The Daily Mail reports on a new theory that "climate change" is speeding up the procession of the Earth's poles.
Update: The Daily Mail article indicates that the theory is that melting of ice at the poles is unbalancing the planet. However, the Daily Caller notes today that the amount of ice at the North Pole was 50% greater this year:
The North Pole [sea ice] is still there, and growing. BBC News reports that data from Europe’s Cryosat spacecraft shows that Arctic sea ice coverage was nearly 9,000 cubic kilometers (2,100 cubic miles) by the end of this year’s melting season, up from about 6,000 cubic kilometers (1,400 cubic miles) during the same time last year.Which brings me to this essay from Mark Landsbaum on the increasing desperation of the global warming fanatics, which points out:
There’s no shortage of inventive excuses for why things aren’t so hot, including, incredibly, China’s increased use of coal, even though “dirty” fossil fuel is supposed to increase, not decrease temperatures.
Implicit in this “where-did-the-heat-go” shell game is an inconvenient reality.
Climatologist Roger Pielke Sr., University of Colorado, Boulder, professor emeritus of Atmospheric Science, says, if correct, the ocean paper means, “the end of surface temperature trends as the icon of global warming.”
If so, that’s a game changer for the climate wars.
If surface temperatures lose their credibility (and we side with those who long have said that’s the case), where will alarmists point to prove their point?
There always have been problems relying on land-based thermometers. For instance, where should thermometers be placed? How high off the ground? There are no worldwide uniform standards.
While airports, concrete and asphalt represent a scant percentage of Earth’s surface, they are home to a disproportionate percentage of ground measuring stations. Does this matter? Consider the common sense knowledge that standing in a grassy field is cooler than standing on an asphalt runway. Not only are such locales hotter, they get hotter faster and hold their temperatures disproportionately longer.Today, also, is a rather appropriate article on the sentencing of John C. Beale, the EPA's highest paid official and leading expert on global warming. Beale pled guilty in September to bilking the government out of nearly $1 million in salary and other benefits over a decade in a massive scheme of fraud. His sentencing hearing is later this week, and prosecutors are asking for 30 years. Beale's attorney is asking for leniency, arguing that "Beale was driven 'to manipulate those around him through the fabrication of grandiose narratives … that are fueled by his insecurities.'” Would those grandiose narratives include global warming?