by Charles the moderator, November 15, 2019 in WUWT
As we approach the tenth anniversary of Climategate and are deluged with whitewashing and revisionist history, we will post a few articles, but cannot counter everything.
As far as we are concerned the tenth anniversary is on November 17th, the day I personally received the files.
The following post by Dr. Curry is one of the best historical retrospectives I’ve seen on the topic.~ctm
Reposted from Dr. Judith Curry’s Climate Etc.
Legacy of Climategate – 10 years later
Posted on November 12, 2019 by curryja | 121 Comments
by Judith Curry
My reflections on Climategate 10 years later, and also reflections on my reflections of 5 years ago.
Last week, an email from Rob Bradley reminded me of my previous blog post The legacy of Climategate: 5 years later. That post was the last in a sequence of posts at Climate Etc. since 2010 on Climategate; for the entire group of posts, see [link] Rereading these was quite a blast from the past.
While I still mention Climategate in interviews, the general reaction I get is ‘yawn . . . old hat . . . so 2010 . . . nothingburger . . . the scientists were all exonerated . . . the science has proven to be robust.’ I hadn’t even thought of a ’10 years later’ post until Rob Bradley’s email.
Now I see that, at least in the UK, the 10 year anniversary looks to be rather a big deal. Already we are seeing some analyses published in the mainstream media:
Two starkly different perspectives. While I personally think Delingpole’s article is a superb analysis, it would not surprise me if the ‘establishment’ media in the UK is looking to rewrite history and cement the ‘exoneration,’ especially with this forthcoming one hour BBC special Climategate: Science of a Scandal, set to air November 14.
According to Cliscep (not sure what the source of this information is), McKitrick and McIntyre were both interviewed for the BBC special, but apparently McKitrick was cut completely. Lets see how they edit McIntyre.
Also: It’s Officially the Tenth Anniversary of Climategate – and they’ve learned nothing
by Cap Allon, November 16, 2019 in Electroverse
The GFS and it’s ensembles are forecasting a dramatic reduction in westerly Zonal winds over the North Pole during the latter half of November and throughout December.
Conversely, October and the first half of November brought very strong Zonal winds at 60N, which went hand-in-hand with below-average temperatures at the Pole — Zonal winds in the stratosphere strengthen as the temperature over the North Pole drops:
IMPACTS OF AN SSW
Following the onset of an SSW event, temperatures at the pole will often climb sharply, and the high altitude winds will have reversed to flow in an eastward direction instead of their usual westward one.
These eastward winds progress down through the atmosphere and weaken the jet stream, often resulting in easterly winds near the surface which usually bring with them a dramatic drop in temperatures across Europe and North America.
Check out what happened to temps over the South Pole in September as an SSW took hold there:
by Cap Allon, November 12, 2019 in Electroverse
Northern Africa caught the edges of Europe’s polar blast over the weekend and into Monday. Heavy snowfall affected several wilayas (provinces) in Algeria yesterday, as reported by alg24.net.
The key national road 33, linking Bouira to Tizi-Ouzou, was closed during Monday morning rush-hour near the town of El Asnam. As was the RN30, the alternative route connecting Bouira to Tizi-Ouzou.
Heavy early-season drifts also shut national road 15 near Iferhounene, in the wilaya of Tizi-Ouzou.
Same case for the RN109 linking Sidi Bel Abbès and El-Bayadh.
And the road 172, located between Djbel Chélia and Lyabous (Khenchela) was also shut.
by Paul Berth, 15 novembre 2019 in ScienceClimatEnergie
La “pétition des 11 000” a été publiée dans le journal BioScience le 5 novembre 2019. Dans un style ultra-alarmiste, Ripple et ses collaborateurs nous apprennent que le CO2 et les gaz à effet de serre (GES) sont à la base de tous nos problèmes. Rien de nouveau ici : rappelons que le même auteur a publié un article très semblable il y a deux ans, en novembre 2017, et ce dans la même revue (BioScience). Il avait cependant fait mieux il y a deux ans puisqu’il avait récolté 15 000 signatures. Au total, 4 000 scientifiques se sont donc désistés cette année… Avant de lire le présent article, commencez par l’analyse de 2017 (cliquez ici). Comme vous le verrez, les conclusions tirées peuvent être appliquées au nouvel article de 2019.
La solution proposée par Ripple et ses “suiveurs” est simple : il faut arrêter immédiatement d’extraire du pétrole, du gaz et du charbon et laisser tout cela dans le sous-sol.Comme charité bien ordonnée commence par soi-même vous pourrez déjà vérifier, en consultant la liste des pétitionnaires, que les 234 scientifiques belges signataires de la pétition vont travailler le matin à vélo et se chauffent aux éoliennes. Dans le présent article nous allons analyser le nouveau texte publié dans BioScience.
1. Le journal BioScience
Also : An Analysis Of The 11,000 ‘Micky Mouse’ Climate Scientists
by T. Bjorklund, October 16, 2019 in WUWT
1. From 1850 to the present, the noise-corrected, average warming of the surface of the earth is less than 0.07 degrees C per decade.
2. The rate of warming of the surface of the earth does not correlate with the rate of increase of fossil fuel emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere.
3. Recent increases in surface temperatures reflect 40 years of increasing intensities of the El Nino Southern Oscillation climate pattern.
This study investigates the relationships between surface temperatures from 1850 to the present and reported long-range temperature predictions of global warming. A crucial component of this analysis is the calculation of an estimate of the warming curve of the surface of the earth. The calculation removes errors in temperature measurements and fluctuations due to short-duration weather events from the recorded data. The results show the average rate of warming of the surface of earth for the past 170 years is less than 0.07 degrees C per decade. The rate of warming of the surface of the earth does not correlate with the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. The perceived threat of excessive future global temperatures may stem from misinterpretation of 40 years of increasing intensities of the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) climate pattern in the eastern Pacific Ocean. ENSO activity culminated in 2016 with the highest surface temperature anomaly ever recorded. The rate of warming of the earth’s surface has dropped 41 percent since 2006.
by Patrick Franck, September 6, 2019 in Frontierin EarthScience
The reliability of general circulation climate model (GCM) global air temperature projections is evaluated for the first time, by way of propagation of model calibration error. An extensive series of demonstrations show that GCM air temperature projections are just linear extrapolations of fractional greenhouse gas (GHG) forcing. Linear projections are subject to linear propagation of error. A directly relevant GCM calibration metric is the annual average ±12.1% error in global annual average cloud fraction produced within CMIP5 climate models. This error is strongly pair-wise correlated across models, implying a source in deficient theory. The resulting long-wave cloud forcing (LWCF) error introduces an annual average ±4 Wm–2uncertainty into the simulated tropospheric thermal energy flux. This annual ±4 Wm–2 simulation uncertainty is ±114 × larger than the annual average ∼0.035 Wm–2 change in tropospheric thermal energy flux produced by increasing GHG forcing since 1979. Tropospheric thermal energy flux is the determinant of global air temperature. Uncertainty in simulated tropospheric thermal energy flux imposes uncertainty on projected air temperature. Propagation of LWCF thermal energy flux error through the historically relevant 1988 projections of GISS Model II scenarios A, B, and C, the IPCC SRES scenarios CCC, B1, A1B, and A2, and the RCP scenarios of the 2013 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, uncovers a ±15 C uncertainty in air temperature at the end of a centennial-scale projection. Analogously large but previously unrecognized uncertainties must therefore exist in all the past and present air temperature projections and hindcasts of even advanced climate models. The unavoidable conclusion is that an anthropogenic air temperature signal cannot have been, nor presently can be, evidenced in climate observables.
by K. Richard, November 11, 2019 in NoTricksZone
International and NASA solar scientists find their Total Solar Irradiance reconstruction extending to 1700 can “correlate well” with Earth’s global temperature records, including a positive net TSI trend during 1986-2008. A new Grand Solar Minimum is expected to commence during the 2030s.
Surface climate records that have been uncorrupted by coastal (ocean-air)/urbanization biases suggest there has been a long-term oscillation in temperature since 1900, with peaks during the 1920s-1940s and again during recent decades (Lansner and Pepke Pedersen, 2018).
by P. Homewood, November 10, 2019 in NotaLotofPeople KnowThat
It’s apparently taken ex IPCC Chair Bob Watson four years to work out that the Paris Agreement did nothing to reduce emissions.
It’s a pity he did not read this blog, because I was saying the same thing when it was signed!
Steve Milloy reports:
The truth behind the Paris Agreement climate pledges
Almost 75% of 184 Paris Agreement pledges were judged insufficient to slow climate change; Only 28 European Union nations and 7 others will reduce emissions by at least 40% by 2030
UNIVERSAL ECOLOGICAL FUND
- Only 28 European Union nations & 7 others will reduce emissions by at least 40 percent by 2030
- China & India, top emitters, will reduce emissions intensity, but their emissions will increase
- U.S., second top emitter, has reversed key national policies to combat climate change
- Almost 70 percent of the pledges rely on funding from wealthy nations for their implementation
Almost three-quarters of the 184 climate pledges made under the Paris Agreement aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions are inadequate to slow climate change, and some of the world’s largest emitters will continue to increase emissions, according to a panel of world-class climate scientists. It is these increasing greenhouse emissions that are driving climate change.
The Truth Behind the Climate Pledges, a new report published by the Universal Ecological Fund, examines in great detail the 184 voluntary pledges under the Paris Agreement, the first collective global effort to address climate change.
by Donna Laframboise, November 11, 2019 in BigPictureNews
Many scientists are now activists. They’re just another flavour of politician. Armed with a particular worldview, they’re willing to do questionable things to advance that worldview – including dragging the good name of science through the mud.
As I’ve explained recently, this isn’t a new phenomenon. It was well underway by the 1970s. Those of us who are aware of this history aren’t likely to get overly excited by the latest 11,000 scientists say it’s time to panic headlines (see here, here, here, and here).
The typical journalist, on the other hand, is a babe in the woods, totally lacking in historical perspective. Every iteration of this very old song gets treated like something fresh and new.
2019’s statement/petition is published in BioScience, the journal of the American Institute of Biological Sciences. Down in the ‘Conclusions’ section we read the following. The bolding has been added by me:
As the Alliance of World Scientists, we stand ready to assist decision-makers in a just transition to a sustainable and equitable future…such transformative change, with social and economic justice for all, promises far greater human well-being…prospects will be greatest if decision-makers and all of humanity promptly respond to this warning and declaration of a climate emergency…
Nope, these people don’t have a messiah complex. If all of humanity drops whatever it’s doing and follows their advice, they won’t just save us from the climate emergency. They promise to toss in universal justice and equity, as well.
by DR. B. Peiser, Nov. 8, 2019 in ClimateChangeDispatch
A new paper from the Global Warming Policy Foundation looks at how scientists monitor changes in ocean temperatures and finds a story of huge uncertainties and surprising findings.
For example, while warming might be expected to be fairly uniform, measurements suggest that it is regionalized, with parts of the South Pacific, in particular, warming more than elsewhere.
As the report’s author, Dr. David Whitehouse, says, it is hard to draw firm conclusions about what is happening in the seas:
“The oceans can absorb far more heat than the atmosphere, so temperatures changes are extremely small and therefore hard to measure reliably.”
“The energy that would raise the temperature of the atmosphere by 4 degrees C would only raise the ocean temperature by thousands of a degree, barely detectable.”
“Measuring changes in the ocean heat content are at the limits of our current capability and are made with significant uncertainties and unknowns.”
A recent claim that warming of the oceans was accelerating had to be withdrawn after errors were found in its uncertainty estimates by an independent scientist.
Cold Water? The Oceans and Climate Change can be downloaded here (PDF)
by Jim Steele, November 9, 2019 in WUWT
As one wildfire expert wrote, “Predicting future fire regimes is not rocket science; it is far more complicated than that.” But regardless of accuracy, most people are attracted to very simple narratives such as: more CO2 causes global warming causes more fires. Accordingly in the summer of 2019, CNN trumpeted the headline California wildfires burn 500% more land because of climate change. They claimed, “the cause of the increase is simple. Hotter temperatures cause drier land, which causes a parched atmosphere.” CNN based their claims on a scientific paper by lead authors Park Williams and John Abatzoglou titled Observed Impacts of Anthropogenic Climate Change on Wildfire in California. The authors are very knowledgeable but appear to have hitched their fame and fortune to pushing a very simple claim that climate change drives bigger wildfires. As will be seen, their advocacy appears to have caused them to stray from objective scientific analyses.
If Williams and Abatzoglou were not so focused on forcing a global warming connection, they would have at least raised the question, ‘why did much bigger fires happen during cooler decades?’ The 1825 New Brunswick fire burned 3,000,000 acres. In Idaho and Montana the Great Fire of 1910 burnt another 3,000,000 acres. In 1871, the Great Michigan Fire burned 2,500,000 acres. Those fires were not only 6 times larger than California’s biggest fire, they occurred in moister regions, regions that don’t experience California’s Mediterranean climate with its guaranteed months of drought each and every summer. If those huge devastating fires occurred in much cooler times, what are the other driving factors of big wildfires?
by Dr. Benny Peiser, Nov. 5, 2019 in ClimateChangeDispatch
The Paris Climate Agreement, far from securing a reduction in global CO2 emissions, is fundamentally a blank cheque that allows China and India to increase their emissions as they see fit in pursuit of economic growth.
This is the conclusion of a new paper by Law Professor David Campbell (Lancaster University Law School) and published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation.
For the last 25 years, international climate change law has failed to agree on a program of global emissions reductions.
Indeed this law grants permission to major emitters such as China and India to emit as much as they see fit. Global emissions reductions, therefore, have always been impossible and since 1992 global emissions have enormously increased.
Indeed, the Paris Agreement contains a categorical statement that countries such as China and India will not be obliged to undertake any reductions.
The UK Government proposes to continue with decarbonization even though Britain’s unilateral decarbonization is utterly pointless and thus wholly irrational.
Read the full paper here (PDF)
by Natasha Doff, November 7, 2019 in Bloomberg
Bloomberg) — Russia has ditched plans to set greenhouse-gas emissions targets for companies as a sign of its commitment to fighting climate change, following lobbying from big businesses that risked fines if they didn’t comply.
The measure was part of a bill intended to accompany Russia’s ratification of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change in September. Instead, the world’s fourth-largest carbon polluter scrapped the proposal after the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP) warned it would raise costs for companies and delay investment.
“After consultations with the government, it was decided to abandon the specific regulatory requirements,” the press department of the Economy Ministry, which is drafting the bill, said by email. “The government will have the right to decide after Jan. 1, 2024 what measures to introduce if Russia is forecast to miss its emissions targets.”
Cap Allon, November 5, 2019 in Electroverse
Brutal Arctic fronts have engulfed Scandinavia over the past few weeks. The record for Finland’s lowest-ever Autumn temp has just been smashed (for the second time this week), as has Sodankylä’s all-time snow-depth record (for early Nov).
The temperature in Enontekiö –a municipality in the Finnish part of Lapland– plunged to a Santa-freezing –28.2C(-18.8F) on Tuesday, Nov 5; beating-out the nation’s previous all-time autumnal low set just the previous day — Muonio’s -26.4C (15.5F) –located in far-northern Finland.
The previous record low for any autumn day in Enontekio was -26.3C (-15.3F).
Temperatures below -27C (-16.6F) were also recorded in Sodankylä, Luosto, and Kittilä on Tuesday, breaking local all-time record lows.