To date, every single NOAA, NASA, and IPCC Climate Model has gotten it wrong.
To counter this now obvious flaw, climate science agencies adopted the following strategy: utilize flashy marketing techniques when selling new “updated” climate models, focus media attention on supposedly once in-a-lifetime weather phenomenon, and most importantly, convince the public to patiently wait for the inevitable rise in global temperatures.
The ridiculous nature of this strategy is satirically portrayed in the photo (right) with an associated implied message here paraphrased as… just keep dressing yourself in a swimsuit even though there is snow on the ground, snow in the trees, and its cold outside. Not to worry, because eventually your dress attire will suit the climate. Shockingly for eighteen years the public has dutifully followed this crazy climate science mandate.
The Obama administration is seeking to hitch its climate change message onto that of the ever-popular Pope Francis, whose upcoming environmental encyclical has drawn more speculation than any papal document in recent memory. The head of the Environmental Protection Agency met Friday with senior Vatican officials who helped draft the document, which is expected to be released in June or July. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told reporters that her aim was to show how aligned President Obama and Francis are on climate change. She added: “It’s certainly not my place to dictate to the pope what he should be doing in an encyclical.” --Associated Press, 30 January 2015
I made a promise to myself that I would not write about President Obama’s State of the Union speech because that would require me to watch him deliver it. Like many others I can barely watch him under any circumstance because, to my mind, that means having to watch a psychopathic liar. The problem with that is that he is the President for two more years.
And then I read an article on Politico.com, “Republicans outfox Democrats on climate votes” subtitled “The GOP accepts the notion of climate change, but not in the way the Democrats wanted them to.”
Al Gore once suggested that since climate change is a “moral issue,” it is “beyond politics.” You must not question “settled” science or policy “consensus.” You must check your brain at the door, and obey the dictates of, er, politicians.
Moral issues are ultimately about how we treat each other. Those such as Mr. Gore who espouse grim Biblical projections of droughts, floods and plagues of insects, all caused by the malign hand of industrial capitalist man, claim that they are only “speaking up for” poor people both now and in the future. They stand against “intergenerational tyranny.”
Seems we have literally "lucked" out. An international team of researchers set out to find why the computer climate models keep getting it wrong. Over and over again. The results of their work were published in the Journal Nature. Turns out the 18-year-pause in global warming no one expected can be blamed on "chance."
We're not out of the woods yet, though. According to a lead researcher, if "massive climate policies" aren't undertaken now, global warming will have "reached a grave magnitude by the end of this century." Now does that sound like an unbiased researcher? From Deutsche Welle:
The research team has just published his results in the journal Nature. With the help of a multi-step calculation, Marotzke and Forster ruled out systematic errors in the models. Instead, the researchers now blamed serendipity for the current lull in global warming. On the basis of their calculations, they say there is no reason to doubt current forecasts detailing strong global warming.
Turns out global warming is nothing new.
Solar radiation has been warming Siberian permafrost for the past 7,000 years, according to a new peer-reviewed study — long before human greenhouse gas emissions began to build up in the atmosphere.
Researchers with Germany’s Alfred Wegener Institute looked at ice wedges found under the Siberian tundra to examine what the winter climate has been like in the region for thousands of years. What they found was that Siberian winters have been gradually warming during that time. Not only did they find a warming trend, but they found that increased intensity and duration of solar activity in the last 7,000 years has been causing winter temperatures in the region to rise.
Basal geothermal heat flow melts/collapses Hagafellsjökull Glacier in IcelandWest Antarctica, Greenland, the central Arctic Ocean Basin, Iceland, and now the Svalbard Island Chain have one thing in common: powerful and currently active geological forces—specifically geothermal heat flow and associated fluid release—are melting their glacial ice masses. This contention is supported by previous postings here, here, here, and here.
So where exactly is the Svalbard Island Chain, and of what importance is it? Thrust into prominence by recent reports of rapid ice melting in one specific continental glacier, these islands are located north of Iceland along the giant Mid-Atlantic / Arctic Mid-Ocean Rift Complex.
This broad geological region has been the focus of debate concerning the cause of what climate experts perceive as unnatural amounts of oceanic and continental glacial retreat due to man-made global warming. So how does the Svalbard Island Chain fit into this picture?
The network meteorologists barely had time to come up for air while “forecasting” the latest snowstorm non-disaster. Politicians, fearing what might happen to their approval numbers if a blizzard hit, went on TV to announce they were taking proactive measures. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio shut down tunnels, bridges, even the subway to prepare for the worst. Governors Andrew Cuomo and Chris Christie announced road closings in New York and New Jersey.
When wide-scale devastation failed to materialize, though New England was hardest hit, those same forecasters explained that snow is “unpredictable” and began backtracking faster than a four-wheel drive pickup on an icy road.
India’s ambitious plans to more than double coal output to increase power generation will not face the heat of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s commitment to tackle climate change. Ironically, the carbon-emitting fuel got protection from the government’s plans to ramp up its solar power capacity five-fold. Coal was given a wide berth in the Modi-Obama climate and energy deal. --Urmi Goswami, Economic Times of India, 29 January 2015
It’s a sign of utter desperation that President Obama uses a set of flawed data to claim that 2014 was the hottest year on record. Obviously, that it not the case and the Met Office here in the UK has confirmed that it is impossible, statistically speaking, to say which of the last few years were warmer. – Benny Peiser, Sun News TV, 27 January 2015
Things used to be simple. The Church taught how the world worked and how to behave. The positive and the normative were united. The Enlightenment put an end to that. We are supposed to follow evidence rather than dogma. In the early days, an intelligent person could comprehend all of science. Not any longer. Experts master a small subfield only.
We recently replaced our audio system with a Bluetooth one. When my daughter asked how it worked, the best I could offer was “it’s magic”. For most of us, it does not matter that we do not know how our smartphone works. We know what it is supposed to do. We know when it does not work. We know how to read online reviews. We rely on experts, but we know how to tell a reliable one from a charlatan.
Climate change enthusiasts are determined to cover all bases; they assert that the enormous East Coast winter storm is the result of global warming. According to climate change true believers, the big snowstorms of recent years can be attributed to warmer climes nearby.
The theory propounds that the warmer temperatures from climate change trigger more precipitation in North America, which then produces snow when the temperature drops. According to The Guardian, “Five of New York’s biggest snow storms have occurred since 2000, and 2014 was the hottest year in 130 years of temperatures records.”
Of course, The Guardian quoted Kevin Trenberth, a lead author of the 1995, 2001, and 2007 Scientific Assessment of Climate Change reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), who shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with the IPCC. Trenberth pointed out that ocean surface temperatures near the East Coast were roughly 2F above normal last year, and argued that there was 10% more water vapor in the atmosphere, ergo, bigger winter storms. The Guardian noted that the atmosphere contains 4% moisture for each one-degree rise in temperature.
"January 2015 nor'easter New York 08" by Krish Dulal - Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons"Is there any weather event that is inconsistent with global warming? — This is now akin to the predictions of Nostradamus or the Mayan calendar." --Marc Morano, Climate Depot (via The Australian)
From newsmaine: On Tuesday, heavy snow covered several regions ranging from Long Island to New England. Meteorologists have given it a name 'Winter Storm Juno', while climate scientists have been calling it 'once-in-a-century' blizzard. The blizzard had started on Monday and pounded heavy snow, high winds and coastal flooding in many locations. The climate scientists said that the storm is result of climate change.