Phil Jones: Warming Not Just Based On Temperature - LOL

Yeah, I get where he's going with this. But geez. Even assuming global warming, given the Earth's history, proving it is caused my man, or anthropomorphic, is an entirely different issue that hasn't been proved at all. Freaking scam artists. They might have to get real jobs if the whole charade didn't exist.

"That the world is warming is based on a range of sources: not only temperature records but other indicators such as sea level rise, glacier retreat and less Arctic sea ice."

Comments

[unseen]

Are these people unintelligent idiots? Do they not understand that the earth has gone thru many periods of warming and cooling in its 4.5 billion years? Did they miss the big mile thick ice sheets 20,000 years ago which carved out the Great lakes? Hudson bay? The thousand of lakes in Mi? MN? southern Canada? Glaciers that melted long before man was in any way a force on the earth? We are simply in a interglacial period that started around 20,00 years ago. Most of these warming periods have lasted about 20,000 to 50,000 years and then the glaciers come back. And those glaciers stay around for 200,000- 500,000 years. So when all is said and done I HOPE we continue to live in a warming period. An ice age would destroy the human race as we know it.

These people are too stupid to understand that even if they are correct about AGW they should be placing programs to require the human population to PRODUCE MORE CO2 to save us from the threat of another ice age. Not less.

Do they not understand the same warming was seen on Mars, Venus, Neptune among other in the 90's?

Anyone with a basic understanding of geology, climatology, geography, and plate tectonics knows that there is and always will be periods of warming and cooling. Man's effect on this, if any, in the larger scheme of things is meaningless.

[crosspatch]

I am going to post some links and I hope I don't trigger a spam filter for it. But:

Sea level rise:

Satellite measurements show global sea levels have not exceeded a peak set in late 2005. Sea levels have been flat for 4 years:

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/current/sl_noib_global.jpg

Glacial retreat: overstated or maybe not even happening. Most recent case is IPCC arm waiving over Himalaya retreat that seems to be made up.

Himalaya glaciers aren't melting:

http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/himalayan-glaciers-not-melting

And neither are Greenland's:

http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/greenlands-ice-armageddon-comes-end

Arctic sea ice is an interesting case. There was a wind anomaly in 2007 that blew a huge amount of old (5+ years old) ice out into the Atlantic where it melted. Arctic ice floats on water and is not anchored on land. When wind blows from most directions, it pushes the ice cap against one of the continents (N. America or Eurasia). In 2007 the wind was such that a lot of it was blown past Greenland into the open (and much warmer) Atlantic ocean where it melted. It wasn't due to Arctic temperatures, it was due to Arctic wind direction. As a lot of old ice was lost it will take at least 5 years to rebuild the inventory of 5yo ice but it is recovering nicely. 2008 and 2009 show steady recovery during the September minimum from 2007. It takes old ice to stand up to the summer melt. Old ice is thicker and the ice is "fresher" having most of the salt "worked" out of it over the years which means it melts at a higher temperature than newer, saltier ice.

2009 is the red line.

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

It is just a repeat of the same propaganda that actually has no basis in science. I can't believe a scientist is even saying it.

[Neo]

Why I think that Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be barred from the IPCC process
Eduardo Zorita, November 2009

Short answer: because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.

[gahrie]

Quite a long post with my thoughts on global warming.

http://gahrie.blogspot.com/2009/11/some-inconvenient-truths.html