Complete turn around – Now NASA says burning fossil fuels ‘COOLS planet’

More doublespeak. Burning fossil fuels and cutting down trees causes global COOLING, new NASA study finds. Fossil fuel burning gives of aerosols which reflect sunlight.

Environmentalists have long argued the burning of fossil fuels is responsible for global warming and predicted temperature increases because of the high levels of carbon dioxide produced – which causes the global greenhouse effect.

But those arguments have been thrown into doubt after NASA found the Earth has cooled in areas of heavy industrialisation where more trees have been lost and more fossil fuel burning takes place.

A NASA spokesman said it was “well known” that aerosols such as those emitted in volcanic eruptions and power stations, act to cool Earth, at least temporarily, by reflecting solar radiation away from the planet.

He added: “In a similar fashion, land use changes such as deforestation in northern latitudes result in bare land that increases reflected sunlight.”

Kate Marvel, a climatologist at GISS and the paper’s lead author, said: “Take sulfate aerosols, which are created from burning fossil fuels and contribute to atmospheric cooling.

“Because earlier studies do not account for what amounts to a net cooling effect for parts of the northern hemisphere, predictions for TCR and ECS have been lower than they should be.”

But rather than bow to the reality of this new information, NASA has circled the wagons.

“This means that Earth’s climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide—or atmospheric carbon dioxide’s capacity to affect temperature change—has been underestimated, according to the study.”

So now it’s official, they have it both ways: Burning fossil fuels causes BOTH global warming and global cooling.

Talk about masteful double speak! 

If it gets warmer, it’s our fault. If it gets colder, it’s our fault.

Either way, they’ll need more funding.

Thanks to Matt West, Price Foster and Don Brown for this link

44 thoughts on “Complete turn around – Now NASA says burning fossil fuels ‘COOLS planet’

  1. They’re paving the way to start mentioning the fact that our planet is entering a cool phase, not a hotter one. And, as you say, they have to find a way to blame us. You can’t tax the Sun for going into hibernation!

  2. Before making this pronouncement, did NASA receive Jim Hanson’s Imprimatur, Nihil Obstat, and Fubar Maximus as certification ?

  3. Piers Corbyn confirms wild jet stream swings result of entering mini ice age period:

    December Weather Comment 18-19-20….Dec
    The wild temerature contrasts world-wide so far in December confirm WeatherAction’s prediction of Wild-Jet-stream/Mini-Ice-Age conditions which ensure long South-North-South stretches of the Jet stream convey cold air well southwards and warm air well northwards.
    This and associated contrasts and extremes are contrary to CO2 warmist theories which requires a poleward shifted benign jet stream.
    The BBC and other media consistently misinform and lie about what is going on across the world weather-wise, reporting warm aspects and ignoring cold blasts despite the fact that these have happened – eg in west USA confirming WeatherAction Long-Range forecast, or the Middle East – eg snow in Eastern Turkey (see below).

    BBC/Media/Warmists selling a lie, a fraud about climate and weather. We only have 100 years of proper reliable data for temps etc., slight warming in late 20th century, more in earlier part, more than what happened in late 20th century. No warming since, couple this with huge solar spots and activity right up until early noughties now stabilising and ready to plummet once climate loses heat “memory” from hot sun in later part of 20th century. Once that goes and this record breaking el nino cools down the Earth will start plunging into more wilder colder and stormier conditions. Wet summers, cool, same with winter, wetter and eventually snowier and colder, less sunlight, less plants, less life, crops washed away. No end. We can’t choose warming or cooling it’s part of the huge colossal cosmic forces. And no I don’t have a cheque from “big oil” wish I did. I seek truth. Follow the money, read Agenda 21, find climate lies to make us all poorer and more dependent on government.

    • The BBC has always been a propagandist for the UK ruling Junta called the Crown.
      The 640 MPs are simply the acceptable icing covering the unchanging bunch of taxation weasels, which treat the working population as economic units to be harvested as required and then scraped when they are incapable of any more work.
      The BBC has taken a decision that the AGW science is fixed and that there can be no more debate by Skeptics who disagree with AGW. To cover their blushes over the lack of warming over the last 19 years, having promised a 2C rise in UK temperatures which will never happen until the start of next Interglacial in around 120,000 years from now.

      AGW has been renamed “human induced Climate Change” with the IPCC definition dropping the first two words.

      The following:
      • David Shukman
      • Pallab Ghosh
      • Roger Harrabin – Environment Analyst
      • Rebecca Morelle – Global Science
      These claim to be journalist presenting the truth to the tax paying viewers, they are not, they are fully paid up Global Warmist propagandists, with the BBC Trust fully backing them up.

  4. Woah, burning fuel causes cooling! That is what NASA taught me when I was in elementary school somewhere around 1978. The soot from the coal and the particulates from diesel, especially were suppose to float in the air and block out the sun, causing the cooling effect which was at a maximum in the 1970’s and the cooling was going to continue forever, unless we all forsook electricity and driving. Crops would eventually fail and we would all die of starvation.

    Now we are back to that?

    • As far as cooling goes they were wrong then during the 1970s
      It wasnt Carbon based fuels which casued the cooling but the Suns own orbit during a single cycle AMP B event.
      That reduction in EUV caused the same menidonial Jet streams and 4 separate El-Nino cooling periods during the period 1964 -1976.
      It also seems that the larger, or longer periods of El-Nino take place on the declining edge, or at the bottom of the cycle.

      • An additional point, in looking at SC20, its more likely than not, that a Solar Minimum could generate several El-Niño per cycle, particular that we are now on the declining edge of this cycle and the next one SC25, is expected to be very flat or even more reduced in EUV output than this one, SC24.
        Are there links to historical records for El-Nino during the Dalton period?

    • yup:-) best cover your ass and all probabilities snafu ..and the river of crap they produce goes on…at a cost us all..lives and livelihoods.
      tar n feathering would be just a start of what Id like to see happen to the knowing liars involved
      and they DO know..
      not just following orders..
      and thats not a viable reason anyway

    • This site is a crusade against using coal ash —that radioactive stuff really does float in the air, in this case that 30,000 ft area—to alter the climate.

      The diesel –now that the elites have locked up all transportation: the tankers, the refineries, the diesel cross country tankers, the redistribution stations, etc., it is time to eliminate one last outgo that is not owned by the global elites, and that is the platinum catalyst that must be purchased from Russia. Viola! the Achates company, recipient of government largess, is now producing a new truck engine that is not diesel. Heavens only knows why we passed on the Wankel, the other forms of compression engines but I guess the time just wasn’t right to eliminate Russia and her platinum.

      • Looking at the Achetes engine, it is just the old workhorse opposed piston two stroke Diesel cleaned up to meet smog laws. Not really new at all.

        BTW, mineral catalysts are replacing platinum ( have for some years now). Look up zeolites among others. Platinum is not needed for engines anymore.

  5. Well, the Earth is Cooling and likely will be for the next 20 years something that man is doing must cause it. CO2 is BIG MONEY so just explain that “Opps we were mistaken CO2 from Fossil is bad, we just didn’t understand; now we do, the Science is Solid and only Deniers would question it.” Guess we will need to double our efforts to reduce CO2.

  6. Again the AGW crowd have a theory that can’t be disproved. Global warming causes both warming and cooling. A complete violation of the scientific method which states that all hypothesis must be disprovable. What a collection of frauds.

  7. The 40 k of parisites who attended the cocktail party at paris will have to go away before anyone in Nasa ,NOAA, and MSM is allowed to tell the truth. Genocidal maniacs now control the planets politics and most of the wealth, the payback for all of the time,money, resources wasted in the last 35 years will be paid for by all of humanity in lives, it’s their goal and their succeeding. Stone age minded man continues to allow it to go on.

    • Now that the CO2 lies have been proven as false, that C02 is necessary for vibrant plant growth and that C02 follows temperature increases and doesn’t cause them. Na
      ASA elevates Co2 in the oxygen systems astronauts use in their space flight suits to 800 PPM with absolutely no ill effect.

      The AGW crowd, to maintain credibility, had to come up with a new story that would justify and enable them to continue down the same money grabbing path they have been on.

      By the way, unless the fossil fuel aerosols get up to above 30,000 feet and have enough volume this too is nothing more than a joke and a sad commentary on the people ((that’s us)) who allow them to do this to us.

    • And why do they control the planet? There are far more of us than them, so why DO THEY control the planet?

      Because we don’t stop them.

  8. I think mother nature is just having fun with the climate scientists using the El Nino and La Nina tag team. They are her fun loving children, after all.

    • That was an excellent read, summed it up pretty good, scary for me because I already know what weak UV affects are having on plants, if this gets worse we are in big trouble with global food production like John Casey warns.

  9. It’s climate change folks. It’s gonna change one way or another so lets tax people and claim the world is in a weather crisis. Now if it’s hot or cold the “climate change” is covered as an emergency that only Government can save us from. If this were a movie script it couldn’t be easier to write the story line.

    No matter what we are going to get fleeced unless we make a stand and stop it.

    The Crisis we are in is that no matter what our situation >>> elected officials<<< NOT some govt structure written in a document, fully intend to take our tax dollars to enrich them selves. Any excuse will do and the SHEEPLE will stand by, watch it happen and allow them to flagrantly steal from us.

    Govt does not fear us as it should or it would not dare to be so obviously abusive to it's citizens.

  10. In Monday’s “Die Burger” (Cape Town newspaper) it was announced that 2015 will be the hottest year on record, globally, with atmospheric CO2-levels the highest ever. Confuse and rule seems to be the NASA policy!

  11. This is good news! We just now have to determine exactly what kind of mileage cars need to get and how much insulation needs to be in the walls, and we can “walk the line” keeping the Earth’s temperature in perfect balance! We just have to get a little more efficient and we can throw away the solar panels and tear down the bird choppers, and we can set Earth’s thermostat at any temperature we like! Great news, don’t you think?

    And speaking of reflecting, solar panels do change some sunlight to electricity, but do they reflect the IR back into space? Should we blame the solar industry for “the pause?”

  12. How long will it be before the left decries this as junk science. When in truth, ALLL of the global warming science is based on climate models on computers, where the programers just input the data they want to get the result they want. Thats the real junk science.

    I had spoken with a climate scientist who was being interviewed on a local radio station and posed this question to him…Is it possible that any variance in the climate temperature over the last 100 years, (1 tenth of 1 degree Celsius), is actually more a response of the more accurate measurements of the temperature due to more accurate measuring devices? More modern technology responding to more accurate measurements being the difference. He had to acknowledge that this was a factual argument, plus he admitted we now have satellites that can accurately measure the temperature throughout the atmosphere which was not available 100 years ago. This was a climate scientist admitting this

    • You might want to read this paper:

      We have constructed a new estimate of Northern Hemisphere surface air temperature trends derived from mostly rural stations – thereby minimizing the problems introduced to previous estimates by urbanization bias. Similar to previous estimates, our composite implies warming
      trends during the periods 1880s-1940s and 1980s-2000s. However, this new estimate implies a more pronounced cooling trend during the 1950s-1970s. As a result, the relative warmth of the mid – 20th century warm period is comparable to the recent warm period – a different conclusion to previous estimates.

      Although our new composite implies different trends from previous estimates, we note that it is compatible with Northern Hemisphere temperature trends derived from (a) sea surface temperatures; (b) glacier length records; (c) tree ring widths. However, the recent multi model means of the CMIP5 Global Climate Model hindcasts failed to adequately reproduce the temperature trends implied by our composite, even when they included both “anthropogenic and natural forcings”

      One reason why the hindcasts might have failed to accurately reproduce the temperature trends is that the solar forcings they used all implied relatively little solar variability. However, in this paper, we carried out a detailed review of the debate over solar variability, and revealed that considerable uncertainty remains over exactly how the Total Solar Irradiance has varied since the 19 th century.

      When we compared our new composite to one of the high solar variability reconstructions of Total Solar Irradiance which was not considered by the CMIP5 hindcasts (i.e., the Hoyt & Schatten reconstruction),
      we found a remarkably close fit. If the Hoyt & Schatten reconstruction and our new Northern Hemisphere temperature trend estimates are accurate, then it seems that most of the temperature trends since at least 1881 can be explained in terms of solar variability, with atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations providing at most a minor contribution. This contradicts the claim by the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that most of the temperature trends since the 1950s are due to changes in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations (Bindoff et al., 2013).

  13. Climate science is amazing !

    First we are told we have a “layer” of CO2 high in the atmosphere “trapping heat” and radiating it back to superheat the Earth’s surfaces – you’ve all seen those pictures of it, right – and now we find there is also a “layer” of aerosols high in the atmosphere as a result of burning fossil fuels at ground level reflecting “heat” away.

    WOW !

    The unusual thing about all of these claims is they defy reality.

    Air is mostly molecular Oxygen and Nitrogen with molecular mass of 32 and 28 respectively – averaged at about 29.

    CO2 has a molecular mass of 44 whilst SO2 – the most common aerosol from fossil fuel burning – has a molecular mass of 64.

    Yet somehow these heavier than air molecules defy known
    scientific facts and do not “sink”to the ground due to their larger mass – they defy gravity and every rule of science and remain aloft despite the mass imbalance performing their magic.

    Yeah – right.

  14. Hi Robert,

    Just found this:

    Climate and Human Civilization over the last 18,000 years
    Posted on November 29, 2015 by Russ Steele

    I recommend readers examine this post at WUWT as it puts multiple grand minimums in perspective, in that they follow long warm periods which promoted human growth and expansion. It is interesting to note that the cold periods were accompanied by long-term droughts. Droughts that disrupted civilizations and in many cases promote collapse. Highly recommend reading.

    Watts Up With That?

    Guest essay by Andy May

    This is an updated timeline of climatic events and human history for the last 18,000 years. The original timeline was posted in 2013. The updated full size (Ansi E size or 34×44 inches) Adobe Reader version 8 PDF can be downloaded here or by clicking on Figure 1. It prints pretty well on 11×17 inch paper and very well on 17×22 inch paper or larger. To see the timeline in full resolution or to print it, you must download it. It is not copyrighted, but please acknowledge the author if you use it.

  15. The question will be answered in a century and all of us will be worm’s meat by then. And the interglacial will be over maybe.

  16. Skip
    7:56 AM

    A false-color image of El Chichón in Mexico seen in 1986, four years after the VEI 5 eruption of March-April 1982. The new caldera, inside the older caldera, is prominent, along with the crater lake that formed shortly after the 1982 eruption. Compare to the image taken in 1980 (see below). Red is vegetated areas, grey are ash/tephra deposits. Image courtesy of NASA.
    TODAY MARKS THE 30th anniversary of one of the most important volcanic events of the 20th century — the eruption of El Chichón in Mexico. In a little under a week, the seemingly dormant volcano in Chiapas produced three Plinian eruptions that killed at least 1,900 people living near the volcano and also released a remarkable amount of sulfur dioxide and particulates into the atmosphere relative to the size of the eruption. The total volume of the eruption was much smaller than Pinatubo in 1991, but its effect on global climate was as significant as its bigger cousin. The eruption of El Chichón is is overlooked in comparison to other historic eruptions like Mount St. Helens in 1980 or the aforementioned Pinatubo eruption, yet it teaches us a number of important lessons about how we can be better prepared for volcanic disasters and the potential influence of volcanoes on the Earth’s climate.

    A false-color image of El Chichón seen in 1980. The old caldera and dome in the middle are visible, but the entire area is vegetated (red). Image courtesy of NASA.
    El Chichón was by no means a remarkable-looking volcano prior to 1982 (see right) — it is merely a complex of domes with a tuff ring made of ejected volcanic material. It sits between two volcanic arcs — the Trans Mexican Volcanic Belt and the Guatemalan Belt — and in a region with few active volcanoes. Prior to the 1982 eruption, the volcano had not erupted since ca. 1360 A.D. (although a small explosion may have occurred in ca. 1850). The eruption in 1350 was a major event, a VEI 5 eruption that produced about 2.3 cubic kilometers of tephra — and was one of a string of at least 11 VEI 4-5 eruptions from the El Chichón complex over the past 10,000 years. This area has seen human habitation for thousands of years, so it isn’t surprising that eruptions of El Chichón may have played a role in how civilization rose and fell in the region. (In fact, pottery shards are found in deposits from the volcano as far back as 2,500 years before present.) So, although the volcano erupted infrequently, when it did, it did it with gusto (a typical pattern for volcanoes with longer repose times).

    Thanks to the over 600 years since the last major eruption of El Chichón, few people living near the volcano (or even in the geologic community) appreciated the danger that it posed. Some even considered El Chichón to be dormant or extinct. However, small earthquakes were felt around the area in 1980 into 1981, but little was done to increase monitoring around the supposedly quiet volcano. It wasn’t until the first major explosive eruption occurred on Mar. 28, 1982 that it was fully realized that El Chichón was far from dormant.

    The rapid escalation of activity at El Chichón is very similar to what happened at Chaitén in Chile during its 2008 eruption — the time between the first signs of an impending major eruption from a volcano thought to be “dormant” and the explosion itself was very short. Earthquakes had been increasing over February and March 1982, enough to cause some people living near the volcano to leave, but little was done to increase monitoring or awareness of the volcano, even after geologists who had mapped the volcano in 1980-1981 had warned that it was hazardous. On Mar. 28, 1982, this all changed. At around 11:30 p.m., the volcano produced the first of its three major Plinian eruptions, unleashing a plume that reached 27 km and within 40 minutes, the plume had a diameter of 100 km.

    This first eruption only last two to three hours, but in that time, about 0.3 cubic kilometers (dense rock equivalent) were erupted at a rate four times the intensity of the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens. Ash and tephra fall from the eruption was 15 cm thick 20 km NE from El Chichón and 5 cm thick as far as 70 km NE. Fires had been started near the volcano due to all the hot volcanic material falling on the flanks of the volcano. After the initial blast on Mar. 28, things quieted down at El Chichón until Apr. 4, with only smaller vulcanian and phreatic (steam-driven) explosions from the volcano — and all this time people chaotically evacuated the area. (However, with the lower activity, some did return, with dire consequences.)

    Before and after views of the village of Francisco Leon, near El Chichón. The village was destroyed during the Apr. 4, 1982 pyroclastic flow. Image: Geofísica internacional.
    However, on Apr. 4, the volcano opened up yet again, this time producing an even bigger eruption than on Mar. 28. The eruption began with a pyroclastic flow that ran out over 8 km from the volcano. The deposits produced by this pyroclastic flow were 100 meters wide and 3 meters thick at its far end. The flow is estimated to have been moving at 100 m/s and, most famously, destroyed the village of Francisco Léon (see above), killing as many as 1,000 people. The pyroclastic flow was followed by two plinian eruptions that produced plumes that reached at least 29 km (see below). In total, nine villages were destroyedover the course of the eruption.

    An AVHRR weather satellite image, both visible and thermal, of the Apr. 4, 1982 plume from El Chichón in Mexico.
    Apr. 4 was the last major explosive event at El Chichón. The total eruption released about 1.1 cubic kilometers of material (dense rock equivalent), or roughly the same as St. Helens in 1980 and a new crater that was a kilometer across and 300 meters deep was formed (an acidic lake has since formed in the crater; see below). Near the volcano, the landscape was covered by 25 to 40 cm of airfall and villages 7 km from the volcano has roofs destroyed by 50- to 60-cm diameter bombs. Over 24,000 square kilometers of countryside were covered with ash as a majority of the material erupted came in the form of airfall. At the time, Mexican officials estimated that over $55 million (equivalent to about $132 million in today’s dollars) of damage was done to the coffee, cocoa and banana crops and cattle ranchers had to move their herds as pastureland was covered in ash as well. After the eruption, a dam on the Río Magdalena made of volcanic debris breached, flooding the valleys with hot water (as hot as 82°C) that destroyed bridges and a hydroelectric station. The eruption of El Chichón is still the largest volcanic disaster in modern Mexican history.

    The summit of El Chichón after the 1982 eruption.
    However, the effects of this eruption were not limited to Mexico. El Chichón released a remarkable amount of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere – almost 7 to 10 million tons, or roughly seven times that of the equivalently sized St. Helens eruption. The andesite magma from El Chichón has about 2.6 weight percent SO3, many times more than most magmas. One clue to where this sulfur came from was the odd occurrence of anhydrite (a calcium sulfate) and halite in particles collected from the stratosphere from the eruption — this suggests that the magma was contaminated by an evaporite deposit, which are usually high in sulfur due to the presence of minerals like anhydrite and gypsum. However, recent research suggests this might not be possible based on the isotopic composition of the sulfur.

    The ash plumes from El Chichón added a large load of sulfur dioxide (see below) and particulates to the atmosphere that circled the globe in a few weeks. This material helped warm the stratosphere by 4°C and cool the north hemisphere by 0.4-0.6°C — one of the most significant cases of cooling in the past few centuries. It also lowered atmospheric transmission of sunlight to the surface significantly. The haze from the eruption reduced visibility to a few kilometers as far as 700 km from the volcano and produced vibrant sunsets around the world.
    This was a very interesting event which changed world climate temporarily..did paris qw summit baloney meeting mention facts like this.

    • I quit watching bbc crap because at quarter til, it’s extreme weather, 10 til its climate change 5til its global warming destroying everything the show was about, a most sick pattern. BOYCOTT BBC they lie. =I wanna bumper sticker!

    • I watched the video again and the facts of Global Dimming may be correct but the conclusions as usual are preposterous.
      Dimming pollution from Europe caused the drought in Ethiopia during the 70’s and 80’s? Impossible because India and Asia have far more dimming especially SE Asian burning practices and Chinese industrial pollution meaning their Monsoon should fail constantly but this never happened. Indonesia had one failed monsoon…..once, in the late 80’s, Australia the same year. India has had failed Monsoons but they are the exception, not the rule.

  17. Look, folks; if they can not take the known climate data from 50 years ago and predict the observed climate of today, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that they can predict the climate of 50 years from now. And they can not. It really is that simple.

    • It’s more than money, it’s power. These people are resentful that the prols don’t hang on their every word. They want to run things and they aren’t very fond of humanity in general. To them humanity is a bunch of messy, icky creatures polluting their pristine Gia so anything to make humanity’s lives more miserable is high on their list.

      A few years ago a couple of scientists published an article stating that the future of the planet depended on genetically modifying humans to be smaller and more ‘docile’. That is the mentality of the people pushing Global Warming/Climate Change.

  18. Interesting the reversal in NASA’s “Thinking” I wonder if NOAA will have a sudden reversal in their thinking since they were sued for their non-compliance in releasing their data on AGW as a court instructed.

Comments are closed.