Archives mensuelles : mars 2020

unclassified

ESA STUDY REVEALS THE 2019 “HORRIFIC” AMAZON FIRE SEASON WAS ACTUALLY INLINE WITH THE 2001-2018 AVERAGE

by Poppaloff, March11, 2020 in Electroverse

Never has the phrase “don’t believe the hype” been so relevant.

Last year media outlet after media outlet pumped the horror of the fires in the Amazon: “The Earth is burning up – The Earth is burning up.” However, the latest study released from the ESA points to the fact that last year’s burn, although 70% up on the previous year, was in fact in line with the previous seventeen years of acreage burn figures.

“While forest fires are common in the Amazon, they vary considerably from year-to-year driven by changes in climate, as well as variations in deforestation and forest degradation,” the ESA wrote.

The 2019 fires triggered an international demand for updated information about active fires, most importantly in Brazil. However, these figures were never compared to the number of blazes over a longer time period, reads a watchers.news article.

Using information from ESA’s Fire CCI project, researchers studied fire-ravaged areas in South America in 2018 and 2019, then compared the data to the annual average from 2001 to 2018. The report indicated that the total burned area in South America was roughly 70 percent more in 2019 as compared to the same period of 2018– however, only a fraction more than the annual average over the previous 17 years:

 

Continuer la lecture de ESA STUDY REVEALS THE 2019 “HORRIFIC” AMAZON FIRE SEASON WAS ACTUALLY INLINE WITH THE 2001-2018 AVERAGE →

biology+acidification

Study: No Evidence Ocean Acidification Harms Coral Reef Fish Behavior

by C. Idso, March10, 2020 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Paper Reviewed: Clark, T.D., Raby, G.D., Roche, D.G., Binning, S.A., Speers-Roesch, B., Jutfelt, F. and Sundin, J. 2020. Ocean acidification does not impair the behavior of coral reef fishes. Nature 577: 370-375.

In an incredibly important and revealing paper published in the journal Nature, Clark et al. (2020) write that “establishing a robust and independently replicated database of the effects of ocean acidification on fishes is essential to gain a reliable understanding of the consequences of climate change on marine ecosystems.”

Such a database, they add, is critical “before drawing broad conclusions and implementing management measures.”

Unfortunately, too many have been far too eager to jump to conclusions when it comes to estimating the impacts of ocean acidification.

And in this regard, Clark et al. note that “a number of highly publicized studies have reported detrimental effects of elevated CO2 levels on the sensory systems and behaviors of fishes, with coral reef fishes appearing to be the most sensitive despite experiencing large daily and seasonal fluctuations in nature (for example, 100-1,300 µatm).”

Such projected detrimental effects include “alterations in olfaction, hearing, vision, learning, behavioral lateralization, activity levels, boldness, anxiety, and susceptibility to predation,” which have led to “dire predictions for fish populations and marine ecosystems.”

But how solid is this body of research?

Clark et al. note there are two important red flags that call the pessimistic ocean acidification projections of fish into question.

…

better to know...?

Delingpole: Wikipedia Airbrushes List of Climate Sceptic Scientists Out of History

by J. Delingpole, March 9, 2020 in WUWT

Wikipedia has deleted its ‘List of Scientists Who Disagree with the Scientific Consensus on Global Warming’.

Stalin — who set the template for airbrushing inconvenient people out of history — would no doubt have heartily approved of this wanton act of censorship.

But what would probably have pleased him more is the magnificently twisted justification offered by the editor responsible.

…

…

 

Full text here

energy and fields

‘This Is Masochism’: Russia Wages An Oil War Against Saudi Arabia, US Amid Coronavirus Concerns

by C. Rotter, March 9, 2020 in WUWT

Oil prices dropped Monday as Saudi Arabia and Russia haggle over whether to reduce crude production amid fears that coronavirus will hamper air travel and potentially wreck the global economy.

Prices fell into the $30s as the Saudis push for a cut in output to prop up prices, while Russia went the other way, and decided to infuse the market with hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil, according to The Washington Post. Moscow is worried that the U.S. will use shale oil to take advantage if Saudi Arabia ease off production.

Basement-low oil prices could substantially impact oil companies and the global markets, which are already being hurt by fears related to coronavirus. Brent crude dropped to $35 per barrel; and the price of West Texas Intermediate crude fell to $32 from $41 per barrel, a four-year low.

“From the point of view of Russian interests, this deal [to cut production] is simply meaningless,” Mikhail Leontiev, a spokesman for the Russian oil giant Rosneft, told a Russian media outlet Sunday night.

He said the U.S. would be sure to step up shale production if production is cut.(RELATED: REPORT: Chinese Censors Jumped In To Suppress Online Messages Warning About Coronavirus Spread)

…

climate-debate

More On Earth’s Meaningless Global Temperature, Now And Before

by J. Moseley, March 9, 2020 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Is planet Earth warming, cooling, or staying the same? I often challenge advocates for climate alarmism: what is the temperature of the planet today?

Or we can use any specific day in recent years for which data are available. We cannot know the temperature of the planet thousands or millions of years ago if we cannot even measure it today.

Yes, the question is one single temperature of the entire planet. Not the temperature in Nome, Alaska, or Dallas, Texas, or Sydney, Australia, or in your hometown.

One single temperature reading for the entire globe. To put it that way immediately sounds strange.

But if we don’t have a single temperature reading for the entire planet for today, how can we say if the planet is getting warmer or cooler or not changing at all?

We cannot talk about the temperature in, say, Geneva or London or New York City only. The question is whether the entire planet is getting warmer, not isolated cities.

Some of us have forgotten basic statistics. Some avoided it in school. But most of us are vaguely familiar with the random sampling process used in public opinion surveys.

…

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Met Office Does Not Know What “Extreme Weather” Is.

by P. Homewood, March 9, 2020 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/press-office/news/weather-and-climate/2019/weather-overview-2019

According to the Met Office, 2019 was a year of weather extremes in the UK. There is actually very little evidence to back this claim up, but this does not stop them ludicrously claiming one mild day in February as “extreme”!

To most people, extreme weather would be the sort of stuff our ancestors experienced in this very week in 1891:

…

better to know...?, energy and fields

Russia Just Told the World, “No.”

by Tom Luongo, March 6, 2020 in GoldGoats’NGuns

There is real power in the word “No.”

In fact, I’d argue that it is the single most powerful word in any language.

In the midst of the worst market meltdown in a dozen years which has at its source problems within global dollar-funding markets, Russia found itself in the position to exercise the Power of No.

Multiple overlapping crises are happening worldwide right now and they all interlock into a fabric of chaos.

Between political instability in Europe, presidential primary shenanigans in the U.S., coronavirus creating mass hysteria and Turkey’s military adventurism in Syria, the eastern Mediterranean and Libya, markets are finally calling the bluff of central bankers who have been propping up asset prices for years.

But, at its core, the current crisis stems from the simple truth that those prices around the world are vastly overvalued.

Western government and central bank policies have used the power of the dollar to push the world to this state.

And that state is, at best, meta-stable.

But when this number of shits get this freaking real, well… meeting the fan was inevitable.

And all it took to push a correction into a full-scale panic was the Russians saying, “No.”

The reality has been evident in the commodity markets for months.  Copper and other industrial metals have all been in slumps while equity markets zoomed higher.

But it was oil that was the most confounding of all.

Most of 2019 we saw oil prices behaving oddly as events occurred with regularity to push prices higher but ultimately see them fall.

Since peaking after the killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani oil prices have been a one-way trade. Down.

…

better to know...?, energy and fields

Guerre du prix du pétrole : revanche de la technologie sur l’OPEP

by Samuel Furfari, 9 mars 2020 in Contrepoints

Le monde regorge de pétrole grâce au développement de la technologie. C’est elle qui est le vecteur de la marche du monde de l’énergie.

Je vous avoue que je ne suis pas le cours du pétrole tous les jours. Cela n’a d’importance que pour les traders et les spéculateurs qui engrangent des bénéfices plantureux en jouant sur quelques centimes de volumes gigantesques.

Si vous voulez comprendre la géopolitique du pétrole et donc de l’énergie , il faut observer les tendances lourdes, comme celle du week-end dernier.

Lorsque j’ai publié en mars 2014 un livre intitulé Vive les énergies fossiles qui indique qu’il n’y a aucune raison objective ou technologique pour que le prix du brut dépasse les 100 dollars le baril, on m’a pris pour un farfelu. Même si j’étais probablement le seul à oser le dire ouvertement en milieu francophone, nombreux étaient ceux qui l’affirmaient de vive voix et par écrit dans le monde. Les faits nous ont donné raison.

LA DEMANDE DE PÉTROLE EN CHUTE LIBRE

Face à la chute brusque de l’activité économique occasionnée par l’épidémie de coronavirus, la demande de pétrole est en chute libre. La consommation chinoise de pétrole a chuté de plus de 3 millions de barils par jour.

De toute évidence, cette crise sera bien plus profonde pour l’économie mondiale que celle déclenchée par les subprimes en 2008. On s’attend à un net recul de la demande en énergie primaire et singulièrement du pétrole.

Cela va de soi : les avions qui ne volent pas, les voitures qui restent au garage, les restaurants désertés, les stades fermés, les vacances annulées font dégringoler la consommation de produits pétroliers et partant, de toute l’économie. De quoi réjouir les écologistes profonds !

Vendredi dernier à Vienne, à la réunion de l’OPEP, comme d’habitude la Russie – non membre – a été conviée à participer aux travaux. L’OPEP, qui manipule le prix du brut depuis 1973 voulait réduire sa production pour maintenir le prix au niveau précédant l’arrivée sur scène du virus dévastateur. Par la même occasion Ryad aurait mis l’Iran encore plus à genoux pour le peu de pétrole que celui-ci parvient à écouler au marché noir (l’Iran ne sait plus où stocker le pétrole pompé qu’il ne peut pas vendre).

LES ORIGINES DE LA CHUTE DU PRIX DU PÉTROLE BRUT

Il est vrai que depuis trois ans, l’OPEP et la Russie se sont accordés pour ajuster leurs extractions à la demande mondiale. Il y a bien eu une tentative de faire chuter le prix de manière à restreindre le développement du pétrole de roche-mère des USA, mais en vain.

Cette fois, Moscou n’a pas voulu suivre le leader de l’OPEP – Ryad – et a refusé d’adhérer à la réduction de la production pour soutenir le prix. L’Arabie Saoudite, piquée au vif, a réagi de manière inverse et a déclaré son intention de porter sa production de brut à plus de 10 millions de barils par jour en avril, après l’expiration de l’accord actuel entre l’OPEP et la Russie fin mars – connu sous le nom d’OPEP+.

De plus, elle a réduit le prix de tous ses bruts vers toutes les destinations de 6 à 8 dollars le baril. La conséquence ne s’est pas fait attendre : le prix du brut a chuté à environ 32 dollars le baril.

Les contrats à terme sur le pétrole ont subi leur plus grosse perte quotidienne depuis 1991 lors de la guerre du Golfe. Lors de la crise asiatique de 1998, le Financial Times du 10 septembre 1998 titrait que la seule chose qui était plus basse que le cours du pétrole était le moral de l’économie. On pourrait dire la même chose aujourd’hui.

LE MONDE REGORGE DE PÉTROLE GRÂCE À LA TECHNOLOGIE

 

Continuer la lecture de Guerre du prix du pétrole : revanche de la technologie sur l’OPEP →

better to know...?, climate-debate

‘HO! FOR THE POLE!’ — DID DUTCH SHIPS REACH THE 89TH LATITUDE IN 1665 AND 1675?

by H. Hardrada, March 8, 2020 in Electroverse

I [Harry Hardrada] recently unearthed an intriguing piece of literature from a 19th century periodical named ‘Ho! For the Pole!’ in Littell’s Living Age, Volume 66 (1860).

The paper highlights various voyages to the North Pole throughout the 17th-18th centuries with meticulous detail. It appears, according to the article, that many wooden ships penetrated as far north as the 89th latitude in ‘open iceless seas’ during this time — as in 1665 and 1675.

A bit far-fetched?

Perhaps, on the face of it… but there is some good evidence out there which may suggest otherwise.

…

climate-debate

NASA satellite offers urban carbon dioxide insights

by University of Utah, March 8, 2020 in WUWT

CO2 measurements from OCO-2 in parts per million over Las Vegas on Feb. 8, 2018. Credit: Dien Wu/University of Utah

A new NASA/university study of carbon dioxide emissions for 20 major cities around the world provides the first direct, satellite-based evidence that as a city’s population density increases, the carbon dioxide it emits per person declines, with some notable exceptions. The study also demonstrates how satellite measurements of this powerful greenhouse gas can give fast-growing cities new tools to track carbon dioxide emissions and assess the impact of policy changes and infrastructure improvements on their energy efficiency.

Cities account for more than 70% of global carbon dioxide emissions associated with energy production, and rapid, ongoing urbanization is increasing their number and size. But some densely populated cities emit more carbon dioxide per capita than others.

To better understand why, atmospheric scientists Dien Wu and John Lin of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City teamed with colleagues at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland and the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. They calculated per capita carbon dioxide emissions for 20 urban areas on several continents using recently available carbon dioxide estimates from NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) satellite, managed by the agency’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Cities spanning a range of population densities were selected based on the quality and quantity of OCO-2 data available for them. Cities with minimal vegetation were preferred because plants can absorb and emit carbon dioxide, complicating the interpretation of the measurements. Two U.S. cities were included–Las Vegas and Phoenix.

Continuer la lecture de NASA satellite offers urban carbon dioxide insights →

better to know...?, climate-debate

Arctic Meltdown Latest

by P. Homewood, March 3, 2020 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

Arctic sea ice extent continues to run well ahead of the last few years, as it has done for most of this year so far, and continues to grow at a time of year when it normally begins to stabilise and recede.

Average extent in February was the highest since 2013, and stands greater than 2005 and 2006:

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover_30y.uk.php

…

climate-debate

Sorry Greta, Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 With Wrong Predictions

by Mark Simone, March 5, 2020 in ClimateChangeDispatch

For more than 50 years, climate alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.

List Of Doomsday Predictions That Climate Alarmist Got Wrong:

Here is the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions.

The sources for numbers 28 to 41 are linked individually.

  1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
  2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
  3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000
  4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
  5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
  6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
  7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
  8. 1974: Another Ice Age?
  9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
  10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
  11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
  12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
  13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in the 1990s
  14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
  15. 1988: The Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
  16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
  17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
  18. 2000: Children Won’t Know What Snow Is
  19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
  20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
  21. 2008: The Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
  22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
  23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
  24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
  25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
  26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
  27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
  28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
  29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
  30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
  31. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
  32. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
  33. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
  34. 1970s: Killer Bees!
  35. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
  36. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in the 90s
  37. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
  38. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
  39. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
  40. 2005: Manhattan Underwater by 2015
  41. 2006: Super Hurricanes!

Sorry, Experts… Sorry, Scientific Consensus… Only a fool comes running for the 42nd cry of wolf.

climate-debate

La neige n’est pas prête de disparaître…

by SCE-info, 6 mars 2020 in ScienceClimatEnergie

Depuis le début des mesures satellitaires en 1967, la couverture neigeuse de l’hémisphère nord a augmentée en automne et en hiver. Ce phénomène incontestable a par exemple été illustré en graphiques par un laboratoire spécialisé dans les chutes de neige à la Rutgers University aux Etats Unis, le Global Snow Lab, mais également par l’Organisation Météorologique Mondiale.

Pour l’automne, on est ainsi passé de 18,4 106 km2 de neige en 1967 à environ 20,2 106 km2pour 2019 (Figure 1). Pour l’hiver, la situation est plutôt stable ou en légère augmentation : on est ainsi passé de 45,3 à 46,0 106 km2 de neige dans l’hémisphère nord (Figure 2). Par contre, pour le printemps on constate une diminution de 31,5 à 28,7  106 km2, une chute d’environ 9% (Figure 3).

Les données de l’Institut météorologique finlandais (FMI), présentées sur le site internet d’un organe de l’Organisation Météorologique Mondiale (Global Cryosphere Watch), révèlent également que la masse totale de neige pour l’hémisphère Nord a été constamment supérieure à la moyenne de 30 ans pendant la majeure partie de la saison 2020 et que son taux de croissance est en augmentation (Figure 4).

Conclusion : dire que la neige disparait en automne ou en hiver à cause du réchauffement global est donc une contre-vérité. Cela peut être vrai au niveau local, mais pas pour l’ensemble de l’hémisphère nord. Concernant cet hémisphère, une diminution n’est visible que pour le printemps.

Pour un rappel des épisodes neigeux remarquables en Belgique cliquez ici

….

Figure 4. Masse de neige totale (gigatonnes) pour l’hémisphère nord (montagnes exclues) entre octobre 2019 et mars 2020 (points rouges). La moyenne sur 30 ans est indiquée par le trait pointillé noir (± 1 écart-type). Source : ici.
climate-debate

NORTHERN HEMISPHERE TOTAL SNOW MASS CURRENTLY RUNNING 300 GIGATONS ABOVE THE 1982-2012 AVERAGE

by Cap Allon, March 4, 2020 in Electroverse

Data from the Finnish Meteorological Institute (FMI) reveals that the Total Snow Mass for the Northern Hemisphere has been consistently above the 30 year average for the majority of the season, and is now actually increasing its rate of growth.

Feel free to shovel this chart down the throats of those still insisting the world is burning up and that snowfall is a thing of the past.

Looking at the chart, the light blue indicates the 30-year average (1982 to 2012):

FMI — globalcryospherewatch.org/

It’s clear for all to see, and for all climate alarmists to ignore, Total Snow Mass for the Northern Hemisphere is currently running well-above the 30-year norm, according to the latest observation point; plotted March 02, 2020 — by some 300 gigatons at that!

 

Continuer la lecture de NORTHERN HEMISPHERE TOTAL SNOW MASS CURRENTLY RUNNING 300 GIGATONS ABOVE THE 1982-2012 AVERAGE →

climate-debate

Calculating Temperatures Without Thermometers

by Tony Heller, March 5, 2020 in RealClimateScience

Over the past 30 years, NOAA has been rapidly losing US thermometers. In 1989, 1,205 stations reported some daily temperatures, but last year only 871 stations reported some daily temperatures.

Thirty-five percent (424) of the stations in 2019 were zombie stations, meaning that NOAA estimated data for all twelve months. This is done even for some of the thermometers which reported at least a little data in 2019.

…

 

better to know...?, climate-debate

New Study Asserts Cloud Cover Changes Drove The Post-1980s Solar Radiation Increase Important To Recent Warming

by K. Richard, March 2, 2020 in NoTricksZone

Using NASA’s MERRA-2 radiation data, scientists find shortwave radiation (SW) has been rising since the 1980s. The SW increase has been larger and faster than longwave radiation (LW) changes during this same timespan. Cloud variability has been the “main driver” of these trends.

In a new Nature journal paper (Delgado-Bonal et al, 2020) published in Scientific Reports, scientists use radiation records from NASA to conclude shortwave (SW) changes are “mainly determined” by cloud modulation.

Clouds are “showing a declining trend” from 1984-2014. Fewer clouds means less SW radiation is reflected to space and more is absorbed by the Earth’s surface.

…

climate-debate

A Skeptic’s Guide To Global Temperatures

by Clive Best, August 30, 2019 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Climate change may well turn out to be a benign problem rather than the severe problem or “emergency” it is claimed to be.

This will eventually depend on just how much the Earth’s climate is warming due to our transient but relatively large increase in atmospheric CO2 levels.

This is why it is so important to accurately and impartially measure the Earth’s average temperature rise since 1850. It turns out that such a measurement is neither straightforward, independent, nor easy.

For some climate scientists, there sometimes appears to be a slight temptation to exaggerate recent warming,  perhaps because their careers and status improve the higher temperatures rise.

They are human like the rest of us. Similarly, the green energy lobby welcomes each scarier temperature increase to push ever more funding for their unproven solutions, without ever really explaining how they could possibly work better than a rapid expansion in nuclear energy instead.

Despite over 30 years of strident warnings and the fairly successful efforts of G7 countries to actually reduce emissions, CO2 levels in the atmosphere are still stubbornly accelerating upwards.

This is because simultaneously the developing world has strived to raise the wellbeing and living standards of their large populations through the use of ever more coal and oil, exactly as we did.

This is our current dilemma. Should they somehow be stopped from burning fossil fuels, or maybe compensated financially to ‘transition’ to so-called renewable energy instead?

All this again depends on the speed of climate change, which simply translates to the slope of the temperature record.

…

…

climate-debate

There’s No Such Thing As The Earth’s Ideal Temperature

By Jerry Powlas, March 2, 2020 in ClimateChangeDispatch

“The temperature of the Earth” is an ambiguous term that cannot mean anything.

At any given time, it is possible to measure the temperature of some very small part of the Earth, such as, perhaps, a shot glass of water.

At that same moment, other temperatures of the Earth that could be measured will show a variation from the temperature of molten rock (1,300 to 2,200°F) to polar ice (32 to -76°F).

Daily variation of the same place on Earth can be 50 to 60°F. Seasonal variation can be well over 100°F in high latitudes.

Conceptually, we could imagine, but not actually measure, every possible place and thing, at every possible time through all the seasons, and then average these data.

To detect “global warming,” we would have to modify these data to include the specific heat of everything measured, as well as the latent heat of all the things that change phase such as water, which appears as a liquid, vapor, and ice.

Conceptually, yes; actually, no. Not possible.

Atmospheric science is presumably the scientific study of the atmosphere. (I am proudly not an atmospheric scientist.) If you use the scientific method to study something, you might presume to call yourself a scientist.

Calling yourself a scientist does not give you the privilege of using bad data to reach fuzzy conclusions and then scare people with the latter.

These folks are looking for about a 1°C change in “the temperature of the Earth” over the course of 100 years.

 

 

Continuer la lecture de There’s No Such Thing As The Earth’s Ideal Temperature →

better to know...?, climate-debate

ANTARCTIC BLAST DELIVERS RARE SUMMER SNOW AND FREEZING TEMPERATURES TO PARTS OF AUSTRALIA

by Cap Allon, March 2, 2020 in Electroverse

Australia’s “Grand Solar Minimum” summer –which brought record cold/heat, drought/floods, fires, and dust storms– had one final sting in the tail: another flurry of rare summer snow.

While summer down-under officially ended on Saturday, Feb 29, another blast of heavy, unexpected snow began burying parts of Tasmania on Wednesday, Feb 26.

Mountainous areas of the isolated island state reported large accumulations to close out the week, with local meteorologists warning yet more snow could settle above 1,000 m (3,280 ft) –including at Mount Field and Wellington– over the coming days.

 

 

climate-debate

NOAA Relies on ‘Russian Collusion’ to Claim January Was Hottest Month on Record

by Anthony Watts, February 29, 2020 in WUWT

In a report generating substantial media attention this month, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) claimed January 2020 was the hottest January on record. In reality, the claim relies on substantial speculation, dubious reporting methods, and a large, very suspicious, extremely warm reported heat patch covering most of Russia.

The January 2020 Climate Assessment Report, released by NOAA’s National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI), was accompanied by a map showing a giant red menace of extraordinary asserted warmth extending from the Russian border with Poland well into Siberia. Yet, the asserted hot spot appears nowhere else.

 

Figure 1: Map of temperature departure provided by NOAA/NCEII. Note the huge red spot over Russia.

Continuer la lecture de NOAA Relies on ‘Russian Collusion’ to Claim January Was Hottest Month on Record →

climate-debate, unclassified

Tendency, Convenient Mistakes, and the Importance of Physical Reasoning.

by Pat Frank, March 1, 2020 in WUWT

Last February 7, statistician Richard Booth, Ph.D. (hereinafter, Rich) posted a very long critique titled, What do you mean by “mean”: an essay on black boxes, emulators, and uncertainty” which is very critical of the GCM air temperature projection emulator in my paper. He was also very critical of the notion of predictive uncertainty itself.

This post critically assesses his criticism.

An aside before the main topic. In his critique, Rich made many of the same mistakes in physical error analysis as do climate modelers. I have described the incompetence of that guild at WUWT here and here.

Rich and climate modelers both describe the probability distribution of the output of a model of unknown physical competence and accuracy, as being identical to physical error and predictive reliability.

Their view is wrong.

Unknown physical competence and accuracy describes the current state of climate models (at least until recently. See also Anagnostopoulos, et al. (2010), Lindzen & Choi (2011), Zanchettin, et al., (2017), and Loehle, (2018)).

GCM climate hindcasts are not tests of accuracy, because GCMs are tuned to reproduce hindcast targets. For example, here, here, and here. Tests of GCMs against a past climate that they were tuned to reproduce is no indication of physical competence.

When a model is of unknown competence in physical accuracy, the statistical dispersion of its projective output cannot be a measure of physical error or of predictive reliability.

Ignorance of this problem entails the very basic scientific mistake that climate modelers evidently strongly embrace and that appears repeatedly in Rich’s essay. It reduces both contemporary climate modeling and Rich’s essay to scientific vacancy.

The correspondence of Rich’s work with that of climate modelers reiterates something I realized after much immersion in published climatology literature — that climate modeling is an exercise in statistical speculation. Papers on climate modeling are almost entirely statistical conjectures. Climate modeling plays with physical parameters but is not a branch of physics.

I believe this circumstance refutes the American Statistical Society’s statement that more statisticians should enter climatology. Climatology doesn’t need more statisticians because it already has far too many: the climate modelers who pretend at science. Consensus climatologists play at scienceness and can’t discern the difference between that and the real thing.

Climatology needs more scientists. Evidence suggests many of the good ones previously resident have been caused to flee.

…