We’ve just been waiting for this predictable headline to emerge somewhere, and it happened to pop up in Canada’s CBC News:
h/t to Ron Christie in WUWT Tips and Notes
That “new study” from Rutgers? Not even new. They write:
The 2012 paper says melting Arctic ice is weakening the jet stream. This weakening causes the jet stream to dip further south, which in Canada brings severe cold temperatures for prolonged periods of time.
Um, no. The 2012 study by Jennifer Francis of Rutgers they allude to (but don’t mention) is titled:
Evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in mid-latitudes
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL051000/abstract
Arctic amplification (AA) – the observed enhanced warming in high northern latitudes relative to the northern hemisphere – is evident in lower-tropospheric temperatures and in 1000-to-500 hPa thicknesses. Daily fields of 500 hPa heights from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction Reanalysis are analyzed over N. America and the N. Atlantic to assess changes in north-south (Rossby) wave characteristics associated with AA and the relaxation of poleward thickness gradients. Two effects are identified that each contribute to a slower eastward progression of Rossby waves in the upper-level flow: 1) weakened zonal winds, and 2) increased wave amplitude. These effects are particularly evident in autumn and winter consistent with sea-ice loss, but are also apparent in summer, possibly related to earlier snow melt on high-latitude land. Slower progression of upper-level waves would cause associated weather patterns in mid-latitudes to be more persistent, which may lead to an increased probability of extreme weather events that result from prolonged conditions, such as drought, flooding, cold spells, and heat waves.
So what is being argued is that somehow, Arctic Amplification (making the Arctic warm faster than the rest of the planet) results is bitterly cold air masses that protrude southward from the circumpolar vortex and linger longer. Note in this forecast panel for the next few days, the cold air outbreak is a regional issue. Would CBC care to say that the warm outbreak over Alaska and the North Atlantic (giving some very nice weather to the UK) is also caused by the same mechanism? If they do, then of course it becomes an unfalsifiable belief, essentially a religion.
Dr. Judith Curry has already taken on this nonsense back in January and writes:
Is global warming causing the polar vortex?
by Judith Curry
In a word, no.
And now for the 2nd question: Does the massive cold air outbreak blanketing much of the U.S. disprove global warming?
Same word: no.
The media are mostly in stupid mode over this one.
Cliff Mass provides a good overview, the punch lines:
The bottom line: the claims that greenhouse warming causes more cold waves like we have seen this week really seems to be without any basis in observational evidence or in theory. The media needs to stop pushing this unsupported argument.
It is SO frustrating that every major weather event causes such claims and counterclaims to be aired, with many media outlets unable to do the minimal research that would allow them to give the public more dependable information.
All this bogus reporting has done substantial damage, with many American’s believing that global warming is already causing our winter weather to become more extreme, while the observational evidence suggests no such thing. One day some sociologists will study this situation and the psychological elements that drove it.
The arguments in favor of an AGW impact on the cold air in the U.S. come from Jennifer Francis (see this previous post).
The bitter winter of 1976-77 in the U.S. with its large polar excursions certainly didn’t have anything to do with global warming then, and it would have been absurd then to make such a claim, it is no less absurd now.
Read the whole paper: 1977v002no04-Wagner (PDF)
The “blocking high” slowed down the progression of the jet stream much like Ms. Francis suggests in her 2012 paper, see this pictorial for what happened in January 2014, much like the pattern of 1977:
Except in 1977, “global warming” was the furthest thing from most scientists and journalists minds at the time.
[Snip – I’m sorry Jai, this is just too stupid to print, especially in lieu of what Nature and IPCC SREX has to say about extreme weather linkage. It’s just another thread hijack by you, which are becoming tiresome. – Anthony]
Richard,
http://www.ibtimes.com/australias-heat-wave-threatening-agricultural-production-1543730
Australia’s Heat Wave Threatening Agricultural Production
January 17 2014 3:31 PM
Australia is the world’s second-largest wheat exporter, the third-largest sugar exporter and the world’s third-largest beef exporter. Already in the last month, beef prices on the benchmark Eastern Cattle Indicator dropped nearly 10 percent as farmers send more animals to the slaughter.
The country’s cattle herd will fall to 25 million head this season, the lowest since the 2009-2010 season, according to the Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics and Sciences.
“It will be much harder to maintain production if you have such extreme weather events,” Paul Deane, senior agricultural economist at ANZ Bank, told Eco-Business.com.
“Higher temperatures tend to lead to more evaporation of any rain, and all of sudden the water availability for crops is reduced, which will have a big impact on crops like wheat and sugar,” Deane said.
Over-confident over-reach is a key step along the way toward public and scientific fatigue with nut jobs. They become indefensible and predictable for both the short attention span types and concerned intellectuals. It is the double dose of skepticism that really thins the crowds.
Billboard:
Image: Big Brother (the well-known guy with the scowl and the crew cut)
Caption: Cool Is Warm!
Sub-caption: And Don’t You Forget It!
@Jeff Alberts
>>“And the bulldozer that had an evil mind of its own.”
>Killdozer was actually a decent short story, written by Theodore Sturgeon, I believe (going from memory).
Well done. Perhaps one way to look at the matter of AGW and CC is to compare how a real story that had legs, albeit they were short legs, is turned into Climate Godzilla by Hollywood, played in this version by the main stream media (MSM). Hollywood is renowned for having lots of ‘agendas’ including those forced on them by the government from time to time. Usually though, it is just self-serving materialism with lipstick.
On the bright side, however, once Hollywood determines that they have been misled and the public is not going to drink from the Green Kool-Aid Fountain™ for much longer, they will start portraying the self-serving industrialists and politicians behind the scam as targets of ridicule and scorn. That of course will lead to a new generation of young people who are at odds with the core beliefs of their parents.
*Yawn* Life goes on.
I’m surprised that no one has had a laugh at low information journalism’s expense yet, at this whopper
“Jet streams are ribbons of wind that blow from west to east in the northern hemisphere, and are formed when cold air from the Arctic comes in contact with warm air from the south.”
Are they stupid? Or do they just think everyone else is.
This says it all. It’s found at the bottom of the article in question:
Low inforrmation journalism. Welcome to the CBC.
They count on ignorance, and yet are available for the current analysis and forecasts.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/
Jai mitchel
Nah Australia will be fine,
MArch 4th 2014
http://www.theland.com.au/news/agriculture/agribusiness/general-news/abares-2014-projections/2690128.aspx
“Would CBC care to say that the warm outbreak over Alaska and the North Atlantic (giving some very nice weather to the UK) is also caused by the same mechanism? If they do, then of course it becomes an unfalsifiable belief, essentially a religion.”
I’m on your side, but I think there’s a better way to express this. I can at least imagine how something like increased warmth in one part of the world could influence weather in different ways depending on location.
The trouble arises with the ad hoc nature of these papers. They’re obviously making it up as they go along.
The SUN’s magnetic field changes is the cause. This has allowed a shift in the earth’ magnetic field to a more disorganized arrangement. An increase in the strength is the local field along the North American west coast has densified the atmosphere over it. This semi permanent high pressure area is steering the Northern Jet in a loop that is dragging arctic air down over the northeast. Now you are getting a lesson in the creation of the Great Ice Mountains. They grew in place and did not slowly travel down from the north. pg
For some reason I am remembering a study that showed different views of the polar climate. Most of the time the boundary between the cold polar air and the warmer mid-latitude was fairly circular and well defined, but periodically you would instead see these long extrusions of polar weather stretching south, with corresponding lobes of warm air stretching north. This was presented as something that would occur every couple of decades and was not that big a deal regarding overall impact to the climate. The graphic I’m remembering in particular on the left has the boundary looking mostly like a circle, but on the right looking almost like a starfish plopped on top of the globe. I’m trying to remember other details of the study but I’m coming up blank.
Does this sound familiar to anyone?
And by extension the climate change argument also explains snow birds and other migration patterns, including viewership decline.
Yeah, right. During the Brutal Winter of 1978-1979 weakening of the jet stream was caused by too much sea ice, which made it dip further south, only this time it was the other way around. Who dares say true science is not exciting?
To paraphrase the CBC caption: Is global warming a myth? No, climate change is not a myth. Calling it sleight of hand would be to do it too much credit.
I’m sorry it’s true and heat waves are caused by global cooling.
This must be all the rage with the global warming idiots in Canada. This is the third such story I have read from Canada in the past week or so. At least, unlike NOAA, they aren’t denying that it was cold.
To view the daily weather maps for the Winter of 1976/77 go to the following link:
http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/ncepreanal/
Plug in a starting date of 1976-year 11-month 15-day
This will get you started on November 15, 1976. Hit the + to advance by day thru December, January and February.
The Polar Vortex drops way south repeatedly, causing numerous, extreme cold outbreaks in the eastern half of the US and Canada during that Winter as you can plainly see.
1. California was also having an historical drought.
2. CO2 and greenhouse gas warming could not have caused this
3. This pattern happened much less frequently during the global warming years of the 1980’s/90’s while the Arctic was warming most and losing large amounts of ice. If Arctic ice loss causes this pattern, it should have been most evident with it increasing most during those years.
4. The PDO was negative in the 1970’s when we saw this pattern more frequently. When we had a +PDO in the 80’s/90’s, along with global warming, we saw the Polar Vortex dropping south LESS frequently.
5. The PDO has shifted back to negative in the last decade. Global warming has stalled and now we have the Polar Vortex dropping south again like it did more frequently during the 1970’s
This shows a strong correlation to this pattern and the PDO. No correlation to CO2, which has been increasing the entire time and the opposite correlation to global warming suggested by this study.
This obvious correlation (or lack of it) is not rocket science (or computer modeling)(or pet theories) it is plain and simple………..using observations of the actual weather that occurred.
I thought climate change was hiding in the deep oceans?………….
“Cold snaps result of global warming”
Good one from Canada’s CBC News. Perhaps next year they have the patience to wait the extra 15 days to make it perfect.
And what caused the cold in the late 1800’s and in the 1930’s?
They make it up as they go along.
They are not giving up.
They are not going away.
They are not taking their hand out of our wallets.
Ralph Kramdon says:
March 18, 2014 at 8:00 am
Are they stupid? Or do they just think everyone else is.
The latter and they know the vast majority of people are stupid; about 97%