To the global warming nay-sayers

[lynnvinc]

More on the dev-oily deceptive Oregon Petition [from http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=158]:

If we remove all the engineers, medical professionals, computer scientists, and mathematicians, then the 31,478 “scientists” turn into 13,245 actual scientists, as opposed to scientists according to the OISM’s expansive definition…

13,245 scientists is only 0.1% of the scientists graduated in the U.S. since the 1970-71 school year.

We can, however, compare the number of atmospheric scientists, climagologists, ocean scientists, and meteorologists who signed this petition to the number of members of the various professional organizations. For example, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) has over 55,000 members, of which over 7,200 claim that atmospheric sciences is their primary field. The OISM claims 152 atmospheric scientists. Compared to the atmospheric scientist membership in the AGU, the OISM signatories are only 2.1%, and this estimate is high given the fact that the AGU does not claim all atmospheric scientists as members.

The AGU hydrology group has over 6,000 members who call hydrology their primary field. The OISM list has 22 names that claim to be hydrologists, or 0.4%.

The AGU ocean sciences group claims approximately 6,800 members. The OISM has 83 names, or 1.2%. And again, given that AGU membership is not required to be a practicing ocean scientists, this number is inflated.

The American Meteorological Society claims over 14,000 members and the OISM claims 341 meteorologists as petition signatories. That’s only 2.4%.

It’s clear that the OISM names don’t represent a significant number of scientists when compared to either the total number of science graduates in the U.S. or to the number of practicing scientists who work in likely relevant fields…
So I guess the real message of that petition is that only a very tiny fraction of scientists in the U.S. dispute AGW

Well done.

Now can we get on with turning off lights not in use and hypermiling, etc?

And giving a bit of respect to what the holy fathers have to say. They also have good education and are just as smart as many on that list. And I’d wager they are better morally grounded, as well.

 

[lynnvinc]

No kidding. I bet they’d pass out cold if they realized the amount of various stuffs that one volcanic eruption puts into the atmosphere, too. Better shut those down, while we’re at it!

See skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming.htm:

Humans emit 100 times more CO2 than volcanoes.

The solid Earth contains a huge quantity of carbon, far more than scientists estimate is present in the atmosphere or oceans. As an important part of the global carbon cycle, some of this carbon is slowly released from the rocks in the form of carbon dioxide, through vents at volcanoes and hot springs. Published reviews of the scientific literature by Moerner and Etiope (2002) and Kerrick (2001) report a minimum-maximum range of emission of 65 to 319 million tonnes of CO2 per year. Counter claims that volcanoes, especially submarine volcanoes, produce vastly greater amounts of CO2 than these estimates are not supported by any papers published by the scientists who study the subject.

The burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use results in the emission into the atmosphere of approximately 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year worldwide, according to the EIA. The fossil fuels emissions numbers are about 100 times bigger than even the maximum estimated volcanic CO2 fluxes. Our understanding of volcanic discharges would have to be shown to be very mistaken before volcanic CO2 discharges could be considered anything but a bit player in contributing to the recent changes observed in the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere.

Volcanoes can–and do–influence the global climate over time periods of a few years but this is achieved through the injection of sulfate aerosols into the high reaches of the atmosphere during the very large volcanic eruptions that occur sporadically each century. But that’s another story…[these aerosols actually cause short term cooling].

Recommended further reading on CO2 and volcanoes can be found here: Terry Gerlach in Earth Magazine ; USGS
However, it is thought that extrreme volcanism over many many 1000s of years caused the end-Permian great warming and massive extinction, also with magma rising through coals beds, releasing methane. See geology.about.com/od/extinction/a/aa_permotrias.htm

So you’re right. Volcanism can cause extreme warming or climate hysteresis. It’s just that we’re doing it 100s of times faster by digging up fossil fuels, burning them, and pumping GHGs into the atmosphere lickity-split (in geological time).

 

[Lochias]

See skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming.htm:

Humans emit 100 times more CO2 than volcanoes.

The solid Earth contains a huge quantity of carbon, far more than scientists estimate is present in the atmosphere or oceans. As an important part of the global carbon cycle, some of this carbon is slowly released from the rocks in the form of carbon dioxide, through vents at volcanoes and hot springs. Published reviews of the scientific literature by Moerner and Etiope (2002) and Kerrick (2001) report a minimum-maximum range of emission of 65 to 319 million tonnes of CO2 per year. Counter claims that volcanoes, especially submarine volcanoes, produce vastly greater amounts of CO2 than these estimates are not supported by any papers published by the scientists who study the subject.

The burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use results in the emission into the atmosphere of approximately 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year worldwide, according to the EIA. The fossil fuels emissions numbers are about 100 times bigger than even the maximum estimated volcanic CO2 fluxes. Our understanding of volcanic discharges would have to be shown to be very mistaken before volcanic CO2 discharges could be considered anything but a bit player in contributing to the recent changes observed in the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere.

Volcanoes can–and do–influence the global climate over time periods of a few years but this is achieved through the injection of sulfate aerosols into the high reaches of the atmosphere during the very large volcanic eruptions that occur sporadically each century. But that’s another story…[these aerosols actually cause short term cooling].

Recommended further reading on CO2 and volcanoes can be found here: Terry Gerlach in Earth Magazine ; USGS
However, it is thought that extrreme volcanism over many many 1000s of years caused the end-Permian great warming and massive extinction, also with magma rising through coals beds, releasing methane. See geology.about.com/od/extinction/a/aa_permotrias.htm

So you’re right. Volcanism can cause extreme warming or climate hysteresis. It’s just that we’re doing it 100s of times faster by digging up fossil fuels, burning them, and pumping GHGs into the atmosphere lickity-split (in geological time).

Well, I have yet to see glaciers forming in the streets and the sky crumbling down around our ears. Panic-mongering and nonsense, that’s all the “global warming crisis” is.

 

[Fairwinds]

the top shelf global activist Gulfstreams to conferences on global warmerin. all True Believers ride bikes, scooters or take a bus everywhere, and if they don’t they’re … what’s that word … starts with an “H”?

given that they don’t take it seriously, except as a platform to lecture and harangue for leftist political-economic causes, neither do I. I’m going to put an extra bag of Kingsford into the grill this coming Memorial Day.


Est. 5 MPG

 

[lynnvinc]

Well, I have yet to see glaciers forming in the streets and the sky crumbling down around our ears. Panic-mongering and nonsense, that’s all the “global warming crisis” is.

The impacts of AGW are fairly small right now, and depending on your age you may not see much of a “show.” However, there are enough harms in the pipes (even if we do decide to mitigate AGW) that your young children or grandchildren will likely be experiencing them, and the yet-to-be born are really into for a ride.

Happy now?

 

[lynnvinc]

the top shelf global activist Gulfstreams to conferences on global warmerin. all True Believers ride bikes, scooters or take a bus everywhere, and if they don’t they’re … what’s that word … starts with an “H”?

given that they don’t take it seriously, except as a platform to lecture and harangue for leftist political-economic causes, neither do I. I’m going to put an extra bag of Kingsford into the grill this coming Memorial Day.

Like I said I had to give up my bicycle for health reasons, but we do run our Chevy Volt mostly on wind-generated energy (soon to be 45% solar powered). And Pope Francis is a great supporter of public transportation.

But I do backslide in many ways (and not just on AGW mitigation but on a host of sins), and have to pick myself up with God’s amazing grace and trudge on again. Shame on me , but thank goodness for Jesus and his forgiveness.

We also barbeque now and then, but with a propane barbeque. Don’t you know charcoal barbeque is carcinogenic?

Anyway have a good time…charcoal barbeque does taste better

 

[Fairwinds]

Like I said I had to give up my bicycle for health reasons, but we do run our Chevy Volt mostly on wind-generated energy (soon to be 45% solar powered). And Pope Francis is a great supporter of public transportation.

But I do backslide in many ways (and not just on AGW mitigation but on a host of sins), and have to pick myself up with God’s amazing grace and trudge on again. Shame on me , but thank goodness for Jesus and his forgiveness.

We also barbeque now and then, but with a propane barbeque. Don’t you know charcoal barbeque is carcinogenic?

Anyway have a good time…charcoal barbeque does taste better

I’d use a local volcano, but they’re dormant.

 

[Lochias]

The impacts of AGW are fairly small right now, and depending on your age you may not see much of a “show.” However, there are enough harms in the pipes (even if we do decide to mitigate AGW) that your young children or grandchildren will likely be experiencing them, and the yet-to-be born are really into for a ride.

Happy now?

Nope. I’ll pass on the Kool-Aid, thanks.

 

[Fairwinds]

Nope. I’ll pass on the Kool-Aid, thanks.

I wouldn’t worry about this too much, it will be Global Colding soon enough. there’s a demonstrable cycle of Global Warmerin’ and Global Colding Alarmery.

the point is, stay scared, contribute to the right cause du jour, and use sweetener in the Kool-aid.

 

[Lochias]

I wouldn’t worry about this too much, it will be Global Colding soon enough. there’s a demonstrable cycle of Global Warmerin’ and Global Colding Alarmery.

the point is, stay scared, contribute to the right cause du jour, and use sweetener in the Kool-aid.

True 'dat.

 

[epan]

Just making this statement over and over and over does not make it true.

True. However, the overwhelming body of evidence tends to support it. Far more than FOX news and reactionary minority opinions contradict it in any significant way, as funny as that may seem to you.

 

[Fairwinds]

True. However, the overwhelming body of evidence tends to support it. Far more than FOX news and reactionary minority opinions contradict it in any significant way, as funny as that may seem to you.

its nothing the climate control space satellites can’t handle.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

The current hubbub over the notion of catastrophic global warming is based on a 15-year period of warming. We then went into a 16-year period of cooling prior to this spring, which is the coolest one on record (until the report comes out next year claiming it was actually the hottest ever recorded, like they did after 2011–the year without a summer–which they claimed in early 2012 to be the hottest year ever recorded). According to the global warming alarmists, that 16-year cooling period not only doesn’t indicate that we’re undergoing catastrophic global cooling, but it’s not even allowed to be part of the climate change discussion. Then again, we’re also not allowed to discuss any temperature trends prior to 1950, anything that contradicts their claimed findings, or any inconsistencies or flat out dishonest content in their papers and reports. The main thrust of the global warming political machine doesn’t appear to have any actual concern with the environment (as in, how they nonsensically exclude China, India and Brazil–three of the 4 biggest environmental disasters on the planet–from their schemes), but seems more intent on getting a cash grab from the US. If there wasn’t such a sheen of dishonesty and inconsistency coating everything the global warming conglomerate touches, I might have more of an inclination to be sympathetic to the cause.

 

[CaptFun]

http://i.imwx.com/images/maps/current/acttemp_600x405.jpg

Looks like America has Global Warming stopped at the border of Texas and Mexico.

Ok. These temps are taken at NIGHT. 1:26 PDT Still. That’s a “cool” map for the middle of May with the whole planet warming.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

Looks like America has Global Warming stopped at the border of Texas and Mexico.

Ok. These temps are taken at NIGHT. 1:26 PDT Still. That’s a “cool” map for the middle of May with the whole planet warming.

I nearly lost my garden this past week to frost.

 

[Fairwinds]

I nearly lost my garden this past week to frost.

that alGorebeal Warmerin’ will get to you any number of ways.

 

[lynnvinc]

Looks like America has Global Warming stopped at the border of Texas and Mexico.

That’s a “cool” map for the middle of May with the whole planet warming.

Well, you are on to something re to global warming.

There is growing evidence that global warming is leading to stronger and perhaps more frequent negative arctic oscillations, which brings cold weather from north to south (nor’easters), as opposed to the more typical west-to-east pattern, while some the areas in the arctic are much warmer than usual. This may be contributing to the cold snaps in late spring.

http://www.climatecentral.org/image.../9_18_12_andrew_jetstreamnasaimg-475x268.jpeg

Such negative arctic oscillations are natural – and they bring killing freezes to N. Mexico winter crops and my winter garden veggies in the Rio Grande Valley about every 7 years or so, but global warming may be enhancing them and making them more frequent. Arctic ice loss also seems to be playing a role in this. Drats!!! And I had thought the one silver lining to GW would be less chance of winter freezes down here, since it’s too hot here to grow veggies in the summer.

See

• en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_oscillation
• climatecentral.org/blogs/closer-look-at-arctic-sea-ice-melt-and-extreme-weather-15013?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+climatecentral%2FdjOO+Climate+Central±+Full+Feed
• onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL051000/abstract
• journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2010JCLI3372.1
• onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL051000/abstract
• tos.org/oceanography/archive/25-2_greene.html
• guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/25/frozen-spring-arctic-sea-ice-loss

 

[lynnvinc]

Well, you are on to something re to global warming.

There is growing evidence that global warming is leading to stronger and perhaps more frequent negative arctic oscillations, which brings cold weather from north to south (nor’easters), as opposed to the more typical west-to-east pattern, while some the areas in the arctic are much warmer than usual. This may be contributing to the cold snaps in late spring…

And this may have also contributed to Superstorm Sandy, along with other GW factors (sea rise, increased hurricane intensity, etc).

See Greene, C.H., J.A. Francis, and B.C. Monger. 2013. “Superstorm Sandy: A series of unfortunate events?” Oceanography 26(1):8–9, at tos.org/oceanography/archive/26-1_greene.pdf

We believe that the recent record-breaking losses of Arctic sea ice may figure prominently in answering this question and in improving our understanding of Sandy’s unusual nature. While Sandy started out as a relatively normal late-season hurricane, its
character became anything but normal as the storm tracked northward along the eastern seaboard (Blake et al., 2013). Unusually warm ocean temperatures helped Sandy maintain tropical storm characteristics as it headed north. However, what made Sandy become so unusual were the atmospheric interactions that transformed it into a monster
hybrid storm that combined the worst features of a late-season hurricane and an extra-tropical cyclone. Unlike a typical hurricane, this huge and powerful hybrid storm did not lose strength after making landfall because it was supercharged with energy derived from
a southward dip in the jet stream over the Mississippi Valley that ushered in an invasion of cold Arctic air…

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Brave new globally warming world here we come.

Bought to by those who are scared to death of doing any or many of the things they could to mitigate GW that would actually save them money, such as turning off lights not in use, or even going to the store to buy LED or CF bulbs – afraid there will be a Black Friday-type stampede in the lighting section and they’ll be trampled to death.

They are the climate change mitigation alarmists

 

[Fairwinds]

if only we listened to Al Gore. our Doom wouldn’t be upon us.

 

[lynnvinc]

if only we listened to Al Gore. our Doom wouldn’t be upon us.

So true.

But do what he says, not what he does (re living high on the hog)