About Us
Contact Us
Global Warming and CO2 Articles Before 2007
U.S. Outperforms EU and Japan. November 12, 2006
Cosmic Rays and Global Warming. October 29, 2006
Gulf Steam Not Slowing. October 22, 2006
George Orwell Today. October
15, 2006
Hurricanes and Global Warming. July 9, 2006
European CO2 Trading Debacle. June 25, 2006
NZ Scientists Challenge Global Warming. May 7, 2006
Absurd Hysteria.
March 12, 2006
Gulf Stream
Circulation. December
11, 2005
Greenland Ice Thickens. October 30, 2005
Hurricane Cycles. October 2, 2005
Satellites and Balloons. September 4, 2005
Consensus is Not Science. August 21, 2005
U.S. Outperforms EU and Japan.
When it comes to controlling Green House Gas (GHG) emissions the U.S. has done a better job than Europe or Japan. Yet the Europeans continue to chide America over its stand on the Kyoto Protocol.
The UN announced on October 30, 2006 that between 2000 and 2004 the 41 industrialized signatory countries increased GHG emissions by 2.4%. During this same period the U.S. increased GHG by 1.3%.
Concurrently, the U.S. had vigorous economic growth while the economies of Europe and Japan have been sluggish … making the achievement of the U.S. even more impressive.
It appears as though European countries have squandered their huge windfall reduction in GHG resulting from the collapse of the Soviet Union and East German economies together with the U.K’s fortuitous shift from coal to North Sea oil. The Soviet Bloc had a 36.8% decrease in GHG when it collapsed, which allowed the EU to show reductions in GHG between 1990 and 2000.
There is considerable desperation setting in among European Governments with the prospect that the EU will not be able to meet its Kyoto target. The recently issued Stern report in the UK is supposed to galvanize the world into action.
Europeans are now touting the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) allowed under Kyoto as a way for the EU to achieve its target. The CDM permits European’s to invest in projects aimed at reducing GHG emissions in developing countries … not in Europe.
They also are touting Carbon Trading and Carbon taxes as a way to meet their target. Carbon trading has thus far been a failure, with the market collapsing earlier this year. Carbon taxes have yet to be enacted and it will be interesting to see whether the common man in the EU will accept even higher taxes.
Japan is 14.1% above its Kyoto target.
Closer to home, Canada is 27% above 1990 emissions while its Kyoto target was to cut 1990 emissions by 6%. (The Conservative Government appears to believe it is impossible to meet the Kyoto target agreed to by the Labor Government.)
Sources:
UN press release dtd October 30, 2006
EPA Summary GHG Emissions. http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads06/06ES.pdf
November 12, 2006
TSAugust
Cosmic Rays and Global Warming.
Scientists at the Danish National Space Center have established that cosmic rays can affect the earth’s climate.
It is well known that water vapor in the earth’s atmosphere accounts for 95% of natural greenhouse warming and that clouds have an important effect on global warming.
The long standing theory proposed that cosmic rays ionized gasses in the atmosphere and that these ionized particles formed the nuclei for water droplets with subsequent cloud formation. Now this theory has been successfully demonstrated in the laboratory.
Danish researchers, led by Henrik Svensmark, have published their experiment in the proceedings of the British Royal Society showing that high-energy cosmic rays do have the ability to ionize molecules in our atmosphere and form clouds.
Researchers have long thought that the sun and sun spots have influenced the earth’s atmosphere. The problem has been that increased radiant heat from the sun during periods of active sun spots is not sufficient to explain changes in temperatures on the earth.
Sun spots, however, do change the sun’s magnetic field that shields the earth from cosmic rays. During the 20th Century, the Sun's magnetic field more than doubled, thereby reducing the average influx of cosmic rays. With fewer cosmic rays there are fewer clouds and more global warming.
Eigil Friis-Christensen, who is Director of the Danish National Space Center, said; "Some said there was no conceivable way in which cosmic rays could influence cloud cover. The SKY experiment now shows how they do so, and should help to put the cosmic-ray connection firmly onto the agenda of international climate research. '
Source: Danish National Space Center http://spacecenter.dk/cgi-bin/nyheder-m-m.cgi?id=1159917791|cgifunction=form
October 29, 2006
TSAugust
Gulf Steam Not Slowing.
Last December the media enthusiastically embraced a report that the Gulf Stream was slowing by 30%. Disaster was about to engulf mankind because of global warming.
Now, two new studies show that the Gulf Stream is not slowing.
This constant barrage of conflicting information creates confusion … especially when the media only reports one side of the issue.
Two recent articles in Geophysical Research Letters addresses whether the Gulf Stream (thermohaline circulation) is slowing.
The first by Christopher Meinen and two associates at the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory in Miami, measured the Southward flow of water (millions of cubic meters per second) in the MOC [Meridional Overturning Circulation] between September 2004 and September 2005 and found no indication of a significant reduction in the strength of thermohaline circulation.
The second by German scientist Friedrich Schott et al, measured the current over the Grand Banks and concluded, "Although the water mass characteristics show inter annual to decadal variations at those locations," "there is no sign of any MOC 'slowdown' trend over the past decade."
It also appears as though Petr Chylek, Las Alamos National Laboratories, had identified an error in the original study by Bryden et al (source of claim that thermohaline circulation had slowed by 30%) that invalidated the study’s conclusions, but Nature decided not to publish the correction.
References:
Meinen,
C. S., M. O. Baringer, and S. L. Garzoli (2006), Variability in Deep
Western Boundary Current transports: Preliminary results from 26.5° N in
the
Schott, F. A., J. Fischer, M. Dengler, and R. Zantopp. 2006). Variability of the Deep Western Boundary Current east of the Grand Banks. Geophysical Research Letters, 33, L21S07, doi:10.1029/2006GL026563.
October 22, 2006
TSAugust
George Orwell Today.
In his book 1984, George Orwell demonstrated the power of thought control.
Today there are people who are trying to use the same Orwellian principles to eliminate scientific debate on global warming.
Scientists and organizations are being labeled “denier”, as in “holocaust denier”.
Some pundits are calling for trials of “deniers” similar to the Nuremburg Trials.
David Roberts, Grist Editor, wrote in online comments;
"When we've finally gotten serious about global warming, when the impacts are really hitting us and we're in a full worldwide scramble to minimize the damage, we should have war crimes trials for these bastards -- some sort of climate Nuremberg."
An Australian columnist wrote;
“Perhaps there is a case for making climate change denial an offence. It is a crime against humanity, after all."
It is now becoming clear that a new witch hunt is emerging in an effort to shut down scientific debate. Remember when the consensus insisted the sun revolved around the earth? Those who doubted that consensus were treated rather shabbily; even put to death."
Science is a rigid task master. Science requires that a hypothesis be tested repeatedly before it can be declared a law. Today we have a hypothesis called “global warming”. It has not been tested because there is no way that such a test can be constructed. Absence a real test, scientists have used computers to simulate possible outcomes based on the hypothesis. Anecdotal evidence has been cited to support the hypothesis … though there is conflicting anecdotal evidence.
Without a real test there must be debate, because the computer models are incomplete. Not a single computer model can accurately forecast the weather five days from now let alone forecast what will happen to climate 50 years from now.
To create a climate of fear, where scientists are afraid to posit theories and outcomes different from the “global warming hypothesis” is the world described in “1984”.
Roger Pielke, Professor University of Colorado Boulder, said:
"Now that I've seen the phrase ‘climatechange deniers’ in the peer-reviewed literature as well in use over at Real Climate, it is my sense that such characterizations can only work against effective debate on climate policy, hence my plea."
Sources: CCNET and University of Colorado Boulder
October 15, 2006
TSAugust
Supreme Court To Judge CO2.
Twelve states, 13 environmental groups, two cities and American Samoa have sued the Federal government to require the EPA to regulate CO2 under the Clear Air Act. After the lower court ruled against these plaintiffs the Supreme Court agreed to hear their case beginning this fall. A ruling is expected next year, possibly in June.
"The court's decision to hear the case is momentous," said New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. (New Mexico is one of the plaintiffs.)
The suit is premised on CO2 causing global warming.
If the court rules that CO2 should be regulated by the EPA it is directly or indirectly because the court assumes that CO2 is causing global warming.
How the EPA will react is not clear. It is also not clear whether congress would try to rewrite the Clean Air Act to exclude CO2.
Since it requires a 60% reduction in CO2 to stabilize CO2 in the atmosphere at current levels, and since any increase above current levels will increase global warming (based on the plaintiff’s suit) the EPA would technically have to initiate drastic cuts in CO2 emissions.
Any delay in drastic cuts would mean that CO2 levels in the atmosphere would continue to rise.
The United States emitted 5,802 million metric tons of CO2 in 2003. Generating electricity accounted for 40%, gasoline accounted for 20% while industry accounted for 18% of these emissions. (See Stabilizing CO2 in Atmosphere to Stop Global Warming for details..)
Drastic cuts would therefore have a debilitating impact on the American economy and severely impact the freedom enjoyed by Americans.
Anything less than a 60% cut would allow global warming to continue, if CO2 actually causes global warming.
Additionally, since CO2 is transported in the atmosphere around the world, emissions from China and India and other countries would not be affected by a Supreme Court ruling, CO2 levels in the atmosphere would continue to rise regardless of any drastic reductions made by the United States.
Presumably Global Warming would also continue to increase.
July 23, 2006
TSAugust
Hurricanes and Global Warming.
Linking hurricanes to global warming has been widely reported as fact in the media.
A new study by climatologists from the University of Virginia has found that only about half of the increase in strong storms over the past 25 years can be attributed to increasing water temperatures.
Their study examined the water temperatures along the path of each storm “providing a more precise picture” of each storm’s development.
The study found thatthe strength of a hurricane is not directly linked to water temperatures. Once a temperature threshold of 89 degrees Fahrenheit is reached water temperature is no longer an important factor. "At that point, other factors take over, such as the vertical wind profile, and atmospheric temperature and moisture gradients," Patrick Michaels, the lead author, said.
He went on to say, “It is too simplistic to only implicate sea surface temperatures in the dramatic increase in the number of major hurricanes."
And further, "The projected impacts of global warming on Atlantic hurricanes are minor compared with the major changes that we have observed over the past couple of years," He ascribes recent enhanced hurricane activity to “to naturally varying components of the tropical environment."
Sources:
AScribe Newswire
American Geophysical Union GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 33, L09708, doi:10.1029/2006GL025757, 2006
Authors
Patrick
Paul C. Knappenberger, New Hope Environmental Services, Inc., Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
Robert
E. Davis,
Department of Environmental Sciences,
University
of
European CO2 Trading Debacle.
In an effort to create a market out of thin air, in this case CO2, the EU required each of its 21 member countries to establish quota’s for how much CO2 large factories and power plants could emit.
Each country was to issue permits to its power plants and large factories that established the amount of CO2 (in metric tons) each could emit. If a power plant or factory produced less CO2 than the amount for which it had permits, it could sell the excess permits to those companies that could not meet their allowed quotas.
This created a market wherecompanies selling permits increased their profits at the expense of those buying permits to make up for their inability to meet their quotas. The companies buying permits had to increase their prices for electricity in order to sustain their profitability.
In this real “Alice in Wonderland” market, companies selling permits are now accused of reaping windfall profits at the expense of customers now paying higher prices for electricity purchased from companies that had to buy permits.
In what may have been an effort to protect their power plants from tight control, it appears that all countries except the UK issued an excessive number of permits.
With too many permits having been issued, the market for CO2 permits collapsed by 65% in May 2006.
Perversely, this market collapse has nearly eliminated cash that developing countries could receive from the EU for carbon credits they could sell under the Kyoto Protocol Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). The UN had hoped that $100 billion would be invested in developing countries with the issuance of corresponding carbon credits under the Kyoto CDM.
The EU emission Trading Scheme (ETS) was launched in January 2005 to assist EU member countries meet their Kyoto commitments for reducing CO2 emissions.
Currently, most EU countries are exceeding their Kyoto commitments and the CO2 emission trading scheme will not help at least until 2008 when the next phase of the ETS is to go into effect.
One lesson to be learned from Europe’s CO2 trading scheme is that the establishment of CO2 quotas was based on politics—and was not market based.
A second lesson is that some of the public will have to pay higher prices for electricity as the result of the trading scheme.
A
third lesson is that governments will try to take away that which they
have created by imposing windfall profit taxes on companies selling the
permits they do not need.
Salem Redux.
Will today’s witch hunt destroy unbiased science?
Richard Lindzen, professor of meteorology at MIT, has raised this issue. In a recent article he stated;
"Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis."
An example
of how the witch hunt works is found in Vanity Fair magazine where writer Mark Hertsgaard alleges that Frederick Seitz was a shill for the Tobacco Industry. The accusation is that Seitz spearheaded attacks on global warming while directing a $45 million for the tobacco industry; inferring that Seitz is untrustworthy at best.
Frederick Seitz, the former president of the National Academy of Sciences and the former president of the prestigious Rockefeller University, says this is all "ridiculous, completely wrong." Now 94, Seitz explains that R. J. Reynolds had given Rockefeller University $5 million a year for basic research. Seitz says he directed the money toward non-tobacco related efforts in the study of prions (the virus-like proteins that cause mad cow disease), tuberculosis and other diseases.
Prion researcher Stanley Prusiner thanked both R. J. Reynolds and Seitz in his Nobel Prize acceptance speech.
In spite of the many good works done by Seitz, he is now being targeted because he is a scientist who doesn’t believe in catastrophic global warming.
Sources: Vanity Fair Magazine, and
The Science and Environmental Policy Project
May 21, 2006
TSAugust
Polar Bears OK.
Contrary to scary reports in the media, Polar Bears seem to be doing well under current climate conditions.
The most recent scare story was that Polar Bears would be extinct within 25 years. The story was incorrect according to Dr. Mitchell Taylor, Polar Bear Biologist.
The scare story said that polar bears usually gave birth to triplets and that the number of offspring had declined; while in fact they usually give birth to two cubs and that had not changed.
The scare story said that weaning times had risen to 18 months from 12. In fact the weaning period has not changed.
The
scare story made reference to a shortened reproductive cycle. In fact, polar
bears have a three year reproductive cycle worldwide; except for one part of
The
scare story made reference to a shortened reproductive cycle. In fact, polar
bears have a three year reproductive cycle worldwide; except for one part of
The
scare story said the population of polar bears in west
Dr.
Mitchell Taylor
went on to say, “They are not going extinct or even appear to be affected
at present.” And, “It is noteworthy that the neighboring population of
southern
Source: Toronto Star May 1, 2006
Reference: Dr. Mitchell Taylor, Polar Bear Biologist, Department of the Environment, Government of Nunavut, Igloolik, Nunavut
May 14, 2006
TSAugust
NZ Scientists Challenge Global Warming.
Leading New Zealand climate scientists have formed the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, to refute what they believe are unfounded claims about man-made global warming.
Terry Dunleavy, the coalition’s secretary, said members of the coalition had had enough of "over-exaggerated" claims about the effects of man-made global warming.
Owen McShane, said manyscientists and economists were concerned that the UN International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had an effective monopoly on public announcements on global warming. He went on, "Its statements go largely unchallenged -- or go largely unchallenged in a format that will carry weight with governments, the media or the general public".
The coalition includes such well-known climate scientists as:
-
Dr Vincent Gray, of Wellington, an expert reviewer for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), most recently a visiting scholar at the Beijing Climate Centre in China.
-
Dr Gerrit J van der Lingen, of Christchurch, geologist/paleoclimatologist, climate change consultant, former director GRAINZ (Geoscience Research and Investigations New Zealand.
-
Prof August H. (Augie) Auer, of Auckland, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand .
-
Professor Bob Carter, a New Zealander, now at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Queensland, Australia.
-
Warwick Hughes, a New Zealand earth scientist living in Perth.
-
Roger Dewhurst, of Katikati, consulting environmental geologist and hydrogeologist.
-
Owen McShane, of Kaiwaka, director of the Centre for Resource Management Studies.
Source: The New Zealand Herald, 1 May 2006.
May 7, 2006
TSAugust
Absurd Hysteria.
Hansen
of NASA has said that the melting ice of
Perhaps there was good reason for people to worry about what Hansen would say.
Seldom is it possible in scientific matters to say someone is absurd; but this is one of those rare instances.
Die Welt has a more balancedview; “Systematic climate research has been going on for some 30 years on the seventh continent - with contradictory findings: the climate of the Antarctic is complex."
And some facts to support Die Welt’s view. Jay Zwally (NASA-GSFC) et al. wrote in a just published paper in the Journal of Glaciology (2006): “Greenland has a ‘small overall mass gain’ corresponding to a lowering of sea level of -0.03 mm per year. Antarctica shows a ‘combined [negative] net change' corresponding to a sea level rise of + 0.05 +/- 0.03 mm per year."
SEPP commented that: “The net effect is about as close to zero as it possible to come."
Zwally’s
results were mentioned in Science; page 1073 on
Antarctic researcher Duncan Wingham (University College London) presented satellite data in February 2005 showing that the Antarctic ice cover is getting thicker. (Presentation at Earth Observation summit in Brussels.)
Die Welt reported: “He showed radar measurements taken by the European satellites ERS-2 and Envisat, whose altimeter exactly measures elevations on the earth's surface down to two centimeters by means of electromagnetic wave pulses."
“A temperature rise over the western peninsula has coincided with a cooling of the south part of the continent. And even in the west the ice cover has been growing."
Sources: Die Welt am Sonntag, 6 March 2005
The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) March 4, 2006
March 12, 2006
TSAugust
Gulf Stream Circulation.
A recent study (Byden et al.) indicated that the Gulf Stream had slowed by 30%. This again raised the specter of the Gulf Stream stopping; with northern Europe becoming dramatically colder.
However, Science magazine (Richard Kerr) reported that;
"It
would be dangerous to jump to the conclusion that
there's a persistent weakening"of the conveyor circulation, says ocean
and climate modeler Richard Wood of the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction
and Research in Exeter, U.K.
Wood, Rhines, and Bryden all worry that the
near-instantaneous snapshots taken by the ocean surveys might have been
misleading. Like any part of the complex climate system, the conveyor is
bound to slow down at times and speed up at others. The two latest surveys,
Wood says, may have happened to catch the Atlantic
as the
conveyor slowed temporarily, giving the impression that a permanent change
had taken place.
In addition,
Carl
Wunsch and Patrick Heimbach of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
have just crunched far more oceanographic data from a variety of sources
over the interval of dramatic change (1993 to 2004) in the NOC analysis. In
a paper submitted for publication, they report a small slowdown, a quarter
the size of the NOC group's. The change in heat transported northward is
negligible, they calculate.
Another paper (Knight et al.) reconstructed the Gulf Stream over the past 125 years and concluded that the Gulf Stream circulation had increased substantially since the 1970’s.
Notes:
-
Byden et al are at Britain's National Oceanography Centre (NOC)
-
The Gulf Stream refers to the Atlantic meridional circulation; also known as the thermohaline circulation (THC)
-
For additional information, see Gulf Stream Not in Danger, previously published by TSAugust.
Sources:
Article
by Dr. Patrick Michaels Research professor of environmental sciences,
University
of
References
used by Dr Michaels included:
Bryden,
H.L., et al., 2005. Slowing of the Atlantic meridional overturning
circulation at 25ºN. Nature, 438,
655-657.
Kerr,
R., 2005. The Atlantic Conveyor May Have Slowed, But Don't Panic Yet.
Science, 310, 1403-1404.
Knight,
J.R., et al., 2005. A signature of persistent natural thermohaline
circulation cycles in observed climate. Geophysical Research Letters, 32,
doi:10.1029/2005GL024233
December 11, 2005
TSAugust
Permafrost Scare.
“Permafrost melting, methane coming, humanity doomed."
This was one of hundreds of headlines in environmental papers and web sites triggered by a report in New Scientist Magazine in August.
But what are Russian scientists saying about the conditions in Siberia since the report was about permafrost in Siberia.
"The Russian Academy of Sciences has found thatthe annual temperature of soils (with seasonal variations) has been remaining stable," reported the August 22 Russian News and Information Agency. "If anything, the depth of seasonal melting has decreased slightly."
Professor Nikolai Alexeyevsky, Head of Land Hydrology Department, Moscow State University, said that "Unscrupulous scientists are exaggerating and peddling fears about permafrost thawing and swamp methane becoming aggressive."
Vladimir Melnikov, director of Russia’s Institute of the Earth’s Cryosphere, said that "This is just another scare story": He went on to say; "This ecological structure is balanced and is not about to harm people with gas discharges."
"The boundaries of the Russian permafrost zone remain virtually unchanged," said Yuri Izrael, director of the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of Climatology and Ecology. He continued: "At the same time, the permafrost is several hundred meters deep. For methane, other gases, and hydrates to escape to the surface, it would have to melt at tremendous depths, which is impossible."
Professor
Nikolai Alexeyevsky also said; "Siberia
has vast natural resources, oil and gas above all. The article [New
Scientist Magazine]
aims to set public opinion against Western Siberia and discourage investment in its industry, oil and gas. They are saying,
'Swamp methane poses a global threat, so don't touch
Source:
The above quotations by Russian scientists are from RIA, (Russian News and Information Agency).
For more, see an article by James M. Taylor who is managing editor of Environment & Climate News, at www.heartland.org.
November 27, 2005
TSAugust
Greenland Ice Thickens.
Recent satellite measurements show that the Greenland ice cap is thickening due to increased snowfall. The ice cap has thickened by 21.26 inches (1.8 feet) over the past 11 years according to the center for Global Ocean Studies and Operational Oceanography in Norway.
The study was not able to determine whether the ice around the fringes of Greenland was thinning as the satellite data was not sufficiently accurate in these areas.
This latest study debunks the recent scare stories about sea levels rising several feet as the result of Greenland’s ice cap melting.
Similar results were announced in May 2005 for studies of Antarctica. Curt Davis, University of Missouri-Columbia, and his team published their data in Science Express. They showed that from 1992 to 2003 there was a mass gain of 45 (plus or minus 7) billion tons per year which locked up enough moisture to lower sea levels by 0.12 millimeters per year.
Both the Greenland and Antarctica results are consistent with global warming which predicts that warming results in greater snowfall over Antarctica and Greenland, thereby increasing the thickness of ice.
Neither study supports any conclusions about whether global warming is a natural phenomena or attributable to humans. They do show that the climate system has built in checks and balances.
October 30, 2005
TSAugust
Hurricane Cycles.
In the late 1800’s, water temperatures determined the maximum speed of steam ships. The colder the water used in the condenser the higher the efficiency of the steam engines. For this reason engineers kept accurate records of water temperatures so they could predict top speeds.
These records are now part of the scientific record for hurricane forecasts. The records show that temperatures in the North Atlantic rose and fell over 65 to 70 year periods.
It has now been determined that the engine driving these cycles is called the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO).
According to a hurricane researcher Hugh Willoughby, Miami's Florida International University, “The consensus among hurricane researchers and forecasters is that the hurricane landfalls of 2004 resulted from the AMO, a natural cycle of hurricane activity..." "The effect of global warming was at most second order," he wrote, "and probably not present at all."
The AMO cycles were cool from 1900-1925, warm from 1926-1969, cool from 1970-1994 and warm since 1995. It’s clear that a generation of Americans, from 1970 to 1994, have no idea of the true nature of hurricane threats. People built along the coasts in what are obviously dangerous areas with little thought to hurricanes.
A study just published in Science magazine by Dr. Webster of the Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, evaluated the number and size of hurricanes in the six ocean basins (North Indian, South Indian, West Pacific, Southwest Pacific, East Pacific and North Atlantic) using satellite data going back to 1970. The study showed that rising water temperatures did not appear to increase the number of hurricanes or their maximum wind speeds, though the proportion of category 4 and 5 storms doubled overall. Since the proportion of large storms also doubled in the Southwest Pacific basin where water temperatures had not risen, it is premature to conclude that rising water temperatures is the cause of the doubling.
Reprinted below are portions of an earlier article that shows the frequency and costs of hurricanes past. Katrina will, of course, now head the list of most costly hurricanes: But until Katrina only one other storm after 1969 was among the ten most costly. (The final cost of Rita may put it ahead of other storms and right behind Katrina.).
Sources: St. Petersburg Times reporter Bill Coats and
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Satellites and Balloons.
Recent studies show better reconciliation between satellite, ground and balloon temperature readings. There are still differences, but they are smaller.
The debate about global warming should now shift to: How much warming can we expect? And how much of the warming is caused by people?
Satellite
readings, as determined by the
Christy and Spencer of the UAH team agree the original data was wrong but that the corrected data shows an increase of 0.123 degrees C per decade.
While these scientists were comparing their data and methodology another team from Yale University, led by climate researcher Steven Sherwood, analyzed weather balloon data and showed that there were also errors in the original balloon temperature data.
The new balloon data suggest the global temperatures are closer to the UAH data than they are to the RSS data. The RSS team agrees saying; "Trends from temporally homogenized radiosonde data sets show less warming than our results and are in better agreement with the [corrected] Christy et al. results."
From the UAH website Spencer and Christy say: “We thank Carl and Frank for digging into our procedure and discovering this error. All radiosonde comparisons have been rerun and the agreement is still exceptionally good. There was virtually no impact of this error outside of the tropics."
Accepting the UAH data as most likely could mean a temperature rise of 1.23 degrees C by 2100 (i.e., 2.21 degrees F). This is somewhat greater than the 1.5 degree F rise in temperatures during the twentieth century.
Sources:
UAH news release.
“Some Convergence of Global Warming Estimates” by Roy Spencer, August 11, 2005 online at http://www.techcentralstation.com/081105RS.html.
See
SEPP
Consensus is Not Science.
Supposedly there is a consensus among scientists that Global Warming is a threat and that it is primarily caused by mankind burning fossil fuels. This in spite of 17,000 scientists signing the Oregon Petition a few years ago that said; "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."
This was reiterated by Arthur Schlesinger in his recent WSJ op-ed article where he said; “science is not a matter of consensus, as the histories of Galileo, Copernicus, Pasteur, Einstein and others will attest. Science depends not on speculation but on conclusions verified through experiment. Verification is more than computer simulations -- whose conclusions mirror the assumptions built in the model. Irrespective of the repeated assertions regarding a "scientific consensus," there is neither a consensus nor is consensus science”.
The Earth’s climate can not be replicated: controlled experiments can not be conducted to prove any hypothesis. The best that can be done is to attempt to validate computer simulations by comparing their output with past history. So far, no computer simulation has been successfully validated in this manner.
The IPCC’s summary report, used by the media to hype global warming, is a political, not a scientific document: It was written by politicians to advance their mission which was to support the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. The convention, itself, calls for protecting mankind by reducing the emission of greenhouse gasses. The politicians are supporting a predetermined conclusion.
While some component of global warming may be from greenhouse gasses, other natural variables, such as solar flares, are much more likely to affect the Earth’s climate. Most of the global warming that occurred in the twentieth century occurred before 1940, when the release of greenhouse gasses was much less than today. In addition, cooling actually occurred between 1940 and 1975.
Furthermore, the total increase in the Earth’s temperature during the 20th century was around 1 degree F.
The U.S. has entered into the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate with Australia, China, India, Japan and South Korea. “The focus will be on technology to cope with concerns about global climate as well as pollution”.
The alternative proposed by Kyoto proponents to technology, especially in the EU, is dramatic cuts in the emission of greenhouse gasses; cuts of around 60% to merely stabilize CO2 at current levels. Cuts of this magnitude would cause a worldwide depression and condemn millions to abject poverty: And probably not have any significant effect on global warming.
The Europeans, who have been most vocal about reducing emissions, have failed to do so. From 1990 (Kyoto's base year for measuring changes) to 2002, emissions of CO2 by the EU, increased 16.4 percent, reports the International Energy Agency. (See Note) Their failure to meet the Kyoto target underscores the difficulty of any attempt to reduce greenhouse gasses by 60%.
Similarly, since 1990 Canada's emissions are up 23.6 percent; Japan's, 18.9 percent.
Quoting from Schlesinger; “The issue of climate change urgently needs to be brought down from the level of theology to what we actually know”: And “We must always bear in mind that the earth's atmosphere remains a highly complex thermodynamic machine. Given its complexities, we need to be modest in asserting what we know. Knowledge is more than speculation”.
Source:
Partly drawn from Wall Street Journal Op-Ed by Schlesinger. Mr. Schlesinger
was the first secretary of energy and established the Department of Energy's
Carbon Dioxide Effects and Assessment Program in 1977.
Consensus! What Consensus?
The media and some politicians keep reiterating that the science of global warming is settled: and that there is a consensus that people are causing global warming, primarily by burning fossil fuels.
In the past few days, at least one governor and one CEO has jumped onto this wobbly bandwagon.
They ignore overwhelming evidence that there is no consensus and that the science is not settled.A few years ago the
Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine established a petition where reputable scientists could show that they opposed the Kyoto Treaty and did not agree that the science on global warming was settled: 17,000 scientists signed that petition.
There was also the Leipzig Declaration (1997) where hundreds of leading scientists proclaimed their opposition to the idea that the science was settled.
Even earlier, in 1992, there was the Heidelberg Appeal where 4,000 scientists, including 72 Nobel Prize winners, from 106 countries, subscribed to the view that “We are worried at the dawn of the twenty-first century, [with] the emergence of an irrational ideology which is opposed to scientific and industrial progress [that] impedes economic and social development."
Recently (2004) an attempt was made by N. Oreskes when she reviewed 928 peer reviewed abstracts and claimed to find universal acceptance that global warming was caused by people; a claim that in her view confirmed a consensus of scientists.
Concerned with the obvious dichotomy of N. Oreskes paper, Professor Benny J Peiser, Liverpool John Moores University, UK, did a study of 1117 abstracts and found that only “13 abstracts (or 1%) explicitly endorsed the consensus view”... “470 (or 42%) abstracts include the keywords ‘global climate change’ but do not include any direct or indirect link or reference to human activities, CO2 or greenhouse gas emissions, let alone anthropogenic forcing of recent climate change."
While Science Magazine was happy to publish N. Oreskes paper it refused to publish Professor Peiser’s paper on the basis that the material had already been published on the Internet (which was not true at the time).
Another recent survey of 500 international climate researchers conducted by Professors Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch of the German Institute for Coastal Research, found that "a quarter of respondents still question whether human activity is responsible