I cringe every time I see stories like the one being pushed in the Associated Press today by AP science writer Seth Borenstein.
My Way News – This US summer is ‘what global warming looks like’ http://apnews.myway.com/article/20120703/D9VP9J681.html
Even Drudge picked it up.
The amount of unsupported speculation trying to be passed off as science is nothing more than the classic appeal to authority. In this case, the “authority” is NCAR’s Dr. Kevin Trenberth, a man with so much hatred for alternate viewpoints that he refused to remove the holocaust word “denier” from his keynote address to the American Meteorological Society.
This reminds me of the Russian heat wave of 2010.
The same people made essentially the same comments, then months later the peer reviewed literature (published by NOAA researchers no less) said that it was caused by natural variation…a blocking high pressure pattern. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/09/noaa-findsclimate-change-blameless-in-2010-russian-heat-wave/
That was followed up by another paper saying the same thing: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/29/another-paper-shows-that-the-russian-heatwave-of-2010-was-due-to-natural-variability/
We have essentially the same thing happening here, a persistent quasi-stationary weather pattern, part of the normal natural variation.
As for the derecho, it is hardly new. The word was first used in the American Meteorological Journal in 1888 by Gustavus Detlef Hinrichs in a paper describing the phenomenon and based on a significant derecho event that crossed Iowa on 31 July 1877. Further, NOAA’s Storm Prediction Center has catalogued them through the years. According to NOAA’s Storm Prediction Center, climatology, the Washington DC area gets a derecho about once every four years:
As I said in my essay, The idea that the recent derecho is linked to global warming is pure folly spun by people that wish to exploit any remotely plausible situation for political purposes. It happens on a regular basis, for example when they try to link tornado outbreaks to global warming: The folly of linking tornado outbreaks to “climate change”.
Or how about the disparity in “weather is not climate except when we say it is” blame game: New York Times Blames 2009’s Record Cold on Natural Factors — But Blamed Record Warmth in 2000 on Man-Made Global Warming!
Given how badly global warming is faring in the minds of the public according to the last Washington Post/Stanford poll:
Global warming no longer Americans’ top environmental concern, poll finds
…it is clear they are desperate to sell any connection because the public will probably not hear about the science studies that will follow.
It is another shameful attempt to do just that by Dr. Kevin Trenberth aided by Seth Borenstein’s media bully pulpit. I will give Borenstein at least one credit though, he asked Dr. John Christy what he thought about it and printed it:
‘…history is full of such extremes, said John Christy at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He’s a global warming skeptic who says, “The guilty party in my view is Mother Nature.”‘
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I mean “data,” not “dara.”
(Although some data produced by adjustment filtered through computers is a word that begins with “dara.”) (And ending with “rear,” which is where it belongs.)
Why wouldn’t a warmer world have increased numbers of and severity of heat waves? The contention in this post and in the comments that heat wave severity has decreased as the world has warmed is counter-intuitive. What process would cause this?
Some scientists are considered just too big to fail.
Unfortunate, but true.
pseudo-Jimbo,
The Nazi holocaust killed about 2/3 of Europe’s Jewish population, which was more than 1/3 of the Jewish population of the entire world. Think about that.
No one is denying that other people died in WWII. However, no other group of people was targeted for extermination and in fact suffered such high losses as the Jews.
In fact, certain anti-Jewish groups would like to stage a repeat, which is why various Jewish groups make it a point to make sure we all remember the holocaust and determine never to allow it to happen again.
Answer your question?
Yes, yes, Anthony — SUPERSTITION — that is a great rebranding word! Man made global warming? Rebrand it global warming superstition! Man made climate change? Rebrand it climate change superstition! Words have power and superstition is a true power word. You have really hit on something. You may have just shortened the PR battle by a couple years.
Superstition — 1) Belief that events can be influenced by certain acts or circumstances that have no demonstraable connection with them. An idea or practice based on this. 2)A belief that is held by a number of people but without foundation.
And the rebranding, besides having memorable impact, is absolutely true! What a word choice! Absolutely brilliant!
Eugene WR Gallun
According to Mr. Borenstein, “Scientifically linking individual weather events to climate change takes intensive study, complicated mathematics, computer models and lots of time”. Is there a process by which weather events can be scientifically linked to climate change? If so, Mr. Borenstein, what is this process?
I drove right through the heart of the derecho on my way home from work. Seemed like your typical angry thunderstorm. Not pleasant, by any stretch, but I have seen worse.
I have been in several derechos. Back when I lived in MO one of the yearly camping trips I did was to a part of SW Missouri, and if you look at the map you can see that is where these basically centralize during the Summer months. Last Summer that trip resulted in a quite bad down-burst as its called and I don’t know if they called it a derecho or not, but the damage was over 3-4 counties.
Camping in that was just a mess. Ill leave it like that except to say that most tents were flattened and in some cases people in a tent by themselves were actually awakened to no tent and several of the tents were never found.
Downbursts are not fun, especially while camping. The fact that these storms which Missourians are used to are something terrible is just laughable. You are bound to get 1-2 bad downbursts a year across the state (maybe microbursts, but effect is basically the same).
Wind damage, check. Heavy rain, check. And lots of lightning. Check. Tornadoes? Never heard of one in those storms but guess it says they are possible?
But yes, this is the new normal. You point your fingers and hand wave at some event, and tell people, “see this disaster proves that X is causing bad things to happen. If you don’t mend your evil ways, it will happen more often.”
Or its the new normal.
Or “If we don’t stop sinning against Gaia, then Gaia will strike down with furious anger with derechos and heat waves.”
That is kind of how I always picture Trenberth as some nutjob when he goes off the rails like this. He does it to himself. And I tell everyone I see about how the “best Government scientists” are nutjobs and really are nothing but bums walking around the streets of the world chanting “the end is near, repent.” It does wonders to people’s impressions of NASA, NOAA etc whenever I point these things out. They do it to themselves!!
THE THESIS: The article “This US summer is ‘what global warming looks like’ is “fact free folly” that is merely “unsupported speculation being passed off as science”.
<bThe supporting arguments
I cringe every time I see stories like the one…
Personal feelings, …
“In this case, the “authority” is NCAR’s Dr. Kevin Trenberth, a man with so much hatred for alternate viewpoints that he refused to remove the holocaust word “denier”
A classical ad hominem attack …
This reminds me of the Russian heat wave of 2010.
Going off on a tangent unrelated to the article at hand …
We have essentially the same thing happening here, a persistent quasi-stationary weather pattern, part of the normal natural variation”
Speculation about what might be determined at some future date regarding this particular heat wave. It might turn out to be true, but it is currently unsubstantiated.
As for the derecho, it is hardly new.
There was no claim that this was “new”, only that it was an example of “a powerful freak wind storm”.
Alan Mackintosh says:
July 3, 2012 at 2:27 pm
Fires can be started by bullets if they are tracer rounds. They have a blob of phosphorous in their tail and if the rounds ricochet away from the target they will ignite dry grass, gorse etc.
True, but you usually have to send a lot of them downrange to get a fire going. Military ranges usually shut down when fire conditions are right, but when a fire starts, most posts will let the central impact area burn — the fire cooks off dud artillery and mortar rounds, and the explosions add an extra hazard to firefighting.
This UK summer is ‘what Global Cooling looks like” ??
I mentioned that to an ex-pat American, and she said, “Serves ’em right!” (lightly-sardonically). Not sure what it meant, and asking would have been pointless. 😉
If you want an excellent read/demo of the phenomenon, check out Skinner’s original article on operant conditioning called, “Superstition and the Pigeon”, in which pigeons were induced to concoct elaborate “dance” rituals by random food pellet deliveries (‘rewards’ for whatever they happened to be doing at the time, they ‘thought’.)
Thanks, Anthony. Off-topic request, if I may? Regarding the “consensus” of Ph.D’s et al. allegedly believing in AGW or CC or (now) “climate disruption ” what is the status of the petitions and surveys to identify/enumerate skeptics? Apparently (per Wiki) there was an Oregon Petition Project back in about 1997 and maybe a supplement since then. But if I want to tell a friend that not “all scientists” buy the AGW story, what can I use? Thanks.
Dr. Kevin Trenberth, a man with so much hatred for alternate viewpoints that he refused to remove the holocaust word “denier”
A classical ad hominem attack …
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The use of the word “d*nier” in the manner meant by Dr Trenberth is a slur far more egregious than any ad hominem attack could ever be, and calling the man out for it hardly constitutes same. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but the smear intended by the use of that word is a slur of the type that millions die for. Shame on you for defending it.
Tim Folkerts;
I cringe every time I see stories like the one…
Personal feelings, …
>>>>>>>>>>>
I cringe also when I see a political agenda dressed up as science by a man who admits he cannot balance the earth’s energy budget yet adamantly advocates for a theory that his own science does not support whilst labelling his detractors with an emotionally charged word intended to dehumanize them.
Tim Folkerts;
This reminds me of the Russian heat wave of 2010.
Going off on a tangent unrelated to the article at hand …
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The point being made was that the blame was laid then without any substantiating data, and the same is being done now. It isn’t a tangent, it is the core issue. Conclusions flung around at will with no factual data behind them, and pointing out that those who do so are repeat offenders on this matter is simply drawing attention to reality.
Tim Folkerts;
Speculation about what might be determined at some future date regarding this particular heat wave. It might turn out to be true, but it is currently unsubstantiated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The speculation that is has anything to do with global warmin is even more unsubstantiated. It is hotter than usual in one part of the world, and colder than usual in many other parts. Neither is a sign that the earth is warming or that the earth is cooling, and fixating on a tiny portion of the earth for a tiny portion of time as evidence of anything on a global basis is speculation beyond common sense.
Tim Folkerts;
“Given how badly global warming is faring in the minds of the public … “
Interesting, but unrelated to the article at hand…
>>>>>>>>>>>
Completely relevant. The public has grown weary of continued alarmism based on the flimsiest of evidence. The alarmists are grasping at straws, and this one is a perfect example. It is an isolated event, and the global temperature record continues to be in decline, as is has been for the last 15 years.
Tim Folkerts;
But since at least 1988, climate scientists have warned that climate change would bring, in general, increased heat waves, more droughts, more sudden downpours, more widespread wildfires and worsening storms.
Is this wrong? Is this not what climate scientists have claimed?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes it is, but they claimed it on a global basis. On a global basis, temperatures are in decline. On a global basis, total extreme weather as measured by Total Cyclone Energy is falling and has been for decades.
Tim Folkerts;
“This is what global warming looks like at the regional or personal level,” said Jonathan Overpeck, professor of geosciences and atmospheric sciences at the University of Arizona.
Are these sorts of events not what global warming would look like?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Global trends are GLOBAL. Regional trends are REGIONAL. One can no more conclude that the heat in some parts of the USA is indicative of global warming than one can conclude that increasing ice in the Antarctic is indicative of an impending ice age as I am certain both you and Jonathan Overpeck are well aware, as is anyone who stops to think about it for a few moments.
Tim Folkerts;
It is late … I should probably edit this a bit more, but I am tired and heading to bed. Additions == or rebuttals — supported by references and/or quotes would be welcome, although I don’t know if/when I will be back to continue the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You probably should have edited it a considerable amount. It reads rather sadly as it now stands. If you want to come back and continue the discussion, at least provide something that is a challenge to rebutt.
No, no! My</bI Way News – This UK summer is ‘what global warming looks like’ …grey ‘n’ wet, no summer yet.
BillD says:
July 3, 2012 at 9:21 am
“I think that the sheer numbers of local record high temperatures, rather than any one event make the better case for global warming. The ratio of high to low records is a useful statistic.”
That’s complete nonsense. The only useful statistics comes from the trend. Temperature records, whether high or low, are almost completely meaningless, because they result from very short term fluctuations that have nothing to do with longer term climate trends.
.
We have experienced global warming for about 150 years, since the end of the Little Ice Age. The warming stopped between ten and fifteen years ago. Since then there has been no significant cooling, so we’re still right at the top. Therefore short term high temperature records can easily be broken. By the same token it is very difficult to set low temperature records, precisely because we’re still near the top.
.
I would have thought this is pretty obvious. The claim that high temperature records prove that global temperatures are still rising is not science, it’s propaganda.
Chris
Climate science is to mainstream science as Ramen noodles are to a 5 star buffet. It’s processed crap packaged for mass consumption and marketed to look like it contains real substance. Impressive claims are trumpeted but only and always with weasel wording disclaimers.
Seth Borenstein’s article is a prime example: “Horrendous wildfires. Oppressive heat waves. Devastating droughts. Flooding from giant deluges. And a powerful freak wind storm called a derecho.”
“This is what global warming looks like at the regional or personal level,” said Jonathan Overpeck, professor of geosciences and atmospheric sciences at the University of Arizona. “The extra heat increases the odds of worse heat waves, droughts, storms and wildfire. This is certainly what I and many other climate scientists have been warning about.”
Kevin Trenberth, head of climate analysis at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in fire-charred Colorado, said these are the very record-breaking conditions he has said would happen, but many people wouldn’t listen. So it’s I told-you-so time, he said.
“What we’re seeing really is a window into what global warming really looks like,” said Princeton University geosciences and international affairs professor Michael Oppenheimer. “It looks like heat. It looks like fires. It looks like this kind of environmental disasters.”
Then the weasel wording disclaimer: “These are the kinds of extremes climate scientists have predicted will come with climate change, although it’s far too early to say that is the cause. Nor will they say global warming is the reason 3,215 daily high temperature records were set in the month of June.”
This is regurgitated on the Guardian website. It also links to a video of Suzanne Goldenberg and Jeff Masters (director of Meteorology at Weather Underground) discussing wildfires and climate change on Democracy Now!
It must be real.
****
Tim Folkerts says:
July 3, 2012 at 11:13 pm
As for the derecho, it is hardly new.
There was no claim that this was “new”, only that it was an example of “a powerful freak wind storm”.
****
Hahahahahahaha. That’s hilarious…..
When the severe thunderstorm from last week was called a derecho by the mass media the day after, I knew beyond any doubt that it would be tied into global warming hysteria within a day or two. Telling the public that a severe thunderstorm complex is an effect of global warming is not as alarming as telling them that derechos are an effect. It would be fascinating to learn precisely where the term entered the mass media after last week’s storm. I suspect the ultimate source knew exactly how the term would be latched onto.
No, it’s a rebuttal of the implicit claim that Trenberth is a proper authority by pointing out that he’s biased. Here’s what T. Edward Damer’s Attacking Faulty Reasoning, 6th ed., says (p. 103) on this matter:
And here’s what a textbook on critical thinking, Good Reasoning Matters! by Groarke & Tindale (4th ed.), says about ad hominems (pp. 378-80):
Our local paper ran this story under the headline, “Mother Nature or Climate Change”.
Could someone please explain the difference to me?
The one thing I never understand in this debate is why we all can’t agree that it is a good thing (not a bad thing) to consider and work toward alternatives whether or not the climate changes or mother nature is in control. The answer to which is correct should be a resounding, Who cares?” However, just as they say to act as though there is a god because then you at least cover your ass, the same should be true about doing something to lower carbon emissions, conserve water, and clean air, etc. Why are the deniers not on the same page as the believers when it comes to action? They were the ones who first imagined “cap and trade” and if that’s become a bad idea for them now, what should we be doing? I cannot believe how much time is wasted by the deniers. Let’s all agree that something must be done. This just seems elementary.
Jane Thomas~ As soon as they stop denying that this is mostly Natural climate change, we realists will get right on it.