Here's the snip from the C's session of 9 May 1998:
And here's an article I read this morning. Ignore all the "human caused global warming" nonsense.
Hubris will getcha every time. "Restricting the analysis to the large scales"???!!! Thirty five years of observations when it is well-known that interglacials last, on average, about 10K years and we are past 11K years of the current interglacial???
Oh, puh-leeeeeeeeeze.
In any event, at least their observation of the movement of the zone of precipitation farther north (toward the poles) confirms what the Cs said and makes their predicted onset of an Ice Age far more probable in the very near future. As they said in February of 1997:
Q: Okay, let me get more specific: the Atlantean land that
was supposed to have existed in the Atlantic Ocean... what
was the farthest north of any any part of Atlantis that
was in the ocean, that no longer exists?
A: It is "time for you" to know that Atlantis was not a
nation, land, Island, or continent, but rather, a
civilization!
Q: All I wanted was to have an idea of a land mass in the
Atlantic ocean that people talk about - where did it sit?
A: Where do you think?
Q: Well, I sort of think that the Azores and the Canary
Islands are sort of...
A: Yes, but many other places too. Remember, the sea level
was several hundred feet lower then...
Q: Why was the sea level several hundred feet lower? Because
there was ice somewhere or because there was not as much
water on the earth at that time?
A: Ice.
Q: Was the ice piled up at the poles? The ice sheet of the
ice age?
A: Yes.
Q: So, Atlantis existed during the ice age?
A: Largely, yes. And the world's climate was scarcely any
colder away from the ice sheets than it is today.
Q: Well, how could that be? What caused these glaciers?
A: Global warming.
Q: How does global warming cause glaciers?
A: Increases precipitation dramatically. Then moves the belt
of great precipitation much farther north. This causes
rapid buildup of ice sheets, followed by increasingly
rapid and intense glacial rebound.
And here's an article I read this morning. Ignore all the "human caused global warming" nonsense.
Claim: LLNL scientists find precipitation, global warming link
Posted on November 13, 2013 by Anthony Watts
LIVERMORE, Calif. — The rain in Spain may lie mainly on the plain, but the location and intensity of that rain is changing not only in Spain but around the globe.
A new study by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory scientists shows that observed changes in global (ocean and land) precipitation are directly affected by human activities and cannot be explained by natural variability alone. The research appears in the Nov. 11 online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
{The "cannot be explained by natural variability" part is due to the fact that these nincompoops are not thinking in terms of the onset of an Ice Age and the fact that nobody living has ever witnessed this phenomenon.}
Emissions of heat-trapping and ozone-depleting gases affect the distribution of precipitation through two mechanisms. Increasing temperatures are expected to make wet regions wetter and dry regions drier (thermodynamic changes); and changes in atmospheric circulation patterns will push storm tracks and subtropical dry zones toward the poles.
“Both these changes are occurring simultaneously in global precipitation and this behavior cannot be explained by natural variability alone,” said LLNL’s lead author Kate Marvel. “External influences such as the increase in greenhouse gases are responsible for the changes.”
{It certainly CAN be explained by the onset of an Ice Age which is not your ordinary "natural variability". And the Cs did exactly that back in 1998.}
The team compared climate model predications with the Global Precipitation Climatology Project’s global observations, which span from 1979-2012, and found that natural variability (such as El Niños and La Niñas) does not account for the changes in global precipitation patterns. While natural fluctuations in climate can lead to either intensification or poleward shifts in precipitation, it is very rare for the two effects to occur together naturally.
{So, these idiots are comparing their climate models to observations between 1979 and 2012 when they OUGHT to be looking at models over 10K years in the past since any first year climatology student knows that there is a cycle of Ice Ages and we are due for the onset of the next one. Geeze, how do these people dress themselves?}
“In combination, manmade increases in greenhouse gases and stratospheric ozone depletion are expected to lead to both an intensification and redistribution of global precipitation,” said Céline Bonfils, the other LLNL author. “The fact that we see both of these effects simultaneously in the observations is strong evidence that humans are affecting global precipitation.”
{This is about the stupidest statement I've ever read. Again notice that their comparisons are severely restricted to just the recent past, they are not taking into account much longer time periods and the obvious grand cycles of Ice Ages, and so, they just conclude that since they didn't see anything like it in the last 35 years or so, it MUST be "human caused." This is about as ignorant as saying that a person who has hydrophobia is possessed by demons.}
Marvel and Bonfils identified a fingerprint pattern that characterizes the simultaneous response of precipitation location and intensity to external forcing.
“Most previous work has focused on either thermodynamic or dynamic changes in isolation. By looking at both, we were able to identify a pattern of precipitation change that fits with what is expected from human-caused climate change,” Marvel said.
{Well, when you believe in demons, what you see is demons even if a microorganism is the real cause. They also ignore the changes to other planets in the solar system which cannot possibly be "human caused" and which suggests a solar system-wide phenomenon. Again, their idiocy/stupidity is jaw-dropping.}
By focusing on the underlying mechanisms that drive changes in global precipitation and by restricting the analysis to the large scales where there is confidence in the models’ ability to reproduce the current climate, “we have shown that the changes observed in the satellite era are externally forced and likely to be from man,” Bonfils said.
Hubris will getcha every time. "Restricting the analysis to the large scales"???!!! Thirty five years of observations when it is well-known that interglacials last, on average, about 10K years and we are past 11K years of the current interglacial???
Oh, puh-leeeeeeeeeze.
In any event, at least their observation of the movement of the zone of precipitation farther north (toward the poles) confirms what the Cs said and makes their predicted onset of an Ice Age far more probable in the very near future. As they said in February of 1997:
One change to occur in 21st Century is
sudden glacial rebound, over Eurasia first, then North America. Ice ages
develop much, much, much faster than thought.