OK, so my art is a bit tongue in cheek. But it does fit the disaster theme of the topic.
This op-ed piece in the Herald Sun is interesting, because it touches on many of the points covered here on WUWT. This is the first time I’ve seen all these collected in one article in a major newspaper. Andrew Bolt routinely uses material from WUWT, and this is the first time I’ve been able to reciprocate. There are some truly unique points raised by Bolt that are indigenous to Australia that we haven’t discussed here, but they are valid for discussion nonetheless. In cases where we have covered a point on WUWT, I’ve made a footnote link [in brackets] – Anthony
From Andrew Bolt, The Herald Sun
Global Warming Alarmists Out in the Cold
April 29, 2009 12:00am
IT’S snowing in April. Ice is spreading in Antarctica. The Great Barrier Reef is as healthy as ever.
And that’s just the news of the past week. Truly, it never rains but it pours – and all over our global warming alarmists.
Time’s up for this absurd scaremongering. The fears are being contradicted by the facts, and more so by the week.
Doubt it? Then here’s a test.
Name just three clear signs the planet is warming as the alarmists claim it should. Just three. Chances are your “proofs” are in fact on my list of 10 Top Myths about global warming.And if your “proofs” indeed turn out to be false, don’t get angry with me.
Just ask yourself: Why do you still believe that man is heating the planet to hell? What evidence do you have?
So let’s see if facts matter more to you than faith, and observations more than predictions.
MYTH 1
THE WORLD IS WARMING
Wrong. It is true the world did warm between 1975 and 1998, but even Professor David Karoly, one of our leading alarmists, admitted this week “temperatures have dropped” since – “both in surface temperatures and in atmospheric temperatures measured from satellites”. In fact, the fall in temperatures from just 2002 has already wiped out a quarter of the warming our planet experienced last century. (Check data from Britain’s Hadley Centre, NASA’s Aqua satellite and the US National Climatic Data Centre.)
Some experts, such as Karoly, claim this proves nothing and the world will soon start warming again. Others, such as Professor Ian Plimer of Adelaide University, point out that so many years of cooling already contradict the theory that man’s rapidly increasing gases must drive up temperatures ever faster.
But that’s all theory. The question I’ve asked is: What signs can you actually see of the man-made warming that the alarmists predicted?
[ Ian Plimer, Temperature trends]
MYTH 2
THE POLAR CAPS ARE MELTING
Wrong. The British Antarctic Survey, working with NASA, last week confirmed ice around Antarctica has grown 100,000 sq km each decade for the past 30 years.
Long-term monitoring by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports the same: southern hemisphere ice has been expanding for decades.
As for the Arctic, wrong again.
The Arctic ice cap shrank badly two summers ago after years of steady decline, but has since largely recovered. Satellite data from NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Centre this week shows the Arctic hasn’t had this much April ice for at least seven years.
Norway’s Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Centre says the ice is now within the standard deviation range for 1979 to 2007.
[Antarctic Ice Growth, Arctic Ice Recovery ]
MYTH 3
WE’VE NEVER HAD SUCH A BAD DROUGHT
Wrong. A study released this month by the University of NSW Climate Change Research Centre confirms not only that we’ve had worse droughts, but this Big Dry is not caused by “global warming”, whether man-made or not.
As the university’s press release says: “The causes of southeastern Australia’s longest, most severe and damaging droughts have been discovered, with the surprise finding that they originate far away in the Indian Ocean.
“A team of Australian scientists has detailed for the first time how a phenomenon known as the Indian Ocean Dipole – a variable and irregular cycle of warming and cooling of ocean water – dictates whether moisture-bearing winds are carried across the southern half of Australia.”
MYTH 4
OUR CITIES HAVE NEVER BEEN HOTTER
Wrong. The alleged “record” temperature Melbourne set in January – 46.4 degrees – was in fact topped by the 47.2 degrees the city recorded in 1851. (See the Argus newspaper of February 8, 1851.)
And here’s another curious thing: Despite all this warming we’re alleged to have caused, Victoria’s highest temperature on record remains the 50.7 degrees that hit Mildura 103 years ago.
South Australia’s hottest day is still the 50.7 degrees Oodnadatta suffered 37 years ago. NSW’s high is still the 50 degrees recorded 70 years ago.
What’s more, not one of the world’s seven continents has set a record high temperature since 1974. Europe’s high remains the 50 degrees measured in Spain 128 years ago, before the invention of the first true car.
MYTH 5
THE SEAS ARE GETTING HOTTER
Wrong. If anything, the seas are getting colder. For five years, a network of 3175 automated bathythermographs has been deployed in the oceans by the Argo program, a collaboration between 50 agencies from 26 countries.
Warming believer Josh Willis, of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, reluctantly concluded: “There has been a very slight cooling . . .”
MYTH 6
THE SEAS ARE RISING
Wrong. For almost three years, the seas have stopped rising, according to the Jason-1 satellite mission monitored by the University of Colorado.
That said, the seas have risen steadily and slowly for the past 10,000 years through natural warming, and will almost certainly resume soon.
But there is little sign of any accelerated rises, even off Tuvalu or the Maldives, islands often said to be most threatened with drowning.
Professor Nils-Axel Moerner, one of the world’s most famous experts on sea levels, has studied the Maldives in particular and concluded there has been no net rise there for 1250 years.
Venice is still above water.
[Sea Level in the Maldives, Sea Level satellite data]
MYTH 7
CYCLONES ARE GETTING WORSE
Wrong. Ryan Maue of Florida State University recently measured the frequency, intensity and duration of all hurricanes and cyclones to compile an Accumulated Cyclone Energy Index.
His findings? The energy index is at its lowest level for more than 30 years.
The World Meteorological Organisation, in its latest statement on cyclones, said it was impossible to say if they were affected by man’s gases: “Though there is evidence both for and against the existence of a detectable anthropogenic signal in the tropical cyclone climate record to date, no firm conclusion can be made on this point.”
[Ryan Maue and Hurricane energy, Hurricane landfall trends]
MYTH 8
THE GREAT BARRIER REEF IS DYING
Wrong. Yes, in 1999, Professor Ove Hoegh-Gulberg, our leading reef alarmist and administrator of more than $30 million in warming grants, did claim the reef was threatened by warming, and much had turned white.
But he then had to admit it had made a “surprising” recovery.
Yes, in 2006 he again warned high temperatures meant “between 30 and 40 per cent of coral on Queensland’s Great Barrier Reef could die within a month”.
But he later admitted this bleaching had “minimal impact”. Yes, in 2007 he again warned that temperature changes of the kind caused by global warming were bleaching the reef.
But this month fellow Queensland University researchers admitted in a study that reef coral had once more made a “spectacular recovery”, with “abundant corals re-established in a single year”. The reef is blooming.
MYTH 9
OUR SNOW SEASONS ARE SHORTER
Wrong. Poor snow falls in 2003 set off a rash of headlines predicting warming doom. The CSIRO typically fed the hysteria by claiming global warming would strip resorts of up to a quarter of their snow by 2018.
Yet the past two years have been bumper seasons for Victoria’s snow resorts, and this year could be just as good, with snow already falling in NSW and Victoria this past week.
[New low temp record at Australian ski resort this year]
MYTH 10
TSUNAMIS AND OTHER DISASTERS ARE GETTING WORSE
Are you insane? Tsunamis are in fact caused by earthquakes. Yet there was World Vision boss Tim Costello last week, claiming that Asia was a “region, thanks to climate change, that has far more cyclones, tsunamis, droughts”.
Wrong, wrong and wrong, Tim. But what do facts matter now to a warming evangelist when the cause is so just?
And so any disaster is now blamed on man-made warming the way they once were on Satan. See for yourself on www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm the full list, including kidney stones, volcanic eruptions, lousy wine, insomnia, bad tempers, Vampire moths and bubonic plagues. Nothing is too far-fetched to be seized upon by carpetbaggers and wild preachers as signs of a warming we can’t actually see.
Not for nothing are polar bears the perfect symbol of this faith – bears said to be threatened by warming, when their numbers have in fact increased.
Bottom line: fewer people now die from extreme weather events, whether cyclones, floods or blinding heatwaves.
Read that in a study by Indur Goklany, who represented the US at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: “There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.”
[Going down – death rates due to extreme weather events]
So stop this crazy panic.
First step: check again your list of the signs you thought you saw of global warming. How many are true? What do you think, and why do you think it?
Yes, the world may resume warming in one year or 100. But it hasn’t been warming as the alarmists said it must if man were to blame, and certainly not as the media breathlessly keeps claiming.
Best we all just settle down, then, and wait for the proof — the real proof. After all, panicking over invisible things is so undignified, don’t you think?

Brendan H
You have a very dry British sense of humour that I think some of our American Friends here misinterpret (but I enjoy!) It is often said that Americans don’t do irony or sarcasm-I am not sure I agree with that, nevertheless it is striking how often you see someone making a comment here then finish with ‘sark off” in order to illustrate they were joking.
Perhaps we ought to arm ourselves with emoticon symbols. 🙂
Tonyb
RW
forgot this link showing oceans are cooling
http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/03/the-ocean-really-is-cooling/?cp=all
Tonyb
TonyB:
Tony, your reasoning is flawless, and can not be refuted. However, you must understand that you’re feeding a species of troll who always demands answers — and then when answers are provided, it instantly moves the goal posts and demands different answers to new questions. It is a one-way street with him. He snipes from the sidelines while convincing no one.
This guy in particular always hides out from answering any questions himself, while making statements that are trivial to refute, as you did above. IMO he’s got mental problems, but I’m not a psychologist, only a retired metrologist.
So I would advise not feeding that particular troll, you’ll never get any straight answers… unless, of course, you’re having fun showing everyone how wrong he is. In that case, then by all means, fire away!
Tony, I begin to doubt that you’re posting in good faith. You claimed there was an ‘IPCC stated rate of 3.5mm’ . I showed you that this was not so. You object to the idea that you made the figure up, but you have not provided its source. How about you either show us where this number of 3.5mm/year came from, or withdraw the claim?
Next, you demand “Why are you linking to sea level graphs that finish in 2003?”
First, you didn’t understand the graphs you linked to for Newlyn and Helsinki. They showed residuals – that is, data with trend removed. Now it seems that you didn’t understand that the graphs I linked to were the actual data. You badly misunderstood what you posted, and now you’ve badly misunderstood my attempt to correct you. I think you have to try quite hard to misunderstand so badly, so often.
“I clearly said that sea levels have been falling over the last three years i.e to 2005. Please recheck your figures and use current data.”
It’s 2009 so I’m not sure what you mean, exactly, by “the last three years i.e to 2005”, but yet again you seem to have misunderstood. I already posted a link to sea level data, right up to date, which does not support your claims. Look again, here.
As for urban heat islands, I did think I’d been quite clear. Everyone knows they exist. However, it is obvious that they do not strongly bias the surface temperature record, because
1. the greatest warming is seen in northern polar regions, and on the Antarctic Peninsula, both of which are very sparsely populated;
2. the oceans are warming by about 0.1°c/decade;
3. the satellite and ground-based temperature records agree very closely.
As you clearly believe that they do strongly bias the surface records, I’d like to hear what you make of these three observations.
According to this New Scientist article on: Seal level rise could bust IPCC estimates
So, let me see, 180mm to 590mm in almost 100 years (93, say). Seems close to 3.5mm/yr as the mid-point of the range. (Quick, someone check the numbers.)
Probably wrong since NS is a notoriously unreliable rag. Where is that IPCC source document?
Rw
Amazing. Check your 13 29 06
” see for example here” It did not work (try it-DNS error) so I had no idea what you were linking to.
I quoted three references to the 3.5mm. How many do you want? This is the figure being used by the UK Govt and all the others signed up to the Kyoto protocol.
Individual 2008 figures will likely be adjusted (for good reasons) so I calculated the three years as starting in 2005. (if 2008 confirms the trend it will make 4 years) You quoted for some reason data that concluded in 2003-probably because that still showed a rise. I didn’t dispute that there had been a rise as part of the short term cycle.
I comment on sea level temperatures and you then ignore my link and refer to your previous comment as if I hadn’t said anything. (In the meantime completely ignoring the bulk of my email which gave numerous references illustrating the historic background).
It seems to me that I post the links, you then ignore them or make a reference to something else claiming I have misunderstood. So to my list enumerated earlier as to ‘where have we got to?’ we can now add sea level temperatures. THe list now reads;
“Sea levels not rising, let alone at the rate claimed.
Sea level temperatures
Arctic ice melts with surprising regularity.
Global temperatures are an unrealistic construct based on severely flawed and manipulated information gathered since 1850 (or 1880) from a tiny number of ever changing stations.
UHI severely understated in relation to the number of sites situated in urban areas.
Individual Station sites severely flawed (see the current thread on this site)
Hundreds of studies illustrating the extent and nature of the MWP (previously linked but not commented on by you) demonstrate the current climate is not unprecedented (there are numerous studies of the Roman optimum as well)
Computer models inaccurate as admitted by the people promoting them.
You do not appear to want to engage on UHI and merely answer my questions with other questions or accuse me of not backing up my statements (which I continually do with links.)
Lets add another to the list as well, ” The science is not settled.”
You obviously believe the science is settled and that the only facts are ones that have graced the pages of realclimate or similar and will not look at the latest evidence, whether it is sea levels, ice, temperatures etc.
Even the Met office are admitting they dont know as much as they thought they did;
Current Advert
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/recruitment/vacancies/001758.html
“A significant uncertainty in future projections of sea level is associated with dynamical changes in the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets and a key aspect of this uncertainty is the role of ice shelves, how they might respond to climate change, and the effect this could have on the ice sheets. The goal of the post is to contribute to improved scenarios of sea-level rise, which is an important aspect of climate change, with large coastal impacts.”
I have no idea what will happen in the near future-I would have expected the long term LIA would be replaced by a period of considerable warming. If it then exceeded the MWP or other warm period then certainly that would be a cause for concern. However that was my original point-the current circumstance are not unprecedented as is so often claimed.
I will reluctantly concede that Smokey is right with his16 45 39 so I will take his advice that it is pointless in continuing a one sided debate where the only facts are those that emanate from your side and you appear reluctant to accept any other information. As the Royal Socety motto says ‘Nobody’s word is final.’
I am away from my computer for a few days and when I return I will rejoin the party in one of the other threads and hope to meet up with you there.
With best regards
Tonyb
OK, Tony, ~snip~ <—– Personal attack. ~dbstealey, moderator.
What? What? There was nothing of the sort in what I posted.
After the inexplicable deletion of my last post, I’ll try again. And this time I’ll save what I write. If arbitrary deletions are the thing here, then perhaps you could make that clear somewhere so that people don’t waste time writing long posts.
So, Tony, the figure of 3.5mm/year does not appear in any IPCC document that you linked to. You do appear to have invented it, or perhaps misread it. I quoted earlier from the IPCC’s most recent report – it contradicts your claim, which therefore falls.
You failed to understand when you linked to graphs of residuals that they were not showing sea levels. I linked to the actual data, but rather than admit your mistake and thank me for pointing it out, you ignored your error and complained about when the graphs stopped. Your claims that there had been no change in sea level at Newlyn and Helsinki were incorrect, and thus they fall.
You ignored the graph of sea level rise – here it is again. Your claims that sea level has stopped rising, or is falling, are not correct. They fall.
It is now clear that you’re not posting in good faith, and thus I will have no further dialogue with you. After your unprovoked attack on me before we’d even conversed (but which the moderators apparently thought was fine!), I gave you the benefit of the doubt, though I now see I shouldn’t have done.
Reply: I didn’t delete your post (at least I don’t remember), but certainly someone else may have. Certain tones will get an entire post deleted with no notice. Please read policy page if you don’t think things are made clear. FYI I did delete one post today, a personal attack on an AGW proponent.~ charles the moderator
TonyB,
Sea levels are notoriously difficult to measure. This anomaly graphic shows that there has been no recent rise, and in fact there are negative anomalies in the past few years: click
Also, Tony, it depends on which iteration one cites from CU. In this case, the rise in sea level is actually less than 3 mm/year: click
And as long time readers of WUWT know, the UC chart is “adjusted” and needs to be taken with a big pinch of salt: click
Before the secret inverse barometer manipulation, recent sea levels are declining significantly. Then after the “adjustment,” *voila!* the sea level rises again.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
[For a fine discussion of historic sea levels, see here: click1 and especially click2].
Finally, here is more sea level info from NASA, covering the past 12 years. No reason for alarm: click
Hi Anthony,
thank you very much for your WUWT blog!
I’ve been browsing through the NEIC (http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/epic/epic.html) data recently and made a diagram of the number of earthquakes since 1973 and got this result: http://www.divshare.com/download/7677300-dc8. I couldn’t find any source on the net that could really explain the increase of M4-5 earthquakes. Just some conspiracy and weird science sites. Have you ever covered this subject yet?
Thanks again and regards,
Jan
“Myth” 5
The Oceans *are* Getting Hotter
Andrew Bolt must have missed the end of the story…
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/OceanCooling/page1.php
See the heat content of the Oceans going up, up, up ?
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/OceanCooling/page4.php
That means the Oceans are getting Warmer.
Josh Willis himself found the errors in some new Argo and old XBT data.
As for “Myth” 2, The Polar Caps are Melting:
I’m sure a clever Australian journalist can explain *this* away after a few pints:
http://www.nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20090706_Figure3.png
Oh look, much better these last 3 years… crisis averted.