Just when we start to believe the government and Al Gore that we'll all end up frying unless we begin paying a hefty new tax - a startling bit of information comes to light.



In a speech last week at the U.N.'s World Climate Conference in Geneva, Professor Mojib Latif of Germany's Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at Kiel University, one of the world's foremost climate modelers and a lead author for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change acknowledged that the Earth has been cooling and is likely to continue that trend for the next couple of decades. Al Gore, call your office.

Latif has been looking into the influence of cyclical changes to ocean currents and temperatures in the Atlantic, a feature known as the North American Oscillation. When he factored these natural fluctuations into his global climate model, Professor Latif found the results brought the allegedly endless rise in global temperatures to a screeching halt.

Latif conceded the planet has not warmed for nearly a decade and that we are likely entering "one or even two decades during which temperatures cool." Latif still believes in a warming trend and thinks it will resume. But he at least acknowledges the empirical evidence of cooling, that there are factors at work here other than your SUV, and that doom will not occur the day after tomorrow.

None of the alarmists and their supercomputer climate models ever predicted even a 30-year respite in their apocalyptic scenarios. Neither did they predict the sun, that thermonuclear furnace in the sky that has more influence on earth's climate than any number of Ford Explorers, would suddenly go quiet for an indefinite period.

Charles Perry, a research hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Lawrence, Kan., says there's a growing sense in the scientific community that the earth may be entering into a "grand minimum" - an extended period with low numbers of sunspots that results in cooler planetary temperatures.

In July through August of this year, 51 consecutive days passed without a sunspot, one day short of the record. As of Sept. 15, the current solar minimum - with 717 spotless days since 2004 - ranks as the third longest on record.

Perry cites data indicating that global temperature fluctuations correspond to a statistically significant degree with the length of the sunspot cycle and variations in solar activity. 1816, the "year without a summer," was during an 1800 to 1830 grand minimum when Europe became significantly cooler.

Latif and others conclude that, at the very least, we have time to think about it and analyze and learn. We don't have to fight global warming by inflicting global poverty. More things on Earth affect climate than are dreamed up in computer models.

http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2009/09/23/decades_of_global_cooling_ah...

As Professor Latif is the lead author for the IPCC and one of the main proponents of global warming - he's the one who's been coming up with these terrifying scenarios. Now he's changed his mind.

So will Rudd now reconsider the ETS, and perhaps concentrate on renewables, growing more trees to cope with the carbon emissions and generally cleaning up Australia for a sustainable future, now that the imminent danger has passed?

In cases like this, the most honest thing to do is to go back to the researcher himself and find out what he really meant as opposed to the distorted version.

http://deepclimate.org/2009/10/02/an-email-exchange-with-mojib-latif/

Quote:


"Not much of an additional warming" is just a tad different from cooling 

mantra wrote on Oct 13^th, 2009 at 9:33pm:



Spot on.

This just in:








I am sure it means nothing...

muso wrote on Oct 14^th, 2009 at 10:54am:


"Latif conceded the planet has not warmed for nearly a decade and that we are likely entering "one or even two decades during which temperatures cool." Latif still believes in a warming trend and thinks it will resume. But he at least acknowledges the empirical evidence of cooling, that there are factors at work here other than your SUV, and that doom will not occur the day after tomorrow".

Muso, how do you reconcile your attack with the above quote, particularly the bit in bold?

Muso, Muso, Muso. Latif is covering all his bases - that is so obvious. His sentences are full of should, may, could, foresee - he states nothing definitive - apart from the fact that global warming will eventually resume. Of course it will - we all know that. It has always done so after a cooling period.

All these climate experts will be dead by the time their theories have been disproved and in the meantime, we are going to be penalised financially for their suppositions. What are these taxes going to be used for? My guess is that they will be used to replenish the serious financial losses many nations have incurred over the past 2-3 years and Australia as the most financially viable country will lead the way.

Yes perhaps the world is warming and the cause is human activity - but there's not much we can do about it apart from preparing ourselves for serious disasters, concentrating more on renewables and alternatives etc. and to make a huge effort to ensure this planet is sustainable for all its inhabitants. The UN IPCC solutions to global warming are useless and the public is finally starting to wake up to their rhetoric.

mantra wrote on Oct 14^th, 2009 at 9:07pm:


Mantra,

You've just been sold the Sydney Harbour Bridge and you're at the point of getting a team of painters in to paint it a nice shade of pink.

Maybe you should look at the Copenhagen synthesis report. Unfortunately, it has not received much media attention. The data referred to there was compiled by world authorities on climate.

The interesting thing to note is the variability. However, not only has there been no cooling, the actual increase in total heat by the planet has been in the upper range of predictions that were made in made in the 4th Annual  Report.  We're really not doing too well.

It's not a question of Latif just covering his bases. If you look at the actual presentation that Latif gave, it was nothing like what appeared in that Calgary newspaper and eventually ended up in other media.

Tell me why you don't trust experts in the field, yet you follow every last word of a hick reporter who has been demonstrated to be lying? 

Many people in society seem to have the same attitude towards vaccinations. The actual risk of complications is extremely low, and is far outweighed by the benefit by a factor of at least 1000 - 

They trust rumour, but don't trust experts in the field. No - they are part of the grand conspiracy - the new world order to control and subjugate us all. They have probably added something to the vaccinations that make us vote for Rudd - or whatever conspiracy is now current in the great unwashed blogosphere.   

I'm trying (very unsuccessfully no doubt) to explain my frustrations with the general public. I live my life by the use of facts. It's second nature to me. I buy the best and freshest vegetables, I research their nutritional value and I design my inputs around what offers the optimum benefit to me (and what tastes good - which comes down to the same thing anyway - taste, like anything else internal is programmable).  All the decisions I make are based on the best data available. Just as I find it unbelievably stupid to buy stale vegetables because they are going out on special, I can't understand why people will settle for stale incorrect and misleading information. It jars on my sensibilities.

The ocean is the biggest sink of heat on the planet. The graph shows how ocean heat has been steadily increasing through the years.