Whoops! No Global Warming For the Last 15 Years Science is all about questioning theories. this obviously has pissed in Al gores cornflakes and sent our Liely suicidal


Opponents of the global warming cult have often been confronted with a little presto-chango logical fallacy. When the dearth of evidence that human activity contributes to any sort of climate change became painfully inconvenient, the cult began deliberately conflating “man-made” or “anthropogenic” warming with temperature fluctuations that might be entirely natural phenomena.

This allowed the fanatics to posture as reasonable people of science, while dismissing those who advanced reasonable questions as fanatics. If you agreed that the globe might be warming, you were automatically signed on to the entirely different belief that human activity was causing it. Various studies purporting to show increases in temperature were cited, and magically transformed into “proof” that the economy-destroying, power-centralizing agenda of the Church of Global Warming must be adopted immediately. Greenhouse gases are killing the Earth! The science is settled!

This was always about power and money, not science. Here’s a little data crunching from one of the great cathedrals of global warming alarmism, the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit – which was also the source of the “Climagate” emails that revealed much of the global warming movement was based on deliberate fraud. As reported by the UK Daily Mail:

The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

(Emphases mine.) “Released without fanfare,” eh? That’s funny, because this has to be one of the most important stories in modern history. The entire global warming movement just went up in smoke. All of the shrieking hysteria about greenhouse gases, which still drives multi-billion dollar command economics programs in the United States has just been revealed as a pile of anti-scientific garbage.

Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of sunspots seen at their peak.

We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle 24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th Century.

So the primary factor driving “climate change” is not people running their air conditioners and driving around in cars, but rather… the Sun. Were your kids told any of this when their public-school teachers were busy indoctrinating them in Green dogma about man-made global warming? Was it ever even suggested that maybe human activity had far less to do with global temperature changes than solar activity?

The modern “climate change” movement began with warnings of global cooling, and the threat of an impending Ice Age, back in the Seventies. This was changed for purely political reasons, because it obviously wasn’t something that could be blamed on human activity. But car engines are hot, and hot gas comes out of their mufflers, so maybe that gas is forming into toxic clouds in the upper atmosphere, and turning the Earth into an oven! Factory smokestacks even look kind of like ovens, don’t they? We can scare people into giving up their economic liberty with that!

A Duke University climatologist quoted by the Daily Mail noted “if temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become so great that the whole scientific community will question the current theories.” Questioning theories? Now that sounds like science! Unfortunately for the cultists, it’s not very helpful for getting cap-and-trade legislation passed, or selling “carbon credits.”

Other stories hinting at this outcome have popped up over the past few years, but this one is definitive… and utterly devastating to the official religion of the U.S. government. Think of all the millions charlatans like Al Gore have raked in from gullible suckers over the years. “An inconvenient truth,” indeed. The birth of global warming was heralded by big-budget Hollywood movies and hysterical political campaigns. Its final demise occurred without fanfare.

This is why you should not read low-quality conservative media, especially when it requotes itself without checking its sources...

From the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit :

www.cru.uea.ac.uk . . .

The time series shows the combined global land and marine surface temperature record from 1850 to 2010. According to the method of calculation used by CRU, the year 2010 was the equal third (see footnote) warmest on record (with 2003), exceeded by 1998 and 2005. The years 2003, 2005 and 2010 are only distinguishable in the third decimal place. The error estimate for individual years (two standard errors is about ±0.1°C, see Brohan et al., 2006) is at least ten times larger than the differences between these three years.

The period 2001-2010 (0.44°C above 1961-90 mean) was 0.20°C warmer than the 1991-2000 decade (0.24°C above 1961-90 mean). The warmest year of the entire series has been 1998, with a temperature of 0.55°C above the 1961-90 mean. After 1998, the next nine warmest years in the series are all in the decade 2001-2010. During this decade, only 2008 is not in the ten warmest years. Even though 2008 was the coldest year of the 21st century it was still the 12th warmest year of the whole record.

This time series is compiled jointly by the Climatic Research Unit and the UK Met. Office Hadley Centre. Increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere due to human activities are most likely the underlying cause of warming in the 20th century. The warmth or coldness of individual years is strongly influenced by whether there was an El Niño or a La Niña event occurring in the equatorial Pacific Ocean (see Information Sheet 12).

So, basically, for the CRU, 1998 was exceptionnaly hot, and 2008 colder than the 10 latest years. Apart from these two exceptions, the 10 hottest years are the 2001 - 2010 years.

Just like the "Global Climate change" proponents say.

Since conservatives cannot defeat the theory of global climate change with science, they resort to lie and deceit. I am not surprised.

The greenhouse effect is real and yes it is getting warmer.


NASA Confirms Man's role in Global Warming



January 17, 2011 06:48 AM

A new NASA study confirms the fact that greenhouse gases generated by human activity - not changes in solar activity - are the primary force driving global warming.


The study offers an updated calculation of the Earth's energy imbalance, the difference between the amount of solar energy absorbed by Earth's surface and the amount returned to space as heat. The researchers' calculations show that, despite unusually low solar activity between 2005 and 2010, the planet continued to absorb more energy than it returned to space.

James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City, led the research. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics recently published the study.

Total solar irradiance, the amount of energy produced by the sun that reaches the top of each square meter of the Earth's atmosphere, typically declines by about a tenth of a percent during cyclical lulls in solar activity caused by shifts in the sun's magnetic field. Usually solar minimums occur about every eleven years and last a year or so, but the most recent minimum persisted more than two years longer than normal, making it the longest minimum recorded during the satellite era.

Pinpointing the magnitude of Earth's energy imbalance is fundamental to climate science because it offers a direct measure of the state of the climate. Energy imbalance calculations also serve as the foundation for projections of future climate change. If the imbalance is positive and more energy enters the system than exits, Earth grows warmer. If the imbalance is negative, the planet grows cooler.

Hansen's team concluded that Earth has absorbed more than half a watt more solar energy per square meter than it let off throughout the six year study period. The calculated value of the imbalance (0.58 watts of excess energy per square meter) is more than twice as much as the reduction in the amount of solar energy supplied to the planet between maximum and minimum solar activity (0.25 watts per square meter).

"The fact that we still see a positive imbalance despite the prolonged solar minimum isn't a surprise given what we've learned about the climate system, but it's worth noting because this provides unequivocal evidence that the sun is not the dominant driver of global warming," Hansen said.

Photo credit: Earth and Sun, via Shutterstock

Article continues: www.clickgreen.org.uk . . .

Chia-pet, I have been on the ocean in some capacity for a whole lotta years. Please try and keep up. The high tide marks on the pilings that have been planted in the bottom, and the seawall that was put in in the 1950's, has not changed.
If the planet has a fever and is warming, why has not the high tide marks changed, or risen?
I though the ice caps were melting at an "Alarming Rate"? Where did all the water go?

Thats my anchor rope in the picture, on top of a 10 to 12 foot wave that I was in the bottom of looking UP at

This is why you should not read low-quality conservative media

How about low-quality leftist media? The article Mikgof posted above is a good example.

Note the article's title. Then read the article very carefully.

The article simply indicates that NASA has evidence that that the Earth absorbs more energy than it returns to space and it concludes that the Sun is not the "dominant driver in global warming". That's all. It offers no evidence whatsoever that "global warming" is man-made. It doesn't even mention it, in fact. Nonetheless, the title give to it is "NASA Confirms Man's Role in Global Warming".

THIS is low-quality journalism.

Ever since Obama cancelled our space program. NASA has become a Muslim outreach program and uses junk science to received funding from the Obama administration.

y Chimere Comments: 3782, member since Thu Apr 08, 2004
On Sat Feb 04, 2012 04:52 AM
Edited by Chimere (74206) on 2012-02-04 04:52:35
This is why you should not read low-quality conservative media, especially when it requotes itself without checking its sources...

From the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit :

cru.uea.ac.uk . . .

RETARDED CUNT, YOUR OWN CHART SHOWS NO WARMING FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS



Look at it again. The Earth almost died from warming which for some reason stopped around WW2.

No Global Warming For the Last 15 Years is just more proof that global warming is real.

One day historians will look back at this AGW hysteria and have a really, really big laugh. They are going to have to wonder if we had ANY common sense back in the day.

I recall back in the 1990's hearing that NY would be under water by now,.. seemed pretty dry to me the last time I was there.

I read in the newspaper, The DAILY HERALD, at my Gran and Grandad's back in the 40s that England wos going to be tropical by the end of the century. Wot bollocks!
Back in Medieval times England was warmer than during the last 2/3 centuries. Growing grapes, peaches and the like wos prolific, and now grapes have made a comeback. Mainly white grapes like in Germany and Northern France. A ways to go before England can produce a full bodied red wine like I'm drinking right now. A 14% Madiran from Gascony! The climate works in cycles, controlled by the sun. All this bollocks about CO2 and carbon footprints is just another way of fuckin' screwing us for more taxation. The more CO2 a plant gets, the stronger and productive it grows. The shit that wos put in the air during the last 2 Centuries didn't cause global warming. As a boy I remember the brown killer smogs and sitting in the sun all day and not getting burnt. Now, 30 minutes in the sun can be dangerous. Bring back some coal fired power stations, and kick off the catalyctic converter on your motor. Clean energy is bollocks, but we do need to achieve the correct balance. We need a certain amount of shit up there to shield us from radiation.

By BurnParis Comments: 27476, member since Thu Mar 13, 2003
On Sat Feb 04, 2012 11:28 AM
I recall back in the 1990's hearing that NY would be under water by now,.. seemed pretty dry to me the last time I was there.

They are still working on the models, you see. Just ask LilyTheCunt. The models are right, you see. All of them, which they twist and turn year after year after year. The models are excellent. It is the predictions they produce worth shit.

.


Question:

Why did Al Whore buy a mansion at sea level? ... (answer) he knew at the time that Mann was full of shit and that sea levels were going to stay put.

... but Manbearpig lives on.

www.youtube.com . . .

.

Funny as hell I tell ya....

I especially love the comments that these GW idiots posted a few years ago on FF, where we would continue to see temps raise to record levels, the ocean would rise and we would have more hurricanes in one year than we have seen in decades... Then reality set in and facts proved that we were actually cooling, versus warming then these idiots preached "global change"

weather is cyclical.. always has been.

BTW.. global warming dolts... manmade warming due to the industrial age... hummm care to explain the medieval warming period, prior to the industrial age, that reflected temps higher than todays records? ... who da thunk.. climate changes?

bunch of dumb fucks who cannot think for themselves... just lie their hero, who, on public record, stated that the ocean levels would swamp most cities in the US coastal regions, shortly before he bought his water front mansion with the BILLIONS he made off of this hype...

modern day snake oil