Here’s the headline from the press release today, which will undoubtedly be regurgitated worldwide:
Stanford climate scientists forecast permanently hotter summers
Oh gee, where have wee seen this before? It’s another example of model madness, and it fits in with the now famous: Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past. Let’s compare expert quotes:
A. According to Dr David Viner, 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”.
“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.
Right, we saw how that worked out.
B. “According to our projections, large areas of the globe are likely to warm up so quickly that, by the middle of this century, even the coolest summers will be hotter than the hottest summers of the past 50 years,” said the study’s lead author, Noah Diffenbaugh
From Eurekalert
Stanford climate scientists forecast permanently hotter summers
The tropics and much of the Northern Hemisphere are likely to experience an irreversible rise in summer temperatures within the next 20 to 60 years if atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations continue to increase, according to a new climate study by Stanford University scientists. The results will be published later this month in the journal Climatic Change.
In the study, the Stanford team concluded that many tropical regions in Africa, Asia and South America could see “the permanent emergence of unprecedented summer heat” in the next two decades. Middle latitudes of Europe, China and North America – including the United States – are likely to undergo extreme summer temperature shifts within 60 years, the researchers found.
“According to our projections, large areas of the globe are likely to warm up so quickly that, by the middle of this century, even the coolest summers will be hotter than the hottest summers of the past 50 years,” said the study’s lead author, Noah Diffenbaugh, an assistant professor of environmental Earth system science and fellow at the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford. The study is co-authored by Stanford research assistant Martin Scherer.
“When scientists talk about global warming causing more heat waves, people often ask if that means that the hottest temperatures will become ‘the new normal,'” Diffenbaugh said. “That got us thinking – at what point can we expect the coolest seasonal temperatures to always be hotter than the historically highest temperatures for that season?”
Climate models, past and future
To determine the seasonal impact of global warming in coming decades, Diffenbaugh and Scherer analyzed more than 50 climate model experiments –including computer simulations of the 21st century when global greenhouse gas concentrations are expected to increase, and simulations of the 20th century that accurately “predicted” the Earth’s climate during the last 50 years. The analysis revealed that many parts of the planet could experience a permanent spike in seasonal temperatures within 60 years.
“We also analyzed historical data from weather stations around the world to see if the projected emergence of unprecedented heat had already begun,” Diffenbaugh said. “It turns out that when we look back in time using temperature records, we find that this extreme heat emergence is occurring now, and that climate models represent the historical patterns remarkably well.”
According to both the climate model analysis and the historical weather data, the tropics are heating up the fastest. “We find that the most immediate increase in extreme seasonal heat occurs in the tropics, with up to 70 percent of seasons in the early 21st century (2010-2039) exceeding the late-20th century maximum,” the authors wrote.
Tropical regions may see the most dramatic changes first, but wide swaths of North America, China and Mediterranean Europe are also likely to enter into a new heat regime by 2070, according to the study.
Environmental impact
This dramatic shift in seasonal temperatures could have severe consequences for human health, agricultural production and ecosystem productivity, Diffenbaugh said. As an example, he pointed to record heat waves in Europe in 2003 that killed 40,000 people. He also cited studies showing that projected increases in summer temperatures in the Midwestern United States could reduce the harvest of staples, such as corn and soybeans, by more than 30 percent.
Diffenbaugh was surprised to see how quickly the new, potentially destructive heat regimes are likely to emerge, given that the study was based on a relatively moderate forecast of greenhouse gas emissions in the 21st century.
“The fact that we’re already seeing these changes in historical weather observations, and that they match climate model simulations so closely, increases our confidence that our projections of permanent escalations in seasonal temperatures within the next few decades are well founded,” Diffenbaugh said.
The research was supported by the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, the National Institutes of Health and the World Bank.
This article was written by Donna Hesterman, a science-writer intern at the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University.
“The fact that we’re already seeing these changes in historical weather observations, and that they match climate model simulations so closely, increases our confidence that our projections of permanent escalations in seasonal temperatures within the next few decades are well founded,” Diffenbaugh said.
I have no idea what he is talking about. Previous predictions, based upon the very models they used in this study, demonstrably failed. So I presume at this point Diffenbaugh is simply relying upon his personal feeling that he is seeing proof of AGW around the globe.
And why is the tax payer paying for a study on the cumulation of model predictions? Everyone knows what the warmists models predict. Why not a study on how these predictions failed?
DJ says:
June 6, 2011 at 8:27 am
Permanently hot summers?
Apparently they didn’t read the comment of this article at the Reno Gazette Journal about chains and snows required on Mt. Rose Hwy and I-80!!
http://www.rgj.com/comments/article/20110606/WEATHER/110606003/Chains-snow-tires-required-stretches-80-Mount-Rose-Hwy-
Read the comment…it’s hysterical!!!
==================================================
saved it! thanks!
“According to our projections, large areas of the globe are likely to warm up so quickly that, by the middle of this century, even the coolest summers will be hotter than the hottest summers of the past 50 years,” said the study’s lead author, Noah Diffenbaugh
Hope he has his Ark ready!
Let me get this straight – TROPICAL regions of the world could “see the emergence of unprecedented summer heat”? But what happens in these places in the winter??
And, just when Jim Hansen had me convinced the Arctic was heating up the quickest, these guys come along and tell us that, nope, it’s been the tropics that have been heating up the fastest all along. Thank God, they’ve straightened that out for us!
Arrhenius must be turning over in his grave at the stupidity of these people that call themselves scientists.
These predictions are a godsend to the skeptic movement keep them coming!
Oh goody the tropics are going to heat up faster than the poles. Oh boy that is the opposite of what global warming theory predicts, so I guess we can forget about that nonsense about CO2 causing global warming.
Your tax dollars at work yet again…
“The research was supported by the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, the National Institutes of Health and the World Bank.”
We know that NSF, DOE, and NIH are CAGW junk science junkies. But why is the World Bank involved in junk science???
Maybe they could double check on the historical weather data from the tropics, ponder for a while as to how the peer reviewers didn’t catch that critical error, and then retract this garbage before it is published ??
I’m not holding my breath.
“he pointed to record heat waves in Europe in 2003 that killed 40,000 people.”
No… lack of air conditioning, electricity, proper hydration, acclimation and the common sense to go find a shade tree when it gets oppressively hot “killed 40,000 people.”
AZ, NM, TX, LA, MS, AL, FL, and yes, even GA have seasonally dealt with that level of heat since those states were populated. While on deployment, we stopped at Covb Ireland and I was struck at just how much the country side looked like any place in MS or AL. That sort of explained why my ancestors settled in those states. (plus the lack of an idiotic government)
The only real difference was that it wasn’t 98° to 105°F with 80% humidity.
Once again we have a study that relies on un-questioning faith that +ve feedback exists and only +ve feedback exists, no hint of -ve feedback, no siree!
So, let me get this straight. Summers are suppose to get hotter in about 60 years from now. They don’t say how much but I’m sure we’re suppose to panic about this statement. They also state the tropics are heating up faster, but that flies in the face of the posit that most of the warming is occurring at the poles. And like Lat shows, it isn’t.
“Diffenbaugh was surprised to see how quickly the new, potentially destructive heat regimes are likely to emerge,…..” Interesting choice of words, “quickly”. Quickly? After over 30 years of this hyperbolic nonsense they’re saying we may have to wait another 60 to see the dire consequences of warmer summers (we don’t know by how much, but they seem to imply that this will be really bad!)
I can’t wait for the intellectually stimulating “results” to be published…….
John F. Hultquist says: June 6, 2011 at 8:22 am
Can we nominate Donna for a fantasy fiction writer award?
Nominations are closed for now, but you may nominate her for the next year. A WSFS attending membership is all that is required.
In the meanwhile, skiing season starts early in Australia. http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/the-chill-is-on-but-hopes-up-for-skiers-20110606-1fpa1.html
“To determine the seasonal impact of global warming in coming decades, Diffenbaugh and Scherer analyzed more than 50 climate model experiments …”
(sarc)
Only 50 climate model “experiments”? Not very “robust”, that!
(/sarc)
Hmmm…this is sooo last year…
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100708122617.htm
Is it being regurgitated just in time for summer or perhaps a new funding cycle is beginning???
Extreme [fill in the blank] in 60 years… is not a bold forecast. Even their children will have retired. We are getting hood-winked by the Ivy league. Where are the keys to the departmental wine cabinet…oh and shut the doors. I hear protesters.
So according to then the historical weather data already shows the extreme heat from 2010 to 2039.
Time machine, anyone?
“analyzed more than 50 climate model experiments” golly, cutting edge stuff.
” –including computer simulations of the 21st century” um.. Lost me now.
What is the difference between a computer model and a computer simulation?
“Diffenbaugh and Scherer analyzed more than 50 climate model experiments”
I added “Computer model outputs are “experiments”.” to my Authority poster scrapbook:
http://oi52.tinypic.com/wlt4i8.jpg
Theo, your comment is so on point i’m repeating it and will include it as a response when I send out this piece of ( plaktah-klingon word for bs)!:]
Theo Goodwin says:
June 6, 2011 at 8:27 am
“The authors of this report are not scientists. No scientist would touch such claims with a ten foot pole. The claims are based on no actual physical hypotheses and cannot be genuine predictions for that reason alone. The claims are not falsifiable, obviously, because they are based on models, no less than 60. So, if the claims turn out to be false in 2071, what gets rejected? Is there some element of one model that can be rejected and thereby improve the model, as is normal scientific practice? Of course not? You have to reject the whole model; that is the nature of models. In this case, you have to reject 60 of them. Of course in 2071, no one will be able to find so much as one reference to these models. The authors are worthy of a middle school newspaper trying to hype something. Pathetic! Stanford needs to clean house big time”
All
An obvious “fit of stupidity”
How about giving us a prediction for the front years? If you can’t predict that, then how the heck can you have any confidence in a prediction 60 years in advance?
This is based on results of 50 climate models. How embarassing. Take 50 climate models all of which are already known to be completely incorrect and combine them. Then publish the WAG as if it is important.
Shameful that a once respected institution like Stanford would employ someone with as little understanding about climate science as Noah Diffenbaugh.
This paragraph is a representative sample of the large body of twaddle which makes up the paper. How it ever got through the peer review process beggars belief!
“To determine the seasonal impact of global warming in coming decades, Diffenbaugh and Scherer analyzed more than 50 climate model experiments –including computer simulations of the 21st century when global greenhouse gas concentrations are expected to increase, and simulations of the 20th century that accurately “predicted” the Earth’s climate during the last 50 years…”
Noah is not telling the whole truth here. I have never seen a model that could accurately represent climate over the last 50y and none of the ‘forecasts’ made are anything like the reality observed. Sorry Noah, this paper is a FAIL – your fired.
Why does the World Bank finance such nonsense?
NTERVIEW-W.Bank to suggest CO2 levy on jet, shipping fuel
http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFLDE75407H20110605?sp=true