Global warming contortions and backdowns...

...are now becoming the norm. Even the UK New Scientist magazine, a past staunch cheer leader for green climatastrophe is looking sheepish, admitting...Forecasts of climate change are about to go seriously out of kilter. One of the world's top climate modellers (Mojib Latif of the Liebniz Institute of Marine Sciences, and an IPPC author) said ... we could be about to enter one or even two decades during which temperatures cool....and that natural variability is at least as important as the long-term climate changes from global warming...

In other words, the much loved planetary emergency is over.

Breaking with IPPC orthodoxy, Latif said Northern Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) cycles were probably responsible for some of the strong global warming seen in the past three decades. "But how much? The jury is still out," he told the conference...more from Fred Pearce and New Scientist here... and this from Mick Hulme... in a New Scientist article interestingly titled Climate Change : No Eden, No Apocalypse...

...The world's climates will keep on changing, with human influences now inextricably entangled with those of nature. So too will the idea of climate change keep changing as we find new ways of using it to meet our needs. We will continue to create and tell new stories about climate change (are you listening Al Gore ?) and mobilise these stories in support of our projects. Whereas a modernist reading of climate may once have regarded it as merely a physical condition for human action, we must now come to terms with climate change operating simultaneously as an overlying, but more fluid, imaginative condition of human existence...

So here we have the new (age) green approach to climate guilt... It remains too, to be seen what contribution to this new thinking the ongoing results from the ARGOS sea temperature project, satellite monitoring and the CLOUD experiment will provide, but two things are now very clear...the AGW mirage is collapsing, and greens tell lies...

STOP PRESS...a new target, and an admission of failure...

From ProCommerce ....The G-8, minus China when the premier left the meeting early, agreed to an actual empirical target number for global warming. For those of us who know the facts... we have a pure unadulterated victory. The number is 2 degrees C above the current global temperature. There is no way that such a number could be reached in a century, even if global warming were a reality.
The average global temperature is now 21.5C and that is roughly .4C above the 20th Century average. In the past 150 years the temperature, starting before human generated CO2, rose only .8C. The chance that the global temperature could rise 2 degrees in the remaining 90 years of this century is close to nil. Goodbye global warming hysteria. Killed by a target number and, to me, a very clear admission by global leaders that they don't believe in the hysteria...Postscript: The Wall Street Journal reports that the 2 degrees C is based on pre-industry not current global temperatures. So that means a remaining increase of 1.2 degrees C will be allowed (as if these leaders who have never done anything together effectively could do something in the imaginary future). This is inside the possible global temperature range based on the rise in one period of increase in temperature from 1978 to 1998. Otherwise based on any other period it remains a probability close to nil.
...and from WuWT...
...The world’s major industrial nations and newly emerging powers failed to agree Wednesday on specific cuts in heat-trapping gases by 2050, undercutting an effort to build a global consensus to fight climate change, according to people following the talks.......more here...
...and in G8 jargon...
“We reaffirm the importance of the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and notably of its Fourth Assessment Report, which constitutes the most comprehensive assessment of the science. We recognise the broad scientific view that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels ought not to exceed 2°C. Because this global challenge can only be met by a global response, we reiterate our willingness to share with all countries the goal of achieving at least a 50% reduction of global emissions by 2050…"