Tag Archives: climate

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/what-catastrophe_773268.html?nopager=1

What Catastrophe?

MIT’s Richard Lindzen, the unalarmed climate scientist

Weekly Standard, Jan 13, 2014, Vol. 19, No. 17 • By ETHAN EPSTEIN
When you first meet Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology at MIT, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, leading climate “skeptic,” and all-around scourge of James Hansen, Bill McKibben, Al Gore, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and sundry other climate “alarmists,” as Lindzen calls them, you may find yourself a bit surprised. If you know Lindzen only from the way his opponents characterize him—variously, a liar, a lunatic, a charlatan, a denier, a shyster, a crazy person, corrupt—you might expect a spittle-flecked, wild-eyed loon. But in person, Lindzen cuts a rather different figure. With his gray beard, thick glasses, gentle laugh, and disarmingly soft voice, he comes across as nothing short of grandfatherly.

Henny Penny Climate Fear Mongers Count on General Public’sLack of Critical Thinking

Henny Penny aka Climate Change Fear Mongers use whopper alarmist threats of “Vast Costs of Arctic Change”, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v499/n7459/pdf/499401a.pdf

7_26_13_news_andrew_meltcam5-660x373
Image from one of the North Pole Environmental Observatory webcams, taken on Thursday, July 25.
Credit: NSF’s North Pole Environmental Observatory.

The Lake at the North Pole, How Bad Is It? by  Andrew Freedman;     http://www.climatecentral.org/news/melting-at-north-pole-how-bad-is-it-16294 Published: July 26th, 2013 , Last Updated: July 26th, 2013

The pictures are dramatic — a camera at the North Pole Environmental Observatory, sitting in the middle of what appears to be either a lake or open ocean, at the height of the summer sea ice melt season. Set against the backdrop of the precipitous decline in sea ice cover in recent decades due in large part to global warming, this would seem to be yet another alarming sign of Arctic climate change.

7_26_13_news_andrew_driftmap-500x285
Annotated map showing the location of the North Pole and the location of the buoys with the webcams.
Credit: NSF’s North Pole Environmental Observatory.

[…]These images have attracted media attention, such as this AtlanticWire post and this Daily Mail story, both of which portray the images as potential signs of an intensifying Arctic meltdown. But before concluding that Arctic climate change has entered an even more ominous phase, it’s important to examine the context behind these images. First, the cameras in question, which are attached to instruments that scientists have deposited on the sea ice at the start of each spring since 2002, may have “North Pole” in their name, but they are no longer located at the North Pole. In fact, as this map below shows, they have drifted well south of the North Pole, since they sit atop sea ice floes that move along with ocean currents. Currently, the waterlogged camera is near the prime meridian, at 85 degrees north latitude.[…] (Notice that these records of observations are extremely recent, so any comparisons within them are in no way fit to be compared with the Record of Arctic sea ice cover before satellite observations in 1979)  […]Arctic sea ice cover has been rapidly shrinking and thinning since the start of satellite observations in 1979. Last year, sea ice extent and volume plunged to a record low. When the melt season finally ended in late September, the Arctic Ocean managed to hold onto less than half of the average sea ice extent seen during the 1979-to-2000 period. The past six years have had the six smallest sea ice extents since 1979, indicating that the ice has not recovered from the previous record low in 2007. Researchers attribute this to the loss of thicker multiyear ice, which has been replaced by thinner ice that forms in the fall and melts in the spring and summer. Serreze said the thinness of the ice cover has made it much more susceptible to weather patterns that promote ice transport and melting. So far this summer, sea ice extent has tracked above that of 2012, with a slow rate of ice melt in June followed by much more rapid melting during the first three weeks of July after weather patterns became more favorable for melting, Serreze said. “I would be extremely surprised if we were not” well below average come September, Serreze said, but the prospect of setting another record low “depends on the vagaries of the weather, and we just can’t predict that.”[…]

Without critical thinking we are malleable to every emotional appeal to whomever wishes to control us. In the past century mankind has been subjected to the concerted efforts of those who would rob us of our critical thinking abilities to get us to behave in certain ways, to buy certain things, and to change human value systems for the ends of the manipulators.  The “Henny Penny Sky Is Falling” schitck is a favourite change catalyst. Sigmund Freud’s nephew 1920s_Edward_BernaysEdward Louis Bernays (November 22, 1891-March 9, 1995) written up in his obituary as “the father of public relations”,  well understood critical thinking vs emotional reactive thinking. (century_self_lead The subject of anthropocentric (man) caused climate change is one we’re all familiar with from warring sides. Much much much critical thinking needs to be done……….a good place to start would be; http://www.climatedepot.com/ Here’s an example of one so called journalistic effort that needs careful discernment follows with my layman’s comments included in green in parentheses.) Scientists warn on Arctic ‘economic time bomb’     http://www.cnbc.com/id/100912062

(Opening paragraph full of opinion and fearful possibilities) The rapidly melting Arctic (a highly debated theory, with extreme disagreement among scientific community)  is an “economic time bomb” (Henny Penny-be afraid-phrase) likely (a speculation) to cost the world at least (indicating they don’t know but may be larger) $60 trillion (a very large unsubstantiated estimate), say researchers (anonymous authoritative figures you should respect) who have started to calculate (they haven’t calculated it yet, but they are working on it) the financial consequences of one of the world’s fastest changing climates (Is it? says who? and just how many changing climates are they referring to?). (opinion, unproven speculation, etc. highlighted in green below) A record decline in Arctic sea ice has been widely seen as economically beneficial until now, as it opens up more shipping and drilling in a region thought to contain 30 percent of the world’s undiscovered gas and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil. However, the Arctic’s pivotal role in regulating the oceans and climate means that as it melts it is likely to cause climatic changes that will damage crops, flood properties and wreck infrastructure around the world, according to research by academics at the UK’s University of Cambridge and Erasmus University Rotterdam in the Netherlands. This is likely to end up creating costs that will outstrip any benefits by three or more orders of magnitude, said Chris Hope of Cambridge’s Judge Business School. “People are calculating possible economic benefits in the billions of dollars and we’re talking about possible costs and damage and extra impacts in the order of tens of trillions of dollars,” he said. The Arctic has been warming at least twice as fast as the rest of the world for many years and the area of its sea ice, which melts and refreezes after every summer, has been declining by an amount almost equal to the size of the UK each year since 2001. Last year, the summer ice shrank to its lowest point since satellite observations started in 1979 (extremely short amount of time), raising concerns about the impact on the climate. The effect the European researchers have focused on is the way warmer Arctic waters are expected to hasten thawing of the permafrost beneath the East Siberian Sea off northern Russia that is believed to contain vast deposits of methane. This is a greenhouse gas some 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide, though it does not last as long in the atmosphere. There is much debate about how long it might take to release these methane deposits, and what impact it would eventually have. But some scientists say there is already evidence of large plumes of methane escaping and others fear this could happen fast enough to accelerate global warming and eventually speed up other changes such as the melting of the Greenland ice sheet, which contains enough frozen water to push up global sea levels by 7 meters. That is why the group felt it was important to assess the possible economic impact of such changes, said Peter Wadhams, a professor of ocean physics at Cambridge who believes the Arctic sea ice could completely vanish in summers as early as 2015. UK climate scientists say oceans hold key as global warming slows Met Office weathers storm of criticism Energy chiefs warn on EU oil sands measures “We’re looking at a possibly catastrophic effect on the global climate that has been a consequence of this extremely fast sea ice retreat,” he said. The researchers assessed the impact of higher methane emissions with a newer version of the economic model used in the UK government’s 2006 Stern Review on the economics of climate change, which concluded the benefits of curbing global warming early far outweigh the potential costs of not acting. Depending on how much methane was emitted, they calculated its potential cost was likely to be $60 trillion, with 80 percent of the damage occurring in developing countries least able to curb the impact of more floods, droughts and storms. “It’s not just important for polar bears (the emotional polar bear extinction argument , on which there is ample proof that they are increasing in population instead of becoming more endangered), it’s important for societies and global economies,” said Professor Gail Whiteman of Erasmus, adding her group’s research underlined the need for world leaders to start thinking about what she described as an economic time bomb.  from  http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v499/n7459/pdf/499401a.pdf

Critical thinking, yes, that is what we need, yet we are surrounded by people who are bound by vested interests for whom our critical thinking is a road block to their ends of profit making and control.  My opinion is that we desperately need to teach more people to be critical thinkers. That elementary statement should be a “no-brainer”.

“We will be climate choosers…” Will We ‘Fix the Weather?

NPR article link

EXCERPT:

Will We ‘Fix’ The Weather? Yes. Should We Fix The Weather? Hmmm

by Robert Krulwich
October 30, 2012 2:13 PM

Because I’m at home, wind raging outside, trees bending, leaves flying, a hurricane descending, subways suspended, my day upended, I can’t stop thinking: “What is Maureen Raymo thinking?”

She teaches at Columbia University, up the block from where I live. She’s a paleoclimatologist. Her focus is climate change, and in a book I am reading, she says someday soon we won’t be climate victims, we will be climate choosers. We will engineer the climate we want. (…)  (…)Geoengineers shouldn’t be the ones who clean up human messes, and there’s no guarantee geoengineers won’t make mistakes too. Technology won’t give us a free ride.

But in the long run, geoengineering — tinkering with air, oceans, the skies — will help us survive on a changing planet. Maureen Raymo is hardly alone in her prediction. More and more eminent scientists agree with her, that if the human race survives, the engineers will get smarter, the tools will get better, and one day we will control the climate. But what then?(…)

 

click the link below for entire article and very interesting videos;

http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2012/10/30/163964979/will-we-fix-the-weather-yes-should-we-fix-the-weather-hmmm

 

 

 

 

 

NY Mayor Bloomberg, “drinking water is safe, we put in extra chlorine…”

At Tuesday’s morning after Sandy news conference, NY city mayor, Bloomberg told us that the “drinking water is safe, we put in extra chlorine”.

Should we believe him? Does chlorine cancel out all the toxic run off and chemicals and sewage that flowed out of the ocean, rivers, ponds, ditches, and highways, yards, and business, residence,  and industrial properties into the water supply?

I wouldn’t drink it.

Memory tells us of another safety assurance about the safety of the air after the twin towers disaster by EPA administrator Christine Whitman. That proclamation proved to be false.

Mayor Bloomberg also took the news conference as an opportunity to with no evidence whatsoever speculate upon whether “global warming” was to blame for Sandy’s intensity. Bloomberg patently urges us to trust and obey the authorities. He indicated that more official powers and regulations would make you safer and that Sandy will lead to consideration of more restrictions and regulations.

No doubt this will be an excellent opportunity to institute more of UN Agenda 21. Stay tuned to local planning boards, city, county, and regional regulations for building and useages of properties private and public.

Stay calm and only drink water you know is safe, don’t drink from the tap. Look out for yourself, you have a brain, use your common sense. Do a bit of research on water safety too when you have the time, get your information for yourself and trust your ability to make good decisions with your own research.

Update;

This NYTimes article shows how ready and willing big government is to make all our decisions for us, this one touts;  here

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/opinion/a-big-storm-requires-big-government.html?_r=1&

Editorial
A Big Storm Requires Big Government
Published: October 29, 2012

(…)Most Americans have never heard of the National Response Coordination Center, but they’re lucky it exists on days of lethal winds and flood tides. The center is the war room of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, where officials gather to decide where rescuers should go, where drinking water should be shipped, and how to assist hospitals that have to evacuate.

 

Here’s the rest of the story that the NYTimes leaves out;  here.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/nyt-on-hurricane-sandy-were-doomed-without-fema-and-big-government.html

(…) A 1992 study by the Cox Newspapers Group found that during 1982-1992 FEMA’s budgets included only $243 million for disaster relief but $2.9 billion for black ops, according to Harry Helms, author of Inside the Shadow Government: National Emergencies and the Cult of Secrecy.

“Not only is it the most powerful entity in the United States, but it was not even created under Constitutional law by the Congress,” writes Harry V. Martin.

Since Carter’s pen stroke in 1979, we have learned quite a bit about FEMA, none of it reported by the New York Times, however.

During the Reagan regime, the agency acquired a new mandate, namely COG, or Continuity of Government. In April, 1984, Reagan signed Presidential Directive 54, authorizing FEMA to conduct a simulation of a “state of domestic national emergency,” codenamed Rex 84, or Readiness Exercise 1984. Rex 84 called for suspending the Constitution, declaring martial law, placing military commanders in charge of state and local governments, and detaining large numbers of American citizens considered to be “national security threats.”

Rex 84 was based on a plan cooked up at the Army War College by FEMA boss Louis Giuffrida. It proposed the detention of 21 million “militant” Americans. The military had concurrent plans to impose martial law, most notably Operation Garden Plot and Lantern Spike.(…)

 

 

Space Mirrors Will Reduce Rainfall in Americas and Eurasia by 10 to 20%

New Scientist June 18_2012 Article linked here.

 

 

 (…)Previous studies have shown that geoengineering cannot restore both temperature and rain to previous levels, linked here. (…)

(…) Hauke Schmidt of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, Germany, and his colleagues played out the same simple scenario in four different climate models. In each one, he quadrupled carbon dioxide levels from pre-industrial levels, linked here. (…)

(…) Article linked here.

 

Hummmmm,

WORD to the wise here,

I rather think that would mean a reduction of agriculture and food, and causing thirst and harm of living beings. I hope the scientists and their financiers will extrapolate life as more important than playing God to ‘help’ the earth with their experiments to cool the globe.

This research is only possible through the public purse and is after all financed by the trusting unscientific mass proletariat  through taxation of their labor and goods. It is cruel to violate that trust, cruel and criminal. Tread carefully because to whom much is given much is required of them.

 

Earth Summit Rio+20 Craig Rucker Attends

Here are video reports as the first attendees participate in the pre-convention convention of Rio+20 Earth Summit 2012, June, from Craig Rucker, CFACT.

http://www.cfact.tv/

http://www.cfact.tv/2012/06/12/the-future-we-dread-marked-up-draft-of-un-rio20-agenda-reveals-shocking-sustainability-wish-list/

 

 The future we dread

Marked-up draft of UN Rio+20 agenda reveals shocking “sustainability” wish list.

An American family of four could owe the UN $1,325 per year.

The UN defines “climate change” as being man-made: Orwell could not have done it betterGreen Guru James Lovelock: ‘So-called sustainable development is meaningless drivel’

 Flashback April 2012: ‘Gaia’ scientist James Lovelock reverses himself: I was ‘alarmist’ about climate change & so was Gore! ‘The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago’      Article here

 

 

If you wonder how serious the Earth Summit Rio+20 is to those who make treaty and law and policy for our USA witness who is going;

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton To Head U.S. Delegation to the UN Conference on Sustainable Development

Press Statement
Victoria Nuland
Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
June 12, 2012

(…)In addition to Secretary Clinton, Administrator Jackson, and Special Envoy Stern, the U.S. delegation will include the following U.S. Government representatives:
Ambassador Thomas A. Shannon, Jr., Ambassador of the United States to Brazil
Nancy Sutley, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality
Kerri-Ann Jones, Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs
Ambassador Elizabeth Cousens, U.S. Representative to the UN Economic and Social Council
Carlos Pascual, Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs, Department of State
Reta Jo Lewis, Special Representative for Global Intergovernmental Affairs, Department of State
Kris Balderston, Special Representative for Global Partnerships, Department of State
Don Steinberg, Deputy Administrator, U.S. Agency for International Development
Elizabeth L. Littlefield, President and CEO, Overseas Private Investment Corporation (…)

 

The good news about this entire all encompassing subject matter’s being challenged by many is found here at Climate Depot with all the links to the comprehensive back stories;

http://climatedepot.com/

 

 

 

 

 

European Geosciences Union Publishes Study, Geoengineering Could Disrupt Rainfall Patterns

Geoengineering Could Disrupt Rainfall Patterns

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120606092715.htm

Geoengineering Could Disrupt Rainfall Patterns

ScienceDaily (June 6, 2012) — A geoengineering solution to climate change could lead to significant rainfall reduction in Europe and North America, a team of European scientists concludes. The researchers studied how models of Earth in a warm, CO2-rich world respond to an artificial reduction in the amount of sunlight reaching the planet’s surface.

The study is published June 6, 2012,  in Earth System Dynamics, an Open Access journal of the European Geosciences Union (EGU). (…) Emphasis added.

 

ESD pdf

(…)

Solar irradiance reduction to counteract radiative forcing from a
quadrupling of CO2: climate responses simulated by four earth
system models
H. Schmidt1, K. Alterskjær2, D. Bou Karam3, O. Boucher4,*, A. Jones4, J. E. Kristj´ansson2, U. Niemeier1, M. Schulz5,
A. Aaheim6, F. Benduhn7, M. Lawrence7,**, and C. Timmreck1
1Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany
2University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
3Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et l’Environnement, CEA, CNRS, UVSQ, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
4Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
5Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway
6Cicero, Oslo, Norway
7Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, Mainz, Germany
*now at: Laboratoire de M´et´eorologie Dynamique, Institut Pierre Simon Laplace/CNRS, Paris, France
**now at: Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies, Potsdam, Germany
Correspondence to: H. Schmidt (hauke.schmidt@zmaw.de)
Received: 13 January 2012 – Published in Earth Syst. Dynam. Discuss.: 25 January 2012
Revised: 8 May 2012 – Accepted: 14 May 2012 – Published: 6 June 2012

 
Abstract.

In this study we compare the response of four
state-of-the-art Earth system models to climate engineering
under scenario G1 of two model intercomparison projects:
GeoMIP (Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project)
and IMPLICC (EU project “Implications and risks of engineering
solar radiation to limit climate change”). In G1,
the radiative forcing from an instantaneous quadrupling of
the CO2 concentration, starting from the preindustrial level,
is balanced by a reduction of the solar constant. Model responses
to the two counteracting forcings in G1 are compared
to the preindustrial climate in terms of global means
and regional patterns and their robustness. While the global
mean surface air temperature in G1 remains almost unchanged
compared to the control simulation, the meridional
temperature gradient is reduced in all models. Another robust
response is the global reduction of precipitation with
strong effects in particular over North and South America
and northern Eurasia. In comparison to the climate response
to a quadrupling of CO2 alone, the temperature responses are
small in experiment G1. Precipitation responses are, however,
in many regions of comparable magnitude but globally
of opposite sign.

 (…)

See complete pdf  here.

 

 

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120606092715.htm

 

 

Also see;

Geoengineering would turn blue skies whiter

  01 June 2012 by Jeff Hecht

Blue skies would fade to hazy white if geoengineers inject light-scattering aerosols into the upper atmosphere to offset global warming. Critics have already warned that this might happen, but now the effect has been quantified.

Releasing sulphate aerosols high in the atmosphere should in theory reduce global temperatures by reflecting a small percentage of the incoming sunlight away from the Earth. However, the extra particles would also scatter more of the remaining light into the atmosphere. This would reduce by 20 per cent the amount of sunlight that takes a direct route to the ground, and it would increase levels of softer, diffuse scattered light, says Ben Kravitz of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California.

That would have knock-on effects for life – and human technology.(…)