The article: Has CO2 warmed the planet at all in the last 50 years? It’s harder to tell than you think explains the uncertainty regarding the Anthropogenic Global Warming proposition.
It seems clear that the perception of human caused “Global Warming” is a function of several factors:
1) Urban Heat Island Effect (UHI) – the effect of concentrated human technocratic infrastructure that raises local temperatures. The proximate causes of UHI range from placement of weather recording stations in areas of artificial heat generation (airports, near air conditioners r other industrial heat sources) to generalized heat bubbles surrounding major cities. Selection of recording sites is critical in evaluating temperature records. (See numerous articles on Watts Up With That?)
3) Political agendas – environmental groups, UN/IPCC, World Bank, International Monetary Fund – organizations such as the IPCC, the Met Office, Union of Concerned Scientists, United Nations World Meteorological Organization are not scientific organizations, they are science policy organization. Therefore, the conclusions they reach and communicate are not scientific conclusions, they are policy recommendations based on interpreted results of scientific investigation. The United Nations focus is on “sustainable development,” and most, if not all of their policy documents are couched in terms of making the developed nations pay for continuing development in the “global South.” Environmental organizations such as Greenpeace, The Sierra Club, and World Wildlife Fund have changed from grassroots advocacy and action to political lobbying organizations, requiring multi-million dollar budgets and a compromising presence in world seats of power and influence.
Some one or some organization is attempting to influence the upcoming annual meeting of the American Meteorological Society (AMS).
According to Urging American Meteorological Society to Get Tougher on Climate Change, a program called Forecast the Facts is attempting to lobby the AMS to change their 5-year policy on climate change to a new policy “drafted by a panel of [unidentified] experts” (emphasis added). The “Campaign Director” is identified as Daniel Souweine.
The web site describes CEL as: “a non-profit, non-partisan organization that uses digital media and technology to amplify the voices of underrepresented constituencies. We seek to empower individuals to take collective action on the issues that concern them, promoting a world of greater equality and justice in the process.”
The CEL web site lists 350.org as a “Partner,” which describes itself as: “building a global grassroots movement to solve the climate crisis. Our online campaigns, grassroots organizing, and mass public actions are led from the bottom up by thousands of volunteer organizers in over 188 countries.“
Sounds like birds of a feather, even though they are both attempting to lobby a major national organization to change a policy that affects all of its members… from the top down. Hardly grass roots organization. And hardly on behalf of “underrepresented constituencies.”
Evidently, grassroots meteorologists are insufficiently toeing the line when it comes to laying weather patterns at the feet of “global warming.” Someone unnamed wants them to publicly join the global warming bandwagon in blaming human CO2 emissions for observed climate change, ignoring the uncertainty of climate science, ignoring all evidence to the contrary, insisting on one single simplistic explanation for climate change.
TeeVee weather presenters, even those who are qualified meteorologists, are the most visible source of public information about weather and climate. They appear daily to billions of people, and whether or not it is a good idea, their “opinions” about climate change carry a lot of weight in popular culture. It’s no wonder that those whose interests are served by spreading fear of climate change in support of a predetermined economic outcome are after these “grass roots” who fail to tremble in fear of natural climate phenomena.
This is not grass roots, this is Big Money come to the service of shadowy figures in the background of international politics and economics. Who profits from fear of climate change? Who is funding this program to gag independent meteorologists and TeeVee weather presenters?
This is part of a concerted behind-the-scenes program funded by monied interests to subvert all elements of environmental awareness and activism to the cause of money and power, political and economic influence. Global warming hyperbole has been used to discredit free-thinking, independent scientific research, free expression, free thought and free action. The individuals and corporations funding this movement are laying the ground work for society controlled by corporate-government-military oligarchies to maintain the economic and political status quo.
Follow the money…
George Monbiot’s article: Cold Burn requires a more careful response than “Oh yeah? Is everything caused by global warming?”
In short, Monbiot’s article makes the claim that recent cold and snowy weather in the UK and elsewhere is due to warming in the Arctic due to reduced Arctic ice causing the ocean to absorb more heat from the sun, forcing Arctic cold further south. Therefore, severe winters are caused by global warming.
The errors in this in this conclusion are as semantic as they are scientific.
First of all, from the Niggling Small Details Department, the ocean doesn’t absorb heat from the sun. Heat does not travel from the sun to the earth. Energy travels from the sun and is transformed to heat by being absorbed in the atmosphere, land and ocean.
Secondly, and more importantly, the Earth is in a cooling phase at the moment (see Akasofu, 2010 Natural Science at http://www.scirp.org/journal/NS/) and is likely to remain so for the next 20 years or so. What Monbiot is referring to is regional warming, not global warming, which is far more important in terms of yearly weather patterns, aka, the white stuff we shovel off our front walk.
As one might expect, it turns out there is more to this story than meets the UK journalist’s computer keys. “Everyone” knows that the Arctic is warming faster than the rest of the Earth, right? NASA says it, James Hanson says it, Monbiot says it.
How do we know this to be true? Who is doing the measuring?
Well, lots of people actually, and one is no surprised to learn that they don’t all agree.
There are several databases of global temperature records. The above mentioned NASA and James Hanson have one called GISS. HADCRUT is the database for the Hadley Centre of the Met Office and the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, of email fame.
Guess what? They don’t agree.
It seems that the GISS database has been manipulated to fill in Arctic and Antarctic temperature records with those from land data sources, while HADCRUT reports only the records from their true sources.
And guess what? GISS reports 3 degrees C warming in the Arctic and HADCRUT reports 2 degrees cooling. Who you gonna believe?
From many winters I spent in the Arctic screwing trees, I learned (at least) one thing: winter temperatures vary wildly from place to place, from hill top to river valley, from land to ocean, from snow to ice. When I rode my bicycle eight miles to work in Fairbanks, the temperature would vary from 20 below zero at home, to 40 below zero as I rode through the river valley, back up to 20 below zero on the hill top overlooking the valley.
Computer manipulation of Arctic temperature records results in an electronic version of Arctic climate variation that bears little relationship to that experienced by the Inuit who live there.
The “Climate Change causes cold air to move south” scenario is a cartoonish attempt to bolster reputations built on global warming alarmism based on a speculation feedback loop forcing the global climate modeling industry.
Weather is not climate, regional climate variation is not global climate change, climate change is not Anthropogenic Global Warming.