DR Salinger in replying (Greenhouse gases, warming world and Norse Greenland
- Gisborne herald 4th June) to my opinion piece (Pull ecofascists from corridors of power
- Gisborne Herald 4th June) does a splendid job of demonstrating how global warming believers twist the facts to fit the theory.
I do not deny that we have had global warming. I do not deny that the decade 2000 to 2010 was a warm one, or that it was warmer than the 1990s. The 1990s were a period of warming. The next decade has shown a relatively constant temperature at the elevated level that was reached in the 1990s. It therefore must have a higher average than the previous decade.
Omitted in Dr Salinger’s piece, but mentioned in his presentation, is the fact that the Pinatubo eruption lowered the 1990s temperature from what it would have been. That may have accounted for a large part of the difference between the temperatures of the 1990s and 2000s.
It is interesting and noteworthy that Dr Salinger did not challenge my claim that the last decade has recorded temperatures lower than the IPCC had projected. He can’t. His former mentor, Prof. Phil Jones of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, has conceded that there has been no significant warming since 1995.
On sea level rises, Dr Salinger gives no rebuttal to my cited reference but merely brings out the IPCC mantra with no references. My reference clearly shows that the raw satellite data shows no rise and that the rise only occurs on “corrected” data. But these “corrections” are not specified.
We have had past examples of data being “massaged” to produce the desired result. The Seven Station Series on N IWA ’s website, originally built by Dr Salinger, is an obvious example.
After many questions in Parliament, NIWA has had to remove it from their website as unscientific because they could not provide the details and calculations to allow peer review of the “adjustments”.
Dr Salinger’s history lesson on the Vikings reveals he is confused. He claims the reason the Vikings left was because they did not adapt to farming conditions becoming more difficult due to the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). Dr Salinger, the NAO is climate. But again, he avoids my point. It was warm enough for farming to occur. Ice levels must have been less than now around the coast. It did not trigger a tipping point causing runaway ice melt. On the contrary it all froze up again. Without runaway ice melt the projected accelerated sea level rise will also not eventuate.
Finally, to the question of solar cycles. The sun has a far greater influence on our climate than the mere fluctuation in energy output over the duration of the solar cycle. It appears that the sun’s magnetic field affects cosmic rays, which in turn affect cloud cover. The influence of cloud cover on the climate was something Dr Salinger tried to play down in his talk. But whatever the mechanism, it is clear that there is a far more strongly correlated relationship between temperature and the number of sunspots than there is between temperature and carbon dioxide.
The press release 2-2011 from http://www.spaceandscience.net/id69.html
states: “The statistical peak of the long term curve of the last sun-caused global warming was probably between 2005 and 2007. Global temperatures have suddenly returned to the same level they were in 1980 and are expected to drop much further . . . it is now unlikely that our generation will return to the level of global warming that we have just passed through.”
The age of global warming espoused by Dr Salinger and others belongs to the 20th century. It is time they moved to the 21st century and the real possibility of global cooling.
Original DR Salinger reply
Greenhouse gases, warming world and Norse Greenland
- Gisborne herald 4th June
Auckland-based climate scientist Dr Jim Salinger
NEIL Henderson raises some interesting issues in his column today.
Greenhouse gases include the trace gases of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide which cause our planet to be warmer than it would otherwise be. Water vapour is also a greenhouse gas, and as carbon dioxide and temperatures increase in the atmosphere this can then hold more water vapour in the atmosphere. Water vapour then amplifies the warming caused by carbon dioxide and other trace gases. So this warms the surface of the planet more.
The diagram at bottom shows changes in heat energy at the earth’s surface since 1750. The extra heat input has mainly been due to additional greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere over the past 250 years.
Although there is the well-known solar cycle, satellite monitoring of this has shown that in terms of energy input into the earth, the variability only contributes one-tenth of 1 percent of the incoming energy from the sun between the cycle’s minimum and maximum — about 0.1 watt per metre square of energy.
However, the extra heating because of all the extra greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere sums up to about 2.5 watts per square metre. Looking at all the effects today, there is about an extra 1.7 watts per square metre of heating.
Sea levels have indeed been rising and records show an increase of about 10cm in the past 50 years, with rise rates now at 3cm per decade, and these are expected to increase in the next few decades as the oceans swell because of warming and water is added by melting of glaciers and ice caps.
The earlier estimates in the early 1980s did not have the benefit of satellite measurements of sea level rise and ice loss from mountain glaciers and Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.
And what of recent temperatures?
We need to take records over at least a decade to determine trends. Temperature measurements from both land and sea show that the last decade (2001-2010) was 0.8 degC warmer than in 1901-1910, 1991-2000 was 0.65 degC warmer and 1981-1990 was 0.5 degC warmer.
These three decades were consecutively the warmest in thermometer records back to 1850. And longer-term ice cores from Greenland show that 2010 was by far the warmest year, and equivalent warmth is only found in the ice core record about 8000 to 10,000 years ago.
There have been several misconceptions about the warmth experienced by the colonising Norse in Greenland between AD 985 and 1500.
Erik the Red and these Norse colonisers moved into Greenland because they were expelled from Iceland during the 10th century.
Thomas McGovern in his study on the Inuit-Norse project has shown the Norse were farmers and were particularly vulnerable to climatic fluctuations because of warm and cold growing seasons as a result of the North Atlantic Oscillation. When Greenland is warm, northern Europe is cold — and vice versa. This oscillation was particularly active during the 14th and 15th century, with difficult conditions for pastural farming.
The Norse never made use of the fisheries resource. Because they clung to pastural farming, they became extinct. In contrast, the local Inuit survived very well hunting the marine resources, and occupied Greenland up until the present day.
These are the real reasons for medieval colonisation and decline of the Norse in Greenland, not climate.
In summary, greenhouse gases have increased rapidly in the past 250 years because of human activities, resulting in 2001-2010 being the warmest decade on record, and perhaps in the last 8000 years.
Mountain glaciers and ice sheets are melting with sea level rise and frost days in New Zealand have dramatically decreased. Global warming has arrived.
Extra heating added to the surface of the earth from addition of greenhouse gases in the last 250 years (Source IPCC, 2007).
Original article by Neil Henderson
Pull ecofascists from corridors of power
- Gisborne Herald 4th June
JIM Salinger recently visited Gisborne, prophesying doom and gloom due to global warming. But how much of what he said was documented fact and how much was simply propaganda?
He presented a graph showing temperatures going back to the 1800s. This showed the typical hockey stick “kick up” in the most recent years shown. Salinger was honest enough to say that this graph was not up to date. The hottest years of 1998, 2005 and 2010 all recorded the same temperature. This makes a flat line, not a warming trend.
The Fourth Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projected significant warming right through the current century. The truth is that the current global temperature is below the most conservative of the IPPC’s range of projections and has been for a decade.
When facts emerge that contradict a theory it is the theory that should be trashed, not the facts. So one must ask why Salinger and others such as James Hansen are still preaching this nonsense.
Salinger cited recent adverse weather events as evidence to support his claims. But there is nothing happening that is unprecedented. Wairoa was also hit in 1977 and in 1938 when the Kopuawhara rail construction camp was washed away with the loss of lives.
Salinger showed us the melting Arctic ice cap has opened up the NW and the NE passages. But history shows that naval vessels used these passages during WW2. In 1922 an expedition sailed to 81 degrees north and reported great masses of ice had gone from the land.
He gave a series of climate tipping points with the one for Greenland being two degrees warmer than now. We know Greenland was much warmer in the Medieval Period because the Vikings farmed livestock outdoors. That warm period did not tip the climate then. Why should it now?
He quoted “new” evidence of sea level rise of up to 1.5 metres by 2100. That is a significant reduction on the three metre rise in sea level in 40 years advanced by Hansen 23 years ago but we have seen little if any change in sea level over a period of 50 years. (See http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/paper_540.pdf
The global warming fear is based on positive feedbacks generating runaway warming. Rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels cause rising temperatures, which cause more evaporation. This water vapour is also a greenhouse gas, causing more warming . . . . But negative feedbacks also occur. As water evaporates it absorbs lots of heat. This is then released up in the atmosphere as the vapour condenses and falls as rain. The heat is given a “leg up” to escape to outer space. It is no surprise to me that this planet is full of checks and balances that maintains its climate in a relatively narrow band. If it didn’t, major cataclysmic events of the past such as the Taupo eruption would have destroyed life before now.
It is obvious to me that government and certain science institutions maintain an excellent symbiotic relationship.
Increasingly socialistic governments desiring to exert greater control on our lives can see huge possibilities in regulating the use of carbon-emitting products. They therefore eagerly pour millions of dollars into “research” that will provide the necessary “data” to justify their controls.
Meantime the truth is lost. There is real evidence that the current solar cycle patterns are similar to those during the Little Ice Age. Cooling will cause greater problems for humanity than an equivalent amount of warming.
Will people wake up in time to stop the ecofascists in the corridors of power before it is too late?