Despite the recent editorial in Nature saying that there’s no current connection between the two, NCAR’s Dr. Kenneth Trenberth is going to pitch connections between extreme weather and climate change anyway at an upcoming seminar at the University of New South Wales in Australia. From their website:
Kevin Trenberth public lecture: Extreme weather and its links to climate change
The ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science is sponsoring a free public lecture at UNSW from 6:30pm, Tuesday, October 16, by internationally recognised climate scientist Dr Kevin Trenberth.
The lecture explores the links between extreme weather events and climate change by one of sciences leading voices who is actively exploring that connection.
With the summer Arctic ice reaching it’s lowest extent during the period of the satellite record in September of this year and a rash of extreme weather events causing billions of dollars damage throughout 2012, the links Dr Trenberth describes in this lecture are of growing importance.
In this public lecture, Dr Trenberth will explain why global warming is occurring and reveal how heating the planet has generated many different kinds of extreme weather events around the world.
As a climate scientist of 40 years, since receiving his degree in meteorology in 1972, Dr Trenberth brings a wealth of experience to the topic.
He is currently a Distinguished Senior Scientist in the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado and was a lead author of the 1995, 2001 and 2007 Scientific Assessment of Climate Change reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Dr Trenberth also served from 1999 to 2006 on the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) and chaired the WCRP Observation and Assimilation Panel from 2004 to 2010. He now chairs the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment (GEWEX) scientific steering group.
During his extensive career, he has published over 480 scientific articles or papers, including 47 books or book chapters and over 213 refereed journal articles and is widely regarded as one of the world leaders in his field.
There is only limited seating for this one-off Sydney lecture, so it is important to RSVP early to COECSS@unsw.edu.au if you want to be a part of the audience.
DETAILS:
Time: 6:30pm sharp
Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2012.
Venue: Leighton Hall, The Scientia Building, University of NSW
RSVP: COECSS@unsw.edu.au
h/t to WUWT reader AndyG55
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
First sentence already contains two errors. Kevin not Kenneth, and did you even read the Nature editorial? It does not say what you claim.
He just thinks that if he says it often enough it will become true.
Let’s hope someone attending stands up and asks “Can you provide empirical evidence for that BS?”
“Extreme weather and its links to climate change” should instead read as:
Extreme political climatologists and their links to Climate Change.
Oh, Anthony, you missed it:
The title of the lecture is “Extreme weather and its MISSING links to climate change”…
what, no?
/SARC
University of NSW provided this newspaper article in 2009:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/how-noisy-naysayers-led-fielding-on-to-false-path-20090616-cghf.html
It’s all there – tobacco, fossil fuel funding, ‘consistency with’ climate models, and cherry-picking (by sceptics, of course).
‘As a climate scientist of 40 years’ – and Ed Wood made films for decades as well didn’t mean he was any good, although Depp was brilliant.
(OT) Oh and if your having a boring day at work try: http://www.edwood.org/
Gary: I am not sure what your agenda is here. I have read the article and it says exactly what is claimed: ‘there’s no current connection between the two’. Note the word ‘current’ – it may be that future research may establish a link between global warming, whatever its cause, and extreme weather events but then it might not. The evidence is not yet in. Fly-by shooting from the lip is not the way to commence a sensible discussion. But then, that may not be your intention.
… and while we’re on the subject of Senator Fielding and smoking (as addressed by the SMH article linked in my last comment):
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/161303.php
“AMA President, Dr Andrew Pesce, urged all Senators to back the Plain Labelling of Tobacco Packaging Bill, which was introduced into Parliament by Senator Steve Fielding. “.
I don’t think we should be too hard on Trenberth.
After all, if he hadn’t forged a career as a climate Jeremiah, what would he be doing? It’s not as if he has any skills which would enable him to get hired in the private sector, where bad performance and bad decisions cost companies real money.
He has a mindset which says that if you can’t join capitalism, then beat it, and an excellent position from which he can pursue that goal, funded by the taxpayer.
What would you do in his place?
All that hype about his credentials? I must say.it cuts no ice with me – many good scientists have made genuine mistakes and backed the wrong horse in the past. KT may be no different, but what is different is his lack of an open mind.. Even the likes of Einstein would always add a caveat to the effect of ‘I think this, or show me otherwise’ and would always be challenging his own thoughts/theories.
Basically, KT may well be a good scientist under all that hype – but his method and obvious confirmation bias would suggest otherwise and hence he is a science fail.
I’ll just use 8:22 in Genesis(Bereshith): While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. Two points, I’ll believe the Hebrew, on even Greek, inspired Scriptures. Especially knowing that both Environmentalist & Marxists admittentingly use “LYING” as a tennet to advance their agenda. Yeah, I know, women make up the single largest majority voter & have a biological need to lie to themselves and be lied to by others and are a natural prey for sociopaths. Just saying..
Gary says:
October 9, 2012 at 4:10 am
No Gary – you are wrong. Here’s the key paragraph:
“At a workshop last week in Oxford, UK, convened by the Attribution of Climate-related Events group — a loose coalition of scientists from both sides of the Atlantic — some speakers questioned whether event attribution was possible at all. It currently rests on a comparison of the probability of an observed weather event in the real world with that of the ‘same’ event in a hypothetical world without global warming. One critic argued that, given the insufficient observational data and the coarse and mathematically far-from-perfect climate models used to generate attribution claims, they are unjustifiably speculative, basically unverifiable and better not made at all. And even if event attribution were reliable, another speaker added, the notion that it is useful for any section of society is unproven.”
Perhaps Gary knows something about the coupled differential equations and boundary/initial conditions which purportedly model “climate” that permits them to be used to attribute extreme weather events (or ANY weather event for that matter) to climate. I’m sure Gary can explain all. By the way Gary, please include a discussion of the appropriate numerical methods and their stability and consistency properties (which are both essential for obtaining valid “solutions”).
By the way, if you read the editorial, you can see that the intention is to set up government-run “climate services” so that anyone can sue anyone else (e.g. “big oil”) over weather losses that some “climate model” can “prove” was due to climate change – climate change which is supposedly caused by oil drilling, manufacturing, breathing…If these extremists have their way, it will change our society dramatically for the worse.
Extreme weather is extremely lucrative for Trenberth and pals.
It has been scientifically proven that lecturing on “Extreme weather and its links to climate change” pays a lot more than lecturing on “No link between extreme weather and climate change.”
I’m beginning to think that it is not Trenberth’s heat, that is missing…
One could assume Trenberth will refer to his recent paper “Climate extremes and climate change: The Russian Heat Wave and other Climate Extremes of 2010”. Hopefully there will be a Q&A portion with his presentation and someone in attendance can ask him about the fact that the Indian and Pacific Oceans haven’t warmed in 20 years, according to the sea surface temperature dataset HADISST he referenced in the paper, while climate models showed that it should have warmed over 0.3 deg C:
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/figure-41.png
That was the basis for this post, which was cross posted here at WUWT:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2012/09/20/a-blog-memo-to-kevin-trenberth-ncar/
And it’s also the basis for the YouTube video “We Now Control Weather – Extreme Heat Events, Dirty Weather, Climate Disasters”…
…which was attached to this post, which was also cross posted here at WUWT:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2012/10/03/we-now-control-weather-extreme-heat-events-dirty-weather-climate-disasters/
Kev-in-Uk says:
October 9, 2012 at 5:19 am
“Basically, KT may well be a good scientist under all that hype – but his method and obvious confirmation bias would suggest otherwise and hence he is a science fail.”
The theory that KT is a good scientist is contradicted by his “travesty” e-mail.
One should not need an “Editorial in Nature” to realize that providing “Attributions” that will stand up in court is not likely to be available within anyone’s lifetime.
Frank K.
Did you not pass reading comprehension 101? If I state that Frank K made a claim that Gary was wrong, that does not actually mean that I said that Gary was wrong. The nature editorial quotes two critics but does not conclude that they are correct. In any case, why would you or Anthony suddenly start claiming that nature editorials are the ultimate authority on this (or anything)?
only when you think they agree with you? Even when they don’t? Funny that.
I don’t know about other types of extreme weather, but I’m betting that the extreme heat events of recent years would have been just about impossible in earlier times.
Of course if you think that Leprechauns are causing the warming, don’t let me influence you…
GallopingCamel says: “One should not need an “Editorial in Nature” to realize that providing “Attributions” that will stand up in court is not likely to be available within anyone’s lifetime.”
Yes, we’ve all seen too many cases where blind Freddy and everyone else knew someone was guilty as sin, but the courts let them walk. Let the legal system stick to what its good at, and stay away from science.
Last fall KT announced he’d found the “missing heat” in hundreds of down-hole, long term temperature records and that deep underground temperature changes PRECEDED surface changes by six months. This “variable” fission produced energy could not be added to the “CO1 is Evil” climate equation and the proposed October 2011 article release date quietly slipped away. The KT co-authored K-T radiative budget is the biggest fiction since the world was flat. After falling for the Carbon tax, with stiff fines for opposition, it is possible that propaganda is “value enhanced’ down under.
@ur momisugly Neil says: October 9, 2012 at 6:28 am, try being civil, your sophistry is transparent.
As a warmist Neil I thought nature was your bible thus infallible therefore you must believe “models used to generate attribution claims, they are unjustifiably speculative, basically unverifiable and better not made at all” as per the Nature editorial.
John Brookes says:
October 9, 2012 at 6:30 am
“I don’t know about other types of extreme weather, but I’m betting that the extreme heat events of recent years would have been just about impossible in earlier times.”
You realize that you need to substantiate this statement. You will have no credibility and look the fool if you don’t. Of course, you have been shown over and over that you are incorrect on this and many other points, yet still spew the same garbage. One has to wonder at your motivation and/or sanity.