Click here: Climatologists Baffled by Global Warming Time-Out
Here are some of the most interesting pieces of the article, with my comments.
The planet's temperature curve rose sharply for almost 30 years, as global temperatures increased by an average of 0.7 degrees Celsius (1.25 degrees Fahrenheit) from the 1970s to the late 1990s. "At present, however, the warming is taking a break," confirms meteorologist Mojib Latif of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences in the northern German city of Kiel. Latif, one of Germany's best-known climatologists, says that the temperature curve has reached a plateau. "There can be no argument about that," he says. "We have to face that fact."
I love how they can't bring themselves to say "it has stopped". They use phrases like "Time-Out" or "taking a break". As if they are hoping that the warming will resume again. That is the problem with these ideologues: they can't just let the science be what it is, they have to try and bend it to their own agenda.
Speaking of that, there is this from the article:
But a few scientists simply refuse to believe the British calculations. "Warming has continued in the last few years," says Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). However, Rahmstorf is more or less alone in his view. Hamburg Max Planck Institute scientist Jochem Marotzke, on the other hand, says: "I hardly know any colleagues who would deny that it hasn't gotten warmer in recent years."
You got to love these guys. When temperatures were rising, at a rate of 1.25 degrees Fahrenheit over 30 years mind you, all we heard was chickenlittle, doomsday predictions. But as soon as the science shows that there is no longer any warming occurring, they dismiss the objective, real data, and "simply refuse to believe".
That is the difference in the "global warming believers" and the "global warming deniers". Believers want there to be warming, regardless of the science. Deniers have never denied the data that the earth was warming, they simply pointed out that the actual warming was less than the predicted warming. And that the cause could not be pinpointed to human activities.
"Perhaps we suggested too strongly in the past that the development will continue going up along a simple, straight line. In reality, phases of stagnation or even cooling are completely normal," says Latif.
You think? See this is their problem. They have attributed the warming to greenhouse gas emissions. Yet there are more greenhouse gas emissions today than there were at any point during the warming that occurred from the 1970's through the 1990's. Their hypothesis would suggest that warming should be accelerating, not decelerating, or even stopping altogether.
At a minimum, this lack of warming, or even cooling, proves that this is not a man-made phenomenon. That the earth warms and cools in cycles, regardless of what humans do or don't do, is now apparent. This fact is being met with skepticism for one reason and one reason only: it fails to provide the excuse they need for the radical changes they want to impose.
Algore and his minions were planning on using the fear over human-induced global warming to push through a radical agenda of changes. Carbon credits, fines for emissions, outlawing of internal combustion engines, etc. The lack of this fear that this lack of warming is now allowing for is jeopardizing those initiatives, and they have lost traction. The momentum is now swinging back the other way toward the direction of making sound economic decisions, and no longer worrying about global warming.
In the end, Algore sees the possible end of his meal ticket that he has enjoyed over the last 9 years. Since he lost the 2000 election, Algore has made a significant amount of money in promoting the idea of human-induced global warming. I have a feeling he won't give up that idea until it is pried from his cold (pun intended), dead hands.