The WUWT Hotsheet for Tuesday September 10th, 2013

WUWT_hot_sheet7

Carbon soot gets blame for Arctic Ice Melt:

Oil industry and household stoves speed Arctic thaw
Gas flaring by the oil industry and smoke from residential burning contributes more black carbon pollution to Arctic than previously thought — potentially speeding the melting of Arctic sea ice and contributing to the fast rate of warming in the region.

============================================================

A crisis for the credibility of IPCC:

Governments footing the IPCC bill are demanding 1,500 changes to the upcoming Fifth Assessment Report. Why? Because report is not explaining the apparent pause in warming.

Crisis meeting to be held later this month.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10294082/Global-warming-No-actually-were-cooling-claim-scientists.html

h/t to Jack Simmons

============================================================

National Geographic botched statue of liberty cover prompts a letter to the President and CEO about “planetary smut”:

Dear Mr Fahey

As an expiring subscriber let me convey the profound dismay in regards to the inane publication you have the opportunity to direct. With a little thank you though, for some aspects of the September 2013 “rising seas” issue are unlikely what you expected them to be.

After decades of uninterrupted reading I gave up a few months ago, having seen the Magazine slide (fall) from its geography mission to open, fear-based “environmental” advocacy (with a lowercase “e”). It seemed and still seems there is no low you would avoid to reach in order to describe the planet or mostly cute species as either ultimately doomed or irremediably ruined: by evil humans, obviously, including one suspects all of your readers.

http://omnologos.com/national-geographic-sep-2013-what-kind-of-house-would-want-it-in/

==========================================================

LOL! The Sks kidz think a searchable database of climategate emails represents a “blacklist”.

See for yourself here: http://tome22.info/

==========================================================

Imploding:

Brian H says:

World Bank Climate Science funding collapses:
http://www.thegreenmarketoracle.com/2013/09/the-world-bank-declining-climate-change.html

===========================================================

Hurricane season has been a dud despite dire forecasts

The preseason predictions were all dire, using words like “extremely active” and “above-normal” to describe the forecast for the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicted that seven to 11 hurricanes would form, while AccuWeather predicted eight.

However, the season so far has been a welcome if unexpected dud, with not a single hurricane yet through the first week of September. (A typical full June-November hurricane season, based on weather records that go back to 1950, has seven hurricanes.)

In fact, the season is about to enter record territory for its unusual lack of hurricanes.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/09/07/quiet-hurricane-season/2776845/

=============================================================

New consensus: Now that the Arctic isn’t ice-free, it turns out that nobody is willing to stand behind those ice-free predictions of a few years ago

Global cooling? London newspapers scuffle over climate change in the Arctic | Alaska Dispatch

The conservative Mail also mocked a prediction made six years ago by scientist Wieslaw Maslowski, a researcher at the U. S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif., who forecast ice-free Arctic seas as early as this year.

That’s more cherry-picking, said Scambos.

That was a single prediction by one scientist and “it got amplified out of proportion to what the majority of scientists were saying,” Scambos said. “Some skeptics would have all of us live with this prediction, but in fact very few people stepped up to back that prediction when it was made.” [Which climate scientists stepped up to disagree with that high-profile prediction?]

2009:  Exclusive: Brochure may reveal Gore accurately cited scientist’s prediction of ice-free Arctic — It is the Scientist who has the explaining to do — not Gore | Climate Depot

COPENHAGEN – Al Gore’s citation of a scientist predicting an ice-free Arctic within a decade appears to have been accurate. It appears the scientist Gore cited, Dr. Wieslav Maslowski, did in fact make this prediction and it was published on December 2, 2009 by the Danish Climate Centre, lending support to Gore’s claim that the “figures are fresh.”…Dr. Maslowski essentially threw Gore under the bus

Joe Romm, Dec 15, 2009:

Yes, Maslowski predicted just two years ago that the Arctic could be ice-free by 2013…

h/t to Tom Nelson

=============================================================

Zeke grapples with reality:

“What is clear is that there is still much we don’t understand about the many different factors impacting Earth’s climate system, especially over periods as short as a decade”

Examining the Recent Slow-Down in Global Warming | The Yale Forum on Climate Change & The Media

Zeke Hausfather, a data scientist with extensive experience with clean technology interests in Silicon Valley, is currently a Senior Researcher with Berkeley Earth

 

 

 

About these ads
This entry was posted in The WUWT Hot Sheet. Bookmark the permalink.

50 Responses to The WUWT Hotsheet for Tuesday September 10th, 2013

  1. DGP says:

    I really like the “planetary smut” analogy. Whether its humankind or the Earth itself, CAGW has been peddling climate change snuff stories for decades. Weren’t we supposed to have learned something from the Chicken Little story as children?

  2. Theo Goodwin says:

    “In the new study, the researchers for the first time included temporal distribution of black carbon emissions from residential combustion. “Understanding how much is emitted when during the year is something that has to be included better in our regional models,” says IIASA researcher Zbigniew Klimont, who worked on the study. It also incorporated detailed regional data on the location of gas flaring emissions, improving upon previous estimates that either ignored them entirely or used only regional averages. These improved emission estimates and their temporal resolution allows for a better reproduction of seasonal variability in observed black carbon concentrations.”

    Isn’t Empiricism wonderful? Isn’t Scientific Method wonderful? Alarmists have been screaming about the Arctic sea ice’s imminent demise from global warming yet the first, or near first, close look reveals that black carbon from many and diverse local sources is a main culprit. (I must give credit to Anthony who has been on top of this topic for quite a while.)

  3. Henry Galt says:

    Zeke grapples with reality:

    “What is clear is that there is still much we don’t understand about the many different factors impacting Earth’s climate system, especially over periods as short as a decade”

    Climate is a period of more than 30 years – according to Zeke’s peers, for the last 40 years. We have had this rammed so far down our throats that I need to take my trousers off to brush my teeth.

    Shirly “… periods as short as a decade” are ‘just’ weather?

  4. Rob Dawg says:

    So we should undertake a massive northern hemispheric initiative to scatter bits of reflective mylar across the the frozen wastelands?

    Better idea. Reduce dark emissions as might be practical for many reasons not necessarily CAGW related and watch for a few decades for any discernible impact.

    Lacking detailed knowledge of the meaning of the multitude of climate control knobs available the ONLY prudent course is to stop turning the valves.

  5. Day By Day says:

    ;LOL! The Sks kidz think a searchable database of climategate emails represents a “blacklist”.

    Its funny they think its a blacklist–I can’t tell what it is. It has a lot of links to a lot of things with few explanations. There are no climategate emails to search–so what is it?

  6. It seems to be the natural course of once great publications, like National Geographic, and Scientific American, to slide from excellence to mushy mediocrity, to be captured by fear-mongering political pressure groups, and to subordinate science to political correctness.

  7. AnonyMoose says:

    National Geographic – low-information climate alarmists

  8. Rhoda R says:

    Why is it petroleum burn off and residential heating that are causing the soot problems? What about the Chinese massive use of unscrubbed coal fired power plants? I should think the latter are capable of putting much more soot into the atmosphere than the piddling amounts coming out of Alaska and Northern Canada.

  9. Gail Combs says:

    Governments footing the IPCC bill are demanding 1,500 changes to the upcoming Fifth Assessment Report. Why? Because report is not explaining the apparent pause in warming.

    Crisis meeting to be held later this month…..
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Congradulations to Roy Spencer, WUWT, Jo Nova, Climate Audit, Bishop Hill, Lord Monckton, James Delingpole and all the rest who kept pushing reality into the faces of the politicians.

    I think they got the message.

  10. Gunga Din says:

    An off topic question.
    I noticed the record high for my area was reported on TWC for today as 96F set in 1983. but the record, according to the NWS was 96F set in 1897 and tied in 1964 and 1983.
    My question is (and I don’t really want opinions as to why it might be reported as 1983), before the global warming stuff, was it common to report the most recent year a record was tied as the year the record was set?

  11. Gunga Din says:

    Zeke grapples with reality:

    “What is clear is that there is still much we don’t understand about the many different factors impacting Earth’s climate system, especially over periods as short as a decade”

    ==========================================================================
    Dang! Is Zeke beginning to realize that “Climate” forecasting and “Weather” forecasting aren’t that much different after all? (Except that a poor weather forecast is a temporary problem (or reprieve?) for the forecast area. A poor “Global” forecast can wreck a nation’s economy.)

  12. rabbit says:

    Rule 1 For Alarmists: Don’t make falsifiable predictions for events occurring within one’s lifetime.

    Come on, Al, you should know these things!

  13. Luther Wu says:

    This thread could be likened to a tasty banquet feast.

  14. Luther Wu says:

    Rhoda R says:
    September 10, 2013 at 2:04 pm

    “….”
    ____________________
    That’s true Rhoda, but still, the gas flaring in ND is no insubstantial thing:
    http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2013/01/16/169511949/a-mysterious-patch-of-light-shows-up-in-the-north-dakota-dark

  15. Joe Chang says:

    there is an article on NPR http://www.npr.org/2013/09/08/220188619/climate-change-leaves-hares-wearing-the-wrong-colors expressing concern for snowshoe rabbits which change color between white and brown. With “Climate Change” the timing between the rabbit cycle and snow cycle could become misaligned, putting the rabbits in mortal danger. Could the rabbits adapt quickly?
    If only rabbits could breed like … rabbits? they might be able to adapt quickly?

  16. John Trigge says:

    That was a single prediction by one scientist and “it got amplified out of proportion to what the majority of scientists were saying,” Scambos said.

    Are predictions by scientists to be treated in a similar manner to climate model outputs? Whilst they are all wrong and we should not focus on any single one, if they are averaged then that is the truth. Thus, we can throw an individual scientist’s predictions under the bus and you have to believe that we are omnipotent and know which scientist has to watch out for large public transport vehicles.

  17. KNR says:

    A crisis for the credibility of IPCC:

    sorry I must have missed it , but when did the IPCC get any ‘credibility ‘ ?

  18. CD (@CD153) says:

    “Governments footing the IPCC bill are demanding 1,500 changes to the upcoming Fifth Assessment Report. Why? Because report is not explaining the apparent pause in warming.”

    I have a better idea for all those governments. Why don’t they just ignore what the IPCC is spewing out, pull the funding for it, and let it shut down. Problem solved.

  19. TomR,Worc,MA says:

    rabbit says:
    September 10, 2013 at 2:34 pm
    Rule 1 For Alarmists: Don’t make falsifiable predictions for events occurring within one’s lifetime.

    Come on, Al, you should know these things!
    ==============================================================
    I believe they have learned this lesson, as all of the latest predictions are for 2100 and the like.

    Come to think of it…… has there been any one major prediction that the alarmists got right?

  20. Jimbo says:

    The confident Wieslaw Maslowski actually said:

    BBC – 12 December 2007
    Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,”…….”So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.”
    [Professor Wieslaw Maslowski]

    He said 2013 “is already too conservative”. Maslowski is to the Arctic what Viner is to UK rare snowfalls. Both are utter failures, no skill, crap, alarmists, idiots, fools, shisters.

  21. Jimbo says:

    Here is another failed part time professor and shister.

    Yale Environment360 – 30 August 2012
    “If this rate of melting [in 2012] is sustained in 2013, we are staring down the barrel and looking at a summer Arctic which is potentially free of sea ice within this decade,”
    [Dr. Mark Drinkwater]

    How many more times can they be allowed to fail and fail badly. I hear that the Arctic extent is up compared to last year by a very statistically significant amount. Arctic amplification has gone AWOL.

  22. Jimbo says:

    CORRECTION and apologies to Drinkwater – for now.
    I meant this failed shister.

    Sierra Club – March 23, 2013
    “For the record—I do not think that any sea ice will survive this summer. An event unprecedented in human history is today, this very moment, transpiring in the Arctic Ocean….”
    [Paul Beckwith - PhD student paleoclimatology and climatology - part-time professor]

  23. pat says:

    re Walsh’s sub-heading: surely he realises the “impact” will depend on what kind of “climate change” we actually get, but Walsh doesn’t see it that way cos “climate change” to the ridiculous MSM is CAGW:

    9 Sept: Time Mag Ecocentric: Bryan Walsh: A Silent Hurricane Season Adds Fuel to a Debate Over Global Warming
    We’ve passed the midpoint of the Atlantic hurricane season, and there’s been not a storm to see. What does a hurricane drought tell us about how climate change will impact tropical cyclones?…
    What happened?…

    http://science.time.com/2013/09/09/a-silent-hurricane-season-ignites-a-debate-over-global-warming/

    to find out “what happened”, Walsh looks to Revkin, MotherJones & Kerry Emanuel!

  24. Rhoda R says:
    September 10, 2013 at 2:04 pm
    Why is it petroleum burn off and residential heating that are causing the soot problems? What about the Chinese massive use of unscrubbed coal fired power plants? I should think the latter are capable of putting much more soot into the atmosphere than the piddling amounts coming out of Alaska and Northern Canada.

    Almost all of the BC comes and came from Russia. At the fall of the Soviet Union, the population of the Kola Peninsula was 1.15 million, more than 90% of the total Arctic population. The main reason for such a large population is, it is Russia’s only ice free Atlantic port and was a major centre of heavy industry, and the same winds and currents that keep it ice free blow on into the Arctic ocean.

    I don’t believe significant amounts of China BC reach the Arctic, and anyway those new power stations are in large part replacing residential stoves and hearths used for heating/cooking.

  25. pat says:

    10 Sept: WinnipegFreePress: U of M researcher aboard Amundsen dies in Arctic crash
    University of Manitoba research scientist Klaus Hochheim and two Canadian Coast Guard officers died Monday night when their helicopter crashed into the Arctic Ocean during a routine flight from the research icebreaker Amundsen…
    The helicopter is believed to be 420 metres below the surface.
    Hochheim was a climatologist and research associate with the Centre for Earth Observation Science at U of M, which announced a $15-million Arctic research centre last March if which the Amundsen was a key part.
    The U of M’s renowned Arctic research program has used the Amundsen as its base for several years…
    Harper said the three died in the McClure Strait, near Banks Island in the Northwest Territories, during a routine ice reconnaissance mission to check ice conditions…
    http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/Fatal-crash-in-Arctic-involving-Amundsen-223141291.html

  26. JimS says:

    “Governments footing the IPCC bill are demanding 1,500 changes to the upcoming Fifth Assessment Report. Why? Because report is not explaining the apparent pause in warming.”

    The IPCC responds and says, “Pause? What pause?”

  27. mikemUK says:

    Goodness me.
    I thought that the ‘apparent pause in warming’ had been long ago explained by Trenberth as a “travesty”: surely that is sufficient explanation for governments and their taxpayers’ wallets?

    Suggested definition:
    travesty : a term used in climate ‘science’ to define where a weak hypothesis together with its inadequate computer ‘modelling’ has diverged from observed reality.

  28. Jack Simmons says:

    Rob Dawg says:
    September 10, 2013 at 1:37 pm

    So we should undertake a massive northern hemispheric initiative to scatter bits of reflective mylar across the the frozen wastelands?

    Rob,

    What a wonderful idea!

    This sounds like another Christo project.

    http://www.overtheriverinfo.com/

    This could all be privately funded. Christo is always careful to clean up after himself. He’s an ‘artsy craftsy’ sort of person with an apparently large following. People would just flock after a project withe this scale, noble purpose, and artsy approach. Think of all the thousands of people who would volunteer to help on this project, unemployed college graduates, retired folks looking for something to do, members of the various Occupy groups, etc. During the project people could facebook about their impressions of how awful the mess mankind has gotten itself into and we’re here ‘to make a difference.’ Encounters with polar bears would be instructive.

    Great idea Rob!

  29. captaingrumpy1 says:

    And what happens when all the Polar Bears and whales and Turtles and Dolphins etc , Ingest the reflective particles??? THEY DIE from the toxic coating , But it’s all Global Warming’s fault.

  30. Ric Werme says:

    Gunga Din says:
    September 10, 2013 at 2:14 pm

    An off topic question.
    I noticed the record high for my area was reported on TWC for today as 96F set in 1983. but the record, according to the NWS was 96F set in 1897 and tied in 1964 and 1983.
    My question is (and I don’t really want opinions as to why it might be reported as 1983), before the global warming stuff, was it common to report the most recent year a record was tied as the year the record was set?

    I’ve generally heard the original record as the one referenced. It would be interesting to see if people report the most recent instance for heat records and the earliest for cold records.

    Perhaps for ties they should write something like 96°F(3X) as the actual years aren’t so informative as they are for single instance records.

  31. Luther Wu says:

    Ric Werme says:
    September 10, 2013 at 6:17 pm

    _______________
    We’ve seen so much mendacity from the ‘heaters’ that they no longer get any benefit of the doubt… of course they will misrepresent references to temp records. For them, it’s a simple matter of course.

  32. galileonardo says:

    Mr. Morabito,
    I wrote a similar letter a few weeks ago, but to the National Geographic Forum instead. I think your approach will likely be more effective, but whatever way it is done I would suggest to any other long-term subscribers to National Geographic who are also fed up with their activist alarmism to let your voices be heard. My follow-up post for a more likely outcome by the year 25,550.

  33. Gunga Din says:

    Ric Werme says:
    September 10, 2013 at 6:17 pm

    …. It would be interesting to see if people report the most recent instance for heat records and the earliest for cold records.

    =========================================================================
    That thought occurred to me also but I don’t want to assume it actually does happen that way now in an effort to give the illusion of a hockey stick without knowing what the common practice is compared to what it was before the AC was shut off in that hearing room.
    I don’t know the answer.

  34. OssQss says:

    Sooooo, what exactly happens to Carbon soot once it melts it’s way all the way through the ice?

    Do we have a study for that yet?

  35. A crisis for the credibility of IPCC:

    Governments footing the IPCC bill are demanding 1,500 changes to the upcoming Fifth Assessment Report. Why? Because report is not explaining the apparent pause in warming.

    Crisis meeting to be held later this month.[...]

    I believe the Telegraph may have grabbed the wrong end of the “crisis” stick here!

    The meeting at the end of this month was scheduled long ago. And, to the best of my knowledge, on May 22, governments were sent copies of the “Final Draft” of the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) along with the “invitation” and agenda for the Sept. 23-26 WGI Session (which IPCC members are invited to attend and which is to be followed immediately by a scheduled plenary Session of the IPCC to rubber-stamp whatever gets decided in the WGI Session).

    At this stage, notwithstanding the “leaks”, we can only speculate on the actual content of the SPM – not to mention the underlying “technical summary” and the 14 Chapter actual report!

    Not sure where the demand for “1,500 changes” came from, though. Perhaps it was inferred by someone who has seen the actual comments noted in the IPCC’s publicly posted “Fact Sheet for Working Group I” which noted that “1855 comments [had been received] from 32 Governments”.

    Consequently, IMHO, the result of the meeting may well turn out to present a “crisis” for the movers and shakers at the IPCC (Pachauri, Stocker and others dedicated to “the cause”!)

    But, AFAIK, the meeting itself is not a “crisis” meeting – assuming that by “crisis meeting” the writer at the Telegraph meant previously unscheduled.

  36. Henry Galt says:

    Idiot:

    “”UPDATE Dr. Richard Keen adds in comments:

    All this discussion of a degree or two is a moot point, since even the “nearly 80 degrees”, i.e. 79F, is still 7 degrees short of the record high for Greenland.

    That honor belongs to Ivigtut, down on the southern tip of Greenland (probably not far from Maniitsoq), where it was 86F (30.1C) sometime before 1940. This record is published in:

    Climates of the World, in Climate and Man – Yearbook of Agriculture, US Dept of Agriculture, 1941

    reprinted in:

    Climates of the World, US Dept. Commerce, 1969

    and even in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivittuut

    So you know it’s valid.

    I don’t know the exact date of the record, but suffice it to say it’s before 1940, which explains why the DMI chose to use records starting in 1958. After all, Greenland weather records go back to 1784 (Vinther et al., Extending Greenland temperature records into the late eighteenth century, JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 111, D11105, doi:10.1029/2005JD006810, 2006). It’s a common ploy for the Warmers to act as though climate started in 1958, when Keeling starting recording CO2 on Mauna Loa, or 1947, when the PDO went cool, or 1970, when Arctic temperatures bottomed out, to get their upward trends.””

    Yeah – let’s spend trillions of our children’s’ cash on 0.4C

  37. DirkH says:

    “Zeke grapples with reality:
    “What is clear is that there is still much we don’t understand about the many different factors impacting Earth’s climate system, especially over periods as short as a decade”
    Examining the Recent Slow-Down in Global Warming | The Yale Forum on Climate Change & The Media”

    A standstill is a slowdown?

    Why are all the wamists Orwellian liars?

    Have they all been abused as children like Richard Dawkins?

    What’s Wrong with these people?

  38. cui bono says:

    From Zeke: “Total ocean heat content has increased by around 170 Zettajoules since 1970, and about 255 Zettajoules since 1955….if the same amount of energy had gone into the lower atmosphere it would of caused about 36 C (nearly 65 degrees F) warming!

    Since no-one has ever suggested that – without an ocean heat sink – AGW would produce a 36 degree increase in surface temperatures, the extra heat cannot be down to us. Where did it all come from?

  39. RCM says:

    Didn’t know where to post this but hope this is appropriate enough.
    “Esa’s Cryosat mission observes continuing Arctic winter ice decline”
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23964372

    So now I’m really confused. I’ve seen the graph of Arctic ice increasing vastly over last year, but the BBC and ESA claim a decline. It’s volume vs extent but…… hey. What’s going on here?

  40. MikeP says:

    RCM, They’re using a March/April time frame. As I understand it, this summer is not only seeing a big increase in the amount of first year ice surviving the summer, but a big increase in the second year ice as well. Therefore the ice thickness next March/April should be up considerably over this past March/April. To get their “decreasing trend”, they’re just using a three year comparison with an endpoint influenced by the extreme 2012 melt. This is not statistically a very strong comparison, but supports their narrative.

    Look at it this way. If that’s the best they’ve got, they’re really suffering. :)

  41. climatologist says:

    Why is nobody connecting the trend with the fact that the sun is at its lowest for more than 100 years?

  42. Man Bearpig says:

    Henry Galt says: September 10, 2013 at 1:23 pm

    Shirly “… periods as short as a decade” are ‘just’ weather?
    Unless it is a heat wave, tornado, deluge or flood in which case it is global warming. Snowm ice, record cold, yes they are just weather. /sarc

  43. TomB says:

    @RCM: It’s called “moving the goal posts”. Since the claim of proof of CAGW was sea ice decline (that has traditionally been interpreted as sea ice extent) has not panned out, they’re now claiming “Yeah, there’s more extent – BUT IT’S MUCH THINNER! Oh Noes!!!”
    So they’re still right. Soon, the goal posts won’t even be in the stadium anymore.

  44. mwhite says:

    “New consensus: Now that the Arctic isn’t ice-free, it turns out that nobody is willing to stand behind those ice-free predictions of a few years ago”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23964372

    “Esa’s Cryosat mission observes continuing Arctic winter ice decline”

    Where there’s ice there’s a story

  45. mwhite says:

    “ALMOST-BLANK SUN: 2013 is supposed to be a year of solar maximum. Indeed, the sun’s magnetic field is poised to flip, a long-held sign that Solar Max has arrived. But if this is Solar Max, it looks a lot like Solar Min. The face of the sun is almost completely blank:”

    http://spaceweather.com/archive.php?view=1&day=11&month=09&year=2013

  46. Village Idiot says:

    Henry Galt – September 11, 2013 at 1:21 am
    Yep, us Villagers must stick with the bogus reading, or we’ll all end up with egg on our moustaches (or whatever the saying is) ;-)

  47. Brian H says:

    Other experts agree that natural cycles cannot explain all of the recorded warming. (Telegraph)

    Right. It’s responsible for 0.01% of the warming. Can we get back to civilizing the planet, now?

  48. Brian H says:

    Predictions! Warmist (of all temperatures) just hate being held to ‘em. Just scare-mongering with ‘em, which pays so much better.

  49. Brian H says:

    Typo: Warmists ….

Comments are closed.