The Arctic: Over 1,000+ Years, CO2 Has Zero Impact On Polar Warming & Cooling

The AGW hypothesis states that human CO2 emissions will cause the world to warm, with the the globe’s polar areas being especially vulnerable to rapid warming, due to CO2. The evidence from the last 1,000 years plus does not support the hypothesis.

Previously, we examined the data from Antarctica. Now we look at the actual Arctic area data (see chart below) and find that like the Antarctic, the northern polar regions have temperature swings unrelated to the CO2 levels. From peak to valley, Arctic temperatures changed more than 1.6 degrees Celsius while CO2 levels remained fairly stable. (click on image to enlarge)
Arctic 1000 yr Temps CO2_cr
Despite the alarmist claims of polar regions melting due to CO2-induced warming, there is no evidence to support that claim, either historically or currently. In fact, the highest temperatures reached over the last 1,000+ years were during the Medieval Period (about 1,000 years before present) when CO2 levels were close to being their lowest, based on the ice core data.

Temperature data is from the Greenland GISP II ice core, which ends in year 1905. CO2 levels are from the same dataset used in the previous Antarctica graph.

More historical charts here. Other climate history postings here. Modern temperature charts.


Oops. Greenland Was Warmer 80 Years Ago

Near-Surface Greenland Air Temperatures: 1840-2007 is a new paper analysing Greenland temperature data and has come to the conclusion that Greenland was warmer in the 1930’s than now!

“Using a set of 12 coastal and 40 inland ice surface air temperature records in combination with climate model output,” the authors say they reconstructed “long-term (1840-2007) monthly, seasonal, and annual spatial patterns of temperature variability over a continuous grid covering Greenland and the inland ice sheet,” after which they say they compared “the 1919-32 and 1994-2007 warming episodes” and made “a comparison of Greenland ice sheet surface air temperature temporal variability with that of the Northern Hemisphere average.”
Based on the results depicted in the figure above, the four researchers determined that “the annual whole ice sheet 1919-32 warming trend is 33% greater in magnitude than the 1994-2007 warming,” and that “in contrast to the 1920s warming, the 1994-2007 warming has not surpassed the Northern Hemisphere anomaly.” Indeed, they note that “an additional 1.0°-1.5°C of annual mean warming would be needed for Greenland to be in phase with the Northern Hemisphere pattern.”

What it means
In spite of all the fuss climate alarmists make about Greenland being on the verge of crossing a tipping point and beginning to experience dramatic ice loss, the results of Box et al. demonstrate there is nothing unusual, unnatural or unprecedented about the nature of its 1994-2007 warming episode. In fact, it is much less impressive than the 1919-1932 warming; and it becomes even more “less impressive” when it is realized that the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration only rose by about 5 ppm during the earlier period of stronger warming but by fully 25 ppm (five times more) during the later period of weaker warming.

It is interesting to note that the 1930’s were the warmest in the US also – I wonder how widespread the 1930’s warming actually was or if this is just a co-incidence.

Source via Climate Depot

800,000 signatures submitted for measure to suspend climate bill

Proponents of a state ballot measure to suspend a California climate bill have submitted enough voter signatures to qualify it for November, saying they have nearly twice the number necessary to do so. One of the chief proponents, Assemblyman Dan Logue, said he believes the submission means the state is one step closer to restoring regulatory sanity. “It’s a great day,” said Logue, R-Linda, of the formal submission Monday of his measure, which would suspend the 2006 legislation, AB 32, until state unemployment drops to 5.5 percent for an extended period. “People will have a voice on this issue.” To qualify for the November ballot, as Logue believes it will, county election officials where the campaign submitted signatures will first have to verify the total number, then verify a sample as to whether they’re of actual registered state voters. A spokesman for a group opposing the measure said the submission of signatures only proves money buys access. “It’s the power of $2 million in big oil money to get onto the ballot,” said Steve Maviglio of Californians for Clean Energy and Jobs, referring to companies like Valero and Tesoro that have underwritten much of the initiative campaign. Californians for Clean Energy and Jobs announced Monday that George Shultz, secretary of state under President Ronald Reagan, would co-chair their campaign. “He’s a well-established superstar and he brings a lot of heft to the campaign,” Maviglio said, adding his presence suggests AB32 has far more widespread support among state residents of all political persuasions. “We’re convinced we’ll have a strong coalition of businesses, environmentalists and health care providers speaking on our behalf.” AB32 would reduce the state’s level of carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, as a means to stem global warming. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has described the bill as one of his legacy achievements while in office. The governor vowed Monday to oppose the initiative if it qualifies. “We will do everything we can in this state to raise money, bring stakeholders together,” the governor said. Schwarzenegger said the state will continue to lead the nation with its strong environmental policy. “California is 40 percent more energy efficient than the rest of the country,” he said. “Now greedy oil companies want to roll back that cut, they want us to depend on just oil.” Logue and many other conservatives, as well as both major GOP candidates for governor, have said the measure stifles the state’s economy and will make it harder, if not impossible, to recover from the current downturn. “We don’t want California to go alone while the rest of the country stands by,” Logue said, adding discussions over possible carbon emissions legislation in Washington, D.C. have suggested measures far less draconian than AB32. He said the group opposing his initiative is largely funded by “green jobs” companies, which are subsidized by taxpayers rather than private funding. “We want green jobs, blue jobs, gray jobs, all kinds of jobs,” Logue said. For the ballot initiative suspending AB 32 to qualify, it needs 433,971 verified voter signatures, or a projected number of 477,369 signatures under a method using sample counts of signatures. Logue said the campaign collected more than 800,000 signatures. According to the California Secretary of State’s press office, both the signature total and registered voter verification must be completed by June 24 to qualify the measure for November.Source

Al Gore's New House

Al’s existing Florida home

Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a Montecito-area property to their real estate holdings, reports the Montecito Journal.
The couple spent $8,875,000 on an ocean-view villa on 1.5 acres with a swimming pool, spa and fountains, a real estate source familiar with the deal confirms. The Italian-style house has six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms.

Can’t wait for someone to tally up the carbon buttprint of this one.

Via Planet Gore

Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, April 29th 2010

Al Gore has a modest new home in California, because every eco-cult leader needs a mansion on each coast. Australia’s government dropped emissions trading like a hot rock because the ‘climate crisis’ can wait until after the pesky election, and CNN emulates ancient cultures and is fearful of a vengeful planet. This week’s round-up is a bit of a monster edition, so the hottie is the world’s sexiest woman. It seemed only fair.

Part One: Al Gore & Friends

Al Gore loves the planet so much he has dedicated his earning potential life to the cause. He’s so in love with the Earth that it’s almost as if he wants to visit all of it, in one week:

April 30, 2010–Philippines
April 29, 2010–Johannesburg, South Africa
April 27, 2010–New York (afternoon)
April 27, 2010–Chicago (morning)
April 26, 2010–Denver
April 24, 2010–Italy
April 22, 2010–Montreal

His New York trip was almost a Gore Effect day, it was cold but the snow held off. Al won a big payday in court this week, when a fine of $588 was reversed on appeal. The original fine was for unfair use of a photograph his Current TV used without permission. I was intending to be all snarky and critical of Gore for fighting over a few hundred dollars, but what I didn’t know was he needed the cash for his new California home. Al and Tipper dropped $8,875,000 for an ocean-view villa with a swimming pool, spa and fountains. So, that $588 will come in handy when Tipper starts shopping for new drapes. The Goreacle lashed out at the media, calling articles skeptical of the global warming hoax ‘ridiculous’. Without any sense of irony, Al later blogged and blagged emo-Joe Romm’s ‘important’ new book, which made Romm go ’squeeee’, or something. It wasn’t all easy riding for the global warming profiteer prophet, The Foundry discovered some awkward math when assessing the real costs of Al’s preferred Repowering America plans:

…to meet Al Gore’s plan, with the cheapest renewable energy source, onshore wind, a family of four’s electricity bill would be almost double than if it were supplied by all coal – up from $189 a month to $340 a month. He assured Americans that we can use wind, solar and geothermal to power America. But the price only increases. Offshore wind: $404 a month. Solar thermal: $504 a month and worst of all, solar panels: $718 a month. That’s only $8,600 per family per year to cover our earth with solar panels.

Oddly, when Al wrote about coal’s dirty secrets, the fact that it only costs half of wind power never came up. Don’t hold your breath waiting for Al’s thoughts on the dirty secrets of his favorite renewable, ethanol. An ABC commenter pondered the idea of Al Gore being nominated to the Supreme Court, which is frankly both terrifying and hilarious. But mostly hilarious. The Supremes don’t earn enough to attract an A-lister like Al.

Suzuki circa 1970: ‘In 40 years I’ll be a total failure’

Canada’s perennial hippie and preachy irritant David Suzuki is a scientist, allegedly:

Suzuki believes the broader public still understands the urgent need for action because of the “in your face” impacts of climate change, like extreme weather, wildfires and melting polar ice. “Canada is the most vulnerable to climate change of any of the industrialized countries,” Suzuki said. [he] won’t predict whether the warming problem will be solved in the next 40 years. He and others once believed the 1990s had to be the turnaround decade. “It’s 20 years later and we’re still fighting the battles,” he said. “The direction we’re heading is catastrophic. This is not going to be easy. But the important thing is to get started.”

The daft old hippie has devoted his life to a lost cause and the important thing is to get started? Pardon me, but Epic Fail, no?

Part Two: AGW Scaremongers

A US Democrat finally finds an enemy he can fight, climate change is a national security issue. Remember, as the warmists rush to replace oil, only one place on the planet has enough rare earth metals to make all the shiny new batteries that new green technologies need… and it happens to be a Communist giant that owns a large swathe of US debt. What could possibly go wrong? emo-Joe Romm interviewed Van Jones for Earth Day:

And there’s going to be the opportunity for regular people to get real actual benefits—to get refunds. People are like, “oh, I’m scared of this energy bill because it’s going to make my energy bill go up,” but there’s a way you can actually get a refund on your energy bill and actually wind up with more money in your pocket if you make your home more energy efficient.

Jones, a fired Marxist doesn’t actually say whose pocket the ‘refunds’ will be coming from, but if you have a job in America, it’s probably yours.CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST!

After 40 years of Earth Day, we're still surviving

Hundreds of millions of dollars up for grabs by enviro-insiders

Well, I survived Earth Day. But only just. Thanks to all the hot air and greenhouse gases being spewed into the atmosphere, especially from that nasty Icelandic volcano, the global temperature likely went up by at least a couple of degrees.But here it was simply a lovely spring day, the kind that reminds us we live in one of the cleanest, most pollution-free cities on the planet (except, of course, when the potheads cloud it over during their annual toke-in).Nevertheless, the relentless drive to make the Lower Mainland ever cleaner and greener continues to consume our province’s most creative minds.The reason? There’s a lot of green in it, especially when you consider the hundreds of millions of dollars in grants and subsidies up for grabs by environmental insiders — and the excuse it gives government to grab those dollars back and more from regular taxpayers through various eco-levies.The Vancouver office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, for example, has now come up with an innovative, Robin-Hood-style plan to help government seize more cash . . . at least from the wealthy.The socialist think-tank argues that, since the richest 20 per cent of B.C. income earners are to blame for almost double the greenhouse-gas emissions of those in the lowest income group, the fat cats should pay proportionately more in carbon taxes.”If climate policies are going to be effective, they need to be fair,” noted senior economist Marc Lee. “That means high-income British Columbians should bear the greater burden of reducing greenhouse-gas emissions.”Now, I have some sympathy for this line of thinking. I mean, if we could permanently ground the David Suzukis, the Al Gores and other high flyers who jet around attending global-warming summits and other major carbon-emitting get-togethers, we could lower the temperature of the planet in no time.But why stop there? Why not simply stop folks from flying altogether? Well, I suspect that would cool down the global economy so much it would send it into deep freeze . . . or the next ice age.More seriously, though, I think we should all take a deep breath and look back 40 years to 1970, the year of the first Earth Day, to see what leading environmentalists were saying back then about civilization ending. Well, according to the free-market, Seattle-based Washington Policy Centre, Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes stated: “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.”Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, predicted the world would be 11 degrees colder in the year 2000: “This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”Well, we are still surviving. And I suspect that, during the next 40 years, we will continue to survive all the gases that the big corporations and the bad volcanoes pump skyward . . . though maybe by then we will find a way of taxing volcanoes.As for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives’ tax-the-rich carbon scheme, I think it will likely go the way of the Dodo.Given the current level of environmental hysteria, though, I wouldn’t bet on it.jferry@theprovince.comBy Jon Ferry, The Province

Now that 'global warming' is dead, what's the next eco-scare?

So global warming is dead, nailed into its coffin one devastating disclosure, defection and re-evaluation at a time. Which means that pretty soon we’re going to need another apocalyptic scare to take its place.

As recently as October, the Guardian reported that scientists at Cambridge had “concluded that the Arctic is now melting at such a rate that it will be largely ice free within ten years.” This was supposedly due to global warming. It brought with it the usual lamentations for the grandchildren. But in March came another report in the Guardian, this time based on the research of Japanese scientists, that “much of the record breaking loss of ice in the Arctic ocean in recent years is [due] to the region’s swirling winds and is not a direct result of global warming.”

It also turns out that the extent of Arctic sea ice in March was around the recorded average, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. The difference between the two stories has little to do with science: There were plenty of reasons back in October to suspect that the Arctic ice panic—based on data that only goes back to 1979—was as implausible as the now debunked claim about disappearing Himalayan glaciers. But thanks to Climategate and the Copenhagen fiasco, the media are now picking up the kinds of stories they previously thought it easier and wiser to ignore.

This is happening internationally. In France, a book titled “L’imposture climatique” is a runaway bestseller: Its author, Claude Allègre, is one of the country’s most acclaimed scientists and a former minister of education in a Socialist government. In Britain, environmentalist patron saint James Lovelock now tells the BBC he suspects climate scientists have “[fudged] the data” and that if the planet is going to be saved, “it will save itself, as it always has done.” In Germany, the leftish Der Spiegel devotes 15 pages to a deliciously detailed account of “scientists who want to be politicians,” the “curious inconsistencies” in the temperature record, the “sloppy work” of the U.N.’s climate-change panel and sundry other sins of modern climatology.

As for the United States, Gallup reports that global warming now ranks sixth on the list of Americans’ top 10 environmental concerns. My wager is that within a few years “climate change” will exercise global nerves about as much as overpopulation, toxic tampons, nuclear winters, ozone holes, killer bees, low sperm counts, genetically modified foods and mad cows do today.

Something is going to have to take its place.

The world is now several decades into the era of environmental panic. The subject of the panic changes every few years, but the basic ingredients tend to remain fairly constant. A trend, a hypothesis, an invention or a discovery disturbs the sense of global equilibrium. Often the agent of distress is undetectable to the senses, like a malign spirit. A villain—invariably corporate and right-wing—is identified.

Then money begins to flow toward grant-seeking institutions and bureaucracies, which have an interest in raising the level of alarm. Environmentalists counsel their version of virtue, typically some quasi-totalitarian demands on the pattern of human behavior. Politicians assemble expert panels and propose sweeping and expensive legislation. Eventually, the problem vanishes. Few people stop to consider that perhaps it wasn’t such a crisis in the first place.

This is what’s called eschatology—a belief, or psychology, that we are approaching the End Time. Religions have always found a way to take account of those beliefs, but today’s secular panics are unmoored by spiritual consolations or valid moral injunctions. Instead, we have the modern-day equivalent of the old Catholic indulgence in the form of carbon credits. It’s how Al Gore justifies his utility bills.

Given the inescapability of weather, it’s no wonder global warming gripped the public mind as long as it did. And there’s always some extreme-weather event happening somewhere to be offered as further evidence of impending catastrophe. But even weather gets boring, and so do the people who natter about it incessantly. What this decade requires is a new and better panic.

Herewith, then, I propose a readers’ contest to invent the next panic. It must involve something ubiquitous, invisible to the naked eye, and preferably mass-produced. And the solution must require taxes, regulation, and other changes to civilization as we know it. The winner gets a beer and a burger, on me, at the 47th street Pig N’ Whistle in New York City. (Nachos for vegetarians.) Happy panicking!

By Bret Stephens, Wall Street Journal

VIDEO: Leave the politics out of science class

This past weekend I was horrified to learn that my little sister was shown the “Day After Tomorrow” as part of her geology class. Scarier, for me, is that it happened at an University level. Shouldn’t students be horrified that they’re paying hundreds of dollars per credit to be fed environmental propaganda?

My story is one of many that we’ve encountered at Not Evil Just Wrong.

By Kristin McMurray

Private property is toast, and global warming a hoax

In the Friday, March 19, guest opinion “Yolo County works to build better communities” Helen Thomson and David Morrison stated Yolo County is capable of “successfully navigating through the maze of confusing regulations.”Really? Has anybody looked at the new Yolo County General Plan? Every type of land use restriction imaginable has been applied to everyone’s private properties.Helen Thomson always told farmers that agriculture was the county’s first priority, but the General Plan drops the Williamson Act and reduces our farms and ranches into a stifling government run agricultural park.If the “farmbudsman” position is assigned to a nonprofit, will grants remove county costs allowing an unelected and unaccountable entity to enforce the rules? Remember the Conaway Ranch? Special Districts will impose new taxes and bureaucracies for road maintenance (Action CI-A23); Parks (Action CO-A10); Police protection (Action PF -A24), and Annexation of SMUD (Action PF-A67).Items within Action AG-A-7 dictate:n Size and mass of the home(s);n Location of the home(s) to avoid areas of excessive slope, higher quality agricultural soils, native vegetation, flooding, lack of water availability, or other physical constraints;n Approval of a stewardship plan demonstrating how the property would be farmed;n Cluster homes in a location within the parcel with the least impact on agricultural operation. New farm dwellings may be clustered in proximity to existing homes on adjoining properties;n Consideration of an agricultural conservation easement deed restriction or similar instrument on all or a portion of the remainder of the property, outside of any home site(s). Please read this one again. A Constitutional challenge?Policy CO-7.4 New construction: “Require the use of Energy Star certified appliances, such as water heaters, swimming pool heaters, cooking equipment, refrigerators, furnaces and boiler units…” and C0-A84 Resales: “…ordinance requiring that existing homes retrofitted with water efficient appliances and fixtures prior to sale.”Action CO-A115… “Climate Action Plan (Cap) to control and reduce net Green House Gas emissions, and to address economic and social adaptation to the effects of climate change.”However, confessions of serious manipulations of scientific data by the leading global warming scientists created a false consensus of global warming science, and its cause and effects are correspondingly corrupted. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, once thought as the world authority on climate change, lost its credibility when incriminating e-mails from scientists surfaced that scientists colluded to change the data and stonewalled Freedom of Information requests.Yolo County tried to do the right things to have the General Plan comply with the mandates of global warming, but the basic scientific premise of global warming is now known to be fraudulent.Regulatory actions relating to human-caused climate change need to be repealed or suspended until human-caused climate change is fully debated and settled. The hypotheses must be fully vetted and, in the end, be based on sound and peer-reviewed data. The cost to individuals and society to comply with these unfounded scientific political ideologies will cause great harm to our economy. Global warming has to be proven before its rules are imposed. And until that scientific basis is proven, Yolo County’s General Plan must not implement Policies and Actions that apply all those fees, fines and mandates.— Vicki Murphy is a resident of Brooks.Source