Record Breaking Winter Cold? Don’t Worry, the Climate Explainers Have it Covered

Graph from p3768 of J. Hansen et al.: Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms.
Graph from p3768 of J. Hansen et al.: Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms.

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Does record breaking winter cold cast doubt on climate predictions of milder winters? Could ANY weather or climate shift cast doubt on the dominance of that wicked little trace molecule? Apparently not, according to leading climate explainers.

It’s cold outside, but that doesn’t mean climate change isn’t real

Sammy Roth, USA TODAY Published 5:13 p.m. ET Dec. 28, 2017

This week’s cold snap has brought record-low temperatures, freezing rain and heavy snow to much of the United States. But 2017 is still on track to be the second- or third-hottest year ever recorded globally — and scientists say climate change is to blame.

Even this week’s cold weather is probably being caused at least in part by global warming, said Jonathan Overpeck, a climate scientist at the University of Michigan.

The Arctic is warming much faster than most of the planet, leading to a dramatic decline in the amount of sea ice that covers the region each winter. That loss of ice has allowed more heat to transfer from the ocean to the atmosphere, causing a weakening of the polar vortex winds over the Arctic. Those winds usually “insulate the rest of the Northern Hemisphere” from freezing Arctic temperatures, Overpeck said. But as the winds have weakened, it’s gotten easier for freezing Arctic air to swoop further south, he said.

“That is due to the warming of the Arctic, which in turn is due to human emissions of greenhouse gases and primarily burning of fossil fuels,” Overpeck said in an interview.

Arctic warming may also be contributing to the long-term drying of the U.S. Southwest, although the science on that front is less certain, Overpeck said. Unlike most of the rest of North America, the Southwest is warmer than usual right now, and 2017 will “without a doubt” go down as one of the region’s hottest years ever measured, Overpeck said.

“This is contributing to our record wildfires in California, and the drying out of vegetation that’s leading to those wildfires, and the drying out of the Southwest’s water,” he said.

Read more: https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2017/12/28/its-cold-outside-but-doesnt-mean-climate-change-isnt-real/987948001/

So what happens if global temperatures take a real plunge for a sustained period? Don’t worry, the explainers have that one covered as well – James Hansen, former NASA GISS Director, published a paper which suggests global warming will trigger a short ice age in the near future (see the graph at the top of the page).

Global temperature becomes an unreliable diagnostic of planetary condition as the ice melt rate increases. Global energy imbalance (Fig. 15b) is a more meaningful measure of planetary status as well as an estimate of the climate forcing change required to stabilize climate. Our calculated present energy imbalance of ∼ 0.8 W m−2 (Fig. 15b) is larger than the observed 0.58 ± 0.15 W m−2 during 2005–2010 (Hansen et al., 2011). The discrepancy is likely accounted for by excessive ocean heat uptake at low latitudes in our model, a problem related to the model’s slow surface response time (Fig. 4) that may be caused by excessive small-scale ocean mixing.

Large scale regional cooling occurs in the North Atlantic and Southern oceans by mid-century (Fig. 16) for 10-year doubling of freshwater injection. A 20-year doubling places similar cooling near the end of this century, 40 years ear- lier than in our prior simulations (Fig. 7), as the factor of 4 increase in current freshwater from Antarctica is a 40-year advance.

Cumulative North Atlantic freshwater forcing in sverdrup years (Sv years) is 0.2 Sv years in 2014, 2.4 Sv years in 2050, and 3.4Sv years (its maximum) prior to 2060 (Fig. S14). The critical issue is whether human-spurred ice sheet mass loss can be approximated as an exponential process during the next few decades. Such nonlinear behavior depends upon amplifying feedbacks, which, indeed, our climate simulations reveal in the Southern Ocean. …

Read more: http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/16/3761/2016/acp-16-3761-2016.pdf

Global warming is an infinitely flexible, unscientific, unfalsifiable theory which can be stretched to accommodate any observation. Some Climate Scientists even shamelessly reject the very concept of scientific falsification with regard to the conduct of climate science.

1. Methods aren’t always necessarily falsifiable

Falsifiability is the idea that an assertion can be shown to be false by an experiment or an observation, and is critical to distinctions between “true science” and “pseudoscience”.

Climate models are important and complex tools for understanding the climate system. Are climate models falsifiable? Are they science? A test of falsifiability requires a model test or climate observation that shows global warming caused by increased human-produced greenhouse gases is untrue. It is difficult to propose a test of climate models in advance that is falsifiable.

Science is complicated – and doesn’t always fit the simplified version we learn as children.

This difficulty doesn’t mean that climate models or climate science are invalid or untrustworthy. Climate models are carefully developed and evaluatedbased on their ability to accurately reproduce observed climate trends and processes. This is why climatologists have confidence in them as scientific tools, not because of ideas around falsifiability.

The Conversation: Climate change has changed the way I think about science. Here’s why

No matter what happens to the weather, the climate explainers shamelessly cobble together an explanation which blames bad weather on your sinful lifestyle.

Whatever the observation, the climate explainers have their theory – their infinitely adaptable theory, which they claim is science. Warm weather confirms their worst fears. Cold weather is waved away. Whatever the observation, the explainers shamelessly adapt their theory to provide an explanation, based on their “scientific” theory which cannot be falsified by any conceivable observations, event an abrupt plunge into a new ice age.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
616 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris
December 29, 2017 2:33 pm

Please give it up. You just can’t explain stupid.

Pat
December 29, 2017 2:37 pm

Historical climate change included global warming and cooling but now it has been politicaly hijacked by the left and envirowackos to only mean global warming! Global warming is now disguised as climate change because it totally failed to hoodwink the gullible. If we had an ice age tomorrow the left would say it was due to global warming.

Nick Duane
December 29, 2017 2:42 pm

There was an article from a bunch of years ago which no longer exists but I luckily I copied a significant snippet from it. Here it is:

“Karl Popper, the late, great philosopher of science, noted that for something to be called scientific, it must be, as he put it, “falsifiable.” That is, for something to be scientifically true, you must be able to test it to see if it’s false. That’s what scientific experimentation and observation do. That’s the essence of the scientific method.

Unfortunately, the prophets of climate doom violate this idea. No matter what happens, it always confirms their basic premise that the world is getting hotter. The weather turns cold and wet? It’s global warming, they say. Weather turns hot? Global warming. No change? Global warming. More hurricanes? Global warming. No hurricanes? You guessed it.

Nothing can disprove their thesis.”

Here’s my comment: Man induced climate change is junk science!

December 29, 2017 2:47 pm

Here is an idea, if you guys think you can fix weather…why don’t you save lives and stop this cold snap…THEN I’ll be a believer. So, put up or shut up.

Bill
December 29, 2017 3:09 pm

Liberals will hang on to their beliefs no matter what proof their is to the contrary.

Cjones1
December 29, 2017 3:12 pm

The Ice Age cometh!
Climate change history is cyclic and the continuing downward trend of the Solar sunspot cycle follows previous patterns foretelling a cooling trend similar to a Dalton or Maunder Minimum. The severity could worsen if there are large volcanic eruptions.
Humankind may have overestimated the effect of our CO2 emissions. We may be able to seed clouds, make desert bloom, change the course of rivers, and pollute the air, but natural forces are of a greater magnitude. Humbling thoughts. Throw another log on that fire and prepare for colder years ahead.

Eli Toro
December 29, 2017 3:14 pm

This is precisely how groupthink and politically correct tyranny triumph by literally frightening people into not saying anything that doesn’t already comport with the progressive left wisdom – and it doesn’t seem to matter what the topic is.

This is how it now works. If you don’t get with the groupthink, if you don’t adopt immediately the cultural and liberal wisdom, if you don’t loudly and publicly let everybody know that you think like everybody else does and you agree with what everybody else is agreeing with, then you are identifying yourself and you’re painting bull’s-eye on your back.

Terry Benedict
December 29, 2017 3:18 pm

I guess all the human activity in the artic is to blame.
Global Warming= FAKE NEWS

December 29, 2017 3:23 pm

Would we call that “Mann-splaining”?

Gary K
December 29, 2017 3:32 pm

Climate change is a given and any fool would try and deny that. MAN MADE Climate Change however is a false belief and many have been so radically indoctrinated into that belief that they will disavow or isolate any potential detractors including firings and disqualifying of anyone that denies Man creates the change in climate. If man could so easily affect the climate then man could affect it for the good as well as the bad but that isn’t the case. Most Man Made global warming advocates rest their faith upon computer models and not actual data. It’s time for all to allow some sanity to come back into the argument and not be so divisive and dogmatic when their faith is not only based upon computer models but has been disproven with factual data ever since they started sounding the alarm bells of rising seas and shrinking California and Florida coastlines.

December 29, 2017 3:33 pm

Don’t you just love it when these same “scientists” schedule a major conference and have to cancel it because of three feet of snow.

December 29, 2017 3:33 pm

Climate is the sum of the historical record. It is the past. “Future” climate is an attempt to predict what the historical record will show someday, by people who purport to know and understand the implications of trends in the record as it now stands.

In other words, it is at best a fantasy, at worst a lie.

Weather? It’s the present. That is the only difference.

Daniel
December 29, 2017 3:41 pm

Climate change is real. What’s not real is the evidence man is responsible. The sun…you know, that massive ball of hydrogen fusion in the sky? We’ll kids, it has a thing called cycles in which it makes us hotter and colder. snit science neat? We don’t even know how many undersea volcanoes there are. They produce enormous amounts of methane, which is a far worse greenhouse gas than Co2. China used more concrete in the last three years than the US did in the last one hundred years. If you want to make a difference, stop buying cheap disposable Chinese made garbage at the dollar store. Grow your own food instead of relying on produce trucked in from five states away.

Dave Fair
December 29, 2017 3:42 pm

Man’s determination of ‘forcings’ cannot drive global climate. The ‘forcing’ numbers involved are subsumed by dynamic forces on scales beyond mere computation.

Get over it. The real world doesn’t care about your theories. CO2 is a minor gas.

December 29, 2017 3:44 pm

Don’t they remember we saw their game films and playbook with the email dump long ago? Who is paying these people to prolong the myth?

Grietver
December 29, 2017 3:51 pm

“Climate models are carefully developed and evaluated”

This is like.engineering (not science) and it might or might not work. Only for climate models there are no users who tell if it works for them. In software engineering you will run off track after a few years (or sooner) if you do it like this, w/o user verification. And the teams involved hardly ever see this by themselves.
It would be a miracle if they can develop fit for purpose climate models this way, over the timespan of decades.

December 29, 2017 3:58 pm

The cold snap we are having now is called weather not climate; however the three hurricanes we had this year were also just weather and the lefties tried to make it into climate. Every weather event that furthers their agenda is a climate event, and every weather event that doesn’t they call a weather event. People just need to be honest.

Dave Fair
Reply to  bigroundglobes
December 29, 2017 9:36 pm

Honesty would ruin the narrative.

December 29, 2017 4:01 pm

Record Breaking Winter Cold? Don’t Worry, the Climate Explainers Have it Covered

Nothing is happening that we haven’t predicted and that we can’t control.
Don’t believe us?
We have a Hockey Stick.
BEWARE!

donfitness
December 29, 2017 4:27 pm

Global warming alarmists or as I like to call them: Scientific method deniers.

Gamecock
December 29, 2017 4:27 pm

Shifting from ‘global warming’ to the undefined, undimensioned ‘climate change’ allows them to ascribe EVERYTHING to climate change.

December 29, 2017 4:32 pm

I don’t get it. The climate has been changing since the beginning of time. What is there to argue about?

Reply to  Skip Van Lenten
December 29, 2017 5:46 pm

I would put a priority on what kind of response we should have to changes in the climate, which are inevitable, rather than what causes it. We were taught in the 5th grade that human beings are an “adaptive species,” and yet we spend all this time arguing about the causes of climate change, rather than how to adapt to it. I think it’s more important to start thinking about shelter, food, and protecting large segments of the populace from extreme temperature swings, and climate-related phenomena.

Reply to  Skip Van Lenten
December 29, 2017 10:07 pm

The Money.

December 29, 2017 4:39 pm

A very enlightening explanation … but I have a better one:

Santa’s elves got fed up freezing their asses off in slavish servitude to the jolly elf, and so they all went out and bought heaters, fired ’em up, and started the polar ice melting, … which scared the crap out of the reindeer — LITERALLY, more crap, which caused more greenhouse gases to enter the atmosphere, which caused more polar warming, which caused more ice to melt, which caused wind patterns to change, thus, driving the wee cloud-warming fairies out of their warm clouds, creating colder temperatures, transferred by the changing wind patterns, intercepted by all Northern Hemisphere unicorns that inhaled it and exhaled it about the continent to produce record cold temperatures.

Hey, if you’re gonna write climythology, then at least give it some color.

Chris Weidner
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
December 29, 2017 5:47 pm

You need to be a teacher. Well said.

Lickety Split
December 29, 2017 4:48 pm

Global lying.

Boutros
December 29, 2017 4:52 pm

Whether it’s global warming, cooling, the ozone hole, acid rain, or any of the other myriad climate doomsday predictions (which NEVER come true) the proposed “solution” is always the same: More money and more power for politicians, and higher taxes and less freedom for ordinary people.

Steve
Reply to  Boutros
December 29, 2017 7:41 pm

Ding ding ding…. We have a winner!!!

Jim P
Reply to  Boutros
December 29, 2017 8:46 pm

Ozone – – – – if you think about this for a minute – – – – Ozone is O3 and is not stable – – – – it reacts with anything – – iron and causes rust – – – it also kills bacteria – – –

because of this O3 has a life time – – it degrades with time – –
as we know UV radiation breaks O2 apart and the free O atom wants to grab something – – and this forms O3 – – – –

a keep point to think about – – – in winter over the Arctic – – there is no sunshine – – 24 hours a day of darkness – – – so what happens the Ozone it dissipates during the time period of no sun shine – – – does the lack of Ozone to harm us – – as it is not blocking the UV radiation – – there is no sun shine so all is fine – – when spring comes and the sun is shining and UV radiation is present – – – guess what – – the Ozone is created – – and blocks the UV radiation – – – – this has been going on for millions of years – – this yearly cycle

Dr. A.
December 29, 2017 4:59 pm

Climate Change hasn’t slowed the liberal Nazis from flying in personal jets or Stopped Al Gore from lightinh up his 28,000 sq foot home has it???

1 8 9 10 11 12 14