In climate world, up is down

Update and brief review below by Ryan Maue…

From Reuters Alert Net: Colder winters possible due to climate change-study

* Colder winters possible in northern regions

* Shrinking sea ice causes airstream anomalies

* Finding does not conflict with global warming

BERLIN, Nov 16 (Reuters) – Climate change could lead to colder winters in northern regions, according to a study by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research on Tuesday.

Vladimir Petoukhov, lead author of the study, said a shrinking of sea ice in the eastern Arctic causes some regional warming of lower air levels and may lead to anomalies in atmospheric airstreams, triggering an overall cooling of the northern continents.

“These anomalies could triple the probability of cold winter extremes in Europe and northern Asia,” he said. “Recent severe winters like last year’s or the one of 2005/06 do not conflict with the global warming picture but rather supplement it.”

h/t to WUWT readers e.c cowan and Michael P.

Ryan Maue Update: It took me some doing to find this study in the Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres.  The study is fine as constructed, but why is this worthy of a press release?

This study employs a climate model to determine the sensitivity of the atmospheric circulation to sea-ice concentration.  The ECHAM5 model is used with T42 spectral resolution (that is 2.8×2.8 degree longitude/latitude spacing !!!) and 19 vertical levels.  This is about the model setup of NCEP’s operational weather forecasting models in the 1980s.  Six “simulations” (or scenarios) were performed of 100 years duration with differing sea-ice concentration in the Barents-Kara (B-K) sector.  Their results are therefore 100-year averages obtained from the simulations.

The conclusions are not conclusive at all but very equivocal in nature.  This is contrary to the press release.  Since European winter climate is strongly controlled by a host of climate modes such as ENSO, NAO, AO, PDO, etc., their study cannot include the non-linear interplay between the actors and their sea-ice concentration scenarios.  This is a very idealized experiment with results that are very preliminary when it comes to relating to the true atmosphere.  There is no analysis of the 2005/2006 winters to determine if indeed the sea-ice mechanism was responsible for the cooler winter.

The study’s conclusions with respect to future climate change are very speculative to say the least.  This is the case with many of these types of climate scenario experiments.  Step one is to find a phenomenon that goes against the AGW consensus:  here it is a cold winter in the Northern Hemisphere.  Step two is to construct an experiment which explains the phenomena in the context of AGW.  Step three is to connect step 2 to step 1 and issue a press release containing facts not in evidence.

Advertisements

113 thoughts on “In climate world, up is down

  1. Is there no end to the chicanery of these AGW pushers.
    How can cooler Winters in the Northern Hemisphre be an indicator that the climate is warming?
    As a minimum, it defies common sense.

  2. I suppose the question goes something like this: If we get colder winters in the north, where all the ice is, then that should lead to more ice. More ice would lead to warmer winters, at which point the ice melts again, and we get colder winters again.
    Doesn’t that sound like a natural cycle?
    Or does the ice somehow not increase during those colder winters, due to global warming?
    (Insert suitable onomatopoetica for losing one’s mind here.)
    Time for a stiff drink, with ice.

  3. OK then, do models show that some of the heatwaves in Europe have been due to global cooling and argue against AGW. Or is absolutely everything one way – every !%#@& wether event indicative of global warming? I can’t take this any more.
    Oh wait, of course, no change in temperature will also support AGW – after they finally put the Solar Cycle 24 cooling trend into the models.

  4. What more do they want, this is perfect — the Arctic was supposed to heat the most now it’ll be cold and offset that problem. Then the cold air will create more ice and then we repeat, repeat, repeat. Voila, climate feedback!

  5. If warmer winters supplement it (recall “snow will be a rarity predictions), and colder winters supplement it (the current claim), it isn’t a scientific theory because it isn’t falsifiable.

  6. I would love to comment on this, put I just plugged in a logic algorithm using the above formula, and blacked out half of the great state of Ohio. Not electrical grid black out, I mean the sheer power of such double thinking logic (warm=cool) caused half the state to pass out without even knowing why. This is the same logic that would get me financed for a mansion. Oh wait…

  7. “Climate change could lead to colder winters…”
    How nearly every single study, paper and article in support of global warming always uses such confident and concrete claims to support their findings is always refreshing.

  8. I am not one to pay much attention to press releases or brief new articles; usually they contain more opinion and misinformation than anything else. I will make an exception here. Having lived all of my life in the northern hemisphere and most of it in the north part of it, my experience indicates that cold winters are the norm. It is the ones not cold that are anomalous. The position of the polar jet has more to do with La Niña then anything else. This is more dreaming then reality or perhaps the author is overly fond so some social drug or herbs.

  9. Its official – the team are madder than the hatters of old – perhaps they have eaten way too much swordfish.

  10. “Colder winters … does not conflict with global warming”

    So how come they never said earlier this year that warmer summers don’t conflict with global cooling?

  11. This is precisely why the term ‘global climate disruption’ has been coined, so that any observed phenomenon can be blamed on human activities such as development, particularly of the capitalist kind.
    I can’t help ruminating that the urge and eventual necessity to pin all manner of supposed evils on a pre-chosen scapegoat group is an ideological stance with an unhappy history.

  12. Give the guy a break, will ya? If showing everyone how stupid he is means he gets handed a large bundle of taxpayer dollars then a guy’s gotta do what a guy’s gotta do.

  13. Zis isht hardly surprzing! As you have been tolt, .. should you die of hypothermia it is obviously because of globl warwmink! (I know nothing … nothing)

  14. The low quality of science at the Potsdam PIK is explainable with its mission:
    Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
    Without an AGW scare, they would just loose their reason to exist.
    Many still remember the shocking poor quality of Rahmstorf et al 2008. Despite the damage done by this paper it has not been retracted.
    Needless to say, that these people advise the German government and institutions such as Deutsche Bank.

  15. What took them so long! This was so predictable. These people do it with such a straight face. Another sign of how desperate they are getting. The devoted will be comforted by this nonsense. Sigh!

  16. I once had a propane refigerater that worked like that— when the burner turned on the inside got cold. But, since this works on water, amonia and hydrogen under pressure, I doubt that the atmosphere works like that.

  17. Excellent news. Let them keep digging, until the tops of their heads are no longer visible.
    The general public is way too sensible to fall for this stuff. As the punters in the northern hemisphere shiver away this winter, they will be thrilled to hear that the reason why heating is becoming more expensive is to prevent it from getting colder, except when it’s getting hotter.
    I am looking forward to similar explanations for the recent breaking of the drought (on a spectacular scale) and a very cool Spring here in Australia. I am really, really looking forward to that …
    Joining Torgeir in a drink, to celebrate. Give ’em enough rope etc.

  18. Match the data to fit the theory, so what’s changed?
    The theory is indestructible because it’s endlessly evolveable.

  19. To be a science something has to be disprovable. So, when you can claim to be predicting either warmer or cooler (depending on what fits the actual data),
    it simply isn’t science
    Bogus, bogus, bogus!

  20. Michael Cejnar says:
    November 16, 2010 at 10:28 pm
    OK then, do models show that some of the heatwaves in Europe have been due to global cooling and argue against AGW. Or is absolutely everything one way – every !%#@& weather event indicative of global warming? I can’t take this any more.

    Yes, everything is one way. When your only tool is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail.

  21. To see what will really be going on this winter click name tag.
    The fact that Ice insulates the heat loss from open sea water to end up regulating the amount of heat loss out into space, you cannot get lower temperatures with open water.
    With continued heat loss through the Arctic winter the open water will close rather rapidly, and then the heat flow resistance of ice increases with thickness, regulating the total maximum heat loss. [Polar thermostat that when working right, stops excessive global cooling]
    The reason there will be large blocking highs and colder weather than “normal” further South, is due to the declinational angle of the moon ~23.5 degrees at culmination, being about the same as the apparent declinational angle of the sun in arctic winter.
    The combined atmospheric tidal bulges will be cumulative and large sweeping patterns will be the normal for this up coming NH winter. Just part of the 18.6 year Mn declination cycle of the Moon nobody looks at. IF I look out my bedroom window I can see it just fine, and “the team” says it doesn’t exist, or do anything to the weather, but the CO2 in my breath is raising He11 with the ice?

  22. Hard to believe that anyone could claim their model could show this.
    This is the key point:-
    “Since European winter climate is strongly controlled by a host of climate modes such as ENSO, NAO, AO, PDO, etc., their study cannot include the non-linear interplay between the actors and their sea-ice concentration scenarios. This is a very idealized experiment with results that are very preliminary when it comes to relating to the true atmosphere. ”
    In other words their prediction is useless.

  23. Colder winters possible due to climate change-study
    obviously from the above headline we must stop doing studies because of unintended consequences.

  24. Similar to what I read from a warmer here in the Philippines. He said “global warming exacerbates the cooling, intensifies extreme events.” Heads I win, tails you lose.

  25. I looked at the Sea Ice Page and what do I see? The Arctic sea ice near Svalbard is greater than in 2007. So, less sea ice alluded to in the study compares with a sea ice situation in which satellite observations say there’s more ice in the area. This will lead to a colder winter in northern Europe due to global warming. Let’s get this straight: in reality, more sea ice and a colder winter; in Vlad’s mind, less ice caused by global warming will have the same colder winter. But 2007/08 was a low ice year. Was the winter then colder than last year or 2006?

  26. Colder winters don’t cause climate change, they are climate change. Warmer winters also. The climate changes. The question is: “what drives the changes?” One side of the “debate” has twisted the language to imply that those who disagree with them don’t believe in “climate change”. We need to constantly make the point that we do believe the climate changes, but that the change is probably not driven by plant food.

  27. I don’t think so. First, the ever thinner Arctic ice and its ever later freezing in somewhat withholds the forming of stationary cold continental airmasses at least in November and December. Second, northern hemisphere winters are clearly observed to become warmer, with e.g. DJF 2009-2010 among the very warmest.

  28. This is what people have been saying all along. Whatever the weather, somebody´s going to come up with an article blaming it on CAGW.

  29. This post is a little confusing about who is saying what about the issue and what issues are in play. So, with that premise, here is a quote from one section of that post. I can’t tell who to attribute it to so here it is…:
    “The study’s conclusions with respect to future climate change are very speculative to say the least. This is the case with many of these types of climate scenario experiments. Step one is to find a phenomenon that goes against the AGW consensus: here it is a cold winter in the Northern Hemisphere. Step two is to construct an experiment which explains the phenomena in the context of AGW. Step three is to connect step 2 to step 1 and issue a press release containing facts not in evidence.”

    My questions are whether this is an acknowledged, new manipulative tactic; what issues can we raise about this data-distorting tactic; and how do we present these issues, so that this misuse of data, or misapplication of data to explain a result, will be recognized in each case? By effect, I mean a realistic chance that our views of manipulation/recognition will be accepted, in each case.
    This is a question to the greater consciousness of WUWT.
    Everyone, please give this some thought, and give recommendations to Anthony and his fabulous site mates.

  30. Richard Holle says:
    November 16, 2010 at 11:41 pm

    To see what will really be going on this winter click name tag.
    The fact that Ice insulates the heat loss from open sea water to end up regulating the amount of heat loss out into space, you cannot get lower temperatures with open water.
    With continued heat loss through the Arctic winter the open water will close rather rapidly, and then the heat flow resistance of ice increases with thickness, regulating the total maximum heat loss. [Polar thermostat that when working right, stops excessive global cooling]

    Quite right, although it works better to prevent excessive global heating. There has never been a runaway greenhouse but there have been a number of ice ages including one right now. I daresay the normal state for the arctic ocean is no ice cover at all.

  31. “Step one is to find a phenomenon that goes against the AGW consensus: here it is a cold winter in the Northern Hemisphere. Step two is to construct an experiment which explains the phenomena in the context of AGW. Step three is to connect step 2 to step 1 and issue a press release containing facts not in evidence.”
    Believers in CAGW 65% / Wolf, 60% / Wolf ! 50% / Wolf !! 45% / Wolf !!! 40% Wolf Wolf Wolf, Al Gore.

  32. Colder winters possible due to climate change-study
    There is every reason to believe the next time “due to” is used properly in a sentence, the grammar-antigrammar effect will cause the world to implode. Fortunately the chance of this happening in our lifetimes is exceedingly remote.

  33. What is it that sends the jets poleward or equatorward to effect changes in regional temperatures with maximum consequences in the mid latitudes ?
    There is no adequate establishment view in my opinion.
    Here is my latest which is relevant to this issue:
    http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=6645
    “How the Sun Could Control Earth’s Temperature”.

  34. Last winter in the SH Peru, not known as a high latitude country, had the coldest winter in memory. Or does this only apply to the NH. OK Last winter in Spain, according to my daughter who lives there and me because I was there as well, there was unexpected snow which was not forecast up to 10 inches deep. Probably our imagination because Spain is not a high latitude country.

  35. The Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany meanwhile has some hundred employees.
    It would immediately be closed if the climate change alarm by anthropogenic emission of CO2 would turn out to be hoax (as it is).
    Don´t ask the frog if you want to drain the swamp!
    They make publications of the type discussed here all the time. Their director J. Schellnhuber even today claims that the temperature of the last ten years from 2001 shows the increase of temperature as forecast by the climate models.
    The most serious fact is and we skeptics should be careful not to use and to oppose the wording “experiment” for their computer runs.
    Experiments or measurements in Science are used to verify (or not) hypotheses, theories and models.
    By using the word “experiment” these climate modellers try to convince people of the reality of their computer runs. And their models are nothing else but computer games (at best hypotheses) especially if the complexity of climate is considered.

  36. No conflict, no contradiction, just needs guidance to understand. Ahem. A poem.
    A zebra died and so being late
    Met Saint Peter by the gate.
    He said “I thought these pearly portals
    Were reserved for earthly mortals.”
    Saint Peter said “And zebras too –
    Don’t be smart. What can I do?”
    “I have to ask,” the zebra said,
    “A question of you, now I’m dead.”
    “Ask away, we have all day
    And evermore, I have to say.”
    The zebra said “My skin is white
    With black the colour of the stripe.
    “Or so I thought until today.
    Perhaps it is the other way
    The colour of my skin is black
    With white the stripe upon my back.
    “Can you help me, Mister Saint?
    Am I black, or am I ain’t?
    I need to know what coat to wear
    To match the colour of my hair.”
    Saint Peter thought this question odd
    Deserved an answer from our God
    And so he said “Here’s what I’ll do
    I’ll page the Lord, so stand by two.”
    They told the story to the Lord
    Who thought and gave the final word
    With wisely nodding of His head.
    “YOU ARE WHAT YOU ARE’, the good Lord said.
    Then He turned and walked away
    To help some nearby angels pray.
    The zebra said “What did He mean?
    Saint Peter, would you please explain?”
    Saint Peter said “The Lord, my friend
    Told you that from end to end
    Your skin is truly white without
    The faintest shadow of a doubt.
    For if your skin indeed was black
    The Lord would not resist a crack
    The type of joke to make His day.
    “YOU IS WHAT YOU IS”, I think He’d say.

  37. I’ve been joking with my kids for some time that the freezing winters in the UK are all down to that there “Globull Warming”, now it seems I have been proved correct – where do I apply for my grant please?

  38. Over at “Skeptical Science”, here’s what “What the science says…”:
    “Decline in sea ice is the major driver of Arctic amplification. This is evidence by the pattern of atmospheric warming over the Arctic. Maximum warming occurs over the surface during winter while less surface warming is found in summer when heat is being used to melt sea ice. This pattern is consistent with sea ice amplification.”
    Well, I guess that’s what the science said until the cold winters returned…

  39. climate change is a geological reality that has existed since the earth was formed. The AGW theory is nonsensical anthropocentric made by those who did not understand that climate change is a natural event.
    Anonimous Geologist

  40. …the guy on the right is Dr. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, boss of the PIK (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, founded in 1992 and now has a staff of about 270 people. ). The other one is the leader of SPD (Social Democrates Party) In 2006 he was at the helm of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety.
    http://www.bmu.de/files/mediathek/fotogalerien/archiv/image/pjpeg/waskosteteis01_dl.jpg
    …and that’s the orignal press releas:
    http://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/press-releases/global-warming-could-cool-down-temperatures-in-winter

  41. “Vladimir Petoukhov, lead author of the study, said a shrinking of sea ice in the eastern Arctic causes some regional warming of lower air levels and may lead to anomalies in atmospheric airstreams, triggering an overall cooling of the northern continents.
    “These anomalies could triple the probability of cold winter extremes in Europe and northern Asia,” he said. “Recent severe winters like last year’s or the one of 2005/06 do not conflict with the global warming picture but rather supplement it.”
    I find AGW scientists are wonderfully clever people. For non-scientists like myself I’ve lived all my life thinking that warm is warm and cold is cold, but how wrong can you be. All I hope is that the climate doesn’t get much warmer as I don’t look forward to colder winters, or is it that the other way round and that colder winters will turn Sweden and Finland into the sun-loving paradises of northern Europe? I’m also amazed to learn that colder winters are actually melting the ice caps. Now there’s a revelation if ever there was one. Am I the only person in the world who has been under these mis-apprehensions all my life? going on blindly believing what I thought was a basic truth, only to have those beliefs shattered by these mind boggling revelations by such clever people with lot’s of letters after their names. Oh, hang on, have I got it wrong, I see Mr. Petoukhov, says warming of the atmosphere may lead to overall cooling, and “ these anomalies could triple the probability of cold winter extremes” now I am completely lost, will it or won’t it. I really need to know as these things can keep a simple person like me awake at night wondering what next to expect from these very clever AGW scientists with lots of letters after their names.

  42. I allowed myself to cherry-pick (like the climate ‘scientists do, teeheehee!) from the press release the following sentence:
    “Climate change could lead to colder winters” –
    And omigawd – I so agree!
    If the climate changes from a warm to a cooler period, we will indeed see colder winters, no?
    Why are the taxpayers everywhere fleeced to pay for research which syas that no matter what, any change in the weather is due to climate change, never mind if it is colder!

  43. Why does modelling still get credited with being an ‘experiment’. When I read this, it was obviously a projection, an estimate derived from the behaviour of a model. The relationship between the model and the actual physical world that we all live in is tenuous to the point of being wildly preposterous.
    Don’t tell these alarmists, but there is a rather large tear in their marble bag and the marbles are falling out, one after another.

  44. Yep. My eyes are crossed, too guys ~ (which makes these comments of yours DOUBLY interesting!)
    But……you can’t see my eyes right now…..’cause it’s nighttime in Australia and I’ve given up on those horrid mercury globes/lightbulbs ‘they’ WERE forcing me to use… So, now ~ it’s just the annoying glow of my little computer screen which at times is less than that of my mobile/cell phone…
    Oh, heck…….I’m jus’ gonna keep singin’: ‘This little light of mine’ till Monckton and his compatriots shellack them all in Cancun… Then, Ian and I will begin making our own water from the beach across from the house, and they can get upset with us for doing it cheaper than that damned de-sal plant monstrosity “they’re” creating up in Adelaide…. An’ the hits jus’ keep on rollin’… Anyone remember Wicksie 560??? (my old radio station from the early 70’s….I digress happily away…singin’ my little song…
    Cynthia Lauren (who’s always preferred oil lamps anyway…humm hmmm hmmm)

  45. RR Kampen says:
    November 17, 2010 at 12:29 am
    “I don’t think so. First, the ever thinner Arctic ice and its ever later freezing in somewhat withholds the forming of stationary cold continental airmasses at least in November and December. Second, northern hemisphere winters are clearly observed to become warmer, with e.g. DJF 2009-2010 among the very warmest”.
    Yes van Kampen, the heat is unbearable:
    http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp2.html
    http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp4.html
    http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp5.html
    How is this possible?
    http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2010/11/16/julienne-stroeve-arctic-melt-since-1978-cannot-be-easily-explained-away-by-natural-variability/

  46. In fact there have been several other so-called “studies” that have “shown” that cold weather is caused by global warming, according to the “experts”.
    See for example John Brignell’s List of things caused by global warming.
    “The recent cold wave sweeping across Mumbai and other parts of India could be attributed to global warming, experts said on Tuesday here at an environmental conference. ”
    “AUSTRALIA is in the grip of a nationwide cold snap – and paradoxically, it could be another result of global warming.”
    “It’s cold out there – blame global warming.
    Weather experts say global warming not only warms the world, it also brings colder extreme weather. “

  47. This is pure Orwellian newspeak.
    That´s why the terms Climate Change and Climate Disruptions are beeing used. Any event can be explained to fit as a “change” or “disruption”.
    Next in line: New broader definitions on mental illnesses – beware!

  48. Remember Richard Feynman’s definitions of what constitute pseudoscience. One of the main ones was inability to be proven wrong, that is no matter what phenomena are observed, they all mean the hypothesis is true. Temps go up, proof of AGW, temps go down, proof of AGW, more storms, proof, fewer storms, proof!

  49. Model on top of assumption underlain by scenarios based on inference and speculation with no discussion about uncertainty to make a counter-intuitive explanation of real world observation on a subject that less and less people give a crap about.
    Well done.

  50. Viv Evans says:
    November 17, 2010 at 3:12 am
    “Why are the taxpayers everywhere fleeced to pay for research which says that no matter what, any change in the weather is due to climate change, never mind if it is colder!”
    Viv – we ALL must take responsibility to complain to our elected representatives about the WASTE that occurs yearly in the government science establishment. In the U.S. we are broke, and private sector taxation can no longer afford to pay for dubious scientific research.
    To be honest, I think these government-run climate science groups should find a private benefactor like Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, or George Soros to fund their “work”…I’d be in favor of that. They could even have multiple “press releases,” their own cable channel (“Climate News Network”), their own science magazine (“Scientific Hysteria”). I couldn’t think of a better use of George Soros’ money!!

  51. Press Relase – CRU East Anglia – Everything is consistent with Global Warming
    The CRU at East Anglia has released a new study which proves conclusively that Global Warming caused Climate Change, which in turn caused Climate Disruption, which in turn is the cause of everything else. Based on previous research by the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster linking global warming with the decrease in the number of pirates over the last few hundred years, and new research showing that the current flat trend in global temperatures correlates with a recent resurgence of piracy, especially in the waters off of Somalia, Phil Jones et al, have submitted a new research paper to the Journal of Unbelievably New Claptrap (JUNC) that proves everything is caused by Global Warming.
    “It was really very simple in the end,” said Jones. “Once we went over the Pastafarian research, which was very robust, we realized anything and everything with even the barest correlation to global temperatures could in fact be linked via other correlations to any and every other trend in the universe.” Indeed, the new paper which is currently under review at JUNC has linked Global Warming with trends in the stock market, the orbit of Mars and Jupiter, whale migrations, and turtle droppings. The algorithm used to draw these conclusions has been called “ground breaking” and “robust” by many of Jones’ colleagues. Said Professor Michael Mann of The Earth System Science Center at Penn State, a coauthor of the paper: “How they have come up with these links is amazing, the cross disciplinary work has been very heartening.” Responding to criticisms from statisticians and engineers that such work is suspect, Mann replied, “Nonsense, they’re obviously being paid millions by ExxonMobile. The work I have done with the zoological community alone in order to get the requisite number of monkeys into one room to come up with the equations is proof enough of the robustness of the work.”
    Gavin Schmidt of NASA agreed. “The critics of this paper are obviously being paid off by Big Oil, we know this because they drive cars and have to buy gas occasionally.” Schmidt, a contributor to the space based portion of the paper that found correlations with global warming and the movements of a blueberry muffin launched into orbit last year, declined further comment. When asked about their refusal of requests to release the algorithm in question in order to review the paper, Jones declined saying, “How or why anyone would want to check this kind of work is beyond me, the conclusions are so staggeringly awesome that they don’t need to be reviewed.” The editors and peer reviewers at JUNC agreed. Said editor Alvin Hicks: “We don’t need to check this kind of work too carefully, and since I’d like to keep my job and would lose it if I dared question anything these guys put out, I’m confident in declaring it sound and worthy of publication.” Al Gore also hailed the paper as a milestone, writing in a press release, “All questions and skepticism should be ended at this point, the proof is in.” Gore declined to comment, aids saying he was too busy selling carbon offsets to himself.
    The paper came at a fortuitous time for alarmists, who have been taking a bit of a beating lately due to the Climategate emails and the tendency of the IPCC to cite Leisure magazine and other sources in their reports on the current state of the science of global climate disruption. Jones concluded his remarks with this reporter, “I think we’ve finally got the name right so no one can question cause and effect via that route, now we have the science to back the name up and it’s really beyond criticism or question now that Global Warming is the cause of everything.” When asked about the convenience of having a theory that can’t under any circumstances ever be falsified, Jones shrugged. “Why would I want to falsify it? It’s bringing in tons of dough. The only people who would want to falsify it are Big Oil and their stooges.”
    A passerby had been listening to Jones and I speak as Jones fished in the fountain, and asked, “Isn’t it a little paranoid and contradictory to posit this grand conspiracy by Big Oil and then claim their grand plan is to covertly fund a few blogs run by retired statisticians and weathermen?” Jones quickly jumped on the man and proceeded to try and strangle him with a spaghetti strand, and was subsequently arrested for assault with a deadly noodle. On follow-up in the court Jones blamed Global Warming for his behavior, and was let off with a suspended sentence. Claims that Michael Mann, Kevin Trenberth, and others put pressure on the local government to impeach the judge and that Greenpeace activists harassed the judge by rummaging through his trash and egging his house unless the trial came to ‘the right decision’ were dismissed out of hand.

  52. WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. …
    …And cold winters are global warming. Er, um, Climate Change. Climate
    disruption, maybe?

  53. Oh, you lot really are too stoopid for words.
    They will dream up anything – ANYTHING – provided it has the phrase ‘global warming’ in the headline. I can think of a couple:
    ‘William and Kate will take account of GLOBAL WARMING for when they plan their wedding ..’
    ‘The current woes of the euro are due to GLOBAL WARMING, a report says..’
    See..? Its easy..!

  54. The problem here of course lies in the Press Release. Who writes that stuff?
    I doubt that the researchers take care of this – rather some administrative official (budding science journalist?) bought into the CAGW agenda.
    Its insidious.

  55. I expect to see a press release sometime soon that says:
    “Climate Scientists at the University of Yoo-hoo announced today that their experiences inside the virtual World of Warcraft have convinced them that the threat of continuing, inter Kingdom, Global-Warming-Cooling-Stability remains a threat demanding the highest level of non-virtual funding.”

  56. It is proof that politicians need support for climate change legislation. This may not be true but it seems that government supplies the grants and scientists produce the desired results for government.

  57. PaulM posts a quote: “AUSTRALIA is in the grip of a nationwide cold snap – and paradoxically, it could be another result of global warming.”
    Bah… Whenever I hear the word “paradoxically” I always power up my bull s&*^ detector. The real world does not contradict itself, and “paradox” is just another way of saying “Our accepted explanation does not seem to make sense.”

  58. I lit a fire in my fire pit last night. This angered my neighbor because his property cooled due to my fire. He is consulting a lawyer as we speak to get a restraining order.

  59. Ted Annonson says:
    November 16, 2010 at 11:22 pm
    I once had a propane refigerater that worked like that— when the burner turned on the inside got cold. But, since this works on water, amonia and hydrogen under pressure, I doubt that the atmosphere works like that.

    I bet we could get a grant to study whether we could put in our air conditioners backwards and make it cold outside.

  60. I seems to me that the only people surprised that the climate changes are the climate scientists.
    Actually, that’s not true. The politicians, bureaucrats, and media are equally surprised.

  61. The believers are gathering for another conference soon, so expect more of this propaganda to soften people up….

  62. Oh I see. Climate Change leads to…..climate change. I’m glad we have climate pscientists to find this stuff out for us.
    I’m a diurnal pscientist – I predict it will get dark before morning. I really need to study this hypothesis some more. Is there a funding organisation I can apply to for a grant?

  63. “Colder winters possible due to climate change-study”
    It used to be that the cartoons were funny. Now I take just a small sip of my coffee to make sure I have time to swallow it completely before the guffaw that may follow the next headline I read.
    Reuters, a press agency that does its best to make us think along politically-correct lines, would have headlines written by headline writers. Those do that for a living and and do not always know what they do or understand what the headline they write is all about. Therefore it is reasonable to expect a confusion of cause and effect that makes it past the editors who perhaps know even less.
    It’s a good thing. It lightens up the day.

  64. Petoukhov’s study is not about tomorrow’s weather forecast but about longtime probabilities of climate change. “I suppose nobody knows,” he says, “how harsh this year’s winter will be.”
    It looks like they really don’t know what kind of weather is coming this winter and they are trying to save face with respect to their previous unprcedented warming predictions and blame it all on global warming again prior to the Mexcican conference . The public may not buy this .
    Sooner or later they will have to bite the bullet and tell the public the truth, that the global mean temperature curve has now swung down to 20- 30 years of possible cooler weather and global warming of the kind we just had will not return again until the 2060’s. We can anticipate that the global mean annual temperature anomaly could be 0.4-0.5 C lower than today at the bottom of the cycle expected to be around 2030-2040] Regionally the weather may be much cooler [ comparable to the late 1970’s and early 1980’s]

  65. This study is one a many reasons why CAGW is bunk and climate change “science” should be lumped in with sociology, anthropology, and any number of other soft sciences.
    Whenever a criticism of CAGW is gaining prominence in this case the public is questioning why we’re experiencing record cold and snow immediately a “study” is produced to counter the criticism. Basically the “science” is made to order. This reminds me of the time when some gay “researcher” created a study of twins that “proved” gayness was genetic because that was the popular rationale of the gay movement at that time.
    Whatever the CAGW crowd needs to make a particular point they can pull it out of their hats at a moments notice.

  66. This is a standard propaganda ploy; say it often enough in as many ways possible using every available communication modality, and the masses will believe. The greenies are laying the groundwork for their next campaign. They are expecting cooling temps. No one remembers the study, but they remember the headlines of the press releases(when prompted). The rest is cascade effect. Expect daily press releases and news stories about the press releases screaming about AWG caused cooling and AWG caused drought.

  67. Jason Calley
    November 17, 2010 at 6:23 am
    I expect to see a press release sometime soon that says:
    “Climate Scientists at the University of Yoo-hoo announced today that their experiences inside the virtual World of Warcraft have convinced them that the threat of continuing, inter Kingdom, Global-Warming-Cooling-Stability remains a threat demanding the highest level of non-virtual funding.”
    ##
    You know, the “Cataclysm” is coming, it is expected to hit on December 7. It will change the world as we know it!

  68. The whole AGW agenda can be neatly summarised by a paraphrase of Lewis Carroll’s Red Queen; “AGW means just what I want it to mean”.

  69. This “study” is like a pre-emptive strike. With this study the CAGW promoters have all of their bases covered. If it’s really cold they have a counter argument at the ready. If it’s a mild winter then it will be business as usual for the CAGW promoters. As someone above brilliantly stated “heads we win/ tales you lose.”

  70. “Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster”
    We of the “Fellowship of the Chocolate Glazed Donuts” will declare you heretics and deep fry you in a vat!

  71. These crooks rewrite their predictions after the fact to make them coincide with observed weather patterns. They predicted warmer winters, but that didn’t happen; the winters got colder. So now they claim their models predict colder winters due to global warming.
    Postdictions are the height of fraud, and common in scriptures written after the events they claim to foretell. That the AGW crowd has now adopted this classic religious con is revealing. I hope someone is cataloging all of these papers, reports, news releases, etc., because at some point those responsible will be held accountable. I foresee countless individual and class-action lawsuits in the not-too-distant future, and thousands of self-described climate scientists and environmental reporters losing their shirts and reputations.

  72. Well, in my northern region called northern Canada we have a tendency to prepare for cold winters, so I predict we will all stay warm and do fine here.

  73. Okay, now that I’ve recovered from a good laugh at the illogical chimera of global warming causing colder winters (after they prognosticated winters so hot that snow will be a thing of the past), I am reminded they can’t help themselves. They suffer from a socially accepted form of AGW insanity.

  74. This study employs a climate model to determine the sensitivity of the atmospheric circulation to sea-ice concentration.
    The study’s conclusions with respect to future climate change are very speculative to say the least. This is the case with many of these types of climate scenario experiments.

    Uh excuse me, but running a computer model IS NOT an experiment.
    ryanm: u r quibbling

  75. Global Warming was way to specific. Climate Change was vague but not quite there. Climate Disruption vaguer still but could do better. How about Climate Thingy?
    This appellation seems to me to characterise the rigour of the erstwhile discipline and its proponents perfectly.

  76. What does CAGW mean? Is it citizens against governments waste? I don’t get it since AGW means Anthropogenic global warming.
    REPLY: Catastrophic AGW

  77. of course CLIMATE CHANGE can lead to colder winters. the climate changes and it gets colder, it changes again and it gets warmer etc etc etc. That is surely the definition of climate change. However thats not the same as Arthropogenic Global Warming which again by definition must mean the clmate changes, it gets warmer, it changes again it gets warmer still etc etc etc. the clue you see, is in the word warming. Simples

  78. I haven’t quite managed to get my head around this yet. Global warming in the northern hemisphere will make for a cooler winter. Does that mean that here in the southern hemisphere I will be able to keep my air conditioning switched off come January? Or will that lost energy in the north swirl down to the south and leave me sweating as usual?

  79. GIGO: This paper is based on model projections, OH my mistake the models are right [ well at least the warmist keep telling us that]. The straws they are grasping for are getting smaller so what they spout off as fact is getting bigger.

  80. “PaulM says:
    November 17, 2010 at 4:54 am”
    His post has a URL with hundreds of things that were alleged to be caused by global warming. However I have come across only one thing that would be proof of global cooling. And that was 30 years of globally cooling temperatures. Does any one have a second thing that would prove global cooling?

  81. “LightRain says:
    November 16, 2010 at 10:32 pm
    What more do they want, this is perfect — the Arctic was supposed to heat the most now it’ll be cold and offset that problem. “

    Same thoughts here. I suspect this is a preparation paper i.e. in case things get colder in the NH Warmists can argue that “the models predicted this.” Of course they do! Predict everything and your theory can never be falsified.

  82. My question about the study comes from the press release. They say:
    “What the researchers did was to feed the computer with data, gradually reducing the sea ice cover in the eastern Arctic from 100 percent to 1 percent in order to analyse the relative sensitivity of wintertime atmospheric circulation.”
    This apparently results in colder northern winters.
    Can anyone explain to me how you can have 1% eastern Arctic sea ice coverage and colder northern winters at the same time, model or no model…? How can that possibly be sensible??

  83. I’m dead tired, it’s half past midnight here in central european time in the middle of the med sea and I don’t have the time to read all the comments, so, what I will say may already have been said:
    Wern’t the warmists telling us that our children would not know what snow is? That winters will be warm and that and the other and……….?
    Now they are telling us that our kids, no, all of us, will freeze in winter because of global warming…? So were their old computer models wrong? YES. Are their new models better? Better in ridiculing themselves.
    Now I get it: The little ice age was the effect of a little global warming and the great ice age was the result of a great global warming.
    Good night and good day to you all and may the warmth be with you.

  84. Bruce says:
    November 17, 2010 at 2:39 pm
    My question about the study comes from the press release. They say:
    “What the researchers did was to feed the computer with data, gradually reducing the sea ice cover in the eastern Arctic from 100 percent to 1 percent in order to analyse the relative sensitivity of wintertime atmospheric circulation.”
    This apparently results in colder northern winters.
    Can anyone explain to me how you can have 1% eastern Arctic sea ice coverage and colder northern winters at the same time, model or no model…? How can that possibly be sensible??
    ###
    I haven’t had a chance to do more then glance at the gas .. I mean press release, let alone the study itself, but if this is what they did, I’ll be ROTFLMAO. They artificially adjusted a dependent and expect the result to have meaning. No wonder their findings sound imaginary. They are as in sqr( -1)!

  85. The article can be found here:
    http://eprints.ifm-geomar.de/8738/1/2009JD013568-pip.pdf
    Here there is a review of Arctic ice impact on atmospheric circulation which presents a much sober picture with high uncertainty:
    Role of Arctic sea ice in global atmospheric circulation: A review
    http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/future/docs/ArcticAND_Globe.pdf
    It would be interesting to check Wu, B., Ronghui, H., Dengyi, G., 1999. Effects of variation of winter sea- ice area in Kara and Barents seas on East Asia winter monsoon. Acta Meteorological Sinica 13, 141–153. (which is not quoted in the Postdam paper)
    Another article ,
    Sorteberg, Asgeir, Børge Kvingedal, 2006: Atmospheric Forcing on the Barents Sea Winter Ice Extent. J. Climate, 19, 4772–4784.
    http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI3885.1
    indicates that it is the atmospheric circulation which forces the sea ice extent rather than the opposite.
    The Postdam paper refers Sorteberg and Kvingedal (2006) briefly:
    Based on the observational data (e.g., [Sorteberg and Kvingedal, 2006]) the background lower-troposphere flow – the latter we attribute to the case of 100% SIC with 0~F and V_T~0 – is supposed to possess a close-to-zero vorticity.
    However, this is what the observational data of Sorteberg and Kvingedal, 2006 says:
    During sparse sea ice winters, the picture is reversed,
    and a stronger east–west gradient in the MSLP
    anomalies (Fig. 3) favors southerly geostrophic wind
    anomalies over the southern Nordic Seas. This may
    contribute to the increased inflow of warm, saline Atlantic
    water into the Nordic Seas. Over the Barents Sea,
    advection of warm and humid air, which disfavors
    freezing, will contribute to a reduced sea ice extent by
    dynamically pushing the sea ice northward and keeping
    the thick ice (and therefore freshwater) confined to the
    area north of Greenland.

    But who are the observational data to question the word of the models…
    (Anyway, we still need data for Siberia and Northern Europe to question Postdam, if anyone has access to the Wu paper it would be interesting to know)
    Reply

  86. R. de Haan says:
    November 17, 2010 at 4:23 am
    Yes van Kampen, the heat is unbearable:

    It is actually, for me who loves skating. A perfect blocking is settling in over Europe and we should get freezing weather as of middle of next week. Oh, no. We’re not getting it. Up northeast it was warm to fat record warm again and that unbearable heat keeps stuff sweaty here. Another skating chance down the drain.
    When there was still some Arctic sea ice cover, like in November 1993, the circulation would have been goed for two weeks of ice, like then. Not now.

  87. This is pretty simple – excellent example of paradigm paralysis …
    Wikipedia:
    Paradigm paralysis
    Perhaps the greatest barrier to a paradigm shift, in some cases, is the reality of paradigm paralysis: the inability or refusal to see beyond the current models of thinking . This is similar to what psychologists term Confirmation bias.
    Examples include rejection of Galileo’s theory of a heliocentric universe, the discovery of electrostatic photography, xerography and the quartz clock.
    And only damned noisy revolt can move paradigm …

  88. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
    November 17, 2010 at 5:47 pm
    ““Colder winters possible due to climate change-study”
    then it would follow that for global warming to happen summers will be even hotter”
    It would not follow. There are a number of possibilities. This is not a world wide phenomenon but applies to northern land areas. Other parts of the world may end up being warmer than normal in the same winter. The northern sea temperatures are in fact warmer than normal at the same time, and this is the cause of the air circulation pattern that makes the Northern Continents colder.
    In fact the total northern hemisphere temperatures for the winter of 2005-2006 was quite warm, with anomalies of .96, .78 and 1.11 C using the GISS data set.

  89. I’m going to bet on the Al Gore effect, and predict unprecedented cold weather in Cancun Nov 29 to Dec 10…
    Bwahahahaha!

  90. I think the Al Gore Effect in Cancun would reflect in a remarkable absence of cat. 5 hurricanes making landfall 🙂

  91. As G&T observed, video games do not qualify as models, much less as science. Policy decisions based on them are simply accepting the “projections” and “scenarios” of the image-makers as though they were more than computerized opinions.

Comments are closed.