Earth has not been warming for nearly two decades, and the poles are moving opposite each other – they are supposed to move in unison. Climate models are useless.
ncep_cfsr_t2m_anom_ytd.png (1024×768)
h/t to Joe Bastardi and Tom Nelson
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- Disillusioned on Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- Ulric Lyons on “Impossible Heatwaves”
- William on Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- William on 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- czechlist on Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- arn on Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- GeologyJim on Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- Peter Carroll on New BBC Climate Expert
- Peter Carroll on New BBC Climate Expert
Too bad Jullienne is on a cruise with Greenpeace, or she could explain to us how we just don’t understand the differences in the poles and everything we see is consistent with the models and theory (one and the same) but we are just too ignorant and close minde to grasp the nuances. I really miss those well thought out, deeply informative posts.
If you believe Henrik Svensmark’s theory that it is the magnetic field of the sun that is one of the major drivers of climate (see his book The Chilling Stars), and I do, then as per his explanation, the south pole will move opposite the rest of the planet. This is just another set of confirming data for his solar magnetic field / cosmic ray / cloud formation theory, confirmed this year at CERN.
Gary, why is that?
The increase in magnetic field from the sun deflects cosmic radiation from entering the Earth’s atmosphere which results in cooler temps? Explanation sans clouds.
<>
Not according to the cosmic ray theory, which actually predicts antarctica would cool when the rest of the earth was warming.
http://amzn.to/Qn1znE
To paraphrase a certain believer: “We must rely on them because sceptics have produced nothing to replace them.”*
(c) David Appell 😉
‘Extreme weather’
Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.
http://www.nature.com/news/extreme-weather-1.11428
Show me the trend… unless you do that, you’re arguing from anecdotes… the same style of evidence used to prove the efficacy of tarot card readings, UFO’s and Big Foot.
Our star’s (interstellar magnetosphere & solar stream) varies widely over time, as does our planet’s magnetosphere, via changing core processes…
The inner & outer Van Allen belts radiation field allow seepage through the earth’s sheath, which occurs both at the poles and at the equator. The belts/radiation species also completely disappear at times and are continuously changing magnitude and shape. The varying shape of our magnetosphere is no small matter and studying the zones 6 miles to 100 miles up is as hard as drilling more than 7.1 miles deep.
It is a bit unusual that 570 degrees F has killed our attempts to get beyond the 7.1 mile depth and should we fund robotic lateral drilling (with cooling at the head) and a robotic conveyor assembly, that golden 1700 degree jackpot would be realized as a true sustainable power source for steam driven turbine electrical power…
David,
It has been a while since I read the book, but I will try to paraphrase a whole book in a paragraph or two. The short version
While the Sun’s visible light does vary a few percent, it is not enough to account for observed climate changes. And by climate change, I do not mean all this nonsense discusion over the last decade or even the last 100 years; I am talking about the history of the planet. However, the Sun’s magnetic output varies significantly (relative to the Earth) over time.
1. Sun’s magnetic field varies over time.
2. Cosmic rays, which are ubiquitous in the Universe, as they pass through Earth, are modulated not only by the Earth’s magnetic field, but also by the Sun’s.
3. A more active Sun (sunspots are a visible sign of activity) has a stronger magnetic field.
4. This stronger magnetic field repels cosmic rays of a certain energy (I call them the Goldilocks Rays as the wavelength is critical, not too hot and not too cold).
5. Phytoplankton are continuously dying in the oceans, which cover 70% of the planet, especially near the equator. When the phytoplankton die, they release H2S gas.
6. When the cosmic rays strike the H2S gas, they ionize the gas.
7. The ions serve as cloud nucleation sites. Until 1998 (I think, it was a NASA study), everyone new that small water droplets served as the nucleation sites that energized cloud growth. However, no one knew where the original nucleation sites came from.
8. The free ions now combine with water vapor (there is a LOT of it near the equator!) to form H2SO4 (sulfuric acid), which serves as the cloud nucleation site that can attract more water vapor.
9. Cloud formation is catalyzed.
10. Cloud cover modulates Earth albedo.
11. Earth albedo modulates heat absorption or reflection of the planet.
In summary:
More solar activity means more intense magnetic field which leads to lower cosmic ray flux which leads to lower cloud formation which leads to lower Earth albedo, more solar radiation absorption and a warming planet. Lower solar activity means less intense magnetic field, higher cosmic ray flux, more cloud formation, higher albedo and cooler planet.
The Little Ice Age ocurred during the Maunder Minimum (Maunder did not really discover it, but the guy who did did not have a name that sounded as nice with the word Minimum).
This theory has been confirmed either this year or last at CERN in an experiement based on Henrik Svensmark’s work, but it is hard to get the data as CERN is funded by governments who support AGW so that they can have power and control over energy. In other words, Svensmark’s work does not fit the narrative, so it is conveniently ingnored, the REAL Inconvenient Truth if you will.