Global warming alarmists are now alarmed because they cannot account for the cooling trend that has been evident since the late 1990s in contradiction to their climate models. In fact, there is a growing body of evidence that suggests the planet has entered a cooling cycle that could persist for decades. Dr. Don Easterbook, for instance, a geologist and professor emeritus at Western Washington University, has concluded that sea surface temperatures will experience a drop that could last for the next 25 to 30 years based on his observations of the Pacific Decadal Oscilliation or PDO, a weather phenomenon that reverts between warm and cool modes.

Researchers who have long questioned the premise of man-made global warming theories point out that alarmist claims are driven more by computer models that omit key variables than they are by actual observations. The growing “climategate” scandal goes a long way toward vindicating the scientific skeptics who have been ostracized in the media and the academic community. Emails that have been leaked to the Internet from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia show that researchers have deliberately fudged and manipulated data in an effort to account for predicted catastrophic warming that has not materialized.

In his testimony before the British Parliament, Phil Jones, the CRU director, suggested that he would be cleared of any wrongdoing once a fuller body of evidence is presented. The emails that have been made public were only a “tenth of one percent” of his correspondence, Jones said.

If anything, the more recent email revelations serve to invalidate the use of climate models that figure prominently into the reports issued through the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

(more…)

Poll after poll have recently affirmed that the ClimateGate revelations (I actually say “affirmations“) dealt a mortal blow to the public’s belief in the environmentalist brass ring of “catastrophic Man-made global warming.” The dishonesty exposed therein iced the cake for a public attentive to the increasingly shrill and absurd alarmist campaign, demonstrably cooler temperatures cool and the sky remaining precisely where we left it.

Troubled by such results, several green groups to rush out polls of their own, riddled with gauzy questions generally distilling to “wouldn’t you want to save the planet from destruction if you could get rich doing so?” I oversimplify, but not grossly. This week the National Wildlife Federation claimed two-thirds of Americans want federal limits on greenhouse gases! Surely a Congress desperate to do something popular will hop on board this train? Not likely.

The shocker from these forays is that a substantial number have so little regard for the alarmist claptrap that they’re willing to dismiss even loaded questions designed to elicit a positive response.

(more…)

Over the weekend I received an email that, on its face, might appear to be rather strange. It read: “planet warming is a serious issue that must be substantiated immediately!”

What’s facially odd is that this insistence on the truth of the author’s belief, and clarion call for comrades to somehow back said dogma up, came on a list-serve for the “World Environmental Journalists”. To be honest, I have no idea how I got on this list, but I do read the missives regularly and the message was fairly typical in its tone and content.

The entirety actually read “[J]ust to restate the obvious (I’ve personally experienced the effects while researching my global islands project): planet warming is a serious issue that must be substantiated immediately!”

Although a quick search revealed the author boasting of personal experience with planet warming to be more an activist than a professional journalist, his activism is common among the profession. I mention this in the context of noting how the media are treating – rather, refusing to treat – that about which they would be in hysterics if it were warming rather than cooling.

(more…)

Even for those not paying very close attention to the news in recent months, this headline from today’s “Climate Wire” may strike you as a tad incongruent:

MILITARY: Coastlines plumbed for ancient data in Pentagon climate study

Possibly the Pentagon’s advice on this matter will find favor in the White House.

The hook for the $5.5 million boondoggle is “how rising seas and strengthening storms could affect coastal bases, perhaps causing facilities to be abandoned or moved over the next century.” Of course, the idea of shrieking press releases (and headlines soon thereafter) of a “Pentagon study predicts inundation” never entered anyone’s mind and are nothing we should look forward to, if history is any guide.

Yet, outside of certain hysterical quarters, sea level rise is not that great a mystery: it rises between coolings, particularly glaciations (ice ages) which we fortunately find ourselves in between. It does so at a fairly constant rate of about 8 inches per century. That remained true following the end of the Little Ice Age in the mid 19^th century until today, with no statistical change in the pace since then (unless you count the most recent years; read on). Then it falls. When things cool, as has been the case in recent years, sea level rise plateaus and even reverses depending on how great the cooling. Indeed, the satellites we already pay so much for – and which, like those measuring the (cooling) atmospheric temperatures, are being ignored – tell us that sea level rise peaked in 2005 (wow, this guy works fast!).

(more…)