by Tony Heller, July 29, 2017 in DeplorableClimateScinceBlog
The New York Times said yesterday that heatwaves in the past were “virtually unheard of in the 1950s”, temperatures approaching 130 degrees didn’t used to occur, and summer temperatures have shifted towards more extreme heat.
(…) Every single claim in the article is patently false, and the exact opposite of reality. The authors intentionally started their study in a cold period, after the extreme heat of the 1930’s.
by Larry Kummer, July 29, 2017, in WUWT
Now that the alarmists have had their day trumpeting the IPCC’s worst case scenario (it’s unlikely and becoming more so), let’s look at their best case scenario (hidden by journalists). The risk probabilities are asymmetric: the good news is more likely than the bad news. This is inspirational, telling people that we can make a better world.
Primary energy use per year (in EJ), by source
by Dr S. Lüning and F. Vahrenholt, July 26, 2017 in NoTricksZone
About half of the CO2 emitted by man gets absorbed by the oceans and so does not stay in the atmosphere. Here there are certain areas of the ocean that are especially efficient CO2 sinks, while others do not absorb so well. What follows is a look of the newest literature on the subject.
by Institute for Basic Science, July 26, 2017 in SienceDaily
A new study shows that difference in water temperature between the Pacific and the Atlantic oceans together with global warming impact the risk of drought and wildfire in southwestern North America.
by Robert W. Felix in ClimateChangeDispatch
That’s right, according to NASA, sea levels are going DOWN! This is big news. How come the media hasn’t mentioned it?
NASA satellite sea level observations for the past 24 years show that – on average – sea levels have been rising 3.4 millimeters per year. That’s 0.134 inches, about the thickness of a dime and a nickel stacked together, per year.
See also here (nasa.gov)
by Paul Homewood, July 25, 2017
I’ve looked at UK sea level rise, but what about global?
As you can see, the rate of rise was very similar between roughly 1930 to 1960, as it has been since 1990. We see the same pattern at UK sites.
David’s graph mirrors that of the original paper. As with most sources of sea level data, the scale is set to make the rise appear to be astronomic.
Given that the IPCC is forecasting a rise of a meter and more by 2100, a more appropriate scale would look like this …
See also here
by William F. Jasper, July 22, 2017
However, China, the new climate-change champion, is leading the charge in a global building splurge that will see 1,600 of those dirty, villainous coal-fired power plants all across our planet. Even the New York Times, one of the most fervent voices of catastrophic global-warming alarmism — and one of the most vociferous critics of Trump’s decision to dump Obama’s Paris climate deal — has admitted that China’s coal plans make it “virtually impossible” to meet the Paris accord goals.
by Willis Eschenbach, July 22, 2017 in WUWT
Well, Dr. James Hansen, the man who invented the global warming scam and our favorite failed serial doomcaster, recently addressed the cratering of a 30-year prediction he made in 1988.
Back then, he said the globe would warm up by one full degree by 2018 under the “business as usual” rubric … not. Here’s the story as written up in “Spin” magazine in 1988.
…
by Willis Eschenbach, July 20, 2007 in WUWT
There’s a recent and good post here at WUWT by Larry Kummer about sea level rise. However, I disagree with a couple of his comments, viz …
This question all revolves around whether the rate of sea level rise is relatively steady, or whether it is accelerating … so how do we tell the difference?
by Ph.D. Roy Spencer, July 21st, 2017
When I read that, I (like everyone else) assumed that corrections to the satellite sea level data since 1993 have now led to a revised trend toward faster (not slower) sea level rise. Right?
Wrong.
by P Gosselin, July 21, 2107 in NoTricksZone
A commentary appearing here at the Swiss Baseler Zeitung (BAZ) slams a recently published British paper on moss growth in Antarctica that gave the impression the south polar continent was greening up due to climate change.
The BAZ writes that the paper is an example of “how today science is manipulated and used for political purposes“.
by Uzbek, 7 juillet 2017 in ClimatoRéalistes
Le site carbonbrief a publié le 30 juin 2017 un article sous le titre : « Des corrections majeures aux données satellitaires augmentent de 140% le réchauffement depuis 1998[1] »
Précisons d’abord que Les satellites ne mesurent pas directement la température. Ils sont équipés de capteurs sensibles à la luminance de l’atmosphère et de la mer dans le spectre des infrarouges. Pour en dériver la température, des traitements informatiques sur les données brutes sont nécessaires.
by Kenneth Richard, July 20, 2017 in ClimateChangeDispatch
As a new scientific paper (Turney et al., 2017) indicates, the Southern Ocean encompasses 14% of the Earth’s surface. And according to regional temperature measurements that have apparently not been subjected to warming “corrections” by data adjusters, the Southern Ocean has been cooling in recent decades.
by Tony Heller, July 20, 2017 in ClimateChangeDispatch
The Greenland Ice Sheet is gaining near record amounts of ice this year. Very little melting has occurred this summer, which is about to start winding down. Temperatures on the Greenland Ice Sheet have been extremely cold, and broke the all-time record for Northern Hemisphere July cold on July 4, at -33C.
See also DMI
by David Middleton, July 17, 2017 in WUWT
The Tethys Sea couldn’t have been a better place for petroleum source rock deposition even if it had been designed for such a purpose. The “Tethyan realm” encompassed much of the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods…
by Climatism, July 16, 2017
Dec 14, 2009 : New computer modeling suggests the Arctic Ocean may be nearly ice-free in summer as early as 2014, Al Gore said today at the U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen.
by Kenneth Richard, July 17, 2017
A Swiss scientist known to have published hundreds of scientific papers in physics journals has authored a new scholarly paper that casts serious doubts on the effectiveness of CO2 as a greenhouse gas influencing Earth’s temperatures.
This paper has been added to a growing volume of peer-reviewed scientific papers that seriously question estimates of a high climate sensitivity to significant increases in CO2 concentrations.
by David Middleton, July 17, 2017 in WUWT
When the observations don’t match the models, adjust the observations…
So… They accomplished accelerated sea level rise by slowing down the past…
by Ph.D. Roy W. Spencer, July 14, 2017
It’s pretty clear that the models are producing too much atmospheric warming compared to satellites, radiosondes (weather balloons), and multi-observational atmospheric reanalyses.
by Dr. J. Wallace III et al., June 2017
Abridged research Report, 30 pages, .pdf
The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting warming.
See also here
by JoNova, July 10, 2017
There are two main groups that use essentially the same NASA and NOAA satellites to estimate global temperatures. In the last year, they’ve both made adjustments, one down, and one up, getting further apart in their estimates. In ClimateWorld this is a big deal. Believers are excited that now a satellite set agrees a bit better with the maligned “hot” surface thermometers. But UAH still agrees more with millions of weather balloons. The debate continues. Here’s my short synopsis of the Roy Spencer (and John Christy) from the “Comments on the new RSS lower tropospheric temperature set.” (If something is wrong here, blame me).
by Judith Curry, July 15, 2017 in ClimateEtc.
In understanding climate change risk, and deciding on the ‘if’ and ‘what’ of ‘action’, we need to acknowledge that we don’t know how the climate of the 21st century will play out (Deep Uncertainty, folks). Four possibilities:
It is possible that human-caused climate change will be swamped by much larger natural climate variability.
It is possible/plausible that the sensitivity of the climate is on the low end of the IPCC envelope (1.0-1.5C), with a slow creep of warming superimposed on much larger natural variability.
It is possible/plausible that the IPCC projections are actually correct (right for the wrong reasons; too much wrong with the climate models for much credibility, IMO).
It is possible that AGW and natural variability could conspire to cause catastrophic outcomes
by DMI (Danish Meterological Institute), July 2017
The graphic shows the mean September sea ice extent on the northern hemisphere. The plotted values correspond approximately to the sea ice area that ‘survived’ the summer melt in the respective years
The graph illustrates a decreasing trend in sea ice extent since 1978, with annual variations of occationally more than 1 million square kilometres. The 2012 sea ice minimum extented set a new minimum record.
See also here
by Javier, July 11, 2017 in ClimatEtc.
In our attempt to better understand the nature of our planet’s abrupt climate changes I have already reviewed the glacial-interglacial cycle, and the Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle’s that take place during glacial periods. I now start reviewing the millennial climate cycles that abruptly impact the slowly changing Holocene climate. The most significant and regular one is the ~ 2400-year Bray cycle.
by Larry Kummer, July 15, 2017 in WUWT
After 30 years of failure to gain support of the US public for massive public policy measures to fight climate change, climate activists now double down on the tactics that have failed them for so long. This post explains why it will not work. Nor should it. Instead they should trust the IPCC and science, showing both the good and bad news.
