The folly of blaming the Eastern U.S. heat wave on global warming

Paul K2 on July 7th at 1:56 PM:
“But the climate scientists underestimated the impact of AGW on the polar regions. The Arctic ice pack, and snow coverage, have fallen much faster than the climate scientists expected.”
This is absolutely true because they have no idea of what they are doing. Arctic warming is not greenhouse warming but they persist in using climate models that use the enhanced greenhouse effect to predict warming. Small wonder they underestimate the warming by a factor of four. The true cause of Arctic warming is warm water from the Gulf Stream carried north by Atlantic Ocean currents. It started suddenly at the turn of the twentieth century, paused for thirty years in mid-century, then resumed, and is still going strong. To understand it you have to download this paper: http://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/arno-arrak.pdf . Unfortunately this means that you cannot point to any aspect of Arctic warming as part of global warming. And since this is the case it leaves you without any authentic example of greenhouse warming whatsoever within the last 100 years.

Blaming one location is just idiotic. Every place has contributed to it. Sure the eastern side may have a bit more, but I don’t think it’s fair to assign blame to any one place. Also, look at Greenland and parts of Asia. Sure they aren’t AS hot, but it is still somewhat the same temperature. Idiots

Paul K2;
How about last summer in Texas? Didn’t you have a 1 in a 1000 year event caused by several abnormally long blocking highs? My relatives in San Antonio told me that Texas never had so many 100 degree days in a summer before. >>>>
Well obviously anecdotal evidence presented from a single city in Texas is representative of what is happening on a global scale. This is the mistake that you have made in pretty much all your comments. You focus on examples of extreme weather and present them as proof of predictions made in regard to climate while ignoring the larger picture which is chalk full of contrary examples which are just as valid on a cases by case basis as the examples you present (which is to say not at all). Hold the big picture in perspective or you’ve got nothing of substance upon which to predicate your argument.
Take KR’s clever attempt to show us Hadcrut and GISS temperature trends with linear trend lines jammed through what is clearly cyclical data, making linear trends useless accept on time scales orders of magnitude larger than we have data for. Notice also that the globe has in fact been warming up at very roughly the same rate since the LIA several centuries ago, and that CO2 increases that became significant after 1920 don’t seem to have altered that rate of warming at all.
Even the IPCC admits that CO2 is logarithmic, a fact that they tend to then gloss over when writing their reports, but read AR4 closely enough and you’ll see that every single prediction and outcome is predicated upon CO2 being logarithmic. That being the case, even by the IPCC’s own standards, anything over 400 ppm (which is pretty much where we are now) is subject to the law of diminishing returns, and hence is pretty much negligible.
In 1920, accodring to the IPCC, it would have taken 280 additional ppm of CO2 to arrive at a direct temperature increase of +1 degree. The debate about feedbacks aside, this is a rather clever piece of subterfuge all on itz own. This is not 1920 and we’re not at a baseline of 280 ppm anymore. It will take 400 ppm to drive a direct temperature increase of just one degree from where we are today. At peak consumption rates, that will take us the next 200 years to arrive at and probably longer because of the increased uptake by the biosphere (which mostly turns that uptake into food btw).
We have FAR more to fear from climate change due to natural variability than we do from CO2 increases, FAR more. That’s what the science espoused by the IPCC actually says once you get past all the distracting marketing spin and alarmist language. That’s what our written history books tell us. That’s what the geological record tells us. Spout cherry picked quotes and graphs from AR4 all you want, the science, the written history, and the geological record all say otherwise.
But if you want to insist that something catastrophic is happening, then consider this.
Human beings could survive rather easily another ice age provided that we exploit to the fullest possible extent the energy resources we have available.
Human beings could survive rather easily global temperatures exceeding the highest the earth has ever experienced and at CO2 concentrations that make our current levels look like a rounding error to zero provided that we exploit to the fullest possible extent the energy resources we have available.
Drill baby, drill.

Personally, I don’t recall any Warmists back in February or March saying that there would be record heat in the U.S.A. or record wet in The Black Sea or Britain, or severe cold in Australia. Do you?
I do not find post hoc pronouncements at all convincing.
As Shakespeare put it:
“I can summon Spirits from the Vasty Deep.”
“Aye, so can any Man, but will they come?”

I blame the EPA. Growing up, the summertime would always be super hazy. You could almost count on the forecast being hazy, hot, and humid. The visibility would routinely drop to five or six miles. I’ve noticed since about 2009, it no longer gets hazy. The sky remains blue and visibility remains at 10 miles at the airport. Ever since that time there has been a trend towards hotter weather even though it doesn’t look like there’s been any fundamental change in weather patterns. In the 90s and early 2000s, it usually never got above the low 90s. Even the “hot” summers only peaked at 91-93, though there might be 10 or 15 days with temperatures between 90 and 92. Several years never even hit 90. Temperatures have now reached the upper 90s for two straight years, with locations nearby reaching 100. Temperatures this high had not occurred since the drought of 1988. So I don’t know if it’s a coincidence or if it has something to do with a new EPA policy, but at the same time summers starting becoming hot again, the skies have cleared up. Weird.

A global phenomenon? Yeah, well. Down here on the southern Victorian coast in Australia we’ve just had our second white frost in two days. Unusual enough for all the locals to chat about it on morning walks.

Apparently PaulK2 doesn’t know the difference between projection and measurement?
It looks like climatology will end up contributing more material to the science of anthropology than it will to the study of climate.

I notice these global warming alarmists were no where to be found when Florida citrus crops were covered in ice.

It does pose an interesting conundrum.
Either use your electricity and air conditioning, thus causing CO2 emissions, or bake in the heat on the assumption that less CO2 emissions means that you will only bake a little bit more in the future.
Or you can have no electricity as the warmers want and has happened to many because of the storms and you can bake without any choice.
Take your pick. Forego electricity and air conditioning for the cause or blame global warming because you have no electricity to keep cool. It’s very hard to explain this conundrum. How many warmers have air conditioning? How many that have no electricity desperately want it now.

So many comments so far off the mark; too many to respond to. Arno Arrak says that the Arctic ice pack is melting not due to polar amplification, but a long term shift in ocean currents. In my comments I said polar amplification, but that the faster melt than expected seems due to teleconnection (transport of heat by wind and ocean currents) and faster melt mechanisms due to the weakened pack (fractured ice floes exposed to wind and waves have higher heat transfer rates than a solid pack). We may disagree on the triggering cause, but possibly may agree on the factors causing the runaway melt.
Amino Acids in Meteorites: Please view the Jennifer Francis video more carefully. The increased amplitude of Rossby waves in the jet stream pulls cold Arctic air down into the Northern side of the jet stream bend, and pulls tropical air up into the Southern side of the bends. Florida citrus crops covered in ice are yet another sign.
Many of the rest of you have been taught to attack climate scientists. But these theories I am discussing and have linked to today are espoused by meteorologists (weather scientists). You guys need to learn some new scrips and taunts. It seems that the group of scientists involved in your proposed conspiracy just got a whole lot bigger. Check out some famous meteorologists like the Wunderblog where Dr. Masters talks about the work of Dr. Francis. Its a bit odd that this stuff is so new and novel to you, especially since WUWT is run by someone supposedly knowledgeable in weather patterns.