Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The frantic public efforts to “correct” President Trump’s tweets every time he trolls the warmists are revealing.
US government scientists correct Trump over climate change statements: ‘Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening’
President’s outburst follows number of recent tweets gleefully disregarding scientific consensus
Tom Embury-Dennis
Chris Riotta…
Experts were quickly forced to correct the president online, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a government research agency which simply tweeted the statement, “Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.”
…
In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded. In coming days, expected to get even colder. People can’t last outside even for minutes. What the hell is going on with Global Waming? Please come back fast, we need you!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 29, 2019
Responding to Mr Trump on Twitter, Jonathan Foley, an environmental scientist at the California Academy of Sciences, said: “You knew this was going to happen. It’s cold in less than 1% of the planet for a few days, so the long term warming and destabilization of a planet’s entire climate system must not be true.
“In related news, Trump had a Big Mac today, so there is no such thing as global hunger.”
Winter storms don't prove that global warming isn't happening. https://t.co/LDqfq4JH9n pic.twitter.com/ndmLD637Cb
— NOAA Climate.gov (@NOAAClimate) January 29, 2019
…
NOAA’s claim that warm ocean temperatures cause more snowfall is a bit of a turnaround from all the end of snow predictions we’ve heard over the years.
NOAA’s explanation also leaves out a little, such as an explanation of why the heat from the warmer oceans is being lost in transit.
I just tried to check the great climat science of NOAA:
– I heated water in the kitchen and went to the living room to see if it was snowing.
Instead, my living room thermometer showed an increase in temperature … 🙁
What a desappointment !
When you peddle propaganda you must constantly nip at the heals of the truth.
Truth bomb!
Remember the kettle is just making it wetter you then have to summon the climate unicorn and get him to fly around to make the wetter into cold.
The heat is hiding in the kettle!
I do not understand what this tweet is trying to say: “Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.”
Also, can someone point me to empirically grounded articles linking CO2 increases and/or AGW to extreme temperatures. The NYT seems to believe there is a connection.
Attempts have been made to cherry pick an increase in temperature variability, but most good research (i.e. Pielke) shows no statistical increase. Somehow, it has become an accepted fact among media and politicians that there is. I wish Trump would cite some actual hard data in his trolls.
It’s a tweet. Very space limited.
It is the double negative that I have difficulty with difficult.
“Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.” ==> Winter storms prove global warming is happening!!
This is not Trump’s clumsy syntax but the syntax of NOAA scientists/spokesperson.
not (A implies (not B))
is not the same as
A implies B
Doug
No point. Alarmists don’t listen to facts. Trolling is more effective with them as it’s all they understand.
bernie1815
I have asked this question of Kym but Dim (first post of the day) on two occasions now. Still no answer.
I thought it was Climate Change, Climate Disruption…….. Global Warming went out a long time ago.
Wasn’t it extreme weather .. I agree it is hard to keep up.
It must be ‘global warming’ again, the name game coming full circle.
Trump’s trying to get ahead of the game, hence global “waming”. If it is getting colder it’s no longer because of global warming, climate change or climate weirding. It’s because of global “waming”. On the other hand if it gets warmer, it’s also because of global waming. Even if it dangerously stays the same, it can still be blamed on global waming.
Trump is playing chess against opponents playing checkers.
How brave of them.
“Ain’t a fit night out ffor man nor beast.” W. C. Fields in The Fatal Glass of Beer
“Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening. ”
…and no amount of colored squiggly lines prove that it IS happening.
Andrew
Let me recap this:
when its cold outside its weather and when its warm outside it is global warming?
/sarc
Precisely. Summer storms prove..something or other… about global warming, but winter storms… don’t.
They love to have their cake and eat it.
Do you know that the ‘cake’ in that quote is actually chimney-coke carbon?
I suspect the cake is actually cow pie. It’s all they deal in.
I think you meant “male bovine pie.”
“‘cake’ in that quote is actually chimney-coke carbon” So does eating that “cake” sequester the carbon? Asking for a friend.
Only “cake” we need is yellow cake – nuclear power will address the concerns about CO2-driven warming (if there is any CO2 warming) and provide base load power to prevent anybody crazy enough to invest in wind/solar from destroying the grid.
No, Doug, I didn’t know that. Is there a story to match it with the phrase?
I think there has been some kind of consensus that “when its cold outside it’s global warming and when its warm outside it’s global warming and when it’s just right it’s global warming.” LOL
A recent study by SOHN Geneva confirms that the earth is still too cold. Since cold weather kills twenty times as many people as hot weather does, the scientists determined that the perfect temperature of the earth is precisely 6.3069°C hotter. The study also points out that the polar regions of the earth need more warming, while the equator is only slightly too cold. In order to correct the imbalance, the remaining fossil fuels of earth must be quickly consumed in order to increase the safety and productivity of our home planet. Of course, when all fossil fuels are consumed, we must find other ways to warm ourselves and keep our planet fertile. For now, have barbecues every weekend, drive your ICE powered vehicles as much as possible and thank your lucky stars that you live in a free country.
Mike
I appreciate your enthusiasm, but the actual ratios for cold v.s. hot are between 8:1 (Canada) and 16:1 (China). My reference on this is Gasparrini, et al 2015 which was ostensibly a look at heat-related deaths. But he and the team found that cold-related deaths were far more frequent even in developed countries.
Heat kills. Colds kill far more. If you have citation for 20:1 I’d appreciate you posting it.
https://canadafreepress.com/article/more-deaths-from-cold-weather-than-hot-weather
You left out and if we aren’t measuring anything there it’s changing according to the models and it’s global warming.
I am hoping that when it is hot out and the alarmists start going on about Global Warming, Trump will re-tweet this.
This just in:
NASA says, “global warming isn’t happening”.
C’mon, that’s an exact quote. Call it John’s missing “…” trick.
I thought “dowdifying” quotes was the exclusive province of the NYT and Mo Dowd. 😉
I agree with NASA that “… global warming isn’t happening.” However, if it is, it sure isn’t an emergency.
Pavlov had a harder time making his dogs salivate than Trump does with the media.
That is why President Trump goes to FB and Twitter land..Save money, cut out the “Fake News” middleman… lol
Apparently he also has a knack for getting under the skin of NOAA scientists. This only goes to prove the time tested, axiom (that I just made up) that:
Donald probably had a good laugh at Jonathan Foley’s over-reaction to his sarcastic Twitter.
The difference is dogs salivate the media has rabid froth.
“Experts were quickly forced to correct the president online,”
Who exactly threarened to burn down their house and shag their dog if they didn’t get on DOTUS’s case *right now*??
What they mean by “forced” is “could not help themselves”…
“Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening. ”
It seems like only yesterday that Obama’s WH science adviser John Holdren was speaking from the WH podium saying that bad winter storms are caused by global warming and science says so.
I’m with you resource guy. The least qualified science advisor in history came on television and tried to “science-splain” how the polar vortex was dipping farther south these days because we drive SUVs and if we just allowed the government to steal more of our wages he could fix it.
As Trump likes to say…
..You are FIRED ! D’OH !
Not just “scientists” to the messaging rescue but also knee jerk media outlets. That suggests direct connections not just random commentary.
Correlation is not causation. 😉
The same media ecosystem also lit up across the country in the weeks and months leading up to Obama’s signing of the Paris “Agreement” Non-Treaty. Street money talks, especially nowadays in the financially struggling local media groups.
That’s not exactly correct Ed. Correlation of factors doesnt necessarily reflect causation, but you damned well better HAVE correlation to whatever is supposed to be the causation. Since you raise it, your comment couldnt be more apropos to the arguement that CO2 causes a warming atmosphere. Temperatures have gone up with declining CO2 and gone down with rising CO2 in the past.
For much of the 20th century women’s hemlines have risen and fallen with copper prices!
President Trump may not be a “climate scientist” but there’s nothing wrong with his B.S. detector.
+10
He seems to do a better job than most AGW peer reviewers.
NASA was hollowed out by Al Gore when he was on the Science and Technology Committee in Congress. He went into overdrive on reorienting it toward Climate Change when he was VP. A failed politician who couldn’t get elected dog catcher in his home state continues to haunt our country.
It wasn’t Florida that cost him the Presidency. It was the electoral votes of his home state that went overwhelmingly for his opponent. We know Al very well
We do know Al, but when I read your comment, I thought you had written AI which, of course, is artificial intelligence. Isn’t funny that a piece of a serif can make the difference between intelligence and stupidity?
If he had any intelligence it would be considered artificial. You should see the damage Al did when he convinced our Governor to go all in on the “Green Supply Chain” concept. Massive subsidies to companies that failed. When I write failed I mean each and every piece collapsed costing rate and tax payers many millions of dollars. Really an object lesson that hasn’t been examined in depth as it should.
Well Al could use some artificial intelligence, lord knows he has none of his own.
Mike Bryant
Does that mean we should be referring to Gore as ‘sans serif’.
🙂
Yup!
As soon as I find out what a “waming” is, I’ll let you know what they meant… : )
Everyone RELAX!! Global warming will be back next week.
“Winter Storms don’t prove Global Warming isn’t happening”
Well Duh…
Nothing can PROVE that Global Warming isn’t happening.
The Science is written that way.
Everything that happens is proof of Global Warming
‘Record’ low temperatures in the parts of the USA, it could be said, are more likely to be sign of a new global cooling experienced in 1960s and 70s, when a return of Ice Age was considered, than a consequence of global warming. It is normal weather response to natural cycles that regional climate changes are continually subjected.
“If you ain’t eatin’ Wham, you ain’t eatin’ ham.”
We’re being porked by “Global Waming”.
(The quote is from “Mr. Blanding Builds His Dream House”)
Wahming, you know, that North East, upper crust accent New York accent.
I think they meant “warning”???
“Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening. ”
No…they don’t. In fact, there is no combination of weather events that proves global warming isn’t happening, according to those mainstream scientists. This is precisely why global warming isn’t science. It is not falsifiable.
I believe NOAA has hoisted itself on its own petard!
So, let’s ask the question: If Anthropogenic Global Warming Theory was actually science and could be falsifiable, what type of observations would indicated that the theory was in need of serious correction?
1. A pause in atmospheric warming exceeding 10 years.
2. No tropical upper-tropospheric hot-spot
3. One of the poles not warming, where warming is expected to be greatest.
4. Warming that is no different than warming recorded previously, before CO2 began increasing significantly. In other words, a warming trend not discernible from previous natural warming trends.
5. Nearly identical weather patterns producing nearly identical temperatures 34 years later
6. A lack of correlation between observed atmospheric temperatures and increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Scientifically speaking, all of these things are indications that the current theory is significantly incorrect. I am sure here are many other indications as well.
Even more damning is the behaviour of those who defend the theory as it stands. Their constant relying on ad hominem attacks and appeals to authority, while completely avoiding addressing any of the scientific concerns; their hyperbole; their appeal to consensus; their refusal to openly share data and methods; their collusion with the media and politicians; their cherry-picking; their manipulation of data (from changing the numbers to highly questionable statistical methods); their attempts to control journal content and squelch opposing scientists; and their blatant pandering for funds with unsupportable conclusions, all point to a very weak scientific theory!
So…record cold in the upper-midwest today does not ‘disprove’ global warming theory. It is just one more nail in a coffin that is completely riddled with nails!
I keep looking for the right hand swimming sharks as a sure sign but no luck so far.
Very well said.
“(W)hat type of observations would indicated that the theory was in need of serious correction?”
Superb question which points to the pseudoscientific nature of the claim that mankind is causing catastrophic global warming. Or really any global warming at all.
pokerguy
Kym and griff offline, let me help…
1. There never was the pause after all. We have adjusted and adjusted.
2. Somebody did find a trop hot spot. I can’t remember the reference for you, just trust me.
3. Come on! Antarctica is melting like crazy.
4. It is unprecedented in my 9-1/2 year life span.
5. Yeah, ancient history but what about the modern period?
6. Give us more time, we will get the adjustments right.
James Clarke
Can I add a 7) to that list?
Lack of any empirically derived, credible studies, which demonstrate CO2 causes the planet to warm.
That’s none ever.
It is not a winter storm it is an intrusion of very cold dry air due to a large, sudden stratospheric warming. The Arctic is around normal temperature so no warm air intrusion there and the Arctic ice extent is within 2 standard deviations of normal.
This is the precise opposite of what was forecast only a few years ago where warm air in and around the arctic was said (in sepulchral voice) to be about to thaw the permafrost and the melting peat would gasp release more ‘carbon’ (sic).
Climate ‘science’ is based on hot-swappable unfalsifiable hypotheses
Are you denying what the experts at NOAA have so clearly illustrated? That the cold dry air is caused by a giant steaming kettle drifting around somewhere in the mid-Atlantic.
I don’t see any steaming kettles however closely I look – even the loop current in the Gulf of Mexico doesn’t seem to be linked into the Gulf Stream – and you’ll need a few more kilojoules to boil a kettle …
Yeah, I can’t find it either. But people should point and laugh at them for accompanying “NOAA’s Kettle” with a “Russell’s Teapot” sort of claim: “Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening.” Taxpayers were deprived of that kind of quality government output for several weeks during the shutdown.
“Taxpayers were deprived of that kind of quality government output for several weeks during the shutdown.”
Nick, you are a funny guy! That’s the second post of yours in a row where I have busted out laughing! Keep up the good work! 🙂
It’s called the moist greenhouse effect and you might want to stop and ponder what stops it going into runaway right now. Better still ask NOAA or Nick Stokes to explain what stops the runaway.
There is a slight problem with the theory that no climate scientist really wants to talk about 🙂
It is a lot harder to warm moist air. That pesky water vapour.😊
Yeah but that doesn’t cover the real problem your water is evapourating putting energy into the atmosphere. Ok so now you summon the climate unicorn and say the increase energy makes stronger storms then you displace cold air to get your measured cold weather from those cold regions (so we match observed). The problem is your cold areas are now warmer and now the whole process goes into runaway because your next batch of cold air is already warmer so you can’t loose the same energy this time. You need a negative feedback or else even cutting CO2 emissions to zero does nothing the process just keeps going into runaway and we are all dead regardless what you do with CO2.
The only response I’ve ever received from a climate cultist regarding runaway feedbacks is a denial that the IPCC et al project/predict runaway warming. I guess to them, an indefinite exponential warming is not runaway warming. They seem to define words on the go as they deem fit.
“Better still ask NOAA or Nick Stokes to explain what stops the runaway.”
You could just ask anyone who understands the simple algebra of feedback. You can have positive feedback up to a limit without runaway.
ROFL oh please Nick try reading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_feedback
Normally a value larger than 1 will do it but you said I can have any amount so lets immediately falsify you .. I choose +infinity.
Ummm I think that is the purest definition of runaway.
Oh btw even sks waffled thru it and finally worked out any feedback >1 defines runaway. Then they got lost thinking natural systems can’t go >1 before they finally worked it out the blocking effect in greenhouse actually allows that quite easily and walking back down to a position that they were going to settle on 0.6
https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?p=3&t=119&&a=386
But hey you can have any value … right?
Nick, I think this is an image of Bertrand Russell’s orbitting teapot captured accidentally from a space camera.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
“Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.” this si true.
But the dangerous global warming is predicted to come about because of positive feedbacks that cause an acceleration in the warming.
Winter storms do prove global warming isn’t happening at a dangerous rate.
Increase in evaporation from the ocean surface into the air from local air temperature increases results in increased cloud cover, which diverts more of the sun’s heat back into space. The feedback loop is not positive.
If it were, we would not have the luxury of posting ideas about it on the internet at the present time. There would be no end to the heat, and the “humanly inhabitable areas” of the earth would have succumbed to it long before we got here.
There were negative feedbacks that helped the earth out of the last great ice age. Polar caps reflected sun back into space, but there was so much less cloud cover, that mid latitude heat absorption eventually warmed the earth back up to where it is now.
If you think there is a positive feedback process in play at this time, then we are balancing ourselves on the top of an overinflated basketball. Only perfectly timed and proper force corrections could keep us from real calamity. This is where the Green Initiative folks are at. Gymnastics are needed, now.
I don’t think winter storms prove or disprove anything. Neither do heat waves.
The only thing Crispin, with Catastrophic AGW after 40 years, shouldn’t the edge have been taken off the cold events? We shouldnt be recording new record cold as frequently as new record heat at least. Nothing has been proven one way or the other. But with the meme invented by a Canadian communist highschool drop out, it seems a perfect analogy to Bertrand Russell’s orbitting tiny teapot.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
The end is nigh
In Chicago at least. The Obama city can’t wait for the Cortez’s 12 year Armageddon it may not fry but might freeze, which I’m told it is slightly less painful way to go.
Seriously, my sympathy is with the Chicago population despite my family’s unhappy links with that city.
Vuk,
Misery loves company…
https://www.weather.gov/lot/weatherstory
The end is Nye. 😉
So, if I’ve got this right, according to NOAA, severe cold in Europe and North America are not evidence against the Global Warming Hypothesis. Therefore, mild, warm winters cannot be used as evidence for Global Warming either.
Canada and Poland are noted as leaders in reducing air pollution-
“The GBD report compares data from 2007 to 2017 and provides + or – percentages. For Canada, the drop in the “air pollution” risk factor was negative 17.5% and appears to be one of the biggest drops of any country. Surprisingly, Poland which gets 80% of its electricity from coal, shows a drop of 14.4%. China was up by 1.7% whereas India was down 2.7% and the USA by 5%. Germany (the bastion of renewable energy) was down by only 2.7%. This data suggests Canada is a leader in reducing air pollution.”
https://parkergallantenergyperspectivesblog.wordpress.com/2019/01/14/is-it-time-for-canada-to-claim-environmental-hero-status/
The report indicates the need to reduce FF use-
“As one would expect, the Review says a lot about GHGs and climate change, and laid out reputed accomplishments and future plans. The Review also lectures us, telling us to use less: “The best energy is the energy we do not use. By doing more with less, Canadians can significantly reduce GHG emissions, save money, improve their environment and make their homes more comfortable.””
“Minneapolis hit with -51 degree wind chills as polar vortex grips Midwest”
https://www.foxnews.com/us/deadly-polar-vortex-blasts-midwest-with-record-breaking-cold-forecasters-warn-to-minimize-talking-outdoors
Born in Manitoba to the north of Minneapolis, we used to call it the Wimp Chill factor. Of course in Manitoba, men were men and the women loved it. At least that’s what I learned in my women’s studies. But I understand this isn’t so anymore!
Well I suppose it gives all those government “scientists” something to do whilst their at home waiting for things to open up again.
James Bull
The government is fully open currently.
R Shearer
Except the post office, which contrary to their reputation, is put off by cold weather.
Neither rain nor sleet nor…
Well, it is pretty cold, after all…
Neither rain nor sleet nor …
That was before they unionized.
I hadn’t noticed … either way.
I agree. There is no global waming, no global warming to speak of, no warning necessary… plenty of cold warnings about, though.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=cold+kills+more+than+heat&t=ipad&ia=web
no waning necessary… plenty of cold wanings about, though.
There…
“You knew this was going to happen. It’s cold in less than 1% of the planet for a few days, so the long term warming and destabilization of a planet’s entire climate system must not be true.”
Yeah, and we also know that every time it gets hot, or every time it rains (or doesn’t), and every time there’s a hurricane, a tornado, an earthquake, a volcanic eruption, or whatever… ‘Climate Scientists’ tell us it’s climate change.
Good for President Trump. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. His tweet is making the alarmists highlight the stupidity of their own arguments.
“His tweet is making the alarmists highlight the stupidity of their own arguments.”
BINGO!
I believe it is unusually cold in all of N. America and also Europe. Is that only 1% of the land surface?
john
We have had a few snowflakes in the SE of England where I live (no, the type that fall from the sky, not the other type) some of the rest of the country has some snow, nothing dramatic, just normal for a British winter over the last 30 years in my experience.
I was getting ready to ask you what you used to drive off the snowflakes.
It is presently warm in Moscow.
Louis, that’s right on! I’ve detected a considerable loss of heart and growing moodiness among once jolly climateers every time they are in the ridiculous situation of having to defend the meme when its 40 below. Their testiness is a ‘tell’. They’re pushing back against a niggling suspicion in their own minds that is whispering to them how silly it sounds.