pt2

Historical record

However, the historical record of alternate cooling and warming suggests a very different future.

Said Easterbrook: "Rather than drastic global warming at a rate of 0.5°C (1°F) per decade, historic records of past natural cycles suggest global cooling for the first several decades of the 21st century to about 2030, followed by global warming from about 2030 to about 2060, and renewed global cooling from 2060 to 2090."

Professor Easterbrook said that climatic fluctuations over the past few hundred years showed regular alternate cycles of warming and cooling, each lasting about 30 years.

On the basis of ice core data, he said global climate changes have been far more intense (12 to 20 times as intense in some cases) than those of the past century, and they took place in as little as 20-100 years.

"Global warming of the past century (0.8° C) is virtually insignificant when compared to the magnitude of at least 10 global climate changes in the past 15,000 years," he said.

None of these sudden global climate changes could possibly have been caused by human CO2 input to the atmosphere because they all took place long before anthropogenic CO2 emissions began.

Professor Easterbrook said that after several decades of studying alpine glacier fluctuations in the North Cascade Range in the state of Washington, "My research showed a distinct pattern of glacial advances and retreats (the Glacial Decadal Oscillation, GDO) that correlated well with climate records.

In 1992, Dr Nathan Mantua published the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) curve showing warming and cooling of the Pacific Ocean that correlated remarkably well with glacial fluctuations.

According to Easterbrook: "Both the GDA and the PDO matched global temperature records and were obviously related. All but the latest 30 years of changes occurred prior to significant CO2 emissions, so they were clearly unrelated to atmospheric CO2."

Using the pattern established for the past several hundred years, in 1998 he projected the temperature curve for the past century into the next century.

He said: "At that time, the projected curve indicated global cooling beginning about 2005 ± 3-5 years until about 2030, then renewed warming from about 2030 to about 2060 (unrelated to CO2 - just continuation of the natural cycle), then another cool period from about 2060 to about 2090. This was admittedly an approximation, but it was radically different from the 1° F per decade warming called for by the IPCC. Because the prediction was so different from the IPCC prediction, time would obviously show which projection was ultimately correct."

He added, "Now a decade later, the global climate has not warmed 1° F as forecast by the IPCC, but cooled slightly until 2007-08 when global temperatures turned sharply downward.

"In 2008, NASA satellite imagery confirmed that the Pacific Ocean had switched from the warm mode it had been in since 1977 to its cool mode, similar to that of the 1945-1977 global cooling period. The shift strongly suggests that the next several decades will be cooler, not warmer as predicted by the IPCC."

Professor Easterbrook said that the consequences of climate cooling could be severe.

"The ramifications of the global cooling cycle for the next 30 years are far-reaching - e.g., failure of crops in critical agricultural areas (it's already happening this year), increasing energy demands, transportation difficulties, and habitat change.

"All this during which global population will increase from six billion to about 9 billion. The real danger in spending trillions of dollars trying to reduce atmospheric CO2 is that little will be left to deal with the very real problems engendered by global cooling."

He concluded: "Global warming (i.e., the warming since 1977) is over. The minute increase of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008 per cent) was not the cause of the warming - it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years.

"The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling, perhaps much deeper than the global cooling from about 1945 to 1977. Just how much cooler the global climate will be during this cool cycle is uncertain.

"Recent solar changes suggest that it could be fairly severe, perhaps more like the 1880 to 1915 cool cycle than the more moderate 1945-1977 cool cycle. A more drastic cooling, similar to that during the Dalton and Maunder minimums could plunge the Earth into another Little Ice Age, but only time will tell if that is likely."

- Peter Westmore (President, NCC)

Grendel, it has been pointed out to you so many times before, that the skeptics analogous contention that GW will be like a heating oven, with each day/week/month/year?, hotter than the one before, is not, and never has been the contention of real scientists.
Of course the same factors which have caused weather fluctuations in the past, will not just disappear overnight, and so we will see cooling, and warming spikes, caused by other factors, but the warming trend, nonetheless goes on unabated.

It is good that real scientists keep questioning, but it is foolhardy for individuals to think that they alone have discovered the 'Truth', when it is contrary to the opinions of thousands of their peers.
That is just 'contrariness', and I know that you can relate to that grendel.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm

Seem to be out of???
Well seeing that I just went through the hottest hot spell I have ever experienced, and topped off with the hottest day ever in Melbourne, and the worst bushfires in the country's history, which are all just weather events, but it hardly inspires confidence that this lone scientist has got it right in his belief that we are now cooling.

The last arctic winter, was four degrees fahrenheit warmer than average, and just last week we saw the ice bridge linking to the wilkins shelf, collapse, for the first time in recorded history.

So while mild fluctuations linked to traditional el nino and la nina cycles, and the eleven year solar cycles, the vast consensus of respected scientists still consider global warming is continuing, despite the lonely voices of the few who determinedly attempt to try and confuse people with isolated weather reports.

It is not good enough to pretend that skeptics are just keeping an open mind, when they bloody mindedly ignore the studies of thousands of respected scientists, and latch onto individual voices that offer alternate theories, as being equally valid and important as the accumulated efforts of thousands of bona fide experts in the field.

Certainly when someone raises points, like easterbrook has, they should be examined, but they certainly are not noteworthy enough to invalidate everybody elses' work, which is how skeptics try and present it, which is both churlish, and childish.

Now if you actually looked at your argument with unbiased eyes you'd see how biased and incorrect it is Mozz.

Suddenly daily variation is ok to use, suddenly bushfires many started by firebugs are part of the climate?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...

So people who don't believe what you do... likw scientists I quote are crackpots and lunatics?

says a lot to me Mozz.

Global warming and today was 5 degrees below average in Sydney.

I know, daily or seasonal fluctuations are common, but it could also be cooling rather than warming.

I would rather concentrate on pollution except CO2 rather than CO2 only.

Hey muso..  read heaven and earth yet?
No?
How unusual.