West Coast warming linked to naturally occurring changes
A new study makes the case that human activity played very little role in the warming of the northeast Pacific Ocean over the past century or so. (Rick Loomis/Los Angeles Times)
By Tony Barboza contact the reporter

Study of Pacific Ocean, West Coast temperatures challenges assumptions about greenhouse gases
Changes in ocean circulation because of weaker winds are linked to rise in West Coast temperatures
New West Coast climate study 'does not call into question the concept of global warming,' expert cautions
Naturally occurring changes in winds, not human-caused climate change, are responsible for most of the warming on land and in the sea along the West Coast of North America over the last century, a study has found.

The analysis challenges assumptions that the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has been a significant driver of the increase in temperatures observed over many decades in the ocean and along the coastline from Alaska to California.


Changes in ocean circulation as a result of weaker winds were the main cause of about 1 degree Fahrenheit of warming in the northeast Pacific Ocean and nearby coastal land between 1900 and 2012, according to the analysis of ocean and air temperatures over that time. The study, conducted by researchers from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Washington, was published Monday by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

lRNatural, wind-driven climate patterns in the Pacific Ocean, such as El Niño and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, are already known to exert a powerful influence on sea and land temperatures over years and even decades.
This latest research shows that similar changes in atmospheric and ocean circulation can drive trends that last a century or longer, overshadowing the effects of human-generated increase in greenhouse gases, the study's authors said.

"Changing winds appear to explain a very large fraction of the warming from year to year, decade to decade and the long-term," said study leader James Johnstone, an independent climatologist who did most of the work when he was at the University of Washington's Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean.  http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-pacific-warming-20140923-story.html

The last line in Shadow's Link:
"There is no doubt that regionally, the changes
in temperature are dominated by changes in the atmospheric
circulation that likely have little or nothing to do with climate change,"
Trenberth said, but, he added, "this does not call into question the
concept of global warming."
Thanks for the info Shadow!

Quoted from Box A Rox

Did ya read about the part where your best friends at Al Qaeda were in the final stages of an attack
on the USA?  Did ya read that part Cissy???

Al Qaeda?  They are sooooo 2000-late...It's ISIS/ISIL now!  Get with the times.  

How do they know they are in the final stages?  What is the sequence of staging an attack?

Are we in the final stages of global warming? LOL!

BE SCARED! BE VERY SCARED!!!

Quoted from CICERO

Al Qaeda?  They are sooooo 2000-late...It's ISIS/ISIL now!  Get with the times.  

How do they know they are in the final stages?  What is the sequence of staging an attack?

Are we in the final stages of global warming? LOL!

BE SCARED! BE VERY SCARED!!!

Cissy is so confused... He isn't sure if he should post about Global ISIS or Al Quada Change!  

Quoted from Box A Rox

The last line in Shadow's Link:
"There is no doubt that regionally, the changes
in temperature are dominated by changes in the atmospheric
circulation that likely have little or nothing to do with climate change,"
Trenberth said, but, he added, "this does not call into question the
concept of global warming."
Thanks for the info Shadow!

Wait a minute!!!  Are you saying global warming is a concept?  I thought it was a fact!

Quoted from CICERO

Wait a minute!!!  Are you saying global warming is a concept?  I thought it was a fact!

Yes Cissy... Like Gravity, it's a 'concept as well as a fact.  

a bunch of people 'agreeing' that global warming/climate change is human made, doesn't make it a truth.....

a bunch of people in church singing and praying to god, doesn't make god a truth.....

is there climate change....sure...do humans have an impact....sure.....are we that important to affect the earth that is billions of
years old and lives in the big giant universe.....in the way we exist in our galaxy, in the universe based on our size....hhhmmmm.....

the people agreeing are stockholmed believers

Quoted from Box A Rox

Yes Cissy... Like Gravity, it's a 'concept as well as a fact.  

Why am I not surprised you believe ideas equal fact?  Yeah, yer a real scholar of science.

Coming from a guy who burns more fuel in his private jets then most Americans would use in a year, so tell me box why should we listen to a guy who doesn't practice what he preaches? Oh maybe because he learned from the master hypocrite himself

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
2014 CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION ROADMAP

The report — the 2014 Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap, which was released during Secretary
Hagel's visit to Peru — proposes steps America's armed forces should take to identify and plan for the
impacts of global climate change. It comes as NASA announced on Monday that September 2014 was
the hottest September on record, making it increasingly likely that 2014 will become the warmest
year ever documented.

http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/download/CCARprint.pdf

DailyMail
Sunday, Nov 16th 2014 4PM  

MANDATORY CREDIT: Humans are NOT to blame for global warming, says Greenpeace co-founder, as he insists there is 'no scientific proof' climate change is manmade
Patrick Moore has poured cold water on manmade global warming theories
The Canadian said that a hotter earth would actually be better for humans
He said that there's 'no actual proof' of manmade global warming
Moore was a member of campaign group Greenpeace for 15 years

By Ted Thornhill

Published: 08:12 EST, 27 February 2014 | Updated: 10:00 EST, 27 February 2014

There is no scientific proof of man-made global warming and a hotter earth would be ‘beneficial for humans and the majority of other species’, according to a founding member of environmental campaign group Greenpeace.

The assertion was made by Canadian ecologist Patrick Moore, a member of Greenpeace from 1971 to 1986, to U.S senators on Tuesday.

He told The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee: ‘There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists.’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci.....e.html#ixzz3JEtp4FWk

Quoted from Shadow

Humans are NOT to blame for global warming, says Greenpeace co-founder,[/color] as he insists there is 'no scientific proof' climate change is manmade
Patrick Moore has poured cold water on manmade global warming theories
The Canadian said that a hotter earth would actually be better for humans
He said that there's 'no actual proof' of manmade global warming
Moore was a member of campaign group Greenpeace for 15 years

Quoted Text

Patrick Moore (born 1947) is a Canadian ecologist, known as one of the early
members of Greenpeace, in which he was an environmental activist from 1971 to 1986.

Today he is the co-founder, chair, and chief scientist of Greenspirit Strategies in Vancouver,
a consulting firm that provides paid public relations efforts, lectures, lobbying, opinions and
committee participation to government and industry
on a wide range of environmental and sustainability issues.
He is a frequent public speaker at meetings of industry associations, universities,
and policy groups.
He has sharply and publicly differed with many policies of major environmental groups,
such as Greenpeace itself, on other issues including forestry, biotechnology, aquaculture,
and the use of chemicals for flame retardants. He is an outspoken proponent of nuclear
energy and skeptical of sole human responsibility for climate change.

He is paid to say what those who pay him want to hear.  He'll tell you anything for the right price!