Volcano's Impact on Climate: Fixed It For You

Bloomberg has a story today about the volcano in Iceland not having a significant impact on the earth's climate like the Mount Pinatubo eruption in the Philippines in 1991, which spewed a reported 20 million tons of sulphur dioxide into the atmosphere. I call it a story because, well, when you ask some people for facts, a story is what you get instead.

In an interview for the story, Stuart Biggs and Jeremy van Loon (I'm not making that name up) interviewed Blair Trewin, a senior climatologist at Australia’s National Climate Centre in Melbourne.

“In its current form, we wouldn’t expect the eruption to have any significant global climate effects,” Trewin said today by telephone. “In terms of how much material was being put up into the atmosphere, Pinatubo was several hundred times larger than this has been so far.”

And now, as amended by me;

“In its current form, we wouldn’t expect the eruption to have any significant global climate effects,” Trewin said today by telephone. “In terms of how much material was being put up into the atmosphere, Pinatubo was several hundred times larger than this has been so far.”

In the current environment of growing public skepticism about our veracity, we wouldn’t dare say the eruption will have any significant global climate effects. Not until we find some way to get the data to look like it bears our opinion out.  In terms of how much material was being put up into the atmosphere, Pinatubo was several hundred times larger than this has been so far.”

There we go Blair - Fixed it for you. That fits the global warming alarmists' reality a little better. Of course that means discounting the thought that the idea they want pushed is that volcanoes have little or no climatic impact, unlike we evil humans.  Now I'm not saying Mr. Trewin is an alarmist.  I don't know for sure.  But in an interview with The World Today, he did have this exchange;

GEORGE ROBERTS: What does this say then to the so-called climate change sceptics who say that the planet's actually been cooling over the past decade or so?

BLAIR TREWIN: Well, a decade's a very short period of time to be looking at and in the case of global temperatures 1998 was a massive El Nino year and if you're only taking trends over 10 years one outlying year like that can really influence your results.

But once you go out to 40, 50, 100 years, trends become much less sensitive to the start and end point.

 Do we need to do another "fixed it for you"?

As a scientist, surely he can't be pushing the idea that 10 years is short and 100 years is a long time in a geological or meteorological sense?  They are both the blink of an eye in the time span of a planet.  We need to look at thousands and tens of thousands of years.  To say otherwise is as dangerously misleading as the decade view he is debunking.  But I suppose that doesn't fit the agenda.

As an aside, volcanoes also spew aerosols which it is said impacts the ozone holes.  Remember the early  panic to remove aerosols from everything? It wasn't our fault.  Blame Pinatubo and other volcanoes that erupted during the late 1970's through the early 2000's for that.