This is #2 in an ongoing series of serial forecast failures (that need to be thrown back in their faces) by climate alarmists and their helpers, the mainstream media. Here, USA Today helped Al Gore make a forecast about Arctic sea ice that had no chance of ever being right. Of course, this was in 2009 at COP15 in Copenhagen, considered by many leaders to be the “last chance” for planet Earth.
Source: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2009/12/gore-new-study-sees-nearly-ice-free-arctic-summer-ice-cap-as-early-as-2014/1#.VbDxe9JVhBc
And, the Arctic ice is still there:
![N_bm_extent[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/n_bm_extent1.png?quality=75)
It didn’t disappear in 2014, and in fact it appears to not be all that much different from 2009 around the time of the peak summer melt in mid-September:
Source: http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=09&fd=15&fy=2009&sm=09&sd=15&sy=2014
The result of this failed forecast:
![al_gore_facepalm_reuters[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/al_gore_facepalm_reuters1.jpg?quality=83)
See other Throwback Thursday failed predictions here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Yep, the failed doomsday prophesies just keep coming. Hansen keeps adding to them as well.
How anyone can believe any of this nonsense is a testament to our easy lifestyle and failure to use common sense.
“Worst ice conditions in 20 years”
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/ccgs-amundsen-re-routed-to-hudson-bay-to-help-with-heavy-ice-1.3162900
Yes, but it is a warmer ice than normal.
… and probably “rotten”
Yes, the measurements were 0 deg, 0.001 deg, 0.0012 deg, 0.0011 deg. Granted, our instruments cannot measure to better than 0.01 deg, but there is an unmistakable upward trend of 0.00035 degC/sample.
No silly, it’s Styrofoam chunklets made by Koch brothers, another evil skeptics trick!
They can’t measure better than 0.01C in a laboratory environment with regular calibration.
In the field … not so much.
You misunderstood. Gore didn’t say arctic ice would disappear, or even might disappear. He said it may disappear, meaning it had Gore’s permission to do so if it wished.
Dammit. I hate it when you’re right.
Why are we attempting to defend the bloody idiot.
lolz. Headline:
‘OCEANS MAY BOIL DRY BEFORE 2200’
‘Nobel-winning’ Al Gore gives permission for seas to take the Venusian way.
Let’s look at his exact statement: “New computer modeling suggest the Arctic Ocean may be nearly ice-free in Summer as early as 2014″ It is so loaded with vague qualifiers it could be true at this very moment no matter how much ice there is in the Arctic Ocean.
Another Scott
Agreed.
Absolutely.
But was the intention to have those – unashamed – qualifiers bruited?
Or was it meant to be understood as:
New computer modelling means the Arctic Ocean will be ice-free in Summer no later than as 2014 (and winter by 2016 at the very latest) as a bracketty undertone.
Or am I just a pico-tad cynical? Huh?
Auto
Auto, you are definitely cynical. Unfortunately in the present environment, that is the correct position to be taking.
We could try putting in those qualifiers with a statement from An Inconvenient Truth: “If we fail to act, it is suggested that the World may be nearly on fire in Summer as early as 2014″. Hmm. This could be a fun game.
Do you think that Al Gore may one day, disappear?
Off topic, but Lubos Motl has a very interesting post concerning false postings by John Cook.
aco joe: You must mean this: http://motls.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/identity-theft-thief-of-lubosmotl-turns.html#more
Hope it helps.
Thanks Harry, I assumed readers were familiar with Lubos.
kinda stinky
without a linky
ne’er mind
This needs a LOT more exposure.
It’s getting it now…..
Well at least the computer modelers who made the projections were fired, right? I can’t imagine anyone who blew that forecast so bad would have continued employment, unless the point of the forecast was not accuracy but political talking points, in which case the computer modelers did exactly what they were expected to do.
Of course they didn’t get fired… it’s their job. They are the writers of Mad Magazine.
That’s a massive insult to the writers and cartoonists of a revered publication!
(Cartoonists…wonder if Cookie could get a job there?)
They weren’t fired because they are not meteorologists. When a meteorologist is wrong again and again, he is sacked. When a climatologist is wrong again and again, he is promoted.
When a reputable guy like Joe Bastardi is off or wrong with a forecast, at least we get an explanation. Is it too much to ask for an explanation? An examination into what went wrong is how we get better. Sure would be nice to get an explanation about what went wrong with the ice free Arctic prediction. Maybe there is a teachable moment here, something to be learned. Unfortunately there is no intent to “get better” and more accurate with the global warming climate modelers, we don’t get explanations or teachable moments, we get nothing, except more lines of propaganda to swallow, no questions allowed.
I wrote WADHAM’s again this year about his prediction of ice-free arctic in 2015. He actually responded with a snark last year saying…IT ISN’T 2015 YET…to which I replied, Fine…I’ll wait. I just sent him a reminder….he has not replied. Idiot.
Could you do James Hansen’s New York underwater by 2008 please. He is back in the news, still predicting New York will go under…
Hansen claims that the reporter didn’t quote him properly. The reporter claims that he reviewed his notes and that, magically, Hansen is right – he wasn’t quoted properly. What’s funny is that Hansen never complained until after his prediction failed. I think the corrected quote only gave him a 10 year extension – which means that the predication still fails in 2018 (because there’s no chance that the West Side Highway will be underwater by then) – I think.
But I agree that this prediction should be revisited.
‘new computer modeling’….this worked so magnificently for IPCC in the lat 25 years; can’t wait until the ‘newer’ modeling surfaces.
The models employed by the Federal Reserve work so efficiently that the 2001 market fall completely took Greenspan by surprise and ditto for the 2007 plunge was missed by Bernanke.
With Greenspan, remember his “irrational exuberance speech?” Same with Bernanke. They both saw it, predicted it and warned about it….. In reality, some models do work. The ones that are vetted and show a correlation to reality:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_exuberance
level in the Great Lakes is up 3-4 ft as I heard this morning. Reason is increased precipitation, snowfall, cold because of these darn polar vortexes. The root cause of all these strange wether phenomena is of course: global warming.
Levels were pretty low a few years ago and they’re up 30-36 inches from the lows, which puts them above average, But fairly cold water temps for this time of year, which will, likely, lead to more ice next winter
http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/now/wlevels/levels.html
and ….
http://www.coastwatch.msu.edu/michigan/m2.html
Having a family residence in Northern Michigan for 139 years I can tell you that this kind of cyclical stuff is pretty normal, The only man-made tragedy up here are those pseudo-estates at Bay Harbor
Great Lakes levels were going to rise as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow. It’s just that the recovery is…unprecedented!
Remember when rising temperatures seemed to be “working”? For a while there was a “nice” surge in Hurricanes. Then it was polar ice.
Now, you’ve got to bear in mind the tactics of the New Activism: I’ve got just one word for you—extremes.
It takes a long time to get dry, and a very short time to get wet.
Water levels rose 3 feet in 2 years. That is on pace for 150 feet per century right?
Only a moron would extrapolate a long term cyclical phenomenon on a short term basis. Yet we pay billions to people who do just that.
They spend a lot of money dredging out my Lake Michigan harbor this spring because of the low water conditions 2 years ago. No one ever said government spending was efficient.
Love the new Throwback Thursday feature. It alone is worth the price of admission 🙂
http://indigoprogram.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Paypal-Donate-Button.png
ante up
will do again, et tu brute?
My all-time favourite is Hansen’s boiling oceans prophecy. That alone should have discredited him forever. Why didn’t it?
He serves the political and other interests to the Washington well connected.
The media knows that what they publish is difficult to prove when it comes to climate science. Can’t prove the future.
Here are the facts: the Arctic WILL be ice free this summer. A scientist says so…
https://climatesanity.wordpress.com/2015/05/09/definition-barber-event/
The Arctic is ice-free now: if you can get there, you can get all the ice you want for $0.00.
Offer limited to one gigaton of ice per customer; customer must arrive in rowboat; whiskey not included; consuming arctic ice mixed with whisky is known to the State of California to cause cancer in laboratory animals and is not recommended for pregnant women or women who may become pregnant; the effects of consuming arctic ice with whiskey on pregnant men or men who may become pregnant are not known, but a court decision is expected shortly; void where prohibited by law; mandatory where not prohibited by law. Ask your doctor if arctic ice is right for you.
You left out the missive about being in or from areas where fungal infections are frequent or common.
I would suspect that if every week you highlighted one “expert” or politician who made a forecast similar to Gore’s or reiterated such a forecast as being authoritative there would not be enough weeks in the year to cover them all.
Love throw back Thursday’s, hilarious +1
Inertia: Lying once started is hard to stop.
Truths are facts honest people can freely forget. Lies are burdens dishonest people are forced to remember their entire life … maybe longer.
I think Al has finally beaten out Curly as my favorite Stooge.
No way never… Moe, Larry, CHEESE!
Check out curly’s advice for Al
Facepalm? I thought that was something to do with cardsharping.
Record sea ice for every month of the year in the Antarctic. http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png
Sudden increase in ice mass on the Greenland ice sheet. Sudden increase in multi year sea ice in the Arctic. http://beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/
If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks, it’s a duck. Yup the planet is cooling.
The cult of CAGW will very shortly require a plan to B to explain why the planet is abruptly cooling which should be impossible based on what they have spent the last 30 years telling us, blah, blah, blah, ….
Unequivocal significant planetary cooling, is only possible if there are one or more fundamental errors in the cult of CAGW’s surface warming calculations and if the majority of the surface warming in the last 30 years was due to solar cycle change modulation of planetary cloud cover, rather than the increase in atmospheric CO2.
The cult of CAGW’s no feedback calculation for a doubling of atmospheric CO2 which is the foundation of CAGW, fixed the lap rate for the calculation and ignored the fact that the absorption spectrum of water and CO2 overlap. There is no scientific basis for either assumption however both are necessary to create any significant surface warming. The so called ‘no feedback’ calculation determined the forcing for a doubling of CO2 is 4 watts/meter^2 which was later changed to 3.7 watts/meter^2.
Question: How does taking into account reality/physics facts affect the doubling of the atmospheric CO2 calculation? Do you remember Al Gore’s analogy of millions of tiny light bulbs heating the surface of the earth?
Effect of correcting Cult of CAGW’s known calculation errors for the no ‘feedbacks’ double atmospheric CO2 forcing case
1) Effect of surface warming if the fact that the Absorption spectrum of CO2 and water overlap is not ignored. As there is a great deal of water vapor lower in the lower regions of the atmosphere, particularly in the tropics (no surprise 70% of the earth is covered with water), there is a significant reduction in surface warming due to the CO2/water absorption spectrum overlap.
Redoing the double atmospheric CO2 level, no feedback calculation with an atmospheric model that takes into account the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere and the radiation effects of water/CO2 absorption overlap reduces the surface forcing for a doubling of atmospheric CO2 from 3.7 watts/meter^2 to 1.1 watts/meter^2 ( reduction in surface forcing of a factor of four, see figure 2 in the linked to paper). The 1.1 watts/meter^2 increase in forcing will result in surface warming of ball park 0.1C to 0.2C which is so small, the no feedback case is the same as with feedback case.
(Check out figure 2 in this paper.)
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0469%281982%29039%3C2923%3ARHDTIC%3E2.0.CO%3B2
2) Effect of surface warming if the fact that Greenhouse gases cause an increase in convection cooling is not ignored. It is a fact that greenhouse gases increase the lap rate (hot air rises and hot air rising must be balanced by colder higher elevation air falling, convection cooling dominates up to 20 km).
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.ca/2015/07/collapse-of-agw-theory-of-ipcc-most.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B74u5vgGLaWoOEJhcUZBNzFBd3M/view?pli=1
The solar cycle has been interrupted, this is a big deal. The public and media will of course notice that the current abrupt change to the sun correlates with current abrupt cooling.
In addition to abrupt cooling which will be fun to talk about, the explanation of what is happening to the sun will result in the most important scientific discovery of the last 70 years. Comparable to the discovery of nuclear energy or quantum physics.
This is the solar so called gray scale display which enable one to see tiny sunspots that are no longer visible with broad spectrum.
http://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/assets/img/latest/latest_4096_HMII.jpg
The clearest evidence that the Church of CAGW high priests know their orthodoxy is in trouble is by the Karl et al, 2015 Science paper vainly trying to create some (any) warming for 18 years of rising CO2.
Poor Al made the mistake of prognosticating a testable event. The “new and improved” politicians now know to blame the World’s terrorists on climate change, which is not only non-testable, but only discussable in the realm of foreign policy and political analysis…an area that’s so fuzzy and nebulous that you can claim virtually anything, which folks are happy to do.
AGW theory is in the process of being proven wrong on every single prediction they have foolishly made.
To be fair they have started to make their predictions for so far in the future that they will not be around to be reminded of their claims when they fail . Now I wonder why that is ?
Nice work hanging Gore from his own petard.
Yes, I just wish we didn’thave to look at his ugly puss.
Seeing that fat, flabby face reminds me to ask: Has anyone made an estimate of the ‘negative carbon footprint’ attributable to each one of us, and the ever increasing billions of inhabitants of Planet Earth? Even a wattle-and-daub hut has wooden supports, a thatched roof and contains wooden furniture. How much carbon is sequestered, on average, by each new addition to Earth’s population? If CO2 actually were a problem the population explosion would seem to me to be counteracting it quite significantly.
2014 seems to be a very cautious estimate from Al Gore in the light of even more alarming predictions.
How about a prediction of ice-free by 2000
0r 2008
or 2012
or 2013
And, whilst we are laughing, the best of all…
So, the moral of this story is: Don’t lose too much sleep on end-of-the-world scare stories.
Technically, he said “may.” Watch their language- that’s how these tools succeed in scaring people “to action” (read: to support handing more of their social power to goverments).
Pigs may fly by 2020.
While we are compiling, let’s not forget Vicky Pope:
Interesting comment at 1::35
Obviously using the IPCC definition of climate change, being unnatural and caused by humans.
Thanks for the Video, I found myself laughing at the fool making failed prediction after failed prediction. It is hilarious.
Hopefully she no longer has a job and is no longer filling British subjects with such drivel.