Letter to the Editor (orginally published in the Washington post, also submitted to WUWT)
For the second year in a row, we’ve had peak cherry blossoms later than the average date of March 31. In 2013, they were nine days late; this year they were 10 days late. That’s not a big surprise; after all, the usual peak date itself is just an average.
But what is curious is how The Post’s coverage of cherry blossoms veers into discussions of global warming in some years but not in others. In 2012, when the blossoms peaked on March 20, one front-page article was ominously headlined, “Much-too-early bloomers? As temperatures rise, scientists speculate that cherry blossom times could advance by a month.” A Capital Weather Gang blog post that month was headlined, “D.C.’s cherry blossoms have shifted 5 days earlier: What about global warming and the future?” Why enjoy an early spring when you can turn it into a teachable moment?
Needless to say, this news angle wilted a bit in the past two years.
When it comes to global warming, the recent late blossoms don’t prove much. But for that matter, neither did the early blossoms of years past.
Sam Kazman, Washington
The writer is general counsel for the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I believe one of the Earliest blossoming dates, was set in 1943, which places it right on the verge of the last cooling cycle. Someone correct me if I am wrong…
Just another instance that in climate science only the theory and the model matter, actual observations can be safely ignored when awkward.
Why are we still calling climate science a science? As practiced today, it is as much a science as astrology, Scientology and homeopathy.
Listening to: Talking Heads: “Stop Making Sense”
What’s the Deal with the Cherry Blossoms? (The Hoya, Georgetown, March 30, 2014)
With a very good scatter chart of peak Cherry Blossom bloom date (x) vs average March temperatures.(y) It made the graphical prediction that peak 2014 date would be April 11.
The CAGW myth-makers will quickly grab anything to “prove” their theory – and drop it just as fast when it becomes “Inconvenient” for their righteous crusade.
Coral, polar bears, glaciers, Australian water supplies, Pacific atolls, food shortages etc., etc., etc.,
Shades of Monty Python’s LoB sandal scene…….
Here in se BC we’ve had a Windermere Lake “ice out” contest for over 40 years. The bet money for closest time goes to charity. Four of the last 5 years have been record late or very late ice outs. Does this prove much, probably not. Do I throw it out there to bug my constantly exagrerating, warmist friends, you bet.
…and if this trend continues
Wasn’t that long ago they also published an op-ed saying they would be able to grow bananas
Why do we bow to the term ‘climate change’? Climate has been changing since the beginning of time and there is nothing we can do about it other than cope. Let us not forget how the hucksters and charlatans tried to foment fear with the term ‘global warming’ but the darn planet didn’t cooperate so rather than trash their hypothesis they changed the terminology. Today any weather event qualifies as ‘climate change’ and the more we use this term the more legitimately we give it. A while back there was a discussion of terminology and someone proposed the term ‘Climate Rambunctiousness’ which I believe puts all this into the correct perspective.
Peter Miller:
Why are we still calling climate science a science? As practiced today, it is as much a science as astrology, Scientology and homeopathy.
Let’s be fair. it’s probably more comparable as a science to, say, economics and psychology than scientology and homeopathy.
The Post’s articles linked to are about long term trends. The data from the last two years don’t have much impact on the trend. Thus, it is Kazman who is cherry blossom picking.
Here’s what we’re up against. Asked a relative to “show me the data” that shows temps climbing over the last century, or whenever. She shows me a graph, which I point out is a) a graph of the data after it was heavily processed with algorithms unspecified, not “the data”, and b) a projection into the future, not data from observations made in the past. Response: “So what?’
You’ll never believe who she voted for in every election since she turned 18.
Re: Monty Python.
I was thinking the CAGW Climate Theory discussions are quickly approaching the Dead Parrot Sketch.
“The Post’s articles linked to are about long term trends. The data from the last two years don’t have much impact on the trend. Thus, it is Kazman who is cherry blossom picking”
No, it’s you who are cherry picking, which in this case means reading selectively. Try reading the last sentence.
“When it comes to global warming, the recent late blossoms don’t prove much. But for that matter, neither did the early blossoms of years past.”
Felix says:
April 26, 2014 at 8:02 am
Mr Kazman’s letter did not argue trends one way or another. Your statement regarding trends is therefor silly. What he did question is the Post’s using early blooms to argue global warming was here, yet when blooms are later there is no corresponding comment.
cheers,
gary
Climate is what you expect, weather is what you get. Since the consensus folks always expect warm, warm weather is always climate.
Here is a Japanese record of Cherry Blossoms spanning the last 1000 years
http://www.leif.org/EOS/Cherry-Trees-Japan.pdf
“The dates of cherry tree festivals in Japan have emerged as one of the most important sources
of information on the impacts of climate change on plants. The data set is exceptionally detailed, and extends back in time more than any other known data set on plant flowering times. “
I don’t know about trends but i can tell you that here in the North West of England we didn’t see the first cherry blossoms until as late as two weeks ago. The Apples are in blossom now. my English basil is all but died off, my rosemary is struggling. Half my tomato plants are stunted and struggling that I’m concerned they won’t even get to fruit before the weather turns again. Potatoes? Don’t even go there. of the 20 plus plants i am expecting only two have even shown their faces above ground.
Does this mean anything for the climate? Of course not but it has a bloody annoying effect on my summer larder!
Richard Primack and Hiroyoshi Higuchi attributed Japan’s recent earlier cherry blossom festivals to global warming. Climate Change and Cherry Tree Blossom Festivals in Japan
This year the Koyoto bloom was later.
As an aside, the Nenana Ice Classic is also over.
David L. Hagen says:
April 26, 2014 at 8:26 am
Richard Primack and Hiroyoshi Higuchi attributed Japan’s recent earlier cherry blossom festivals to global warming.
Actually, most of it to Urban Development…
The Japan Cherry Trees link Leif provided closes with a contour map of cherry blossom dates in the region of Osaka. There is a clear bullseye on the city center. The record of Cherry Trees is defining the Urban Heat Island effect.
It is also possible that the higher CO2 provides a faster time to blossoms from the time when the tree leaves dormancy in the spring.
Realclimate picked the Nenana ice out this year.
The Japan Cherry Trees link Leif provided is a decidedly AGW promulgating article.
Interesting how the article on the Kyoto trees from Mr. Isvalgaard discusses how the urban heat island effect makes the trees bloom early.