While people like Bomber, Nick Smith and John Key think the science is settled and that we must prostrate ourselves before the great god Gaia and pay increased taxes through our ETS to save the whole planet, when the rest of the planet couldn’t give a fat rat’s arse about doing the same, other scientists are setting out discovering that which hasn’t been discovered before about the Earth’s climate.
In other words that the science isn’t settled, far from it, the science as it should be is moving all the time. There was a time when science declared the earth was flat, it was settled, that was that, the earth is flat the science is settled. Some didn’t believe, they were probably called Flat Earth Deniers and ostracised. The problem was for the science is settled brigade is that the Earth wasn’t flat and the deniers were right.
Queue the new science.
From UCSB News: (h/t to David Schnare) UCSB Geologist Discovers Pattern in Earthâ€™s Long-Term Climate Record
(Santa Barbara, Calif.) â€“â€“ In an analysis of the past 1.2 million years, UC Santa Barbara geologist Lorraine Lisiecki discovered a pattern that connects the regular changes of the Earthâ€™s orbital cycle to changes in the Earthâ€™s climate. The finding is reported in this weekâ€™s issue of the scientific journal Nature Geoscience.
Lisiecki performed her analysis of climate by examining ocean sediment cores. These cores come from 57 locations around the world. By analyzing sediments, scientists are able to chart the Earthâ€™s climate for millions of years in the past. Lisieckiâ€™s contribution is the linking of the climate record to the history of the Earthâ€™s orbit.
It is known that the Earthâ€™s orbit around the sun changes shape every 100,000 years. The orbit becomes either more round or more elliptical at these intervals. The shape of the orbit is known as its â€śeccentricity.â€ť A related aspect is the 41,000-year cycle in the tilt of the Earthâ€™s axis.
Glaciation of the Earth also occurs every 100,000 years. Lisiecki found that the timing of changes in climate and eccentricity coincided. â€śThe clear correlation between the timing of the change in orbit and the change in the Earthâ€™s climate is strong evidence of a link between the two,â€ť said Lisiecki. â€śIt is unlikely that these events would not be related to one another.â€ť
Besides finding a link between change in the shape of the orbit and the onset of glaciation, Lisiecki found a surprising correlation. She discovered that the largest glacial cycles occurred during the weakest changes in the eccentricity of Earthâ€™s orbit â€“â€“ and vice versa. She found that the stronger changes in the Earthâ€™s orbit correlated to weaker changes in climate. â€śThis may mean that the Earthâ€™s climate has internal instability in addition to sensitivity to changes in the orbit,â€ť said Lisiecki.
She concludes that the pattern of climate change over the past million years likely involves complicated interactions between different parts of the climate system, as well as three different orbital systems. The first two orbital systems are the orbitâ€™s eccentricity, and tilt. The third is â€śprecession,â€ť or a change in the orientation of the rotation axis.
The Climate is far more complicated than the simplistic, mal-adjusted, corrupted data of Mann et al’s now infamous hockey-stick. This latest paper shows that fctors such as Earth’s axis, orbit and Solar Forcing contribute far more than anything else to climate change, and no ETS is ever going to be able to change the Earth’s axis, or orbit.
Is climate changing? Of course it is. Are humans affecting it? Probably, but not by much when you consider just how complex the whole climate/geography/solar relationship is.
If we are now moving into a glaciation phase which happen every 100,000 like clockwork, so to speak then all this global warming hokum will be for naught. It is bollocks, and hokum science, which is far from settled and cannot ever be, that is the point of science.
Right now we have a theory that carbon dioxide from man’s activities causes global warming/cooling. It’s a theory only and hasn’t been proven. There isn’t a theory of gravity but there once was, but Albert Einstein proved the theory that Isaac Newton conceived and thus gravity is a certain, known, measurable proof. It took 200 years to prove newton’s theory, and when it was proved, it was found that Newton was slightly wrong.
Climate Science is but a puppy when compared to the 200 years it took to prove gravity, in fact climate science hasn’t even made it a quarter of the way and is as far from proof than anyone between Newton and Einstein were for proving gravity.