If you get you news from the likes of The Huffington Post and the New York Times here are some stories about Global Warming that occurred in 2013 that you probably never heard of.
1. Antarctic Global Warming Expedition Ship Trapped in Sea Ice. You may have heard about the Russian vessel trapped 100 miles away from land in 10 feet thick ice in Antarctica and how three ice breakers have failed to rescue it. What you may not have heard is this ship is filled with Climate Scientists studying Global Warming. They are comparing data from 100 years ago when there was no sea ice in the same location.
2. Yachts Trapped in Sea Ice in the Arctic Last Summer. You probably didn’t hear about all the yachts, sailboats, rowboats, and kayaks that got trapped by sea ice while trying to sail the fabled Northwest Passage. They were promised an ice free passage.
3. Global Sea Ice at Record Levels. Al Gore and John Kerry 5 years ago predicted that 2013 would be ice free in the arctic. You probably haven’t heard that the exact opposite came true. 2013 is currently at the second highest volume of sea ice ever recorded and will probably break the all time record before the season is over.
Al Gore made no such prediction, and you know it. He quoted one NOAA study postulating that 2014 (NOT 2013) could see the melting of the ice caps. But let’s not let easily checkable facts get in the way of your Al Gore bashing or your radical pro-fossile fuel propaganda. Another thing you might want to share with your readers is that WEATHER is not the same as CLIMATE. The Antarctic is cold and will probably always be cold, but pretending that a ship getting stuck in the ice is somehow evidence that the Earth’s temperature is NOT rising and that it’s NOT caused by industrial pollution is stupid and is evidence that you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I’m about 80% certain you won’t post this comment – prove me wrong.
Boy, for someone who wants us to get our facts straight, yours are wrong.
As far as weather not being the same as climate, that’s true, but where were you when every time there was a high temperature, or a severe storm, or any other kind of weather phenomenon you were shouting from the hilltops “SEE? IT’S GLOBAL WARMING STUPID!!!”
And my agenda is not pro fossil fuel, it’s pro facts, pro truth, and pro science.
A ship getting stuck in the ice is not evidence that the Earth’s temps are not rising. The fact that the Earth’s temperatures have not risen in the last 16 years is evidence that the Earth’s temps are not rising. Duh!
Neilio if you were pro science, your views would be backed up by the IPCC.
You guys ARE pro fossil fuel. They put out misinformation and propaganda that the simple minded will lap up and regirgitate. Essentially you are free mouthpeices supporting their interests of preserving THEIR profits. The only way you benefit is via shares….let me guess???
profit isnt bad – we can find alternatives while remaining profitable and without ruining our planet. (as much)
BTW: as for cooling, we have been in a low solar cycle. also, volcano eruptions and mass aerosol pollution being emmitted over recent years have had a cooling effect to offset the warming effects of the greenhouse effect while causing more cloud formations and extreme weather events <- this is what science is telling us.
Sorry, but that is nonsense. The IPCC is not a scientific body. The IPCC is a political body.
I wish I was getting paid by the fossil fuel industry because, unfortunately, I have to get ready to go to work now. But I will continue later, when I get back home, from my real job.
Look, if you really want to know what the IPCC is about you really need to read this book, The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert by Donna Laframboise
Profits? The fed and the states reap more profit from fossil fuels than the producers. Look it up, it’s not a secret. And as for solar heating we are at or near peak for solar cycle 24. Do just a little homework before popping off.
“…if you were pro science, your views would be backed up by the IPCC.”
That was good. Tell us another one.
“BTW: as for cooling, we have been in a low solar cycle. also, volcano eruptions and mass aerosol pollution being emmitted over recent years have had a cooling effect to offset the warming effects of the greenhouse effect while causing more cloud formations and extreme weather events <- this is what science is telling us." -Prison All of that is mostly true, except the part about extreme weather events. records are indicating fewer extreme events. the only thing that is increasing is media hype of any extreme event. The problem is that everything you mention there has been brought up many times and, until only recently, had been dismissed, downplayed, and ignored by warmists. The models said none of that would matter, that we were headed for catastrophic warming despite any of it. But now? Now they are making mad scrambles, and backpedaling furiously to explain away why there has been no warming for 16 years.... without having to say they were wrong to begin with. Oh, and there is only one "m" in emitted.
Make that 17 years 8 months without any warming.
It depends on the source Pat. I’ve heard 15 years, I’ve heard 18 years. It varies with different sources. The important thing is that it hasn’t warmed in over a decade. But I do appreciate your precision.
@Mac Farley.. Al Gore did make that prediction. The Earth has been on a cooling trend for the last 11 years. You global warming fear and religion are unfounded by fact.
How did you get to “about” 80% certain?
Did you measure the success rate based on previous comments that you yourself posted?
Did you have a hunch, and just assign a subjective value to it?
Some other method?
Just like Obama’s “If you like your insurance you can keep it, period” claim. Here is Al Gore making the prediction.
How are we leftist going to blame Bush for global cooling? Any Ideas?
Good one. Neilio is usually Johnny-on-the-spot to shoot down and ridicule such posts- he’s the site’s self-proclaimed gunslinger. He’s been slipping a bit lately, probably due to lack of any interest in this site, which he LOVES and lives for, or used to. They’ve let most if not all posts occur which is the only positive thing I can say about this site, and it provide fodder for Neilio’s rabid and rapid responses. Or, maybe Neilio is slacking due to the success of the anti- climate change propaganda. They’ve won, but like good little soldiers they remain vigilant and ready to reengage in their battle against everything liberal or even tinged as such. And sucker in new followers who happen to stumble into this dormant and dead site. The Right never gives up or gives in. Pit bulls they are.
I just got home from a long day at work, sorry I was too slow for you.
All I ask is for someone to offer empirical proof of a connection between man, co2 and climate change. If co2 is the culprit why do 52 of the last 100 years show a negative correlation between co2 and temperature? Anyone? Beuller? After 25 years and $100 billion in research there is no empirical evidence to support the CAGW theory. If it is so obviously true why isn’t there any proof? Why do so many observed facts contradict the theory? Global ice levels, actual observed temperatures, storm intensity and frequency, crop yields,. co2 going up and the temperature going down. Do you want the full list? I may not have enough room.
If you have a theory that flipping a switch always turns on a light and 52 times out of 100 the switch does nothing, would you stand by the theory and conclude that people who doubted it were wrong? If that switch also was supposed to melt ice, change the temp and increase storms, cause crop failures and none of that occurred what would you conclude?
The obvious conclusion is that anyone who doubts the theory is an idiot and must be wrong, the switch does work, they just don’t understand that by failing the switch proves it works. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me with 114 times with failed climate models and I must be a CAGW believer.
Thou doth asketh too mucheth. That’s like asking for empirical proof that Moses parted the Red Sea! Of course what they will answer you with is a never ending list of computer model projections which, evidently, are like some kind of holy scripture to the devoted AGW faithful. You and I know that computer models are just a sophisticated method of speculation at best. And at worst, a deliberately falsified mathematical construct. But that don’t matter to the devotees of AGW. In their minds models are empirical, not just proof, but truth.
Awww, my bad. You gotta keep up with all the on-going successes…!
Cap-and-trade may as well have been designed to fail: Poland, which depends on coal-fired plants for 95 percent of electricity generation has threatened to block the next phase of Europe’s emissions plan unless it gets an “exception.” Everyone needs higher caps, special exemptions, temporary relief. And so it goes. With Europe’s cap-and-trade plans in tatters, Obama dropped his own cap-and-trade plan, once the centerpiece of his environmental campaign platform. In 2010, Japan and South Korea shelved their proposed plans to start cap-and-trade schemes in 2013, under heavy pressure from businesses that complained it was unfair to burden them with such costs when the United States and China refused to do the same. Australia officially has put off any decision on carbon-trading. And so it goes.
Well, I certainly don’t need a Kleenex over any of that. Thanks for sharing.
Love the first comment on this article, a liberal global warming.. Sorry, global dimming… Oh sorry it’s just climate change now.
I forget with all of the alterations to try and promote enviormental legislations.
Clearly you have done no real research Mac, the reality is that Neilio is right the planet has been cooling for the past 16 years and climate change is slowly being riddled out as nonsense.
I just would love to see in 20 years when absolutely nothing has changed in our climate ignorant people like you screaming that we are killing are planet. I’d be willing to bet you were in support of saving the spotted owl that shut down the nations largest lumber industry as well. This site may have a ridiculous propaganda suggesting name, but at least they are correct in their information.
Yeah, my favorite will always be Global Climate Disruption!
Yes, and we could say you all have a logic disruption.
Hmmm, you want to talk logic? What role does logic play in your support of AGW theory? You have admitted to not really believing in the theory, but because it advances your world view/agenda, you are one of the most persistent, and staunch supporters of it. Is that logical?
GW is a new narrative of the left.
They persist in a society of statism, i.e government control.
How to do that?
Use GW and how we are all ‘guilty’. The ‘trickle down’ of global warming is sardine
apts, not farting, more bikes, (cars bad), mass transit, stop sprawl, (remember Al Gore
when he ran for president, “sprawl is our most important issue”), um..not malaria
deaths, starving, poverty, pollution, health care, good jobs, oh, ok. He is the num nuts
making about 1/2 billion dollars off GW and laughing all the way to his sauna.
Thinking humans caused GW is hubris to the max.
The Earth has been constantly under weather variations for 4 billion years. Why not
capitalize on that to control society? There you have it.
The entire reason for the 2 attempts at getting a treaty signed was that unless immediate action was taken, we would suffer dire consequences. The memory for AGW keeps shifting. There is a laundry list of events that haven’t happened. I have been involved in this debate a long time. I’ve seen and done the math and it comes down to whether the heat is ‘retained’ or ‘released’. As in any rainstorm, which in my view acts as a radiator. If you do the math and the heat is ‘retained’ then everyone of the predictions made would happen. If you do the math where it is released, then not much. I think we are seeing ‘not much’.
The real concern that I had 12 years ago, and still do, is that the AGW community has squashed any attempt at any other outcome or than runaway global warming. I’ll trust my own research into long running solar cycles that predict or explain climate changes. Nothing has been done to prepare us for global cooling. Not even any ideas as to what might happen or how to handle them. I was surprised to see a statement that a low solar cycle could influence climate by the AGW crowd as it was ‘proven’ that the sun’s output remained constant. And was not a factor.
One other thing that has troubled me, is the name calling, the condescension by AGW people. As if we are all in one party or the other, being paid by some group or the other, or that somehow, someone by virtue of their standing in an organization somehow knows more. Almost anybody that comes on these blogs is obviously literate, has an interest or knows more about science than what would have been possible a 100 years ago. Most of us can do calculus and can understand complex ideas. We also have a wide selection of material about the subject, both pro and con. To think that other ideas are not worthy, is not in the best interest of science or politics. The science is far from settled.. I disagree. The heat is released. Correct math will prove that out. AGW can say what they will, I’m the son of an unwed mother, or I failed at truck driving school. That will discredit the math. Fractals anyone? Chaos Theory?
What’s making it colder? I would like to say it is the solar cycle. I’m pretty sure, but not certain. The research that has been done has opened up other thoughts. Really complex interactions. I don’t know and research isn’t being done. Universities are generally looking at how co2 is ‘bad’. I’ve read a number of the projects. It is always surprising when they don’t find anything, and if anything is good, they don’t report it.
Thanks for listening… The kindest thing I can say is that AGW is in error.
I’m not a scientist or anything but how come there are websites stating that 97% of papers say global warming is real? if there is such an overwheling amount that say global warming is real how is it that what you say is the truth?