American Elephants


Historic. Remarkable. Devastating. Destructive. World Ending. by The Elephant's Child

(Chicago, 1871. A city destroyed. Very low CO2.)

We are indeed watching historic hurricanes, but not in size or — destructiveness. Irma comes in only 7th in the list of hurricanes that have made landfall on the U.S. We had quite a respite from serious hurricanes, but now they’re back, but not because of global warming.

This year we have not only have almost instant coverage and constant updates, but we have film from the intrepid pilots who fly over the hurricanes. We have pictures from the Space Station and satellite pictures delivered instantly to your computer or cell phone. 

But hurricanes are unpredictable. Irma was a Category 5, degraded to a 4, then a 2.  Was supposed to go up the east coast of Florida, made a turn and is heading up the west coast, expected to hit Georgia and the Carolinas, then last I saw is turning west towards the more central states. Unpredictable.

Will more information make us brighter? Probably not. Irma pulled the waters out of Tampa bay, and some residents promptly went down to the shoreline to see the water pull so far back. STORM SURGE! A storm surge can be 12 or 15 feet above normal. All at once. One of the brighter souls suggested shooting this #*”! storm, and many thought that was an excellent idea, while officials shrieked no! no! the bullets can be blown right back at you. Looters are busy and busy being taken in. Some wag remarked — At least bookstores are safe!

For more serious and informed information, and a bracing dose of common sense, visit Climate Depot or Watts Up With That  where you will find the silliness debunked and links to the comments of climate scientists who are experts in this stuff. Read the comments too:

The WashPost ist buyed by Al Gore and his co-operates. That`s the real fight Pres. Trump has to fight against the fake news media. But Trump is a scotch fighter with german blood, he will stand this media storm. Scotchs have been fighting over hundreds of years against the normans, saxons and vikings on the british islands and Scotland is still standing until today. It is, in line with Ireland ( which is an island) and Wales the last bastion af the once great celtic nation.

With a period of low hurricane activity, people have forgotten how bad it can be, and they are scared that it’s all falling apart: Here’s Peter Brannen from the Guardian: “This is how Your World Could End.” And as a rebuttal, here’s the always sensible Christopher Booker: “Hurricane Irma’s numbers simply do not add up  although the global warming brigade would like them to.”

Advertisements


Could Global Warming Slow the Rise of the Sea Level? by The Elephant's Child

Since the first Planet of the Apes movie, the image of the Statue of Liberty drowning in rising sea waters has been done and done and overdone. But images are powerful and that may have helped to make many people think that a global rise in sea levels is the most to-be feared consequence of global warming. Flooding Pacific Islands, environmental refugees, panic in the streets. If I remember correctly, Santa Barbara was going to paint a line on city streets to indicate the potential rise of waters.

Remember that Obama predicted a deceleration of sea level rise when he accepted the Democratic Party nomination in 2008. “This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal.”  Some scientists have predicted an acceleration of ongoing global rise, while others insist stoutly that there has been no increase in the rise of sea level. Here is climate scientist S. Fred Singer to explain the complications.

The difficulty with projections of sea level rise is nicely illustrated by the IPCC. The initial estimates of its first assessment report (1990) showed a range of 10-367 cm for sea level rise in 2100. The second report published in 1996 narrowed the range to 3-124 cm. The third report published in 2001 showed 11-77 cm. The fourth assessment report published in 2007 showed 14-43 cm in draft form but changed it to 18-59 cm in the final printed version.  As can be seen, the maximum SLR decreased successively as estimates improved.  All these IPCC projections are very much smaller than the extreme values of about 600 cm (20 feet!) by activist-scientist James Hansen (and by climate multi-millionaire Al Gore) — which assume excessive melting of the Greenland icecaps.

If you pour yourself a glass of water and add some ice cubes, as the ice melts the glass does not overflow. Keep that in mind. If you add another handful of ice, the glass may overflow.

During the strong warming of 1920-1940 there was no SLR — indicating a rough balance between the opposing effects.  In fact, scrutinizing the record, I can even discern a slight lowering of sea level, an over-compensation.  Unfortunately, back then in 1997 we had no data on Antarctic ice accumulation; so the hypothesis was not publishable.  However, now we do have sufficient data in support of such a scenario.

But if, as surmised, ice accumulation roughly balances ocean thermal expansion and contributions from melting mountain glaciers, why then is sea level rising?  Another riddle requiring a solution.

The relevant clue comes from corals and from geological observations: It seems that sea level has been rising for the past centuries at about the same rate as seen by tidal gauges in the last 100 years.  In other words, sea level was rising even during the colder Little Ice age, from about 1400 to 1850 AD.  This provides further support for the hypothesis that the observed global SLR since 1900 is reasonably independent of the observed temperature rise.  [It is also a killing argument against a widely quoted (‘semi-empirical’) theory that assumes rate of SLR is proportional to global surface temperature.]

Dr. Singer concludes that the melting of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which is not floating ice but like a mountain glacier—contributes more water to the ocean thus raising the sea level by about 7 inches per century. The melting will continue for another several millennia until the ice sheet is all gone (barring another ice age in the meantime), and there is nothing that we can do to stop this future rise. It is as inevitable as the ocean tides. Do read the whole thing. You will become an expert, able to dispel the anxieties of the true believers, and  your own, if any. Learn how they measure, and how recent studies have clarified the picture. And no, even Obama’s valiant efforts had not the slightest effect.



The Deception of Human Caused Global Warming by The Elephant's Child

Dr. Tim Ball gave a lecture on November 3rd in Vancouver, Canada. He explains, point by point, how we arrived at our present state, and just what the believers stand to gain from their deception.

If you are at loose ends on New Years Day, badly hungover, or just exhausted with a year of electoral campaigning and the Left’s childish reaction to not getting their way, you may enjoy this. Dr. Ball is an entertaining speaker, and funny. The subject is serious. the video is fairly long, but I enjoyed it thoroughly.



Progressive Talking Points For The Democrats’ Attack Machine by The Elephant's Child
June 1, 2015, 8:13 pm
Filed under: Politics | Tags: , ,

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) had an op-ed in The Washington Post yesterday, largely reviewing the RICO Battle with the Tobacco Companies and comparing it to what he assumes is “a massive and sophisticated” scheme by fossil fuel companies (and their allies?) “to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution.”

The Big Tobacco playbook looked something like this: (1) pay scientists to produce studies defending your product; (2) develop an intricate web of PR experts and front groups to spread doubt about the real science; (3) relentlessly attack your opponents.

There is no such thing as “carbon pollution.” We are carbon life forms. Carbon is one of the building blocks of life. We exhale carbon dioxide every time we breathe. We all supposedly learned that in High School Biology. So now we know who wasn’t paying attention. Trust me, my mother was a high school Biology teacher.

James Hansen is an atmospheric physicist who was from 1981 to 2013 the head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City, a part of the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. He was quite involved in the development and use of computer models as a method of understanding global warming. A paper of his in 2007  claimed that CO² levels above 350 ppm would be dangerous to humans, but we have long since passed 400 ppm and the increased carbon dioxide’s natural fertilization of plants has resulted in a vastly greening planet — helping to feed the hungry. Greenhouses keep their CO² atmosphere around 1200 ppm with happily growing plants and not the slightest ill effect on the nurserymen. Dr, Hansen has since gone full global warming activist, getting arrested at demonstrations. See the interview with Freeman Dyson just below.

What fascinates me is the extent to which Progressives appear to depend on talking points. Talking points are the Democrats’ version of these are the things we are voting for. You can tell if they are talking points when 3 Progressives in a row all make the same point in exactly the same words, and can’t argue the point in alternate words or thought.

You will find increasing efforts to portray those who are skeptical of the President’s position that Climate Change is America’s most urgent national security risk as gullible dummies paid for by the Fossil Fuel Industry Cabal. You will also find that those who are absolutely positive that the climate is warming out-of-control and leading to some climate Armageddon have never read any of the science, and don’t really understand the arguments at all. Senator Whitehouse is an excellent example.



Here is the Average of 102 Climate Models Versus Observed Reality by The Elephant's Child
June 1, 2015, 6:41 pm
Filed under: Politics | Tags: , ,

michaels-img1

It is even worse than shown by this graph. 1977 was a year chosen by the “warmists” to demonstrate the “massive” increase in temperature. It was actually the low temperature period of the 20th century. Headlines were full of a “New Ice Age” scare.

(h/t: Cato Institute & Never Yet Melted)



The “Greens” and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Week! by The Elephant's Child

Things  have not been going well for the climate change alarmists.  It was revealed that a prominent Greenpeace activist, Sven Teske, had been a lead author of a recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change renewable energy report.

A press release from the IPCC on May 9, contained the following statement:

Close to 80 percent of the world’s energy supply could be met by renewables by mid-century if backed by the right enabling public policies a new report shows.

The study on which this remarkable statement was based was not released until a month later.  By then the claim was out there, but the media had moved on.  Steve McIntyre looked into the study and found that the scenario in the press was derived from a report issued by Greenpeace and the European Energy Council.  In other words,  green activists and lobbyists collaborated to disseminate something pretending to be “science.”  This is usually termed a conflict of interest.  Aside from just being wrong.

Then the University of Colorado”s Seal Level Research Group decided in May to add 0.3 millimeters every year to its actual measurements of sea levels, causing criticism from experts who called it an attempt to exaggerate the effects of global warming.

“Gatekeepers of our sea level data are manufacturing a fictitious sea level rise that is not occurring” said James Taylor, a lawyer who focuses on environmental issues for the Heartland Institute. “There is really no reason to do this other than to advance a political agenda.”

But that’s not all.  The Bishop Hill Blog reveals the incestuous relationship between the EU and governments, quasi-autonomous organizations and NGOs (non-governmental organizations).  Organizations such as Friends of the Earth and WWF are paid by the EU to lobby the EU in favor of the policies that the EU wants, and the IPCC  takes research that benefits the agendas of governments.  It is the sheer scale of this shameless enterprise that surprises.  But to ask questions about this incestuous process is to be labeled as a “denier” supposedly paid by fossil fuel interests.  Pointing out the implications for democracy and the economy is characterized by “denying scientific evidence.”

Then the Supreme Court dismissed a frivolous and novel “global warming” lawsuit.  Radical environmentalists are in trouble when a unanimous court rules against you and Ruth Bader Ginsburg  writes the opinion.  Eight states and several land trusts sued five of the largest American power companies, including the Southern Company and the TVA.  They claimed that carbon dioxide emissions of the companies’ power pants are a public nuisance that violate federal common law.  They wanted a federal judge to set emissions standards.  Alito and Thomas wrote a short concurrence in which they questioned  the erroneous conclusion of the Court that carbon dioxide is even a “pollutant” that is covered under the Clean Air Act.

And to top it all off, a federal court has sharply rebuked the EPA for exceeding its statutory authority.  On May 26, 2011, Judge Ricard Leon of the federal district court for the District of Columbia ruled that the agency’s regulatory process cannot trump a clear Congressional mandate, not override judicial authority to compel EPA’s compliance with the law. At  issue was the statutory maximum time frame for EPA’s final decision to issue a Prevention of Significant Deterioration air-quality permit, a fundamental authorization for large industrial sources such as power plants and refineries.  The EPA readily admitted that it had violated the one-year statutory deadline, but essentially that the EPA had made a regulatory process created for the convenience of the Administrator.  A kind of arrogance that is characteristic of this administration.  The Judge called the EPA claims “horsefeathers” and said “their argument was too clever by half.”  “That dog won’t hunt,” he added.

Such is the recent activity in the environmental bureaucracy.  It was a good week for common sense. There are enormous amounts of money involved and misleading media reports, and attacks on democracy and public welfare.

The picture above has nothing to do with the stories here, but I love seeing Russian cops carrying off a Greenpeace activist. Makes me laugh from sheer pleasure.



Another Day, Another Global Warming Lie Debunked by American Elephant

Actually, it was yesterday, but nonetheless — “progressive” warm-mongers hardest hit:

Himalayan glaciers are actually advancing rather than retreating, claims the first major study since a controversial UN report said they would be melted within quarter of a century.

Researchers have discovered that contrary to popular belief half of the ice flows in the Karakoram range of the mountains are actually growing rather than shrinking.

The discovery adds a new twist to the row over whether global warming is causing the world’s highest mountain range to lose its ice cover.

It further challenges claims made in a 2007 report by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that the glaciers would be gone by 2035.

Although the head of the panel Dr Rajendra Pachauri later admitted the claim was an error gleaned from unchecked research, he maintained that global warming was melting the glaciers at “a rapid rate”, threatening floods throughout north India.




%d bloggers like this: