posted July 29, 2011 01:38 PM            

By Alan Caruba

20 Jun 11 ' Since the late 1980s a “consensus” of scientists, we were told, agreed that the Earth was in a period of “global warming” and anybody who disputed that was a “skeptic” or a “denier.”

Then, in 1998, the Earth began to cool. The handful of scientists at the heart of the global warming hoax began to sweat and not from the heat, but because they knew their scheme, created and blessed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) would soon be revealed. Frantic emails went back and forth as they tried to come up with some way of keeping the lie alive.

Literally thousands of scientists had climbed on the global warming bandwagon, scooping up billions in research grants that were all intended to “prove” that global warming was real. Nations, including ours, were making investments and controlling people’s lives based on the hoax. By 2009, the game was up. A huge blizzard concluded the 2009 IPCC Copenhagen climate change conference. The next one was held in Acapulco.

On June 30-July 1, the Heartland Institute, headquartered in Chicago, a free-market policy center, will hold what may likely be the last of its six climate change conferences, all of which debunked global warming by bringing together some very brave scientists to present seminars based on real, not fraudulent, science. It will be held in Washington, D.C. You will be able to “attend” by watching it on streaming video.

In 1997 Robert W. Felix published a book, “Not by Fire, but by Ice”, a softcover. It’s second edition, can be purchased from his website, IceAgeNow.com. For anyone interested in knowing the truth about the Earth’s many cycles of warming and cooling, and especially about its ice ages, I recommend it. While there, pick up his other book, “Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps.”

Fourteen years ago Felix pointed out that ice ages occur in a “dependable, predictable, natural cycle that returns like clockwork every 11,500 years.” Then he noted that the Earth is at the end of the current interglacial period!

The human species, homo sapiens, that had been evolving from an ape-like state really hit its stride around 500,000 years ago while modern humans showed up around 200,000 years ago. It took a while to learn how to use fire, make tools, develop language, and spread around. It wasn’t until about 5,000 years ago that what we call civilization began.

In addition to developing agriculture, building pyramids, and such, our ancestors spent their time making war on each other. With each passing century we developed new weapons of war, plundering, looting, raping and pillaging. Religions were invented, discarded, refined, but the wars have continued unabated. Now we are so “advanced” we can kill thousands of people with a single bomb.

Civilization was greatly facilitated by an interglacial period that provided increasing crop yields to feed armies and populations clustered in cities, virtually all of which were surrounded by large walls.

Since the weather was critical to agriculture and the waging of war, humans began to pay greater attention to what the sun was doing and keeping records. It was noticed that lots of sunspot activity was an indicator of warmer climate.

From 1645 to 1715, virtually no sunspots appeared and this phenomenon called the Maunder Minimum coincided with the Little Ice Age. Rivers froze over in Europe and America. Crops failed. Revolutions occurred.

Now, instead of “global warming”, scientists are agog over a new slowing of sunspot activity—enormous magnetic storms—something that occurs every 11 years, half of the 22-year sunspot cycle. Now the U.S. National Solar Observatory and the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory are suggesting that a new Little Ice Age is on its way.

Robert W. Felix told them that back in 1997 while most U.S. climate agencies were still blathering away with global warming predictions. This time, though, based on cycles known to the ancient Chinese and others, they have gotten it right.

What is not being said, however, is that this predicted Little Ice Age could very well turn into a very Big Ice Age. It’s due. It could start tomorrow. Bundle up!

posted July 29, 2011 01:40 PM            

Global warming a "contrived phony mess"
"Flat out hogwash"

1 July 11 - In his recent book Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington, Texas Governor and potential Presidential candidate Rick Perry writes that global warming is "all one contrived phony mess that is falling apart under its own weight."
Bravo, Governor Perry. Finally, a politician who hasn't been intimidated or hoodwinked by the global warming bullies.

Global warming is "flat out hogwash," says Perry.

"Bravo!" says Climate Depot's Marc Morano. "Rick Perry Gets it!"

Jonathan Hiskes summed up Perry's record in Grist last fall, when Perry was running for reelection:

Perry relishes his role as a foe of national climate action. He lambasted the climate bill that passed the House [in 2009] as an "economic disaster." He is suing the EPA to block it from regulating greenhouse gas pollution. ... Perry is "not convinced" climate change is a threat, according to his policy analyst. And he tried to fast-track permits for 11 new coal plants ...

In 2007, Gov. Perry addressed the California Republican state convention and said this:

PERRY: And since when did the field of science become the sole purview of left-wing politicians? I don’t know about you, but I’ve heard Al Gore talk about man-made global warming so much that I’m starting to think that his mouth is the leading source of all that supposedly deadly carbon dioxide.

Virtually every day another scientist leaves the global warming bandwagon…but you won’t read about that in the press because they have already invested in one side of the story. I’m not saying we shouldn’t be good stewards of our environment. We should. I am just saying when politics hijack science, it quells true scientific debate and can have dire consequences for our future.

This contrasts with Mitt Romney's stance, who would take us down the same old destructive path that we're now on. Here's Romney:

"I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that. ...It's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors."

posted July 29, 2011 01:44 PM            

By Climatologist Cliff Harris

14 Jun 11 - On November 20, 2009, an unnamed climate scientist released more than four thousand private e-mails and climate-related files on the Internet.

Most of these highly embarrassing internal documents came from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom, headed by Professor Phil Jones.

Those of us who long suspected that the CRU and other anthropogenic global warming (AGW) alarmists had ‘cooked up’ falsified historical climate data to support a predetermined conclusion, were finally able to look at the scientists ‘hidden agenda.’

For many years, AGW scientists had refused to share much of their research data relating to global warming. The CRU and the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) each did everything possible to deny past periods of global warming and cooling that took place on this planet between 600 B.C. and 1850 A.D.

By extreme contrast, Randy Mann, Bob Felix and I have shared our detailed long-term charts and graphs frequently with our subscribers over the past couple of decades.

These charts of ours (and other scientists) detail several periods of warming and cooling during the past 2,600 years.

The Roman Warm Period between 250 B.C. and 450 A.D. and the Medieval Warm Period of 900 A.D. and 1300 A.D. each produced widespread prosperity in the world. Remember, WARM TIMES ARE ‘GOOD TIMES,’ CO2 or not.

By extreme contrast, however, the harsh Dark Ages Cold Period, that extended from 535 A.D. to approximately 900 A.D., saw a dramatic decline in living conditions through Europe and Asia. Crops failed, which led to disease and famine, and the average European lifespan decreased by nearly 20 years!

The so-called ‘Little Ice Age,’ which occurred from 1350 to 1850 A.D. wiped out the mighty Vikings, who were previously farming Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period as well as the advanced Incan civilization in the mountains of Peru that likewise flourished during warmer times.

Asia, Europe and North America saw massive economic, social and health-related hardships, especially during the ‘heart’ of the Little Ice Age around the ‘Maunder Minimum’ (extremely low sunspot activity) between 1645 and 1715, when the Thames River in London froze on an annual basis.

My own exhaustive climate research shows that the earth does not maintain a ‘static’ climate. It’s always changing. Our sun is the major influence on our planet’s climate at any given time, as I pointed out last week. It’s getting active again, hence a new trend towards a bit warmer temperatures in the near-term, a naturally occurring cycle, especially in the eastern U.S. and southwestern Europe.

My biggest complaint with the AGW scientists is that their climate models tend to ignore the past significant changes on the planet.

For example, University of Virginia Professor Michael Mann’s ‘hockey-stick graph’ is a climatological ‘joke,’ in my not so humble opinion. It shows a very stable climate on a global scale between 1000 A.D. and 1980 A.D. followed by a huge warmup in the past 30 years since 1981.

Many of these ‘Climategate’ e-mails exposed Mann’s statistical errors in his hockey-stick graph. He completely ignored the 11-year cooling period between 1998 and 2009 that almost wiped-out the warming cycle of 1981 to 1998 in the mid-latitudes.

Mann was told by Professor Phil Jones in a November 2009 e-mail, "not to leave stuff lying around that would point out his many climate errors."

Canadian climate scientists, Ross McKitrick and Steve McIntyre, have completely discredited Mann’s ‘hockey-stick’ graph. To me, it’s just a "cracked puck in the weeds."

Only a few dozen climate scientists still support the AGW cause. At least 32,000 climate scientists worldwide, approximately 9,000 holding PhD’s, now believe that the ‘theory of catastrophic global warming’ is not supported by scientific evidence over the ages. Carbon dioxide does not heat the planet.

Like me, they also believe that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a beneficial substance for both plants and animals, not a pollutant like carbon monoxide or sulfur dioxide.

Next week, what about Al Gore’s claims of "rising sea levels" that may eventually swamp New York City, New Orleans and San Francisco? Stay tuned.

Several years ago, climatologist Cliff Harris teamed up with meteorologist Randy Mann to form Harris-Mann Climatology. They provide a daily commodity and weather service for traders, farmers, and anyone who has an interest in the markets. According to their website, Harris has been rated as one of the top commodity traders in the country.

posted July 29, 2011 01:46 PM            

Solar cycle 25 may not happen at all

14 Jun 11 - "What may be the science story of the century is breaking this evening, as heavyweight US solar physicists announce that the Sun appears to be headed into a lengthy spell of low activity, which could mean that the Earth – far from facing a global warming problem – is actually headed into a mini Ice Age," begins an article today in the UK Register.

The Sun at minimum phase (2006) and maximum phase (2001).
Image credit: National Solar Observatory, Air Force Research Laboratory

Solar activity rises and falls about every 11 years, which is half of the 22-year sunspot cycle. The current cycle is now supposed to be ramping up, but so far results have been most disappointing.

Sunspots, the enormous magnetic storms that erupt on the sun's surface as the cycle builds, might disappear entirely for the first time since the Maunder Minimum, almost 400 years ago.

Today's shocking announcement came from scientists at the US National Solar Observatory (NSO) and the US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL).

At a press conference held at the annual meeting of the Solar Physics Division of the American Astronomical Society in Las Cruces, New Mexico, three solar scientists gave their forecast for the next solar cycle, number 25.

"Cycle 24 may be the last normal one for some time," said solar physicist Dr Frank Hill, "and the next one, Cycle 25, may not happen. The solar cycle may be going into hiatus, like a TV show."

Hill, who is associate director of the NSO’s Solar Synoptic Network, is the lead author on one of three papers presented at the meeting.

"This is highly unusual and unexpected," says Dr Hill. "But the fact that three completely different views of the Sun point in the same direction is a powerful indicator that the sunspot cycle may be going into hibernation."

If we are right, this could be the last solar maximum we’ll see for a few decades, said Hill. That would affect everything from space exploration to Earth’s climate.

Are we headed for another Maunder Minimum and a Little Ice Age?

The Maunder Minimum, a 70-year period from 1645 to 1715 when virtually no sunspots appeared, coincided with the Little Ice Age.

NASA on the Maunder Minimum:

"Early records of sunspots indicate that the Sun went through a period of inactivity in the late 17th century. Very few sunspots were seen on the Sun from about 1645 to 1715.... This period of solar inactivity also corresponds to a climatic period called the "Little Ice Age" when rivers that are normally ice-free froze and snow fields remained year-round at lower altitudes. There is evidence that the Sun has had similar periods of inactivity in the more distant past."

During the Maunder Minimum, many European rivers – including the Thames – routinely froze over, allowing ice skating and even for armies to march across them in some cases, the Register points out.

In the second paper, Matt Penn and William Livingston predict that by Cycle 25 magnetic fields erupting on the Sun will be so weak that few if any sunspots will form. Typically, magnetic field strength in a sunspot measures 2,500 to 3,500 gauss. (Earth’s magnetic field is less than 1 gauss at the surface.) Based on present trends, the field strength will drop below the 1,500 gauss threshold and spots will largely disappear.

In the third study, Richard Altrock, manager of the Air Force’s coronal research program at NSO’s Sunspot, NM, facilities, described a slowing of what is called the “rush to the poles,” where new solar magnetic activity moves toward the poles.

Cycle 24 started out late and slow and may not be strong enough to create this rush to the poles, indicating we’ll see a very weak solar maximum in 2013... if at all, said Altrock.

Meanwhile, Richard Kerr over at Science magazine doesn't seem too enamored of the findings. "A hibernating sun would have only a slight cooling effect on climate," opines Kerr.

Kerr made sure to include some opposing viewpoints, saying that the sun's behavior "is so uncertain that projections far into the future are more or less speculation." (I don't think Kerr would recognize a cooling trend even if he were buried beneath an advancing glacier.)

Articles on Yahoo.com and MSNBC pooh-poohed the idea that this could affect climate even more than did Kerr, a foolish stance in my opinion.

posted July 29, 2011 01:47 PM            

By Climatologist Cliff Harris

6 Jun 11 - (Excerpts) - As I’ve said dozens of times in the past couple of decades in various columns including, of course, ‘Gems,’ I believe in CLIMATE CHANGES of the naturally occurring variety, but not anthropogenic global warming (AGW). It’s a massive fraud in my opinion, a LIE, pure and simple.

There is no peer-confirmed scientific research that establishes a cause-and-effect relationship between increased atmospheric carbon dioxide and higher (or lower) global temperatures. This is a clever deception put forth by those attempting to impose a centralized, worldwide socialistic form of government headed by an empowered United Nations.

This far-reaching global warming industry, already making huge profits at tax-payer expense, has been given credence by most governments, the news media, political interests, fear-gripped citizens of the planet and much of the scientific community.

Some of the key scientists in the AGW movement have falsified historical data to make it conform to their agenda, which is decidedly anti-American (Western), anti-democracy and anti-capitalism.

Their methodology is to completely ignore the climatological facts that, since 1998, we’ve been in a pronounced cooling trend on a global scale that has completely wiped-out the warming that occurred from 1981 through 1997 that followed directly on the chilly heels of a prolonged colder period that began during World War II.

The Earth’s climate, like the rest of the planets in our Solar System, changes constantly in a ‘natural response’ to both terrestrial and extraterrestrial influences. These include solar rays, the sun is the big weather-maker, cosmic rays, radiation from exploding stars in our galaxy (supernovas), the moon and numerous other factors.

There have been several rather epoch climate changes since before the time of Christ, which AGW alarmists conveniently seem to ignore in their falsified climate models, like the Roman Warm Period (250 B.C. to 450 A.D.), the Medieval Warm Period (900 A.D. to 1300 A.D.), the Little Ice Age (1350 A.D. to 1850 A.D.), and the recent slow-warming from the mid 1800s through 1997.

This warming of the planet during the 20th Century was a mere 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit and, as I stated previously, was completely wiped-out during the brief period from 1997-2011, especially after our ‘sun went silent’ in 2007.

Virtually the entire mid-latitude regions of both northern and southern hemispheres have had a series of very cold winters since 2007, as sunspot activity decreased to levels not seen since the ‘Maunder Minimum’ between 1645 and 1715, when frost fairs were celebrated on the frozen Thames River in London almost on an annual basis.

The years 2008 and 2009 experienced extremely low levels of sunspots. There were an amazing

266 (73 percent) days that were ‘sunspot-free’ in 2008 and 260 such days in 2009. Only recently, have sunspot numbers increased to more normal levels. This cycle of higher sunspots should peak in late 2012 and then ‘drop off a cliff,’ no pun intended.

Cliff Harris is a climatologist who writes a weekly column for
The Coeur d'Alene Press.

posted July 29, 2011 01:50 PM            

By Alan Caruba

30 May 11 - (Excerpts) - "The University of Virginia, after vigorously resisting a Freedom of Information Act (FOI) request for data related to the emails of Michael Mann, was the subject of a court order to make them available.

"Mann, a climatologist, was part of a relatively small clique of charlatans who, working for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), conjured up all manner of “proof” that the Earth was on dangerous trajectory, heating up. Mann invented the “hockey stick” graph that demonstrated this bit of climate magic.

"Mann’s problem began when the “hockey stick” graph was debunked and demolished as bogus. All this occurred while Mann was on the faculty of the University of Virginia and while large amounts of research grant money were being received by the University to support Mann and others.

"Since 1990, it is estimated that $100 billion of taxpayer’s funding went to support “climate research” by thousands of scientists who, it turned out, were unable to find and certainly not measure any evidence of human influence on global temperature.

"The same thing was occurring across the Atlantic in England where the University of East Anglia was home to Mann’s IPCC co-conspirators. On May 25th, the Guardian reported that Nobel Laureate, Sir. Paul Nurse, complained that the British version of FOI was being used to “harass” some climate scientists by requesting data and other research materials.

"Given the collusion of both the University of Virginia and of East Anglia, it should come as no surprise that both institutions held their own boards of inquiry and cleared the climate scientists on their staffs of any wrongdoing. That explains why the court had to drag them into demonstrating the probity of their activities.

"This is far from a spat between some universities and their scientists, and "skeptics" challenging the global warming fraud. It most certainly is a fraud when global warming claims are used to impose a huge cost to consumers when utilities and other large emitters of carbon dioxide are required by law to utilize “alternative” sources such as wind and solar power or to install multi-million dollar technologies to needlessly reduce CO2 emissions.

"Plainly stated, CO2 emissions have zero effect on the weather or the climate.

"It was in November 2009 that a huge cache of emails between Mann and other IPCC scientists was imported to the Internet where it rapidly became clear that they were very worried that the Earth had entered a natural cooling cycle in 1998 and discussed how to pressure scientific journals to not publish the research of skeptics refuting the hoax.

"The IPCC continues to propagate global warming lies, only now it is called “climate change.” Any public figure that uses the term “climate change” is lying if for no other reason than the climate of the Earth has been and is always in a state of change.

"Unanswered is the role that the mass media played in spreading and defending the global warming hoax. On Memorial Day, when we celebrate the sacrifice of fallen heroes to preserve liberty, the Washington Post published a bizarre editorial criticizing “climate skeptics” for using the FOIA to find out why Mann and the University of Virginia received funding while participating in a massive deception. Unmentioned were comparable Greenpeace FOIA efforts against climate skeptics.

"It's worth noting that the global warming/climate change fraud is still being perpetrated in American schools from coast to coast."

© Alan Caruba, 2011

posted July 29, 2011 01:51 PM            

By Robert Ashworth, Nasif Nahle and Hans Schreuder

10 May 11 - In Al Gore’s presentation of his "Inconvenient Truth" documentary, he conveniently separated the Vostok Ice core temperature and CO2 graphs so you could not see which came first, a warming spike or a CO2 spike. He said that a CO2 spike came first but alas, it was the just the opposite as shown in the Vostok Ice Core graph below.

Vostok, Antarctica Ice Core Data
Click to see larger version

When both lines are combined on one graph, suitably enlarged and viewed in the correct direction from left to right, it is clearly seen that a warming spike always comes first (blue line) followed by a CO2 increase (red line) some 800 years later.

There are many reasons for the oceans to warm and cool over long periods of time and those influences are not the subject of this paper. Warming of the oceans reduces the solubility of CO2 in water which results in the liberation of CO2. An additional effect of the oceans warming up is that more water vaporizes and for each pound of water evaporated 1,000 Btu of cooling occurs. Increased water vapor and CO2 in the atmosphere then causes a further cooling effect through the reflection of more radiation back to outer space. Nature has this under control.

Gore also gave no explanation what would cause a CO2 spike to occur in the first place. What is so disturbing here is that, just like Al Gore, many climatologists and meteorologists seem to have a problem discerning cause and effect. It is very simple, if what you call an effect comes first, you have it backwards; a cause always comes first to produce the effect.

See entire paper http://www.tech-know.eu/uploads/Greenhouse_Gases_Cool_Earth.pdf

Robert Ashworth is a chemical engineer and member of the American Geophysical Union. He holds 16 US patents and some foreign patents on coal conversion processes and environmental control technologies. In 2001 the Kentucky Governor Paul Patton commissioned him a Kentucky Colonel for his work on clean coal technology.

Nasif Nahle is a University Professor and Director of the Scientific Research Division at Biology Cabinet, Mexico; a Biologist, 1st. Level Certificate in Scientific ICAM Research by the University of Harvard and certificated in Physics, Climatology, Meteorology, Paleontology and Geology. He's a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Physical Society.

posted July 29, 2011 01:52 PM            

With Willie Soon and David Legates

6 May 11 - Dr. Willie Soon Ph.D., an Astrophysicist from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and Dr. David Legates Ph.D., a Climatologist from the Center from Climate Research at the University of Delaware provide an easy-to-follow review of current climate science, which suggests that the sun's irregular patterns and other natural forces are the major sources of climate change.

For the past 650,000 years, first came the warming, then CO2 levels rose.

Global warming alarmists have cause and effect reversed.

posted July 29, 2011 01:54 PM            

By Terrance Aym

28 Mar 11 - (Excerpts) - Geologic records show that Ice Ages are the norm, punctuated by brief periods of warming. Now one of the most highly respected paleoclimatologists - George Kukla, 77, retired professor of paleoclimatology at Columbia University and researcher at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory - has weighed in and is warning everyone to prepare for a new Ice Age.

The "Earth has experienced an ongoing cycle of ice ages dating back millions of years. Cold, glacial periods affecting the polar to mid-latitudes persist for about 100,000 years, punctuated by briefer, warmer periods called interglacials," says Kukla.

Kukla asserts all Ice Ages start with a period of global warming. They are the the harbingers of new Ice Ages. Actually, he explains, warming is good. Ice Ages are deadly and may even kill millions.

Can Mankind stop it? No. Just as humanity cannot affect the long term climate of the planet, neither can it stop an Ice Age from happening. The climate is primarily driven by the sun.

"I feel we're on pretty solid ground in interpreting orbit around the sun as the primary driving force behind Ice Age glaciation," he says. "The relationship is just too clear and consistent to allow reasonable doubt. It's either that, or climate drives orbit, and that just doesn't make sense."

During a lengthy interview with Gelf Magazine, Kukla explained: "What is happening is very similar to the time 115,000 years ago, when the last glaciation started.... Believe it or not, the last glacial started with 'global warming!'"

He knows that global warming always precedes an Ice Age. The history of that is in the ice core records repeating itself every 100,000 years or so over millions of years.

Generations ago, scientists believed Ice Ages advanced slowly taking tens of thousands of years. Now some researchers have revealed startling evidence that an Ice Age can be triggered in under 10 years.

Warming is much more preferable than cooling. Warming would actually help Mankind; cooling will do just the opposite.

Kukla and his colleagues warn that as the ice starts marching southward from the Arctic there will be "substantially lowered food production" and evidence will abound of "extreme weather anomalies" in both the northern and southern latitudes.

Global superstorms may break out. Some regions may experience anomalous cold spells while others roast from spiking temperatures never before seen by civilization.

Those things too are exactly what's happening now.

Not taken into Kulka's model of an encroaching Ice Age are the facts and possible impact of the magnetic pole shift, the shifting core of the Earth, or the revelation by NASA and the ESA that the sun is going to fall into a quiet period for the next 30 to 50 years.

That exceptional solar minimum cycle is expected to start in 2014, perhaps earlier.

It seems the odds are good that the Earth will slip into an extended cooling, or so-called mini-Ice Age. Whether that becomes an extended 100,000 year full-fledged Ice Age even Kulka doesn't know.

See entire much more comprehensive article: http://www.helium.com/items/2125333-prepare-for-new-ice-age-now-says-top-paleoclimatologist
Thanks to Marc Morano for this link

George Kukla's biography (published by Canada.com):

George Kukla, micropalentologist and Special Research Scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, is a pioneer in the study of solar forcing of climate changes. He was the lead author of the scientific paper that first supported Milutin Milankovic's theory of glacial cycles by investigating the stratigraphy in deep-sea sediment cores from the southern Indian Ocean. In the cores were clear imprints of Milankovic's proposed cycles. In his paper he wrote, "We are certain now that changes in the Earth's orbital geometry caused the ice ages. The evidence is so strong that other explanations must now be discarded or modified." Prior to joining Columbia in 1971, he had published landmark studies in Czechoslovakia, where he was a member of the Czechoslovakian Academy of Sciences

posted July 29, 2011 01:56 PM            

By Alan Caruba

6 Feb 11 - (Excerpts) - From the earliest days the global warming “theory” was proposed I knew that it was a complete hoax.
It never made any sense to me that an element of the earth’s atmosphere, carbon dioxide that measured an infinitesimal 0.0389%, could have an effect on the planet’s climate. Just one of the so-called “greenhouse gases”, water vapor—clouds—is 51 times greater than CO2.

Moreover, not one single computer model can factor in the effect clouds have on the planet’s weather because not one single meteorologist, living or dead, has a clue why they do what they do. They appear and disappear in the very definition of chaos. So it struck me as odd that all the computer models of the advocates of global warming always came to the same conclusion; it’s coming and the earth's temperature will rise dramatically IF…

IF is the key word that global warming advocates, now called “warmists”, kept saying. If you don’t stop using coal and oil for energy, we’re doomed. If you don’t reduce your personal “carbon footprint”, we’re doomed. If we don’t immediately start using ethanol, wind and solar power, we’re doomed.

Beyond IF came an endless avalanche of claims that global warming was altering or affecting every single natural phenomenon in the world. The claim was that glaciers were melting. Polar bear populations were disappearing. Hurricanes were increasing. The seas were rising. Eventually, just about everything happening anywhere was blamed on global warming.

Follywood and the mass media signed onto this absurdity, ignoring the science involved and the most obvious fact that an entirely natural cooling cycle began in 1998 and continues to this day. The worst of it, however, was a combination of the way the government and the nation’s educational system became parties to this massive fraud. And still are!

The EPA claim that it has the authority to regulate CO2 is a pure lie and it is based on the global warming lie.

Ultimately, however, not one "warmest" ever once pointed to the single greatest factor in the earth’s climate, the sun.

All this brings me to a new book, “Slaying the Sky Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory”, by eight co-authors, contributors whose expertise ranges across climatology, meteorology, physics, and mathematics, along with an expert in the legal aspects of the hoax. All have been derided as “deniers” and “skeptics.”

I know several of them as Internet friends, I count Hans Schreuder, Joseph A. Olsen, and John O’Sullivan among the many people who have helped me, over the years, to understand the complexities of climate science.

This book is not light reading. Indeed, if you don’t come equipped with an understanding of physics, for example, some chapters will remain beyond your grasp. And mine! Happily, most is easily comprehended. In sum, it is a damning condemnation of the great hoax of the modern era, perhaps the greatest hoax since the bogus economic theory of communism.

Real science is not arrived at by “consensus.” Real scientists actually seek to disprove the findings of other scientists until they cannot be disproved, affirming them finally as accurate.

Real science can be corrupted in the same way as other aspects of society can be. For me, the real crime of global warming is the way governmental agencies, beginning with the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, deliberately falsified data, mostly based on computer models, to underwrite the global warming fraud. That is also what NOAA, NASA, and the EPA, have done, to name just three.

Now add in billions of dollars lavished on “climate research” conducted on university campuses from coast to coast. There were exceptions. Some university-based scientists disputed the bogus research and some were threatened with the loss of their jobs. The other crime involves the corruption of formerly respected science journals and general science-related media such as National Geographic.

I have used the words “hoax” and “fraud” interchangeably, but the latter refers to the way global warming was never about the climate and all about a handful of people becoming quite wealthy by setting up exchanges to buy and sell bogus “carbon credits” mandated by governments in order to emit CO2 in the normal process of manufacturing production and other applications.

Others have cashed in building solar and wind farms, or became producers of ethanol. None of these ventures would survive without government mandates requiring their use.

The Cap-and-Trade Act is one such fraud and is currently in the U.S. Senate’s political dead zone, hopefully to never be enacted. It is the global warming equivalent of Obamacare; the death of thousands of jobs and the economy.

I recommend you read “Slaying the Sky Dragon” as the definitive answer to more than twenty years of global warming lies.

posted July 29, 2011 01:58 PM            

quote:

---

Then, in 1998, the Earth began to cool.

---

False. It didn't. Temperatures leveled off. They didn't cool.

quote:

---

Gov Perry:-
Global warming a "contrived phony mess"
"Flat out hogwash"

---

Wow! Quoting a governor as an expert. That's rich.

Climategate: we've been over that. Not nearly as damning as sceptics are wanting to believe.

quote:

---

Many of these ‘Climategate’ e-mails exposed Mann’s statistical errors in his hockey-stick graph. He completely ignored the 11-year cooling period between 1998 and 2009 that almost wiped-out the warming cycle of 1981 to 1998 in the mid-latitudes.

---

Once again, the cooling myth.

Where do you see cooling in this chart?
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cmb-faq/anomalies.php

posted July 29, 2011 01:58 PM            

NOAA - Natural factors not AGW caused

last year's snowy winter

CSI Team finds no connection

21 Feb 11 - With record-setting snowfall in the U.S. mid-Atlantic region last winter (winter of 2009-2010), NOAA’s Climate Scene Investigators (CSI) assembled to analyze why the snowstorms happened

Combing through historical records dating back to the late 1800s, the CSI team identified the separate “fingerprints” of wintertime climate conditions related to El Niño and the NAO (North Atlantic Oscillation). They deduced that NAO conditions alone could explain Europe’s extreme winter and the large-scale cold temperatures in the United States

The CSI Team found abundant historical evidence of heavy mid-Atlantic snowstorms whenever an El Niño and a negative NAO acted in concert, supporting their conclusion that the record-setting snowstorms were the result of natural causes.

But could global warming have elevated the potency of this dynamic duo? The CSI Team didn’t find a connection.
See entire NOAA article: http://www.climatewatch.noaa.gov/2010/articles/forensic-meteorology-solves-the-mystery-of- record-snows/4
Thanks to Joe D'Aleo and Marc Morano for this link

So much for Al Gore's claims that 'increased heavy snowfalls are completely consistent with... man-made global warming'

So much for the New York Times claims that 'Overall warming of the atmosphere is actually creating cold-weather extremes.'

posted July 29, 2011 02:00 PM            

almost all

of the past 10,000 years

8 Mar 11 - Has our planet been enduring unprecedented global warming (now coyly referred to as "climate change")? The facts do not bear that out.

Look at this chart.

Created by Cuffy and Clow in 1997, and based on Greenland ice core records, this chart shows global temperatures for the past 15,000 years.

You'll see that today's benign climate is not even close to being the warmest on record.

In fact, temperatures have been warmer than today for almost all of the past 10,000 years.

In fact, if the chart went further back, you'd see that temperatures have been warmer than today for most of geologic history.

I sat just ten feet from Dr. Don Easterbrook, Professor of Geology at Western Washington University as he presented this chart, along with several of his own, at the Heartland Institute's 4th International Conference on Climate Change in Chicago last year.

"Natural global warming much more intense than modern warming has occurred many times in the geologic past without CO2 change," said Easterbrook.

The changes occurred rapidly, without any help from humans

"Fifteen thousand years ago, temperatures rose 10 to 20 degrees in just one century," said Easterbrook.

About 12,800 years ago we plunged into the Younger Dryas, said Easterbrook. When we came out of the Younger Dryas, temperatures again shot upward, rising 15 degrees in just 40 years. Then, from about 10,000 years ago to 3,000 years ago, temperatures were warmer than today.

Forget human influence, said Easterbrook. Cooling and warming are both natural.

"Numerous, abrupt, short-lived warming and cooling episodes much more intense than recent warming/cooling occurred during the late Pleistocene, none of which could have been caused by changes in atmospheric CO2," said Easterbrook.

"Twice as many people are killed by extreme cold than by extreme heat," Easterbrook warned.

posted July 29, 2011 02:01 PM            

Warm weather NOT causing cold

Short video

21 Jan 11- "This is bullsh--t," says astrophysicist Piers Corbyn. "The idea that warming can somehow cause cooling is fiction and lies created by the global warming lobby."

"These are the same people who told us that snow would become a thing of the past in Europe. They told us we would have ongoing hotter and hotter summers. Ongoing warmer and warmer winters. That has not happened.

"All their predictions have failed. Absolutely. ALL of them. ALL their predictions.

"Now they're saying that warming is cooling. It's nonsense. It's utter nonsense.

"They're acting like a failed cult whose predictions have not come true.

"Their predictions are also fraud. I'd like to know what happened to the 62 percent of stations they have removed.

"They lie about their forecasts.

"This is bulls--t. These people cannot be trusted with anything.

posted July 29, 2011 02:02 PM            

is delusional, irrelevant & disingenuous

Piers Corbyn

21 Jan 11 - "Warmist (warm is cold) explanations for extreme events are as useless as saying "Wet days cause rain”, says Corbyn.

"WHY is there a statistically highly significant systematic inverse relationship between the number of stations they selected for ‘official’ use and the average temperatures resulting?

" What average temperature would result from the 62% of stations they removed since around the 1960s - which had the coldest temperature averages and the highest number of stations - up to the present decade - which is officially the warmest and has the least number of stations?

"Anyone with a brain can see that this systematic connection means that either temperature is magically determined by the number of stations or there has been systematic selecting of data which is best described as data fraud”, said Piers.

"This question requires an international inquiry which is independent of any of the organizations involved in this data creation. ( See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPMmCruPAWU )

"ALL the global warmist predictions since 2000 have failed and the OPPOSITE types of extremes (floods, supercold and blizzards) to their predictions (droughts, warm winters and the end-of-snow) have occurred, so their warmist (or warm is cold) explanations for extreme events are as useless as saying "Wet days cause rain”.

"If weather were just entertainment this would not matter but their refusal to accept their total failure forces up energy and food prices through low carbon cult measures and holds back real science which directly prevents governments and authorities from applying useful forecasts which can reduce suffering and save lives.

"NOTE The Main USA TV channels reported WeatherAction correctly predicted the coldest December in UK for 100 years, yet the BBC carry nothing. Why?"

posted July 29, 2011 02:03 PM            

'Global warming is the greatest and most successful
pseudoscientific
fraud I have seen in my long life'

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.

Anthony Watts describes it thus:

This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.

From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society

06 October 2010

Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:

1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.<

5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.

6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.

APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.

I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal

posted July 29, 2011 02:05 PM            

With an assist from axial tilt and precession

By the University of California news service

6 Apr 10 - (Santa Barbara, Calif.) –– In an analysis of the past 1.2 million years, UC Santa Barbara geologist Lorraine Lisiecki discovered a pattern that connects the regular changes of the Earth's orbital cycle to changes in the Earth's climate. The finding is reported in this week's issue of the scientific journal Nature Geoscience.

Lisiecki performed her analysis of climate by examining ocean sediment cores. These cores come from 57 locations around the world. By analyzing sediments, scientists are able to chart the Earth's climate for millions of years in the past. Lisiecki's contribution is the linking of the climate record to the history of the Earth's orbit.

It is known that the Earth's orbit around the sun changes shape every 100,000 years. The orbit becomes either more round or more elliptical at these intervals. The shape of the orbit is known as its "eccentricity." A related aspect is the 41,000-year cycle in the tilt of the Earth's axis.

Glaciation of the Earth also occurs every 100,000 years. Lisiecki found that the timing of changes in climate and eccentricity coincided. "The clear correlation between the timing of the change in orbit and the change in the Earth's climate is strong evidence of a link between the two," said Lisiecki. "It is unlikely that these events would not be related to one another."

Besides finding a link between change in the shape of the orbit and the onset of glaciation, Lisiecki found a surprising correlation. She discovered that the largest glacial cycles occurred during the weakest changes in the eccentricity of Earth's orbit - - and vice versa. She found that the stronger changes in the Earth's orbit correlated to weaker changes in climate. "This may mean that the Earth's climate has internal instability in addition to sensitivity to changes in the orbit," said Lisiecki.

She concludes that the pattern of climate change over the past million years likely involves complicated interactions between different parts of the climate system, as well as three different orbital systems. The first two orbital systems are the orbit's eccentricity, and tilt. The third is "precession," or a change in the orientation of the rotation axis.

If you've read "Not by Fire but by Ice," you know that this is what
I've been saying for years.

posted July 29, 2011 02:07 PM            

By James Delingpole

26 Sep 10 -(Excerpts) - Bilderberg. Whether you believe it’s part of a sinister conspiracy which will lead inexorably to one world government or whether you think it’s just an innocent high-level talking shop, there’s one thing that can’t be denied: it knows which way the wind is blowing.

At its June meeting in Sitges, Spain... some of the world's ... most powerful CEOs rubbed shoulders rubbed shoulders with notable academics and leading politicians. * ... Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Dick Perle, the Queen of the Netherlands, the editor of the Economist…. Which is what makes one particular item on the group’s discussion agenda so tremendously significant.

The 58th Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Sitges, Spain 3 – 6 June 2010. The Conference will deal mainly with Financial Reform, Security, Cyber Technology, Energy, Pakistan, Afghanistan, World Food Problem, Global Cooling, Social Networking, Medical Science, EU-US relations.

Yep, that’s right. Global Cooling.

Let me explain briefly why this is a bombshell waiting to explode.

Almost every government in the Western world from the USA to Britain to all the other EU states to Australia and New Zealand is currently committed to a policy of “decarbonisation.” ... (But)... Winters are getting colder. Fuel bills are rising (in the name of combating climate change, natch). The wheels are starting to come off the AGW bandwagon. Ordinary people, resisting two decades of concerted brainwashing, are starting to notice.

All this, of course, spells big trouble for the global power elite. As well as leading to food shortages (as, for example, it becomes harder to grow wheat in northerly latitudes; adding, of course, to such already-present disasters as biofuels and the rejection of GM), global cooling is going to find electorates increasingly angry that they have been sold a pup.

If man-made global warming was really happening and really a problem we might possibly have carried on putting up with all these constraints on our liberty and assaults on our income. But if it turns out to have been a myth……

Watch the global power elite squirming to reposition itself as it slowly distances itself from Anthropogenic Global Warming (”Who? Us? No. We never thought of it as more than a quaint theory…”), and tries to find new ways of justifying green taxation and control. (Ocean acidification; biodiversity; et al). You’ll notice sly shifts in policy spin. In Britain, for example, Chris “Chicken Little” Huhne’s suicidal “dash for wind” will be re-invented as a vital step towards “energy security.” There will be less talk of “combatting climate change” and more talk of “mitigation”. You’ll hear enviro-Nazis like Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren avoid reference to “global warming” like the plague, preferring the more reliably vague phrase “global climate disruption.”

And you know what the worst thing is? If we allow them to, they’re going to get away with it.

It is time we put a stop to this.... We need to punish these dodgy politicians at the ballot box. We need to ensure that those scientists guilty of malfeasance are, at the very least thrown out of the jobs which we taxpayers have been funding these last decades. We need to ensure that corporatist profiteers are no longer able to benefit from the distortion and corruption of the markets which result from green regulation.

See entire great article: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100055500/global-cooling-and-the-new-world-order/

* Also see my article:
http://www.iceagenow.com/Bilderberg_Group_concerned_about_global_cooling.htm

posted July 29, 2011 02:10 PM            

NOAA systemically excised data
with ‘poor and biased interpolations’

19 Aug 10 - With growing evidence of systemic global warming data flaws by government climatologists, respected American physicist Dr Charles R. Anderson marvels at NOAA's “scientific incompetence or completely unethical behavior."

“Both higher altitudes and higher latitudes have been systematically removed from the measured temperature record with very poor and biased interpolated results taking their place,” says Anderson

Anderson, a successful Materials Physicist with his own laboratory, was quick to spot sinister flaws in official temperatures across northern Lake Michigan as revealed in earlier articles by whistle-blower John O’Sullivan.

Lake temperatures supposedly ranged up to 604 degrees Fahrenheit

“I had proven that the website operated by the Michigan State University had published ridiculously high surface water temperatures widely distributed over the lake many indicating super-boiling conditions,” says O’Sullivan. “The fear is that these anomalies have been fed across the entire satellite dataset. We have since learned there are now five key satellites that have become either degraded or seriously comprised.”

In his post Satellite Temperature Record Now Unreliable Anderson reveals that “there may now be thousands of temperatures in the range of 415-604 degrees Fahrenheit automatically fed into computer climate models and contaminating climate models with a substantial warming bias. This may have gone on for a far longer period than the five years originally identified.”

“One has to marvel at either the scientific incompetence this reveals or the completely unethical behavior of NOAA and its paid researchers that is laid open before us,” says Anderson.

NOAA proven to have engaged in long-term cover up
“My investigations are increasingly proving that such data was flagged by non-NOAA agencies years ago,” says O’Sullivan, “but NOAA declined to publish notice of the faults until the problem was publicized loudly and widely in my first ‘satellitegate’ article, US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal NOAA Disgraced.”

NOAA finally conceded that O’Sullivan’s story was accurate in the face of the evidence.

Censorship between 2005-10
“Even more sinister is the fact that the official online summary now only shows events recorded up to 2005,” says O’Sullivan. “All subsequent notations, that was (sic) on NOAA’s web pages last week and showed entries inclusive to summer 2010, have now been removed. However, climatechangefraud.com is displaying a sample of the missing evidence copied before NOAA took down the revealing web pages after it entered into ‘damage limitation mode.’

Serious flaws affect up to five U.S. satellites

“We are also learning that major systemic failures in the rest of the satellite global data-collecting network were also not reported,” O’Sullivan continues. “Such serious flaws affect up to five U.S satellites.”

NOAA-17 appears in even worse condition. On February 12 and 19 2010 NOAA-17 concedes it has ” AVHRR Scan Motor Degradation” with “Product(s) or Data Impacted.”

Beleaguered NOAA customers have been told, “direct readout users are going to have to deal with the missing data gaps as best they can.”

No reliable worldwide temperature records

On his blog, Dr. Anderson sums up saying; “It is now perfectly clear that there are no reliable worldwide temperature records and that we have little more than anecdotal information on the temperature history of the Earth.”

See entire article by John O’Sullivan: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/26758

John O’Sullivan is a legal analyst, author and journalist. As an accredited academic, John taught and lectured for over twenty years at schools and colleges in the east of England before moving to the United States. As an analytical commentator, O’Sullivan has published over 100 major articles worldwide.

posted July 29, 2011 02:12 PM            

Sea surface temperatures, extremely low
solar activity and increased volcanic activity would lead to
widespread food shortages and famine

By Kirk Myers

19 May 10 - (Excerpts) - “Global warming” may become one of those quaint cocktail party conversations of the past if three key climate drivers – cooling North Pacific sea surface temperatures, extremely low solar activity and increased volcanic eruptions – converge to form a “perfect storm” of plummeting temperatures that send our planet into a long-term cool-down lasting 20 or 30 years or longer.

“There are some wild cards that are different from what we saw when we came out of the last warm PDO [Pacific Decadal Oscillation] and entered its cool phase [1947 to 1976]. Now we have a very weak solar cycle and the possibility of increased volcanic activity. Together, they would create what I call the ‘Triple Crown of Cooling,’” says Accuweather meteorologist Joe Bastardi.

If all three climate-change ingredients come together, it would be a recipe for dangerously cold temperatures that would shorten the agricultural growing season in northern latitudes, crippling grain production in the wheat belts of the United States and Canada and triggering widespread food shortages and famine.

Cool Pacific Decadal Oscillation

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation refers to cyclical variations in sea surface temperatures that occur in the North Pacific Ocean. (The PDO is often described as a long-lived El Niño-like pattern.) PDO events usually persist for 20 to 30 years, alternating between warm and cool phases.

From 1977 to 1998, during the height of “global warming,” North America was in the midst of a warm PDO.

But the PDO has once again resumed its negative cool phase, and, as such, represents the first climate driver in the Triple Crown of Cooling. With the switch to a cool PDO, we’ve seen a change in the El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO), which alternates between El Nino (warm phase) and La Nina (cool phase) every few years. The recent strong El Nino that began in July 2009 is now transitioning to a La Nina, a sign of cooler temperatures ahead.

“We’re definitely headed towards La Nina conditions before summer is over, and we’re looking at a moderate to strong La Nina by fall and winter, which ...should bring us cooler temperatures over the next few years,” predicts Joe D’Aleo, founder of the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project (ICECAP) and the first director of meteorology at the Weather Channel.

He is not alone in his forecast. Bastardi also sees a La Nina just around the corner.

“I’ve been saying since February that we’ll transition to La Nina by the middle of the hurricane season. I think we’re already seeing the atmosphere going into a La Nina state in advance of water temperatures. This will have interesting implications down the road. La Nina will dramatically cool off everything later this year and into next year, and it is a signal for strong hurricane activity,” Bastardi predicts.

The difference in sea surface temperature between positive and negative PDO phases is not more than 1 to 2 degrees Celsius, but the affected area is huge. So the temperature changes can have a big impact on the climate in North America.

Declining solar activity

Another real concern – and the second climate driver in the Triple Crown of Cooling – is the continued stretch of weak solar activity... We recently exited the longest solar minimum –12.7 years compared to the 11-year average – in 100 years. It was a historically inactive period in terms of sunspot numbers. During the minimum, which began in 2004, we have experienced 800 spotless days. A normal cycle averages 485 spotless days.

In 2008, we experienced 265 days without a sunspot, the fourth-highest number of spotless days since continuous daily observations began in 1849. In 2009, the trend continued, with 261 spotless days, ranking it among the top five blank-sun years. Only 1878, 1901 and 1913 (the record-holder with 311 days) recorded more spotless days.

In 2010, the sun continues to remain in a funk. There were 27 spotless days (according to Layman’s sunspot count) in April and, as of May 19, 12 days without a spot. Both months exhibited periods of inexplicably low solar activity during a time when the sun should be flexing its “solar muscle” and ramping up towards the next solar maximum.

Strong correlation between sunspot activity and global temperature

Why are sunspot numbers important? Very simple: there is a strong correlation between sunspot activity and global temperature. During the Dalton Minimum (1790 - 1830) and Maunder Minimum (1645 -1715), two periods with very low sunspot activity, temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere plummeted.

During the Dalton Minimum, the abnormally cold weather destroyed crops in northern Europe, the northeastern United States and eastern Canada. Historian John D. Post called it “the last great subsistence crisis in the Western world.” The record cold intensified after the eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815, the largest volcanic eruption in more than 1,600 years (see details below).

During the 70-year Maunder Minimum, astronomers at the time counted only a few dozen sunspots per year, thousands fewer than usual. As sunspots vanished, temperatures fell. The River Thames in London froze, sea ice was reported along the coasts of southeast England, and ice floes blocked many harbors. Agricultural production nose-dived as growing seasons became shorter, leading to lower crop yields, food shortages and famine.

If the low levels of solar activity during the past three years continue through the current solar cycle ... we could be facing a severe temperature decline within the next five to eight years.

“The sun is behaving very quietly – like it did in the late 1700s during the transition from Solar Cycle 4 to Solar Cycle 5 – which was the start of the Dalton Minimum,” D’Aleo says. If the official sunspot number reaches only 40 or 50 – a low number indicating very weak solar energy levels – during the next solar maximum, we could be facing much lower global temperatures down the road.”

Even NASA solar physicist David Hathaway has said this is “the quietest sun we've seen in almost a century.”

Volcanic eruptions

Unfortunately, there is a very real chance Eyjafjallajokull’s much larger neighbor, the Katla volcano, could blow its top, creating the third-climate driver in the Triple Crown of Cooling. If Katla does erupt, it would send global temperatures into a nosedive, with a big assist from the cool PDO and a slumbering sun.

The Katla caldera measures 42 square miles and has a magma chamber with a volume of around 2.4 cubic miles, enough to produce a Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI) level-six eruption – an event ten times larger than Mount St. Helens.

Katla erupts about every 70 years or so, most recently in 1918, often in tandem with neighboring Eyjafjallajokull, which is not a good sign.

According to Bastardi, “The Katla volcano in Iceland is a game changer. If it erupts and sends plumes of ash and SO2 into the stratosphere, any cooling caused by the oceanic cycles would be strengthened and amplified.”

Iceland’s President Olafur Grimsson says the eruption of Eyjafjallajoekull volcano is only a "small rehearsal.”

“The time for Katla to erupt is coming close . . . I don't say if, but I say when Katla will erupt,” Grimsson predicts. And when Katla finally erupts it will “create for a long period, extraordinary damage to modern advanced society.”

Not a very encouraging outlook. Yet major eruptions throughout history bear witness to the deadly impact of volcanoes.

The Tambora eruption in 1815, the largest in 1,600 years, sent the earth’s climate into a deep freeze, triggering “the year without a summer.” Columnist Art Horn, writing in the Energy Tribune, describes the impact:

“During early June of 1815, a foot of snow fell on Quebec City. In July and August, lake and river ice were observed as far south as Pennsylvania. Frost killed crops across New England with resulting famine. During the brutal winter of 1816/17, the temperature fell to -32 in New York City.”

When (Katla) unleashed its fury in the 1700s, the volcano sent temperatures into a tailspin in North America.

"The Mississippi River froze just north of New Orleans and the East Coast, especially New England, had an extremely cold winter.

Global cooling: a life-threatening event

Says D’Aleo: “Cold is far more threatening than the little extra warmth we experienced from 1977 to 1998 ... A cooling down to Dalton Minimum temperatures or worse would lead to shortened growing seasons and large-scale crop failures. Food shortages would make worse the fact that more people die from cold than heat.”

Actions to limit CO2 emissions should be shelved and preparations made for an extended period of global cooling that would pose far more danger to humankind than any real or imagined warming predicted by today’s climate models.

posted July 29, 2011 02:13 PM            

and the Media Ignores Them...Again

By Alan Caruba

18 May 10 - (Excerpts) - The Fourth International Conference on Climate Change concluded Tuesday in Chicago. Sponsored by The Heartland Institute, a non-profit, free market think tank, it brought together eminent (and legitimate!) scientists and other distinguished folk for panels and speeches addressing the arcane mysteries of climate.

Among the dignitaries addressing the thousand or more people who attended was former astronaut, Harrison Schmitt, PhD, a one-term Senator who discussed why the U.S. Constitution makes no provision whatever for the Department of Energy
or the Environmental Protection Agency.

A Google search for any mainstream media coverage of the event turned up little evidence of it, nor is it likely that were I to list the names of the speakers, you would have ever heard of them. These foremost “deniers” have received short shrift in a media that has been determined to convince Americans that the Earth is burning up due to an infinitesimal amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

The conference was of great significance this year because the Kerry-Lieberman Cap-and-Tax bill has been introduced in the Senate for the purpose of putting limits on carbon dioxide emissions, i.e., the use of all energy; a bill without a scintilla of scientific justification, nor merit. It will, however, create the buying and selling of utterly bogus “carbon credits” to enrich utilities and those involved in the exchanges based on the global warming fraud.

It will also kill the U.S. economy.

The problem is that global warming or climate change is being used to manipulate the world’s population into accepting global governance that involves the loss of their nation’s sovereignty in favor of international organizations like the United Nations. A draft international treaty making the rounds would be the end of democracy.

It is a full scale attack of the very basis for modern life, the use of coal, oil, and natural gas. Those of us living in advanced societies tend to forget that vast portions of the globe have no electricity whatever. How would you like to cook your dinner over dried animal dung?

Global warming? Here’s an excerpt from the latest edition of IceAgeNow.com:

UK - Coldest winter in a lifetime - Freezing in May - 12 May 10
Record Cold in Paris - 11 May 10
Snow in "sunny" Spain - Coldest May since records began - 6 May 10
Snow In Southern France - 5 May 10
Again? Yet another Alberta snowstorm! - 5 May 10

The biggest news emerging from the conference is that, in addition to the fact that the Earth is ten years into another perfectly natural cooling cycle, it is also verging on another ice age. We are all literally at the end of an interglacial period of approximately 11,500 years.

Bundle up!

© Alan Caruba, 2010

posted July 29, 2011 02:15 PM            

CO2 not the main cause of global warming

22 Apr 10 - Carbon dioxide is not the main cause of global warming, says Swedish climate expert Dr. Fred Goldberg. Climate change is not affected by humans, but mainly by solar activities and ocean currents such as PDO (Pacific Decadal oscillations) He even predicts that the earth is going to experience colder winters in the following years or even decades.

Goldberg holds that climate change is natural and caused by the sun activity. In an exclusive interview with People's Daily Online, Goldberg explained his ideas.

We could have an ice age any time

(Excerpts) - "We could have an ice age any time," Dr. Goldberg says, "Over the past one million years, we have experienced eight ice ages. Eighty percent of the last million years was ice age. We are lucky to live in this short inter-glacial period."

"If we go down to the last 4000 to 3500 years in the Bronze Age period, it was three degrees warmer than today on the northern hemisphere at least," Goldberg explained.

"Two thousand years ago, during the Roman period or during China's East Han Dynasty, the temperature was two degrees higher than now," he said. During the Viking era a thousand years ago it was one degree Celsius warmer.

During the Viking era or the medieval Warm Period it was warm enough to grow grapes and cereal in England, he said.

"We had a new peak in high temperature in 2002 after a solar activity maximum, now the temperature is going down again. So we are heading into a cooling period."

"If you look at the last 150 years, we had a warming period from 1910 to 1940 and then a cooling period from 1941 to 1977. Then it was a warming period from 1977 to 2002," Goldberg said. This shows a 60 year cycle correlating to the ocean current PDO in the Pacific Ocean.

During the depression period 1929-1933, the production of CO2 went down by 30 percent. But due to the increase of the global temperature, the CO2 increased in the atmosphere because of the heating of the oceans thereby emitting CO2.

In 1991, there was an eruption of the Pinatubo volcano, one saw the reduction of CO2 because the volcano ash blocked the sun causing a cooling of the oceans. Goldberg said this is an indication that it was the solar activity that decides the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

How much CO2 is there in the air?

How much CO2 is there in the air? Only 0.0387 %, it has neither odor, nor color and is not poisonous. If there isn't CO2, there will not be plant life, therefore, we must have CO2, we need it, Goldberg argued.

Over the past 100 years, with an increase of 100 ppm CO2, the earth temperature only increased 0.7 degree. Thus it is not possible for the temperature to increase 2 degrees globally which our politicians want to prevent, Goldberg said.

Why? Goldberg explained that the ocean will absorb large amount of CO2. Once it is absorbed by the ocean, it will to some extent become calcium carbonate which is the same thing as limestone. Then the limestone will be building up at the bottom of the oceans. The whole island of Gotland which is the largest island in Sweden is formed of limestone.

"Many climate scientists are bluffing in order to please the politicians who want to put a tax on CO2. These scientists live in symbiosis with the politicians. They both depend on each other," Goldberg criticized this.

Solar activity decides whether the temperature is up or down

Goldberg said that solar activity has increased 3 times according to records from NASA earth observatory. This is something we can't do anything about.

"The activity of the sun shows the highest activity ever recorded in 2002.

Sun activity heats the sea surface, and the sea releases CO2. Over the past 100 years, 100 ppm CO2 were emitted due to the warming of the sea surface.

Along the equator, the sun is heating the water. When the water is warmer, the water is releasing carbon dioxide (CO2). The colder the water is, the more CO2 it absorbs. And therefore the colder waters around the Arctic and Antarctica will absorb a lot of CO2. There is a huge cycle of CO2. If you take out the CO2 for plants, then the ocean will evaporate more to air. If you emit more, the ocean will take it up. Ocean controls the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. The sun controls the ocean temperatures which in turn has a strong effect on the climate on earth.

"The people of Bangladesh breaths out 75 million tons CO2 per year, Sweden generates 60 million tons per year from all its industrial activities, transports and warming of houses etc. while the people in China breathes out 700-800 million tons per year. What does it mean? It means to reduce the amount of the CO2 will have no effect on our climate at all. You cannot do anything, I mean you cannot stop the sun from coming up tomorrow morning. If we cannot stop the sun from going up in the morning, can we change the CO2 system in the atmosphere? It is self regulated and sun-controlled," Goldberg said.

Why does the arctic ice melt?

Goldberg explained that the reason we have the Gulf Stream is that the rotation of the earth creates a force to push the water north. To stop the Gulf stream, one has to stop the rotation of the earth.

It is the same theory with the ancient trade current or trade wind, when you travel from Europe to China, you have to wait for the winds to go in that direction and when you arrived in China, you have to wait another six months until the wind change direction so that you could sail back again.

Goldberg said in 1977, there was a great climate shift in the Pacific Ocean, the temperature in Alaska increased by 3 degree C in one year. In 2008, it decreased 3 degrees back to normal which means the warm water is not going to the Arctic Ocean any more.

"So when you hear the ice in Arctic Ocean is disappearing, it was because of this warm current flowing to the Arctic. Now it has stopped. So the ice is building up again. Very few seems to have understood this. They think it is the global warming that has melted the ice, but in fact, it is the warm current that melted the ice," Goldberg said.

Goldberg said whether the current is warm or cold depends on if the PDO is positive or negative. If it is positive, there is warm current entering the Arctic Ocean and if it is negative, the warm water stays in the western Pacific Ocean.

Goldberg already predicted in the summer of 2009 that the 2010 winter will be a very cold one because the solar activity was zero according to data in NASA in the US and Kiruna in Northern Sweden.

Almost three years without sun spot

"If we look at the history, we see almost three years without sun spot. Thus, I think it will be cold. Last time with a similar situation was between 1810 and 1812. That also coincided with the time when Napoleon invaded Moscow," said Goldberg.

"I think China should prepare for future cold weather because as a consequence the food production will go down." Goldberg concluded.

Goldberg focuses on climate issues for over a dozen years with well grounded science knowledge. He used to teach in Sweden's Royal Technology University.

posted July 29, 2011 02:16 PM            

challenges peers to 'take back climate science'

If the sun persists in its sleepy state, Earth could be headed
for another Grand Minimum

11 May 10 - In the following interview (excerpted), Dr. Willie Soon, a solar and climate scientist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, questions the prevailing dogma of man-made global warming and challenges his peers to “take back climate science.”

Examiner.com: What drives climate change on Earth?

Dr. Soon: Most of the weather and climate variations we observed are essentially related to the sun and the changing seasons – not by CO2 radiative forcing and feedback. The climate system is constantly readjusting naturally in a large way – more than we would ever see from CO2. Within the framework of a proper study of the sun-climate connection, you don’t need CO2 to explain anything.

Examiner.com: What is your opinion of the anthropogenic (man-caused) global warming theory?

Dr. Soon: It’s never been about the science – even from the very beginning. It’s based on confusion and a mixture of ideology.

Examiner.com: Many of the scientists promoting the global warming theory appear to be driven by politics rather than hard scientific data. What are your thoughts?

Dr. Soon: I am a scientist. I go where the facts take me. And the facts are fairly clear. It doesn’t take very long to discover that their views [of man-caused global warming] aren’t grounded in the facts. Why would any solid science need so much promotion and advertisement and the endless shouting about how the science has all been “settled”?

Examiner.com: Many scientists like you (often referred to as “skeptics”) are ridiculed and isolated for challenging the dogma of man-made global warming. Many of your peers have been very successful in their efforts to marginalize anyone who deviates from the approved script? What is happening?

Dr. Soon: The pro-AGW supporters have become more and more confrontational in their attacks on scientists who challenge their views. For instance, Stephen Schneider [a professor of environmental studies at Stanford University], says that skeptics sell garbage and that we are playing games with science. He compares it to selling drugs and believes that we are criminals who should go to jail. Guess what? You don’t pull that sort of thing on people who know something about science.

Examiner.com: What needs to be done to combat the strong-arm tactics being used against scientists who disagree with the AGW theory?

Dr. Soon: Science needs to stand up. The AGW movement is killing science. It’s very unhealthy in many ways. They are corrupting science for material gain. It’s time for us to take back climate science.

Examiner.com: Many AGW scientists state with confidence that there is a very high probability that the earth is warming. Therefore, something must be done now to cut CO2 emissions. How accurate are their statistics?

Dr. Soon: Their probabilities are absolute crap. They are pulling these statistics out of thin air. It is completely anti-science.

Examiner.com: The temperature data over the past eight years or so seem to indicate that we have entered a period of global cooling. Are we experiencing a cooling trend?

Dr. Soon: If you look at the data empirically, there is a cooling tendency. We’re already seeing signs. The possibility of a colder climate ahead is a very real thing.

Examiner.com: What is your opinion of Al Gore?

Dr. Soon: He’s somebody who needs to just shut-up and stop spreading nonsense. He has neither credibility on science nor moral standing.

Examiner.com: You have developed a theory showing a close correlation between solar radiation and temperatures in the arctic and surrounding regions – and, perhaps, even globally. Would you like to explain it?

Dr. Soon: In 2005, I discovered a surprisingly strong correlation between solar radiation and temperatures in the Arctic over the past 130 years. Since then, I have demonstrated similar correlations in all the regions surrounding the Arctic, including the U.S. mainland and China.

The close relationships between the abrupt ups and downs of solar activity and of temperature that I have identified occur locally in coastal Greenland; regionally in the Arctic Pacific and north Atlantic; and, hemispherically, for the whole circum-Arctic, suggesting that changes in solar activity drive Arctic and perhaps even global climate.

There is no such match between the steady rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration and the often dramatic ups and downs of surface temperatures in and around the Arctic.

I recently discovered direct evidence that changes in solar activity have influenced what has been called the “conveyor-belt” circulation of the great Atlantic Ocean currents over the past 240 years. For instance, solar-driven changes in temperature, and in the volume of freshwater output from the Arctic, can cause variations in sea surface temperature in the tropical Atlantic five to 20 years later.

The hallmark of good science is the testing of a plausible hypothesis that is then either supported or rejected by the evidence. The evidence in my paper is consistent with the hypothesis that the sun causes climatic change in the Arctic.

It invalidates the hypothesis that CO2 is a major cause of observed climate change – and raises serious questions about the wisdom of imposing cap-and-trade or other policies that would cripple energy production and economic activity, all in the name of “preventing catastrophic climate change.”

Thanks, Dr. Soon, for taking the time to speak to Examiner.com.

Dr. Soon's remarks are his personal opinion based upon 19 years of scientific research.

posted July 29, 2011 02:19 PM            

31,486 U.S. Scientists Disagree

30 Apr 10 - (Excerpts) - Many of the best and brightest minds in the United States and around the world are in total agreement: The so-called global warming “scientific consensus” is a complete fabrication and does not exist.

In the largest effort to date to document global warming dissent in the scientific community, 31,486 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,029 PhD, 7,157 MS, 2,586 MD and DVM, and 12,714 BS or equivalent - have signed on with the Global Warming Petition Project to state “the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity.”

Since 2009 more than 238 physicists including Nobel Prize winner Ivar Giaever and professors from Harvard, MIT, Princeton, UCLA and dozens of other top universities and research institutions have signed an open letter saying the scientific data did not support the conclusion that increased CO2 concentrations are responsible for global warming.

In 2009 over 700 international scientists, including many current and former UN IPCC members, joined with Senator Inhofe in a Senate Minority Report to express their doubts over man-made global warming claims.

In the report U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg was quoted as saying “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.”