Tuesday, July 1, 2014

Some Global Warming / Climate Change Links

Article: Updated Global Temperature: No global warming for 17 years, 6 months – (No Warming for 210 Months)

This was published in March of this year.  A person may object to the website. A person may object to the author. However, the data is from NASA's satellite. You can read the article if you want the technical details. The graph shows the temperature spiking in 1998, due to an "El Nino" event. And no increase since then. 

Yes, May was supposedly the hottest on record. I have read that in various places, but have not found it any "official" publication or in any graphs. This past winter was supposed to be the coldest in North America since 1985. Both of these reflect the weather, not the climate.

When I first taught about weather in high school, "climate" was the 30-year, rolling average of the weather. I have seen mostly 15-year averages more recently. In any case, a single year's weather is the weather. A single weather event (snowstorm, hurricane, tornado) are weather events. Neither are climate.

Article: Pessimistic Predictions: Global Temperature Changes (Published in 2013).

This graph is similar to the one in the article above, except that this graph contrasts the earth's surface temperature to the various predictions from the IPCC.

I am working on a post that spends more time exploring the following idea. The computer models used by the IPCC are, scientifically speaking, the experiment. The hypothesis the model is trying to prove is the collection of assumptions and predictions that make the particular hypothesis for each model.

Because the models have failed to match reality, scientists say that the "hypothesis has been falsified." That is, they have been shown to be false. Now that does not mean global warming has not occurred over the last 150 years. It is just that the models currently used fail to reflect reality. One article I read about, says the following: [Quoting an article in German (in Der Spiegel)]
"Climate models had never expected the pause: Only 3 of 114 climate simulations were able to reproduce the trend of the past years, the IPCC [link in German] concludes in its latest report. The reason for the deviation between models and observations is unclear.”
In other words, about 3% of all global warming simulations made predictions that reflect reality. The rest have been falsified.

Article: U.S. Meets Kyoto Emissions Targets Without Trying: Emissions from energy consumption at lowest level since 1994

The US is the only country in the world that has met the fabled Kyoto Treaty's emissions target. This is partly due to increasing energy efficiency. However, it is mostly due to switching to cheaper natural gas. Natural gas releases less carbon dioxide than coal. And natural gas is cheaper due to increased supplies due to fracking. (I have paid my "dues" for those two sentences.)

So, reduced carbon dioxide emissions and more fracking? Or, as most environmentalists advocate, less fracking? And, therefore, more emissions.

Article: Al Gore, soothsayer: Ice caps are still there, and hurricanes haven’t blown us away (Published December, 2013)

The article notes that Al Gore predicted in December 2008 that the all Arctic ice would be gone in 5 years. It is now 2013 and we have same amount of ice in 2013 that we had in 2008. And "the total today is within 5 percent of what it has been for the past 30 years."

He was wrong about Arctic ice, wrong about polar bears, wrong about more and more powerful hurricanes, wrong about how much the seas will rise, and (see above) wrong about how much temperatures would rise in the last 17 years.

Before you wave your hand and say that Al Gore is just a blowhard, consider the following.

He won the votes of 51,000,000 Americans to be president in 2000.

His documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, was seen by at least 10,000,000 people in the theaters alone (based on gross receipts).

Fifty thousand copies were made available for schools in the US alone, and made part of the curriculum in many western countries. My eldest daughter had three different teachers show it to her in a single school year.

He went, based on a variety of revenue streams snd most of them related to his advocacy, from being worth a few million (7 figures) in 2000 to being worth in the hundreds of millions. (He is so wealthy, that he has had to deny that he is a "carbon billionaire.")

He is rich, powerful, famous, and persistent. People listen to him, even if is a "reverse Cassandra" (that is everyone believes him, but he is rarely right, at least in his major predictions).

And yet, he is the mostly widely recognized "expert" on global warming and climate change in the world.

No comments:

Post a Comment