Global warming ! Dontcha just hate it !!

Climate change - another perspective on the historical temperature record

Climate is the continuation of the oceans by other means
Arnd Bernaerts 1992 ***


Watts up with that blog has a first rate analysis by Bill Illis - Adjusting Temperatures for the ENSO and the AMO which he describes ....

" People have noted for a long time that the effect of the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) should be accounted for and adjusted for in analyzing temperature trends. The same point has been raised for the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation ( not to be confused with not be confused with the North Atlantic Oscillation.) (AMO). Until now, there has not been a robust method of doing so.

This post will outline a simple least squares regression solution to adjusting monthly temperatures for the impact of the ENSO and AMO There is no smoothing of the data, no plugging of the data; this is a simple mathematical calculation."

Basically, a highly successful attempt to account for global temperature records after adjusting for the ocean oscillations ENSO and AMO. His statisticalanalysis which is lengthy and detailed, requires considerable efffort and knowledge to follow, but it clearly shows that after adjusting for the temperature variation caused by ocean oscillations, there is very little "climate change" signature left.

Al Fin who claims to float between North America and Afghanistan provides a perfect, clear and simple explanation of Illis's paper / essay.

The sun drives the ocean oscillations. Ocean oscillations plus water vapour/cloud effects then drive Earth's climate. CO2 has only a marginal effect. The Earth is currently undergoing a cooling phase.

A David L Hagen comments "Can the effects of the Urban Heat Island effect be quantitatively separated from CO2 forcing on temperature trends?" ... which highlights, if nothing else the paucity (or even non-existence) of study / research into another 20th century phenomenom, a further direct effect of burning fossil fuels which seems to have eluded the crazed IPCC bunch of scientists with a political agenda and hungry for research grants.

***
Capt. Dr. Arnd Bernaerts Postfach 730462 22124 Hamburg, Germany Phone: +49-40-67580714 E-Mail: arnd1939@yahoo.com

A trained seaman and a master mariner, he was a shipmaster before he became
a lawyer and a doctor of law in the 1970s, with a law office in Hamburg, and an international consultant since the 1980s. see here

Beware God's cleared up the Sun's spots - super cool period ahead ?

Sunspot data has been collected since 1749. Now the job is handled by Mount Wilson Observatory, which is part of UCLA - this pic was taken minutes ago.

Sunspot activity on the face of the sun that we can see is cyclical - we are now at the start of Solar Cycle 24 . It is uncommon / rare for no sunspots to be visible but in the whole of August 2008 not a single sunspot has been recorded (last such even June 1913) - this follows 7 months when the average sunspot number has been 3. (NOAA claim a "half/spot" has been seen in August - Mount Wilson disagree.) Also check out monthly report from Solar Influences Data Analysis Centre SIDA part of Royal Belgian Observatory

The 11-year sunspot cycle is not built symmetrically. The ascending part from minimum to maximum is shorter than the declining part from maximum to minimum.

This apparent lack of solar activity has caught astronomers on the hop. However 2 authors based at the National Solar Observatory (NSO) in Tucson AZ. proposed, in a paper in 2005 , eventually refused publication in the respected journal Science ,that from observed minute spectroscopic and magnetic changes they could reasonably extrapolate that within 10 years sunspots would vanish completely.

In the past millenium there have been 3 such "Maunder Minimum" events Dalton, Maunder, and Spörer Minimums, have all led to rapid cooling. One was large enough to be called a "mini ice age".

Whilst agriculture evidently needs heat for crop growth, cooling produces shorter growing seasons , crop yields drop accelerated by autumn frosts.

Therefore the gloomy summers experienced in the last few years in the UK may be explained by the sun's dynamo slowing down . Anthony Watts a meteorologist explains that the effect of sunspots on TSI (total solar irradiance) is negligible, but the reduction in the solar magnetosphere affects cloud formation here on Earth, which in turn modulates climate.

Clouds have a hundred times stronger effect on weather and climate than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. H. E. Landsberg has shown that if the atmosphere’s carbon dioxide content doubled, its effect would be cancelled out if the cloud cover expanded by 1%. (Landsberg, H. E.: Man-made climatic changes. In: Proceedings of the symposium on physical and dynamic climatology of the World Meteorological Organization 347 (1974), 262.)

It seems remarkable but the study of clouds, and their origins is imperfectly understood. Physicist Henrik Svensmark, claims to have proven that galactic cosmic rays -- which the sun's magnetic field partially shields the Earth from -- increase the formation of molecular clusters that promote cloud growth.he says this is a more significant factor in climate change than greenhouse gases.

Briefly , when the solar wind is strong and cosmic rays are weak, the global cloud cover shrinks. It extends when cosmic rays are strong because the solar wind is weak. This effect, attributed to cloud seeding by ionized secondary particles, causes a change in cloud cover by more than 3 % within 3 ½ years.

Ilya Usoskin is a solar physicist at the University of Oulu, Finland, says the equation "more rays equals more clouds" is a simplification and points out the effects are not global but are more important at certain latitudes and altitudes which control climate.

J. E. Hansen who is a renowned cheer leader and protagonist of global warming said in 1998 (Hansen, J. E., Sato, M., Lacis, A., Ruedy, R., Tegen, I., and Matthews, E.: Climate forcings in the industrial era. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 95 (1998), 12753-12758:

"The forcings that drive long-term climate change are not known with an accuracy sufficient to define future climate change ... The natural forcing due to solar irradiance changes may play a larger role in long-term climate change than inferred from comparisons with general circulation models alone."

Nigel Calder pointed out in the Times Feb 11th 2007 The best measurements of global air temperatures come from American weather satellites, and they show wobbles but no overall change since 1999. The silence of the IPCC lobby remains silent on this unpersuasive and inconvenient Truth.

This was immediately prior to his publication of, "The Chilling Stars: The New Theory of Climate Change " by Henrik Svensmark and Nigel Calder Amazon billed as "Nigel Calder has provided a very readable explanation of how solar activity affects climate change"

Calder attacks the agreed and current consensus on the role of anthropogenic greenhous gases. Of course non scientific , non peer reviewed souls must not upset the IPCC whose real reason is to increase the size and scope of government, and centralizing power. You notice the alarmism, and their call for "something to be done about it," meaning for individuals to give up freedom and conveniences and for government to increase taxes and regulation. We posted about this Friday, March 09, 2007 The climate on the climate change crisis is changing

But thats's another story ... Meanwhile lets just have a look at the sun - naked.

PS SOHO sun images here SIDA sunspot cycles here as Gemma says, to make them bigger simply click on them.

The climate on the climate change crisis is changing

In reply, or by happy coincidence, to the UK Channel 4 TV program "The Great Climate Crisis Swindle" last night Real Climate send us notice of their posting today 9 Mar 2007
‘Cosmoclimatology’ - tired old arguments in new clothes

"In a recent issue of the journal Astronomy and Geophysics (A&G), Henrik Svensmark coined a new term: 'cosmoclimatology' . I think 'cosmoclimatology' is a good and refreshing name for anything combining our cosmos with our climate. However, all other aspects of the article I found very disappointing......

Which appears to be the same vapid academic debate and rearguard action from the dyed in the wool, blinkered Kyoto maniacs.

"There are a number of issues which really make the A&G paper poor in my view. One is the neglect to address old criticism of the hypothesis that galactic cosmic rays (GCR) change our climate by modulating clouds..." and the startling conclusion..."I wonder if Svensmark really knows what he talks about."

For those interested in further reading about how funding on "climate change" is easier to secure if there is no questioning of the current paradigm (or Litany as Lomborg describes it)resulting in a self-perpetuating self-interest by scientists, applauded by an unthinking and unquestioning press they may read with profit Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media by Patrick J Michaels - a far sighted man from a Virginian vale of academe who has been writing on this topic since 1992.

Czech President Klaus says Al Gore is insane hits out at IPCC and politicized climate change scientists

Hospodářské noviny,is a Prague based, Czech economics daily and on the 9th of February they published a interview with Václav Klaus, Second President of the Czech Republic - he looks a real avuncular sort, the man should be on TV selling Werther's Originals. Anyway he was quizzed on his views on the alleged threat of global warming.Václav Klaus: Žádné ničení planety nevidím a nikdy jsem ani neviděl

Fortunately Harvard Professor Lubos Motl is both a physicist and a Czech and has handily translated this for us, on his website.

President of Czech Republic Calls Man-Made Global Warming a 'Myth' - Questions Gore's Sanity

Czech president Vaclav Klaus has criticized the UN panel on global warming, claiming that it was a political authority without any scientific basis.

Here are some excerpts - checkout the Profs website for the complete interview - and some entertaining views on the stringy Universe we share with him.

Q: IPCC has released its report and you say that the global warming is a false myth. How did you get this idea, Mr President?

A: It's not my idea. Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment. Also, it's an undignified slapstick that people don't wait for the full report in May 2007 but instead respond, in such a serious way, to the summary for policymakers where all the "but's" are scratched, removed, and replaced by oversimplified theses.

This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians. If the European Commission is instantly going to buy such a trick, we have another very good reason to think that the countries themselves, not the Commission, should be deciding about similar issues.
.................
Q: How do you explain that there is no other comparably senior statesman in Europe who would advocate this viewpoint? No one else has such strong opinions...

A: My opinions about this issue simply are strong. Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice.
.................
• Q: But you're not a climate scientist. Do you have a sufficient knowledge and enough information?

A: Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable and this fact scares me. The second part of the sentence should be: we also have lots of reports, studies, and books of climatologists whose conclusions are diametrally opposite.

Indeed, I never measure the thickness of ice in Antarctica. I really don't know how to do it and don't plan to learn it. However, as a scientifically oriented person, I know how to read science reports about these questions, for example about ice in Antarctica. I don't have to be a climate scientist myself to read them. And inside the papers I have read, the conclusions we may see in the media simply don't appear. But let me promise you something: this topic troubles me which is why I started to write an article about it last Christmas. The article expanded and became a book. In a couple of months, it will be published. One chapter out of seven will organize my opinions about the climate change. Environmentalism and green ideology is something very different from climate science. Various findings and screams of scientists are abused by this ideology.

.....
A: It's such a nonsense that I have probably not heard a bigger nonsense yet.•

Q: Don't you believe that we're ruining our planet?

A: I will pretend that I haven't heard you. Perhaps only Mr Al Gore may be saying something along these lines: a sane person can't. I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing.

It is refreshing to hear such forthright views expressed in such a direct fashion - no doubt we are going to hear a lot more straight talking from President Klaus amongst the endless tosh we are fed

The stamp is by the way from the nation of Polynesian State of Palau who always vote against any UN motion critical of Israel - it is said to represent ex Vice President Al Gore inventor of the Internet.