May 01 2008
The Global Climate Is Cooling, But It’s Still Global Warming!
You know, when you take your entire reputation out on a limb of speculation it is sometimes impossible to admit you screwed up and humbly crawl back off it. That seems to be the case with the Global Warming crowd because now someone is claiming we will see a decade of overall cooling in the future (after the last decade of no warming at all), but not to worry it is all part of Global Warming:
Parts of North America and Europe may cool naturally over the next decade, as shifting ocean currents temporarily blunt the global-warming effect caused by mankind, Germany’s Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences said.
Average temperatures in areas such as California and France may drop over the next 10 years, influenced by colder flows in the North Atlantic, said a report today by the institution based in Kiel, Germany. Temperatures worldwide may stabilize in the period.
The study was based on sea-surface temperatures of currents that move heat around the world, and vary from decade to decade. This regional cooling effect may temporarily neutralize the long- term warming phenomenon caused by heat-trapping greenhouse gases building up around the earth, said Richard Wood, a research scientist at the Met Office Hadley Centre, a U.K. provider of environmental and weather-related services.
“Those natural climate variations could be stronger than the global-warming trend over the next 10-year period,” Wood said in an interview. “Without knowing that, you might erroneously think there’s no global warming going on.”
…
Since 1988, CO2 levels in the world’s skies have increased by 9.8 percent, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Pure BS. Look, the CO2 levels are rising consistently and have been, which means they should be driving the climate if the Priests of the Church of IPCC-Gore were right all these years. Look at the CO2 levels (green line chart below) and explain what the hell changed ‘naturally’ to not only offset the CO2 levels but reverse their global effect”
What changed since 1998-1999 to not only stop the Green House effect over the last 10 years but will cause it to offset actually offset the still rising CO2 to the point we see a decade of lower temperatures? These people simply claim man-made global warming is still there without providing one bit of proof or evidence by identifying the countervailing force that has stopped the end of the world from coming. And why is that? Yes, they claim there was a shift in ocean currents – but what caused the shift – God with a big spoon stirring up some fun? More here at the NY Times.
Clearly something else is offsetting the CO2 levels in a way no one predicted – and that could be our salvation! Instead of having to lower CO2 levels so drastically the world economy will tank and millions will suffer we could use this new, unforeseen force to save us – if these ‘scientists’ would just tell us what it is. The truth is they don’t know what drives global climate and they are starting to face the reality many predicted – the global temperatures are dropping in spite of C02 levels – which means CO2 probably is not the culprit (reference this post).
You know why the Church of IPCC-Gore and Man-Made Global Warming is under attack by skeptical scientists? Because it is no longer science, it is truly a religion. In the light of evidence and measurements that belie their theories and fantasies these people simply don’t face up to the faults in their findings. They ask us all to simply believe and have faith now. They are just another cult waiting for the mother ship to take them to Nirvana.
Addendum: Reading through the NY Times article linked above I came across this bit of revisionist history:
The global climate will continue to be influenced in any particular decade by a mix of natural variability and the building greenhouse effect, said Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo. He said efforts to build forecasts by mixing modeling and measurements were vital in a world with rising populations in places where poverty leads to vulnerability from climate-related threats like flooding and famine.
It should also help the public and policy makers understand that a cool phase does not mean the overall theory of human-driven warming is flawed, Dr. Trenberth said.
“Too many think global warming means monotonic relentless warming everywhere year after year,†Dr. Trenberth said. “It does not happen that way.â€
Yeah, well tell that to the IPCC which initially predicted huge increases in global temperatures by now when they first started their Church of Man Made Global Warming and who had to revise and dial down the near term doom and gloom predictions as the global climate did not pan out. In 2001 the IPCC made this prediction:
Projections using the SRES emissions scenarios in a range of climate models result in an increase in globally averaged surface temperature of 1.4 to 5.8°C over the period 1990 to 2100. This is about two to ten times larger than the central value of observed warming over the 20th century and the projected rate of warming is very likely to be without precedent during at least the last 10,000 years, based on paleoclimate data. Temperature increases are projected to be greater than those in the Second Assessment Report (SAR), which were about 1.0 to 3.5°C based on six IS92 scenarios. The higher projected temperatures and the wider range are due primarily to lower projected sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions in the SRES scenarios relative to the IS92 scenarios. For the periods 1990 to 2025 and 1990 to 2050, the projected increases are 0.4 to 1.1°C and 0.8 to 2.6°C, respectively.
Emphasis mine. Back in 2001 the IPCC was still riding high because 1998, one of the warmest temperatures on record in the modern era (but one of many “warmest years” seen on Earth), had just passed by and their theories had the faith of the masses behind them. But a decade after this prediction the actual measurements show there has been a slight cooling. Given the news above it looks like another IPCC prediction is going to fall flat on its face. What irked me about the NY Times article was that the IPCC did indeed predict a steady increase in temperature. Their models have shown that kind of out put for decades. And for someone form the Church of IPCC-Gore to now to claim that is not how it works is the height of hypocrisy. It is revisionism – and it is not science.
Addendum: OK, one last rant at the stupidity of the comment “Too many think global warming means monotonic relentless warming everywhere year after year,†Dr. Trenberth said. “It does not happen that way.†– we are not talking one year there is no rise or a small dip here. We are talking about 10 years of no rise and another ten years of decline. Geez, what a moronic effort at spinning the news that the Church of IPCC-Gore has been scientifically busted. When their models work they show no global warming for the next ten years. Doh!
SO, following their logic, it would actually be catastrophically colder over the next decade if it were not for Global Warming.
RMaartin: The Sea Levels could DROP by centimeteres!!!!
Do you realize what this would do to the Kennedy Family Compound Naval Base and Marina?
AJ – I think the answer to the prediction conundrum has been found, but the global warming fanatics won’t like it.
Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Do some research on it, and you will be amazed. This is where the *Real* science has been leading. Here’s a good website to start with, look closely at the graph at at the bottom.
http://www.jisao.washington.edu/pdo/
And here’s a press release from the JPL (I believe you’re familiar with them, heh!) which confirms that readings are showing “the early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation.”
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2008-066
The mechanism causing this isn’t understood yet, which is why it hasn’t been publicized much. (you know scientists, they hate to talk about observations they can’t explain) But just looking at the dates (the wiki stump has a good roundup with several references listed) it appears that the PDO oscillations appear to correlate to measured northern hemisphere temperature events.
The PDO showed a strong swing and entered a warm phase in 1905, which held until 1946. Recall that the 1930’s were an extremely hot decade, characterized by droughts and intense hurricane activity. (worst decade for hurricanes yet recorded) The PDO shifted to a cold phase in 1946, and this lasted till 1977. Recall the predictions of a new ice age in the 70’s – we had just seen 30 years of cooling.
It oscillated back to a warm phase, which has held from 1977 till the spring of 2008, and the data now show a once every 30 years shift back to a cold phase. Which strongly – *Very* strongly – suggests that we are now going to see approximately 30 years of cooling, with some statistical noise along the way. (see the chart on the first link)
This data is *independant* of the german study you referenced in your post, but both of them are reflective of the actual science rather than the religious hype. We are on the verge of at least 10 and probably 30 years of a strong cooling trend, and that has nothing to humanity.
RMartin,
No, that would be YOUR logic which came up with that silly conclusion. My point is we have only begun to measure global temperatures in a way that allows us to decouple local events from the larger picture. All we might be seeing is how our increased ability to measure has removed an error bias and the higher temperatures we have seen since the advent of weather satellites is not warmer temps but simply more accurate data.
Much of this is within the error bars – if you cared enough to check.
AJ – I think one of the keys to global temperature trends has finally been identified.
I invite you to do some research on the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.
Start with the chart on this page:
http://www.jisao.washington.edu/pdo/
“Several independent studies find evidence for just two full PDO cycles in the past century: “cool” PDO regimes prevailed from 1890-1924 and again from 1947-1976, while “warm” PDO regimes dominated from 1925-1946 and from 1977 through (at least) the mid-1990’s.”
Combine that with this release from the JPL:
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2008-066
“The image also shows that this La Niña is occurring within the context of a larger climate event, the early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation.”
also
“Sea surface temperature satellite data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration also clearly show a cool Pacific Decadal Oscillation pattern, as seen at: http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/map/images/sst/sst.anom.gif . The shift in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, with its widespread Pacific Ocean temperature changes, will have significant implications for global climate.”
Compare the dates of the PDO swings with what we know of global temperature events. The 30’s were in the middle of a warm PDO cycle, and they were characterized by high temperatures throughout the northern hemisphere, massive droughts, and the most intense hurricane activity yet seen. (much worse than anything since, although you wouldn’t know that from all the wailing about Katrina. Most people today would be astonished to learn that a major hurricane devastated Long Island in 1938). They cycle shifted in 1946, and by the mid 70’s scientists were talking about a new ice age, since we had by then experienced 30 years of continuos cooling.
1977 – the last observed PDO shift, which resulted in a 30 year warming trend, peaking in 1998.
2008 – evidence shows that the PDO has flipped back to a cool phase. Evidence suggests that this will bring a pronounced 30 year cooling trend in the northern hemisphere, one that will occur without regard to the antics of mankind.
Note that this is independant of the German study you referenced. Both lines of research are now showing the world entering a pronounced period of cooling, one that will last at least 10 but more probably 30 years.
That’s science, not politics, and not religion.
Heh – my first post didn’t show up, and I thought it was lost. So I had some breakfast and rewrote it from memory. That’s why it shows up twice, sorry!
I want to point out something outrageous said by Kevin Trenberth, the climate scientist quoted by the NYT: “He said efforts to build forecasts by mixing modeling and measurements were vital…”
NO! NO! NO! You build forecasts based on measurements ONLY!!! Models only come into play when you don’t LIKE the measurements and you want to introduce a “fudge factor” to push your results in a pre-determined direction! If you have accurate measurements, you don’t need models! And if you can’t predict based on your measurments, YOU DON’T PREDICT!
Look at his statement with this more honest substitution: “He said efforts to build forecasts by mixing measurements and making shit up were vital…” Yeah, vital to keeping his job, and vital to supporting a failed theory.
A couple of quotes:
“The truth is they don’t know what drives global climate”
“Parts of North America and Europe may cool naturally over the next decade,”
funny, they don’t know but they’re ‘sure’ humans are driving the warming while it’s ‘mother nature’ driving the cooling. Isn’t it strange how much stronger Mother Nature is than humans. basically, I think earths’s temp are more influenced by the stages of the sun. (I saw on the Science channel where the sun is expected to only last about 5 billion more years.)
None of the past models have accurately predicted today’s climate behavior so what faith are we to put into today’s models that attempt to predict tomorrow’s?
Five years ago the models were all showing warming at a rate of something like 0.2 degrees per decade. Now we find out that there has actually been slight cooling of about 0.14 degrees since 1998 and all of those models were wrong. So now they tweak their models to reflect today’s reality and trot them back out with the warming that in two more decades warming will return. Well, yeah, it probably will, just like it always seems to do in 20 to 40 year cycles when it comes to the PDO.
They have not produced a single model that has accurately predicted climate behavior. Ever.
This article over at “Stubborn Facts” is priceless:
Back in the “dark” ages, when I was a geology student (late 60’s), the idea of global climate change was a topic actively discussed. Of course there wasn’t a lot of empirical evidence then (sort of like now), but the theory back then was that increases in carbon dioxide would be sequestered by biologic activity in the oceans. The theory went that as more carbon entered the oceanic biosphere, more coral building would occur (a rationale for limestone development over the aeons). I wonder if there is any research validating new reef formation? At one time, there was concern that corals were dying off (due to pollution), however I have seen some recent anecdotal evidence that the reverse is occuring. Could carbon sequestration be occuring naturally?
Granitroc,
Of course it could be and probably is. Also the plants can consume quite a bit, adding more leaves and height and sucking up even more CO2. There is a theory we have been at the low end of where plant life likes things to be. More plants, more crops…..
I think what people forget is that since the Cambrian the Earth has seen CO2 go from about 7000ppm to around 200ppm. Earth is at about an all time record low in atmospheric CO2 as more and more of it gets locked up in limestone and other carbonates. There were times when the atmosphere was 4000ppm CO2 that we were in an ice age.
The think is that if CO2 gets much lower in the atmosphere, plants will have a hard time existing. We NEED to pump the CO2 level of the atmosphere up else we are going to soon find ourselves in a situation where the plants don’t even have enough to survive.
I saw a recent documentary on the Science Channel on the eventual demise of the earth. Long before the Sun gets too hot, the Earth’s atmosphere runs out of CO2 and the plants die. No plants, no animals.
AJ the explination for the cooling outpacing the O2 is simple. The planet bought into the hype and over reacted and is now trying to cool itself at the rate it was told it would warm. See so simple to understand.
This is the alarmists’ attempt to maintain their global warming fantasy in the face of a cooling world. It actually is possible for an oscillation of cold ocean surface water to mask global warming (where an active sun is raising the average temperature of the oceans), and it even happened a mere 60 years ago (between 1940 and 1960), but this is NOT what is happening now.
Instead, we have a very dangerous situation where the cooling effect of a fall off in solar activity is being compounded by cold Pacific and Atlantic oscillations. Warming effects incur negative feedbacks that make them self limiting. Not so with cooling effects, which regularly plunge the world into 100,000 year long ice ages, with the next one due any century now. We should be guarding against this very real danger by pumping out as much greenhouse gas as we can, tailored to patch the infrared “holes†in our greenhouse blanket. My post here.
Very good article at your link, Alec. I’m going to hang onto that one!
The downtick in solar activity is worrisome – has it started to pick up yet?
[…] this period, but they still are and as the top graph shows we have seen 10 years of flat temps with the next 10 years predicted to experience actual cooling. With CO2 levels marching higher why will we in essence see 20 years without a green house […]