Dr. Ryan N. Maue
Comments in addition to Previous Post…
Time to build another igloo, this time in Oklahoma: Al Gore finally responds to a question about global warming fueled snowstorms, and who does he cite? Clarence Page at the Chicago Tribune, not a climate scientist but someone self-described as having a scientific education commensurate with the old “Watch Mr. Wizard” TV show and a subscription to “Popular Mechanics”. This is lame to say the least. The link on Gore’s blog goes back to a Clarence Page article from February 14, 2010, on the heels of the two major snowstorms:
“A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.”
Compare with this with Dr. Michio Kaku’s explanation from last week:
“…Of course, this means only that global warming is consistent with the monster storms hitting the Northeast, not that it is the only definitive factor.”
And as the Earth continues to heat, it means that there will be more moisture in the air to possibly drive more monster storms and hurricanes, simultaneously with droughts and hot spells. So we might expect more unusual, bizarre weather patterns in the future.”
Neither Clarence Page of Dr. Kaku cite a peer-reviewed paper that definitively shows a link between the posited increasing blizzard frequency or intensity due to human-caused global warming, but resort to a hand-wavy, thought-experiment that uses the phrase “completely consistent with” and “all sorts of havoc” causing warmcold and drywet. Why doesn’t Al Gore cite the vast body of scientific research over the past 20-years that has been warning of that global warming “could” make snowstorms more severe — specific scientific papers that have directly attributed the recent snowfall changes to AGW — not El Nino or La Nina or the PDO or the rest of the alphabet soup of climate oscillations?
Instead, you cut and paste from a liberal columnist and talk show pundit. For some reason, I doubt Bill O’Reilly is going to fall for that one. This is called “spinning” or a “snow-job”.
Just an open question to those that have a scientific IQ much higher than Al Gore and Clarence Page: are we even sure of the sign of the change in extratropical cyclone (including blizzards and other midlatitude storms) frequency or intensity? How many decades will it be before we can detect these changes and over what geographical area?
During Northern Hemisphere winter, the planet Earth is climatologically as cold as it gets in January and February due to the preponderance of land versus ocean coverage. The average global near-surface air temperature during the past 30-years on February 1st is 13C, compared to well over 16C during July and August. When averaged out during the entire annual cycle or calendar year, the temperature is about 14.4-14.6C depending on who you ask. The largest changes in winter temperatures have been with warmer night-time lows, for whatever reason.
When the air is super cold like in Havre Montana last night (-42F), it carries next to no water vapor. That’s the air mass that will follow behind the current blizzard — underneath a 1050 mb Arctic high pressure — which is causing the strong winds due to the pressure gradient with the storm. Ahead of the storm and the warm front, temperatures are in the 50s and 60s from Louisiana to Virginia and the Carolinas, which isn’t destroying any record highs. This blizzard could have a helluva lot worse in terms of atmospheric dynamics — and moisture since the Gulf of Mexico and Tropical Pacific sea-surface temperatures (the source region for this so-called global warming moisture), are of course anomalously cold due to La Nina…
Compare the actual Sea-Surface Temperatures between 2011 with 2010 and 2009 and 2008…that’s “climate change” I can believe in…
But just wait for next week as the entire Northern Hemisphere sinks further into the deep-freeze…
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Common sense falsifies CAGW.
Ah, yes if only the heat of the dust bowl of the 1930’s would return, then everyone would believe us. Surly that would be absolute proof of global warming that none could dispute! Nothing that intense could be natural, right? (what Al Gore and all the other alarmists are hoping for)
The sheer scale of natural variability seems to be incomprehensible for many but in fact it just all boils down to a shift of the air circulations overhead. Going from one side of a jetstream to another for a period of time gives a huge change in climate regionally.
The same for regions that move closer to or further from the subtropical highs or the ITCZ.
That is all that climate change is. The absolute global temperature matters hardly at all and is not discernible day to day. The Earth cares not a jot whether from time to time there is a bit more energy in the oceans or the air. Natural forces will swamp human influences (globally) at will.
Al is hoping that no one can tell the difference between an anomoly map, and a temperature map.
That air coming down from the arctic is way below freezing, I’m sure it’s just loaded in moisture.
If it were warmer, we would be calling it rain……….
I doubt that Mr. Gore actually reads scientific papers .
What really gets me is that these so called experts act as though it has never snowed before .
Debunking Al Gore = Shooting Fish in a Barrel…
I thought I’d try and find some of Dr Kaku’s appearances on Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell, but the sheer volume of crank stuff is too great to post here! Instead, I will simply recommend Binging for michio kaku on coast to coast am. Dr Kaku likes to talk about crazy things! I have no problem with him talking about another crazy thing. I’d be happy if he were to be the new face of AGW. He’s a rich target.
And I thought it was his Chakra.
I am starting to see the light on global warming. This is a winter from hell.
What does science matter to the global warmers??
I had a dream and Mr. Potatohead said that CO2 causes everything.
So, that settles that.
And now that this has been ‘published’ here it is available as evidence.
“A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.“
Is there an AGW mouthpiece somewhere who has bothered to explain exactly how this Warming causes Cooling?
Because they did NOT predict this.
They said “Snowstorms would become a thing of the past”.
That’s what they predicted.
Al Gore has the market cornered for hot air predictions.
David says:
February 1, 2011 at 3:57 pm
I am starting to see the light on global warming. This is a winter from hell.
Yup.
O/T but interesting. The Daily Mail are running an article to the effect that the UK’s CO2 emissions were down by 9% in 2009 due to the financial crisis/recession. See
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1352521/Greenhouse-gas-emissions-drop-9-Britons-use-fuel-energy-recession.html
Presumably there will be a similar trend in CO2 emissions from other industrialised countries, such as the US and many European countries. The article does not say how the figures fared in 2010 but at least as far as the UK was concerned there was little economic growth such that one would expect 2010 levels to be down by a broadly similar amount (probably not quite such a reduction).
This is interesting since if this is wide spread, presumably there should be some trace of this in the Mauna Loa measurements if these measurements are truly measuring the effects of manmade emissions as opposed to CO2 emissions from natural sources. It would be interesting to see some analysis of all this data (extended world wide).
This won’t be any comfort to anyone suffering the effects, but I wonder if the higher incidence of these extreme events is caused by the transition from warming to cooling.
One often sees this in financial markets where there is an increase in volatility around the inflection point between bear markets and bull markets and vice-versa. Once the bear or bull market is established, volatility goes down. They are both quasi-chaotic systems, so it’s plausible.
[ryanm: what is the metric for extreme events? who is measuring this, and who decides what is extreme. a rigorous statistical definition would be preferable, though the variability of climate and weather on a variety of time scales makes this most difficult]
David says:
February 1, 2011 at 3:57 pm
I am starting to see the light on global warming. This is a winter from hell.
=================================================
David, it all makes perfect sense
The world economy tanked, so the US and UK produced slightly less CO2.
China and India produced a lot more….
…which proves that they were right all along.
It’s that nasty capitalist CO2 that did it ;-D
“Of course, this means only that global warming is consistent with the monster storms hitting the Northeast, not that it is the only definitive factor”
EVERYTHING is consistent with ‘Global Warming’; that’s precisely why ‘Global Warming’ has nothing to do with science.
This looks like ManBearPig central.
What else could Al Gore say but it’s global warming?
Amino Acids in Meteorites,
True dat. He owns that lie.
If there are two more big snowstorms, Al should consider changing his name and quietly moving far, far away. Am I the only one who thinks of Al and Exodus 22:18 every time I shovel out the driveway?
So good to hear from Big Al again. Really missed him.
On yahoo news: “The system that stretched more than 2,000 miles across a third of the country promised to leave in its aftermath a chilly cloak of teeth-chattering cold, with temperatures in the single digits or lower.”
Yep, the cold is a clear signature of global warming! 😉
ryanm: what is the metric for extreme events? who is measuring this, and who decides what is extreme. a rigorous statistical definition would be preferable, though the variability of climate and weather on a variety of time scales makes this most difficult
Fair point, Ryan. I don’t have a robust statistical metric. It is subjectively based on about three years of regularly reading WUWT and other blogs, and years before of an interest in weather and climate.
We do seem to have had a lot of precipitation over the last year, more than a few records broken in temperatures, and a lot of “unprecedenteds”. And yet none of them in the same general direction, i.e. indicating definitive warming or cooling.
It could just be the increased focus on weather events, or it could be me adding 2+2 and getting 5.
This weather is not a big deal. I would not call it unusual. If anything, Al Gore should be saying that global warming causes normal weather. Like a stopped clock that is right twice a day, he would be at the moment of truth.