From NASA: Research Links Extreme Summer Heat Events to Global Warming
A new statistical analysis by NASA scientists has found that Earth’s land areas have become much more likely to experience an extreme summer heat wave than they were in the middle of the 20th century. The research was published today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Earth’s Northern Hemisphere over the past 30 years has seen more “hot” (orange), “very hot” (red) and “extremely hot” (brown) summers, compared to a base period defined in this study from 1951 to 1980. This visualization shows how the area experiencing “extremely hot” summers grows from nearly nonexistent during the base period to cover 12 percent of land in the Northern Hemisphere by 2011. Watch for the 2010 heat waves in Texas, Oklahoma and Mexico, or the 2011 heat waves the Middle East, Western Asia and Eastern Europe. Credit: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center Scientific Visualization Studio |
Anthony comments on the NASA animation by Dr. James Hansen of surface temperature trends from 1955-1999:
There are many issues with this presentation. It seems to be a big Cherry Picking exercise.
1. Note all of the missing southern hemisphere data. There are operating weather stations during his time, but they are excluded from the analysis. Why?
2. The period chosen, 1955-1999 (in the bell curve animation) leaves out the warmer 1930’s and the cooler 2000’s. Why?
3. The period from 2000-present has no statistically significant warming. Leaving that period out (of the bell curve animation) biases the presentation.
4. The period chosen exhibits significant postwar growth, urbanization is not considered.
5. As for severe weather, Hansen ignores the fact that neither tornadoes nor hurricanes have shown any increase recently. Only smaller tornadoes show an increase, due to reporting bias thanks to easily affordable and accessible technology. NOAA’s SPC reports that July 2012 seems to be at a record low for tornadoes.
6. My latest results in Watts et al 2012 suggest surface station data may be biased warmer over the last 30 years.
The statistics show that the recent bouts of extremely warm summers, including the intense heat wave afflicting the U.S. Midwest this year, very likely are the consequence of global warming, according to lead author James Hansen of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York.
“This summer people are seeing extreme heat and agricultural impacts,” Hansen says. “We’re asserting that this is causally connected to global warming, and in this paper we present the scientific evidence for that.”
Hansen and colleagues analyzed mean summer temperatures since 1951 and showed that the odds have increased in recent decades for what they define as “hot,” “very hot” and “extremely hot” summers.
The researchers detailed how “extremely hot” summers are becoming far more routine. “Extremely hot” is defined as a mean summer temperature experienced by less than one percent of Earth’s land area between 1951 and 1980, the base period for this study. But since 2006, about 10 percent of land area across the Northern Hemisphere has experienced these temperatures each summer.
|
James Hansen and colleagues use the bell curve to show the growing frequency of extreme summer temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere, compared to the 1951 to 1980 base period. The mean temperature for the base period is centered at the top of the green curve, while hotter than normal temperatures (red) are plotted to theright and colder than normal (blue) to the left. By 1981, the curve begins to shift noticeably to the right, showing how hotter summers are the new normal. The curve also widens, due to more frequent hot events. Credit: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center Scientific Visualization Studio |
Comments from Anthony:
This bell curve proves nothing, as it has the same problems with data as the surface temperature visualization above: cherry picking period, missing data, and contradictory severe weather statistics. This is nothing but a political ploy from a man who has abandoned any pretext of professionally done science in favor of activism. However, in spite of this, it will be used as “proof” by non-thinking individuals like Bill McKibben to promote a political end. Prepare for a barrage of such stories trying to link any observed weather aberration to climate. They’ll use the same level of fact checking like we saw with the melting street lamps last week.
In 1988, Hansen first asserted that global warming would reach a point in the coming decades when the connection to extreme events would become more apparent. While some warming should coincide with a noticeable boost in extreme events, the natural variability in climate and weather can be so large as to disguise the trend.
To distinguish the trend from natural variability, Hansen and colleagues turned to statistics. In this study, the GISS team including Makiko Sato and Reto Ruedy did not focus on the causes of temperature change. Instead the researchers analyzed surface temperature data to establish the growing frequency of extreme heat events in the past 30 years, a period in which the temperature data show an overall warming trend.
NASA climatologists have long collected data on global temperature anomalies, which describe how much warming or cooling regions of the world have experienced when compared with the 1951 to 1980 base period. In this study, the researchers employ a bell curve to illustrate how those anomalies are changing.
A bell curve is a tool frequently used by statisticians and society. School teachers who grade “on the curve” use a bell curve to designate the mean score as a C, the top of the bell. The curve falls off equally to both sides, showing that fewer students receive B and D grades and even fewer receive A and F grades.
Hansen and colleagues found that a bell curve was a good fit to summertime temperature anomalies for the base period of relatively stable climate from 1951 to 1980. Mean temperature is centered at the top of the bell curve. Decreasing in frequency to the left of center are “cold,” “very cold” and “extremely cold” events. Decreasing in frequency to the right of center are “hot,” “very hot” and “extremely hot” events.
Plotting bell curves for the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s, the team noticed the entire curve shifted to the right, meaning that more hot events are the new normal. The curve also flattened and widened, indicating a wider range of variability. Specifically, an average of 75 percent of land area across Earth experienced summers in the “hot” category during the past decade, compared to only 33 percent during the 1951 to 1980 base period. Widening of the curve also led to the designation of the new category of outlier events labeled “extremely hot,” which were almost nonexistent in the base period.
Hansen says this summer is shaping up to fall into the new extreme category. “Such anomalies were infrequent in the climate prior to the warming of the past 30 years, so statistics let us say with a high degree of confidence that we would not have had such an extreme anomaly this summer in the absence of global warming,” he says.
Other regions around the world also have felt the heat of global warming, according to the study. Global maps of temperature anomalies show that heat waves in Texas, Oklahoma and Mexico in 2011, and in the Middle East, Western Asia and Eastern Europe in 2010 fall into the new “extremely hot” category.
Theo, thanks, but that article would have zero content. Jim Hansen doesn’t have a theory of natural variability (neither does anyone else).
@Curiousgeorge:
Why does anyone even bother discussing Hansen, et al anymore? He’s yesterday’s freak show. C’mon folks, find something to talk about that’s more interesting than beating this dead horse. The header for this site is far more inclusive than just the latest bullshit from the likes of Hansen. It’s getting really boring.
The problem is this:
http://www.wral.com/news/story/11392572/
Maybe if you can get THEM to stop parroting Hansen, this blog won’t have to cover it anymore.
AndyG55 says:
August 6, 2012 at 4:16 pm
A wonder how many of the CAGW bletheren realise that the REAL DANGER comes if they are wrong, and people like Easterbrook are right.
A drop into a cold period, with the current world wide state of energy supply systems, crushed by the alternative energy agenda, will have devastating consequences.
CO2 is GOOD… Warmer is GOOD… Colder is VERY BAD !!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are right Andy – that is why the name for the warmer periods is ‘Optima’. Unfortunately, the excitable Hansen and the ignorant Nobel prize winning Gore need to frighten the ignorant into sending more money and ceding more control. Even when you point out that NONE of the prophecies of doom have occurred, the faithful remain convinced in their cognitive dissonance. One wonders how long it will take for them to accept that they have been fooled. As I have said in another place – there are people who as they watch the Mississippi glacier calve into the frozen wastes of the Gulf of Mexico will be saying – “You wait – when this lot melts it’s going to get dangerously warm!!”
The only reason Paul Ehrlich’s population bomb did not occur was the rapid increase in agricultural output, “deserts turning green”, helped by advanced agriculture and almost certainly by increased CO2 in the atmosphere. If it gets colder and the food grow-line moves only 200 miles south – then Ehrlich’s population bomb will explode. It will NOT be nice. Do not be close to a large Northern hemisphere city when the food shortages hit, supermarkets only hold 3 days food.
A drop into a cold period, with the current world wide state of energy supply systems, crushed by the alternative energy agenda, will have devastating consequences.
Excellent point. And if the cold is triggered by a volcanic eruption, we would have no time to prepare.
If cold weather records were being increasingly broken on the world’s land masses would we hear from Dr. James Hansen that cold weather events will increasingly occur??? Of course not. Hansen is an activist with an agenda and flies to exotic locations to spew out hot air and gets paid handsomely for it. Why is Hansen not embarrassed about his 1988 piece of speculation that has spectacularly failed?
Nasa did a fine job recently with the perfect landing of the new Mars rover. They are doing a bad job keeping an activist scientist within their employment.
Its time to start lobbying for cuts to NASA’s budget.
I noticed they decided to exclude Greenland from the study (apparently not in the Northern Hemisphere anymore — must have got voted out).
How incredibly freeing it must be to a Climate Scientist — you get to pick your “base period” and which countries to include\exclude, you even get to create your own scientific terms like: “Extremely Hot”, based on criteria you just made up. Frankly, I would have chosen more colorful terms like: “El Scorcho”, “Inferno”, or “Bloody Hot.”
And the MSM lapped it up and spewed wildly. I’m about ready to pack it in and become a drunken backwoods hillbilly or desert rat. Chuck it all, say goodbye to the madness as I hermit away in my declining years.
Questions. In the years since that infamous Senate hearing, didn’t Hansen admit that he and his associates were responsible for having the Senate air conditioning off (and the windows closed) on that fateful Senate hearing day, in order to better drive home the message of ‘warming’? Isn’t this study of his just more sly subterfuge of the same wink wink nudge nudge sort? What exactly is this man good at, besides subterfuge and selling a politically motivated view? Most importantly, how does he keep his job at NASA? The man seems a proper fool, or takes his masters for one. What is up with that?
[REPLY: No, it was Senator Tim Wirth who made that admission, and to the best of my knowledge did not implicate Dr. Hansen. -REP]
The bell curve animation is of ten year periods starting every year from 1951 to 2001.
Phil Clark~
Is Hansen really finding more ‘hot spots’ in the (already adjusted upwards) temperature record? Or is he simply confirming an already warmed up – and minorly warming – temperature record? This is the key question here. You believe the first; others claim the second.
I have an analysis of the story about Hansen from a different angle: http://meteorologicalmusings.blogspot.com/2012/08/science-by-press-release-story-about.html
It’s so nice to see that Hansen’s paper is not behind a pay wall… Thank you Rattus.
“The climate dice are now loaded to a degree that a perceptive
person old enough to remember the climate of 1951–1980 should
recognize the existence of climate change, especially in summer.”
AND
“It is not uncommon for meteorologists to reject global warming
as a cause of these extreme events, offering instead a meteorological
explanation. For example, it is said that the Moscow heat
wave was caused by an extreme atmospheric “blocking” situation,
or the Texas heat wave was caused by La Niña ocean temperature
patterns. Certainly the locations of extreme anomalies in any
given case depend on specific weather patterns. However, blocking
patterns and La Niñas have always been common, yet the
large areas of extreme warming have come into existence only
with large global warming.”
Facts from “Dynamic Analysis of Weather and Climate” by Marcel Leroux, 2ed. Springer 2010:
Figure 14.28 page 364, Annual mean pressure Toulouse, Marseille-Marignane and Perpignan (rising), Figure 14.29 Bavaria Germany (rising), Figure 14.32 Clermont-Ferrand (Centre of France) for JJA (rising) and Figure 14.33, rising frequency of MPHs reaching France during JJA.
So Hansen sees larger anticyclonic agglutinations in summer and their correlative temperature rises that are fed by an increasing frequency of polar anticyclones that is all high pressure systems… And that is due to “large global warming”????
Let’s also mention that the very same occurs in winter as Moscow in 2011 experienced its colder winter in 100 years and South America is experiencing cold, clear winters hurting their populations. I guess brought by “large global warming” too… LOL
With “large global warming” like this one, who needs glaciations.
What’s amazing is Hansen’s utter gall in the face of so much proof he is quoting BS that he continues to do so and he even has media outlets that will publish it!
When will this guy just shut his pie hole and go golfing?
SteveSadlov,
Certainly understandable being a drunken backwoods hillbilly myself, having suffered the letdown of the hoped European enlightenment progress into a New Age of Science, Wonderment and Lots of Free Stuff.
Welcome to Kali Yuga! Don’t go nihilistic at this point, you’ll end up in the lie business with the liars.
If they really want a study to see if warmer periods have gotten longer, pick a REALLY extreme period and location – Marble Bar, Australia.
The town set a world record of most consecutive days of maximum temperatures of 37.8 degrees Celsius (100 degrees Fahrenheit) or more, during a period of 160 such days from 31 October 1923 to 7 April 1924.
So when Hansen states that “…Such anomalies were infrequent in the climate prior to the warming of the past 30 years, so statistics let us say with a high degree of confidence that we would not have had such an extreme anomaly this summer in the absence of global warming…”, he needs to ask, how would the Russian heat wave of 2010 (during July and early August 2010) stack up against this record?
“…During December and January, temperatures in excess of 45 °C (113 °F) are common, and the average maximum temperature exceeds normal human body temperature for 6 months each year…”
If THAT average is going up, then they may have a point.
All,
Jan P Perlwitz, a NASA colleague of Hansen’s, has complained in the open weekend thread about the insults and vitriol hurled at Hansen and others by skeptics. I have challenged Jan P Perlwitz in that thread to make an appearance in this thread and to defend Hansen’s work. I’ve predicted that he will slink away in silence rather than make an appearance in this thread. He’d be faced with defending the indefensible and looking foolish in the process, or, he’d have to call a spade a space and suffer the wrath of his colleague. He’s got little choice but to slink away.
Hansen getting a lot of media coverage in Australia. It’s a shame there’s no balance in Aussie alarmist MSM.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/here-comes-the-sun-chilling-verdict-on-a-climate-going-to-extremes-20120806-23q5o.html
A. Sinan Unur says:
August 6, 2012 at 11:17 am
“As such, this pretty animation cannot show anything other than the fact that the distribution of temperatures at the stations whose data continue to make it into the data set shifted right.”
I see much significance in what you say, and I also liked your later linked graphic presentation on the “dying of Thermometers”. That in itself should provide a good basis for challenging anything based upon modern assumptions of the validity of reconstructed temperatures. And what delicious irony if Hansen’s “Bell Curve” graphic presentation is used and applied over historical temperature changes to illustrate how the historical record has been cooked. Kinda nice if the curve moves to the right (cooked for warming) and thinking moves with it, rather than all this leftist self promoted clap trap.
Hoisted on their own petard, comes to mind!
henrythethird: Great observation about world record HIGH temperatures.
One would have to be stupid to not wonder if the “extremes” of today are really all that extreme.
What follows are world record high temperatures: World (Africa) El Azizia, Libya; Sept. 13, 1922, (136F):
North America (U.S.), Death Valley, Calif.; July 10, 1913 (134F);
Asia; Tirat Tsvi, Israel, June 21, 1942, (129F):
Australia ,Cloncurry, Queensland; Jan. 16, 1889 (128F):
Europe, Seville, Spain,Aug. 4, 1881 (122F):
South America, Rivadavia, Argentina; Dec. 11, 1905 (120F):
Canada,Midale and Yellow Grass, Saskatchewan, Canada; July 5, 1937 (113F):
Oceania;Tuguegarao, Philippines, April 29, 1912 (108F):
Persian Gulf (sea-surface): Aug. 5, 1924 (96F):
Antarctica; Vanda Station, Scott Coast, Jan. 5, 1974 (59F):
South Pole, Dec. 27, 1978, (7.5F).
Highest average annual mean temperature (world): Dallol, Ethiopia (Oct. 1960 Dec. 1966), 94° F.
Longest hot spell (world): Marble Bar, W. Australia, 100° F (or above) for 162 consecutive days, Oct. 30, 1923 to Apr. 7, 1924. Notice anything regarding the dates of these records? Anyone heard of the dust bowl & wasn’t that in the 30s
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001375.html
This information is also at this link:
http://www.worldfactsandfigures.com/weather_extremes.php
Now for the question. If the earth is suffering this fever that these dishonest kind of people such as hasen want people to believe, then why haven’t these all time high records been broken?
David Ball says:
August 6, 2012 at 10:30 am
Waiting for James’ reply,……cue Jeopardy music. Great article Anthony. So sick of their “selective science”. How will Hansen be viewed by his peers in the future? Perhaps as one of the men who derailed science for political machinations (the cause).
____________________________–
If truth manages to win, Hansen, Jones, Trenberth and Mann will take their place along side Teilhard de Chardin, Martin A.C. Hinton, Charles Dawson and Arthur Woodward in history texts.
and Hansen’s explanation for the Texas 1950-1957 drought, which was far worse than the Texas drought that stretched through last year, is?
John West says:
August 6, 2012 at 1:33 pm
Ridicule is the answer to nonsense. This is why WUWT is as popular as it is.
Expose the shortcomings (like cherry-picking and lies of omission) and ridicule the perpetrator.
i.e.: Any REAL climatologist would know the 30’s had more heat waves. (see Christy)
I just wish the message could be taken to a broader audience, like the buzz the hide the decline video got; for Hansen something like a hide the cycle video or a I’ll break the law for the cause so imagine what I’ll do to the data video.
JW,
I agree! There’s something quite satisfying and lasting about defeating your enemies with humor. Hmmm… how to go about it though?
How about a ‘TwiLight Zone’ type video titled:
Post Normal Science From The Cherry Picking Zone!
A Rod Serling-esque narrator intones “Mr Whatsupwiththat was a quiet meteorologist from AnyStreet Chico CA, with no idea he was about to encounter a region of post normal science where light turns into color…. and color turns into The Cherry Picking Zone!”
Scene opens with 2 ‘scientists’ (one that looks suspiciously like Mike Mann) standing in front of a large bowl of ripe cherries, which the MM character is eagerly devouring saying “I just LOVE fresh picked cherries, don’t you?” The MM character says excitedly “Hey! I think I’ve got final proof of man made global warming! Have a look at this!” Behind the cherry bowl is a large display of the bell curve shown above, that comes into focus as the camera leaves the bowl. He proceeds to demonstrate how to manipulate his bell curve and gleefully highlights the conclusions he draws from it, finally summarizing with “Yup! Man Made Global Warming! Right in line with The Consensus. Whaddaya think?”
The second scientist (looking amazingly like one of the WUWT 2012 et.al. team) says “I dunno, Mickey. How come you just used 1955 to 1999 data for the curve? And why did you use 1951 to 1980 data for the ‘base’ period? We have a lot more data available. Something looks funny here…. Tell ya what. I’m going to try a few other base periods for comparison. And then I’m going to use a data set from 1930 through 2010 for comparisons. Let’s see if the MMGW trend really holds up!”
It rapidly becomes obvious to both scientists (and our audience) that only those specific ‘cherry picked’ data sets and start/end points can produce the alarming graph of Mickey’s shame. The scene closes with Mickey holding his stomach in distress, by the almost empty cherry bowl. “I feel sick!” he says. “So do I!” says the WUWT scientist. “But you didn’t eat any of the cherries… It can’t be the cherries making you sick?!” says MM. “It isn’t the cherries, Mickey.” says the WUWT scientist “It’s the Cherry Picking that makes me ill!”
(scene fades out to the Rod Serling-esque disclaimer) “The story you have just scene is true. It provides a clear illustration of how statistics are used by consensus climatologists to willfully mislead our legislators and the public at large. The names have been changed to protect the folks who brought you this important message. Any resemblance to actual people is uninternational and strictly up to the whimsical interpretations of each viewer. The multiple interpretations of the data sets were all produced with out changing or ‘adjusting’ the original data, to better illustrate how statistics and selective ‘cherry picking’ of start and end points can be used to draw sharply differing conclusions from the same basic data. The story of ‘adjusting the data’ must wait for another day…. in another part of The Cherry Picking Zone!“
Patrick Davis
Not only is the report getting lots of mileage in the warmist Fairfax press, it gets the obligatory “ooga booga” survey with a somewhat expected answer if they’ve just read the article.
“Do you believe extreme weather events are being caused by climate change?”
67% “Yes”. Hypothesis achieved!
You all need to look at the bell curve animation much more carefully. The last picture is 2001-2011. All the data from the 2000’s is included. Why would Hansen leave off the years that show his point the best?? How can you participate in a discussion of the data when you cannot read the graph?
The data from the southern hemisphere is in the paper. The data is split up by months and the summer is the most interesting. Since that is winter in the Southern hemisphere the animation only shows the North. The Southern hemisphere data is similar to the data in the animation.