Record Cold To hit Global Warming Conference

[Capitalism Forever 0]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2406791/posts

It just started snowing where I live, too. I think I'm going to scrape the ice off the LS400 and do a little unnecessary driving, maybe that'll help keep those poor people in Copehagen from freezing to death.

[rtg24 0]

Haha, you'd have thought they'd organize the climate summit in Hawaii or Sydney, at least somewhere with sweltering heat! Talk about bad psychology...

[jasonlockwood 0]

Haha, you'd have thought they'd organize the climate summit in Hawaii or Sydney, at least somewhere with sweltering heat! Talk about bad psychology...

Hey now, I don't want those morons coming to Sydney. That's MY city. ;-)

[mweiss 0]

But Coppenhagen is the citadel of Socialism, is it not? So what better political petri dish can a left-wing event have?

[Capitalism Forever 0]

But Coppenhagen is the citadel of Socialism, is it not?

Actually, as far as I know, Danish politics tends to be relatively pro-freedom by European standards.

I think the most fitting setting for such a conference would be somewhere in the "pristine" wilderness, in tents with no electricity or plumbing. Or better still, caves. That way, they could lead by example in the quest to make Homo Sapiens "rejoin nature."

[JohnRgt 0]

I think the most fitting setting for such a conference would be somewhere in the "pristine" wilderness, in tents with no electricity or plumbing. Or better still, caves. That way, they could lead by example in the quest to make Homo Sapiens "rejoin nature."

Tents? Caves? How yesterday of you, Capitalism Forever!

Tom Clancy - - ended one of his non-Ryan stories by having caught ecoterrorists abandoned in the middle of a massive rainforest clearing with nothing --not even underwear. If I ever see that, I may take these people seriously enough to laugh in their faces.

[Vespasiano 0]

But Coppenhagen is the citadel of Socialism, is it not?

I think the most fitting setting for such a conference would be somewhere in the "pristine" wilderness, in tents with no electricity or plumbing. Or better still, caves. That way, they could lead by example in the quest to make Homo Sapiens "rejoin nature."

Why stop there? I think all the conference attendees should return to their countries of origin (preferably sooner rather than later) via pre-Industrial Revolution modes of transportation -- so much the better to demonstrate by actually putting into practice one aspect at least of the kind of lifestyle "choices" they envision for the rest of us. Imagine all those horses and carriages (if the attendees are lucky enough to obtain them) clattering o'er hill and dale and all those little Ninas, Pintas and Santa Marias -- as originally "outfitted", of course -- traversing the Atlantic and other waterways in wintertime seas! Better still . . . imagine, if you can, the likes of Al Gore and all those other pampered politicos, NGOers and their respective sycophants in such scenarios. At the very least, this would allow us several months without having to hear their whining homilies, and one would like to imagine that the survivors of such journeys might present with slightly different tunes upon reaching their destinations.

[Capitalism Forever 0]

It's 1:30 PM now in Hungary, 16 degrees F, and the view from my window is as below. All that snow on my car fell since yesterday.

Is anyone selling carbon debits? I'll pay good money for them.

[rtg24 0]

Same here, there's about 1.5 times that much snow, and it's so cold nobody is going skiing, because the mountains are too cold even with full ski suits and 3 sub-layers!

Could be one of the coldest winters on record, it's already snowed in the UK too...

Anyway, let's celebrate the miserable failure of Copenhagen. Hopefully by the time the altruists get the next attack together, the warming crowd will have been thoroughly discredited in the mainstream (we are unfortunately only a few % of the way there).

[alann 0]

Well, if it's freezing that means it's warming [link]:

From Miami to Maine, Savannah to Seattle, America is caught in an icy grip that one of the U.N.'s top global warming proponents says could mark the beginning of a mini ice age.

Oranges are freezing and millions of tropical fish are dying in Florida, and it could be just the beginning of a decades-long deep freeze, says Professor Mojib Latif, one of the world's leading climate modelers.

Latif thinks the cold snap Americans have been suffering through is only the beginning. He says we're in for 30 years of cooler temperatures -- a mini ice age, he calls it, basing his theory on an analysis of natural cycles in water temperatures in the world's oceans.

Latif, a professor at the Leibniz Institute at Germany's Kiel University and an author of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, believes the lengthy cold weather is merely a pause -- a 30-years-long blip -- in the larger cycle of global warming [emphasis mine], which postulates that temperatures will rise rapidly over the coming years.

At a U.N. conference in September, Latif said that changes in ocean currents known as the North Atlantic Oscillation could dominate over manmade global warming for the next few decades. Latif said the fluctuations in these currents could also be responsible for much of the rise in global temperatures seen over the past 30 years.

Latif is a key member of the UN's climate research arm, which has long promoted the concept of global warming. He told the Daily Mail that "a significant share of the warming we saw from 1980 to 2000 and at earlier periods in the 20th Century was due to these cycles -- perhaps as much as 50 percent."

And, yet, does this mean he and the IPCC are revising their sky-is-falling stance on Global Warming?

. . . Oh, come on, don't be silly. . .

"Has ocean variability contributed to variations in surface temperature? Absolutely, no one's denying that," said Mark Serreze, senior research scientist with NSIDC. But the Center disagrees with Latif's conclusions, instead arguing that the cold snap is still another sign of global warming.

"We are indeed starting to see the effects of the rise in greenhouse gases," he said.

Many parts of the world have been suffering through record-setting snowfalls and arctic temperatures. The Midwest saw wind chills as low as 49 degrees below zero last week, while Europe saw snows so heavy that Eurostar train service and air travel were canceled across much of the continent. In Asia, Beijing was hit by its heaviest snowfall in 60 years.

And as for the cold weather?

"This is just the roll of the dice, the natural variability inherent to the system," explained Serreze.

Strange how that "natural variability" explains away a 30-year cold "snap", but not a post-email-scandal non-pattern that Serreze still claims is incontrovertible proof of Anthropogenic Global Warming.

Yep. A True Believer's faith may be tested by doubt and powerful evidence that his god doesn't exist, but his faith will always prevail.

Can we call them "Suicide Climatologists?" They are certainly putting us all on a path to destruction and I fail to see a significant epistemological difference between this idiot and the "Islamic scientists" who claim that

. . .modern science had at last provided evidence that Mecca was the true centre of the Earth; proof, he said, of the greatness of the Muslim "qibla" - the Arabic word for the direction Muslims turn to when they pray.

Maybe "Suicide Warmists," it's shorter and syllabically consistent with the explosive-toting kind.

[Bob Kolker 0]

One cold winter does not predict the end of the warming trend nor does it predict a coming ice age.

Climate is based on long term weather averages.

Bob Kolker

[Carlos 0]

One cold winter does not predict the end of the warming trend nor does it predict a coming ice age.

Climate is based on long term weather averages.

Bob Kolker

This last cold winter though has broken many records that are +30 years old.

Also this last winter is hardly alone; many of the winters in the 2000's have been notably cold.

[mweiss 0]

I'm find that temperatures are more moderate since 1980, than they were prior.

Back in the 50s, it was not uncommon to have -26°F in the morning, even in Mamaroneck, NY, which is typically warmer than where I live today. In the 1960s, we had a brief freeze so cold that the house started making dreadful cracking noises. We heard on the radio that the temperature had dipped to -40°F for about half an hour. In the mid 1970s, we would see the occasional -10°F.

Nowadays, we barely dip below zero. Last year, the colded recorded temp at my house was -0.4°F. This year so far it's 8.6°F. I have a digital thermometer that stores the lo and hi extremes.

The summers are less hot, too. For instance, it was quite normal to have 104°F by 11am. Last summer's high was 91.2°F.

My temperature history at the house indicates that we are seeing less extreme swings in temperature than we did 30 years ago. This winter, we are having a colder average temperature, but we haven't hit the extreme peaks of winters past. I remember 30 years ago, braving sub-zero temps on New Year's Eve outings. Not lately.

Frankly, I like warmer winters, as it uses less heating oil, which reduces the financial burden on us.

[alann 0]

One cold winter does not predict the end of the warming trend nor does it predict a coming ice age.

Climate is based on long term weather averages.

Bob Kolker

This last cold winter though has broken many records that are +30 years old.

Also this last winter is hardly alone; many of the winters in the 2000's have been notably cold.

Yes, and one of the big concerns in the East Anglia (Hadley CRU) emails was the concern over the last 10 years of apparent halt in the alleged upward trend. Of course, that upward trend was something that they had doctored into being and the NASA reference data was doctored to follow their fabrications. This article shows a 30 year cooling trend on top of that 10 year stasis. That, on top of the complete unreliability of the Hadley CRU data prior, gives us just that much more reason to doubt anthropogenic global warming. But, even if there has been some upward trending after the end of the Little Ice Age early in the 20th Century; as mweiss says: Good! More people die of cold weather than of hot weather. But the point here is that such a GW trend, let alone the alleged causality of an AGW trend, has no legitimate evidence to support it and, now that we can start baselining legitimately, post-Hadley, we are told that the trend is for cooling. The tree-ring data has been discredited (both by Steve McIntyre's debunking of Michael Mann's Hockey Puck...uh, Stick, when McIntyre revealed Mann & Co's cherry-picking of non-representative trees populations, and by Hadley, in their revealing emails -- that show the tree-ring model that was artificially benchmarked against the Hadley contemporary record for confirmation, which record was cooked to match -- actually didn't correlate at all. That was what the emails and modeling program documentation showed.

If there were a Perry Mason today, he would have made a nice 1/2 hour mincemeat of this fraud. We do have Lord Monckton, with his Caught Green-Handed, which does the job fairly nicely.

If 30 years (40, adding the 10 of current stasis) is "just a blip", then, once you remove the fraudulent figures from the Hadley data, you might find that many years-worth of allegedly anthropogenic influence, maybe even 50 years, although we now don't know, since Phil Jones and the Hadley goons destroyed their raw numbers. How, then, is that 40 or so years is a catastrophe of global proportions, but this 40 years is "just a blip??"

Your point is taken, Bob, that Climate is about long-term trends. The point is that there is no clear long-term warming trend, but the power-grubbing potentates of the world, led by Gore and Obama, are using this disinformation to undermine our economy. 30 years is significant when the lies are stripped away and we find not even that many years of warming are being used as proof of the evils of gasoline and Corvettes.

We don't have good long-term temperature figures right now. As Harry Binswanger has said several times, global warming, if real, would most likely be a very good thing. But we don't have evidence for that. And, now, we have some evidence for a fairly substantial proximate cooling trend. I was merely commenting on the lunacy of labeling this [a] "a blip" and proof of global warming. Your point about all of this being beside the point in terms of time scale is noted. I was talking about the persistence of a defiance of reason by the True Believers would would call three coin tosses all heads Proof of Global Warming.

[Capitalism Forever 0]

Could this be the beginning of the next 180 degree turn by the viros? It would be amusing to have Al Gore proclaim in 2018 that "the Earth is having a chill" and world leaders call for measures to "limit the drop in global temperatures." We will see pictures of shivering camels desperately clinging on to disappearing sand dunes, and read scare stories about the prospect of Malibu, CA becoming landlocked due to falling see levels. The culprit will be Americans who fly too much, irresponsibly polluting the atmosphere with condensation trails that reflect the Sun's rays back into space, depriving the planet of the warmth meant for it by Mother Nature!

[Bob Kolker 0]

Could this be the beginning of the next 180 degree turn by the viros? It would be amusing to have Al Gore proclaim in 2018 that "the Earth is having a chill" and world leaders call for measures to "limit the drop in global temperatures." We will see pictures of shivering camels desperately clinging on to disappearing sand dunes, and read scare stories about the prospect of Malibu, CA becoming landlocked due to falling see levels. The culprit will be Americans who fly too much, irresponsibly polluting the atmosphere with condensation trails that reflect the Sun's rays back into space, depriving the planet of the warmth meant for it by Mother Nature!

No matter which way the climate turns the 'viros will blame the Capitalists.

Bob Kolker

[Thales 0]

One cold winter does not predict the end of the warming trend nor does it predict a coming ice age.

Climate is based on long term weather averages.

Bob Kolker

What warming trend? I mean, you're engaged in propaganda by repeating the lie.

[Carlos 0]

One cold winter does not predict the end of the warming trend nor does it predict a coming ice age.

Climate is based on long term weather averages.

Bob Kolker

What warming trend? I mean, you're engaged in propaganda by repeating the lie.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/10/seco...ern-hemisphere/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/11/ipcc...-next-30-years/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/11/anta...ign-of-warming/

[Carlos 0]

One cold winter does not predict the end of the warming trend nor does it predict a coming ice age.

Climate is based on long term weather averages.

Bob Kolker

What warming trend? I mean, you're engaged in propaganda by repeating the lie.

Even if it were warming and man was causing it, it would probably be undetectable due to the much larger natural variability and instrumental uncertainty. Even then warming would probably be a good thing.

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter if it is warming or not, but that it is more than likely impossible for anthropogenic CO2 to cause significant warming in the first place.

[Carlos 0]

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter if it is warming or not, but that it is more than likely impossible for anthropogenic CO2 to cause significant warming in the first place.

Example: http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/01/clouds...ver-since-2000/

There appear to be other factors that can be orders of magnitude stronger than CO2 in how they affect the climate.

[Bob Kolker 0]

What warming trend? I mean, you're engaged in propaganda by repeating the lie.

No lie. The world got warmer and the Little Ice Age ended about 1750 or thereabouts. Eventually having ice skating in the canals of Amsterdam and Ice Fairs on the Thames became a memory from grandpa's time. The world has been cool and the world has been hot. And it will become cooler again and hotter again after that. It is a natural cycle.

The question is what causes the variations in temperature. Is it human activity? I doubt it. There are many natural causes for climate change among which is variable solar output, variations in the earth orbit, variations in the tilt of the the axis of rotation and variations in secondary and tertiary cosmic radiations which affects cloud formation.

Check your premises.

Bob Kolker

[Carlos 0]

What warming trend? I mean, you're engaged in propaganda by repeating the lie.

No lie. The world got warmer and the Little Ice Age ended about 1750 or thereabouts. Eventually having ice skating in the canals of Amsterdam and Ice Fairs on the Thames became a memory from grandpa's time. The world has been cool and the world has been hot. And it will become cooler again and hotter again after that. It is a natural cycle.

The question is what causes the variations in temperature. Is it human activity? I doubt it. There are many natural causes for climate change among which is variable solar output, variations in the earth orbit, variations in the tilt of the the axis of rotation and variations in secondary and tertiary cosmic radiations which affects cloud formation.

Check your premises.

Bob Kolker

From the last 60 million years we've been steadily cooling.

From the last 3 million years we've been steadily warming.

From the last 15 thousand years we've been warming since the beginning of this interglacial period.

For the last 8 thousand years we've been cooling since the beginning of the Holocene.

Since the 1700's and the Little Ice Age we've been warming.

Since 2000 it looks like we've been cooling.

Whether it is warming or cooling is profoundly a matter of where you draw your endpoints.

The Forum posters here have drawn up the significant point that within the timeframe of consideration and controversy (the last 100 years), the warming appears to have stopped or reversed recently (the last 10 years). The climate appears to be warming or cooling depending on the timeframe you examine, probably due to the different short-term (ocean oscillations, others) and long-term (orbital variations, others) mechanisms that affect climate on profoundly different timescales and magnitudes.

Citing that the recent 100 year warming, which is claimed to do be due to a short-term mechanism of anthropogenic CO2 forcing, appears to have stopped does have significance, and is worth noting.

[Carlos 0]

What warming trend? I mean, you're engaged in propaganda by repeating the lie.

No lie. The world got warmer and the Little Ice Age ended about 1750 or thereabouts. Eventually having ice skating in the canals of Amsterdam and Ice Fairs on the Thames became a memory from grandpa's time. The world has been cool and the world has been hot. And it will become cooler again and hotter again after that. It is a natural cycle.

The question is what causes the variations in temperature. Is it human activity? I doubt it. There are many natural causes for climate change among which is variable solar output, variations in the earth orbit, variations in the tilt of the the axis of rotation and variations in secondary and tertiary cosmic radiations which affects cloud formation.

Check your premises.

Bob Kolker

Also this wasn't my post. The quote tags got mismatched.

[Bob Kolker 0]

What warming trend? I mean, you're engaged in propaganda by repeating the lie.

No lie. The world got warmer and the Little Ice Age ended about 1750 or thereabouts. Eventually having ice skating in the canals of Amsterdam and Ice Fairs on the Thames became a memory from grandpa's time. The world has been cool and the world has been hot. And it will become cooler again and hotter again after that. It is a natural cycle.

The question is what causes the variations in temperature. Is it human activity? I doubt it. There are many natural causes for climate change among which is variable solar output, variations in the earth orbit, variations in the tilt of the the axis of rotation and variations in secondary and tertiary cosmic radiations which affects cloud formation.

Check your premises.

Bob Kolker

Also this wasn't my post. The quote tags got mismatched.

My apologies to you. But what I said to whomever it might have been aimed is correct.

I wish people would check out climate history as measured and recorded before the question of warming became politically polluted. There was a time when the world was a lot warmer than it is now. There was a time when Greenland was green and Vikings farmed on it and raised cattle there. That was during the medieval warming period which was followed by the Little Ice Age when Europe and parts of North America cooled down considerably. Neither period was due to human industrial activity since there was no industrial activity to speak of.

Bob Kolker

Bob Kolker

[Thales 0]

What warming trend? I mean, you're engaged in propaganda by repeating the lie.

No lie. The world got warmer and the Little Ice Age ended about 1750 or thereabouts. Eventually having ice skating in the canals of Amsterdam and Ice Fairs on the Thames became a memory from grandpa's time. The world has been cool and the world has been hot. And it will become cooler again and hotter again after that. It is a natural cycle.

The question is what causes the variations in temperature. Is it human activity? I doubt it. There are many natural causes for climate change among which is variable solar output, variations in the earth orbit, variations in the tilt of the the axis of rotation and variations in secondary and tertiary cosmic radiations which affects cloud formation.

Check your premises.

Bob Kolker

I've checked this a million times. Maybe a million and one times. In terms of statistical significance, there has been no warming since the late 1980s. That was in a recent talk by Richard Lindzen before Climategate broke out. Yes, of course I am well aware of the warming since the little ice age, and of the Medieval optimum, and of the even warmer Roman period. And I'm aware that going back thousands and millions of years we are in an over all warm period that is very much in the norm. I know these things quite well, so much so that I'm really tired of the matter.

At the end of the day the people pushing global warming are using every trick in the book, from cooking the books to overwhelming you with endless reams of data from every odd direction in an attempt, I believe, to muddy the waters. Scientists like Richard Lindzen and Patrick Michaels, otoh, present clear and concise arguments focused on essentials.