Denver Weather: Another Record Broken As Temperatures Plunge To Near Zero

by Ashton Altieri, Oct 30, 2019 in 4CBSDenver


DENVER (CBS4) – The temperature in Denver officially dropped to 3 degrees above zero early Wednesday morning. It was cold enough to shatter the previous record low for October 30 by 4 degrees. It was our third record temperature in 3 days and one more record is expected Thursday morning.

One final record is expected Thursday morning when the combination of clear skies, mainly light winds, and snow on the ground allows temperatures to plunge below zero along the Front Range. If the temperature manages to drop below -2° early Thursday, the all-time record low for October in Denver will be broken.  That record was set on October 29, 1917.

Is the Man-Made Climate Change Debate Really Over?

by Dom Armentano, Oct 30, 2019 in ClimateChangeDispatch


Climate change enthusiasts are convinced that man-made global warming poses a near-term environmental disaster. Yet gloom-and-doom forecasts about the fate of the Earth are hardly new, and few have proven accurate.

In 1798 the Rev. Thomas Malthus predicted that mass starvation would strike England in the 19th century because population growth would inevitably overwhelm food production. It didn’t happen.

Or recall the dire predictions by experts in the 1970s that the world was running out of oil and that prices would skyrocket and stay high for decades.

These views were supported by analyses from the CIA and a boatload of geologists who believed in the so-called “peak oil” theory.

But the experts were wrong. Adjusted for inflation, a barrel of crude oil today is cheaper than it was in 1980, which is arguably one of the most pro-consumer developments in recent economic history.

And now we are told that the world is on the brink of environmental disaster due to man-made global warming.

The conventional wisdom, repeated endlessly in the popular press, is that the Earth is heating dangerously because we burn fossil fuels and that this will generate devastating droughts, fires, floods, and rising ocean levels. (The oceans are currently rising by about one-eighth of an inch per year).

 

Mother Nature, Not Global Warming, Behind The California Wildfires

by Chris Martz, Oct 30, 2019 in ClimateChangeDispatch


Articles, like the one from Politico above (Figure 1)¹, have been popping up left and right claiming that climate change is causing the wildfires.

Endless amounts of disinformation are being spread around on Twitter and Facebook from well-known media outlets, public figures, government officials, and even a handful of well-known scientists.

There’s no doubt that the dozen or more wildfires that have broken out in the state, including the Getty and Kincade fires, are serious.

Firefighters are doing their best to try and contain these fires before any more serious damage occurs. But, playing the blame game on climate change does nothing for public safety whatsoever.

What’s really to blame for these fires?

The Kincade Fire, in particular, was caused by a broken jumper wire of the Pacific Gas & Electric company(PG&E), though “mother nature,” as you will find out below, has enhanced the fire and others that have since broken out across the state.

October through March is the prime time of the year for wildfires to break out in the Western United States (Raphael, 2003).²

This is largely because atmospheric and surface conditions tend to be very favorable in the region for fire weather; that is a.) dry soil and vegetation, b.) low relative humidity, c.) warm temperatures, and d.) strong winds.³

See also here and here

World Leading Climate Scientist: “Greta’s Message Is Ridiculous”…”Something Of An End-Of-World Sect”

by Prof. H .von Storch, October 29, 2019 in NoTricksZone


In an interview with the Hamburg daily Abendblatt here, retired German climate researcher Prof. Hans von Storch commented on the global climate debate, saying “Greta’s message is ridiculous” and that “Greta Thunberg’s demand that we panic has something of an en of world sect.”

Doesn’t share doomsday views

When asked by the Abendblatt whether he shares the doomsday views of a “climate crisis” and that there needs to be an “uprising, or extinction”, von Storch says he does not share that outlook and reminded that today’s modern technology has made it possible for people to live by the millions in areas that would otherwise be inhospitable, like Phoenix, Arizona. “That was impossible in the past; today there are air conditioning systems.”

Selective listening

On Greta Thunberg’s demand that we “listen to the science!”, the award-winning German scientist slaps it down, hinting at a non-consensus among scientists: “She demands listening to scientists who should reinforce what she believes and says anyway.”

Scientists: The Entirety Of The 1979-2017 Global Temperature Change Can Be Explained By Natural Forcing

by K. Richard, October 28, 2019 in NoTricksZone


The last 40 years of global temperature changes can be radiatively explained by a natural reduction in cloud cover.

From 1979 to 2011, satellite data provide documentation of a reduction in cloud cover and aerosol depth that allowed an additional 2.3 W/m² of positive shortwave energy to be absorbed by the Earth’s surface rather than reflected to space.

This change in absorbed solar radiation can account for the energy imbalance and warming during this period far better than the much smaller 0.2 W/m² forcing associated with a +22 ppm CO2 change over 10 years (representing just 10% of the overall trend in downwelling longwave).

German Portrait Of The Thunberg-Ernman Family: Acutely Dysfunctional, “An Infinitely Sad Family History”

by U. Stockman, October 26, 2019 in NoTricksZone


At the German libertarian site achgut.com here, guest writer Ulrike Stockmannwrites a portrait of climate activist Greta Thunberg’s family. The title: “The Thunberg-Ernmans: An infinitely sad family history“.

 

Stockmann portrait is based on the published book by Greta Thunberg’s mother, Malena Ernman: “Scenes from the Heart”, which describes Greta’s past life and her path to becoming an environmental activist.

Family a drama and tragedy

Having read the book, Stockmann writes that “nothing surprises any more and that Greta being climate prophet is merely the tip of the iceberg of a family drama.”

What follows are excerpts of Stockmann’s portrait of the Ernman-Thunberg family:

Malena Ernman is a successful opera singer. Her husband Svante Thunberg is an actor. […] By the time Greta enters the fifth grade, suddenly she is no longer feeling well at all. She refuses to eat, cries all day long and is depressed. […]

Greta’s hunger strike becomes life-threatening: she eats almost nothing for two months. The parents take her to the hospital and the Centre for Eating Disorders. [..] In addition, Asperger’s syndrome, highly functional autism and OCD (obsessive-compulsive disorder) are diagnosed.

One day at school Greta sees a film about the pollution of the oceans showing a huge island of plastic waste and bursts into tears. Overall Greta is unhappy at school. […]  She doesn’t feel well at school. Everything becomes too much for her.”

Stockmann sees parental neglect, quoting Ernman in the book

China feeds coal addiction with 17 new mines this year

by Amy Hawkins, October 22, 2019 in The Times


China is expanding its coal power infrastructure despite pledges to curb carbon emissions.

Analysis reveals that the amount allocated to large infrastructure projects by Beijing has doubled this year, with airports and high-speed rail lines among 21 schemes allocated a total of £83.9 billion.

Included in the new allocations is funding for 17 new coal mines across China, despite Beijing’s pledges to reduce reliance on the power source.

Seven mines were approved last year and, between 2017 and 2018, China added 194 million tonnes of coal mining capacity with the total number of mines reaching more than 3,000.

China, the world’s biggest coal consumer, has vowed to cap carbon emissions by 2030, although it has stopped short of the “net zero” emissions target by 2050…

China’s coal basins and coalbed methane resources. Source: Caterpillar Inc.

 

China consumes more coal than all other nations together

Debunking Popular Climate Myths About CO2

by N. Thurner, October 25, 2019 in ClimateChageDispatch


If you believe the debate over global warming has ever been about science—or for that matter climate—you have been conditioned, through formal education or through reports warning of doom and gloom, to believe what others rightly describe as a world-wide hoax concocted to unite the world under a single socialistic government where there is no capitalism, no democracy, and no freedom.

Why is exposing the truth so important? Because it has everything to do with the redistribution of wealth and the establishment of political agendas aimed at destroying the foundation of eastern democracies and free markets.

Accordingly, it is therefore critical for everyone to become informed so free and open debate can exist, rather than the suppression and falsification of actual scientific climate data.

This article will expose some of the popular climate myths about CO2, so the reader will be equipped with ammunition to spread the truth to those who are willing to listen and have not yet become environmental extremists.

Links are included after each myth to substantiate information and to provide reference material for further interest and clarification.

The article was written using individual articles, with permission from my friend Jay Lehr, Ph.D., in which he exposed popular climate myths related to CO2. Jay Lehr is a Senior Policy Analyst for The International Climate Science Coalition.

Myth #1:  Carbon dioxide emissions cause catastrophic global warming.

Does the Climate System Have a Preferred Average State? Chaos and the Forcing-Feedback Paradigm

by Roy Spencer, October 25, 2019 in GlobalWarming


The UN IPCC scientists who write the reports which guide international energy policy on fossil fuel use operate under the assumption that the climate system has a preferred, natural and constant average state which is only deviated from through the meddling of humans. They construct their climate models so that the models do not produce any warming or cooling unless they are forced to through increasing anthropogenic greenhouse gases, aerosols, or volcanic eruptions.

This imposed behavior of their “control runs” is admittedly necessary because various physical processes in the models are not known well enough from observations and first principles, and so the models must be tinkered with until they produce what might be considered to be the “null hypothesis” behavior, which in their worldview means no long-term warming or cooling.

What I’d like to discuss here is NOT whether there are other ‘external’ forcing agents of climate change, such as the sun. That is a valuable discussion, but not what I’m going to address. I’d like to address the question of whether there really is an average state that the climate system is constantly re-adjusting itself toward, even if it is constantly nudged in different directions by the sun.

 

1575 Winter Landscape with Snowfall near Antwerp by Lucas van Valckenborch.Städel Museum/Wikimedia Commons

La science classique s’arrête où commence le chaos…

Prof. Igr. H. Masson, 25 octobre 2019 in ScienceClimatEnergie


1. Un nouveau paradigme : les systèmes chaotiques

« Depuis les premiers balbutiements de la Physique, le désordre apparent qui règne dans l’atmosphère, dans la mer turbulente, dans les fluctuations de populations biologiques, les oscillations du cœur et du cerveau ont été longtemps ignorées ».

 « Il a fallu attendre le début des années soixante-dix, pour que quelques scientifiques américains commencent à déchiffrer le désordre, il s’agissait surtout de mathématiciens, médecins, biologistes, physiciens, chimistes cherchant tous des connections entre diverses irrégularités observées. Le syndrome de la mort subite fut expliqué, les proliférations puis disparitions d’insectes furent comprises et modélisées, et de nouvelles méthodes d’analyse de cours boursiers virent le jour, après que les traders aient dû se rendre à l’évidence que les méthodes statistiques conventionnelles n’étaient pas adaptées. Ces découvertes furent ensuite transposées à l’étude du monde naturel : la forme des nuages, les trajectoires de la foudre, la constitution de galaxies. La science du chaos (« dynamical systems » pour les anglo-saxons) était née et allait connaître un développement considérable au fil des années ».

 

Figure 4. L’effet papillon : analogie entre les ailes d’un papillon et l’attracteur étrange découvert par E. Lorenz.

West Antarctic Ice Sheet Growing As Southern Ocean Warms Slightly

by Michaels, P.J., October 22, 2019 in ClimateChangeDispatch


The West Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing, but I bet you didn’t read about it in the news. Nor would you probably be able to find it if you entered “West Antarctic Ice Sheet Growing” in a Google search.

That search would likely uncover one 2015 publication by NASA’s Jay Zwally in the Journal of Glaciology using actual weather data that showed increasing snowfall, primarily over East Antarctica, was adding a small amount of ice.

That report generated a flurry of coverage, but of course in the current era of public shaming of any deviation from the apocalyptic orthodoxy, you don’t hear much about it anymore.

Which may explain why you have heard nothing about this new publication which has been accepted in Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres but isn’t in print yet:

 

Who Are the “Experts” on Climate Change?

by John Droz, Jr October 22, 2019 in WUWT


We live in complicated times, immersed in a society of incessant, loud, conflicting voices. Nowhere is this more true than in the discussion of the impact of carbon dioxide on the planet, oceans, better known as “climate change.” When interested citizens try to get to the bottom of such a highly complex issue, the standard, and proper, rejoinder is: “Listen to the Experts.”

Although that sounds like common sense, such advice is not as simple as it’s made out to be. For millennia, it was safe to assume that mainstream scientists (as a matter of principle) faithfully adhered to high scientific standards (see below). In our lifetime that has dramatically (and disappointingly) changed.

Today there is an ever-increasing number of scientists driven by political agendas, peer pressure, job security, etc. rather than scientific mores. This change has extraordinarysocietal implications — and none of them are beneficial.

Real Experts on a science-related subject have six distinguishing characteristics, which are really no more than the traditional scientific standards:

1 – They have a high degree of competence in the topic at hand.

[For example, out of 1000 people, they would know more than 999.]

2 – They have a comprehensive understanding of the topic.

[They are not one of the blind people examining just a part of the elephant.]

3 – They are objective in their conclusions and recommendations.

[They are not influenced by economic incentives, or undeclared political agendas.]

4 – They are genuinely open-minded regarding their positions.

[They encourage other parties to critique their analyses and conclusions.]

5 – Their research and data are transparent.

[No pertinent information is hidden behind such claims as “work product.”]

6 – Their research and data are based on empirical evidence.

[Real world data always takes priority over computer-generated information.]

Human CO2 Emissions Have Little Effect On Atmospheric CO2

by Ed Berry, October 21, 2019 in PrincipiaScientificInternational


The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) agrees human CO2 is only 5 percent and natural CO2 is 95 percent of the CO2 inflow into the atmosphere. The ratio of human to natural CO2 in the atmosphere must equal the ratio of the inflows.

Yet IPCC claims human CO2 has caused all the rise in atmospheric CO2 above 280 ppm, which is now 130 ppm or 32 percent of today’s atmospheric CO2.

To cause the human 5 percent to become 32 percent in the atmosphere, the IPCC model treats human and natural CO2 differently, which is impossible because the molecules are identical. IPCC’s Bern model artificially traps human CO2 in the atmosphere while it lets natural CO2 flow freely out of the atmosphere.

By contrast, a simple Physics Model treats all CO2 molecules the same, as it should, and shows how CO2 flows through the atmosphere and produces a balance level where outflow equals inflow. Thereafter, if inflow is constant, level remains constant.

The Physics Model has only one hypothesis, that outflow is proportional to level. The Physics Model exactly replicates the 14C data from 1970 to 2014 with only two physical parameters: balance level and e-time. The 14C data trace how CO2 flows out of the atmosphere.

The Physics Model shows the 14CO2 e-time is a constant 16.5 years. Other data show e-time for 12CO2 is about 4 to 5 years. IPCC claims human CO2 reduces ocean buffer capacity. But that would increase e-time. The constant e-time proves IPCC’s claim is false.

IPCC argues that the human-caused reduction of 14C and 13C in the atmosphere prove human CO2 causes all the increase in atmospheric CO2. However, numbers show these isotope data support the Physics Model and reject the IPCC model.

The Physics Model shows how inflows of human and natural CO2 into the atmosphere set balance levels proportional to their inflows. Each balance level remains constant if its inflow remains constant. Continued constant CO2 emissions do not add more CO2 to the atmosphere. No CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere.

Present human CO2 inflow produces a balance level of about 18 ppm. Present natural CO2 inflow produces a balance level of about 392 ppm. Human CO2 is insignificant to the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. Increased natural CO2 inflow has increased the level of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Keywords: carbon dioxide, CO2, climate change, anthropogenic

Antarctic ice cliffs may not contribute to sea-level rise as much as predicted

by Massachusetts Institute of Technology, October 21, 2019 in ScicnceDaily


Researchers report that in order for a 90-meter ice cliff to collapse entirely, the ice shelves supporting the cliff would have to break apart extremely quickly, within a matter of hours — a rate of ice loss that has not been observed in the modern record.

A realistic picture

The results suggest that the Earth’s tallest ice cliffs are unlikely to collapse catastrophically and trigger a runaway ice sheet retreat. That’s because the fastest rate at which ice shelves are disappearing, at least as documented in the modern record, is on the order of weeks, not hours, as scientists observed in 2002, when they captured satellite imagery of the collapse of the Larsen B ice shelf — a chunk of ice as large as Rhode Island that broke away from Antarctica, shattering into thousands of icebergs over the span of two weeks.

“When Larsen B collapsed, that was quite an extreme event that occurred over two weeks, and that is a tiny ice shelf compared to the ones that we would be particularly worried about,” Clerc says. “So our work shows that cliff failure is probably not the mechanism by which we would get a lot of sea level rise in the near future.”

La géologie, une science plus que passionnante … et diverse