Monday, July 20, 2009

Very old map displays warmer period than the present

Derived from the Roman warm period, the Medieval warm period or earlier? It certainly shows Antarctic coastal detail now under ice



A recently discovered and publicized ancient map of the globe disproves the theory of man-made global warming. The enormous significance of the map has only now become apparent as Congress considers sweeping legislation intended to combat global warming supposedly caused by human activity.

The map was discovered in the Library of Congress, Washington DC, in 1960 by Charles Hapgood. It was drawn by well-known French cartographer, Oronteus Finaeus, in 1531. There is no serious question about the authenticity of the map. Finaeus was a well-known scholar and was an expert in cartography, astronomy, mathematics and military weaponry. The map is based on numerous source maps, some of them going back to the time of Alexander the Great (335 BC).

One section of the map pictures the globe from the perspective of the South Pole. Antarctica is clearly shown on this map and is pictured as being largely ice-free with flowing rivers and a clean coastline. Some of the mountain ranges pictured on the map have only been recently discovered. Photographs of the map can be found on numerous websites; one such photograph appears below:

The other half of the map, which is not shown, pictures the globe from the perspective of the North Pole. Continents and islands clearly pictured on the map above include Antarctica (center), South America (lower right), Africa (lower left), Madagascar (left of center) and Australia (upper left).

There are numerous sensational features of the map-one of them being the reality that it clearly pictures Antarctica long before it was "discovered" in 1820. Also significant is the fact that Antarctica is depicted as largely free of ice, at least in the coastal areas. This means that some of the source-maps were drawn before the mile-thick ice-cap covered the continent. This is not surprising because it is well-known that when the Vikings settled Greenland in 980 AD, it too was much warmer than today. The Vikings in Greenland numbered about 5,000 by 1200AD, but as the earth cooled, the settlers died off or moved away.

The Finaeus depiction of Antarctica is extraordinarily accurate-so much so that modern cartographers are mystified as to how it could have been drawn with such amazing accuracy. The mapmaking ability of earlier people (perhaps the Phoenicians), including their abilities in mathematics and geometry, must have been far superior to what has recently been imagined.

The map demonstrates that Antarctica had been extensively explored and mapped long before it was known to the Western world. Since Antarctica was much warmer when some of the source-maps were drawn than it is today, the theory that man-made carbon dioxide emissions are the primary cause of climate change must be given up.

How can the accuracy of this map be explained? One of the earliest authorities on mapmaking was Claudius Ptolemaeus (referred to in the West as "Ptolemy") who lived from about AD 85-168. Ptolemy was a cartographer, mathematician, astronomer and geographer. He lived in Alexandria under the Roman Empire.

Ptolemy wrote a monumental work on mapmaking, Guide to Geography, also known as Geographia, in about 150 AD. Geographia was lost to most of the civilized world for more than a thousand years until it was re-discovered around 1300 AD. The book demonstrates that Mediterranean people of 2,000 years ago had the knowledge and expertise to sail far and wide and to make accurate maps of their travels.

Ptolemy's book describes longitudinal and latitudinal lines and how they are drawn. The book identifies the location of numerous geographical sites by means of those lines. The book additionally specifies how important locations can be accurately placed on maps by means of celestial observations. That is, the book explains how accurate maps can be made and how to navigate based on those maps by means of celestial navigation relying on the perceived locations of the sun, moon, planets and stars.

When Ptolemy's Geographia was translated from Greek into Latin in Western Europe in 1406, its global coordinate and navigational system revolutionized European sailing and mapmaking abilities-putting them on a previously unknown scientific basis. The knowledge Europeans gained from Ptolemy enabled them to engage in their own explosion of exploration and cartography beginning in the 15th Century.

SOURCE







This Quiet Sun

The Sun has gone back to blank after having had just one sunspot group that caused otherwise rational people to go off their heads… Here’s the magnetogram of the Sun showing precisely nothing that presages any sunspot formation:

As a comparison, here is the sun image from the Extreme ultraviolet Imaging Telescope at 304 ångstroms for today and near solar maximum in 2000 by way of comparison

Now its easy to see how quiet the Sun really is at the moment. The prominences are weak, the coronal holes are very small, the corona (the solar atmosphere) shrunken.

All of this can be seen to be normal behaviour for the Sun, except that this hiatus between Solar Cycle 23 finally winding down and the next cycle is unprecedented in nearly a hundred years. (By the way, the overuse of “unprecedented” by climate alarmists has me wincing at using it as a clich√©)

Eventually the solar cycle must return. The question is whether solar scientists gain insight into the behaviour of the Sun by understanding why their models failed (see below). The result can only be better science.

SOURCE (See the original for links, graphics etc.)






Americans need to pay for CHINESE emissions!

Another example of the folly that wrong assumptions lead to

With the U.S. secretaries of energy and commerce in China this week, much of the attention focused on the standoff over emissions reductions or small breakthroughs in clean-tech cooperation.

But yesterday, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said something amazing—U.S. consumers should pay for part of Chinese greenhouse-gas emissions. From Reuters:

“It’s important that those who consume the products being made all around the world to the benefit of America — and it’s our own consumption activity that’s causing the emission of greenhouse gases, then quite frankly Americans need to pay for that,” Commerce Secretary Gary Locke told the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai.

The idea that rich-country consumers should pick up the tab for some of China’s industrial emissions has been gaining currency lately—but not from within the Obama administration. The argument is that many of China’s factories churn out cheap stuff for the West, not for domestic consumption, so those consumers are actually responsible for the emissions. China, of course, loves the idea.

This could just be another area for trade tensions with China over the environment. The House climate bill includes a provision for mandatory “carbon tariffs” on dirty imports from countries such as China, which might be illegal under international trade law and which have riled up Beijing. President Obama and Senate leaders have frowned on hardline trade measures.

But Secretary Locke’s statement could open up a new can of worms—right when China’s actions on energy and the environment are proving so crucial to mustering support among wavering senators for the administration’s big cap-and-trade bill.

UPDATE: The Commerce Department sent this clarification late Friday:

“Secretary Locke has been very clear on emphasizing the importance of fair trade as a part of the United States’ relationship with China. He believes U.S. companies should not be disadvantaged by Chinese imports not bound by responsible policies to reduce carbon emissions. China and the US must work together to ensure a level playing field and reduce our carbon footprints. The Secretary’s trip to China demonstrated his commitment to fair trade and his belief that both the United States and China can benefit from shared investments and cooperation in clean energy that will lead to commercial and environmental benefits for both countries.”

SOURCE





More deceit from Hansen

Claim: Utah Farm Bureau CEO Randy Parker: In his latest column before this week's conference, he blasted NASA scientist James Hansen as a radical seeking to control the issue. "This is the same James Hansen who in 2008 called for trials of climate skeptics for 'high crimes against humanity.'"

Hansen Response: Hansen said Thursday in an e-mail » "I have never said any such thing about 'climate skeptics,' who, by the way, are more accurately termed 'contrarians,' as they simply state a position inconsistent with what the relevant scientific community (e.g., the National Academy of Sciences) has concluded." See here

Reality Check: UK Guardian: NASA scientist calls for putting oil firm chiefs on trial for 'high crimes against humanity' for spreading doubt about man-made global warming

June 23, 2008 Excerpt: James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer. […]In an interview with the Guardian Hansen said: "When you are in that kind of position, as the CEO of one the primary players who have been putting out misinformation even via organisations that affect what gets into school textbooks, then I think that's a crime."





Liars and the Global Warming Lies They're Telling

By Alan Caruba

It must be that the believers in “global warming” all live in caves and do not wander out to discover what is really happening on the planet. The constant and hysterical cries from the global warming crowd claim that we have merely months, weeks and days before we’re toast.

Of course, the “solution” they offer is the appalling “Cap-and-Trade” bill that the Obama gang is trying to rush through Congress. We are supposed to believe that a huge tax on all use of electricity will “solve” the peril of global warming by cutting “greenhouse gas emissions.”

We are supposed to believe it is wise policy to slow or stop the building of coal-fired or nuclear plants to generate electricity. We are supposed to believe that the vast coal, oil, and natural gas resources throughout the nation are not to be extracted to keep us warm in the coming years of cold weather or to fuel the nation’s vast fleet of cars and trucks.

For many throughout the nation and the world, a walk outside tells them a very different story. Over at ClimateDepot.com the headlines read: “Baltimore: ‘Record low temp tied, another on the way—a summer without much heat.’” And “Not so peachy: Ohio cold snap takes bite out of local peach crop.” Remember, it’s JULY.

At IceAgeNow.com you will find notices of cold spells in Peru, the coldest May in New Zealand, reports of frost in Canada, and of temperature records shattered in northern Michigan and throughout New England.

AccuWeather.com’s Chief Meteorologist, Joe Bastardi, an expert on long range forecasting, is predicting that “cooler-than-normal weather this summer in the Northeast could point to a cold, snowy winter for the Northeast and mid-Atlantic states.”

Ironically, Bastardi predicts that the cold weather will be “centered over the area from Boston to Washington, D.C.” On September 8, the “climate bill”, aka “Cap-and-Trade” is scheduled for a vote and who knows, the snow could be several feet thick in the streets outside the Capitol? Last year when protesters gathered to demand the coal-fired plant providing energy to the Capitol Building be shut down did so in a snow storm!

Is the Earth cooling? Yes and it has been for a decade. The cooling is likely to continue for several more decades and you better pray it doesn’t turn into a full-fledged new ice age because the planet is at the end of a 11,500 year interglacial period similar to previous cycles that preceded ice ages.

Bastardi attributes his forecast to factors that include “a combination of El Nino and worldwide volcanic activity over the past six to nine months” which he says “may have played a role in causing this trend.”

Not mentioned is the present inactivity of sunspots, solar storms on the Sun that has been ongoing for quite some while. For an explanation of why this is bad news relative to the planet’s overall climate, click here.

The purpose of this exercise is, of course, to point out the obvious. The climate of the Earth, wherever one happens to be is cooling and is likely to continue. That is why anyone and everyone citing “global warming” is a liar and deserves the contempt, derision, and acrimony of the Earth’s entire population.

SOURCE






HAS "REAL CLIMATE" SHIFTED?

By David Whitehouse

Something noteworthy has happened at www.realclimate.com. I've always regarded www.realclimate.com a little unfavourably, thinking that it was rather extreme and narrow minded; the AGW equivalent to the many "it's nothing to do with CO2" websites out there. The single time I posted a comment on the site - in response to an unwarranted personal criticism - it was "moderated," ie removed. But, such trivialities aside, realclimate has just posted a guest commentary by Kyle Swanson of the University of Wisconsin-Milwakee asking "has the climate recently shifted?" It raises some interesting points.

In January 2008 Realclimate posted an article partly in response to an article of mine in the New Statesman asking what the apparent flatlining of global temperatures since 2001 meant, "Has Global Warming Stopped?" I asked. Their answer was a definite no! It was backed up by a rather biased and shoddy piece of analysis using trend lines.

Late in 2008 realclimate was unimpressed with a paper in the journal Nature by Keenlyside et al that suggested the standstill in global temperature was real, possibly due to the influence of decadal oceanic variations.

So Dr Swanson's posting is interesting. It suggests that the flatline seen since 2001 is indeed real. It is suggested that a "break" has occurred in the Earth's climate from the warming seen between 1976/7 - 2001-2 (I could argue slightly with those figures believing that 1980-1996 is more accurate). (Bear in mind that since Realcimate dismissed the whole notion of a standstill there has only been one annual temperature data point added to the record.)

While the media, commentators, pressure groups, past and present government advisors and many scientists keep telling us that the "science is settled" Dr Swanson clearly doesn't think so. Regarding the relative importance of CO2 forcing and natural variability he says "significant issues remain to be resolved about their relative importance." Swanson reckons that we are not seeing a global cooling but a "pause in warming." But I maintain there is another way to look at the data.

Swanson says that global warming will recommence around 2020. Given that the recent global warming fuss is the result of the 1980 - 1996 warming spell it could be argued that rather than the post 2001 standstill being anomalous the 1980 - 1996 period should be awarded that status.

Swanson believes that the super-El Nino of 1998 forced the Earth's climate to change mode, "something extraordinary happened to the climate system in response to the 1997-98 super el nino," he says. It will take me a while to digest fully Swanson's arguments but in essence he says that the Earth has to dissipate the extra energy introduced by the super el nino and that until this is done long-term global warming will be paused. The way the earth gets rid of this extra energy is by getting colder in a way that overwhelms the AGW increase!

Swanson adds that there is no guarantee as to how the climate may respond. In doing so he emphasises that in this cutting-edge aspect of climate science - the interpretation of the bedrock raw real-world data - this is all hypothesis, speculation and in many cases wishful thinking. Remember that when you are told by the media that "the science is settled." Such a debate taking place in Realclimate.com demonstrates that the science is far from settled and never has been.

In essence what we have here is a standstill in global temperature that is real but according to the 'consensus' the computer models predict it will be temporary and warming will resume. The fact that those self-same computer models in which faith is put failed to predict the standstill in the first place is often ignored as an inconvenient truth as it shows the ludicrous nature of the circular and illogical argument and conclusion.

The standstill in earth's climate is obvious and pronounced in the Met Office's HadCRUT3 data set, though the Met Office denies its reality. Personally I hope they change their view as I think their own data warrants it and that they will start describing the data not spinning it.

SOURCE

Comment on the above from F. James Cripwell [jim_jill@ncf.ca]

I find it interesting that we have had a succession of forecasts of global temperatures not rising. First there was Smith in Science, with temperatures increasing after 2009; then Keenleyside in Nature, with the rise after 2015; now with have Swanson delaying this until 2020. Note that none of the models forecast any fall in global temperatures.

The Smith model seems to have the quaint idea, that if you adjust the fudge factors, and hindcast the data, this gives magical powers to the computer code, and allows accurate forecasts to be made. So far as I am aware, the only way to successfully validate a model, is to establish a history of accurate forecasts. However, it is clear that not all three forecasts can be correct. The first that will come under scrutiny, will be the Smith model. The UK Met Office puts out a forecast each January as to what the expected temperature is going to be for the year. They have been using the Smith model in recent years. This forecasts that half the years after 2009 will be warmer than 1998. What will the Met Office do in January 2010?

There are all sorts of possibilities, one of which would be to admit that the Smith model is just plain wrong, and abandon it’s use. It is not long to wait.

***************************************

For more postings from me, see DISSECTING LEFTISM, TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here. For readers in China or for times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site here.

*****************************************

No comments: