James Hansen's latest doomsday paper falls flat on its face, grounds his 'flying boulders'

James Hansen, formerly head of NASA GISS published a new study Tuesday March 22nd in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, claiming global warming, sea level rise, and severe storms, could be (paraphrasing) “worse than we thought”. Just a 2°C rise would see the world suffering through massive sea level rise and super storms that would hurl giant boulders to the tops of mountains:

According to the Washington Post and activist writer Chris Mooney:

Standing atop a 60-foot cliff overlooking the Atlantic, James Hansen — the retired NASA scientist sometimes dubbed the “father of global warming” — examines two small rocks through a magnifying glass. Towering above him is the source of one of the shards: a huge boulder from a pair locals call “the Cow and the Bull,” the largest of which is estimated to weigh more than 1,000 tons.

While there is a suggestion in the scientific literature that the boulders were simply left behind after surrounding rocks eroded away, Hearty and another leading Bahamas geology expert, Pascal Kindler of the University of Geneva in Switzerland, agree that the boulders are older than the surface upon which they rest and, thus, probably were moved by the sea. Even the tourist placard near here takes their side, saying the ocean “lifted them atop the ridge.” But exactly how it could have done that is another matter.

Hansen's Flying Boulder on the island of Eluethra. Image from Washington Post
Hansen’s Flying Boulder on the island of Eluethra. Image from Washington Post

Added: Here is a view of both rocks.

cow-and-bull-eleuthra
Via Panaramio image by Mamedov Ruslan

Hansen’s theory has drawn some criticisms from the scientific community.

A scientific study conducted on the cow and the bull, for example, concludes the boulders could be the last remaining remnants of karst towers, or not, but definitely not deposited by tsunamis

karst-cow-bull-hansen

Source

Hansen’s doomsday paper suffers from another major flaw: it depends on a slowdown of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), which transports warm water from the tropics to the North Atlantic where it warms the atmosphere.

Hansen and his co-authors list…

“slowdown and eventual shutdown of the Atlantic overturning circulation with cooling of the North Atlantic region”

…as one of five impacts just 2°C of global warming would have on the planet.

In an article in The Atlantic, Hansen is quoted as saying:

At the heart of the findings is his argument that cold meltwater from Greenland is weakening an important internal current in the Atlantic Ocean, called AMOC, that keeps weather across the entire planet temperate. Once this current is shut down, then the Atlantic near the Arctic will stay cold and heat will build up in the southern latitudes, creating the potential for extreme weather of mythical proportions.

“I believe we are already watching the beginning of this cooling, southeast of Greenland,” Hansen says. “In that case, extra cooling and extra warming along the United States East Coast are not natural fluctuations. The warm water is the reason that [Hurricane] Sandy retained hurricane-force winds up to the New York City area.”

“Have we passed a point of no return? I doubt it, but it’s conceivable,” he adds. “But if we wait until the real world reveals itself clearly, it may be too late to avoid sea-level rise of several meters and loss of all coastal cities.”

Where Hansen falls flat:

Hansen’s big problem is a new paper published yesterday and first highlighted on WUWT demonstrates that despite all the warming seen in the last century, the AMOC remains unaffected:

Study: There is no real evidence for a diminishing trend of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation

In an email from the lead author Albert Parker, he noted:

[The AMOC is] apparently quite stable and not following the anthropogenic CO2 emissions

Indeed, the data supports this:

amo_timeseries_1856-present-1[1]

It looks like Hansen’s “flying boulders” are grounded, at least for now.

The AMOC shutting down due to global warming was the main scientific plot point in the science fiction movie “The Day After Tomorrow”. In the movie, after the AMOC shut down, it spawned tornadoes in Los Angeles, floods in New York City and caused the Northern Hemisphere eventually freeze over. But remember, this is climate science fiction, not real attributable effects that would hold up under scientific scrutiny.

A number of climate scientists have been highly critical of Hansen’s new study, both in the 2015 version that was initially rejected, and the present one. Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry called the initial paper a “backfire”.

According to the website Climate Home, UK Climate scientist Peter Thorne said the 2015 draft report was “highly political” and questioned whether or not the paper should have been submitted to the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Thorne also said Hansen was “unprofessional” and “grossly inappropriate.”

“I expect this kind of thing of my kids,” Thorne told Climate Home. “I do not expect this behaviour to be out there in the public domain for all to see amongst leading scientists in the field.”

Even normally “say anything” Seth Borenstein of the Associated Press declined to cover the Hansen paper:

borenstein-on-hansen

Ouch! (h/t to Dr. Ryan Maue)

This article in The Atlantic indicates the process to get the paper peer-reviewed was a contentious one. Hansen had to tone down some of his rhetoric:


As Revkin noted Tuesday, the peer-review process was not for naught: The final paper was altered, sometimes significantly, from its July 2015 draft. For example, while last year’s version of the paper claimed absolute certainty in its title

Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2° C global warming is highly dangerous

—this year’s final version scales that language back:

Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2° C global warming could be dangerous

Now the paper has at last been peer reviewed and published. The Times and thePost both covered its release on Tuesday, the latter with the headline: “We had all better hope these scientists are wrong about the planet’s future.”


 

Then there’s the “hottest year ever” and the Hottest February ever according to NASA GISS and Gavin Schmidt:

Gavin-hottest-ever

Assuming that data is correct, and not just mostly artifacts of NASA GISS processing and other problems, where’s the big uptick in severe weather that is supposed to accompany such things?

torgraph-big[1]

Hansen even made a video, trying to look like Indiana Jones in the process:

Maybe James Hansen is just having another “Jor-El episode”, as Steve McIntyre noted back in 2007:


 

It’s as though Hansen, who grew up in the 1930s and 1940s, has a Jor-El complex: Jor-El being familiar to young boys of a certain age as Superman’s father who (per Wikipedia):

“was a highly respected scientist on the planet Krypton before its destruction. He foresaw the planet’s fate, but was unable to convince his colleagues in time to save their race. Jor-El was, however, able to save his infant son, Kal-El, sending him in a homemade rocketship to the planet Earth just moments before Krypton’s demise.

 


At least Hansen doesn’t dress up in tights like some other “climate scientists”, such as “Supermandia”.

Note: within about 15 minutes of publication, this article was updated to fix some broken links, and the reference to AP’s Seth Borenstein added.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
134 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Joe Civis
March 24, 2016 12:47 pm

perhaps some “boulder holders” could be re-purposed to become boulder catchers to save us from this dreaded scenario!!!
Cheers,
Joe

george e. smith
Reply to  Joe Civis
March 24, 2016 1:17 pm

Well after reading this WUWT thread James Hansen might be a Boulder but wiser man !
g

March 24, 2016 12:54 pm

Just a 2°C rise would see the world suffering through massive sea level rise

Presumably this “massive sea level rise” would be due to expansion of ocean water and more ice melting. However at the south pole, the trend is down since UAH started. So that leaves Greenland since floating ice at the north pole cannot cause a sea level rise.
But the article also says this:

Once this current is shut down, then the Atlantic near the Arctic will stay cold

So exactly what will cause this “massive sea level rise”?

ossqss
Reply to  Werner Brozek
March 24, 2016 1:04 pm

Massive subsidence?
I am stumped too Werner….

Reply to  Werner Brozek
March 24, 2016 6:09 pm

Even meltwater pulse 1A never had sea level rising nearly fast enough to cause what Boilin’ Oceans Hansen predicted in 1988.

RockyRoad
Reply to  Werner Brozek
March 24, 2016 8:35 pm

…a million converging comets… all made of ice.

timg56
March 24, 2016 1:04 pm

The most interesting part of the story is Seth Borenstein’s response. When true believers start having doubts about what they publish, it’s a sign they are worried they’ve backed the wrong horse.

ghl
Reply to  Anthony Watts
March 24, 2016 6:10 pm

So Seth B. decided that Hansen is outside The Consensus? Who rejected who I wonder.

ShrNfr
March 24, 2016 1:17 pm

“But exactly how it could have done that is another matter.” That is the problem, isn’t it? Reality intrudes.

Reply to  ShrNfr
March 24, 2016 1:28 pm

Reality never intrudes upon James Hansen. He floats serenely on his own personal cloud in some remote mental phase space completely and forever inaccessible to individual H sapiens of normal intellectual faculties.

Stas peterson
March 24, 2016 1:24 pm

James Hansen is long past going round the bend.His theories have been disproved and now he doesn’t even try to be semi-scientific in his bleats.

Robber
March 24, 2016 1:28 pm

Isn’t it time to call scientists and the IPCC out on this claim: “Just a 2°C rise would see the world suffering through massive sea level rise and super storms.” As I read the temperature anomaly chart above, In February 2016 the globe reached 1.7 degrees above preindustrial temperatures, so we are just 0.3 degrees away from catastrophe? Has someone started building a modern Noah’s ark?

Bill Illis
March 24, 2016 1:28 pm

He is only the founder of this discipline.

RockyRoad
Reply to  Bill Illis
March 24, 2016 8:40 pm

Is that why “climate science” is so screwed up, Bill? I mean, really…

BCBill
March 24, 2016 1:34 pm

Nobody else seems to have said it so here goes- this latest Hansen work is not about the cow and the bull but just another cock and bull story.
Sorry, sorry,……………………sorry.

JimB
March 24, 2016 1:38 pm

I note that Scott Mandia sports hip boots. Appropriate.

Bob Quartero
March 24, 2016 1:49 pm

The boulders are the last remnants of an eolean (wind-blown) dune deposit.
The deposition occurred in the pleistocene. All caves (kars) are found within these pleistocene dunes.
They are undercut by erosion, and a sea level that was about 1 m higher 8000 years ago. Once cave walls are sufficiently eroded they might tumble sideways, hence the severe tilt of the bedding in one block. The other one, on the left appears to be still in its original position. Dating eolean deposits is tricky, since the material is older or nearly same age as the substrate. The dune deposition by itself is of course younger than the substrate. If the right block tumbled sideways, the clay deposit at the base might be younger than the block.

Thin Air
March 24, 2016 1:54 pm

One more cry of the wolf. There is a quota, on those “cries” (I still believe), and one day, the shame will arrive.

March 24, 2016 2:15 pm

I don’t agree with the Hansen’s view of the world, however I do not think he is stupid or trying to present something that he knows is a falsehood.
I have looked at number of data sets from various sources (often quoted here) and what I I found is that the ‘fundamental periodicity’ of AMOC is slowly increasing, manifested in a progressive rise in its delay to the other related events. This could have been interpreted by Hansen & co as a weakening of the AMOC.
Reason for this (I think) is relatively simple, with the warming of the NA ocean the overturning is moving further north.

March 24, 2016 2:32 pm

Perhaps he will retract this like he retracted his “boiling ocean” comment.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/14/boiling-oceans-and-burning-reputations-with-james-hansen/

Grant
March 24, 2016 2:43 pm

I often wonder how Hansen was hoisted to his position. Clearly he’s not made of the same stuff upon which he stands.
Theory based on, ‘that’s all I can think of’ to come.

Reply to  Grant
March 24, 2016 3:18 pm

Well put.

March 24, 2016 2:56 pm

Our long retired astronomer, hybrid climate scientist takes out a hand lens and examines a shard of the rock! Every geologist is having a laugh about this.
Hansen was showing some neurotic deterioration in his latter years on the job. He was expecting things to move to disaster proportions by 15 years ago and he got hit with the dreaded “Pause”. By now, he would have expected having to abandon his 2nd floor office in New York because of flooding in the street.
People behave differently to psychological stress. Most of those with the “climate science blues” fell into melancholy and lost interest in their work. A half, or horrors, whole career spent on phlogiston theory will do this to you. Some are moved to teary floods as they fight to resist the dawning of reality tormenting them from inside their brains (this is the real, longstanding, meaning in science of the term ‘DeNile’. Sigmund Freud and his daughter Anna investigated this and it is recognized as part of the coping mechanism that has to be rooted out in addiction, grief, etc.). In Climate Blues, avoidance has commonly taken the form of saying they are depressed because they see the world coming to the end and they can’t make people see it. Their dreams are tormented by spotted butterflies and yellow toads and who knows what.
Some take a more aggressive or hysterical turn. Anger and hyperbole are their tools to dampen the thoughts fighting for their attention in the soft gray tissues. 100 ton boulders flying to the mountain tops is so extreme a ‘symptom’ that it is very telling of the integrity of the publisher that the paper got published. Even Seth Borenstein’s seemingly boundless faith and devotion couldn’t stretch around that one.
From a logical viewpoint, what does invoking flying boulders from the early Holocene do for a theory of warming that is supposed to be unprecedented! What has a Tsunami got to do with CO2 and temperature? Also, as a physicist/astronomer/mathematician, here he has two 5 story boulders flying through the air and both perching beside each other on the edge of a cliff. What are the odds of something like that? They don’t mention several thousands of others gathered in the valley below and decorating the beach. Nor is there any sense of strength of materials here. These karst carbonate rocks would have crushed themselves and rubble would be traceable from the point of impact over several thousand square metres. The ‘shards’ he talks about are from spalling of the surface of the so-called boulders because of hydration and wetting and drying.
A once sober minded lukewarmer who now does drive-by irksome cryptic commenting and belittlement shows that even lukewarmers can, in DNile become embittered and hurt when nature hauls the rug out from under them.

March 24, 2016 3:17 pm

“father of global warming”
Largely on the basis of his claim that the 400K excess of Venus’s surface temperature over the gray body temperature in its orbit is due to a “runaway” Green House Gas effect — all without either testable quantitative enabling equation or experimental demonstration of the effect .

Trevor B Vernon
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
March 24, 2016 5:38 pm

And of course when instruments landed on Venus and proved him wrong: that classical gas mathematics using the law of thermodynamics for calculating – go figure the temperatures of atmospheres – works perfectly fine calculating the temperature of Venus, Earth, Mars – Hansen doubled down on stupid and kept denying the truth to the point that to this day you see it said in educational books that ”there is a runaway green house gas effect on Venus.”
No there’s not.
Steve Goddard legendary climate blogger calculates the temperatures of Venus, Earth, and Mars, with no problems whatsoever in his famous W.U.W.T. posts ”Venus Envy” and ”Hyperventilating on Venus.”
It’s right there in the comments of those posts where Harvard physicist came in and told Goddard, ”This is silly, I’m going to debunk you 🙂 ”
and on his own blog came to the same stunned conclusions Goddard had:
”he can hardly believe someone didn’t check Hansen’s bullsh**”
”he always thought it was true being taught it himself and heard it since – forever”
”He concurs with Goddard: ” We say” – Not Goddard says – ”No Green House Effect on Venus.”
Lubos Motl’s blog is called ”the reference frame” and his review of Goddard’s work is named ”hyperventilating on venus” referring to Goddard’s work.
This has been known outside the educational world for years. Hansen is/was simply an insane human being who perfected lying, to generate fake alarm, to get himself money: lying about fake, atmospheric chemistry.
Anyone who is not used to the level of scamming involved in this pseudo science ought to review not just what Goddard does on W.U.W.T.
but also there are other people who have done it, too. Goddard followed another man on the internet who showed how swiftly and textbook clear the steps are, for calculation of any volume of gas temp.
Gases are the simplest phase of matter; the law regarding gas energy mechanics – gas chemistry – is very straightforward and simple, relative to the chemistry of other phases of matter.
Harry Huffman is the name of the man I know of; he was a government employee of some kind who dealt with atmospherics maybe – I can’t remember exactly.
Also is of course the paper Steve Goddard I think referred to when he said he thought ”Carl Sagan was smoking pot” when he wrote it.
The paper is a N.A.S.A. publication after Sagan submitted it to them for review. Scientists had at the time radar cross sections of Venus’ atmosphere/planet complex thus knowing how deep the atmosphere is and how big the planet.
They didn’t have a landed probe for instrument-verified atmospheric density at the surface so Sagan calculated at 90 atmospheres’ density. It’s actually 93 as probes landing on the surface show; but Sagan’s work was *right on the money* had the atmosphere been 90 atmospheres; Goddard hearing of this paper was what prompted him to write and submit the documents to the public so everyone who cares to can plainly see – the gas laws not only perfectly calculate the temperature of Venus, but of Earth and Mars as well: right on target.
There’s no ‘runaway green house gas effect on Venus.’ It’s a scientific falsehood premised on simply lying, lying, lying,
the same way Federal administrators lied, lied, lied, and lie – to THIS DAY and HOUR about the chemistryr of pot – making it an addictive gateway drug equal to heroin in it’s danger to users; worse than methamphetamine for a person.
It’s that sort of officially printed therefore bottomless money academic crime in the field of chemistry the average person simply doesn’t feel confident challenging; and it’s as fake as pot’s like heroin.
The two are equally realistic. And all it takes is for one to simply go around and see these people using the simplest laws of thermodynamics
to calculate the temperature of a volume of the simplest phase of matter: gas.
It’s even more revealing if you’re not an atmospheric chemist – to see professional chemists from other fields, take apart Hansen and his ilk’s computer ”models” and exclaim ”I searched in vain for the laws of compressible fluid dynamics but found none! I did however find repeated loops assigning larger value of CO2 = raise temperature. There is nothing in here that resembles atmospheric thermodynamics, at all.”
This refrain is coincidentally a perfect paraphrase of the outcry by Hansen’s old supervisor who told the entire world, Hansen’s so called ‘modeling’ was hoax-ville.

Bob Armstrong
March 24, 2016 at 3:17 pm
“father of global warming”
Largely on the basis of his claim that the 400K excess of Venus’s surface temperature over the gray body temperature in its orbit is due to a “runaway” Green House Gas effect — all without either testable quantitative enabling equation or experimental demonstration of the effect .

Sweet Old Bob
March 24, 2016 3:33 pm

……Man reads Hansen paper to Bulldog……
Result ? Doggy facepalm……
It’s what happens when things go to the dogs…(:P)

taxed
March 24, 2016 3:58 pm

The North Atlantic Drift may well transport heat into the Arctic.
But it does not seem to be doing half as good a job as the atmosphere has been doing this year. The high pressure forming over Russia this year have been real climate changes. By the fact they have become tall rather then long. By which l mean they have been extended more to the north/south then to the east/west. This has had a important effect on the current climate. As they have been pushing large amounts of warm air northwards into the Arctic. Leading to much of the warming see have seen there this winter. Now over the short term this may lead to warming. But longer term should this last then l can see it switching the NH climate to cooling.

Peter Miller
March 24, 2016 4:38 pm

Hansen is well known as being a serial peddler of BS, but I cannot see what the interpretation of the presence of these rocks has to do with ‘climate scientists’.
As a humble geologist – is there any other kind? – and fully realising my limitations in not having visited the rocks’ site, I cannot see why a fault/earthquake induced tsunami should not be their most likely cause.

Reply to  Peter Miller
March 24, 2016 6:16 pm

I am gonna go with “Paul Bunyan’s kidney stones” myself.
But seriously, I agree he has said waa-aay stupider stuff than this.

John Harmsworth
Reply to  Peter Miller
March 24, 2016 11:39 pm

What is more likely? A giant wave threw up two huge rocks within a few feet of each other in one spot, or they are weathered out of a larger and older feature? Might take a geologist to prove it but it looks pretty obvious to me. A tsunami of that magnitude would leave evidence on the entire coastline.

pat
March 24, 2016 4:44 pm

22 Mar: ClimateChangeNews: Megan Darby: James Hansen’s apocalyptic sea level study lands to mixed reviews
Critics accuse prominent climate scientist of unprofessional behaviour and alarmism, in debate over risk of rapid ice sheet melting
A climate modeller at the Danish Meteorological Institute, Mottram did not take part in the review. “I took one look at the comments and thought: ‘It is a bear pit, I’m not getting involved.’”…
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/03/22/james-hansens-apocalyptic-sea-level-study-lands-to-mixed-reviews/

charlie
March 24, 2016 4:45 pm

Is this attempt to ramp up the scariness of a 2°C rise a tacit admission that projections of 3,4,,5, 6°C rises are alarmist nonsense perpetrated by people like…..Mr Hansen?

toorightmate
March 24, 2016 6:50 pm

There is more bull than cow in that little soliloquy.

March 24, 2016 7:02 pm

If the boulders don’t fly, they just need more hot air.
This paper is just him doing his part.

AndyE
March 24, 2016 7:28 pm

Have just listened to his 15 minutes talk – it is clear that our old friend Hansen has retired to practice pseudo-science. He is not backing anything with facts – but just with his own speculations. And did you notice that his very last suggestion was that we should ask scientists (having listened to his talk) what their OPINIONS were. Well, it’s not very useful to ask scientists that. Just ask them for FACTS – then you stand a better chance of hearing something edifying.

michael hart
Reply to  AndyE
March 25, 2016 2:29 am

I still think he has a great hat, though. It reminds me of one I quickly bought when I went to live in Seattle. Lost it, unfortunately.