The Realists Take on Climate Change
Sorted by: Date Posted
Monday, April 1st 2013, 6:57 PM EDT
RECORD LOW SUNSPOT NUMBERS
For reasons including "pure politically correct", NASA has fought a losing battle - against reality - on the subject of Global Warming, which it feels obliged to believe in as a "scientifically correct" theory. Linked to this, quite directly, NASA has also battled against reality on the subject of sunspot frequency, size, location on the Sun's surface and other variables linked to sunspot cycles in this present Cycle 24 of approximately 11-year-long cycles. These have been accurately recorded since Cycle 1 set by convention between astronomers as starting in Feb 1755.
NASA wanted to believe Cycle 24 would be about the same, perhaps bigger in sunspot numbers and intensity, than Cycle 23. This has not happened. Cycle 24 started weak and got much weaker: February 1906 and Fenruary 2013 had one thing in common, they both had extreme low numbers of observable sunspots on "our" local Star. Year 1906 was the year the San Francisco earthquake hit. Other notable events for 1906 included Finland allowing women to vote - the first European country to do it!
Monday, April 1st 2013, 12:38 PM EDT
New Climate Scandal Exposed: Will AP & NYT Retract Articles?! ‘Gross misrepresentation of the findings’ of New Hockey Stick Paper ‘via press release which appears to skirt awfully close to crossing the line into research misconduct’
Click source to read FULL report
Sunday, March 31st 2013, 7:49 PM EDT
Environment: The alarmists want to place the world in servitude to the models that are predicting global warming. But those models can't even reconstruct the past.
A researcher at Sweden's University of Gothenburg analyzed climate models to see how closely their predictions fit with history, in this case, precipitation in China from 1961 to 2000. What Tinghai Ou found should crimp the alarmists' plans to establish regimes that punish and limit man's use of fossil fuels.
"Only a few climate models were able to reproduce the observed changes in extreme precipitation in China over the last 50 years," says the university's Department of Earth Sciences.
Ou himself said that the "results show that climate models give a poor reflection of the actual changes in extreme precipitation events that took place in China" during the period he examined.
"Only half of the 21 analyzed climate models were able to reproduce the changes in some regions of China," he said. "Few models can well reproduce the nationwide change."
Sunday, March 31st 2013, 7:31 PM EDT
There have been repeated claims that this past year’s hurricane activity [2005-2006] was another sign of human-induced climate change. Everything from the heat wave in Paris to heavy snows in Buffalo has been blamed on people burning gasoline to fuel their cars, and coal and natural gas to heat, cool and electrify their homes. Yet how can a barely discernible, one-degree increase in the recorded global mean temperature since the late 19th century possibly gain public acceptance as the source of recent weather catastrophes? And how can it translate into unlikely claims about future catastrophes?
The answer has much to do with misunderstanding the science of climate, plus a willingness to debase climate science into a triangle of alarmism. Ambiguous scientific statements about climate are hyped by those with a vested interest in alarm, thus raising the political stakes for policy makers who provide funds for more science research to feed more alarm to increase the political stakes. After all, who puts money into science–whether for AIDS, or space, or climate–where there is nothing really alarming? Indeed, the success of climate alarmism can be counted in the increased federal spending on climate research from a few hundred million dollars pre-1990 to $1.7 billion today. It can also be seen in heightened spending on solar, wind, hydrogen, ethanol and clean coal technologies, as well as on other energy-investment decisions.
But there is a more sinister side to this feeding frenzy. Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis.
Sunday, March 31st 2013, 7:19 PM EDT
My cover story for The Sunday Times (the biggest UK broadsheet with 1m copies).
Getting smarter with global warming:
"As I fly into a snow-bound Britain, I realise that you might be asking where global warming has gone as you shiver in the coldest March for 50 years and wonder what you will do if gas has to be rationed. I have been involved in the climate debate for more than a decade, but I am still amazed at how wrong we get it. Let us try to restart our thinking on global warming.
Yes, global warming is real and mostly man-made, but our policies have failed predictably and spectacularly.
Source Link: facebook.com/
Sunday, March 31st 2013, 6:46 PM EDT
As of March 26, 2013, the snow depth in Moscow, Russia, was 30 inches, their highest March snow depth in more than 20 years.
"A previous record snow depth of 29 inches was recorded March 19, 1994," said Senior Expert Meteorologist Jim Andrews.
In early February, following a big outburst of snow, reports from Interfax (the Russian news service) stated the snowfall had reached 85 inches. Normal snowfall for Moscow is 60 inches.
The Moscow Times reported that Moscow is having their coldest March since the 1950s. Colder temperatures there this spring have prevented the birds from migrating north from their wintering grounds.
Sunday, March 31st 2013, 9:54 AM EDT
Is there Global Warming or Global Cooling?
Whatever you believe on this topic, one thing IS certain.... you have to use the results from real time observations.
It's no good trying to make a forecast if your results have no bearing on reality....it would be like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole!
Sunday, March 31st 2013, 9:26 AM EDT
The icy Easter weekend has been declared the coldest in 100 years and forecasters have warned the cold snap will continue for the rest of the week.
Despite welcoming in British summer time, temperatures plummeted to -12.4C last night in Braemar in Aberdeenshire, while South Newington in Oxfordshire dropped to -5C.
The Met office confirmed it could be the coldest Easter Sunday morning in 100 years.
Click source for more
Sunday, March 31st 2013, 9:20 AM EDT
Helping to ease the pressure on farmers who lost livestock in the heavy snow is an "urgent priority" says the Welsh government.
Snow drifts of 15ft (4.57m) in north Wales left hundreds of sheep buried.
Now Natural Resources and Food Minister Alun Davies says he has asked Wales' chief veterinary officer Professor Christianne Glossop to look at what can be done to ease the burden on farmers.
The Farmers' Union of Wales (FUW) has already called for urgent assistance.
"I'm very aware of the extreme difficulties farmers in Wales are experiencing as a result of the extreme weather we have witnessed over the last week," Mr Davies said.
"Sheep farmers are facing their busiest time of the year with the lambing season, which is not yet over in some parts of Wales. The extreme weather has put an added strain on them.
"One of the most pressing issues farmers have told me they are now facing is how to deal with fallen stock."
Mr Davies said that he was also asking farmers to be aware of the regulations stating that they need to dispose of carcasses as soon as possible but also be kept secure until then.
Sunday, March 31st 2013, 8:09 AM EDT
The official watchdog that advises the Government on greenhouse gas emissions targets has launched an astonishing attack on The Mail on Sunday – for accurately reporting that alarming predictions of global warming are wrong.
We disclosed that although highly influential computer models are still estimating huge rises in world temperatures, there has been no statistically significant increase for more than 16 years.
Despite our revelation earlier this month, backed up by a scientifically researched graph, the Committee on Climate Change still clings to flawed predictions.