Global sea temperatures continue to plunge


Wave goodbye to El Niño, say hello to La Niña and widespread cooling, as Dr Roy Spencer reports:

Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) measured by the AMSR-E instrument on NASA’s Aqua satellite continue their plunge as a predicted La Nina approaches. The following plot, updated through yesterday (June 17, 2010) shows that the cooling in the Nino34 region in the tropical east Pacific is well ahead of the cooling in the global average SST, something we did not see during the 2007-08 La Nina event:

And Dr Spencer’s conclusion is timely:

At this pace of cooling, I suspect that the second half of 2010 could ruin the chances of getting a record high global temperature for this year. Oh, darn.

Read it here.

ABC: sea temperature alarmism


Nothing alarmist here

They can bore us with as much evidence of warming as they like – the point is, it still doesn’t make the link to human emissions. But Radio Australia hits pay dirt with John Lyman, an interviewee who gives them all the alarmism they need in a piece about sea temperatures:

JOHN LYMAN: We can see with that uncertainty that there has definitely been significant warming, that warming as a signal is six times larger than the uncertainty we measured.

TIMOTHY MCDONALD: John Lyman says oceanic warming is in the order of 0.16 of a degree Celsius. He says that might not sound like much but it’s actually very significant.

JOHN LYMAN: Five-hundred 100-watt light bulbs per person on earth burning continuously – that would be the trend we’ve seen over the last 16 years just being sucked up by the ocean.

But I like to think of it in units of bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and that would be over about 16 years two billion of those bombs. So it’s a heroic job the ocean does sucking up that signal at the top of the atmosphere. (source)

Gee, sounds scary. But now for some sanity from Dr Roy Spencer:

Being a believer in natural, internal cycles in the climate system, I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that global-average SSTs will plunge over the next couple of months. Based upon past experience, it will take a month or two for our (UAH) tropospheric temperatures to then follow suit.

SSTs heading south as El Nino fades

Read it here.

More Barrier Reef scaremongering


Dangerously rapid warming, as you can see

Dangerously rapid warming, as you can see

Whenever things are a bit slow, and the alarmists are a bit desperate, they throw in a story about some cuddly creature becoming extinct, koalas or possums or polar bears, or in default, that great Aussie icon, the Barrier Reef. So here we go again, with the same ol’ same ol’ story rehashed and spun slightly differently:

THE Great Barrier Reef has only a 50 per cent chance of survival if global CO2 emissions are not reduced at least 25 per cent by 2020, a coalition of Australia’s top reef and climate scientists said today.

The 13 scientists said even deeper cuts of up to 90 per cent by 2050 would necessary if the reef was to survive future coral bleaching and coral death caused by rising ocean temperatures.

We’ve seen the evidence with our own eyes. Climate change is already impacting the Great Barrier Reef,” Terry Hughes, director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University, said in a briefing to MPs.

Australia is one of the world’s biggest CO2 emitters per capita [What relevance is that? We produce less than 1.5% of global emissions – Ed], but has only pledged to cut its emissions by five per cent from 2000 levels by 2020. The Government said it would go further with a 25 per cent cut, if a tough international climate agreement is reached at UN climate talks in Copenhagen in December, but this is looking increasingly unlikely with legally binding targets now off the agenda.

[Cue violins]This is our Great Barrier Reef. If Australia doesn’t show leadership by reducing emissions to save the reef, who will?” asked scientist Ken Baldwin.

The reality, of course, is that sea surface temperatures around the GBR have hardly risen at all, the reef has been here for hundreds of thousands of years, and has been through more warmings and coolings that Terry Hughes or Ken Baldwin between them have had hot dinners. And it’s still here. And it will still be here long after Terry Hughes and Ken Baldwin are pushing up the daisies. Why? Because reefs adapt. Unlike humans, who panic and throw trillions of dollars at a solution that won’t work.

Read it here.

%d bloggers like this: