Med COIN-Bloggen kommenteres løbende på dagsaktuelle emner. Vi vil søge at præge debatten, sådan at de skjulte konsekvenser ved nye former for indgreb, afgifter, skatter, forbud bliver gjort mere synlige.
| Man | Tir | Ons | Tor | Fre | lør | Søn |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
The paper, published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics focused on the period 1844-1960 (but extended at least one graph back to 1600) and finds our current warming period is not that different from earlier episodes and that the increase in solar activity in the last 400 years explains the warming, without any need to invoke a man-made enhanced greenhouse hypothesis.
What does the best evidence now tell us? That man-made global warming is a mere hypothesis that has been inflated by both exaggeration and downright malfeasance, fueled by the awarding of fat grants and salaries to any scientist who'll produce the "right" results. The warming "scientific" community, the Climategate emails reveal, is a tight clique of like-minded scientists and bureaucrats who give each other jobs, publish each other's papers -- and conspire to shut out any point of view that threatens to derail their gravy train. Such behavior is perhaps to be expected from politicians and government functionaries. From scientists, it's a travesty. Matt Patterson in Meltdown of the Climate "consensus"
For 120.000 år siden var mængden af CO2-indholdet i luften 78 pct. af hvad det er tilfældet i dag, vandstanden var i gennemsnit seks meter højere, og planeten var betydeligt varmere, end den er det i dag. [kilde]
For såvel 1.000 som for 500 år siden var klimaet også varmere: For 1.000 år siden var gennemsnitstemperaturen på omkring 24,5 gr. C. De næste 500 år oplevede planeten først et fald i temperaturen med næsten 2 gr. C (til 22,5 gr. C), før temperaturen atter steg til lidt under de 24 grader gr. C. Den nuværende gennemsnitstemperatur på omkring 23 gr. C svarer i øvrigt til temperaturen på omkring Jesu tid (alt dette målt ved havets overfladetemperatur). [kilde]
En række af disse temperaturstigninger og fald har i øvrigt været drastiske set med historiens målestok. Temperaturforandringerne har ikke desto mindre været aldeles uvæsentlige, når det gælder den menneskelige evne til at overleve og til at forbedre egne livsvilkår. Mennesket har til alle tider været i stand til at tilpasse sig. Og befolkningerne i de frie og industrialiserede lande har tilpasset sig bedst.
Klimaforandringer, herunder ændringer i gennemsnitstemperaturen, er den normale tilstand, når det gælder livet på klodens overflade. Store og voldsomme drivhuseffekter eller modsatrettede - kølehuseffekter har fundet sted i hele planetens historie.
Betydelige klimaforandringer sker derfor helt uden menneskers påvirkning af klimaet. Ideen om menneskets indflydelse, når det gælder klimaforandringer, er, som den fremtræder i medierne, derfor også vildt overdrevet.
Klimaets dynamik
Hvordan vil Kyoto-tilhængere eksempelvis forklare perioden 1940-1970, da den globale gennemsnitstemperatur faldt, mens mængden af CO2-indholdet i atmosfæren samtidig steg? [kilde]
De kan kun forklare sådanne fænomener, der modbeviser enhver idé om nogen simpel sammenhæng, ved at gøre op med deres egne forudsætninger og dermed indrømme, at klimaet har sin helt egen dynamik.
De påståede simple sammenhænge mellem mængden af CO2-indhold i atmosfæren og gennemsnitlige temperaturstigninger holder derfor ikke. [Kilde. Se også Scotese og Berner.]Der er blot tale om en tvivlsom og - fra et menneskeligt og naturhistorisk synspunkt - i øvrigt temmelig uinteressant teori.
Det mest foruroligende ved EU's klimapolitik, herunder det fastsatte mål for, hvor meget temperaturen må stige (hvem sagde storhedsvanvid?), er derfor først og fremmest, at denne absurde politik, som også Kyoto-aftalen er en del af, slet ikke får modspil fra forskere, ansvarlige politiske beslutningstagere eller fra medieverdenen.
Lige så bekymrende er det, at stort set ingen journalister og meningsdannere gør sig ulejlighed med at påpege de økonomiske og dermed velfærdsmæssige og sociale konsekvenser, der følger ved at forpligte befolkningen i alverdens lande på stadigt nye reduktioner af CO2.
Hvorfor er der praktisk talt ingen, der protesterer over, at store dele af verdens befolkning nu skal lære at tilpasse sig den fattigdom, som Kyoto-aftalen medfører? Findes der virkelig en god begrundelse for, at velfærdsskabelse gennem industrialisering skal ofres til fordel for den mildt sagt absurde ambition om at regulere på den gennemsnitlige globale temperatur?
Bragt første gang 17. marts 2005 i Jyllands Posten
Læs også Internt brev fra finansministeren afslører uenighed om klimapolitikken
besøg også:
http://www.copenhagenclimatechallenge.org/
http://www.coin.dk/default.asp?aid=895
http://s-espersen.blogspot.com/2009/12/its-climategate-christmas.html
For Messerschmidt er det vigtigt at gøre opmærksom på, at klimadiskussionen ikke er præget af total konsensus blandt forskerne, som det ellers ofte fremstilles i medierne.
"Der er på ingen måde tilfældet. Der er mange forskere med andre holdninger end IPCCs," siger Messerschmidt til berlingske.dk.
Konferencen som Dansk Folkeparti arrangerer i samarbejde med deres Europaparlamentsgruppe Gruppen for Europæisk Frihed og Demokrati, finder sted den sjette december.
http://www.180grader.dk/nyheder/Dansk_Folkepartis_alternative_klimatopm_de_tager_form.php
For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures. And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise. So what on Earth is going on? - Det skriver BBC's klimajournalist Paul Hudson.
Bud på svaret findes i artiklen What happened to global warming?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm (BBC)
Læs mere i Sceptics welcome BBC report on 'global cooling'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/6300329/Sceptics-welcome-BBC-report-on-global-cooling.html (Telegraph)
og The BBC's amazing U-turn on climate change (Telegraph)
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100013173/the-bbcs-amazing-u-turn-on-climate-change/
In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.
The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter.)
From: The Climate Change Climate Change
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html
by Kimberly Strassel
Seen on: Time to re-engage debate on global warming science
http://www.cfact.org/a/1545/Time-to-reengage-debate-on-global-warming-science
The team first confirmed a theory that the slight increase in solar energy during the peak production of sunspots is absorbed by stratospheric ozone. The energy warms the air in the stratosphere over the tropics, where sunlight is most intense, while also stimulating the production of additional ozone there that absorbs even more solar energy. Since the stratosphere warms unevenly, with the most pronounced warming occurring at lower latitudes, stratospheric winds are altered and, through a chain of interconnected processes, end up strengthening tropical precipitation.
At the same time, the increased sunlight at solar maximum causes a slight warming of ocean surface waters across the subtropical Pacific, where Sun-blocking clouds are normally scarce. That small amount of extra heat leads to more evaporation, producing additional water vapor. In turn, the moisture is carried by trade winds to the normally rainy areas of the western tropical Pacific, fueling heavier rains and reinforcing the effects of the stratospheric mechanism.
Sunspots Do Really Affect Weather Patterns, Say Scientists
http://reason.com/blog/show/135747.html
Seen on http://www.climatedepot.com
The past is the key to the present. Previous rapid and large climate changes were not related to carbon dioxide.
This has occurred on all scales of time. This century temperature has been decreasing, yet CO2 has been increasing. Over the last 150 years, temperature has increased (1860–1880, 1910–1940, 1976–1998) and decreased (1880–1910, 1940–1976, and 2002 to the present), yet CO2 has been increasing. If CO2 has been increasing, how can CO2-driven warming have driven cooling? Over historical times, there were the Minoan, Roman, and Medieval warmings, when temperature was a few degrees higher than at present. Sea level did not change. Over archaeological time, ice cores show that temperature peaks some 800 years before CO2 peaks, hence CO2 could not have driven temperature rise.
http://www.intellectualactivist.com/php-bin/news/showArticle.php?id=1120
The year 2009 is proving to be a yet another very inconvenient year for the promoters of man-made global warming fears. As the “year without a summer” continues, the U.S. in July alone has broken over 3000 cold temperature records, and global temps have fallen [...] since Gore's film “An Inconvenient Truth” was released in 2006. In addition, meteorologists are predicting more record cold and snow this winter. [...] But man-made climate fear promoters have finally constructed an explanation for the recent record cold temperatures.
The explanation? According to climate activists: “Global warming made it less cool.”
It appears the global warming fear movement has gone from predictions that we face a "climate crisis" and we are all going to die to their new slogan: "Global warming made it less cool."
Read more here:
Professor i fysisk geografi ved Oslo Universitet, danskeren Ole Humlum, mener, at klimaforskerne har et forklaringsproblem.-- "Ifølge forudsigelserne skulle temperaturen på grund af den voksende mængde CO2 i atmosfæren stige med mellem 0,3 og 0,4 grader i løbet af 20 år. Nu er vi 10 år henne, og temperaturen er ikke steget. Tværtimod er den nu begyndt at falde. For hvert år, der går, bliver klimaforskernes forklaringsproblem større," mener Ole Humlum. Mere i Jyllands-Posten.