UFWDA Community Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 20, 2014, 11:21:18 pm

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
ATTENTION: Delegates, Lifetime and Ambassador Members if you can not see or access "Delegate Level Private Forums (including Lifetime Members)" please send an e-mail to forums@ufwda.org requesting access.
14,024 Posts in 3,234 Topics by 971 Members
Latest Member: onejsmith
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
UFWDA Community Forum  |  Regional Focus - News and Local Events  |  International  |  Topic: Climate consensus now being seen? « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Climate consensus now being seen?  (Read 1070 times)
Peter Vahry
UFWDA International Vice-President
ghost

Offline Offline

Posts: 1,321



« on: October 23, 2012, 03:18:35 am »

 Ken Ring |  October 23, 2012, 9:21 am

Environmental scientists appear to have reached consensus. They are at last agreed that the jury is still out on climate change and global warming. Many skeptical reports at university level have emerged, and those in the field seem to agree that what once they thought was reliable evidence is now too shaky.

A week ago the British metservice released its finding that global warming stopped 16 years ago and that their computer models to project global warming were deeply flawed.

Associate Professor of Physical Geography, James Renwick of NIWA last week admitted that "in the Antarctic in total the ice is growing, and when you add up what is happening around the continent the area of sea ice has been increasing for at least 20 years or so”.

His comments were backed up by the National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Boulder, Colorado, which has said Antarctic sea ice reached a maximum extent of 19.44 million square kms in September 2012, with a record high monthly average of 19.39 million square kms, being slightly higher than the previous record in 2006.

In his Geological Society of America abstract, Dr. Don Easterbrook, Professor of Geology at Western Washington University, presented data showing that the global warming blip from 1977 to 1998 is over and we have entered into global cooling that should last for the next thirty years.

He also suggests that because IPCC climate models are now so far off from what is actually happening, their projections for both this decade and century must be considered highly unreliable.

David Douglass and John Christy, in a paper available on the internet, concluded that natural changes in water temperature are responsible for increases in global temperature, and El Nino and La Nina have a more significant effect on global temperature than carbon dioxide.

El Nino and La Nina are now recognized to be functions of the Southern Oscillation Index, which correlates well with the lunar declination cycle.

At NASA, Dr. Roy Spencer believes natural cycles account for most of last century’s slight warming, with carbon dioxide increases contributing only a modest amount.

His new research, submitted to Geophysical Research Letters, shows that climate models are flawed because they are only programmed to look for positive feedback from an increase in carbon dioxide, in other words warming evidence, and therefore will find some, so are programmed to overstate or even invent warming.

Two new studies printed in Science Magazine point to wind-induced circulation changes in the ocean as the dominant cause of recent ice losses through glaciers draining both the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets, not global warming.

Dr. David Evans, an architect of Australia’s Kyoto compliance, and for years a noted climate change alarmist, has become another man-made global warming doubter. Evans outlines the four main reasons why he recently jumped off the global warming bandwagon.

1. The missing “greenhouse signature”, which would be a hot zone about 10 km up in the atmosphere, is simply not there. It is statistically impossible that hundreds of tests missed the spot. The existing models on greenhouse warming do not work without this hot zone.

2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. There is plenty of evidence of warming in various places and times in history, but no evidence that carbon emissions drive warming trends.

3. Satellites measuring the world’s temperature uniformly show that any tiny warming trend (less than 1°C over a century) stopped in 2001 and that in the past year the temperature actually returned to 1980 levels. Satellite measurements are the only truly reliable method for capturing the data as land-based measurements are vulnerable to encroachments of expanding cities and “urban heat island effect.” (NZ scientists' global warming claims were based on data from only 7 stations).

4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. This proved that CO2 increase could not have caused any warming in the atmosphere.

Hundreds of environmental studies now conclude the behavior of man is not the cause of warming, and it matters not if we ride bikes or SUVs, the planet will not burn to a cinder as a result of our slowness to embrace green policies.

The inactive sunspot cycle between 2007-2010, and the resultant devastatingly cold northern hemisphere winter, during which the Copenhagen global warming conference struggled to remain relevant, plus the open admissions by Climategate scientists of manipulating figures to justify their massive funding, all have contributed to the turn of the public tide.

Then there was 2010 case of the Iceland volcano that caused considerable public panic. At first Eyjafjallajokull was declared an environmental disaster because planes were grounded, but this shifted quickly to conjecture about long-term planet damage.

Apparently the media overlooked the fact that volcanoes are a fact of life in Iceland, much like seismic action in NZ., and Eyjafjallajokull often erupts.

In fact it previously did so in 1821, firing non-stop black ash into the atmosphere for 14 months. But over the intervening 180 years between 1821 and 2010 the climate in Iceland did not change, either in temperature averages or rainfall amounts.

The costs alone of implementing the ETS in New Zealand were estimated in 2010 at over 1.5 billion dollars. If we scrapped the ETS there would have been no need to increase GST.

Not for much longer can we continue to fund a scientific deception just to grab a tax that buys Green support to help governments win next elections, when so many earth scientists, including our own, are now going public with changes of heart.

In the nick of time it may save science credibility, because public unease about the politicizing of science has been fast approaching a tipping point.
Ken Ring of www.predictweather.com is author of the Weather Almanac for NZ for 2013

Logged

Auckland Four Wheel Drive Club Inc, 4x4 Challenges NZ Inc, NZFWDA life member
dds4x4
ghost

Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2012, 04:23:45 am »

Interesting
Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
UFWDA Community Forum  |  Regional Focus - News and Local Events  |  International  |  Topic: Climate consensus now being seen? « previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!