Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Sorry Deniers, There's No Such Thing as 'Global Cooling'

Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet at 11:15 AM on October 28, 2009.


An AP reporter takes the hot air out of deniers' sails.
lohanheadshotmedium
Tara Lohan is a senior editor at AlterNet.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

The latest plot by some global warming deniers is to push a bogus 'theory' that the earth is actually cooling, instead of warming. But the AP's Seth Borenstein took the hot air out of their sails. In his recent story, Borenstein explains that the AP gave temperature data to four independent statisticians to see what kinds of trends they found. "The experts found no true temperature declines over time," he reports. Instead, they found "a distinct decades-long upward trend," which of course has been backed up by the world's leading scientists for years.

So who's behind the global cooling charade? You may be surprised. The BBC recently ran a poorly researched news story and so did the New York Times' Andrew Revkin. But the most attention lately has come from the new book, Super Freakonomics: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance, by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. The authors wrote, "Then there's this little-discussed fact about global warming: While the drumbeat of doom has grown louder over the past several years, the average global temperature during that time has in fact decreased."

Since publication one of the authors has tried to explain that they were really just being ironic -- and they don't actually believe in so-called 'global cooling.' But the book is so rife with scientific errors (as Joe Romm explains in great detail) that their 'irony' just isn't a valid excuse.

Borenstein points to a better explanation from a climate scientist at the DOE's Lawrence Livermore Labs, who said it was "'a concerted strategy to obfuscate and generate confusion in the minds of the public and policymakers' ahead of international climate talks in December in Copenhagen."

Good thing that reporters like Seth Borenstein are still doing their job and actually reporting on the science. The last thing we need before Copenhagen is more media misinformation.

 

Digg!

Tagged as: climate change, globa warming, global cooling, deniers

Tara Lohan is a senior editor at AlterNet.


Buying Sarah Palin's Book Will Help Save Wolves?
There's one good thing about it...
Post by Tana Ganeva. November 18, 2009.
Sorry Monsanto, You're Wrong: More GE Crops Mean More Pesticides
When do we get to officially call the "green revolution" an environmental nightmare?
Post by Tara Lohan. November 17, 2009.
Under Pressure From Tea Party Activists, Charleston GOP Censures Lindsey Graham For Bipartisanship
Part of the fury from the right against Graham is being spurred by the oil and coal industry.
Post by Lee Fang. November 11, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Tools: [Post a new comment] [Login] [Signup] View:
Global Warming is Now Global Cooling, and you are stupid and ignorant if you buy the Hoax.
Posted by: dullly on Oct 28, 2009 11:50 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.

www.dailytech.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» LoL good one! Posted by: civilsavage
» Doc, you missed a big decrease Posted by: ChicagoWay
» absolutely incorrect Posted by: Drclaw
» What's incorrect, Doc Posted by: ChicagoWay
» RE: What's incorrect, Doc Posted by: Drclaw
» Chill Davy.... Posted by: ChicagoWay
Is the natural state of the planet "Ice Age"???
Posted by: dingham on Oct 28, 2009 12:42 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I believe it is. However, lets just look at reducing carbon emissions as a way to save us consumers some serious money. If carbon goes down alongside reduced use of fossil fuels isn't that a win/win?
I think the cap and trade plan is insane, Goldman Sachs has already setup a carbon commodity trade system, with futures and derivatives and such. Next bubble I'd bet!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Carbon tax is the way Posted by: Changling
» Try again Posted by: ChicagoWay
Actually we are cooling a bit because of the sunspot cycle.
Posted by: Rod on Oct 28, 2009 1:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because of the suns recent extra long Sunspot minimum, the solar output of light and heat is down a bit, like 1 or 2%. When the sunspots reappear, and they appear to be beginning to so that now, expect the global warming to ramp up. Then the methane boils out of the permafrost, and we get really toasty. Hopefully we do survive, but at what population level?

Rod

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

are you fucken kidding.. its col' outside!!...
Posted by: Annapurna1 on Oct 28, 2009 8:49 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
after the chilly summer in the northeast..its kind of hard for me to believe in "global warming"...right now im more inclined to believe that the opposite is true and that we really are at the beginning of a new ice age...if thats so..then maybe we can stop it with (drum roll) more greenhouse gases...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Denial is but a symptom, and YOU have the symptoms.
Posted by: jdlark on Oct 29, 2009 4:39 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is it that you believe I am the "denier"? Can you honestly evaluate opposing views without your close-minded approach. There are credible voices against this so called science everywhere. Will you listen to any? Obviously there are plenty of valid points and theories you deny. Are they all totally implausible? Personally, I would sooner follow my grandchild's guesses than I would the insane ravings of the likes of Al Gore. Consider the motivations of those who would take our freedoms around the world by controlling our behavior. Wake up man!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Consider the Connection
Posted by: CTC123 on Oct 29, 2009 5:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Denial Vs. Action
SEE NO CLIMATE
HEAR NO CLIMATE
SPEAK NO CLIMATE
DENIAL (-)___R___(+) ACTION
The choice is ours.
The Earth is in the balance!!!
Search 4 me:
CTC123GREEN
& www.politicalbase.com/CTC123GREEN
Great article Tara Lohan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There used to be a British comedy show
Posted by: willymack on Oct 29, 2009 11:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Called "The Two Ronnies".
They were both hilarious, either singly, or together. One of them sat on a stool and told the following joke:
Momma Polar Bear: "Yes, you're a polar bear. Why do you ask?"
Baby Polar Bear: "Because I'm freezing my bloody arse off!"
There IS a difference between weather and climate, folks. There really is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

either way.
Posted by: IRIQUOIS227 on Oct 29, 2009 1:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What difference does it make. New ice age, or climate warming. Either way, the human race loses, and we damned well deserve it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here we go again
Posted by: FreeAmerica on Oct 29, 2009 2:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Words, like statistics, are easily manipulated, as we see above. I am all for being cleaner, but I loathe being bullshitted for the cause. Some points..

1) If the multi-decade cooling periods in the last century are insignificant, then most certainly the decade of great warming, 1990-2000, would be statistical noise as well. Filtering for noise 30 years or more takes away the big jump on the way to 97-98 and the big El Nino. Oops, no big warming trend, no crisis, shriveling funding, lost cause.

2) Since the peak temperature in 98, there is a slight cooling trend. Equally cherry picked to have the time frame start in the (cold) 70s would show a big rise. It is all in the temporal perspective. For the last decade, temps are down slightly. The current global temp anomaly is at 0.42ÂșC. Nothing that has been presented is outside of our climatology.

3) More of interest, we have a negative PDO and a solar minimum. We are nearing the end of an interglacial, we are past due for a Bond Event, and a 'you are here' looking at the Volstok ice cores brings an oh shit moment. You guys really should study climate a little before cocking off about it or trying to turbofuck the world economy for no obvious gain.

3) Lead by example. When you can say how well the new gen solar has been working for you, you might have a valid opinion. Otherwise it is repeating propaganda in a wonderfully ovine fashion.

At the moment solar isn't up to the job that I need it for, and financially it is a non-starter. Believe me I looked. Even for a DIY guy it is still 20-30G plus battery and regulator/inverter repairs. Wind is only slightly better.

You might think you know better, but no.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You can lead a horse to water ...
Posted by: monkeywrench on Oct 29, 2009 9:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Good thing that reporters like Seth Borenstein are still doing their job and actually reporting on the science. The last thing we need before Copenhagen is more media misinformation."
. . . . .

Yes, it is. Now, if we could just educate the population well enough so that they would turn off Rush and Sean, et al., pull their noses out of pop culture for awhile, and actually READ, let alone understand, the science.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]