Mysterious global warming "hiatus" blamed on sudden ocean cooling

Photo: Steve Ryan/Flickr CC

Scientists don’t want us to get bogged down in the details — the ups-and-downs of global temperatures. The mercury is still rising, they say…

That is, except in large parts of the globe, and during certain decades:

“The suddenness of the drop in Northern Hemisphere ocean temperatures relative to the Southern Hemisphere is difficult to reconcile with the relatively slow buildup of tropospheric aerosols,” Thompson said.“We don’t know why the Northern Hemisphere ocean areas cooled so rapidly around 1970. But the cooling appears to be largest in a climatically important region of the ocean,” Wallace said.

via Sudden Ocean Cooling Likely Aided Mid-20th Century Global Warming Hiatus in Northern Hemisphere.

Striking while the iron's hot: Heat waves common in coming decades, scientists announce

Photo: Lucy Boynton/Flickr CC

The body forgets pain easily. Perhaps that’s why Stanford scientists are taking this opportunity to do a little imprinting.

The Stanford scientists — one of whom is now working for a US DOE lab — insist that heat waves “and other hot events” might be commonplace by 2039.

The researchers also determined that the hottest daily temperatures of the year from 1980 to 1999 are likely to occur at least twice as often across much of the U.S. during the decade of the 2030s.

“By the decade of the 2030s, we see persistent, drier conditions over most of the U.S.,” Diffenbaugh said. “Not only will the atmosphere heat up from more greenhouse gases, but we also expect changes in the precipitation and soil moisture that are very similar to what we see in hot, dry periods historically. In our results for the U.S., these conditions amplify the effects of rising greenhouse gas concentrations.”

via Heat waves could be commonplace in the US by 2039, Stanford study finds.

Childfree movement gets its greenwash

Part of the problem. Photo: Alan Turkus

I am  sure that some in the childfree movement feel so self-conscious about their choice not to raise kids that they need, occasionally, to create a smug, in-your-face manifesto.

The latest missive from the childfree movement, which has been around since the 1960s, comes in awash in green.

Lisa Hymas, in an essay at Grist*, claims that humans who choose not nurture other humans are making an admirable choice for the planet, and their pocketbooks.

Hymas, a disciple of Al Gore and Stephanie Mills of the Post Carbon Institute (think about that one, for a moment), writes that being childfree is a “luxurious indulgence that just so happens to cost a lot less for me and weigh a lot less on the carbon-bloated atmosphere.”

Hymas does not avoids mentioning adoption, abortion or infanticide, issues that would have introduced some ethical complexity to the piece.

The green solution, according to a Grist editor and blogger.

Hymas also uses a hackneyed rhetorical technique — the false premise — to get her point across.

She suggests, without any supporting evidence, that people with kids typically look down on those who have none.

A link to HuffPo’s coverage of Hymas’ manifesto, is below.

via Ultimate Way to Go Green? Don’t Have Kids, Writer Lisa Hymas Says – AOL News.

*Note: I have written for Grist myself, about environmental issues.

Welcome to the New World of the "Anthropocene"

Force of nature. Photo: Ville Miettinen/Flickr CC

Scientists are wielding a nonscientific term in an effort to modify human behavior. — MB

Humans have wrecked the planet so badly in the past two hundred years — on an order of magnitude equivalent to meteor strikes, or tectonic plate shifts — that we’ve earned a place in the geologic record, a group of scientists say.

Led by the Nobel Prize-winning atmospheric chemist, Paul Crutzen, they write in the latest issue of Environmental Science and Technology (excerpt and link, below) that we are living the “Anthropocene Epoch,” in which humans are cracking ice sheets and wiping out vulnerable critters with their CO2 emissions and settlement habits.

Shockingly enough, Crutzen, who first came up with “Anthropocene” (New Human) ten years ago, admits the term is “informal and not precisely defined.”

In other words, Anthropocene is not a scientific term at all.

But that doesn’t mean that scientists can’t use the term to push an agenda:

“The concept of the Anthropocene might, therefore, become exploited, to a variety of ends. Some of these may be beneficial, some less so. The Anthropocene might be used as encouragement to slow carbon emissions and biodiversity loss, for instance; perhaps as evidence in legislation on conservation measures 31; or, in the assessment of compensation claims for environmental damage. It has the capacity to become the most politicized unit, by far, of the Geological Time Scale—and therefore to take formal geological classification into uncharted waters.”

via The New World of the Anthropocene1 – Environmental Science & Technology ACS Publications.

James Lovelock to humans (again): "Go to Hell"

Lovelock's solution. Photo: Nate Ritter/Flickr CC

Is a “false flag” eco-attack somewhere in the offing? — MB

The scientist who popularized the theory that the Earth is a single organism this week told the UK Guardian humans are too stupid to understand the threat of global warming.

He also said that only a very dramatic event — such as catastrophic flooding, which would surely take thousands of lives — may be necessary to get people’s attention:

“He thinks only a catastrophic event would now persuade humanity to take the threat of climate change seriously enough, such as the collapse of a giant glacier in Antarctica, such as the Pine Island glacier, which would immediately push up sea level.

‘That would be the sort of event that would change public opinion,” he said. “Or a return of the dust bowl in the mid-west.’”

via James Lovelock: Humans are too stupid to prevent climate change | Environment | The Guardian.

Heretic on 2012: Fear people, not God (news video feature)

The young Boston investigative journo Dan Rowinski recently produced this news feature about 2012 (below), as part of his graduate studies at BU.

Dan interviews me (I’m cited as an “apocalyptic expert”), along with Mayan and millennial experts from BU, and end-timers on the street.

I enjoyed watching the piece. The point I make in it is that the risk of chaos in 2012 is very real: not from above, mind you, but from crazy people getting amp’d up with anticipation.

Apocalyptic – 2012 News Feature from Dan Rowinski on Vimeo.

IPCC scientist: Global temps now "in reverse"

And for decades to come. (Yeah, it’s in the Daily Mail, but the scientists’ names in this piece do not appear to be made-up.)

Among the most prominent of the scientists is Professor Mojib Latif, a leading member of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has been pushing the issue of man-made global warming on to the international political agenda since it was formed 22 years ago.

Prof Latif, who leads a research team at the renowned Leibniz Institute at Germany’s Kiel University, has developed new methods for measuring ocean temperatures 3,000ft beneath the surface, where the cooling and warming cycles start.

via DAVID ROSE: The mini ice age starts here | Mail Online.

Buzzkill for the global warming gang: Global atmospheric CO2, temps, not changing

Don't worry. Be happy. Photo: Ville Miettinen/Flickr CC

Good news for 2010! We’re not all gonna die, just yet:

CO2 levels in the atmosphere, it turns out, have not changed since 1850, according to a recent report:

This suggests that terrestrial ecosystems and the oceans have a much greater capacity to absorb CO2 than had been previously expected.

via Controversial new climate change data: Is Earth’s capacity to absorb CO2 much greater than expected.

All this, on top of the 2008 finding that global warming, well, ain’t happening.

This should ease Al Gore’s guilt, the next time he boards a private jet.

Stay tuned for the next decade’s bogeyman, as additional findings emerge in 2010 that further contradict the global warming panic of 2006-9.

Interior Secretary: US needs more trees, fewer people

Carbon footprint. Photo: Samantha Jade Royds/Flickr CC

Carbon footprint. Photo: Samantha Jade Royds/Flickr CC

In Copenhagen, where world leaders are slapping the “pollutant” label on any carbon-based life-form with a nervous system, the US signals its cooperation:

“Carbon pollution is putting our world—and our way of life—in peril,” said Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar in a keynote speech at the global conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark. “By restoring ecosystems and protecting certain areas from development, the U.S. can store more carbon in ways that enhance our stewardship of land and natural resources while reducing our contribution to global warming.”

via New science estimates carbon storage potential of US lands.

Truth is, the federal government is no good steward of the environment. (In fact, it is the nation’s #1 polluter.)

And the mineral exploitation of federally-managed lands, particularly split estates, threaten to spoil water supplies for cattle ranchers, farmers and homeowners who depend on well water for their very survival.

Join the "climategate" debate at MIT today

Image: Rainmaker. Flickr/CC

One day only: MIT profs this afternoon will try to put the climate change “hoax” genie back in the bottle (click the link, below, for time and location):

Three weeks ago, thousands of emails were hacked from servers at the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. A small fraction of them address controversial issues; how to present climate data in the most favorable light and how to combat climate skeptics, among others. The responses reported in the press have ranged from these emails being a confirmation of climate change deniers' assertions that global warming is a conspiracy and a hoax, to the whole affair being a tempest in a teapot with no relevance to the reality of global warming and the need to combat it.

via MIT Global Change Program | Events.