Global Warming: On Hold? (Scientists Mystefied at lack of Warming)

Discovery ^ | March 2, 2009 | Michael Reilly

[LoneStarC]

The most inconvenient truth (irony intended) of the global warming scam is that there is no actual scientific evidence that human activities have any measurable effect.

1. Our present mean world temperatures are solidly in the middle of a typical uptrend in the pattern that has existed for thousands of years.

2. We are nowhere near the highs that existed in historical (recorded history) times - and there is nothing in actual data to suggest we are about to soar out of the normal range.

3. The term “computer models” refers to computer programs written by global warming advocates, funded by grants from global warming activists with the grant contingent upon a “threat to the survival of the human race” result. A computer program, source code unavailable, fed with data based on hypothesis rather than empirical data, reported at conventions of groups seeking more global warming by potential beneficiaries of taxpayer research money is AT BEST highly suspect!

4. The “scientific consensus” is made up of some scientists, most of whom are direct beneficiaries of global warming research money, as well as hundreds of “concerned citizens” from Hollywood, and other democratic AlGore type groups. -— The “consensus” does not admit the existance of an opposing scientific group of over 31,000 actual scientists, almost 10,000 of whom are PHDs, mostly in directly related fields who disagree.

5. The pegging of global warming to CO2 is a desperate “hail mary” because the only observable correlation of anything affected by man to global temperature change is the fact that the two move together. THE BIG LIE completely ignores that the temperature numbers reverse direction at highs and lows several hundred years before the CO2 swings.. In other words todays CO2 figures are the result of the tempertature that existed several hundred years ago. Algore claims that the caboose goes around the curve before the engine!

6. In any highly polarized debate, one reliable indication of which side is dishonest is the “conversion factor” of knowledgeable parties who explore the research. Just as in the case of gun control advocacy, almost all global warming position reversals are from left to right........

Finally, actual numbers have trended down for the last decade, despite several “going up!” false alarms attributed to “honest mistakes and equipment malfunctions.” The very unusual anomaly in recent sunspot activity suggests we may be entering another “Maunder minimum” pattern. Not yet proof, but suggests possibility of a repetition of a “little ice age.” If that proves to be what is happening the squandering of billions on global warming theology of “An Inconvenient Truth” may prove exponentially more fatal than “Silent Spring.”

Rachel Carson killed roughly 50 million in the third world by malaria. Al Gore may wind up killing 20 times that by starvation..

[Condor51]

How does this square with temperature records from 2005-2007, by some measurements among the warmest years on record?

It 'squares' very simply. As those 'warmest year measurements' were bogus.

It's easy to get the hotter temp reading you want and NEED to backup that phony 'computer model' when you...

• Locate the 'thermometers' on a sun drenched asphalt airport runway.
  
• Locate the 'thermometers' on sun drenched Black Tar, or Black Rubber, building roofs.
  
• Locate the 'thermometers' next to Air Conditioning Condensing units on building roofs.
  
• Locate the 'thermometers' next to Exhaust Fans (like for Kitchen Hoods) on building roofs.
  and last but not least...
  
• Locate the 'thermometers' anywhere that's in direct sunlight.

Anyone whose ever watched a Baseball or Football Game, or watched a NASCAR race that was in summer has heard..

Well Bruce, its a hot one today. At game time about 95^o but its 110^o on the field (or track). The guys are going to have a rough time in all that heat.

Everyone knows by now, or should, those 'hot' temps the (cough) scientists recorded are bogus when it came out last year that their instruments were all improperly located.

[LomanBill]

See Spot
See Spot Run
See Spot Hide
Where’s Spot?

Brrrrrrrrrr

[ohioman]

Funny that these dumbass scientists fail to even mention that the Sun has been very quiet (i.e. the Al Gore sunspot minimum) for the past year and 1/2.

[MD_Willington_1976]

No sunspots for a long period of time just like at the end of the 70’s.. Hmmm

Where did the “Scientists” get their degrees?

Did they drink their Ovaltine and get the “Bill Nye the Science Guy” UPC code PHD... Pretty much sounds that way.

[MNDude]

so...20 years of warming is a trend, and 30 years of cooling is a hiccup?

[Elsiejay]

I don’t know whether the incident solar radiation flux has diminished and might account for a cooling trend, but this writer barely acknowledges any heat source or sink that is not within the earth’s solid and liquid sphere or its gaseous envelope.

[Sgt_Schultze]

In spite of predictions of massive wealth, Sgt_Schultze’s lack of serious bank continues to confound him.

[theymakemesick]

Global cooling is consistent with global warming. /idiocy

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[Jim Robinson]

Gump said it best, “It happens.”

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

Nice post!

[ROCKLOBSTER]

according to a new study, global warming may have hit a speed bump and could go into hiding for decades.

Good, maybe by then the green-weenie communists will grow up and forget about it.

Earth's climate continues to confound scientists.

That's because their government funded "computer in a bottle" experiments aren't jiving with reality.

Following a 30-year trend of warming, global temperatures have flatlined since 2001 despite rising greenhouse gas concentrations.

Maybe that's because the oceans release CO2 as they warm up. CO2 concentrations always lag periods of warming.

"This is nothing like anything we've seen since 1950," Kyle Swanson of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee said. "Cooling events since then had firm causes, like eruptions or large-magnitude La Ninas. This current cooling doesn't have one."

He must mean besides the lack of solar flare activity...something the "scientists" failed to take into consideration throughout the entire duration of the hoax.

Instead, Swanson and colleague Anastasios Tsonis think a series of climate processes have aligned, conspiring to chill the climate.

Ah yes, those evil "climate processes" conspiring to make the poor victim geniuses look bad.

When added up with the other four years since 2001, Swanson said the overall trend is flat.

Hmmm, temperature averaging...imagine that.

...one of the toughest problems in climate science -- identifying the difference between natural variability (like the occasional March snowstorm) from human-induced change.

That's because there isn't such a thing as "human-induced change"

just what's causing the cooling is a mystery. Sinking water currents in the north Atlantic Ocean could be sucking heat down into the depths.

I don't know about that, but considering the billions or trillions of cost to consumers, I think you federal grant "climatologists" suck.

Or an overabundance of tropical clouds may be reflecting more of the sun's energy than usual back out into space.

So the Einsteins finally admit the ultimate "climate change" gas is actually good old water vapor...nature's own global thermostat.

[Magnatron]

It can’t be over yet. The greenies haven’t had a chance to get all of their policies in place yet. They need just a bit more time to get everything going. Rest assured, though, once everything is in place, they’ll begin to cheer how their forceful efforts saved the planet - and ended global warming for all mankind.

...oh, and Obama will be praised as the messiah who led them through the wilderness.

[SunkenCiv]

Global Warming: On Hold? (Ooops)
The Discovery Channel (”Global Warming’s” premier television cheerleader)
| March 2, 2009 | Michael Reilly
Posted on 03/02/2009 2:50:43 PM PST by presidio9
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2197606/posts

[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

[metmom]

Morons.....

[GOPJ]

If Al Gore had any integrity, he would return his Nobel prize.

Then he'll l have it forever.

[cogitator]

I decided to needle him gently about how the Volt will actually have a larger carbon footprint than a conventional car of similar size if the electricity used to charge it comes from a coal-fired power plant.

Except it isn't true. An electric vehicle creates about 20% less CO2 to produce the same amount of energy than a conventional gas-powered automobile.

A couple references to back me up:

Electric Cars and CO2 Emissions

Electric Cars Are Unlikely to Help Carmakers Cut CO2 Emissions Significantly by 2020, According to The Boston Consulting Group (60% !!!)

Council hears about electric car impacts on power system

"Kinter-Meyer told the Council that Battelle’s research suggests that between 43 and 73 percent of all the cars and light trucks in the nation today could be replaced by plug-in hybrid electric vehicles without adding new power plants or transmission lines, depending on the time of day that the vehicles would be charged.

If this were to happen, America’s net oil imports would be reduced by 52 percent, the nation’s total emissions of carbon dioxide would be reduced by 27 percent, and the batteries in all of those vehicles would provide an important source of storage capacity that could enhance power-system stability, he said. The amount of carbon-dioxide reduction also depends on the time of day the vehicles are charged, as time of day determines whether more coal or cleaner natural gas is being used to generate electricity."

[gridlock]

Not to rain on your parade, but your references are crap.

Take the first one. To quote:

Doing the Math

According to the Energy Information Administration, for every 35 miles that the average compact car (25mpg) travels, it emits approximately 28 pounds of carbon dioxide. To fully charge a ZENN Car, it takes approximately 17 kilowatt hours, to propel the car its full range, 35 miles. Seventeen kilowatt hours of electricity produce 15 to 25 pounds of CO2 depending on the power plant providing the electricity. Coal-burning power plants, which make up about half of the US power grid, are the heaviest emitters of carbon dioxide. Nuclear, wind, and solar power contribute no CO2 emissions and the more they are in use, the better the numbers are in favor of EV cars.

The ZENN car is not the same as the Chevy Volt. The ZENN is limited to 25 mph with a maximum range of 30 miles. It is a NEV, not a fully featured automobile, like the Volt.

The battery pack on the ZENN is probably three or four twelve volts lashed together. The battery pack on the Volt will have to have five times the capacity, because the Volt weighs twice as much, goes twice as far, at three times the maximum speed. So they are not really comparable.

So, you have to take that 15 - 25 kilowatt hours and make it 75-125 kilowatt hours, right off the bat. So, we are already three to five times the 28 pounds of CO2 emitted by the compact car.

Also, you reference does not account for transmission losses, which can be as high as 50%, depending on the location. Add another 75 kilowatt hours, and you are getting to ten times the 28 pounds of CO2 emitted by the typical compact car.

Your reference was being fundamentally dishonest by comparing conventional cars and NEVs, and pretending they were the same thing. If you were to use a conventional car exactly like an NEV, they might have a point, but it's apples and oranges.

Then they compound their dishonesty by neglecting to add one of the major losses, transmission, into the electrical equation.

Don't believe everything you read. Particularly from people who are hawking electric cars.