Earth Changes
Republican lawmakers have blasted EPA for failing to release the document, accusing the Obama administration of suppressing dissenting views for political purposes. But EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson says the agency considered a broad range of opinions and maintained an open and transparent process in developing the proposed finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare.
Dissent on the proposal was expressed in a March 16 report (pdf) by Alan Carlin and John Davidson of EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics. They raise questions about data that EPA used to develop the proposed finding. The Washington-based Competitive Enterprise Institute posted the document on its Web site last night.
"While we hoped that EPA would release the final report, we're tired of waiting for this agency to become transparent, even though its administrator has been talking transparency since she took office," said CEI attorney Sam Kazman. "So we are releasing a draft version of the report ourselves, today."
Introduction
The sun was dismissed by the IPCC as a contributor to the apparent warming of the Earth's climate during the period from 1975 to 2000.
It seems to be accepted that the warming that occurred in the early part of the 20th Century was more likely solar induced but it is asserted that in the late 20th Century man made influences took over and forced a rise in global temperatures that would not otherwise have happened naturally. However it is notable that the highest recorded US mainland temperatures were recorded in the 1930s and not the 1990s. That interesting fact was obscured until recently when the data was investigated and the records corrected.
I have already dealt with the likelihood that the IPCC was in error regarding solar influence in my article for climaterealists.com and which can be found here:
The Death Blow to Anthropogenic Global Warming
For the purposes of this article I will ignore the Urban Heat Island effect that seems to have contaminated the surface station record as a result of poor recording site management and surrounding development over many years. Suffice it to say that the more recent satellite recordings do confirm a warming of the air until recently, albeit less than suggested by surface records and far less than that anticipated by climate models.
The concern about the human effects on global climate as opposed to local effects is now reaching a crescendo with energy control, pricing and rationing measures being pushed through in many parts of the Western world and especially in the USA and the UK.
Energy costs are critical to modern civilisations and their abilities to advance whilst providing adequately for their citizens, especially the poorest, so anything that significantly affects such costs or indeed energy availability is of the utmost importance.
If the sun is primarily responsible for observed global air temperature changes (even if heavily modulated by ocean behaviour as I contend elsewhere) then we need to know sooner rather than later otherwise a misdiagnosis of the causes of climate change could cause unimaginable disruption and hardship through the imposition of incorrect remedies.
The sun and it's cycles seem to have undergone a sharp change in behaviour in recent years hence the importance of concentrating specifically on the solar cycles 24 and 25 which taken together are likely to tell us much of what we need to know about climate change and thus the right measures we need to adopt in order to adapt to it. I do not believe we can ever adequately control natural climate swings.
But the passage of this bill does not signify any great "green revolution" or "growing" climate "awareness" on the part of Congress. Instead, the methods and manner that the Pelosi led House achieved final passage, represents nothing more than unrestrained exercise of raw political power, arm-twisting, intimidation and special interest handouts. (See: Pay offs: 'Florida Democrat won $50 million pledge of support for proposed hurricane research facility in his district')
The House of Representatives passed a bill it did not read, did not understand. A bill that is based on crumbling scientific claims and a bill that will have no detectable climate impact (assuming climate fear promoters are correct on the science and the bill is fully implemented - both implausible assumptions).
Proponents of the bill made spectacular claims in their efforts to impress the urgency of the bill on their colleagues. To illustrate just how delusional these claims became, imagine if in 1909 the U.S. Congress passed a bill attempting to predict climate, temperature and the energy mix powering our national economy in the year 2000. (not to mention sanctimonious claims about "saving the Earth.") Any such attempt would have been ridiculed, but somehow in 2009, attempting to control the economy and climate of the year 2100 is seen as reasonable by many.
The calm on the surface of the sun ultimately will have some say in the course of weather across the Earth. For one, if the sunspot pattern does not revitalize soon, and continues for the next few months or years, it is conceivable that a more volatile pattern of trough formation and cold intrusions could occur, with the polar ice caps undergoing some growth and global sea surface temperatures less prone to rise in critical areas.
For instance, with an emerging El Nino the lack of solar energy influx may provide a critical boost of equatorial SSTs from going into the "strong" +ENSO designation. A weak to moderate El Nino episode, against what appears to be a neutral PDO configuration, may mean better capacity for -EPO and +PNA ridge development against an invigorated storm track running close to 30 N Latitude.
That, in combination with better-organized snow and ice fields in northern Canada, may well mean that the character of the upcoming autumn and winter could be far different (yes, longer-lasting and more frequent cold advection cases) than the past three NDJFM periods. The sun has been very quiet, with a decreasing number of sunspots and flarings since January 2002.
What makes this report different from any of its predecessors is the resolution of the predictions that the Met Office is making. They are not just presenting a general impression of what might happen globally during this century, or even how climate change could affect the UK as a whole. They are claiming that they can predict what will happen in individual regions of the country. Apparently there is even a page somewhere on their website where you can enter your postcode and find out how your street will be affected by global warming in 2040 or 2080, although I've failed to find it.

Arizona may become the first state to ban costly legislation based on climate change theory.
One state looks to ensure its citizens do not have to pay for climate change efforts
Climate change is a controversial topic. Some believe man is causing the world to warm. Others point out that the Earth has undergone solar warming and cooling for millions of years and that current temperatures are well within historic levels. A recent report challenging AGW theory showed significant support with 31,478 U.S. researchers and scientists, many of whom hold Ph.D's, signing a statement that they believe that man has not played a part in the current warming trend.
Arizona is now close to becoming the first state to outlaw climate change legislation. The state Senate voted Monday, 19-10 to approve a bill banning the Department of Environmental Quality from enacting or enforcing measures with language pertaining to climate change. The bill is now awaiting House approval.
But the science is not settled. If it were, we would have great confidence in all these statements: 1) the world is getting warmer, 2) that's more bad than good, 3) humans are causing the warming, and 4) we know how to fix the problem.
If either of the first two statements is wrong, then warming is not a crisis. If either of the last two is not correct, we can't fix it. What are the chances that all four are true ?
To find out, we must multiply the four individual probabilities by each other. For example, if each statement has a 70 percent chance of being correct, the overall probability is just 24 percent that all are true.
The average arctic temperature is still not above (take your pick) 32°F 0°C 273.15°K - this the latest date in fifty years of record keeping that this has happened. Usually it is beginning to level off now and if it does so, it will stay near freezing on average in the arctic leading to still less melting than last summer which saw a 9% increase in arctic ice than in 2007.
There is a webcam at the "North Pole" (at least it starts out very near there) that reports via satellite data uplink at regular intervals. They also have a weather station with a once weekly data plot. Note it is still below zero centigrade there.
Potoczak owns a bee farm in Corfu and he's part of the Western New York Honey Producers group. He says his farm is still seeing a loss of bees and there's no solid explanation for it, but researchers are looking into possible reasons. "The name given to this situation is Colony Collapse Disorder, that's because they don't know what's doing it, the {bee} colony just collapses," Potoczak said. "The bees are there one week and then it just goes downhill... the bees disappear, they're gone and there's nothing left."
Meteorologists said rains would continue into the next week, keeping the east and southwest of the central European country on flood warning until Wednesday.