jump to navigation

Obama Climate Change Advisers Holdren and Lubchenco Are Told Global Warming Is Over Time to Prepare the US for the New Cold Era January 11, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Global Cooling.
Tags: , , ,
trackback

Obama Climate Change Advisers Holdren and Lubchenco Are Told Global Warming Is Over
Time to Prepare the US for the New Cold Era

From the Space and Science Research Center, January 8, 2009

The Space and Science Research Center (SSRC), today releases a letter mailed on January 1, 2009 to President-elect Barrack Obama’s nominated science adviser Dr. John Holdren and nominated NOAA administrator Dr. Jane Lubchenco clearly stating that “…global warming is over; a new cold climate has arrived.”

In this letter, SSRC Director John Casey calls on Dr. Holdren to immediately reverse course on global warming programs and start preparing the country for the next climate change. Since the early 2007 discovery of the solar cycles that according to Casey drive our climate over a period of about 200 years, he and later the SSRC have been on a mission to get the word out to government leaders and media representatives in order to prepare the US for the coming bitter cold era.

In explaining the reason for this first press release of 2009, Mr. Casey says,” There can no longer be any doubt that the Sun has entered an historic period of dramatically reduced activity which will bring us many long years of deep cold weather. This was predicted by me and a few other scientists around the globe but of course we were not taken seriously because of the politics of global warming and the refusal of many media outlets to print or telecast alternatives to the now discredited man made global warming concept. According to national and international sources that monitor the Sun, what is happening on and in the Sun is nothing short of record setting, astounding, and at the same time worrisome. The solar wind is at its lowest level in fifty years. The surface movement on the Sun has slowed to record rates and according to NASA’s previous announcements is ‘off the bottom of the charts.’ Most telling is the current prolonged lack of sunspots between the normal 11 year solar cycles 23 and 24 which is about to set a one hundred year record for time without sunspots. NASA also has long since forecast that cycle 25 will be ‘one of the weakest in centuries.” All of these events in combination leave little doubt that a ‘solar hibernation’ lasting several decades delivering the coldest weather in over two centuries has in fact arrived.”

In its last press release of 2008, the SSRC had warned President-elect Obama in its sternest language to date, of the coming cold and genuine apprehension about climate change campaign promises and recent appointments. The release expressed that such actions in support of anthropogenic global warming would create a punitive and restrictive atmosphere for scientists who oppose the belief that greenhouse gas emissions were the primary agents of climate change and that the ill-effects of the new cold weather without government assistance and preparation, would lead to a ‘worst case scenario’ for the American people.

Director Casey repeated his long standing position on the next climate change with the comment, “The longer we delay the necessary nation-wide preparations for the coming cold era the more difficult it will be. If the extremist rhetoric of man made climate change advocacy takes hold in the Obama administration which at this point is at fever pitch, then the stage will be set for the new cold climate to catch us completely off guard and unprepared. This will cause many Americans to suffer needlessly.”

He added further, “The Earth has been in a long term cooling trend technically for eleven years. The significant drop in global temperatures that also occurred between January 2007 and much of 2008 should have been enough for most observers to finally accept that global warming is over, except that this information was intentionally not passed on to the American people. Also and unfortunately, the Presidential campaign where both major parties continued to beat the drum of global warming and man made climate change only helped to cement in the flawed concept that mankind was more powerful and had more influence on the Earth’s climate than the Sun itself. This unbelievable idea has been pushed heavily by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This and the previous press release are intended to be no nonsense, to the point pleadings for some sanity in our government and the main stream media that have failed to accept the new climate reality. Specifically, it was the Sun and not man that caused the past twenty years of peak heating and it is the same Sun that through a dramatic decline in its activity will now bring us decades of extreme cold climate.”

In a closing statement Casey reiterated, “The global warming of the past decades was caused by the Sun. It is now over. It will not return based upon the SSRC’s research, for at least thirty years. It will then return only because the Sun’s repeating cycles of activity are scheduled to pick up again at that time. We should not waste another minute, another penny in controlling something that simply does not exist, namely man made climate change and global warming. It is essential for the welfare of all Americans if not the world, that in light of these new and startling changes in the Earth’s temperature and the profound changes in the Sun, that the next administration initiate a top-down review and redirection of climate change policy as soon as President Obama takes office.”

Letter to Dr. Holdren

Press Release SSRC 1-2008

Press Release SSRC 2-2008

Press Release SSRC 3-2008

Press Release SSRC 4-2008

Press Release SSRC 5-2008

Comments»

1. Dash RIPROCK - January 11, 2009

Al Gore very recently said that the northern polar ice cap will be completely gone in five years. To view the video, visit my site and click on the picture of Al Gore holding up five fingers.

http://www.hootervillegazette.com

It seems like a rather risky prediction on his part. In five years, if it doesn’t happen, he’ll either have to admit he was wrong or take credit for saving the planet. Hmmmmmmmm, I wonder which one he’ll do???

2. Tuukka Simonen - January 12, 2009

SSRC has nothing to do with real science, it’s just a lobby: http://issuepedia.org/Space_and_Science_Research_Center

Also, the main guy John L. Casey is a space shuttle engineer with no background in climate science.

3. honestclimate - January 12, 2009

Dear Tuukka Simonen

The IPCC has nothing to do with real science, it’s just a political body.

Also, the main guy Rajendra Pachauri is an engineer and economist with no background in climate science.

4. Francis Tucker Manns - January 12, 2009

Probably no cooler than the 50s, but, keeping in mind that windmills are hazardous to birds, be wary of the unintended consequences of believing and contributing to the all-knowing environmental lobby groups.
Water vapour is the most important green house gas followed by methane. The third important greenhouse gas is CO2, and it does not correlate well with global warming or cooling either; in fact, CO2 in the atmosphere trails warming which is clear natural evidence for its well-studied inverse solubility in water: CO2 dissolves in cold water and bubbles out of warm water. The equilibrium in seawater is very high, making seawater a great ‘sink’; CO2 is 34 times more soluble in water than air is soluble in water.
Correlation is not causation to be sure. The causation has been studied, however, and while the radiation from the sun varies only in the fourth decimal place, the magnetism is awesome.
“Using a box of air in a Copenhagen lab, physicists traced the growth of clusters of molecules of the kind that build cloud condensation nuclei. These are specks of sulphuric acid on which cloud droplets form. High-energy particles driven through the laboratory ceiling by exploded stars far away in the Galaxy – the cosmic rays – liberate electrons in the air, which help the molecular clusters to form much faster than climate scientists have modeled in the atmosphere. That may explain the link between cosmic rays, cloudiness and climate change.”
As I understand it, the hypothesis of the Danish National Space Center goes as follows:
Quiet sun → reduced magnetic and thermal flux = reduced solar wind → geomagnetic shield drops → galactic cosmic ray flux → more low-level clouds and more snow → more albedo effect (more heat reflected) → colder climate
Active sun → enhanced magnetic and thermal flux = solar wind → geomagnetic shield response → less low-level clouds → less albedo (less heat reflected) → warmer climate
That is how the bulk of climate change might work, coupled with (modulated by) sunspot peak frequency there are cycles of global warming and cooling like waves in the ocean. When the waves are closely spaced, the planets warm; when the waves are spaced farther apart, the planets cool.
The ultimate cause of the solar magnetic cycle may be cyclicity in the Sun-Jupiter centre of gravity. We await more on that. In addition, although the post 60s warming period is over, it has allowed the principal green house gas, water vapour, to kick in with humidity, clouds, rain and snow depending on where you live to provide the negative feedback that scientists use to explain the existence of complex life on Earth for 550 million years. The planet heats and cools naturally and our gasses are the thermostat.
Check the web site of the Danish National Space Center.
http://www.space.dtu.dk/English/Research/Research_divisions/Sun_Climate/Experiments_SC/SKY.aspx

5. Spaceand Science Research Center - January 12, 2009

The previously transmitted letter or reference to the web site press release regarding Dr.John Holdren at http://www.spaceandscience.net/id16.html
has been edited because of a misspelling.
Please see corrected version.

Apologies,

SSRC

6. honestclimate - January 12, 2009

SSRC, I’ve updated the post.

7. Tuukka Simonen - January 13, 2009

“Dear Tuukka Simonen

The IPCC has nothing to do with real science, it’s just a political body.

Also, the main guy Rajendra Pachauri is an engineer and economist with no background in climate science.”

Every major national academy of sciences, every major scientifical organization and overwhelming amount of peer-reviewed science are behind IPCC. Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

There are very few scientific articles which reject the viewpoint of the IPCC, as well as there are only a few climate scientists who reject the viewpoint of the IPCC.

John L. Casey himself IS a large part of the SSRC. As far as I know there are only TWO employees in his lobby! Pachauri on the other hand is just a chair and he doesn’t do the science part in the IPCC. He does the chairing thing and he is there because he is a good chairman, not because he knows detailed parts of all the scientific work the IPCC has done..

8. honestclimate - January 14, 2009

Dear Tuukka Simonen

“There are very few scientific articles which reject the viewpoint of the IPCC, as well as there are only a few climate scientists who reject the viewpoint of the IPCC.”
-Nope, there are many, many, many scientists who reject the viewpoint of the IPCC and the list is growing by the day as the globe continues to cool.

“John L. Casey himself IS a large part of the SSRC. As far as I know there are only TWO employees in his lobby!”
– I don’t understand this comment, please explain what this has to do with the science.

“Pachauri on the other hand is just a chair and he doesn’t do the science part in the IPCC. He does the chairing thing and he is there because he is a good chairman”
-Nope, he most certainly isn’t a good chair. Calling those who question the man-made global warming theory flat earthers isn’t what a good chair would do. That sort of behaviour belongs in the playground, not in science…

9. Tuukka Simonen - January 15, 2009

There are a couple of hundred climate scientists globally who reject the viewpoint of the IPCC and most of them don’t publish their opinions on their papers (which usually are of neutral viewpoint). The list is not growing and the globe is not cooling. The current decade has been easily the warmest since the beginning of measurements.

SSRC is a lobby of 3 people whose climate opinions are endorsed by zero scientific organizations. I could start a lobby like that myself with similar credentials! But I would not expect that anyone would pay any attention to my lobby since it would lack all the essential credentials such as scientifical peer-reviewed publications. IPCC is an institution of the UN and it is endorsed by virtually every large scientific community in the world.

At to a certain degree I agree with Pachauri since if someone really disagrees with the scientific fact that humans are causing global warming (at least some), then you really have to be blind to the facts.

Being sceptical is the most important thing as a scientist. However, being sceptical only to one of the viewpoints in utterly non-scientific. The science that the “sceptics” are based their viewpoints on is weak and does not scientifically explain the current climate change.

10. honestclimate - January 15, 2009

Dear Tuukka Simonen

“There are a couple of hundred climate scientists globally who reject the viewpoint of the IPCC and most of them don’t publish their opinions on their papers (which usually are of neutral viewpoint). The list is not growing and the globe is not cooling”
– You say the list isn’t growing? Are you for real?
– You say the globe isn’t cooling? Well all those record cold and snow records being broken left right and centre tell us otherwise.
-Funny how record c02 is no match for record cold and snow.

“At to a certain degree I agree with Pachauri since if someone really disagrees with the scientific fact that humans are causing global warming (at least some), then you really have to be blind to the facts.”
– The head of the IPCC calling other scientists flat earthers is childish and downright immature. It says a lot about the science when the head of the IPCC behaves like that. I guess with the globe cooling the best form of defence is attack!

11. Tuukka Simonen - January 18, 2009

The list includes mostly people who have been known skeptics for many many years and the people on those lists do not agree with each other in just about anything. Many of them are aware of that rising CO2 levels do cause warming but they don’t see it as a threat. The amount of people in those lists is still really small. For example the scientific organizations under AAAS consists of 10 MILLION members. There are more than 120 000 direct members of AAAS.

It is NOT record cold and the amount of snow doesn’t tell you anything about the temperature. It tells you about the amount of precipitation in winter.

Record CO2 has made this decade easily the warmest on record. Yearly fluctuations easily outnumber the warming caused by CO2 if you look at the yearly temperatures of a single decade. But if you look at the decadal temperatures, you’ll easily see that the globe is warming and physical evidence shows that it is because of CO2 and other radiative forcing agents identified by the IPCC.

You can check ANY temperature record and you’ll see that if you look at longer timescale they all show significant warming.

There’s a new thread by [Link removed, stick to the science, not websites which engage in ad hominem attacks, pls]

12. honestclimate - January 18, 2009

Dear Tuukka Simonen

The list of skeptics is growing, you can deny it all you like, but it won’t change it.

We have not had a record hot year since 1998. Clearly something else has been driving the climate.

P.S. Quoting from Tamino does nothing for your cause. I challenge you to quote from a scientific website that doesn’t engage in ad hominem attacks.

13. david brown - February 19, 2011

2010 tied with 1998 as the hottest year on record. the earth continues to warm


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: