Global Warming is Going to The Back Burner

A few years ago I did a post about global warming. I pointed out the gaps in logic which I could see in this consensus driven "science". It seems that I couldn't have been too far off the mark because some scientists are starting to back me up, check out Cycle 25.

Pal Brekke, senior adviser at the Norwegian Space Centre, said some scientists found the importance of water cycles difficult to accept, because doing so means admitting that the oceans – not CO2 – caused much of the global warming between 1970 and 1997.

Why would scientists have and issue with something that doesn't support their hypothesis? That's the purpose of science is to find truth. Are the people pushing CO2 as the cause of Global Warming "real" scientists?

The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

The East Anglia Climatic Research Unit consists of the same clowns whose emails were leaked showing that they doctored temperature readings to make it appear as if there were temperature increases when in fact there weren't. They were petitioned to release the raw data from which their predictions were made. It looks like they finally have; what do we see? We see that the data suggested the exact opposite of what we were told!

Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of sunspots seen at their peak.

We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle 24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th Century.

Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona – derived from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s surface – suggest that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a great deal weaker still.

Anyone who believes that the sun plays a minor role in this planet's climate is denying reality. What happens at night? The sun goes down and so does the temperature (with the exception of a warm front). Why do seasons change? Because the earth tilts on its axis causing sun to reach the surface at an increased angle (more radiation is absorbed by the atmosphere and the planet's magnetic field). Why is it colder at the north and south poles? This can easily be observed.

Dr Nicola Scafetta, of Duke University in North Carolina, is the author of several papers that argue the Met Office climate models show there should have been ‘steady warming from 2000 until now’.

‘If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become so great that the whole scientific community will question the current theories,’ he said.

He believes that as the Met Office model attaches much greater significance to CO2 than to the sun, it was bound to conclude that there would not be cooling. ‘The real issue is whether the model itself is accurate,’ Dr Scafetta said. Meanwhile, one of America’s most eminent climate experts, Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology, said she found the Met Office’s confident prediction of a ‘negligible’ impact difficult to understand.

‘The responsible thing to do would be to accept the fact that the models may have severe shortcomings when it comes to the influence of the sun,’ said Professor Curry. As for the warming pause, she said that many scientists ‘are not surprised’.

I agree; Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs are not going to cause a change in climate, neither will reducing cow emissions. There is absolutely no reason to pass legislation in an attempt to control the climate. Climate change legislation is absurd and is designed to slow economic growth in the U.S. and the rest of the developed world. I will cover this in depth later, for now, the link above is my source material.

Don't fall for it.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

Follow The WindUpRubberFinger on Twitter!