The Pink Flamingo’s series into science, climate change, liberal versions of science, conservative versions, and abject stupidity of both groups continues. This is yet another of those ‘no brainer’ Pink Flamingo posts I decided to toss together as quick and easy. Nothing is farther from the truth. I’ve changed the title several times. After four hours of working on it on Sunday evening, I’ve realized I have at least three parts to it. I started out with one premise, and ended up with another. Instead of editing it to exhibit that premise, I’m just going to go with a train of thought and let you, my poor, abused reader, deal with it. Part II will come tomorrow. Part III will be on Wednesday. There is so much information, I’m just cutting it off at so many words. You can’t read the entire post at one time. I’ve thrown too many facts into it.
If you are a liberal, climate change is your new religion. If you are a conservative, debunking climate change is your new cause. So, what’s wrong with this picture?
They call it Volcanic Winter: The Pink Flamingo is more of an advocate of that – for climate change, than any other excuse. Until 1880 or so, there was no real tracking of global temperatures. The first real test of modern instruments began, then. If you will notice, there is a major dip in temperature in the years from about 1883 – about 1900. There is a very good reason for this.
“…The effects of volcanic eruptions on recent winters are modest in scale, but historically have been significant.
Most recently, the 1991 explosion of Mount Pinatubo, a stratovolcano in the Philippines, cooled global temperatures for about 2–3 years.
In 1883, the explosion of Krakatoa (Krakatau) created volcanic winter-like conditions. The four years following the explosion were unusually cold, and the winter of 1887 to 1888 included powerful blizzards. Record snowfalls were recorded worldwide.
The 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora, a stratovolcano in Indonesia, occasioned mid-summer frosts in New York State and June snowfalls in New England and Newfoundland and Labrador in what came to be known as the “Year Without a Summer” of 1816.
A paper written by Benjamin Franklin in 1783 blamed the unusually cool summer of 1783 on volcanic dust coming from Iceland, where the eruption of Laki volcano had released enormous amounts of sulfur dioxide, resulting in the death of much of the island’s livestock and a catastrophic famine which killed a quarter of the Icelandic population. Northern hemisphere temperatures dropped by about 1 °C in the year following the Laki eruption.
In 1600, the Huaynaputina in Peru erupted. Tree ring studies show that 1601 was cold. Russia had its worst famine in 1601 to 1603. From 1600 to 1602, Switzerland, Latvia and Estonia had exceptionally cold winters. The wine harvest was late in 1601 in France, and in Peru and Germany, wine production collapsed. Peach trees bloomed late in China, and Lake Suwa in Japan froze early.
In 1452 or 1453, a cataclysmic eruption of the submarine volcano Kuwae caused worldwide disruptions.
The Great Famine of 1315–1317 in Europe may have been precipitated by a volcanic event, perhaps that of Mount Tarawera, New Zealand, lasting about five years.
The extreme weather events of 535–536 are most likely linked to a volcanic eruption.
One proposed volcanic winter happened around 71,000–73,000 years ago following the supereruption of Lake Toba on Sumatra island in Indonesia. In the following 6 years there was the highest amount of volcanic sulphur deposited in the last 110,000 years, possibly causing significant deforestation in Southeast Asia and the cooling of global temperatures by 1 °C.
Some scientists hypothesize the eruption caused an immediate return to a glacial climate regime by accelerating an ongoing continental glaciation, causing massive population reduction among animals and human beings on Earth. Others argue that the climatic effects of the eruption were too weak and brief to impact early human populations to the degree proposed.
This, combined with the fact that most human differentiations abruptly occurred at that same period, is a probable case of bottleneck linked to volcanic winters (see Toba catastrophe theory). On average, super-eruptions with total eruptive masses of at least 1015 kg (Toba eruptive mass = 6.9 × 1015 kg) occur every 1 million years….”
There is also a reason why the world is warmer now than it has been since recorded (1880) temperatures began. This chart says it all.
It is quite simple, and explains why we are now warmer than we have been in ages – if you subscribe to the volcanic theory of temperature change, the way The Pink Flamingo does.
“…We can study the details of the effects of volcanic eruptions on climate by using information from tree-rings over the last several centuries. It turns out that the density of wood is a good indicator of summer warmth: high density = warm temperatures, and vice versa. A recent article by Briffa et al. (1998) summarized the occurrence of volcanic eruptions and data from average tree-ring density around the northern hemisphere.
This compilation revealed that the timing of lowest tree-ring densities closely follows major eruptions in almost all cases. It appears from the compilation of Briffa et al. (1998) that volcanic activity was an important factor in the cold spells of the Little Ice Age (1350 A.D. to 1850 A.D.).
Presumably such spells were the most severe, since they were superimposed on the background of a generally cooler climate.
The largest of the eruptions, in Peru in 1601, is thought to have caused such severe economic damage in Peru and its neighbors that it took 150 years to recover (according to Silva and Zielinski, 1998).
The second largest eruption, Tambora in 1815, is known to have emitted enormous amounts of particles into the stratosphere (according to Lamb, 1972), including sulfurous aerosol which is the most effective at blocking radiation. Severe winters, late frost, and cool summers tend to follow such eruptions, with the consequences of poor harvests stimulated emigration.
For example, the Tambora eruptions in the early 19th century resulted in much economic stress, with the French historian Ladurie claiming that all of Europe spent the summer around the fireplace in 1816, with frost in July, followed by famine….”
There is a direct corolation between tree-ring data and volcanic explosions. If you truly want to know why the world is warmer today that it was 150 years ago, and warmer than it was for the past 500 years, this is the simplest explanation available.
This is the usual spew about climate change. Simple examination of the volcanic recorder renders this absolutely useless. What is fascinating, the charts that The Pink Flamingo, has presented, about volcanic climate change come from this study, but it is being ignored.
“…The chief benefit of climate history is the expansion of our horizons even beyond imagination. Without the historical perspective we are trapped within the limited wisdom provided by physics and the experience of individual observers. It is perhaps surprising that the various expert opinions in the climate-related sciences regarding the problem of man-made global warming can diverge as much as they do. But it will also surely come as a shock to realize that many of these opinions are not especially relevant to the question of how much of the warming experienced over the last several decades can be ascribed to human impact.
The reason for this is actually quite simple. Physics can tell us a lot about how the climate machine works. We are in great need of that knowledge, and we should vigorously pursue such studies. However, only climate history, that is, long-term experience, can tell us whether we are witnessing highly unusual conditions or not. In some ways, only the scientists studying long time series of climate change have anything worthwhile to say about whether the Earth is warming or not. Their data show that the Earth is warming, and it is doing so at a highly unusual rate and toward highly unusual conditions. Concerning the future, the balance between physics and history is a bit more difficult to assess. We definitely need to generate mathematical simulations of the climate machine using computer programs, and ask how these artificial climate systems would react if we were to change the trace-gas content in the atmosphere, or the amount of aerosol, or the number of hurricanes, or any number of other conditions. (After all, we cannot do these experiments any other way.)…”
Let’s try another chart:
There is an entire course based on the ‘riddle of the little ice age’ – once again, ignoring salient facts.
There is only one logical explanation to the dribble above. It is not the answer climate change enthusiasts want. The real answer to climate change is via geology. You can’t base changing the way we live on a ‘science’ that is so new, and so iffy, it could be considered pseudo science. The Pink Flamingo did not feel this way when I began this post. I was leaning toward some other sources for climate change. I am now more positive than ever that we’re dealing with volcanism, plain and simple. Sunspots don’t cut it. By carefully examining the volcanic record, you find a simple and logical explanation for what has happened for the past 2000 years in climate on this planet.
“...In The Science Delusion, Sheldrake reminds us that scientists are, above all else, human, with all the short-comings and foibles of other mere mortals: “They compete for funding and prestige, constrained by peer-group pressures and hemmed in by prejudices and taboos.” This image runs directly counter to that actively promoted by scientists in recent history – one of a totally impartial, dispassionate elite, who can be uniquely relied upon to reveal the exact truth. Sheldrake quotes Ricky Gervais, who naïvely claims that: “Science is humble… It doesn’t get offended when new facts come along.” This popular view of science is aired regularly in the media by other high-profile celebrities. Stephen Fry (“The stupid person’s clever person”) is an enthusiastic devotee of Richard Dawkins, whose supporters, incidentally, include a surprising number of comedians.
Since the Enlightenment of the 18th century, the world of science has professed to operate in “an open-minded spirit of enquiry” but this is rarely true in practice; any modern research programme is under a good deal of pressure to not produce unexpected or unwanted results. Making waves by questioning accepted dogma is simply not on. Rupert Sheldrake may well be correct in his assertion that something fundamental has been ignored by science – it could even be something as important as gravity. But unless science comes to practise the open-mindedness that it preaches, we may never know. As Sheldrake writes:
“In the Enlightenment ideal, science was a path to knowledge that would transform humanity for the better. Science and reason were the vanguard. These were, and still are, wonderful ideals, and they have inspired scientists for generations. They inspire me. I am all in favour of science and reason if they are scient-ific and reasonable. But I am against granting scientists and the materialist worldview an exemption from critical thinking and sceptical investigation. We need an enlightenment of the Enlightenment.”…
The far left has made fools of themselves endorsing what is little more than a pathetic attempt at science. The far right has rendered themselves utterly stupid for ignoring science and embracing propaganda. Both have rendered themselves abject fools. The far left is so determined to prove that climate change is destroying the planet with global warming that they are incapable of comprehending the fact that we are living in a period of geological time where there has been no major volcanic eruption since the mid 1880s. We are coming out of a 500 year period of major volcanic eruption.
During that time period, modern written records were born. We know what went on, the weather, crops, and exploration. To base a science on what has happened during those past 500 years is foolish. It is abjectly dangerous. The far right is so positive that climate change does not exist that they are blind to the very real problem that is going on in the world. Their billionaire handlers are using the excuse of climate change to hide their real agenda of polluting on a scale that will almost render the entire planet poison.
If the far left were to truly face climate reality they could begin to engage the far right on the real problem here. But, we can’t. The right, thanks to their propaganda is at the throat of the left, which, thanks to their propaganda is at the throat of the right. Neither side truly gives a damn about doing something constructive. In order to do something constructive they must both admit that they are wrong and that the other side is partially correct. Neither side is going to do that. Those of us who are interested in sensible solutions that will preserve our planet (reasonably) are left without real recourse. To worship the planet is abjectly – stupid.
To ignore the fact that man can destroy it is equally stupid. I believe the old term is a pox on both their houses!