Sunday, March 23, 2008

More evidence to undermine global warmism

Jennifer Marohasy, biologist and senior fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs in Melbourne talks about new evidence that runs counter to the "consensus" on global warming.
Duffy asked Marohasy: "Is the Earth stillwarming?" (sic)

She replied: "No, actually, there has been cooling, if you take 1998 as your point of reference. If you take 2002 as your point of reference, then temperatures have plateaued. This is certainly not what you'd expect if carbon dioxide is driving temperature because carbon dioxide levels have been increasing but temperatures have actually been coming down over the last 10 years."

Duffy: "Is this a matter of any controversy?"

Marohasy: "Actually, no. The head of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has actually acknowledged it. He talks about the apparent plateau in temperatures so far this century. So he recognises that in this century, over the past eight years, temperatures have plateaued. . .

[I]f carbon dioxide is driving temperature then you'd expect that. . . temperatures should be going up. . . So (it's) very unexpected, not something that's being discussed. It should be being discussed, though, because it's very significant. . .

[T]he head of the IPCC has suggested natural factors are compensating for the increasing carbon dioxide levels and I guess, to some extent, that's what sceptics have been saying for some time: that, yes, carbon dioxide will give you some warming but there are a whole lot of other factors that may compensate or that may augment the warming from elevated levels of carbon dioxide."

Duffy: "Can you tell us about NASA's Aqua satellite, because I understand some of the data we're now getting is quite important in our understanding of how climate works?"

Marohasy: "That's right. The satellite was only launched in 2002 and it enabled the collection of data, not just on temperature but also on cloud formation and water vapour. What all the climate models suggest is that, when you've got warming from additional carbon dioxide, this will result in increased water vapour, so you're going to get a positive feedback. That's what the models have been indicating. What this great data from the NASA Aqua satellite ... (is) actually showing is just the opposite, that with a little bit of warming, weather processes are compensating, so they're actually limiting the greenhouse effect and you're getting a negative rather than a positive feedback. . .

"These findings actually aren't being disputed by the meteorological community. They're having trouble digesting the findings, they're acknowledging the findings, they're acknowledging that the data from NASA's Aqua satellite is not how the models predict, and I think they're about to recognise that the models really do need to be overhauled and that when they are overhauled they will probably show greatly reduced future warming projected as a consequence of carbon dioxide. . .

The meteorological community at the moment is really just coming to terms with the output from this NASA Aqua satellite and (climate scientist) Roy Spencer's interpretation of them. His work is published, his work is accepted, but I think people are still in shock at this point."
As more empirical evidence comes in, the "science" behind global warming is starting to be exposed, and scientists are becoming more comfortable about speaking out. I suspect (and hope) we'll reach critic mass soon and cooler heads will prevail, before we severely harm our economy. If that happens, don't expect a lot of hoopla about it. Like the War in Iraq, you'll simply stop hearing about it when there is good news to report.

[Via Dean's World]

No comments: