Image Credits: Soft Pixel – clker.com – Cagel.com
By WUWT Regular “Just The Facts”
For anyone who was witness to the absurdity of the recent warming makes it cold meme, it should come as no surprise that even ardent Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming believers are trying to distance themselves from the meme before it causes more damage. After the White House took a run at it, and the willfully gullible media, e.g. Bloomberg Businessweek, BBC and NPR lapped it up, now everyone, including the scientist credited with starting it, are walking away. Let us start with this Washington Post – Capital Weather Gang article yesterday, “Scientists: Don’t make “extreme cold” centerpiece of global warming argument“:
“It’s an intriguing theory – that recently has gotten legs: the melting Arctic – spurred by global warming – is causing the weather’s steering flow, the jet stream, to become more extreme. This extreme jet stream – rather than zipping around the world in a straight circle (right below) – is more frequently meandering off course (left below) and getting stuck in place, sending bitter, prolonged blasts of cold southward and conversely, see-sawing strong heat domes northward. It’s a fascinating paradox: global warming as the culprit for bone-chilling cold.
But more and more scientists are expressing reservations about this hypothesis, first proposed by Rutgers climate scientist Jennifer Francis and collaborators.
“It’s an interesting idea, but alternative observational analyses and simulations with climate models have not confirmed the hypothesis, and we do not view the theoretical arguments underlying it as compelling,” write five preeminent climate scientists (John Wallace, Isaac Held, David Thompson, Kevin Trenberth, and John Walsh) in a recent letter published in Science Magazine.
Elizabeth Barnes, an atmospheric scientists from Colorado State University, after an attempt to dismantle Francis’ theory last summer, published a second challenge in January.
“…the link between recent Arctic warming and increased Northern Hemisphere blocking is currently not supported by observations,” Barnes’ study concludes.”
Funny stuff and it gets even better, from this Princetonian article from two days ago, “U. lecturer argues global warming doesn’t cause polar vortex”
“The polar vortex is a ring of Westerlies, prevailing winds that blow from west to east around the poles that are strongest in the winter, Wallace explained. Wallace is a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington.
Wallace noted that the vortex continually changes its shape, and when its lobes sweep down over temperate areas, those regions get periods of cold weather.
“I don’t think the slowing down of the polar vortex is enough to really affect behavior of the vortex very much,” he said.
He also noted that the belief that human-induced climate change could cause more extreme cold was, in fact, held by only a small minority of researchers.”
“Like Held, University Physics professor William Happer said this year’s weather is not anomalous.
“It’s exactly the same as weather we’ve had in my own lifetime many times,” Happer said. “Why should it suddenly be climate change?”
Happer explained that this year’s record lows have been emphasized in order to support the climate change “myth.”
“You know, for years we were told we’re going to fry, and the earth refused to cooperate. And so they desperately look for something else to hang their hat on,” he said, referring to supporters of the global warming theory.
Held also said this year’s extreme cold is most likely part of natural fluctuations in global climate.”
And then, to top it all off, Jennifer Francis, who first proposed the warming causes cold meme, and had previously blessed us with pearls of wisdom like;
“‘It’s basically the jet stream on a drunken path going around the Northern Hemisphere,’ explains Rutgers University climate scientist Jennifer Francis.” Grist
“Scientists tend to call the jet stream a “polar vortex,” Francis says.” Bloomberg Businessweek
has now has seen the light:
“The media certainly had a field day with the “attack of the polar vortex” in early January, and in their hyping of the story, some misquoted me (and others) by saying that climate change caused the unusual cold spell. Of course this sort of event has happened before, and this one wasn’t unprecedented.
I also agree that greenhouse-gas induced warming will reduce, not increase, the likelihood of breaking cold temperature records — the data already show this.” New York Times – Dot Earth
Gotta love when we can all agree on something. If you would like to learn more about what might actually have caused the recent “weak vortex event” and associated “cold-air outbreaks”, this article and associated comments offers a reasonably detailed analysis.
Euan Mearns:
I write to draw attention to the links in your post at February 22, 2014 at 2:06 am.
Your articles are good and the discussions in the threads – especially on the jet stream- are very good, so I am writing to commend them to others who otherwise may not have bothered to read them.
Richard
There is some confusion arising in relation to the Polar Vortex which is a column of descending air in the stratosphere above each pole and entirely separate to the jet stream which flows around the polar air masses from west to east. It does not descend below the tropopause.
The effect of the stratospheric Polar Vortex on atmospheric pressure AT THE SURFACE is manifested by the Arctic Oscillation (AO) in the northern hemisphere and the Antarctic Oscillation (AAO) in the southern hemisphere. They are both measures of the surface pressure distribution between specified locations.
The Polar Vortex itself is limited to the stratosphere and therefore it can only affect the surface pressure distribution by altering tropopause height. It is those changes in tropopause height which force a change in the surface pressure distribution and thus the degree to which the AO and AAO can be regarded as positive or negative.
A positive AO and AAO appear to occur most often when the sun is active and it is when they are positive that the polar air masses contract and the jets and climate zones shift poleward.
What seems to happen is that an active sun depletes ozone above 45km in the mesosphere for a cooling effect (the opposite of the effect below 45km) and then the colder (reduced ozone) air in the mesosphere sinks towards the tropopause within the Polar Vortex and reduces the temperature of the stratosphere above the polar tropopause to lower than it otherwise would have been
The interesting thing is that a colder stratosphere lifts tropopause height upward so the heights rise above the poles relative to the heights above the requator and the entire global air circulation is drawn poleward AT A TIME OF ACTIVE SUN.
When the sun is less active the opposite occurs, the tropopause height over the poles falls relative to that over the equator, the AO and AAO become more negative and the entire global air circulation is pushed equatorward.
Note that zonal jets can occur either in a poleward scenario (a warm interglacial) or in an equatorward scenario (ice ages) and so meridionality is a function of variations between the two extremes. Such variations are driven by the interplay between the solar effect from the top down towards the poles and the oceanic effect (from ocean cycles) from the bottom up towards the equator.
However, whilst between those two astronomically induced extremes of zonality (via the Milankovitch Cycles) it is the degree of meridionality which serves as the most powerful climate forcing mechanism because that degree of meridionality affects total global cloudiness and albedo so as to vary the amount of solar energy getting into the oceans to drive the system.
Basic summary here:
http://www.newclimatemodel.com/new-climate-model/
*Our old teachers agree ….*
_peter_ : February 22, 2014 at 2:17 am :-
_…by the true-believers who will sneer at anyone who questions the idea that GW causes extreme cold._
“Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad.” – Aldous Huxley
“The important thing is not to stop questioning.” – Albert Einstein
_anticlimactic_ : February 22, 2014 at 2:18 am :-
_Much of climate science is the science of the dark ages._
“The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it’s just the best we have. And to abandon it, with its skeptical protocols, is the pathway to a dark age.” –
good to check on the Alexa stats that skeptic sites are increasing viewers and alarmist are declining.
An instant look website of these stats , Skeptic Vs alarmists would be mighty fun.
or do this,
“In today’s MLM blogging post, I want to discuss something called Alexa Rank.
Before I jump into it though, I recommend all online marketers use Firefox for their web browser of choice.
(If you don’t already, click here to install it).
The main reason I’m encouraging my peeps to use Firefox is because it allows for handy dandy little add-ons, or plugins.
As you can imagine, there’s pretty much an add-on for anything and everything.
But the one I’d like you to install is called SearchStatus (install it here).
By using Firefox and adding the SearchStatus plugin, you’ll be able to quickly and effortlessly view the Alexa Rank (and Page Rank) for any website you visit.
After the one-click install of each, you should see the blue SearchStatus icon somewhere on the top or bottom of Firefox.
If you right-click the icon, you can set the “Options.”
Here’s how I’ve set mine up:
Next, right-click on the blue icon once again, then hover your mouse over “Enable” and make sure Page Rank and Alexa Rank are ticked:
After doing all that, it should look similar to this:
See how, as you click between different websites or blogs, the green and blue bars change? Also, note that you can hover your mouse over either bar to get the actual score or rank for each”
People seem to be missing the fundamental fact that this is Science (Scientific Method) vs Religion (Global Warming). If ALL of the Climate Scientists were to say that new evidence has come to light and the Models are completely wrong, they were mistaken, and the world is cooling. The Believers will merely write it of as those scientists IPCC and all were bought off. Using the scientific method to prove or disprove a theory is part of science. If light didn’t bend around the sun as observed during a Eclipse on May 29, 1919 when the observers could see known stars while the sun as blocked by the moon, Einstein may not have been proven wrong, but his theories would have been in doubt. The Global Warming crowd wont debate you scientists v Scientist, they must discredit you as a person and as a heretic, regardless of the science. Bring someone that studies cults into the debate and they will recognize the actions of the Global Warming crowd almost immediately, the members of the cult will refuse to recognize that they are wrong at all costs. They will give their time and money to the cult and any outsiders must be made believers or their influence expelled from the group. Disproving Global Warming scientifically to them is almost impossible under these circumstances.
oh dear,
trends – clmatechange.
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=climatechange
sorry for hogging the comments but you can have a lot of fun on the google trends,
Al Gore,
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=al%20gore
‘Unprecedented’…
Means: ‘We haven’t had such bad weather for – oooooh – at least five years…’
To me, this proves that this was a political argument from the start… you back down from political arguments if they are not working to convince people… you don’t back down from scientific arguments if you feel you have a solid basis for them…
The BBC has a habit of checking scientists claims by talking to scientists with opposing / sceptical views. With the jet stream they just mainly let it slide as it is given. This is what happens when you hold secret seminars and take climate advice from advocates, PR folks, Church of England reps etc. There are many worried folk in the BBC but they will remain in their closets as they gnash their teeth at the global surface temperature hiatus. It serves them right.
I should add that with climate science they also let too much slide. Investing your pension in climate schemes is a problematical thing indeed.
Jennifer Francis digs a hole by trying to have her 15 minutes of climate voodoo fame.
Here is something she prepared earlier.
Climate scientists are not what they used to be either.
Fifty years ago, more or less, when the Jetstream acted up people used to blame it on HAARP experiments or some secret weapon the Soviets were supposed to have. Ignorance still rules!
OK, here goes:
“Green House Gasses” add to the warming of the atmosphere.
CO2 is one of the “Green House Gasses”.
CO2 then adds somewhat to a warming atmosphere (exact amount of warming not known).
A warming atmosphere equals “Global Warming”.
Global Warming equals “Climate Change” (the climate is becoming warmer)
However, Global Cooling also equals “Climate Change”.
Therefore, all Global Warming is Climate Change, but not all Climate Change is Global Warming.
And all Global Cooling is Climate Change, but not all Climate Change is Global Cooling.
Global Warming does not cause a cooling climate.
Global Cooling does not cause a warming climate.
Question: how’s my Eight grade education doing so far?
🙂
So glad they dropped the warming creates cooling. The stupidity of it hurt my head and irritated me to no end. Unfortunately there are many who lapped it up.
Sort of like “agreeing” that the oceans aren’t going to be boiling over anytime soon, but baby steps, I guess.
@Dana Engle
Yes, I agree.
I was pondering the mentality of CAGW believers and it struck me that they are similar to UFO believers. Any report favourable to their cause is automatically true and incontrovertible, and anything against is a dark conspiracy of some sort. Of course that would suggest many climate ‘scientists’ are ‘Von Danikens’!
As an example of why it is futile to get into a dialogue with opinion makers who don’t understand the basics:
On FOX the other night Kirsten Powers, a liberal known for her levelheadedness and intelligence (in a segment on the Keystone Pipeline) declared “Even if we find that CO2 does not cause global warming, we can ALL agree that we should do all we can to curb CO2 because it is a pollutant” (a close paraphrase). The FOX host agreed!
NO KIRSTEN, IF WE WERE TO AGREE THAT CO2 DOES NOT CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING, THEN IT IS GAME OVER!! (Sorry for shouting.) Everything sprouts from that one assumption. We can shut down the IPCC, tell EPA to worry only about particulate matter from smokestacks, approve the Keystone pipeline, take down windmills and solar panels and open federal lands to drilling – just as a start.
Having a global warming conversation with those folks would be like starting a conversation on English Literature by reviewing the alphabet!
The reality, of course, is that all sane people accept that there is some warming due to CO2. The questions are whether the amount due to CO2 is catastrophic, what role natural variation plays (the earth has been covered by ice more frequently than it has been at current temperatures), are there natural “thermostats” like clouds, and whether the the “cure” is worse than the “disease”? (Devastation to western economies, higher fuel bills – 2 to 4 time current US prices per EU’s experience etc.)
There is still a LOT to be learned about the subsystems that drive our climate. The Science is not Settled!
/rant
The Hari Seldon on exhibit here is not the one I once knew. Hari was one smart fellow.
JohnWho: …Global Warming does not cause a cooling climate.
Global Cooling does not cause a warming climate.
Question: how’s my Eight grade education doing so far?
🙂
Global Warming does cause Global Cooling because what goes up must come down, and Global Cooling does cause Global Warming because what goes down must come up. How’s my Seventh grade education doing?
@ur momisugly riahardscourtney
Thank you! I have a new post up dissecting last weeks Met Office report called “Met Office storm final briefing – good, bad and ugly”, I’ll post a link later. The report actually has some commendable sections with good description of the global ocean – climate – jet stream picture. But spoiled by the irresistible temptation to put an AGW spin on. It doesn’t mention CO2 or carbon dioxide once. Nor does it mention “snow” once and these storms dumped huge amounts of the stuff on Scotland.
Euan Mearns:
Thankyou for your post to me at February 22, 2014 at 9:51 am.
It seems you are building a blog which assesses climate-related UK institutions. So, in hope of helping, I mention an addendum to your flooding article. As you say, the Thames flooding was exacerbated by building a channel which transported water from a region which had a history of minor flooding to another region which had a history of minor flooding. The result was reduction to the minor flooding upstream and conversion of the minor flooding to catastrophe in the region downstream. However, you do not point out that the original scheme was for three channels which would transport excess water to the sea but funding was stopped after the first channel was completed and before the other channels were built.
Richard
Poor Jennifer Francis is complaining about being misquoted by some newspapers. Okay Jennifer, I’ll quote directly from an article you wrote:
“The ice cover, only half of what it was only a few decades ago, is a stunning visual demonstration of the effects that increasing greenhouse gases…The loss of ice and snow in the far north may load the dice for “stuck” weather patterns, compounding potential risks for our economy, our health, and our security.”-Jennifer Francis
but now she says…
“some misquoted me (and others) by saying that climate change caused the unusual cold spell.”
Her statement that she was misquoted is untrue. She is either lying or like a sociopath, unable to tell truth from lies.
Reblogged this on Norah4you's Weblog and commented:
Well well well – something to agree on….. 😛