You knew it was coming. It was only a matter of time. Al Gore is working on a sequel to his 2006 eco-ganda film "An Inconvenient Truth," which will be called "The Path to Survival" and released on April 22, 2008, otherwise known as Earth Day.
No doubt we can expect yet another scientifically inaccurate polemic, full of bullshit and ridiculously exaggerated claims. I would be barely able contain my boredom, except that our evil fucking leaders will no doubt be queuing up to spend our money on the bloody thing, so that they may glean new ideas of ways to control us.
No doubt Mr Gore will recommend that we all return to the Dark Ages and start wearing sackcloth and ashes. But he may not get such an easy ride this time because the whole thing is starting to unravel, not least in the fact that the trend is already towards cooling.
In January 2007, we were informed that 2007 was either likely or certain to surpass 1998 and become the world's warmest year on record by most media, including:Reuters
AP & Foxnews
The New York Times
The New York Sun
The Washington Post
China People Daily
as well as virtually all other media you know. They justified this statement by referring to scientists who have combined greenhouse gases with the observed El Nino. Many sources, such as the New York Sun, even gave you the probability that 2007 would be the hottest year as 60 percent. They immediately added that this should "add momentum for the next phase of the Kyoto protocol", a comment that clarifies what is the actual goal of many of the people who study these questions professionally.
Now, you know that I am going to call "bullshit" on this one, but to what extent?
However, the greenhouse gases are not too important and El Nino was replaced by La Nina. As a consequence, RSS MSU data for the lower troposphere (graph, more graphs) show that 2007 was the coldest year in this century so far. In alarmist jargon, it was the ninth hottest year on record: the most recent year was cooler than all other years in this century as well as 1998 (by a whopping 0.41 °C) and even 1995. According to different datasets (HadCRUT3, UAH MSU, NOAA), the year is going to be approximately the 8th (HadCRUT3) or 7th (NOAA) or 6th warmest year. UAH might report 2007 as the 4th warmest year and GISS will be a real exception because 2007 will be almost certainly its 2nd warmest year (as James Hansen [PDF] said a few weeks ago, after 2005 but slightly above 1998) - but it is still very far from the hype about the hottest year. Your humble correspondent is not the only one who believes that the satellite measurements such as RSS, UAH are more accurate than GISS, HadCRUT3. It just happens that HadCRUT3 is closer to RSS than UAH to RSS, as far as the recent rankings go.
The RSS MSU linear trend extracted from the 1998-2007 interval is -0.48 °C per century of cooling! Numerically, it's almost the same trend that we assign to the 20th century but with the opposite sign. The RSS MSU data imply that 2007 was 0.12 °C cooler than the already cool year 2006. Other teams will generate qualitatively compatible results but substantially different numbers, raising doubts about the reliability of the temperature measurement even in the modern era.
So, essentially, what we are concluding here is that 2007—far from being the hottest year yet—was, in fact, the coldest year this century.
Do you expect the media listed above to apologize for the misinformation they have printed? Do you think they will tell their readers and audiences that they have made a mistake and reported scientifically unreliable and unlikely propaganda created by political activists and hacks such as Phil Jones? Do you think that they will promise us that they will be more careful in the future and avoid this kind of hype? If you do, you haven't understood what religious bigotry and special interests really mean. Most of these people are either lunatics who pay no attention whatsoever to reality, the actual data, or serious science, or corrupt people who greatly benefit from this big-scale misinformation and propaganda.
Quite so: the vested interests will continue to lie and obfuscate because otherwise, amongst other things, they won't get their grant money. But how are these idiot fucking alarmists going to deal with this temperature drop?
Phil Jones et al. now forecast 2008 to be even cooler than 2007 (sanely, due to La Nina that will strongly affect at least the 4 following months) but they present this prediction as perfectly compatible with "underlying global warming" that is not "waning" in any way, despite the observed cooling. It seems obvious that the mysterious "underlying" numbers are more important for them than the numbers that are being actually measured.
Now they bravely forecast that 2008 will be in the "top ten" of the warmest years.
Yes, that's right: despite the very definite cooling trend since 1998, the data still supports global warming.
Really? Fucking how, exactly?