« | »

Kyoto Treaty Caused Hottest Decade Ever

From an unrelenting Associated Press:

Decade of 2000s was warmest ever, scientists say

By Charles J. Hanley, AP Special Correspondent

December 7, 2009

It dawned with the warmest winter on record in the United States. And when the sun sets this New Year’s Eve, the decade of the 2000s will end as the warmest ever on global temperature charts.

Warmer still, scientists say, lies ahead.

Through 10 years of global boom and bust, of breakneck change around the planet, of terrorism, war and division, all people everywhere under that warming sun faced one threat together: the buildup of greenhouse gases, the rise in temperatures, the danger of a shifting climate, of drought, weather extremes and encroaching seas, of untold damage to the world humanity has created for itself over millennia.

As the decade neared its close, the U.N. gathered presidents and premiers of almost 100 nations for a "climate summit" to take united action, to sharply cut back the burning of coal and other fossil fuels.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told them they had "a powerful opportunity to get on the right side of history" at a year-ending climate conference in Copenhagen.

Once again, however, disunity might keep the world’s nations on this side of making historic decisions.

"Deep down, we know that you are not really listening," the Maldives’ Mohamed Nasheed told fellow presidents at September’s summit.

Nasheed’s tiny homeland, a sprinkling of low-lying islands in the Indian Ocean, will be one of the earliest victims of seas rising from heat expansion and melting glaciers. On remote islets of Papua New Guinea, on Pacific atolls, on bleak Arctic shores, other coastal peoples in the 2000s were already making plans, packing up, seeking shelter.

The warming seas were growing more acid, too, from absorbing carbon dioxide, the biggest greenhouse gas in an overloaded atmosphere. Together, warmer waters and acidity will kill coral reefs and imperil other marine life — from plankton at the bottom of the food chain, to starfish and crabs, mussels and sea urchins.

Over the decade’s first nine years, global temperatures averaged 0.6 degrees Celsius (1.1 degrees F) higher than the 1951-1980 average, NASA reported. And temperatures rose faster in the far north than anyplace else on Earth.

The decade’s final three summers melted Arctic sea ice more than ever before in modern times. Greenland’s gargantuan ice cap was pouring 3 percent more meltwater into the sea each year. Every summer’s thaw reached deeper into the Arctic permafrost, threatening to unlock vast amounts of methane, a global-warming gas.

Less ice meant less sunlight reflected, more heat absorbed by the Earth. More methane escaping the tundra meant more warming, more thawing, more methane released.

At the bottom of the world, late in the decade, International Polar Year research found that Antarctica, too, was warming. Floating ice shelves fringing its coast weakened, some breaking away, allowing the glaciers behind them to push ice faster into the rising oceans.

On six continents the glaciers retreated through the 2000s, shrinking future water sources for countless millions of Indians, Chinese, South Americans. The great lakes of Africa were shrinking, too, from higher temperatures, evaporation and drought. Across the temperate zones, flowers bloomed earlier, lakes froze later, bark beetles bored their destructive way northward through warmer forests. In the Arctic, surprised Eskimos spotted the red breasts of southern robins.

In the 2000s, all this was happening faster than anticipated, scientists said. So were other things: By late in the decade, global emissions of carbon dioxide matched the worst case among seven scenarios laid down in 2001 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.N. scientific network formed to peer into climate’s future. Almost 29 billion tons of the gas poured skyward annually — 23 percent higher than at the decade’s start.

By year-end 2008, the 2000s already included eight of the 10 warmest years on record. By 2060, that trajectory could push temperatures a dangerous 4 degrees C (7 degrees F) or more higher than preindustrial levels, British scientists said.

Early in the decade, the president of the United States, the biggest emitter, blamed "incomplete" science for the U.S. stand against rolling back emissions, as other industrial nations were trying to do. As the decade wore on and emissions grew, American reasoning leaned more toward the economic.

By 2009, with a new president and Congress, Washington seemed ready to talk. But in the front ranks of climate research — where they scale the glaciers, drill into ocean sediments, monitor a changing Earth through a web of satellite eyes — scientists feared they were running out of time.

Before the turn of the last century, with slide rule, pencil and months of tedious calculation, Svante Arrhenius was the first to show that carbon dioxide would warm the planet — in 3,000 years. The brilliant Swede hadn’t foreseen the 20th-century explosion in use of fossil fuels.

Today their supercomputers tell his scientific heirs a much more urgent story: To halt and reverse that explosion of emissions, to head off a planetary climate crisis, the 10 years that dawn this Jan. 1 will be the fateful years, the final chance, the last decade.

What are we calling "on record"?  The ‘warmest decade ever’ is pretty laughable, unless one does not believe in dinosaurs.

But if we aren’t using the geological record to say that the 2000s were the "warmest on record," we really aren’t saying so much, since our worldwide meteorological records don’t go back very far. And even then they are not that all that trustworthy.

But for the sake of argument let’s ignore all the data, including the CRU’s very own charts which show no increase in global temperatures for the last ten years, and say that it’s all true.

Let’s use the global warming scientists’ method for finding ’cause and effect’ and look at the most significant environmental event that occurred before the start of the decade – the ‘Kyoto Protocol’ – which was officially adopted in December 1997.

As of October 2009, 187 states have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, aimed at combating global warming.

And while the US ‘signed’ the Kyoto Protocol, it did not officially ratify it. However, many US states are abiding by it — including, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Massachusetts, and Maryland.

(In 2006, California Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law the ‘Global Warming Solutions Act,’ to reduce the state’s greenhouse-gas emissions, which rank at 12th-largest in the world, by 25% by the year 2020. This law puts California in line with the Kyoto limitations, but at a date later than the 2008-2012 Kyoto commitment period.)

Moreover the following US cities have also "signed on" to Kyoto and are abiding by its requirements:

Albany, New York; Albuquerque, New Mexico; Alexandria, Virginia; Ann Arbor, Michigan; Arlington, Texas; Atlanta, Georgia; Austin, Texas; Baltimore, Maryland; Berkeley, California; Boston, Massachusetts; Charleston, South Carolina;Chattanooga, Tennessee; Chicago, Illinois; Cincinnati, Ohio; Columbus, Ohio; Dallas, Texas; Denver, Colorado; Des Moines, Iowa; Fayetteville, Arkansas; Hartford, Connecticut; Honolulu, Hawaii; Indianapolis, Indiana; Jersey City, New Jersey; Lansing, Michigan; Las Vegas, Nevada; Lexington, Kentucky; Lincoln, Nebraska; Little Rock, Arkansas; Los Angeles, California; Louisville, Kentucky; Madison, Wisconsin; Miami, Florida; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Nashville, Tennessee; New Orleans, Louisiana; New York, New York; Oakland, California; Omaha, Nebraska; Pasadena, California; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Phoenix, Arizona; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Portland, Oregon; Providence, Rhode Island; Richmond, Virginia; Sacramento, California; Salt Lake City, Utah; San Antonio, Texas; San Francisco, California; San Jose, California; Santa Ana, California; Santa Fe, New Mexico; Seattle, Washington; St. Louis, Missouri; Tacoma, Washington; Tallahassee, Florida; Tampa, Florida; Topeka, Kansas; Tulsa, Oklahoma; Virginia Beach, Virginia; Washington, D.C.; West Palm Beach, Florida; Wilmington, Delaware; Wilmington, North Carolina.

And yet we are told that global warming sped up, carbon emissions have increased dramatically — and, indeed, everything is now far more worse than was predicted ten years ago.

So what good did Kyoto do? It seems to us like it just made things worse.

And why should we expect that a Copenhagen agreement will do any better?

Using the logic of the Warm Mongers, shouldn’t we believe that a Copenhagen Protocol will cause even more carbon emissions and global warming?

(Thanks to RightWinger for the heads up.)

This article was posted by Steve on Monday, December 7th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

7 Responses to “Kyoto Treaty Caused Hottest Decade Ever”

  1. proreason says:

    If you had to pick warmer temperatures or colder temperatures, what would you pick?

    It’s not a very difficult choice, is it?

  2. Laree says:

    Hiding the Decline Climategate Parody Video. Sung to Tommy James and The Shondells “Draggin The Line.


  3. RightWinger says:

    Talk about being a shrill and water carrier to the bitter end. The guy who wrote this article reminds me of Baghdad Bob. Mr. Hanley would be standing in downtown Houston a few days ago and declare there is no snow anywhere in the city, even while the snow flakes are falling around him. Of course ClimateGate doesn’t exist in his mind, its all the invention of kooks and troothers.

    Record cold and snow falling all over the world the past couple of years and you would think that by reading this drivel… “this is the final chance, the final decade”….that Earth’s atmosphere was going to transform into that of Venus’s by 2020. Absurd.

  4. TerryAnne says:

    Ok…a few things.

    First – warmest ever? But only in comparisson to the years between 1951-1980? Seems to that not only are several hundreds of thousands of years missing from prior to 1951, but there are also the years between 1981-1999 that appear selectively forgotten.

    Second – if warming is occurring more in the north…why are the Papua New Guinea islands – located in the Southern Hemisphere – being given as the example of AGW? Oh…it must be because they’re in the northern part of the Southern Hemisphere; my bad.

    All this while we’re approaching some of our record low temperatures in the DC Metro Area (close to records set in the 1930s, or before the selective period noted above).

    When I combine such brilliant research as given by the author of this article, and combine it with our current temperatures, I can’t believe that I have the audacity to keep believing that global warming is a farce.

  5. TwilightZoned says:

    In light of the scandalous Climategate
    allow me to make a correction to this statement.
    “Warmer still, scientists say, lies ahead.”

    It should read…
    “Warmer still, scientists say. Lies ahead.”

  6. canary says:

    There’s a new e-mail out from UK where scientist says they need to delete any reports people might learn they can get from the FOIA. And some UK scientist excused it, because complying with the FOIA requests is burdensome!!! So, be transferable and post it on the internet. How can they be trusted.

  7. hotpolarbear says:

    It should be pointed out that the Kyoto goal for carbon emmisions was to reduce the global number of 6000 to 4700. The latest number measured was 5400. See, we did nothing and the carbon emisions measurement went down….We’re well on way to the gaol by doing nothing and we should continue doing it ….

« Front Page | To Top
« | »