Global warming taking a 10-year vacation!

On a cool May afternoon in 2008, an alarmed climate alarmist schemes:

"Wait! 100-years of global warming was more or less erased in one year! We need a way out of this debacle; our reputations are in jeopardy! I've got it! We'll just say that global warming is taking a decade hiatus...perfect! Surely the temperatures will begin migrating towards warmth again within a decade; all good sine waves eventually head back towards the positive. Then we'll be back in the climate-consensus-manipulation business."

We've seen this coming folks; I've already written about how they've been claiming that the cooling we've seen is caused by global warming OR that La Nina is driving the cooling trend and "masking" warming (they'll deny until they're blue in the face that solar weather has anything to do with our climate). But few in the media seem willing to entertain the idea that AGW is a bunch of bunk.

Everything possible is being dreamed up or manipulated to prop up the notion of human-emitted CO2 as the "boogeyman" of our climate. Their little theory is blowing away like a fart in the wind (or at least CO2 in the wind), and we've talked here about why they must salvage this baloney at all costs. Now, there is far too much money at stake, and far too many "experts" are on record as espousing this completely baseless drivel (in science and politics, REPUTATIONS ALSO EQUAL MONEY).

IN ONE YEAR (2007-08 winter season), the temperatures moderated in the reverse direction (below the questionable "long-term average" baseline THEY established); the global mean this winter was 0.7°C below the "long term" average (I use their words "long-term" loosely, because there's nothing statistically "LONG-TERM" about how they came up with their baseline).

Need I mention again that the temperature (against their baseline) has ONLY FALLEN since the proclaimed 1998 high (when El Nino was supposed to be warming the Earth), while CO2 keeps going up? This means (again if you believe their baseline-and why should you when they're wrong about everything else?) that our temperatures are now at 1930s levels-with AN EVER INCREASING CO2 SATURATION! So, the very basis of their theory is done--IT'S SHOT! Therefore, enter La Nina to save the day. We must keep the faithful believing in the faith! There MUST be a reason global warming is being "masked"! LOL! So many "consensus experts" can't be wrong.

Just remember, when Galileo published his theories about the Sun being the center of the known universe (opposing the Earth-centric theory espoused by the Roman-Catholic Church), other thinkers of the day produced intricate, complex mathematical models by which we could continue propping up the church-backed myth that the Earth was the center of the solar system, such that it would jibe with the observed movements of the heavens. Galileo's theory was perfect; it easily explained the movements of the heavenly bodies in terms of elliptical or circular orbits, but it also required one to accept the notion (now known fact) that the Sun was the center of the solar system.

This was heresy at the time! Galileo was threatened, branded with "D" for "denier" or "skeptic," if you will; he dared to poke the consensus opinion (the "smart" people) of the day with a stick. Galileo was also eventually silenced and forced to recant his "heretical" counter-theory, eventually vindicated only after his death. Sounds a lot like what's going on right now with the consensus-deemed "unassailable theory" of manmade global warming. It's utter nonsense...it's in danger of being totally exposed. Advocates and alarmists aren't happy with this recent turn of cold and snowy events, so it's time for "shields-up!"

Ocean Cooling to Briefly Halt Global Warming, Researchers Say

April 30 (Bloomberg) -- Parts of North America and Europe may cool naturally over the next decade, as shifting ocean currents temporarily blunt the global-warming effect caused by mankind, Germany's Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences said. Average temperatures in areas such as California and France may drop over the next 10 years, influenced by colder flows in the North Atlantic, said a report today by the institution based in Kiel, Germany. Temperatures worldwide may stabilize in the period.

``Natural variations over the next 10 years might be heading in the cold direction,'' Wood said. ``If you run the model long enough, eventually global warming will win.''

The world will become at least 2.5 degrees Celsius warmer by 2100, compared with the pre-industrial period, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said in March.

Steven Milloy of junkscience.com had a terrific write-up on this very subject (he beat me to the punch :D):

Junk Science: The Great Global Warming Race

Can global warming's vested interests close the deal on greenhouse gas regulation before the public wises up to their scam? A new study indicates alarmist concern and a need to explain away the lack of actual global warming. Researchers belonging to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, reported in Nature (May 1) that after adjusting their climate model to reflect actual sea surface temperatures of the last 50 years, "global surface temperature may not increase over the next decade, as natural climate variations ... temporarily offset the projected anthropogenic warming."

You got that? IPCC researchers project no global warming over the next decade because of Mother Nature. Although the result seems stunning in that it came from IPCC scientists who have always been in the tank for manmade global warming, it's not really surprising since the notion of manmade climate change has never lived up to its billing.

The bottom line of global warming - and that is why so many are behind it - is that its many vested interests are on the verge of a financial and political bonanza, something that scientific facts and climatic realities are likely only to spoil.

So when global temperature doesn't behave as predicted, excuses and explanations must be found to prevent the almost-mature golden goose from being roasted for dinner. The spin on the Nature study provided by its authors to The New York Times is that, "We're learning that [natural] climate variability is important and can mask the effects of human-induced global change. In the end this gives more confidence in the long-term projections."