C3

Rain Forest Health & Its Carbon Storage Potential Improves Dramitically From Increased Levels of CO2, Peer-Research Finds

Read here. Increased atmospheric CO2 levels have done wonders for old tropical rain forests, such as the Amazon, and newer ones growing on former cleared lands. Based on the findings of their research,

"Consequently, it would appear that the historical increase in the atmosphere's CO2 concentration, driven by the burning of fossil fuels, has been good for the Amazon's trees, and (very likely) for the rest of the region's plants and animals, even in the face of the local warming of 0.26°C per decade that they report for the region since the mid-1970s."

Are Climate Models Worthless? When They Are Used To Predict Future Climatic Conditions, Yes

Read here, starting page 23. We have written multiple times about the failures of climate models. Politicians and the mainstream press are in love with climate models because they can be used to proffer scary "scientific" predictions to influence the public regarding global warming. Climate alarmists scientists find the climate model predictions a convenient way to help them raise additional research funds. As has been well documented though, climate models are absolutely worthless regarding accurate climate predictions. 

Below is an example of wildly different predictions of two climate models. These are predictions of rainfall change across 18 regional areas by the year 2090. This is the typical, non-consensus output one sees when comparing "state-of-the-art" climate models. (click on image to enlarge)

Is Solar The Major Influence On Climate Cooling & Warming? Multiple Asian Peer-Research Studies Confirm Solar Impact

Read here. IPCC Climategate scientists have conveniently dismissed the influence of the Sun on the climate, by simply rejecting any solar science being included in the IPCC reports. Outside of the IPCC though, peer-reviewed research is determining that solar, not CO2, is the primary climate driver.

"The researchers' final conclusion was that "quasi-100-year fluctuations of solar activity may be the primary driving force of temperature during the past 6000 years in China." And since their data indicate that peak Medieval Warm Period temperatures were higher than those of the recent past, it is not unreasonable to assume that the planet's recent warmth may have been solar-induced as well."

NASA Researchers Discover Their Understanding of Aerosols Is 'Unsatisfactory'; Serious Problem For Climate Change Assessments

Read here. A critical climate forcing, atmospheric aerosols, is analyzed by six NASA researchers using satellite technology. Aerosols have huge impact on climate, from absorbing energy to reflecting sunlight. For climate models to function as planned, it necessitates a full understanding of aerosols interactions. The researchers found the following, which indicates a major climate model and assessment weakness:

"because of the global nature of aerosol climate forcings, satellite observations have been and will be an indispensable [our italics] source of information about aerosol characteristics for use in various assessments of climate and climate change,"...."our new results suggest that the current knowledge of the global distribution of the AOT [aerosol optical thickness] and, especially, aerosol microphysical characteristics remains unsatisfactory."

Has Past Global Warming Caused Increase of Infectious Diseases? Latest Peer-Research Says No

Read here. Global warming scientists and alarmists have made non-scientific claims and predictions that global warming will increase the spread of disease. Peer-reviewed research reveals the predictions to be without merit.

"In fact, he concludes that "shifts in climate suitability might actually reduce the geographic distribution of some infectious diseases." And of perhaps even greater import (because it is a real-world observation), he reports that "although the globe is significantly warmer than it was a century ago, there is little evidence that climate change has already favored infectious diseases."

50 Years of Cooling? Could It Be 100? A New Little Ice Age For A Few Centuries? New Research Finds Climate Science Far From Settled

Read here. As every objective and open-minded scientist knows, the science is never, ever settled. Global cooling could very well be the future environment for earth, yet IPCC climate scientists, politicians and the mainstream media chose to put their faith in virtual, global warming climate models that have been proven failures time and again.

Did Copenhagen Conference At Least Stop The Idiocy of Chopping Forests Down For Renewable Energy? Nope

Read here, here and here. Most people, on every side of the AGW debate, would agree that chopping down a rain or boreal forest to promote development of renewable fuels is an extremely bad idea in terms of earth's climate. Unfortunately, the failure of Copenhagen also keeps these forests at risk because of the previous idiotic legislation/regulations previously agreed upon or promoted (Kyoto, cap & trade, U.S. renewable energy schemes, etc.).

Because of the Climategate scientists fraudulent science, and their propaganda of imminent world catastrophes if nothing was done about CO2 emissions immediately, it caused all the focus to be on a questionable, nebulous problem with an impossible political/economic solution, instead of actually focusing on real world climate and environment problems that could be solved. Climategate lies cause trees to die.

Arctic Sea Ice Decline In Past Far Exceeded Modern Sea Ice Retreat (Multiple Times), Peer-Research Discovers

Read here. Earth's climate is constantly changing as it oscillates from one extreme to another. As the researchers documented, this oscillation also affects the Arctic area and its sea ice. During ancient periods, the earth was a lot warmer and produced periods where Arctic sea ice decline was substantial.

"Since the change in sea-ice cover observed at the end of the 20th century (which climate alarmists claim to be unnatural) was far exceeded by changes observed multiple times over the past several thousand years of relatively stable atmospheric CO2 concentrations (when values never strayed much below 250 ppm or much above 275 ppm), there is no compelling reason to believe that the increase in the air's CO2 content that has occurred since the start of the Industrial Revolution has had anything at all to do with the declining sea-ice cover of the recent past..."

Peer-Reviewed Research Is Finding Climate Models Are Fundamentally Wrong? Will They Always Be 'Bass Akwards'? Probably

Read here. The IPCC, politicians and mainstream journalists are in love with climate models despite the near continuous, abysmal failures of the technology. Read why this technology is such a climate science loser, and why its prospects for improvement are not too hot.

The Very Unsettled Science: Why Oceans Cooled In Recent Years Still Has Scientists Baffled; Cooling Contradicts Climate Models

Read here. Article reviews a long list of ocean/sea temperature studies that confirm the recent ocean cooling. But scientists are unable to explain why oceans lost such a massive amount of heat, especially since climate models predicted the exact opposite. What these findings suggest are earth's warming/cooling climate cycles are dominated by natural causes yet to be identified, let alone being understood.

The Climate Liars of Copenhagen, Pt. 3: Global Warming Is "Unequivocal"

Read Pt.1 here and Pt.2 here. From the dictionary: "Unequivocal - admitting of no doubt or misunderstanding; having only one meaning or interpretation and leading to only one conclusion." The "unequivocal" boast of warming alarmists amounts to the same as "the science is settled," which every thinking person with a pulse knows to be untrue. This one single chart depicting temperatures of Brisbane, Australia indicates the serious problems with the "global warming is unequivocal" statement:

What can accurately be inferred from the chart is that Brisbane experienced "unequivocal global warming" only after climate scientists unequivocally adjusted up the original (RAW) temperatures of the late 20th century, and unequivocally adjusted down the temperatures in the early 20th century.

This is just not an isolated case, but the tip of the proverbial iceberg. As more are discovering, temperatures across the world have been methodically "adjusted" in the same manner to create or enhance the warming of the temperature record. Recent examples of discovered manipulation of the temperature database include: China; Darwin, Australia; Nashville, USA; New Zealand; Siberia, Russia; the Nordic countries; Alaska, USA; Switzerland; New York City, USA; California, USA.

How much global warming has occurred in during the post-1970s? Based on this new evidence, it appears not very much. And most importantly, the claimed warming by alarmists is not "unequivocal," instead it's a fabrication.

Additional articles on subject of temperature adjustments/fabrication:

Last updated: 1/13/2010 Does “unadjusted” mean cooked?

GHCN – Does “unadjusted” mean cooked?

‘Cold’ Weather stations left out of climate data

Surface warming-bias vs. satellite temps over large land masses

Missouri adjustments

The "Bolivia" Effect - fabricated temperatures

Arkansas adjustments

Illinois adjustments

Austria adjustments

Update: New Zealand temperature adjustments

Another Update: Darwin, Australia temperatures

A review: The Alaska temperature adjustments

An update: How Siberia was made hotter and the attempt to suppress truth

An Update: Concerning Darwin, Australia temp ddjustments

A Warming Bias in the U.S. temperature record

The Warm Bias in the CRU data

Why We Need a new global data set

‘Stimulating’ Scientists into proving global warming

United States and global data integrity issues

NOAA August and summer numbers again not jiving with satellite data

Is the earth getting warmer, or cooler? A tale of two thermometers

Is NASA’s Hansen playing Enron accounting games with climate data?

Correcting Hadley CRUT temperatures to remove UHI bias

The Climate Liars of Copenhagen, Pt. 2: Current Global Temperatures Are "Unprecedented"

Read Pt.1, here. As the global warming alarmist lies grew in breadth and scope in the years leading up to the Copenhagen climate conference, ever more individuals became less convinced. The unrelenting lies designed to convince the public of a looming climate catastrophic crisis had the opposite effect, causing a huge growth in public skepticism.

As skepticism grew, the Climategate scientists felt compelled to literally manufacture global warming evidence that portrayed modern warming as "unprecedented." The result was the totally bogus hockey stick temperature chart that became the first clear indication that the climate science community had very seriously veered off the rails of objectivity and integrity.

Despite what can be best described as "hockey stick" malfeasance, the actual historical paleo information was not about to cede truth to the UN's IPCC climate charlatans. For example, below are temperature graphs from Antarctica and Greenland ice cores that clearly and unambiguously show that modern temperatures are not in any fashion "unprecedented." In addition, here are multiple charts from other peer-reviewed studies that belie the obvious attempt at temperature fraud that the hockey stick represented. Although Al Gore, Obama, Pelosi, Boxer, Waxman, Lindsey Graham and other big government, liberal-leftist politicians continue to claim modern temperatures are "unprecedented," all the real climate science evidence easily refutes that big lie. (click on images below to enlarge)