When It Cools, It’s Natural

And when it gets hot, it can only be human induced. The absurdity just writes itself, as a new NOAA paper goes all sorts of weird climate alarmist, via Watts Up With That?

Cooler North American temperatures in 2008 resulted from a strong natural effect, and the overall warming trend that has been observed since 1970 is likely to resume, according to university and NOAA scientists.

“Our work shows that there can be cold periods, but that does not mean the end of global warming. The recent coolness was caused by transitory natural factors that temporarily masked the human-caused signal,” said Judith Perlwitz, lead author of the study and a researcher with the Cooperative Institute for Research Environmental Sciences, and NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, both in Boulder, Colo. The paper will be published Dec. 8 in Geophysical Research Letters.

Got that? When it is cool, it is nature, when it is hot, it’s mankind. And even the cool masks mankind being evil.

Digging into the paper itself

A precipitous drop in North American temperature in 2008, commingled with a decade-long fall in global mean temperatures, are generating opinions contrary to the inferences drawn from the science of climate change.We use an extensive suite of model simulations and appraise factors contributing to 2008 temperature conditions over North America. We demonstrate that the anthropogenic impact in 2008 was to warm the region’s temperatures, but that it was overwhelmed by a particularly strong bout of naturally induced cooling resulting from the continent’s sensitivity to widespread coolness of the tropical and northeastern Pacific sea surface temperatures. The implication is that the pace of North American warming is likely to resume in coming years, and that climate is unlikely embarking upon a prolonged cooling. Citation: Perlwitz, J., M. Hoerling, J. Eischeid, T. Xu, and A. Kumar (2009), A strong bout of natural cooling in 2008, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L23706, doi:10.1029/2009GL041188.

First of all, computer models. Not actual research, but, models. Garbage in/garbage out. Second of all, ROTLFOL! What a pant load.

I don’t have an issue with continued warming, it could happen, it might not. I do have an issue with this whole bullshit notion that all warming is man caused, but, cooling is natural (and covering up the man induced warming.)

“North American temperatures would have been considerably colder in 2008 had there been no human-induced warming influence present,” Perlwitz said.

The scientists conclude that the North American temperatures are likely to resume increasing again, and do not see the recent coolness as an emerging downward trend.

“Our work shows the importance of the role of natural climate variability in temporarily masking or enhancing human-induced climate change. Through diagnosis, we ensure that natural changes, when occurring, are not misunderstood to mean that climate change is either not happening or is happening more intensely than the expected human influence,” said Arun Kumar, a NOAA meteorologist and co-author.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

13 Responses to “When It Cools, It’s Natural”

  1. Otter says:

    commingled with a decade-long fall in global mean temperatures

    I guess the NOAA has no clue what the scientific definition of a trend is, eh realsick?


    They admit it, and then talk about the globe getting warmer. Just like realsick.

    Yo, real! You want us to believe you have a better understanding of the fraud- errrr, climate science, Prove it!

    Take pictures of all your certificates and awards.

    Post them to Photobucket.

    And then post the link to your pics on photbucket, here.

    In the meantime, we’ll trust the people who have been doing the real grunt work on climate change.

    And that sure as HELL doesn’t include anyone currently hyping the hyped fraud of ‘man-made’ global warming.

  2. TFMo says:

    And to kick off our Dear Leader’s trip to Copenhagen, I’ve got a three-parter (thus far) Lil’ O-Bama strip up. Apparently there’s unfinished business in the Land Of The Rising Sun!

  3. Reasic says:

    LMAO! Otter, did you see the word “trend” in there? I sure didn’t. You found a graph that supports your assertion yet?

  4. Trish says:

    OMG- do you ever give up Reasic? Seriously, if you think you can convince those of us here who are skeptics, you are barking up the wrong tree! We cannot be conned bought or brainwashed and that is that. I am even willing to say there is room for debate, not here but in real science circles; only AGW’ers won’t have any. But that indicates this; the science Is. Not. Proven.

  5. Otter says:

    He knows it isn’t proven, Trish.

    As to your question, real- Yes, I have. Several in fact, on a number of sites, such as Climate Critic, Climate Audit, C3… they are easy enough to find, why can’t you?

  6. Reasic says:


    So… there’s no debating here, but AGW’ers are the ones who “won’t have any”, and also “there IS room for debate” in “real science circles”. Right…

    You know, for a group of people who complain about “AGW’ers” being in a “religion”, you people sure don’t seem to be able to explain yourselves very well. You just seem to blindly trust and obey.

    “Go away, Reasic, so we can continue in ignorance, believing the lies and manipulations of the denialist machine!”


    In what kind of alternate universe does it make sense for the person making a claim to force the opponent to search for proof to said claim? This is like some childish game in which you’re pretending to have proof when you really don’t. If you’ve found sources, all you have to do is link them. I’m not going to waste my time looking for YOUR proof, because I know it doesn’t exist. There has been no 11 year global cooling “trend”.

    Here’s what I want to know. When will one of you kool-aid drinkers supply me with a decent explanation for why the science behind AGW is bogus?

  7. Reasic says:

    Oh, Trish. I also thought the “cannot be brainwashed” part was especially entertaining, considering that fact that you already are. You’ve obviously already been brainwashed long ago into believing that the UN is evil, that actual climate scientists are not to be trusted, all climate models are bunk, climate research is bogus, and anyone who says otherwise is “bought or brainwashed”. Generally, when one is brainwashed, they’re convinced NOT to think for themselves. That sounds a lot more like your line of reasoning to me.

  8. Trish says:

    Brainwashed, refers to the inundation by the media, the schools, the democrats, Al Gore, the Hollywood elite with their insipid commercials about dying polar bears and other untrue AGW supposed devastation, the constant BS that we hear about how the planet is being ravaged, the lack of honest debate about how to “fix” it, the little video they played at the start of the summit that was over the top on the whine factor and much much more.
    I thought that only Republicans are supposed to be fear mongers, but in fact this issue in and of itself has claimed the prize for doing its best to scare the bejeezus out of folks, and if not for some of us who refuse to allow the hype to rattle us, would seal the deal.
    But, despite their well funded attempts to get their message across, and even though we are supposed to be in the minority, polls say that Global Warming is no longer a terribly important issue in the polls.
    Listen Reasic, use your reason & logic to admit that there is a tide change acoming, and that politics is more vested in furthering the agenda, than real people are.

  9. Reasic says:


    So you don’t think arctic sea ice is disappearing? You don’t think sea ice in general is steadily decreasing? Glaciers, ice sheets, ice caps, etc., all on the decline? How about sea levels? Are they not rising?

    Forget the non-scientists that you mentioned. Forget Al Gore. He’s not a scientist, either. You’re getting bogged down in unnecessary distractions.

    I really want honest debate. I want to understand where your beef is. So, I’ll lay out for you my understanding of climate change in a simple syllogism, and you explain for me where your disagreement lies.

    1. The planet is warming.

    2. The vast majority of warming over the last 50 years has been due to increases in the atmospheric concentrations of various greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide), of which carbon dioxide has the greatest effect.

    3. Human activity is primarily responsible for the recent increases in greenhouse gases, through the combustion of fossil fuels and changes in land use.

    4. Therefore, the planet is warming largely as a result of human activity.

    Which of these points do you disagree with?

  10. Otter says:

    Teach, here’s another good site: http://www.c3headlines.com/

    They have a great deal of good information, supported by charts. Prrof that the Mideival Warm Period was warmer than today. Charts which detail the cooling of the Earth. Proof that Pacific islands are Not sinking. Links to many other sites that support the real climate situation, such as the real effects of CO2 and the response of the environment to it.

  11. Reasic says:

    Yeah! More kool-aid to drink!

  12. Otter says:

    Where did you find, realsick? sure as hell not on this site.

  13. Reasic says:

    At the link you gave.

    By the way, which of my points above do you disagree with?

Pirate's Cove