The ever-gullible MSM reports every unusual weather event as evidence of global warming. But recent reports point in the other direction. Clayton Cramer finds “More Evidence of Global Warming” and cites examples, including frost in New Delhi (first since 1935), record snowfall in Japan, and snow in Thailand.

It would be very easy to create to impression that the world was entering another ice age by cherry picking weather reports of unusual cold weather events.

The fact of the matter is that weather is an extremely complex system that is not understood. To claim that slight increases in CO2 concentrations are going to lead to catastrophic increases in global temperatures is scientific garbage. The Earth has been warmer in the past. Mostly, it has been much colder. In the very long term (hundreds of millions of years) CO2 concentrations have fallen by an order of magnitude. The Earth survived those “catastrophic” concentrations of CO2.

How poor is our understanding of global weather? Consider the year 1816, otherwise known as The Year without a Summer. Patrick Hughs writes:

This account focuses almost solely on conditions in the Northeastern United States and parts of eastern Canada. But the Year 1816 was also unusually cold elsewhere. Reports from northern Europe indicate similar impacts on crops and the population, just as the continent was emerging from the chaos of the Napoleonic Wars. The unusual weather lead to riots in France shaking the new constitutional monarchy of Louis XVIII and Tallyrand. Some historians believe the famine begun in 1816 created conducive conditions for the typhus epidemic that killed millions from 1817-1819.

“This past summer and fall have been so cold and miserable that I have from despair kept no account of the weather. It could have been nothing but a repeatation [sic] of frost and drought.”

Hughes asks:

What Made 1816 So Cold?

and supplies various theories:

The meteorological facts of life during 1816 have been laid out. The period March to September was marked by a series of strong and frequent invasions of dry arctic air across New England. While the movement of arctic air masses through this region is not uncommon in other seasons, their appearance in the summer as cold and frequent as in 1816 is indeed unusual. The question arises, why? Various theories have been put forward.

The most likely cause was volcanic influences. Proponents note that a number of major volcanic eruptions preceded 1816: Soufriére and St. Vincent in 1812: Mayon and Luzon in the Phillippines during 1814; Tambora in Indonesia during 1815. The volcanic theory of climatic influence relates increased volcanic activity with decreased temperatures due to the increased reflection of solar radiation from volcanic dust blown and trapped high in the atmosphere. The Tambora eruption has been estimated to be the most violent in historical times. The explosion is believed to have lifted 150 to 180 cubic kilometres of material into the atmosphere. For a comparison, the infamous 1883 eruption of Krakatau ejected only 20 cubic kilometres of material into the air, and yet it affected sunsets for several years after.

Another possible explanation concerns the number of sunspots during the year. The year 1816 was one of a weak sunspot maximum. This climate theory related to sunspot numbers suggests an increase in sunspot numbers results in a decrease in energy released by the sun, thus reducing the solar radiation incident upon the Earth and the planetary temperature.

Other causes of temperature abnormalities which have been hypothesized include abnormal temperature of ocean waters over a large area, or changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide or ozone content, but no data exist to uphold or refute these theories. The final possible cause is that the weather of 1816 was just a matter of chance–that a series of events occurring at the right place and time could initiate the atmospheric conditions which became the weather of the Summer of 1816.

While the political and scientific elites are fretting about global warming we are more likely to experience another ice age. Jim Miller points out a super volcano in North America that could be more catastrophic than Tambora if it blows again. The direct damage would be immense. The climatic impact could truly be catastrophic.

Advertisements