Debate on Global Warming is NOT Over; Green Peace's Patric Moore Says It's Bunk!

[JimBowie1958]

I guess that now that he has dropped AGW theory he is no longer considered a qualified scientist?

Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore: ?I fear a global cooling? ? Rips Obama for ?hollow? climate claims | Climate Depot

Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore: ‘I fear a global cooling’ – Rips Obama for ‘hollow’ climate claims
Moore: ‘President Obama seems to say it is sufficient to say the ‘science is settled’. It is hollow statement with no content.
On Kids: ‘Change the way our kids are being taught about this subject because if we don’t there will be a whole generation of people who are just blindly following this climate hysteria.’
...

Moore noted that “the U.S. is currently been cooling” and noted that there has been “no global warming for nearly 18 years.” He also mocked the notion that “everything is due to global warming.”

“If it warms two degrees, hopefully more in Canada in the North…maybe it would be a good thing if it did,” Moore explained.

Moore noted that carbon dioxide is a trace essential gas in the atmosphere and is not the control knob of the Earth’s climate.

“CO2 is the most important nutrient for all life on earth,” he noted.

“There are so many [climate] variables that we can’t control and when you do an experiment you have to control all the variables except the one you are studying if you want to get a clean result. There are even variables we do not even understand that we cannot control,” he said.

“So it is virtually impossible to think of doing an experiment where we would be able to tweeze out the impact of CO2 versus the hundreds of other variables at work. Which is why you could never make a model that would predict the climate,” he added.

Meanwhile, voters are changing their minds as well.

Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over - Rasmussen Reports?

Voters strongly believe the debate about global warming is not over yet and reject the decision by some news organizations to ban comments from those who deny that global warming is a problem.

Only 20% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the scientific debate about global warming is over, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Sixty-three percent (63%) disagree and say the debate about global warming is not over. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Forty-eight percent (48%) of voters think there is still significant disagreement within the scientific community over global warming, while 35% believe scientists generally agree on the subject.

The tide has turned and AGW bullshit is soon to die (as a major fund raiser anyway, there will always be leftist kooks pushing it).

 

[Old Rocks]

Speaking from the point of view of the scientfic community, the debate is over. Not only that, but that community is now concentrating on how it will react to the inevitable results of AGW.

Virtually every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University in the world has policy statements to the affect that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. All you have to do to prove this statement untrue is post several policy statements from Scientific Societies that state otherwise. You cannot, because there are none.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Speaking from the point of view of the scientfic community, the debate is over. Not only that, but that community is now concentrating on how it will react to the inevitable results of AGW.

Virtually every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University in the world has policy statements to the affect that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. All you have to do to prove this statement untrue is post several policy statements from Scientific Societies that state otherwise. You cannot, because there are none.

Which only proves the political clout of establishment scientists who have too much invested in the AGW myth.

Man, I would hate to see scientists trying to essplain Global Warming in a few years if the cooling continues.

 

[JimBowie1958]

But make no mistake, in parts of the Great Lakes and Upper Midwest getting dealt the chilliest air, hoodies and jeans will be required. Highs in this region could well get stuck in the 50s and 60s – especially where there is considerable cloud cover.
Wednesday morning’s lows may drop into the 40s over a large part of the central U.S. Remember, this is July!

Poor man?s polar vortex to make shocking summer return in eastern U.S. next week

 

[JimBowie1958]

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

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

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

When you average the temperatures we have seen for the first 9 days of July we are already 3°C below normal. Adding on this upcoming cold outbreak will likely cause the entire month to end up below average. This would mean that six of the first seven months of 2014 have brought below normal temperatures in Northern Ontario - with only June being near normal.



Polar vortex arrives for mid-July - LOCAL2 Sault Ste. Marie

 

[Old Rocks]

Was in the Dakotas the last two weeks of June, saw some very violent thunderstorms. And while the mid-west had a very cold winter and a cool spring and summer, what is happening in Alaska?

Record warmth, confused plants: An Alaska January to remember | Alaska Dispatch

Warm weather blanketing Alaska for days now has shattered records, turned plants green and changed the way some people live.

The temperature hit 62 degrees at Port Alsworth, on Lake Clark, on Monday, tying the highest January temperature ever recorded in the state, the National Weather Service reported.

RELATED:
John Schandelmeier: Weird weather can have an upside
Sunday's Ski for Women is a go, one way or another
Nome peaked at 51 degrees, topping the city's warmest January with a temperature typical of early June, forecasters said.

In Anchorage, snow continued melting Tuesday in the latest of 15 consecutive days with temperatures at 32 degrees or above. As of Monday, it was the city's fourth warmest January ever recorded.

"It's spectacular," said Sam Albanese, warning coordination

2014: A Weird Weather Year in Alaska So Far | Climate Central

With the arrival of summer, the year is nearly halfway through, and it has been a warm and somewhat weird one weather-wise for Alaska. While the eastern half of the U.S. shivered through winter, Alaska saw unseasonable warmth, which melted snows early in some areas and brought rains instead of snows. Snow and rain failed to fall in other places and have led to heightened wildfire risks, water restrictions and a particularly tough Iditarod.

 

[Old Rocks]

Speaking from the point of view of the scientfic community, the debate is over. Not only that, but that community is now concentrating on how it will react to the inevitable results of AGW.

Virtually every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University in the world has policy statements to the affect that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. All you have to do to prove this statement untrue is post several policy statements from Scientific Societies that state otherwise. You cannot, because there are none.

Which only proves the political clout of establishment scientists who have too much invested in the AGW myth.

Man, I would hate to see scientists trying to essplain Global Warming in a few years if the cooling continues.

What cooling?

Global Analysis - May 2014 | State of the Climate | National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)

Global Highlights
The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for May 2014 was record highest for this month, at 0.74°C (1.33°F) above the 20th century average of 14.8°C (58.6°F).
The global land surface temperature was 1.13°C (2.03°F) above the 20th century average of 11.1°C (52.0°F), the fourth highest for May on record. For the ocean, the May global sea surface temperature was 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 16.3°C (61.3°F), making it the record highest for May and tying with June 1998, October 2003, and July 2009 as the highest departure from average for any month on record.
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the March–May period was 0.74°C (1.33°F) above the 20th century average of 13.7°C (56.7°F), making it the second warmest such period on record, behind 2010.
The March–May worldwide land surface temperature was 1.26°C (2.27°F) above the 20th century average, the third warmest such period on record. The global ocean surface temperature for the same period was 0.54°C (0.97°F) above the 20th century average, also the third warmest March–May on record.
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the January–May period (year-to-date) was 0.66°C (1.19°F) above the 20th century average of 13.1°C (55.5°F), the fifth warmest such period on record.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I guess that now that he has dropped AGW theory he is no longer considered a qualified scientist?

Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore: ?I fear a global cooling? ? Rips Obama for ?hollow? climate claims | Climate Depot

Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore: ‘I fear a global cooling’ – Rips Obama for ‘hollow’ climate claims
Moore: ‘President Obama seems to say it is sufficient to say the ‘science is settled’. It is hollow statement with no content.
On Kids: ‘Change the way our kids are being taught about this subject because if we don’t there will be a whole generation of people who are just blindly following this climate hysteria.’
...

Moore noted that “the U.S. is currently been cooling” and noted that there has been “no global warming for nearly 18 years.” He also mocked the notion that “everything is due to global warming.”

“If it warms two degrees, hopefully more in Canada in the North…maybe it would be a good thing if it did,” Moore explained.

Moore noted that carbon dioxide is a trace essential gas in the atmosphere and is not the control knob of the Earth’s climate.

“CO2 is the most important nutrient for all life on earth,” he noted.

“There are so many [climate] variables that we can’t control and when you do an experiment you have to control all the variables except the one you are studying if you want to get a clean result. There are even variables we do not even understand that we cannot control,” he said.

“So it is virtually impossible to think of doing an experiment where we would be able to tweeze out the impact of CO2 versus the hundreds of other variables at work. Which is why you could never make a model that would predict the climate,” he added.

Meanwhile, voters are changing their minds as well.

Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over - Rasmussen Reports?

Voters strongly believe the debate about global warming is not over yet and reject the decision by some news organizations to ban comments from those who deny that global warming is a problem.

Only 20% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the scientific debate about global warming is over, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Sixty-three percent (63%) disagree and say the debate about global warming is not over. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Forty-eight percent (48%) of voters think there is still significant disagreement within the scientific community over global warming, while 35% believe scientists generally agree on the subject.

The tide has turned and AGW bullshit is soon to die (as a major fund raiser anyway, there will always be leftist kooks pushing it).

"Moore's views and change of stance (see above) have evoked controversy in environmentalist arenas. He is accused of having "abruptly turned his back on the environmental movement" and "being a mouthpiece for some of the very interests Greenpeace was founded to counter".[25][50] His critics point out Moore's business relations with "polluters and clear-cutters" through his consultancy.[25] Moore has earned his living since the early 1990s primarily by consulting for, and publicly speaking for a wide variety of corporations and lobby groups such as the Nuclear Energy Institute.[42] Monte Hummel, MScF, President, World Wildlife Fund Canada has claimed that Moore's book, Pacific Spirit, is a collection of "pseudoscience and dubious assumptions."

The writer and environmental activist George Monbiot has written critically of Moore's work with the Indonesian logging firm Asia Pulp & Paper (APP). Moore was hired as a consultant to write an environmental 'inspection report' on APP operations. According to Monbiot, Moore's company is not a monitoring firm and the consultants used were experts in public relations, not tropical ecology or Indonesian law. Monbiot has said that sections of the report were directly copied from an APP PR brochure,[30][51] adding that hiring Moore is now what companies do if their brand is turning toxic.[30]

The Nuclear Information and Resource Service, an anti-nuclear group, criticized Moore saying that his comment in 1976 that "it should be remembered that there are employed in the nuclear industry some very high-powered public relations organizations. One can no more trust them to tell the truth about nuclear power than about which brand of toothpaste will result in this apparently insoluble problem" was forecasting his own future.[52]A Columbia Journalism Review editorial criticizes the press for uncritically printing "pro-nuclear songs" such as Moore's, acting as the paid spokesman of the nuclear industry."
Patrick Moore (environmentalist) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Only people disputing global warming all benefit financially from energy corporations and those contributing the most to the change. Energy companies will make more money if the ice caps melt giving access to untapped energy reserves. And the US and RUssia are already stationing troops up there to secure them when they're finally accessible. If enough people buy the line 'global warming isn't happening, or being caused by people' then the ice caps will melt completely and filthy rich people will get filthier.

Whole subject boils down to this:

-Either global warming is happening, and is being caused by people

or,

-It isn't happening, or at least isn't being caused by us.

In the latter case there's no need to change anything. But ask yourself this, "What if it is happening, and is being caused by us?" In that case, what possible reason does anyone have to dispute it?

As with everything else, money is usually the biggest reason.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I guess that now that he has dropped AGW theory he is no longer considered a qualified scientist?

Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore: ?I fear a global cooling? ? Rips Obama for ?hollow? climate claims | Climate Depot

Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore: ‘I fear a global cooling’ – Rips Obama for ‘hollow’ climate claims
Moore: ‘President Obama seems to say it is sufficient to say the ‘science is settled’. It is hollow statement with no content.
On Kids: ‘Change the way our kids are being taught about this subject because if we don’t there will be a whole generation of people who are just blindly following this climate hysteria.’
...

Moore noted that “the U.S. is currently been cooling” and noted that there has been “no global warming for nearly 18 years.” He also mocked the notion that “everything is due to global warming.”

“If it warms two degrees, hopefully more in Canada in the North…maybe it would be a good thing if it did,” Moore explained.

Moore noted that carbon dioxide is a trace essential gas in the atmosphere and is not the control knob of the Earth’s climate.

“CO2 is the most important nutrient for all life on earth,” he noted.

“There are so many [climate] variables that we can’t control and when you do an experiment you have to control all the variables except the one you are studying if you want to get a clean result. There are even variables we do not even understand that we cannot control,” he said.

“So it is virtually impossible to think of doing an experiment where we would be able to tweeze out the impact of CO2 versus the hundreds of other variables at work. Which is why you could never make a model that would predict the climate,” he added.

Meanwhile, voters are changing their minds as well.

Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over - Rasmussen Reports?

Voters strongly believe the debate about global warming is not over yet and reject the decision by some news organizations to ban comments from those who deny that global warming is a problem.

Only 20% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the scientific debate about global warming is over, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Sixty-three percent (63%) disagree and say the debate about global warming is not over. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Forty-eight percent (48%) of voters think there is still significant disagreement within the scientific community over global warming, while 35% believe scientists generally agree on the subject.

The tide has turned and AGW bullshit is soon to die (as a major fund raiser anyway, there will always be leftist kooks pushing it).

"Moore's views and change of stance (see above) have evoked controversy in environmentalist arenas. He is accused of having "abruptly turned his back on the environmental movement" and "being a mouthpiece for some of the very interests Greenpeace was founded to counter".[25][50] His critics point out Moore's business relations with "polluters and clear-cutters" through his consultancy.[25] Moore has earned his living since the early 1990s primarily by consulting for, and publicly speaking for a wide variety of corporations and lobby groups such as the Nuclear Energy Institute.[42] Monte Hummel, MScF, President, World Wildlife Fund Canada has claimed that Moore's book, Pacific Spirit, is a collection of "pseudoscience and dubious assumptions."

The writer and environmental activist George Monbiot has written critically of Moore's work with the Indonesian logging firm Asia Pulp & Paper (APP). Moore was hired as a consultant to write an environmental 'inspection report' on APP operations. According to Monbiot, Moore's company is not a monitoring firm and the consultants used were experts in public relations, not tropical ecology or Indonesian law. Monbiot has said that sections of the report were directly copied from an APP PR brochure,[30][51] adding that hiring Moore is now what companies do if their brand is turning toxic.[30]

The Nuclear Information and Resource Service, an anti-nuclear group, criticized Moore saying that his comment in 1976 that "it should be remembered that there are employed in the nuclear industry some very high-powered public relations organizations. One can no more trust them to tell the truth about nuclear power than about which brand of toothpaste will result in this apparently insoluble problem" was forecasting his own future.[52]A Columbia Journalism Review editorial criticizes the press for uncritically printing "pro-nuclear songs" such as Moore's, acting as the paid spokesman of the nuclear industry."
Patrick Moore (environmentalist) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Only people disputing global warming all benefit financially from energy corporations and those contributing the most to the change. Energy companies will make more money if the ice caps melt giving access to untapped energy reserves. And the US and RUssia are already stationing troops up there to secure them when they're finally accessible. If enough people buy the line 'global warming isn't happening, or being caused by people' then the ice caps will melt completely and filthy rich people will get filthier.

Whole subject boils down to this:

-Either global warming is happening, and is being caused by people

or,

-It isn't happening, or at least isn't being caused by us.

In the latter case there's no need to change anything. But ask yourself this, "What if it is happening, and is being caused by us?" In that case, what possible reason does anyone have to dispute it?

As with everything else, money is usually the biggest reason.

Or 3) the world was warming as it came out of the 'Little Ice Age' that ended in the early 1800's, and has now plateaued and is in a period of cyclic oscillation.

The interesting thing about using cyclic data is that you can argue trends are increasing, decreasing or remaining the same off the same data by where you chose to start and end your data set. Start with data in an up cycle and end in a down cycle and you have a cooling trend, and vice versa.

We were warming until about 1998 and now we are in a slow cooling period according to the UK MET.

Global warming: Met Office releases revised global temperature predictions showing planet is NOT rapidly heating up | Mail Online

Global warming: has the rise in temperatures 'paused'? | Environment | theguardian.com

Scientists Baffled as Report Proves Global Warming Has Stopped | Collective-Evolution


and the AGW alarmist defense:
"Global Warming Has Stopped"? How to Fool People Using "Cherry-Picked" Climate Data - Forbes

Has global warming stopped? | Carbon Brief

Researchers Puzzled About Global Warming Standstill | The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)

 

[JimBowie1958]

Speaking from the point of view of the scientfic community, the debate is over. Not only that, but that community is now concentrating on how it will react to the inevitable results of AGW.

Virtually every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University in the world has policy statements to the affect that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. All you have to do to prove this statement untrue is post several policy statements from Scientific Societies that state otherwise. You cannot, because there are none.

Which only proves the political clout of establishment scientists who have too much invested in the AGW myth.

Man, I would hate to see scientists trying to essplain Global Warming in a few years if the cooling continues.

What cooling?

Global Analysis - May 2014 | State of the Climate | National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)

Global Highlights
The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for May 2014 was record highest for this month, at 0.74°C (1.33°F) above the 20th century average of 14.8°C (58.6°F).
The global land surface temperature was 1.13°C (2.03°F) above the 20th century average of 11.1°C (52.0°F), the fourth highest for May on record. For the ocean, the May global sea surface temperature was 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 16.3°C (61.3°F), making it the record highest for May and tying with June 1998, October 2003, and July 2009 as the highest departure from average for any month on record.
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the March–May period was 0.74°C (1.33°F) above the 20th century average of 13.7°C (56.7°F), making it the second warmest such period on record, behind 2010.
The March–May worldwide land surface temperature was 1.26°C (2.27°F) above the 20th century average, the third warmest such period on record. The global ocean surface temperature for the same period was 0.54°C (0.97°F) above the 20th century average, also the third warmest March–May on record.
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the January–May period (year-to-date) was 0.66°C (1.19°F) above the 20th century average of 13.1°C (55.5°F), the fifth warmest such period on record.

See the links above, both for and against and decide for yourself.

As to AGW theory, if it warms it's Global Warming, if it cools its climate change, if there are fewer or more hurricanes its AGW, etc.

I.e., AGW theory is an untestable proposition, is not valid science and is a tautology.

 

[JimBowie1958]

 

[JimBowie1958]

Coldest Antarctic June Ever Recorded | Watts Up With That?

Antarctica continues to defy the global warming script, with a report from Meteo France, that June this year was the coldest Antarctic June ever recorded, at the French Antarctic Dumont d’Urville Station.

According to the press release, during June this year, the average temperature was -22.4c (-8.3F), 6.6c (11.9F) lower than normal. This is the coldest June ever recorded at the station, and almost the coldest monthly average ever – only September 1953 was colder, with a recorded average temperature of -23.5c (-10.3F).

June this year also broke the June daily minimum temperature record, with a new record low of -34.9c (-30.8F).

Other unusual features of the June temperature record are an unusual excess of sunlight hours (11.8 hours rather than the normal 7.4 hours), and unusually light wind conditions.