SHOCK CLAIM: World is on brink of 50 year ICE AGE and BRITAIN will bear the brunt

You can find all the details at UK Express HERE.

AccuWeather long-range expert Brett Anderson added: “When there is an anomaly with either the atmosphere or ocean temperature you can bet there will be some effect on the other nearby or far away.”

The warning comes just months after the Met Office warned Britain might be facing another maunder minimum period of cooling.

A recent report warned the amount of light and warmth released by the sun is nosediving to levels “not seen for centuries”.

A so-called ‘Maunder Minimum’ has been responsible for historic winter whiteouts and led to the River Thames freezing 300 years ago.

The Met Office-led study claimed that although the effect will be offset by recent global warming, Britain could see some cooler than average winters in years to come.

A spokesman said: “A return to low solar activity not seen for centuries could increase the chances of cold winters in Europe and eastern parts of the United States but wouldn’t halt global warming.

“Return of ‘grand solar minimum’ could affect European and eastern US winters.”

And, the political bodies of the world are preparing the population for global warming!  This is not going to work out very well.

Advertisement

EPIC FAIL: 73 CLIMATE MODELS VS. OBSERVATIONS

Courtesy of John Christy, a comparison between 73 CMIP5 models (archived at the KNMI Climate Explorer website) and observations for the tropical bulk tropospheric temperature (aka “MT”) since 1979.

http://www.thegwpf.org/epic-fail-73-climate-models-vs-observations/

Now, in what universe do the above results not represent an epic failure for the models?  It is time to get back to observing the cooling and see if their is any trend after 2005.

The Wrong Solution

Russ Steele

Ignoring the cyclical nature of climate history President Obama is placing the United States on a path that will prepare the county for global warming, when there is a higher probability of global cooling.

As leaders in Washington obsess about the fiscal cliff, President Barack Obama is putting in place the building blocks for a climate treaty requiring the first fossil- fuel emissions cuts from both the U.S. and China.

State Department envoy Todd Stern is in Doha this week working to clear the path for an international agreement by 2015. While Obama failed to deliver on his promise to start a cap-and-trade program in his first term, he’s working on policies that may help cut greenhouse gases 17 percent by 2020 in the U.S., historically the world’s biggest polluter.

“We are making good progress, and I think we are on track,” Stern told reporters today in Doha when asked if the U.S. can meet its goal even if Congress doesn’t pass climate legislation this decade.

Obama has moved forward with greenhouse-gas rules for vehicles and new power plants, appliance standards and investment in low-emitting energy sources. He’s also doubled use of renewable power and has called for 80 percent of U.S. electricity to come from “clean” energy sources, including nuclear and natural gas, by 2035.

“The president is laying the foundations for real action on climate change,” Jake Schmidt, who follows international climate policy for the Washington-based Natural Resources Defense Council, said in an interview in Doha. “Whether or not he decides to jump feet first into the international arena, we’ll see.”

You can read more HERE. The article concludes:

“The interesting thing is that for the past three UN climate conferences, the U.S. delegation has never talked about this,” Stavins said in an interview. “They haven’t been interested in taking credit internationally for what’s already in place. When I mention this to other parts of the world, people are shocked.”

The silence, he said, is understandable in part because the “last thing” the Obama administration wants is for State Department officials overseas making it appear as if the White House was trying to “take an end run around the Congress” on climate policy.

“It would have been very bad for the president’s re- election,” he said.

The election is over and the stupidity can commence. Let the end run around scientific reason begin.  Large segments of the economy will be preparing for warming, burning our food for fuel, installing solar panels that only work when the sun is shining and wind turbines that turn when the power is not needed and require back ups generators, all the  while the earth cooling.   Can anyone think of a worse case scenario? Millions will die from starvation as we burn the food need for survival. Millions will freeze when there is not enough affordable energy to stay warm.

California Governor Brown Defends Steps to Fight Climate Change

Russ Steele

The AP has the story:

Gov. Jerry Brown told attendees at an environmental conference Friday that climate change must be prevented or humans might one day be forced to live on another planet.

Addressing the Greenbuild Expo in San Francisco, Brown lauded California’s cap-and-trade auction for greenhouse gas emissions, which began this week. It was the formal launch of the nation’s most ambitious carbon-trading market, which for the first time established a market-based system to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions.

The Democratic governor said future generations will be living “indoors … or we’ll be living on some other planet.” He urged other states and the nation to follow California’s lead, saying the state can only do so much by itself

“Human impact on climate is real,” Brown said. “It is growing, and we need to take steps to stop it or there will be catastrophic consequences.”

 The climate change that Governor Brown is espousing as “growing” stopped 16 years ago, and is relatively static. For 16 years the global CO2 has increased, yet the temperatures have refused to climb in unison. If the two are connected, it would appear to me that both CO2 and temperatures should be increasing.  As you can see in Steven Goddard’s plot:

It is leadership like Governor Brown’s that will insure the majority of Californians will be ill prepared to cope with a predicted grand minimum, and potential little ice age. Governor Brown is held captive by his ideology and belief system, rather than observing the scientific data which points to a cooling trend rather than warming.

Our ancestors that have lived through past little ice ages had to live indoors in the winter and wished they were living on another planet.

New Satellite Data Contradicts Carbon Dioxide Climate Theory (Updated)

Russ Steele

[Editors Note: The original link to this story has been updated. The story was pulled from Suite1o1.com. Details on why this story was removed from the Internet can be found HERE.]

Conventional wisdom and dodgy climate change models have been turned upside down. CO2 warming is not going to offset  the cold and misery of the Next Grand Minimum. Details at johnosullivan

Industrialized nations emit far less carbon dioxide than the Third World, according to latest evidence from Japans Aerospace Exploration Agency JAXA.

Global warming alarmism is turned on its head and the supposed role of carbon dioxide in climate change may be wrong, if the latest evidence from Japans scientists is to be believed.

Japanese national broadcaster, NHK World, broke the astonishing story on their main Sunday evening news bulletin October 30, 2011. Television viewers learned that the countrys groundbreaking IBUKU satellite, launched in June 2009, appears to have scorched an indelible hole in conventional global warming theory.

Standing in front of a telling array of colorful graphs, sober-suited Yasuhiro Sasano, Director of Japans National Institute for Environmental Studies told viewers, “The [IBUKU satellite] map is to help us discover how much each region needs to reduce CO2 [carbon dioxide] emissions.

Industrialized Nations Worlds Lowest CO2 Polluters.

Indeed, the map at which JAXA spokesman Sasano was pointing see photo above had been expected by most experts to show that western nations are to blame for increases in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, causing global warming.

But to an officious looking TV interviewer Sasano turned greenhouse gas theory on its head.

According to UN science the greenhouse gas theory says more CO2 entering the atmosphere will warm the planet, while less CO2 is associated with cooling.Gesturing to an indelible deep green hue streaked across the United States and Europe viewers were told, “in the high latitudes of the Northern hemisphere emissions were less than absorption levels.”

More details HERE. The article concludes:

Thus, the unthinkable could be made real: the greenhouse gas theory of climate change may collapse in the face of empirical evidence that industrialization is shown to have no link to global warming.

CIA Says Global-Warming Intelligence Is ‘Classified’

Russ Steele

Why are the results of a CIA’s Global-Warming study secret? Wired has this story:

Two years ago, the Central Intelligence Agency announced it was creating a center to analyze the geopolitical ramifications of “phenomena such as desertification, rising sea levels, population shifts and heightened competition for natural resources.”

But whatever work the Center on Climate Change and National Security has done remains secret.

In response to National Security Archive scholar Jeffrey Richelson’s Freedom of Information Act request, the CIA said all of its work is “classified.”

“We completed a thorough search for records responsive to your request and located material that we determined is currently and properly classified and must be denied in its entirety,”

What could be so classified, that is has to be a secert. Could it be the report says that there is no global warming, and that would be counter to the current policy of the Obama administration. I wonder if this is while it is still classified?

Spencer and Braswell must have hit a big soft spot in warmer’s models (Or maybe it is more of a connection)

Russ Steele

Editors Note:  See the update below from a post at Watts Up With That, the critics and the editor may have a business and academic relationship.  See the rest of the story below.

Roy Spencer and John Braswell published a paper in Remote Sensing, a peer- reviewed journal which is the litmus test for valid science by Nevada County’s local left.  This paper would force some re-thinking and re-calculation of the existing climate models, thus reducing the amount of warming projected by these climate models.  Therefore they have declared it is bad science, and even worse yet done by a bad scientist. The reaction by the warmer’s was brutal. The full paper On the Misdiagnosis of Climate Feedbacks from Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance can be found HERE.

I wrote about the issues HERE, when James Taylor wrote in Forbes Magazine: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism. Which in retrospect the article was a bit over the top, but the finding by Spencer and Braswell will required revision to the warmer models unless they can discredit them as scientist.

And that is exactly what the warmers are trying to do, as they wrote in the Climategate e-mail they are redefining climate science peer-review process.

• They have force the Remote Sensor Journal editor Wolfgang Warner to resign, and commanding an apology for publishing the paper in the first place.
• Forcing the resignation, rather than publishing counter paper in the Remote Sensing, demonstrating the mistakes in Spencer and Braswell, they chose to attack them in the blogs, which is not how good science is done. The place to refute a published paper is in peer-reviewed papers, not in blogs or the media.
• Those who are demanding resignations and apologies, Kevin Trenberth, John Abraham, and Peter Gleick have written a personal attack on John Spencer in The Daily Climate.

Dr Roger Pielke writes at Climate Science about the historical fabrications and ad hominem attacks by this trio in: Hatchet Job On John Christy and Roy Spencer By Kevin Trenberth, John Abraham and Peter Gleick

I do not think that Peter Gleick is much of a scientist, more a political hack. He wrote a study on Sea Level Rise for the California Energy Commission’s Climate Change Center Report Series. I took exception to Dr Gleick truncating his sea level rise data in 2006, when the data beyond 2006 showed a sea level decline. My full exchange with Dr Gleick is in: Pacific Institute truncates sea level rise data. Why?

But, now after reading Dr. Gleick in Forbes, I now understand where I went wrong.

“[T]his is also the way science works: someone makes a scientific claim and others test it. If it holds up to scrutiny, it become part of the scientific literature and knowledge, safe until someone can put forward a more compelling theory that satisfies all of the observations, agrees with physical theory, and fits the models.” – Peter Gleick at Forbes; emphasis added. 9/2/2011

The real world data that I presented to Dr Glick did not fit the model, so it could be ignored. This is appears to be the case with the Spencer-Braswell paper. The real world satellite data does not fit the warmers models, thus it must be wrong and Dr Spencer must be attacked for presenting data that did not fit the warmers model.

The strength of this attack tells me that Dr Spencer and Dr John Christy are on to something that will destroy the warmer’s assertion that we must stem the flow of CO2 or fry.  However, I think the real issue is that Kevin Trenberth, John Abraham, and Peter Gleick will lose their global warming research revenue stream if Spencer and Christy are right.

Anthony Watts has pointed out that this whole issue has gone viral. Details HERE. I also recommend reading Dr Pielke’s exchange with Dr Gleick HERE. This is not going to turn out the way the warmer’s and Wolfgang Warner thought is would. Stay Tuned.

Update from WUWT Post by Les Johnson:

Here comes the interconnected parts; I read Maurizio Morabito’s blog, and discovered that Mr. Wagner may have connections to Mr. Trenberth, to whom Mr. Wagner gives the only scientific reference in his letter. There are also suggestions that his apology is directed right at Trenberth, which seems odd, doesn’t it?

I went to Bishop Hill’s site, to link Maurizio’s site. While there, I noted similar work done by Robert Phelan, who mentions davidhoffer.

David Hoffer speculates that Wagner is upset that SB2011 will interfere with the modeling gravy train, of which Mr. Wagner is part of. This is pure speculation of course, but it is logical. Mr. Wagner hints at this, in his letter:

“ Interdisciplinary cooperation with modelers is required in order to develop a joint understanding of where and why models deviate from satellite data.”

On this side of the story, that is the connection: myself, to Maurizio, to Bishop Hill, to Robert Phelan, and finally to davidhoffer, who apparently started the whole thing, then back to WUWT.

The connection on the other side? Trenberth and Wagner? Well, Wagner is apparently the director of a group that wants to start a Soil Moisture Network. For this, they have asked the help of the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment (GEWEX).

GEWEX in 2010 announced the appointment, by acclamation, of Kevin Trenberth, as its new Chairperson. (page 3 of this newsletter). On Page 4, is the announcement that the Soil Moisture Network (which is the department Wagner runs) is looking for help. Not, coincidentally, on Page 5 is an article on how cloud albedo is overestimated in models, thus it’s worse than we thought.

In the conclusion of this cloud albedo discussion, is some boot licking directed at the new Chairperson.

Thus, the circle of climate is complete.

Here again, we learn there are more connection on the Warmer’s Team, than ever imagined.  As they said in their Climategate e-mails, they would redefine the peer-review process is they have to, all to keep the skeptics from publishing.  They have surely bastardized the process in this case, to damage the reputation of Dr. Roy Spencer and his colleagues.

Is Your City Wasting Precious Resources On Climate Change?

Russ Steele

According to a story in at KQED Climate Watch there are not as many communities as some would like preparing for climate change. Change which some scientist say is caused by CO2 emissions. Others scientist say it is the sun in conjunction cosmic rays and clouds. However, the warmers at the puzzle palace in Sacramento, including the ring master Jerry Brown are in the warmers camp. “Climate denial propaganda is very powerful, but California is standing against it,” Brown said. “Part of my job is to advance the truth of science.”

“Speaking at the National Clean Energy Summit on Aug. 30 in Las Vegas, California Gov. Jerry Brown stated: ”Climate change will create floods, droughts, forest fires of greater intensity and regularity, and with far greater devastation.” He asserted that many of the people who once denied that tobacco was harmful are now well-financed “climate deniers.”

 This is stuff right out of Al Gore Play Book.  According to the KQED article:

Oh My God! — Climate change is going to fry California’s Seniors

Russ Steele

According to a study funded by CARB, California can expect more frequent and more dangerous heat waves in the coming decades, the result of global warming and the state’s aging population.  I am a member of this aging population and according to a new climate-modeling study commissioned by the California Air Resources Board I am toast.  Study is here.

The KQED Climate Watch warmers have this quote from CARB’s Warmer-in-Chief Mary Nichols along with the scary stats in the second sentence:

“Along with reducing our climate-warming emissions, we need to prepare for longer and hotter heat waves,” Board Chairman Mary Nichols said. “Raising public awareness of the risks and having safety nets such as community cooling centers can greatly reduce those risks.

 Currently, an average of about 500 elderly people die from excessive heat each year in the nine major urban areas studied: Fresno, Los Angeles, Oakland, Santa Ana, Riverside, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco and San Jose. By the 2090s, the death toll within this population group could rise more than nine-fold – to a range of roughly 4,700 to 8,800 – depending on the climate scenario, according to the study.

 How did this CARB funded team arrive at this conclusion? From the study:

House Republicans Seek to Remove U.S. Funding for UN Climate Efforts

Russ Steele

Elections have consequences. The Republican controlled house is targeting the funds for the IPCC and UNFCCC, two programs designed to educate policy makers about climate science and the need slow global warming world wide.

WASHINGTON—House Republicans are applying a search and destroy tactic to international funding for global warming this budget season. It goes like this: Ax any line items with the words “climate change.”