The past two snowy winters for the nation may become more common.
Has this late winter storm left you scratching your head about global warming? This winter itself has proven to be cold and snowy for most of the US, including many southern locations (Las Vegas, New Orleans, Houston, and Hawaii). The snow finally arrived in the Mid Atlantic, albeit late in the season. The irony of five inches of snow still did not stop the Global Warming protest in DC on Monday, but the onslaught of new research may hinder others.
Michael Reilly posted an article in Discovery News that is getting a lot of internet traffic, as well it should. It brings up the possibility that warming of the planet will not resume.
First, Reilly cites a new study in Geophysical Research Letters which suggests that global warming might stop... for up to 30 years. Wait...in the 1970s, there was fear of an impending ice age. Newsweek published The Cooling World in 1975. Since then, the planet has warmed for, uh, about 30 years!
Just last week I reported that 2008 was the coolest year for the planet since 2000. You can see the related slide show below. One climate expert tried to argue against it, which put the spotlight on inconsistent data. There is a debate now just on the accuracy of data. Arctic sea ice measurements were just discovered to be flawed and were missing ice the size of California due to a faulty sensor. Even Denver Weather Examiner, Tony Hake, discussed how moving the weather station to the new airport has disrupted their records. Can we even trust the data we are getting now?
Reilly asked Kyle Swanson of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee about some recent warming:
"How does this square with temperature records from 2005-2007, by some measurements among the warmest years on record?" When added up with the other four years since 2001, Swanson said the overall trend is flat, even though temperatures should have gone up by 0.2 degrees Centigrade (0.36 degrees Fahrenheit) during that time.
As a scientist, I have been hesitant about the runaway warming train for one main reason: Feedback Mechanisms. Regardless of my belief in the natural cycles and variability, Earth has a way of balancing out extremes. For example, melting arctic ice would in turn cool the ocean and add fresh water that forces warmer salt water to sink, suppressing a heat source. Another feedback that is not fully understood is the result of warming on clouds. Will the atmosphere fill with more clouds since warmer temperatures will lead to more evaporation? In that case, more rain would be a cooling feedback. This was seen by Dr. Roy Spenser (former NASA climatologist), who was a pioneer in climate modeling. His initial data did not include precipitation, and the IPCC ran with those numbers. When he included precipitation and corrected his numbers, a lot of the expected warming disappeared.
Reilly's article suggests that this could be part of the natural system:
"It is possible that a fraction of the most recent rapid warming since the 1970s was due to a free variation in climate," Isaac Held of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Princeton, New Jersey wrote in an email to Discovery News. "Suggesting that the warming might possibly slow down or even stagnate for a few years before rapid warming commences again."
Okay, so we have to wait for perhaps another 30 years to see more warming? Doesn't this contradict the letter from James Hansen (and Al Gore) to President Obama stating that we only have 4 years left before the point of no return? Or will the number of years actually increase with the next report? That does seem to be the trend. Back on April 30th, the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works stated:
The UK Telegraph reports on April 30: “Global warming will stop until at least 2015 because of natural variations in the climate, scientists have said. Researchers studying long-term changes in sea temperatures said they now expect a "lull" for up to a decade while natural variations in climate cancel out the increases caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.
More scientists and more research continue to support that the Global Warming Theory has some flaws. The widespread media reports may have been overdone. However, the barrage of attacks against those of us that care to share some of this 'other' information is getting worse. Roger Pielke, Jr. wrote on his blog Prometheus:
One climate scientist suggests that my calling out Al Gore for misrepresenting the science of disasters and climate change (as well as Andy Revkin’s comparison of that to George Will’s misrepresentations) to be morally comparable to killing 1,000 people.
It sounds a lot like Dr. Heidi Cullen (The Weather Channel's former Climate Code) telling Larry King in 2007 that degreed meteorologists who don't promote Global Warming awareness should lose their certification. It also sounds like the Catholic Church imprisoning Galileo for promoting heliocentrism. At that time, the accepted public view was that Earth was the center of the universe. Speaking out against it, even with scientific proof, was subject to imprisonment or even death. Scary....
.png)
Comments
I question the greenhouse effect for two reasons. 1- Climate models state that reflected heat from the surface heats the troposphere which re-radiates this heat back to the surface. Where is this heat? neither radiosonde nor satellites can find it, the troposphere temperature falls as you climb and always has. 2- Thermodynamics law zero, for want of a better term, states that heat can ONLY flow from warm to cold. Since the troposphere is colder than the surface how can heat be re-radiated to the surface it can only flow to space since that is colder than the troposphere. I have asked the UK Met Office for an explanation and after 2 months they have failed to do so apart from some reference to an IPCC report which says that the greenhouse effect is a fact. Complete PC rubbish and only goes to prove the old saying 'if you shout a lie for long enough and loud enough it will become truth'
John: Nights with cloud cover represent an extreme case of greenhouse. It does hold heat in near the surface. I have seen many a morning with clouds rolling overhead resulting in a bump on the thermometer before sunrise. The troposphere does demonstrate warming with height, based on the presence of Ozone. That molecule absorbs UV radiation from the sun and results in heat. I will say however that there is some heat transfer between layers of the atmosphere...but will save the lengthy details for a later post.
Ozonator- I am glad you posted the scientific method, but you left out one thing. Retest the theory. Global Warming is not 'Law'. It continues to be tested and reevaluated.
Your attacks were plain as day (and wrong)below. Republican/Christian, as well as falsely claiming I missed the storm. As for the original story... it was from Discover News and re-posted on major media sites such as MSNBC News and many more.
I am not going to get into a sparring match here. This spot is for reader comments. I ask that you think before you attack, then stand by your remarks. Better yet, try staying more constructive. As for your email, this computer just popped it in as I wrote. If you want me to remove it just let me know. I will have to erase your comments in the process but I will try to re-post them.
I always use my thermometer to track temp variations over periods of time. I'll look at it, and it will say whatever degrees and I'm like "cool".
Good job Justin. Is there any data suggesting we're still warming from the little ice age?
James, Roy Spencer showed data from (including temps from the UK Met Office) showing an increase from 1700 until present. Tarand has shown temp. increase from Tallinn since 1800, and NASA's GISS data shows a wobbling increase from 1880 until 2000. Of course, the temp. wobble has been to the downside recently.
Justin, don't listen to Ozonator. Some people remain ignorant, even when evidence stares them right in the face. There is no use trying to convince someone that they are wrong, when they don't want to listen. Unfortunate as this may be, I commend you for defending your position. There are a lot of people that respect you, and appreciate you for posting the truth.
Thanks for everything:)
interesting discussion, however, reductionist science dosen't quite explain an integrated system. you can argue weather all you want but climate does seem to be changing. with a few exceptions, glaciers seem to be retreating everywhere, and there is less ice by volume at both poles. i'm NOT a scientist but when ice melts it is usually because it's warmer. 2008 is the warmest year in a decade, but still warmer than the mean, could this be a reflection of the currant solar minimum. history will prove who is accurate and who is not, but it seems to me climate IS changing, as it always has, but when you read about exceptional heat waves like the one in Australia last month, and the ongoing deep droughts in Australia, China, California, Texas, the southeast, here in Florida and elsewhere i can't help but wonder if it is changing so fast we will not be able to adapt. so here is my fervent hope and prayer that you are right and the climate change due to human caused global warming is just so musg politics
Ron-
I think you meant to say that 2008 was the 'coolest'. While you bring up a good point, arctic sea ice has been recovering as I reported on a few times here. Just search under the topics section.
You also bring up another good point: Climate Change is the proper term, not global warming. That has become the vogue catch phrase. However, climate is always changing. There are deep droughts around the world, but there have always been. The most profound was the 'Dust Bowl' in the nation's heartland in the 1930s. We have only been sampling and recording weather data for a small part of recorded history. We don't know everything. Isn't it possible that technology allows us to see a lot more from every corner of the world than every before. That allows us to see natural events that were missed in the past. Lumping them all together in news stories makes it seem more intense. Climate does not remain static, and we are in a period of flux.
Just like the recent cooling, it might be due to solar output or it might be for some other unknown reason. But we do know the planet has been cooling and that was not part of any 'global warming' theory. I contend we use cautious terms for public use, rather than scare people into thinking the sky is falling. When it doesn't, they won't believe anyone. This topic has been blow out of proportion. Just reporting anything about cooling or natural forces and attacks fly. This has also become too political and expensive. I have always agreed in 'cleaning' up our energy and waste, but not at the expense of false fears.
Thanks for your comments.
A little controversy brewed this morning on these comments, and by request, I have taken the reader's email out. I did feel that the attacking comments were important to keep in place. That is posted again here. The first comment leads the time line in order below:
Posted/Updated: 03/03/2009 09:34 PM
By: Ozonator - Poor Justin Berk, Baltimore Weather Examiner;
Sadly, you have again made bogus claims on people whose most striking talents are manufactured by extremist Republicans and Christians. And, you give godlike powers to those extremist Republicans and Christians who, including yourself, seemed to miss predicting the most recent monster storm from the UP to Florida. I had no need to make claims without predictions as somehow global warming accounting for greater than 5% of random chance. Claims without predictions comes under the heading of “entertainment” and not “science” - “Tony Hake ... Dr. Roy Spenser ... Roger Pilke, Jr”. Interestingly, your claims of being a scientist are cast further in doubt since you misspelled 2 of your movement’s heroes - ”Roy Spenser” and “Roger Pilke”. For example and from google, “Did you mean to search for: Roger Pielke”. Misspelling is a hallmark of extremist Republicans and Christians whose “scientific” talent is to copy, plagiarize, and steal intellectual property without thinking to much. Catholic and other readers should note that “Catholic Church imprisoning Galileo for promoting heliocentrism. ... Gosh, I hope it doesn't go that far again...” is also a hallmark among extremist Republicans and Christians lacking real world understanding and paid for laziness while claiming all knowledge. As American extremists dwell in the Dark Ages, for example, “ Pope Benedict XVI on Monday formally rescinded the promotion of an ultraconservative priest who came under fire for suggesting that God punished New Orleans with Hurricane Katrina” (“Pope rescinds promotion of 'Katrina' pastor”; By ALESSANDRA RIZZO, The Associated Press; nola.com, 3/2/09)
Posted/Updated: 03/04/2009 03:22 AM
By: Justin- Weather Examiner -
Oz- First, Dr. Spencer's name was spelled correctly, I fixed the other...but that proves that there is no copying here. As far as a movement, what about the scientific backing of this information? Spencer was a NASA Climatologist who developed the method of measuring temperature from satellites. His method was the backbone of the IPCC report, but he found his own mistakes. Hardly made up science. As far as you religious claims... ummm I am not Christian, but do have many Christian friends. I never attack them for their religion. Besides, what makes you think that Christians are bad spellers? Didn't you find your claim and attack ironic when I also mentioned the policy of the Catholic Church in the past? As far as stealing property, hardly. I sourced everything and was not the first to mention the story. I inject my own thoughts, but I know you can find many of these stories in many different locations on the internet. Finally Tony Hake from Denver made a good point. The weather data is skewed because the weather station was moved. We have the same problem in Baltimore. For most of the 20th Century, the Custom House housed the weather station on it's 5th story black tar roof. BWI has only been used since 1950. The records from both were merged. That doesn't seem very consistent with the scientific method. That eliminates the constant, and you seemed to ignore that. Thanks for my next project, reporting all of the weather stations that have been moved, making record keeping inaccurate. Try googling Chicago and see what happened to their late 90s temperatures when they moved the weather station next to the building's vent system. Next time you want to make an attack, try using science, or I will block you out.
Posted/Updated: 03/04/2009 04:28 AM
By Justin- Baltimore Weather Examiner -
Ozonator- One more thing...Have you been reading my blog for the past few days? I would say that the storm forecast was pretty darn good. If anything, just a slight adjustment up on snowfall the day before it hit. But my original forecast from 3 days prior had up to 5 inches in Baltimore. If you want to attack Global Warming- use science. If you want to attack my forecast- make sure you know when I miss it. I never claim G-D like powers, just doing my job as a forecaster. Once again you prove irony...attack me for forecasting a few days away, but place high confidence in climate projections for decades away even while their predictions are already proven wrong.
Posted/Updated: 03/04/2009 04:42 AM
By Ozonator:
Amazing. Does this look like an attack? “Steps of the Scientific Method ... • The steps of the scientific method are to: • Ask a Question • Do Background Research • Construct a Hypothesis • Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment • Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion • Communicate Your Results” sciencebuddies.org/mentoring/project_scientific_method.shtml Shouldn't posting an email address mean something non-scientific to your handlers?
By Justin Berk: Ozonator- I am glad you posted the scientific method, but you left out one thing. Retest the theory. Global Warming is not 'Law'. It continues to be tested and reevaluated. Your attacks were plain as day (and wrong)below. Republican/Christian, as well as falsely claiming I missed the storm. As for the original story... it was from Discover News and re-posted on major media sites such as MSNBC News and many more. I am not going to get into a sparring match here. This spot is for reader comments. I ask that you think before you attack, then stand by your remarks. Better yet, try staying more constructive. As for your email, this computer just popped it in as I wrote. If you want me to remove it just let me know. I will have to erase your comments in the process but I will try to re-post them.
As you can see, I did repost the entire conversation and tool out the emails. Let's try to be adults here. I encourage debate, but make it constructive.
Well that was fun! I'm glad I read that. I think you won that round hands down! touche!
I WANT TO KNOW THAT THE TECHNOLOGY DOSEN'T LEADS GLOBAL WARMING
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!