2013 Was Not A Good Year For Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Climate Warming Change Disruption Weirding Ocean Acidification Extreme Weather, etc.

European Space Agency – CryoSat – Click the pic to view at source

Image Credit: European Space Agency – CryoSat

By WUWT regular “Just The Facts”

For anyone keeping track, 2013 has not been a good year for those who propagate the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) Narrative, also know by a litany of increasingly nebulous buzzwords including “Climate Change“, “Climate Disruption”“, “Global Weirding”, “Ocean Acidification”, and “Extreme Weather“. Regardless of efforts to nebulize CAGW to explain all forms of climatic and weather variation, in 2013 every loosely falsifiable prediction of the CAGW narrative seems to have failed. The apparent complete failure of the CAGW narrative in 2013 could make the most fundamentalist agnostic wonder if Mother Nature sometimes takes sides, aka the Gore Effect, but before we praise Gaia, let’s take a look at some CAGW predictions and the associated 2013 data.

Global Temperature:

“For the next two decades, a warming of about 0.2°C per decade is projected for a range of SRES emission scenarios. Even if the concentrations of all greenhouse gases and aerosols had been kept constant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1°C per decade would be expected. {10.3, 10.7}

Since IPCC’s first report in 1990, assessed projections have suggested global average temperature increases between about 0.15°C and 0.3°C per decade for 1990 to 2005.” IPCC AR4 2007

“Gulledge says some current projections point to a rise in average global temperature of 0.5°C (slightly less than 1°F) by the year 2030.” National Geographic 2005

“Global temperatures are increasing” NASA 2009

Global Temperatures through November 2013 had not increased for between 8 years and 11 months to 17 years and 3 months. depending on data set and Remote Sensing Systems (RSS)  reached 17 years in October, 2013:

WoodForTrees.org – Paul Clark – Click the pic to view at source

17 years has significance because in this 2011 paper “Separating signal and noise in atmospheric temperature changes: The importance of timescale” by Santer et al., found that:

Because of the pronounced effect of interannual noise on decadal trends, a multi-model ensemble of anthropogenically-forced simulations displays many 10-year periods with little warming. A single decade of observational TLT data is therefore inadequate for identifying a slowly evolving anthropogenic warming signal. Our results show that temperature records of at least 17 years in length are required for identifying human effects on global-mean tropospheric temperature.

So during the “at least 17 years” “required for identifying human effects on global-mean tropospheric temperature” Earth’s Temperature has been flat/Paused, making it quite difficult to identify any “human effects on global-mean tropospheric temperature”, unless they are of a stabilizing nature. Also, in 2013 “The Pause” in Global Temperature finally received widespread media coverage, i.e.:

“Over the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar.” The Economist “But climate sceptics have focused their attention on the references to a pause or hiatus in the increase in global temperatures since 1998″ BBC “Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released… and here is the chart to prove it.” Daily Mail “Twenty-year hiatus in rising temperatures has climate scientists puzzled.” The Australian “Has the rise in temperatures ‘paused’?” Guardian “RSS global satellite temperatures confirm hiatus of global warming, while the general public and mainstream press are now recognizing the AWOL truth that skeptics long ago identified…global temperatures are trending towards cooling, not accelerating higher” C3 Headlines

Northern/Arctic Sea Ice

“Arctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years?” … “NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally said: ‘At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions.'” National Georgraphic 2007

“Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013′” … “Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years.” BBC 2007

Actually;

“The volume of ice measured this autumn is about 50% higher compared to last year.

In October 2013, CryoSat measured about 9000 cubic km of sea ice – a notable increase compared to 6000 cubic km in October 2012.”

“About 90% of the increase is due to growth of multiyear ice – which survives through more than one summer without melting – with only 10% growth of first year ice. Thick, multiyear ice indicates healthy Arctic sea-ice cover.

This year’s multiyear ice is now on average about 20%, or around 30 cm, thicker than last year. “

“‘One of the things we’d noticed in our data was that the volume of ice year-to-year was not varying anything like as much as the ice extent – at least in 2010, 2011 and 2012,’ said Rachel Tilling from the UK’s Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling, who led the study.

‘We didn’t expect the greater ice extent left at the end of this summer’s melt to be reflected in the volume. But it has been, and the reason is related to the amount of multiyear ice in the Arctic.'” European Space Agency

The animation at the head of this article and below demonstrates the increase in ice thickness measured by CryoSat over the last four Octobers:

European Space Agency – CryoSat – Click the pic to view at source

Also, Arctic Sea Ice Extent remained within two standard deviations of the 1981 – 2010 average for the entirety of 2013;

National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) – Click the pic to view at source

and Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area saw its smallest decline since 2006, with a decline less than half of the prior year and  it ended 2013 less than .5 Million Sq Km below the 1979 – 2008 average;

Cryosphere Today – Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois – Click the pic to view at source

Southern/Antarctic Sea Ice:

“A new NASA-funded study finds that predicted increases in precipitation due to warmer air temperatures from greenhouse gas emissions may actually increase sea ice volume in the Antarctic’s Southern Ocean. NASA 2005

“Models solve mystery, but suggest South Pole sea ice melt will soon accelerate.” “The data show that Antarctic sea ice growth in the 20th century might be mostly dictated by natural processes, Liu noted. But that won’t be the case for the 21st century, since human-caused global warming is predicted to dominate the Antarctic climate and trigger faster melting of sea ice, he said.” National Geographic 2010

There certainly has been an increase in sea ice in Antarctic’s Southern Ocean, as Antarctic Sea Ice Extent has been above two standard deviations of the 1981 – 2010 average for much of the 2nd half of 2013;

National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) – Click the pic to view at source

Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area Anomaly reached its 2nd largest positive anomaly in the 34 year historical record on December 23rd, 2013;

Cryosphere Today – Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois – Click the pic to view at source

and a Global Warming Research Media Junket Tourist Party Cruise got stuck in thick sea ice off Antarctica, along with its first, second and third rescue icebreakers. Furthermore, NASA’s claim that “predicted increases in precipitation due to warmer air temperatures from greenhouse gas emissions may actually increase sea ice volume in the Antarctic’s Southern Ocean” appears to be falsified in 2013 because Southern Sea Ice has reached near record highs, while Southern Polar Lower Troposphere Temperature Anomaly has had a negative trend and was average;

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Click the pic to view at source

and Southern Sea Surface Temperature as been below average for the last 6 years:

Bob Tisdale – Click the pic to view at source

The impact of  increased  Southern Sea Ice Area is that Global Sea Ice Area has remained stubbornly average for all of 2013 and ended the year more than 1 Million Sq Km above the 1979 – 2008 average:

Cryosphere Today – University of Illinois – Polar Research Group – Click the pic to view at source

Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover

“Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past” “Britain’s winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives. Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain’s culture, as warmer winters – which scientists are attributing to global climate change – produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries.” The Independent – 2000

Actually, 2013 Northern Hemisphere Winter Snow Cover was the 4th highest on record;

Rutgers University – Global Snow Lab (GSL) – Click the pic to view at source

2013 Northern Hemisphere Spring Snow Cover was highest in 10 years;

Rutgers University – Global Snow Lab (GSL) – Click the pic to view at source

and 2013 Northern Hemisphere Fall Snow Cover was the 5th highest on record:

Rutgers University – Global Snow Lab (GSL) – Click the pic to view at source

But we mustn’t get complacent:

Scientists are warning that global warming is melting Alpine glaciers at an unprecedented rate.

They claim that in 15 years time, many low level ski resorts could have no snow at all. BBC 2001

It is just a matter of two years until “Low level skiing resorts” in the Alps “could end up with no snow at all” …

Tropical Cyclones/ Hurricanes:

“Expect to see more hurricanes, tornadoes, and blizzards thanks to climate change, scientists say” Daily News 2011
“But climate change is likely playing a role as well—in the case of hurricanes, warming temperatures seem to make storms stronger” TIME May 2013

Global Tropical Cyclone Frequency shows no increase in Hurricanes;

Ryan N. Maue PhD – PoliClimate.com – Click the pic to view at source

and the increase “Major Hurricanes” appear to be negligible:

Ryan N. Maue PhD – PoliClimate.com – Click the pic to view at source

Furthermore, “When the 2014 hurricane season starts it will have been 3,142 days since the last Category 3+ storm made landfall in the US, shattering the record for the longest stretch between US intense hurricanes since 1900″:

Roger Pielke, Jr. – Center for Science and Technology Policy Research – University of Colorado at Boulder – Click to enlarge

Tornadoes

“Expect to see more hurricanes, tornadoes, and blizzards thanks to climate change, scientists say” Daily News 2011

Global Warming Will Bring Violent Storms And Tornadoes, NASA Predicts Science Daily 2007

The United States, which“experiences approximately 75 percent of the world’s known tornadoes”, “with 900 tornadoes, 2013 will be 2 SD below the adjusted norm, and the lowest detrended annual count in the long-term record”;

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – Storm Prediction Center- Click the pic to view at source

and U.S. Inflation Adjusted Annual Tornado Trend and Percentile Ranks show that the the 2013 tornado count of 802 for 2013 is 142 tornadoes below the historical minimum of 944, 495 tornadoes below the 50th percentile of 1297 and 1082 tornadoes below the historical maximum 1884:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – Storm Prediction Center- Click the pic to view at source

Tornado counts are Detrended/ Inflation Adjusted “because the increase in tornado reports over the last 54 years is almost entirely due to secular trends such as population increase, increased tornado awareness, and more robust and advanced reporting networks.” NOAA – Storm Prediction Center

Blizzards

“Expect to see more hurricanes, tornadoes, and blizzards thanks to climate change, scientists say” Daily News 2011

Now you might be thinking that while CAGW Hurricane and Tornado predictions are looking quite bad, they might be right about the Blizzards part… However, the asserted reason for the predicted increase in blizzards is:

“The Christmas blizzard last year can also be blamed on global warming, which increases humidity in the atmosphere, creating greater precipitation all year round.” Daily News

However, a look at Relative Atmospheric Humidity;

climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences – Click the pic to view at source

and Specific Atmospheric Humidity;

climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences – Click the pic to view at source

show no increased “humidity in the atmosphere” and in terms of “Global Warming” “creating greater precipitation all year round”, Global Annual Precipitation Anomalies through 2011:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) – Click the pic to view at source

appear to show the opposite relationship, i.e. there were mostly negative precipitation anomalies during the period of “Global Warming” from approximately 1975 to 1998 and mostly positive precipitation anomalies during The Pause since 1998.

Conclusion

It seems like every major CAGW prediction has failed in 2013. Thus CAGW proponents must be very bad at making predictions or maybe Mother Nature is just showing them who’s boss… Can anyone cite a CAGW prediction that was accurate in 2013? Are there any additional CAGW predictions that failed in 2013?

About these ads

69 thoughts on “2013 Was Not A Good Year For Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Climate Warming Change Disruption Weirding Ocean Acidification Extreme Weather, etc.

  1. You seem to have a precip anomaly chart in the tornado section. Since it is later repeated in the precip discussion, I suspect a mistake.

  2. Nice collection of evidence – I could have used some of this for troll smashing lately.

    Thank you for the effort involved

  3. Stu Miller says: January 4, 2014 at 12:08 pm

    You seem to have a precip anomaly chart in the tornado section. Since it is later repeated in the precip discussion, I suspect a mistake.

    Corrected, thanks.

  4. Every hysteria is driven by confirmation bias. Global warming/changing superstitions will be no different. Eventually the delusion fades as people begin silently wondering “what in the hell were we thinking?”

  5. Well that convinced me CAGW is real and there is an obvious and urgent need to tax the poo out of any CO2 emitter. The IPCC are far too conservative in their forecasts, we must act now before we are too late!

    What?

    That stupid comment is no more than typical alarmist thinking – just keep ignoring the facts, while regularly morphing the scary story into something new.

  6. The increase in multi-year sea ice has less to do with temperature and more to do with wind. It is the wind that piles first year sea ice together taking it from .5 meters thick to 5 meters thick.It takes years to melt 5 meter thick sea ice thus turning it into multi-year sea ice over the course of time..Most first year sea ice melts in the summer unless it has been wind piled much thicker.
    Multi -year sea ice only gets so thick unless it is piled up by the wind.The thicker it gets the slower it thickens in the winter and slower it melts in the summer..

  7. Observations that do not agree with the scared models are not inconsistent with CAGW.

    You just need to look at the data differently, one just ignores any observations that don’t fit..Simples! Just ask the Met Office!

  8. kent blaker says: January 4, 2014 at 12:22 pm

    The increase in multi-year sea ice has less to do with temperature and more to do with wind. It is the wind that piles first year sea ice together taking it from .5 meters thick to 5 meters thick.It takes years to melt 5 meter thick sea ice thus turning it into multi-year sea ice over the course of time..Most first year sea ice melts in the summer unless it has been wind piled much thicker.
    Multi -year sea ice only gets so thick unless it is piled up by the wind.The thicker it gets the slower it thickens in the winter and slower it melts in the summer.

    Most Sea Ice changes have more to do with wind and atmospheric oscillations then temperature, i.e.:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/16/the-economist-provides-readers-with-erroneous-information-about-arctic-sea-ice/

    Per this 2004 Science Daily article, ”Winds, Ice Motion Root Cause Of Decline In Sea Ice, Not Warmer Temperatures“:

    “extreme changes in the Arctic Oscillation in the early 1990s — and not warmer temperatures of recent years — are largely responsible for declines in how much sea ice covers the Arctic Ocean, with near record lows having been observed during the last three years, University of Washington researchers say.”

    Per this 2007 NASA article NASA Examines Arctic Sea Ice Changes Leading to Record Low in 2007;

    “Son V. Nghiem of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said that “the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past two years was caused by unusual winds. “Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic,” he said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in the warmer waters.”

    Per this 2010 NASA article NASA Study Quantifies Role of Melt in Loss of Old Arctic Sea Ice

    “Not all of the multiyear ice loss is accounted for, however. Ice loss through Fram Strait and from melt from 2005 to 2008 accounts for just 52 percent of total ice loss. The team suggests that melt in other Arctic regions and outflow through other passages besides Fram Strait could account for the difference.”

    “They found that over the 17-year period, an area of 947,000 square kilometers (365,639 square miles), or about 32 percent of the decline in multiyear sea ice area, was lost in the Beaufort Sea due to melt.

    A similar calculation using thickness estimates from NASA’s ICESat from 2004 to 2009 show a volume loss of 1,400 cubic kilometers (336 cubic miles), or about 20 percent of the total loss by volume.”

    Per this 2013 NSIDC article A better year for the cryosphere

    In recent summers, there has been considerable transport of older ice into the Beaufort and Chukchi seas, where it has been broken up and exposed to a warm ocean and high air temperatures. This has been a major factor in the loss of multiyear ice over the last decade. This year was notably different. Because this year’s wind pattern was different than 2012, the multiyear ice largely remained in a compact area along the Canadian Archipelago and did not circulate into the Beaufort and Chukchi seas. The cooler conditions this summer also helped preserve more of the first-year ice through the summer.

    The first-year ice that survived the summer, now defined as second-year ice, will thicken through autumn and winter. However, it would take several more cool years in a row to build the ice cover back to the state it was in during the 1980s, which consisted of a larger proportion of thicker, multiyear ice that was more resistant to melt. While ice in the Arctic will thicken through this autumn and winter, winds may also transport some of the thicker ice out of the Arctic Ocean and into the North Atlantic.

    However, regardless of why there’s more multi-year ice in the Arctic, there’s a big difference between “Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013′” BBC 2007 and “Data from Europe’s Cryosat spacecraft suggests there were almost 9,000 cu km of ice at the end of this year’s melt season. This is close to 50% more than in the corresponding period in 2012.” BBC 2013

  9. This last year has proven one thing. They don’t know what they’re talking about and need to do some basic science instead of looking for the answer they want.

  10. Ah, but did you Deniers consider the possibility that the minor discrepancy of 100% between predicted CAGW and 17 years of no significant global temperature change could be due to increased acidity from your readers? Or masking of warming by aerosols from Santa’s reindeer? Or a CONSPIRACY by the owners of the vast supplies of oil beneath the Vatican? Or SILENCING of this telling of the Truth To Power by the CIA, a Parallel Government, the Religious Right, the Coca-Cola Company, the Vulcans testing Red Matter on our planetary core, or the ( … add in your obsession of choice)? We may never know the full story but we can PROVE it will be worse than we thought. Can you prove it WON’T happen? Well there you are. Please donate urgently to our CAUSE before it’s too late and the forces of Reaction cut me off in midsent

  11. Regular WUWT visitors will recognize the three fundamental fails ov the CAGW ‘scientists’ GCM models. First, they do not appropriately incorporate natural variability. Bod Tsdale has more thn adequately shown this. Since they were tuned during a natural warming cycle, they run hot into the future as the pause has shown. Second, they overstate the positive water vapor feedback, because they produce roughly constant UTrH, then the data shows it and therefor UTsH declined over the natural warming period. The humidity charts above provide the evidence. The reason is almost certainly Lindzens adaptive iris, which relates to tropical TStorm consequences. Third, they cannot adequately model clouds, which Eschenbach has shown are a natural regulator via albedo, and further via the adaptive iris. The underlying science is all being developed and explained here, not just the observational falsification of the models.

  12. CAGW – the great con game, where its practitioners sucker the marks by constantly diverting attention by highlighting the latest weather disaster and NEVER putting it in context by discussing factual data.

    For some people, fantasy is more fun than reality.

  13. @ ConfusedPhoton January 4, 2014 at 12:34 pm
    “Observations that do not agree with the scared models are not inconsistent with CAGW.”

    ?Freudian Slip? – ‘scared’ or ‘sacred’?

  14. Do our politicians ever get to read this stuff? It should be mandatory reading for the Prime Minister, Treasurer and Minister for the Environment and all public servants in the Met Office. If our nation’s leaders understood what was really going on with the climate they could justifiably cancel the gravy train to all CAGW bludgers and save us taxpayers a few bucks.

  15. Great report. To all the wheels that came off for the alarmist cause, add that 1998, 2005 and 2010 were hotter than 2013.
    Not in Australia, though. If you believe our alarmist Bureau of Meteorology (BOM), that is. IT’S OFFICIAL: 2013 WAS THE HOTTEST ON RECORD screams the typical headline.

    http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/pause-continues-as-uah-reports-2013-4th-warmest-since-1979.html

    Before accepting that claim, I would like to see a Royal Commission of inquiry into suspect practices used by BOM to promote the alarmist agenda.

    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/06/threat-of-anao-audit-means-australias-bom-throws-out-temperature-set-starts-again-gets-same-results/

    Our CSIRO too, while they’re at it.

  16. I have been reading some Guardian comments on the following thread and I noticed the sceptics have a really strong showing there. Where were the censors??? I also notice the voting as did someone else.

    Guardian – 4 January 2014
    Should Australian newspapers publish climate change denialist opinion pieces?

    COMMENTS
    Laura Griffin – 04 January 2014 1:38pm
    What I find rather interesting is that even though it is the AGW crowd who have posted the most comments in favour of censorship, it is the Climate Realists (formerly known as deniers) who have the most up-votes or readers agreeing with them
    . Look at the numbers alongside the comments. The AGW group has 1 to 4 up-votes, while the Climate Realist comments have as many as 35 to 50+ votes.

    Face it Climate Alarmists. You are in the minority. No one is buying into the AGW hysteria anymore, which is why all of you are becoming so frantic and why the media wants to suppress climate realist views.

    The clock is ticking down to the final minutes of the game. The AGW team is losing by a landslide and they’re busy running all over the field with blindfolds on trying to find the net.

    http://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/30437847

    2013 was indeed a bad year for Warmists. 2014 started off very badly and very early for them too with the Antarctic farce, tourist expedition.

  17. No matter what observational facts you present, Warmists will lean on IPCC computer generated projections for comfort and sometimes for evidence. Even if Arctic sea ice volume and extent was bang on the 1979 levels they would find a way to deny it. They are trying it out with Antarctic until the recent farce focused minds on the area. Isn’t it ironic they use the ‘D’ word on us?!

  18. How about droughts (actually higher in cooling with drier air), and climate refugees, and swamped islands, and collapsed biodiversity, and vanishing poley b’ars? And malarial epidemics? Those are just off the top of my head, I’m sure there’re more.

  19. John from Oz says: @ January 4, 2014 at 2:46 pm

    Do our politicians ever get to read this stuff? ….
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Who the heck do you think came up with CAGW in the first place?

    The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. ~ H. L. Mencken

    Mencken died in 1956 but he sure as heck say CAGW coming,

  20. Jimbo says:
    January 4, 2014 at 3:18 pm

    Thanks for yet another great compilation.

    I don´t want to create a Guardian account to comment, but am surprised no one quoted the always hysterical Jim ¨Boiling Oceans¨ Hansen when instances of CACA advocate hysteria were solicited.

  21. wbrozek says:
    January 4, 2014 at 3:33 pm

    As a Seahawks fan, I´m glad it´s those guys playing, not Seattle.

  22. Quote: “Can anyone cite a CAGW prediction that was accurate ever?”

    They made many predictions that came true.

    1) There is a lot of grant money in scaring the crap out of people with this warming stuff!
    2) Politicians will have our back since they love to hear that they need to control the people to save the world.
    3) The government worshiping MSM will have our back always since they know that politicians love hearing they must act to keep the people safe.
    4) There is power and prestige in this global warming propaganda campaign for those willing to do the “new science”.
    5) There is tenure and advancement in this.

    There is more, but I think you can see that many of the alarmist really did see a bandwagon and got on the thing early. I do not know if they started believing the BS later on; but I wager they did.

  23. “Our results show that temperature records of at least 17 years in length are required for identifying human effects on global-mean tropospheric temperature.”

    If they have not done so already I suspect they will come back with something like –

    “Seventeen years was the lower bound we estimated at that time. We now have the correct number! It will take exactly 2,443 years of continuous observations to disprove our hypothesis…”

  24. Comment over an hour ago, some-what, not yet represented.

    (Thank Apple for the easy screen shots. Censorship helping to prevent censorship. You got to love it….)

  25. Can anyone cite a CAGW prediction that was accurate in 2013?

    Do we have 52 climate refugees? It is just a little ironic that they are going from the continent of Antarctica to the island of Tasmania.

  26. The North American winter is rippin’ this year, hope the poor polar bears aren’t turning into Popsicles. This global warming seems to be playing a double game on them.

  27. Werner Brozek says: January 4, 2014 at 5:12 pm

    Do we have 52 climate refugees? It is just a little ironic that they are going from the continent of Antarctica to the island of Tasmania.

    We should have a lot more than that, back in 2005 we had:

    “Climate Change Creating Millions of “Eco Refugees,” UN Warns”

    “Environmental degradation around the world is creating a new category of people known as “environmental refugees,” a United Nations group says.

    What’s more, the refugees’ ranks are growing rapidly.

    There are at least 20 million environmental refugees worldwide, the group says—more than those displaced by war and political repression combined.”

    “By 2010 the number of environmental refugees could grow to 50 million, the UNU-EHS predicts. According to other estimates, there could be as many as 150 million by 2050.” National Geographic 2005

    In then in May 2013:

    “Impossible Choice Faces America’s First ‘Climate Refugees’

    Climate change is a stark reality in America’s northernmost state. Nearly 90 percent of native Alaskan villages are on the coast, where dramatic erosion and floods have become a part of daily life.

    Perched on the Ninglick River on the west coast of the state, the tiny town of Newtok may be the state’s most vulnerable village. About 350 people live there, nearly all of them Yupik Eskimos. But the Ninglick is rapidly rising due to ice melt, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers says the highest point in the town — a school — could be underwater by 2017.

    Suzanne Goldenberg, a U.S. environmental correspondent for The Guardian, spent time in Newtok and this week on the plight of its residents, whom she calls America’s first climate refugees.” NPR 2013

    If this bitter cold weather keeps up I may consider becoming a climate refugee in Florida… :)

  28. A great summary of all that is wrong with AGW and the true believers.
    The only problem is, you’re dealing with true believers – ideologues who stick to their doctrine no matter how forcefully or dramatically it is proven false.
    This sort of mentality enters into matters other than climate – for instance, the continuing devotion to socialist and nanny-state policies despite the repeated demonstrations of their failure – and their murderous effects.

  29. Today Professor Chris Turney said “my latest research proves CO2 driven hot-cooling has reached a tipping-point & the day after tomorrow we’re all going to freeze to death. Furthermore, space aliens are coming, they’re unhappy about what we’re doing to the planet and whales”.

    Turney added “The space aliens say the only solution is to increase taxes on everything to fund more research into why sometimes it’s a bit warmer than average and sometimes a bit colder. But we can stop wasting money on SETI as the aliens are invisible and will only speak to me, through telepathy”.

    Suggestions that Turney was ‘bonkers’, ‘an incompetent fool’ and a ‘liar’ were rejected by his University who said donations for research should be sent directly to them.

  30. Quote: “Can anyone cite a CAGW prediction that was accurate ever?”

    I have been looking for nearly 20 years not found one yet.

  31. I am a loyal WUWT supporter but I can no longer comment here due to extreme moderation. I am a “bad guy” because I respect science. My comments are delayed/deleted. Anthooony rejects scientific debate. He allows many folks that support AGW, but he DENIES folks that reject AGW.

    WUWT???????

    (For the record, this is screen shot.)

    [Reply: For the record, we don't care. And FYI, when you use 'denier', 'denies', 'denialist', etc., your comment is automatically held in moderation. It is posted now. Better take a screen shot! ~mod. ]

  32. [Reply: For the record, we don't care. And FYI, when you use 'denier', 'denies', 'denialist', etc., your comment is automatically held in moderation. It is posted now. Better take a screen shot! ~mod. ]

    You phonies:

    1) I did not use the “d” words in the first comment (not represented}.
    2) I was never in “moderation” before I emailed Anthonnnnny that the AGW science was documented seriously flawed.
    3) Yeah, WUWT no longer “cares”.
    4) Suggest you just raise funds from those that do not care. You will be BILLIONAIRES.

    I wonder if I will take a screen shot of this comment….4

    [Reply: whatever. ~ mod.]

  33. Multi -year sea ice only gets so thick unless it is piled up by the wind.

    So should we work to increase global winding or work to end it?

  34. 2013 was indeed a bad year for Warmists. 2014 started off very badly and very early for them too with the Antarctic farce, tourist expedition.

    2014 started off with a Christmas present from 2013. It doesn’t get much better than that even [for] the nominally Jewish. Me. Well my mother was Jewish. So there is that.

  35. How much did the seas rise in 2013? Looked about the same the last I checked, but anything less than a cm is hard to detect.

  36. “Can anyone cite a CAGW prediction that was accurate ever?”

    No responses yet in eight hours, surely the believers that normally post have one example of the true faith being correct?

    Seriously, can anyone state one accurate [C]AGW prediction?

  37. Paul Benedict says: January 4, 2014 at 7:59 pm

    How much did the seas rise in 2013? Looked about the same the last I checked, but anything less than a cm is hard to detect.

    Global Mean Sea Level Change looks reasonably flat through August 2013;

    climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences – Click the pic to view at source

    University of Colorado at Boulder – Click the pic to view at source

    but we will need to wait until the University of Colorado Sea Level Research Group updates their data;

    http://sealevel.colorado.edu/files/current/sl_global.txt

    before we’ll know for sure. Also, it is important to note that Sea Level has been increasing at a similar pace as it did during the first half of the 20th century;

    Wikipedia – Click the pic to view at source

    has been increasing since then end of the Little Ice Age ~ 1850

    JustFacts.com – Click the pic to view at source

    before anthropogenic CO2 emissions from Fossil-Fuels became potentially consequential in approximately 1950 i.e. Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuels;

    Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center – Click the pic to view at source

    and Cumulative Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuels:

    Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center – Click the pic to view at source

    This is why the IPCC only claims to be;

    “95% certain that humans are the “dominant cause” of global warming since the 1950sBBC

    In May 2013, the Economist noted that;

    The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO₂ put there by humanity since 1750. And yet, as James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observes, “the five-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.”

  38. justthefactswuwt.
    Thank you for all the hard work, it’s a great compilation of indisputable facts. Warmist that are honest will be boiling between the ears at the invented CAGW hysterics of the fraud promoters and their lackeys in the MSM. Will the CAGW true believers double down on dumb? probably, either way this is a fact laden keeper for anybody in search of the truth.

  39. This part:

    “… Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area saw its smallest decline since 2006, with a decline less than half of the prior year and it ended 2013 less than .5 Million Sq Km below the 1979 – 2008 average;”

    is confusing. What decline? Arctic sea ice increased …

  40. justthefactswuwt:

    Thankyou for an excellent and useful summary. Your article is a ‘keeper’.

    The main points of ‘verything in one place makes it easy to find information which is needed rapidly prior to finding additional information.

    Again, thankyou.

    Richard

  41. There is of course the severe hurricane season for the Atlantic that turned into nothing (a couple of fizzles in fall when it cooled a bit, none in summer). And the BOMs regular “records will fall” rubbish. Catastrophic fire season – nope, nasty but entirely normal fire in Oct then nothing reportable.

    No, the only thing that came true was the trivial / universal predictions that warmies increasingly resort to. Weather weirding – “there will be an unusual condition / extreme high – low somewhere in the world some time, and a major wind event will occur.”

  42. justthefactswuwt says:
    January 4, 2014 at 5:37 pm

    On your comment on climate refugees did you notice they interspeced ‘environmental refugees’ too? If you want to know about the worlds first climate refugee(s) click here.

    Since they claim Katrina refugees then you have to wonder who are the world’s first climate refugees. See my link above.

  43. “Are there any additional CAGW predictions that failed in 2013?”

    Thanks for the excellent compilation, Mr. Facts. I’m not sure if the following are exactly what you are looking for, but here are some other items recently in the news that you may wish to consider:

    1) The bogus drowning polar bear researcher was finally officially discredited.

    2) The Nenana Ice Classic broke the record for latest spring thaw (see: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/20/nenana-ice-classic-sets-new-record-for-latest-ice-out-and-the-record-is-still-growing/).

    3) Cumulative Greenland ice sheet melt days was close to average and dramatically lower than previous year (see NSIDC’s Greenland Today page: http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/).

    4) Average temperature of the arctic as compiled by DMI was below average all summer and remains much closer to average than recent years (see: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php).

    5) Melting of the Antarctic Pine Island ice shelf has been shown to have slowed down and to have been a function of local changes in geography, not global warming all along (see: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/01/03/antarctic_ice_shelf_melt_lowest_ever_recorded_just_not_much_affected_by_global_warming/).

    6) In regard to claims that the expanding Antarctic sea ice is somehow a function of warmer water, if you follow the sea surface temperature anomalies as plotted on Weather Underground’s tropical page, the souther ocean sea surface temperatures have been running below average (see: http://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/).

    7) More daily record highs than lows for first time in 20 years (see: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/31/first-time-in-20-years-more-daily-record-lows-than-daily-highs-that-were-either-tied-or-set-in-2013/).

    My apologies for being in a rush as I post this and not better documenting these points.

  44. kent blaker says: January 4, 2014 at 12:22 pm

    The increase in multi-year sea ice has less to do with temperature and more to do with wind.

    So true, but it was bloody cold this past summer in the central Arctic ocean. A record since 1958 according to DMI. Is this a sign of climate change? I think so.

  45. ““The Pause” in Global Temperature finally received widespread media coverage…….”
    That may be why the Global Warministas are running another get-together at Lake Tahoe [which is in a drought and has had unusually warm temps this winter] for the weather readers on TV and radio to remind them how serious the problem of ‘Climate Change’ continues to be. Obviously, the media folks are not stressing how AGW is – or should be – at the heart of every weather report.
    They may convince the folks at the Lake about Global Warming, but I bet it’s a hard sell from the Great Plains to the East coast!

  46. Did you read these articles?

    This article was referring to New York City:

    “Expect to see more hurricanes, tornadoes, and blizzards thanks to climate change, scientists say” Daily News 2011

    “Tornadoes, once a weather phenomenon that New Yorkers associated with the movies, are now a reality for the city.

    During Hurricane Irene the National Weather Service put the five boroughs under a tornado watch.

    Last September, 45,000 customers lost power in Brooklyn and Queens after a powerful storm with 70 mph winds knocked down trees and powerlines.”

    This article was referring to a model based on conditions in the distant future:

    Global Warming Will Bring Violent Storms And Tornadoes, NASA Predicts Science Daily 2007

    “The model then was applied to a hypothetical future climate with double the current carbon dioxide level and a surface that is an average of 5 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the current climate. The study found that continents warm more than oceans and that the altitude at which lightning forms rises to a level where the storms are usually more vigorous. “

  47. Joe says: January 5, 2014 at 11:58 am

    Did you read these articles?

    Yes

    This article was referring to New York City:

    As one would expect from the NY Daily News.

    This article was referring to a model based on conditions in the distant future:

    But it implies that the effects are right around the corner, i.e.:

    NASA scientists have developed a new climate model that indicates that the most violent severe storms and tornadoes may become more common as Earth’s climate warms.

    As stated in the introduction, “in 2013 every loosely falsifiable prediction of the CAGW narrative seems to have failed”. There’s a reason “loosely” was used, i.e. much of the CAGW narrative is based upon inference and innuendo, e.g. coulds, woulds and shoulds, thus some of the CAGW predictions are of an abstract nature. However, the inference from both articles is clear, CAGW is and will cause more or more violent tornadoes, and the data doesn’t support those assertions.

  48. JJ says: January 4, 2014 at 10:46 pm

    This part:

    “… Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area saw its smallest decline since 2006, with a decline less than half of the prior year and it ended 2013 less than .5 Million Sq Km below the 1979 – 2008 average;”

    is confusing. What decline? Arctic sea ice increased …

    Arctic Sea Ice increased as compared to the prior year, but continued its pattern of larger than average summer declines, which appears to have begun in 2006. The reasons for these declines are reasonably well understood and mostly disassociated with anthropogenic influences, but Arctic Sea Ice still declined more than average in 2013.

  49. @Geran:

    You seem to think you are special some how. You are not.

    Moderators here really do not care what you, or anyone else for that matter, thinks.

    Moderation is ENTIRELY limited to tone (i.e. not insulting or picking fights with folks), relevance to the thread (i.e. not too far off topic, not a thread hijack, etc.), and a keyword / spam filter. The keyword / spam filter is about 99.99% automated by WordPress and beyond the control of the site owner or the moderators. There is a facility to add a few key words manually to the automated list, but no way to remove those automated key / spam triggers.

    Beyond that, Anthony MAY, from time to time, designate someone to “take a break” for 24 hours or similar. That is done entirely at his discretion and has nothing to do with the moderators other than that they are supposed to (somehow) keep track of that and act accordingly.

    So why do your comments end up in the “moderation” or “spam” queues? Almost 100% of the time it will be due to the key word / spam filter provided by WordPress and beyond the control of the moderators. Occasionally it will be one of the words that was added to that list. (On my site, I added a select group of swear words so an “F-Bomb” triggers it. Anthony has added the D-Word here.) But again, substantially all the key word / spam triggers are provided by WordPress and outside control of moderators. If you hit the moderation queue, it is most likely using the D-word OR any of the things that causes WordPress to be unhappy.

    WHY does any given posting go to moderation? God, I don’t know. I’ve had my own comment on my own blog be put in moderation by the WordPress Rules. Spent a good 20 minutes staring at it and still can’t figure out what might have caused it to do that. (I suspect it makes a “hot phrase list” from known spam and I accidentally tripped on one. So “Come on down!” might trip on “I was going to come on down and see a friend”. That’s the best guess I can make.

    So insulting the moderators and attempting to claim some kind of hurt from selective moderation or muzzling just makes you look a bit petty, and unaware of how WordPress works.

    Now if you DO continue to be a PITA to folks, constantly whining and complaining about how special you are, it IS possible to add your IP address or name to the SPAM filter key word set. Then you get a 100% “hold or pitch” treatment. I’ve done that to about a dozen folks all told in many years of running my site. As that’s a bit of a pain to do, moderators tend not to bother with it (unless someone makes it worth the time.) Essentially, at the point where you are effectively being a “thread hijack” by making it all about you, you hit the “off topic and thread hijack” rule.

    So my advice to you, as someone who’s read this particular blog for, gosh, is it a decade now?; my advice is that the moderation here tends to be some of the least partisan and most fair I’ve seen anywhere. Just be polite, stay on topic, and make your case. Oh, and avoid nasty and insult terms that tend to trip the filters and avoid cliche phrases that sound like SPAM, or WordPress (not the moderators) will pitch your stuff in the bucket.

    Moderators mostly just want to click on “approve” and move on. It’s a lot more work to deal with things in the SPAM queue or things that are insulting or need “snipping”, and moderators really don’t care what you think… just that you say it politely and somewhat near the topic of the thread. Then THEY can just click “approve” and move on.

    Oh, and insulting moderators or your host, Anthony, is a Very Bad Idea. It isn’t particularly polite, and is certainly not On Topic.

    With that: Moderators, please forgive this off topic rant. I just get tired of the bleating whining complaining about something that isn’t real.

    [Reply: Mike, agree w/everything you wrote here. ~mod.]

    Back on topic:

    I’d also note that there has been a failure of any measurable sea level rise. That heat has not caused massive famine or crop failures. That the ocean is still producing large harvests of shellfish, that the reefs have demonstrated “recovery” (and a lack of dying), and so much more.

    Oh, and there have been early start and late endings to ski seasons around the world…

  50. Friends, let’s get back on-topic.

    Here is something inspiring from David Garcia-Andrade’s book “A New Look at Infinities” that has a lesson for those who are brilliant but who remain divorced from reality enough for their postulations not to matter (much). At least, that is how it is supposed to work.

    ++++++++++

    A man returns to his car from a business appointment to find one of his tires flat. He gets a car jack, lug wrench, and spare wheel and tire from the trunk of the car, loosens the lug nuts of the wheel, jacks the car up, removes the lug nuts completely, puts them in a small paper cup near by to make sure none are lost, removes the wheel, and then places the spare wheel and tire on the wheel hub – all done with great pride in his methodical efficiency. Then he accidentally knocks over the paper cup spilling out the lug nuts. The lug nuts roll down through a metal grating into the sewer below.

    He’s suddenly overcome with dismay, frustration and confusion. Not knowing what to do, he sits down on the curb cradling his head in his arms.

    “Hey, mister!” calls out a voice from a window of the mental hospital just behind him. “Why don’t you take one lug nut off of each of the other three wheels and put those on your spare
    wheel? Then you’ll be able to drive to a place where you can get your flat tire fixed and also get some new lug nuts to replace those you’ve lost.”

    “That’s brilliant!” says the businessman with new hope. “Why didn’t I think of that? Thanks so much! … What’s a smart guy like you doing in a mental hospital?”

    “I may be crazy,” answers the inmate, “but I’m not stupid!”

    This old joke is possibly a little stale by now. But it conveys a point relevant to the aim of this book. Being intelligent and Introduction being sane are two different things. Sanity is about being in touch with reality, about having the foundations of what one thinks and does rooted in reality. Reality is mental reality as well as physical reality. Intelligence can build up beautiful structures of reason on any foundations at all – whether realistic or not. For best results both are required.

  51. Your article is stupid, and I believe it’s falsehoods are deliberate.

    1.) Global Temperature

    It is rising, the measurements including in the stupid article are atmospheric temperatures, ignoring that the Oceans have been absorbing the excess heat. This is predictable, it has happened before, with atmospheric temperatures plateau for a while as the seas get warmer. If the heat is held near the surface, it eventually gets released. Last time it did this was 198–which is pretty recent history.

    2.) Northern/Arctic Sea Ice

    The ice coverage isn’t really recovering, because it is still worse than 2009 and earlier. Ice coverage is merely better than 2011 & 2012 (two of the three worst years on record), which were two of the three worst years ever recorded.

    3.) Southern/Antarctic Sea Ice

    Antarctica is also getting warmer, which was discussed earlier on this thread. And don’t give me no lip about Antarctic volcanoes, that was also addressed.

    4.)

    Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover harsher winters in the Northern Hemishere have long been part of AGW senarios. There are a number of reasons for this, but one is super easy and reconized way back in colonial America.

    Hotter summer = more evaporation.

    More evaporation = more atmospheric moisture

    More atmospheric moisture (usually) = more snow in the winter

    5.) Tropical Cyclones/ Hurricanes:

    Most models did say MORE hurricanes, tornadoes, and blizzards, just more severe ones. And guess what? They are quantifably more severe (and some actually are, in fact, more numerous).

  52. Bob says: January 7, 2014 at 1:26 pm

    Your article is stupid, and I believe it’s falsehoods are deliberate.

    A very insighful and well reasoned analysis…

    1.) Global Temperature

    It is rising, the measurements including in the stupid article are atmospheric temperatures, ignoring that the Oceans have been absorbing the excess heat. This is predictable, it has happened before, with atmospheric temperatures plateau for a while as the seas get warmer. If the heat is held near the surface, it eventually gets released. Last time it did this was 198–which is pretty recent history.

    According to NASA;

    Global warming is the unusually rapid increase in Earth’s average surface temperature over the past century primarily due to the greenhouse gases released as people burn fossil fuels. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page2.php

    So NASA must be wrong on that then? And instead the ocean’s absorbed the heat and hid it really deep where our measurement capabilities are most limited? Furthermore, this occured without being captured by our sea surface and near sea surface measurement capabilities? Can you cite a study that explains the method by which this absorbtion and deep ocean heat transfer occured?

    2.) Northern/Arctic Sea Ice

    The ice coverage isn’t really recovering, because it is still worse than 2009 and earlier. Ice coverage is merely better than 2011 & 2012 (two of the three worst years on record), which were two of the three worst years ever recorded.

    Please read this comment;

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/04/2013-was-not-a-good-year-for-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-climate-warming-change-disruption-wierding-ocean-acidification-extreme-weather-etc/#comment-1524360

    and explain why you disagree.

    3.) Southern/Antarctic Sea Ice

    Antarctica is also getting warmer, which was discussed earlier on this thread. And don’t give me no lip about Antarctic volcanoes, that was also addressed.

    In my article I cited two data sources that show that Southern Polar Lower Troposphere Temperature Anomaly and Southern Sea Surface Temperature have both decreaced. In your comment you’ve cited no data sources and introduced some irrelevant bluster about volcanoes. Can you cite any data sources to support your assertion that “Antarctica is also getting warmer”?

    4.)

    Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover harsher winters in the Northern Hemishere have long been part of AGW senarios. There are a number of reasons for this, but one is super easy and reconized way back in colonial America.

    Hotter summer = more evaporation.

    More evaporation = more atmospheric moisture

    More atmospheric moisture (usually) = more snow in the winter

    In my article I cited 3 data sources that show no increace in Humidity or Precipitation during the last 60 years. Can you cite any data sources that support that assertion you’ve made?

    5.) Tropical Cyclones/ Hurricanes:

    Most models did say MORE hurricanes, tornadoes, and blizzards, just more severe ones. And guess what? They are quantifably more severe (and some actually are, in fact, more numerous).

    Your sentence appears to be missing a “not”, but regardless, the data sources I posted in the article above refute your assertion. Can you provide any data sources that support your assertion?

Comments are closed.