Sea ice extent in Antarctica last month set a new record high for the month of May, according to data from the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). NSIDC data shows average sea ice extent around Antarctica reached 12.10 million sq. km. in May – some 12 per cent above the long term average for the period from 1981 to 2010 of 10.79 million sq.km. May sea ice extent in Antarctica is growing at a rate of 2.9 per cent per decade, according to NSIDC data. --Reporting Climate Science, 3 June 2015
Over the past 60 years the sea has risen by around 30 centimetres locally,sparking warnings that the atoll is set to disappear. But Paul Kench of the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and colleagues found no evidence of heightened erosion. After poring over more than a century’s worth of data, including old maps and aerial and satellite imagery, they conclude that 18 out of 29 islands have actually grown. “There is presently no evidence that these islands are going to sink,” says Virginie Duvat of the University of La Rochelle in France. --Penny Sarchet, New Scientist, 2 June 2015
The number of excuses for the global warming pause or hiatus had grown to more than 66 when the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) added yet another one to the list in a just-published study in Science. In their argument that came out yesterday, NOAA said that long-existing instrument bases have masked rising sea surface temperatures. Once they "readjusted" the data, the warming hiatus disappeared. By cooling the past, they were able to make the most recent years even warmer.
This assessment has drawn heavy criticism from both sides of the bitter climate debate, but one thing no one disputes: NOAA may have overstepped its authority in rewriting climate history and relying on faulty data sets. By making the early 1900s colder, and using only land-based temperature stations and less-reliable ocean temperatures, NOAA can now readjust the past to chart a new future.
A new paper posted today on ScienceXpress (from Science magazine), by Thomas Karl, Director of NOAA’s Climate Data Center, and several co-authors, that seeks to disprove the “hiatus” in global warming prompts many serious scientific questions.
The main claim by the authors that they have uncovered a significant recent warming trend is dubious. The significance level they report on their findings (.10) is hardly normative, and the use of it should prompt members of the scientific community to question the reasoning behind the use of such a lax standard.
E-mails obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency show that Harvard University, Syracuse University and two of their researchers appear to have falsely claimed a study supporting EPA’s upcoming global warming rules was conducted “independent(ly)” of the agency.
In early May, a study published in the journal Nature Climate Change purported to support a key EPA claim about its forthcoming global warming rules aimed at coal-fired power plants. The New York Times’ headline, “EPA Emissions Plan Will Save Thousands of Lives, Study Finds,” typified the media coverage.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists have found a solution to the 15-year “pause” in global warming: They “adjusted” the hiatus in warming out of the temperature record.
New climate data by NOAA scientists doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting pre-hiatus temperatures downward and inflating temperatures in more recent years.
“Newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA’s [National Centers for Environmental Information] do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus,'” wrote NOAA scientists in their study presenting newly adjusted climate data.
Yesterday, California's Democratic Legislature rammed through two new ambitious climate change proposals to make sure its cap-and-trade cash cow doesn't expire. The proposals would also attempt to reduce the state's carbon footprint, boost the use of renewable energy to 50 percent in 15 years, and extend the length of its money-making cap-and-trade program indefinitely.
In California, Gov. Jerry Brown's clarion call to limit CO2 emissions has been met with astonishment by fiscally conservative Republicans, especially in a state drowning in debt, inordinately high taxes, mass migration of talented workers, all while dealing with a naturally occurring four-year-long drought. The new proposals (Senate Bill 32 and AB 1288) being rubber stamped into law by the Democratic majorities in Sacramento are being pilloried by Republicans who claim these new regulations are akin to "coastal elitism that would kill working class jobs."
Science mag is publishing a blockbuster paper today, on June 4. Oh boy! Get ready to watch yet another big fight about climate change – this time mainly among different groups of climate alarmists. Is there a “pause”? Did global climate really stop warming during the last dozen years, 18 years, or even 40 years – in spite of rising levels of the greenhouse (GH) gas carbon dioxide?
The renowned National Climate Data Center (NCDC), a division of NOAA located in Asheville, NC, claims that the widely reported (and accepted) temperature hiatus (i.e., near-zero trend) is an illusion – just an artifact of data analysis – and that the global climate never really stopped warming. If true, what a blessing that would be for the UN-IPCC – and for climate alarmists generally, who have been under siege to explain the cause of the pause.
Last April, in a short, narrated YouTube series titled Black Swan Climate Theory  (BSCT), irrefutable evidence was presented that sometime between 2011 and 2015 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) had on two occasions rewritten its own version of Maine’s statewide climate history. The gist of my findings was that I believe I caught NOAA purposefully using computer code (algorithms ) to lower historic temperatures to promote present day temperatures as the warmest on record. The image above is from the new YouTube series posted after NOAA’s acknowledgement that they had indeed made improvements to Maine’s climate history.
Presidential nominee Rick Santorum (R) has a message for Pope Francis: "Leave the science to the scientists" and stop buying into the global warming debate. Santorum made these comments during an interview on Monday with WPHT after host Dom Giordano mentioned that the Pope would be weighing in on the climate change debate later this summer. This comes after a late-April climate conference that was sponsored by the Vatican and closed to anyone who dissented from the man-made global warming narrative.
Santorum, who is a "big fan" of the pope and also a Catholic, believes the nabobs of the liberal media have been misrepresenting the views of the pope by implying he's more liberal than the popes that preceded him. The pope "is as committed to the nuclear family as I am," the senator said. "I’m a huge fan of his and his focus on making sure that we have a healthier society." Santorum mentioned that the church should move forward with caution as it has not been on the right side of science a few times in the past.
“Legacy” or something.
The Obama administration is set to announce that it will require new rules to cut emissions from airplanes, expanding a quest to tackle climate change that has included a string of significant regulations on cars, trucks and power plants.
The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to report as early as Friday its conclusion that greenhouse gas emissions from airplanes endanger human health because they significantly contribute to global warming, although people familiar with the agency’s plans said the announcement could slip into next week.
President Obama's stance, expressed in his 2014 State of the Union address, is that the debate is settled, and climate change is a fact.
Obama is by no means unique in that view. Former Vice President Al Gore declared that "the science is settled."
This "settled science" vision about climate is held by many, including those in academia.
To call any science settled is sheer idiocy.