Local Take on Global Cooling from Missouri.

[Missourian]

From the Opinion Section of my regional paper, The Springfield News-Leader:

Al Gore and his noisy band of global-warming alarmists have a very big problem: planet Earth has moved into a cooling mode, and the evidence to support their sweltering-earth alarmism is unraveling like a cheap sweater. With cherry-picked data and flawed computer models, they have tried to convince us the debate is over. Not so fast.

Consider some facts: Water vapor is Earth's most significant greenhouse gas--not carbon dioxide (CO2). Man-made CO2 is only 3 percent of global CO2 emissions; nature accounts for the other 97 percent. The Earth has been cooling for almost a decade and from January 2005 (Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" release date), global cooling has occurred at a rate of minus 5.5 degrees C per century.

Science accepts no hypothesis at face value. Given time, science will settle the global warming debate. Unfortunately, science is not being afforded that opportunity because the debate has been co-opted by the politicians. With catastrophic global warming as their justification, some in the U.S. Congress are determined to raise $646 billion via legislation known as carbon cap-and-trade."...

Well-informed voters must not allow laws for cap-and-trade | News-Leader.com | Springfield News-Leader




​

 

[code1211]

Not only that, the predicted cmplete disappearrance of the Arctic Sea ice seems to be slowing, that is, actually not happening. The Arctic Sea ice extent is just a smidge below the average established from 1979 to 2000.

Maybe the crisis is overstated.

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

 

[Sinatra]

Well done Code - more and more are joining the ranks of the common sense anti-global warming brigade!

Look for a HUGE push in pro-AGW PR-Machine though this summer, which will precede the real down n dirty cap n trade debate.

 

[k2skier]

Not only that, the predicted cmplete disappearrance of the Arctic Sea ice seems to be slowing, that is, actually not happening. The Arctic Sea ice extent is just a smidge below the average established from 1979 to 2000.

Maybe the crisis is overstated.

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

And maybe the 2 big El Nina years helped increase the anomaly?

 

[Old Rocks]

At present, the Arctic Sea Ice cover is almost to the norm for the period from 1979 to 2000. However, most of that ice is year old ice. If it stays frozen over the summer, we can all breath a sigh of relief. If it goes ahead and melts as it has for the last five years, we will have another year in at least the lowest ten for cover, possibly in the lowest three.

If, by a cooling trend, you mean cooler than 1998, then it is cooler. If you mean cooler than the norm for the last 150 years, 11 of the last 13 years have been the warmest on record. That does not constitute a cooling trend. In 2008 we had a strong and persistant La Nina, and a solar minimum, we should have had a very cold year, compared to the average. What we had was a year that tied 2001 for the eighth warmest on record. What will we see in the next El Nino? That should happen within the next three years.

OK. Listen, water vapor is the most important at any given instant. However, remove the water vapor totally from the atmosphere, and within days, the warmth of the atmosphere will draw more vapor up into the atmosphere. Remove CO2, and it will take many, many years for the natural processes to put enough CO2 back into the atmosphere to warm the Earth again. We have actually had this happen a couple of times in the geological record, and the oceans froze almost down to the equator.

The Snowball Earth

Many lines of evidence support a theory that the entire Earth was ice-covered for long periods 600-700 million years ago. Each glacial period lasted for millions of years and ended violently under extreme greenhouse conditions. These climate shocks triggered the evolution of multicellular animal life, and challenge long-held assumptions regarding the limits of global change.

by Paul F. Hoffman and Daniel P. Schrag

August 8, 1999
The Snowball Earth

That would seem to indicate that the important greenhouse gas is CO2, not water vapor. CO2 is like a little valve that controls a big valve. The big valve may deliver more, but it is under the control of the small valve. For that reason, the most important greenhouse gas is not water vapor, but CO2.

 

[ItsFairmont]

All of this begs the question: Who cares?

 

[code1211]

At present, the Arctic Sea Ice cover is almost to the norm for the period from 1979 to 2000. However, most of that ice is year old ice. If it stays frozen over the summer, we can all breath a sigh of relief. If it goes ahead and melts as it has for the last five years, we will have another year in at least the lowest ten for cover, possibly in the lowest three.

If, by a cooling trend, you mean cooler than 1998, then it is cooler. If you mean cooler than the norm for the last 150 years, 11 of the last 13 years have been the warmest on record. That does not constitute a cooling trend. In 2008 we had a strong and persistant La Nina, and a solar minimum, we should have had a very cold year, compared to the average. What we had was a year that tied 2001 for the eighth warmest on record. What will we see in the next El Nino? That should happen within the next three years.

OK. Listen, water vapor is the most important at any given instant. However, remove the water vapor totally from the atmosphere, and within days, the warmth of the atmosphere will draw more vapor up into the atmosphere. Remove CO2, and it will take many, many years for the natural processes to put enough CO2 back into the atmosphere to warm the Earth again. We have actually had this happen a couple of times in the geological record, and the oceans froze almost down to the equator.

The Snowball Earth

Many lines of evidence support a theory that the entire Earth was ice-covered for long periods 600-700 million years ago. Each glacial period lasted for millions of years and ended violently under extreme greenhouse conditions. These climate shocks triggered the evolution of multicellular animal life, and challenge long-held assumptions regarding the limits of global change.

by Paul F. Hoffman and Daniel P. Schrag

August 8, 1999
The Snowball Earth

That would seem to indicate that the important greenhouse gas is CO2, not water vapor. CO2 is like a little valve that controls a big valve. The big valve may deliver more, but it is under the control of the small valve. For that reason, the most important greenhouse gas is not water vapor, but CO2.

During the last million years, the Ice Ages have ended when the warming trends started. Those warming trends in every case, every single one, began when CO2 was at the lowest point in that cycle.

Warming has never been the result of rising CO2. Right now, CO2 continues to rise and cooling is the result.

A causal link should produce a predictable effect, not a continuing conundrum.

 

[Old Rocks]

At present, the Arctic Sea Ice cover is almost to the norm for the period from 1979 to 2000. However, most of that ice is year old ice. If it stays frozen over the summer, we can all breath a sigh of relief. If it goes ahead and melts as it has for the last five years, we will have another year in at least the lowest ten for cover, possibly in the lowest three.

If, by a cooling trend, you mean cooler than 1998, then it is cooler. If you mean cooler than the norm for the last 150 years, 11 of the last 13 years have been the warmest on record. That does not constitute a cooling trend. In 2008 we had a strong and persistant La Nina, and a solar minimum, we should have had a very cold year, compared to the average. What we had was a year that tied 2001 for the eighth warmest on record. What will we see in the next El Nino? That should happen within the next three years.

OK. Listen, water vapor is the most important at any given instant. However, remove the water vapor totally from the atmosphere, and within days, the warmth of the atmosphere will draw more vapor up into the atmosphere. Remove CO2, and it will take many, many years for the natural processes to put enough CO2 back into the atmosphere to warm the Earth again. We have actually had this happen a couple of times in the geological record, and the oceans froze almost down to the equator.

The Snowball Earth

Many lines of evidence support a theory that the entire Earth was ice-covered for long periods 600-700 million years ago. Each glacial period lasted for millions of years and ended violently under extreme greenhouse conditions. These climate shocks triggered the evolution of multicellular animal life, and challenge long-held assumptions regarding the limits of global change.

by Paul F. Hoffman and Daniel P. Schrag

August 8, 1999
The Snowball Earth

That would seem to indicate that the important greenhouse gas is CO2, not water vapor. CO2 is like a little valve that controls a big valve. The big valve may deliver more, but it is under the control of the small valve. For that reason, the most important greenhouse gas is not water vapor, but CO2.

During the last million years, the Ice Ages have ended when the warming trends started. Those warming trends in every case, every single one, began when CO2 was at the lowest point in that cycle.

Warming has never been the result of rising CO2. Right now, CO2 continues to rise and cooling is the result.

A causal link should produce a predictable effect, not a continuing conundrum.

A cooling trend that produces the eleven warmest years on record in the last thirteen years?

 

[code1211]

At present, the Arctic Sea Ice cover is almost to the norm for the period from 1979 to 2000. However, most of that ice is year old ice. If it stays frozen over the summer, we can all breath a sigh of relief. If it goes ahead and melts as it has for the last five years, we will have another year in at least the lowest ten for cover, possibly in the lowest three.

If, by a cooling trend, you mean cooler than 1998, then it is cooler. If you mean cooler than the norm for the last 150 years, 11 of the last 13 years have been the warmest on record. That does not constitute a cooling trend. In 2008 we had a strong and persistant La Nina, and a solar minimum, we should have had a very cold year, compared to the average. What we had was a year that tied 2001 for the eighth warmest on record. What will we see in the next El Nino? That should happen within the next three years.

OK. Listen, water vapor is the most important at any given instant. However, remove the water vapor totally from the atmosphere, and within days, the warmth of the atmosphere will draw more vapor up into the atmosphere. Remove CO2, and it will take many, many years for the natural processes to put enough CO2 back into the atmosphere to warm the Earth again. We have actually had this happen a couple of times in the geological record, and the oceans froze almost down to the equator.

The Snowball Earth

Many lines of evidence support a theory that the entire Earth was ice-covered for long periods 600-700 million years ago. Each glacial period lasted for millions of years and ended violently under extreme greenhouse conditions. These climate shocks triggered the evolution of multicellular animal life, and challenge long-held assumptions regarding the limits of global change.

by Paul F. Hoffman and Daniel P. Schrag

August 8, 1999
The Snowball Earth

That would seem to indicate that the important greenhouse gas is CO2, not water vapor. CO2 is like a little valve that controls a big valve. The big valve may deliver more, but it is under the control of the small valve. For that reason, the most important greenhouse gas is not water vapor, but CO2.

During the last million years, the Ice Ages have ended when the warming trends started. Those warming trends in every case, every single one, began when CO2 was at the lowest point in that cycle.

Warming has never been the result of rising CO2. Right now, CO2 continues to rise and cooling is the result.

A causal link should produce a predictable effect, not a continuing conundrum.

A cooling trend that produces the eleven warmest years on record in the last thirteen years?

Which record are you looking at?

The link below shows the last 65 or so million years. During that period, we have vascillated within about a 20 degree range. We are currntly below the mid point by a good piece. We seem to be staying well below the mid point and there is no indication that we will approach the mid point again any time soon.

Of the 20 degree range, we are only using the bottom 8 or so degrees to move from ice Age to Interglacial and back again.

Are these temperatures not also on record?

We are experiencing only the second occassion in 65 million years that the South Pole has been glaciated.

In this "record", we are in the coolest million years ever.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/e/e2/65_Myr_Climate_Change_Rev.png

 

[driveby]

Al Gore wants money, global warming is real ..........

 

[Old Rocks]

Al Gore wants money, global warming is real ..........

Sure, Al Gore makes so much more money that Shell, Exxon, BP, and the rest put together.

 

[driveby]

Al Gore wants money, global warming is real ..........

Sure, Al Gore makes so much more money that Shell, Exxon, BP, and the rest put together.

Those companies sell a product, create revenue and are not a burden to the tax payers. Al Gore is selling a fucking hoax that requires billions of tax payer dollars for "research and prevention"........

 

[Old Rocks]

Al Gore wants money, global warming is real ..........

Sure, Al Gore makes so much more money that Shell, Exxon, BP, and the rest put together.

Those companies sell a product, create revenue and are not a burden to the tax payers. Al Gore is selling a fucking hoax that requires billions of tax payer dollars for "research and prevention"........

OK, you say global warming is a hoax. But all of the Scientific Societies, all of the National Academies of Science, and all of the major Univerisities in the world state that it is real, we are the cause, and the the effects are already being felt. Now who do you think an intelligent person would believe?Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[driveby]

Sure, Al Gore makes so much more money that Shell, Exxon, BP, and the rest put together.

Those companies sell a product, create revenue and are not a burden to the tax payers. Al Gore is selling a fucking hoax that requires billions of tax payer dollars for "research and prevention"........

OK, you say global warming is a hoax. But all of the Scientific Societies, all of the National Academies of Science, and all of the major Univerisities in the world state that it is real, we are the cause, and the the effects are already being felt. Now who do you think an intelligent person would believe?Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This has been covered to death on this board, there are plenty that state it's a hoax as well, but their opinions get shut down.

Case in point:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/74879-democrats-fear-global-warming-skeptic.html

 

[Old Rocks]

Those companies sell a product, create revenue and are not a burden to the tax payers. Al Gore is selling a fucking hoax that requires billions of tax payer dollars for "research and prevention"........

OK, you say global warming is a hoax. But all of the Scientific Societies, all of the National Academies of Science, and all of the major Univerisities in the world state that it is real, we are the cause, and the the effects are already being felt. Now who do you think an intelligent person would believe?Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This has been covered to death on this board, there are plenty that state it's a hoax as well, but their opinions get shut down.

Case in point:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/74879-democrats-fear-global-warming-skeptic.html

Sure, it has been covered. I, and others, offer real scientists, real articles from peer reviewed scientific journals, and we are countered by articles from wingnut think tanks.

And there are no scientific societies that claim it is a hoax. There are no National Academies of Science that state it is a hoax. There are no major universities that claim it is a hoax. Just a few scientists that are not in the field, a few paid whores, like Singer and Lindzen. There is an absolutely overwhelming consensus on this in the scientific community.

You people are in denial simply because it does not fit your political ideology. And you have lost almost all influence in our government because of your disconnect with reality in this and almost all other fields.

 

[Missourian]

During the last million years, the Ice Ages have ended when the warming trends started. Those warming trends in every case, every single one, began when CO2 was at the lowest point in that cycle.

Warming has never been the result of rising CO2. Right now, CO2 continues to rise and cooling is the result.

A causal link should produce a predictable effect, not a continuing conundrum.

A cooling trend that produces the eleven warmest years on record in the last thirteen years?

Which record are you looking at?

The link below shows the last 65 or so million years. During that period, we have vascillated within about a 20 degree range. We are currntly below the mid point by a good piece. We seem to be staying well below the mid point and there is no indication that we will approach the mid point again any time soon.

Of the 20 degree range, we are only using the bottom 8 or so degrees to move from ice Age to Interglacial and back again.

Are these temperatures not also on record?

We are experiencing only the second occassion in 65 million years that the South Pole has been glaciated.

In this "record", we are in the coolest million years ever.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/e/e2/65_Myr_Climate_Change_Rev.png

Interesting.

 

[code1211]

OK, you say global warming is a hoax. But all of the Scientific Societies, all of the National Academies of Science, and all of the major Univerisities in the world state that it is real, we are the cause, and the the effects are already being felt. Now who do you think an intelligent person would believe?Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This has been covered to death on this board, there are plenty that state it's a hoax as well, but their opinions get shut down.

Case in point:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/74879-democrats-fear-global-warming-skeptic.html

Sure, it has been covered. I, and others, offer real scientists, real articles from peer reviewed scientific journals, and we are countered by articles from wingnut think tanks.

And there are no scientific societies that claim it is a hoax. There are no National Academies of Science that state it is a hoax. There are no major universities that claim it is a hoax. Just a few scientists that are not in the field, a few paid whores, like Singer and Lindzen. There is an absolutely overwhelming consensus on this in the scientific community.

You people are in denial simply because it does not fit your political ideology. And you have lost almost all influence in our government because of your disconnect with reality in this and almost all other fields.

The key to good science is that it offers predictabilty. Global Warming Science does not. Dr. Hansen created three scenarios detailed on this link:

http://rankexploits.com/musings/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/hansenlineartrend.jpg

The A and B scenarios show his prdiction for temperatures if the Rise in CO2 increased or remained stable. The C scenario showed a prediction if the increase in CO2 was dramatically reduced. The actual increase has been below all three and there has been an increase in CO2.

All of the Societies and Academies know this and yet do not change their conclusion.

What does this tell you about their conclusion and their method of reaching their conclusion?

It tells me that they fall into the group that you describe as "paid whores".