Earth ChangesS


Don't e-mail me the UKMET ideas

I have been getting a lot of e-mail on the UKMET center announcement which people email me, and I am not reading. Why? Because such agenda-driven agencies, and plainly they are, can distract me from the actual weather. I am aware of their position, I think it makes them helpless in the face of the obvious if its coming, and unlike me, I do respect the opposite side's argument. What I don't respect is a scientific agency that is driven more by government policy than the science. So, their agenda is plain.. Mine is also..,debate and let's get the right answer.

Succinctly put, I can't trust what they say given the things I know to be fact about past climate conditions that the Earth has experienced. They have ranged from ice fairs on the Thames in the time of Victoria to weather which inspired the tapestry's of orange trees around the time of the Tudors...which occurred at the last end of the warm cycle that predated the mini ice age that was ending around the time of the Victorian reign.

Bizarro Earth

Saving the Earth?

global warming snowman demonstration
© unknown

Every time I hear someone say something about "saving the Earth" I want to say, "Are you out of your mind?"

The Earth is some 4.5 billion - that's billion with a b - years old. How did it ever manage to exist without us? How did it survive ice ages, meteor impacts, and all the other stuff that went on before homo sapiens decided to climb down out of the trees and walk upright?

If human beings are responsible for "global warming" how did the Earth manage to get through various earlier stages such as the Permian, Triassic, Jurassic, Paleocene, Eocene, Oligocene, Miocene, Pleistocene, and our era, the Holocene which reaches back a mere 10,000 years; a period that matches up with the ending of the last major ice age.


New Report On The Lack Of Recent Global Warming

There is an interesting article on at MSNBC from the Discovery Channel titled, "Warming might be on hold, study finds Authors sense hibernation, but warn of 'explosive' rise later" (Link)

This article finally (although implicitly) acknowledges in the media that there a substantive issue with the predictions of the IPCC and CCSP models.

It includes the revealing comments that
"according to a new study, global warming may have hit a speed bump and could go into hiding for decades."
"It is possible that a fraction of the most recent rapid warming since the 1970's was due to a free variation in climate," Isaac Held of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Princeton, New Jersey wrote in an email to Discovery News. "Suggesting that the warming might possibly slow down or even stagnate for a few years before rapid warming commences again."

Swanson thinks the trend could continue for up to 30 years. But he warned that it's just a hiccup, and that humans' penchant for spewing greenhouse gases will certainly come back to haunt us.

"When the climate kicks back out of this state, we'll have explosive warming," Swanson said. "Thirty years of greenhouse gas radiative forcing will still be there and then bang, the warming will return and be very aggressive."
First, these statements clearly indicate that the IPCC and CCSP global model predictions (which are being used as the basis for making expensive and difficult to implement government policies) are seriously flawed.


Two years of cooling has destroyed global warming consensus

Last June I found myself somewhere over Central America at about 37,000 feet in a 757, en route to the Andes Mountains in Peru for an annual missionary trek that I have been a part of since 1999. While getting a cup of coffee in the galley in the rear of the aircraft, I struck up a conversation with a Peruvian who wanted to know what a Gringo was doing traveling to his country for the eighth time in ten years. I explained that our treks through the mountains to visit different villages of indigenous Quechua often took us through passes or pasos de portachuelos at the edge of snow fields starting around 16,000 feet.

In ten or twenty years all the snow and ice will be gone from the Nevados of the Cordillera Blanca because of global warming, he said to me in Spanish.

So when I arrived a day later in the city of Huaraz in the Callejon de Huaylas, I was curious to see if in fact the glaciers had retreated and if the snow cover was reduced from prior years. What I learned was in fact, just the opposite - from my own photographs and from the testimonies of the people with whom I spoke over the next two weeks.


Natural Global Warmings Have Become More Moderate

This week, at the 2nd international conference of man-made warming skeptics sponsored by the Heartland Institute in New York, I'll predict the earth's warming/cooling trends for the 21st century.

I will be among splendid company such as John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel, Ross McKitrick, who debunked the "hockey stick" study, physicist Willie Soon, and many other presenters with brilliant credentials. A thousand scientists, economists, and skeptics from every walk of life will meet to discuss the current climate indicators.

I'll use physical evidence of the more than 500 warmings in the past million years, which are found worldwide in ice cores, seabed sediments, fossil pollen and cave stalagmites. At least 700 scientists have published evidence on these solar-driven Dansgaared-Oeschger cycles. The good news is that the D-O cycle's warmings have been getting somewhat cooler for the past 10,000 years, and there is no evidence that human-emitted CO2 will make them much warmer.

Better Earth

It's the Sun, stupid!

New direct evidence demonstrate that changes in solar activity influence climate - The theory that climate change is chiefly caused by solar influences "is no longer tenable," says US National Academy of Sciences president Ralph Cicerone. Carbon dioxide, he argues, is the key driver of recent climate change. I beg to differ.

The amount and distribution of solar energy that we receive varies as the Earth revolves around the Sun and also in response to changes in the Sun's activity. Scientists have now been studying solar influences on climate for 5000 years.

Chinese imperial astronomers kept detailed sunspot records. They noticed that more sunspots meant warmer weather on Earth. In 1801, the celebrated astronomer William Herschel noticed that when there were few spots, the price of wheat soared - because, he surmised, less "light and heat" from the Sun resulted in reduced harvests.

Is it true then that solar radiation, which supplies Earth with the energy that drives our climate, and caused so many climate shifts over the ages, is no longer the principal influence on climate change?

Comment: Dr. Willie Soon's Harvard affiliations can be found here.

Wikipedia page on Dr. Willie Soon is here.

Notice how Dr. Willie Soon makes it clear at the end of this article that this is his opinion based upon 18 years of scientific research. This wouldn't be evidence of this career researcher trying to protect himself from being fired, harassed or blacklisted in the scientific and academic community would it?


Alaskan weather "very, very unusual"

National Weather Service Fairbanks Alaska

Stormy weather over the Bering Sea .. Significant snowfall possible over the interior Friday...

In most Alaska winters, winter storms reach their greatest strength and frequency in November, December, and January. By February rough weather begins to subside. By April the spring season usually comes gently.

This winter has not followed the normal pattern. During February a series of 8 strong low pressure systems made their way through the Bering Sea, all accompanied by gale force winds.


Where's global warming?

Suppose the climate landscape in recent weeks looked something like this:

Half the country was experiencing its mildest winter in years, with no sign of snow in many Northern states. Most of the Great Lakes were ice-free. Not a single Canadian province had had a white Christmas. There was a new study discussing a mysterious surge in global temperatures - a warming trend more intense than computer models had predicted. Other scientists admitted that, because of a bug in satellite sensors, they had been vastly overestimating the extent of Arctic sea ice.

If all that were happening on the climate-change front, do you think you'd be hearing about it on the news? Seeing it on Page 1 of your daily paper? Would politicians be exclaiming that global warming was even more of a crisis than they'd thought? Would environmentalists be skewering global-warming "deniers" for clinging to their skepticism despite the growing case against it?

No doubt.

But it isn't such hints of a planetary warming trend that have been piling up in profusion lately. Just the opposite.


US: Colorado wages battle with bark beetles

As sunset softens the vast Colorado sky into warm shades of pink and blue, the sound of chainsaws jars the stillness of this remote and rugged wilderness.

A forest service team works quickly, felling dozens of dead or dying lodgepole pines, the majestic trees that have towered over this region for generations. They are locked in a race against the mountain bark beetle, a tiny insect the size of a rice kernel, which is devouring unprecedented swathes of woodland across the US and Canadian north-west.

"It has reached a level where we cannot do anything to stop the bark beetle," said Clint Kyhl, a bark beetle incident commander for the US Forest Service. "So now our main focus is mitigating the impact of all these dead and dying trees."

Bizarro Earth

US: Wells in New England tested for uranium

The U.S. Geological Survey has begun a survey of private wells in New England to determine how many contain dangerous levels of uranium.

John Colman is leading the investigation, working with the Massachusetts departments of public health and environmental protection, The Boston Globe reported Friday. Next week, 1,600 residents of three counties in eastern Massachusetts will get letters with two plastic bottles asking for samples of their water.