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.
Match the data to fit the theory, so what’s changed?
The theory is indestructible because it’s endlessly evolveable.
Had to spank my old stiff fingers — the word was refrigerator.
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!
Yes, everything is one way. When your only tool is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail.
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?
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.
Colder winters possible due to climate change-study
obviously from the above headline we must stop doing studies because of unintended consequences.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Richard Holle says:
November 16, 2010 at 11:41 pm
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.
“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.
And this lovely bit of doom saying from our local ‘paper’ here in Sacramento: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/11/17/3191208/tahoe-snowfall-going-on-downhill.html
As I recall, the media said the same thing about the snow in the Rockies some years ago and were proven quite wrong. Sheesh.
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.
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”.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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…
Climate model = GIGO
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