On Feb 14, 10:03Â*pm, " n0b z0" wrote:
"Roger Coppock" wrote in message

...

Has the Earth been cooling? Â*Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer.../0/xvMmPtEt8dc

Well it definitely ain't been warming!

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no
global warming since 1995
Jonathan Petre
14 February 2010

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing

There has been no global warming since 1995
Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

The academic at the centre of the 'Climategate' affair, whose raw data is
crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble
'keeping track' of the information.
Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of
Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations
of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was
swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is 'not as good as
it should be'.
The data is crucial to the famous 'hockey stick graph' used by climate
change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in
medieval times than now - suggesting global warming may not be a man-made
phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no 'statistically
significant' warming.
The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there
are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the
orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.
Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as director
of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit after the leaking
of emails that sceptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.
The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world
and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the
United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to press
governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

Â*More...MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: The professor's amazing climate change
retreat

Following the leak of the emails, Professor Jones has been accused of
'scientific fraud' for allegedly deliberately suppressing information and
refusing to share vital data with critics.
Discussing the interview, the BBC's environmental analyst Roger Harrabin
said he had spoken to colleagues of Professor Jones who had told him that
his strengths included integrity and doggedness but not record-keeping and
office tidying.
Mr Harrabin, who conducted the interview for the BBC's website, said the
professor had been collating tens of thousands of pieces of data from around
the world to produce a coherent record of temperature change.
That material has been used to produce the 'hockey stick graph' which is
relatively flat for centuries before rising steeply in recent decades.
According to Mr Harrabin, colleagues of Professor Jones said 'his office is
piled high with paper, fragments from over the years, tens of thousands of
pieces of paper, and they suspect what happened was he took in the raw data
to a central database and then let the pieces of paper go because he never
realised that 20 years later he would be held to account over them'.
Asked by Mr Harrabin about these issues, Professor Jones admitted the lack
of organisation in the system had contributed to his reluctance to share
data with critics, which he regretted.
Enlarge

But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the
scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises were
predominantly man-made.
Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: 'There is
some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations have
come from but it's probably not as good as it should be.
'There's a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of everything is
difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on their data then issue
improved data, so it can be very difficult. We have improved but we have to
improve more.'
He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar
warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be
explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.

He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no
'statistically significant' warming, although he argued this was a blip
rather than the long-term trend.
And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even
warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of high
temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.
Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer between
about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high temperatures in
northern countries.
But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only applying
to the northern part of the world.
Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: 'There is much
debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not.
The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North
Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.
'For it to be global in extent, the MWP would need to be seen clearly in
more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere. There
are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.
'Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or
warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not be
unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm
than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented.'
Sceptics said this was the first time a senior scientist working with the
IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming Period could
have been global, and therefore the world could have been hotter then than
now.
Professor Jones criticised those who complained he had not shared his data
with them, saying they could always collate their own from publicly
available material in the US. And he said the climate had not cooled 'until
recently - and then barely at all. The trend is a warming trend'.
Mr Harrabin told Radio 4's Today programme that, despite the controversies,
there still appeared to be no fundamental flaws in the majority scientific
view that climate change was largely man-made.
But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy
Foundation, said Professor Jones's 'excuses' for his failure to share data
were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and 'mates'.
He said that until all the data was released, sceptics could not test it to
see if it supported the conclusions claimed by climate change advocates.
He added that the professor's concessions over medieval warming were
'significant' because they were his first public admission that the science
was not settled.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...gate-U-turn-As...

Warmest Regards

Bon_0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."
Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

Causes of climate change

The work of climatologists has found evidence to suggest that only a
limited number of factors are primarily responsible for most of the
past episodes of climate change on the Earth. These factors include:

Variations in the Earth's orbital characteristics.
Atmospheric carbon dioxide variations.
Volcanic eruptions
Variations in solar output.
Hot air from politicians in Washington.

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Causes_of_climate_change

Precession: Variations in the Earth's orbital characteristics
Milankovitch Theory describes the collective effects of changes in the
Earth's movements upon its climate, named after Serbian civil engineer
and mathematician Milutin Milanković. Milanković mathematically
theorised that variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession
of the Earth's orbit determined climatic patterns on Earth.

The Earth's axis completes one full cycle of precession approximately
every 26,000 years. At the same time, the elliptical orbit rotates,
more slowly, leading to a 23,000-year cycle between the seasons and
the orbit. In addition, the angle between Earth's rotational axis and
the normal to the plane of its orbit moves from 22.1 degrees to 24.5
degrees and back again on a 41,000-year cycle; currently, this angle
is 23.44 degrees and is decreasing.

Other astronomical theories were advanced by Joseph Adhemar, James
Croll and others, but verification was difficult due to the absence of
reliably dated evidence and doubts as to exactly which periods were
important. Not until the advent of deep-ocean cores and a seminal
paper by Hays, Imbrie and Shackleton, "Variations in the Earth's
Orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages", in Science, 1976,[1] did the theory
attain its present state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles