“The decade of 2000 to 2009 appears to be the warmest one in the modern record, the World Meteorological Organization reported in a new analysis on Tuesday,” according to the New York Times. “The announcement is likely to be viewed as a rejoinder to a renewed challenge from skeptics to the scientific evidence for global warming, as international negotiators here [in Copenhagen] seek to devise a global response to climate change.”
Yes, and a false and misleading rejoinder at that. The statement appears here in what’s obviously a propaganda sheet. At a glance it would seem to refute my recent assertion in Forbes that there’s been no warming over the past decade.
But it’s a matter of which interpretation do you think counts. Yes, the last decade was warmer than the previous decade. But there has been no warming within that decade. My point remains intact: During the last decade GHG emissions and ambient levels have gone up every year whereas warming has not as this chart shows. That’s the only point I was trying to make, that even as every year the world poured more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and the ambient concentrations of those gases rose, there was no rise in warming. The formula of “more GHGs = more warming” is overly simplistic; something is going on in nature that’s seriously impacting temperatures.
Oh, and as far as that “modern record” stuff goes, that’s sneaky stuff too. As I pointed out, and as this graph shows, it was much warmer in the medieval warming period – you know, back when those Viking ships were pumping CO2 in the atmosphere and when the Carolingian empire got most of its power from coal-fired power plants.
So, yeah, the WMO is kinda basically lying.
RSS Updates 
RSS E-Mail Updates 
CEI.org 
i don’t know about you but i would rather reduce air pollution and reduce CO2 because i still want to live. forget your global warming debates — act now and stop fighting mother nature’s revenge because humans like us are abusing nature’s resources…
I am all for reducing pollution and the like but what makes you so sure that Carbon Dioxide is a pollutant. That is the crux of the problem. Carbon Dioxide levels rise and fall with temperature but is it because it is the driver or is it because of the result. Ice Cores, until recent modifications of the record, show that Carbon Dioxide lagged temperature changes indicating it was the result rather than the cause. There is no doubt that there has been warming the amount of warming and the intensity are still in question due to the methodology which was used to determine this. Our efforts would be better spent on planning what would have to be done if the predictions of warming is true rather than trying to modify a process that is poorly understood and attempts at any modification could lead to a real disastor.
I agree with Michael, the best one is that the WMO seem to base figures on the 1960 and 1970 decade when temps plummeted and scientists thought we were heading for a new ice age. The other thing they fail to publicise is that North America (United States and Canada) experienced conditions that were cooler than average for 2009, Not bad for a country that is allegedly producing much of the Co2 and as I ask every where how does .1% (man's contribution) affect climate and how will we stop all this water vapour (95% +) from warming the planet.
I think,too.
select which among the following way: the prevention or with a same eruption by Mount Krakatoa in 1883 that will reduce global temperatures.
Comments on this entry are closed.