NASA: We May Be On the Verge of a “Mini-Maunder” Cooling Event

Climate change predictions on track, report finds
December 10th, 2012

(Phys.org)—A new report co-authored by Professor David Frame, Director of the New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute at Victoria University, has confirmed that climate change predictions made 20 years ago are proving reasonably accurate.
Professor Frame and Dr Dáithí Stone, from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, have had their findings published in the latest edition of Nature Climate Change.
The report compares predictions from the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment Report published in 1990, with global climate change data gathered over the past 20 years.
Their analysis suggests that the global climate is responding largely as predicted by the first IPCC report, which included a range of predictions for global temperature increase to the year 2030.

http://phys.org/wire-news/116583339/climate-change-predictions-on-track-report-finds.html

 

not the predictions used to hype the hysteria.

 

LOL "Drastic Cuts" is the model assuming we had made drastic cuts in CO2 emissions, which we have not. Regardless, the statement above belies the reality. LOL

<img src=http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j191/mikesamerica/mikesamerica2/cid_image001_gif01CA746B.jpg>

 

Tree ring studies confirm global COOLING, cast doubt on California AB 32

Jan. 31, 2013

By Chriss Street

Global cooling? New studies of tree rings show that it’s happening.

Yet California remains governed by AB 32, whose official title is the “Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.” It’s seven years later. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who signed AB 32 into law, is long gone. And the environmental movement, sensing that “global warming” wasn’t selling any longer, now calls bad weather “climate change,” as President Obama did in his Inaugural Address.

The prestigious Nature Journal recently published a major climate change study, “Orbital Forcing Of Tree-Ring Data.” It provided a thorough analysis of more than 2000 years of tree-ring evidence that showed current climate models substantially underestimated ancient Northern Europe temperatures levels during the Roman and Medieval Periods.

Researchers from Germany, Finland, Scotland and Switzerland examined tree-ring density profiles in trees from Finnish Lapland, way up North. In this extremely cold environment, trees often collapse into one of the numerous lakes, where they remain well preserved for thousands of years. The international team was able to conduct high reliability calculations of tree-ring density from the Scandinavian pine trees preserved in the cold water. The tree rings correlated very closely with annual summer temperature patterns.

The United Nations-endorsed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore for interpreting studies of ice cores and ocean sediments to “conclude” that Europe was about to suffer catastrophic anthropogenic global warming.

Cooling trend

But the new tree-ring data allow precise measurements of annual climate variability. The results reveal there has been a cooling trend of -0.3°C (0.54°F) every thousand years “due to gradual changes to the position of the sun and an increase in the distance between the Earth and the sun.”

The high-resolution graph shown above demonstrates that temperatures during ancient periods were much warmer than predicted by the IPCC. The study also documented the extreme temperature phases that occurred during Europe’s “Little Ice Age” that resulted in a general cooling trend between the 1150 and 1460 AD, and the extremely cold climate between 1560 and 1850 AD. According to lead researcher Jan Esper:

“We found that previous estimates of historical temperatures during the Roman era and the Middle Ages were too low.… Such findings are also significant with regard to climate policy, as they will influence the way today’s climate changes are seen in context of historical warm periods.”

The results are a huge embarrassment to the IPCC, which has acknowledged it did not carry out its own original research to monitor climate and related phenomena. But their extrapolated conclusions regarding a recent warming trend served as justification for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to demand Western industrialized nations implement the job-killing Kyoto Protocol treaty to achieve “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.”

http://www.calwatchdog.com/2013/01/31/tree-ring-studies-confirm-global-cooling-cast-doubt-on-ab-32/

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n12/full/nclimate1589.html

 

I am always amused at how the global warming alarmists regularly deny that global cooling was a big topic in the 1970s. They always attempt to claim that more papers were written on global warming than global cooling in the 1970s (which is categorically false). The alarmists also try to claim there was minimal media coverage of global cooling in the 1970s. (The reality was it was the third top media topic in the U.S. after Vietnam and Watergate).

Let me add in a couple Time covers...

 

Here is a huge list of stories about Global Cooling from the '70's. I don't recall anybody talking about the planet warming back then. But, we are fortunate that we got 15 or 20 years of warming after the 70's.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compilation/

 

It is amazing all this stuff starts to pour out after the election.

Look like we did not need Obama to stop the tides from rising.

 

you keep pointing to old discredited models.
you are like those old biker chicks who have not changed since the 70s. hair like Farrah with blue eye shadow. And even they seem to be dwindling in numbers.

 

Are you saying that this could be futurecurrents?

<img src=http://i867.photobucket.com/albums/ab239/moehavingfun/bikerchick-fat.jpg>

 

It certainly has NOT been discredited. Maybe in your crazed moron denier mind but not in the world of climate science. In fact some recent studies predict that the higher estimates are the more likely. The release of methane from melting permafrost was not included nor some other factors that are likely to make it worse.

Doyle Rice, USA TODAY3:16p.m. EST November 9, 2012
A study finds that temperature rises due to global warming could reach a potentially catastrophic 8 degrees by 2100.

"As the USA swelters through its hottest year on record — and the Earth sees yet another top-10 year for heat — a study published today in the journal Science says we'd better get used to it.

The study finds that future temperature rises due to global warming will probably be on the high end of projections, as much as a potentially catastrophic 8 degrees warmer than now by the end of the century.

Most predictions of upcoming temperature rises are roughly 3.6 degrees to 8.1 degrees.

Study co-authors John Fasullo and Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., reached their conclusions by looking at how well 16 top climate computer models reproduced actual relative humidity in the tropics and subtropics, as measured by satellites.

Higher levels of humidity tend to produce clouds, which remain one of the most vexing aspects of predicting future climate. Though additional clouds can cause temperatures to cool as less heat reaches the ground, they can also act to increase the heat that's trapped below them. In their study, the scientists used humidity as a substitute for clouds, since models cannot accurately forecast cloud cover."


http://www.usatoday.com/story/weath...ange-global-warming-temperature-rise/1694797/