By Joe D’Aleo, CCM, AMS Fellow
The pressure has been mounting. The public doubt about global warming has been increasing in the past year given Climategate, and how promises of warm snowless winters failed. After cold and snowy winters in 2007/08 and 2008/09, the winter of 2009/10 was the coldest ever in parts of the southeast, and in parts of Siberia and the coldest since 1977/78 or 1962/63 in many parts of the United States, Europe and Asia. This past December was the second coldest in the entire Central England Temperature record extending back to 1659.
It was the coldest ever December in diverse locations like Ireland, Sweden, and Florida. Reluctantly, alarmists changed their tune and the promise of warm and snowless winters as recent as 4 years ago morphed into global warming means cold and snowy winters.
…
NASA/NOAA homogenization process has been shown to significantly alter the trends in many stations where the siting and rural nature suggest the data is reliable. In fact, adjustments account for virtually all the trend in the data. Unadjusted data for the best sites/rural shows cyclical multi-decadal variations but no net long term trend as former NASA scientist Dr. Ed Long showed here (PDF). He showed however that after adjustment, the rural data trend was made consistent with the urban data set with an artificial warming introduced.
Steve McIntyre demonstrates what NASA GISS has been up to since their Y2K bug:
For the Full Report in PDF Form, please click here.
R Gates says
“GCM’s have always shown the poles to warm more rapidly than the equator when factoring in the rises in GHG’s. This is the famous (or infamous) “polar amplfication” caused in part by the melting of sea ice which opens up more open water which absorbs more sunlight, causing more warming etc. ”
What evidence does he have that the cause of any Arctic warming now is any different to the 1920’s + 1930’s when by all accounts similar conditions existed?
R “40%” Gates:
“GCM’s have always shown the poles to warm more rapidly than the equator when factoring in the rises in GHG’s.”
Not again!!
Well according to my rather clear memory, this is not the case at all! The original GMC’s clearly showed equatorial warming coming first in the mid troposphere with the heat feeding north through circulation by the Hadley Cells. It was going to be a roasted Sahel with millions of deaths and climate refugees! Shimmering dry heat in the tropics! Remember?
The big switch to ‘polar amplification’ happened when a) it was shown conclusively by none other than Monckton that the troposheric hot spot was non-existent and b) when the ice started retreating in the North (only). Of course the polar claim was already there in print so as to be able to refer to if it Plan Alpha didn’t work (which it didn’t).
In the 80’s, when the Antarctic 20 year ice cycle (look it up) was in the retreating phase we were all warned daily about collapsing ice shelves – unprecedented! In the 90’s of course the ice returned in the South. Silence on the warm front.
Now that the cycle is repeating we will no doubt start hearing recycled stories about how NOW it is Antarctic ice that is ALSO collapsing (again) as the North quietly recovers.
An interesting twist to the non-existent hot spot is that the whole point of modelling it was to show that CO2 captured heat ‘like a greenhouse’ above the Earth. The fact is there may indeed be a warm spot but the temperature fiddlers have so successfully grafted warming onto the surface temperatures that there is no different between the surface (as reported) and the mid-troposhpere (as measured). Maybe it is actually there! It certainly is not settled science!
Look on the bright side: when the surface temps are shown to be nonsense, being actually lower than they have been reported to be, you can always revive the old and (currently-discredited) story about a hot spot in the tropical troposhpere! You can show Monckton was a liar by proving Hansen is a Liar! Trumpet the former!
You can recycle the old arguments about Hadley Cells and GCM’s showing anything you want (because they are written to do exactly that). You might even be able to get out a few radical warmist phophecies before the whole thing freezes over and a cold famine grips us all. I at least will be able to burn stacks of your outlandish claims and bad science to keep warm.
And by exactly what mechanism does a warmer atmosphere heat the Southern Oceans? ……… [crickets]
Oh yeah, not warmer air, melting ice exposing the darker water. Too bad the ice has been advancing. See the ice page thoughtfully supplied free by WUWT. And those warmer Southern Ocean temperatures? Check with ARGO.
How’s this: maybe you can claim that the oceans are cooling because of the advancing ice, giving credence to the ‘ice cover’ theory (operating in reverse). Some evidence is there, IMV. The only problem is you would have to admit to the truth of the ARGO temperatures and the increase ice extent (not volume) data which puts your whole 40%-increase-in-CO2-will-cause-calamities theory back to square one.
Well look, an actual address ‘Snappy’:
(From their website)
.
Still the confusion between weather and climate on both sides of the divide.
No wonder the boy in the street thinks the Emperor has no clothes…
Snapple: “SPPI is a fake “science” organization. Their Virginia address is only a P.O. box in a shopping center store. ”
The term “virtual” would be used by truth tellers, “fake” by AGW fanatics.
Just because all the prominent personnel aren’t sitting in the same office building does not make them “fake”.
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/personnel.html
Snapple says:
January 18, 2011 at 10:09 am
“SPPI is a fake “science” organization. Their Virginia address is only a P.O. box in a shopping center store. ”
Assuming this were true, which i don’t know, this would invalidate Joe D’Aleo’s statements exactly how?
And what science is fake or not fake is in the eye of the beholder. Letting imperfect GCM’s run to 2100 is not even any kind of science IMHO. It’s tinkering; it can be fun, but it’s not science.
Unfortunately the article reads like something from The Watchtower. I don’t think propaganda of this sort is helping anything. Some of the evidence alluded to is from the same publication, for instance.
I am interested in the facts, not bias either way.
SNAPPLE.
He does a lot of post at real climate were he preaches to the choir and opposeing are not allowed. So it is good to see his ilk posting here, maybe he will learn something.
Jeff says:
January 18, 2011 at 9:47 am
there is no warming in the unadjusted data and the adjustments follow no logical reasoning … pushing rural temperatures DOWN makes no sense …
garbage in …
————————-
You can’t say ‘garbage in’. Not when they actually get healthy raw data in. Their models are more similar to the digestive system: food in, crap out.
Noelle says:
January 18, 2011 at 9:38 am
“alarmists changed their tune and the promise of warm and snow-less winters as recent as 4 years ago morphed into global warming means cold and snowy winters.”
Can you provide some names and references, please?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Take your pick:
While the weather was warm….
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
http://www.emagazine.com/view/?4012&src=QSA079
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2006/2006-10-04-03.asp
As soon as the weather gets cold….
http://notrickszone.com/2010/12/23/potsdam-climate-instutute-now-says-to-expect-warmer-colder-winters/
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2039777,00.html?xid=rss-mostpopular
http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/here-is-the-reason-why-europes-severe-cold-winter-weather-may-continue.html
Whatever will they say if next winter is lovely and warm?
Meanwhile, back in the real world and specifically that of the UK, a 3.7% rate of inflation finally has awoken the MSM. Of course, the fast rising price of oil has been their main gripe, with the vehicle fuel escalator (a greenie- weenie invention whereby the tax rises each year by !% plus inflation in order to cut down our usage and save the planet) becoming the focus of their attention, together with the costs of electricity, oil and gas for heating, all of which carry an as yet unremarked escalator known as the renewables obligation, to pay for that other brilliant green genius invention , the wind turbine. Also known as Modern Art – Still Life. Definitely not a Turner.
Now the bills for November and December are coming through the doors, and people are seriously squealing. These green taxes, added surreptitiously to all power bills, have now reached a critical mass, and represent a not inconsiderable portion of the bill. The MSM must decide whether to report the existence and malign effect of these hidden Renewables taxes, thereby attacking the government’s green agenda, or face a further slump in circulation as people call into question their raison d’etre.
richard verney says:
January 18, 2011 at 11:05 am
As far as albedo is concerned, it is the areal extent of ice in May, June and July that is most important.
======================================================
The summer months is when albedo has its greatest effects, but I wouldn’t call it important. As I pointed out earlier, every year the arctic’s albedo contribution is zero’ed. As in nothing. It doesn’t gain or lose as momentum or inertia it is reset to zero every year. The polar amplification is a misnomer. It should be called polar curtailment. To say that they’ve underestimated polar albedo would be to imply they didn’t consider it at all.
Snapple:
In a post on your blog that you reference in comments above, you write that a certain commentator is an “ignorant, arrogant demagogue”, then go on to write that you don’t watch the station on which that commentator resides. I don’t want to tie up Anthony’s blog with politics so I’ll end here.
BTW, I have added the following line to my morning boot code:
Snapple.credibility = 0;
“Can you provide some names and references, please”
Dr Viner of CRU made that assertion back in 2000 I believe. Google his name.
“…GCM’s have always shown the poles to warm more rapidly than the equator when factoring in the rises in GHG’s. This is the famous (or infamous) “polar amplification” caused in part by the melting of sea ice which opens up more open water which absorbs more sunlight, causing more warming etc..”
Nice bit of mis-direction. This thread concerns GHCN data, and its manipulation by NOAA and NASA, and not esoteric unverifiable GCM theory. But if you insist, the IPCC said a decade ago that the main footprint of GHG induced AGW will be the tropical mid-tropespheric hotspot. Once this pocket of warm air is forced poleward by the Hadley Cell, the mid-latitudes and high latitudes would warm. My how narratives change so quickly. In 2002, no one was interested in the poles. Now that the tropics have failed to warm, the Alarmists talks about little else.
No[w] back on topic….
Noelle says:
Can you provide some names and references, please?
Here’s a couple from then and now;
June 4, 1999
“Warm Winters Result From Greenhouse Effect, Columbia Scientists Find, Using NASA Model”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/06/990604081638.htm
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v399/n6735/abs/399452a0.html
March 2000
“Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past”
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
—————————
Nov. 17, 2010
“Global Warming Could Cool Down Northern Temperatures in Winter”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101117114028.htm
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013568
December 2010
“Expect more extreme winters thanks to global warming, say scientists”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/expect-more-extreme-winters-thanks-to-global-warming-say-scientists-2168418.html
Noelle says @ur momisugly January 18, 2011 at 9:38 am: Can you provide some names and references, please?
You are kidding right?
According to Dr David Viner (2000), a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia: within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event.”
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (2008) Snow and sledding are things of the past. Global warming means no snow in D.C.
Dr. Michael Oppenheimer (2000): points out that global warming is the most significant reason that sleds now are unused.
Robert McClure (2006): Global warming means less snow in winter.
Union of Concerned Scientists (2006): Global warming will cause major changes to the climate . . . less snow, more frequent droughts
Claudia Tebaldi, scientist National Center for Atmospheric Research (2006): Our study shows that we suffer more extended droughts.
Would you like more?
NOAA and NASA are receiving big dollars $437M (NOAA) and $438M (NASA) in climate research funding
Both NOOA and NASA should renounce their dependency on “BIG GOVERNMENT” dollars which are corrupting their science. Anybody this far in the pocket of politicians should take this step to cleanse themselves of the corruption that goes hand-in-hand with “BIG GOVERNMENT” dollars.
No, doesn’t that sound a bit funny. How does it feel to have the shoe on the other foot ?
So it’s not explained by CO2, according to your answer.
BTW: Can you explain where the data for the North Pole comes from?
Hi Anthony,
Would you please consider adding a brief/simple explanation of both the NASA/NOAA homogenization process, and what the NASA/NOAA justification is for same? That would really make this article both far more meaningful to many many readers, and more complete also. I’m suggesting just a brief paragraph or two…. or links to good brief articles on those issues. The NASA/NOAA data adjustment and homogenization is mentioned all over the place, but its far rarer to see any explanation of the basics involved, and, of course, most importantly how NASA/NOAA justifies those adjustments — in terms understandable to those who even if scientists perhaps, aren’t in these fields or familiar with these specific issues, let alone the well educated laymen out there (including those who read here religiously!).
Thanks so much!!
Noelle says:
January 18, 2011 at 9:38 am
“alarmists changed their tune and the promise of warm and snowless winters as recent as 4 years ago morphed into global warming means cold and snowy winters.”
Can you provide some names and references, please?
Google turned up this reference: http://pgosselin.wordpress.com/2010/06/15/noaas-overland-warns-of-cold-snowy-winters/
It’s a hard sell when the “developed” countries that have to pay,
are having record low temperatures and record snow fall………
Scientists are followers of a cult, defending dogmas with which they do not wish to part. Scientists have proclaimed these dogmas to be established laws, when in reality they are nothing but views, and erroneous ones at that.
Inmanuel Velikovsky
http://www.google.com.pe/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CBgQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.grazian-archive.com%2Fquantavolution%2FQUANTAVOL%2Frfs_docs%2Frfs_1.pdf&ei=IwU2TbqhMtDdgQeVhbGCCw&usg=AFQjCNHq_f_rqO8Z0Pmy4EXWY5GOKzWblQ
ge0050 says:
January 18, 2011 at 9:46 am
The melting ice in the Arctic has prompted a movement of frozen CO2 (dry ice) as a replacement. However all failed when the dry ice sublimated, drastically increasing the CO2 concentrations in the polar region. Higher CO2 levels, as everyone knows, led to higher temps.
Or maybe the temperatures were just adjusted higher by GISS?