End Times and Current Events
October 18, 2018, 02:05:59 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome To End Times and Current Events.
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next...

Shoutbox
August 08, 2018, 02:38:10 am suzytr says: Hello, any good churches in the Sacto, CA area, also looking in Reno NV, thanks in advance and God Bless you Smiley
January 29, 2018, 01:21:57 am Christian40 says: It will be interesting to see what happens this year Israel being 70 years as a modern nation may 14 2018
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
September 14, 2017, 04:31:26 am Christian40 says: i have thought that i'm reaping from past sins then my life has been impacted in ways from having non believers in my ancestry.
September 11, 2017, 06:59:33 am Psalm 51:17 says: The law of reaping and sowing. It's amazing how God's mercy and longsuffering has hovered over America so long. (ie, the infrastructure is very bad here b/c for many years, they were grossly underspent on. 1st Tim 6:10, the god of materialism has its roots firmly in the West) And remember once upon a time ago when shacking up b/w straight couples drew shock awe?

Exodus 20:5  Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
View Shout History
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Global warming ended 15 years ago; 'mini-ice age' next...  (Read 2571 times)
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #60 on: 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/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #61 on: 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
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #62 on: 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
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #63 on: 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
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #64 on: August 08, 2014, 04:47:31 am »

NASA Climate Scientist Explains 15-Year ‘Global Warming Hiatus’

 Cheesy

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/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #65 on: August 22, 2014, 11:41:00 am »

Cause of global warming hiatus found deep in the Atlantic Ocean

 Roll Eyes

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.

 Cheesy

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/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #66 on: 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: 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 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
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: September 01, 2014, 02:49:08 pm »

This has been by far the coolest summer in my lifetime(in North Texas now, but spent all my lifetime in Alabama, North Texas, and New Orleans). No, it wasn't Fall-weather like, per se - but nonetheless didn't feel much heat, and couldn't tell you how many times I had to tell my mom and others in the car, "Could we turn off the AC?".

Looks like this winter is shaping up to be THE most freezing ever!
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #68 on: 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.

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #69 on: 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: 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.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #71 on: October 15, 2014, 10:49:20 pm »

Frigid Winter Alarm Triggered Early as Snow Piles Up in Siberia...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-14/new-york-gets-frigid-winter-warning-from-siberia-snowfall.html

Great Lakes water temps 6 degrees colder than normal...
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/14/water-temperature-of-the-great-lakes-is-over-6-degrees-colder-than-normal/

GALLUP: 'Global Warming' least important issue surveyed...
http://www.gallup.com/poll/178268/voters-give-gop-edge-handling-top-issues.aspx
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #72 on: 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
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #73 on: 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: http://www.mlive.com/weather/index.ssf/2014/11/great_lakes_ice_cover_developi.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #74 on: November 24, 2014, 05:16:42 pm »

I was thinking about this lately - this whole "overpopulation" propaganda that's part of global warming - this is JMHO, but they could very well be conditioning the masses for the rapture, why? B/c over and over and over again, they're repeating this "overpopulation" lie - so what will happen when the rapture of the church happens? The Antichrist/False Prophet will use THIS(or at least in part) to "explain away" these why these "mass disappearances" happened(and even "conservative Republicans", that are lost, that is, will buy into this lie).
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #75 on: December 11, 2014, 09:40:33 am »

A Year Without a Summer will happen again and Western Civilisation is not prepared!

http://www.thebigwobble.org/2014/12/a-year-without-summer-will-happen-again.html?utm_source=BP_recent



How Icelandic volcano Bardarbunga will plunge Europe into the dark ages:The eruption of Icelandic volcano Bardarbunga will have sweeping repercussions for the whole of Europe, and has been pencilled in as an 'outrageous' risk for 2015 by Saxo Bank

http://www.thebigwobble.org/2014/12/how-icelandic-volcano-bardarbunga-will.html?utm_source=BP_recent

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/index.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #76 on: 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.

 Angry http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #77 on: 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/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #78 on: April 07, 2015, 07:09:41 am »

Video: UN Climate Change Official Says “We Should Make Every Effort” To Depopulate The Planet
"There is pressure in the system to go toward that; we should do everything possible"


Officials within the UN are pushing the notion that the human population should be reduced in order to effectively combat climate change.

The long standing notion has been continually pushed by Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC). In 2013, Figueres had a conversation with Climate One founder Greg Dalton regarding “fertility rates in population,” as a contributor to climate change.

The comments are made at 4.20 into the following video:



“A related issue is fertility rates in population.” Dalton opined. “A lot of people in energy and environmental circles don’t wanna go near that because it’s politically charged. It’s not their issue.” he added.

“But isn’t it true that stopping the rise of the population would be one of the biggest levers and driving the rise of green house gases?” Dalton asked.

“Obviously less people would exert less pressure on the natural resources,” Figueres answered, also noting that estimates suggest the Earth’s population will rise to nine billion by 2050.

Dalton then questioned whether that figure could in some way be stalled or halted.

“So is nine billion a forgone conclusion? That’s like baked in, done, no way to change that?” he asked Figueres.

“There is pressure in the system to go toward that; we can definitely change those, right? We can definitely change those numbers,” Figueres said in response.

“Really, we should make every effort to change those numbers because we are already, today, already exceeding the planet’s planetary carrying capacity.” she also claimed.

“So yes we should do everything possible. But we cannot fall into the very simplistic opinion of saying just by curtailing population then we’ve solved the problem. It is not either/or, it is an and/also.” the UN official also said.

Climate One is a self described public affairs forum which advocates extreme action to combat climate change. It is a branch of The Commonwealth Club of California based in San Francisco, essentially a talking shop visited regularly by heads of government and corporate business.

Figueres is no stranger to controversial statements when it comes to climate change. The UN official previously described the goal of the UNFCC as “a complete transformation of the economic structure of the world.”

She has also repeatedly said that a Chinese style communist dictatorship is better suited than the U.S. constitutional system to fight “global warming.”

Figueres told Bloomberg News last year that the Chinese government (which continues to enforce forced abortions, infanticide and compulsory sterilization) is “doing it right” when it comes to climate change, even though China is by far the biggest emitter of greenhouse gasses.

Figueres noted that a partisan divide in the U.S. Congress is “very detrimental” to passing climate related legislation, while the Chinese Communist Party, sets policies by decree. President Obama clearly agrees given that he continues to bypass Congress by issuing executive orders on climate change.

As InfoWars has continually noted, there is a fundamental flaw in associating climate change with overpopulation.

Populations in developed countries are declining and only in third world countries are they expanding dramatically. Industrialization itself levels out population trends and even despite this world population models routinely show that the earth’s population will level out at 9 billion in 2050 and slowly decline after that. “The population of the most developed countries will remain virtually unchanged at 1.2 billion until 2050,” states a United Nations report. The UN’s support for depopulation policies is in direct contradiction to their own findings.

Once a country industrializes there is an average of a 1.6 child rate per household, so the western world population is actually in decline. That trend has also been witnessed in areas of Asia like Japan and South Korea. The UN has stated that the population will peak at 9 billion and then begin declining.

In addition, as highlighted by the Economist, global fertility rates are falling.

Since radical environmentalists are pushing to de-industrialize the world in the face of the so called carbon threat, this will reverse the trend that naturally lowers the amount of children people have. If climate change fanatics are allowed to implement their policies, global population will continue to increase and overpopulation may become a real problem – another example of how the global warming hysterics are actually harming the long term environment of the Earth by preventing overpopulated countries from developing and naturally lowering their birth levels.

Even if you play devils advocate and accept that humans do cause catastrophic warming and there are too many of us, and if you can skip past the eugenics connotations of population control and depopulation policies, those methods are fundamentally still not a valid solution to the perceived climate change threat.

The real solution would be to help increase the standard of living of the cripplingly poor third world, allowing those countries to industrialize, and seeing the population figures naturally level out.

Instead, the third world has seen a doubling in food prices owing to climate change policies such as turning over huge areas of agricultural land to the growth of biofuels.

In addition, Climate legislation continually pushed  by the developed world has those nations taking on less of a burden than anticipated demanding more of poorer countries, despite the fact that any further cuts in CO2 emissions will further cripple their flimsy economies and poverty-stricken people.

Previous legislation, such as the Copenhagen agreement, allowed people in developed countries to emit twice as much carbon per head than those in poorer countries, who have not caused the rise in emissions said to be threatening our existence on the planet. The revelations have led third world leaders to accuse the developed world of “climate colonialism”.

Linking environmental policy to depopulation agendas opens the door to eugenics and it is no surprise that through that door have come pouring hordes of elitist filth just begging to be on the front line of the extermination policy.

One example is UK-based public policy group The Optimum Population Trust (OPT), which has previously launched initiatives urging wealthy members of the developed world to participate in carbon offsets that fund programs for curbing the population of developing nations.

In 2007, the group also published a report announcing that children are ‘bad for planet and ‘having large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags.

The same talking point has been re-iterated again and again by public policy groups and environmentalists, as well as the most influential scientists in the US government.

While you may think ideas of sterilization and depopulation could never be accepted by the public, those very concepts are now being embraced and popularized by some as the way forward for humanity.

The head of the UN’s leading climate change panel is providing a platform, and in some cases actively pushing for a policy enforced by a dictatorship that hunts down mothers who become pregnant with their second child, abducts them off the street and takes them to government controlled hospitals where they are drugged and their baby is killed – all in the name of saving the planet.

http://www.infowars.com/video-un-climate-change-official-says-we-should-make-every-effort-to-depopulate-the-planet/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #79 on: April 26, 2015, 06:14:14 am »

Top scientists start to examine fiddled global warming figures
The Global Warming Policy Foundation has enlisted an international team of five distinguished scientists to carry out a full inquiry


 Last month, we are told, the world enjoyed “its hottest March since records began in 1880”. This year, according to “US government scientists”, already bids to outrank 2014 as “the hottest ever”. The figures from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) were based, like all the other three official surface temperature records on which the world’s scientists and politicians rely, on data compiled from a network of weather stations by NOAA’s Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN).

But here there is a puzzle. These temperature records are not the only ones with official status. The other two, Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and the University of Alabama (UAH), are based on a quite different method of measuring temperature data, by satellites. And these, as they have increasingly done in recent years, give a strikingly different picture. Neither shows last month as anything like the hottest March on record, any more than they showed 2014 as “the hottest year ever”.

An adjusted graph from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies



 Back in January and February, two items in this column attracted more than 42,000 comments to the Telegraph website from all over the world. The provocative headings given to them were “Climategate the sequel: how we are still being tricked by flawed data on global warming” and “The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest scientific scandal”.

My cue for those pieces was the evidence multiplying from across the world that something very odd has been going on with those official surface temperature records, all of which ultimately rely on data compiled by NOAA’s GHCN. Careful analysts have come up with hundreds of examples of how the original data recorded by 3,000-odd weather stations has been “adjusted”, to exaggerate the degree to which the Earth has actually been warming. Figures from earlier decades have repeatedly been adjusted downwards and more recent data adjusted upwards, to show the Earth having warmed much more dramatically than the original data justified.

So strong is the evidence that all this calls for proper investigation that my articles have now brought a heavyweight response. The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) has enlisted an international team of five distinguished scientists to carry out a full inquiry into just how far these manipulations of the data may have distorted our picture of what is really happening to global temperatures.

 The panel is chaired by Terence Kealey, until recently vice-chancellor of the University of Buckingham. His team, all respected experts in their field with many peer-reviewed papers to their name, includes Dr Peter Chylek, a physicist from the National Los Alamos Laboratory; Richard McNider, an emeritus professor who founded the Atmospheric Sciences Programme at the University of Alabama; Professor Roman Mureika from Canada, an expert in identifying errors in statistical methodology; Professor Roger Pielke Sr, a noted climatologist from the University of Colorado, and Professor William van Wijngaarden, a physicist whose many papers on climatology have included studies in the use of “homogenisation” in data records.

Their inquiry’s central aim will be to establish a comprehensive view of just how far the original data has been “adjusted” by the three main surface records: those published by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss), the US National Climate Data Center and Hadcrut, that compiled by the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (Cru), in conjunction with the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction. All of them are run by committed believers in man-made global warming.

Below, the raw data in graph form



 For this the GWPF panel is initially inviting input from all those analysts across the world who have already shown their expertise in comparing the originally recorded data with that finally published. In particular, they will be wanting to establish a full and accurate picture of just how much of the published record has been adjusted in a way which gives the impression that temperatures have been rising faster and further than was indicated by the raw measured data.

Already studies based on the US, Australia, New Zealand, the Arctic and South America have suggested that this is far too often the case.

But only when the full picture is in will it be possible to see just how far the scare over global warming has been driven by manipulation of figures accepted as reliable by the politicians who shape our energy policy, and much else besides. If the panel’s findings eventually confirm what we have seen so far, this really will be the “smoking gun”, in a scandal the scale and significance of which for all of us can scarcely be exaggerated.

More details of the Global Warming Policy Foundation's International Temperature Data Review Project are available on the inquiry panel's website www.tempdatareview.org

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11561629/Top-scientists-start-to-examine-fiddled-global-warming-figures.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #80 on: May 21, 2015, 10:36:34 am »

Obama: Climate change deniers endangering national security

Ever notice how they changed it from Global Warming to Climate Change?  Roll Eyes

President Obama in a speech on Wednesday cast climate change as a growing national security threat, accusing Republican skeptics of harming military readiness by denying its effects.

Obama argued in his address to graduates at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy that rising sea levels and higher global temperatures endanger military bases and could force personnel to respond to conflicts around the world that are fueled by their effects.

“Climate change constitutes a serious threat to global security, an immediate risk to our national security, and, make no mistake, it will impact how our military defends our country,” Obama told new Coast Guard officers at the academy’s New London, Conn., campus. “And so we need to act — and we need to act now.”

Obama has highlighted security implications of climate change in recent months to drum up more support for his efforts to invest in climate adaptation and reduce greenhouse gases, including a landmark regulation to limit carbon emissions from power plants.

Republicans in Congress, however, have stymied legislative action on climate change. The president took aim at GOP critics, saying temperatures are rising even though “some folks back in Washington” refuse to admit it.

“Denying it, or refusing to deal with it, endangers our national security and undermines the readiness of our forces,” Obama added.

He also questioned how Republicans could claim to support the military while downplaying the effects of global warming.

“Politicians who say they care about military readiness ought to care about this as well," he said.

Obama claimed the rise of Boko Haram in Nigeria and the civil war in Syria were both fueled by instability caused by severe drought and crop losses connected to rising temperatures.

In addition to the international problems that global warming can cause, Obama argued the effects threaten military facilities and readiness.

He pointed to street flooding in Miami and Charleston, S.C., as evidence that American infrastructure, such as roads and power plants, in coastal areas is vulnerable. The same is true for military bases in places like Norfolk, Va., where flooding has also occurred, he added.

"It’s estimated that a further increase in sea level of one foot by the end of this century could cost our nation $200 billion,” Obama said.

The president touted his efforts to reduce carbon emissions through more-stringent vehicle fuel standards, new Environmental Protection Agency regulations and his pursuit of an international agreement to reduce greenhouse gases.

Refusing to act would be a “dereliction of duty,” he said.

“It will not be easy. It will require sacrifice, and the politics will be tough, but there is no other way," he said. “This will be tough, but so often is the case, our men and women in uniform will show us the way."

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) criticized Obama for calling climate change a national security threat, saying it shows the president lacks a coherent strategy to deal with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the Syrian civil war and North Korea.

“It’s no wonder that our military personnel's trust in their commander-in-chief is at an all time low,” the senator said in a statement. “The president’s speech at the Coast Guard Academy stating his belief that climate change poses the greatest threat to future generations is a severe disconnect from reality.”

Inhofe famously threw a snowball on the Senate floor in February to protest the administration’s climate agenda.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/242672-obama-climate-deniers-endangering-national-security
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #81 on: May 25, 2015, 05:17:35 am »

Three nations altered temperature data, and you can probably guess why

Let’s review the logic we are asked to accept from the we-must-act-now-on-global-warming crowd. They tell us that the science is undeniable in showing global warming is both man-made and running wild, and that only liberal policy ideas like carbon taxes and controls on industry can solve the problem.

And they must happen now!

Question this in any way and you are anti-science, because no one can possibly question the data culled from the science.

There is one problem with this, of course, and that is that the data culled from science only has value if we can actually trust it was compiled and presented to us honestly. We already know from the East Anglia e-mail controversy that some climate scientists have a motive to jack up these numbers to make global warming look more serious than it really is. What we don’t always know is how they employ clever tricks to do that.

But we do now, at least in one case. Thanks to the excellent work of the Heartland Institute’s H. Sterling Burnett, we know that at least three countries – Australia, Paraguay and Switzerland – appear to have altered some of their meteorological data to exaggerate the rate at which their temperatures are rising. Burnett writes:

    In previous editions of Climate Change Weekly (CCW), I reported weather bureaus in Australia (CCW #139) and Paraguay (CCW #158) were caught adjusting datasets from their temperature gauges. After the adjustment, the temperatures reported were consistently higher than those actually recorded. Science journalist Markus Schär of the Swiss news weekly Weltwoche discovered the Swiss Meteorological Service (SMS) tampered with its datasets as well.

  For example, in Sion and Zurich, SMS adjustments resulted in a doubling of the temperature trend. Schär notes there has been an 18-year-pause in rising temperatures, even with data- tampering. As a result, Schär calls the adjustments a “propaganda trick, and not a valid trend.”

  In light of significant urbanization resulting in an expanded heat island effect near many temperature gauges, Schär argues the adjustment of raw data to report higher temperatures than are actually measured is unjustifiable. “The corrections ... appear so massive that they represent half of the entire temperature increase,” said Schär.

  Even with fudged data, governments have been unable to hide the fact winters in Switzerland and in Central Europe have become colder over the past 20 years, defying predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other climate alarmists.

What this really shows is that the politics of climate change trumps the science. The IPCC and its supporters are so invested in the global warming narrative, they can’t afford to have the data contradict their claims. If global warming isn’t real, isn’t urgent, isn’t beyond all dispute, then everything they’ve built up to support their agenda is called into question – not to mention their attacks on global warming skeptics as “deniers” akin to the Holocaust deniers of World War II.

So when the numbers don’t turn out to be convenient, the numbers are fudged, and this is justified as necessary to prevent the dreaded “deniers” from having something to talk about.

Never forget, folks, what this is all about. It’s about government control. The left never considers the possibility that, if man-made global warming is real, the answer might lie in the innovative work of the private sector to give us cleaner technologies. No. The answer always lies with government. We must tax carbon. We must impose new regulations on manufacturing. We must enforce this through international bodies.

And we must do it now! We’re running out of time!

It’s the same thing they said 20 years ago. The fake urgency is designed to stop all debate so they can just go forward and do what they want to do, just as the fake numbers are designed to stop their critics from questioning their larger premise.

Once again, the global warmists are busted. Eventually, frauds always are.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/72251
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: July 16, 2015, 06:22:17 pm »

bro Mark, are you familiar with this?

http://www.icr.org/article/7841/385/

Was There an Ice Age?
by Jake Hebert, Ph.D. *
Resources › Earth Sciences Resources › Ice Age

Secular scientists believe there have been at least five major ice ages during Earth's history, and the most recent is thought to have begun about 2.6 million years ago. Within this Pleistocene ice age, ice sheets are thought to have advanced and receded over many tens of thousands of years, growing in size during shorter ice ages called glacials and shrinking during the warmer interglacial periods.

Because secular discussions of ice ages involve millions of years, Bible-believing Christians may wonder: Was there really an ice age?

Yes, there is strong geological evidence of an ice age. Today, receding glaciers often leave behind recognizable geological features such as drumlins (elongated ridges) and moraines (rock debris carved and then deposited either along the side or at the end of a melting, moving glacier). Since these features are also found in lower latitudes than today’s ice sheets and glaciers, it is clear that both the northern and southern hemisphere ice sheets extended to lower latitudes than they do today and have since melted.

Secular scientists have dozens of theories to explain ice ages, but they all have serious problems. Even the most popular one, the astronomical or Milankovitch theory, offers far too weak a cause.1

The Bible, on the other hand, suggests a plausible mechanism for explaining a relatively recent ice age that began shortly after the Flood about 4,300 years ago and may have only lasted for several centuries. Surprisingly, the Ice Age actually required large amounts of heat, which this mechanism provides. One can use the acrostic HEAT to remember its key points.

Hot Oceans. During the Genesis Flood, hot, molten material from Earth’s interior, possibly including much warmer waters from the “fountains of the great deep” (Genesis 7:11), volcanism, and friction from plate tectonics, would have significantly warmed the world’s oceans, perhaps by tens of degrees Celsius.

Evaporation. Warmer oceans would have resulted in greatly elevated evaporation. This would have increased the amount of moisture in the atmosphere, ultimately resulting in much greater snowfall over the relatively cool continents in the mid- and high-latitude regions.

Aerosols. The enormous amounts of volcanic activity that occurred toward the end of the Flood and afterward would have ejected an enormous volume of tiny particles called aerosols into the atmosphere. These aerosols would have reflected significant amounts of sunlight away from Earth’s surface, resulting in cooler summers over the continents. Thus, winter snow and ice would not completely melt, even during the warmest months. Ice sheets would grow as more snow and ice accumulated during subsequent winters.

Time. Explosive volcanic eruptions can result in noticeable cooling over the continents, and both creation and evolution scientists agree that many enormous volcanic eruptions have occurred in the past. Creation scientists believe many of these eruptions occurred toward the end of the Flood and for many years afterward as Earth slowly returned to equilibrium after the Flood cataclysm. As noted above, aerosols from explosive volcanic eruptions are a potent cooling mechanism for keeping developing ice sheets from melting. However, because secular scientists hold that millions of years separated each volcanic eruption from the next, they cannot use this mechanism to account for an ice age. Thus, the Bible’s short timescale is critical in explaining the Ice Age!

Yes, extensive geological evidence demands that high-latitude ice sheets did once extend to much lower latitudes than they do today. The secular view holds that there were multiple ice ages, each lasting for millions of years. In truth, there was only one relatively short ice age, perhaps with several “surges,” and it was a result of the Genesis Flood.2,3
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #83 on: July 25, 2015, 05:20:29 am »

“Global Warming” Expedition Foiled by Record Ice
Arctic ice the worst it's been in 20 years, according to Coast Guard


A scientific expedition to study “global warming” was delayed by record ice in the Arctic.

The icebreaker ship used for the 115-day expedition had to be rerouted Tuesday to break ice for commercial ships in the Hudson Bay because the ice conditions are the worst they’ve been in 20 years, according to the Canadian Coast Guard.

“Obviously it has a large impact on us,” said Martin Fortier, the executive director of the “global warming” research institute ArcticNet, which was spearheading the expedition.

The ice is so thick that ships are having to skirt around it.

“The same ice has also been blamed for bringing two polar bears into the community last week — a highly unusual event,” CBC News reported.

The volume of Arctic sea ice has increased by 33% since 2013, although scientists who are funded to promote the government-driven “global warming” agenda are claiming the record ice is a freak occurrence.

Their claim, however, runs contrary to satellite data showing there’s been no global warming for over 18 years.

“For 222 months, since December 1996, there has been no global warming at all,” weather researcher Lord Christopher Monckton reported. “[June’s] Remote Sensing System temperature – still unaffected by a slowly strengthening el Niño, which will eventually cause temporary warming – passes another six-month milestone, and establishes a new record length for the pause: 18 years 6 months.”

“What is more, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s centrally-predicted warming rate since its First Assessment Report in 1990 is now more than two and a half times the measured rate.”

“On any view, the predictions on which the entire climate scare was based were extreme exaggerations,” he added.

Another scientific ship carrying “global warming” researchers was similarly stopped by record ice in the Antarctic back in 2013 and the researchers were ultimately evacuated from the ship after several botched rescue attempts.

http://www.infowars.com/global-warming-expedition-foiled-by-record-ice/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #84 on: August 12, 2015, 08:07:24 am »

Doubts over climate change link to Sun’s activity

Until recently, scientists believed solar activity had been trending upward in the past three hundred years after a period known as the “Maunder Minimum” or “the little ice age”. Furthermore they also reported that from 1885 to 1945, there was a marked increase in the number of sunspots, which is commonly known as the Modern Grand Maximum.



As it happens, the authors of the review say it was always problematic to use the sunspot number as a single authoritative source. After that period, scientists used two separate methods to measure sunspot activity: the Wolf Sunspot Number and the Group Sunspot Number.

But in 1994 scientists began to question whether the WSN was an accurate method to build a reliable index of historical sunspot records.

So, a new counting method called the Group Sunspot Number (GSN) was created by Douglas Hoyt and Ken Schatten in 1994 and introduced in 1998.

This recalibration is a major step forward in studying solar activity as the sunspot number is the only direct record of the evolution of the solar cycle over centuries and is the longest scientific experiment still ongoing. Uncertainty loomed after they did a re-analysis of past records. This has become a contentious issue among scientists for some time.

As SILSO explains, the sunspot data set (which, courtesy of Galileo (the man, not the spacecraft), stretches back 400 years) was first collected into an index by Rudolph Wolf in 1849. During the Maunder Minimum there were scarce sunspots and the winters harsh.

“In other cases, sky-watchers were focused on making other solar observations, so if their notes do not mention sunspots this does not necessarily mean that none were present”, said a report in the journal Nature. Now that the error has been corrected, the researchers believe the data indicates solar activity has remained stable since the 1700s.

A new study conducted by researchers in the United States, however, has found no evidence of such solar activity culmination that occurred during the 20th century.

Zharkova’s prediction has been met with criticism from fellow scientists who study solar activity and climate change.

Now, researchers say that flaw has been eliminated and the sunspot counting method has been re-calibrated. “There has been nothing exceptional about the level of solar activity”, Dr. Clette told a meeting of the worldwide Astronomical Union in Honolulu, Hawaii.

The resulting new sunspot index called the Sunspot Number Version 2.0, which also includes the older historical data of the GSN, shows that solar activity has been constant over the past few centuries without any noteworthy long-term upward trends in solar activity since 1700.

“This suggests that rising global temperatures since the industrial revolution cannot be attributed to increased solar activity”, it added.

http://sentinelrepublic.com/doubts-over-climate-change-link-to-sun-s-activity/69971/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #85 on: August 12, 2015, 12:15:41 pm »

NOAA July 2015 – USA – Below Normal For 3rd Year in a Row
  Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
— sunshinehours1 @ 8:08 AM

According to the NOAA , Maximum temperatures in the USA were -0.77F colder than the 1901-2000 average.

1936 was ranked 121 (121 is hottest) and was 4.93F hotter than 2015.

2015 was only ranked 34.

Read more: http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/08/12/noaa-usa-july-temps-below-normal-for-3rd-year-in-a-row/#ixzz3iccwV5rV
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #86 on: September 18, 2015, 11:41:57 am »

Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics

The science on global warming is settled, so settled that 20 climate scientists are asking President Barack Obama to prosecute people who disagree with them on the science behind man-made global warming.

Scientists from several universities and research centers even asked Obama to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to prosecute groups that “have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.”

RICO was a law designed to take down organized crime syndicates, but scientists now want it to be used against scientists, activists and organizations that voice their disagreement with the so-called “consensus” on global warming. The scientists repeated claims made by environmentalists that groups, especially those with ties to fossil fuels, have engaged in a misinformation campaign to confuse the public on global warming.

“The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peer-reviewed academic research and in recent books,” the scientists wrote.

But these riled up academics aren’t the first to suggest using RICO to go after global warming skeptics. The idea was first put forward by Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, who argued using RICO was effective at taking down the tobacco industry.

“In 1999, the Justice Department filed a civil RICO lawsuit against the major tobacco companies… alleging that the companies ‘engaged in and executed — and continue to engage in and execute — a massive 50-year scheme to defraud the public, including consumers of cigarettes, in violation of RICO,’” Whitehouse wrote in the Washington Post in May.

“We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation,” the scientists wrote to Obama. “The methods of these organizations are quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry. A RICO investigation (1999 to 2006) played an important role in stopping the tobacco industry from continuing to deceive the American people about the dangers of smoking.”

“If corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that have been documented in books and journal articles, it is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done,” the scientists added.

This year has been a trying one for global warming skeptics. Earlier this year, Democratic lawmakers began an investigation into scientists who disagreed with the White House’s stance on global warming. Many of these skeptical scientists were often cited by those critical of regulations to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

Arizona Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva went after universities employing these researchers, which resulted in one expert being forced to get out of the field of climate research altogether.

“I am simply not initiating any new research or papers on the topic and I have ring-fenced my slowly diminishing blogging on the subject,” Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. of the University of Colorado wrote on his blog.

“Congressman Grijalva doesn’t have any evidence of any wrongdoing on my part, either ethical or legal, because there is none,” Pielke wrote. “He simply disagrees with the substance of my testimony – which is based on peer-reviewed research funded by the US taxpayer, and which also happens to be the consensus of the IPCC (despite Holdren’s incorrect views).”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/17/scientists-ask-obama-to-prosecute-global-warming-skeptics/#ixzz3m6pvVzHC
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #87 on: September 18, 2015, 01:35:47 pm »

Scientific ‘Consensus’ Can’t Agree On The Existence Of The Global Warming Hiatus

A rift is growing in the so-called consensus on global warming that’s as wide as the Atlantic Ocean. Scientists just can’t seem to agree on whether or not the 15-year hiatus in warming actually exists or not.

A recent study by Stanford University scientists reinforces the claim made by federal government researchers earlier this year that the hiatus in global warming was essentially a fluke in the surface temperature data and never actually existed.

The Stanford study comes just months after scientists with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) made adjustments to surface temperature data that eliminated the 15-year hiatus in global warming. The data adjustments were highly controversial among climate scientists, but now Stanford researchers have put forward new data they say confirm there was no hiatus in warming.

“Our results clearly show that, in terms of the statistics of the long-term global temperature data, there never was a hiatus, a pause or a slowdown in global warming,” Stanford climate scientist Noah Diffenbaugh said in a statement following the study’s release.

But scientists across the Atlantic aren’t buying American scientists’ claims the hiatus in warming never happened. Just a couple days before the release of the Stanford study, the UK’s Met Office — the premier climate research unit in the country — released findings that the hiatus in warming could last a few more years because of natural cooling cycles over the Atlantic Ocean.

“Observational and model estimates further suggest [Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation] shifts have an effect on global mean near-surface temperatures of about 0.1˚C,” the Met Office wrote in its September climate outlook. “A rapid AMO decline could therefore maintain the current slowdown in global warming longer than would otherwise be the case.”
Special: Doctor Recommended – Fix Eye Bags Without Surgery, Do This Daily

Though the Met Office did say this year’s El Nino is likely to make 2015 as warm or warmer than 2014 — which was declared the warmest year on record by government meteorologists. Met Office scientists also cautioned that “there are signs in the observations and near term climate predictions that are consistent with a resumption of warming.”

But even if warming resumes this next year, which is made more likely by El Nino, the Met Office still acknowledges there is in fact a slowdown or hiatus in global warming. The Met Office says “the rate of warming has slowed over the most recent 15 years or so.” This stands in stark contrast to Stanford and NOAA scientists that say the hiatus in warming never even existed.

The hiatus or pause in warming has been heavily researched in the past few years, and scientists have put forward dozens of explanations to why warming has dramatically slowed. The temperature record showed a lack of warming from the late 1990s the early 2010s, which meant that most climate models were over-predicting how much warming would be caused by man-made carbon dioxide emissions.

Now, more and more scientists are saying the pause was just an aberration in the data. NOAA scientists eliminated the hiatus from the temperature record by adjusting temperatures taken by ocean buoys upwards to match those taken from ships. The Stanford study analyzed old temperature data sets along with newly corrected records to bolster its findings that there was no pause in warming.

“By using both datasets, nobody can claim that we made up a new statistical technique in order to get a certain result,” Bala Rajaratnam, a Stanford statistician and scientist, said in a statement.

“We saw that there was a debate in the scientific community about the global warming hiatus, and we realized that the assumptions of the classical statistical tools being used were not appropriate and thus could not give reliable answers,” said Rajaratnam.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/18/scientific-consensus-cant-agree-on-the-existence-of-the-global-warming-hiatus/#ixzz3m7IV8hK5
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #88 on: September 19, 2015, 12:51:55 pm »

NOAA Massively Ramps Up Their Temperature Fraud Ahead Of Paris

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/09/17/noaa-massively-ramps-up-their-temperature-fraud-ahead-of-paris/

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21387



View Profile
« Reply #89 on: November 01, 2015, 06:06:09 pm »

U.N. planning court to judge U.S. for 'climate justice'

At the upcoming United Nations Climate Summit in Paris, participating nations have prepared a treaty that would create an “International Tribunal of Climate Justice” giving Third World countries the power to haul the U.S. into a global court with enforcement powers.

Congress would be bypassed – left out in the cold – by this climate deal, critics say.

Policies once left to sovereign nations could be turned over to a U.N. body if the U.S. and its allies approve the proposed deal in Paris during the summit scheduled for Nov. 30-Dec. 11.

According to the proposed draft text of the climate treaty, the tribunal would take up issues such as “climate justice,” “climate finance,” “technology transfers,” and “climate debt.”

Buried on page 19 of the 34-page document is the critical text – still heavily bracketed with text that hasn’t been completely resolved and agreed upon – reads:

[An International Tribunal of Climate Justice as][A] [compliance mechanism] is hereby established to address cases of non-compliance of the commitments of developed country Parties on mitigation, adaptation, [provision of] finance, technology development and transfer [and][,] capacity-building[,] and transparency of action and support, including through the development of an indicative list of consequences, taking into account the cause, type, degree and frequency of non-compliance.

The U.N. held a preparatory conference in September in Bonn, Germany, that drafted language to be approved at the upcoming Paris climate summit. At the Bonn meeting the U.N. brought together more than 2,000 participants from governments, observer organizations and the media.

But none of those media chose to report on the proposed new global tribunal.

Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.

The Paris Conference is mandated to adopt “a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all parties,” which is to come into force in 2020, according to IISD Reporting Services, which tracks the global sustainable development movement.

Like many initiatives that come out of the U.N., there has been a media blackout on coverage of the potential for a new world tribunal that would make binding decisions on a host of issues critical to the U.S. economy. The draft text has been available on the Internet since Oct. 20 for all to see.

“The only mentions one is likely to find with search engines are alarms being sounded by critics, the climate realists who reject the apocalyptic predictions (and discredited pseudo-science – see: here, here, and here) of the multi-billion dollar global warming lobby,” writes William F. Jasper for the New American magazine.

China, India behind the move

One such critic is the Craig Rucker, executive director and co-founder of CFACT.

Rucker points out that more than 130 developing nations – “led by South Africa and instigated by China and India” – are insisting they will not sign a climate deal in Paris unless it contains massive redistribution of wealth from developed to poor nations.

“Now they want the power to haul the U.S. and its allies before a U.N. Star Chamber to enforce compliance,” Rucker writes.

He also notes that this is not the first time the U.N. has tried to insert language creating a global climate court into a U.N. climate document. It happened in 2011 at a summit in Durban but was stripped at the last minute when CFACT blew the whistle and some media outlets picked up the story.

But this time around, the globalists writing the text have substituted the world “tribunal” for “court” and insist the body will be “non-judicial.”

What you don’t hear in the media! Get Global Warming or Global Governance? The Truth About Global Warming (DVD) from the WND Superstore!

“The slight edit to the terminology offers little comfort,” Rucker said, cautioning that the word “tribunal” could get watered down further if it attracts too much attention.

“If the climate tribunal becomes the focus of public scrutiny, watch for the negotiators to pull a switch behind closed doors and try and accomplish the same thing by re-branding it an enforcement ‘mechanism,’” he said.

Ceding sovereignty to U.N. bureaucracy

“Whatever they call it, countries who sign onto this agreement will be voting to expand the reach of the U.N. climate bureaucracy, cede national sovereignty, and create a one-way street along which billions will be redistributed from developed to poor nations,” Rucker says. “Developed nations would be expected to slash their emissions while the ‘poor’ countries expand theirs. China, which holds a trillion dollars in U.S. debt, would be counted among the poor.”

He said China and India are “delighted,” with the prospect.

“They would like nothing better than a world where the West cedes the competitive advantages their free market economies created,” Rucker writes. “They hope for a future where Asia does the manufacturing and the U.S. and Europe do the importing – until their wealth runs out, anyway.”

Obama, Kerry ‘desperate’ to claim treaty as success

Rucker said President Obama and John Kerry are desperate to claim the climate treaty as a foreign policy “success.”

“President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry are mired in foreign policy failures,” Rucker notes. “They desperately want to get this agreement signed so they can claim a victory for their legacies.

“How far are they willing to sell out American interests to get this ill-begotten agreement signed?”

http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/u-n-tribunal-to-judge-u-s-for-climate-debt/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy