climate-debate

Greenland Meltdown Hoax

by P. Homewood, August 29, 2019 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

You will recall those ridiculous stories about Greenland heatwaves and ice sheet meltdown, which were circulating just a couple of weeks ago :

…

As I pointed out at the time, they were simply not true. And, now the actual data bears this out.

The Surface Mass Balance (SMB) of the ice sheet, while below average is still well above that of 2012, and also within the historical range.. Most of the shortfall this year is because of dry weather during the winter, hence lack of snow.

[The light grey band shows differences from year to year. For any calendar day, the band shows the range over the 30 years (in the period 1981-2010), however with the lowest and highest values for each day omitted. ]

http://polarportal.dk/en/greenland/surface-conditions/

…

climate and geology

Switching on the Atlantic heat pump

by Stockholm University, August 27, 2019 in WUWT/fromNature

34 million years ago the warm ‘greenhouse climate’ of the dinosaur age ended and the colder ‘icehouse climate’ of today commenced. Antarctica glaciated first and geological data imply that the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, the global ocean conveyor belt of heat and nutrients that today helps keep Europe warm, also started at this time. Why exactly, has remained a mystery.

“We have found a new trigger to explain the start-up of the Atlantic current system during the greenhouse-icehouse climate transition: During the warm climate, buoyant fresh water flooded out of the Arctic and prevented the ocean-sinking that helps power the conveyor. We found that the Arctic-Atlantic gateway closed due to tectonic forces, causing a dramatic increase in North Atlantic salinity. This caused warming of the North Atlantic and Europe, and kickstarted the modern circulation that keeps Europe warm today,” says David Hutchinson, researcher at the Department of Geological Sciences, Stockholm University, and lead author of the article published in Nature Communications.

The team of scientists, from the Bolin Centre for Climate Research, used a combination of geophysical data and climate modelling to show that the freshwater transport through the Arctic-Atlantic gateway plays a critical role in controlling the overturning circulation.

…

climate-debate

Amazon Wildfires Are Horrifying, But They’re Not Destroying Earth’s Oxygen Supply

by Scott Denning, August 22, 2019 in LiveSci=nce

Fires in the Amazon rainforest have captured attention worldwide in recent days. Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who took office in 2019, pledged in his campaign to reduce environmental protection and increase agricultural development in the Amazon, and he appears to have followed through on that promise.

The resurgence of forest clearing in the Amazon, which had decreased more than 80% following a peak in 2004, is alarming for many reasons. Tropical forests harbor many species of plants and animals found nowhere else. They are important refuges for indigenous people, and contain enormous stores of carbon as wood and other organic matter that would otherwise contribute to the climate crisis.

Some media accounts have suggested that fires in the Amazon also threaten the atmospheric oxygen that we breathe. French President Emmanuel Macron tweeted on Aug. 22 that “the Amazon rain forest — the lungs which produces 20% of our planet’s oxygen — is on fire.”

…

Don’t hold your breath

Even though plant photosynthesis is ultimately responsible for breathable oxygen, only a vanishingly tiny fraction of that plant growth actually adds to the store of oxygen in the air. Even if all organic matter on Earth were burned at once, less than 1% of the world’s oxygen would be consumed.

In sum, Brazil’s reversal on protecting the Amazon does not meaningfully threaten atmospheric oxygen. Even a huge increase in forest fires would produce changes in oxygen that are difficult to measure. There’s enough oxygen in the air to last for millions of years, and the amount is set by geology rather than land use. The fact that this upsurge in deforestation threatens some of the most biodiverse and carbon-rich landscapes on Earth is reason enough to oppose it.

climate-debate

Fake News and Fires in the Amazon

by Donna Laframboise, August 23, 2019 in BigPicturesNews

Politicians and government officials like to talk as though it’s possible to stamp out fake news. It isn’t.

Fake news is as old as humanity. After Aristotle incorrectly claimed women had fewer teeth than men, generations of highly educated people believed it.

Rajendra Pachauri was called “the UN’s top climate scientist” by the BBC – and a “Nobel laureate” by the New York Academy of Sciencesmagazine. Neither statement was true.

Pachauri’s doctorate wasn’t in climatology, but in industrial engineering and economics. And the fact that he accepted the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the UN organization he chaired doesn’t make him or any other person affiliated with that organization a Nobel laureate.

Published in 2008 and 2009, these inaccurate statements have never been corrected. In other words, we’re surrounded by fake news. And always will be. Humans are frequently mistaken. Organizations, as well as individuals, post things on the Internet before double-checking.

While media outlets are supposed to be more reliable than your brother-in-law, that seems less true every day. Over the past week, people have shared a CNN headline on Facebook that declares: “The Amazon rainforest is burning at a record rate” (see the screengrab from my own Facebook feed, at the top of this post).

If you click through to the CNN website, you’ll find a few extra words: “…research center says.” But the primary statement is misleading. Which means that millions have been alarmed unnecessarily – including a lovely, smart, young mother of my acquaintance.

Over at the website of National Geographic, a headline falsely declares: Brazil’s Amazon is burning at record rates – and deforestation is to blame. The second half of that assertion is vigorously disputed here.

…

Why Everything They Say About The Amazon, Including That It’s The ‘Lungs Of The World,’ Is Wrong

Amazon fires: how celebrities are spreading disinformation

The Amazon Is Not Earth’s Lungs: Humans could burn every living thing on the planet and still not dent its oxygen supply

Is Amazon Rainforest Burning At Record Rates? What Is The Way Forward?

Lies, Damn Lies, And Rainforest Fear-Mongering

Annual Amazon farmland burn sets records for international outrage

Amazon fires: What about Bolivia?

Stop Sharing Those Viral Photos of the Amazon Burning

The Three Most Viral Photos of the Amazon Fire Are Fake. Here Are Some Real Ones to Share.

What Satellite Imagery Tells Us About the Amazon Rain Forest Fires

The myth of ecocide: So many lies are being told about the Amazon fires

Why shouldn’t Brazilians burn down trees?

Sugar cane, Palm oil, and Biofuels in the Amazon

climate-debate, to keep an eye on...

How the Media Help to Destroy Rational Climate Debate

by Dr Roy Spencer, August 25, 2019 in GlobalWarming

An old mantra of the news business is, “if it bleeds, it leads”. If someone was murdered, it is news. That virtually no one gets murdered is not news. That, by itself, should tell you that the mainstream media cannot be relied upon as an unbiased source of climate change information.

There are lots of self-proclaimed climate experts now. They don’t need a degree in physics or atmospheric science. For credentials, they only need to care and tell others they care. They believe the Earth is being murdered by humans and want the media to spread the word.

Most people do not have the time or educational background to understand the global warming debate, and so defer to the consensus of experts on the subject. The trouble is that no one ever says exactly what the experts agree upon.

When you dig into the details, what the experts agree upon in their official pronouncements is rather unremarkable. The Earth has warmed a little since the 1950s, a date chosen because before that humans had not produced enough CO2 to really matter. Not enough warming for most people to actually feel, but enough for thermometers to pick up the signal buried in the noise of natural weather swings of many tens of degrees and spurious warming from urbanization effects. The UN consensus is that most of that warming is probably due to increasing atmospheric CO2 from fossil fuel use (but we really don’t know for sure).

For now, I tend to agree with this consensus.

And still I am widely considered a climate denier.

Why? Because I am not willing to exaggerate and make claims that cannot be supported by data.

…

…

The widely reported Greenland surface melt event around 1 August 2019 (green oval) was then followed by a recovery to normal in the following weeks (purple oval), which was not reported by the media.

…

climate-debate

More fake five-alarm crises from the IPCC

by Paul Driessen, August 25, 2019

UN and other scientists recently sent out news releases claiming July 2019 was the “hottest month ever recorded on Earth” – nearly about 1.2 degrees C (2.2 degrees F) “above pre-industrial levels.” That era happens to coincide with the world’s emergence from the 500-year Little Ice Age. And “ever recorded” simply means measured; it does not include multiple earlier eras when Earth was much warmer than now.

Indeed, it is simply baseless to suppose that another few tenths of a degree (to 1.5 C above post-Little Ice Age levels) would somehow bring catastrophe to people, wildlife, agriculture and planet. It is equally ridiculous to assume all recent warming has been human-caused, with none of it natural or cyclical.

Moreover, as University of Alabama-Huntsville climate scientist Dr. Roy Spencer has noted, this past July was most likely not the warmest. The claim, he notes, is based on “a limited and error-prone array of thermometers which were never intended to measure global temperature trends.”

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Michael Mann Refuses to Produce Data, Loses Case

by P. Homewood, August 26, 2019 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

Some years ago, Dr. Tim Ball wrote that climate scientist Michael Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn State.” At issue was Mann’s famous “hockey stick” graph that purported to show a sudden and unprecedented 20th century warming trend. The hockey stick featured prominently in the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report (2001), but has since been shown to be wrong. The question, in my view, is whether it was an innocent mistake or deliberate fraud on Mann’s part. (Mann, I believe, continues to assert the accuracy of his debunked graph.) Mann sued Ball for libel in 2011. Principia Scientific now reports that the court in British Columbia has dismissed Mann’s lawsuit with prejudice, and assessed costs against him.

What happened was that Dr. Ball asserted a truth defense. He argued that the hockey stick was a deliberate fraud, something that could be proved if one had access to the data and calculations, in particular the R2 regression analysis, underlying it. Mann refused to produce these documents. He was ordered to produce them by the court and given a deadline. He still refused to produce them, so the court dismissed his case.

 

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Amazonie : fake news, désinformation, manipulation !

by Jo Moreau, 26 août 2019 in Contrepoints

L’ avalanche d’articles, de photos et d’avis de personnalités de tous horizons sur les incendies qui ravagent l’Amazonie constitue une illustration parfaite du sale boulot de manipulation de l’opinion publique exercée par les médias, et porteur de l’amalgame trompeur diffusé jour après jour entre protection de l’environnement et réchauffement climatique.

La première chose qui a attiré mon attention est le rapport fait entre le nombre d’incendies constatés en 2019, avec la situation en… 2018. Il est à peine croyable qu’une comparaison aussi peu significative sur le plan statistique et trompeuse sur le plan historique ait été diffusée sans aucune réserve par tous les médias mondiaux, mais serve de surcroît les intérêts d’hommes et de femmes politiques, à commencer par le leader auto-proclamé de l’Union Européenne et porte-drapeau mondial de l’écologisme, j’ai nommé le président Macron.

Illustré par une photo « détournée », son récent tweet sur le sujet résume parfaitement l’amalgame entretenu par les sauveurs de la planète sur base de fake news :

« Notre maison brûle. Littéralement. L’Amazonie, le poumon de notre planète qui produit 20 % de notre oxygène, est en feu. C’est une crise internationale. Membres du G7, rendez-vous dans deux jours pour parler de cette urgence. »

Alors, soit le président Macron est mal informé, soit il suit aveuglément les avis très orientés d’ONG n’ayant aucune légitimité scientifique ou démocratique. Le problème est que la majorité de ceux qui nous gouvernent a une démarche identique.

Mais reprenons les choses dans l’ordre.

FAKE NEWS

Je place sous ce titre l’emploi par les médias ou sur les réseaux sociaux de photos parfois anciennes, non pas « fausses », mais tout à fait étrangères avec la situation actuelle en Amazonie.

Il s’agit d’une tactique souvent employée, destinée à émouvoir le public et l’orienter dans le sens voulu. Le choix des photos qui illustrent un article a une grande importance. Ainsi, les photos de dirigeants politiquement incorrects montrent souvent des visages grimaçants ou dans des poses peu avantageuses, tandis que les dirigeants idéologiquement corrects (aux yeux des médias) nous sont montrés souriants et sympathiques.

Mais l’emploi massif de ces photos « détournées » était tellement flagrant qu’après les avoir abondamment publiées, l’ensemble de la presse émit dans un deuxième temps des réserves prudentes quant à leur origine, ce qui lui permit accessoirement de se draper dans une démonstration émouvante d’objectivité.

DÉSINFORMATION

…

…

Voir aussi ici
(Une Amazonie bien commode pour la politique idiote de Macron)

only geology, sciences-general

Deducing the scale of tsunamis from the ’roundness’ of deposited gravel

by Tokyo Metropolitan University, August 25, 2019 in ScienceDaily

Scientists from Tokyo Metropolitan University and Ritsumeikan University have found a link between the “roundness” distribution of tsunami deposits and how far tsunamis reach inland. They sampled the “roundness” of gravel from different tsunamis in Koyadori, Japan, and found a common, abrupt change in composition approximately 40% of the “inundation distance” from the shoreline, regardless of tsunami magnitude. Estimates of ancient tsunami size from geological deposits may help inform effective disaster mitigation.

…

…

Journal Reference: Daisuke Ishimura, Keitaro Yamada. Palaeo-tsunami inundation distances deduced from roundness of gravel particles in tsunami deposits. Scientific Reports, 2019; 9 (1) DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-46584-z

better to know...?, climate-debate, press and newspapers

Amazon Rain Forest Fires: Here’s What’s Really Happening

by Alexandria Symonds, August 23, 2019 in TheNewYorkTimes

…

 

These fires were not caused by climate change. They were, by and large, set by humans. However, climate change can make fires worse. Fires can burn hotter and spread more quickly under warmer and drier conditions.

When it comes to the future of climate change, widespread fires contribute a dual negative effect. Trees are valuable because they can store carbon dioxide, and that storage capacity is lost when trees burn. Burning trees also pumps more carbon into the atmosphere.

…

…

climate-debate

Is Amazon Rainforest Burning At Record Rates? What Is The Way Forward?

by R. Walker, August 21, 2019 in Science20

Short summary: we have had wild fires for many years now in the Amazon, even in the tropical rainforest – mainly started by humans for forest clearing and ranching. It is not enough to impact significantly on the Paris agreement pledges yet, though it is important in the long term if this continues for decades. It does of course have major and immediate impacts on forest residents, nature services and the biodiversity in Brazil.

This image is being shared widely, for instance in National Geographic’s “The Amazon is burning at record rates – and deforestation is to blame”. Similarly, the BBC is reporting it as ‘Record number of fires’ in Brazilian rainforest.

Yet, NASA’s own description for this photo says that it is burning at close to the average for the last 15 years. So, what is going on here?

APOLOGIES – UPDATE FROM NASA FROM 19TH AUGUST – THEY NOW CONFIRM INPE INSTEAD OF SAYING IT IS BELOW AVERAGE

Previous version of this article was mistaken. I have made a copy on my website here (the comments on this article are based on that earlier version):

NASA Say Amazon Rainforest Burning At Close To Average Rates – Yet Many News Stories Say Record Rates – Which Is It?

It accurately summarized the article it linked to from NASA (Fires in Brazil) and that page showed as updated on 22nd August which lead me to believe it was up to date. But apparently it isn’t, that’s just the date for a minor update of the page.

…

climate-debate

Looking behind the scenes of the well-orchestrated climate hysteria

by Sanjeev Sabhlok, August 22, 2019 in TheTimesofIndia

We know there is simply no basis for climate alarm. All “scientific” predictions have failed, life has survived happily with much higher CO2 in the past, the medieval warming period a thousand years ago was much warmer than today, the small temperature variations of the 20th century are easily explained by natural causes, and the IPCC reports confirm that there is no increase in extreme weather events and no economic harm from CO2.

And yet the hysteria is increasing by the day. The “remedies” being suggested are becoming more extreme: it is no longer just about making energy so expensive that the poor can’t afford it, it is now about removing meat from their diet as well.

…

climate-debate, to keep an eye on...

Amazon Fire History Since 2003

by Les Johnson, August 23, 2019 in WUWT

We are told that Amazon fires are at record levels right now. This is a blatant lie. The only “record” is that Amazonian fires have DECREASED over the “record”.

This (is) what the data actually looks like, to August 22. Yes, its updated daily.

This comes from a wonderful site, https://www.globalfiredata.org/forecast.html#elbeni

It uses NASA MODIS data, from the Terra and Aqua satellites, and is updated daily. By going to the website, you can look at individual regions in the Amazon, or as I have done, look at the totals for the Amazon. This site also has global data, but I am only looking at the Amazon region here.

The Interactive Graphs are very informative. Hovering the cursor over the graph will show the data at that point.

You can highlight individual years, by clicking on a year in the legend at the bottom of the graph. That year remains bright, while the rest are dimmed. Using Eyeball Mark 1 Trend Indicator (EBM1TI), 2019 is slightly high, but not at record levels. Not even close.

One thing I saw by looking at each year, was a rough pattern – one or two bad years, one or two years at much lower levels, then a bad year. This pattern is there until 2010. 2010 was the last “bad year”. Levels since 2010 have been 1/2 or less of the “bad years”. The old pattern has been broken.

 

…

 

See also here

climate-debate

Re-evaluating the manufacture of the climate consensus

by Judith Curry, August 21, 2019 in ClimateEtc.

A new book by Oppenheimer, Oreskes et al. entitled ‘Discerning Experts: The Practices of Scientific Assessment for Environmental Policy‘ makes a case against consensus seeking in climate science assessments.

I have long railed against the consensus-seeking process used by the IPCC (see my previous blog posts on this topic).  And particularly, my paper:

Oppenheimer has long voiced concerns about consensus (e.g. his 2007 paper).  However, Oreskes has been consensus enforcer in chief, originating the 97% thingy.

I haven’t read their new book, but authors Oreskes, Oppenheimer and Jamison have written an essay on their book in Scientific American, entitled Scientists have been underestimating the rate of climate change.

You can see where this is going from the title of this article; most of this is an attempt to justify alarmism. But they make some interesting points.  Excerpts:

…

…

Lets stop manufacturing consensus about climate change.  Lets open up the scientific debate on climate change and celebrate disagreement and use it to push the knowledge frontier of climate science.  The whole consensus thing has done little to reduce global CO2 emissions, which was the point of the whole exercise.  It’s time for new approaches to both science and policy.

climate-debate

Listen to the Trees!

by Jim Steele, August 22, 2019 in WUWT

What’s Natural?

Published in Pacifica. Tribune August 20,2019

This summer I taught a class on the Natural History of the Sierra Nevada for San Francisco State University’s Sierra Nevada Field Campus. The first day we taught students how to identify the trees. Once students know their trees, they can easily see how tree species vary with elevation, temperature, moisture, and snow pack. They can see which species colonize open sunny areas and which trees need shade before they can invade. Old time naturalists used trees to identify “life-zones” where different species of mammals, birds, insects and other plants can be found. Furthermore, when you listen to the trees, you can see change.

…

 

Tree rings indicate the warmest decades of the 20th century were the 1930s and 40s, and temperatures have yet to surpass those decades. This divergence between thermometers and trees is best explained by the fact that instrumental temperatures are biased upwards when taken at hot airports or in areas recently suffering from growing urban heat island effects. In contrast, trees measure temperatures in natural habitat.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Why CO2 is Not the Control Knob of Global Temperature and Observational Proof it is Not Causing Dangerous Warming

by Institute for the Human Environment,   August 2019

There is no debate as to whether or not atmospheric carbon dioxide, or CO2, is a so-called greenhouse gas. When present in the atmosphere, this one-carbon and two-oxygen molecule indeed has the capacity to absorb infrared radiation and warm the planet. There is also no debate as to whether or not the concentration of atmospheric CO2 is rising; over the past two centuries it has increased from a meager 0.028% of the atmosphere by volume to a still-meager 0.041% today. Furthermore, there is no argument that global temperatures are warmer today than they were 50, 100 or even 200 years ago. However, there is much debate on whether or not the modern increase in atmospheric CO2 has caused, or is presently causing, dangerous global warming, warming so severe that it is threatening life all across the planet.

…

But how accurate is this narrative?

In answering this question, one need only examine the historic temperature and CO2 records illustrated in Figure 1 more critically. Certainly, these two variables experience a fairly high degree of correlation over the time period shown. However, it doesn’t take a Ph.D. scientist to recognize and understand the fact that correlation among two variables does not prove causation. Every textbook on statistics teaches as much, and they also teach that a hypothesis of causation among two variables can be rejected if there is no statistically significant correlation between them, or if the correlation fails to be maintained in a consistent and expected manner across time.

By applying such principles to the case being considered here, it can confidently be argued that if carbon dioxide is indeed the all-important control knob of temperature that climate alarmists claim it to be, then changes in atmospheric CO2 should always precede changes in temperature. And, because CO2 is a greenhouse gas, to prove causation those changes must always be such that a rise in CO2 induces a corresponding rise in temperature, whereas a decline in CO2 must always induce a corresponding drop in temperature. Consistent observations to the contrary, if present in the historic record, would therefore serve to invalidate a causation claim, as well as demonstrate that atmospheric CO2 is nothing more than a bit player among the many factors that drive climate change.

…

Figure 1. 400,000 years of historic temperature and CO2 from the Vostok Ice Core, Antarctica. Source: Petit et al. (1999) Nature 399: 429-436.
…
better to know...?, climate and geology

‘MASSIVE POOL’ OF METHANE HIDDEN DEEP BENEATH EARTH’S SURFACE DISCOVERED BY SCIENTISTS

by Hannay Osborne, 21 August 2019 in Newsweek from PNAS

A huge source of methane has been discovered deep beneath the surface of Earth, sitting between the upper mantle and lower oceanic crust. The discovery is important as it could provide an insight into the hydrothermal vents that may have helped the planet’s first life emerge. Researchers also argue it could be a source of hydrogen and methane on other planets in the solar system—”even those where liquid water is no longer present.”

The ‘abiotic’ methane—methane that is not formed with organic matter—was found locked inside rocks. Researchers from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), Massachusetts, took 160 samples from hydrothermal sites across the globe, including the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, Guaymas Basin, the East Pacific Rise and the Mid-Cayman Rise. After analyzing them with a laser-based microscope, they found that almost all contained pockets of methane.

In their study, published in the journal PNAS, the team says this could be the biggest source of abiotic methane in the world. This reservoir, they say, could account for more methane than was in Earth’s atmosphere before the onset of the industrial era.

The methane appears to have formed by reactions between trapped water and olivine, a group of rock-forming minerals found in the planet’s subsurface. When seawater moves through the deep ocean crust, it mixes with magma-hot olivine. When the mineral cools, the water is trapped inside and a chemical reaction takes place, leading to the formation of hydrogen and methane.

Traditionally, we think of methane—a potent greenhouse gas—as forming when organic material breaks down. When it is emitted into the atmosphere, it has a warming effect far greater than carbon dioxide, although it is far shorter-lived than the latter, disappearing after about a decade.

However, methane is also known to exist on the seafloor. It is released through deep-sea vents—geothermally heated fissures on Earth’s crust. In 2016, scientists with the Ocean Exploration Trust discovered over 500 methane spewing vents off the west coast of the U.S.

However, the source of the seafloor methane has remained something of a mystery. “Identifying an abiotic source of deep-sea methane has been a problem that we’ve been wrestling with for many years,” study author Jeffrey Seewald, a senior scientist at WHOI, said in a statement.

Lead author Frieder Klein added: “We were totally surprised to find this massive pool of abiotic methane in the oceanic crust and mantle. Here’s a source of chemical energy that’s being created by geology.”

climate-debate

Media Ignore Vast Summer Cold Across Northern Hemisphere; Southern USA, Russia See “Record Lows” In July

by P. Gosselin, August 3, 2019 in NoTricksZone

While the headlines naturally focused on an intense heat wave over a region centered over France and Germany last week, the global warming ambulance chasers worked overtime avoiding and ignoring the real story: vast, continent-wide cold spreading across Russia.

Heat and cold zero-sum

First at the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE), Klaus Öllerer reported how the Sahara heat ended up being a “zero-sum” event for the northern hemisphere region of Europe and Asia.

Öllerer wrote last week that despite the heat that took place in large parts of Europe, it was cooler than usual in other neighboring parts. Only a certain area in Central Europe (purple area) was particularly hot. Around it, it was less warm (yellow) and cooler than usual (blue):

Source: wetterzentrale.de

“Even large parts of the Sahara are cooler than usual (blue). This is no wonder, as the heat is now in Europe and cooler air flows into the Sahara,” Öllerer wrote.

“The above-average warm areas balance out with the above-average cold areas,” he concluded. “The current warming is a zero-sum game! Historically, such events have occurred again and again.”

“It is even the case that in cooler times – such as the Little Ice Age – warm summer extremes were more frequent than in the last one hundred years and more,” Öllerer added.

Severe cold across Russia

…

climate-debate, to keep an eye on...

Northern Europe July Temperature Sees NO WARMING Over Past Decades. Global July Not A Record High!

by P. Gosselin, August 20, 2019 in NoTricksZone

Parts of Europe have seen a couple of brief but intense heat waves this summer, and so some of the public got brainwashed by the media into thinking the continent’s summer climate is rapidly getting hotter and that all this is the new normal.

Yet, when we examine the unaltered data from the Japan Meteorology Agency (JMA) for locations in northern Europe that have long-term datasets available, we see there has been no July warming trend over the past decades. Media reports suggesting otherwise are nonsense.

Ireland

Looking at 6 stations in Ireland, we have the following for July:

 

Data source: JMA.

Overall, Ireland’s mean July temperatures have been cooling off modestly over the past 3 decades and more, even though three stations are located at airports.

Sweden

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’

by Judith Curry, August 14, 2019 in ClimateEtc.

The latest travesty in consensus ‘enforcement’, published by Nature.
.
Abstract. We juxtapose 386 prominent contrarians with 386 expert scientists by tracking their digital footprints across ∼200,000 research publications and ∼100,000 English-language digital and print media articles on climate change. Projecting these individuals across the same backdrop facilitates quantifying disparities in media visibility and scientific authority, and identifying organization patterns within their association networks. Here we show via direct comparison that contrarians are featured in 49% more media articles than scientists. Yet when comparing visibility in mainstream media sources only, we observe just a 1% excess visibility, which objectively demonstrates the crowding out of professional mainstream sources by the proliferation of new media sources, many of which contribute to the production and consumption of climate change disinformation at scale. These results demonstrate why climate scientists should increasingly exert their authority in scientific and public discourse, and why professional journalists and editors should adjust the disproportionate attention given to contrarians.
.
This ranks as the worst paper I have ever seen published in a reputable journal.  The major methodological problems and dubious assumptions:
.
  • Category error to sort into contrarians and climate scientists, with contrarians including scientists, journalists and politicians.
  • Apart from the category error, the two groups are incorrectly specified, with some climate scientists incorrectly designated as contrarians.
  • Cherry picking the citation data of top 386 cited scientists to delete Curry, Pielke Jr, Tol, among others (p 12 of Supplemental Information)
  • Acceptance of the partisan, activist, non-scientist group DeSmog as a legitimate basis for categorizing scientists as ‘contrarian’
  • Assumption that scientific expertise on the causes of climate change relates directly to the number of scientific citations.
  • Assumption that it would be beneficial for the public debate on climate change  for the ‘unheard’ but highly cited climate scientists to enter into the media fray.
  • Assumption that scientists have special authority in policy debates on climate change
The real travesty is this press release issued by UC Merced:
…
…

The harm that this paper does to climate science is an attempt to de-legitimize climate scientists (both academic and non academic), with the ancillary effects of making it more difficult to get their papers published in journals (stay tuned for my latest engagement with the journal peer review process, coming later this month) and the censorship of Nir Shaviv by Forbes (hopefully coming later this week).

climate-debate

Hurricane Camille Remembered

by P. Homewood, August 19, 2019 in NotaLotofPeopoleKnowThat

This month marks the 50th anniversary of Hurricane Camille, the second most powerful to git the US coast. The strongest was the Labor Day Hurricane of 1935.

The NWS has issued this press release:

 

Hurricane Camille
August 17, 1969

Late in the evening on August 17 in 1969, Hurricane Camille made landfall along the Mississippi Gulf Coast near Waveland, MS. Camille is one of only FOUR Category 5 hurricanes ever to make landfall in the continental United States (Atlantic Basin) – the others being the 1935 Labor Day Hurricane, which impacted the Florida Keys; Hurricane Andrew in 1992, which impacted south Florida; and Hurricane Michael in 2018, which impacted the Florida panhandle. (Note: It is worth mentioning that the 1928 San Felipe Hurricane made landfall as a Category 5 Hurricane on Puerto Rico)

Camille ranks as the 2nd most intense hurricane to strike the continental US with 900 mb pressure and landfall intensity of 150 knots. Camille ranks just below the 1935 Labor Day Hurricane with 892 mb and 160 knots, while slightly stronger than Hurricane Andrew with 922 mb and 145 knots and Hurricane Michael with 919 mb and 140 knots. The actual maximum sustained winds of Hurricane Camille are not known as the hurricane destroyed all the wind-recording instruments in the landfall area. Re-analysis data found peak winds of 150 knots (roughly 175 mph) along the coast. A devastating storm tide of 24.6 feet occurred west of our area in Pass Christian, MS.

…

climate and geology, energy and fields

Fire from Ice: A Case Study of Methane Hydrates in the Eastern Mediterranean

by E. Zogopoulos, August 13, 2019 in EnergyIndustryeView

Methane hydrates is a source of methane gas which is found in crystalline formation that look like ice and can be found in permafrost regions or under the sea in outer continental margins.

We are living in times of fundamental changes in the energy landscape, driven by uncertainty, unstable energy prices, disruptive technologies, geopolitical gambits and subsequent attempts for regulatory interventions. While governments and corporations are trying to adjust to the new landscape and guess the name of the game, they need reliable sources of power to make predictions and critical strategic decisions.

Historical & geopolitical context

The era of hydrocarbons does not seem to be over, but there might be some indications in the horizon. We like it or not, they will still account for the vast majority of the global energy mix by 2050, despite significant breakthroughs in renewables. Many new players come in the energy market with the elusive promise of additional and cheaper resources and the will to disrupt the game – and eventually make money out of it.

Furthermore, the growing tension between public policy and private initiatives has been boiling and has been more than just an understatement for decades. The under-investment that we observe now due to lower prices and risks could become chronic and the global output of energy resources could lead to secure supply deficit.

Gas is believed to gradually replace coal, which is a source of distress for some existing players. The world is facing a proliferation of Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) supplies that are already impacting gas markets and competing with pipeline gas. Some of the largest and most significant consuming nations are contemplating reform or unbundling, which could mean some take or pay contracts become stranded and an increasing oil price is likely to reinforce the price arbitrage between long-term and spot pricing.

There is undeniably a constant call for further investments in renewables, but lower oil, gas and coal prices and increased efficiency (or very effective lobbying) might slow this down. The global players do take into consideration the call for renewables (like solar and wind energy), either for publicity purposes or even because they do believe that this could be the future.

…

 

Location of sampled and inferred methane hydrate occurrences in oceanic sediment of outer continental margins and permafrost regions. Most of the recovered methane hydrate samples have been obtained during deep coring projects or shallow seabed coring operations. Most of the inferred methane hydrate occurrences are sites at which bottom simulating reflectors (BSRs) have been observed on available seismic profiles. The methane hydrate research drilling projects and expeditions reviewed in this report have also been highlighted on this map. (Map courtesy of Timothy S. Collett, USGS)

energy and fields

Congo : la découverte des gisements d’Oyo change la donne pour le pays et le Continent

by La Tribune Afrique, 16 août 2019

Le Congo dispose de 2 milliards de barils de réserves de pétrole prouvées provenant d’une vingtaine de champs en cours d’exploitation. La récente découverte de pétrole onshore devrait redessiner le futur de l’industrie congolaise des hydrocarbures.

La récente découverte onshore faite dans le gisement du Delta de la Cuvette en République du Congo change la donne pour le Congo et l’Afrique. La découverte a été annoncée le 10 août par SARPD Oil et PEPA, un consortium congolais travaillant en tant qu’opérateurs du bloc.

Les premières projections indiqueraient que les gisements découverts pourraient produire jusqu’à 359 millions de barils de pétrole, soit 983 000 b/j. Cela pourrait quadrupler la production du Congo, qui se situe actuellement à plus de 330 000 barils/jour, selon les derniers chiffres de l’Opep. Le gouvernement lui s’est fixé comme objectif un volume de production de 400 000 barils/jour d’ici 2020.

«Il s’agit de notre première découverte onshore et elle nous laisse beaucoup d’espoir que nous ferons plus de découvertes, en particulier maintenant que nous allons attribuer plus de blocs pour l’exploration pétrolière dans le cycle de licences en cours», a expliqué Jean-Marc Thystère-Tchicaya, ministre congolais des Hydrocarbures dans une déclaration rapportée par la Chambre africaine de l’Energie.

Troisième producteur du Continent

….

biology+acidification, climate-debate

CRYING WOLF OVER THE GREAT BARRIER REEF

by Peter Ridd, August 12, 2019 in GWPF

The scare stories about the Great Barrier Reef started in the 1960’s when scientist first started work on the reef. They have been crying wolf ever since.

Scientists from James Cook University have just published a paper on the bleaching and death of corals on the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) and were surprised that the death rate was less than they expected because of the adaptability of corals to changing temperatures. It appears as though they exaggerated their original claims and are quietly backtracking. To misquote Oscar Wilde, to exaggerate once is a misfortune, to do it twice looks like carelessness, but to do it repeatedly looks like unforgivable systemic unreliability by some of our major science organisations.

It is a well-known phenomenon that corals can adapt very rapidly to high temperatures and that if you heat corals in one year, they tend to be less susceptible in future years to overheating. It is the reason why corals are one of the least likely species to be affected by climate change, irrespective of whether you believe the climate is changing by natural fluctuations or from human influence.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

AUSTRALIA HIT BY ANTARCTIC FRONT WITH TOWNS RECEIVING THEIR FIRST SNOW IN DECADES

by Cap Allon, August 12, 2019 in Electroverse

Regions just 90 minutes from Sydney received extremely rare snow over the weekend, as an intense cold front released from the Antarctic pushed north past Tasmania.

Blackheath resident Erica Mann was ecstatic to find fresh white powder falling in her garden, saying it was the most snow she had ever seen there:

“I opened the curtains and I could see a huge amount of snow on top of the water tank — it was so exciting,” she said. “It’s amazing. I went up the street … and all the houses are completely covered in snow.”

Residents in the Riverina also received a dumping of snow, with some towns recording their first falls in decades. Cootamundra local Steve Theobald said the last time he remembered snow there was 1985(solar minimum of cycle 21), while residents in Tumut –just 300 metres above sea level– said it was their first fall since 2000.

Other towns in southern NSW which recorded rare snow include Adelong, Harden and Batlow.

The powder continued falling through Sunday and finally began abating on Monday.

…

See also here (in French)

La géologie, une science plus que passionnante … et diverse