Natural Climate Cycles – Part 2: Millennial Oscillations

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 photo earth_covered_by_clouds_zps4deb8d7f.jpg

This shall be part two of a four part series, discussing and detailing natural climate cycles and how these cycles combine and/or interact to contribute to and/or drive the weather that we observe, over time.  Once the entire series has been completed, it will be compiled into a book with some additional details, and graphics added.

It should be noted, that much of the data used when discussing climate over this length of time or longer, is scientifically reconstructed.  Actual observations can only take us back a few hundred years.  Beyond that, methods such as: ice cores; ocean, lake, and river bottom sediment cores; tree rings; geologic evidence in rocks; and historical accounts can be used to get an indication of what climate factors were like in Earth’s past.  Some of this data is open to interpretation, but I shall attempt to use the most logical, common sense approach to interpreting such data.

Part two of this series, shall discuss natural climate oscillations that cycle with a periodicity of 100 to 10,000 years.

Solar Cycles / Oscillations

Short term solar oscillations were discussed in part 1 of this series.  However, new research indicates that longer term solar oscillations also play a significant role in our natural climate variability.  Of utmost importance, is an apparent cycle of “Grand Solar Minimum” or “Solar Hibernation“, such as the “Maunder Minimum“, which appears to cycle around every 412 years on average.  The “Maunder Minimum” began around the year 1615, or 400 years ago.  Therefor, we can assume that if this new research is correct, then the cycle is due to repeat.

TSI-CYCLE-LENGTH-400yrs_trend-300x247

The above chart shows sunspot cycle length and Total Solar Irradiance, over the last ~420 years.  TSI is a measure of energy which reaches the top of earth’s atmosphere, from the Sun.  It is measured in Watts per square meter.  The “Maunder Minimum” is clearly identified on this chart, near the left edge, as a sharp and long lasting dip in solar output.  Also of note, is the recent rise in TSI over the latter half of the 20th Century, which is largely responsible for the period known as “Global Warming“. During this time, sunspot cycles were both shorter (peaks were closer together) and more intense.

Three crucial solar oscillations can be identified by this chart.  At the top we see a ~103 year oscillation in the length of sunspot cycles from as short as 8 years, to as long as 14 years.  In the bottom chart we see the ~206 year oscillation in sunspot cycle intensity.  The intensity of solar irradiance should have peaked around the year 1800 AD, but in stead a period known as the “Dalton Minimum” occurred at this time, due to the sunspot cycles being longer / farther apart.  The entire length of this chart, signifies the ~412 year cycle of “Solar Hibernation“.  This oscillation for the most part alternates every-other trough in the ~206 year oscillation.  These oscillations then also provide the basis for a cycle of warm periods, or “climate optimums” which appear to peak every 824, 1,030, or 1,236 years.  These optimums are apparently dependent upon just how well these oscillations line up, and the effect of longer period oscillations, as well.

Millennial Cycle of Warm Periods

What exactly causes these cyclic warm periods, is still being intensely investigated.  The most logical hypothesis, assuming that each cyclic warm period happen the same way the “Modern Warm Period” did, is that it is a cyclic peak in solar activity.  A period where sunspot cycles become shorter (closer together) and more intense, as is shown above to have occurred in the late 20th Century.  Some influence may also be exerted on the Sun by neighboring stars as they rotate together around the galaxy, but confirming that hypothesis will be difficult.

Looking back farther, actual temperature measurements only go back so far, especially in the Americas, where weather stations have only been in place since the mid to late 1800s.  So, in order to see further into the past, scientists must reconstruct the temperatures based on the numerous methods available to us.  While these temperature reconstructions are fantastic tools for seeing deep into Earth’s past climate, they are somewhat open to interpretation, and different methods sometimes lead to different and occasionally even conflicting results.  Here, I shall use the most common, most trusted methods, and show what the most consistent results have been, to get a picture of natural climate cycles over the past 10,000 years, since the end of the last period of glaciation.

 Warm-Periods-300x176

This chart shows the results of an ice core study from the ice sheet in northern Greenland, indicating relative temperature at that location.  Here, you can see a relatively regular cycle of “warm periods“, which occur roughly every 824 to 1,236 years. At the far left of the chart is the end of the “Younger Dryas“, where this interglacial period began in the Northern Hemisphere, which is a period also known as the “Holocene“.  Long range ice cores indicate that many interglacial periods have two temperature peaks, or “climate optimums“, and on this chart we see those peaks being at about 7,300 years ago, and 3,600 years ago.  More information about the glacial / interglacial cycle will be available in Part 3 of this series.

The peak 7,300 to 6,000 years ago is known as the “Mid-Holocene Climate Optimum“, which is believed by many scientists to be the peak of this interglacial (between glacial advances) period.  Since then, the warmest temperatures within the past 5,000 years were during what is known as the “Minoan Warm Period“, which occurred around the year 1200 BC.  Next came the “Roman Warm Period“, which peaked around time of Christ, or around 20 BC.  Then came the “Medieval Warm Period“, which peaked at around the year 1050 AD.  Finally, the “Modern Warm Period” peaked around the year 1990 AD.  At the far right of the chart, the ice core data is augmented with actual temperature observations at that location, which clearly shows the peak of the “Modern Warm Period”. The “Modern Warm Period” exactly matches the timing and scope of the Millennial warm period cycle, and also exactly matches the timing and scope of the peak in solar activity shown in Chart 2-A above.

Now, lets look back farther still, and see if these cyclic warm periods only occur during the Holocene, or if they’re a constant in climate.

20K-TEMPS-GREENLAND-300x189

 

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

This chart is formulated in much the same way as the Chart 2-B above, but goes back twice as far.  Bracketed in the top right, is the size of the 10,000 year chart in relation to the 20,000 year chart.  Here, we can see that these cyclic warm periods do indeed continue back well beyond the Holocene, into the coldest, deepest parts of the last period of glaciation. While larger forces are at play to drive the overall long term climate, the shorter term Millennial oscillation drives temperature fluctuations of about +/- 1.5°C from the mean temperature being driven by longer term cycles, that will be discussed in later parts of this series.  Each successively shorter cycle happens within the longer term cycles.

We can also see that temperatures began to warm in the Northern Hemisphere about 15,000 years ago, but then sharply fell again.  This sharp fall in temperatures around 13,000 years ago is what is known as the “Younger Dryas“.  The cause for this sharp dip in temperatures is not fully understood, and did not have the same affect in the Southern Hemisphere, as Vostok ice cores do not indicate much of a dip in temperatures during this period.  Some theories have been put forward to attempt to explain this.  The most logical of which being that the rapid melt of the Arctic ice sheets around 14,600 years ago, caused the North Atlantic Ocean to become flooded with fresh water, which then caused a shift within the Thermohaline Current, which had the result of cooling the Arctic and growing the ice sheet once again.  Some scientists have stated that this melting alone could not have caused the Younger Dryas, but perhaps some kind of asteroid impact in the Arctic may have enhanced or augmented the melting that was already underway.  This would seem to be supported by the fact that the melting after the Younger Dryas happened just as quickly, yet did not have the same affect on the North Atlantic.  In any case, the Younger Dryas is indicated in all ice cores throughout the Northern Hemisphere, so we know it happened.  The main question is how can we explain it?

Cycle of Sharp Cold Shifts

Between the Millennial Warm Periods are often lengthy periods of substantially cooler climate.  These cooler periods are likely due to reduced solar activity, as was the case during the “Little Ice Age“, which stretched from the 1200s AD to the mid/late 1800s AD, a period of around 600 years.  As indicated in Chart 2-A, the Maunder Minimum largely contributed to the coolest years of the Little Ice Age.

The cooler periods tend to last significantly longer than the dips in solar activity.  The most logical explanation for this, is that as Infrared and TSI as a whole decrease, and the sun’s heliosphere becomes weaker, galactic cosmic rays are more able to penetrate the sun’s heliosphere and reach the planets, including Earth.  Since cosmic rays are confirmed to cause an increase inatmospheric aerosols, which then lead to an increase in low clouds around the globe, this would have the affect of reflecting sunlight, and enhancing the affect of reduced solar output, which further reduces global temperatures, over time.

The cyclic periods of solar hibernation extend back beyond the Maunder Minimum.  New research suggests it is a quasi-regular oscillation of about 412 years in length.  So, lets take a closer look at more recent solar activity, and see if there are clear signs of this beginning.

TSI-and-sunspots-300x218

 

The above chart shows TSI at the top, and the sunspot count over the same time frame, at the bottom.  Direct solar records began too late into the process of entering into the Maunder Minimum, to be able to do a direct comparison between then, and now.  Therefor we must assume that if the Sun is indeed entering into a new “Solar Hibernation“, we should see solar cycles getting both weaker, and farther apart, as an indication of it.  Cycle 21 and 22 were 9 1/2 years apart, which was also typical of the two cycles preceding cycle 21.  Cycle 22 and 23 were about 11 1/2 years apart.  Cycles 23 and 24 were 14 years apart.  Clearly, the cycles are getting farther apart, and that alone is enough to cause a decline in global temperatures.   The chart also indicates that each successive peak is lower than the one before it, so each is also getting weaker.  This will enhance the effect of cooling our global temperatures over time.

I outlined in this article, other factors which also indicate the existence of this ~412 year solar cycle, and what the effects may be if this cycle is repeating.

Past Affects of Climate Shifts

Human history is replete with mass migrations that are a direct result of both the Millennial warm period oscillation, and the effects of “Solar Hibernation” periods, as well.  One example is the “Great Wall of China“, which was largely built during the “Roman Warm Period”.  It has been surmised by some who study both history and climate, that the “Great Wall” was built because the Chinese knew about this temperature oscillation, and that the climate would soon cool.  The Chinese economy could not withstand being bombarded with a mass migration of the Mongols and people of the Eurasian Steppes to the north, so the “Great Wall” was built to keep them out.

The Mayan Civilization is another example.  Given their knowledge of astronomy and geography, and having such an accurate calendar system, it is quite possible that they too, knew the climate was about to change to their determent.  Having been founded just as the “Roman Warm Period” was ending, and likely knowing the Medieval Warm Period was soon to come, they abandon their magnificent cities in favor of cooler, wetter lands to the north.

The Harappan Civilization is yet another example.  The Harappans thrived in what is now northwest India and southeast Pakistan, along the Indus River, around the same time that the Egyptians were building the pyramids at Giza.  Then as the Minoan Warm Period began, the monsoon rains changed, and their entire rich civilization was lost to encroaching desert.  Like the Mayans, they too were forced to migrate northward, into the Eurasian Steppes where the climate was more suitable.

There are many other examples which serve to help confirm the results of the ice core data shown above, such as the early inhabitants of Ireland migration from what is now Libya, as the Sahara changed from savannah to desert 5,500 years ago at the end of the “Mid-Holocene Climate Optimum“, but I’ll save those for the book form of this series.

Previous parts of this series….
Natural Climate Cycles Part 1 – Short Term Oscillations

Coming Soon….
Natural Climate Cycles Part 3 – Glacial Cycles and the Milankovich Cycle Theory
Natural Climate Cycles Part 4 – Deep Time Cycles

** Data source: Lean 2000, SIDC sunspots, PMOD and ACRIM Composite TSI
*** Data source: GISP2 data set.

© 2015, James Covington. All rights reserved. On republishing this post, youmust provide link to original post

.

.

Share

Natural Climate Cycles – Part 1: Short Term Oscillations

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 photo earth_covered_by_clouds_zps4deb8d7f.jpg
 

This shall be part one of a four part series, detailing natural climate cycles and how these cycles combine and/or relate, to create the overall climate, and daily weather that we observe.  Once the entire series has been completed, it will be combined into a book with some additional details and graphics added.

Before I begin, please understand the difference between weather and climate.  To get one single climate data point, requires the averaging together of 30 years of weather.  Therefor a century of weather, would contain only three climate data points and some change.  Keep this in mind throughout this multipart series.  Then when I speak of climate, you know I am referring to periods of longer than 30 years. Also by this strict scientific definition, “Global Warming” is a historic weather event, nothing more.  It lasted less than 25 years, and ended more than 18 years ago.  Therefor, it cannot fit the scientific definition of climate, at all.  This series will also discuss why there were no human causes in the past, or today.

There is one other point I’d like to make before I begin.  Wherever possible, when I use temperature or sea level charts and/or data, I will be using the raw, unadjusted data.  “Official” temperature data from NOAA and other sources has been “homogenized” or “corrected”, which I find to be very suspect, as these “adjustments” do not seem to conform to established scientific methods.  I will not use that kind of data here, unless it is to show how those “adjustments” were made.

Part One shall detail the shortest climate cycles…. those which oscillate, or cycle with a periodicity of 25 to 250 years.

Oceanic / Upper Air Oscillations

The most important cycles to our daily weather and short-term climate, are the oceanic and upper air oscillations.  Here, I will list the most prominent oscillations and how they affect what we observe, over time.

The PDO – Pacific Decadal Oscillation is a periodic oscillation in the northern Pacific Ocean.  This is quite similar to the El Nino / La Nina (ENSO) pattern in the central Pacific Ocean, but takes place in the northern Pacific Ocean, and oscillates over a period of around 25 to 35 years.  It has a warm (positive) phase, and a cool (negative) phase.  The PDO phase is a major contributor / driver of weather and short-term climate variability throughout North America and eastern Asia.  The PDO also works in tandem with the ENSO – El Nino Southern Oscillation.  When the PDO is in its warm phase, an El Nino can be stronger, such as the El Nino of 1998.  During a PDO cool phase, an El Nino tends to be much weaker if they develop much at all, but the opposite La Nina phase can be much stronger than it would be during a PDO warm phase.  Below is a graphics representation of the PDO.

PDO
positive (warm) phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . negative (cool) phase

When the PDO is in its positive (warm) phase (at left), sea surface temperatures in the northern Pacific Ocean tend to be below normal. Across North America, temperatures tend to be above normal, with precipitation generally near or below normal.  However, areas along the Pacific coast of both North America and Asia, tend to be cooler and wetter during a PDO warm phase.

Conversely, when the PDO is in its negative (cool) phase (at right), the waters of the northern Pacific Ocean tend to be warmer than normal, and the Pacific coasts of North America and Asia also tend to be warmer and dryer.  Inland portions of North America tend to be cooler with generally above normal precipitation, especially in winter.  This can contribute to the development of blizzards which strike the central and eastern United States and southern Canada with regularity.

PDO - US Temperature
PDO / Raw US Temperature Record (click to enlarge)

The above is a graphic I put together, which shows the clear and obvious correlation between the PDO, and the raw US temperature record.  While it is not an exact match, as no single climate driver will be, it does show just how significant the PDO phase is, to our weather in the United States.  The PDO works in tandem with the next oscillation we’ll look at and discuss.

The AMO – Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation is quite similar to the PDO, but takes place in the northern Atlantic Ocean, and generally cycles with a periodicity of about 30 to 45 years.  The AMO has a major impact on temperature and precipitation throughout the Northern Hemisphere, but particularly eastern North America, and much of Europe, into western Asia.  When the AMO is in its cool phase, temperatures tend to be below normal over a wide area of the Northern Hemisphere.  Conversely, when the AMO is in its warm phase, above normal temperatures are typically observed.

AMO---US-Temperature
AMO – US Temperatures (click to enlarge)

Similar to the previous graphic, I put this together to show the obvious correlation between raw US temperatures, and the AMO phase.  The AMO phase correlates equally as well as the PDO phase does.  However, when you combine the effect of the two, this makes up about 70% of the influence on our daily weather, and short-term climate in the Northern Hemisphere.

Both the PDO and the AMO were in their warm phase for an extended period only once during the last 140 years, which was the 1930s into the early 1940s…. the time known as the “Dust Bowl”.  When both the PDO and the AMO are in their negative phase for an extended period, as occurred in the 1910s into the 1920s, and again in the 1960s and 70s, is when we get our coolest summers, and coldest winters. When one of them is in positive phase and the other in negative phase, the two rarely cancel each other out. In stead, it depends on the phase of various shorter term weather oscillations, such as the AO (Arctic Oscillation), NAO (North Atlantic Oscillation), and PNA (Pacific / North America Oscillation), which help determine which ocean’s phase is dominant in our daily weather.

As of late October of 2014, the PDO was mildly in its negative phase, and the AMO has just flipped into a weak negative phase.  Therefor, our next several years are likely to be much cooler than the past several have been.  Shorter term weather oscillations, such as the AO, NAO, and PNA, are what have pushed the so called “polar vortex” southward in the winter of 2013/14, which is likely to return in the next several winters.  The negative PDO phase has also been a significant contributor to the drought conditions in the western US.

Solar Cycles / Oscillations

Many people do not realize that our sun is actually a variable star.  Just how variable our star is over time, is a matter of some conjecture, and considerable importance to our long-term climate.  We only have sunspot records going back to the year 1610.  Prior to 1610 the solar record is reconstructed, based on ice cores, ocean bottom sediment cores, tree rings, and various other methods.  As a scientist, I prefer direct measurement methods, which involve less guess-work, and are much less open to interpretation / possible error.

In short-term climate, solar variability generally accounts for about 20% of what is observed.  In the geologic past, it may have been much higher, but this will be explained in later parts of this series.  For now, lets discuss the sunspot record that exists since 1610.

ssn_yearly
Sunspot Record since 1610 (click to enlarge)

The above graphic shows the sunspot count, since the year 1610 when direct measurement records began.  There are several features which are noteworthy in the sunspot record, which had significant impacts on our climate.  Most notable, is the clear oscillation between peak and valley in the sunspot count, which is what is commonly called the “Sunspot Cycle”.  The Sunspot Cycle is highly variable in both length (9 to 14 years), and strength, over time.  For example, when the sun goes into a period where peaks are both stronger, and closer together, as was the case in the latter half of the 20th Century, then our climate warms.  This is what was largely responsible for the period commonly called “Global Warming”.  Conversely, when the peaks are weaker and farther apart, as was the case during the “Little Ice Age”, our climate cools.  The effects of a strong solar peak are mitigated by the atmosphere’s ability to bleed excess heat off to space through convection.  Therefor the warming effects of solar peaks are of lesser importance to day-to-day weather and short-term climate, than are the effects of weaker solar activity.

Another major feature in the sunspot record is the period from about 1615 to about 1710, which is known as the Maunder Minimum.  During this period of “Solar Hibernation”, there were very few sunspots noted on the surface of the sun, and extended periods where none were noted at all.   A second, shorter “Solar Minimum” occurred between roughly 1805 and 1840, which is known as the “Dalton Minimum”.  The period from roughly 1600 to 1860 is known in climate as the “Little Ice Age”, as the effect of lower solar radiation, combined with an active period of volcanism, lead to cool summers and very cold winters throughout much of this period.  This combined effect lead to “The Year Without a Summer” in 1816 as measurable snow was observed throughout the summer months, in New England and parts of Europe.

One other item of note on the sunspot chart, is that our latest Solar Maximum was the weakest in a Century.  Many of the record cold temperatures that are now being tied or broken, were set the last time we had a Solar Maximum this weak.  Clearly, while solar variability only accounts for about 20% of our short-term climate, it can have a major impact on what we observe.

Something which goes along with this most recent weak Solar Maximum is the double-peak, with the second peak having just occurred in October and early November of 2014.  Looking back over the sunspot record, there are only two other times when a double-peak occurred similarly to what we’ve just observed.  Those two times were in 1615 as the Maunder Minimum began, and 1805 as the Dalton Minimum began.

Several scientists, such as Dr. Don Easterbrook, PhD, Piers Corbyn, and former NASA engineer John L. Casey, who has written a book entitled “Cold Sun“, have theorized that the sun is entering a new Solar Minimum similar to the Dalton Minimum, or possibly a new “Solar Hibernation” similar to the Maunder Minimum.  The current time frame of the sunspot record, is not long enough to determine if there is a possible cycle of Solar Minimum or Solar Hibernation.  Thus, trying to predict such a cycle is no easy task.  However thus far their predictions have been almost exactly accurate, making it quite likely that they are indeed, correct.  However, only time will tell.  If the sunspot count drops to almost zero and stays there, we’ll know for certain that at least a Dalton-type of Solar Minimum has begun.  Then, if it is sustained over a period of years, we’ll know it has become a Solar Hibernation.  We should know for sure within the next few years.  It should be noted, that if the sun enters a period of “Solar Hibernation”, it could have dramatic effects on human civilization.  Cool summers and shortened growing seasons could lead to significant crop losses throughout the “bread baskets” of the world.  Extremely cold winters could lead to a failed power grid, costing thousands of lives if it happens at the wrong time of year.

The Volcanism Connection

volcanoSome scientists, with which I personally agree, have hypothesized that when the sun goes into a period of Minimum or Hibernation, and infrared radiation from the sun declines, that other forms of radiation like neutrinos and cosmic rays, have a corresponding increase.  Cosmic rays are known through empirical and experimental data to increase atmospheric aerosols, which increase low level cloud cover, globally.  This increase in low clouds has the effect of reflecting sunlight, resulting in cooling of the short-term climate.  Additionally, neutrinos are believed to result in heating of the interior of planetary bodies in the Solar System.  Observations of Mercury and Mars may indicate a possible resurgence in their magnetic fields, while increased storm activity within the atmospheres of the Gas Giants and Ice Giants in the outer Solar System, also seems to point to an increase in internal heat within those planets.  Along the same lines… Earth responds to this increase in neutrinos with an increase in earthquake and volcano activity, which we are now beginning to observe.  While earthquakes have little effect on climate, volcanoes can have a major impact on climate.  The size of the impact on climate, relates directly to the size of the eruption.

Large volcanic eruptions such as Laki in 1783, Mt. Tambora in 1815, or Mt. Pinatubo in 1991, are able to spew significant amounts of sulfur dioxide, SO2, into the stratosphere.  SO2 then mixes with water vapor already in the stratosphere, to become sulfuric acid.  Sulfuric acid has the effect of blocking sunlight.  This effect when combined with reduced IR radiation from the sun, and the effect of low clouds reflecting sunlight, is what leads to periods like the “Little Ice Age”, especially during those periods when the PDO phase and AMO phase are both negative at the same time, which is what accounts for the coldest years of the “Little Ice Age”.

If temperature records went back far enough, the coldest year on record for the eastern United States would be 1784, the year after Laki erupted in Iceland.  In 1784, the Mississippi River froze over at New Orleans, and ice was observed on the surface of the northern Gulf of Mexico, while much of the eastern US had its most extreme winter recorded before, or since.  This is what happens when all of these negative feedback forces on our climate, hit us all at once.  Given recent activity of Icelandic volcanoes, with both the PDO phase and AMO phase now negative, and the sun possibly going into a phase of weaker activity, a repeat of 1784 could be on the horizon.

Coming Soon….
Natural Climate Cycles Part 2 – Millennial Cycles
Natural Climate Cycles Part 3 – Glacial Cycles and the Milankovich Cycle Theory
Natural Climate Cycles Part 4 – Deep Time Cycles

.

.

Share

White House Memo: Don’t Mention Temperature When Discussing Global Warming

Share

 photo earth_covered_by_clouds_zps4deb8d7f.jpg

Hat/Tip to Doug Ross @ Journal.

The temperatures aren’t rising?

Then we’ll switch to calling it “Climate Change” instead of “Global Warming.”

The temperatures STILL aren’t rising?

Er, um, don’t mention temperature when talking about Global Warming.

Gore-Global-Warming-Lies

Yes, the Gore-distas really are that pathetic…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

First rule about global warming: don’t talk global warming.

The White House quietly released a draft guidance telling federal agencies to consider the impact more carbon dioxide emissions will have on the environment, but only in terms of how much more carbon dioxide will be emitted.

When conducting environmental impact analyses on rules and projects, federal agencies should only talk about carbon dioxide emissions increases — not things like potential increases in temperature, precipitation, storm intensity and other environmental impacts that scientists warn about.

“In light of the difficulties in attributing specific climate impacts to individual projects, [Council on Environmental Quality] recommends agencies use the projected [greenhouse gas] emissions and also, when appropriate, potential changes in carbon sequestration and storage, as the proxy for assessing a proposed action’s potential climate change impacts,” the White House wrote in its guidance federal regulatory agencies conducting environmental reviews.

Why is that? Federal environmental assessments will likely show regulations have a negligible impact on the environment in terms of temperature rises, sea level rises and such — indeed if every industrialized country stopped emitting carbon dioxide tomorrow, temperatures would only be reduced 0.21 degrees Celsius by 2100.

“CEQ recognizes that many agency [National Environmental Policy Act] analyses to date have concluded that [greenhouse gas] emissions from an individual agency action will have small, if any, potential climate change effects,” the White House wrote.

Basically the White House is telling agencies not to make any predictions about how much an individual project or program will impact the environment through global warming because there’s too much uncertainty.

“In other words, it would prove that the assessment of climate change impacts of federal actions, as directed by the CEQ, to be a complete and utter waste of time,” writes Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberger, climate scientists with the libertarian Cato Institute.

The Cato scientists argue the White House’s order to agencies not to consider the actual environmental impacts of global warming allows the government to hide how little its actions will actually impact the climate.

Michaels and Knappenberger say climate models, which the federal government has spent billions of dollars developing, can be used to quantify the environmental impacts from higher carbon dioxide emissions.

But what the Obama administration doesn’t want you to see is just how small an impact individual federal actions will have on temperature increases, sea level rises, precipitation and other factors.

“So instead of assessing actual climate impacts (of which there are none) of federal actions, the CEQ directs agencies to cast the effect in terms of greenhouse gas emissions—which can be used for all sorts of mischief,” write Michaels and Knappenberger. “For example, see how the EPA uses greenhouse gas emissions instead of climate change to promote its regulations limiting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.”

The EPA says its rule to cut carbon dioxide emissions from power plants 30 percent by 2030 will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by as much as 555 million metric tons per year in 15 years — sounds like a lot, but it will have a negligible impact on global temperatures.

Even if the EPA got rid of carbon dioxide from all power plants currently operating, global temperature rises by 0.03 degrees Celsius by 2100.

“Government action occurs incrementally, program-by-program and step-by-step, and climate impacts are not attributable to any single action, but are exacerbated by a series of smaller decisions, including decisions made by the government,” the White House wrote.

“Therefore, the statement that emissions from a government action or approval represent only a small fraction of global emissions is more a statement about the nature of the climate change challenge, and is not an appropriate basis for deciding whether to consider climate impacts under [the National Environmental Policy Act],” the White House added.

Read the full story here.

.

.

.

Share

Out Of Top 23 Items Americans Want DC To Focus On, Global Warming Barely Makes The List

Share

 photo wordcloud001_zps6fa3e187.jpg

Hat/Tip to soopermexican at The Right Scoop.

Al Gore and all his “Goredistas” continually sound the alarm that humans are killing the planet!

The only problem with that, is that hardly anyone believes them.

One of the funnier things to see is Obama and Democrats in the liberal media sound the alarm on Global Warming, when most Americans really could care less. A recent Pew poll report shows just how little they care about the issue:

The center asked a nationally representative pool of Americans which policy issues they believe should be a top priority for the Obama administration and newly appointed Congress this year. Only 38 percent of people said they thought global warming qualifies, which is almost low enough to make the issue the least important to the American public out of 23 responses. Only global trade, which 30 percent of respondents said was a top priority, was lower.

Here is the chart that shows Global Warming is second from the bottom of the list.

1-15-2015-priorities_001

 

So the libs got caught off guard by this poll, but wait! There’s more!!

Pew also showed that Democrats don’t give a hoot about so-called “man-made global warming,” either.

Ha!

Defending against terrorism, strengthening the economy and improving the job situation rank among the leading priorities for both Republicans and Democrats. But strengthening the military and reducing the deficit rate as more important for Republicans than Democrats, while improving education and dealing with the problems of the poor rank higher for Democrats than Republicans.

Read the full story here.

.

.

.

Share

Bad News For Al Gore: 28 In Arizona, Temps In The ’30s In Florida…Record Cold Spell All Across The U.S.

Share
Lake-Michigan November 2014
The Frozen view of Lake Michigan and Chicago

Hat/Tip to Jon Erdman at Weather.com.

The only thing that is more mortally wounded than that bird on your Thanksgiving table is Al Gore’s Global Climate Warming Change fear factory. Record cold temperatures are being recorded all across the country. Waves of cold Arctic air are finding their way down into the “lower 48” and wreaking havoc along the way.

Record-Breaking November Arctic Cold

arctic-13nov14

 

Long Lasting Cold

Above is a European computer model of the Arctic blasts that are reaching their way deep into the Continental United States.

With blocking high pressure aloft over eastern Alaska and northwest Canada, a direct pipeline of cold air came from Siberia to near the North Pole, then southward into Canada and the U.S., particularly the Plains and Midwest. While not as cold in magnitude, the arctic surges have also swept into parts of the East, though there was a brief mild spell in between the first two cold snaps along the East Coast.

Here is the general timing of each arctic cold surge, and when the coldest air may ease:

First arctic surge: Spread into the East last week (November 11-15).

– Second arctic surge: Blasted through the East, Midwest, and South through early Thursday (November 16-20). For parts of the mid-Mississippi Valley, Ohio Valley, Tennessee Valley and the Middle Atlantic States, this was the coldest of the surges, with numerous daily record lows broken.

– Third arctic surge: Reached the Northern Plains and Upper Midwest Thursday, then slid east across the Great Lakes and parts of the Northeast on Friday. It did not press nearly as far south as the first and second surges did.

– Cold relief: Relief began in the Rockies, then expanded into the southern Plains and Southeast Wednesday and Thursday. Midwest and Northeast relief arrives this weekend.

United States Chill Map

Via Plymouth State Weather Center:

uschill

Other Cold Notables

– Burlington, Colorado, on the eastern Plains near the Kansas border, dipped to -10 Thursday, setting a new record low for the month of November.

– Casper, Wyoming, dipped to -27 at 11:59 p.m. Wednesday night, shattering their all-time November record low of -21 on Nov. 23, 1985 (records date to 1939). The temperature stayed at -27 at midnight Thursday, making it the new record low for Nov. 13 as well. Previously, the soonest Casper plunged to -27 was on Dec. 5, 1972. Casper’s high of 6 on Nov. 11 was the record earliest single-digit or colder high temperature there. (On Nov. 15, 1955, the high was only -3 degrees). Wednesday, Casper only managed a high of 3 degrees!

– Denver’s high of 6 on Nov. 12 was the coldest daily high so early in the season. Only three other November days had daily high temperatures colder in Denver, dating to 1872. Early Thursday morning, Denver chalked up a bone-chilling -14 degrees, easily the coldest temperature so early in the season. (Nov. 17, 1880 was the previous earliest such cold reading in Denver.)

– Livingston, Montana, dipped to minus 21 Wednesday, their coldest so early in the season. That said, they once dipped to minus 31 degrees just one day later in the calendar, on November 13, 1959.

– In the Southern Plains, Amarillo (21), Lubbock (27),  Childress (29) and Goodland (14) all set their coldest daily high temperatures on record for so early in the season on Wednesday.

– Riverton, Wyoming had a daytime high of 0 degrees Thursday.

– Redmond, Oregon, dropped to 19 degrees below zero Sunday morning, crushing its all-time record low for the month of November, previously 14 below zero on Nov. 15, 1955. Sunday’s low was an astonishing 23 degrees colder than the previous daily record for Nov. 16 in Redmond.

– Kansas City, Missouri set a record cool high of only 23 degrees on Monday, which beat the previous record of 24, which was set back in 1891.

– Joplin, Missouri set a record low for the month of November on Tuesday with a low temperature of 6 degrees.

– Paducah, Kentucky dropped to 10 degrees on Tuesday morning setting a record low and tying the third lowest temperature ever recorded in the month of November. The high temperature on Tuesday only reached 25 degrees, which is only the second time they have had a high that cold so early in the season.

– Valentine, Nebraska had a low of -12 on Tuesday morning, which shattered their previous record of 0.

– Dallas, Texas, saw highs of 45 degrees or colder for six consecutive days, Nov. 12 through Nov. 17. This is the longest such streak on record there in the month of November, besting a five-day streak in November 1937. (That month had a total of seven non-consecutive days with highs 45 or colder; that record still stands, for now.)

– Charlotte, North Carolina recorded a low of 14 degrees on Wednesday morning making it the coldest on record so early in the season.

– Charleston, West Virginia set a record low of 12 degrees on Wednesday, which made it the coldest on record for so early in the season.

– Macon, Georgia, plummeted to 17 degrees on Wednesday morning. Macon has never recorded a low in the teens or colder so early in the season since records began in 1892; in fact, the only other time they’ve seen teens in meteorological autumn (Sept. 1 to Nov. 30) was on Nov. 24-25, 1950, with lows of 19 and 10 degrees, respectively.

– Jacksonville, Florida dropped down to 24 degrees on Thursday morning, making it the coldest on record so early in the season. It is their third-coldest November reading on record, behind 23 degrees on Nov. 25, 1950, and 21 degrees exactly 20 years later on Nov. 25, 1970.

– South Bend, Indiana recorded eight consecutive days at or below freezing on Thursday, making it the longest streak on record for the month of November. The previous longest streaks were five days.

The Coldest Thanksgiving Since 1930?

Via WCCO Channel 4:

 

.

.

.

.

.

Share

Evidence: Get Used to Colder Weather – Sorry, Al!!

Share

 

Temperatures
Northern Hemisphere Temperature
It is becoming increasingly likely that we can expect at least the next few decades to be considerably colder than the last few decades have been.

With the recent cold snaps striking the central and eastern US, following the extreme winter we had a year ago, many find themselves asking “what happened to ‘global warming’?”.  Others are asking if this cold weather is here to stay, or just temporary.  This is the place to find answers, and the UN-IPCC certainly is not.  Why? Because as I spell out in this article, the UN-IPCC in its charter, defines climate change as “Changes in climate caused by human interference with atmospheric composition.” They are specifically only looking for man-made causes of climate change, and ignoring any potential natural causes.  Since the cause of this gradual decline in temperatures is entirely natural, they are not able to discuss it, if they bother to look for it at all.

As I am discussing in great detail in my recent and ongoing series on natural climate cycles, the cause of this shift toward cooler climate, is entirely natural.   The first thing we must look at to determine the cause of a shift in short-term climate, is the Sun.  Since the Sun is the source of all energy on the surface of Earth, as the Sun changes, so does our climate.

TSI and sunspots
TSI and Sunspot Count (click to enlarge)

This chart shows two very important facts about recent solar activity.  At the top is TSI, or Total Solar Irradiance.  This is a measure of all energy reaching Earth from the Sun, which is measured in Watts per square meter.  At the bottom of this chart is the sunspot count over the same period.  Again, as Ioutlined in this article, solar cycles vary in length and in strength, over time.  Solar cycles in the latter half of the 20th Century averaged about 9.5 to 10 years apart, and were quite intense.  This contributed to a period of warming.  Then solar cycles 22 and 23 were 11.4 years apart, and cycles 23 and 24 were nearly 14 years apart.  Solar cycles are getting farther apart, and each one weaker than the one before.  Solar cycle 24 was the weakest in a Century.  Even if the UN-IPCC is correct about the effects of Carbon Dioxide, it is largely irrelevant.  Its common sense, that as the amount of energy coming from the Sun declines over time, our average temperatures must surely decline.  If Carbon Dioxide is indeed an agent of warming, it can only slightly mitigate the effects of a decline in Total Solar Irradiance.

This was not unexpected.  In fact, this cooler shift in our average temperature has been predicted by myself and several other scientists, since 2006.  Source material here.  TSI and the sunspot count are not the only indicators that the Sun is going into a period of weaker energy output.  Mike Loughly, Professor at Space Environment Physics and others say that solar output is weakening faster than at any point in the last 9,000 years.  Stanford’s Wilcox Solar Observatory says the Solar Heliosphere has been weakening for the last four decades in a row.  Source material here.  The United Kingdom Office of Meteorology has stated that the Sun goes into a period of “grand solar minimum”, a period roughly a century long where solar activity is considerably weakened, roughly every 366 to 450 years.  Source material here.  The last “grand solar minimum”, the “Maunder Minimum”, began in 1615, about 400 years ago.  Clearly, this cycle is due to repeat.  These recent changes in the Sun, indicate that it may have already begun to do so.

irradiance-82744856745
Total Solar Irradiance (click to enlarge)

Here you can see Total Solar Irradiance over the last ~420 years.  The “Maunder Minimum” is very clear on this chart, from the years 1615 to 1710.  This period of “grand solar minimum” largely contributed to a colder period in climate known as “The Little Ice Age”.  It is too early to be certain that we are going to observe a repeat of “The Little Ice Age”, which lasted for nearly 600 years.  However, it is becoming increasingly likely that we can expect at least the next few decades to be considerably colder than the last few decades have been.

Another, longer term cycle which may have an impact on our average global temperatures, is a cycle of warm/cool oscillation which repeats about every 950 to 1100 years.  This cycle is clearly indicated by Antarctic and Greenland ice cores.  An example is shown below.

Drakeetal2012b
5,000 Year Temperature Reconstruction

This shows a reconstruction of temperatures over the last 5,000 years.  Clearly, there are warm periods about a millennium apart, with longer periods of cooler temperatures between them.  Also, notice that since the “Minoan Warm Period” 3,500 years ago, each of these warm periods, the “Roman Warm Period”, the “Medieval Warm Period”, and the “Modern Warm Period”, have been about 1°C cooler than the one before it.  In this cycle, we have already exited the “Modern Warm Period”, that peaked around 1940, which is where this chart ends.  The cause for this cycle is still being investigated, but adding this cycle to the decline in solar activity, and the cooling effects of oceanic and upper air oscillations which also have a significant impact on our short-term climate, and it becomes highly likely that we are due to see cooler summers, and extreme winters to come.  As I detail in this article, it would be prudent to at least prepare for the possibility, despite what those who sound the global warming alarm might be predicting.  Especially considering they haven’t gotten a single prediction correct, yet.

.

.

Share

Obama Flushes $3 billion of Taxpayer Dollars Into A Third World Climate Change Slush Fund

Share

 photo money_tree_biodiversity_zps8128b0ea.jpg
 

Climate change, it’s not about saving the planet. It’s about wealth transfer.

Barack Obama will announce a three billion dollar taxpayer funded US contribution to the world climate change fund.

The pledge is directed to the Green Climate Fund, a financial institution created last year by the United Nations with headquarters in Seoul, South Korea. It comes ahead of a Nov. 20 climate meeting in Berlin, at which countries have been asked to make formal commitments to the fund.

In particular, the world’s least developed economies insist that the world’s richest economies — which are also the largest greenhouse gas polluters — must commit to paying billions of dollars to help the world’s poorest adapt to the ravages of climate change.

By “adapt” they mean, of course, line their pockets with our money.

In Obama’s lefty worldview, it’s like reparations for colonialism, only better.

And $3 billion is merely the down payment.

At a 2009 climate change summit in Copenhagen, then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton pledged that by 2020 the United States would help mobilize $100 billion, through a combination of public aid and private investments, to flow annually from rich countries to poor countries to help the poor economies deal with climate change.

$100 billion dollars of our money. Annually. Flowing into the pockets of Third World shithole dictators everwhere! It’ll certainly change their, uh, “climate.” For the better, I’m sure.

But I guarantee it won’t do Thing One to change the weather.

.

.

.

Share

Half Dozen Climate Facts That Make Global Warming Alarmists Squirm

Share

As I’m giving Don the weekend off, so to speak, I’d like to address perhaps the single most covered topic in the history of the CH 2.0-the global warming hoax.   We’ve had so much fun with it, as the alarmists make startling OMG DOOM AND GLOOM predictions, and they all fall flat.  Then, the explanations as to why their predictions didn’t come true are even more far fetched than their originals.   It”s nearly endless blog fodder.

Earlier this week, The Lid published A Dozen Facts Debunking Global Warming Obama Can’t Answer (Despite The Phony China Deal).  Our of courtesy, I will publish six. You’ll have to click the link for the rest.

For those of you who want to think for themselves rather than simply listen to the scary speeches of the global warming proponents, I have created a list of a dozen facts about global warming, that those those folks making the scary speeches cannot respond.

Everything below is a fact and I invite the POTUS and /or his climate friends to respond. But they wont. Instead they will call me names like denier or member of the Flat Earth Society (actually there really is a Flat Earth Society and its president believes in the global warming hypothesis so who is the real “flat-earther?)

 
1) Through Halloween of 2014- The Global Warming Pause has lasted 18 years and one month. Heartland Institute analyst, Peter Ferrara, notes“If you look at the record of global temperature data, you will find that the late 20th Century period of global warming actually lasted about 20 years, from the late 1970s to the late 1990s. Before that, the globe was dominated by about 30 years of global cooling, giving rise in the 1970s to media discussions of the return of the Little Ice Age (circa 1450 to 1850), or worse.” So there was thirty years of cooling followed by 20 years of warming and almost 18 years of cooling…and that’s what the global warming scare is all about.

2) Antarctic Sea Ice is at record levels and the Arctic ice cap has seen record growth.  Global sea ice area has been averaging above normal for the past two years. But to get around those facts, the global warming enthusiasts are claiming that global warming causes global cooling (really).

3) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant it’s what you exhale and it is what “feeds” plants. Without CO2 there would not be a single blade of grass or a redwood tree, nor would there be the animal life that depends on vegetation; wheat and rice, for example, as food. Without CO2 mankind would get pretty hungry. Even worse the global warming proponants keep talking about population control because they don’t want more people around to exhale, and let’s not talk about what they say about stopping methane (no spicy foods, no cows, no fart jokes).

4) There is not ONE climate computer model that has accurately connected CO2 to climate change. In fact CO2 is at its highest levels in 13,000 years and the earth hasn’t warmed in almost 18 years. Approximately 12,750 years ago before big cars and coal plants CO2 levels were higher than today. And during some past ice ages levels were up to 20x today’s levels.

5) Even with the relatively high levels there is very little CO2 in the atmosphere. At 78% nitrogen is the most abundant gas in the Earth’s atmosphere. Oxygen is the second most abundant gas-of-life in the atmosphere at 21%. Water vapor is the third most abundant gas-of-life in the atmosphere; it varies up to 5%. Exhale freely because carbon dioxide is the least abundant gas in the atmosphere at 0.04%.

6) The climate models pushed by the global warming enthusiasts haven’t been right. Think about that one for a second. If you believe what people like Al Gore the polar ice caps should have melted by now (actually by last year), most coastal cities should be underwater and it should be a lot warmer by now. As my Mom always said, Man plans and God laughs. The Earth’s climate is a very complicated system and the scientists haven’t been able to account for all the components to create an accurate model.

Of course, when they predict doom, and doom doesn’t happen, they say that global warming caused the opposite to occur!  And, even though there has been no statistically significant global warming since I was a 20-something, the established “science” will tell us, once again, that this year was the “hottest on record.”

Because science!

Share

Natural Climate Cycles – Part 1: Short Term Oscillations

Share

 photo earth_covered_by_clouds_zps4deb8d7f.jpg
 

This shall be part one of a four part series, detailing natural climate cycles and how these cycles combine and/or relate, to create the overall climate, and daily weather that we observe.  Once the entire series has been completed, it will be combined into a book with some additional details and graphics added.

Before I begin, please understand the difference between weather and climate.  To get one single climate data point, requires the averaging together of 30 years of weather.  Therefor a century of weather, would contain only three climate data points and some change.  Keep this in mind throughout this multipart series.  Then when I speak of climate, you know I am referring to periods of longer than 30 years. Also by this strict scientific definition, “Global Warming” is a historic weather event, nothing more.  It lasted less than 25 years, and ended more than 18 years ago.  Therefor, it cannot fit the scientific definition of climate, at all.  This series will also discuss why there were no human causes in the past, or today.

There is one other point I’d like to make before I begin.  Wherever possible, when I use temperature or sea level charts and/or data, I will be using the raw, unadjusted data.  “Official” temperature data from NOAA and other sources has been “homogenized” or “corrected”, which I find to be very suspect, as these “adjustments” do not seem to conform to established scientific methods.  I will not use that kind of data here, unless it is to show how those “adjustments” were made.

Part One shall detail the shortest climate cycles…. those which oscillate, or cycle with a periodicity of 25 to 250 years.

Oceanic / Upper Air Oscillations

The most important cycles to our daily weather and short-term climate, are the oceanic and upper air oscillations.  Here, I will list the most prominent oscillations and how they affect what we observe, over time.

The PDO – Pacific Decadal Oscillation is a periodic oscillation in the northern Pacific Ocean.  This is quite similar to the El Nino / La Nina (ENSO) pattern in the central Pacific Ocean, but takes place in the northern Pacific Ocean, and oscillates over a period of around 25 to 35 years.  It has a warm (positive) phase, and a cool (negative) phase.  The PDO phase is a major contributor / driver of weather and short-term climate variability throughout North America and eastern Asia.  The PDO also works in tandem with the ENSO – El Nino Southern Oscillation.  When the PDO is in its warm phase, an El Nino can be stronger, such as the El Nino of 1998.  During a PDO cool phase, an El Nino tends to be much weaker if they develop much at all, but the opposite La Nina phase can be much stronger than it would be during a PDO warm phase.  Below is a graphics representation of the PDO.

PDO
positive (warm) phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . negative (cool) phase

When the PDO is in its positive (warm) phase (at left), sea surface temperatures in the northern Pacific Ocean tend to be below normal. Across North America, temperatures tend to be above normal, with precipitation generally near or below normal.  However, areas along the Pacific coast of both North America and Asia, tend to be cooler and wetter during a PDO warm phase.

Conversely, when the PDO is in its negative (cool) phase (at right), the waters of the northern Pacific Ocean tend to be warmer than normal, and the Pacific coasts of North America and Asia also tend to be warmer and dryer.  Inland portions of North America tend to be cooler with generally above normal precipitation, especially in winter.  This can contribute to the development of blizzards which strike the central and eastern United States and southern Canada with regularity.

PDO - US Temperature
PDO / Raw US Temperature Record (click to enlarge)

The above is a graphic I put together, which shows the clear and obvious correlation between the PDO, and the raw US temperature record.  While it is not an exact match, as no single climate driver will be, it does show just how significant the PDO phase is, to our weather in the United States.  The PDO works in tandem with the next oscillation we’ll look at and discuss.

The AMO – Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation is quite similar to the PDO, but takes place in the northern Atlantic Ocean, and generally cycles with a periodicity of about 30 to 45 years.  The AMO has a major impact on temperature and precipitation throughout the Northern Hemisphere, but particularly eastern North America, and much of Europe, into western Asia.  When the AMO is in its cool phase, temperatures tend to be below normal over a wide area of the Northern Hemisphere.  Conversely, when the AMO is in its warm phase, above normal temperatures are typically observed.

AMO---US-Temperature
AMO – US Temperatures (click to enlarge)

Similar to the previous graphic, I put this together to show the obvious correlation between raw US temperatures, and the AMO phase.  The AMO phase correlates equally as well as the PDO phase does.  However, when you combine the effect of the two, this makes up about 70% of the influence on our daily weather, and short-term climate in the Northern Hemisphere.

Both the PDO and the AMO were in their warm phase for an extended period only once during the last 140 years, which was the 1930s into the early 1940s…. the time known as the “Dust Bowl”.  When both the PDO and the AMO are in their negative phase for an extended period, as occurred in the 1910s into the 1920s, and again in the 1960s and 70s, is when we get our coolest summers, and coldest winters. When one of them is in positive phase and the other in negative phase, the two rarely cancel each other out. In stead, it depends on the phase of various shorter term weather oscillations, such as the AO (Arctic Oscillation), NAO (North Atlantic Oscillation), and PNA (Pacific / North America Oscillation), which help determine which ocean’s phase is dominant in our daily weather.

As of late October of 2014, the PDO was mildly in its negative phase, and the AMO has just flipped into a weak negative phase.  Therefor, our next several years are likely to be much cooler than the past several have been.  Shorter term weather oscillations, such as the AO, NAO, and PNA, are what have pushed the so called “polar vortex” southward in the winter of 2013/14, which is likely to return in the next several winters.  The negative PDO phase has also been a significant contributor to the drought conditions in the western US.

Solar Cycles / Oscillations

Many people do not realize that our sun is actually a variable star.  Just how variable our star is over time, is a matter of some conjecture, and considerable importance to our long-term climate.  We only have sunspot records going back to the year 1610.  Prior to 1610 the solar record is reconstructed, based on ice cores, ocean bottom sediment cores, tree rings, and various other methods.  As a scientist, I prefer direct measurement methods, which involve less guess-work, and are much less open to interpretation / possible error.

In short-term climate, solar variability generally accounts for about 20% of what is observed.  In the geologic past, it may have been much higher, but this will be explained in later parts of this series.  For now, lets discuss the sunspot record that exists since 1610.

ssn_yearly
Sunspot Record since 1610 (click to enlarge)

The above graphic shows the sunspot count, since the year 1610 when direct measurement records began.  There are several features which are noteworthy in the sunspot record, which had significant impacts on our climate.  Most notable, is the clear oscillation between peak and valley in the sunspot count, which is what is commonly called the “Sunspot Cycle”.  The Sunspot Cycle is highly variable in both length (9 to 14 years), and strength, over time.  For example, when the sun goes into a period where peaks are both stronger, and closer together, as was the case in the latter half of the 20th Century, then our climate warms.  This is what was largely responsible for the period commonly called “Global Warming”.  Conversely, when the peaks are weaker and farther apart, as was the case during the “Little Ice Age”, our climate cools.  The effects of a strong solar peak are mitigated by the atmosphere’s ability to bleed excess heat off to space through convection.  Therefor the warming effects of solar peaks are of lesser importance to day-to-day weather and short-term climate, than are the effects of weaker solar activity.

Another major feature in the sunspot record is the period from about 1615 to about 1710, which is known as the Maunder Minimum.  During this period of “Solar Hibernation”, there were very few sunspots noted on the surface of the sun, and extended periods where none were noted at all.   A second, shorter “Solar Minimum” occurred between roughly 1805 and 1840, which is known as the “Dalton Minimum”.  The period from roughly 1600 to 1860 is known in climate as the “Little Ice Age”, as the effect of lower solar radiation, combined with an active period of volcanism, lead to cool summers and very cold winters throughout much of this period.  This combined effect lead to “The Year Without a Summer” in 1816 as measurable snow was observed throughout the summer months, in New England and parts of Europe.

One other item of note on the sunspot chart, is that our latest Solar Maximum was the weakest in a Century.  Many of the record cold temperatures that are now being tied or broken, were set the last time we had a Solar Maximum this weak.  Clearly, while solar variability only accounts for about 20% of our short-term climate, it can have a major impact on what we observe.

Something which goes along with this most recent weak Solar Maximum is the double-peak, with the second peak having just occurred in October and early November of 2014.  Looking back over the sunspot record, there are only two other times when a double-peak occurred similarly to what we’ve just observed.  Those two times were in 1615 as the Maunder Minimum began, and 1805 as the Dalton Minimum began.

Several scientists, such as Dr. Don Easterbrook, PhD, Piers Corbyn, and former NASA engineer John L. Casey, who has written a book entitled “Cold Sun“, have theorized that the sun is entering a new Solar Minimum similar to the Dalton Minimum, or possibly a new “Solar Hibernation” similar to the Maunder Minimum.  The current time frame of the sunspot record, is not long enough to determine if there is a possible cycle of Solar Minimum or Solar Hibernation.  Thus, trying to predict such a cycle is no easy task.  However thus far their predictions have been almost exactly accurate, making it quite likely that they are indeed, correct.  However, only time will tell.  If the sunspot count drops to almost zero and stays there, we’ll know for certain that at least a Dalton-type of Solar Minimum has begun.  Then, if it is sustained over a period of years, we’ll know it has become a Solar Hibernation.  We should know for sure within the next few years.  It should be noted, that if the sun enters a period of “Solar Hibernation”, it could have dramatic effects on human civilization.  Cool summers and shortened growing seasons could lead to significant crop losses throughout the “bread baskets” of the world.  Extremely cold winters could lead to a failed power grid, costing thousands of lives if it happens at the wrong time of year.

The Volcanism Connection

volcanoSome scientists, with which I personally agree, have hypothesized that when the sun goes into a period of Minimum or Hibernation, and infrared radiation from the sun declines, that other forms of radiation like neutrinos and cosmic rays, have a corresponding increase.  Cosmic rays are known through empirical and experimental data to increase atmospheric aerosols, which increase low level cloud cover, globally.  This increase in low clouds has the effect of reflecting sunlight, resulting in cooling of the short-term climate.  Additionally, neutrinos are believed to result in heating of the interior of planetary bodies in the Solar System.  Observations of Mercury and Mars may indicate a possible resurgence in their magnetic fields, while increased storm activity within the atmospheres of the Gas Giants and Ice Giants in the outer Solar System, also seems to point to an increase in internal heat within those planets.  Along the same lines… Earth responds to this increase in neutrinos with an increase in earthquake and volcano activity, which we are now beginning to observe.  While earthquakes have little effect on climate, volcanoes can have a major impact on climate.  The size of the impact on climate, relates directly to the size of the eruption.

Large volcanic eruptions such as Laki in 1783, Mt. Tambora in 1815, or Mt. Pinatubo in 1991, are able to spew significant amounts of sulfur dioxide, SO2, into the stratosphere.  SO2 then mixes with water vapor already in the stratosphere, to become sulfuric acid.  Sulfuric acid has the effect of blocking sunlight.  This effect when combined with reduced IR radiation from the sun, and the effect of low clouds reflecting sunlight, is what leads to periods like the “Little Ice Age”, especially during those periods when the PDO phase and AMO phase are both negative at the same time, which is what accounts for the coldest years of the “Little Ice Age”.

If temperature records went back far enough, the coldest year on record for the eastern United States would be 1784, the year after Laki erupted in Iceland.  In 1784, the Mississippi River froze over at New Orleans, and ice was observed on the surface of the northern Gulf of Mexico, while much of the eastern US had its most extreme winter recorded before, or since.  This is what happens when all of these negative feedback forces on our climate, hit us all at once.  Given recent activity of Icelandic volcanoes, with both the PDO phase and AMO phase now negative, and the sun possibly going into a phase of weaker activity, a repeat of 1784 could be on the horizon.

Coming Soon….
Natural Climate Cycles Part 2 – Millennial Cycles
Natural Climate Cycles Part 3 – Glacial Cycles and the Milankovich Cycle Theory
Natural Climate Cycles Part 4 – Deep Time Cycles

 

.

.

Share

Is Your Goat Shrinking? Must be Climate Change!

Share

I know, we all prize our goats (especially if you’re in with ISIS), but there is a danger lurking out there.  It’ a previously unknown phenomena called…

(Dun dun daaaaa!)

GOAT SHRINKAGE!

That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, you precious goat (beloved if you’re in ISIS) is being secretly shrunk by Global Cooling Global Warming Climate Change!   Caused by a previously unknown phenomena called solar inflicted intergoatal scoliosis, your goats are being shrunk before your eyes!  For more on this devastating development, we now go to Watts up With That…

From Durham University, and the “would you, could you, with a goat” department comes this inanity. They can’t come up with any other explanation, so it must be ‘climate change’. At the rate of observed shrinkage, the goats will be palm sized by the year 2100. Just think of the pet market!

climate_goats1

Via Eurekalert:

‘Shrinking goats’ another indicator that climate change affects animal size

Alpine goats appear to be shrinking in size as they react to changes in climate, according to new research from Durham University.

The researchers studied the impacts of changes in temperature on the body size of Alpine Chamois, a species of mountain goat, over the past 30 years.

To their surprise, they discovered that young Chamois now weigh about 25 per cent less than animals of the same age in the 1980s.

In recent years, decreases in body size have been identified in a variety of animal species, and have frequently been linked to the changing climate.

However, the researchers say the decline in size of Chamois observed in this study is striking in its speed and magnitude.

The research, funded by the Natural Environment Research Council is published in the journal Frontiers in Zoology.

According to leading environmentalists, there are a handful of solutions to Goat Shrinkage…

1.  Just effing die you effing right wing Christian scum!

2.  Introduce a killer disease to decrease the human population, let’s call it…

3.  Make everyone live in thatch huts (except environmentalists), abandon all modern transportation (except environmentalists), decrease the lifestyle and diets of all humans (except environmentalists).

4.  Leave most of the population to freeze to death because of global warming.

5.  Make Al Gore a billionaire.

Just remember kids, it’s for the goats (and the ISIS members that love them so. very. much.)

Share

Americans Should Prepare for Winter Blackouts

Share

Stop.the_.EPA_-300x192Americans generally take our power grid for granted.  For most areas of the country, it has been pretty reliable over the past few decades, despite growing demands placed upon it.  However, our power grid faces many threats which could cause wide-scale blackouts…. such as EMP attack, solar storms, and aging infrastructure.  The biggest threat to our power grid, is less known to most Americans, and that threat is our very own Environmental Protection Agency.

In January 2014, Americans suffered some of the coldest temperatures ever recorded in the heartland of the United States and throughout the northeast as well, due to the supposed “Polar Vortex”.  It was during this time, that our power grid very nearly failed.  On January 7, 2014, PJM Interconnections, the Regional Transmission Organization serving areas from New Jersey to Illinois, measured a power load of almost 142,000 MegaWatts.  Eight of the top ten PJMs all-time winter power load peaks occurred in January of 2014.  It was only the heroic efforts by grid operators, which saved large parts of the nation from long-term, potentially catastrophic blackouts.  Had any one of our power plants suffered a failure during this time, the entire grid would have failed as a result.

The mainstream media only mentioned this event in passing, probably in an effort not to alarm the public, to just how close we came to real disaster.  A major and long-term blackout during winter temperatures that cold, could lead to massive casualties all across the central and eastern US, as so many families are dependent on electricity to heat their homes.

Fast forward to present-day, and the greatest current threat to our power grid, has become the EPA.  Through the MATS (Mercury and Air Toxics Standard) and CSAPR (Cross State Air Pollution Rule), the EPA’s new regulations, touted by the Obama Administration as a major step toward combating Global Warming, has forced the closure of dozens of coal-fired power plants across 37 states, resulting in a loss of power generation capacity of 72 GigaWatts, to say nothing of the $51 Billion in lost revenue per the US Chamber of Commerce as a direct result of these regulations.

Winter-Outlook-HD
USA Weather Inc. Winter Outlook thru Jan 20 (click to enlarge)

As you can see from the above outlook, the coming winter could be at least as bad as last winter, in terms of temperatures.  This outlook is from USA Weather Incorporated, and  I collaborated heavily into its production.  Our outlook received an A- grade from an independent media source for last winter, and we have an extensive track record of accuracy.  Further information about our outlook can be found here.  Other entities such as the Old Farmer’s Almanac have published very similar forecasts.    Given the current trends, in addition to a reduced sunspot count, and increasing volcanic activity around the globe, these forecasts of colder than January 2014 temperatures this winter are likely to pan out.  Considering how close we came to disaster last winter, but having a reduced power generation capacity this winter…. our power grid is not likely to sustain the demands placed upon it.

I believe wide-scale blackouts are going to be likely, particularly from mid-December 2014 through mid February 2015.  I strongly urge all Americans in areas likely to be affected by the extreme cold this winter, to prepare for this strong possibility.  You must have alternative heat sources, food storage of at least several days, and enough clean water for that length of time, as well.  Preparation is the best chance of surviving this kind of disaster.  Then, if it doesn’t happen, at least you are prepared for any other potential disaster that may come along, such as ice storms or blizzards, which can cause significant power outages as well.

These regulations from the EPA are supposedly designed to reduce our output of Carbon Dioxide…. which is a naturally occurring trace gas in our atmosphere.  They say they believe it is a leading contributor to human-caused climate change.  In the unlikely event that they are correct about Carbon Dioxide, what they are doing amounts to potentially causing a major catastrophe in the near term, to avert a smaller potential catastrophe in the long term.  If they are wrong about Carbon Dioxide, then they’re causing a major catastrophe for no reason at all.  Either way, its utter madness!

I welcome your comments on this post….

© Copyright 2014 James Covington – American Movement to Restore Common Sense.  All Rights Reserved

.

.

.

 

Share

Coming Soon…. Natural Climate Cycles: A Multipart Series

Share

jet stream

Since the UN – IPCC and other governmental agencies have basically refused to fund or publish studies about natural climate drivers, and/or natural climate cycles, here at American Movement to Restore Common Sense, we are now working on a multipart series of articles which will detail exactly this topic.

Part 1 will detail decadal climate cycles, which take place over a 10 to 100 year time scale.  Included in this section will be oceanic and upper air oscillations such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation or PDO, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation or AMO, short term solar cycles of length and strength, and others.

Part 2 will discuss millennial climate cycles, which take place from 150 to 1250 years.  Included in this will be solar cycles and the cycle of periodic warm periods like the Minoan, Roman, Medieval, or Modern Warm Periods.

Part 3 will discuss the glacial period / interglacial period cycle, the “Milankovich Cycle Theory”, and how this cycle may affect the shorter term cycles.

Part 4 will detail the deep time, or geologic time scale cycles… which take place over millions of years.  Data about cycles of this length is somewhat limited, and primarily comes from ice cores and ocean bottom sediment cores, but is still quite useful in determining long term natural climate changes.

Part 5 will conclude the series by discussing how these cycles of differing lengths and differing influence, relate to one another.  Also included will be a discussion of greenhouse gas “theory” and how it fails to account for any of the natural climate cycles.

Summary:  Once completed, all parts will be published with links in each one to move on to the next segment.  The reader will gain a comprehensive understanding of all known natural climate cycles, and just how inadequate that the theory of anthropogenic climate change really is.  Look for it in the coming days, here on American Movement to Restore Common Sense.

© Copyright 2014 – James Covington, American Movement to Restore Common Sense.  All Rights Reserved.

.

.

 

Share

IPCC Has Become “Too Blinkered and Corrupt to Save”

Share

its called weatherDr. Vincent Gray, serving in his role as “climate-change activist”, has some revelations for those of us less familiar with the IPCC, or United Nations – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  Dr. Gray is a graduate of the University of Cambridge, with a PhD in physical chemistry.  He has published more than a hundred scientific papers and authored the book “The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of ‘Climate Change 2001?”.

The IPCC is a UN body that is charged with combating “global warming” by advocating the reduction of carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse gasses”.  Comprising the Panel is a mix of politicians and scientists, which publish reports on a semi-regular basis about the state of our global climate.  Dr. Gray has served as an expert reviewer on the Panel since the early 1990s.

In 1992, the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) definition of “climate change” was stated as being “Changes in climate caused by human interference with atmospheric composition.”  In other words, only humans could be responsible for climate-change, by their narrow-minded definition.  Dr. Gray states that “The whole process is a swindle”, in large part because the IPCC has “a blinkered mandate that excludes natural causes of global warming.”

As an expert reviewer with the IPCC, Dr. Gray knows the review process as well as anyone.  He states that he has become increasingly troubled by what he considers to be an appalling absence of real scientific rigor in the review process put into practice by the Panel.

Dr. Gray states that “Right from the beginning, I have had difficulty with this procedure.  Penetrating questions often ended without an answer.  Comments on the IPCC drafts were rejected without explanation, and attempts to pursue the matter were frustrated indefinitely.”   He also stated that “Over the years, as I have learned more about the data and procedures used by the IPCC, I have found increasing opposition by them to provide explanations, until I have been forced to the conclusion that for significant parts of the work of the IPCC, the data collection and scientific methods employed are unsound.  Resistance to all efforts to try and discuss or rectify these problems has convinced me that normal scientific procedures are not only rejected by the IPCC, but that this practice is endemic, and was part of the organization from the very beginning.”

Dr. Gray points to one story in particular as an example of the practices set forth by the IPCC.  “We are told that sea level is rising and will soon swamp all of our coastal cities.  Everybody knows the Pacific island of Tuvalu is sinking.  Al Gore told us that the inhabitants are invading New Zealand because of it.  Around 1990 it became obvious that the local tide-gauge did not agree — there was no evidence of ‘sinking’.  So scientists at Flinders University, Adelaide, were asked to check whether this was accurate.  They set up new, modern, tide-gauges on 12 Pacific islands, including Tuvalu, confident that they would show that all of them are sinking.  Recently, the entire project was abandoned as there was no sign of a change in sea level at any of the 12 islands for the past 16 years.  In 2006, Tuvalu even rose a bit.”

Other expert reviewers that are on the Panel, and scientists elsewhere around the world, share Dr. Gray’s alarm at the conduct of the IPCC.  An effort is now underway to reform the Panel and Organization as a whole, in order to have it follow real scientific methods of fact-finding and publication.  Speaking about this effort to reform the IPCC, Dr. Gray stated “The IPCC is fundamentally corrupt.  The only ‘reform’ I could envisage would be its abolition”.

I personally must agree with Dr. Gray.  The IPCC was never charged with fact-finding to begin with, unless those facts fit the initial agenda, of Anthropogenic causes of climate change.  If they do find facts to the contrary, those facts are hidden or never published, in favor of the political agenda.  No studies have ever been funded by the IPCC to determine any natural causes of climate change, including changes in solar output, which is the primary driver of our climate on Earth.  It is clear that the IPCC must be ended, as it has served to undermine the efforts of real science, trying to find real answers with regards to our ever-changing climate.

© Copyright 2014, James Covington – American Movement to Restore Common Sense

Share

Climate Science Info War Expanding Into Fraud?

Share

 photo globalclimatewarmingchange_zps427ad218.jpg
 

In the last two weeks, two US Government agencies have potentially expanded the climate change war of information into the territory of publishing fraudulent information to the public and media.

For our first contestant, let’s have a look at a publication on September 15, 2014, from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or NASA.  NASA released new data, stating that August 2014 was the hottest August since records began in 1880.  One of the many news outlets which carried the story can be found here.

Lets do the job of a news editor for just a moment, and fact-check this story.  Below are two images produced from NASA satellite derived temperature data.  The first being August 2014, the second being August 1998.  Clearly, August 1998 is not only hotter, but much hotter than 2014.

August 2014

August 1998

This seems like a clear attempt to further the Global Warming agenda.  It sure looks like nothing more than an effort to present the illusion that our climate has continued to warm, despite the fact that there has been no measurable warming trend for between 17 and 26 years, depending upon which data set you look at.  For the record, 1998 isn’t the only August that was hotter than 2014…. there have been several.

For our next contestant, we have a tweet from the National Climatic Data Center, which is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA.  The tweet can be found here.   In their tweet they state that the area burned by wildfires in the United States has doubled since the year 2000.  Obviously, they are making the implication that Global Warming is to blame for this increase, as well.  Let’s fact-check this tweet, shall we?

A look at the stats from the National Interagency Fire Center reveals that the actual area burned by wildfires in 2014, is among the lowest in the last decade.  Wildfires happen every year.  There is no clear trend to indicate that the number of wildfires, or area burned by them, is on the increase.

Obviously, as stated in my previous article, the climate change war of information continues unabated…. and information from once reputable sources, can seemingly no longer be trusted.  Whether it is incompetence or intentional, I shall leave for you to decide…. though the choice would seem to be quite clear.

UPDATE October 1, 2014….
Now the European Space Agency has gotten into the disinformation business, as well.  An October 1, 2014 news article here details how they are now stating that melting Antarctic ice is causing a slight shift in gravity.

Again, as I have stated in my previous article, the area where they are saying a warming climate is melting ice, has air temperatures in the -35°C to -45°C range, and ice does not melt in these temperatures!  Any melting in that area is due to volcanoes, melting it from below!

Total Antarctic sea ice is currently at an all time record extent since satellite monitoring began.  The photos below show Antarctic sea ice, and the location of Antarctic volcanoes.

Antarctica Ice
Antarctic Sea Ice
Antarctica Volcanoes
Antarctic Volcano Locations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

© Copyright 2014, James Covington – American Movement to Restore Common Sense

Share

Look Out! Climate Change Causing Shift in Earth’s Gravity, and Guam Might Tip Over!

Share

jet stream
Rep. Hank Johnson, please call your office.

According to the European Space Agency, Climate Change is altering the Earth’s gravitational field, which, if we’re not careful, could quite possibly disrupt the balance of, well, everything.

Gravity — yes, gravity — is the latest victim of climate change in Antarctica. That’s the stunning conclusion announced Friday by the European Space Agency.

“The loss of ice from West Antarctica between 2009 and 2012 caused a dip in the gravity field over the region,” writes the ESA, whose GOCE satellite measured the change. Apparently, melting billions of tons of ice year after year has implications that would make even Isaac Newton blanch.

To be fair, the change in gravity is very small. It’s not like you’ll float off into outer space on your next vacation to the Antarctic Peninsula.

We’ve gotta watch out! And Do Something, Dammit!. Because even minute changes in gravity could be problematic for a small, precarious island like Guam.

In a discussion regarding a planned military buildup on the Pacific island, [Rep. Hank] Johnson [D-Ga.] expressed some concerns about the plans to Adm. Robert Willard, head of the U.S. Pacific fleet.

“My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize,” Johnson said. Willard paused and replied, “We don’t anticipate that.”

 

.

.

Who knew Climate Change could be so dangerous?

As for the melting sea ice, it’s reappearing elsewhere, faster than it’s been melting.

So Guam is probably safe. For now.

Share

Climate Science Devolving Into War of Information? [Guest Post]

Share
Antarctic Ice Jun 2014
Antarctic ice anomaly June 2014

A rather large group of outspoken politicians and scientists, aided by the mainstream media, continue to present a public face of near certainty regarding the current state of climate science. However, the truth behind the scenes is anything but certain. In fact, it would probably not be an overstatement to say that climate science has never been less certain. Indeed there are multiple facets to the issue of climate change, even among those who believe humans are causing or contributing to our ever changing climate.

Uncertainty is part of science. Scientific method states that scientists should question even their own findings. Yet we’re told by our mainstream media that the “science is settled”, or “global warming is fact”. Those who are skeptical of such statements are called “deniers” at best, and many other less desirable and less professional names at worst, simply for doing exactly what scientists are supposed to do….. question everything.  I’m sure many of you heard those warning bells go off just as I did, when politicians began to squelch debate over such an important scientific topic.

Given much of the empirical data and observations that have been reported and/or obtained in recent years, scientists have good reason to question the “settled science” known as Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, or CAGW. You may also know it simply as Global Warming. In recent years, politicians through the use of focus groups to find the most effective terminology, have changed to just “climate change” or “anthropogenic climate change”.  The latest term seems to be “climate disruption”.  Climate has been changing since the Earth formed 4.6 Billion years ago, so I suppose my question would be…. What constitutes a climate disruption, and how exactly could humanity go about disrupting it?

Aside from whatever they’re calling it these days, the real issue has gotten lost in the confusion and disinformation.  An information war has been created, intentionally, by politicians and by government agencies.  Such an information war is perfectly in line with the tactics of Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein, as outlined in his 2008 book “Nudge“. The concept is to publish so much information on all sides of an issue, that only those who are intimately familiar with the issue will be able to distinguish fact from fiction.  This is a tactic that politicians have executed quite effectively, in recent years.  An example, today we might see a chart going around social media and some newspapers showing that the sea ice around the north pole is melting, or almost gone.  A few days later, we’ll see another image from a different source, showing how the ice in the arctic has in fact, grown considerably in the last few years.  Which one is correct?  How does the layman know which chart is true?  What do we need to look for, to distinguish fact from disinformation?  Here at American Movement to Restore Common Sense, we shall endeavor to cut through the propaganda and disinformation.

One tactic commonly used by government agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, is to take the raw data and observations and plug that data into their computer models.  They can then make seemingly minor adjustments to the model output as it operates, to get output that is closer to the desired result.  They then produce new charts from the model output, giving it a title just like the raw data.  The text within such a publication will say that the chart is derived from model output, but the chart itself will not.  The chart is what gets shared on social media, and NOAA knows this.  The end result being multiple charts for the same specific topic, all showing something different…. and the layman has no idea which is correct, or if any of them are.  People generally trust information they believe to be from government agencies, over information from scientific organizations they’ve never heard of.  This is how they’ve controlled the message, for so long.

The chart included with this article is a prime example.  This shows the departure from “normal” ice coverage in the Antarctic.  As you can clearly see, ice coverage has increased dramatically over the last four years in that area…. which is backed up by satellite images of the region.  Yet we continue to see almost weekly news publications such as this one from CNN, about how the ice in Antarctica, and particularly West Antarctica, is melting “dangerously fast”.  Perhaps these “scientists” could explain how ice melts, in air temperatures around -40°C?  The only way that can happen, is active volcanoes melting the ice from below…. and there just happens to be a string of volcanoes under that area.

Another example is that every temperature data set, from weather balloons, to surface sensors, to satellite derived lower tropospheric temperatures, shows that there has been no measurable warming trend for between 17 and 26 years.  Yet, we continue to see publications such as this one from the Huffington Post about “accelerating warming” or other such scare stories, which have absolutely no basis in fact.  Climate change has quite literally been turned into some kind of pseudo-science or pseudo-religion, and we will not participate in that kind of rubbish.  Here we shall stick to the real empirical scientific data.  Facts and only facts, no matter where those facts may take us.  That is, after all, what science is meant to be.

© Copyright 2014, James Covington

Share

Global Warming Not Proceeding As Planned

Share

Global Warming MythIf you haven’t noticed, the United Nations is having its annual meeting of the minds in New York. Heads of state and other prominent characters from around the world are gathering to discuss the issues that are supposed to concern us all. You know, important issues such as global warming, radical Islam, climate change, and more global warming. One would think radical Islam would be at the center of the agenda, given how many people it is killing across the Middle East, but it is taking a back seat to global warming. The powers that be are gathering to bemoan the fact that our planet is well on its way to destruction. All because, of course, us humans are simply not doing what we should and thus, we are killing the planet.

At the center of their argument is a new study from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that tells us August temperatures set a record. Global surface temperatures are purported to have been the highest ever recorded for the month. This has set off more of “the sky is falling” rhetoric from everyone who loves a good crisis. Especially from those who love to harp about global warming causing climate change. Hmm, isn’t that convenient? Just in time for a climate summit, we have new data that tells us things are really heating up. Except, they really aren’t heating up so much.

What the report from NOAA doesn’t tell us is how long it has been since a new record has been set for the all-time highest average temperature for all months. That would have been in February 1998. That’s more than a few months ago. Let’s look at some of the details.

Fox News – But the anomalous warmth in August still fell short of the all-time record for all months. That record was set nearly 200 months ago in February 1998. And that’s the real news. In this era of human-caused global warming, what is taking so long to set a new global temperature record?

During the 1980s and 1990s, new all-time record-high anomalies were occurring about every 3-4 years. But then, we hit the “hiatus.” The rise in the Earth’s average surface temperature basically stopped, “global warming” morphed into “climate change,” and it has been 16.5 years since the last all-time all-month record monthly temperature anomaly was set.

Just-published research from University of Guelph’s Ross McKitrick pegs the length of the hiatus, or “pause”—the period of no statistically significant rise in the earth’s average temperature—at about 19 years. Looking back even further, the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) shows that since the mid-20th century, observed global warming has been less than expected.

In short, all those computerized climate models that predicted large, accelerating, and generally uninterrupted warming were wrong. And it has the believers in those models scratching their heads.

Global warming is not proceeding as planned.  The climate appears less sensitive to our emissions of greenhouse gases than expected. The urgency to grant the government the authority to limit energy choice is not justified.

That’s the real news.

Yes, my friends, that is the real news that President Obama and the rest of the global warming/climate change scaremongers do not want us to know or realize. Global warming isn’t cooperating with their plans to scare the rest of the world into submission. Their complicated models on global warming and how it will affect climate change are being shown as flawed. That’s the polite way of describing them. I believe they would be more aptly described as a pack of lies, designed to enrich those who are manipulating the data to get the desired results. How else can you describe Al Gore and his untold wealth, gleaned from his rantings on global warming?

Now, I am not against taking care of our planet. I do not believe we should pollute, any more than is absolutely necessary. We should pick up after ourselves and keep things as clean as we can, unlike the global warming protestors who recently left New York in a mess, before they jetted off into the sunset. (By all accounts, the Save the Earth crowd left a lot of trash behind.) At the same time, we should not be running around like the boy who cried wolf all the time. The way the global warming activists are using this “crisis” to their own advantage is shameful. Of course, I would expect nothing less from the crowd of liberals who currently seem to be running this country.

President Obama has already met with several heads of state on global warming and climate change. He is pushing for another treaty to be reached in Paris in a little over a year from now. You can bet he will continue to harp on the issue, even though he has one foot out of the door of the White House. Come to think of it, maybe that’s why he hasn’t been focused on the threat from ISIS until it was almost too late. After all, he has much bigger problems on his hands, trying to deal with global warming that isn’t proceeding as planned.

Share

RFK Jr Wants a Law to Jail Climate Deniers, On His Carbon Footprint: Says He Doesn’t Need to Lead by Example: Must See Video

Share

 photo rfkjrglobalclimatewarmingchangenutjob_zpsf7e1b8dc.jpg

Hat/Tip to The Washington Times, The Daily Mail and Rush Limbaugh.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy once famously said of Free Speech and the 1st Amendment, “Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed – and no republic can survive.”  That was 1961. Fast forward 53 years to 2014, and my how the times have changed.

Now we find the nephew of the 35th President, and son of Attorney General and United States Senator, Robert Francis Kennedy wishing for a law that, rather than foster ‘debate’ and ‘criticism’, would stifle further discussion and jail anyone who disagrees with him on Global Climate Warming Change.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., one of climate change’s loudest activists, said there should be a law that lets authorities punish skeptics and deniers – those who engage in “selling out the public trust,” he said, in an interview with Climate Depot during New York City’s recent People’s Climate March.

“I wish there were a law you could punish them with,” he said, in the videotaped interview. “I don’t think there is a law that you can punish these politicians under … [and skeptical politicians are] selling out the public trust.”

Not wanting to miss a single far left loon talking point associated with Global Climate Warming Change, RFK Jr ran down the list as he bounced from the Koch Brothers to the “Wars for Oil.” Um, by the way, since we’ve had all these wars for oil, why are we still paying  between 3 and 4 dollars a gallon for gasoline?

“Those guys are doing the Koch Brothers bidding and are against all the evidence of the rational mind, saying global warming does not exist,” Mr. Kennedy said, Climate Depot reported. “They are contemptible human beings.”

He then turned his attacks directly at the Koch Brothers, accusing them of “polluting our atmosphere,” he said, the blog reported.

“I think it’s treason. Do I think the Koch Brothers are treasonous — yes, I do,” Mr. Kennedy said, Climate Depot reported. “They are enjoying making themselves billionaire by impoverishing the rest of us. Do I think they should be in jail — I think they should be injuring three hots and a cot at the Hague with all the other war criminals. Do I think the Koch brothers should be tried for reckless endangerment? Absolutely, that is is criminal offense and they ought to be serving time for it.”

~~~~~

We need this kind of event to save the environment.  What I’m concerned with is the kind of damage that’s been caused by Exxon and the Koch brothers and by the oil wars that we’ve spent $4 trillion on over the last 10 years. 

When PJTV Correspondent, Michelle Fields also asked Mr. Kennedy if he was worried about the example he sets. Essentially, she asked him if he felt guilty over his rather large carbon footprint.

What transpired next is that RFK Jr got pretty hot under the collar, and very defensive at this line of questioning.

PJ Media reporter Michelle Fields then asked the 60-year-old if he has an iPhone or an Android. 

Kennedy Jr stuttered: ‘…I have a cell phone.’

‘Are you concerned about the damage that the cell phone and electricity generation causes to the environment?’

He exclaimed: ‘Are you joking about this!’

‘No, I want to know if you’re willing to give up your iPhone,’ she asks.

‘No.’

‘Why not? Doesn’t it start with people like you?’

‘No.’

The conversation then fell into confusion.

Fields asked: ‘So will you lead by example?’

Kennedy Jr interrupted: ‘No no…I do lead by example.’

‘Are you going to give up your cell phone?’ she said.

‘No,’ he responded.

‘Are you going to give up your car?’

Visibly aggravated, Kennedy Jr pointed his finger in the reporter’s face and barked: ‘Are you going to give up your car?’

She calmly responds: ‘I’m not the one who’s here talking about the environment’.

The multi-millionaire then declared he will not stop using a phone or a car because he does not believe that quality of life should be sacrificed for the environment.

So, once again we have a far left loon, who practices that long held tenet of Progressivism which states, “Do as I say, NOT as I do.”

Maybe RFK Jr ought to do a bit of reading up on his deceased uncle, who also once said, “As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.”

 

.

RFK Jr Wants to Jail Climate Deniers
 

.

 

.

RFK Jr Loses His Cool About His Carbon Footrpint
 

.

Share