Environmentalism's Berlin Wall

I wholeheartedly approve of "climate change." It happens four times a year, at least where I live, and we call it "seasons." At any rate, it is a gorgeous Spring day outside, one that should not be spent inside writin. A friend sent me some articles yesterday showing the collapse of the scientific claims behind the other kind of "climate change," which I reprint below.

"I wanted to pass along an article ("Global Warming Researchers Reverse Stance on Storm Intensity") published April 13th which reports that renowned MIT hurricane expert Kerry Emanuel has recanted his view that global warming will increase the severity of storms. Emanuel, who became a media darling after he authored the theory that global warming breeds stronger hurricanes, has released new research indicating that even in a rapidly warming world, hurricane frequency and intensity will not be substantially affected.

"In a blunt admission of the gross failure of atmospheric models, Emanuel says, 'The models are telling us something quite different from what nature seems to be telling us.'
"Several weeks ago the UN begrudgingly agreed with what climate researchers have been saying all year: global temperatures have indeed dropped, with the Earth continuing to cool throughout most of 2008. ("UN: Global Temperatures Will Decline in 2008")
"The cool spell means global temperatures have been on the decline for a full ten years, since early 1998. Not surprisingly, none of the IPCC's computer models can explain a decade of cooling.

"Another environmental researcher, physicist Miklós Zágoni, a former global warming activist and outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol, has also recently stopped calling global warming a crisis. What made him change his mind? Looking at a series of differential equations for the greenhouse effect, he noticed the solution—originally done in 1922, but still used by climate researchers today—ignored boundary conditions by assuming an 'infinitely thick' atmosphere. ("Researcher: Basic Greenhouse Equations 'Totally Wrong'")

"The correct solution, developed by Ferenc Miskolczi, an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA's Langley Research Center, contradicts runaway greenhouse theories. When Miskolczi re-derived the solution he found that as greenhouse gases rise, negative feedback predominates, forcing values back down.

"When NASA refused to release the results, Miskolczi resigned in protest, stating in his resignation letter, 'Unfortunately my working relationship with my NASA supervisors eroded to a level that I am not able to tolerate. My idea of the freedom of science cannot coexist with the recent NASA practice of handling new climate change related scientific results.'"

This is more evidence for what could be environmentalism's equivalent of the collapse of the Berlin Wall: a cooling period that so blatantly contradicts that predictions of the climate models that it causes the collapse of the global warming hysteria, discrediting the environmental movement as a whole.

By esanch36 on Apr 28, 2008, 05:43 in Off Topic.