New Study Casts Doubt On Controversial Theory Linking Melting Arctic To Severe Winter Weather

by P. Voosen, May 13, 2021 in ClimagteChangeDispatch


Every time severe winter weather strikes the United States or Europe, reporters are fond of saying that global warming may be to blame.

The paradox goes like this: As Arctic sea ice melts and the polar atmosphere warms, the swirling winds that confine cold Arctic air weaken, letting it spill farther south.

But this idea, popularized a decade ago [and was the outlandish plotline in The Day After Tomorrow, pictured], has long faced skepticism from many atmospheric scientists, who found the proposed linkage unconvincing and saw little evidence of it in simulations of the climate.

Now, the most comprehensive modeling investigation into this link has delivered the heaviest blow yet: Even after the massive sea ice loss expected by midcentury, the polar jet stream will only weaken by tiny amounts—at most only 10% of its natural swings.

And in today’s world, the influence of ice loss on winter weather is negligible, says James Screen, a climate scientist at the University of Exeter and co-leader of the investigation, which presented its results last monthat the annual meeting of the European Geosciences Union.

Wandering polar bears are the new starving polar bears, falsely blamed on climate change

by Polar Bear Science, May 15 , 2021


Back in 2017, we famously had National Geographic falsely blaming a starving polar bear on climate change but since then we have been inundated (relatively speaking) with stories of ‘wandering’ bears sighted far from Arctic coastlines. These wandering bears are oddities to be sure but are not in any way an indicator of melting Arctic sea ice or lost habitat, as The Times (UK) has claimed in this latest example (Polar bear treks 1,500 miles south as Arctic hunting zone melts away).

The Greenhouse Effect In A Water World

by B. Irvine, May 17, 2021 in WUWT


A knowledge of Greenhouse gases is fundamental to any understanding of global surface temperatures. The presence of GHGs in our atmosphere has increased the global surface temperature by about 33C.

There are multiple lines of evidence, however, that challenge the strong water vapour feedback to a small initial CO2 forcing.  These strong positive feedbacks are central to the IPCC narrative.

These lines of evidence include.

  • The failure of all models and catastrophic warming projections.
  • The stubborn refusal of atmospheric Precipitable Water Vapour (PWV) concentration to rise in recent years.
  • The strength of convection cells in the tropics that have kept tropical temperatures approximately the same for many millions of years.
  • Irrigation and extra humidity generally coincide with cooler temperatures.
  • The hot spot as a signature of the positive Water Vapour (WV) feedback and its opposite, the negative lapse rate feedback, has not occurred.

INTRODUCTION