Wednesday, 8 February 2012

Changing Climate ...

Today's Frankfurter Algemeine - a serious daily newspaper - carries a lengthy article today by someone in the Greenpeace/Green Party camp, essentially attempting to rubbish some recent research papers published in the UK, Scandinavia and elsewhere. These argue that the "Global Warming" is affected by solar output and a host of other things. Disappointingly, the Algemeine, an otherwise excellent newspaper, simply resorts to references from the now discredited IPCC 4 report of 2007 and ignores a host of other observed and measurable indicators which all point to the IPCC/Greenpeace claims being hype.

The solar variability is simply dismissed, so is the evidence of false readings from weather stations situated in heat islands and the gap between what satellites are measuring and what is being used in the infamous "models." They rely on the IPCC 2007 report to support their statements and beliefs that the solar output is "fixed" and non-variable. In this they ignore the plethora of evidence that shows the lie in that and in several other supposedly "fixed" measurements.

This article has appeared just as the protests against more "windr├Ąder" begins to gather momentum. It has to be said that those who want more of these infernal machines to cover every available bit of open ground, don't have to live with them. Those that do, want them torn down, chopped up and removed from the face of the earth. They claim to be generating around 30% of Germany's electrical needs, but when this claim is examined more closely the weasel words "on average" appear in the text. Interestingly, in the UK, during the coldest period in decades, the wind farms supplied just 0.01% of the power in the national grid. Why? Well, the wind speeds where either to high or to low for them to work.

The article also appears to be an attempt to deflect people, currently suffering sub-zero temperatures for a prolonged period now, from asking the all important question - why, if the planet is warming, are we suffering in this cold? Why are we expected to believe that the latests series of solar flares which produced some spectacular Northern Lights displays, have had no impact on the weather at all? Why should we believe the people who, ten and fifteen years ago, where telling us that icy winters, snow and frozen rivers were a thing of the past?

The climate is changing, it has been changing for millennia. It goes through cycles. We know the Roman period was warmer than we are at present - they cultivated vines for wine in Cumbria! We know that Greenland has been warmer - they could keep cows there in 800 - 1000 AD, but can't now. Five hundred years ago, the Medieval Warm Period came to an end and we had a Little Ice Age. Since the late 1890s its been getting warmer - but let's be honest, the 1930s were drier, and in some places warmer than at present. The IPCC "its getting hotter and we're all gonna die ..." is a scam. The manner in which they determine the "temperature trend" is a scam. If you want to know the "average for something you need to median between the highest and the lowest, not, as someone from the Met Office in the UK admitted, take an average of the "Highs" only.

We've had very little snow this year, it's been too cold and too dry. But south of us, the Alps and the Mediterranean copped the lot. So did the UK and last night we even got some very fine powdery stuff here.

Picking up on the comments made by Josephus the other day about pollution I would add that we do have to clean up our act. We do have to reduce the particulates we pump out, and we certainly have to reduce our reliance on oil, but to place all our reliance on "windr├Ąder" is stupid. It is as stupid as doing nothing. In all seriousness we need a balance and we need to stop and think and critically examine what we are fed from the newspapers. All too often it is nothing more than someone's latest bid for tax funds for their "research" and may not be either the truth or even a part of the truth. It is certainly never, the whole truth.

1 comment:

  1. Ah, to be back in Scotland where the principal energy provider is universally referred to as "the Hydro".