Articles Tagged "Kirtland Griffin"

Yes, you read it correctly. Dr. James Hansen’s latest article, "What Global Warming Looks Like" and associated full paper, "Global Surface Temperature Change", supports the hype of man-made global warming. It does nothing to show that man is responsible for the current climate temperature but the details are illustrative and interesting. Here are a few of the key points that one could easily miss but they were certainly not invisible to the fine doctor.

If you look into the first paragraph of the full paper you see the real key to the claim that the globe’s temperature rose as fast in this decade as it did in the past two. To define the issue I go back to a discussion on a sceptic website several years ago where it was agreed that any running average over more than three years was deceiving at best. In the IPCC AR4 report they went to a running average of 9 years, if I recall, illustrating that the climate was still warming. The average temperatures had been dropping for 5 or 6 years at the time. Give or take a few years between data submission and publishing. At the time I thought it was entirely dishonest as did a number of scientists whose comments I saw. At the time I queried,

“What are they going to do next time, average 10 years to make their point.”

Well, as you might imagine, since it has been a few years, Dr. Hansen had to extend the running average to 12 years! As the late Dr. Stephen Schneider stated, referring to AGW supporting scientists,

When I think of all the evidence I have been presented with over the past several years regarding the main driver of our climate, one man stands tall. That would be Piers Corbyn, founder of WeatherAction.com in the UK. He does long range weather and climate predictions and his accuracy is amazing, especially for the extreme events all based on the Sun.

I had seen his forecasts on the web but I had my first chance to talk with him in person at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change in New York put on by the Heartland Institute. It was March and Piers had saved his first public trial forecast in the USA for the conference.

The prediction was for a record Midwest snowfall in the middle of March, then 2 or 3 weeks away. There was nothing about it from the national weather people. This forecast was way out there. What was more the data for the prediction was available more than a month, as much as 3 months in advance and it was based on the Sun! It was such an extreme prediction that it made eyeballs roll.

For those of you who recall that storm, you know it came true. Did it ever! Since then I have observed the outcomes of the predictions Piers has made and he has been amazing in his performance. There have been a few misses but his success is around 85% around the world and a bit higher in the USA. He regularly posts on You Tube, so you can see his predictions come true several times during the year. Let’s get to the discussion:

Click source to read FULL interview with astrophysicist Piers Corbyn by Kirtland Griffin

'Worst possible March for farming & gardening in Britain, Ireland & much of Europe' is on the way warns Piers Corbyn of WeatherAction long range weather and climate forecasters at his monthly media Report event on Feb26th. The 10 minute video also reports on the ground-breaking winter success of WeatherAction's solar-based long range forecasts for Britain, Ireland, Europe, USA and other parts of the world, and the failure - yet again - of standard meteorology and the man-made climate change hypothesis.

The following source link is from Piers Corbyn at Twitter, to join him and have a daily update simply click Piers_Corbyn

To read more of the above article click source

Updated below by Kirtland Griffin, The Examiner

During the past two summers a strange thing has happened in the Arctic that is made even stranger by the alleged global warming that is occurring. The point often missed in the media and political discourse is that the extent of sea ice at the summer minima in the Arctic is growing. There has been more ice than the year before by approximately 400,000 square kilometers per year for the past 2 years. Now we know that this is likely not a linear phenomenon but often the climate is projected to follow linear progressions to illustrate the possible man-made global warming alarmist outcomes that could occur. Now, this may be a simplistic approach, but it is interesting to note how that could be turned around to illustrate the point.

At the present time, according to www.CryosphereToday.com the current sea ice extent is approximately 3.6 million square kilometers. This is approximately 0.4 million square kilometers more than 2008 at this time last year and the same larger than the 2007 minimum. Thus we have a 0.4 square kilometer per year growth rate. The area of the Earth north of the latitude of New York City is approximately 47.5 million square kilometers. Subtracting the current ice area, 3.6 million square kilometers, the net difference comes to 43.9 million square kilometers.

A polar bear mother and her two cubs in Wapusk National Park on the shore of Hudson Bay near...(AP Photo/The Canadian Press,Jonathan Hayward/file

As I noted in Part 1, the lIUCN/SSC Polar Bear Specialists Group was presented with a paper by Steven Amstrup disputing the claims of Armstrong and Green who claimed several violations of forecasting rules in the nine papers that were used to support the classification of Polar Bears as Endangered. As you may know, the ruling was made to declare the bears threatened instead, thus preventing the implementation of draconian regulations that would have crippled the US economy. A special comment was added to stipulate that man was not responsible for any alledged problems the bears were encountering further reducing the likelyhood of severe measures being implemented. These are the very same regulations that are in the bill that was recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives with only insignificant modifications.

I really didn’t want to get into this question since it bears (pun intended) not the least on whether man is responsible for the modest warming that ended in 2002. But since so many have put so much importance on this debate, ignoring more important scientific evidence and consequences, I will address the question.

Environmentalists, or opportunists, depending on your viewpoint, had been forcing the Bush administration to list the fuzzy white polar bears on the Endangered Species List. This would have allowed the environmentalists to force the United States to adopt a Kyoto type carbon emissions program without ever having a vote in Congress. They were using the bears to push their agenda. The discussions were covered under many venues so there should be no doubt that this was at least one of the objectives. The logic goes that the IPCC says man’s CO2 is warming the world so Arctic ice will melt and the bears will be unable to ruthlessly annihilate cute baby seals in a cruel bloody massacre. It seems environmentalists wanted to save the white harp seals but black, brown or gray seals can be brutally murdered.

Our US Senators are about to vote on a far ranging climate bill that only narrowly passed the House of Representatives. My question is, "Do they have even the remotest idea of what is involved in global warming?" The answer is mixed. Some do but apparently most haven't a clue. They may have a few talking points supplied by the IPCC, Al Gore and James Hansen but that is about it. I dare say that few, if any, have read a single paper contrary to the UN IPCC position.

Kudos should go to Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Representative from Minnesota, Michele Bachmann, two that are on track and there are others. The Connecticut contingent is clearly not in this category.

I could appreciate that Joe likes Polar Bears. So do I, but I hope I would be smarter than to trash the world's economy on a bogus claim that bears that have tripled their population in recent decades are going extinct. Joe is apparently not that smart. Senator Leiberman made a speech to some 5th graders last year and made several gaffs from robins showing up in Connecticut in the winter (there is a wintering population in Connecticut) to Glaciers melting (They recede, they do not melt in the traditional sense, except on the edges and bottom. Water supplied by glaciers actually comes from winter snow melt. The ice sublimates.) I wrote a letter to the New Haven paper about that event which got published after supplying a full reference list that the editor was insistent on seeing. How many feature articles come with references? None!

In a recent post on his web site, Dr. James Hansen wrote a piece entitled "Strategies & Sundance Kid" he started with the usual and a oft repeated claim of imminent tipping points leading to run-away heating and melting of the Arctic ice caps. The story goes according to Hansen, "Our global climate is nearing tipping points. Changes are beginning to appear, and there is a potential for rapid changes with effects that would be irreversible – if we do not promptly slow fossil fuel emissions during the next few decades. Tipping points are fed by amplifying feedbacks. As Arctic sea ice melts, the darker ocean absorbs more sunlight and speeds melting. As tundra melts, methane a strong greenhouse gas, is released, causing more warming.

My response, "This paper even includes at least one reference to one of your papers and lists 4 scientists as authors from Columbia University, where Dr. Hansen is an Adjunct Professor: Earth and Environmental Sciences. It demonstrates that cloud cover is increased with melting Arctic ice completely offsetting the albedo effect and even a bit more. So, again, the Earth shows another of it's feedbacks to counter physical changes.

Timo Niroma, a physicist from Finland, publishes a Solar Report each month. He has given his permission to use it and distribute it to all so here it is. It will be a regular feature here and I hope you look forward to it as much as I do. The report is not written in the usual user-friendly way, but is rather intended for scientists that are familiar with the information contained in it. I will attempt to simplify and explain the details of the report and how it could impact you and, of course, Al Gore and company. As the predictions come true, as I assume they will, the green lobby will go on unemployment compensation. Let's start at the beginning and take it piece by piece.

"JUNE BREAKING NEWS: THE CYCLE GOES AT THE MOMENT BELOW DALTON LEVEL" gives away the punch line but let's see how he gets there.

In the following Timo discusses the sunspot activity of the new, as yet not begun, cycle #24:

Well the long awaited report, actually not long enough, was released on Tuesday June 16. The Climate Change Impacts in the United States report (download here) Executive Summary began rather predictably with, " Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal. The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases." You can't get any more predictable than that. I could go on but rather than pick on all the gaffs in this report, I will select a couple of the more insidious assertions.

Ocean Acidification is the fall back position for the global warming activists. The report makes the claim that it will harm shelly creatures in the world's oceans. This is pure fantasy. This interesting demonstration illustrates how fast the CO2 dissolves in water as carbonic acid and converts to calcium carbonate. The calcium carbonate falls to the bottom of the ocean where it is used by creatures to make their shells. It happens quickly as you can see. There is enough Calcium in the oceans to combine with all the coal and oil produced CO2 currently in the Earth 100 times over. The ocean will not become acidic. The thought is that if the oceans become more acidic, the calcium carbonate will dissolve leaving nothing for the shelly creatures. This can't happen. For a more detailed explanation go here.