This is almost hypnotic. One of the leaders at a Tea Party event with the Citizens of Liberty holds forth on the science of global warming. [Note: there will be no academic credit awarded for this Internet learning exercise].
The site for this organization makes clear that this is about a world socialist agenda:
No, nothing will ever be enough for these extremists. Because it really isn’t about saving the planet in the first place. It’s about pushing a socialist agenda to cripple the capitalist nations of the west. It’s about wealth redistribution and socialist schemes under the guise of environmentalism.
While nothing will ever be enough to straighten out the socialists and other Koolaid drinkers, we have more than enough for the American people to force our government to stop treating us worse than foreign dictators and stop this cap and trade global warming tax nonsense in the Senate.
I had to add this to our library of hard-right science, here.
Now do you understand
“Do not think something is not possible without first exploring the possibilities” Ghandi
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3677437859600027297
Bdaman:
you cannot argue with the truth, it is typically a losing proposition.
At this point I would think all but the most politically motivated would give up the idea of agw.
IS have you noticed since my post bdaman
1, July 25, 2009 at 6:28 pm Everyone who believes in AGW has vanished, poof like co2 into the atmosphere.
Gary T:
you are wasting valuable CO2.
justme:
The global greenhouse warming effect is premised solely upon radiative heat retention. It is not the same colloquial greenhouse effect that the name derives from.
The one that you cite, and that most of us are familiar with, is a result of convective heat retention.
But I don’t blame you for the confusion, it is not something they talk about much, as per marketing this scare it resonates better for people to have this touchstone as an experiential reference.
NYC may miss 90°F for second time in history.
PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW YORK NY
444 AM EDT FRI JUL 24 2009
DUE TO THE UNUSUALLY COOL CONDITIONS THUS FAR IN JULY…HERE ARE
SOME INTERESTING FACTS TO NOTE…
WITH AN AVERAGE DAILY TEMPERATURE OF 71.6…CURRENTLY RUNNING 4.7
DEGREES BELOW NORMAL…THIS JULY IS ON TRACK FOR THE 2ND COOLEST
ON RECORD. BELOW AVERAGE TEMPERATURES HAVE OCCURRED ON 21 OUT OF
23 DAYS…WITH THE OTHER TWO DAYS BEING NORMAL. THERE HAVE BEEN
ZERO ABOVE NORMAL DAYS.
CENTRAL PARK HAS ONLY REACHED 85 DEGREES ONCE THIS MONTH…ON THE
17TH…AND HAS NOT YET REACHED 90 DEGREES THIS SUMMER. IF THIS
CONTINUES THROUGH THE END OF THE MONTH…IT WILL ONLY BE THE
SECOND TIME SINCE 1869 THAT 90 DEGREES WAS NOT REACHED IN JUNE OR
JULY. THE ONLY OTHER TIME THIS OCCURRED WAS 1996.
Gary,
Ah. So that’s why my car stays so nice and cool when I park it in the sun. Thanks for clearing that up.
bdaman:
Check out Heaven and Earth by Dr. Plimer in Australia.
The video by pardon me appeared to be mostly from third world nations. Although I to want clean air and water I just think a free people engaging in mutually beneficial transactions is the best way to that end.
IS, thanks, was wondering when someone was going to comment. I could go on and on. It is exactly that, a scam. If you ever get the chance to read “Cool It” by Bjorn Lumberg, these are the things we as a people should focus on. This whole cap and trade nonsense would not of worked anyway unless China, Russia, and India would be on board, there not. Do I want to see smoke stacks spewing, no. Do I want to see a conservitive effort to rid/control the planet of polution, yes. Third world countries who do not have the technology to dispose of human waste properly need help first. Look at the video Pardon Me posted. We do a halfway decent job as a country, that said we are still one of the worst violators.
bdaman:
a yeoman’s work you have done in rebutting human driven global warming. It just never did jibe with me for a number of reasons one of which is heat loss is related to area another is that CO2 doesn’t appear to be any better or worse an insulator than O2 and Nitrogen as they have similar specific heats (I believe that is the term) of around 1.3-1.4.
It is all a bunch of BS so Al Gore and his cronies in the Sierra Club can make a bunch of money while sticking it to people that actually create jobs. They must be laughing at the gullibility of most people.
3,000 Low Temp Records Set This July!
UPDATE: It’s not just the surface land temps — Blog reader Tim points out “Water temps at Frying Pan Shoals (off Cape Fear) fell to 78 degrees a few days ago; NDBC historical data shows this occurs only 0.3% of the time in July!”
The period of July 17-20 was the worst, with over 1,600 stations breaking records. It’s worth noting that these stats include all records across the nation. Of the record lows, through July 20th (thanks to William Schmitz @ SERCC, check out their Twitter Feed), this was the regional breakdown:
Nationwide: 966
Southeast (AL/GA/FL/NC/SC/VA): 248
Northeast (MD/DE/PA/NJ/NY/CT/RI/MA/NH/VT/ME): 193
Next, a map of the Departure from Average temperatures so far in July (yes, we have one week left). Yes, that’s a “-10.0” in Pennsylvania – double digit deficits over a month are rare indeed. Note that there are no positive numbers.
The lowest temperatures of the month are also impressive, with 50s in every state and 40s in most, some 30s. Normally temperatures are peaking in July.
http://www.accuweather.com/mt-news-blogs.asp?blog=weathermatrix&partner=&pgUrl=/mtweb/content/weathermatrix/archives/2009/07/1000_low_temp_records_set_this_july.asp
Pardon Me, no I haven’t but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn last night. Just kidding. I put it in a search engine and read about it as much as I could. This is one of the reason why I am so upset with this drive to push for cap and trade. It is a huge money making ponzi scheme to fill the pockets of the already rich. We have to do a better job of things on the ground. One of my first trips of many to Costa Rica I ran into a group of girls that were there sponsored by the U.S. Govt. to replant trees. This is one of many things that we should focus on, not some legeslation that fills the pockets of politicians. Access to clean drinking water another hot topic. As we polute the ground and oceans clean drinkable water for the poor becomes less and less. Think about it. It is the natural resources in front of you that need attention. Look at the switch to flourescent light bulbs and those new curly que bulbs. Do you know what happens when we put those in the landfills. If you get a chance read the book Cool It by Bjorn Lumberg.
Buddah here’s more for ya my friend
The Earth’s history is very revealing on solar activity and our climate, less activity on the Sun results in “Global Cooling” and more activity results in “Global Warming”. Somehow this simple rule of “thumb” has not made an appearance to those people directly involved with “Man Made Climate Change” (MMCC).
And here is the reason why.
In times of low solar activity the Earth has more “dust” in its atmosphere, the MMCC analysis show this as a spurious “coincidence”. The principal climate scientists go on to say that volcanic “dust” was the reason behind times of “Global Cooling” and not the coincidental low solar activity.
This is what they say about the Dalton Minimum period from 1790 to 1839, during this time there was extra volcanic activity, and the dust from the eruptions reduced the effect of the Sun on the Earth.
At no stage was it put forward that the period of low solar activity was the “cause” of the Earth being more susceptible to tectonic plate movements. It’s another example of the IPCC/UN showing the “Effect being the “Cause”.
If you now accept that our climate is determined by the activity on the Sun, you must also accept that people can forecast the future from observed solar data rather then from the spurious analysis of “Man Made Climate Change”.
I recently put this question of low solar activity and tectonic plate movement to Astrophysicist Piers Corbyn of WeatherAction, who specialize in Solar wind forecasts, and use their models for climate predictions on the Earth weather system’s, these show a very high accuracy in long range weather forecasts, and here is what he said….See the below comment section from Piers, he expands on the following remarks
http://solarcycle25.com/index.php?id=10&linkbox=true
continue reading here
Buddah this paragraph is for you especially yhe last sentence.
The close relationship between ENSO and global temperature, as described in the paper, leaves little room for any warming driven by human carbon dioxide emissions. The available data indicate that future global temperatures will continue to change primarily in response to ENSO cycling, volcanic activity and SOLAR CHANGES.”
Slarti:
Now you have delved into areas that are not science.
Most egregious is the assertion that life can violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It does not, and cannot.
Your analogy about water flowing into a bathtub (where the water represents energy) is also specious.
I have been hammering home the whole StefanBoltzmann energy radiative equilibrium laws from my very first post here.
It is simply not science to say that you can plug up the energy output while still retaining the radiative input.
No chemical, material, or any substance short of alchemy, is going to allow a radiative influx of energy, and then not subsequently release it at the same rate; nor will you be able to have any retention of that energy.
I do believe that you have been too long away from the fundamentals of physics, radiative analysis, and thermodynamic theory, as these snafus are just embarrassing.
(FYI, I know and agre that traditional human pollution of the planet is a travesty. I am not arguing that point however.)
Howdy,
Has anybody here read “The Limits to Growth” or its 30-year update?
Washington DC – An abundance of new peer-reviewed studies, analyses, and data error discoveries in the last several months has prompted scientists to declare that fear of catastrophic man-made global warming “bites the dust” and the scientific underpinnings for alarm may be “falling apart.” The latest study to cast doubt on climate fears finds that even a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide would not have the previously predicted dire impacts on global temperatures. This new study is not unique, as a host of recent peer-reviewed studies have cast a chill on global warming fears.
“Anthropogenic (man-made) global warming bites the dust,” declared astronomer Dr. Ian Wilson after reviewing the new study which has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Geophysical Research. Another scientist said the peer-reviewed study overturned “in one fell swoop” the climate fears promoted by the UN and former Vice President Al Gore. The study entitled “Heat Capacity, Time Constant, and Sensitivity of Earth’s Climate System,” was authored by Brookhaven National Lab scientist Stephen Schwartz.
ABSTRACT. The equilibrium sensitivity of Earth’s climate is determined as the quotient of the relaxation
time constant of the system and the pertinent global heat capacity. The heat capacity of the global ocean,
obtained from regression of ocean heat content vs. global mean surface temperature, GMST, is 14 ± 6 W
yr m-2 K-1, equivalent to 110 m of ocean water; other sinks raise the effective planetary heat capacity to 17
± 7 W yr m-2 K-1 (all uncertainties are 1-sigma estimates). The time constant pertinent to changes in
GMST is determined from autocorrelation of that quantity over 1880-2004 to be 5 ± 1 yr. The resultant
equilibrium climate sensitivity, 0.30 ± 0.14 K/(W m-2), corresponds to an equilibrium temperature increase
for doubled CO2 of 1.1 ± 0.5 K. The short time constant implies that GMST is in near equilibrium with
applied forcings and hence that net climate forcing over the twentieth century can be obtained from the
observed temperature increase over this period, 0.57 ± 0.08 K, as 1.9 ± 0.9 W m-2. For this forcing
considered the sum of radiative forcing by incremental greenhouse gases, 2.2 ± 0.3 W m-2, and other
forcings, other forcing agents, mainly incremental tropospheric aerosols, are inferred to have exerted only a
slight forcing over the twentieth century of -0.3 ± 1.0 W m-2.
http://www.ecd.bnl.gov/steve/pubs/HeatCapacity.pdf
Update: More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims
Outpouring of Skeptical Scientists Continues as 59 Scientists Added to Senate Report
‘The science has, quite simply, gone awry’
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=10fe77b0-802a-23ad-4df1-fc38ed4f85e3
Peer-Reviewed Study Rocks Climate Debate! ‘Nature not man responsible for recent global warming…little or none of late 20th century warming and cooling can be attributed to humans’
‘Surge in global temps since 1977 can be attributed to a 1976 climate shift in the Pacific Ocean’
Wednesday, July 22, 2009By Marc Morano – Climate Depot
A new peer-reviewed climate study is presenting a head on challenge to man-made global warming claims. The study by three climate researchers appears in the July 23, 2009 edition of Journal of Geophysical Research. (Link to Abstract)
Full Press Release and Abstract to Study:
July 23, 2009
Nature not man responsible for recent global warming
Three Australasian researchers have shown that natural forces are the dominant influence on climate, in a study just published in the highly-regarded Journal of Geophysical Research. According to this study little or none of the late 20th century global warming and cooling can be attributed to human activity.
The research, by Chris de Freitas, a climate scientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, John McLean (Melbourne) and Bob Carter (James Cook University), finds that the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a key indicator of global atmospheric temperatures seven months later. As an additional influence, intermittent volcanic activity injects cooling aerosols into the atmosphere and produces significant cooling.
“The surge in global temperatures since 1977 can be attributed to a 1976 climate shift in the Pacific Ocean that made warming El Niño conditions more likely than they were over the previous 30 years and cooling La Niña conditions less likely” says corresponding author de Freitas.
“We have shown that internal global climate-system variability accounts for at least 80% of the observed global climate variation over the past half-century. It may even be more if the period of influence of major volcanoes can be more clearly identified and the corresponding data excluded from the analysis.”
Climate researchers have long been aware that ENSO events influence global temperature, for example causing a high temperature spike in 1998 and a subsequent fall as conditions moved to La Niña. It is also well known that volcanic activity has a cooling influence, and as is well documented by the effects of the 1991 Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption.
The new paper draws these two strands of climate control together and shows, by demonstrating a strong relationship between the Southern Oscillation and lower-atmospheric temperature, that ENSO has been a major temperature influence since continuous measurement of lower-atmospheric temperature first began in 1958.
According to the three researchers, ENSO-related warming during El Niño conditions is caused by a stronger Hadley Cell circulation moving warm tropical air into the mid-latitudes. During La Niña conditions the Pacific Ocean is cooler and the Walker circulation, west to east in the upper atmosphere along the equator, dominates.
“When climate models failed to retrospectively produce the temperatures since 1950 the modellers added some estimated influences of carbon dioxide to make up the shortfall,” says McLean.
“The IPCC acknowledges in its 4th Assessment Report that ENSO conditions cannot be predicted more than about 12 months ahead, so the output of climate models that could not predict ENSO conditions were being compared to temperatures during a period that was dominated by those influences. It’s no wonder that model outputs have been so inaccurate, and it is clear that future modelling must incorporate the ENSO effect if it is to be meaningful.”
Bob Carter, one of four scientists who has recently questioned the justification for the proposed Australian emissions trading scheme, says that this paper has significant consequences for public climate policy.
“The close relationship between ENSO and global temperature, as described in the paper, leaves little room for any warming driven by human carbon dioxide emissions. The available data indicate that future global temperatures will continue to change primarily in response to ENSO cycling, volcanic activity and solar changes.”
“Our paper confirms what many scientists already know: which is that no scientific justification exists for emissions regulation, and that, irrespective of the severity of the cuts proposed, ETS (emission trading scheme) will exert no measurable effect on future climate.”
—
McLean, J. D., C. R. de Freitas, and R. M. Carter (2009), Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, Journal of Geophysical Research, 114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637.
This figure from the McLean et al (2009) research shows that mean monthly global temperature (MSU GTTA) corresponds in general terms with the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) of seven months earlier. The SOI is a rough indicator of general atmospheric circulation and thus global climate change. The possible influence of the Rabaul volcanic eruption is shown.
Slart, I believe you said in one of your post one of the things you like is peer review studies. I found one that was just released. Let me know what you think.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
That mean global tropospheric temperature has for the last 50 years fallen and risen in close accord with the SOI of 5–7 months earlier shows the potential of natural forcing mechanisms to account for most of the temperature variation.
I’m not good at science speak but I think they are saying that they don’t believe Co2 is the driver of temps.