Posted on 02/25/2010 8:43:51 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
* Exact causes unknown for lack of warming from 1999-2008
* The underlying reason for cold winter not known
* Climate science in focus after email scandal, errors
By Gerard Wynn and Alister Doyle
LONDON/OSLO, Feb 25 (Reuters) - Climate scientists must do more to work out how exceptionally cold winters or a dip in world temperatures fit their theories of global warming, if they are to persuade an increasingly sceptical public.
At stake is public belief that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the planet, and political momentum to act as governments struggle to agree a climate treaty which could direct trillions of dollars into renewable energy, away from fossil fuels.
Public conviction of global warming's risks may have been undermined by an error in a U.N. panel report exaggerating the pace of melt of Himalayan glaciers and by the disclosure of hacked emails revealing scientists sniping at sceptics, who leapt on these as evidence of data fixing.
Scientists said they must explain better how a freezing winter this year in parts of the northern hemisphere and a break in a rising trend in global temperatures since 1998 can happen when heat-trapping gases are pouring into the atmosphere.
"There is a lack of consensus," said Kevin Trenberth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research, on why global temperatures have not matched a peak set in 1998, or in 2005 according to one U.S. analysis. For a table of world temperatures: [ID:nLDE6050Y5]
Part of the explanation could be a failure to account for rapid warming in parts of the Arctic, where sea ice had melted, and where there were fewer monitoring stations, he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at alertnet.org ...
One think I’ve noticed about this “global temperature” stuff is that it takes ONE reading at any geological point. No notice is taken of thermal conditions higher in the atmosphere, or if a body of water is involved, thermal conditions in the depths. You are bound to get superficial results that way. Even weather is three dimensional, not two dimensional.
Translated, it means this:
While the whole North hemisphere is shivering, and roofs are creaking under weight of snow, we proclaim that there is somewhere, far above the ground, in some inaccessible geography, a small area of air - about a bucket - that is MILLIONS OF DEGREES hot. When averaged with all the rest of the chilly planet, it proves that the global warming is real.
This is a fallacy, of course, because it assumes a physical process (that we have no reason to suspect) that occurs in a place that is by definition inaccessible. They might just as well mention the touch of His Noodly Appendage.
Dr. David Evans has a paper talking about how the measurements fail to show the Hot spot above the tropics that is predicted by the Climate Modelers resulting from CO2 caused warming...
Damnable liars, it was a lot more than e-mails, and it revealed a lot more than sniping.
Global warming killed their editor.
Coupled with the presumption that it must be a temporary condition.
Which it is, of course. Could cool for another year, another ten years, another hundred years. But, at some point, it's going to start getting warmer again.
And, then...
There. Is. No. Climate. Science.
I’m sure it was “unexpected”.
This sort of behavior seriously undermines their settled-science consensus thingy.
...could it be...lack of sunspots....?
Guess I should chase down that thread with the 6 youtube videos of the Prof from MIT laying out exactly what is going on.....
|
Link to 6 youtubes of Dr Lindzen :
Dr Lindzen, Deconstructing Global Warming
OK looks like it might work...just select each of them as you have time to view and listen
Related thread:
Investors Representing $13 Trillion Call on U.S. and Other Countries to Move Quickly - on AGW Laws)
LOL!
See second link at post #34.
This is nuts! Bill Nye the Science Guy says the last 10 years, based on NASA data, were the warmest ever......The Europeans, apparently using the Phil Jones “no significant change” numbers, try to figure out why temps are steady......
I see it this way, the scam at East Anglia has got the “warmers” on the run. Barbara “Call me Senator” Boxer says, while there are problems with British data.....NASA DATA IS GOOD..........
The Europeans, believing Phil Jones, go with his “NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGE” numbers.
Hell, they are BOTH based on NASA and other US agencies RAW DATA.
The times they are a changin! MORE POPCORN!
Maybe they should test the Null Hypothesis again. In other words examine if they could be wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.