Our position has always been that global climate change is a natural phenomena and is the sum expression of a complex chaotic system. The question is, and has always been, can man’s influence in long-term climate affairs even be measurable against the background noise of natural climate variability.

To all but the terminally unaware, the issue of global warming has been a political one – pushed to the forefront by International Marxism as a methodology for internationalizing control over the economies and populations of sovereign nations as a means to further the goals of Marxist ideology.

One of the central tenets of Marxism notes that power is derived from the management of scarcity, whether real or manmade. They posit that the Earth’s natural resources are somewhat finite or that the sustainability limits are linked to population density. Therefore, it is in the best interest of planetary preservation to control the population and allowing an enlightened ruling elite to manage relatively unexceptional units of populations (the people) using “scientific” methods. In other words, an excuse for a centrally-controlled totalitarian government whose central planning benefits everyone. Or “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

Lying through their teeth …

Because the great majority of the United Nation’s IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is comprised mostly of politicians and administrators, it should surprise no one that the science portion of their report is conformed to the political summary and that only 5 out of the alleged 2,500 scientists read all eleven chapters of the 2007 report.

The science is perverted …

The governmental money washing through institutions, projects and scientists has biased the researchers. No other discipline like “climate sciences” has so thoroughly corrupted the science and the peer review process to make a mockery of many of the global conclusions derived from extremely sparse data and extrapolated to unwarranted grand vistas. The inherent bias is that most institutions, projects and scientists are biased towards projects which will be funded and which will allow them to build facilities, support personnel and do some form of research. Therefore the projects they select somewhat conform to the wishes of their governmental patrons.

The real truth …

Examined closely, with the exception of a few obviously biased scientists who have crossed the barrier from scientists to activists, most scientific results are valid for local observations and cannot be extrapolated to larger event horizons.

All of the horrific predictions have been created using silicon silliness … inartfully programmed computer models which feature unwarranted assumptions, grossly simplified and incomplete processes and highly manipulated data inputs. And one of the most ludicrous assertions is that we can predict global climate over hundreds of years to a tenth of a degree accuracy – the decimal position being nothing more than an artificial artifact of the computational process.

What the scientists are really saying …

Background:

“ENSO (El Niño/La Niña-Southern Oscillation) is a quasiperiodic climate pattern that occurs across the tropical Pacific Ocean roughly every five years. It is characterized by variations in the temperature of the surface of the tropical eastern Pacific Ocean—warming or cooling known as El Niño and La Niña respectively—and air surface pressure in the tropical western Pacific—the Southern Oscillation. The two variations are coupled: the warm oceanic phase, El Niño, accompanies high air surface pressure in the western Pacific, while the cold phase, La Niña, accompanies low air surface pressure in the western Pacific.”

“ENSO causes extreme weather (such as floods and droughts) in many regions of the world. Developing countries dependent upon agriculture and fishing, particularly those bordering the Pacific Ocean, are the most affected.”

As a demonstration of why more climate research is necessary before implementing costly and draconian public policies, I give you the results of a peer-reviewed paper from three well-known climate researchers.

The basis of the study …

“Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature”

“The El Nino–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a
tropical Pacific atmosphere-ocean phenomenon but its influence on climate can be seen globally.”

“The detailed mechanisms driving these changes are unclear but large-scale changes in global circulation are involved.”

“The extent to which ENSO forcing explains variance in the mean global temperature record has been the subject of several studies, but the additional record in the satellite tropospheric temperature observations provides the opportunity to investigate this further. In our study we quantify the effect of possible ENSO forcing on mean global temperature, both short-term and long-term, and then examine the implications.

Here is the good part: strong correlations with observed climate behaviors …

Change in SOI [Southern Oscillation Index] accounts for 72% of the variance in GTTA [Global Tropospheric Temperature Anomalies] for the 29-year-long MSU[satellite Microwave Sensing Units] record and 68% of the variance in GTTA for the longer 50-year RATPAC [Radiosonde Atmospheric Temperature Products for Assessing Climate] record. Because El Nino Southern Oscillation is known to exercise a particularly strong influence in the tropics, we also compared the SOI with tropical temperature anomalies between 20S and 20N. The results showed that SOI accounted for 81% of the variance in tropospheric temperature anomalies in the tropics.”

“Overall the results suggest that the Southern Oscillation exercises a consistently dominant influence on mean global temperature, with a maximum effect in the tropics, except
for periods when equatorial volcanism causes ad hoc cooling. That mean global
tropospheric temperature has for the last 50 years fallen and risen in close accord with
the SOI of 5–7 months earlier shows the potential of natural forcing mechanisms to
account for most of the temperature variation.”

But here is the kicker …

“We have shown that the Southern Oscillation is a dominant and consistent influence on mean global temperature.”

“Shifts in temperature are consistent with shifts in the SOI that occur about 7 months earlier. The relationship weakens or breaks down at times of volcanic eruption in the tropics, and meridional heat dispersal likely accounts for this.”

“The slight fall in temperatures prior to the Great Pacific Climate Shift can be attributed to the increasing dominance of positive SOI values (i.e., toward La Nina) leading up to that event and the rise in temperatures following the shift can be attributed to the dominance of negative SOI values since (i.e., a period of extended El Nino tendencies).”

“Since the mid-1990s, little volcanic activity has been observed in the tropics and global average temperatures have risen and fallen in close accord with the SOI of 7 months earlier.”

Finally, this study has shown that natural
climate forcing associated with ENSO is a major contributor to variability and perhaps recent trends in global temperature, a relationship that is not included in current global climate models.

Riddle me this: One of the major drivers of global temperature changes and a source of the storms that are attributed to global warming is not included in global climate models. How can that be?

And might this encourage politicians and others to reconsider the accuracy and validity of the present models which are the basis for such draconian public policies?

And before the global warming alarmists spout their nonsense …

“The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicted that La Nina and the Arctic Oscillation would bring a colder and wetter winter season to the Northwest and central regions of the country--and potentially another ‘Snowmaggedon’ to the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic.”

“’The winter outlook this year is shaped by the redevelopment of La Nina,’ Mike Halpert, deputy director of NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center said on a conference call with reporters.”

“NOAA defines La Nina as ‘unusually cold ocean temperatures in the Equatorial Pacific.’”

“’In very general terms,’ NOAA’s Halpert said, “the outlook favors colder, and wetter than average conditions along the northern part of the nation from the Pacific Northwest to the Great Lakes and drier and warmer than average conditions across much of the South, particularly in the southern Plains.”

“’More specifically,’ he said, ‘a colder than average winter is most likely right along the West Coast and across the northern Plains and Great Lakes states, while a milder than average winter is favored across the south central part of the nation, from the Southwest eastward across the southern Plains to the central Gulf Coast.’”

“NOAA said that precipitation would be heavier than usual in the northern parts of the country and down the valleys of the Ohio and Tennessee rivers.”

Again, “natural climate forcing associated with ENSO is a major contributor to variability and perhaps recent trends in global temperature, a relationship that is not included in current global climate models.

The alarmists tell us that all of this is a result of global warming and yet their vaunted models exclude a potential source of this weather phenomenon. How can this be?

Bottom line …

This is but a single paper, but it puts us, “We the People,” on notice that the major climate models which purport to “prove” that global climate change is greatly influenced by man – and actions must be immediately taken to avoid a planetary emergency -- is based on deeply flawed and incomplete computer models and input data.

And to my way of thinking, it is criminal that the politicians are using this flawed science to push an agenda which features larger government, higher taxes, higher costs, less productivity and above all, the loss of significant portions of our personal freedom.

We must remember:

• science is not performed by consensus;
• computer models are but a pale imitation of the physical phenomena they purport to mathematically replicate;
• computer models are not accepted proof in the scientific community which still relies on experimentation and observation for confirmations;
• science is a process of perpetual skepticism – hypothesis, challenge, counter challenge – and that skeptics should not be demonized for contributing to the process; and
• most politicians are corrupt and self-serving.

More research – without political interference -- is needed to determine whether or not man’s influence on the planet can be measured against the noise of natural climate variability and it man’s present abilities can even affect global weather patterns to a measurable extent.

And we need a new crop of politicians to serve as honest brokers for “We the People.” Starting with a clean-up of the Presidency, the Senate, the House and state and local governments in 2012.

Enough is Enough!

-- steve

Reference Links …

McLean, J.D., de Freitas, C.R. and Carter, R.M. 2009. Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature. Journal of Geophysical Research 114: 10.1029/2008JD011637.

La Nina Strikes Again! NOAA: Colder, Wetter North; Drier South; 'Snowmaggeddon' Threat in East | CNSnews.com