Global Warming Has Stopped?
by Brendon Carr
So says this article in The Australian. But if our evil industrialized lifestyle, and carbon emissions, was solely responsible for global warming, and emissions are up—wouldn’t the warming trend have continued past 1998?
The Australian columnist Christopher Pearson reported on an interview involving the co-host of Counterpoint, Michael Duffy and Jennifer Marohasy, a biologist and senior fellow of Melbourne-based think tank the Institute of Public Affairs in which it was discussed how new satellite data doesn’t fit the global-warming orthodox opinion. As Pearson notes, “Anyone in public life who takes a position on the greenhouse gas hypothesis will ignore it at their peril”. Here we go:
Duffy: “The climate is actually, in one way anyway, more robust than was assumed in the climate models?”
Marohasy: “That’s right ... 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.”
Duffy: “From what you’re saying, it sounds like the implications of this could beconsiderable ...”
Marohasy: “That’s right, very much so. The policy implications are enormous. 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.”
What will become of all the people who make their living telling us about global warming? The Nobel Prize winning liars, the jet-setting NGOs trying to force the rest of us back 500 years, the carbon-trading hustlers, the government regulators, the schoolteachers filling children’s heads with lies—boy, talk about an inconvenient truth!
Comments
1 Responses to This Entry
Comments Policy: Comments to Korea Law Blog are moderated. This means abusive, or just plain stupid comments will be deleted. So don't be a jerk. It also means there may be some delay from the time you post a comment to the time it shows up here. If your comment wasn't against the policy, it will show up in a little bit.
-
About Korea Law Blog
Korea Law Blog is brought to you by Brendon Carr, an American lawyer working as a foreign legal consultant for more than 10 years in Seoul. (Brendon is not admitted as an attorney in Korea. But you knew that.) -
Contact Details
-
Tel. +82 (0)2 772 2734
Fax +82 (0)2 772 2800
Mobile +82 (0)10 8788 0750 -
Download My FREE Korea Employment Law FAQ
-
Korean Media
-
Blogroll
-
Is global warming nothing more than a gravy train for hustlers and NGOs? Denying global warming seems to pay well, too.
A quick Google-ing shows that IPA gets a lot of money from mining companies and oil companies and anyone else looking for a little deregulation. Is it fair to even suggest that the IPA’s science is for sale? Well, in 2004 the “think tank” had it’s top biologist working hard to convince the government to roll back regulations on a certain river. Then it came out that the IPA had forgot to mention that it had pocketed $40,000 worth of funding from a company all set to profit from the rollback. I guess it’s not a think tank after all. It’s a PR firm.
But the really interesting thing is not the name calling and assigning of evil motives. It’s that IPA’s top biologist’s claims that global warming stopped in 1998 are not really new.
From the nice people at GISS, the NASA offices above Tom’s Restaurant of “Seinfeld” fame:
“‘Global warming stopped in 1998,’ has become a recent mantra of those who wish to deny the reality of human-caused global warming… In reality, global temperature jumped two standard deviations above the trend line in 1998 because [of] the “El Niño of the century"… but there has been no lessening of the underlying warming trend.”
IPA takes data out of it’s larger and more complex context and then tries to use it to disprove the existence of the context itself. Neat trick.