In spite of the whitewash over the leaks from the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia University, which concentrated on the leaked emails and resolutely ignored the real story – the flawed programmes which manipulated the raw data into showing warming whatever was happening in the real World, the convenient ‘loss’ of the world-wide raw data upon which the over-hyped warming predictions were made, and the total discrediting of the IPCC and its corrupt leader Rajendra Pachauri – the actual science is actually beginning to influence politicians as the Australian and US Governments abandon their ridiculous Emissions Trading schemes.
From the observed temperature record, (that is, what actually happened in the real World before AGW advocates masquerading as scientists ‘added value,’) there were two global warming phases. The first was from 1910 to 1940 with a warming of 0.13+0.64=0.77 deg C in 30 years. The second was from 1970 to 2000 with a warming of 0.48+0.29=0.77 deg C in 30 years. Note that both warming phases have an identical increase of 0.77 deg C in 30 years, which gives an average warming rate of (0.77/30)*10=0.26 deg C per decade.
From the observed temperature record, (see above,) there were two global cooling phases. The first was from 1880 to 1910 with a cooling of 0.64-0.22=0.42 deg C in 30 years. The second was from 1940 to 1970 with a cooling of 0.13+0.29=0.42 deg C in 30 years. Note that both cooling phases have an identical decrease of 0.42 deg C in 30 years, which gives an average cooling rate of (0.42/30)*10=0.14 deg C per decade.
Note that none of the records show any correlation at all with atmospheric CO2 levels.
So, when UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says that “climate change is accelerating at a much faster pace than was previously thought by scientists” he is talking nonsense.
As the leaked CRU emails show:
‘Just updated my global temperature trend graphic for a public talk and noted that the level has really been quite stable since 2000 or so and 2008 doesn’t look too hot.
…
Be awkward if we went through a early 1940s type swing!’
(Mick Kelly to Phil Jones)
And:
‘I think we have been too readily explaining the slow changes over past decade as a result of variability–that explanation is wearing thin. I would just suggest, as a backup to your prediction, that you also do some checking on the sulfate issue, just so you might have a quantified explanation in case the prediction is wrong. Otherwise, the Skeptics will be all over us–the world is really cooling, the models are no good, etc. And all this just as the US is about ready to get serious on the issue.
…
We all, and you all in particular, need to be prepared.’
(Mike MacCracken to Phil Jones and others.)
So, fire-up your SUVs folks, throw out those crappy mercury gas-producing lightbulbs, crack the coal mines and let’s get some power down the lines, the more aerial plant food we churn out, the better we’ll be able to feed people, and the more cheap, reliable energy we produce, the better we’ll be able to help with development in poor countries. Give them the power and watch them go, go, go!
Boadicea's Chariot 
I find it quite remarkable how climate change has gone from the political agenda in recent months. There are better ways of scaring the population, obviously!
More whacko
grant-farmingscience:Whale excrement could help fight climate change
Whale droppings could help fight global warming by ‘fertilising’ the oceans, according to a new study.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/7639614/Whale-excrement-could-help-fight-climate-change.html
Volume of the Southern Ocean: 292,131,000 cubic km
The Sei Whale feeds near the surface of the ocean, swimming on its side through swarms of prey to obtain its average of about 900 kilograms (1,984 lb) of food each day.
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Sei_Whale
About 650 kilograms of excrement per whale, per day, then. You do the numbers.
I don’t see how you can rubbish Nicol’s research on the basis of a newspaper report. It appears in a science journal (http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=1467-2960) and presumably comprises the ‘verifiable data’ you love so much. Unfortunately, only the abstract can be viewed gratis.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123336520/abstract
‘He believes that before commercial whaling, baleen whale faeces may have accounted for some 12 per cent of the iron on the surface of the Southern Ocean.’
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18807-whale-poop-is-vital-to-oceans-carbon-cycle.html
Yes, it seems that climate change has gone from the political agenda, but what was it doing there in the first place?
It is a scientific argument, that was politicised, and ruined thereby.
Bravo
I totaly disagree with your last paragraph. Scientists can argue about temperature variations till the cows come home,to me the whole climate change discussion was a kick of point for a better and cleaner way to live.
Only one Planet, the world population tripled in the last fifty years, so we need to change our ways of consuming resources, get smarter about water use and food production.
You are never going to convince poor nations not to breed like rabbits, so you might as well try to get some global effort going whereby we rethink our way of life.
Driving Suvs and burning coal isn’t going to be of much help in conserving our resources.
Have you heard the latest, some crank has opined that earthquakes and volcanoes are caused by CO2 emissions and that the IPCC has to investigate this aspect.
Roughly interpreted thus-
Shit, we’ve got to keep that gravy train rolling!!!
Man’s attitude to the world equates to the behaviour of woodlice to a block of wood. We are, as far as I can tell, the ultimate parasite!
I am sure you are right!
Rainer,
“You are never going to convince poor nations not to breed like rabbits”
We could start by not artificially improving their environment by piling shitloads of money into a lost cause.
Its not a famine if there aren’t too many people to feed.
Brendano, unlike you I can rubbish something because, unlike you, I look at data. Do the numbers yourself. ‘He believes…’
Rainer, it was never a scientific argument. It was a theory seized upon by advocates and politicised. The data has manipulated, skewed, hyped and distorted – as someone else wrote here, like the epicycle theory – until the grant-farmers were finally exposed.
And the way to stop ‘poor people breeding like rabbits,’ is to free them from being poor instead of keeping them in poverty with so-called ‘sustainable’ development. Build them power stations, let them have access to plentiful, cheap energy – such as fuelled development in the ‘not-poor’ countries – stand back and watch them go!
Farting cows cause global warming and now shotting whales are going to cure it. It is to laugh.
These scientists have done mankind an enormous disservice. There may be climate change caused by mankind, nobody has been able to prove that it doesn’t or won’t exist. There is a real need to get a control of the consumption of finite resources so that we don’t just run into a wall one day. By pretending to be able to prove something when they couldn’t they have discredited necessary and important actions and given the neanderthals a field day. In which country do they work?
Hot air doesn’t cut it, Profoundo. Do the numbers for yourself. And keep your language temperate on my blog. Byeee.
erm, Pachauri is Indian, Ban Ki Moon is Korean…
Both intemperate language and attacking the blogger, not the post. Byeee.
Climate change may be helped by man, but very slightly, not enough to make a real difference.
All it has done is cost poor nations billions while rich nations get richer.
Is it any surprise that the guy in charge of the IPCC is also on the board of Tata the company that closed Corus steel works and moved it to India, where they got a grant to open a new steel plant from the EU and the UK.
No nepotism here then.
‘Is it any surprise?’ Nope. Just like Al Bore and his carbon scams.
BRavo; I’ve been playing devil’s advocate on this over on Dark Side today. I will return to this to digest properly again later if I may. But it looks very interesting.
I actually asked in which country they worked, not there nationality.
And the quiet shuffle of feet towards the door continues; now Germany:
Merkel Abandons Aim of Binding Climate Agreement
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,691194,00.html
Bravo: just reading. I never take part in debates about this subject but just my thoughts.
Yes: it is all alarmist and political, and it does not help our understanding that raw data has been misinterpreted. I cannot help but feel that this does detract from some essential problems.
I believe that humanity can affect climate by deforestation and pollution, short term in terms of the age of the earth, but planet will survive, but not necessarily mankind.
I also believe that our cavalier attitude to squandering natural resources cannot help our cause in the long term, especially if we do not address the problem of overpopulation.
What really annoys me about AGW is that it has become mixed up with environmental issues. They are, in fact, two quite separate issues:
1. Is human activity heating the planet?
2. Do we need to clean up our industrial activities?
The answer to the first question is absolutely not at all. The world has gone through cycles of warming and cooling for ever. Those cycles have been studied intensely – and dismissed by the AGWers. It’s part of the natural ‘pattern’ and no amount of ‘extra tax’ is going to do one thing about it.
The answer to the second question is a resounding yes. We can’t afford to continue to foul our waterways, pollute our skies and push other species to the brink of extinction. We are interdependent.
The biggest threat to the world is over-population – and any country that tries to tackle that is condemned.
Boadicea: drat, I think that is exactly what I was trying to say, but your comment was rather better!
Well said, Boa and Araminta!
Btw, when I read some opinions on MyT and I appalled at the lack of feeling for other species which share our planet.
Bilby – don’t get me wrong! I’m not a ‘cuddly, save all the animals at whatever cost’ type of person at all…
In my view the feral horses, goats, camels, etc here need wiping out in much the same way as the cane toads do. My ‘care’ for other species is very much a practical approach, in that we’re all part of a finely balanced system. Although, for the life of me I cannot see where cockroaches, which I would happily banish from the face of the earth, fit into the ‘great scheme’ of things… 🙂
Boa, I don’t think I have got you wrong at all. I agree with with you about feral animals, but I have a great interest in all species and abhor cruelty in any form. I can feel compassion for foxes, brumbies, camels, donkeys (yes, even cane toads!) etc, while recognising that the introduction of said animals into countries such as Australia is devastating to the environment and indigenous species. I don’t understand hatred of other species, which was my point. Introduced animals had no choice in the matter; if culling if needed, it should be done humanely … none of the ghastly Cane Toad business.
I do have a problem with the attitudes of some on MyT who appear to believe that animals are of little significance and human beings are paramount. We need each other; it’s as simple as that … and, for me, the loss of any species is extremely sad. I don’t have to see a tiger, a gorilla, a panda, a certain type of insect in the wild; it’s just important to me that they exist, somewhere.
Cockroaches? Well, I’m sure they have their place in life and will likely outlive our kind. 🙂 Yes, I know I’m a ‘cuddly’.
Araminta, this shows up in the data. There is a strong and consistent correlation between increase in population by thousands and increase in local temperatures, as there is between change of land use and local temperature.