Archives de catégorie : climate-debate

A REVIEW OF ‘SKEPTICAL SCIENCE’ ALLEGED MYTHS

by Ken Gregory in Friends of Science, June 22, 2017


Pdf version available here

A website called ‘Skeptical Science.com’ is popular among climate alarmists. The website alleges to refute claims by climate skeptics that global warming is not a crisis. The website features a list of 10 “Most Used Climate Myths” by climate skeptics at the top left part of the webpage.  I review and rebut each rebuttal of the 10 alleged myths.

 

Why “Climate Science” Snubs Climatic Temperature

by Leo Goldstein, June19, 2017 in WUWT


When something pretending to be a science cannot adequately define a quantity for its central subject, this something is inarguably a pseudo-science. This is certainly the case in the self-professed “climate science.” It proposes the hypothesis of a dangerously warming climate, but does it define a meaningful climatic temperature that can be robustly calculated from the observations at the current time? To the extent that it does define climatic temperature (meaningfully or not), does it pay much attention to this quantity? The answer to both these questions is a resounding NO.

The Laws of Averages: Part 2, A Beam of Darkness

by Kip Hansen, June 19, 2017 in WUWT


As both the word and the concept “average” are subject to a great deal of confusion and misunderstanding in the general public and both word and concept have seen an overwhelming amount of “loose usage” even in scientific circles, not excluding peer-reviewed journal articles and scientific press releases,  I gave a refresher on Averages in Part 1 of this series.  If your maths or science background is near the great American average, I suggest you take a quick look at the primer in Part 1 before reading here.

The New ‘Consensus’ On Global Warming – a shocking admission by “Team Climate”

in Anthony Watts, June 20, 2017

By MICHAEL BASTASCH AND DR. RYAN MAUE


A scientific consensus has emerged among top mainstream climate scientists that “skeptics” or “lukewarmers” were not long ago derided for suggesting — there was a nearly two-decade long “hiatus” in global warming that climate models failed to accurately predict or replicate.A new paper, led by climate scientist Benjamin Santer, adds to the ever-expanding volume of “hiatus” literature embracing popular arguments advanced by skeptics, and even uses satellite temperature datasets to show reduced atmospheric warming.

More importantly, the paper discusses the failure of climate models to predict or replicate the “slowdown” in early 21st century global temperatures, which was another oft-derided skeptic observation.

Study: California once had 150 straight years of stormy, wet, weather

by Vanderbilt University, from WUWT, June 20, 2017

Wet and stormy weather lashed California coast… 8,200 years ago

First high resolution evidence of California climate response to Holocene 8.2 ka event

The weather report for California 8,200 years ago was exceptionally wet and stormy.

That is the conclusion of a paleoclimate study that analyzed stalagmite records from White Moon Cave in the Santa Cruz Mountains published online Jun. 20 in Scientific Reports.

The Golden State’s 150-year stretch of unusually wet weather appears to have been marked by particularly intense winter storms and coincides with a climate anomaly in Greenland ice cores first detected in 1997. Before this “8.2 ka event” was discovered scientists thought the world’s climate had been unusually stable during the Holocene, the geological epoch that covers the last 11,700 years of Earth’s history.


 

One lonely molecule…

by Ian Plimmer, Geologist, June 17, 2017


If Australia emits 1.5 per cent of global annual CO2 emissions, 3 per cent of the total annual global emissions are anthropogenic and the atmosphere contains 400 parts per million by volume of CO2, then one molecule in 6.6 million molecules in the atmosphere is CO2 emitted from humans in Australia. This molecule has an atmospheric life of about 7 years before it is removed from the atmosphere by natural sequestration into life and limey sediments.

It’s Said That ‘97% of Climate Scientists Agree’ About Global Warming – But Do They?

by Neil Frank, June 9, 2017


A variety of studies have purported to find an overwhelming consensus among climate scientists on global warming. However, the studies rarely specify what it is to which the scientists agree

Neil L. Frank, Ph.D. (Meteorology), was the longest-serving Director of the National Hurricane Center (1974–1987) and is retired Chief Meteorologist of KHOU-TV, Houston (1987–2008). Living in Fulshear, TX, he continues research on global climate change while serving as a Fellow of The Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation.

Hundreds Of Scientific Papers Challenge ‘Global’ Warming

By Kenneth Richard, June 16, 2017 in NoTricksZone


Recently, an article citing over 80 graphs from scientific papers published in 2017 — and another 55 graphs from 2016  — established that modern “global” warming is not actually global in scale, and that today’s warmth is neither unprecedented or remarkable when considering the larger context of natural variability.

Here, an additional 140 non-hockey stick graphs taken from papers published in 2015 and earlier have now been made available.  With this latest installment, graphical temperature reconstructions challenging the conceptualization of global-scale or unprecedented modern warming are rapidly approaching 300.

 

The Vostok Ice Core: Temperature, CO2 and CH4

by Euan Means, December 12, 2014


In their seminal paper on the Vostok Ice Core, Petit et al (1999) [1] note that CO2 lags temperature during the onset of glaciations by several thousand years but offer no explanation. They also observe that CH4 and CO2 are not perfectly aligned with each other but offer no explanation. The significance of these observations are therefore ignored. At the onset of glaciations temperature drops to glacial values before CO2 begins to fall suggesting that CO2 has little influence on temperature modulation at these times.

See also here

Global versus Greenland Holocene Temperatures

by Andy May, June 19, 2017 i


Last week, I posted a global temperature reconstruction based mostly on Marcott, et al. 2013 proxies. The post can be found here. In the comments on the Wattsupwiththat post there was considerable discussion about the difference between my Northern Hemisphere mid-latitude (30°N to 60°N) and the GISP2 Richard Alley central Greenland temperature reconstruction (see here for the reference and data). See the comments by Dr. Don Easterbrook and Joachim Seifert (weltklima) here and here, as well as their earlier comments.

NEW STUDY: SCIENTISTS FIND RECENT UK FLOODING IS NOT UNPRECEDENTED

by Neil Macdonald and Heather Sangster, June 17, 2017 in GWPF


This paper presents the first coherent large-scale national analysis undertaken on historical flood chronologies in Britain, providing an unparalleled network of sites (Fig. 1), permitting analysis of the spatial and temporal distribution of high-magnitude flood patterns and the potential mechanisms driving periods of increased flooding at a national scale (Britain) since AD 1750.

La crédibilité climat de l’UE menacée par les règles concernant la forêt

by  Dr. Joanna House, 16 juin 2017, in Euractiv


L’atténuation du changement climatique grâce au secteur forestier doit être mesurée par une approche scientifique objective. Elle ne doit pas permettre aux États de masquer les impacts des politiques responsables de l’augmentation nette de leurs émissions.

Dr Joanna House est maitre de conférence en sciences et politique environnementales à l’Institut Cabot, à l’Université de Bristol. Elle co-signe cette tribune avec d’autres spécialistes de l’environnement. 

To Put America First Is to Put Our Planet’s Climate First

by Prof. Dr. Istvan Marko et al., June 16, 2017


On June 2, 2017, in a Letter regarding US withdrawal from Paris climate agreementaddressed to the MIT community, Professor Rafael Reif, president of MIT, criticized President Trump’s decision to exit the Paris Climate Accords. In this refutation, we propose to clarify the scientific understanding of the Earth’s climate and to dispel the expensively fostered popular delusion that man-made global warming will be dangerous and that, therefore, the Paris Agreement would be beneficial.

2015-16 El Nino behind large-scale surface melting event in Antarctica

by Nature Communications, June 15, 2017 in ClimatChangeDispatch


The West Antarctic Ice Sheet, a landbound mass of ice larger than Mexico, experienced substantial surface melt through the austral summer of 2015-2016 during one of the largest El Niño events of the past 50 years, according to scientists who had been conducting the first comprehensive atmospheric measurements in the region since the 1960s.

See also here

Hydroelectric dams may jeopardize the Amazon’s future

by University of Texas at Austin, June 14, 2017 in Science Daily


Hundreds of built and proposed hydroelectric dams may significantly harm life in and around the Amazon by trapping the flow of rich nutrients and modifying the climate from Central America to the Gulf of Mexico. These findings, published in Nature, emerge from a multidisciplinary, international collaboration of researchers from 10 universities, led by scientists at The University of Texas at Austin.

To meet energy needs, economic developers in South America have proposed 428 hydroelectric dams, with 140 currently built or under construction, in the Amazon basin — the largest and most complex network of river channels in the world, which sustains the highest biodiversity on Earth.

Earth Is Not in the Midst of a Sixth Mass Extinction

by Peter Brannen, June 14, 2017


“It is absolutely critical to recognize that I am NOT claiming that humans haven’t done great damage to marine and terrestrial [ecosystems], nor that many extinctions have not occurred and more will certainly occur in the near future. But I do think that as scientists we have a responsibility to be accurate about such comparisons.”

Many popular science articles take this as a given, and indeed, there’s something emotionally satisfying about the idea that humans’ hubris and shortsightedness are so profound that we’re bringing down the whole planet with us.

Climate cycles and their extrapolation into the future

by Dr. Dietrich Koelle, February 2, 2015 in NoTricksZone


As the reconstruction of the climate’s development in the past by proxy data shows, there’s a series of temperature cycles that appear to be unknown, or ignored by many climate scientists. Among these are the larger climate cycles of 150 million to 180 million years (see Part 1 and Part 2), but also the shorter and for us the more important following cycles:

1000 years (900-1100)    Suess cycle with +/-  0.65°C
230 years (230-250)        deVries cycle with +/-  0.30°C
65  years (60-65)              Ocean cycles with +/- 0.25°C

 

Winning climate strategy demands details

by Michigan State University, June 12, 2017 in ScienceDaily


Scientists at Michigan State University (MSU) show that examining the daily minutia of climate, not just temperature, but also sunshine, precipitation and soil moisture simultaneously all over a country gives a better understanding of how variable a land’s climate can be. That information is crucial when countries are setting policies aimed at growing food, protecting water supplies and the environment and stemming disease outbreaks. The findings were reported in this week’s Scientific Reports.

End Game of Climate Wars: Clive James discusses how it plays out (slowly)

by JoNova, 2017


The best way to kill off the Climate Debate is to do what Team-Alarm has done for years — stop talking about whether it’s real, and just project forwards, detailing the collapse. For twenty years others have been saying “the debate is over”. Now the tables are turning. The debate really is over, skeptics won, and what’s left is to watch it continue to unravel. Clive James argues that it won’t collapse like a house of cards… (an extract from the new IPA book Climate Change: The Facts 2017.)

Indirect Effects of the Sun on Earth’s Climate

by Mike Jonas, June 10, 2017 in WUWT


In this article, I explore the scientific literature on possible solar indirect effects on climate, and suggest a reasonable way of looking at them. This should also answer Leif Svalgaard’s question, though it seems rather unlikely that he would be unaware of any of the material cited here. Certainly just about everything in this article has already appeared on WUWT; the aim here is to present it in a single article (sorry it’s so long). I provide some links to the works of people like Jasper Kirkby, Nir Shaviv and Nigel Calder. For those who have time, those works are worth reading in their entirety.