Global Warming Will 'Stop', New Peer-Reviewed Study Says

Inhofe EPW Press Blog ^ | April 30, 2008 | Marc Morano

[EPW Comm Team]

Posted By Marc Morano - 6:40 PM ET - Marc_Morano@EPW.Senate.Gov

BREAKING NEWS: Global Warming Will 'Stop', New Peer-Reviewed Study Says

Global Warming Takes a Break for Nearly 20 Years?

Today’s UK Telegraph reports: “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. The average temperature of the sea around Europe and North America is expected to cool slightly over the decade while the tropical Pacific remains unchanged. This would mean that the 0.3°C global average temperature rise which has been predicted for the next decade by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change may not happen, according to the paper published in the scientific journal Nature.”

This significant new study adds to a growing body of peer-reviewed literature and other scientific analysis challenging former Vice President Al Gore and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC). MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen’s March 2008 analysis found the Earth has had “no statistically significant warming since 1995.”- LINK.

Australian paleoclimate scientist Dr. Bob Carter also noted in 2007 that “ the accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998.” Carter explained that the “temperature stasis has occurred despite an increase over the same period of 15 parts per million (or 4 per cent) in atmospheric CO2.” (LINK)

In August 2007, the UK Met Office, Britain's version of our National Weather Service, conceded that global warming had stopped as well. Both the Nature and UK Met Office analysis predict a continuation of global warming in future years. [Note: Hyping yet more unproven computer models of the future in response to inconvenient evidence based data is the primary tool of the promoters of man-made climate doom.]

Today’s new study in Nature essentially finds that global warming will have stopped for nearly 20 years. (1998 until 2015) According to the UK Telegraph article: “Writing in Nature, the scientists said: ‘Our results suggest that global surface temperature may not increase over the next decade, as natural climate variations in the North Atlantic and tropical Pacific temporarily offset the projected anthropogenic [manmade] warming.’”

The UK Telegraph article by reporter Charles Clover noted the significant deficiencies in UN climate models: “The IPCC currently does not include in its models actual records of such events as the strength of the Gulf Stream and the El Nino cyclical warming event in the Pacific, which are known to have been behind the warmest year ever recorded in 1998.”

The evidence based data showing the Earth’s failure to continue warming has confounded the promoters of man-made climate fear. The American people have consistently rejected climate alarm as a Gallup Poll released on Earth Day 2008 shows the American public’s concern about man-made global warming is unchanged from 1989. Gore's $300 million dollar campaign to promote climate fear is attempting to convince American's that they face a climate "crisis" despite the new accumulating scientific evidence.

This new study in Nature further reveals a “tipping point” for the promoters of climate alarm. 2007 and now 2008 have challenged man-made climate fear as new peer-reviewed studies continue to debunk rising CO2 fears. A U.S. Senate minority report reveals over 400 scientists dissented from man-made climate fears, and more and more scientists continue to declare themselves skeptical of a man-made climate “crisis” in 2008.

Sampling of key inconvenient developments for promoters of a man-made climate “crisis” so far in 2008: (See also related link at bottom of this report)

1) Oceans Cooling! Scientists puzzled by “mystery of global warming's missing heat”- LINK

2) New Data from NASA’s Aqua satellite is showing “greatly reduced future warming projected as a consequence of carbon dioxide.”- LINK

3) Former NASA Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer found not one peer-reviewed paper has 'ruled out a natural cause for most of our recent warmth' – LINK

4) UN IPCC in 'Panic Mode' as Earth Fails to Warm, Scientist says – LINK

5) UN IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri “to look into the apparent temperature plateau so far this century.”- LINK

6) New scientific analysis shows Sun “could account for as much as 69% of the increase in Earth's average temperature” – LINK & LINK.

7) Scientists find dust free atmosphere may be responsible for up to .36 F rise in global temps (LINK)

8) Analysis in peer-reviewed journal finds cold periods – not warm periods – see increase in floods, droughts, storms, famine (LINK)

9) New York Times Laments Media's Incorrect hyping of frogs and global warming (LINK)

10) Prominent hurricane expert reconsiders global warming's impact (LINK)

11) MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen’s March 2008 analysis found the Earth has had “no statistically significant warming since 1995.”- (LINK)

12) An International team of scientists released a March 2008 report to counter UN IPCC, declaring: “Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate” – LINK

# #

[MartinStyles]

I bet then 2009 will be record breaking heat.

They’re just always wrong on this stuff.

[21twelve]

Okay - I’d say it is a bit odd. In another month or two it becomes a tad disconcerting. Anyone know how long before it DOES get really scary?? By the way - based on the already delayed sunspots and the Pacific cool spot off the West Coast, I’m figuring that the Pacific NW will have a cool summer. (Which is a drag after an already too cool and long winter).

[Puppage]

However, the effect of rising fossil fuel emissions will mean that warming will accelerate again after 2015

They can't tell me if it's going to rain next Saturday, yet they know it'll get warmer 8 years hence?

[CSM]

“To anyone who knows what that picture means, THAT IS A SCARY IMAGE!”

Can you help bring us commoners up to speed? I’m a lot ignorant of meteorological and weather stuff, but I do find that the FReeper experts are good teachers.

[Bobarian]

Let me get this straight. Whether the climate gets colder, warmer, or stays the same, these bozos are never wrong. The one crisis I'd really like to see these "experts" confront is their funding drying up.

The article should have been titled:
Climate Refuses to Cooperate with Global Warming Loons

What's next? Do we need to create a special UN panel to deal with the impending continental drift crisis?

[painter]

Bump for later.

[piytar]

In short, the sun goes through fairly predictable cycles of sunspot activity. Sunspots cause strong magnetic fields that stave off inbound cosmic rays. Less sunspots mean more cosmic rays. That in turn means more clouds and a cooler Earth.

The current cycle is months late in starting. There should be several Earth-sized black spots in that image - sunspots. This has happened before. The result was the “year without a summer” back in (I think) the 1600s. If the sunspot cycle doesn’t kick off soon - say in a few more months - we may be looking at another one next year. Literally millions will starve. And there really is not a damn thing we can do about it.

BTW, this isn’t alarmism. It’s actual science (really physics), not computer model pseudo-science ecohobbit global warming cr@p.

[Bobarian]

And there really is not a damn thing we can do about it.

Sure there is. We can blame George W. Bush.

[PA Engineer]

There have only been two very small sunspots since the beginning of January creating a great deal of concern amongst "real" scientists who study sunspots and climate.

Maunder Minimum

The Maunder minimum is the name given to a period of extreme solar inactivity that occurred between 1645 and 1710. Of particular interest is that this period of inactivity corresponds closely to one of the coldest periods of the so-called "Little Ice Age" in Europe, a time of long, cold winters that caused severe hardships in the pre-industrial revolution world. This has led scientists to extensively study the possible influences of solar activity on terrestrial climate, as well as examine other stars for evidence of activity cycle behavior similar to the Sun's.

Today at spaceweather.com:



A good source of Solar information can be found at Nasa Marshall Space Flight Center.

I hope this helps you to get started on your reading. The sunspot reading for today is Zero.

[chessplayer]

Been reading some pro-AGW comments on various sites. The pro-AGW`ers are saying two things;

1) The paper the Telegraph is talking about is total crap.

2) Even if by chance the paper is right, it does`nt disprove AGW. They say it would actually provide further proof of AGW.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

DOOMAGE!

Global ?Warming? PING!

You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming.

Freep-mail me to get on or off: Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.

Global Warming on Free Republic

Latest from Global Warming News Site

Latest from Greenie Watch

Latest from Junk Science

Latest from Terra Daily

[Robert A Cook PE]

Okay - I’d say it is a bit odd. In another month or two it becomes a tad disconcerting. Anyone know how long before it DOES get really scary??

The (lack of) sunspots - the fact that Solar Cycle 24 has NOT started yet and is over 12-14 months late - has been “noticed” by ham radio operators for over two years now, and has been attracting AGW observers for nearly as long.

One or two days of low/no solar flares?

Nah.

Try a couple of hundred days of no activity.

[painter]

I know what that means. NO solar activity. Which means we could be in for a cold spell.

[21twelve]

I've heard/read anywhere from a year late to a month late. I think it was one of the past predictions on the NASA page that they said Cycle 24 would start in March 2008. However, that may have been their prediction when it didn't start in the spring of 2007 like they originally predicted!? And then they were overjoyed at the sunspot in January(?) - but that turned out to be a remnant of Cycle 23.

So, if it already is 1 year late when do we get concerned? Just like most cycles there is variability in their timing. On an 11 year cycle a delay of 1 year is less than 10% which seems in the realm of “average”. I'm not sure we need to be worried if we don't see the new cycle in another month or so. But when DO we??

And that is a question from someone that believes that the sun is the main driving force of our climate change, with periodic volcanic events, ocean turn-overs, and heavy space-dust periods to effect things as well. (The extra .25% of CO2 that we add to the other 99.75% of natural CO2 given off each year? Hardly.)

[FBD]

what say you about this, Cog?

[21twelve]

I tried to find some past predicitions but couldn’t quickly. However, did find a sunspot activity chart which is interesting. Its one of the first down the page.

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/info/Cycle23.html

It is interesting how the general average of sunspot numbers has increased since the early 1900’s to match our global temerature increases. Also, it looks like a fairly low “low” and perhaps a missed cycle in the mid 1960’s. Perhaps that was a period of cooler temeratures which caused Time Magazine to finally come out with their Next Ice Age issue in 1974. I would think it would take them about 5-10 years to catch on.

[qam1]

Interestingly enough you can see the same thing in number of solar storms

[21twelve]

Thanks! I found some temperature charts too - can’t figure out how to post them, but will show them to my kids.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Notice this from Fig 3 in the link:

“Figure 3: the estimated Cycle 23 profile of sunspot number and 10.7 cm solar flux.”

In 1996, Solar Cycle 23 (the one that is ending/should have ended) was to have its MINIMUM (its end, which would be the beginning of Solar Cycle 24) in last quarter 2006- first quarter 2007.

We are now over a year late from that point, and have most days of this very cold winter with NO sunspots at all. None from Cycle 23, and none from Cycle 24.

(CNN this morning BLAMED the next 15 years of “Global Cooling” on the MEASUREMENTS of the ocean's temperatures that show no heating for the last ten years.

Seems an odd bit of logic, doesn't it.

[cogitator]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2009310/posts

#85.

And, from TerraDaily's article on this:

""Just to make things clear, we are not stating that anthropogenic [man-made] climate change won't be as bad as previously thought," said Mojib Latif, a professor at the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences in Kiel, northern Germany.

"What we are saying is that on top of the warming trend, there is a long-periodic oscillation that will probably lead to a lower temperature increase than we would expect from the current trend during the next years."

So... I still stand by my prediction that the next year with a normal-sized El Nino will set a new global temperature record. It may just set that record by a little bit, not by a wide margin. And the apparent shift to the cool phase of the PDO might possibly mean a lower frequency of El Nino events.

There you go.