Tuesday, January 11, 2011

TIME magazine's global warming

TIME magazine is among the loudest alarmist media around the world. Like this cover story. When ice cover in the Arctic goes down, a phenomenon that happens every year and reaches its lowest level of around 4 million sq. kms. during September to October, we should be worried. When Arctic ice recovers a few months after, reaching its peak of around 14 million sq. kms. of ice during March to April every year, either TIME and other warming fanatics are silent or they will say that we should be worried still, as more ice is still part of global warming.

See for instance how they explain the 3 consecutive severe winter in Europe and North America -- lack of ice in the Arctic due to global warming causes a "blocking" of the warm jetstream, so that very cold Arctic wind blows to the south. More cold is due to global warming. Nice logic.

Here is a satellite picture of Arctic ice as of the other day, January 9, 2010. Data is from http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/. Is this a picture of an "ever-melting Arctic ice" that many warming fanatics propagate?

Another front cover by TIME. Its lead warming author, Bryan Walsh, gives the lead story, "How to win the war on global warming." Man-made warming, unequivocal warming, unstoppable climate change, global climate disruption. The terms evolve but the central goal remains the same: global ecological central planning.

Mr. Walsh produced another headline-hugging article, Climate: Unstoppable Global Warming
Posted by Bryan Walsh Monday, January 10, 2011 at 5:32 pm

two papers published over the weekend in Nature Geoscience show that the very length of climatological time can frustrate our efforts to slow global warming—assuming we can begin to do that. In one paper, a group of Canadian researchers decided to see how the climate system might react over the next hundreds of years if greenhouse gas emissions kept rising to a high level until 2100, and then were zeroed out....

by the year 3000 half the CO2 emitted into the atmosphere before 2100 would still be there, and global average temperatures that rose by some 3.5 C would as we kept emitting greenhouse gases would stay roughly at that level, even after the emissions ended. But that's just the global average—Antarctica would become much hotter, adding an additional 9 C after 2100.

We have to wait 1,000 years, or 1 million years, for it to happen. Meanwhile, we should remain worried and scared.

For us in East Asia, here's the latest sea surface temperature (SST) anomaly of Pacific Ocean's Nino region 4, the area closest to us. Data as of January 9, 2010. The ocean remains at 1 to 1.3 C
colder than normal, for the past four months or more. Data is from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/indices.shtml

Terrible global warming.

No comments: