by Paul Homewood, November 25, 2017 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat
“Science” is not a set of facts but a process or method that sets out a way for us to discover information and which attempts to determine the level of confidence we might have in that information. In the method, a “claim” or “hypothesis” is stated such that rigorous tests might be employed to test the claim to determine its credibility. If the claim fails a test, the claim is rejected or modified then tested again.
Let’s face it, global surface temperature histories measured by thermometers are a mess. Recording stations come on-and offline seemingly at random. The time of day when the high and low temperatures for the previous 24 hours are recorded varies, often changing at the same station. Local conditions can bias temperatures. And the “urban heat island” can artificially warm readings with population levels as low as 2500. Neighboring reporting stations can diverge significantly from each other.
According to the most basic precepts of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), variations in CO2 concentrations exert significant control on sea surface temperatures, glaciers, sea levels, and generalized climate dynamics (i.e., precipitation patterns).
In particular, high CO2 concentrations, driven by human activity, are presumed to cause dangerously warming ocean waters, rapid glacier melt and sea level rise, and overall disruption to the Earth’s biosphere.
Newly published scientific papers wholly undermine this popularized conceptualization.
In fact, according to Bertrand et al. (2017), there has been a “marked cooling” of sea surface temperatures in the southernmost South America region during the last ~800 years — 3°C to 4°C colder than during the Medieval and Roman warm periods — that has continued unabated into “the most recent decades”.
by P. Homewood, November 21, 2017 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat
A year ago the media was full of fake Arctic heatwave news (…)
And a year later?
Arctic sea ice extent this October was the third highest since 2006, and continues to track recent years. Most of the Arctic basin is full of 2 meter+ thick ice, in stark contrast to 2008.
An international team of scientists, led by British Antarctic Survey (BAS), has produced a new map showing how much heat from the Earth’s interior is reaching the base of the Antarctic Ice Sheet. The map is part of a new paper accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union.
The team has produced the most up to date, accurate and high-resolution map of the so called ‘geothermal heat flux’ at the base of the Antarctic Ice Sheet. Of the basic information that shapes and controls ice flow, the most poorly known about is this heat
Stenni et al (2017), Antarctic climate variability on regional and continental scales over the last 2000 years, was published pdf this week by Climate of the Past. It includes (multiple variations) of a new Antarctic temperature reconstruction, in which 112 d18O and dD isotope series are combined into regional and continental reconstructions.
After a peak in 2012 the level went down by about 10 cm by mid 2017. It is very much related to natural variations, in sync with the El Ninos (low levels) and La Ninas (high levels).
So what remains of the climate change horror stories in connection to the Fiji Islands? (…)
(…) What does this all mean? Are models consistent with observations or not? Up to the recent very large El Nino, it seemed that even climate scientists were on the verge of conceding that models were running too hot, but the El Nino has given them a reprieve. After the very large 1998 El Nino, there was about 15 years of apparent “pause”. Will there be a similar pattern after the very large 2017 El Nino?
We are witnessing a holy alliance between Third World ecologists and big finance, orchestrated by the European Union, under the amused gaze of the American giant who has now taken leave of all this masquerade.
Sometimes you have to wonder which are the biggest fraud: Germany’s claim that its cars are clean, or its claim of being a leader in climate protection. Both, it turns out, are very fake and even downright frauds.
While German Chancellor Angela Merkel and German activists like going around and scolding Donald Trump for his “irresponsible” stance on “greenhouse” gas emissions, it is coming to light that Germany’s climate posturing is indeed a total swindle.
A new paper by renowned Swedish sea level expert Prof. Axel Mörmer published in the International Journal of Earth & Environmental Sciences dumps lots of cold water on the premise that today’s sea level rise is caused by man and is unusual.
Mörner’s paper looks back at the last 500 years of sea level rise and shows that natural variables are the major drivers, and not man-made CO2-driven global warming.
This is quite interesting. Remember the claim in on the front cover of Nature in 2009 by Steig and Mann that Antarctica was warming, thanks to that “special Mannian PCA math sauce” that was applied to air temperature data to smear surface temperature trends over the entire continent? It was dashed by climate skeptics who wrote a paper. It was accepted for publication and disproved (in my opinion) by a team of credible skeptics that wrote a counter-paper. But, there’s an interesting twist thanks to new and surprising data; Steig and Mann may have captured surface air temperature trends in the exact same areas that have been identified as geothermal hot spots.
While the effects of climate change on tree growth in forests have been extensively studied, there is little information available so far for urban trees”, said Professor Hans Pretzsch from the Chair for Forest Growth and Yield Science at TUM. The study supported by the Bavarian State Ministry for Environment and Consumer Protection as well as by the Audi Foundation for the Environment, which was published in the journal Scientific Reports, for the first time systematically examined the growth of urban trees worldwide for trends resulting from changing environmental conditions.
(…)The body of evidence however clearly shows that the climate sensitivity is on the low side, about 1 to 1.5 degree increase per CO2 doubling. People in the climate community are scratching their heads trying to understand the so called hiatus in the warming. Where is the heat hiding? While in reality it simply points to a low sensitivity.
It is far too early to judge this year’s global temperature developments and their significance regarding the long-term warming trend.
The United Nations climate change conference, held in Bonn this year, is always the cue for press releases from the World Meteorological Office and the UK Met Office in which they give their assessment of the year based on 9-10 months of data.
Dealing with the El Nino of recent years (and don’t forget the ‘Pacific Blob’ before that) they have had difficulty with explaining what part of the record temperature was due to El Nino and natural, and what was anthropogenic.
The plots attached here are taken from the MOYHU blog maintained by Nick Stokes here. The software on the blog allows the global temperature anomaly data for each month for the last several years, it also allows the mesh showing the temperature measurement points to be turned on and off.
by Freeman Dyson, November 10, 2017 in WUWTFREEMAN DYSON is professor of physics at the Institute for Advanced Study, in Princeton. His professional interests are in mathematics and astronomy
My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models. Of course, they say, I have no degree in meteorology and I am therefore not qualified to speak.
But I have studied the climate models and I know what they can do.
In addition, we consider temperature dependent natural emission and absorption rates, by which the paleoclimatic CO2 variations and the actual CO2 growth rate can well be explained. The anthropogenic contribution to the actual CO2concentration is found to be 4.3%, its fraction to the CO2 increase over the Industrial Era is 15% and the average residence time 4 years.”
by Tony Heller, November 9, 2017 in ClimateChangeDispatch
The animation below shows the extent of 5+ foot thick sea ice at present vs. the same date ten years ago. Ice thinner than five feet thick has been masked out.
Though advocates of the dangerous anthropogenic global warming (AGW) narrative may not welcome the news, evidence that modern day global warming has largely been driven by natural factors – especially solar activity – continues to pile up.
Much of the debate about the Sun’s role in climate change is centered around reconstructions of solar activity that span the last 400 years, which now include satellite data from the late 1970s to present.
Study Bolsters Theory of Heat Source Under West Antarctica
A new NASA study adds evidence that a geothermal heat source called a mantle plume lies deep below Antarctica’s Marie Byrd Land, explaining some of the melting that creates lakes and rivers under the ice sheet. Although the heat source isn’t a new or increasing threat to the West Antarctic ice sheet, it may help explain why the ice sheet collapsed rapidly in an earlier era of rapid climate change, and why it is so unstable today.
La géologie, une science plus que passionnante … et diverse