Is Global Warming a Leftist Urban Legend?

[jbg]

This doesn't seem surprising in the face of hotter summers - expect more of what you're accustomed to seeing is a prediction I recall hearing years ago.

Nothing hot about last summer.

Why is it not surprising that we're still seeing serious warming in the coldest parts of the world, also as predicted?

I'm going to tell you something I probably shouldn't.

Cold weather in the U.S. Northeast often corresponds to warm weather further north. In fact while the New York City to Washington DC area was walloped by the first major blizzard of the winter, around December 18-10, 2009 and it was also rather cold just in the New York area (link to data for La Guardia airport), Iqaluit, Nunavut was rather toasty, with even a bit of non-freezing drizzle (yes rain) (link to data for Iqaluit).

The reason for this feature is the "blocking" or negative phase of the Arctic and/or North Atlantic Oscillation. Simplistically, this sets up a bubble of high pressure in the Ontario/Quebec/upstate New York area running all the way to Greenland. Winds flow counterclockwise around a high, giving Nunavut, in this case, a southeasterly flow of warm air, and supplying the U.S. Northeast with cold air. Often, a storm of the magnitude that created the blizzard is strong enough to move the cold air out of the way, causing warming and a changeover to rain. In this case, the "blocking" held the cold air in place, giving near-record snows. This, of course, feeds returning warm air north.

The point of all this is to show that warming in one part of the globe is no more evidence of global climate change than snow in Washington DC or Atlanta Georgia is.

The global warming nuts, being intellectually dishonest, chose to purge data and intimidate non-believers instead (link).

Edited February 22, 2010 by jbg

[jbg]

"1000 AD - I read an old Farley Mowatt book a while back called "West Viking". It's all about the Viking exploration in Canada around 1000 AD. They overwintered in Newfoundland and grapes grew wild there as climate was much milder there than it is now so apparently these temperature ...

From Global Warming Article . - REVscene.net - The Northwest's #1 Automotive, … - Related web pages

www.revscene.net/forums/global-warming-article ..."

Another Farley Mowat novel, Lost in the Barrens, features a story of a warm wave in December which gave falso comfort to some Arctic travellers to emerge for their shelters.

[wyly]

http://www.athenapub.com/vinland1.htm

"Two types of evidence exist for Norse contacts with North America: written sagas and archaeological findings. Vinland, southernmost of three North American coastal areas described in Icelandic Sagas by Norse explorers, was said to be rich in grapes, timber, and a self-sown "wheat." Archaeological investigations in the 1960's at L'Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland discovered proof of an early 11th century AD Norse settlement, defining both a Viking outpost in Canada, and contact with North American natives called "Skraelings." "

and there accounts of ships falling over the "edge" of the world and sea monsters that devoured ships...there is no archelogical evidence for grapes in NFLD...

These next two came up from a simple google:

"1000 AD - 'The northerly retreat of icebergs and pack-ice under the impact of warmer temperatures is a plausible explanation of why Lief Eriksson was able to sail round the top of the Atlantic as far as Newfoundland in or about the year 1000, and why he found vines there.'The northerly retreat of icebergs and pack-ice under the impact of warmer temperatures is a plausible explanation of why Lief Eriksson was able to sail round the top of the Atlantic as far as Newfoundland in or about the year 1000, and why he found vines there. During the “Little Optimum”, Edinburgh enjoyed the climate of London, while London enjoyed the climate of the Loire valley in France, a difference of 2 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit—the equivalent in modern American terms of ...

Show more

Show less

From The 'Great Global Warming Swindle' debate - Related web pages

creation.com/the-great-global-warming-swindle ..."

"1000 AD - I read an old Farley Mowatt book a while back called "West Viking". It's all about the Viking exploration in Canada around 1000 AD. They overwintered in Newfoundland and grapes grew wild there as climate was much milder there than it is now so apparently these temperature ...

From Global Warming Article . - REVscene.net - The Northwest's #1 Automotive, … - Related web pages

www.revscene.net/forums/global-warming-article ..."

Farley Mowat is a fictional novalist he has no evidence of grapes in NFLD because none exists...

After reading these links I understand why your post is so vehemtly against the idea. It supports the idea of there having been mild spells during the Middle Ages, which apparently amongst the "anti-denier" crowd is rankest blasphemy which should never be spoken!

afdter reading your posts it's quite obvious you only believe what suits your agenda, factual evidence is irrelevant...there were no grapes in NFLD and grapes grow in cold climates regardless...

[wyly]

I highly suggest you look for a book called bronze age america --- it is a really good book, and presents some startling evidence about both vikings and celtic groups in american in the era before christ. While you may be all like, what a scam, the guy is a harvard professor

http://www.amazon.ca/Bronze-Age-America-Barry-Fell/dp/0316277711

It is a very good read.

vikings in N America , did you just find this out recently?...is there evidence of celtic groups before christ? NONE....the writer Dr. Barry Fell is a biologist not archeologist...if some archeologist writes a book on his favourite hobby rocket science and Warp Drive, are you going to take that seriously? Edited February 22, 2010 by wyly

[jbg]

afdter reading your posts it's quite obvious you only believe what suits your agenda, factual evidence is irrelevant...there were no grapes in NFLD and grapes grow in cold climates regardless...

Two things are obvious; One, you can't spell; and 2) You won't look at my posts. The one above should give you lots of fodder for your embrace of a fraudulent misguided theory and yet you ignore them.

[DFCaper]

Phil Jones, in fact, continues to insist the Earth is warming. But what he now admits is that it is not warming that rapidly (just 0.12 C per decade) and not "at the 95-per-cent significance level," the level needed to assert statistical certainty.

He also now allows that there may have been other periods in the past 1,000 years that were as warm as or warmer than today.

While this is not a complete about-face, it is hardly business-as-usual, as the alarmist would have us believe. Even if Jones is still insisting that global warming is happening, there is now a measure of doubt in his claims that never existed before. What makes Jones's words significant is not that they reveal some 180-degree change in his thinking, but that for the first time he admits significant uncertainty in the so-called settled science of climate change.

My link

Was an interesting article...

In my experience with outside temperatures... This last summer was coolest in as long as I live in Ontario (12 years) by a long shot. And the last two winters show February is now too cold to go to Florida...

[waldo]

The global warming nuts, being intellectually dishonest, chose to purge data and intimidate non-believers instead (link).

excellent - fresh meat!

let's see your intellectual honesty drive home your specious claims of purged data and intimidation... waiting

[waldo]

Even if Jones is still insisting that global warming is happening, there is now a measure of doubt in his claims that never existed before. What makes Jones's words significant is not that they reveal some 180-degree change in his thinking, but that for the first time he admits significant uncertainty in the so-called settled science of climate change.

the only uncertainty is that which you falsely claim...

- BBC Interview Question: How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?

- Phil Jones Answer: I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.

In my experience with outside temperatures... This last summer was coolest in as long as I live in Ontario (12 years) by a long shot. And the last two winters show February is now too cold to go to Florida...

and your weather pronouncements have what bearing on climate?

[William Ashley]

vikings in N America , did just find this out recently?...there is evidence of celtic groups before christ, NONE....the writer Dr. Barry Fell is a biologist not archeologist...if some arcgeologist writes a book on his favourite hobby rocket science and Warp Drive, are you going to take that seriously?

Read the book - I've studied the subject for a while - and there are lots of substantiated links such as the Verachoca and other links. The book is a good read - and his training and experience in the field is not to be seen as uneducated. The man lived in Iceland and had a very strong case for Ogam. Based upon my reading of various materials on cultural drift, and abnormalities such as the Olmecs, symbolics of various world cultures, and dating of some finds, I actually find his assertions to be strong, and since there is well accepted documented evidence of vikings in North America, their placement in the Great Lakes or North Atlantic, Hudson's Bay or New England doesn't appear a stretch. Now you might say the Celts had no way of acheiving such a feat, but they had one of the largest cities in the world at the time, Gades (if not the largest), and it was the preeminent culture of the European Bronze Age.

early Vikings (Norse) being the likely invaders, and Phoenician trade stretching all the way to Scandinavia, and Egyptian and Phoenician trade stretching into the pacific doesn't limit in my mind the capacity of moving across the Atlantic in ocean going ships - it is an established fact the Norse accomplished the feat.

Based upon my knowledge of these things, and a very convincing argument by Fell, I am in support of the notion, until inscriptions are demonstrated to be hoaxed or otherwise. These are more than a few scratchings in stone, but there are cultural inheritances also - and you need to explain what happened to the copper and who established the mines in Ontario around that time in the BC --- what happened to all the copper?

http://www.philipcoppens.com/copper.html

Edited February 22, 2010 by William Ashley

[Guest TrueMetis]

My link

Was an interesting article...

That article is crap. It's very biased and jumps to conclusions.

Edited February 22, 2010 by TrueMetis

[waldo]

That article is crap. It's very biased and jumps to conclusions.

just another piece of denier bullshit from Lorne Gunter (and the National Post)

[Guest TrueMetis]

just another piece of denier bullshit from Lorne Gunter (and the National Post)

Edmonton journal.

[waldo]

Edmonton journal.

... that first link... meant to add this link from the National Post... which carries most of the same crap across both articles. The NP is Gunter's usual vehicle to dispense his denier bullshit

[waldo]

fallicious and lazy journalism - Lorne Gunter style!

for starters:

Fact checking, National Post style: Lorne Gunter on global cooling (part 1)

Fact checking, National Post style: Lorne Gunter on global cooling (part 2)

Anatomy of a lie: How Marc Morano and Lorne Gunter spun Mojib Latif’s remarks out of control

Edited February 22, 2010 by waldo

[wyly]

...

Edited February 22, 2010 by wyly

[August1991]

Professor Jones said he had not cheated over the data, or unfairly influenced the scientific process.

He said he stood by the view that recent climate warming was most likely predominantly man-made.

But he agreed that two periods in recent times had experienced similar warming. And he agreed that the debate had not been settled over whether the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the current period.

BBC

Waldo, you seem to be following a parade when the parade leaders have already changed direction. You are like a Soviet apparatchik struggling with a change in the Politburo line.

If you want to know the new party line, you can read the Phil Jones BBC interview here. (Hint: The new key word is "uncertainty". All climate models are based on "uncertainty" and so nothing can be stated with, well, certainty.)

----

I first started this OP some two years ago. I was curious, and the National Post ran a series of articles about skeptics.

It is striking that public opinion has shifted so much in the past two years. Waldo, your scare tactics and use of the word "denier" don't work anymore.

The leftist slogan "Question Authority" seems appropriate.

[wyly]

Read the book - I've studied the subject for a while - and there are lots of substantiated links such as the Verachoca and other links. The book is a good read - and his training and experience in the field is not to be seen as uneducated. The man lived in Iceland and had a very strong case for Ogam. Based upon my reading of various materials on cultural drift, and abnormalities such as the Olmecs, symbolics of various world cultures, and dating of some finds, I actually find his assertions to be strong, and since there is well accepted documented evidence of vikings in North America, their placement in the Great Lakes or North Atlantic, Hudson's Bay or New England doesn't appear a stretch. Now you might say the Celts had no way of acheiving such a feat, but they had one of the largest cities in the world at the time, Gades (if not the largest), and it was the preeminent culture of the European Bronze Age.

early Vikings (Norse) being the likely invaders, and Phoenician trade stretching all the way to Scandinavia, and Egyptian and Phoenician trade stretching into the pacific doesn't limit in my mind the capacity of moving across the Atlantic in ocean going ships - it is an established fact the Norse accomplished the feat.

Based upon my knowledge of these things, and a very convincing argument by Fell, I am in support of the notion, until inscriptions are demonstrated to be hoaxed or otherwise. These are more than a few scratchings in stone, but there are cultural inheritances also - and you need to explain what happened to the copper and who established the mines in Ontario around that time in the BC --- what happened to all the copper?

http://www.philipcoppens.com/copper.html

absolutely zero evidence, none, nada, zip, zilch...Dr. Barry Fell was a marine biologist that wrote pseudo-scientific crap for the public never wrote even one peer reviewed archy paper...his ideas have no more credibility than alien abductions and magical crystal skulls...

[waldo]

Professor Jones said he had not cheated over the data, or unfairly influenced the scientific process.

He said he stood by the view that recent climate warming was most likely predominantly man-made.

But he agreed that two periods in recent times had experienced similar warming. And he agreed that the debate had not been settled over whether the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the current period.

BBC

Waldo, you seem to be following a parade when the parade leaders have already changed direction. You are like a Soviet apparatchik struggling with a change in the Politburo line.

If you want to know the new party line, you can read the Phil Jones BBC interview here. (Hint: The new key word is "uncertainty". All climate models are based on "uncertainty" and so nothing can be stated with, well, certainty.)

sorry to diminish your pomposity, but ahhh... I do believe I've read that now week old BBC interview previously. I guess up on your mount, delivery must be a bit slower for you - hey?

having already dispatched your other threads attempt to play gotcha with Jones' MWP related quote, let's see what we have to similarly dispatch your baseless attempt to distort Jones in regards, "two periods in recent times":

-

BBC interview question

: If you agree that there were similar periods of warming since 1850 to the current period, what factors convince you that recent warming has been largely man-made?

-

Phil Jones response

: The fact that we can't explain the warming from the 1950s by solar and volcanic forcing.

-

BBC interview question

: Would it be reasonable looking at the same scientific evidence to take the view that recent warming is not predominantly manmade?

-

Phil Jones response

: No

I first started this OP some two years ago. I was curious, and the National Post ran a series of articles about skeptics.

It is striking that public opinion has shifted so much in the past two years. Waldo, your scare tactics and use of the word "denier" don't work anymore.

The leftist slogan "Question Authority" seems appropriate.

no scare tactics here buddy... and the gloves came off long ago - I have no qualms throwing out the denier tag, particularly with all the free-wheeling MLW use of the so-called "alarmist" label. It's clear you need to come down from your mount more often; that slight public opinion shift you speak of will come back around again... the most prevalent current lazy dishonest journalism and the concerted denier disinformation campaign are both being outed day-by-day - little-by-little... the truth will set you free, August1991

[Michael Hardner]

While this is not a complete about-face, it is hardly business-as-usual, as the alarmist would have us believe. Even if Jones is still insisting that global warming is happening, there is now a measure of doubt in his claims that never existed before. What makes Jones's words significant is not that they reveal some 180-degree change in his thinking, but that for the first time he admits significant uncertainty in the so-called settled science of climate change.

Doesn't Jones repudiate the idea that the science is settled in that very article ?

I thought that the statement about the science being settled had come from Al Gore, who shouldn't be listened to, really, any more than the bloggers.

[Michael Hardner]

I first started this OP some two years ago. I was curious, and the National Post ran a series of articles about skeptics.

It is striking that public opinion has shifted so much in the past two years. Waldo, your scare tactics and use of the word "denier" don't work anymore.

The leftist slogan "Question Authority" seems appropriate.

While there have been new studies published in the last two years, what is far more significant is how this issue has played out with the public. Even on these boards, the skeptics seem to be acknowledging that warming is happening and that human activity may be behind it.

The new fallback is far more defensible: that it may be useless to mitigate warming, and that we should focus on adapting to the new warm globe.

[William Ashley]

absolutely zero evidence, none, nada, zip, zilch...Dr. Barry Fell was a marine biologist that wrote pseudo-scientific crap for the public never wrote even one peer reviewed archy paper...his ideas have no more credibility than alien abductions and magical crystal skulls...

If you haven't read the book or his full bio your opinion is uneducated. I am astounded you would knock a Harvard Professor's credibility as lacking.

One section of the book outlines skull types found in North America - the person was a professor of invertebrate zoology - note that anthropology included physical anthropology - his specialty - and he liaised with other professors around the world, who were experts in their fields of studies. His collaborative works should not be considered uneducated. Read the book and his background before you make such stupid statements. If you knew how closely the fields of anthropology, zoology and archeology were interlaced as a field of study then you'd clue in that this isn't a dolphin doctor trying to say how Hammurabi wore his beard.

Edited February 22, 2010 by William Ashley

[waldo]

Waldo, your scare tactics...

hey August1991... in my best Count Floyd imitation - from NASA GISTEMP... scary - very scary!

[wyly]

If you haven't read the book or his full bio your opinion is uneducated. I am astounded you would knock a Harvard Professor's credibility as lacking.

One section of the book outlines skull types found in North America - the person was a professor of invertebrate zoology - note that anthropology included physical anthropology - his specialty - and he liaised with other professors around the world, who were experts in their fields of studies. His collaborative works should not be considered uneducated. Read the book and his background before you make such stupid statements. If you knew how closely the fields of anthropology, zoology and archeology were interlaced as a field of study then you'd clue in that this isn't a dolphin doctor trying to say how Hammurabi wore his beard.

before I was sidetracked in my career path I was well on my way to being an archeologist...and my daughter is an archeologist so I really do have a clue to what I'm talking about...

I don't care if he had degrees from Harvard, Yale, Oxford and Cambridge he hasn't clue what he's going on about, none...marine biology is not anthropology, anthropology is not archeology...he's not an archeologist, he also has no linguistic qualifications...

this is a dolphin doctor trying to be Howard Carter...he's considered an pseudo-scientific crank by archeologists, an amateur out of his field of study...

having a degree in anything doesn't qualify anyone to make comments on even related fields of study, a Neurologist and Neuro Surgeon are both MD's but neither are qualified to do each others job, a Structural Engineer may be great building bridges but he's knows bugger all about how the Egyptians constructed anything...

Fell's book may be an interesting read but it has no backing in the world of archeology, none...it has as much scientific validity as Chariots of the Gods by Eric von Danikin...fun to debate but based on actual science they're not...

[William Ashley]

before I was sidetracked in my career path I was well on my way to being an archeologist...and my daughter is an archeologist so I really do have a clue to what I'm talking about...

I don't care if he had degrees from Harvard, Yale, Oxford and Cambridge he hasn't clue what he's going on about, none...marine biology is not anthropology, anthropology is not archeology...he's not an archeologist, he also has no linguistic qualifications...

He was a professor who specialized in invertebrate zoology - if you have any clue - someone who specailizes in a particular form of zoology likely has a background in biological structures - for example someone who knows about invertebrates has a very good chance of knowing about vertebrates.

this is a dolphin doctor trying to be Howard Carter...he's considered an pseudo-scientific crank by archeologists, an amateur out of his field of study...

The guy spent decades on the field.. and at sites around the world. He also liaised as stated with specialists, he was not a one man show and communicated and transfered materials and sought expert advice around the world.

having a degree in anything doesn't qualify anyone to make comments on even related fields of study, a Neurologist and Neuro Surgeon are both MD's but neither are qualified to do each others job, a Structural Engineer may be great building bridges but he's knows bugger all about how the Egyptians constructed anything...

I think that you underestimate the time he spent in the field conducting research, and the time he spent writing books on the subject matter.

Fell's book may be an interesting read but it has no backing in the world of archeology, none...it has as much scientific validity as Chariots of the Gods by Eric von Danikin...fun to debate but based on actual science they're not...

Read the book and tell me what isn't valid or is false information. Or maybe your dablings in archeology maybe leave you not being able to tell if his statements are accurate or not.

Material evidence is material evidence. That is what he uses, it isn't made up it is material evidence. Established facts strung together to make a valid explanation for events that happened a thousand to four thousand years ago.

Edited February 23, 2010 by William Ashley

[JB Globe]

Oh whom to believe?

Those scientists that publish studies on climate change in scientific journals?

Or neo-con writers that take pot-shots from the pages of the National Post?

Edited February 23, 2010 by JB Globe