Is the globe warming or cooling? Many meteorologists are
dissenting from the global warming 'consensus.'
While the United States debates whether or not to push climate change legislation this year, the debate on the climate and man’s effect on it continues in the public forum. In recent days two high profile meteorologists have come forth and added their voices to the growing movement of those who reject the ‘consensus’ of the manmade climate change theory.
Many who advocate the manmade climate change theory like Al Gore and James Hansen have said that the ‘science is settled’ and there is no debate to be made on the issue. Despite this, more and more evidence is being released calling into question the very basis of the arguments climate change alarmists make.
The Capital Weather Gang section of the Washington Post is a must read for many weather enthusiasts. Today, meteorologist and Capital Weather Gang writer Matt Rogers outlined his case for questioning the ‘consensus’ of manmade global warming in a ‘top 10’ list.
Among the reasons Rogers gives for his dissent, he points out that despite alarmists’ dire predictions, hurricanes are not increasing in intensity or frequency. The same tired line about the dangers of extreme weather being caused by global warming has even been repeated by President Obama and yet there is no proof to back it up.
Rogers continues with other reasoned arguments including the argument that the climate models that the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) uses are failing, solar activity is likely to be a contributor to any warming or cooling, and that despite increases in CO2 temperatures have actually decreased in the last 10 years. His arguments address the major talking points of those in the climate change movement and provide reasonable discussion points for those wishing to evaluate the issues at hand.
Joe Bastardi, AccuWeather.com Expert Senior
Forecaster calls for people to do their own
research on manmade climate change.
AccuWeather.com is one of the most popular weather websites on the Internet and a major provider of weather related news and information to media of all types. Joe Bastardi is an Expert Senior Forecaster at AccuWeather and is considered one of the premier meteorologists in the country. Bastardi recently said that those that advocate the manmade climate change theory have a “house of cards that goes up in smoke.”
Appearing on The O’Reilly Factor, Bastardi made his case that the temperature records simply do not fit the scenarios being presented by the IPCC and others. He demonstrated that the IPCC’s forecasts for the last 10 years do not fit what has actually happened as despite their predictions, temperatures have actually decreased.
Like Rogers, Bastardi – considered an expert in tropical weather – pointed out that contrary to predictions, tropical cyclone activity has decreased. Bastardi said, “An inconvenient truth is that tropical cyclone accumulated energy is down at record low levels.”
Secretary of Agriculture: Colorado forests to disappear due to climate change
Greenpeace leader forced to admit climate change exaggerations
UN: Four months to secure the future of our planet
Chemists and engineers protest trade group's global warming activism
The lack of any real discussion about global warming rankles Bastardi and he encourages people to get the information themselves and make an educated decision about what they think. As he told Bill O’Reilly, “I think people haven’t been confronted with the facts. I don’t ask people to believe me. I ask people to go and arm themselves and …go look for the facts themselves.”
Matt Rogers and Joe Bastardi are not the only meteorologists clamoring for an open and honest debate on the global warming issue. Dr. William Gray, Professor Emeritus of Colorado State University who is best known for his hurricane forecasts, has long railed against the manmade climate change theory and specifically against the outrageous claims of its advocates like James Hansen. John Coleman, one of the founders of the Weather Channel, has long said that he believed global warming was “the greatest scam in history.”
To be sure there are also meteorologists that firmly place the blame on man for global warming. Weather Channel Senior Meteorologist Stu Ostro has speculated that global warming was the reason for a slower tornado season this year. WHNT TV (Huntsville, AL) meteorologist Dan Satterfield has long stated his belief that man was responsible and recently questioned the credentials and credibility of those who disagree.
Satterfield’s response and others that seem to shout down dissenters without offering any sort of opportunity for reasoned discussion highlights the frustration of other scientists who simply want to have their voice heard. In his article, Matt Rogers addressed the issue and found the lack of scientific debate alarming saying, “several times during debates individuals have told me I should not question the "settled science" due to the moral imperative of "saving the planet". As with a religious debate, I'm told that my disagreement means I do not "care enough" and even if correct, I should not question the science. This frightens me.”
Comments
"...and that despite increases in CO2 temperatures have actually decreased in the last 10 years."
Huh? So having the 10 warmest years in over a century all occurring since 1997 suggest we are in a major cooling trend? The article seems to suggest that not only is warming not man-made, it's not even happening!
Until the growing body of evidence supporting anthropogenic climate change can be refuted, stick with the majority of experts.
WeatherUnderground - You fail though to address the statement in the article. If CO2 is the cause of global warming as we have been led to believe by the IPCC and the mainstream media, why have temperatures moderated and actually decreased in the last 10 years while CO2 has increased? Common sense (something many alarmists lack) dictates something doesn't add up.
The upcoming disclosure of blood type distribution reveals decreasing blood types A/O prevalence and increasing type B prevalence will “prove” that CO2 levels are rising. (See above section on current blood type distribution in the United States.) In truth this is evidence populations are dying off, have been in negative population growth, with much of the world in the final extermination phase for generations now. The last remaining nations, the Western nations, were set up in the final extermination phase in 2005. Like the United States, these western nations’ populations peaked in about 1979-1980.
The remaining blood type AB, the only normal healthy blood, will be the ones to survive; hence -- “survival of the fittest”.
From: unveilingthem.com/PoisoningOfMankindCopperDeficiency.htm
The Global Warming fraud is being used to set up the biggest fraud of all.
The Fraudulent Global Warming: With the alkaline blood types in particular, the body uses compensation or buffer measure to bring down the blood pH and that mechanism is to retain carbon dioxide (CO2). It is not the fraudulent “Global Warming”, an “increase of carbon dioxide in the environment” that is causing humans to die off. The fraudulent “global warming” science explains that the elevated CO2 level in blood is caused by increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere/environment particularly in the last 50 years. This is used for evidence the “carbon cycle” is causing the alkaline blood types O and A to go into extinction first, followed by blood type B.
The last disclosure of blood type distribution was about 50 years ago, when the alkaline blood types were at a higher prevalence and the acidic blood type B was at a lower prevalence in populations. (Continued next comment below.)
Save the planet from CO2. Drink more beer to keep CO2 out of the sky and in our bodies.
Regrading "Until the growing body of evidence supporting anthropogenic climate change can be refuted, stick with the majority of experts."
There is no convincing evidence and no majority of experts.
As common sense would strongly suggest, new Climate Change GCM models show the sun is the source of observed Global Warming, NOT CO2.
“Previously, the direct impact of increased irradiance on global average temperature has been estimated at around 0.25°C last century—a threefold amplifying effect would raise that to 0.75°C. This leaves practically no warming effect for CO2 to account for and renders the whole anthropogenic global warming argument moot. In other words, if the atmospheric solar amplifier theory is correct anthropogenic global warming is wrong, a useless theory describing a nonexistent phenomenon. It seems like poetic justice that a modeling experiment may point the way to discrediting global warming once and for all.”
See solarcycle25.com for details.
www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/global_dimming.html
Skeptics of the current global warming now refer to the period between 1998 and 2008 and claim that global warming has ended. Some go one step further and claim that global cooling has begun. Of course, the observed data shows that this is nonsense. GISS, HadCRU, RSS, and UAH represent the four organizations that publish online the global average temperature estimates. Many experts believe that GISS data is the preferred set because it is the only set that uses all regions of the globe. HadCRU, RSS, and UAH do not include polar regions.
View the data and trends between 1998 and 2008 at:
www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/images/temperature_trends_1998-2008.png
Three of the four global average temperatures indeed are decreasing in their trends (although the actual global mean temperatures are still warmer than the previous decades).
Continued above...
Now view the data and trends between 1999 and present at:
www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/images/temperature_trends_1999-2009.png
Simply by shifting our starting point by one year, all four global average temperatures are increasing in their trends!
So why did the 1998 - 2008 plot show cooling? 1998 experienced an historic El Nino event which caused a large warming spike that year. 2008 experienced a La Nina which causes cooling and also an absence of sunpsots which also causes some cooling.
The point made here is that if one cherry-picks a small subset of the data, one can make just about any claim with a nice plot to back it up. The correct way to view global temperature trends is to look at ALL of the data.
View:
www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/images/temperature_trends_1880-2009.png
This plot shows the global average temperatures along with trends from 1880 to present. (Note: UAH and RSS data does not exist before 1980)
It is quite obvious that global temperatures have been increasing since 1880 and at a faster rate in the past two decades!
Furthermore, much of the heat that is delivered by the sun is stored in the Earth's oceans while only a fraction of this heat is stored in the atmosphere. Therefore, a change in the heat stored in the ocean is a better indicator of climate change than changes in atmospheric heat. Figures 27a and 27b (Richardson et al., 2009) displayed on my Modern Day Climate Change page at www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/modern_day_climate_change.html clearly show that the oceans have warmed significantly in recent years and the trend is 50% greater than that reported by the IPCC in 2007. There is certainly no global cooling in the oceans!
Scott A. Mandia regurgitates the litany of the warmers. Inconvenient facts refute mandia's "evidence":
1. Temperature rise since 1880 reflects end of Little Ice Age and beginning of modern warm period. There is no evidence that any of the change was due to human activity of any kind. Download Dr. Akasofu's "Two Natural Components of Climate Change" at: www.webcommentary.com/docs/2natural.pdf
2. RE: "The point made here is that if one cherry-picks a small subset of the data, one can make just about any claim with a nice plot to back it up. The correct way to view global temperature trends is to look at ALL of the data." True, so look at:
Last 6 million years: www.webcommentary.com/images/climate/6my.jpg
Last 450,000 years: www.webcommentary.com/images/climate/vostok-green.jpg
Last 5,000 years: www.webcommentary.com/images/climate/5000yrs.jpg
See ... nothing special about today's climate.
Facts ARE inconvenient, particularly the right facts.
The United States needs our own objective, transparent climate commission to think-through global warming. We need the advice of a bi-partisan 'Climate Truth Commission' before we burden our economy with expensive energy. Both sides of the man-made global warming issue should welcome such an approach. ...each is so sure of themselves.
-- Robert Moen, www.energyplanUSA.com
Joe Bastardi used a March, 1959 photo of the USS Skate surfacing in open arctic waters to "prove" that arctic sea ice has melted in the past.
Let's see if Joe got his facts right. Take a look at this Arctic Submarines site:
navsource.org/archives/08/08578.htm
Scroll down and find USS Skate makes "first surfacing in open-water polynyas". Click to enlarge photo.
Further down you see USS Skates's March 1959 entry. Photo looks a lot different than Joe's version.
Here's a link to a discussion on sea ice polynyas that the US Navy used to surface in the arctic.
athropolis.com/arctic-facts/fact-polynyas.htm
The March 1959 arctic wasn't ice free, the USS Skate looked for polynyas (temporary openings in the ice) for safe surfacing.
Joe misread the photo and jumped to the wrong conclusion.
Would you go to Is a heart surgeon for a brain tumor? A good meteorologist is not necessarily qualified to speak on climate.
Expertise comes from study
10 warmest years in history?
noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090910_summerstats.html
climatedepot.com/a/2979/Meteorologist-suggests-NOAA-is-manipulating-data-to-support-climate-claims-and-political-goals
wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/16/noaa-warmest-global-sea-surface-temperatures-for-august-and-summer/
scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monthly_report/august_co2_report.html
wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/09/forecasting-the-earth%e2%80%99s-temperature/
wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/04/uah-global-temperature-down-in-august-181%c2%b0c-sh-sees-biggest-drop-of-0-4%c2%b0c/
www.ludingtondailynews.com/news.php?story_id=45686
You big dummy. They are lying about ocean temps and manipulatiing data to make it fit their agenda.
Bob,
The concentration of CO2 has reached a record high relative to more than the past 500,000 years and has done so at an exceptionally fast rate.
CO2 concentrations are known accurately for the past 650,000 years. During that time, they varied between 180 ppm and 300 ppm. As of August 2009 CO2 is 386 ppm which took about 100 years to increase. For comparison, it took over 5,000 years for an 80 ppm rise after the last ice age.
Higher values than today have only occurred over many millions of years.
Although large climate changes have occurred in the past, there is no evidence that they took place at a faster RATE than the present warming.
If projections of a 5 oC warming in this century are realized, Earth will have experienced the same amount of global warming as it did at the end of the last glacial period.
There is no evidence that this RATE is matched to a comparable global temperature increase over the last 50 million years!
Looks like Tony got punked by Bastardi over the submarine lie.....
Dear Bob->
C02 was 5 times higher in the Jurassic and 20 times higher in the Pre-Cambrian...to argue that 380/ppm is "unaturally high" takes a very narrow view of the history of the Earth. If you take the Null Hypothesis as Increased C02 will cause Increased Temperatures (to directly quote Al Gore's movie) and the Alternative Hypothesis as is Increased C02 = steady or cooler tmeperatures, then the EMPIRICAL SCIENTIFIC APPROACH WOULD CONCLUDE THAT 15 YEARS (1995-2010) OF NO STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT INCREASES AND 2002-2010 SHOWING A MILD DECLINE IN GLOBAL MEAN TEMPERATURE...I would reject the NULL and conclude that the AGW Hypothesis, until more or new or different (better) data is compiled, is rejected. Which for everybody, without a political agenda, is great news! That frees up $143 TRILLION over the next century, for other more worthy causes. BE HAPPY!
In Nigeria we hard that there wil be rain which we cos cancer how sure are they
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!