BBC: Globe Not Warming, Maybe Cooling

[AROCES]

Despite a massive campaign involving the United Nations and most of the world's industrialized nations and establishment media, the globe is not warming but in fact may actually be cooling, according to new research detailed by the BBC.

In a story published Sunday, the premiere British journalism organization said that scientists have not observed any increase in global temperatures. In fact, the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

"And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise," the article points out.

So what is happening?

According to research done by Professor Don Easterbrook from Western Washington University, oceans are set to cool over the next two decades and will in turn cool the planet. Oceans are the greatest heat stores on the planet, so if they cool, the earth will cool.

The oceans, he says, have a cycle in which they warm and cool cyclically. The most important one is the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO). Over the last three decades, the PDO was in a positive cycle, that means warmer than average, the BBC report reveals. And observations have revealed that global temperatures were warm too.

But in the last few years it has been losing its warmth and has recently started to cool down.

These cycles in the past have lasted for nearly 30 years. The global cooling from 1945 to 1977 coincided with one of these cold Pacific cycles.

Professor Easterbrook says: "The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling."

Climate change skeptics argue that this is evidence that they have been right all along.

They say there are so many other natural causes for warming and cooling, that even if man is warming the planet, it is a small part compared with nature.

http://www.newsmax.c.../11/270997.html

Edited October 12, 2009 by AROCES

[Startraveler]

Real Climate is your friend:

(1) This discussion focuses on just a short time period – starting 1998 or later – covering at most 11 years. Even under conditions of anthropogenic global warming (which would contribute a temperature rise of about 0.2 ºC over this period) a flat period or even cooling trend over such a short time span is nothing special and has happened repeatedly before (see 1987-1996). That simply is due to the fact that short-term natural variability has a similar magnitude (i.e. ~0.2 ºC) and can thus compensate for the anthropogenic effects. Of course, the warming trend keeps going up whilst natural variability just oscillates irregularly up and down, so over longer periods the warming trend wins and natural variability cancels out.

(2) It is highly questionable whether this “pause” is even real. It does show up to some extent (no cooling, but reduced 10-year warming trend) in the Hadley Center data, but it does not show in the GISS data, see Figure 1. There, the past ten 10-year trends (i.e. 1990-1999, 1991-2000 and so on) have all been between 0.17 and 0.34 ºC per decade, close to or above the expected anthropogenic trend, with the most recent one (1999-2008) equal to 0.19 ºC per decade – just as predicted by IPCC as response to anthropogenic forcing. [...]

The bottom line is: the observed warming over the last decade is 100% consistent with the expected anthropogenic warming trend of 0.2 ºC per decade, superimposed with short-term natural variability. It is no different in this respect from the two decades before. And with an El Niño developing in the Pacific right now, we wouldn’t be surprised if more temperature records were to be broken over the coming year or so.

Really, those guys are fantastic.

[AROCES]

I guess from here on no matter if it gets colder or hotter it will be explained as the result of Global Warming...LOL

[InHuman]

Depends on the area.

We had our hottest days THIS year, also the most messed up weather patterns, but thats not unusal considering we can have snow, sun, and rain within the same day.

[Guardsman Bass]

In a story published Sunday, the premiere British journalism organization said that scientists have not observed any increase in global temperatures. In fact, the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

This is very misleading. In reality, something like seven of the ten hottest years on record have occurred since 2000, but these clowns like to focus on the single high point to make it look like it's "cooling" since that point, when it's not.

[Caesar]

No kidding, its been 35 degrees cooler then normal in some states. only when its warmer is it considered global warming.

[InHuman]

No kidding, its been 35 degrees cooler then normal in some states. only when its warmer is it considered global warming.

Such as?

I only ask because 35 degrees is a HUGE number.

Unbeliveable infact.

Edited October 12, 2009 by InHuman

[el midgetron]

global warming

To think of all the names that get tossed at "conspiracy theorist" for the things they might believe. Yet, if the MSN tells you, "to meny kids may be whats causing global warming" or "save the polar bears", then suddenly its a solid case-closed issue. Climate change is much older than us damn dirty apes.

Just a couple of years ago this was a hot-button-issue. It was "we better act now" "doom and gloom" yet, despite the "OMG" effect, whats been done? Even if man made GW is true, does anyone think the politicians who we excuse as being "incompetent" could really do anything about it? I remember hearing something to the effect that within 20 years the costal cities could be flooded. They can't even legalize gay marriage in 20 years. You think they could save the planet?

IF man made GW is the case, the wrong people are in charge anyway. I wouldn't be supprised if Al Gore was investing money into the development of coastal property on antarctica.

[Lt_Ripley]

This is very misleading. In reality, something like seven of the ten hottest years on record have occurred since 2000, but these clowns like to focus on the single high point to make it look like it's "cooling" since that point, when it's not.

it's just funny , in a sad way , how so many here don't get it.

[itsnotoutthere]

'Global warming' does have some good points. At least it gives those old hippies something to focus on & gets them out of the house.

it's just funny , in a sad way , how so many here don't get it.

um...get what? can you explain what we've got to get?

p.s. I don't know why you worry. God will save us, after all, if he doesn't then what the hell is he for.

Edited October 12, 2009 by itsnotoutthere

[Wickian]

This is very misleading. In reality, something like seven of the ten hottest years on record have occurred since 2000, but these clowns like to focus on the single high point to make it look like it's "cooling" since that point, when it's not.

That's debatable. NASA has already acknowledged that 1934 is the hottest year on record, other sources claim it was 1998 and others say it was 2006. All three were pretty close to the same temperature.

Three of the ten hottest years on record occurred before 1940.

[SQLserver]

This is simply because 1998 was extremely warm due to the El Niño effect.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm

And here we see a best trend line:

With sources at the link.

[SQLserver]

That's debatable. NASA has already acknowledged that 1934 is the hottest year on record, other sources claim it was 1998 and others say it was 2006. All three were pretty close to the same temperature.

This was false. 1934 is the hottest year on record in the USA, which only comprises 2% of the globe. According to NASA temperature records, the hottest year on record GLOBALLY is 2006.

Here's what the mistake did to the data:

The graph below (courtesy of Open Mind) compares the global temperature trend from before and after adjustments. Before the error was discovered, the trend was 0.185°C/decade. After corrections were made, the trend was still 0.185°C/decade. The change to the global mean was less than one thousandth of a degree.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/1934-hottest-year-on-record.htm

[SQLserver]

Yet, if the MSN tells you, "to meny kids may be whats causing global warming" or "save the polar bears", then suddenly its a solid case-closed issue.

The "MSN" has absolutely nothing to do with the science and consensus behind global warming.

If you think that it does, we definitely have a problem here.

No kidding, its been 35 degrees cooler then normal in some states. only when its warmer is it considered global warming.

Read as:

"IT'S BEEN COOLER IN MY BACKYARD THIS YEAR SO GLOBAL WARMINGZ IS FALSE"

[Mattshark]

The "MSN" has absolutely nothing to do with the science and consensus behind global warming.

If you think that it does, we definitely have a problem here.

Read as:

"IT'S BEEN COOLER IN MY BACKYARD THIS YEAR SO GLOBAL WARMINGZ IS FALSE"

Agreed.

Its amazing how many people can't differentiate between weather and climate and local and global then seem think they are making really insightful comments regarding the subject which they obviously do not understand.

[preacherman76]

Agreed.

Its amazing how many people can't differentiate between weather and climate and local and global then seem think they are making really insightful comments regarding the subject which they obviously do not understand.

Whats amazing is people still crying global warming even as the temps drop.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

Whats amazing is people still crying global warming even as the temps drop.

Shhhh! It's "climate change."

[Mattshark]

Whats amazing is people still crying global warming even as the temps drop.

That simply shows you have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

1998 is an anomalously hot year, with or with out it though the trend is still increasing heat and as has been shown 2006 is the hottest year globally. No one expects to see a steady straight increase, it is a trend increase that is expected and what we are seeing.

[Mattshark]

Shhhh! It's "climate change."

Yes global warming is climate change, well done.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

Oh, Alarmism. First it's global warming, then global cooling, then global warming again, and now climate change. And the only solution is always -- you guessed it! -- taxes.

[stevewinn]

Man made Co2 - climate change not proven. FACT simple as that.

these climate change posts could be killed off every single time, by one of the proponents posting a direct link that proves man made Co2 is responsible for global warming. sadly no such link can be provided, so they continue to post links and graphs in a vain attempt to try and convince themselves and the rest of us.

[questionmark]

Now guys, this joker (Esterbrook) is the denier-in-chief of the dangers of the ozone hole in the 90s

Easterbrook: "In the austral spring of 1990 ... the doubled radiation [of ultraviolet light, because of the ozone hole] worked out to only about the natural increase a person would experience by traveling south from Chicago to New Orleans."

We know it was bull then, why would we take his word for anything, especially if he is the only one saying so?

Not because it is what we want to hear makes it true.

ED: I almost forgot, before posting one of these jokers please google his name, this guy seems to be expert in everything...from climate to medicine... and wrong in all fields.

Edited October 12, 2009 by questionmark

[Cradle of Fish]

Whats amazing is people still crying global warming even as the temps drop.

Temperature is soaring here, worst drought in ages, worst bushfire season in ages this year. My anecdotal evidence trumps yours.

Shhhh! It's "climate change."

What does the term matter? Terms and the meaning of words do change over time.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

Bloomberg

Insurance Australia Group Ltd., the nation's largest home insurer, last week posted a sixth straight profit decline after hail storms cost it A$105 million ($97 million). The yearly 'Symphony in the Park,' which usually attracts 80,000 people, had 700 this year as the orchestra played behind a tarpaulin during a downpour.

...After four years of water restrictions, Sydney saw about 50 percent more rain than usual this summer, according to Mike De Salis, a spokesman at Australia's Bureau of Meteorology.

No day topped 31 degrees celsius (88 degrees fahrenheit) for the first time since 1956. Average daily sunshine totaled 6.7 hours, an hour less than normal and the lowest since 1991-92. The average maximum temperature was 25.2, the coolest since 1996-97.

Yep. Definitely warming.

[ExpandMyMind]

Oh, Alarmism. First it's global warming, then global cooling, then global warming again, and now climate change. And the only solution is always -- you guessed it! -- taxes.

i've never agreed with you as much in my entire life. but i'm with you 100% on this one. well said

Man made Co2 - climate change not proven. FACT simple as that.

these climate change posts could be killed off every single time, by one of the proponents posting a direct link that proves man made Co2 is responsible for global warming. sadly no such link can be provided, so they continue to post links and graphs in a vain attempt to try and convince themselves and the rest of us.

i agree 100% again, well said.

and here's a lovely article on the subject. it's from the BBC.

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

So what on Earth is going on?

Climate change sceptics, who passionately and consistently argue that man's influence on our climate is overstated, say they saw it coming.

They argue that there are natural cycles, over which we have no control, that dictate how warm the planet is. But what is the evidence for this?

During the last few decades of the 20th Century, our planet did warm quickly.

Sceptics argue that the warming we observed was down to the energy from the Sun increasing. After all 98% of the Earth's warmth comes from the Sun.

But research conducted two years ago, and published by the Royal Society, seemed to rule out solar influences.

The scientists' main approach was simple: to look at solar output and cosmic ray intensity over the last 30-40 years, and compare those trends with the graph for global average surface temperature.

And the results were clear. "Warming in the last 20 to 40 years can't have been caused by solar activity," said Dr Piers Forster from Leeds University, a leading contributor to this year's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

But one solar scientist Piers Corbyn from Weatheraction, a company specialising in long range weather forecasting, disagrees.

He claims that solar charged particles impact us far more than is currently accepted, so much so he says that they are almost entirely responsible for what happens to global temperatures.

He is so excited by what he has discovered that he plans to tell the international scientific community at a conference in London at the end of the month.

If proved correct, this could revolutionise the whole subject.

Ocean cycles

What is really interesting at the moment is what is happening to our oceans. They are the Earth's great heat stores.

According to research conducted by Professor Don Easterbrook from Western Washington University last November, the oceans and global temperatures are correlated.

The oceans, he says, have a cycle in which they warm and cool cyclically. The most important one is the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO).

For much of the 1980s and 1990s, it was in a positive cycle, that means warmer than average. And observations have revealed that global temperatures were warm too.

But in the last few years it has been losing its warmth and has recently started to cool down.

These cycles in the past have lasted for nearly 30 years.

So could global temperatures follow? The global cooling from 1945 to 1977 coincided with one of these cold Pacific cycles.

Professor Easterbrook says: "The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling."

So what does it all mean? Climate change sceptics argue that this is evidence that they have been right all along.

They say there are so many other natural causes for warming and cooling, that even if man is warming the planet, it is a small part compared with nature.

But those scientists who are equally passionate about man's influence on global warming argue that their science is solid.

The UK Met Office's Hadley Centre, responsible for future climate predictions, says it incorporates solar variation and ocean cycles into its climate models, and that they are nothing new.

In fact, the centre says they are just two of the whole host of known factors that influence global temperatures - all of which are accounted for by its models.

In addition, say Met Office scientists, temperatures have never increased in a straight line, and there will always be periods of slower warming, or even temporary cooling.

What is crucial, they say, is the long-term trend in global temperatures. And that, according to the Met office data, is clearly up.

To confuse the issue even further, last month Mojib Latif, a member of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) says that we may indeed be in a period of cooling worldwide temperatures that could last another 10-20 years.

Professor Latif is based at the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at Kiel University in Germany and is one of the world's top climate modellers.

But he makes it clear that he has not become a sceptic; he believes that this cooling will be temporary, before the overwhelming force of man-made global warming reasserts itself.

So what can we expect in the next few years?

Both sides have very different forecasts. The Met Office says that warming is set to resume quickly and strongly.

It predicts that from 2010 to 2015 at least half the years will be hotter than the current hottest year on record (1998).

Sceptics disagree. They insist it is unlikely that temperatures will reach the dizzy heights of 1998 until 2030 at the earliest. It is possible, they say, that because of ocean and solar cycles a period of global cooling is more likely.

One thing is for sure. It seems the debate about what is causing global warming is far from over. Indeed some would say it is hotting up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8299079.stm

i posted it all because i believe it's the best article i've read on global warming (from a news source). was actually going to start a thread with it until i saw this one.

any thoughts?

edit - my bad. just realised the OP was an excerpt from this bbc article. more info in the BBC one though in my opinion, so i'll leave it up for anyone who wants a gander.

Edited October 12, 2009 by expandmymind