By Cliff Ollier, School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, The University of Western Australia in Benny Peiser’s CCNet
Hansen is a modeller, and his scenario for the collapse of the ice sheets is based on a false model. Hansen has a model of an ice sheet sliding along an inclined plane, lubricated by meltwater, which is itself increasing because of global warming. The same model is adopted in many copy-cat papers. Hanson’s model, unfortunately, includes neither the main form of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets, nor an understanding of how glaciers flow.
The global warming doomsday writers claim the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are melting catastrophically, and will cause a sudden rise in sea level of 5 or more metres. This ignores the mechanism of glacier flow which is by creep. Glaciers are not melting from the surface down, nor are they sliding down an inclined plane lubricated by meltwater. The existence of ice over 3 km thick preserving details of past snowfall and atmospheres, used to decipher past temperature and CO2 levels, shows that the ice sheets have accumulated for hundreds of thousands of years without melting. Variations in melting around the edges of ice sheets are no indication that they are collapsing. Indeed ‘collapse’ is impossible. Read more here. An expanded version with additions and references by CSPP can be found here.
By Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
Kevin Trenberth (Rocky Mountain News, October 24), commenting on Mike Rosen’s article expressing legitimate doubts about the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore, makes 23 scientific mistakes, each of which falls in the direction of magnifying the unjustifiable alarm stoked by panicky politicians and extravagantly-funded environmentalists in cahoots with a shrinking clique of scientists in denial of observational climate data.
For example, Trenberth says the most recent warming was “not from 1900 to 1940, but after 1970.” In fact, according to the land and sea temperature records of the National Climate Data Center the rate of warming in the 1920s and 1930s, before humankind had much influence on climate, was as great as it was in the 1980s and 1990s. Since the IPCC’s previous report in 2001, there has been no statistically-significant “global warming” at all.
Also, Trenberth says, “Gore’s statement that ice-sheets melting in Greenland or the West Antarctic would raise sea level by 20 feet is correct, although it was misleading that he did not put a time-frame on this.” Though Trenberth “played a major part” in the IPCC process, he somehow failed to point out that the IPCC itself has said that temperatures would have to remain 5.5 degrees Celsius higher than today’s for several millennia before the Greenland ice sheet would lose even half of its ice. The Greenland ice sheet has in fact recently thickened by 2 inches per year – a total of 20 inches in 10 years (Johannesen et al., 2005).
See more here.
By World Climate Report
An intense storm struck the northwestern tip of Alaska during the fall of 1963. This storm caused over 3 million dollars in damage, primarily to the U.S. Government research camp that was located at Barrow, AK, as 55mph winds (gusting to 75mph) and waves topping 10 feet pushed a storm surge over the 10 foot high protective beach. The storm hit during an unusual ice-free period in early October—the primary reason why the seas grew to such damaging heights. During most months there, near shore sea ice coverage is sufficient to dampen (or prevent entirely) the build up of significant wave heights. James Hume and Marshall Schalk, described the damage from the 1963 storm in an article written for the journal Arctic in 1967 and based upon historical weather records and the recollection of Inuit elders, reckoned that the storm was about a “200 year” storm.
This storm, and others like it, should have served as ample warming against settling on the unstable coastline of much of Alaska. Instead, today we here repeated reports of recently-established native Alaskan villages having to be moved inland because of an encroaching ocean—and the culprit is always anthropogenic global warming, never lack of foresight.
Clearly, erosion has been gnawing away at the Alaska coast for many, many decades and this fact has been known for equally as long. Wind and waves acting on soil held together by ice acts through a positive feedback to expose more frozen soil to the above-freezing temperatures of summer and the warm rays of sunshine, softening it for the next round of waves and wind. And so the process continues. A decline in near-shore ice cover helps to exacerbate the process. Ignoring these well-known environmental conditions has led to the unfortunate situation today where Inuit villages are facing an imminent pressure to relocate. This situation has less to do with anthropogenic climate change than it does to poor planning in the light of well-established environmental threats—threats that have existed for at least the better part of the 20th century. Read full report here.
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM
While the networks and some politicians are implying global warming is to blame for the fires in the southwest, the unfortunate fires can be explained very nicely by natural factors. La Ninas are more frequent when the Pacific Decadal Oscillation is in its cold phase (see this blog). The Pacific was in that phase from 1947 to 1977 and then briefly from 1998 to 2001 (with 3 of 4 years in La Nina). It has returned back to the cold phase in recent months and a moderate La Nina has ensued.
You can see clearly from the following correlation chart of La Ninas (using the Southern Oscillation Index) with precipitation from CDC, that La Ninas favor dryness in the southwest.
The cooling in the Pacific caused the past El Nino winter (2006/07) rains to fail in California. That means the region has undergone drought for 18 months. This combined with unwise policy that Dr. Scott Campbell reported on yesterday concerning the prohibition against clearing up accumulated brush from the areas surrounding housing developments that were instituted at the insistence of the Sierra Club and other environmental groups has left more fuel for the fires fanned by the Santa Ana winds, which as Dr Patzert indicated, in a recent linked to release, were also more common in La Ninas.
A few years back McCabe, Palecki and Betancourt published a paper that looked at drought frequency across the United States related to both the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and the Atlantic Mulitdecadal Oscillation. Droughts in the United States were more frequent when the Atlantic was in its warm mode. When the Atlantic was warm, and the Pacific was also in its warm mode, the dryness was more across the northwest and southeast and when the Pacific was cold more across the southwest. We are currently in the warm Atlantic and cold Pacific mode and thus should expect the dryness in the southwest. See these maps and read more here.
When I was Dr. Dewpoint for Intellicast, I found and reported that the monthly records for most tornadoes from the fall through the spring were in La Nina years. The worst tornado outbreak, The Superoutbreak of 1974” came after one of the strongest La Ninas.
In recent weeks, Eugenio Hackbaart of the Brazilian METSUL Meteorologia, observed a similarity with seasonal weather patterns in southern Brazil and North America in corresponding seasons. This lead him to suggest we may be surprised by some of the cold here this upcoming winter.
He wrote to me last night and indicated that Brazil experienced a significant severe weather outbreak with very large damaging hail and tornadoes and he wondered whether the same relationship I found with the severe weather here in La Ninas applied to their region. He forwarded two links that show some remarkable photographs of hail and hail and tornado damage. See the hail photos here and the tornado damage photos here. Though the text is in Portuguese, the photos require no translation. The holes in the roof were common and included tin roofs. The damage was in the state of Rio Grande Do Sul in southern Brazil.
By Joe D’Aleo, CCM and Dr. Madhav Khandekar
As reported by the AP, “Carbon dioxide emissions were 35 percent higher in 2006 than in 1990, a much faster growth rate than anticipated, researchers led by Josep G. Canadell, of Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, report in Tuesday’s edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The changes “characterize a carbon cycle that is generating stronger-than-expected and sooner-than-expected climate forcing,” the researchers report.” Alan Robock, associate director of the Center for Environmental Prediction at Rutgers University, added: “What is really shocking is the reduction of the oceanic CO2 sink,” meaning the ability of the ocean to absorb carbon dioxide, removing it from the atmosphere. The researchers blamed that reduction on changes in wind circulation, but Robock said he also thinks rising ocean temperatures reduce the ability to take in the gas.”
As we showed in an earlier blog, though estimates of man’s output of carbon dioxide have increased in the last two decades, the rate of increase in the atmosphere has not increased, implying the opposite, a “missing sink” or underestimated ability of nature, primarily the oceans, to remove the excess carbon dioxide, the exact opposite of what Robock at Rutgers and the alarmists at CSIRO are implying. Never mind they are ignoring the fact that there has been no warming globally in the last 9 years.
See in this blog the real story about carbon dioxide increases, how they relate to El Nino and La Nina and volcanic activity, that the oceans are cooling and not warming and why with a moderate La Nina underway, the rate of increase this year will probably drop dramatically.
Wild Santa Ana winds – some of them reaching hurricane force—have been whipping through Southern California since early Sunday, October 21, triggering massive wildfires. Although this is the start of the area’s typical Santa Ana season, these winds have lasted longer than usual and have wreaked havoc because the area is in the midst of a lengthy drought. NASA Earth-observing satellites monitor our planet’s climate patterns. Bill Patzert, a climatologist with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., says the drought is intensified by a climate pattern called La Nina—a pool of cool water in the Pacific near the equator that steers the jet stream to the north.
Cut 1- JPL Climatologist Bill Patzert explains where the wild Santa Ana winds originated that have been plaguing southern California and fueling the fires.
Running time: :30 Play audio
“Beginning this past Sunday, a great high pressure system, quite intense and quite deep, formed to the north of us and settled into the Great Basin, what is really known as Nevada. And the great clockwise circulation sent very intense winds spinning off the high desert through the great mountain passes of Southern California. As those winds dropped into the basin, the air compressed, it dried out, it heated up and it speeded up.”
Cut 2 - Bill Patzert says this is just the beginning of Santa Ana Season.
Running time: :18 Play audio
“Santa Anas are a winter phenomenon, and they often peak in December or January and so we’re just at the beginning here and unfortunately we’ve seen an exceptionally dry 18 months in Southern California so we’re super-duper fueled up.”
Cut 3 – Bill Patzert says the California drought is linked to a climate pattern called La Nina, in which a cool pool of water lingers near the equator.
Running time: :12 Play audio
“La Nina I often call ‘The Demon Diva of Drought.’” Eight out of 10 years when the La Nina is present in the Pacific are dry winters in Southern California.”
By World Climate Report
The findings by the UK judge announced last week that Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth failed to tell the whole truth on more than a few occasions received a fair degree of press coverage and, of course, a great deal of outcry from Gore defenders worldwide.
Now, “the Gore Team” has come to its own defense on a Washington Post blog site. In running down the list of supposed “errors” in An Inconvenient Truth, it is the basic contention of the Gore team that the scientific issues that Gore was trying to get a cross to a lay audience were far more complex than he had the time (or desire?) to adequately explain in a 90-minute feature film (or in the accompanying 328 page book; hint, use a smaller, albeit less dramatic, typeface next time).
Ultimately, the Gore Team has the following to say, acting dismayed at the state of media coverage these days, “To conclude, it’s unfortunate that news coverage of the UK decision was so sensational and, once again, directed conversation away from a broader and much-needed discussion and debate about solutions to the climate crisis.”
So sensational?! Apparently showing photo after photo of current and potential future environmental catastrophe (carefully ignoring instances of similar catastrophes in the past) while talking and writing in grave tones about climate change and mankind’s role in it, but never admitting that many other factors are also at play and in many cases are the dominant ones, is a perfectly acceptable way of conveying issues to the public. But, pointing out that this is what is going on is “sensational.”
It seems to us, that the Gore Team is just a bit miffed that someone stole a page out of their playbook and successfully ran it against them. See full story here.
By Dave Hoopman, Wisconsin Energy Cooperative News
A growing pile of record daily highs from the National Weather Service (NWS) office at Tucson International Airport (in the late 1980s) —and the absence of corresponding new records from Davis-Monthan Air Force Base on very similar terrain just three miles away—suggested a problem with NWS monitoring equipment, specifically with a device called the HO-83 hygrothermometer, newly installed at the airport in 1986. In the early 1990s, articles in the scientific and technical literature (starting with Gall 1992) began examining design flaws that might cause any HO-83 to read significantly higher than the real ambient air temperature and to produce higher readings the longer it remained in service.
It is common practice for records of the U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) to be adjusted to account for biasing factors such as differing times of recording data or changes in the location of monitoring equipment. But the USHCN records are evidently not adjusted to compensate for measurement errors introduced by the HO-83.
One reason for that could be that the HO-83 is installed at just 5 percent of the USHCN’s 1,221 monitoring stations, the vast majority of which are not NWS offices but rather are sited on private property and operated by citizen volunteers. Even so, in 1995 Thomas Karl, current head of the USHCN’s parent organization, the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), and a strong proponent of the theory of human-induced climate change, authored a paper indicating replacement of older equipment with the HO-83 may have polluted the record of U.S. maximum temperature averages since the 1980s, raising them by an error of as much as 0.5 degree, Celsius.
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, ICECAP
Recently, a critical adjustment was made by NASA to its US Annual mean temperature record since 1895, due to discovering an error in their adjustments found by Steve McIntyre, who also blew the whistle on the flawed hockey stick of Mann, Bradley and Hughes. Tellingly, the adjustment came without a press release or even an explanation on the site, sparking considerable attention in the blogosphere but drawing little mention in the national media. One can rest assured had the adjustment been the other way (a warming), there would have been press releases, widespread hype and headlines for several days.
The adjustment made was primarily to the temperatures in the years post 2000 for which the average year declined by 0.15C. NASA GISS’s Gavin Schmidt and James Hansen have responded to the media that the adjusted downward correction of 0.15 deg C (0.27F) was not significant. If one accepts that as true and examines the new US temperature curve since 1930, one finds a trend of only 0.12C (0.22F) for the 77 years of measurement. Thus, according to the recent judgment of Schmidt and Hansen’s, the warming in the United States over the past 77 years has also been “insignificant”.
With NASA’s revised data base, 6 of the top 10 warmest years now fall within the span from the 1920s to 1950s, and only 4 in the last two decades.
In the blog we go on to look at a case study, New York’s Central Park. We find very large differences between the raw observed data and the adjusted data sets for the US and global data sets (up to 11F). These kinds of huge variances in the “data” for one location raise serious questions as to whether we can trust any surface station based data set to determine changes the order of a tenth of a degree for climate change assessment and policy prescriptions. See the blog on the SPPI site here.
By Alexandre Aguiar,MetSul Weather Center Communications Director and the weatherman for Ulbra TV in Porto Alegre, Brazil
It was exactly 10 years ago today. October 14th 1997. The guest in the El Nino Community Preparedness Summit in Santa Monica, California, was the Vice President of the United States Al Gore. It was another opportunity to him to propagate the scary vision of a warmed globe. The main point was the super El Niño event of that year. Gore took advantage of the scene to forecast a future without La Niña events. El Niño events, according to him and his fellow scientists, would become permanent. “For those who argue that global warming is already changing the world’s climate, this year’s El Nino weather front is more than enough evidence”, the audience was told by Gore. In the next day, a report by the San Francisco Chronicle said: “Gore links El Niño to Global Warming”. The Vice President stated at the summit that growing frequency of El Niño episodes could be connected to the gradual heating of the atmosphere caused by emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
October 14th 2007. Gore is the most celebrated name worldwide. He got an Oscar, then an Emmy and just two days ago a Nobel Peace Prize. There are no more awards to win. He got all. But there is an inconvenient truth to Mr. Gore exactly ten years after that conference in Santa Monica. An ironic truth. The same Pacific that makes Santa Monica one of the most attractive places in California is answering to the claims it would be permanently warm in a global warming era. Gore’s theory bankrupted exactly ten years after its release. The largest ocean in Earth is much colder than average and global climate starts to feel the impacts of a moderate La Niña event that may reach the strong threshold.
NOAA’s Multivariate ENSO Index for September reached its lowest value for that month of the year since 1988. It was the second largest one-month drop on record for this time of year. The -1.1 value was last seen in late 1999 and early 1989. According to the RSS MSU satellite data, September 2007 was the 7th coldest month among 81 months since January 2001. It has made it to the 9% of the coolest months of the 21st century so far, ICECAP reported. The Southern hemisphere was 0.015 Celsius degrees cooler than the long-term average, fifth coldest month since January 2001. Brazil’s MetSul Weather Center chief-meteorologist says this is clear evidence that Joe D’Aleo and other scientists claim that the higher frequency of El Niño events promoted global warming and not the contrary is correct. “Al Gore declared ten years ago that El Niño episodes were a consequence of global warming while historic data prior and after that claim shows El Niño is in fact a cause of warming since the Great Pacific Shift in the 70’s”, said meteorologist Eugenio Hackbart. MetSul Meteorologia expert also stated there is no coincidence that this La Niña of 2007 is taking place right during the 11-year solar minimum cycle. “Major La Niña events were recorded around the solar minima in the last decades”, said Eugenio Hackbart. It will take some more years to “Mother Nature” to dismiss some or all of Gore forecasts, but earlier predictions made by him are already proving to be an inconvenient mistake. See The story at METSUL here.
By Bob Ferguson, SPPI
Despite the lack of any trends in hurricane landfalls along the U.S. and Florida coasts, or damage to U.S. coastlines when population demographics are taken into account, the impact from a single storm can be enormous. The massive population and infrastructure build-up of the US coastline has vastly raised the potential damage that a storm can inflict. It is stunningly dishonest and irresponsibly dangerous to insinuate, let alone assert, that CO2 mitigation policies could cage the destructiveness of nature, particularly in hurricane-prone Florida.
Far and away the most important determinant in future vulnerability is not changes to climate or hurricanes themselves, but changes to the population and wealth structure of Florida’s coastal communities. The best available scientific evidence suggests that natural variations, on time scales ranging from years to decades, dominate any small impacts that a warming climate may have on the frequency and intensity of Atlantic tropical cyclones. Far and away the most important determinant in future vulnerability is not changes to climate or hurricanes themselves, but changes to the population and wealth structure of Florida’s coastal communities, many of which rank among the fastest growing localities in America, having increased five-fold since the mid-20th century (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006).
Read full detailed analysis here.
By James Woudhuysen, professor of forecasting and innovation, De Montfort University
Environmental activists and commentators frequently argue that climate change is the most pressing problem facing humanity, and that if we don’t do something about it the planet will burn up. Yet when planet-sized technological solutions to global warming – also known as ‘geo-engineering solutions’ – are put forward, environmentalists are the first to balk. ‘It will never work’, they say. Why are those who are most concerned about climate change also the most hostile to doing something serious to tackle it?
It isn’t just because such solutions would be ambitious, costly and distant in time; nor is it only because these solutions would carry risks. Rather, environmentalists tend to dismiss geo-engineering because, at root, they are not interested in halting climate change. For many today, both green activists and leading politicians, climate change is a moral and political issue rather than simply a practical problem. They see the ‘issue of climate change’ as a means to changing people’s behaviour and expectations, rather than simply as a byproduct of industrialisation that ought to be tackled by technological know-how. They are resistant to geo-engineering solutions because putting an end to climate change would rob them of their raison d’être.
Environmentalists instinctively reject or ignore technological solutions to global warming because they are bent on making people atone for their sins. Their ridicule of geo-engineering reveals that, for them, climate change is a moral tale about humanity’s greed and arrogance, where the happy ending is a much-reduced human population where everyone lives simply and meekly. Read more here.
By Joe D’Aleo, CCM, ICECAP
In a recent guest blog, John McLean explained how Australia’s CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology (Power and Smith) respectively were reporting a period of unprecedented El Niño dominance the last 30 years, which they blamed on human activity. Last year in May it was Vecchi who told us there was a just 1% probability that this was due to natural events. On The Weather Channel blogs, meteorologist Stu Ostro, also found a similar continuity shift in weather pattern starting 30 years ago. Blog comments back to Stu and John McLean’s blog here showed how the change had precious little to do with anthropogenic factors but was a large scale cyclical climate shift known for decades as the Great Pacific Climate Shift and in more recent years as a phase change in what has come to be known as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.
In this analysis, we show how these are simply changes resulting from multidecadal oscillations in both the Pacific and Atlantic. In addition we show how these cycles correlate extremely well with temperatures in the United States and the arctic. These cycles likely also are responsible for the recent decline in arctic ice as was previously observed in the 1930s and 1940s when arctic temperatures last peaked.
See full analysis in pdf format here
Also see paper on Anthony Watts blog “Watts Up with That” by retired California State Climatologist Jim Goodrich on the PDO, solar and California climate.
By Luboš Motl, Pilsen, Czech Republic in The Reference Frame
According to the new RSS MSU satellite data, September 2007 was the 7th coldest month among 81 months since January 2001. It has made it to the 9% of the coolest months of the 21st century so far. Their gadgets measure temperature at latitudes between -70.0 (S) and +82.5 (N) - about 94.5% of the surface if I compute well.
In the last month, the global temperature was just 0.12 Celsius degrees above the long-term average which means that it was 0.78 Celsius degrees cooler than the temperature in April 1998 when the anomaly was +0.9 Celsius degrees. The main reason is La Nina that is getting stronger and might continue to do so for a few months.
The Southern hemisphere was 0.015 Celsius degrees cooler (!) than the long-term average, fifth coldest month since January 2001. Antarctica has cooled down by roughly 1 Fahrenheit degree in the last 50 years. See Lubos’s blog here.