Global cooling

Source: Orange County Register

May 25th, 2010, 3:12 pm · 49 Comments · posted by Mark Landsbaum

The Heartland Institute’s James M. Taylor, an environmental policy expert, said global cooling is already happening. Figures from the Rutgers University Global Snow Lab show snow records from the last 10 years exceeded the records set in the 1960s and 1970s.

The past “decade set a record for largest average global snow extent,” Taylor said.

There is this too: “Eight straight years’ global temperature downtrend: The authoritative SPPI composite index of global mean surface temperature anomalies, taking the mean of two surface and two satellite datasets and updated through November 2008, shows a pronounced downtrend for eight full years. Not one of the climate models relied upon by the IPCC had predicted this downturn.” – Lord Christopher Monckton.


Then this:

“In fact global warming has stopped and a cooling is beginning. No climate model has predicted a cooling of the Earth – quite the contrary. And this means that the projections of future climate are unreliable,” writes Henrik Svensmark, Professor, Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen.

From “According to the U.S. National Climate Data Center 2008 temperatures in the USA were below the 115 year average for most of the country link. U.S. 2009 summer temperatures were also very cool, the 34th coolest since 1895?

And this from “The cold this December and January has been noteworthy and newsworthy. We just posted that December 2009 was the Second Snowiest on Record in the Northern Hemisphere. Beijing was hit by its heaviest snowfall in 60 years, and Korea had the largest snowfall ever recorded since record keeping began in 1937. Plus all of Britain was recently covered by snow. The cold is setting records too. Oranges are freezing and millions of tropical fish are dying in Florida, there are Record low temperatures in Cuba and thousands of new low temperature records being set in the USA as well as Europe.”

Then there’s this: “US temperatures have only risen .2 (that’s POINT 2) degrees F from 1940!” –

And of course this: “Dr. Patrick Michaels has demonstrated this effect is a common problem with ground- based recording stations, many of which originally were located in predominantly rural areas, but over time have suffered background bias due to urban sprawl and the encroachment of concrete and asphalt ( the “urban heat island effect”). The result has been an upward distortion of increases in ground temperature over time. Satellite measurements are not limited in this way, and are accurate to within 0.1° C. They are widely recognized by scientists as the most accurate data available. Significantly, global temperature readings from orbiting satellites show no significant warming in the 18 years they have been continuously recording and returning data.”

THE BOTTOM LINE is that the ground-level measuring of temperature is highly irregular, unreliable and spotty, at best. Many surface measuring stations are located next to heat-emitting sources that didn’t used to be there. Hundreds if not thousands of stations have been moved or simply removed entirely, skewing comparisons over time and from place to place. And then there’s the alleged suppression of ground-station readings that didn’t jibe with the politically correct theory of warming.

The fact is, whatever temperature changes have occurred in recent decades – if we can know them at all – are probably infinitesimally minute, utterly unreliable and absolutely lacking in significance no matter which direction they may be going, up or down, and almost completely independent of man-made causes because human contributions are so tiny.

And that’s only if you buy the idea that CO2 increases temperature, which is highly doubtful in itself.

As long as we’re talking about tiny, consider that at best, using their own highly questionable calculations based on flawed measuring, selective data and “adjusted” numbers, the earth’s global temperature has increased a fraction – a fraction – of 1 degree in more than a century. The margin of error alone negates whatever significance can be inferred from such a calculation.

Hey, based on that, is anyone really eager to completely revamp the economy? Al Gore and company stand to gain. Do you?

What do you think?