Global Warming Update
May 31st, 2008 at 04:10pm Mark Noonan
The news story:
Each April, weather wizard William Gray emerges from his burrow near the Rocky Mountains to offer his forecast for the six-month hurricane season that starts June 1. And the news media are there, breathlessly awaiting his every word.
It’s a lot like Groundhog Day - and the results are worth just about as much.
“The hairs on the back of my neck don’t stand up,” ho-hums Craig Fugate, director of emergency management for Florida, the state that got raked by four hurricanes - three of them “major” - in 2004. When it comes to preparing, he says, these long-range forecasts “are not useful at all.”
But climate models which claim to tell us what the global average temperature will be in 50 years are useful?
The problem the anthropogenic global warming enthusiasts have is that anyone who actually sits down and thinks about will come to the “you can’t possibly know that” conclusion.
Entry Filed under: Environment
16 Comments
1. neocon | May 31st, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Hopefully the Lieberman-Warner bill will die next week. AGW has to be one of the most hyped non-events ever. In fact the following excerpt defines it well:
>>>The Lieberman-Warner bill sets a cap on greenhouse gas emissions that would reduce them by 70% by 2050. Companies would need permits to emit pollutants that cause global warming. The government would allocate some permits to utilities and industrial companies, and auction others to generate revenues. The question of how to distribute permits and what to do with the money divides even supporters of greenhouse gas regulation.<<<<
At the end of the day, that is what it is all about. More regulations from, and more revenue streams for our government. And the little pavlov liberals are ringing the bell in approval.
2. William Teach | May 31st, 2008 at 4:59 pm
The CLimahysterics will come back and say “but, Mark, that is weather. We are talking about climate!!!!”
The Climahysterics are so dumb that they do not even understand what climate actually is, and what part weather plays in it. I watch the forcasts constantly, and I see them changing not just day to day, but, what it says in the am can be different from the pm forecast.
3. SEW | May 31st, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Parrots don’t think very well. This blog proves that.
4. bongoman | May 31st, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Yeah, why would pumping billions of tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere have any effect?
5. neocon | May 31st, 2008 at 5:49 pm
bongo,
No one here disputes the negative effects of pollution on the environment and the need to transition to other energiy sources.
We do challenge the man-made global warming hysteria and your post is proof that you have no counter argument for it’s support.
Doesn’t the above excerpt cause you to think, maybe just a little, that this is in large part just a big money grab on the part of the government?
Now the government decides which business’s can pollute and at what price?????????
That resolves nothing, except higher prices for all of us.
6. William Teach | May 31st, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Bongo, what if I told you that around 40 percent of the measured CO2 increase occured prior to 1940? The use of fossil fuels was pretty low then. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is around 380 parts per million. Break it down. That is 38 parts in 100K molecules. Not many, eh?
There is approx 1 more molecule expected to be added every 5 years. 1. If you look at the records, between 1910 and 1940, the temps shot up by .4 C. Why? The use of cars and planes was quite low.
There was a small dip after 1940 to 1950, then the average temps shot up .4 C from 1980 to 2000. We have been stagnet over the last 10 years, though.
I would highly recommend reading Climate Confustion by Roy W. Spencer.
Now, if you want to talk about Man’s output of Methane and its effect on the climate, that is something that is actually having an effect.
7. Mark Noonan | May 31st, 2008 at 6:37 pm
neocon,
Heck, I’m not even entirely sold on the assertion that “cap and trade” is baleful overall…what our enviro-whacko friends don’t get (and don’t want to get) is that they are being conned by a bunch of fascists who want full control over human life so they can make it match their own pet theories about how we should live. This has been going on for more than a century how, but it was only in the last 30 years that the facsists figured out how effective environmental alarmism can be as a propaganda tool.
8. neocon | May 31st, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Mark,
When you combine Maxine Waters comments to the oil execs the other day with some of Obamas past utterances of clinging to guns and Bibles, and keeping our thermostats at 72 without world approval, etc., you begin to realize that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of what America is, and what made this country great amongst the left. And not just the far left.
9. Canuckguy | May 31st, 2008 at 9:29 pm
You blocked headed fools. The world climate is warming up at an un-natural rate , just the shrinking of the Artic ice cap alone should give you pause for thought.
I can understand a bit about the arguments over the actual cause of global warming, but you thick skulled right wingnuts are in denial that a warming is even happening. Good grief, how stupid can you be.
10. Danish Artist | May 31st, 2008 at 11:29 pm
Uh, Canuckguy, being so close to the Artic ice cap you should have noticed that the record shrinking was LAST YEAR. THIS YEAR, however, has seen ice growth in coverage and thickness not seen in several years!!!
So much ice in fact that it trapped a climate tour ice-breaking vessel. That’s right, a vessel that was there to asses the so-called affect of climate change on the polar ice cap. Where not talking the thin ice as dismissed by climate change zealots, but ice thick enough that what ice breaker could break through were the size of small cars. The ice breaker became trapped when it hit ice too thick for it to break through.
Read it for yourself. http://icecap.us/
Stop panicking & stop listening to the zealots.
11. Danish Artist | May 31st, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Maybe Al Gore and the liberal democrats trying to tax our way past “climate change” did not get this report.
Correlation of Carbon Dioxide with Temperatures Negative Again
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM
The temperatures over the last century correlated positively with carbon dioxide in the early 20th century but that warming was acknowledged even by the IPCC to be largely natural and minimally anthropogenic.
A negative correlation existed from the early 1930s to the late 1970s as temperatures cooled. This included three decades of the post war economic boom. A very strong positive correlation resumed after the Great Pacific Climate shift in the late 1970s. Data here is the USHCN Version 2.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/FULLRECORDCO2TEMPS.jpg
After 1998, temperatures stopped rising and since 2002 have been falling now into the 7th year. Meanwhile CO2 has continued to rise (9.69 ppm or 2.6%) although the Mauna Loa surface data has actually paused this year with the La Nina inspired cooling. The monthly global data is plotted here for Hadley and UAH MSU along the monthly seasonally adjusted CO2 from NOAA ESRL for Mauna Loa. There is no smoothing here of the monthly data. The correlation (Pearson coefficient, r) for the Hadley and CO2 is now a negative (minus 0.4) and for the MSU UAH (minus 0.21). As we have noted, this MAY mark the start of another cooling interlude as predicted by the 60-70 year cycles of the PDO (http://www.intellicast.com/Community/Content.aspx?ref=rss&a=126) and AMO (http://www.intellicast.com/Community/Content.aspx?ref=rss&a=127), and diminished solar (http://icecap.us/images/uploads/solarcyclestory.pdf).
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Since_2002.jpg
The on again, off again nature of this correlation suggests that carbon dioxide is not the driving factor in our climate. See pdf here (http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Correlation_of_Carbon_Dioxide_with_Temperatures_Negative_Again.pdf).
12. Perry | June 1st, 2008 at 10:39 am
William Gray’s annual predictions used to be taken quite seriously by the media and reported as gospel, that is until he committed the unforgivable sin of coming out as a non-believer in global warming. Now, of course, everything he says must be downplayed and doubted. He has been excommunicated from the church of liberal hype.
13. Canuckguy | June 1st, 2008 at 11:02 am
Hey Danish artist:
–Thanks for your insult free response to my tirade. I will take a lesson from you on manners.
–However I am dubious about your source and the conclusions drawn from it.
–I have yet to be convinced that we have nothing to worry about regarding global warming
14. Rana Quijotesca | June 1st, 2008 at 11:04 am
Did anyone notice that the first named Tropical Storm formed yesterday?
For all of your mental masturbation about global warming, the Hurricane Season technically started on May 31 (granted, the storm is probably not going to become a hurricane).
Perhaps you guys should pull your heads out from down under, wake up, and smell the smog.
15. neocon | June 1st, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Rana,
You are soooo right. I will bet in the million+ year history of the planet, that Hurricane season has NEVER started in May.
Great catch on that. I think that proves us all wrong.
16. long range weather foreca&hellip | June 12th, 2008 at 2:40 am
[…] season that starts June 1. And the news media are there, breathlessly awaiting his every word. Ihttp://blogsforvictory.com/2008/05/31/global-warming-update-14/Hurricane season outlooks of limited use Carroll County OnlineRALEIGH, N.C. - Each April, weather […]