OpEd entitled Sacrificing Africa for Climate Change, Rossiter argued that Africans should benefit from the same mixed energy policy as Americans rather than being denied access to fossil fuels on spurious environmental grounds by green activists. He wrote: "The left wants to stop industrialization - even if the hypothesis of catastrophic, man-made global warming is false."



But the Institute for Policy Studies ("Ideas into Action for Peace, Justice, and the Environment") is ideologically committed to ensuring that Africans only enjoy the benefits of expensive, intermittent, inefficient renewable energy such as wind and solar.



Rossiter told Climate Depot:



"If people ever say that fears of censorship for 'climate change' views are overblown, have them take a look at this: Just two days after I published a piece in the Wall Street Journal calling for Africa to be allowed the 'all of the above' energy strategy we have in the U.S., the Institute for Policy Studies terminated my 23-year relationship with them because my analysis and theirs 'diverge.'"



His sacking follows the persecution last month of Lennart Bengtsson, a Swedish meteorologist and climatologist who decided to resign his position at the Global Warming Policy Foundation after being harassed by climate alarmists for his "incorrect" views on man-made climate change.



http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/13/Climate-McCarthyism-claims-yet-another-victim Rossiter, a former Democratic congressional candidate, has impeccably liberal credentials. As the founder of Demilitarization for Democracy he has campaigned against US backed wars in Central America and Southern Africa, against US military support for dictators and against anti-personnel landmines. But none of this was enough to spare him the wrath of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) when he wrote an OpEd in the Wall Street Journal describing man-made global warming as an "unproved science."Two days later, he was sacked by email. The IPS said: "We would like to inform you that we are terminating your position as an Associate Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies...Unfortunately, we now feel that your views on key issues, including climate science, climate justice, and many aspects of US policy to Africa, diverge so significantly from ours."In the WSJ OpEd entitled Sacrificing Africa for Climate Change, Rossiter argued that Africans should benefit from the same mixed energy policy as Americans rather than being denied access to fossil fuels on spurious environmental grounds by green activists. He wrote: "The left wants to stop industrialization - even if the hypothesis of catastrophic, man-made global warming is false."But the Institute for Policy Studies ("Ideas into Action for Peace, Justice, and the Environment") is ideologically committed to ensuring that Africans only enjoy the benefits of expensive, intermittent, inefficient renewable energy such as wind and solar.Rossiter told Climate Depot:"If people ever say that fears of censorship for 'climate change' views are overblown, have them take a look at this: Just two days after I published a piece in the Wall Street Journal calling for Africa to be allowed the 'all of the above' energy strategy we have in the U.S., the Institute for Policy Studies terminated my 23-year relationship with them because my analysis and theirs 'diverge.'"His sacking follows the persecution last month of Lennart Bengtsson, a Swedish meteorologist and climatologist who decided to resign his position at the Global Warming Policy Foundation after being harassed by climate alarmists for his "incorrect" views on man-made climate change. Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #63 on: June 23, 2014, 09:07:29 am » June 23, 2014, 09:07:29 am » The scandal of fiddled global warming data

The US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record



When future generations try to understand how the world got carried away around the end of the 20th century by the panic over global warming, few things will amaze them more than the part played in stoking up the scare by the fiddling of official temperature data. There was already much evidence of this seven years ago, when I was writing my history of the scare, The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddards US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the worlds most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).



Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAAs US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been adjusting its record by replacing real temperatures with data fabricated by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data. In several posts headed Data tampering at USHCN/GISS, Goddard compares the currently published temperature graphs with those based only on temperatures measured at the time. These show that the US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record; whereas the latest graph, nearly half of it based on fabricated data, shows it to have been warming at a rate equivalent to more than 3 degrees centigrade per century.



When I first began examining the global-warming scare, I found nothing more puzzling than the way officially approved scientists kept on being shown to have finagled their data, as in that ludicrous hockey stick graph, pretending to prove that the world had suddenly become much hotter than at any time in 1,000 years. Any theory needing to rely so consistently on fudging the evidence, I concluded, must be looked on not as science at all, but as simply a rather alarming case study in the aberrations of group psychology.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10916086/The-scandal-of-fiddled-global-warming-data.html When future generations try to understand how the world got carried away around the end of the 20th century by the panic over global warming, few things will amaze them more than the part played in stoking up the scare by the fiddling of official temperature data. There was already much evidence of this seven years ago, when I was writing my history of the scare, The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddards US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the worlds most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAAs US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been adjusting its record by replacing real temperatures with data fabricated by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data. In several posts headed Data tampering at USHCN/GISS, Goddard compares the currently published temperature graphs with those based only on temperatures measured at the time. These show that the US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record; whereas the latest graph, nearly half of it based on fabricated data, shows it to have been warming at a rate equivalent to more than 3 degrees centigrade per century.When I first began examining the global-warming scare, I found nothing more puzzling than the way officially approved scientists kept on being shown to have finagled their data, as in that ludicrous hockey stick graph, pretending to prove that the world had suddenly become much hotter than at any time in 1,000 years. Any theory needing to rely so consistently on fudging the evidence, I concluded, must be looked on not as science at all, but as simply a rather alarming case study in the aberrations of group psychology. Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #64 on: August 08, 2014, 04:47:31 am » August 08, 2014, 04:47:31 am » NASA Climate Scientist Explains 15-Year Global Warming Hiatus







A NASA scientist described a recent global warming hiatus that shows Earths surface temperatures warming at a slower rate than previous decades  but it is still warming.



Norman Loeb delivered a lecture entitled, The Recent Pause in Global Warming: A Temporary Blip or Something More Permanent? at the NASA Langley Research Center auditorium on Tuesday. The talk addressed challenges to scientists and increased skepticism among climate change skeptics due to the recent hiatus of global warming.



The federal space agency climate scientist explored research into a slow-down in surface warming over the last 15 years referred to as the Global Warming Hiatus. In recent years, the global mean surface temperature on Earth has increased at a rate that is about one-third of that from the past 60 years.



The global warming hiatus occurred despite record-breaking temperatures in the 2000s, retreating Arctic sea ice, rising sea levels and a record high global concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, according to a statement released by NASA.



Opinions vary about the hiatus, as some view it as evidence that man-made global warming is a myth, NASA said in a press release. Others explain that it is simply due to climate variability that is temporarily masking a longer-term temperature trend.



The question is whats driving it? said Loeb, according to the Virginian-Pilot. But his answer reflected the complexity of climate science and did not rule out either scenario based upon the last 15 years of the global warming hiatus.



Loeb said that changes in solar radiation, water vapor and aerosol particles in the air have likely played a role, but a major factor may be an El Nino-like pattern of climate variability that has historically coincided with a slowing in global warming. Loeb noted that a rise in global temperatures slowed in the 1940s as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation climate pattern was active  a pattern that similarly lasted 20-30 years.



For average climate records, 30 years is like one data point, said Loeb, reiterating that while the Earth is warming more slowly, it is still warming. Its really forcing us to look at our models and observations and ask questions.



In the global warming slowdown of the past 15 years, Loeb points out that the temperature is rising at nearly one-third the rate as before. The average temperature in the U.S. has risen about 1.5 degrees since the beginning of the 1900s.



Loeb holds a doctorate in in atmospheric sciences from McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and is an atmospheric scientist in the Science Directorate at NASA Langley. Loeb is also the principal investigator of a satellite project called Clouds and the Earths Radiant Energy System (CERES).



http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/08/06/nasa-climate-scientist-explains-15-year-global-warming-hiatus/ A NASA scientist described a recent global warming hiatus that shows Earths surface temperatures warming at a slower rate than previous decades  but it is still warming.Norman Loeb delivered a lecture entitled, The Recent Pause in Global Warming: A Temporary Blip or Something More Permanent? at the NASA Langley Research Center auditorium on Tuesday. The talk addressed challenges to scientists and increased skepticism among climate change skeptics due to the recent hiatus of global warming.The federal space agency climate scientist explored research into a slow-down in surface warming over the last 15 years referred to as the Global Warming Hiatus. In recent years, the global mean surface temperature on Earth has increased at a rate that is about one-third of that from the past 60 years.The global warming hiatus occurred despite record-breaking temperatures in the 2000s, retreating Arctic sea ice, rising sea levels and a record high global concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, according to a statement released by NASA.Opinions vary about the hiatus, as some view it as evidence that man-made global warming is a myth, NASA said in a press release. Others explain that it is simply due to climate variability that is temporarily masking a longer-term temperature trend.The question is whats driving it? said Loeb, according to the Virginian-Pilot. But his answer reflected the complexity of climate science and did not rule out either scenario based upon the last 15 years of the global warming hiatus.Loeb said that changes in solar radiation, water vapor and aerosol particles in the air have likely played a role, but a major factor may be an El Nino-like pattern of climate variability that has historically coincided with a slowing in global warming. Loeb noted that a rise in global temperatures slowed in the 1940s as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation climate pattern was active  a pattern that similarly lasted 20-30 years.For average climate records, 30 years is like one data point, said Loeb, reiterating that while the Earth is warming more slowly, it is still warming. Its really forcing us to look at our models and observations and ask questions.In the global warming slowdown of the past 15 years, Loeb points out that the temperature is rising at nearly one-third the rate as before. The average temperature in the U.S. has risen about 1.5 degrees since the beginning of the 1900s.Loeb holds a doctorate in in atmospheric sciences from McGill University in Montreal, Canada, and is an atmospheric scientist in the Science Directorate at NASA Langley. Loeb is also the principal investigator of a satellite project called Clouds and the Earths Radiant Energy System (CERES). Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #65 on: August 22, 2014, 11:41:00 am » August 22, 2014, 11:41:00 am » Cause of global warming hiatus found deep in the Atlantic Ocean







Following rapid warming in the late 20th century, this century has so far seen surprisingly little increase in the average temperature at the Earths surface. At first this was a blip, then a trend, then a puzzle for the climate science community.







More than a dozen theories have now been proposed for the so-called global warming hiatus, ranging from air pollution to volcanoes to sunspots. New research from the University of Washington shows that the heat absent from the surface is plunging deep in the north and south Atlantic Ocean, and is part of a naturally occurring cycle. The study is published Aug. 22 in Science.



Subsurface ocean warming explains why global average air temperatures have flatlined since 1999, despite greenhouse gases trapping more solar heat at the Earths surface.



Every week theres a new explanation of the hiatus, said corresponding author Ka-Kit Tung, a UW professor of applied mathematics and adjunct faculty member in atmospheric sciences. Many of the earlier papers had necessarily focused on symptoms at the surface of the Earth, where we see many different and related phenomena. We looked at observations in the ocean to try to find the underlying cause.



The results show that a slow-moving current in the Atlantic, which carries heat between the two poles, sped up earlier this century to draw heat down almost a mile (1,500 meters). Most of the previous studies focused on shorter-term variability or particles that could block incoming sunlight, but they could not explain the massive amount of heat missing for more than a decade.



The finding is a surprise, since the current theories had pointed to the Pacific Ocean as the culprit for hiding heat, Tung said. But the data are quite convincing and they show otherwise.



Tung and co-author Xianyao Chen of the Ocean University of China, who was a UW visiting professor last year, used recent observations of deep-sea temperatures from Argo floats that sample the water down to 6,500 feet (2,000 meters) depth. The data show an increase in heat sinking around 1999, when the rapid warming of the 20th century stopped.



There are recurrent cycles that are salinity-driven that can store heat deep in the Atlantic and Southern oceans, Tung said. After 30 years of rapid warming in the warm phase, now its time for the cool phase.



Rapid warming in the last two and a half decades of the 20th century, they proposed in an earlier study, was roughly half due to global warming and half to the natural Atlantic Ocean cycle that kept more heat near the surface. When observations show the ocean cycle flipped, in about 2000, the current began to draw heat deeper into the ocean, working to counteract human-driven warming.



The cycle starts when saltier, denser water at the surface northern part of the Atlantic, near Iceland, causes the water to sink. This changes the speed of the huge current in the Atlantic Ocean that circulates heat throughout the planet.



When its heavy water on top of light water, it just plunges very fast and takes heat with it, Tung said. Recent observations at the surface in the North Atlantic show record-high saltiness, Tung said, while at the same time, deeper water in the North Atlantic shows increasing amounts of heat.



The oscillations have a natural switch. During the warm period, faster currents cause more tropical water to travel to the North Atlantic, warming both the surface and the deep water. At the surface this warming melts ice. This slowly makes the surface water there less dense and after a few decades puts the brakes on the circulation, setting off a 30-year cooling phase.



The authors dug up historical data to show that the cooling in the three decades between 1945 to 1975  which caused people to worry about the start of an Ice Age  was during a cooling phase. (It was thought to have been caused by air pollution.) Earlier records in Central England show the 40- to 70-year cycle goes back centuries, and other records show it has existed for millennia.



Changes in Atlantic Ocean circulation historically meant roughly 30 warmer years followed by 30 cooler years. Now that it is happening on top of global warming, however, the trend looks more like a staircase.



This explanation implies that the current slowdown in global warming could last for another decade, or longer, and then rapid warming will return. But Tung emphasizes its hard to predict what will happen next.



A pool of freshwater from melting ice now sitting in the Arctic Ocean, for example, could overflow into the North Atlantic to upset the cycle.



We are not talking about a normal situation because there are so many other things happening due to climate change, Tung said.



The research was funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the National Natural Science Foundation of China.



http://www.washington.edu/news/2014/08/21/cause-of-global-warming-hiatus-found-deep-in-the-atlantic-ocean/ Following rapid warming in the late 20th century, this century has so far seen surprisingly little increase in the average temperature at the Earths surface. At first this was a blip, then a trend, then a puzzle for the climate science community.More than a dozen theories have now been proposed for the so-called global warming hiatus, ranging from air pollution to volcanoes to sunspots. New research from the University of Washington shows that the heat absent from the surface is plunging deep in the north and south Atlantic Ocean, and is part of a naturally occurring cycle. The study is published Aug. 22 in Science.Subsurface ocean warming explains why global average air temperatures have flatlined since 1999, despite greenhouse gases trapping more solar heat at the Earths surface.Every week theres a new explanation of the hiatus, said corresponding author Ka-Kit Tung, a UW professor of applied mathematics and adjunct faculty member in atmospheric sciences. Many of the earlier papers had necessarily focused on symptoms at the surface of the Earth, where we see many different and related phenomena. We looked at observations in the ocean to try to find the underlying cause.The results show that a slow-moving current in the Atlantic, which carries heat between the two poles, sped up earlier this century to draw heat down almost a mile (1,500 meters). Most of the previous studies focused on shorter-term variability or particles that could block incoming sunlight, but they could not explain the massive amount of heat missing for more than a decade.The finding is a surprise, since the current theories had pointed to the Pacific Ocean as the culprit for hiding heat, Tung said. But the data are quite convincing and they show otherwise.Tung and co-author Xianyao Chen of the Ocean University of China, who was a UW visiting professor last year, used recent observations of deep-sea temperatures from Argo floats that sample the water down to 6,500 feet (2,000 meters) depth. The data show an increase in heat sinking around 1999, when the rapid warming of the 20th century stopped.There are recurrent cycles that are salinity-driven that can store heat deep in the Atlantic and Southern oceans, Tung said. After 30 years of rapid warming in the warm phase, now its time for the cool phase.Rapid warming in the last two and a half decades of the 20th century, they proposed in an earlier study, was roughly half due to global warming and half to the natural Atlantic Ocean cycle that kept more heat near the surface. When observations show the ocean cycle flipped, in about 2000, the current began to draw heat deeper into the ocean, working to counteract human-driven warming.The cycle starts when saltier, denser water at the surface northern part of the Atlantic, near Iceland, causes the water to sink. This changes the speed of the huge current in the Atlantic Ocean that circulates heat throughout the planet.When its heavy water on top of light water, it just plunges very fast and takes heat with it, Tung said. Recent observations at the surface in the North Atlantic show record-high saltiness, Tung said, while at the same time, deeper water in the North Atlantic shows increasing amounts of heat.The oscillations have a natural switch. During the warm period, faster currents cause more tropical water to travel to the North Atlantic, warming both the surface and the deep water. At the surface this warming melts ice. This slowly makes the surface water there less dense and after a few decades puts the brakes on the circulation, setting off a 30-year cooling phase.The authors dug up historical data to show that the cooling in the three decades between 1945 to 1975  which caused people to worry about the start of an Ice Age  was during a cooling phase. (It was thought to have been caused by air pollution.) Earlier records in Central England show the 40- to 70-year cycle goes back centuries, and other records show it has existed for millennia.Changes in Atlantic Ocean circulation historically meant roughly 30 warmer years followed by 30 cooler years. Now that it is happening on top of global warming, however, the trend looks more like a staircase.This explanation implies that the current slowdown in global warming could last for another decade, or longer, and then rapid warming will return. But Tung emphasizes its hard to predict what will happen next.A pool of freshwater from melting ice now sitting in the Arctic Ocean, for example, could overflow into the North Atlantic to upset the cycle.We are not talking about a normal situation because there are so many other things happening due to climate change, Tung said.The research was funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the National Natural Science Foundation of China. Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #66 on: August 31, 2014, 07:34:51 am » August 31, 2014, 07:34:51 am » Myth of arctic meltdown: Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago...despite Al Gore's prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now



Seven years after former US Vice-President Al Gore's warning, Arctic ice cap has expanded for second year in row

An area twice the size of Alaska - America's biggest state - was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice

These satellite images taken from University of Illinois's Cryosphere project show ice has become more concentrated



The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore was apocalyptic. The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff, he said. It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.



Those comments came in 2007 as Mr Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his campaigning on climate change.



But seven years after his warning, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that, far from vanishing, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession  with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012.



Scroll down for video



Read more:







o put it another way, an area the size of Alaska, Americas biggest state, was open water two years ago, but is again now covered by ice.



The most widely used measurements of Arctic ice extent are the daily satellite readings issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by Nasa. These reveal that  while the long-term trend still shows a decline  last Monday, August 25, the area of the Arctic Ocean with at least 15 per cent ice cover was 5.62 million square kilometres.



This was the highest level recorded on that date since 2006 (see graph, right), and represents an increase of 1.71 million square kilometres over the past two years  an impressive 43 per cent.



Other figures from the Danish Meteorological Institute suggest that the growth has been even more dramatic. Using a different measure, the area with at least 30 per cent ice cover, these reveal a 63 per cent rise  from 2.7 million to 4.4 million square kilometres.



The satellite images published here are taken from a further authoritative source, the University of Illinoiss Cryosphere project.



They show that as well as becoming more extensive, the ice has grown more concentrated, with the purple areas  denoting regions where the ice pack is most dense  increasing markedly.



Crucially, the ice is also thicker, and therefore more resilient to future melting. Professor Andrew Shepherd, of Leeds University, an expert in climate satellite monitoring, said yesterday: It is clear from the measurements we have collected that the Arctic sea ice has experienced a significant recovery in thickness over the past year.



It seems that an unusually cool summer in 2013 allowed more ice to survive through to last winter. This means that the Arctic sea ice pack is thicker and stronger than usual, and this should be taken into account when making predictions of its future extent.



et for years, many have been claiming that the Arctic is in an irrevocable death spiral, with imminent ice-free summers bound to trigger further disasters. These include gigantic releases of methane into the atmosphere from frozen Arctic deposits, and accelerated global warming caused by the fact that heat from the sun will no longer be reflected back by the ice into space.



Judith Curry, professor of earth and atmospheric sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, said last night: The Arctic sea ice spiral of death seems to have reversed.



Those who just a few years ago were warning of ice-free summers by 2014 included US Secretary of State John Kerry, who made the same bogus prediction in 2009, while Mr Gore has repeated it numerous times  notably in a speech to world leaders at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009, in an effort to persuade them to agree a new emissions treaty.

The ice cap is falling off a cliff. It could be completely gone in summer in as little as 7 years from now



Mr Gore  whose office yesterday failed to respond to a request for comment  insisted then: There is a 75 per cent chance that the entire polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.



Misleading as such forecasts are, some people continue to make them. Only last month, while giving evidence to a House of Lords Select Committee inquiry on the Arctic, Cambridge Universitys Professor Peter Wadhams claimed that although the Arctic is not ice-free this year, it will be by September 2015.



Asked about this yesterday, he said: I still think that it is very likely that by mid-September 2015, the ice area will be less than one million square kilometres  the official designation of ice-free, implying only a fringe of floes around the coastlines. That is where the trend is taking us.



For that prediction to come true it would require by far the fastest loss of ice in history. It would also fly in the face of a report last year by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which stated with medium confidence that ice levels would likely fall below one million square kilometres by 2050.



Politicians such as Al Gore have often insisted that climate science is settled and have accused those who question their forecasts of being climate change deniers.



However, while few scientists doubt that carbon-dioxide emissions cause global warming, and that this has caused Arctic ice to decline, there remains much uncertainty about the speed of melting and how much of it is due to human activity. But outside the scientific community, the more pessimistic views have attracted most attention. For example, Prof Wadhamss forecasts have been cited widely by newspapers and the BBC. But many reject them.



Yesterday Dr Ed Hawkins, who leads an Arctic ice research team at Reading University, said: Peter Wadhamss views are quite extreme compared to the views of many other climate scientists, and also compared to what the IPCC report says.



Dr Hawkins warned against reading too much into ice increase over the past two years on the grounds that 2012 was an extreme low, triggered by freak weather.



Im uncomfortable with the idea of people saying the ice has bounced back, he said.



However, Dr Hawkins added that the decline seen in recent years was not caused only by global warming. It was, he said, intensified by natural variability  shifts in factors such as the temperature of the oceans. This, he said, has happened before, such as in the 1920s and 1930s, when there was likely some sea ice retreat.



Dr Hawkins said: There is undoubtedly some natural variability on top of the long-term downwards trend caused by the overall warming. This variability has probably contributed somewhat to the post-2000 steep declining trend, although the human-caused component still dominates.



Like many scientists, Dr Hawkins said these natural processes may be cyclical. If and when they go into reverse, they will cool, not warm, the Arctic, in which case, he said, a decade with no declining trend in ice cover would be entirely plausible.



Peer-reviewed research suggests that at least until 2005, natural variability was responsible for half the ice decline. But exactly how big its influence is remains an open question  and as both Dr Hawkins and Prof Curry agreed, establishing this is critical to making predictions about the Arctics future.



Prof Curry said: I suspect that the portion of the decline in the sea ice attributable to natural variability could be even larger than half.



I think the natural variability component of Arctic sea ice extent is in the process of bottoming out, with a reversal to start within the next decade. And when it does, the reversal period could last for several decades.



This led her to believe that the IPCC forecast, like Al Gores, was too pessimistic.



Ice-free in 2050 is a possible scenario, but I dont think it is a likely scenario, she concluded.





http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2738653/Stunning-satellite-images-summer-ice-cap-thicker-covers-1-7million-square-kilometres-MORE-2-years-ago-despite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore was apocalyptic. The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff, he said. It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.Those comments came in 2007 as Mr Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his campaigning on climate change.But seven years after his warning, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that, far from vanishing, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession  with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012.Scroll down for videoRead more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2738653/Stunning-satellite-images-summer-ice-cap-thicker-covers-1-7million-square-kilometres-MORE-2-years-ago-despite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html#ixzz3ByM2GJ00 o put it another way, an area the size of Alaska, Americas biggest state, was open water two years ago, but is again now covered by ice.The most widely used measurements of Arctic ice extent are the daily satellite readings issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by Nasa. These reveal that  while the long-term trend still shows a decline  last Monday, August 25, the area of the Arctic Ocean with at least 15 per cent ice cover was 5.62 million square kilometres.This was the highest level recorded on that date since 2006 (see graph, right), and represents an increase of 1.71 million square kilometres over the past two years  an impressive 43 per cent.Other figures from the Danish Meteorological Institute suggest that the growth has been even more dramatic. Using a different measure, the area with at least 30 per cent ice cover, these reveal a 63 per cent rise  from 2.7 million to 4.4 million square kilometres.The satellite images published here are taken from a further authoritative source, the University of Illinoiss Cryosphere project.They show that as well as becoming more extensive, the ice has grown more concentrated, with the purple areas  denoting regions where the ice pack is most dense  increasing markedly.Crucially, the ice is also thicker, and therefore more resilient to future melting. Professor Andrew Shepherd, of Leeds University, an expert in climate satellite monitoring, said yesterday: It is clear from the measurements we have collected that the Arctic sea ice has experienced a significant recovery in thickness over the past year.It seems that an unusually cool summer in 2013 allowed more ice to survive through to last winter. This means that the Arctic sea ice pack is thicker and stronger than usual, and this should be taken into account when making predictions of its future extent.et for years, many have been claiming that the Arctic is in an irrevocable death spiral, with imminent ice-free summers bound to trigger further disasters. These include gigantic releases of methane into the atmosphere from frozen Arctic deposits, and accelerated global warming caused by the fact that heat from the sun will no longer be reflected back by the ice into space.Judith Curry, professor of earth and atmospheric sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, said last night: The Arctic sea ice spiral of death seems to have reversed.Those who just a few years ago were warning of ice-free summers by 2014 included US Secretary of State John Kerry, who made the same bogus prediction in 2009, while Mr Gore has repeated it numerous times  notably in a speech to world leaders at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009, in an effort to persuade them to agree a new emissions treaty.The ice cap is falling off a cliff. It could be completely gone in summer in as little as 7 years from nowMr Gore  whose office yesterday failed to respond to a request for comment  insisted then: There is a 75 per cent chance that the entire polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.Misleading as such forecasts are, some people continue to make them. Only last month, while giving evidence to a House of Lords Select Committee inquiry on the Arctic, Cambridge Universitys Professor Peter Wadhams claimed that although the Arctic is not ice-free this year, it will be by September 2015.Asked about this yesterday, he said: I still think that it is very likely that by mid-September 2015, the ice area will be less than one million square kilometres  the official designation of ice-free, implying only a fringe of floes around the coastlines. That is where the trend is taking us.For that prediction to come true it would require by far the fastest loss of ice in history. It would also fly in the face of a report last year by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which stated with medium confidence that ice levels would likely fall below one million square kilometres by 2050.Politicians such as Al Gore have often insisted that climate science is settled and have accused those who question their forecasts of being climate change deniers.However, while few scientists doubt that carbon-dioxide emissions cause global warming, and that this has caused Arctic ice to decline, there remains much uncertainty about the speed of melting and how much of it is due to human activity. But outside the scientific community, the more pessimistic views have attracted most attention. For example, Prof Wadhamss forecasts have been cited widely by newspapers and the BBC. But many reject them.Yesterday Dr Ed Hawkins, who leads an Arctic ice research team at Reading University, said: Peter Wadhamss views are quite extreme compared to the views of many other climate scientists, and also compared to what the IPCC report says.Dr Hawkins warned against reading too much into ice increase over the past two years on the grounds that 2012 was an extreme low, triggered by freak weather.Im uncomfortable with the idea of people saying the ice has bounced back, he said.However, Dr Hawkins added that the decline seen in recent years was not caused only by global warming. It was, he said, intensified by natural variability  shifts in factors such as the temperature of the oceans. This, he said, has happened before, such as in the 1920s and 1930s, when there was likely some sea ice retreat.Dr Hawkins said: There is undoubtedly some natural variability on top of the long-term downwards trend caused by the overall warming. This variability has probably contributed somewhat to the post-2000 steep declining trend, although the human-caused component still dominates.Like many scientists, Dr Hawkins said these natural processes may be cyclical. If and when they go into reverse, they will cool, not warm, the Arctic, in which case, he said, a decade with no declining trend in ice cover would be entirely plausible.Peer-reviewed research suggests that at least until 2005, natural variability was responsible for half the ice decline. But exactly how big its influence is remains an open question  and as both Dr Hawkins and Prof Curry agreed, establishing this is critical to making predictions about the Arctics future.Prof Curry said: I suspect that the portion of the decline in the sea ice attributable to natural variability could be even larger than half.I think the natural variability component of Arctic sea ice extent is in the process of bottoming out, with a reversal to start within the next decade. And when it does, the reversal period could last for several decades.This led her to believe that the IPCC forecast, like Al Gores, was too pessimistic.Ice-free in 2050 is a possible scenario, but I dont think it is a likely scenario, she concluded. Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Psalm 51:17

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 28357





Global ModeratorHero MemberPosts: 28357 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #68 on: September 19, 2014, 06:50:54 pm » September 19, 2014, 06:50:54 pm » http://observer.com/2014/09/climate-change-might-be-replacing-gay-marriage-as-the-next-big-social-issue/

Climate Change Might Be Replacing Gay Marriage As the Next Big Social Issue

By Lincoln Mitchell | 09/19/14 8:14am



Only ten years or so ago, the easiest way to drive up conservative turnout in most states was to place an initiative on the ballot seeking to either legalize or ban marriage equality. That initiative would draw conservatives to the polls to vote, one way or the other, against marriage equality, and while there, pull the lever or check the box for the rest of the Republican ticket. As recently as 2008, California a state that Barack Obama carried in that election by a margin of 24 percent, passed Proposition 8, an initiative that outlawed marriage between two men or two women by 52 percent to 48 percent.



By 2014, things have changed, as marriage equality is disappearing from center stage of the political debate. It is not only no longer an issue that helps swing voters move Republican, but these days it is rarely used even to mobilize the conservative base. A recent New York Times/CBS News poll that was full of bad news for Democrats and President Obama, held good news for supporters of marriage equality. Fully 56 percent of respondents said they thought it should be legal for same sex couples to marry, while only 37 percent opposed the idea. Marriage equality may not be settled law, but it is close to settled opinion. Age replacement in the electorate over the next few years will expand support for marriage equality, as older voters oppose it more than younger voters do.



As marriage equality fades away as the signature issue of social conservatives, it is not yet clear what issue will replace it, but it is very possible that climate change will fill that role. Climate change is not, on its face, a social issue, but it is highly partisan and reinforces rifts between secular liberals and religious conservatives. It is in this context that both New Jersey Governor Chris Christies refusal to have New Jersey participate in the Regional Gas Initiative, a cap and trade program in which nine states are participating, and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindals use of the term science deniers to describe the Obama administration this week should be seen. These possible 2012 candidates for the Republican nomination, particularly Mr. Christie, need to establish their conservative bona fides; and climate change provided the best way to do that. It is very likely that between now and November of 2016 other Republicans presidential candidates will do the same as Climate Change transitions from being a scientific and economic issue to being the next front in the culture wars .



By Lincoln Mitchell | 09/19/14 8:14amOnly ten years or so ago, the easiest way to drive up conservative turnout in most states was to place an initiative on the ballot seeking to either legalize or ban marriage equality. That initiative would draw conservatives to the polls to vote, one way or the other, against marriage equality, and while there, pull the lever or check the box for the rest of the Republican ticket. As recently as 2008, California a state that Barack Obama carried in that election by a margin of 24 percent, passed Proposition 8, an initiative that outlawed marriage between two men or two women by 52 percent to 48 percent.Fully 56 percent of respondents said they thought it should be legal for same sex couples to marry, while only 37 percent opposed the idea. Marriage equality may not be settled law, but it is close to settled opinion. Age replacement in the electorate over the next few years will expand support for marriage equality, as older voters oppose it more than younger voters do.As marriage equality fades away as the signature issue of social conservatives, it is not yet clear what issue will replace it, but it is very possible that climate change will fill that role.It is in this context that both New Jersey Governor Chris Christies refusal to have New Jersey participate in the Regional Gas Initiative, a cap and trade program in which nine states are participating, and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindals use of the term science deniers to describe the Obama administration this week should be seen. Report Spam Logged

Psalm 51:17

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 28357





Global ModeratorHero MemberPosts: 28357 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #69 on: September 24, 2014, 08:59:50 pm » September 24, 2014, 08:59:50 pm » U.N. climate change summit: Now we're getting serious, says World Bank President

By Bernice Napach September 23, 2014 1:53 PM Yahoo Finance

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/today-s-u-n--summit-on-climate-change--a-reason-for-hope-150022838.html



The largest gathering of world leaders ever to combat climate change is taking place today in New York at the U.N.two days after thousands marched in cities around the world demanding action.



The leaders of China and India, which are among the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, are not attending the summit, but China did sign a statement supporting policies that would put a price tag on carbon emissions, along with 73 countries and more than 1,000 businesses.



The U.S., home to the U.N., is represented at todays summit, but it did not support the carbon pricing statement. President Obama, however, addressed the summit, saying that climate change will define this century more than any other issue and that the U.S. was ready to lead a new set of global climate change negotiations. He also called on all major economies to curb emissions.



World Bank President Jim Yong Kim is optimistic about the latest global response to climate change. Theres a seriousness around this issue weve never seen before, Kim tells Yahoo Finance's Bianna Golodryga, in an exclusive interview.



We had no idea when we started this statement whether anyone would sign on, so weve been really encouraged. The countries, regions  including seven U.S. states  and companies that signed onto the statement account for 52% of global GDP, 54% of the global greenhouse gas emissions and almost half the worlds population, says Kim.



Could this be the turning point in the fight against climate change that environmentalists and others have been waiting for or just more talk?



Kim is hopeful and says the World Bank, is going to do everything we can to make it happen.



For starters, Kim wants countries to end carbon fuel subsidies, which he says is the exact wrong thing to do." Instead, Kim says, "We need to get rid of them and begin investing in those things that will reduce the carbon thats were putting in the air and will spur forward things like renewable agency."



According to the latest data from the International Energy Agency, global fuel subsidies reached $544 billion in 2012  more than five times the total subsidies for renewable energy.



Kim's hope is that todays U.N. summit will help build momentum for the 2015 International Climate Change Conference in Paris, where world leaders could decide whether to sign a new legally-binding agreement for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. By Bernice Napach September 23, 2014 1:53 PM Yahoo FinanceThe largest gathering of world leaders ever to combat climate change is taking place today in New York at the U.N.two days after thousands marched in cities around the world demanding action.The leaders of China and India, which are among the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, are not attending the summit, but China did sign a statement supporting policies that would put a price tag on carbon emissions, along with 73 countries and more than 1,000 businesses.The U.S., home to the U.N., is represented at todays summit, but it did not support the carbon pricing statement. President Obama, however, addressed the summit, saying that climate change will define this century more than any other issue and that the U.S. was ready to lead a new set of global climate change negotiations. He also called on all major economies to curb emissions.World Bank President Jim Yong Kim is optimistic about the latest global response to climate change. Theres a seriousness around this issue weve never seen before, Kim tells Yahoo Finance's Bianna Golodryga, in an exclusive interview.We had no idea when we started this statement whether anyone would sign on, so weve been really encouraged.54% of the global greenhouse gas emissions and almost half the worlds population, says Kim.Could this be the turning point in the fight against climate change that environmentalists and others have been waiting for or just more talk?Kim is hopeful and says the World Bank, is going to do everything we can to make it happen.For starters, Kim wants countries to end carbon fuel subsidies, which he says is the exact wrong thing to do." Instead, Kim says, "We need to get rid of them and begin investing in those things that will reduce the carbon thats were putting in the air and will spur forward things like renewable agency."According to the latest data from the International Energy Agency, global fuel subsidies reached $544 billion in 2012  more than five times the total subsidies for renewable energy. Report Spam Logged

Psalm 51:17

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 28357





Global ModeratorHero MemberPosts: 28357 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #70 on: September 24, 2014, 09:13:50 pm » September 24, 2014, 09:13:50 pm » http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/23/Obama-Announces-New-Executive-Actions-To-Fight-Climate-Change

9/23/14

Obama Announces Executive Actions to Fight Climate Change at UN



President Obama announced a series of executive actions to fight climate change on Tuesday, during a speech to the United Nations Climate Summit in New York City.



Obama ordered all federal agencies to begin factoring climate resilience into all of their international development programs and investments.



The action is expected to complement efforts by the federal government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, according to the White House.



Obama is also expected to release climate monitoring data used by the federal government to developing nations.



The NOAA will also begin developing extreme-weather risk outlooks for as long as 30 days in advance to help local communities to prepare for damaging weather and prevent "loss of life and property," partnering with private companies to monitor and predict climate change.



This effort includes a new partnership that will draw on the resources and expertise of our leading private sector companies and philanthropies to help vulnerable nations better prepare for weather-related disasters, and better plan for long-term threats like steadily rising seas, Obama said during his speech at the United Nations Summit. 9/23/14President Obama announced a series of executive actions to fight climate change on Tuesday, during a speech to the United Nations Climate Summit in New York City.Obama ordered all federal agencies to begin factoring climate resilience into all of their international development programs and investments.The action is expected to complement efforts by the federal government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, according to the White House.Obama is also expected to release climate monitoring data used by the federal government to developing nations. Report Spam Logged

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #72 on: October 24, 2014, 06:07:55 am » October 24, 2014, 06:07:55 am » Climate change PROVED to be 'nothing but a lie', claims top meteorologist



THE debate about climate change is finished - because it has been categorically proved NOT to exist, one of the world's leading meteorologists has claimed. John Coleman, who co-founded the Weather Channel, shocked academics by insisting the theory of man-made climate change was no longer scientifically credible. Instead, what 'little evidence' there is for rising global temperatures points to a 'natural phenomenon' within a developing eco-system.



http://community.runnersworld.com/topic/climate-change-proved-to-be-nothing-but-a-lie-claims-top-meteorologist THE debate about climate change is finished - because it has been categorically proved NOT to exist, one of the world's leading meteorologists has claimed. John Coleman, who co-founded the Weather Channel, shocked academics by insisting the theory of man-made climate change was no longer scientifically credible. Instead, what 'little evidence' there is for rising global temperatures points to a 'natural phenomenon' within a developing eco-system. Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #73 on: November 24, 2014, 04:42:19 pm » November 24, 2014, 04:42:19 pm » Great Lakes ice cover developing; Earliest in over 40 years



Ice is already starting to develop on Michigan's Great Lakes. This is the earliest ice on some of the Great Lakes in at least 40 years.



According to the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, on November 20, 2014, Three of Michigan's Great Lakes had ice starting to form. Lake Superior and Lake Michigan were one-half percent ice covered, while Lake Huron had one percent ice. Lake Erie was not reporting any ice as of Nov. 20, 2014.



Decent early season ice coverage records date back to 1973. Last Friday was the earliest date that all three Great Lakes already had ice since the better reporting of early season ice began.



Lake Superior actually had ice forming on November 15th of this year. That is the earliest ice on Lake Superior in the good data set.



Lakes Superior, Michigan and Huron had ice 10 days earlier this year than last year.



Lake Superior only had five and a half months without any ice on the lake.



Here's what Lake Michigan looked like in February 2014.



rest: Ice is already starting to develop on Michigan's Great Lakes. This is the earliest ice on some of the Great Lakes in at least 40 years.According to the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, on November 20, 2014, Three of Michigan's Great Lakes had ice starting to form. Lake Superior and Lake Michigan were one-half percent ice covered, while Lake Huron had one percent ice. Lake Erie was not reporting any ice as of Nov. 20, 2014.Decent early season ice coverage records date back to 1973. Last Friday was the earliest date that all three Great Lakes already had ice since the better reporting of early season ice began.Lake Superior actually had ice forming on November 15th of this year. That is the earliest ice on Lake Superior in the good data set.Lakes Superior, Michigan and Huron had ice 10 days earlier this year than last year.Lake Superior only had five and a half months without any ice on the lake.Here's what Lake Michigan looked like in February 2014.rest: http://www.mlive.com/weather/index.ssf/2014/11/great_lakes_ice_cover_developi.html Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #76 on: February 09, 2015, 08:55:17 am » February 09, 2015, 08:55:17 am » The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever



New data shows that the vanishing of polar ice is not the result of runaway global warming



When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records  on which the entire panic ultimately rested  were systematically adjusted to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified.



Two weeks ago, under the headline How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.



This was only the latest of many examples of a practice long recognised by expert observers around the world  one that raises an ever larger question mark over the entire official surface-temperature record.



Following my last article, Homewood checked a swathe of other South American weather stations around the original three. In each case he found the same suspicious one-way adjustments. First these were made by the US governments Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN). They were then amplified by two of the main official surface records, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss) and the National Climate Data Center (NCDC), which use the warming trends to estimate temperatures across the vast regions of the Earth where no measurements are taken. Yet these are the very records on which scientists and politicians rely for their belief in global warming.



Homewood has now turned his attention to the weather stations across much of the Arctic, between Canada (51 degrees W) and the heart of Siberia (87 degrees E). Again, in nearly every case, the same one-way adjustments have been made, to show warming up to 1 degree C or more higher than was indicated by the data that was actually recorded. This has surprised no one more than Traust Jonsson, who was long in charge of climate research for the Iceland met office (and with whom Homewood has been in touch). Jonsson was amazed to see how the new version completely disappears Icelands sea ice years around 1970, when a period of extreme cooling almost devastated his countrys economy.



One of the first examples of these adjustments was exposed in 2007 by the statistician Steve McIntyre, when he discovered a paper published in 1987 by James Hansen, the scientist (later turned fanatical climate activist) who for many years ran Giss. Hansens original graph showed temperatures in the Arctic as having been much higher around 1940 than at any time since. But as Homewood reveals in his blog post, Temperature adjustments transform Arctic history, Giss has turned this upside down. Arctic temperatures from that time have been lowered so much that that they are now dwarfed by those of the past 20 years.



Homewoods interest in the Arctic is partly because the vanishing of its polar ice (and the polar bears) has become such a poster-child for those trying to persuade us that we are threatened by runaway warming. But he chose that particular stretch of the Arctic because it is where ice is affected by warmer water brought in by cyclical shifts in a major Atlantic current  this last peaked at just the time 75 years ago when Arctic ice retreated even further than it has done recently. The ice-melt is not caused by rising global temperatures at all.



Of much more serious significance, however, is the way this wholesale manipulation of the official temperature record  for reasons GHCN and Giss have never plausibly explained  has become the real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records  on which the entire panic ultimately rested  were systematically adjusted to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified.Two weeks ago, under the headline How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.This was only the latest of many examples of a practice long recognised by expert observers around the world  one that raises an ever larger question mark over the entire official surface-temperature record.Following my last article, Homewood checked a swathe of other South American weather stations around the original three. In each case he found the same suspicious one-way adjustments. First these were made by the US governments Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN). They were then amplified by two of the main official surface records, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss) and the National Climate Data Center (NCDC), which use the warming trends to estimate temperatures across the vast regions of the Earth where no measurements are taken. Yet these are the very records on which scientists and politicians rely for their belief in global warming.Homewood has now turned his attention to the weather stations across much of the Arctic, between Canada (51 degrees W) and the heart of Siberia (87 degrees E). Again, in nearly every case, the same one-way adjustments have been made, to show warming up to 1 degree C or more higher than was indicated by the data that was actually recorded. This has surprised no one more than Traust Jonsson, who was long in charge of climate research for the Iceland met office (and with whom Homewood has been in touch). Jonsson was amazed to see how the new version completely disappears Icelands sea ice years around 1970, when a period of extreme cooling almost devastated his countrys economy.One of the first examples of these adjustments was exposed in 2007 by the statistician Steve McIntyre, when he discovered a paper published in 1987 by James Hansen, the scientist (later turned fanatical climate activist) who for many years ran Giss. Hansens original graph showed temperatures in the Arctic as having been much higher around 1940 than at any time since. But as Homewood reveals in his blog post, Temperature adjustments transform Arctic history, Giss has turned this upside down. Arctic temperatures from that time have been lowered so much that that they are now dwarfed by those of the past 20 years.Homewoods interest in the Arctic is partly because the vanishing of its polar ice (and the polar bears) has become such a poster-child for those trying to persuade us that we are threatened by runaway warming. But he chose that particular stretch of the Arctic because it is where ice is affected by warmer water brought in by cyclical shifts in a major Atlantic current  this last peaked at just the time 75 years ago when Arctic ice retreated even further than it has done recently. The ice-melt is not caused by rising global temperatures at all.Of much more serious significance, however, is the way this wholesale manipulation of the official temperature record  for reasons GHCN and Giss have never plausibly explained  has become the real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time. Report Spam Logged



The Man from George Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8 What can you do for Jesus? Learn what 1 person can accomplish.The Man from George Street

Mark

Hero Member



Offline



Posts: 21651







AdministratorHero MemberPosts: 21651 Re: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next... Reply #77 on: February 21, 2015, 05:17:28 am » February 21, 2015, 05:17:28 am » Republicans To Investigate Climate Data Tampering By NASA



re government climate agencies tampering with climate data to show warming? Some Republicans think so. California Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher says to expect congressional hearings on climate data tampering.



@caerbannog666 expect there to be congressional hearings into NASA altering weather station data to falsely indicate warming￼ & sea rise



 Dana Rohrabacher (@DanaRohrabacher) February 20, 2015







Rohrabacher serves as the vice chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, which has jurisdiction over NASA and other agencies that monitor the Earths climate.



Rohrabacher has long been critical of the theory of man-made global warming. Lately, the California Republican has criticizing NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for allegedly tampering with temperature data to create an artificial warming trend. Such data is then used to justify regulations aimed at curbing fossil fuel use and other industrial activities.



@grngamine journalist investigation shows records of various weather stations altered by AGW advocates to make it appear to be warming.



 Dana Rohrabacher (@DanaRohrabacher) February 19, 2015



@caerbannog666 U seem unaware of latest revelation of data manipulation. NASA reported higher temp than what was record at weather stations



 Dana Rohrabacher (@DanaRohrabacher) February 19, 2015







Rohrabacher isnt the only one to call for hearings on the science behind global warming. Oklahoma Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe has also promised to hold hearings on global warming data.



Were going to have a committee hearing on the science, said Inhofe, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. People are going to hear the other side of the story.



For years, those skeptical of man-made global warming have argued that government agencies are altering raw temperature data to create a warming trend. Allegations of tampering have increased as satellite temperature readings show much less warming than land and ocean-based weather stations show.



Science blogger Steven Goddard (a pseudonym) has been a major critic of NASAs and NOAAs temperature measurements. Goddard points out that NOAAs National Climatic Data Center makes the present look warmer by artificially cooling past temperatures to show a warming trend.



NCDC pulls every trick in the book to turn the US cooling trend into warming. The raw data shows cooling since the 1920s, Goddard told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an interview last month.



NCDC does a hockey stick of adjustments to reverse the trend, Goddard said. This includes cooling the past for time of observation bias infilling missing rural data with urban temperatures, and doing almost nothing to compensate for urban heat island effects.



NOAA does make temperature adjustments, but it argues such adjustments are necessary to remove artificial biases in surface temperature data. The biggest adjustment made by NCDC scientists is cooling past data to take into account the fact that there was a big shift from taking temperature readings in the afternoon to the morning.



We get a lot of people questioning our data adjustments, Thomas Peterson, NCDCs principal scientist, told TheDCNF. There was an artificial cool bias in the data, Peterson said.



Switching the time of the day temperatures were taken from the afternoon, when temperatures are warmer, to the morning, when temperatures are cooler, caused a cooling bias in the data. Temperature data from nearby weather stations was used to help create a baseline temperature for different regions.



But there are some drawbacks in surface temperature readings from a few thousand weather stations, boats and buoys spread out across the world. Peterson said the weather station system is only really good for the U.S.



The main problem is where there are a few stations in the middle of nowhere. Peterson said, specifically referring to weather station data problems on St. Helena Island.



UK Telegraph writer Christopher Booker joined the fray recently, using work by Goddard and other bloggers to criticize climate agencies for data tampering.



Of much more serious significance, however, is the way this wholesale manipulation of the official temperature record has become the real elephant in the room of the greatest and most costly scare the world has known, Booker wrote. This really does begin to look like one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.



http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/20/republicans-to-investigate-climate-data-tampering-by-nasa/ re government climate agencies tampering with climate data to show warming? Some Republicans think so. California Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher says to expect congressional hearings on climate data tampering.@caerbannog666 expect there to be congressional hearings into NASA altering weather station data to falsely indicate warming￼ & sea rise Dana Rohrabacher (@DanaRohrabacher) February 20, 2015Rohrabacher serves as the vice chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, which has jurisdiction over NASA and other agencies that monitor the Earths climate.Rohrabacher has long been critical of the theory of man-made global warming. Lately, the California Republican has criticizing NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for allegedly tampering with temperature data to create an artificial warming trend. Such data is then used to justify regulations aimed at curbing fossil fuel use and other industrial activities.@grngamine journalist investigation shows records of various weather stations altered by AGW advocates to make it appear to be warming. Dana Rohrabacher (@DanaRohrabacher) February 19, 2015@caerbannog666 U seem unaware of latest revelation of data manipulation. NASA reported higher temp than what was record at weather stations Dana Rohrabacher (@DanaRohrabacher) February 19, 2015Rohrabacher isnt the only one to call for hearings on the science behind global warming. Oklahoma Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe has also promised to hold hearings on global warming data.Were going to have a committee hearing on the science, said Inhofe, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. People are going to hear the other side of the story.For years, those skeptical of man-made global warming have argued that government agencies are altering raw temperature data to create a warming trend. Allegations of tampering have increased as satellite temperature readings show much less warming than land and ocean-based weather stations show.Science blogger Steven Goddard (a pseudonym) has been a major critic of NASAs and NOAAs temperature measurements. Goddard points out that NOAAs National Climatic Data Center makes the present look warmer by artificially cooling past temperatures to show a warming trend.NCDC pulls every trick in the book to turn the US cooling trend into warming. The raw data shows cooling since the 1920s, Goddard told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an interview last month.NCDC does a hockey stick of adjustments to reverse the trend, Goddard said. This includes cooling the past for time of observation bias infilling missing rural data with urban temperatures, and doing almost nothing to compensate for urban heat island effects.NOAA does make temperature adjustments, but it argues such adjustments are necessary to remove artificial biases in surface temperature data. The biggest adjustment made by NCDC scientists is cooling past data to take into account the fact that there was a big shift from taking temperature readings in the afternoon to the morning.We get a lot of people questioning our