Archive for 1 juli, 2008

Global Warming as Mass Neurosis

1 juli, 2008

Här kommer en intressant analys i dagens Wall Street Journal om Global Warming som en ”mass hysteria phenomon”. Som jag har konstaterat så många gånger tidigare i mina inlägg: hela Global Warming Hysterin handlar INTE om vetenskap och fakta UTAN STYRS av en politisk agenda.

Och det här är väldigt svårt för gemene man att förstå tyvärr. Som tror att det hela handlar om arr rädda vår planet när det i själva verket handlar om att reducera vår levnadsstandard till den nivå som vi hade på 1800 talet.

Först då kommer Global Warming Hysterikerna att vara NÅGORLUNDA nöjda!

Och ta hela skojeriet med dessa avgudade klimatmodellerna! Där de INTE ENS KLARAR AV ATT FÖRUTSE ALLA viktiga och stora klimatpåverkande fenomen. OCH DET ÄR SAMMA MODELLER SOM MAN VILL FÅ OSS ATT TRO KAN FÖRUTSÄGA TEMPERATUREN OM 100 år PÅ EN TIONDELSGRAD NÄR!

Det är alltså resultatet av dess av modeller som IPCC, Al Gore et consortes avgudar och som hela Global Warming Hysterin bygger på.  Och där man vill ”offra” större delen av värt ekonomiska välståd på dess altare för att blidka CO2 guden.

Återigen: Global Warming Hysterin är den största vetenskapliga och politiska skandalen ALLA kategorier detta århundrade!

Se även en del av mina tidigare inlägg, bl.a.:Emperor’s green clothes : UN’s IPCC preying on people’s ignoranceThe Unholy Alliance that manufactured Global WarmingGlobal Warming Hysterics – Get out of Africa Now! Or The curse of environmentalismThey are the worst sort of people to put in charge of anything – ignorant, arrogant, self-righteous, often hypocritical.THE ENVIRONMENTALIST CREED – Anti human, anti scientific, anti technology!,  The REAL inconvenient truth: Zealotry over global warming could damage our Earth far more than climate changeClearing out the environmental fogThe Flawed science behind the Kyoto protocol!Scare the wits out of people with Global warming, then make money off their fear.Giant Global Warming Tax Hikes Headed Your WayWomen will be returned to the Dark Ages if the eco-fundamentalists end up having their wayA ”Nobel” Folly!Global warming is probably the biggest scientific boondoggle since the days of GalileoGreen tax revolt: Britons ‘will not foot bill to save planet’Why on earth do we put up with this green extortion?Don’t Freak Out! Climate sense instead of nonsense.

Artikeln finns här:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121486841811817591.html?mod=todays_columnists

GLOBAL VIEW

By BRET STEPHENS  

Global Warming as Mass Neurosis

July 1, 2008;

Last week marked the 20th anniversary of the mass hysteria phenomenon known as global warming. Much of the science has since been discredited. Now it’s time for political scientists, theologians and psychiatrists to weigh in.

What, discredited? Thousands of scientists insist otherwise, none more noisily than NASA’s Jim Hansen, who first banged the gong with his June 23, 1988, congressional testimony (delivered with all the modesty of ”99% confidence”).

But mother nature has opinions of her own. NASA now begrudgingly confirms that the hottest year on record in the continental 48 was not 1998, as previously believed, but 1934, and that six of the 10 hottest years since 1880 antedate 1954. Data from 3,000 scientific robots in the world’s oceans show there has been slight cooling in the past five years, never mind that ”80% to 90% of global warming involves heating up ocean waters,” according to a report by NPR’s Richard Harris.

The Arctic ice cap may be thinning, but the extent of Antarctic sea ice has been expanding for years. At least as of February, last winter was the Northern Hemisphere’s coldest in decades. In May, German climate modelers reported in the journal Nature that global warming is due for a decade-long vacation. But be not not-afraid, added the modelers: The inexorable march to apocalypse resumes in 2020.

This last item is, of course, a forecast, not an empirical observation. But it raises a useful question: If even slight global cooling remains evidence of global warming, what isn’t evidence of global warming? What we have here is a nonfalsifiable hypothesis, logically indistinguishable from claims for the existence of God. This doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist, or that global warming isn’t happening. It does mean it isn’t science.

So let’s stop fussing about the interpretation of ice core samples from the South Pole and temperature readings in the troposphere. The real place where discussions of global warming belong is in the realm of belief, and particularly the motives for belief. I see three mutually compatible explanations.

The first is as a vehicle of ideological convenience. Socialism may have failed as an economic theory, but global warming alarmism, with its dire warnings about the consequences of industry and consumerism, is equally a rebuke to capitalism. Take just about any other discredited leftist nostrum of yore – population control, higher taxes, a vast new regulatory regime, global economic redistribution, an enhanced role for the United Nations – and global warming provides a justification. One wonders what the left would make of a scientific ”consensus” warning that some looming environmental crisis could only be averted if every college-educated woman bore six children: Thumbs to ”patriarchal” science; curtains to the species.

A second explanation is theological. Surely it is no accident that the principal catastrophe predicted by global warming alarmists is diluvian in nature. Surely it is not a coincidence that modern-day environmentalists are awfully biblical in their critique of the depredations of modern society: ”And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.” That’s Genesis, but it sounds like Jim Hansen.

And surely it is in keeping with this essentially religious outlook that the ”solutions” chiefly offered to global warming involve radical changes to personal behavior, all of them with an ascetic, virtue-centric bent: drive less, buy less, walk lightly upon the earth and so on. A light carbon footprint has become the 21st-century equivalent of sexual abstinence.

Finally, there is a psychological explanation. Listen carefully to the global warming alarmists, and the main theme that emerges is that what the developed world needs is a large dose of penance. What’s remarkable is the extent to which penance sells among a mostly secular audience. What is there to be penitent about?

As it turns out, a lot, at least if you’re inclined to believe that our successes are undeserved and that prosperity is morally suspect. In this view, global warming is nature’s great comeuppance, affirming as nothing else our guilty conscience for our worldly success.

In ”The Varieties of Religious Experience,” William James distinguishes between healthy, life-affirming religion and the monastically inclined, ”morbid-minded” religion of the sick-souled. Global warming is sick-souled religion.

Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reser

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6 rel=”tag”>miljö</a>

Climate Regime Shifts of the Past Four Centuries

1 juli, 2008

Hittade en intressant forskningsartikel i dagens CO2 Science som bl.a. konstaterar följande:

”The nine researchers conclude that their analysis ”suggests that the 1976 transition was not unique in terms of magnitude.” In addition, the recurring nature of the climate regime shifts suggests that they are natural non-anthropogenic-forced phenomena that have nothing to do with the historical increase in the air’s CO2 content.

This conclusion is particularly noteworthy in light of the fact that the study of [] Seidel and Lanzante (2004) suggests, in their words, that ”it is reasonable to consider most of the warming during 1958-2001 to have occurred at the time of the climate ‘regime shift,’ modeled here at the start of 1977.” Consequently, the complementary findings of these two studies do much to relieve anthropogenic CO2 emissions of responsibility for the global warming of the last fifty or more years.”

Global Warming Anyone?

Review finns här

http://www.co2science.org/articles/V11/N27/C2.php

Climate Regime Shifts of the Past Four Centuries

——————————————————————————–

Reference

D’Arrigo, R., Wilson, R., Deser, C., Wiles, G., Cook, E., Villalba, R., Tudhope, A., Cole, J. and Linsley, B. 2005. Tropical-North Pacific climate linkages over the past four centuries. Journal of Climate 18: 5253-5265.

What was done

The authors developed a tree-ring-based reconstruction of the December-May North Pacific Index (NPI) – which is a measure of the atmospheric circulation related to the Aleutian low pressure cell – for the period 1600-1983, based on data derived from 18 tree-ring chronologies (selected from a total of 67 candidate chronologies) obtained from sites surrounding the North Pacific rim that calibrated ”significantly at or above the 90% significance level” against winter/spring monthly values of the NPI derived from 20th-century instrumental data. In addition, they employed an intervention analysis to the NPI reconstruction ”to identify significant shifts in the series.”

What was learned

D’Arrigo et al. report that ”the NPI reconstruction successfully tracks the known regime shifts (1924/25, 1946/47, and 1976/77) seen in the instrumental NPI during the twentieth century.” They also note that ”prior to the instrumental period there are decadal-scale variations that may also represent regime shifts,” noting that ”significant ‘shifts’ (at the 90% confidence limit) are identified in 1627, 1695, 1762, 1806, 1833, 1853, and 1891.”

What it means

The nine researchers conclude that their analysis ”suggests that the 1976 transition was not unique in terms of magnitude.” In addition, the recurring nature of the climate regime shifts suggests that they are natural non-anthropogenic-forced phenomena that have nothing to do with the historical increase in the air’s CO2 content. This conclusion is particularly noteworthy in light of the fact that the study of Seidel and Lanzante (2004) suggests, in their words, that ”it is reasonable to consider most of the warming during 1958-2001 to have occurred at the time of the climate ‘regime shift,’ modeled here at the start of 1977.” Consequently, the complementary findings of these two studies do much to relieve anthropogenic CO2 emissions of responsibility for the global warming of the last fifty or more years.

Reference

Seidel, D.J. and Lanzante, J.R. 2004. An assessment of three alternatives to linear trends for characterizing global atmospheric temperature changes. Journal of Geophysical Research 109: 10.1029/2003JD004414.

Reviewed 2 July 2008

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6 rel=”tag”>miljö</a>


%d bloggare gillar detta: