News that doesn't receive the necessary attention.

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Sea level in Stockholm, Sweden has dropped 1.25 ft. in last 100 yrs., Naples, Florida sea level only rose 2mm per yr. in past 100 yrs., NOAA data

*Update: Since I posted this, the links seem to be inactive.
-------------------------------------
7/31/13, "Tides and currents, Sea level trends," co-ops.nos.NOAA.gov


Stockholm, Sweden, "The mean sea level trend is -3.81 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.32 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from 1889 to 2011 which is equivalent to a change of -1.25 feet in 100 years.







Naples, Florida, "The mean sea level trend is 2.02 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.60 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from 1965 to 2006 which is equivalent to a change of 0.66 feet in 100 years," NOAA.gov




----------------------------------------------

"Sea level measurements have yet to prove any meaningful rise" but who cares. Global profiteers say sea level "is a number which will ultimately establish how billions in taxpayer money will be spent."

7/15/2011, "Contradictory Studies: UN Climate Body Struggling to Pinpoint Rising Sea Levels," Der Spiegel, Axel Bojanowski

"The United Nations' forecast of how quickly global sea levels will rise this century is vital in determining how much money might be needed to combat the phenomenon. But predictions by researchers
 
vary wildly, and the attempt to find consensus has become 

fractious. It is a number which will ultimately establish how billions in taxpayer money will be spent -- and it is one which is the subject of heated debate, both among politicians and scientists.

When the next report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is issued in two years, it will include a forecast for how high the world's oceans might rise by 2100. With 146 million people in the world currently living less than one meter above sea level, the forecast will be vital in determining how much money governments must spend on measures to protect people from
the rising waters and to resettle those in the most acute danger.

Eighteen scientists from 10 countries are involved in the task, and their first step is to determine which of the myriad studies relating to climate change's effect on ocean levels to consider. In the end, they are to establish a possible range, with the maximum being the most decisive -- and most contested -- number. Even more challenging, the estimates currently differ by almost five meters (16.5 feet).

The last IPCC report, which was issued in 2007, forecast an ocean level rise of up to 59 centimeters by the end of the century. Now, the UN experts must once again sift through hundreds of reports, and the haggling over their findings is not unlike the bargaining for the best price at the bazaar. On the one hand, researchers have published forecasts that are far higher than the result reported in the last IPCC report. On the other, sea level measurements have yet to prove any meaningful rise though there is agreement that they are, on global average, rising. "...

=========================

Comment: Amazing how unelected, unaccountable profiteers have all the power now.









.

Scary Reuters sea level report in UK Guardian based on 'new PNAS study' doesn't mention the study was about sea level estimates in the year 4013

A 7/15/13 Reuters article in the UK Guardian has a scary sounding headline about "sea level" rise "per degree of global warming" citing a new PNAS study. The article even quotes the lead author of the PNAS study saying how confident he is of his study's conclusions, that his results are a break from the "uncertainty" of the past, and provide a "robust" number. The author doesn't mention nor is it stated in the Reuters article that the study was an estimate of what things might be like 2000 years from now. You don't find this out unless you read the Abstract of the linked study. The article also doesn't note the overwhelming scientific consensus that global temperatures have been flat for at least 15 years, and that they may or may not rise appreciably in coming decades.

7/15/13, "Sea levels may rise 2.3 metres per degree of global warming, report says," Reuters, via UK Guardian (2.3 meters is approx. 7.5 feet)

Subhead: "Seas will remain high for centuries after temperatures have risen, with the likelihood of more frequent and damaging storms"

(parag. 7): ""In the past there was some uncertainty and people haven't known by how much," Levermann said. "We're saying now, taking everything we know, that we've got a robust estimate
of 2.3 meters of rising sea per degree of warming.""....
.
-----------------

The next sentence in the article says 2 meter high sea level flooding could wipe away large parts of Bangladesh and Florida within 86 years. It doesn't say that the 2.3 meters expressed confidently in the preceding sentence referred to 2000 years from now:

"Some scientific studies have projected sea level rise of up to 2 metres by 2100, a figure that would swamp large tracts of land from Bangladesh to Florida."...

------------------------------------

Following is PNAS Abstract linked in Reuters article, citation for 2000 years is near the end:

7/15/13, "The multimillennial sea-level commitment of global warming," PNAS, Levermann, Potsdam, et al.
.
"Abstract"

"Global mean sea level has been steadily rising over the last century, is projected to increase by the end of this century, and will continue to rise beyond the year 2100 unless the current global mean temperature trend is reversed. Inertia in the climate and global carbon system, however, causes the global mean temperature to decline slowly even after greenhouse gas emissions have ceased, raising the question of how much sea-level commitment is expected for different levels of global mean temperature increase above preindustrial levels. Although
sea-level rise over the last century has been dominated by ocean warming and loss of glaciers, the sensitivity suggested from records of past sea levels indicates important contributions should also be expected from the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets. Uncertainties in the paleo-reconstructions, however, necessitate additional strategies to better constrain the sea-level commitment. Here we combine paleo-evidence with simulations from physical models to estimate the future sea-level commitment on a multimillennial time scale and compute associated regional sea-level patterns. Oceanic thermal expansion and the Antarctic Ice Sheet contribute quasi-linearly, with 0.4 m °C−1 and 1.2 m °C−1 of warming, respectively. The saturation of the contribution from glaciers is overcompensated by the nonlinear response of the Greenland Ice Sheet. As a consequence we are committed to a sea-level rise of approximately 2.3 m °C−1 within the next 2,000 y. Considering the lifetime of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, this imposes the need for fundamental adaptation strategies on multicentennial time scales." 
.

 ===============================
.

4/25/2013 Congressional testimony citing 15 year global warming pause:

Dr. Judith Curry, 4/25/13, "STATEMENT TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE AND TECHNOLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Hearing on “Policy Relevant Climate Issues in Context," 25 April 2013, Judith A. Curry, Georgia Institute of Technology:

page 3, "Since 1998 there has been no statistically significant increase in global surface temperature. While many engaged in the public discourse on this topic dismiss the significance of a hiatus in increasing global temperatures because of expected variations associated with natural variability, analyses of climate model simulations find very unlikely a plateau or period of cooling that extends beyond 17 years in the presence of human-induced global warming....Others have suggested that the pause could last up to two decades (11) or even longer, owing to the transition to the cool phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation that is associated with a predominance of La Nina (cool) events."...footnote 11, Aug.-Sept. 2009, "Advancing Climate Prediction Science," WMO, Geneva (p. 3 graph shows cooling in early 2000's)


-----------------------------------

UN IPCC Chief notes 17 year pause in global warming:

2/21/13, IPCC Head Pachauri Acknowledges Global Warming Standstill,” The Australian, Graham Lloyd
 
"The UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office."...


================================== 

UK Met Office notes pause in global warming since 1998:

1/18/13,Climate change: scientists puzzle over halt in global warming,” Der Spiegel, by Axel Bojanowski (translation from German)

"The British Met Office forecast even more recently that the temperature interval could continue at a high level until the end of 2017 - despite the rapidly increasing emissions of greenhouse gases . Then global warming would pause 20 years."..."The exact reasons of the temperature standstill since 1998, are not yet understood, says climate researcher Doug Smith of the Met Office."...
 








 



UK Met Office chart via Der Spiegel   



=========================

Comment: Reuters and UK Guardian articles citing new studies of alleged CO2 terror can trigger billions of dollars changing hands. It's important the articles not be grossly misleading.





.

1122 record cold temps last week of July 2013 in US

7/30/13, "1,122 Record Cold Temps in the U.S. in one week," IceAgeNow.info Robert

"Here it is, from July 23 to July 29 (1 week) in the U.S.. 1,122 Record Cold Temps, 173 Record
 Warm temps. View this map interactively. Click on any of the 1,122 dots and see the details, including new record, old record, and date of the old record.
http://wx.hamweather.com/maps/climate/records/1week/us.html?cat=maxtemp,mintemp,snow,lowmax,highmin". via Climate Depot










.

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

UN IPCC Chief says he won't rest until he sees major economic changes, says that's real issue, climate just part of it-Nature, 2007

12/19/2007, "Newsmaker of the year: Rajendra Pachauri," Nature.com, Gabrielle Walker

"“We have been so drunk with this desire to produce and consume more and more whatever the cost to the environment that we're on a totally unsustainable path,” he says. “I am not going to rest easy until I have articulated in every possible forum the need to bring about major structural changes in economic growth and development. 

That's the real issue. Climate change is just a part of it.""...(item midway in article, 2 parag. below picture of Pachauri captioned, "In Delhi, at the office," 19 parags. from end)






.

Sunday, July 28, 2013

No drought in Cooperstown, rain delay at Baseball Hall of Fame ceremonies













7/28/13, "Baseball fans sit in the rain during a delay in the Baseball Hall of Fame induction ceremony on Sunday, July 28, 2013, in Cooperstown, N.Y.," ap

Still no drought in Denver, tarp on the field in the 9th, Brewers v Colorado Rockies

























7/27/13, "Member of the field guards pulls the tarpaulin after umpires halted play because of heavy rains as the Colorado Rockies prepared to bat against the Milwaukee Brewers in the bottom of the ninth," final 7-5 Brewers, ap



















7/27/13, "Heavy rain falls on Milwaukee Brewers pinch-hitter Khris Davis as he singles while Colorado Rockies catcher Wilin Rosario looks on in the ninth inning in Denver. Umpires halted play as the Rockies came to bat in the bottom of the ninth," final 7-5 Brewers, ap










.







.

Saturday, July 27, 2013

Pterosaur author says 'there's no crying in baseball and there's no 'trust' in science,' 'everything in science is measurable and repeatable,' no exceptions-Pterosaur Heresies

7/28/13, "There’s no crying in Baseball” and there’s no “Trust” in Science.," Pterosaur Heresies

"A recent letter to PterosaurHeresies mentioned that the writer and, according to him, most of the paleontology community, couldn’t “trust” my drawings and interpretations.
 
I told him that’s how it should be. This is Science.

There is no “trust” in Science.

He and others have the opportunity to and should (if they have the opportunity to) duplicate the observations or tests and see if those interpretations and results differ or are the same as published.

After all, that’s what I do everyday. I find out what I can trust, because I’ve duplicated it –and what I can’t trust, because I can’t duplicate it.

In Science there is only testing.

Everything in Science is measurable and repeatable. If it works for me, it should work for you and vice versa. There are no special circumstances. The supernatural does not enter in. If you don’t get my results, one of us (not always me) has done something wrong. Maybe the taxon inclusion list was not broad enough? Maybe a suture and a crack were misidentified.

The writer and others like him don’t like it when I test their suppositions and traditions and they tell me so. That’s good because they might be right every so often or even more often than not. And I need to know these things to improve the site.

Or vice versa they might learn something they didn’t know before. They might see new possibilities that bust old paradigms.

The whole point of a flexible medium, like the Internet, is to get it right, provide  updates and always be on the cutting edge. That’s why I make changes as new valid data comes in.
 
However, if you’re going to bitch, at least have the decency of providing valid data and results that make sense and back up your statements. Discussing technique, past history or any other issues involving the author deftly avoids the real issue: the taxon in question. If you keep your focus on the reptile(s) you’ll have a better reception for your query or comment and you might even get your wish, a change in the website!

I appreciate those who provide valid alternatives as solutions, but, paraphrasing Jimmy Foxx, There’s no crying in Science either. If you know solutions, you need to provide them. If you know someone who has a solution that differs from mine, have that person get in touch to run that solution by. If you just want to cry about it, you’re not helping your cause, your Science or this blog.

And please, no excuses that, ”it would take eons to go through all, of my mistakes.” Pick one or two and we’ll start from there. Build credibility. Stay with the taxa. Keep your comments focused on the reptiles. Stop bitching about the technique or yours truly. In the end, we’re going to end up swapping photographs as evidence anyway, so telling me photographs are useless is likewise illogical. The Brits defeated the Nazis using photographic interpretation, as shown recently on a PBS special. So it’s a valid tool.

Now let’s go people. Keep those cards and letters coming in!
(but only with solutions attached)…" image above from "A League of their own," 1992 movie, via PterosaurusHeresies





.

Exec. Director of Greenpeace denies peer reviewed science that Alaska has cooled 2.4F since 2000 which scientists say is 'a large value for a decade.' Too bad Greenpeace is anti-science. 2013 was even colder, record cold for Fairbanks

2012, "The First Decade of the New Century: A Cooling Trend for Most of Alaska," G. Wendler, L. Chen and B. Moore, Alaska Climate Research Center, Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA  

--------------------------------------

7/26/13, "After Alaska cooled 2.4F last decade, Greenpeace executive director Phil Radford claims that Lisa Murkowski is "a major cause" of Alaskan glacier retreat," Tom Nelson

"Twitter / Phil_Radford: Alaska's glaciers retreat from ...
Alaska's glaciers retreat from climate change, and Senator continues to be a major cause of the problem...
Flashback: Forget global warming, Alaska is headed for an ice age | Alaska Dispatch
"In the first decade since 2000, the 49th state cooled 2.4 degrees Fahrenheit.""

=================================

Scientists say Alaska's 2.4 degrees Fahrenheit cooling since 2000 is "a large value for a decade:"

2012, The First Decade of the New Century: A Cooling Trend for Most of Alaska," G. Wendler*, L. Chen and B. Moore, Alaska Climate Research Center, Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA  

Alaska cooled -2.4F in the past decade which scientists say is "a large value for a decade:"

As of Dec. 2012: "The mean cooling of the average of all stations was 1.3°C (2.4) for the decade, a large value for a decade."...

2012, The First Decade of the New Century: A Cooling Trend for Most of Alaska," G. Wendler*, L. Chen and B. Moore

Alaska Climate Research Center, Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA

"We analyzed the temperature change of the first decade of the 21st century for Alaska, both for annual and seasonal values. For this study we used all first order meteorological stations in Alaska, which are operated by professional meteorologist of the National Weather Service (NOAA).


There are 20 such stations, fairly well distributed over the
different climatic zones of Alaska [1]. We limited our
investigation to these stations, as all of these have similar or
identical in instrumentation and operational procedures. In
Fig. (1) the location of these stations is given.
There are many more climate stations operating in
Alaska, run by different federal, state and local entities
as

well as by the industry and private individuals. The quality
of these stations is mixed, but it should not be taken as an
indication that all of these are of poor quality....


1926 was the warmest year ever recorded not only in Fairbanks, but also in
Sitka (southeastern Alaska) and Barrow (northern Alaska),

for which stations the data are available. The mean decadal
temperatures of Fairbanks show for the 1980’s the highest
value (-1.94°C) followed by the 1920’s (-2.39°C) and 1990’s
(-2.59°C). Further, a sudden temperature increase in Alaska
was recorded starting in 1977 [5], seemingly driven by the
change in polarity of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)
Index [6], which went from dominantly negative before 1977
to dominantly positive values after that year. An update
version of the temperature trend for the mean of the 20
Alaskan first order stations is presented in Fig. (2), showing

that the temperature increase was non-linear. Besides the
strong temperature increase starting in 1977, on which

Hartmann and Wendler [5] reported,
a cooling trend in the
2nd half of the first decade of the new century is clearly visible
.


At this time it cannot be decided whether this is a
climatic shift during the first decade of the 21st century or if
it represents decadal-interdecadal variability."..,


============================= 

"The 49th state has long been labeled one of the fastest-warming spots on the planet. But that's so 20th Century."

12/23/12, "Forget global warming, Alaska is headed for an ice age," Alaska Dispatch, Alex DeMarban

"The 49th state has long been labeled one of the fastest-warming spots on the planet. But that's so 20th Century.

In the first decade since 2000, the 49th state cooled 2.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

The nation's icebox is getting even icier. That may not be news to Alaskans coping with another round of 50-below during the coldest winter in two decades, or to the mariners locked out of the Bering Sea this spring by
record ice growth."... 

 
================================

Despite Greenpeace science denial, Alaska's 2013 record cold temperatures continued including in Fairbanks:

5/15/13, "Record cold continues in Interior Alaska," newsminer.com, Tim Mowry

"More cold temperature records fell at several locations around the Interior on Tuesday morning, though not in Fairbanks, and more may fall today as the result of a cold air mass that is holding spring hostage in much of the state.

Eielson Air Force Base recorded a temperature of 22 degrees Tuesday morning, breaking the record of 26 set in 1954. The College Observatory at the University of Alaska Fairbanks had a low temperature of 21 degrees, which broke the old mark of 24 set in 1964.

In Bettles, 250 miles north of Fairbanks, the low of 11 degrees shattered the record of 22 degrees set in 1986. Galena saw a temperature of 13 degrees, breaking the record of 16 in 1965.

The low temperature of 23 degrees at Fairbanks International Airport fell 2 degrees shy of tying the record of 21 set in 1913.

The cold temperatures are the result of a cold air mass that moved into Alaska on Sunday night and that has remained over the northern part of the state for the past two days.

Record or near-record cold temperatures were expected again Tuesday night and this morning, but things should gradually begin to warm up later today, said meteorologist Ed Plumb at the National Weather Service in Fairbanks. Highs today should get into the mid-40s, and high temperatures on Thursday are expected to be in the low to mid-50s.


A chinook moving through the Alaska Range could bring even warmer temperatures Friday, but they will be short-lived. More cold air is forecast to move into the area from the west Friday night, dropping the high temperatures back into the 40s during the weekend, Plumb said. The cold air mixed with the chinook could produce some rain or snow Friday night or Saturday.

The good news is that early next week it should start to warm up to more normal temperatures, which at this time of year are 60 degrees for a high and 37 for a low.

Fairbanks set a record low of 22 degrees Monday, and temperatures in many spots in the northern and western Interior failed to climb above freezing Monday. In Bettles, which set a record low of 10 degrees Monday, the high temperature was only 27 above, which was the latest occurrence ever recorded with an afternoon temperature in the 20s.

Fairbanks also set a new record for the coldest high temperature at the airport Monday with a high temperature of 37 degrees. That broke the record of 40 set in 1937.

Other record low maximum temperature records were reported at Galena (31), Tanana (34) and Eielson Air Force Base (38).

Fairbanks avoided another record cold high temperature Tuesday when the high temperature at the airport hit 40 degrees, surpassing the record of 39 degrees in 1937." 


==================================

Following are 3 more citations on this topic, two relating to 2011 and one to 2012:


Nov. 2011 Washington Post, record cold temperatures in Alaska interior:

11/17/11, "Record smashing cold in interior Alaska, Fairbanks," Washington Post, J, Samenow

"A frigid Arctic air mass, unusual even by Alaska standards, is dropping the mercury in the state’s interior to unheard of levels in mid-November. Stunningly low temperatures in the -35 to -50 range have gripped the region since Tuesday. These temperatures are some 25 to 40 degrees colder than average.

This morning, Fairbanks airport dropped to 40 below zero, breaking the old record of 39 below. That’s after setting a record low of 35 below Tuesday morning, breaking the old record of 33 below from 1956. Wednesday’s low of -39 just missed 1969’s record of -41.

Eielson Air Force Base in Fairbanks dropped to an incredible 42 below Wednesday morning, shattering the old record of 37 below set in 1956. This morning, it dropped to 42 below again, setting another new record low. The average low is -7."...


 ---------------------------------------

March 2012 Bering Sea ice extent record:

NSIDC announced record ice in Bering Sea in March 2012 (scroll down for Bering Sea citation):

"High ice extent in the Bering Sea

In the Bering Sea, off Alaska, ice extent reached a record high for the month of March. Persistent winds pushed the sea ice southward and froze more seawater into ice.".


============================ 

Feb.  2012 Bering Sea ice extent record:
.
NASA, NSIDC: "February 2012 had the highest ice extent for the area since satellite records started."... earthobservatory.nasa.gov

"For most of the winter of 2011–2012, the Bering Sea has been choking with sea ice. Though ice obviously forms there every year, the cover has been unusually extensive this season. In fact, the past several months have included the second highest ice extent in the satellite record for the Bering Sea region, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC)....

NSIDC data indicate that ice extent in the Bering Sea for most of this winter has been between 20 to 30 percent above the 1979 to 2000 average. February 2012 had the highest ice extent for the area since satellite records started."... 


==================================

A 2005 peer reviewed study on Alaska climate suggests the year 1976 alone led to misunderstanding of Alaska long term climate. From the Abstract:

"When analyzing the total time period from 1951 to 2001, warming is observed; however, the 25-yr period trend analyses before 1976 (1951–75) and thereafter (1977–2001) both display cooling, with a few exceptions. In this paper, emphasis is placed
on the importance of taking into account the sudden changes
that result from abrupt climatic shifts, persistent regimes,
and the possibility of cyclic oscillations, such as the PDO,
in the analysis of long-term climate change in Alaska."...

Nov.  2005, "The Significance of the 1976 Pacific Climate Shift in the Climatology of Alaska," Brian Hartmann and Gerd Wendler, Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska
 
(Manuscript received 20 April 2004, in final form 25 February 2005)  

Introduction: "In 1976, the North Pacific
region, including
Alaska, underwent a dramatic shift to a climate regime that saw great increases in winter and spring temperatures, and lesser increases in summer and autumn, 
when compared to the previous 25 yr."...It is shown that a significant amount of the warming trend seen throughout
Alaska during the last half of the twentieth century is 
largely a result of the sudden shift in 1976,
The temperature trends of the 25-yr climate periods that correspond to 
opposite phases of the Pacific decadal oscillation 

before and after the shift are not uniform, most often 

indicating cooling, and may contradict
some ideas about long-term climate change
as it relates to Alaska insofar 

as all of the regions in sub-Arctic Alaska have experienced

a net cooling since 1977."

==================================

Philip Radford is Executive Director of Greenpeace

===================== 

Comment: This post isn't intended to prove or disprove the hypothesis that human CO2 is destroying the planet or is capable of doing so (it's not), or that even though US CO2 has plunged and has little to no effect on the global number, murderous profiteers are anxious for US taxpayers already forced into poverty by criminal politicians to sign a global "treaty" and transfer their meager earnings to unelected, unaccountable UN parasites.
.
===========================

10+ climate citations Greenpeace hasn't likely seen:

============================

1. 30 year peer reviewed study finds CO2 does not cause rising temperatures. Using 8 datasets, scientists find CO2 lags land surface, sea surface, and lower troposphere temperatures: 

Jan. 2013, "The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature," Global and Planetary Change, Ole Humluma, b, Corresponding author contact information, E-mail the corresponding author,Kjell Stordahlc, Jan-Erik Solheimd







.







"Abstract

"Using data series on atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperatures we investigate the phase relation (leads/lags) between these for the period January 1980 to December 2011. Ice cores show atmospheric CO2 variations to lag behind atmospheric temperature changes on a century to millennium scale....In our analysis we use eight well-known datasets:

  • 1) globally averaged well-mixed marine boundary layer CO2 data, 
  • 2) HadCRUT3 surface air temperature data,  
  • 3) GISS surface air temperature data,  
  • 4) NCDC surface air temperature data, 
  • 5) HadSST2 sea surface data,  
  • 6) UAH lower troposphere temperature data series,  
  • 7) CDIAC data on release of anthropogene CO2, and  
  •  8) GWP data on volcanic eruptions. "... 
 =================================== 

2. 6/4/12,Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006,” Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage




 

“Not only that, but as my top chart shows, US CO2 emissions are falling even faster than what President Obama pledged in the global Copenhagen Accord.”…

-------------------------

US CO2 has plunged while that of other countries has risen. The US has little to no effect on global CO2 due to China's high number:

6/10/13, CO2 emissions chart from IEA report, p. 2 












—————————————————–






3. UN IPCC, 2/21/13, IPCC Head Pachauri Acknowledges Global Warming Standstill,” The Australian, Graham Lloyd

"The UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office."...


======================

4. 1/18/13, "The British Met Office forecast even more recently that the temperature interval could continue at a high level until the end of 2017 - despite the rapidly increasing emissions of greenhouse gases . Then global warming would pause 20 years."..."The exact reasons of the temperature standstill since 1998, are not yet understood, says climate researcher Doug Smith of the Met Office."...1/18/13, “Climate change: scientists puzzle over halt in global warming,” Der Spiegel, by Axel Bojanowski (translation from German)
 








UK Met Office chart via Der Spiegel   






----------------------------------------------

5. Dr. Judith Curry, 4/25/13, "STATEMENT TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE AND TECHNOLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Hearing on “Policy Relevant Climate Issues in Context," 25 April 2013, Judith A. Curry, Georgia Institute of Technology:

page 3, "Since 1998 there has been no statistically significant increase in global surface temperature. While many engaged in the public discourse on this topic dismiss the significance of a hiatus in increasing global temperatures because of expected variations associated with natural variability, analyses of climate model simulations find very unlikely a plateau or period of cooling that extends beyond 17 years in the presence of human-induced global warming....Others have suggested that the pause could last up to two decades (11) or even longer, owing to the transition to the cool phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation that is associated with a predominance of La Nina (cool) events."...footnote 11, Aug.-Sept. 2009, "Advancing Climate Prediction Science," WMO, Geneva (p. 3 graph shows cooling in early 2000's)

Dr. Curry says temperatures may move from flat to cool: 6/14/13, "Week in review," Climate, Etc., JudithCurry.com


----------------------------------------------- 

6. 6/20/13, Hans von Storch of the Meteorological Institute of the University of Hamburg, "Climate Expert von Storch: Why Is Global Warming Stagnating?" Der Spiegel, Stampf and Traufetter: 
 
"Climate experts have long predicted that temperatures would rise in parallel with greenhouse gas emissions. But, for 15 years, they haven't. In a SPIEGEL interview, meteorologist Hans von Storch discusses how this "puzzle" might force scientists to alter what could be "fundamentally wrong" models.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Storch, Germany has recently seen major flooding. Is global warming the culprit?

Storch: I'm not aware of any studies showing that floods happen more often today than in the past. I also just attended a hydrologists' conference in Koblenz, and none of the scientists there described such a finding."...


---------------------------------------------------

7. NOAA "State of the Climate in 2008," released in August 2009, stated that 15 year lack of warming would be point at which prediction models have failed. 
Scientists in 2008 noted already a decade of no warming, a then approximate 10 year pause in rising temperatures (which as of 2013 is a 15 year pause), and that a 15 year pause would invalidate predictions:

p. 22, "Do global temperature trends over the last decade falsify climate predictions?"

"Observations indicate that global temperature rise has slowed
in the last decade (since 1998) (Fig. 2.8a)....This is despite a steady increase

in radiative forcing as a result of human activities 

and has led some to

of substantial twenty-first

century warming (Lawson 2008; Carter 2008)....

p. 23, "Near-zero and even negative trends are common for intervals
of a decade or less in the simulations, due to the model’s internal climate variability.

The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more, suggesting
that an observed absence of warming of 

this duration is needed to create a discrepancy
with the expected

present-day warming rate." 



============================

8. 11/29/12, 134 scientists write to UN Sec. Gen. Ban Ki-Moon, asking him to desist from blaming climate disasters on global warming that hasn't happened: "Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years."...“The NOAA “State of the Climate in 2008” report asserted that 15 years or more without any statistically-significant warming would indicate a discrepancy between observation and prediction. Sixteen years without warming have therefore now proven that the models are wrong by their creators’ own criterion.”…(2nd parag. fr. end of letter). “Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years.”…"Policy actions that aim to reduce CO2 emissions are unlikely to influence future climate. Policies need to focus on preparation for, and adaptation to, all dangerous climatic events, however caused."...Special to Financial Post, 12/10/12

================================= 

9. NOAA study says US 2012 weather extremes due to natural causes, not global warming:
 
4/12/13, “Study Reveals Global Warming Not To Blame For Last Year’s Crippling Drought,” stlouis.cbslocal.com with AP
.
“A new federal study reveals that global warming is not to blame for last year’s extreme drought that crippled the central Great Plains. The study conducted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Drought Task Force places the blame on natural variations.“…  


------------------------------

10. 5/28/13, Peer reviewed NASA study says Superstorm Sandy not due to man-caused global warming or climate change:

5/28/13, "On the impact angle of Hurricane Sandy's New Jersey landfall," Geophysical Research Letters, Hall and Sobel

"Hall and Sobel report their findings in a paper published last week (29 May 2013) in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union."...


============

Following are two reports noting the above Sandy finding:

6/3/13, "Hurricane Sandy took highly unusual path, but climate change doesn’t get the blame – yet," blogs.AGU.org, by Sarah Charley

7/12/13, "Hurricane Sandy Was 1-in-700-Year Event," LiveScience.com, Elizabeth Howell

=============================

News of US CO2 plunge has been described as:


==============================


If you get your news only from broadcast television networks, you wouldn't know that global warming has "paused" for at least 15 years:

7/11/13, "Networks Do 92 Climate Change Stories; Fail to Mention 'Lull' in Warming All 92 Times, ABC, CBS and NBC ignore 'mystery' warming plateau in favor of alarmism about sea levels, allergies, weather." Wall St. Journal, Julia A. Seymour

"Just since Jan. 1, 2013, ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening news programs have aired 92 stories about "climate change" or "global warming." Not a single one of those stories mentioned the "warming plateau" reported even by The New York Times on June 10."...  


 ====================

In 2012, EPA freely admits cutting greenhouse gas emissions at US electric utility units won't effect US CO2 emissions. They say it's to stimulate investment and to send a "signal internationally." A signal of what, they don't say. Perhaps it's a political signal:

3/27/12, "Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units," EPA, Carbon Pollution Standard, Fed. Register, draft, epa.gov

p. 49, "While this proposed rule also will not have direct impact on U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases under expected economic conditions, it provides assurance that emission rates from new fossil fuel-fired generation will not exceed the level of the standard and will send a strong signal both domestically and
internationally. 


Domestically, this proposed rule can further stimulate investment in CCS and other clean coal technologies, 


by making it clear that such technologies do provide a clear path forward for new coal-fired generating capacity. 
 
Internationally,

to consider less GHG-intensive forms of power generation."...via USNews.com 
 

==================================


Does the EPA not really care about global warming
 

or are they working to end America's use of coal?

Does the EPA only want to increase the price of energy by making it harder to build low-cost electricity generation?

What explains the EPA's actions? And why are taxpayers paying for this nonsense?

The only thing we know for sure is that the EPA claims that global warming is a problem and
then announces rules that the agency admits does nothing about it. Draw your own conclusions."





 


..

Followers

Blog Archive

About Me

My photo
I'm the daughter of an Eagle Scout (fan of the Brooklyn Dodgers and Mets) and a Beauty Queen.