No More Pause: Bullshit Will Be Nonstop From Now On

I’m sure many of you have exhaled in relief upon learning that Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometers MORE than 2 years ago…despite Al Gore’s prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now.

The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore was apocalyptic. ‘The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff,’ he said. ‘It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.’

Those comments came in 2007 as Mr Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his campaigning on climate change. But seven years after his warning, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that, far from vanishing, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession – with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012.

To put it another way, an area the size of Alaska, America’s biggest state, was open water two years ago, but is again now covered by ice.

Judith Curry, professor of earth and atmospheric sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, said last night: ‘The Arctic sea ice spiral of death seems to have reversed.’
Those who just a few years ago were warning of ice-free summers by 2014 included US Secretary of State John Kerry, who made the same bogus prediction in 2009, while Mr Gore has repeated it numerous times – notably in a speech to world leaders at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009, in an effort to persuade them to agree a new emissions treaty.

Professor Andrew Shepherd, of Leeds University, an expert in climate satellite monitoring, said yesterday: ‘It is clear from the measurements we have collected that the Arctic sea ice has experienced a significant recovery in thickness over the past year.

Welp

Welp

I recall when the Global Climate/Warming Change hysteria was in full crest. Weather supremacists strode the lecterns ascendant. Denial of heat became as taboo as denial of race…or even worse! The Earth was growing so molten so quickly that by next Wednesday one would be able to use Hillary’s desiccated womb as an open air microwave. It was all very much settled.

And of course the left’s hoi polloi plunged it down their gullets bones, gristle, and beak. Given some period with a pliant media these people could probably be manipulated into grease painting their faces to sing “I’m a little teapot” in robotic pantomime nude on a weekday sidewalk–while screaming at those who aren’t.

Though Al Gore had this played well. It required only some discreet model tweaking here and thermometer breakage there and the red hot world would be copacetic. Though ironically enough, the weather just wouldn’t cooperate. Cool summers, cold winters, and growing ice. Growing. Always growing. Always mocking. Its smirk no less searing for the frigidity.

No doubt I now grew very pale;—but I talked more fluently, and with a heightened voice. Yet the cold increased—and what could I do? It was a low, dull temperature—much as a winter bough enveloped in snow. I gasped for breath—and yet the media heard it not. I talked more quickly—more vehemently; but the ice steadily increased. I arose and argued about trifles, in a high key and with violent gesticulations; but the ice only grew. Why would these acolytes and minions not be gone? I paced the floor to and fro with heavy strides, as if excited to fury by the observations of the men—but the ice steadily increased. Oh God! what could I do? I foamed—I raved—I swore! I swung the chair upon which I had been sitting, and grated it upon the boards, but the ice arose over all the arctic and continually increased. It grew thicker—denser—whiter! And still the reporters chatted pleasantly, and smiled. Was it possible they saw not? Almighty God!—no, no! They saw!—they suspected!—they knew!—they were making a mockery of my horror!-this I thought, and this I think. But anything was better than this agony! Anything was more tolerable than this derision! I could bear those hypocritical smiles no longer! I felt that I must scream or die! and now—again!—hark! Colder! Slicker! Crunchier! Polar bears!
“Villains!” I shrieked, “dissemble no more! I admit the deed!—tear up my tome! here, here!—It is the freezing of this hideous Earth!”

You know, if Al and the kids were actually convinced of cataclysm, one would imagine news of cooler temperatures and growing ice–a pleasant failure of dire forecasts–would be greeted with a singular sentiment: relief. That it is not may lend some insight into otherwise veiled designs.

Yet the now almost comical failure to bring any predictive power to the debate must have surely sent advocates scurrying back into their own skins for some retro-fitted circumspection. At least that is what the model of human behavior might suggest. But it too would be wildly inaccurate. For science is hardly cowed by mere humiliation. Now is when faithful men in white coats stand to be counted. Now is when guns sound at the front. To reputational ruin or Ragnarok!

No more pause: Warming will be non-stop from now on

Enjoy the pause in global warming while it lasts, because it’s probably the last one we will get this century. Once temperatures start rising again, it looks like they will keep going up without a break for the rest of the century, unless we cut our greenhouse gas emissions.

The slowdown in global warming since 1997 seems to be driven by unusually powerful winds over the Pacific Ocean, which are burying heat in the water. But even if that happens again, or a volcanic eruption spews cooling particles into the air, we are unlikely to see a similar hiatus, according to two independent studies.

According to another recent study, the current hiatus may be our last for a while. Matthew England and his colleagues at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, tried to quantify the chance of another pause. “It’s looking to us that it’s probably going to be the last one that we’ll see in the foreseeable future,” says England.

Using 31 climate models, they showed that if emissions keep rising, the chance of a hiatus – a 10-year period with no significant warming – drops to virtually zero after 2030. The current hiatus will probably be followed by rapid warming as the heat trapped in the ocean escapes back into the atmosphere, so we are unlikely to get another decade of no warming before 2030. England believes it could be another century or more before the next hiatus.

But that could change if we slow greenhouse gas emissions now. If we can reach peak global emissions by 2040, the temperature rise will slow by the end of the century, and hiatus periods will become more likely.

Hiatuses can also be triggered by volcanic eruptions that spew particles into the air, reflecting sunlight away from Earth, as happened after the 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption. But even if a volcano erupts it will make little difference. “After 2030, the rate of global warming is likely to be so fast that even large volcanic eruptions on the scale of Krakatoa are unlikely to drive a hiatus decade,” says team member Nicola Maher.

To the Chromosphere and beyond! So here’s my question: what did the models say about hiatuses in the late 90s? And if the answer is nothing, then what has improved of our climate understanding in the interim to now confidently dress them as natty scapegoats like little Lords Fauntleroy? What a darling hiatus this just happens to be. It’s from those Pacific winds, you know. They just started about 17 years ago and haven’t abated yet. What, you want climate models that take wind into account? Get real.

It may very well be that Warming Change is as both real and dire as claimed. Though the whole present firmament has tainted themselves with histrionics, false predictions, and calumny to skeptics. I’m of little inclination to hear the same bleats from the same mouths. Let them dissolve into less damaging pursuits and be succeeded by a more sober and judicious generation of climatologists who are emotionally capable of offering an honest accounting. If their models offer some predictive value, then informed citizens will be properly advised from there. Though by that time I’ll be dead–and not from a .7 temperature increase either.

4 thoughts on “No More Pause: Bullshit Will Be Nonstop From Now On

  1. Beside the political hype from Al Gore, there was still some value in the Global Warming story: it implied ‘decroissance’, it implies ‘Sustainability, think globally, act locally’ as in: ‘keep your manufacturing jobs close, keep food production close, limit transportations as much as possible, don’t over-product, don’t waste, there is no point to manufacture your socks in china and consume 100 gallons of fuel to move them here, if you can make them at home’, and so on.

    The idea of ‘decroissance’ and ‘sustainability’ was in the air in the 80-90s to back up the idea. I heard the concept in France. Of course ‘decroissance’ had to be also applied to the population: the population growth should never exceed the local ressources in energy and impact the well being of its inhabitant. France had always been less crowded than Germany for example. For a long time it was 40 millions versus 60-70 in Germany. Now its 70 millions in France, thanks largely to massive immigration. And therefore, Massive Immigration also does not make sense in a sustainable system.
    By the way, for the first time in its history, this year, France had to IMPORT wheat . The experts appointed by the system will tell you it’s because of a drought, blablabla, It’s totally irrelevant in my opinion and it’s just an excuse. Think it couldn’t happen in America’s food production system? the central plains are too big? think again.

    Now, nobody talks about Global warming anymore, perhaps because it implied all these concepts that went countercurrent to the wishes of the Elite, first of which was a massive import of population that was not needed. America will reach 350, 400 millions? Africa 2 billions ? and millions of what, under-educated, under-employed (at best) low class citizenry, overpopulated, with imported tropical diseases adapting to northerners latitude thanks to…..yes, global warming.
    Global warming: yes, it may be smaller than the predicted models. But, it may also be difficult to measure because in a dynamic system like the Earth Ecosystem, you can’t expect LINEAR EFFECTS. Everything is buffered against abrupt changes. What you can expect is a series of hick ups that are clues that the system is entering into an instability regime. And then a massive change, without warning, when all buffered systems have been exhausted and collapse.

    A quote from our past:
    “…Though the climate gradually improved after the ice sheets reached their maximum extent around 20,000 years ago, the ice warrior made one more attack. The big freeze came with devastating speed. The first warning was a period in which the climate oscillated from warm to cold. Then in a single year, 12,679 years ago, northern Europe went from a temperate climate to glacial conditions. Once more Europeans were threatened with extinction, but managed to survive, though in some cases by ceasing to be Europeans….”
    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n8/abs/ngeo263.html

  2. Where is the flak?
    But I understand, this in itself is a non-issue. Europeans are more than capable, by themselves, to deal with any issue, Global warming, global cooling, this is irrelevant for those who can re-create the Higgs Boson or send a rover on Mars.
    The real issue, the one that asks for an answer, is how on Earth it is possible for English people to let a few pakis rape repetitively thousands of all the 12 years old white girls in the neighborhood, without any reaction.
    OK, so unconsciously, they don’t care anymore. Their civilization was bright and now they are tired, old, they are waiting for the Angel of Death. OK, it’s gonna come, no matter its shape.

  3. Beside the political hype from Al Gore, there was still some value in the Global Warming story: it implied ‘decroissance’, it implies ‘Sustainability, think globally, act locally’ as in: ‘keep your manufacturing jobs close, keep food production close, limit transportations as much as possible, don’t over-product, don’t waste, there is no point to manufacture your socks in china and consume 100 gallons of fuel to move them here, if you can make them at home’, and so on.

    The idea of ‘decroissance’ and ‘sustainability’ was in the air in the 80-90s to back up the idea… Of course ‘decroissance’ had to be also applied to the population: the population growth should never exceed the local ressources in energy and impact the well being of its inhabitant.

    Now, nobody talks about Global warming anymore, perhaps because it implied all these concepts that went countercurrent to the wishes of the Elite, first of which was a massive import of population that was not needed.

    Interesting observations, all. With utmost respect, Administration, I have been puzzled by the time you spend airing skepticism about global warming. Did you not recently advise that we align our beliefs with our interests?

  4. Reader, certainly I expect the climate to change as it has since formation. And of course human beings may, and probably are, exerting some influence on this. Though I turn immediately “cold” to a movement that points and shrieks at skeptics with denier!.

    To what does that sound familiar? My personal disposition change continues when they offer apocalyptic forecasts that we are assured are absolutely settled science–and do not materialize. Hurricanes were to be hitting the shores like artillery shells by this point. My brow furrows deeper upon contemplating the proffered solution to our impending demise: a highly lucrative carbon trading scheme.

    Here is what I would like to hear from someone other than a hysteric:

    1) Show me your record of prior predictions. If that record is abysmal, consider the possibility that your models are flawed. Get back to me when they are less so.
    2) If your models are improved to produce reasonably accurate forecasts, tell me how much of the change is both beyond and within our capacity to control.
    3) Tell me the cons and also the pros of warming. I just don’t want hear about some Pacific atoll slipping under the waves. I also want to know what it would mean to improving land use and habitability in the huge northern land masses.
    4) Finally, if the cons outweigh the pros and can be altered by human endeavor, tell me the costs of doing so and why those funds are more properly allocated than spending the money on poor minority children, as a for instance.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s