I was reminded by Richard North via email today of this grouchy wordplay from NSIDC when Joe Romm wrote up a piece last year on this subject:
Exclusive: New NSIDC director Serreze explains the “death spiral” of Arctic ice, brushes off the “breathtaking ignorance” of blogs like WattsUpWithThat
Climate Progress, June 5th, 2009
Okay, let’s compare that to what Dr. Serreze said this week in an interview with The Sunday Times:
“In retrospect, the reactions to the 2007 melt were overstated. The lesson is that we must be more careful in not reading too much into one event,” Serreze said.
Source: The Sunday Times – Arctic ice recovers from the great melt
A timeline for the “breathtakingly ignorant” follows.
2007: record Arctic ice minimum in 2007 – big news, unprecedented, shocking, Navy postgraduate school scientist says Arctic summers to be ice-free ‘by 2013′
2008: ditto, this year’s ice recovery is just a blip, it’s really caught in a “death spiral”
2009: ditto, this recovery for a second year means nothing – Arctic continues death spiral, you people are breathtakingly ignorant
2010: Arctic sea ice approaches normal for this time of year, first time since 2001 – “…reactions to the 2007 melt were overstated…we must be more careful in not reading too much into one event”
From the Times arcticle:
The current trends seem to have stopped and Vicky Pope will be way past her retirement age in 2060. :o)
From the WayBack Machine — April 2008:
In 25 years, American and Japanese scientists suggest that perpetual summer will reign. This prediction is based on the Arctic ice cover of 2007 shrinking to its smallest size in recorded history. If I understand the reports from climatologists of many nations, natural ice will become a thing of the past. The so called “tipping point” has been reached and the remaining Arctic ice cover does not stand a chance of rejuvenating itself. It is just too hot.
Observations such as disappearing ice sheets are real evidence of rising global temperatures, not some measurements made from ocean buoys or satellite recordings. The ice is melting and even the nation’s of the world want to plant their flags in the Arctic to control the natural resources now being revealed and made accessible by a reluctant mother nature. Imagine the top of the world dotted with oil drilling rigs like those in the North Sea or Hibernia or the Gulf of Mexico.
Earth’s Temperature the Hottest in Centuries
The National Academy of Sciences reports that the Northern Hemisphere is the hottest it has been in two thousand years, while the entire Earth is the hottest it has been in four hundred years. The planet is running a fever and during the twentieth century the Northern Hemisphere temperature rose by one degree.
That from “sciencecologists” at
http://worldperspective.bravehost.com/Sciencecology.html
The tagline for The X-Files was “The truth is out there.” Unfortunately, so is garbage like the above.
Not to worry, Seresese will be fired on January 21, 2013.
I completely agree with prevailing opinion about blips and bumps in the ice record. These are caused by local weather pattern variations. What I don’t agree with is the jump from what is essentially taking a data string (pick a point, pick the number of years cuz it don’t matter) made up of blips and bumps, averaging it into a linear trend, and calling is AGW. The resulting statistical trend is an artificial construct that has no information in it that can lead to any hypothesis as to cause and effect.
Brain on Easter Sunday morning Irish Coffee in the tank: “is” for “it”. Brain on black coffee: “it” when I mean &^$* “it”. Do the math.
A recent quote from Serreze:
“All of the action is in the Bering Sea,” Serreze said. “For the past several weeks, we’ve been under a rather unusual weather pattern, a cold pattern, that’s given us this late spurt in ice growth in the Bering Sea. If you look at the rest of the Arctic Ocean proper, it is very warm.”
“This is weather,” said Serreze. “Don’t conflate this with climate.” Serreze notes that on the Atlantic side of the Arctic, ice is low.
So you will notice the message isn’t changed, it’s just toned down with more nuance. Translation: The ice growth in the Bering Sea is due to weather… ignore that. For the true climate signal go to the Atlantic where ice is below normal.
For those that have been following the regional ice status, the only regions that are significantly below normal are Baffin/Newfoundland and the St. Lawrence Basin, both below 60N. All others are at or above the 1779-2008 mean.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.4.html
BTW, I can’t let him get away with the “If you look at the rest of the Arctic Ocean proper, it is very warm.” How can it be VERY WARM when it’s covered with ice. Serreze is nothing more than a spinmeister and propagandist minstering over the death spiral of his credibility.
Pride has no calories. Swallow your pride, AGW promoters.
Telling the truth is extremely nutritious. Tell the truth, climate scientists.
And your money is in … CEF, IAU, IGT or ZGLD (ETF traded Gold shares)?
(GOOD LUCK getting 100% payback or ‘taking delivery’ if things go the way you seem to be intimating …)
.
.
One must allow for “late vocations”. Congratulations to Dr. Serreze for having a belated (only three years!) moment of self-knowledge.
Try to keep that one in the memory banks for the next time you find your finger inching towards the Panic Button, Mark.
Well, if wattsupwiththat is guilty of displaying ‘breathtaking ignorance’ by exposing climate fallacies thrown at us via the unquestioning lamestream media, give me ‘breathtaking ignorance’ every time.
More quotations from Dr Serreze concerning this topic at:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1263207/Increase-Arctic-ice-confounds-doomsayers.html
“Dr Mark Serreze, of the NSlDC, said parts of the Arctic were going through an unusually cold spring – but that other areas were warmer than normal.
He added: ‘What this doesn’t show is any indication that global warming is over. If you look at the Arctic as a whole we might get to average amounts of sea ice for the time of year. But the ice is thin and quite vulnerable and it can melt very quickly.’
The best measure of the health of the Arctic was not only the amount of cover, but also the thickness of ice, he said.”
It reminds me of 1984, where the main character’s job was to remove news from past newspapers.
@ur momisugly Steve Goddard (23:55:09) :
If that is true, how can we be below the average for this date?
Bill Tuttle (07:10:44) :
Carsten Arnholm, Norway (06:31:31) :
http://www.ted.com/talks/al_gore_s_new_thinking_on_the_climate_crisis.html
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
That’s not the exact video I was talking about. But still it has his histrionics about North Pole Ice in it, and with many more details.
The one that is now gone was him in a Museum in Germany and he hold up his hand with all his fingers open to show all 5 of them and saying “5 years” as he is doing it, so as to add visual alarm to what he was saying in verbal alarm.
So, why is this video gone now?
Watching Al Gore do his act reminds me of that saying,”There’s a Sucker Born Every Minute”. Where that saying came from:
……Among the visitors were clergymen, college professors and distinguished scientists. Before long, the expert’s opinions split into two theories; one side claimed it was a true fossilized human giant and the other side pronounced it an authentic ancient statue. No one asserted that it was a fake!……
http://www.historybuff.com/library/refbarnum.html
Arn Riewe (08:13:15) :
“This is weather,” said Serreze. “Don’t conflate this with climate.”
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
I also won’t conflate his job title with him actually being qualified to have that job.
Well, Steve (Goddard), I’m hoping your analysis about this year proves correct. Everywhere, one still finds references to “dramatic decline” “Increasingly worrisome” “worse than we thought” . We really need a few years above “average” to blow a hole in this nonsense.
How we were censored
by Bob Carter and John McLean
March 29, 2010
Climate science censorship in action at the American Geophysical Union
http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2010/03/bob-carter-john-mclean
“… there is no “other” side to a story that involves the clear abuse of scientific ethics.”
Amino Acids in Meteorites (09:21:31) :
Bill Tuttle (07:10:44) :
That’s not the exact video I was talking about. But still it has his histrionics about North Pole Ice in it, and with many more details.
I didn’t think it would be, given that it was shot in March and the one you and Carsten mentioned was from December. I figured Uncle Albert would use it in this one, though, because it looks like a rehearsal for his 2008 World Tour, and Gore keeps the same material in his act.
Saves all that inconvenient memorization, y’know…
Amino Acids in Meteorites (09:21:31) :
Bill Tuttle (07:10:44) :
That’s not the exact video I was talking about. But still it has his histrionics about North Pole Ice in it, and with many more details.
I didn’t think it would be, given that it was shot in March and the one you and Carsten mentioned was from December. I figured Uncle Albert would use it in this one, though, because it looks like a rehearsal for his 2008 World Tour, and Gore keeps the same material in his act.
Saves all that inconvenient memorization, y’know…
ooops. Mayday, Moderator — server-burp double post!
Sorry!
2010: Arctic sea ice approaches normal for this time of year, first time since 2001 – “…reactions to the 2007 melt were overstated…we must be more careful in not reading too much into one event”
So basically we should be more skeptical ?!?!? Isn’t that all that we have been saying… I do not know many people who are skeptics that claim that there is NO correlation to C02, only that the amount of warming that is being projected seems, much like the aforementioned 2007 ice free melt, a little unlikely. Not to say it cannot happen, just that according to the data these projections are based on wild assumptions.
Now if these assumptions prove to be true, skeptics will change their tune. Science is science. However as they are conjecture at this point…
Still it is nice to see egg on their face, unfortunately the media has no long term memory.
My rules of propaganda, a couple of them anyway.
Rule number 1: Never attack the message. Always try and discredit the messenger.
Rule number 2: Average or normal is not newsworthy. The outrages is always newsworthy.
Rule number 3: Never place your claim in a scientific or historical meaningful context.
I include an excerpt from an essay I wrote several months ago:
“Advocacy and sophistry can not and do not produce knowledge, only information. Since advocacy, propaganda and sophistry, like faith are not in a position to add knowledge, only incomplete and often misleading information, they are one step further removed from wisdom. Cooking the books, introducing a bias or hiding data and so forth can not produce knowledge either. Such activities dishonor all those who use or accept the results of such activities. We do not rationally expect honor from sophists and propagandists or advocates of faith. We do expect honor from those who profess to seek the rational truth. Some will say Nikols is only angry that his expectations have not been met. Not so, Nikols is angry that they have been.”
Is Joe Romm always grouchy?
I visited his website a few weeks ago and posted on on or two of his recent articles. When I returned I found one removed and I was banned from posting more.
The one that was removed asked whether NASA GISS could make accurate predictions 9 months ahead. I know the weather can be predicted 5 days in advance and that models can predict well into the future but I wasn’t aware of tools that could predcited the global temp for this year or next year for example.
When I emailed him to ask why he banned me he told me that GISS make prediction and he was sick of answering tiresome posts. I obvious mailed back to say the wasn’t much hope for a open debate when people take high minded positions. Needless to say he hasn’t replied.
One wonders why he bothers to keep a climate science blog if not to explain climate science to online Joes.
(Since then I’ve realised the present El Nino conditions can give a good indication of future global temp 7 months into the future. It wouldn’t have been difficult for Joe to post that).
HR (10:06:15) :
Is Joe Romm always grouchy?
He’s been having a bad year, that’s all. Since 2008.
One wonders why he bothers to keep a climate science blog if not to explain climate science to online Joes.
He runs a climate blog, not a climate *science* blog. You’re better off here — you’ll usually find more science in one thread than a week’s worth of posts at some sites *and* knowledgeable will answer your questions.
Granted, some folks can get a bit tart in their answers, but you *will* get answers.
HR, I was banned from ClimateProgress for having the temerity to suggest that Joe Romm’s bet that average temperatures in the second decade would be .1C higher than the first was very weak compared with his stated beliefs. He had stated that an increase of .2C was nearly certain, so I suggested he should base his bet on that position. For that, I was banned forever.
ClimateProgress isn’t a climate science blog. Joe Romm has an audience to which he plays and from which he makes a living. As such, he’s much like Rush Limbaugh, and whether either of them believes all the stuff he says doesn’t matter. It’s pointless to analyze the arguments used by either Romm or Limbaugh on some rational basis, because it’s just theater.