[Scientists Expose Data Manipulation, 'Hide The Decline', And The Post-1940s Hockey Stick Temperature Myth]

Scientists Expose Data Manipulation, 'Hide The Decline', And The Post-1940s Hockey Stick Temperature Myth

Why 'Hide The Decline'?
There Has Been No Net NH Warming Since The 1940s

[One-sentence summary: Shortwave radiation heats both CO2 and air only up to a limited temperature threshold, and there is no observed difference between the heat absorption/emission of air vs. CO2.]

New Paper: Experiment Reveals No Detectable 'Greenhouse' Difference Between CO2 And Air

One-sentence summary: Shortwave radiation heats both CO2 and air only up to a limited temperature threshold, and there is no observed difference between the heat absorption/emission of  air vs. CO2.

Mas estudios que afirman que el cambio es natural y no producido por el ser humano...
http://www.europapress.es/ciencia/habitat-y-clima/noticia-dos-cientificos-argumentan-cambio-climatico-origen-natural-20170830140925.html

[Sea Level Manipulation]

Sea Level Manipulation

Abstract

Sea level changes is a key issue in the global warming scenario. It has been widely claimed that sea is rising as a function of the late 20th's warming pulse. Global tide gauge data sets may vary between +1.7 mm/yr to +0.25 mm/yr depending upon the choice of stations. At numerous individual sites, available tide gauges show variability around a stable zero level. Coastal morphology is a sharp tool in defining ongoing changes in sea level. A general stability has been defined in sites like the Maldives, Goa, Bangladesh and Fiji. In contrast to all those observations, satellite altimetry claim there is a global mean rise in sea level of about 3.0 mm/yr. In this paper, it is claimed that the satellite altimetry values have been "manipulated". In this situation, it is recommended that we return to the observational facts, which provides global sea level records varying between ±0.0 and +1.0 mm/yr; i.e. values that pose no problems in coastal protection.

Mas estudios que afirman que el cambio es natural y no producido por el ser humano...
http://www.europapress.es/ciencia/habitat-y-clima/noticia-dos-cientificos-argumentan-cambio-climatico-origen-natural-20170830140925.html

Veo que una y otra vez se repiten las mismas dudosas ideas por quienes niegan que el cambio climático tenga que ver con el ser humano. Una es la referencia al mítico periodo cálido medieval. Y la realidad es que hay muchos flecos dudosos sobre ese tema. La verdad es que esperaba mucho más del artículo.
Otra cosa, respecto al científico Ruso que afirma "debido a que hay un cambio climático en marte, parecido a la tierra, eso es casi una prueba de que el ser humano no tiene nada que ver...", me parece muy pero que muy poco creíble el argumento. Me parece un error comparar los contextos de otros planetas con lo nuestro.
En mi humilde opinión, parece muy poco probable que el ser humano, con todo su poder de destrucción de vida en la tierra, sea intranscendente en este cambio climático. Pero oye, si alguien lo demuestra, tiene todos mis reconocimientos.
Por otro lado no sé muy bien que pensar sobre el efecto secundario de esta subida repentina de las temperaturas no sé si lo peor que nos pueda pasar va a ser el que nos asemos de calor o los huracanes, o  la radicalización del clima. El día en el que las temperaturas dejen de subir,  ¿No podría haber un bajón bestial de las temperaturas.?. Porque imagino que algún día dejarían de subir. ¿No.?. Esto es algo que no entiendo muy bien de los que defienden que el calentamiento global se debe casi totalmente a la acción del ser humano. Me gustaría saber la opinión de lightmather sobre esto último.

Bueno el articulo dice bastante mas que lo que comentas, al menos el que he leido yo...
Ahora no hay mas huracanes que antes, parece ser que el tema de los huracanes tambien va por ciclos, hay ciclos donde hay mas huracanes y otros donde hay menos.
Yo si alguien demuestra que la subida de temperatura que se dio hasta hace mas de 15 años la hemos causado los humanos por el co2 que producimos tambien lo aceptare encantado, pero eso no lo ha hecho nadie aun...

[Ventisco]

En mi humilde opinión, parece muy poco probable que el ser humano, con todo su poder de destrucción de vida en la tierra, sea intranscendente en este cambio climático. Pero oye, si alguien lo demuestra, tiene todos mis reconocimientos.

El clima ha cambiado, por causas naturales (conocidas o no) a lo largo de toda la historia de nuestro planeta. Por ende, esas causas naturales, cualesquiera que sean, son la hipótesis cero de cualquier cambio climático, incluso el que se pueda estar produciendo ahora.

La conjetura del calentamiento global antropogénico propone una nueva causa, muy específica, para este caso. Por lo tanto, la carga de `producir la evidencia que sostenga esa conjetura corresponde a quienes la proponen, no a quienes se atienen a la hipótesis cero.

Por cierto, hasta ahora, los creyentes en la conjetura CGA no han producido NINGUNA EVIDENCIA que indique la incidencia de la actividad humana sobre el clima a nivel global (ni han identificado cuantitativamente o cualitativamente todas las posibles causas naturales que hayan producido los cambios del pasado, algo imprescindible para poder discernir los efectos humanos actuales). De hecho, toda la conjetura se basa en modelos de computadora que además de no constituir evidencia, han fracasado miserablemente en todas las predicciones hechas hasta el momento.

... Una es la referencia al mítico periodo cálido medieval. Y la realidad es que hay muchos flecos dudosos sobre ese tema.

En realidad, Ventisco, los flecos sobre el PCM son tantos que más bien se parecen ya a la cabellera de Rapunzel. Aquí te dejo algunos mechones para que los desestimes:

New Study Confirms Medieval Warm Period Was Indeed Global, And As Warm As Today

Here's another blow to the global warming alarmist scientists, who have been claiming that the Medieval Warm Period was a local, North Atlantic phenomenon, and did not really exist globally. What follows is a report on yet another paper contradicting this now worn out claim.

The Little Ice Age And Medieval Warming In South Africa

While researching the last article on monsoons, I came across this paper about the Little Ice Age in South Africa:
http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/envirophilo/tyson.pdf
The climate industry likes to pretend that the Little Ice Age was just a local event in Europe, but studies like this one give the lie to that.
Interestingly this Tyson study also includes graphs of historical temperature trends in other parts of the world, for comparison. They all clearly show the MWP and Little Ice Age, although the peaks and troughs don't always match.

Documenting the Global Extent of the Medieval Warm Period

In this article I pose the following questions:
Was the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) a global event?
Where the MWP temperatures higher than recent times?
The reasons for asking these questions are that climate establishment have tried to sideline the MWP as a purely local North Atlantic event. They also frequently state that current temperatures are the highest ever.
I attempt to answer these questions below.

Body Of Proof: Large Number Of Studies Show Medieval Warm Period "Prominent In Southern Hemisphere"

Remember how in the late 1990s/early 2000s the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was made to disappear, and it was claimed that it was mainly a local, North Atlantic phenomenon.
Unfortunately for those trumpeting this claim, a comprehensive worldwide survey of scientific literature is now showing that the MWP was in fact a global phenomenon, suggesting large-scale natural cycles are what is really driving the climate.

Evidence of the Medieval Warm Period in Australia, New Zealand and Oceania

Results are now available for Africa, Antarctica and Australia/Oceania. In the following, we want to present our findings for Australia/Oceania, hoping for reader feedback on additional studies or alternative interpretations. Up to now we have identified 15 study locations in the region.

Evidence Of MWP In Argentina

... so we have yet another well-documented example of the pure and simple fact that the much-studied Medieval Warm Period likely was somewhat warmer than the Current Warm Period has been to date, and during a time when the atmosphere's CO2 concentration was only about 280 ppm, compared to the approximate 400 ppm of today.
... This adds to many other studies which show evidence of the MWP and LIA in South America.   

Hay mucho evidencia más, por supuesto, si la quieres.

[Ocean Cycles, Not Humans, May Be Behind Most Observed Climate Change]

Ocean Cycles, Not Humans, May Be Behind Most Observed Climate Change

In a new report published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation, Anastasios Tsonis, emeritus distinguished professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, describes new and cutting-edge research into natural climatic cycles, including the well known El Nino cycle and the less familiar North Atlantic Oscillation and Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

He shows how interactions between these ocean cycles have been shown to drive changes in the global climate on timescales of several decades.

Professor Tsonis says:
"We can show that at the start of the 20th century, the North Atlantic Oscillation pushed the global climate into a warming phase, and in 1940 it pushed it back into cooling mode. The famous "pause" in global warming at the start of the 21st century seems to have been instigated by the North Atlantic Oscillation too."

In fact, most of the changes in the global climate over the period of the instrumental record seem to have their origins in the North Atlantic.

[Climate Models Can't Even Approximate Reality Because Atmospheric Structure and Movements are Virtually Unknown]

Una y otra vez, las predicciones a corto, medio y largo plazo realizadas por la "ciencia climática oficial" han fracasado rotundamente. Esas predicciones fallidas se basan, al menos las que intentan parecer como más serias, en diversos modelos que no han producido los resultados esperados de ellos.
Por lo tanto, la pregunta más lógica en estos casos es: ¿por qué fracasan los modelos climáticos de la ciencia oficial?

Climate Models Can't Even Approximate Reality Because Atmospheric Structure and Movements are Virtually Unknown

Climate models are abstract models, except they are made up of a multiple of models all interacting with each other. Those interactions bear little resemblance to reality.
In summary,
- We have virtually no data.
- This is true even for fundamental variables like temperature, precipitation atmospheric pressure, and atmospheric water content.
- Data is replaced by symbols that eliminate most of the properties of the natural variable.
- In many cases the "data" is generated in another model and used as 'real' data in the larger model.
- The models are essentially static representations of average conditions. The one thing we know with certainty is that the Earth's atmospheric system is dynamic, changing daily, seasonally and constantly over the course of time.
- The models consistently fail the standard test of scientific understanding and accuracy by producing inaccurate predictions.

La superficie minima del Artico tambien ha sido positiva y tambien ha roto con las predicciones de mas de uno tipo greenpeace que no paran de bombardearnos con dame pasta que el Artico se deshiela como si, de ser esto cierto, que ya vemos que no lo es, ellos o alguien, pudieran hacer algo para que no ocurriera...

Articulos interesantes que te encuentras a veces mientras buscas otras cosas...
http://www.libertaddigital.com/ciencia/cientificos-advierten-de-la-llegada-de-una-mini-edad-de-hielo-1276381243/
https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2017/09/15/tsonis-explains-oceans-making-climate/
Y parece que el Prof Abdusamátov no esta solo, ya colgue hace tiempo un video suyo hablandole al comite del senado de USA sobre el "cambio climatico" y este es su CV Don Easterbrook
https://desmontandoababylon.wordpress.com/2017/07/09/datos-del-experto-dr-easterbrook-ante-comite-del-senado-sobre-el-cambio-climatico-dab-doblado-esp/
Es curioso ver como en realidad son muchos mas cientificos de los que pensamos y sabemos los que afirman que viene una pequeña edad de hielo y que esta se va a sentir en todo el planeta...

[Scientists Rebuke Claims Of Human Control Over Glacier Mass Balance]

Scientists Rebuke Claims Of Human Control Over Glacier Mass Balance

- The claim that the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035 was included in the 4th IPCC report (2007) not for scientific reasons, but to put political pressure on world leaders.
- However, a 2014 comprehensive analysis of over 2,000 glaciers in the region indicated that 88% of Himalayan glaciers are stable or advancing, with overall negligible change (0.2%) since 2000.
- Prior to this apparent 21st century "pause" in Himalayan glacier melt, a substantial glacier retreat occurred between the 1970s and 1990s for the region.   There were also decadal-scale periods of severe glacier melt during the 1600s and 1700s (Little Ice Age), when atmospheric CO2 levels were significantly lower (~275 ppm) than they are now.  The amplitude of the glacier retreat during the 17th and 18th centuries sometimes even exceeded the melt rates achieved during the last few decades (Shekhar et al., 2017).