Guest essay by Eric Worrall
As temperatures plummet in Eastern states, NYT has published their usual screed on why global warming is responsible for cold winters.
Feeling a Chill? Blame the Polar Vortex. And Global Warming.
On Thursday, temperatures on the East Coast are expected to plummet, and some people — fellow journalists and weather broadcasters, we’re looking at you — may start talking about a “polar vortex.”
We thought you might want to know what the polar vortex is, and what it’s not.
(And we wanted to pre-empt the inevitable chatter about climate change that usually crops up when the thermometer drops — “It’s bone-shakingly cold, how could the Earth be warming?” We’ll tell you how.)
…
New York Times published similar articles blaming global warming for extreme winter weather in 2014, 2013, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008…
How much more of this global warming driven extreme cold can we take?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Joe Bastardi and others predicted they would do this. 🙂
…. look out for “sudden stroppospheric worming” as well..
The new MEME to replace the FAILED MEMES of “globular worming” and “Klimate khange”
As you say, a number of people have suggested that Global warming would be used to explain a natural event that has happened numerous times in the past. It used to be called the polar express, or arctic express or some such similar names.
It has always happened and always will. It is weather and simply something that frequently comes with winter.
The weather office calls them by the unromantic name of cold wave. The wiki article has a list going back to the 1800s. As you say, we’ve always had cold waves.
When people point out that we still have cold waves in spite of global warming, the alarmists patiently explain to us that black is white. ‘Experts’ have always done that. When he invented newspeak, George Orwell was working from experience. It’s no wonder that people don’t trust ‘experts’ any more.
Despite the headline this is what the article has to say about it being caused by global warming.
Most people will just read the headline, dismiss it a BS and stop taking any notice of what NYT tells them about climate.
Those that do read it will realise it largely unfounded and speculative claim that it “could” make it more frequent. and stop taking any notice of what NYT tells them about climate.
Greg,
I admire your optimism, but I think you give NYT readers too much credit. I imagine most are progressive sycophants, else why do they continue to read and be swayed by such weasel words.
I prefer calling it “winter”
Yes, but with galloping global warming, shouldn’t this be moderated somewhat? Shouldn’t we ignorant plebes be able to say, yeah but it’s not as bad as it used to be? I want to tell you it is -25C here in eastern Ontario. The rivers are frozen. The whole country is frozen. You can walk from the Panhandle of Texas to India on frozen ground or ice.
After all the trillions spent and the hysteria, shouldn’t we by now be able to detect GW without thermometers even. If our children weren’t supposed to know what snow was by now (Dr. Viner of Met Office early in the new millennium) and we are getting more and more….Shouldn’t Manhattan’s Hudson River highway be under water by now? If polar amplification is warming the poles at 3 times the rest of the globe, shouldn’t polar vortices be a little balmier? The average global land temperature dropped an unprecedented 1C since May. I suggest it is still going down. And look at the SSTs:
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.gif
The Karlization of temps to kill the Pause will look pretty puny if the ocean continues to cool
Oops you have to click the SST map for the December SSTs
I call it fake weather.
Regards
Climate Heretic
To be fair, Global Warming scientists told us years ago that in the future (now) snowfall would become a rare exciting event in the winter.
They said absolutely NOTHING about FALL. So stuff it!
(Will defend Global Warming scientists for $$$. Call me.)
SC
December 16, 2016 at 1:15 pm
Brilliant defense!
Are you a lawyer, or do you just play one on this blog?
Except that where I live the snow won’t have melted by the winter solstice.
This was all explained to everyone in the Hollywood epic “The Day After Tomorrow”. It has to do with polar ice melting, changing the salinity of the oceans, which then stops the Gulf current and freezes the Northern Hemisphere. The eminent climate authority Dennis Quaid explains the whole thing. New York freezes solid in a matter of days. Everyone survives by burning books, then gets airlifted to Mexico by a grateful, but humbled, President of the US (who is welcome in Mexico because of NAFTA).
There. Any questions? I can do this stuff all day… 😎
PS: For our next trick, we drop thermonuclear weapons on the Antarctic, restarting the Gulf current. Or was that a different movie?
@Bartleby – Vice president (He had not been sworn in at the time of his speech, but the president was dead). He was modeled after Cheney.
But that scenario will help with the illegal alien issue in the USA!
And then there is the “January Thaw.” Known when my grandmother was a tot. You can look it up.
Greg, I agree, the article is more balanced, but doesn’t excuse the headline. It explicitly says “Blame Global Warming” right there at the top of the page. Saying that this doesn’t disprove the global warming issue is true, as it’s just weather. However, the message is clear that this is occurring because of gloabl warming, which is false.
Warning, warning! This thread is a science free zone. Click-baiter reporting on click-bait
There. That should boost it along a bit for you Eric.
I can’t help but notice that you never have anything intelligent to say, Tony. Why is that?
As for a science free zone, here’s your chance. Explain to us how global warming, that is supposed to warm the earth predominantly in winter and at higher latitudes, seems tho be having the opposite effect.
And no, ‘Polar Vortex’ isn’t sciency enough.
And while your at it, can you explain how the Jet stream is moving south, when the models have it moving in the opposite direction ?
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/24228037/ns/us_news-environment/t/jet-stream-moving-north-weather-shifts-likely/
“…. pushing the three jet streams toward the poles. Climate models have long predicted that with global warming, the world’s jet streams would move that way,”
Remember this person posted that CO2 “retains” heat…but I cannot be bothered to find the post…lol…I don’t need to it’s is here at WUWT forEVAH!
“This thread is a science free zone.”
You should be right at home then.
For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. So if the globe warms it must get colder, and if it gets cold then it must be get warmer. So there you have it. Newton’s Third Law as applied to climate science.
“This thread is a science free zone.”
Its about an article in the NYT..
Of course its science free. !
I love it when you warmunists try to insist that only science you agree with is science.
The fact that you have given up trying to refute what the author says is merely another indication that even you know that you can’t.
Now that Griff has been so thoroughly embarrassed the other trolls have been tasked with picking up the slack.
Since you like to troll, I will troll you…
From your previous posting history, I assume this is you?
http://www.k-state.edu/today/announcement.php?id=16090
Tony,
Open ridicule and derision of the climate charlatans and other purveyors of Climate Propaganda are quite appropriate and a necessary function in a free society.
Yes, we can attack them on their fake science with science and history, but when their claims are so stupid (as in floods, droughts, cold waves/heat waves never happened before CO2 rose above 300ppm) it becomes that ridicule is the best weapon against the climate fraud that everyone can understand.
If you want science all the time, I suggest Judith Curry’s blog.
ferdberple
December 16, 2016 at 6:14 am
For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. So if the globe warms it must get colder, and if it gets cold then it must be get warmer. So there you have it. Newton’s Third Law as applied to climate science.
———————-
That is the main point for the AGW-ACC to be discarded as a “fantasy” and fictional in principle, not possible at all anyway, in principle;
I mentioned the ACC because in the AR4 of IPCC is clearly stated as a claim under the ACC as per a way to explain AGW, that as there was only warming observed with no any much cooling elsewhere in the system that could account as compensating for, than the GW must be a ACC-AGW……human made and not natural/
Actually by that kind of approach to explanation claiming, ending up with a ACC-AGW as a condition where the Newton’s Third Law is bridged and not holding anymore for the system in question, aka the very end and :”destruction”, break down of the natural functioning of the system.
Systems and functios that do not hold to the Newton’s Third Law do break down and crash.
In principle that what ACC-AGW stand for….silly, as far as I can tell.
Cheers
Hoping the right narrative will help sell whatever it is you’re trying to sell? Sorry, people here look at data and science, not emote and follow like sheep. You get points for trying, but your techniques needs help.
Any polar bears out there Griff?
…a science free zone to the extent that climate hype and climate change extremists defending the climate consensus are indeed free of science. As tony demonstrates so frequently and so well.
“This thread is a science free zone.”
In that case it should suit you perfectly Tony, science not being your strong suit.
Its Khan’s fault, Captain, he is freezing us to death as we roast to death!
“We’ll have to activate the Genesis device, which takes civilization back to before fire began to pollute the world! Khan then might maybe leave the federation alone to rule the masses. Ahead sarc factor 6 mister Sulu.”
Is that what the Klimate Khange Klan are up to?
Apparently they all voted for Donald someone.
But of course.
Global warming enables you to distinguish how damn cold it is from, what feels more comfortable.
See how that works !
G
Yes, and they’ve been doing it for a while:
“The kind of extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States as we speak is a pattern we can expect to see with increasing frequency, as global warming continues.” -John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, 2014 https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/11/john-holdrens-bi-polar-vortex/
“Eliminate all CO2 emissions so we don’t freeze to death!!” -ecoloon
I guess that means we will suffocate – no CO2 – no plants – no oxygen.
But I bet the watermelons will have a tank or two.
Maybe in a basement, near their server. Could that happen?
Auto
The author of this silly article in the NYT is Caroline Kennedys daughter. She should get an award for linking so many global warming falsehoods into one pathetic screed.
Did the Russians do this too?
Absolutely! I have it on good authority from the voices in my head that Putin is responsible!!!! Sarc off!
Wait, You mean that voices were Putin your head?
I know what it is… it’s those evil air conditioners in Florida! ( more dangerous than ISIS or N. Korea with nuclear weapons) They are causing global warming, and global warming is causing it to be colder. …… ( a sarc tag… and some people actually believe this, like a major publication, NYT )
Nice, Bryan.
Of course, Putin wants to sell more Russian petroleum…
That’s it ! Global Warming is actually caused by Russian hackers! They cause every other problem so why not GW (no Bush)?
…. and why does he want to sell more petroleum? To make N. Am colder of course. Then it will be nice temperature for them when they come over in hoards to party with Donald.
….so he can buy more uranium from Hillary. Better hurry, bro.
Yeah, they hacked the polar vortex. This is right after they swayed the US elections and hacked into the minds of all Leave voters to get Brexit. Clever little critters these Russkies
Putin and his minions moved the Winter from Siberia to Upstate NY. So we have to drop nukes to stop this….ooops. This will cause a nuclear winter! Oh no!
Well, the Russian scientists do work on geological and meteorological warfare:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/russian-analyst-advises-blowing-yellowstone-interview-article-1.2169244
The cold is Gaia punishing the US for electing Trump, and Trump appointing a skeptic to head the EPA./s
No. Election results have been caused by global warming.
The NYT is so far right with it’s explanation, that the cause of a sudden snowfall is because of a disturbed function of the polar cycle and can’t be used as a proof of global cooling.
They state even correctly, that the same function of the vortex is causing a warmer arctic.
What they don’t tell: Even in former “colder” years the same vortex was the cause for snow.
But they forget the whole argument, when the arctic gets warm
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/20/science/shrinking-artic-ice.html
And this NYT page was deleted:
El Nino Is Gone, but Earth’s Record Heat Is Sticking Around – The New …
http://www.nytimes.com/…/ap-us-sci-record-heat.html?ref... – Diese Seite übersetzen
19.07.2016 – Earth’s persistent record 2016 heat is now dancing near levels that a … months ago and the record heat — and record melting of Arctic sea ice …
Yep. Climate Change makes the Arctic warmer, but when the Arctic air mass gets pushed south, it is the COLDEST EVAH!
How does that work?
“Warmer” is relative.
Actually, continental polar air masses may start out at high latitudes with temps above 0 F, and as they slide south over snow fields, further cooling takes place via radiation – particularly when daylight is shorter than the hours of darkness.
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/08/04/us/world-war-ii-planes-found-in-greenland-in-ice-260-feet-deep.html This was written when the National Enquirer was gossip and the NY Times was the trusted print. Now it’s opposite.
Isn’t it a fact that during the ice ages the Arctic Ocean was open most of the time? Where else could the precipitation necessary for the build-up of ice over the Baltic regions and North America come from? Haven’t they found 50,000 years’ old human settlements along the coasts of the Arctic Ocean proving that?
This is the NYT headline:
Feeling a Chill? Blame the Polar Vortex. And Global Warming.
But inside the article, the are not so sure about being caused from global warming.
“Some studies suggest that climate change could actually make these frigid waves of Arctic air more common, a result of shrinking sea ice. However, other scientists remain skeptical of this theory.
And the earth is definitely warming: Temperature records show that, by the end of last year, the earth’s surface had warmed by about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit since the 19th century. But even though the earth’s surface is warming, scientists say that winter will still exist.”
So inside the article they didn’t use wrong facts. It’s the subtle way how it is written who may convince people.
Yes, that is the paragraph that caught my attention. Basically, they are saying “we don’t know if this is climate change, but we push this unsubstantiated claim in the rest of the article, and we are right as long as we include the disclaimer.
Remember that articles are given titles by editors who care mostly about attracting eyeballs.
Either that, or they don’t understand the content, or want to spin the content.
Many journalists in history have been highly frustrated by the titles placed on their articles.
One can find actual science articles regarding arctic circulations and winter weather, such as this one from Dr. Judah Cohen at AER.
http://rclutz.wordpress.com/2016/07/06/warm-is-cold-and-down-is-up/
Yes, I thought the article was well balanced and accurate. It is the headline that is wrong, about the article.
IF it were only wintery in the US that would be weather. However, as most that frequent this site know, global temperatures have fallen by 0.5 C. Now as the NY TIMES has pointed out temperature has risen to 1.8 F. … I find it strange that on one side they use C to downplay the drop and F to increase the rise in the way you think about it. 0.5 C is close to 1 F. So temperature has risen to only 0.4 C since the 19th century.
So, if co2 holds heat and warms the planet, why have temperatures dropped ? Are we only dealing with trends ? Suppose the global temperature drops another 0.5 C, what has happened to all that energy ? The warming is here and then it isn’t, where is it ? If the global temperature drops below all the retained warmth over the last 100+ years, does it matter how long it lasts ?
I say no it doesn’t matter how long it lasts. AGW cannot allow the heat ( or energy, for those that want to engage in nitpicking word usage ) to escape. Is there some physical attribute of co2 that allows for these textbook changes ? Whatever causes the temperature to drop is completely independent of co2, and in the case where it soars from those lows in a short time period is also independent of co2. We are speaking globally here, not locally. … 0.5 C globally is stunning, and in 6 months. It has to register with the AGW crowd that something is wrong with the theory.
I noticed the playing fast and loose with F and C degrees.
Where’s Griff ? He usually trolls in about now .
No matter how much they tell all those freezing people that it’s because of global warming that they’re cold, somehow I don’t think most of them will listen .
Especially when their backside is freezing off .
Well they can take comfort in knowing that their electricity is so unaffordable that they cant afford to warm themselves during cold winters which is helping to save the planet from too much warming.
If Monty Python were honest comedians they would have so much material.
Still I think Griff is a character invented by Anthony to make WUWT more attractive… 😉
no, he used to haunt the Daily Telegraph before they decided that closing comments and sacking all the journalists was the Way Forward.
https://disqus.com/by/egriff5514/
Now he is all over the renewable energy and climate change groups earning his keep as a paid shill and a troll.
Active, possible. Attractive, never.
It’s tag team trolling. Griff was worn out and tired, so he’s been replaced by fresh trolls.
Same guy, different name and email account.
I don’t know about that.
Griff had a different writing style.
There is always a fresh crop of believers ! They keep churning them out at the paper mills.
Griff is not qualified to speak on this topic so he has wisely maintained his silence.
Crispin, that never stopped him before.
Now trolls as Tony mc
Craig has a point on one of the other threads he posted some useless graphs that were bogus under the name of Tony , same style .
So surely the changes in polar vortex will help kill all the mosquitoes and such threats from a “warmer planet”.
Droughts threat in winter – gone. The polar vortex could be a negative feedback. Oh wait, no, negative feedbacks dont exist of course.
Three years ago:
Does he realize he is claiming global warming cause cooling , and we will see more cooling as warming continues. He should have said, “you can see my head, yeah? It is so far up my ass that everything looks normal, it just changes the way I see things. So come on everybody, join me in shoving your head up your own ass until you see what I see’
They locked him in the basement since then and claimed he did not speak for the WH. He is not a climate scientist but uses the “I believe” statement while distracting the viewer with many fast moving images that are not explained. They also did not release any science basis for his belief statements when confronted with FOIA requests.
Here in Scotland after an early period with severe frosts for a while, it’s now back to the usual rain and gloomy skies.
The great thing about 2017, is that we should see the La nina develop and that should give us our next clue over whether we are seeing continued pause, cooling or warming.
Sorry – just in case it needs saying – I don’t look at fabricated surface data – only satellites.
The published satellite data is ‘adjusted’ also. Do you know of a source for the raw satellite data?
The “polar vortex” is the scary sciencey sounding name for “winter”. The climate extremist kooks have managed to dumb down their fellow believers to the point where slapping a new name on normal things that have been around forever can scare the weak minded believers. “Polar vortex” is not new. The cold it delivers is not new. It did not come into existence due to CO2. And it is not behaving differently because of CO2. But “climate change”is causing those afflicted with true believer status to become more and more gullible and less capable of critical thinking. And the NYT enjoys profiting from that, apparently.
The “polar vortex” is the scary sciencey sounding name…where slapping a new name on normal things”
+
“Polar vortex” is not new.
You’re giving sceptics a bad name hunter, but then so is Eric
Good heavens tony mcleod, why don’t you just jump in and use the term “denier” like the rest of your virtue-signalling fellow CAGW-believing cohort?
If it’s getting warmer: blame CO2. If it’s getting colder: blame CO2. An earthquake in the eastern Pacific region: blame CO2. Coral bleaching in the northern Great Barrier Reef under water temperatures cooler than in the Red Sea (where coral reefs are flourishing, believe it or not): blame CO2.
CO2 levels in the then atmosphere were much greater during the Late Devonian than currently, and coral reefs were flourishing in Alberta and the Kimberley region of Western Australia. There you go- some science facts for you, conveniently unacknowledged by the IPCC. Climates have been changing for the last 4.5 billion years of earth history and there have been glacial epochs during periods when atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been much higher than today, a fact acknowledged by 97% of geological scientists.
Bring back Griff, at least he was amusing when acting stupid.
Actually it was “new” to the media scaremongering and incorrectly using it as of 2014. See here: http://abcnews.go.com/US/polar-vortex-misused-weather-term-2014/story?id=26793261
Meteorologists have known about it and used the term correctly for decades.
Are you taking over for Griff on this thread?
**“Polar vortex” is not new.**
Correct. It originated about 1850.
However, the CAGW crowd and certain others including the media do not follow history when attempting to sensationalize and seem to think it is a recent phenomenon. In 1979 the Arctic Vortex was blamed on the cold. Today it is twisted and blamed on warming to suit the agenda.
As I wrote in another post, my grandfather called it “Winter”.
And if that global warming vortex continues we could be canoeing with the seals in Hudson Bay in 10 years. See:
In Winnipeg Free Press Dec 7:
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/climate-change-on-fast-forward-in-arctic-u-of-m-scientist-warns-405091456.html
The best one is Ferguson saying winters will be ice free in 5-10 years.
tony, the misuse of the “polar vortex” is new. It is specifically used in today’s climate extremist age to sound scary and new. Few people heard the term in widespread use prior to the last few years. Of course it was known since the 19th century. And yes, you are still an ignorant climate extremist kook.
Back off John, coral bleaching is caused by Fracking not CO2
‘And the NYT enjoys profiting from that, apparently.’
With half the Western World brainwashed its money for jam.
Yep, there is not honest journalism any more, just click baits.
And the NYT enjoys profiting from that, apparently., With the way those guys are losing money? I doubt no matter what they say that they “profiting”. Maybe if they start supporting Trump they might get a few readers back.
Whatever, they have it covered. The mighty they (whoever ‘they’ are) always are superior to me, the deplorable and anyone who is an expert in the field. Don’t matter, they are always right, well, in their mind anyway. Betcha 2016 warmest year ever!
When i was growing up, we called it winter.
We are going to freeze to death due to AGW.
It was so hot, I froze to death, so Suzanna, don’t you cry.
Isn’t that a line from Les Propheties?
😉
It’s December. It is suppose to get cold and it is just as it always does to different unpredictable extents.
ALL Ice Ages began around Hudson Bay, not Alaska. During all Ice Ages, Alaska had virtually no glaciers except in the high mountains while gigantic glaciers covered most of Canada and a lot of the Northeast and Russia had virtually no ice sheets while Europe did…the Polar Vortex is exactly what engineers all Ice Age effects.
An Ice Age is when the Polar Vortex goes on and on and on for about 30-50,000 years. Over and over again, too.
I wonder if glacial epochs begin when the polar air excursions continue through the NH summers and are reinforced by the albedo of constant snowfall and the jet stream staying in it’s winter oscillation?
The polar vortex is a lunar declinational tidal effect in the atmosphere, due to the changes in the angle of declination. LDA bottomed out in September of 2016, and is slowly climbing back toward the maximum value by 2025, when we will have a yuge number of hurricanes again like 2004/5.
During Ice ages the declinational angle relative to the ecliptic plane drops from ~5 degrees to less than 1 degree, causing the solar and lunar tidal effects to stay at a concurrent maximum effect like we see for short periods in inter-glacial periods like now.
This is all due and under the control of the position of the solar system relative to the spiral arms, their magnetic fields induction into the solar and Earth’s magnetic polar orientation.
when the tilt of the magnetic poles of the sun decrease so they line up closer to the axis of rotation, the parker spirals in the solar wind that drive the lunar declination on the ecliptic plane smooth out the moon is less driven N/S so the global circulation synchronizes to large standing oscillations of the jet streams. Which allows most of the moisture and heat from the continuous Pineapple express patterns to clear the Alaskan snow cover and dump it all along the Eastern US and Canada in a near continuous Nor Easter effect for most of 100,000 years.
Now we are seeing the early effects of a lowering of the Earths magnetic fields at the beginning of the cycle. Get used to the blustery winters.
While hurricanes would probably be increasing in 2025, I think the date for maximum might be 2033 to 2035 . But then there might be other factors as well. You know what would be interesting would be to see if there were hurricanes during the last ice age. Or if there was a sharp decrease.
I blame the Russians…
Surely this comes under the heading of Fake News?
You can hardly get any *more* fake than standing up to declare “cold is warm”
Can you……..
Damn stove making my fridge so cold!
My grandad had a refrigerator that ran on propane.
I have one in the living quarters of my horse trailer. also has an electric heater to power the absorber.
During my career I operated absorption chillers on a college campus the size of a small town, which had an underground Chilled water loop cooled by a large lake.
First refrigerator I met burned kerosene to make cold
“World wide Electrolux effect”?
Time to dust off this old chestnut, from 2010. I can’t believe I’ve been coming to this blog for over 6 years now. How time flies.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/26/northeast-us-blizzard-proves-global-warming/
Thanks for posting that … +1
P.S. I think a lot of my posts are going into the spam queue. Especially when I put a link in my post or when I reply to someone.
Yes, but we fish them out….
This is exactly how global weirding is supposed to work.
Holy Macaroni!
Stephen Hawking was right…
…We’re all doomed by 2100! (because that interactive timeline proves it so)
But wait, isn’t all of his pseudo-theories non-testable?
Of course they are non testable, unprovable, even unlikely. However, they are scary. And that’s the point.
So, if the winter is very mild, it is of course due to global warming. But if the winter is very cold, it is due to… global warming.
What explains everything does explain nothing.
Jean Meeus December 16, 2016 at 5:53 am
What explains everything does explain nothing.
Exactly, because the “what” cannot be falsified by events in the real world, And therefore the “what” is not an empirical statement. It has only the appearance or form of a statement about reality. Aka, how people fool themselves and others by not understanding the correct use of words, or by misusing them intentionally. Aka, “Rhetoric over Reality” or “Perception is Reality Delusionalism.”
Aka, Mainstream Climate “Science”.
What about the link to Russian hacking? Stay tuned.
I love how the NYT, that bastion of Climatism and pseudoscience climatesplains the difference between weather and climate, as if they are talking to grade-schoolers. How sciency of them. They then proceed to their pseudoscience, conflating what is generally acknowledged, if grudgingly, by warmunists themselves, to a be a natural warming and (according to them) manmade warming, which didn’t really take hold until the 1980s.
@Bruce Cobb – actually, the NY Times knows it readers, and that is why they appear to talk down to those who only follow links to their articles.
I guess they still have John Holdren locked up in the basement and they now rely on the NYT and other tools to do the bidding.