Surely its time for heads to roll! … The unhomogenized/raw mean annual minimum temperature trend for Rutherglen for the 100-year period from January 1913 through to December 2013 shows a slight cooling trend of 0.35 degree C per 100 years. After homogenization there is a warming trend of 1.73 degree C per 100 years. This warming trend is essentially achieved by progressively dropping down the temperatures from 1973 back through to 1913. For the year of 1913 the difference between the raw temperature and the ACORN-SAT temperature is a massive 1.8 degree C. … In the case of Rutherglen the Bureau has just let the algorithms keep jumping down the temperatures from 1973. To repeat the biggest change between the raw and the new values is in 1913 when the temperature has been jumped down a massive 1.8 degree C.In doing this homogenization a warming trend is created when none previously existed. The Bureau has tried to justify all of this to Graham Lloyd at The Australian newspaper by stating that there must have been a site move, its flagging the years 1966 and 1974. But the biggest adjustment was made in 1913! In fact as Bill Johnston explains in today’s newspaper, the site never has moved. Surely someone should be sacked for this blatant corruption of what was a perfectly good temperature record. more here: http://jennifermarohasy.com/2014/08...d-for-making-up-global-warming-at-rutherglen/
Australian Bureau of Meteorology accused of Criminally Adjusted Global Warming http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-...accused-of-Criminally-Adjusted-Global-Warming
New book: About Face! Why the World Needs More Carbon Dioxide http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/27/new-book-about-face-why-the-world-needs-more-carbon-dioxide/ ”If you are in the slightest doubt about what the climate change alarmists are trying to get us to do –and pay for — you should read this book.” –Dr. Peter Walsh, Geologist, London, England ”This book should be compulsory reading for everyone seriously interested in the Earth’s future –global warming alarmists included.” –Wyss Yim, Professor of Earth Sciences, Hong Kong ”This book should be issued for use by every teacher of any science classes from Grade 7 to the first years of college.” –Gary Sharp, Professor, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources, California ”This book clearly shows that carbon dioxide is our friend. We should be producing more of it.” –Aert Driessen, Geologist, Canberra, Australia ”The real science of global warming and climate change, which is explained in this book, will leave you scratching your head and asking what all the fuss is about why we have to tax a gas that we breathe out and also use to make fizzy drinks, and how we got ourselves into this contentious political position… and that is also explained. If you are beginning to have misgivings about the extreme language and alarmist predictions on global warming and extreme weather events coming from the IPCC and kindred environmental groups, then this book is for you. It is easy to read (the lead author is not a scientist) but, that said, he has chosen two eminent scientists of international standing as co-authors. The strength of this book lies with the way that it explains the science; indeed the lead author has been described elsewhere as ”the great explainer” on the basis of previous books, mainly on economics and marketing. Descriptions of follies in bygone years stemming from hasty and wrong interpretations of scientific data, and sometimes even data manipulation, feel familiar and form an intriguing backdrop to the global warming folly. I refer, inter alia, to the banning of DDT to control malaria (1972) on the basis (without evidence) that it killed birds and was linked to cancer (both untrue). In 2006 the World Health Organization (WHO) came to its senses and supported a partial reintroduction of DDT (for spraying indoors but not before the preventable deaths of 50 million people, mostly children. Other follies cited include a purported link between measles vaccinations and autism (1998, untrue, and it led to a terrible measles outbreak in Wales in 2011), Professor Paul Ehrlich’s prediction that the world would experience mass starvation in the 1970s and ’80s (that never happened but did lead to China s one-child policy), and the Club of Rome’s predictions that the world would run out of mineral resources (still waiting). All these follies, including the folly of ‘stopping climate change’ get their traction and momentum from sensationalized reporting by mainstream media and opportunistic politicians that see votes in large sections of an unquestioning populace. The book also explains how, as an inhabitant of the Solar System, Earth’s climate is influenced mainly by our Sun, and that should come as no surprise. Indeed the book clearly shows that carbon dioxide is our friend and we should be producing more of it.” Aert Driessen, Geologist, Canberra, Australia –Reviews The strength of this book lies in the way that it explains in simple ways the complex science of many disciplines — atmospheric physics, astronomy, meteorology, geology, and more. It is well illustrated and referenced. And what this science shows, backed by much compelling evidence, some irrefutable, is that carbon dioxide has very little to do with climate change, in either direction (hotter or colder). The book also explains how, as an inhabitant of the Solar System, Earth’s climate is influenced mainly by our Sun, and that should come as no surprise. Indeed the book clearly shows that carbon dioxide is our friend and we should be producing more of it.” –Aert Driessen, Geologist, Canberra, Australia ”This book should be compulsory reading for everyone seriously interested in the Earth s future global warming alarmists included.” –Wyss Yim, Professor of Earth Sciences, Hong Kong ”This book should be issued for use by every teacher of any science classes from Grade 7 to the first years of college.’ ‘–Gary Sharp, Professor, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources, California –Reviews
CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It causes warming. This is an indisputable basic bedrock scientific fact. Like gravity or the speed of light or that the earth is round.
I guess futurecunts is aligned with 33rd degree Mason Al Gore, and Al Gore said the Arctic Ice would melt and Polar Bears, cute little things that they are, might all die... So never mind that shit. Myth of arctic meltdown: Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago...despite Al Gore's prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now Seven years after former US Vice-President Al Gore's warning, Arctic ice cap has expanded for second year in row An area twice the size of Alaska - America's biggest state - was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice These satellite images taken from University of Illinois's Cryosphere project show ice has become more concentrated By DAVID ROSE FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY PUBLISHED: 17:04 EST, 30 August 2014 | UPDATED: 17:05 EST, 30 August 2014 87shares 54 View comments The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore was apocalyptic. ‘The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff,’ he said. ‘It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.’ Those comments came in 2007 as Mr Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize for his campaigning on climate change. But seven years after his warning, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that, far from vanishing, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession – with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012. +4 To put it another way, an area the size of Alaska, America’s biggest state, was open water two years ago, but is again now covered by ice. The most widely used measurements of Arctic ice extent are the daily satellite readings issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by Nasa. These reveal that – while the long-term trend still shows a decline – last Monday, August 25, the area of the Arctic Ocean with at least 15 per cent ice cover was 5.62 million square kilometres. This was the highest level recorded on that date since 2006 (see graph, right), and represents an increase of 1.71 million square kilometres over the past two years – an impressive 43 per cent. Other figures from the Danish Meteorological Institute suggest that the growth has been even more dramatic. Using a different measure, the area with at least 30 per cent ice cover, these reveal a 63 per cent rise – from 2.7 million to 4.4 million square kilometres. More... Will there be a global famine in 2050? Crops will be overwhelmed by pests in the next 30 years, scientists warn Think California's drought is bad? Scientists issue dire warning of US megadrought that could last 35 YEARS and lead to mass population migrations Obama will sidestep Congress by signing sweeping international climate change agreement The satellite images published here are taken from a further authoritative source, the University of Illinois’s Cryosphere project. They show that as well as becoming more extensive, the ice has grown more concentrated, with the purple areas – denoting regions where the ice pack is most dense – increasing markedly. Crucially, the ice is also thicker, and therefore more resilient to future melting. Professor Andrew Shepherd, of Leeds University, an expert in climate satellite monitoring, said yesterday: ‘It is clear from the measurements we have collected that the Arctic sea ice has experienced a significant recovery in thickness over the past year. ‘It seems that an unusually cool summer in 2013 allowed more ice to survive through to last winter. This means that the Arctic sea ice pack is thicker and stronger than usual, and this should be taken into account when making predictions of its future extent.’ +4 The speech by former US Vice-President Al Gore (above) was apocalyptic. He said that the North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff and could be gone in seven years Yet for years, many have been claiming that the Arctic is in an ‘irrevocable death spiral’, with imminent ice-free summers bound to trigger further disasters. These include gigantic releases of methane into the atmosphere from frozen Arctic deposits, and accelerated global warming caused by the fact that heat from the sun will no longer be reflected back by the ice into space. Judith Curry, professor of earth and atmospheric sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, said last night: ‘The Arctic sea ice spiral of death seems to have reversed.’ Those who just a few years ago were warning of ice-free summers by 2014 included US Secretary of State John Kerry, who made the same bogus prediction in 2009, while Mr Gore has repeated it numerous times – notably in a speech to world leaders at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009, in an effort to persuade them to agree a new emissions treaty. The ice cap is falling off a cliff. It could be completely gone in summer in as little as 7 years from now Mr Gore – whose office yesterday failed to respond to a request for comment – insisted then: ‘There is a 75 per cent chance that the entire polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.’ Misleading as such forecasts are, some people continue to make them. Only last month, while giving evidence to a House of Lords Select Committee inquiry on the Arctic, Cambridge University’s Professor Peter Wadhams claimed that although the Arctic is not ice-free this year, it will be by September 2015. Asked about this yesterday, he said: ‘I still think that it is very likely that by mid-September 2015, the ice area will be less than one million square kilometres – the official designation of ice-free, implying only a fringe of floes around the coastlines. That is where the trend is taking us.’ For that prediction to come true it would require by far the fastest loss of ice in history. It would also fly in the face of a report last year by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which stated with ‘medium confidence’ that ice levels would ‘likely’ fall below one million square kilometres by 2050. Politicians such as Al Gore have often insisted that climate science is ‘settled’ and have accused those who question their forecasts of being climate change ‘deniers’. However, while few scientists doubt that carbon-dioxide emissions cause global warming, and that this has caused Arctic ice to decline, there remains much uncertainty about the speed of melting and how much of it is due to human activity. But outside the scientific community, the more pessimistic views have attracted most attention. For example, Prof Wadhams’s forecasts have been cited widely by newspapers and the BBC. But many reject them. +4 An area twice the size of Alaska was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice after the arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in a row
The ice is not recovering and Al Gore never said the Arctic would be ice free. You are an idiot that will believe anything on any crap right wing tabloid rag. And calling it that is being generous. It's a shit paper. In fact, the most authoritative source, the IPCC, has underestimated the rate of ice loss. You should really get your facts straight before posting stupid stuff. Better that they think you may be an idiot than open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Hey butt-cube, I shredded you on this in another topic and you never bothered to respond. I guess you just went to another topic and repeated your same lie and hoped I wouldn't see it. Well guess what, I am here and once again am exposing your lies. This is from the BBC on Dec 12, 2007. They are about as left wing as you get. So claiming that it is from a crap right wing tabloid rag, is a complete LIE. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7139797.stm Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013' 'Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice. Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years. ' In black and white for you to read, you liar. So yes, they did make the claim. Not only were they 100% wrong, they made the claim in 2007 that their modeling was too conservative and the ice would actually melt faster. "Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007," the researcher from the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, explained to the BBC. "So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative." How could they have been so, so wrong? Keep in mind, there is a consensus amongst these climate frauds so they all bought in.