Tom Nelson runs a great aggregator blog. he’s got his pulse on climate news all over the globe. He’s also got a keen eye for news detail and offers some interesting insights. I had to chuckle then when he pointed out this hilarious media paradox:
Settled science: Can everyplace really be warming much faster than everyplace else?
[Africa: Allegedly warming faster than the global average]
Prof Gordon Conway, the outgoing chief scientist at the British government’s Department for International Development, and former head of the philanthropic Rockefeller Foundation, said in a scientific paper that the continent is already warming faster than the global average
North Pole Heating Faster than anywhere else
Many scientists seem mystified as to why the North Polar region is warming up several times faster than the rest of the planet.
Australia warming faster than rest of globe, climate report says
Kuwait: Alarm as Gulf waters warm three times faster than average
The seawater temperature in Kuwait Bay has been increasing at three times the global average rate since 1985
Antarctic air is warming faster than rest of world – Times Online
AIR temperatures above the entire frozen continent of Antarctica have risen three times faster than the rest of the world during the past 30 years.
Tibet warming up faster than anywhere in the world | Reuters
(Reuters) – Tibet is warming up faster than anywhere else in the world, Xinhua news agency said on Sunday.
European temperatures rising faster than world average, report says – The New York Times
Sundarbans water warming faster than global average
In the Sundarbans, surface water temperature has been rising at the rate of 0.5 degree Celsius per decade over the past three decades, eight times the rate of global warming, says a new study.
Climate change heating up China faster than rest of the world – report
In a new report, the China Meteorological Administration now says climate change is heating up the People’s Republic faster than the rest of the world
Spain warming faster than rest of northern hemisphere: study
The country has experienced average temperature increases of 0.5 degrees Celsius per decade since 1975, a rate that is “50 percent superior to the average of nations in the northern hemisphere”, the study by the Spanish branch of the Clivar research network found.
U.S. West warming faster than rest of world: study
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – The U.S. West is heating up at nearly twice the rate of the rest of the world and is likely to face more drought conditions in many of its fast-growing cities, an environmental group said on Thursday.
A New Leaderboard at the U.S. Open « Climate Audit
Four of the top 10 are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900.
Global warming is occurring twice as fast in the Arctic as in the rest of the world
Lake Superior is Warming [much stronger than the global average]
The really striking thing here is that the long-term trend in Superior is so much stronger than the global average. Well, we know that the upper midwest is warming more rapidly than the global average, but not this much more rapidly.
Himalayas warming faster than global average
New Delhi, June 4 (IANS) Northwestern Himalayas has become 1.4 degrees Celsius warmer in the last 100 years, a far higher level of warming than the 0.5-1.1 degrees for the rest of the globe, Indian scientists have found.
[Korean Peninsula]: Allegedly warming twice the global average]
According to the Korea Meteorological Administration, the climate has been warming on the Korean Peninsula twice more rapidly than in the rest of the world over the past century.
Doug in Dunedin says:
July 24, 2010 at 10:42 pm
None of this is true. New Zealand is warming faster than any of these!
– Which brings us back to the “adjusted warming” saga.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/uh-oh-raw-data-in-new-zealand-tells-a-different-story-than-the-official-one/
David Charles wrote:
“Is there a World Cup for the country that “warms” the most? Does Al Gore present it?”
You’ve just given me an idea for a simple solution to the global warming problem. If Al Gore were to present such a prize then the “Gore Effect” would soon kick in and cause significant cooling. That would just be a local effect … but if everywhere is warming faster than everwhere else then everywhere deserves the prize and the Gore Effect will become global.
There are just a couple of problems. Al Gore might not be very keen on the jet lag he would experience by flying from one capital city to another for the next few months, or on the bad publicity that his massively increased carbon footprint would attract. However, there is a very elegant solution to both those problems. Simply add the Great Global Warming Race to the next Olympics. Then all Al Gore will have to do is to fly to London in 2012 to present the medals.
Unlike cap and trade and all the other proposed solutions to the global warming problem this will not be ruinlessly expensive. The total cost will merely be that of a olympic gold medal for every country in the world, plus one extra medal.
Why the extra medal? Well, it will be the longest medal winners’ ceremony in history and Al Gore will have to stand while over 100 different national anthems are played, one after the other.
If Usain Bolt earned his first Gold for just over nine and a half seconds work in Bejing who would begrudge Al Gore a Gold for an epic feat or feet of standing? (Please excuse the pun!). Fortunately the Games are still two years away so Gore should be fit enough if he starts training now.
I agree with Lu @ur momisugly 12:10. I have been following WUWT and several others for years and there are times when the argument becomes difficult to follow for the non-scientist. That is not to say that many of the comments and articles are self explanatory. There are many ordinary Joes and Janes who want to be educated and look to this and similar sites for a new perspective. The fact that they are here speaks volumes about the generally poor journalism in much of the MSM. We should welcome the attention and make our points as clearly as possible.
BTW Anthony I don’t wish to subvert your authority nor do I wish to teach you how to suck eggs. I simply agree with Lu’s desire for simple understanding of a very complex issue.
To push the “Cap and Trade” that most countries are trying to get into, you need a significant warming trend blamed on CO2.
The inconvenient cooling data gets in the way of this so media are advised “DO NOT MENTION ANY COOL AREAS”. If you do the follow the money, many medias are subsitized by governmnents, also, any media can be barred from reporting in any government event if they do not play by the rules of the game.
“What we are seeing here is not bad science it is the opposite of science (whatever that is called).”
Hmmmm… “Unscience”? “Darkscience”…or maybe “Antiscience”?
“Joel says:
July 25, 2010 at 1:03 am
Ummmmmmmm…. when you have a bunch of different numbers, some of them are going to be higher than the average. This is hardly surprising.”
While that statement is true, the point of the post/article is that when yhou have a bunch of different numbers, they can’t ALL be higher than all the other numbers. Surely that comes through?
JimB
There’s no need for a post-modern revision of mathematics. Russell’s paradox explains this contradiction. We could even invoke axiomatic set theory to climate (non)science
For all you non-scientists, the faster than everywhere else warming is due to the rapid loss of the solar ice cap which is retreating faster than expected.
And here they say Norway is warming up faster than anywhere else. 😉
It is not surprising that Africa is the fastest warming place on the planet. GISS has almost no data there, so they can claim any trend they want.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBjUPWcUHpg]
The warmists, government and the media are taking us for fools.
Big mistake.
“I had to chuckle then when he pointed out this hilarious media paradox:
Settled science: Can everyplace really be warming much faster than everyplace else?”
Okay…”hilarious media paradox” are pretty much dead giveaways, aren’t they?…and then followed by links to a dozen or so articles that ALL say someplace is warming faster than all the other places?
When we read article after article after article that demonstrates how subverted the science has become in the field of climate study, I find it refreshing when we get these little gems now and then.
I’d love to see MSM pick up on this one…quite funny.
JimB
Most news I read is so depressing. This article just made me laugh. In fact I laughed more than average. Thanks!
Oh come on now! The amount of warming is inversely proportional to the number of thermometers.
PJB says:
July 25, 2010 at 2:12 am
Speaking of sources of hot air coming from GISS in New York…..
Judith Curry says:
24 July 2010 at 2:36 PM
Gavin, the post I made in #167 was a summary of Montford’s book as closely as I can remember it, sort of a review. I did not particularly bring in my personal opinions into this, other than the framing of montford’s points. So asking me to retract a point made in a book in a review of that book is, well, pointless. your attempt to rebut my points are full of logical fallacies and arguing at points i didn’t make. As a result, Montford’s theses look even more convincing. Once you’e in a hole, you can try to climb out or keep digging. Well keep digging, Gavin. My final words: read the book.
[Response: Thanks for passing by. In future I will simply assume you are a conduit for untrue statements rather than their originator. And if we are offering advice, might I suggest that you actually engage your critical faculties before demanding that others waste their time rebutting nonsense. I, for one, have much better things to do. – gavin]
That Judy Curry sure is a breath of fresh (and cooler) air
______________________________________________________
I went to RC (against my better judgement) and looked at the string that Dr. Curry made the (unfortunate) decision to participate in. I never cease to be amazed at the disrespect, arrogance, and snark of Gavin, Romm, Tamino “The Team,” and their band of sychophantic followers. They rip Andy Revkin, Dr. Curry, and others who believe that manmade CO2 emmissions may be causing global warming, but have chosen to be objective, open-minded, and scientific about the subject.
The difference between the AGW blogs and blogs like WUWT, Lucia, etc. can best be illustrated by several recent postings regarding whether the greenhouse effect (GHE) exists, and is pertinent to the question of AGW. Several articles were posted which tried to prove that the GHE violates the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics. Both Roy Spencer and Roger Pielke Sr. posted articles disputing that hypotheses. The exchanges and comments were extraordinarily civil, courteous, and, well, scientific.
Mooloo.
“In fact much of the earth will be warming at average, if you allow for any margin of error, and if the concept of “average” is to have any meaning. (If much is warming very quickly and much cooling, then “average” is effectively meaningless.)”
you dont know what the definition of a mean is. It is highly improbable that any one place will warm at the mean or average of all places. Highly improbable.
However, if you throw error bars around that point, then many fall within that envelope. As for ‘significant’ that’s a different matter.
Here’s a suitable epitaph for Professor Stephen H Schneider…
It’s a video from the 1970’s about how Buffalo, New York, was hit so hard by snow, freezing winds and blizzards that some people were stuck in their cars and froze to death.
2-23 In Search Of… The Coming Ice Age (Part 3 of 3)
Stephen Schneider appears after 6 minutes, warning about what might happen if this represented the onset of the next ice age. He was also the one who said “Scientists… to get some broad-base support, to capture the public’s imagination… of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention about any doubts we might have.”
Lawrie Ayres says:
July 25, 2010 at 3:52 am
I agree with Lawrie Ayres says:
July 25, 2010 at 3:52 am
I agree with Lu @ur momisugly 12:10.
Well, seeing as this
“I had to chuckle then when he pointed out this hilarious media paradox:”
was the third line in the post, I do not understand why “Lu @ur momisugly 12:10” had such a hard time understanding the “tongue-in-cheek” aspect of the posting. That said, I’ve been around the internets for a long, long, time. Use to be, in the early days, when discussions would take place on listservs, or usenet, or fidonet, or bbs’s, that noobs were advised to lurk a while and pick up on the particular culture of any given group they might be joining.
That is still good advice.
This is a gross misrepresentation, not even of the science, but of news articles that should be simple to undestand! Maybe Tom Nelson, Anthony Watts and you people shouting loud here should take the time to read the articles that Mr. Watts spites as a “hilarious media paradox”? The fact is that only two (2) of the many articles make any claim of warming “faster than everyplace else”. The paradox is very small indeed, as long as there aren’t really any such contradictory claims in the rest of the articles, as Nelson and Watts want us to believe.
The articles about Australia, Europe, Spain, Africa, the U.S. West, the Korean Peninsula, China, the Himalayas, Greenland and the rest of the Arctic and the Antarctic does not say that all of those places warm more than every and all other place on Earth. Most of the articles compare to “the global change”, “the world (or global) average”, “the rate of the rest of the world”, “the increases seen globally”, and so forth.
One article states that a certain area is warming “faster than the rest of the world”, which certainly only means faster than the world average, anyway.
Here is what the articles say – the main points:
“Australia is warming slightly faster than the global change” –
“Europe is warming faster than the world average ” –
“Spain has warmed at a faster rate than the rest of the northern hemisphere over the past three decades” –
“Africa is warming faster than the global average” –
“The U.S. West is heating up at nearly twice the rate of the rest of the world” –
“The annual temperature on the (Korean) peninsula rose 1.7 C in the 1912-2008 period, while the world averaged 0.74 C” –
“China’s surface temperature had risen 0.22 degrees every 10 years for the past 50 years, which was higher than the increases seen globally and in the Northern Hemisphere as a whole” –
“Himalayas warming faster than global average” (about twice that average) –
“Global warming is occurring twice as fast in the Arctic as in the rest of the world”
In Greenland: “Trees are growing and the fields are full of potatoes, lettuce, carrots and cabbage”. Unrefutable facts. –
“Antarctic air is warming faster than rest of world”
Seemingly another strong claim, but this is not, like in the other articles, about surface temperatures, but weather balloon data gathered further up in the atmosphere. –
“Tibet is warming up faster than anywhere else in the world, Xinhua news agency said” – “North Pole Heating Faster than anywhere else”
Well, here we finally find the claims Mr. Nelson and Watts could hang their allegations on.
But I guess this is the truth:
The Tibet claim is very strong. This may be an exaggeration; not all news articles can be trusted, and not even every single scientific study. But it could be true, as Tibet is very far above sea level, and virtually all the world’s high level mountain glaciers are losing mass. And Tibet cannot really be put up against to the North Pole an Arctic: The North Pole and Arctic certainly warm faster than any other far reaching region of the Earth. Quite according to what the climate models predict.
REPLY: Hey genius, look at the tags; “humor”. Try it sometime before you get so seriously worked up over something funny, you’ll live longer. – Anthony
Everything’s faster than we thought. It’s all coming together.
As there is less-more moisture in the air, there will more-less and stronger-weaker storm-droughts.
Global warming will mean more snowfall, but more famine, and with all that acid in the ocean, all of the fish will dissolve.
Quick quick we have to save the planet from CO2 or it will heat up and freeze.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Maybe this is all from Larry from the Newhart show….
“I’m Larry, and this is my brother Daryl. And this is my other brother Daryl!”
Expected within short :
Washington is a hotter place than ever by Barack Obama .
My cigars are nowadays self-igniting by Bill Clinton .
My house is getting hotter than ever , millions of degrees by Al Gore .
I really didn’t think this _obvious_ topic would have an interesting thread following.
Delighted to admit, I was wrong!
With Ecneism, Ecneist, Ecneology, Ecneiatry. Ecneability and Ecneical, I now have a mouth stuffed full of sweeties.
But it’s dangerous to LOL with Roy’s hereby-updated prediction of Copenhagen drowning in the sea in 2009; or with Gavin actually posting and replying to Judith Curry.
Lu and Lawrie Ayres… you have my sympathy. Click my name… for an introduction to Climate Science… well, the real Climate Science as I see it… Times Higher Education readers liked it a lot. I taught myself and wrote it for others like me who had no time to teach themselves. I’m not a lukewarmer and my piece goes further than is necessary simply to reinstate good science – but I enjoyed writing it.
chris Riley says:
July 24, 2010 at 10:30 pm
…the opposite of science (whatever that is called).
=============================
My first thought was: ascience
But then I modified it for art’s sake: asscience
Warren
Lake Wobegone, Minnnesota
We will know that they are really fos when everyplace warms faster than the median.
The only place on the planet that is not warming faster than everywhere else is the Nino regions which show no trend at all since reasonable estimates became available starting in 1871. Nino 3.4 was almost exactly the same temperature in June 1871 as it was this past June.
This could be because it is an oscillation system where its temperature is governed by tropical storms that develop when it is warm and don’t when it cold (Willis’ hypothesis). So it just goes up and down within a range.
It could be because there is no room to make adjustments in the data. Nobody is going to try and back-adjust the 1877 Super El Nino, there is already lots of measurements to confirm it. Maybe it is because we have an actual measured SOI index and rainfall measurements which are strongly correlated with ENSO and there is no room to apply adjustments to atmospheric pressure and rainfall measurements.
Just something to keep in mind. A region we have a lot of confidence in going back 140 years has not warmed at all. It must be warming the least of anywhere on the planet.