New Scientist reports that global cooling is proof of global warming

Here is the article from the New Scientist. (H/T Ace of Spades via ECM)

Excerpt:

Forecasts of climate change are about to go seriously out of kilter. One of the world’s top climate modellers said Thursday we could be about to enter “one or even two decades during which temperatures cool.

“People will say this is global warming disappearing,” he told more than 1500 of the world’s top climate scientists gathering in Geneva at the UN’s World Climate Conference.

“I am not one of the sceptics,” insisted Mojib Latif of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at Kiel University, Germany. “However, we have to ask the nasty questions ourselves or other people will do it.”

Rats! Now the lefties will have to find a new fake crisis to justify enslaving humanity.

22 thoughts on “New Scientist reports that global cooling is proof of global warming”

  1. Yes, one or two decades of cooling followed by one or two decades of warming…just like the entire 20th century. (It’s a good thing the average person is a complete dunderhead, or these climate ‘scientists’ might have to find new lines of work.)

    Like

    1. “It really doesn’t matter who’s right…”

      And that I think sums up what has been wrong with this Goracle Global Warming, I mean Climate Change, movement from start to finish.

      Facts don’t matter.

      Like

      1. I only meant that’s not the main issue here… This is like a children playing with matches… one believes there is no way he’s going to get burn, other believes he is! Each presents a case why his idea is the right one.

        In a problem of uncertainty we should approach it by risk management and not arguing who’s right… but instead evaluate the odds of each scenario.

        I really think everyone ought to see the movie by Greg Craven on youtube, he has a book published already… I had the link in a comment but it was not approved here…

        Like

        1. Your example is stupid. I’d like to use another word, but I can’t. It is. Two parents talking about a kid playing with matches is a no brainer. No parent worth their salt let’s a small child who doesn’t understand the consequences, like getting burned, play with matches.

          No one, but no one, is advocating abandoning conservation topics that make sense.

          The insane moonbats that are part of this Goracle Warming cult aren’t talking about that. They’re pushing junk science, based on no facts, that will cause sweeping and world wide devastation to economies, communities, and families. They don’t realize that the work that has already been done is promoting and maintaining wide spread hunger in Africa. It’s certainly costing Americans their jobs. And it’s all based on INSANITY, not common sense.

          Recycling? Yup. Reducing? Yup. Reusing? I’m all about it.

          Carbon credits? Criminal. No really, look it up and you’ll find numerous criminal prosecutions over this disasterously stupid idea.

          Green jobs? Hah! Look up our recent-former Green Jobs czar, the oh so full of ideas, Van Jones answer when asked what a green job was.

          And the whole thing is pushed as “we’re playing with fire”… well, we’re not playing with anything, because man’s not doing it. The SUN is. The big fire god in the sky? The bane to the hung-over? Yeah, that thing.

          Water polution? Yeah, let’s talk about it. Man’s doing it. Deforestation and habitat removal? Yeah, let’s talk about it. Man’s doing it. Global warming, I mean Climate Change? …well the facts just don’t fit. And the persistent instance that this is the thing to address is pushed by people with ulterior motives and perpetuated by dupes.

          Like

          1. Calm your horses! :) I agree with you at some points… carbon credits is a bit stupid, yes. My example was not the best, yes… however to give a better one: We still buy car insurance without knowing for sure if we’re going to get into an accident…

            The main reason Americans, and western world are losing jobs is because of free market vs. different policies! ah… but you still endorse it… of course… being this a conservative blog you’d want to close the borders to stop the job emigration… in spite the consequent raise in consumer prices…

            What I want is for humanity to be careful… as you point out, we don’t know what will happen to climate or to the atmosphere because of our CO2 emissions. We just know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. We are pumping colossal amounts of this gas to the atmosphere without knowing the consequences of this… it’s a dangerous game… the best bet is to reduce emissions, the tipping points are the real danger, and from then there’s no turning back. Saying is just the sun that is provoking some hot years and some nasty storms is speculation.

            Even Mojib Latif said he was not one of the skeptics, he’s just being prudent as we all should be

            I must insist you go to youtube and type “greg craven” and just screen his 10 min clip…

            Like

          2. What I want is for humanity to be careful… as you point out, we don’t know what will happen to climate or to the atmosphere because of our CO2 emissions. We just know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. We are pumping colossal amounts of this gas to the atmosphere without knowing the consequences of this… it’s a dangerous game… the best bet is to reduce emissions, the tipping points are the real danger, and from then there’s no turning back. Saying is just the sun that is provoking some hot years and some nasty storms is speculation.

            Err, no. Our best evidence is that pumping what you call “gargantuan” amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere (an assumption based on what, exactly, when, historically, the world has had much, much, much, much higher atmospheric concentrations of the gas w/o being able to point to humans as the culprits–nor have these much higher concentrations been life-threatening with the Medievil Warm Period being just one, glaring, example of the *benefits* of a substantially warmer, more carbon-rich, climate) is having negligible effect on temperatures (for the last time: carbon increases trail temp increases)–you have swallowed the IPCC/Hockey Stick/etc. propaganda hook, line and sinker. (If this were the 70s you’d be sitting here telling us the world was going to freeze over cite the same, alarmist, ‘evidence’ which, as with AGW, was based on pseudo-scientific quackery.)

            Furthermore, your contention about storms is idiotic: all of the best evidence dismisses that there is any increase at all in frequency and strength of storms and, rather, is simply based on better tools to measure such things.

            You also label the sun’s effect on climate as “speculation”?! Err, what?? Do you actually even read any of the literature on this phenomenon or do you just dismiss it out of hand based on a per-conceived, erroneous, assumption predicated on falsified (e.g., hockey stick) data?? (Don’t answer that: I already know the answer.)

            Answer me these very simple question: if there has been NO warming (quite literally none) in the past decade, how do you square that with the reality of CO2’s effect on temps (again: CO2 rises trail temp rises)? How do you square a planetary history (yes, when humans were alive and very productive) where there were much higher levels of carbon in the atmosphere and much higher temps than today with Chicken Little scare-mongering about the *relatively* paltry amounts of current atmospheric CO2?

            In fact, your silly little pseudo-mea culpa about ‘playing it safe’ is merely the final stage of the death throes of the AGW cult, something I love seeing since such walkbacks are merely a transparent attempt to buy time to milk the lunacy for a few more years. (The latest in this genre is the utterly breathtaking commentary by the IPCC that ‘we might see several decades of cooling but, just look out!, warming will be back…in 2040!’…’oddly’ enough, in the cyclical fashion that has characterized history for the last few thousand years.)

            Like

  2. Whatever… I said that blaming JUST the SUN is speculative… read what is written…
    I see there’s no point discussing this here… I have a degree on biotechnology and I read, however I don’t have to explain myself to you.
    Gladly most of the scientific community agrees with me and doesn’t go with the “business as usual” and “no limits to growth” philosophy.
    We are pumping colossal amounts of CO2 on the atmosphere, and it’s not an assumption, it’s a fact, deal with it… Yes! We had more carbon in the atmosphere! In like millions of years ago when the Earth was a completely different place. Furthermore that buildup took millions of years, this one is like spiking like never before. Also past measurements are very controversial.
    At the Medieval Climate Optimum CO2 concentrations were much lower than today’s, saying otherwise is “idiotic” and in fact average temperature too! The MCO was like 0,2 to 0,4 degrees higher than “normal”.
    Earthbound and satellite measurements are telling us that since the 80s we are on average 0,4 degrees higher… What is causing this in just 25 years? The bogeyman? It can’t be the Sun because it NEVER has this influence in such a short time span, and there’s no evidence that the Sun is radiating more than it was 25 years ago.
    I’m just trying to have an open mind about this but apparently you already know everything… so you closed your mind on this issue. “It’s an IPCC conspiracy, period”.

    “The finding that the climate has warmed in recent decades and that this warming is likely attributable to human influence has been endorsed by every national science academy that has issued a statement on climate change, including the science academies of all of the major industrialized countries.”

    All things considered, even the skeptics, my position on this issue is of preoccupation. I don’t know who’s right, I only look at the facts and those put me worried.

    Like

  3. Our priority should be to limit Pollution of all types. However, the push to limit pollution seems to be virtually absent from the main stream media. Everything is centered around “climate Change,” which is not proven to be a man-made phenomenon by any stretch. What is a proven man-made phenomenon is global pollution. Plastics, chemicals, CFC’s and habitat destruction on a large scale basis. These are real problems for the Earth that are not in dispute. Why is it then, that there is no push for pollution reduction? Simply put, it is because Governments and large businesses are the largest polluters in the world. The reason Climate Change has become the mantra of the media and Western Governments is because they can easily use it to gain more power, by blaming it on the general public. There is never a good reason to sacrifice your freedom to live your life as you see for the “greater good.” Any law that is put in place to protect the planet from “climate change” is intended to suck more money and power from the people. Pollution is the Earth’s problem.

    Like

    1. I agree also, however there’s just one detail in that theory… reducing CO2 emissions e very bad for business… so it makes no sense for them to promote it…

      Like

  4. “I see there’s no point discussing this here… I have a degree on biotechnology and I read”

    Good for you. Many of the readers and posters here have degrees and advanced degrees, and I’m *pretty* sure everyone who reads here, well, can read.

    “Gladly most of the scientific community agrees with me”

    Ah! So facts are a majority rules thing? Funny, I thought that facts were just facts.

    “It’s an IPCC conspiracy, period”.”

    Funny, I thought that hundreds of scientists, in other words, people with degrees in fields of hard science and practicing in the field, sued to had their names removed from the IPCC climate change report, and that the VAST majority of people who’s names were on there, are in fact, not qualified for scientific opinion, but rather are governmental beaurocrats.

    “has been endorsed by every national science academy ”

    Big money in research grants.

    I wonder when ALLLLL those scienctific academies will get together and present the world with a climate change model that fits the facts.

    For all this MASSIVE co2 injection in the atmosphere which is a CONCLUDED FACT THAT IT IS A GREENHOUSE GAS, why is it that no one can make a model that predicts global warming correctly? If the facts are settled, then shouldn’t they play out consistently?

    Like

  5. Look man… I really apreciate you quit the sarcasm… I was just answering to ECM. We are discussing a cientific issue, not making personal attacks.

    “Big Money grants”?

    Sorry my friend, in this world everyone is money biassed. If we’re going down that road, I really don’t trust anyone, even your Big Buisness bought studies…

    On a scientific issue I really trust the egg heads more than in you, sorry… they are professionals at their highest standards, you’re not.

    I think you’re mixing the facts about scientists leaning to one side or the other… The last time I’ve heard “On April 29, 2008, environmental journalist Richard Littlemore revealed that a list of “500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares”. However this list included at least 45 scientists who neither knew of their inclusion as “coauthors” of the article, nor agreed with its contents. Many of the scientists asked the Heartland Institute to remove their names from the list”!

    Don’t believe me… check it out for yourself:

    http://www.desmogblog.com/500-scientists-with-documented-doubts-about-the-heartland-institute

    Facts are not a majority… facts are facts, and we really cant trust our senses when it comes to them… Our best bet is to trust science. And the facts point to a tendency in warming… We have no exact model of climate change because climate is not an exact science. There are too many variables… we can only see tendencies… there are many things in science which are not “exact” like quantics for example…

    Hey man but climate change appart we really have to get out of this addiction of fossil fuels… and this dogmatic “no limits to growth” philosofy… or things are going to get worse… only question is: which bubble is going to burst first

    Like

    1. People replying to Alex, please try to keep it cordial.

      Here’s some stuff I wrote about before.

      NOAA says 2009 summer temperatures below average
      UN IPCC scientist predicts global cooling in the future
      NASA says tropical storms and hurricans not due to global warming

      Here’s a peer-reviewed paper about what I think causes the warming and cooling cycles.

      Recently, I posted about the economic effects of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, including how it would impact individual families. I wrote about the true effects of Obama’s green jobs initiative, which will actually decrease employment instead of increasing it.

      I also posted before about scientific dissent from global warming, the alleged melting polar ice caps, deceptive alarmism to procure research funding, the alleged warming of the oceans, and the use of made-up crises in order to impose socialism. You can also read the testimony of a Princeton University physicist who is against global warming alarmism.

      Like

        1. Don’t feel obligated. Just keep in mind that’s it’s there if you need it. I tried to pick stuff that had pro-global-warming sources like NASA or NOAA or IPCC, so you would really believe me!

          Like

    2. Alex said:

      “Whatever… I said that blaming JUST the SUN is speculative… read what is written…
      I see there’s no point discussing this here… I have a degree on biotechnology and I read, however I don’t have to explain myself to you.”

      Alex said:

      “Look man… I really apreciate you quit the sarcasm… I was just answering to ECM. We are discussing a cientific issue, not making personal attacks.”

      WK, probably wisely said:

      “People replying to Alex, please try to keep it cordial.”

      I say:

      What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. You were rude to ECM, dismissive of anyone who disagrees with you, and make poor argument. Don’t like that pointed out, then you can try making better arguments, based on facts, and address the topic at hand.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s