Back in January, when the Northeast was getting pummeled with snow storms and bone-chilling arctic air on a weekly basis, the Baron of Bullshit came out and, in a vain attempt to salvage his Nobel prize wining reputation, proclaimed that global warming was the cause of all this crazy winter weather...
Al Gore Explains 'Snowmageddon'
By Gene J. Koprowski
Published February 03, 2011 | FoxNews.com
If the planet is warming, why is a third of America locked in a deep freeze, with record-low temperatures as far south as the Mexican border, where the thermometer in Ciudad Juarez plummeted Wednesday night to a bone-chilling 9-below zero?
Self-proclaimed planetary climate czar Al Gore thinks he has answer.
"As it turns out, the scientific community has been addressing this particular question for some time now, and they say increased heavy snowfalls are completely consistent with what they have been predicting as a consequence of man-made global warming," Gore write in a blog post. The Nobel Prize-winning former vice president was responding to a question posed by Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, who wondered on air why global warming was such an urgent science policy priority when the New York City area had become a “tundra” this winter.
Gore also indicated that he believes a rise in global temperatures is creating “all sorts of havoc,” from hotter dry spells to colder winters and ever more violent storms. This is even endangering certain species of animals and leading to forest fires and floods.
*snip*
One week later, the Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project released their findings from a study they did using a supercomputer to analyze global weather data recorded over the past 140 years, essentially debunking most of what Al Gore now claims...
The Weather Isn't Getting Weirder
The latest research belies the idea that storms are getting more extreme.
By ANNE JOLIS
WSJ Opinion Journal
FEBRUARY 10, 2011
Last week a severe storm froze Dallas under a sheet of ice, just in time to disrupt the plans of the tens of thousands of (American) football fans descending on the city for the Super Bowl. On the other side of the globe, Cyclone Yasi slammed northeastern Australia, destroying homes and crops and displacing hundreds of thousands of people.
Some climate alarmists would have us believe that these storms are yet another baleful consequence of man-made CO2 emissions. In addition to the latest weather events, they also point to recent cyclones in Burma, last winter's fatal chills in Nepal and Bangladesh, December's blizzards in Britain, and every other drought, typhoon and unseasonable heat wave around the world.
But is it true? To answer that question, you need to understand whether recent weather trends are extreme by historical standards. The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project is the latest attempt to find out, using super-computers to generate a dataset of global atmospheric circulation from 1871 to the present.
As it happens, the project's initial findings, published last month, show no evidence of an intensifying weather trend. "In the climate models, the extremes get more extreme as we move into a doubled CO2 world in 100 years," atmospheric scientist Gilbert Compo, one of the researchers on the project, tells me from his office at the University of Colorado, Boulder. "So we were surprised that none of the three major indices of climate variability that we used show a trend of increased circulation going back to 1871."
In other words, researchers have yet to find evidence of more-extreme weather patterns over the period, contrary to what the models predict. "There's no data-driven answer yet to the question of how human activity has affected extreme weather," adds Roger Pielke Jr., another University of Colorado climate researcher.
We do know that carbon dioxide and other gases trap and re-radiate heat. We also know that humans have emitted ever-more of these gases since the Industrial Revolution. What we don't know is exactly how sensitive the climate is to increases in these gases versus other possible factors—solar variability, oceanic currents, Pacific heating and cooling cycles, planets' gravitational and magnetic oscillations, and so on.
Given the unknowns, it's possible that even if we spend trillions of dollars, and forgo trillions more in future economic growth, to cut carbon emissions to pre-industrial levels, the climate will continue to change—as it always has.
*snip*
Despite the environmental rhetoric of leftist politicians who are trying desperately to control the flow of the world's wealth by proclaiming the sky is falling, the proof is in the pudding. I find it analogous to the way that Obama says that the government must spend our tax dollars in order to get control of our debt. In other words, folks; it just ain't happenin'! They can talk it up, skew the numbers and try to fool the people all they want, but in the end, only truth will set us free.
