Archives de catégorie : climate-debate

Swiss Daily, German Scientist Slam Reporting U of Exeter Antarctic Findings… “An Abuse Of Science”!

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“.

Des corrections aux données satellitaires augmentent de 140% le réchauffement : le commentaire de Roy Spencer

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.

Scientists Find At Least 75% Of The Earth Has Not Warmed In Recent Decades

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.

CO2 Contributed Only 0.12°C To Global Temps Since 1850

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.

On the Validity of NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU Global Average Surface Temperature Data

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

Satellite battle: Five reasons UAH is different (better) to the RSS global temperature estimates

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).

Alarm about alarmism

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:

  1. It is possible that human-caused climate change will be swamped by much larger natural climate variability.

  2. 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.

  3. 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).

  4. It is possible that AGW and natural variability could conspire to cause catastrophic outcomes

Arctic Sea Ice Extent

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

The 2400-year Bray cycle

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.

Focusing on worst case climate futures doesn’t work. It shouldn’t work

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.

The ‘hiatus’ in global warming is the hottest topic in climate science right now, whether alarmists like it or not

by David Whitehouse, June 22, 2017 in Financial Post


Few things illustrate the poor state of the communication of climate science better than the reaction to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt’s comments about global temperatures in the past 20 years. It was made in written comments to the Senate following his confirmation hearing. He wrote, “over the past two decades satellite data indicates there has been a leveling off of warming.” Has the temperature increase of the Earth’s surface and lower atmosphere “stalled” in the past 20 years or so? Does this change our view of climate change?

Abrupt summer sea ice decline has not affected polar bear numbers as predicted

by  Dr. Susan J. Crockford, July 14, 2017 in ClimateChangeDispatch


Yes, Arctic sea ice has declined since satellite records began in 1979 but polar bears have adjusted well to this change, especially to the abrupt decline to low summer sea ice levels that have been the norm since 2007. Some polar bear subpopulations have indeed spent more time on land in summer than in previous decades but this had little negative impact on health or survival and while polar bear attacks on humans appear to have increased in recent years (Wilder et al. 2017), the reasons for this are not clear: reduced summer sea ice is almost certainly not the causal factor (see previous post here).

Temperature and Forcing

by Willis Eschenbach, July 13, 2017 in WUWT


Over at Dr. Curry’s excellent website, she’s discussing the Red and Blue Team approach. If I ran the zoo and could re-examine the climate question, I’d want to look at what I see as the central misunderstanding in the current theory of climate.

This is the mistaken idea that changes in global temperature are a linear function of changes in the top-of-atmosphere (TOA) radiation balance (usually called “forcing”).

Media gets high on Antarctic Crack

by Anthony Watts, July 13, 2017 in WUWT


I thought I’d take a moment from my R&R to write about all the hullabaloo surrounding the calving of the large iceberg off the Larsen C ice shelf in Antarctica. First, a few of the headlines:

LA Times: After Antarctica sheds a trillion-ton block of ice, the world asks: Now what?

The Grauniad: Iceberg twice size of Luxembourg breaks off Antarctic ice shelf

NYT: Warnings from Antarctica

MOST EUROPEANS AND 2/3 OF BRITONS REJECT IPCC ‘CLIMATE CONSENSUS’

from Global Warming Policy Forum, July 12, 2017


A new opinion poll of 10,000 European citizens reveals majority of Europeans reject the claim that climate change is mainly or entirely caused by humans.

For the last few decades, questions about the causes and impacts of climate change have dominated the climate debate. The IPCC and many climate scientists have been claiming relentlessly that the global warming trend since the second half of the 20th century is mainly if not entirely man-made, i.e. as a result of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. This dogma is habitually claimed to be the global climate consensus.

The Holocene context for Anthropogenic Global warming

by Ed Hoskins, June1, 2015


When considering the scale of temperature changes that alarmists anticipate because of Man-made Global Warming and their view of the disastrous effects of additional Man-made Carbon Dioxide emissions in this century, it is useful to look at climate change from a longer term, century by century and even on a millennial perspective.

(i) See also here

(ii) See also here

Three New Papers: Greenland 3-5°C Warmer With 40 Kilometers Less Ice Area 4,000-10,000 Years Ago

by Kenneth Richard, July 11, in ClimateChangeDispatch


It’s official. According to a new paper published in the journal Scientific Reports, Greenland has been cooling slightly since 2005.

This trend development may be a harbinger of what may be in store for the coming years.  Shifts in North Atlantic temperatures typically lead changes in the Arctic by a few years.  And throughout the North Atlantic, rapid cooling has been underway since 2005, plunging below the levels reached in the 1950s