From the NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION and the “it’s always hotter in the city than the country department comes this collection of spin:

In 50 years, summers across most of the globe could be hotter than any summer experienced by people to date, according to a study by scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colo.
If climate change continues on its current trajectory, the probability that summers between 2061 and 2080 will be warmer than the hottest on record stands at 80 percent across the world’s land areas, excluding Antarctica, which was not studied.
If greenhouse gas emissions are reduced, however, that probability drops to 41 percent.
“Extremely hot summers always pose a challenge to society,” said NCAR scientist Flavio Lehner, lead author of the study. “They can increase the risk for health issues, and can also damage crops and deepen droughts. Such summers are a true test of our adaptability to rising temperatures.”
The study is part of an upcoming special issue of the journal Climatic Change that will focus on quantifying the benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The research was funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Swiss National Science Foundation.
Simulating a range of summers
The research team, which includes NCAR scientists Clara Deser and Benjamin Sanderson, used two existing sets of model simulations to investigate what future summers might look like.
They created both by running the NCAR-based Community Earth System Model 15 times, with one simulation assuming that greenhouse gas emissions remain unabated and the other assuming that society reduces emissions.
NSF and the U.S. Department of Energy fund the Community Earth System Model. The team ran the simulations on the NCAR-Wyoming Supercomputing Center’s Yellowstone system.
“We’ve thought of climate change as ‘global warming,’ but it’s important to understand how this overall warming affects conditions that hit people locally,” said Eric DeWeaver, program director in NSF’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, which funds NCAR.
“Extreme temperatures pose risks to people around the globe,” DeWeaver said. “These scientists show the power of ensembles of simulations for understanding how these risks depend on the level of greenhouse gas emissions.”
By using simulations created by running the same model multiple times, with only tiny differences in the initial starting conditions, the scientists could examine the range of expected summertime temperatures for future “business-as-usual” and reduced-emissions scenarios.
“This is the first time the risk of record summer heat and its dependence on the rate of greenhouse gas emissions have been so comprehensively evaluated from a large set of simulations with a single state-of-the-art climate model,” Deser said.
The scientists compared results to summertime temperatures recorded between 1920 and 2014 and to 15 sets of simulated summertime temperatures for the same period.
By simulating past summers — instead of relying solely on observations — the researchers established a large range of temperatures that could have occurred naturally under the same conditions, including greenhouse gas concentrations and volcanic eruptions.
“Instead of just comparing the future to 95 summers from the past, the models give us the opportunity to create more than 1,400 possible past summers,” Lehner said. “The result is a more comprehensive look at what should be considered natural variability and what can be attributed to climate change.”
Emissions cuts could yield big benefits
The results show that between 2061 and 2080, summers in large parts of North and South America, central Europe, Asia, and Africa have a greater than 90 percent chance of being warmer than any summer in the historic record if emissions continue unabated.
That means virtually every summer would be as warm as the hottest to date.
In some regions, the likelihood of summers being warmer than any in the historical record remained less than 50 percent, but in those places — including Alaska, the central U.S., Scandinavia, Siberia and continental Australia — summer temperatures naturally vary greatly, making it more difficult to detect effects of climate change.
Reducing emissions would lower the global probability of future summers that are hotter than any in the past, but would not result in uniformly spread benefits. In some regions, including the U.S. East Coast and large parts of the tropics, the probability would remain above 90 percent, even if emissions were reduced.
But reduced emissions would result in a sizable boon for other regions of the world.
Parts of Brazil, central Europe, and eastern China would see a reduction of more than 50 percent in the chance that future summers would be hotter than the historic range. Since these areas are densely inhabited, a large part of the global population would benefit significantly from climate change mitigation.
“It’s often overlooked that the majority of the world’s population lives in regions that will see a comparably fast rise in temperatures,” Lehner said.
###
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“It’s often overlooked that the majority of the world’s population lives in regions that will see a comparably fast rise in temperatures,” Lehner said.
Indeed they do – because humans, on the whole, prefer the climate warmer, rather than colder. As do plants. The only people who ‘overlook’ this simple fact are a certain sort of climate scientist.
When people start moving to Alaska to retire, rather than Florida, perhaps I’ll become a believer.
““It’s often overlooked that the majority of the world’s population lives in regions that will see a comparably fast rise in temperatures,” Lehner said.”
So no “polar amplification” any more?
Everyone will move to Buffalo, NY in the future (joke).
I believe the correct way of saying it is “shuffle off to Buffalo”.
If the “current trajectory” isn’t a pause/hiatus, why does it take until 2061 before there are record temperatures?
“If climate change continues on its current trajectory, the probability that summers between 2061 and 2080 will be warmer than the hottest on record “
2061 and 2080 ?
Good grief.
Let rearrange these numbers a bit. For the summers between
2008 and 2016
UK’s Met office seasonal forecast got it wrong every single time. I’m told they are abandoning the idea of forecasting longer than a week ahead, something for the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder to think over.
The world’s population has increased dramatically over the past few decades.
However, fly from Beijing to Tibet and you will see very few people or villages.
Fly from Calcutta to New Delhi – ditto.
Fly from Singapore to Beijing – ditto.
Fly from New York to LA – ditto.
My point??? Move the measuring devices away from the densely populated areas and then we might be something like “fair dinkum”..
In today’s news in Japan: four people hunting mushrooms were ‘eaten’ by bears! 90% of the population lives far from the bears there, in Tokyo, mostly.
“could be hotter than any summer experienced by people to date”
This would only be true if “to date” only goes back a couple hundred years.
We have a long way to go before we reach the temperatures seen during the Medieval, Roman and Minoan warm periods. Not to mention the Holocene Optimum.
Repeat after me – warm is good, cold is bad.
If warm weather is so dangerous, how do you explain people moving in droves to places like Phoenix or Florida to escape the cold? They would rather live in a place where it is demonstrably too hot for comfort (but has A/C) than in a place that is too cold. They universally cite the health benefits of warmer weather. Many of the major cities in the world are too hot in the summer, what with UHI and all, but do we see people flooding to the cooler countryside? No?
Here in Panama (too hot on the coast, but just right in the mountains), we have an entire new international airport at Rio Hato that does not have any scheduled flights. It is used exclusively for charter flights to bring Canadians to the warmth. The major reason they cite for returning at all is too keep their supposedly great medical benefits.
Finally, to end this rant – and this propaganda piece is certainly rant-worthy – there is a real problem for the alarmists as the demonstrable and quantifiable benefits to agriculture of CO2 fertilization become clear. Restricting CO2 is an act of genocide right up there with taking people’s water away or poisoning their fields.
It would be a genocide conducted against every single person on earth. But maybe that’s the plan.
Screw the models. Real data is available. A Google Image search on “urban heat island” will show you many thermal (IR) images the display the temperature distributions in various cities. London, for example, shows a 6° C gradient between Downtown and the East End, where the CO2 levels are practically identical. Sometimes it is 10°.
It is the land use that drives the temperature
I think it is far more likely we’ll have nuclear winter once Iran get the bomb and perfects long range delivery systems. These guys are no different that the guy on the corner with a sign board proclaiming “The End is Near!”.
I interpret this as meaning why use observable data when you can just make stuff up.
Yes, always use simulations. Those pesky real observations can interfere with the theory. Looks more and more like living in the Matrix, doesn’t it?
Prophecy.
The philosophy of science and the scientific method were designed to restrain people from indulging in pattern matching in expansive frames of reference in time and space. They have failed, miserably.
We need a global asphalt measuring satellite.
Please can we have some of this warmth they keep talking about , nearly mid summer in the UK and i have two radiators fully on to keep the cold out !!!!!!!
What warming are they going on about? The source of most warming since 1850 has been natural and what would be expected at the end of a little ice age. The cause of the rest is unknown and probably will never be known thanks to defective models and model goals being preferred over observed data.
That depends on what the definition of “record” is, doesn’t it?
“The oxygen isotopes in the ice imply that climate was stable during the last interglacial period, with temperatures 5C warmer than today.
“Our record reveals a hitherto unrecognized warm period initiated by an abrupt climate warming about 115,000 years ago, before glacial conditions were fully developed. This event does not appear to have an immediate Antarctic counterpart, suggesting that the climate see-saw between the hemispheres (which dominated the last glacial period) was not operating at this time.”
http://epic.awi.de/10226/1/Nor2004a.pdf
There are many, many “records”, ice core and ocean sediment cores, that the Eemian was somewhere between 3-6 degrees C warmer than present. In fact, there are even more records that confirm that the Holocene hypsithermal was 3-4 degrees warmer than today.
Are these records? Or are Playstation outputs better “records”?
What is really on display here is the normal, natural progression from PCPS (Post Crib Partum Syndrome) to APS (Arrested Puberty Syndrome), or the progression from infant to adolescence to cessation of maturity. Children like to control the narrative with fits, factoids and flights of fantasy.
It was not only warmer during most of MIS-11, parts of MIS-9 and MIS-7, but also MIS-5e. These are well-established parts of the paleo record. But, as you might well expect, it is indeed far, far worse than you thought.
MIS-19 and MIS-11 met their interglacial ends with 3 strong thermal pulses, the last one always the strongest, right before falling off into the next respective ~100kyr ice age. MIS-5e did not. It ended with 2 strong thermal pulses, the last one being the strongest. Depending upon whom you wish to quote, the 2nd thermal pulse resulted in a +6.0 to +52 meter rise in sea level above present.
Given that as of this year the Holocene is 11,719 years old (+/-99yrs), and that only 1 post Mid Pleistocene Transition interglacial has lasted longer than about half a precession cycle, and that the precession cycle varies between 19-23kyrs and we are at the 23kyr point now (making 11,500 half), precisely what sort of climate should we reasonably expect?
“Rapid changes in sea level and associated destabilization of climate at the turbulent close of the last interglacial maximum appear to be recorded directly in the geomorphology, stratigraphy, and sedimentary structures of carbonate platform islands in the Bahamas. Considered together, the observations presented here suggest a rapid rise, short crest, and rapid fall of sea level at the close of 5e.
“The lesson from the last interglacial “greenhouse” in the Bahamas is that the closing of that interval brought sea-level changes that were rapid and extreme. This has prompted the remark that between the greenhouse and the icehouse lies a climatic “madhouse”!
conclude Neuman and Hearty (1996) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul_Hearty/publication/249518169_Neumann_A_C_Hearty_P_J_Rapid_sea-level_changes_at_the_close_of_the_last_interglacial_substage_5e_recorded_in_Bahamian_island_geology_Geology_24_775-778/links/0c96051c6e66749912000000.pdf
The climate change now-over non-debate is actually the most definitive intelligence test ever conceived.