Thursday, 15 October 2009

More on Global Cooling

This could be an important time, leading to great relief and perhaps great fear. It appears that the media are finally seeing the cracks in global warming. Much as I hate to link the Daily Mail, as I have said before sources that go off the deep end sometimes will also are sometimes go the whole way, where few others dare go so far.

So temperature records are falling in falling temperatures. Austria’s earliest recorded snows, an American town breaking record low by seven degrees.

Even the alarmists are admitting that temperatures might fall for two decades, although they insist that the rising trend will overcome that.

It is easy to see the fatal flaw in their argument, it is mentioned in the Daily Mail article, “…the global cooling from 1945 to 1977…”. So the globe was cooling until 1977, and the warmest year since 1934 was 1998, and the world has been at an even temperature then cooling since, and now might cool for two decades.

So let me see if I have the sequence right, starting in 1947. The world cooled for three decades, then warmed for two decades and then is about to cool for another two decades before returning to a warming trend. Ooooookaaaaaay. Errrrrrrmmmmmm, I am not sure if you’re getting this, but I don’t see any consistent trend at all here. I see a pattern of rising and falling temperatures, probably therefore dominated by a factor that itself rises and falls.

Since the alarmists have been going on at us for 15 years now about the fact that CO2 levels have been rising exponentially, I am getting the idea that they don’t fit the pattern. I am not sure what physics these guys have, but mine is a little rusty; I did leave university 14 years ago. Can an exponential rise in CO2 really trigger oscillations in temperature? I reckon  it’s possible, but I also am damned sure that is not what those little models predicted.

With the hockey-stick curve having fallen for a second time, and no sign of sea-level rises the evidence for anthropogenic global warming is looking remarkably thin.

Stumble Upon Toolbar


Anonymous said...

So, let me get this right, you are saying that according to the article in the Daily Mail everything they have been telling us for years is not true? Why would they do that?

Doubting Richard said...

No. I don't read the Daily Mail, in fact I generally consciously avoid it since they lied about me, so I have no idea what they have been telling us for years. If they have been long supporters of the panic then this is an even more meaningful story.

I am saying that the daily Mail is reporting something that is backed by other evidence (like the fact that it is very cold) and other sources. The Daily Mail was mentioned and linked as they happen to have a good article in this particular case, that I followed a link to. The material is available elsewhere, but I have not seen a well-known source with the points I wanted to highlight given so succinctly.

Nicole said...

Pft. We have that American town beat by 13 degrees. Heard on the radio this morning that my American town was 20 degrees below average today. It's cold here for mid-October.

I still don't think this will make much of a dent in the AGW crowd. They are far too invested in the myth and there is far too much money made off of the manufactured panic.

Doubting Richard said...

Blimey, Nicole.

Anyway, I am hoping for some good skiing this winter!

Nicole said...

I don't know what they are predicting for over the pond, but here in the US we are supposed to have a very, very harsh and cold winter. Makes up for the mild winter last year and mild summer this year, I suppose. :)

Doubting Richard said...

Ah, we had a cold winter last year and a really cool, wet summer. So far not looking like 'global' anything!

Cedric Katesby said...

Getting your science from the media is a bad idea.
Get your science from science sources.
NASA, The Royal Society, NCAR, NAS etc.
They are all good.
Always take your baloney kit with you.

Post a Comment