Global warming … it’s not warming and now its not global.

When the Kyoto treaty died at the end of last year there remained one fig leaf to hide its demise: that there was still an international agreement to destroy economies by carbon tax. Or to be precise: there was an agreement between the EU and associated countries (like those wanting to join) … and Australia.

Now that very soon after the new Australian government took office we have heard plans to close 33 climate change schemes run by seven departments, it can only be a matter of time before Australia like New Zealand, Canada, India, South Africa and the USA announce that it too is opting out of the “international” treaty on climate.

And how can anyone support action to “tackle global warming”, when the world stopped warming by its own devices over a decade ago?

When Australia ditches any replacement to Kyoto, the Global Warming scam is dead. Just as there is no warming, it is now absolutely clear there is no international agreement: no global consensus.

This entry was posted in climate. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Global warming … it’s not warming and now its not global.

  1. For a post showing how English Scientists got the UK in such a mess and for an estimate of the coming cooling see

  2. not only now, GLOBAL warmings were never global – GLOBAL coolings were NEVER global either

  3. Dan Pangburn says:

    Average global temperature history since 1975 is like a hill. We went up the hill from 1975 to 2001 where the average global temperature trend reached a plateau (per the average of the five government agencies that publicly report average global temperature anomalies). The average global temperature trend since 2001 has been flat to slightly declining but is on the plateau at the top of the hill. Claiming that the hill is highest at its top is not very profound. The temperature trend has started to decline but the decline will be slow; about 0.1 K per decade for the planet, approximately twice that fast for land areas.

    A licensed mechanical engineer (retired) who has been researching this issue (unfunded) for 6 years, and in the process discovered what actually caused global warming and why it ended, has four papers on the web that you may find of interest. They provide some eye-opening insight on the cause of change to average global temperature and why it has stopped warming. The papers are straight-forward calculations (not just theory) using readily available data up to May, 2013. (data through July made no significant difference)

    The first one is ‘Global warming made simple’ at It shows, with simple thermal radiation calculations, how a tiny change in the amount of low-altitude clouds could account for half of the average global temperature change in the 20th century, and what could have caused that tiny cloud change. (The other half of the temperature change is from net average natural ocean oscillation which is dominated by the PDO)

    The second paper is ‘Natural Climate change has been hiding in plain sight’ at . This paper presents a simple equation that, using a single external forcing, calculates average global temperatures since they have been accurately measured world wide (about 1895) with an accuracy of 90%, irrespective of whether the influence of CO2 is included or not. The equation uses a proxy which is the time-integral of sunspot numbers (the external forcing). A graph is included which shows the calculated trajectory overlaid on measurements.

    Change to the level of atmospheric CO2 has had no significant effect on average global temperature.

    The time-integral of sunspot numbers since 1610 which is shown at corroborates the significance of this factor.

    A third paper, ‘The End of Global Warming’ at expands recent (since 1996) measurements and includes a graph showing the growing separation between the rising CO2 and not-rising average global temperature.

    The fourth paper exposes some of the mistakes that have been made by the ‘Consensus’ and the IPCC

    • interesting you mention the retired engineer. There seems to be something about the way engineers look at this issue which causes them to be sceptical. But it is very complicated.

      • Dan Pangburn says:

        Perhaps near the surface is the observation that the work of most engineers is tested in the marketplace (or in my case, on the launch pad or in orbit) instead of by a consensus of like-thinkers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s