Media’s Horribly Dishonest Antarctica Propaganda

By Jim Steele

Attempting to reinforce the climate crisis narrative, a recent high temperature record in Antarctica has been misleadingly ballyhooed as an example of global warming by the world’s largest media outlets – New York Times, BBC, the Guardian, etc. Although the NY Times tries to sell their paper with the slogan “The Truth is Worth It”, their misleading articles suggest you should spend your money elsewhere. These media giants seem more intent on scaring the public and manufacturing a false climate crisis, than educating the public about the real physics that cause weather changes causing Antarctica’s temperature record!

The NY Times wrote, “Antarctica, the coldest, windiest and driest continent on Earth, set a record high temperature on Thursday, underscoring global warming” But the fact that Antarctica is the coldest place on earth, has nothing to do with a temperature record at a single weather station, Esperanza. Esperanza is located at the warmest, most northerly part of the mountainous Antarctica peninsula. Esperanza is most sensitive to El Nino warming. It most sensitive to the southward flow of warm moist subtropical winds. And Esperanza’s topography always amplifies temperatures when winds from the northwest cause foehn wind events. What happened at Esperanza has nothing to do with Antarctica’s overall climate trends, never mind any global warming trend.

The Guardian wrote, Antarctica “is one of the fastest warming places on earth, heating by almost 3°C [5.4°F] over the past 50 years”. However, the Guardian hides the fact they are using zombie data. Recent research shows a cooling trend since the year 2000 and that contradicts any CO2 driven global warming theory.

In the 2016 peer-reviewed paper “Absence of 21st century Warming on Antarctic Peninsula consistent with Natural Variability”, Antarctic climate experts documented that from 1979–1997, Antarctic had indeed experienced the globe’s fastest warming temperatures, increasing by 3.2 °C [5.8 °F] per century. In contrast, from 1999–2014, temperatures then decreased at a rate 4.7 °C [8.5 °F} per century. This strong cooling trend is rarely reported or referred to by media alarmists. Dishonestly, the Guardian ignores the recent cooling trends to suggest a recent one day Esperanza temperature record is “a sign that warming in Antarctica is happening much faster than global average” and “is the foreshadowing of what is to come.” Likewise the NY Times dishonestly claims, “The high temperature is in keeping with the earth’s overall warming trend, which is in large part caused by emissions of greenhouse gases.

The Guardian’s author Graham Readfearn engages in his typical alarmist distortions to write, “Previous research from 2012 found the current rate of warming in the region was almost unprecedented over the past 2000 years.” Really? Almost unprecedented? The paper he refers to actually stated, “Although warming of the northeastern Antarctic Peninsula began around 600 years ago, the high rate of warming over the past century is unusual (but not unprecedented) in the context of natural climate variability over the past two millennia.

The BBC gets the prize for going completely off the rails stating, “Scientists warn that global warming is causing so much melting at the South Pole, it will eventually disintegrate – causing the global sea level to rise by at least three metres (10ft) over centuries.” But there has been no warming trend at the south pole nor in east Antarctica as exemplified by the Dumont D’Urville weather station.

clip_image002

clip_image004

For those readers who only trust peer reviewed papers, I suggest reading, “Foehn Event Triggered by an Atmospheric River Underlies Record-Setting Temperature Along Continental Antarctica” which thoroughly investigated the causes of the previous 2015 record-setting temperature at Esperanza.

What is a foehn event? Foehn events cause rapid extreme temperature jumps simply due to changes in the air pressure as winds descend from a mountain top. During the 2015 foehn event, Esperanza’s daily temperature jumped from 0°C [32°F] 2 days before, to a record setting 17.5°C [63.5°F]. Elsewhere, Antarctic foehn winds are common and have been extensively studied, often raising maximum temperatures by 10+°C [18+°F] above normal.

As seen in figure “c” below, weather systems in 2015 had driven a warm and humid subtropical air flow from the northwest onto the northern Antarctic Peninsula. That warm air flow raised the western peninsula’s temperatures above normal. Then those winds rose up and over the peninsula’s mountain range amplifying temperatures even further on the east side of the peninsula. As the air rose, its water vapor condensed, both releasing precipitation and releasing latent heat that had further warmed the air. As that warmer and drier air passed over the mountain crest and descended onto Esperanza, temperatures warmed further as air pressure increased temperatures at a rate of over 5°F for every 1000-foot drop in altitude. A typical foehn event.

clip_image006

As happens in all the earth’s mountainous regions, foehn winds warm the air due to simple physics and well-established gas laws. Warming does not require any added heat from the sun or CO2. During Esperanza’s 2015 record warmth, temperatures had hovered around 0.5°C [32.9°F] the day before. But as winds from the northwest increased air flow over the peninsula’s mountains, those foehn winds increased Esperanza’s temperatures by 17.5 °C [31.5°F]. Those same dynamics were in play during the February 2020 record temperature.

In contrast to several paragraphs trying to implicate global warming, the Guardian did offer one sentence hinting at a foehn wind warming, quoting Dr. Renwick: “higher temperatures in the region tended to coincide with strong northwesterly winds moving down mountain slopes – a feature of the weather patterns around Esperanza in recent days.”

Also a quote from Dr Steve Rintoul, an Antarctic expert at CSIRO, admitted: “This is a record from only a single station, but it is in the context of what’s happening elsewhere and is more evidence that as the planet warms we get more warm records and fewer cold records.”

But Rintoul is not sharing all the facts. The current context for the Antarctica Peninsula is that for over a decade it has experienced cooling temperatures driven by natural variability. In fact, glaciers in Esperanza’s region have also expanded. Esperanza’s record temperature simply happened due to foehn winds despite a cooling trend. Unfortunately, the media would rather scare the public to promote a climate crisis, than honestly educate them about the causes of natural climate variability.

Jim Steele is Director emeritus of San Francisco State’s Sierra Nevada Field Campus and authored Landscapes and Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism

Contact: naturalclimatechange@earthlink.net

0 0 vote
Article Rating
127 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 9, 2020 6:15 pm

“Antarctica, the coldest, windiest and driest continent on Earth, set a record high temperature on Thursday,” has nothing to do with science but as usual is another fragment of propaganda being waved in the ‘Climate Change – Global Warming’ War. The forces of the Warmistas are freed up in the battle by having absolutely no scruples about misleading and lying.

Joel Snider
Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
February 10, 2020 1:45 pm

When was the last honest media-statement on ANY subject?

If one exists, it had to be an accident.

Louise Nicholas
February 9, 2020 6:19 pm

Thanks Jim! I’ll pass this on to my friends who tend to believe all the MSM propaganda. Love your work, thanks!

Craig from Oz
February 9, 2020 6:26 pm

‘The BBC ….. stating, “Scientists warn that global warming is causing so much melting at the South Pole, it will eventually disintegrate…”‘

The South Pole?

Disintegrate?

They do know what a continent is, right?

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Craig from Oz
February 9, 2020 6:28 pm

You’re right Craig, that’s pretty darn silly. What they meant was, that if the ice on one side melts, the whole thing might tip over.

ScarletMacaw
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
February 9, 2020 7:37 pm

Like Guam?

toorightmate
Reply to  ScarletMacaw
February 10, 2020 3:51 am

Could it really tip over like Guam will?

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  ScarletMacaw
February 10, 2020 7:38 am

Exactly like Guam, just a matter of scale.

h/t Hank Johnson

beng135
Reply to  ScarletMacaw
February 11, 2020 12:01 pm

Gives new meaning to “tipping point”.

R40
Reply to  beng135
February 12, 2020 2:55 pm

beng135 – HAHAHAHA!

John Q Public
Reply to  Craig from Oz
February 9, 2020 7:58 pm

Wrong. In the alarmist’s flat earth theory, Antarctica is the edge of the flat disk, and they are probably worried the whole ice shelf could slide off into space.

observa
Reply to  Craig from Oz
February 9, 2020 9:03 pm

Hmmm…so we’ve moved on from emergency and crisis to climate disintegration now have we? I’ll take it on advisement for a tipping point to get in the ammo and baked beans but as you were preppers for the red alert.

ray boorman
Reply to  Craig from Oz
February 9, 2020 10:03 pm

Craig, you are talking about the bbc. They can’t even spell continent, let alone understand what the word means.

Roger
Reply to  ray boorman
February 10, 2020 5:49 am

BBC radio has a show called “Cross Incontinents” https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000cn4y

Graemethecat
Reply to  Craig from Oz
February 10, 2020 1:47 am

How embarrassing to think I once believed what the BBC said.

areff
February 9, 2020 6:27 pm

Here’s a map of antarctica. Notice the proximity of Signey island in the South Orkneys to Esperanza base at the tip of the peninsula.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Antarctica_location_map.svg

Now read this, an account and explanation of the 19.8C day at about the same time of year in 1982 as the we’re-all-going-to-die 18.3 being described by gullible reporters and reporterettes as the hottest day since dinosaurs roamed the earth.

https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/asl.793

Important to note here is the consequence of what is now three generations of post-literate, post-maths graduates from the West’s education systems. Keep ’em stupid, tell what to think not how to think and, once you have stabilkised a population of dolts, the Redfearns of this world seem relatively intelligent.

Relatively.

Mr.
Reply to  areff
February 9, 2020 8:00 pm

Readfern once tried to debate Christopher Monckton on stage in Brisbane Australia.

Readfern exited stage left in tears.

Warren
February 9, 2020 6:27 pm

Excellent Jim!
I hope people also read this small Esperanza hot debunking from 2017:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/04/07/the-art-of-green-deception-about-those-record-temperatures-in-antarctica/

Joel O'Bryan
February 9, 2020 6:34 pm

I’ll say it,

Dr Steve Rintoul, as a subject matter expert, is attempting to knowingly deceive. That makes him a climate liar.

Scissor
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
February 9, 2020 8:04 pm

Perhaps he’s a lying dog faced pony soldier.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Scissor
February 9, 2020 9:09 pm

That’s Creepy Uncle Joe Biden’s line.

Biden is toast. It’s between the gay mayor and a geriatric socialist with a bad heart for the Democrat’s nomination. They are sooooo f’ing toast.

rah
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
February 9, 2020 10:27 pm

Gotta agree. Been doing a little research. Figure Trump will take about 20% of the black vote and many blacks who are hardcore democrats will stay home. The democrats have delivered nothing but hate Trump to anyone.

Kevin kilty
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
February 10, 2020 9:20 am

It isn’t so much that Pete is gay, but that he is a cynical, opportunistic chameleon who resembles Obama in all regards, with even worse policy goals.

Pillage Idiot
Reply to  Kevin kilty
February 10, 2020 10:53 am

“So you’re telling me there’s a chance.”

Lloyd – Dumb & Dumber

rah
Reply to  Kevin kilty
February 10, 2020 1:43 pm

The guy speaks volumes and still manages to say nothing. I haven’t seen a politician so good at that since François Mitterrand.

Nick Schroeder
February 9, 2020 6:43 pm

Esperanza Base, Argentina is located at south 63.4 degrees latitude.

The Antarctic circle is defined as south 66.6 degrees latitude.

So, technically Esperanza Base is not part of Antarctica.

Another excellent example of cherry picking by the lying, rabble-rousing, fact-free, shit-stirring, fake news MSM propaganda machine spewing “Oh, God – We’re all going to die!!!” climate change fear-mongering.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
February 9, 2020 7:39 pm

The base is as far from the South Pole as the capital of Iceland is from the North Pole.
And it sticks out into the ocean on a long peninsula.
In fact it is very close to South America.
Right now, the vast majority of Antarctica is, in Mid-Summer, colder than places like Siberia and Greenland, which are in Mid-Winter:
Siberia:
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-220.26,73.72,302/loc=138.461,68.300

Interior of Antarctica:
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-235.36,-87.83,302/loc=100.678,-82.739

rah
February 9, 2020 6:48 pm

Anyone that has observed the cycles of propaganda from the alarmists could not help to notice that when things aren’t going as they predicted in the Arctic and the sea ice up there just won’t die as they have predicted over and over and over again, they turn to the Antarctic. It is a seemingly never ending cycle.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  rah
February 9, 2020 7:45 pm

Somewhere on this planet its always winter or summer, flooding or drought. Heat wave or cold wave. Fires or too much rain.

Find the narrative. Play it. Repeat.
That’s the basis of the climate scam propaganda.
Texas-size Liars like Katharine Hayhoe and Dessler have been using that gimmick to make a career.

Nicholas McGinley
February 9, 2020 7:07 pm

I am having a hard time verifying this report from Esparanza station.
The thermometer data from the last five days did not show anything close to what is being reported, when I looked earlier this evening.
But now I checked again, and the numbers have changed completely.
Here is a Tweet I posted with the two graphs side by side:
https://twitter.com/NickMcGinley1/status/1226703191695351808?s=20

It has become nearly impossible to trust anything these days.
Besides for all of that…when a short term blip is announced as if it is a representation of the entire state of the planet, while in Alaska a two month trend of temps is showing the coldest period ever recorded in that entire state, something is not at all right.

A C Osborn
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 10, 2020 1:42 am

That is shocking. I thought the Aussie BOM were bad but that is something else.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 10, 2020 7:42 am

Wow. That is pretty odd.

Rob Leviston
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 10, 2020 9:05 pm

I had the same experience! I searched for the official weather data, and found a record on timanddate.com. It showed fairly consistent temperature pattern with highs around 3-4C. On the day in question , it rose to 6C. Within a short time of posting my find on FB, the data had changed!
Here is a link to the FB thread.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/108655705888371/?multi_permalinks=2741409589279623&notif_id=1581309968467586&notif_t=feedback_reaction_generic

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Rob Leviston
February 11, 2020 3:00 pm

That is exactly what I did.
The first picture was from a few hours prior to coming here and reading this article, and the only reason I had a picture saved was because I posted a few comment on FB about it.

I went to the Time and Date site to get a link to the graph which had showed slightly below temps on Thursday, and a few degrees above average (~40°F) for the data there.

I did not see that the graph had changed until I had started to write my comment here.
It was not more than two hours.
So one really has to wonder what is going on?
The only reason I had even bothered to double check the story myself was because of what happened last Summer in Greenland, where a huge front page banner ran around the world about the hottest ever temperature on the Greenland ice sheet.
Within hours it was shown that the report was false, and a stuck thermometer or something was blamed…conveniently.
Somehow the revised story saying “Nevermind” did not make the top of the front page around the world…so the vast majority of people never heard that the story was false.
But this…this proves they just make stuff up.
Either the first numbers were made up, or the second ones were.
I can think of another explanation, more prosaic, which may explain it.
I do not think that anyone could be hand processing all those weather stations around the world in real time. There must be some automated process going on. So how could it change for just those two days, Thursday and Friday?
Maybe…if it was only a brief warmup that lasted a few hours each day, and one set of numbers was, for example, every six hours starting at midnight, but a few hours later the automated process used every six hours ending at 3:00, or 9:00…
IOW, offset by three hours due to looking at it three hours later.
But the graphs are labelled with the time of each reading…and they are both the same.

The fact is, even if one could think of some possible way it is not people just plain lying and committing fraud, it is impossible to believe the schist from the alarmists when every single time all adjustments go one way, all mistakes are mistaken heat, and then attempts at verification turn up, time and again, crap like we see right here: Ordinary temp at some random out of the way location mysteriously becomes the hottest ever recorded on a whole continent…while no one is looking and only after what was originally recorded was erased and overwritten.

Not that it matters if there was a warm day in one spot…a look at the other days prior and just after , and the discussion in this article by Jim Steele, and the video from Tony Heller…everything makes it clear this is weather, not climate, it is not a trend but a blip, and it is not at all representative of an entire continent, because the location in question is geographically totally dissimilar from the rest of Antarctica. It is a marine location that is not even inside the Antarctic circle, and is actually thousands of miles from the pole.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 11, 2020 3:06 pm

Sorry, that was garbled.
In the second paragraph I meant to point out that originally the graph from Esparanza Base showed slightly below average temps on Thursday, and slightly above average on Friday.

Rob Leviston
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 11, 2020 5:54 pm

I don’t have access to the FB page anymore, and someone might have seen it, bit the evidence that was shown oh the supposed high temperature, was a photo of a pair of either Mercury or alcohol thermometers, that allegedly speed the high and low for the day

beng135
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 11, 2020 12:07 pm

Obviously the “story” was written up & published, and somebody forget to fix up the record. Better late than never. Where’s Stokes to explain everything?

Rud Istvan
February 9, 2020 7:09 pm

Jim, well done.
We who have frequently skied the Alps know all about the meteorology (not climate)of what in Bavaria is called Foehn (Bayerische o umlaut slightly mispronounced in English as oe). Weather, not climate.

rah
Reply to  Rud Istvan
February 9, 2020 10:11 pm

I sure miss it and will never forget it! At Bad Tolz 86-89. After over 5 years on SF mountain teams I was selected to become a ski instructor so my winter of 86-87 started with the evaluation for ski instructors on a glacier in Austria in early November. From that time on I didn’t go three consecutive days without skiing until middle of April as I went through our own ski instructor training then both the German and Italian military ski instructor training . The following winter was nearly the same as far as duration on skis and that year had the best skiing conditions the Bavarian Alps had seen in over a decade. Powder up to ones waist. Both years, we instructors got a day of helicopter skiing as a payoff for our work.

And BTW none of that skiing was done in plastic. All done in Hanwag 3/4 shank leather mountaineering boots on Alpine touring skis using Silvretta Alpine Touring bindings. Bindings that lock down the heels for downhill and which can be released for cross country. Skiing in leather is something most people have never done. Plastic allows skiers to get away with poor technique. Believe me when I tell you that your technique has to be highly developed to ski well in leather boots. Leather does not allow you to get away with any of the many sins that plastic does. Then add a heavy rucksack, weapons, and various other military impedimenta to that at times and the skiers technique must be nearly perfect.

Reply to  rah
February 9, 2020 11:12 pm

I started skiing in 1949 when I was 13.
Leather boots, solid wood skis, no steel edges.
Learned to ski deep powder and steep slopes at Alta, Utah through the 1960s.
Fantastic1
Quit when I turned 70.
Had a health problem.
.

rah
Reply to  Bob Hoye
February 10, 2020 1:29 am

Not many like you around anymore. Bindings back then were nothing like what I enjoyed and made the skier much more susceptible to injury. I’d hate to think how many times I would have gotten hurt without modern bindings that release the boot from the ski when stresses reach a certain point. As it was I strained my MCL a couple times.

letitsnow
Reply to  rah
February 12, 2020 7:58 am

Started skiing in 1953…first ten years in rubber galoshes with metal buckles and cable bindings on skis. Still blessed to be skiing 67 years later. I am very disturbed by the ski industry embracing the global warming b.s., claiming that snowfall is decreasing when data (Rutgers Snow Lab) says otherwise. The industry has bought into the idea to make themselves look good in the eyes of their clients. In the process, they are scaring young professionals away from a career in winter sports…very misguided approach…perhaps the result of a sugar buzz from consuming too much Kool-Aid.

Ian Coleman
February 9, 2020 7:11 pm

The Earth is kind of big. In my opinion. If you want to find something bad in it, you’ve got a lot of area to find it. If you’re the sort of person who can say, something bad happened in this spot therefore something bad is about to happen everywhere else, and especially where I live, you’re always going to be worried.

I cannot fathom how anybody can think that, if there are wildfires in Australia, this means that there is trouble on the way I Alberta. There is no global climate, as a practical entity.. It’s an abstraction.

I don’t care about the temperature in Antarctica anymore than I care about agriculture in Kenya.

Michael
February 9, 2020 7:24 pm

Mr Heller has a nice short video with extra stats on this foolishness:

https://youtu.be/aWlBiih1p9Y

Reply to  Michael
February 10, 2020 8:46 am

Indeed Heller’s video is well worth watching

Roger Knights
February 9, 2020 7:26 pm

A philosopher at a college should write a textbook on critical thinking,andr another academic should write a book on propaganda techniques, both using examples drawn entirely from climate-alarmists, especially the MSM.

John
Reply to  Roger Knights
February 9, 2020 11:25 pm

Not if that person is Rupert Read, professor of philosophy at University of East Anglia.

Editor
Reply to  Roger Knights
February 10, 2020 5:01 am

Thanks, Roger. That’s a great idea for a book.

Regards,
Bob

John Cullen
Reply to  Roger Knights
February 10, 2020 8:03 am

Hello Everybody,
Two books on propaganda have been written recently by Jason Stanley who is a professor of philosophy at Yale University [Refs 1, 2]. The later book (on fascism) is more succinct and less discursive, while the earlier book is more complete.

Interestingly, Stanley, in these two books, seems to give the climate change alarmists a clean bill of health, albeit after the most cursory consideration of the topic. Which just goes to show that even professors of propaganda can be taken in if they do not do proper research and simply take the word of other academics.

Unfortunately there does not seem to be a book on propaganda in the OUP series, “A Short Introduction To …” which I have found to be very useful in getting a broad and rapid understanding of certain topics (e.g. populism, thermodynamics).

References
1. Jason Stanley, “How Propaganda Works”, Princeton University Press, 2015.
2. Jason Stanley, “How Fascism Works”, Random House, 2018.

Regards,
John Cullen.

beng135
Reply to  John Cullen
February 12, 2020 7:39 am

It’s like the Scientologist “cult expert” that closely examined & critiqued cults, and later admitted he never considered that he was in a cult.

February 9, 2020 7:34 pm

I guess what we experience here in southern Alberta, Canada is a “foehn wind.” The warm west wind from the Rocky Mountains sometimes changes the temperature by 20 degrees C in a couple hours. The local name is “chinook wind” (pronounces “shi-nook”). Leo diCaprio famously came here to shoot a movie maybe five years ago and proclaimed he experienced crazy global warming as a chinook wind started blowing, raising the temp by 15 or 20 degrees in a few hours. I mean, at that rate, we’d all be dead by the end of the day, genius.

HotScot
Reply to  Bernie
February 10, 2020 12:52 am

Bernie

Which once again exemplifies why luvvies ought to keep their stupid mouths shut on any subject other than acting*.

I was taught about the Chinook when in primary school, in 1967 or so. I was 9 years old.

*With the exception of the US Patriot and DJT supporter, James Woods and the anti WOKE campaigner here in the UK, Laurence Fox.

Deano
Reply to  HotScot
February 15, 2020 3:38 pm

Hello,
Laurence Fox isn’t an anti-woke campaigner. He’s a posh, public school educated luvvie with establishment connections a twitter account and not much intellect.

Equally, it’d be stupid to declare Wayne Rooney an anti-woke campaigner simply because he occasionally humiliates his wife and likes a beer.

I know Fox implied he could never marry a beautiful, wealthy, witty, intelligent,sexy English woman if she was “woke” but what he failed to mention is that he’d never opt to spend a Friday night sitting in a Thai restaurant in Worthing with an ugly, poor, very right wing English woman who insisted on chucking her chips at the waitress while screaming “Go back to your own bloody country, you fat bitch”. Fox would flee that restaurant and that woman. He certainly wouldn’t sit there praising her lack of woke.

Fox will marry a woman – again – one day, and she won’t be a skint, working class, plain, homophobic racist who likes punching her step-son in his face and calling him “you little poof” when his dad isn’t around to defend him – I can absolutely guarantee you that.

His marriage photos, when published on the Mail website etc in the future – will prove Fox has embraced conformity. Indeed, every time his new middle class/socially acceptable and politically correct wife teases “am I too woke for you? Are you going to leave me?‘ Fox will grin sheepishly, and hold his hands up in the universal man-language of “I know I was a bit of a tit – please see past my mistakes and love me! I don’t want to be single again.”

‘Please do love me and only me!’ That’s what Fox will plead to a woman one day, with his eyes or with his words. Because he’s not an anti-woke campaigne and hero – he’s just an ordinary English posho.

Adopting Fox as a hero is sad. It’s like not very intelligent men deciding Geoff Norcott is the only English comedian they can tolerate because he voted for Brexit. Pitiful stuff.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Bernie
February 10, 2020 9:12 am

“Leo diCaprio famously came here to shoot a movie maybe five years ago and proclaimed he experienced crazy global warming as a chinook wind started blowing, raising the temp by 15 or 20 degrees in a few hours.”

Yeah. Di Crapio’s “knowledge” of weather and climate is on par with Kirk Cameron’s “knowledge” of evolution.

Terry Dey
Reply to  Bernie
February 12, 2020 10:32 am

I was just about to post this exact thing. Good call.

February 9, 2020 7:37 pm

Esperanza Base is near the tip of the Antarctica Peninsula, which is part of West Antarctica. There is no honest dispute that the Antarctica Peninsula and West Antarctica as a whole have been warming over recent decades (including 1979-onward), although most of the warming in West Antarctica may be in the Antarctica Peninsula. West Antarctica appears to me as about 25% of Antarctica and East Antarctica appears to me as about 75% of Antarctica. East Antarctica and the Southern Ocean have bucked the world’s warming trend of recent decades. It has been said that climate models predicted the Southern Ocean and most of Antarctica to not warm with the rest of the world, which is one of the things climate models generally got right. (Climate models generally got some things wrong including overpredicting global warming and predicting a “tropical upper troposphere warming hot spot” that has hardly materialized, and I see that as a result of groupthink with finding a sufficient number of parameters excluding multidecadal oscillations to “fit an elephant” in tuning models for hindcasting.)

Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
February 10, 2020 8:39 am

Donald says “There is no honest dispute that the Antarctica Peninsula and West Antarctica as a whole have been warming over recent decades ”

That is wrong. Several studies show the peninsula has been COOLING for the past 2 decades. I linked to the research.

It is dishonest for agenda driven scientists and media to ignore that fact and claim the peninsula has been warming for 50 years

Reply to  Jim Steele
February 10, 2020 8:50 pm

I looked into this some more, and I found conflicting statements of whether the peninsula is warming or cooling.

https://phys.org/news/2014-12-global-climate-trend-nov-decade.html
comment image

This map is of degree/decade trend of UAH TLT from the time that dataset began in December 1978 to 2014. That shows the peninsula as warming, and this is what I based my previous statement on.

UPDATE: I found another map showing the peninsula as cooling in the UAH record from its start in December 1978 to sometime in 2015 shortly after UAH switched to their V. 6.0. The previous version, 5.6, overreported warming during roughly the 10-12 years before the start of V. 6. This is Figure 4 of
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Version-6-.-0-of-the-UAH-Temperature-Dataset-%3A-New-Spencer-Christy/3492d91b60dbb3b37d82d98f80bebd8c8cb4fa99/figure/3

Is the research you are talking about https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969716327152 ? I took a look, and what I saw said cooling trend starting in 1998/1999, no mention of dates past 2015 for data and said a strong cooling trend from 1999 to 2014. Now, I wonder about 1979 through 2019.

I don’t trust GISS and I didn’t yet look into HadCRUT4 or RSS trends for the Antarctic Peninsula, because I found trend maps of these being not conveniently easy to get from images.google.com. I am surprised at images.google.com not doing as well for showing maps of degree/decade trends as it is for showing maps of temperature anomaly for a specific month or year.

Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
February 18, 2020 9:54 am

It did just occur to me, as a result of a 2/18/2020 posting in WUWT about Esperanza, to check out the latest reported trend for “south polar land” in UAH v6 TLT. That trend is warming at a rate of .10 degree/decade. This is pretty-much for the whole continent of Antarctica, excluding the “pole hole that is the area within 5 degrees of the South Pole. Although that is not a statement about a small part of Antarctica such as its peninsula or Esperanza, I found it surprising that UAH is now saying that continent is warming, because I have seen so much in WUWT over the years about it cooling and plenty of maps in images.google.com showing most of East Antarctica (which is the majority of Antarctica) cooling.

Reply to  Jim Steele
February 11, 2020 5:36 am

I just found a map of RSS 3.3 for all of the world covered by RSS from the beginning of 1979 to sometime in 2016:
comment image&w=1023

The Antarctica Peninsula is barely warming in that map.

(This map was taken from a 2017 Washington Post article supporting the RSS change from V. 3.3 to 4.0, which I disagree with. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/06/30/corrected-satellite-data-show-30-percent-increase-in-global-warming-matching-surface-data/)

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
February 11, 2020 3:21 pm

If you have not already, have a look at Tony Heller’s video, here:
https://youtu.be/aWlBiih1p9Y

The satellites are probably best for discerning the global temp as it related to CO2 effects, because that effect is supposed to be for the whole atmosphere.
But there are surface thermometer data going back far further into the past than the UHI or RSS records, and when those are examined, it can be seen that they have been altered from what was originally recorded.
And not a little, by a lot, over wide areas, including those places that had no thermometer data.
And the thing is, those changes altered the trends, totally changed the shape of the graphs, and made it so what the altered graphs say makes no sense when compared to contemporary accounts in print media, records of the extent and trends in sea ice and mountain glaciers around the world, and even unaltered maps from 40 years ago about sea level trends.
Prior to adjustments, there was a coherent picture that makes sense and tells a consistent story.
Post adjustments…the graphs make no sense and are in accord with only one thing: CO2 is the thermostat of the atmosphere.
Tony’s video shows what he has shown better than anyone: Massive adjustments have been done to all manner of historical records relating to climate, and it all smells very bad.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 11, 2020 3:26 pm

Meant to say unaltered graphs, not maps.
Here is what I am referring to, a tweet with a photo of the sea level trend graph for the 20th century, as reported prior to the era of global warming alarmism.
https://twitter.com/NickMcGinley1/status/1204122453737451531?s=20

All such records have been progressively and systematically altered, in stages, over the past 30 years or more, and these alterations are ongoing.
Some of the biggest alterations are being done to the most recent data, in order to keep every year the warmest evah.

February 9, 2020 7:38 pm

Hard to separate dishonesty from the noble cause fallacy. All caught up in the climate mindset of the time maybe.

https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/02/08/antarctica-hottest-ever/

Nicholas McGinley
February 9, 2020 7:44 pm

The fact is, one can almost always find some place on the planet experiencing record warmth for the date.
And just as surely, one can find the opposite, places experiencing record cold for the date.
By only ever talking about data points that would seem to “confirm” what is in fact a failed hypothesis, while studiously avoiding any mention of any contradictory data points, the media has created a certain impression in the minds of the gullible and easily cowed.
How many mentions in the mainstream media about the record cold in Alaska, or the deluges of rain that have just hit places in Australia?

observa
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 9, 2020 10:27 pm

”The fact is, one can almost always find some place on the planet experiencing record warmth for the date.”
Well if you can’t and you’re a climate changer then true to your name and profession you fiddle the books to suit your narrative-
http://www.waclimate.net/very-hot-days-marble-bar.html
and here’s the original BoM web page before they climate changed it-
https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20090330051442/http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/96122/20090317-1643/www.bom.gov.au/lam/climate/levelthree/c20thc/temp1.html

HotScot
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 10, 2020 1:07 am

Nicholas McGinley

You might take a browse to Electroverse – https://electroverse.net which documents some of the record breaking cold spells (not just a daily anomaly) across the globe right now that you most certainly will not hear about on the BBC.

Whilst the Aussie bush fires were covered and analysed in excruciating, hysterical detail, the plight of parts of Pakistan where hundreds died from ‘unprecedented’ snowfall were utterly ignored.

Today’s headline:

“ALL-TIME RECORD COLD INVADES EASTERN RUSSIA, WHILE MOSCOW JUST SUFFERED ITS CLOUDIEST-EVER JANUARY”

And a nice article on the Keeling Curve (which even as a layman I was always suspicious of):

“ACCORDING TO ‘DIRECT ATMOSPHERIC MEASUREMENTS,’ CO2 LEVELS WERE ABOVE 400 PPM IN THE 1940S…”

thomho
February 9, 2020 7:52 pm

The Antarctic Peninsula is only 960 km from the southern tip of the continent of South America so as the post points out the place where the temperature was recorded is not within the Antarctic circle
Moreover Antarctica is 1.7 times the size of Australia which in turn is about the same size of continental USA ( excluding Alaska and Hawaii) so think of Antarctica as being almost twice the size of mainland USA
Thus to claim a one day temperature record from a north wards jutting peninsula of Antarctica represents the temperature of that vast land is akin to saying a one day temperature from say Key Largo tells us what is happening to the climate of the USA and southern Canada
As for the South pole melting it is located at 2.3km of elevation with an average summer temperature of minus 28 c
The Media is quite shameless in publishing this alarmist tripe which is clearly designed to feed the growing public climate hysteria

donald penman
February 9, 2020 7:58 pm

I must admit I have stopped listening to what the media have to say and I feel much less stressed these days.

HotScot
Reply to  donald penman
February 10, 2020 1:19 am

donald penman

I stopped watching to, or listening to the BBC years ago for much the same reason. I found myself getting wound up and angry at the utter falsehoods they promote. I mean, just nonsense anyone with half a brain should take with a pinch of salt, but it’s just drip, drip, drip.

I often wonder if I’m confining myself to my own ‘bubble’ of confirmation bias, but I keep an eye on social media for news events and it’s actually quite amazing how many people attack the ridiculous claims made about the climate.

The latest announcement of banning the sales of ICE cars in 2035 went down like a lead balloon on Twitter.

The ongoing imposition of Smart meters by the back door (another failing government initiative) is missing every target set, and not by just a little, by a whole lot, and is universally despised.

But governments just never learn.

Wei Zhang
February 9, 2020 9:01 pm
Wei Zhang
February 9, 2020 9:03 pm

Overall, the temps on the continent are remarkably stable https://twitter.com/WeiZhangAtmos/status/1226230241338810368?s=20

James Schrumpf
February 9, 2020 10:17 pm

You know, these claims of record high temps are pretty elusive when you try to track them down in the data. I’ve just finished up installing the NOAA GHCN-Daily TMAX data set into my home Oracle database. It’s a half-billion daily records from over 40, 500 stations.

I remembered reading about some fantastic high temperature at Greenland a while ago, so I looked it up on Google. It was at the Kangerlussuaq Airport, which surprisingly does not have a station in the daily tmax data set, but there are other stations within a reasonable distance. I scanned the TMAX for every station nearby, and the max temp for found for any year was 2.55 C. on 26-Jul-1990. There was nothing even close to 20 C at any time at any of the stations in the NOAA dataset.

So whose data had such high temps at a time when NOAA’s data showed nothing out of the ordinary? It’s a bit mind-boggling.

James Schrumpf
Reply to  James Schrumpf
February 10, 2020 4:59 pm

I have to correct myself here. The GHCN-Monthly data set is in hundredths of degrees C, and I assumed the GHCN-Daily data set was the same. Well, it’s not, it’s in tenths of a degree C, so ignore my comment below. 16-JUN-14 does showa temperature of 23.3 C near the Kangerlussuaq Airport where the reading was taken.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  James Schrumpf
February 11, 2020 3:38 pm

Not sure if it is what you are referring to, but at least one claim of a record temp in Greenland last Summer was subsequently shown to be from a faulty thermometer or a bad reading of it.
That part of the story was not making international headlines like the original story based on phony data, of course.
Did you see where at least one data set did not show any warm days at Esparanza Base, until they suddenly appeared out of nowhere?

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  James Schrumpf
February 11, 2020 3:45 pm

Check out this video if you have time:
https://youtu.be/N7wrRmJ8n5w

WXcycles
February 9, 2020 10:25 pm

Jim, take a look, I took this screen yesterday from ECM when I was looking into what the ABC were yapping about re this topic. I found just one tiny blip during 24 hours and that blip was gone within 3 hours.

comment image

And that’s it!

We’re so doomed.

WXcycles
Reply to  WXcycles
February 9, 2020 10:42 pm

I should have included this with it, the mid Feb forecast, two weeks before Summer ends this year. It’s dropping toward -53 C before Summer is even done. Look at the Antarctic peninsula.

comment image

That ice sheet is here for much longer than humanity is.

Reply to  WXcycles
February 10, 2020 8:22 am

WX, from your png I cant tell the duration of the foehn event, is there a way we can document it only lasted 3 hours? That is an additional fact that is very informative showing alarmists can tell the difference between a 3hour weather event and climate

February 9, 2020 11:06 pm

More on the media’s Antarctica propaganda.

https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/02/09/antarctica-threatens-florida/

Doc Chuck
February 9, 2020 11:36 pm

Jim, Thanks for deconstructing the breathlessly (and brainlessly) asserted representation of the whole deeply frozen ice bound Antarctic continent by that remotest of weather stations that is over 3 times closer to the southern tip of South America and the thermally moderating seas between them than it is to the South Pole.

A couple of corrections are in order: The paragraph below that subtropical airflow graphic has some quantitative errors in temperatures cited. “[0.9 F.]” is of course not the equivalent of a 0.5 C. temperature (adding the 32 degrees F. base freezing temperature was neglected to arrive at 32.9 F.) And you’ll want the preposition corrected in the sentence “. . . foehn winds increased Esperanza’s temperatures to (not by) 17.5 °C [63.5 °F].”

Reply to  Doc Chuck
February 10, 2020 8:03 am

Hi Doc,

Yes I got sloppy when converting actual temperatures and change in temperatures from C to F. Indeed a temperature of 0.5 C should have been converted to an actual temperature of 32.9 F.

The statement “foehn winds increased Esperanza’s temperatures by 17.5 °C is correct given the starting temperature was 0C. My conversion to Fahrenheit should have read (31.5F) for the increase .

soldier
February 10, 2020 12:11 am

To melt the entire Antarctic ice sheet would require 355 x 27.5E+15 = 977.6E+16 MJ heat energy.
(i.e. total energy = 9,776,000,000,000,000,000 MJ)

But, the entire world’s proven energy reserves of oil, gas and coal in total have an energy content of only 2.87E+16 MJ and these reserves will last us for hundreds of years at current consumption rates.

What this means is that it would take 340 times the energy in all the planet’s fossil fuel reserves to melt the Antarctic ice sheet. (Check the data and do the maths yourself – it’s quite a revelation.)
Expressed another way, if we were stupid enough to squander all our energy reserves right away and we focussed all that energy onto the Antarctic ice sheet it would melt only 1/340th portion of it (or 0.3%).
And then we wouldn’t have any energy left to keep warm, or cook, or communicate, or travel, etc.

HotScot
Reply to  soldier
February 10, 2020 1:22 am

soldier

Renewables would save us. 🙂

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  soldier
February 11, 2020 4:05 pm

Did you account for the fact that all the ice first has to be warmed up to the melting point, being that it is almost entirely many tens of degrees below freezing?
I am not sure anyone knows exactly how cold the ice is at all depths and locations…but it is a safe bet it is somewhere near the average temperature there recently and in the past, due to thermal lag.

Graemethecat
February 10, 2020 1:52 am

If anyone on WUWT needs cheering up, I suggest having a look at this jaw-droppingly stupid article from our fave newspaper: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/10/overwhelming-and-terrifying-impact-of-climate-crisis-on-mental-health

Herbert
February 10, 2020 2:04 am

Jim,
If you go to Wikipedia for “Esperanza base”, you will find the fact of the new record on 6 February of 18.3C ( 64.9F) beating an earlier figure in 2015.
What also appears is that the lowest temperature ever recorded was -38.4C (-37.1F) on 18 July 1994.
Further, the temperature trend since 1948 is 0.035C. per year (0.0567F per year) (annual),+ .0413C per year ( +0.0743F per year) ( winter), and 0.0300C per year ( 0.0540 F per year) ( summer).
Hmm.
Temperature records less than a century old. I wonder what the Max and Min records were in the Little Ice Age.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Herbert
February 10, 2020 8:46 am

“Further, the temperature trend since 1948 is 0.035C”

Which is well outside the accuracy of the instruments. So, meaningless.

toorightmate
February 10, 2020 3:49 am

I look at Mawson Base temps on a daily basis – just for interest. I have not recorded the data, but have not noticed anything warmer than -29C so far this summer.

Brian R Catt
February 10, 2020 4:47 am

FACTS HERE: Fifty-year Amundsen–Scott South Pole station surface climatology

DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2012.06.027

No significant change in 54 years to 2012. And m none since if you check the last 8 years, even Nature says its getting rapidly cooler from getting rapidly hotter (Nature editorial speak, which means statistically insignificant fractions of a degree either way in real science. The continental trend is a net cooler regression coefficient.

The Guardian article is simply a deliberate and deceitful lie anyone but a believer can check as false. global temeratures are measured over a 30 year moving average across the globe. This is unusual weather but not atypical, either way, for this location.

This weather station has almost nothing in Common with most of Antarctica, demographically and geologically, apart from a marginal attachment, much closer to South America than the South Pole.. None of this is made clear, in fact the opposite illusion is promoted by this deliberately deceitfully alarmist piece. But then, it’s the Guardian. They don’t do science.

Bob Nabob
February 10, 2020 4:57 am

This needs a correction:

“During Esperanza’s 2015 record warmth, temperatures had hovered around 0.5°C [0.9 °F] the day before.“

Reply to  Bob Nabob
February 10, 2020 8:51 am

Hi Bob,

Indeed I got sloppy when converting actual temperatures and change in temperatures from C to F. Indeed a temperature of 0.5 C should have been converted to an actual temperature of 32.9 F.

BallBounces
February 10, 2020 6:28 am

I turned the temperature up in the den. The den’s new high is also “in keeping with the earth’s overall warming trend….”!

Tom Abbott
February 10, 2020 8:17 am

From the article: “Unfortunately, the media would rather scare the public to promote a climate crisis, than honestly educate them about the causes of natural climate variability.”

Great article, Jim. Thanks for setting the record staight.

All you have to do, when you see some overhyped aspect of CAGW in the media, is come to WUWT were experts on the subject will tell the real story.

Steve Z
February 10, 2020 9:10 am

This is typical cherry-picking by the global-warming scaremongering media. Calling Esperanza’s one-day warmth as typical of Antarctica is like calling Key West’s weather as typical of the continental United States in winter, since Key West is also at the end of a long peninsula sticking out into a warm ocean.

Of course, they neglect to mention the foehn effect, which is typical on the lee side of a mountain range when strong winds blow over the mountains–air over the mountains (which is usually relatively dry) is compressed and heated when it is blown into lower altitudes (at higher pressure), and dry air has a low specific heat and is easily warmed.

The foehn effect is very well-known in France, particularly along the northern slopes of the Pyrenees and along the Cote d’Azur (French Riviera), although at different times. If a storm is approaching France from the west, southerly winds ahead of the storm are compressed along the northern slopes of the Pyrenees, and cities such as Toulouse or Pau reach near-record highs the day before the storm, only to plunge by 15 to 20 C after the storm’s passage, when winds shift to the west or north.

The opposite is true along the French Riviera, with the Alps to the north and the Mediterranean to the south. If there is a storm over Germany, and high pressure over the Atlantic, strong northerly winds tend to bring cloudy and changeable weather over most of France, and snow over the northern Alps, but to the south of the Alps, the “mistral” winds bring clear and unseasonably warm weather, often reaching over 20 C in mid-winter, when it could be snowing just 100 km to the north.

So unseasonably warm and dry weather comes in with south winds over the Pyrenees, north winds along the Riviera (a few hundred km to the east), and none of this has anything to do with CO2, just the orientation of the wind relative to the mountains.

February 10, 2020 9:41 am

Strange how it can be readily accepted that descending air in Foehn events can contribute to surface warming whereas almost nobody acknowledges the same effect from descending air within high pressure areas worldwide.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Stephen Wilde
February 10, 2020 5:55 pm

I’ve wondered about that myself. What’s the difference?

Matt G
Reply to  Stephen Wilde
February 12, 2020 10:43 am

With high pressure systems the effect is not the same with descending air because it requires other mechanisms for it occur that are only present within a mountain.

These involve condensation, precipitation and turbulent mixing. Very cold temperatures at the surface in winter from high pressure systems are generally because they don’t have these and the coldest dense layer stays stable.

“In an anticyclone (high pressure) the winds tend to be light and blow in a clockwise direction (in the northern hemisphere). Also, the air is descending, which reduces the formation of cloud and leads to light winds and settled weather conditions.”

Reply to  Matt G
February 12, 2020 10:57 am

Incorrect.
See the Hadley cell as an extreme example.

Matt G
Reply to  Matt G
February 12, 2020 11:12 am

The rising air near the equator in the Hadley cell provides the condensation, precipitation and turbulent mixing.

Matt G
Reply to  Matt G
February 12, 2020 11:42 am

“The change of state from vapour to liquid water is accompanied by heating, and the subsequent removal of moisture as precipitation renders this heat gain irreversible, leading to the warming”

This warming is mixed within the noise over thousands of miles, so will have no effect with Hadley cell or Ferrel cell on the descending side. One of the Foehn mechanisms not mentioned requires radiative warming that behaves much different over a body of water compared with land.

February 10, 2020 9:52 am

As the air rose [up and over the peninsula’s mountain rang], its water vapor condensed, both releasing precipitation and releasing latent heat that had further warmed the air.

Umm…you may want to go back & learn/relearn some basic meteorology. Rising air does not *warm*, rising air cools as it ascends. Dry adiabatic lapse rate is a constant 9.8 °C/km (5.38 °F per 1,000 ft, 3 °C/1,000 ft) rising & falling. Moist adiabatic lapse rate varies strongly with temperature but a typical value is around 5 °C/km, (9 °F/km, 2.7 °F/1,000 ft, 1.5 °C/1,000 ft). So the release of latent heat keeps the cooling rate at around the 5 °C/km instead of the 9.8 °C/km. To say that the release of latent heat “further warmed the air” is factually incorrect.

Reply to  JKrob
February 10, 2020 10:39 am

Jkrob,

The statement is factually correct. Yes as air rises it cools at the adiabatic rate, that is why the water vapor condenses. However when water vapor condenses, it releases latent heat, which warms the air above what it would be if there was no water vapor.

Reply to  Jim Steele
February 10, 2020 10:45 am

The condensate immediately radiates the formerly latent heat away so that the lapse rate structure is broadly conserved.

Reply to  Stephen Wilde
February 11, 2020 2:00 am

The condensate immediately radiates the formerly latent heat away so that the lapse rate structure is broadly conserved.

That’s funny, I’ve never seen that dynamic shown on any Skew-T diagram or the math that defines it…which has been known about since the early 1900’s.

References please…

Reply to  Jim Steele
February 11, 2020 1:56 am

Jim,

Nice try…but no. It was cooling at a lesser rate (5 °C/km vs 9.8 °C/km). Your focus in the article of the *warming* is not justification to redefine a slower cooling rate…as “further warming”.

Words mean things. Use them properly.

Reply to  JKrob
February 11, 2020 11:04 am

JKrob,

You are oddly creating a problem when none exists simply via your choice of words. The dry adiabatic rate cools as a function of pressure/altitude. Air parcels experiencing the moist adiabatic rate are not cooled as fast as changes in pressure would dictate because latent heat is released and warms the air. I suggest you read up on the contribution of latent heat to foehn events

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  JKrob
February 11, 2020 2:19 pm

JKrob,
Normally I would just correct your mistake, but you went out of your way here to insist that anyone who claims a warming effect from air that climbs up and over a mountain, needs to go study basic meteorology.
Well, before one takes meteorology, one takes physical geography, in order to learn very basic stuff like what happens when air ascends over a mountain, the moisture condenses out of it, latent heat is released, and then the air warms by compression on the lee side of the mountain, such that by the time it returns to the same altitude it started out, what had been cool and moist air has become warm and dry air.
It is literally as basic as it gets JKrob.
If you actually consider yourself educated in this subject and are not just a bag of rude wrong hot air, here is a suggestion: Go study basic meteorology prerequisites…you aint ready for meteorology class yet.

Here in one simple picture are four of the ways that air can be warmed by ascending a mountain:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Foehn-warming-mechanisms-a-Upwind-of-the-mountain-cool-moist-air-can-be-blocked_fig1_277898709

This next one may help…as a child could understand it. It gives sample numbers along with the process of latent heat release and subsequent warming of air:

comment image

In your unnecessary and condescending comment, you did not even reference the entirety of the passage you yourself quoted.
The statement was that as air rose UP AND OVER the mountain, latent heat was released and this warmed the air.
That this happens is beyond dispute. These sorts of winds exist all over the planet, wherever there are mountains. The native Americans of the great plains had a name for these winds that in their language means “snow eater” wind…they call it a Chinook.

You may want to go back and relearn some basic manners, and civility…and while you are at it take a refresher in reading comprehension.
Everyone who is not trying to be a #@&%ing @$$&%@# knows exactly what Jim was saying, and those that also know a few things about the atmosphere know that what he described is factually correct.

Matt G
February 10, 2020 10:08 am

The foehn effect is very well-known especially in Scotland and England east of mountains. These areas record the highest temperatures during winter in the whole UK when these events occur.

Record temperatures in locations around the world high or low mean absolutely nothing until at least 700 years of data are available. (covering two ~360 sun cycles)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle#/media/File:Carbon14_with_activity_labels.svg

More accurately around 2000 to 4000 years, where activity peaks to peaks over this time period.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Sunspots_11000_years.svg

The BBC, Guardian and Independent (not mentioned on here, but like the other two) are a disgrace. Full of pseudoscience and nonsensical claims on a regular basis like a escalator of lies churning out almost daily.

There so called journalists seem to have a competition to see who is the most dishonest.

‘The BBC ….. stating, “Scientists warn that global warming is causing so much melting at the South Pole, it will eventually disintegrate…”‘

More absolute extreme nonsense.

These journalist obviously think ice melts at -37c, feels like -50c in wind chill and the forecast to turn colder later in week.

https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/antarctica/south-pole/ext

Elle Webber
February 10, 2020 10:34 am

Meanwhile in Canada—the national Global News newsreader Dawna Friesen reported this Antarctic temperature as part of her daily “the sky is falling!” portion of the news. She added that this high temperature was a degree over the previous high temp. She added for emphasis that this signified warming of a full degree Celsius in a mere 5 years!

JAXJEREMY
February 10, 2020 11:05 am

Thank you, Jim, for writing a great piece and calling out the mainstream media climate hucksters…When news first broke about the record-setting temps in Antarctica, I thought there was something rotten in Denmark..This was further reinforced by the plethora of alarmist articles immediately following the setting of the “record”. Sadly the unwashed masses will never get to read your piece and will continue to march along believing Antarctica is days away from melting into oblivion..

hallk
February 10, 2020 12:09 pm

People are posting this on facebook all scaredy like only it’s from NPR. I don’t even know what to say to them other than “sounds like a nice day.”

Brian
February 10, 2020 12:29 pm

“…temperatures had hovered around 0.5°C [0.9 °F]” [32.9 F]

Reply to  Brian
February 10, 2020 2:05 pm

Brian,

You are right and that correction was addressed in the comments above. The moderator has been asked to make the correction.

chris
February 10, 2020 1:23 pm

really, if you are disputing the measurements behind the news, you should provide measurements from your satellite and weather stations.

as the saying goes: talk is cheap

Reply to  chris
February 10, 2020 2:11 pm

Chris you miss the point of the article. The temperature is not being disputed. The causes and implications are. There is absolutely no reason to attribute any fraction of that warming to human climate change the media implies. The media ignored peer-reviewed papers showing the peninsula has cooled for 2 decades. Before you get snarky about “talk is cheap” your snarky self should read those papers.

Furthermore, the media totally fails to address that actual physics of the very short-lived warming event. Instead of educating people about common foehn wind effects, they misleadingly push global warming.

Indeed the media’s BS is an example of how cheap that dishonest talk can be.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  chris
February 11, 2020 3:55 pm

Talk is cheap, you got that part right Chris.
And none of it is cheaper than the 100% worthless drivel spewed and strewn by the alarmists and doomsday catastrophe crowd in academia and the MSM.
It literally has no value whatsoever.
Every word they speak makes the entire planet dumber.

Svend Ferdinandsen
February 10, 2020 2:44 pm

Of cause it can be a warm day at the peninsula. It is placed like Iceland is, just at the opposite half of the Earth.
Few peoble know how far north the peninsula stretches, and therefor it is used to scare peoble with warming.
There is more silence about the rest of Antarctica, because it is not warming.

TomRude
February 10, 2020 6:27 pm

And the Antarctica propaganda continues, this time with a tabular iceberg calving, courtesy of the WaPo Andrew Freedman
http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/iceberg-thats-twice-the-size-of-washington-cleaves-off-pine-island-glacier-in-antarctica-in-a-sign-of-warming/ar-BBZQUwK?ocid=ientp

“Iceberg that’s twice the size of Washington cleaves off Pine Island Glacier in Antarctica, in a sign of warming”

As usual this kind of propagandist obfuscates the fact that the largest observed tabular iceberg calved from Antarctica’ s Scott Island, was measured by the USS Glacier 335 x 97 km for a 31,000 km2 area in 1956!

4 Eyes
Reply to  TomRude
February 11, 2020 1:39 am

Big iceberg means big ice. Little iceberg, little ice

Tom Abbott
February 10, 2020 6:36 pm

OT, I think. Has anyone noticed the large move on the ENSO meter over the last day or so?

Or maybe I should say, who else has noticed, and what does it mean?

February 11, 2020 1:05 am

Don’t Don’t forget the drowning Polar Bears around Antarctica as a result of this warm record. https://youtu.be/tgbLrW1Lwic

4 Eyes
February 11, 2020 1:30 am

They had better hope that a record cold in never recorded anywhere because that will be proof of global cooling

Ragnaar
February 11, 2020 7:13 pm

“During Esperanza’s 2015 record warmth, temperatures had hovered around 0.5°C [0.9 °F] the day before.”

They are the same at negative 40.
0.5 C is about freezing. 0.9 F is well below that.

Reply to  Anthony Banton
February 13, 2020 1:49 pm

Same region, same weather dynamics, same fear mongering by the Guardian

JoHo
February 21, 2020 2:55 am

On the British news and newspapers; Up to half a million mussels have been ‘cooked to death’ in the unusually hot sea off the coast of New Zealand. Marine experts believe the mass deaths were caused by climate change.

The molluscs were washed up at Maunganul Bluff Beach on the North Island. Prof Chris Battershill of Waikato Uni said there has been similar losses of cockles and clams after too much sunlight in calm seas.

Is the sea temperature around North Island so hot they are can have this effect? My immediate thought was it must have been related to deep sea volcanic ‘rumblings’, heating the sea around this area.

%d bloggers like this: