February 10, 2007
Global Warming Update (IV)

Linda Wertheimer on NPR this morning:

We officially have global warming, according to a major scientific report. And just when we get the report, all of a sudden the temperatures drop and 8 feet of snow falls on the New York towns around Lake Superior [sic]. This is an extraordinary winter and I guess that's what global warming means. Weird weather.
British zillionaire Richard Branson has offered a $25 million prize for suggestions to reduce global warming by removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. My entry: Next time you get the urge to fly Virgin Airlines, stay home instead!

Or just wait, and the globe will cool by itself, as Spokane residents learned when they got last month's huge utility bill:

Unseasonably cold weather may have contributed to the spike, Simock said. January 2007 was on average 10 degrees colder than January 2006.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 10, 2007 04:55 PM | Email This
Comments
1. You have to get with the program, Stefan. Any global warming afficianado will tell you that warmer than normal temperatures are undeniable proof that global warming exists. Likewise, cooler than normal temperatures are also undeniable proof that global warming is real, since everyone admits that global warming gives rise to meteorological phenomena that lead to cooler temperatures. Finally, eveyone acknowledges that normal weather patterns are also undeniable proof that global warming is real, because global warming causes temperature extremes that average out to normal temperatures, so when they occur it must be because of global warming.

Uh oh, now we finally have it, a Univeral Theory Of Everything. No matter what we observe, it has to have as its cause global warming. Must be the Holy Grail Of Science. Then again, maybe it's just Junk Science.

Posted by: Interested Observer on February 10, 2007 05:01 PM
2. I'm so glad we have Linda Wertheimer and NPR to tell us it's "official." They are, after all, the arbiters of all that's true and right.

Posted by: stu on February 10, 2007 06:04 PM
3. I got an e-mail from an old leftie friend yesterday forwarding a petition to sign because "Bush is cutting off funding for PBS and NPR". There are times I wish he could.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on February 10, 2007 06:13 PM
4. All that matters is most of the people believe in GW. Talk to 18-24 demographic and I think it increases to 80%.

Posted by: Manco_Dollars on February 10, 2007 06:52 PM
5. That is pretty funny that British zillionaire Richard Branson wants to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere considering that more than 75% of greenhouse gases are water vapor. Nothing like stop the natural cycle of the earth's water replenishment to start a day off right.

Posted by: TrueSoldier on February 10, 2007 07:37 PM
6. All this insight from the same bunch of folks who tell us everything is really going well in Iraq. What a laugh.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on February 10, 2007 08:12 PM
7. Simple solution - Ground Al Gore's Private jet and oust him from his four massive energy sucking homes. Just for a start.

Posted by: GS on February 10, 2007 08:56 PM
8. All this insight from the party that swore if they got in power they would get out of Iraq - Pronto...Eh Unkl Witz?


Looks like Pelosi is too busy getting her $300,000 per trip Pelosi 1 decorated to worry about anything as insignificant to her as Iraq....

Posted by: GS on February 10, 2007 09:02 PM
9. I'm not going to worry about Global Warming until every Global Warming Sycophant starts walking the walk, and gets rid of their cars. And every rich Hollyweird elite or Politician stops contributing to Global Warming by giving up their lavish energy consuming lifestyles. And when Richard Branson shuts down Virgin Atlantic, 'cuz those planes sure do spew a lot of greenhouse gases. And finally, when China takes is seriously enough to start doing everything that the Left Leaning Hysteria mongers fanatically urge us to do, but won't do themselves, and won't ask China to do either.

It's going to be a "Cold" day in Hell before any of that happens, so I think I'll go gas up the SUV and go for a drive.

Posted by: Jeff B. on February 10, 2007 09:43 PM
10. Branson is a nutjob. He wants to pull his airliners to the runway so they don't pollute so much. Not only does pulling a fully loaded 747-400 void the Boeing warrenty, it will also cause major backups on the tarmac due to the time it takes for the aircrafts engines to start up. That guy needs to plant some trees.

Posted by: Andrew S. on February 10, 2007 09:49 PM
11. Andrew @ 10.

Had not heard that. Wow Branson's more wacky than I thought. He should definitely be encouraged to pull his planes to the runway. It won't take long for word to get around and for "customers" to choose an airline that's actually about getting where its customers want to go in a timely fashion. And it would make for plenty of great marketing campaigns at the other airlines as well. I can see it now: "Does your airline spend a lot of time driving? Choose an airline that flies, choose United.

Posted by: Jeff B. on February 10, 2007 10:02 PM
12. do any of you geniuses ever wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat considering, "What if I'm wrong about global warming?"

Posted by: poodle pie on February 10, 2007 10:02 PM
13. Never. But I often ponder how positively serious and important "Inventing the Internet" is going to seem for Al Gore when the sea level hasn't risen significantly in 20 years, and he becomes one of the biggest laughing stocks of all time.

Posted by: Jeff B. on February 10, 2007 10:04 PM
14. poodle pie: No. Not ever.

Posted by: Misty on February 10, 2007 11:00 PM
15. do any of you geniuses ever wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat considering, "What if I'm wrong about global warming?"

Considering that the people pushing hardest for Global Warming™ are the same ones who pushed for the Population Bomb®, The Club of Rome's Resource Report, The Coming Ice Age®, Nucular Winter™, Ten Years to Save the Oceans, Our Landfills are Full and Mikhail Gorbachev as Soviet Saviour, I ain't losing any sleep at all.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega on February 10, 2007 11:02 PM
16. One obvious problem with Linda Wertheimer's NPR report is that no major scientific report has been relased. All that has been been released is the "Summary for Policy Makers" - a sort of executive summary document written by bureaucrats for politicians.

The scientific report has been delayed so that it can be amended from its current draft form to agree with what the bureaucrats have written. I know its weird, but this is how the UN works.

I have obtained a copy of the draft science report which was circulated in May 2006. It is labelled as being a final document and, from what I understand, was used by the bureaucrats in preparing the Summary for Policy Makers.

As a practicing scientist with about 10 years of post seconday science education I can assure you that the scientific report is pretty lean on data and rich in interpretation.

It relies very heavily on models based on anthropomorphic CO2 causing the 1.5 rise in average North American, European and Siberian temperatures since 1850.

It supports its model assumptions that CO2 is the driving force by presenting once again the hockey stick (hokey stick?) and showing the correlation between CO2 and the 1.5 degree rise in Northern Hemispheric average temeratures.

It discussion (not evidence) on alternative mechanisms dismisses without credible reasoning all natural triggers for climate change.

There is no mention of the impact of naturally occurring atmoshperic water vapor being the single most plentiful greenhouse gas.

Solar activity is dismissed as being trivial without any mention of evidence to the contrary both within existing written historical accounts of reduced solar activity accompanying the Little Ice Age, nor the increases in solar activity that have remarkably coincided with the period between 1850 and now.

Woefully absent is anything approaching a thorough examination of Urban Heat Islands. I would trust thier approach far more if they remove the urban heat islands and and Soviet Siberian data rather than state without debate these anomalies have little or no effect on how their model works.

It seems the IPCC did not want any words from their report to appear to contradict their conclusions so they simply ignored or summarily dismissed the evidence to the contrary.

The 90% certainty is made as a statement in the summary and never explained by the science. It is a "qualitative" assessment of the authors' certainty they are correct, NOT a scientifically derived level of confidence.

The final report on the scientific basis for the 2007 IPCC report on climate change is expected to be released this coming May. I certainly hope they a much better job in explaining why they are so certain - hopefully by supporting it with real science rather than the false hype contained in the May 2006 draft.

I have serious doubts the IPCC scientists will anything to contradict their politicial masters. The purges in Europe for non-believers started several years ago and the IPCC is largely composed of post-purge remnants.

Posted by: deadwood on February 11, 2007 01:05 AM
17. Deadwood,
You have the best analysis of the situation I have read in a while.
It seems they pick and choose information.
Will they release all the data source and how they interperted the data.

Posted by: ronk on February 11, 2007 02:01 AM
18. Deadwood,

> As a practicing scientist with about 10 years of post seconday science education I can assure you that the scientific report is pretty lean on data and rich in interpretation.

I am impressed, Deadwood. A practicing scientists posting anonymously here on Sound Politics and saying exactly what these people want to hear.

What is your scientific discipline, Deadwood?

Posted by: David Mathews on February 11, 2007 04:47 AM
19. Hello Raoul,

> Considering that the people pushing hardest for Global Warming™ are the same ones who pushed for the Population Bomb®, The Club of Rome's Resource Report, The Coming Ice Age®, Nucular Winter™, Ten Years to Save the Oceans, Our Landfills are Full and Mikhail Gorbachev as Soviet Saviour, I ain't losing any sleep at all.

Unlike the Republicans who have gotten the United States mired in Iraq based upon lies regarding yellow cake, WMDs, and so forth. The Republicans have killed 3,100 American soldiers and murdered 150,000 Iraqi civilians by their lies.

And there is no end in sight for the Republicans' lies. America cannot win Iraq and cannot leave Iraq. I guess that the Republicans feel that American soldiers are expendable. Losing a handful every day is ok even if the Iraq war was established upon fearmongering lies.

Too bad for the soldiers. They have died because of the President's lies.

Posted by: David Mathews on February 11, 2007 04:54 AM
20. For another perspective, read the story on page B1 of the Wall Street Journal, Feb 9. The title is "Latest Report Shows Climate Pessimists Were Climate Realists". It has many data points. Maybe the scientist who is posting anonymously would like to go through and refute them. Stuart Jenner

Posted by: stuart jenner on February 11, 2007 06:34 AM
21. David, you cannot even utter one comment on topic without bloviating about Iraq. Concern about the troops from your ilk rings hollow. You hate the military as much as you hate the President, admit it.

Posted by: Shut Up, David Mathews on February 11, 2007 09:02 AM
22. I asked the question on the previous "global warming" thread. Just who pays David Mathews to spew leftist talking points at length virtually 24/7?

I bet he calls talk radio too, and starts his spiel by saying "I voted for Bush twice, but..."

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on February 11, 2007 09:32 AM
23. The Real Truth is that Global Warming is a Socialist scheme against the US, just like the CFC craze of the 1980s.

Global Warming is fake - see
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818.ece

Posted by: Marc on February 11, 2007 09:43 AM
24. By the way, the #1 story on Drudge today is about a major snowstorm that is headed for the east coast next week. It's predicted that the storm will be followed by high pressure that will bring "brutally cold air" to the area.

Somehow the loons will find a way to blame the continued snow and cold on "global warming". You can count on it.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on February 11, 2007 09:47 AM
25. David

"Too bad for the soldiers. They have died because of the President's lies."

If this is true, then why is Sandy Berger the one stealing and destroying classified documents?

Posted by: Marc on February 11, 2007 09:48 AM
26. Hey, Raoul! People who get a solid night's sleep are healthier and better adjusted than those who don't.

Maybe poodle pie and DM are insomniacs. That would explain how Dave finds so much time to do all of his ranting. I have heard that extended sleep deprivation can lead to paranoia and hallucinations ... it makes sense when you think about it.

Posted by: Peggy U on February 11, 2007 10:38 AM
27. DM appears to think that what I am reporting here is news. It is not. These problems regarding the global warming theory and model have around since the early 1990's when the politicians at the Rio UN summit first proposed the anthropomorhic/CO2 global warming theory. At first several members of the IPCC raised these concerns and others. They have since been purged from the committee, their views called stupid, their proferssional lives ruined, and their tenure in government and acedemia threatened.

European climate scientists have been fired from review panels on climate journals for allowing scientific articles with contrary theories being published.

We now see calls by environmental activists in government, both in Europe and here, calling for the revokation of scientific and professional accreditation for publicly questioning man cause global warming. Equating healthy scientific skepticism with holocaust-denail for crying out loud.

And DM wants academicly trained folks like me who do not buy the party line to post without anonymity? What kind of idiot does he think my mother raised?

Posted by: deadwood on February 11, 2007 11:15 AM
28. Strongly recommend that everyone read (consider as MUST READ) the article Marc lists at: www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818.ece as linked from Drudge. Headline: "An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change -
Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, says the orthodoxy must be challenged" Probably one of the most poignant statements made in the article is the opening sentence, "When politicians and journalists declare that the science of global warming is settled, they show a regrettable ignorance about how science works."

Posted by: Jamie on February 11, 2007 12:03 PM
29. I think those of you who pooh-pooh the MSM's warnings about global warming need to remember the devastation caused by the Comet Kahoutek.

And Y2K.

Posted by: Rey Smith on February 11, 2007 01:33 PM
30. It should be noted that the "people who pushed the hardest" for the U.S. to sign on to Kyoto were the executives at Exxon who hired the greatest numbers of lobbyists working toward that end.

If Kyoto goes into effect it will be a windfall for Exxon due to energy trade credits.

When big money is tied to an issue it creates automatic discreditation for practical concerns. Never works the other way.

The world's largest mining companies contribute heavily to the World Wildlife Fund. The WWF are generous towards our own Sierra Club.

Who, in turn, have sent thousands of college kids to our front door to decry how mining has ruined our environment.

The result is that our highly regulated domestic mining operations have nearly disappeared. Meanwhile our domestic consumption of mineral resources contines to rise.

The result? "Pollution costs" shifted to the third world and the value of domestic mineral resource deposits is now small enough that international mineral resource companies are able to purchase them at a penny on the euro.

Ten years from now listen to the Sierra Club Kids on your porch. They'll be telling you to bring mining back to North America where it's done "right". And that will be true, but by then the British, Canadian and Spanish mining interest will own all our mineral resources, but none of our heritage mining superfund sites.

Those are owned, along with their costs, rightfully by the descendants of those who are still enjoying the fruits of the mineral industry's many labors.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on February 11, 2007 02:24 PM
31. My credentials to speak about the mineral industry?

I am a consultant to Rio Tinto Zinc, Broken Hill Proprietary and Groupo Mexico. The world's top three mining companies. As well as to the extended family of our last major domestic mining company, Newmont.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on February 11, 2007 02:35 PM
32. Oh, here's something interesting: it turns out that the sun has a VERY strong impact on global warming. Via cosmic rays and cloud formation.

So when the furor over GW dissipates in 10-15 years, can we expect mea culpas from DM and friends?

Posted by: Edmonds Dan on February 11, 2007 02:45 PM
33. Maybe we should start calling Global Warming™ Climate Change™ again. That way, no matter what happens, we're right!

Posted by: starboardhelm on February 11, 2007 02:50 PM
34. "So when the furor over GW dissipates in 10-15 years, can we expect mea culpas from DM and friends?"

Heavens no. Liberals never apologize. They spin.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on February 11, 2007 02:54 PM
35. Hello deadwood,

> And DM wants academicly trained folks like me who do not buy the party line to post without anonymity? What kind of idiot does he think my mother raised?

I think that your mother raised a pretty big idiot, but that is besides the point. You don't need to reveal your name. Just reveal your discipline. What sort of advanced degree in science do you possess, deadwood?


Posted by: David Mathews on February 11, 2007 05:38 PM
36. Hello Bart Cannon,

> The result? "Pollution costs" shifted to the third world and the value of domestic mineral resource deposits is now small enough that international mineral resource companies are able to purchase them at a penny on the euro.

I am well aware of the crimes which are committed by mining companies throughout the Third World. It is too bad that mining companies are rewarded for their crimes against humanity.

If it were up to me, I'd put an end to all mining operations globally. Mining companies are distinctly evil in their behavior overseas.

Posted by: David Mathews on February 11, 2007 05:42 PM
37. Hello David,

Or should I say "earth the David"?

Every millisecond of your modern life is made possible through the fruits of the mineral industry. YOU are their customer. YOU hire them to mine the earth. Without YOU and the rest of us consumers they would be doing something else. What is the make, model, year of your vehicle? I'll tell how big a hole was dug to extract the materials on YOUR behalf.

It's done better and cleaner here in North America than anywhere. High wages to boot.

If you have a conscience, you must demand that your metals come from domestic mineral deposts.


Posted by: Bart Cannon on February 12, 2007 12:37 AM
38. Hello Bart,

> Every millisecond of your modern life is made possible through the fruits of the mineral industry. YOU are their customer. YOU hire them to mine the earth. Without YOU and the rest of us consumers they would be doing something else. What is the make, model, year of your vehicle? I'll tell how big a hole was dug to extract the materials on YOUR behalf.

I am well aware of the crimes which the mining industry does on my behalf, and would much prefer that these crimes not occur. I would much rather live without than engage in any sort of oppression against the impoverished people of the world.

As to the mining industry in the U.S. of A.: I have seen these mining operations and they are thoroughly disgusting to me. Mining is a form of violence against Nature which should never occur. Mining is a crime against humanity.

Mining is a horrendous industry. I wish that our laws punished criminals. Unfortunately, our economy rewards these criminals for their crimes against nature and against humanity.


Posted by: David Mathews on February 12, 2007 04:56 AM
39. Bart: It's tempting to feed the troll, but resist the urge. This one is gluttonous, and his ego grows obese from all of this attention. Productive people don't need time wasters like this guy! Ignore him and he will eventually go somewhere else.

Posted by: Peggy U on February 12, 2007 11:23 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?