During the run-up to every major UN global warming conference, warming-funded researchers, climate campaign organizations and the go-along media find news events and research reports to hype. COP 19 is no exception. Temperatures have been flat since the nineties and climate models embarrassingly project higher temperatures than observations show. This deprives the warming industry of the opportunity to make the claim it would most like to make — that the Earth has actually warmed as they said it would. Absent this, they find other things to hype. So far this year’s favorite has been the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, conveniently ignoring the fact that whatever the concentration of CO2 may be, temperatures have yet to behave as the models claimed they would. This week they found a new one and it’s a whopper. Climate campaigners are claiming (with no real-world basis) that typhoon Haiyan/Yolanda, which just struck the Philippines and China is the result of global warming. In short, they blame this storm on you for living in an industrialized, free society.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) climate modeling produces terrifying scenarios of global warming and apocalyptic consequences including polar melting, coastal flooding, extreme weather, and species extinctions. Such forecasts assume that human emissions of greenhouse gases—principally carbon dioxide from burning coal and oil—will cause unprecedented warming. Although the IPCC claims that they provide “scenarios” rather than forecasts, they conflate the terms in practice to suggest that their scenarios describe what will actually happen to climate over the 21st Century.
As Professor of Meteorology Dr. Richard Lindzen at MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences observed, “The latest IPCC report truly sank to the level of hilarious incoherence – it is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going.” The banner claim of this 2013 Summary for Policymakers (AR5) release is that “Human influence is extremely likely to be dominant cause of observed warming since the middle of the last century.” This “extremely likely” was ratcheted up from “very likely” they claimed in their previous 2007 report. At the same time, the IPCC actually admitted that its 2007 report estimate of greenhouse gas influence had been significantly exaggerated. One can only wonder how they have become more confident that at least more than half of the temperature rise since the mid-20th century has been caused by greenhouse gas emissions, when at the same time they are less certain about climate sensitivity to CO2. Making life even more difficult for that climate cartel is having to explain why the global climate has flat-lined over at least the past 16 years despite increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations, something they euphemistically refer to as a “pause”.
New paper demonstrates climate models don't even have the 'basic physics' of the greenhouse effect correct
A new paper published in Geophysical Research Letters inadvertently demonstrates that climate models don't even have the so-called 'basic physics' of the greenhouse effect correct. According to the paper, climate models show that "With CO2 at or below 1/8 of the 1950 value [i.e. ~39 ppm], runaway sea ice does occur as the planet cascades to a snowball Earth climate with fully ice covered oceans and global mean surface temperatures near – 30 °C." However, -30°C is much colder than the -18°C calculated* for an Earth with no atmosphere or oceans or greenhouse effect at all! Further, -30°C is much, much colder [i.e. 35°C colder] than the +5°C global mean temperature calculated using the IPCC formula** for CO2 forcing using a CO2 level of 39 ppm. It is astonishing that the authors, who claim to be top experts on the physics of CO2 radiative transfer, did not realize that their computer model is outputting physically-impossible GIGO.
It is widely reported and accepted that there has been no increase in average global temperatures for at least 16 years. Surprisingly (or not so surprisingly), the delegates in attendance at the UN's Bonn Climate Change Conference (June 3-14, 2013) were either completely unaware of the global warming standstill or didn't think it mattered.
Daily Mail: Global warming stopped 16 years ago, Met Office report reveals
Steve Goreham: Why the climate models of global warming are wrong
[Al Gore’s movie An Inconvenient Truth - PDF] - Global Warming revisited is a new video series from the Galileo Movement that reviews the current state of the Global Warming (Climate Change) Debate. In this second video we put Al Gore and his movie, An Inconvenient Truth under the spotlight and make some startling findings. For more information please visit Galileo Movement and Conscious. For Malcolm Roberts' short report on CSIRO and detailed appendices on many topics uncovered in the report. The Galileo Movement seeks to foster open and free discussion of major scientific issues, notably the current debate regarding global warming, or as it is now known, climate change.
October 22, 2013: Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore’s 24 Hours of Reality: The Cost of Carbon runs from 2 pm EDT, Tuesday October 22, 2013 to 2 pm EDT, Wednesday, October 23, 2013.Mr. Gore bases his activism on several key points, all of which are either wrong or unknown. The red text in the boxes below summarizes positions taken by Mr. Gore. The corrections of ICSC scientists follow each box.
Stanley Kurtz: Why should the privileged wish to become victims? ■ In his important new book, The Fanaticism of the Apocalypse: Save the Earth, Punish Human Beings, French intellectual gadfly Pascal Bruckner does the most thorough job yet of explaining the climate movement as a secular religion, an odd combination of deformed Christianity and reconstructed Marxism. ● Not only have the ideologically driven “studies” programs taken over a large share of the college curriculum, but many courses in conventional departments reflect the underlying assumptions of the various minority-studies concentrations. Today, classic liberal-arts courses have themselves been turned into tiny besieged islands, while the study of alleged oppression represents the leading approach at America’s colleges and universities. In this atmosphere, students cannot help wishing to see themselves as members of a persecuted group. Climate activism answers their existential challenges and gives them a sense of crusading purpose in a lonely secular world. The planet, as Bruckner would have it, is the new proletariat. Yet substitute “upper-middle-class” for “planet,” and the progression of victimhood is explained. Global warming allows the upper-middle-class to join the proletariat, cloaking erstwhile oppressors in the mantle of righteous victimhood.
Pascal Bruckner: Apocalyptic Daze ■ As an asteroid hurtles toward Earth, terrified citizens pour into the streets of Brussels to stare at the mammoth object growing before their eyes. Soon, it will pass harmlessly by—but first, a strange old man, Professor Philippulus, dressed in a white sheet and wearing a long beard, appears, beating a gong and crying: “This is a punishment; repent, for the world is ending!” We smile at the silliness of this scene from the Tintin comic strip L’Étoile Mystérieuse, published in Belgium in 1941. Yet it is also familiar, since so many people in both Europe and the United States have recently convinced themselves that the End is nigh. This depressing conviction may seem surprising, given that the West continues to enjoy an unparalleled standard of living. But Professor Philippulus has nevertheless managed to achieve power in governments, the media, and high places generally. Constantly, he spreads fear: of progress, of science, of demographics, of global warming, of technology, of food. In five years or in ten years, temperatures will rise, Earth will be uninhabitable, natural disasters will multiply, the climate will bring us to war, and nuclear plants will explode. Man has committed the sin of pride; he has destroyed his habitat and ravaged the planet; he must atone.
Marlo Lewis: Balance is not bias ■ The Cook study does not really prove what it claims to prove. The authors examined 11,944 abstracts of climate papers published between 1991-2011. They found that nearly two-thirds of the abstracts expressed no opinion on the supposed “consensus” position. So their headline – 97% of scientists agree – is inaccurate and misleading. IN 1984-speak, they are claiming Silence is Affirmation. Is the 97% figure made up out of whole cloth? Not quite. It turns out that 97% of about one-third of the abstracts affirms or implies that humans are responsible for some portion of global warming since 1951. And guess what? Just about every prominent skeptic agrees with that as well. As an attempt to discredit contrarians, the Cook study is a bust. The key science question for climate researchers today is not whether greenhouse gas emissions warm the planet but whether state-of-the-art computer models are accurate enough to forecast climate change and inform policy decisions.
Mark Steyn: I’m currently being sued in the DC by Dr. Michael Mann, the eminent global warm-monger, for mocking his increasingly discredited climate-change “hockey stick.” So Dr. Mann has sued for what his complaint to the court called “defamation of a Nobel prize recipient.” ● Five years ago, I and my fellow rightwing blowhard Ezra Levant were in the midst of a spirited campaign to rid Canada of its disgusting censorship laws and restore a centuries-old tradition of free speech to a land that, in the name of “human rights,” had surrendered it too easily. The Canadian Islamic Congress had brought simultaneous complaints before the federal, Ontario and British Columbia “human rights” regimes against Maclean’s magazine for publishing an excerpt from my book. Despite the advantages of triple jeopardy, they struck out all three times, and at the federal level their suit so damaged the reputation of “Section 13” (the national censorship law with a 100% conviction rate) that last year Parliament finally repealed it. But the urge to litigate disagreement is never far from the surface in contemporary discourse. So both Ezra Levant and I find ourselves back in court yet again. In my case, I’m currently being sued in the District of Columbia by Dr. Michael Mann, the eminent global warm-monger, for mocking (in America’s National Review) his increasingly discredited climate-change “hockey stick.” So Dr. Mann has sued for what his complaint to the court called “defamation of a Nobel prize recipient.” In fact, Dr. Mann is not a “Nobel prize recipient.”
Experts 95 per cent certain 'humans are responsible for global warming'. Well, of course they are. If there is one overriding prerequisite of every new IPCC Assessment report, it's to sound even more scary and urgent and certain than its predecessor. Professor Bob Carter noted this progression in his excellent book Climate: the Counter Consensus:
● First Assessment Report (1990) – "The observed [twentieth century] temperature increase could be largely due…to natural variability."
● Second Assessment Report (1996) – "The balance of the evidence suggests a discernible human influence on climate."
● Third Assessment Report (2001) – "There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last fifty years is attributable to human activities."
● Fourth Assessment Report (2007) – "Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperature since the mid-twentieth century is very likely [= 90 per cent probable] due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations."
The irony is, of course, that the third, fourth and fifth assessment reports were all produced in a period of rising CO2 levels in which there has been no "global warming" whatsoever. You'd imagine that, had the scientific method been more highly valued by the IPCC, this rather glaring flaw in AGW theory might have been afforded more prominence. But this is not the IPCC Assessment Reports' job. As Christopher Booker and others have often noted, the IPCC's reports are essentially political artefacts rather than scientific ones. This is why some governments – including Germany's and Belgium's – have been manoeuvring behind the scenes to have the new IPCC report "sexed up".
World's top climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years
Leaked United Nations report reveals the world's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years. Politicians fear the findings will encourage deniers of man-made climate change.
● Scientists working on the most authoritative study on climate change were urged to cover up the fact that the world’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years, it is claimed.
● A leaked copy of a United Nations report, compiled by hundreds of scientists, shows politicians in Belgium, Germany, Hungary and the United States raised concerns about the final draft. Published next week, it is expected to address the fact that 1998 was the hottest year on record and world temperatures have not yet exceeded it, which scientists have so far struggled to explain. The report is the result of six years’ work by UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is seen as the world authority on the extent of climate change and what is causing it – on which governments including Britain’s base their green policies.
● But leaked documents seen by the Associated Press, yesterday revealed deep concerns among politicians about a lack of global warming over the past few years. Germany called for the references to the slowdown in warming to be deleted, saying looking at a time span of just 10 or 15 years was ‘misleading’ and they should focus on decades or centuries. Hungary worried the report would provide ammunition for deniers of man-made climate change. Belgium objected to using 1998 as a starting year for statistics, as it was exceptionally warm and makes the graph look flat - and suggested using 1999 or 2000 instead to give a more upward-pointing curve. The United States delegation even weighed in, urging the authors of the report to explain away the lack of warming using the ‘leading hypothesis’ among scientists that the lower warming is down to more heat being absorbed by the Ocean...
Regardless of whether or not scientists are wrong on global warming, the European Union is pursuing the correct energy policies even if they lead to higher prices, Europe’s "climate commissioner" has said. ● Connie Hedegaard's comments come as the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is expected to admit that previous scientific predictions for global warming and the effects of carbon emissions have been proved to be inaccurate. In an interview with the Telegraph, Europe's most senior climate change official argued that the current policies are the correct ones because a growing world population will put pressure on energy supplies regardless of the rate of global warming.
Daily Mail: World's top climate scientists admit computers got the effects of greenhouse gases wrong
The Telegraph: Top climate scientists admit global warming forecasts were wrong
The Telegraph: Global warming? No, actually we're cooling, claim scientists
Arctic ice melt IS a problem because Right-wing newspapers smell, explains Guardian climate expert
A leaked copy of the world’s most authoritative climate study reveals scientific forecasts of imminent doom were drastically wrong. ● The Mail on Sunday has obtained the final draft of a report to be published later this month by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the "ultimate watchdog" whose massive, six-yearly ‘assessments’ are accepted by environmentalists, politicians and experts as the gospel of climate science. They are cited worldwide to justify swingeing fossil fuel taxes and subsidies for ‘renewable’ energy. ● Yet the leaked report makes the extraordinary concession that the world has been warming at only just over half the rate claimed by the IPCC in its last assessment, published in 2007. Back then, it said that the planet was warming at a rate of 0.2C every decade – a figure it claimed was in line with the forecasts made by computer climate models. But the new report says the true figure since 1951 has been only 0.12C per decade – a rate far below even the lowest computer prediction. ● The 31-page ‘summary for policymakers’ is based on a more technical 2,000-page analysis which will be issued at the same time. It also surprisingly reveals: IPCC scientists accept their forecast computers may have exaggerated the effect of increased carbon emissions on world temperatures – and not taken enough notice of natural variability.
■ Scientists from the MARUM Institute at the University of Bremen, the Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, and the ETH Zurich have published a study that find earthquakes are releasing massive amounts of methane into the atmosphere to significantly alter the temperature of the planet and change the dynamics of eco-systems across the globe.
■ David Fischer, professor at MARUM, stated: “We started going through the literature and found that a major earthquake had occurred close by, in 1945.
■ Based on several indicators, we postulated that the earthquake led to a fracturing of the sediments, releasing the gas that had been trapped below the hydrates into the ocean.” Earthquakes cause measurable tears in the ocean floor, allowing methane to seep out. By analyzing an 8.1 magnitude earthquake from 1945, researchers concluded that the Nascent Ridge, a shallow reservoir of methane, was opened after the quake.
■ Based on several indicators, we postulated that the earthquake led to a fracturing of the sediments, releasing the gas that had been trapped below the hydrates into the ocean.” Earthquakes cause measurable tears in the ocean floor, allowing methane to seep out. Fischer explained: “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) calculates the planet’s carbon budget by estimating all possible natural sources of carbon to the atmosphere, and we now provide a new mechanism of carbon export that had not been considered before.”
The first of four parts where Professor Bob Carter uses the scientific method on the popular theory with global warming being linked to CO2 levels. He examnines the hypothesis and it fails the test. Inconvenient Truth author Al Gore would find his presentation contradicted by this presentation? Will Kyoto`s greenhouse reduction goals be in vain? [Part 2 of 4] + [Part 3 of 4] + [Part 4 of 4]
MIT scientist Richard Lindzen explains his doubts about the dangers of global warming.
Anthony Watts: The President’s Climate Action Plan – the good, the bad, and the ugly (with full documents) - I’m not impressed at all with the Obama plan. It lacks real vision, and seems written mainly to appease activist groups. While there are some glimmers of positive things in it, the lack of a real way forward (solar, biofuels, and wind aren’t it) combined with new restrictions can only mean higher energy prices in our future, most of it due to government meddling in the free market. Like most everything from this president, it is likely to be mostly lip service and tied up in legal battles for years. By that time Obama will no longer be President, and we’ll be left to wrestle with the consequences.
James Delingpole: Obama: driving a green dagger into the heart of the American dream - When it comes to pinpointing the nadir of the Obama administration, future historians are going to suffer a serious case of option paralysis. Was it Benghazi? The NSA? His use of the IRS to harass the Tea party? The various scandals involving his black ops department, the EPA? Obamacare? Personally, though, I think the one they will eventually plump for is Obama's Climate Action Plan of June 25 2013. The economy, after all, is everything. But that's just what President Obama has done with today's Climate Action Plan
Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard joined forces with former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Thursday to urge global action on climate change, saying politics must be put aside [politics settled / science settled]. - The unlikely pair met in Perth and jointly penned an opinion piece that ran in News Limited newspapers. Australia is a key greenhouse gas emitter with a heavy reliance on coal mining and exports and most of its electricity comes from coal-fired power stations. But last November it pledged to sign up for a second round of the Kyoto Protocol environmental protection treaty to reduce emissions, while one of Gillard's key policies since taking office has been the introduction of a carbon pollution tax.
:: Next >>