The Shotgun Blog
Monday, September 29, 2008
Make that Global 'Cooling'
National Review online reports today:
The four major agencies tracking Earth’s temperature, including NASA’s Goddard Institute, report that the Earth cooled 0.7 degree Celsius in 2007, the fastest decline in the age of instrumentation, putting us back to where the Earth was in 1930. The climate is changing, but not in the direction Al Gore thinks.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Make that Global 'Cooling':
It's just awful when science catches up to and calls into serious doubt a narrative with which one has strong attachments. Science doesn't deter a true hysteria pimp like Gore.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2008-09-29 11:42:12 AM
I'm totally shocked.
Posted by: set you free | 2008-09-29 11:46:06 AM
So the Western Standard reports that the National Review says that some business magazine claims that NASA says the earth is cooling fast and down to 1903 levels. Sound like the right-wing global warming deniers version of the telephone game? Perhaps it is.
I googled NASA's Goddard Institute to see what they are saying themselves - direct from the horses mouth. I found this:
"The year 2007 tied for second warmest in the period of instrumental data, behind the record warmth of 2005, in the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) analysis. 2007 tied 1998, which had leapt a remarkable 0.2°C above the prior record with the help of the 'El Niño of the century'. The unusual warmth in 2007 is noteworthy because it occurs at a time when solar irradiance is at a minimum and the equatorial Pacific Ocean is in the cool phase of its natural El Niño-La Niña cycle."
Posted by: Fact Check | 2008-09-29 11:46:37 AM
FC is correct. It is right there on Goddard's site.
A lot of people look at upper atmospheric cooling and claim that because it is cooler, surface temperatures must be cooler as well. Perhaps this is what the National Review is referring to.
This is misleading however because we live at the surface not in the upper atmosphere. I am a global warming skeptic, but I hate it when other global warming skeptics start playing the same Al Gore games.
By the way, the reason the upper atmosphere is cooling is because there is less ozone intercepting UV light and creating heat. With China now officially required to eliminate brominated hydrocarbons, our upper atmosphere should start healing, and possibly heating as well.
Posted by: epsilon | 2008-09-29 12:01:39 PM
You know that graph they show in most newspapers and financial news reports? The zig-zaggy one from New York or Toronto or London? Yeah, that's not tracking whether capitalism or communism are right on any given day.
The Dow was down when the Berlin wall fell. I'm guessing the naysayers in Moscow reminded each other that Black Friday proved the western democracy hysteria pimps were wrong, and this Berlin thing was a blip.
The greenland ice sheets will be your Berlin Wall.
Posted by: Steve | 2008-09-29 12:04:56 PM
Even though I often disagree with you, I have to give credit where credit's due.
Good job digging out the truth!
Posted by: set you free | 2008-09-29 12:34:24 PM
Even if there was global cooling or warming, the leftist response will be the same: hand over your money. Oddly enough they have the same solution for everything.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-09-29 1:12:59 PM
Yes ZP, they have the same solution for everything. It is your solution - force. You're the pot calling the kettle black. Big gov't is big gov't. The brand doesn't matter.
Posted by: attitude | 2008-09-29 2:24:33 PM
Any body want to buy some SPF 200 suntan oil? I have 140 crates...damn!
Posted by: JC | 2008-09-29 8:09:52 PM
Robbers and thieves have the same solution to their problems as leftists. Coincidence? Of course not. But it makes for good campaign fodder.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-09-29 8:20:45 PM
Personally I think the whole global warming thing is pure bullshit , but I keep hoping it is true. No matter how I look at it, I simply can not see a downside. We have one of the coldest climates in the world and a couple degrees temp. rise over a hundred years or so can only be beneficial. Besides...if every canadian disappeared tomorrow it would'nt make the slightest bit of difference on a global scale. We are 33 million. China 1.2 billion,India, over a billion. Indonesia,600 million and on and on and on. No one wants to tackle the real problem with the exeption of China. Too damned many people on this little planet.
Posted by: peterj | 2008-09-29 10:05:22 PM
"This is misleading however because we live at the surface not in the upper atmosphere. I am a global warming skeptic, but I hate it when other global warming skeptics start playing the same Al Gore games."
epsilon | 29-Sep-08 12:01:39 PM
There is NO Global Warming at the surface or in the lower Troposphere.
The data for surface measurement is garbage.
"Finally, one of the more disquieting presentations was by retired TV meteorologist Anthony Watts. Part of Watts' training back when he was getting his degree in 1970s was to construct a Stevenson screen in which to shelter weather instruments. When he was putting it together his hands got covered in whitewash. He complained to his professor and suggested that he paint it with latex paint instead. His professor objected that whitewash had been used since 1892 and new paints would change the way the instruments functioned and possibly bias the data they collected. The U.S. Weather Bureau changed paints in the late 1970s.
With time on his hands, a retired Watts decided to run a back yard test with Stevenson screens using whitewash, white latex paint, unpainted wood and an aspirated temperature shield. He measured for several months, but typical among his results was one day in August when he found that the bare screen registered a maximum daytime temperature of 98.47 degrees, the latex screen was 97.74 degrees, the whitewashed one was 96.94 and the aspirated temperature shield reported 95.03 degrees.
Watts decided to check to see how the Stevenson screens housing nearby weather stations that were part of the U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) had been painted. What Watts discovered was much more disturbing—many USHCN weather stations were deplorably placed near parking lots, air conditioning vents, under shade trees, at sewage treatment plants, and so forth.
Watts then proceeded to show the audience slide after slide of badly, even absurdly, sited weather stations. Watts has now created a website of volunteers who are working to identify and audit the siting of all USHCN weather stations. The results are reported at SurfaceStations.org (regrettably down for maintenance at the moment. But for 50 examples of badly sited stations, go here.) So far Watts' volunteers have reported 502 of the 1221 stations in the U.S., and only 13 percent of the network so far conforms to the National Weather Service's own best practices manual. This is shocking when one considers that these are the same surface stations that climatologists rely upon to detect temperature trends."
Posted by: Speller | 2008-09-30 12:28:55 PM
I'm new to this blog. Apologize for asking this though, but to OP... Do you know if this can be true; http://www.bluestickers.info/ringtones.php ? it came off http://ringtonecarrier.com Thanks :)
Posted by: FesHooliFet | 2009-04-07 2:04:18 PM
One of the four main agencies (presumably) removed from consideration. What about the other three? The salient question is: Did the Earth cool off in 2007, or not?
What I find interesting is that the more the planet heats up, the more snow we seem to get.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-04-07 2:49:00 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.