Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry in WSJ: ‘The Global Warming Statistical Meltdown’
My op-ed in the Wall Street Journal is now online
http://judithcurry.com/2014/10/09/my-op-ed-in-the-wall-street-journal-is-now-online
I was invited to submit an op-ed regarding the recent Lewis/Curry paper on climate sensitivity. For background, see Lewis and Curry: Climate sensitivity uncertainty http://judithcurry.com/2014/09/24/lewis-and-curry-climate-sensitivity-uncertainty/ Lewis and Crok: Climate less sensitive to CO2 than models suggest http://judithcurry.com/2014/03/05/lewis-and-crok-climate-less-sensitive-to-co2-than-models-suggest/ Challenging the two degree target http://judithcurry.com/2014/10/03/challenging-the-2-degree-target/ WSJ editorial The full text of the op-ed is reproduced below, WSJ link – http://online.wsj.com/articles/judith-curry-the-global-warming-statistical-meltdown-1412901060. The Global Warming Statistical Meltdown At the recent United Nations Climate Summit, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned that “Without significant cuts in emissions by all countries, and in key sectors, the window of opportunity to stay within less than 2 degrees [of warming] will soon close forever.” Actually, this window of opportunity may remain open for quite some time. A growing body of evidence suggests that the climate is less sensitive to increases in carbon-dioxide emissions than policy makers generally assume—and that the need for reductions in such emissions is less urgent. According to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, preventing “dangerous human interference” with the climate is defined, rather arbitrarily, as limiting warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial temperatures. The Earth’s surface temperatures have already warmed about 0.8 degrees Celsius since 1850-1900. This leaves 1.2 degrees Celsius (about 2.2 degrees Fahrenheit) to go. In its most optimistic projections, which assume a substantial decline in emissions, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projects that the “dangerous” level might never be reached. In its most extreme, pessimistic projections, which assume heavy use of coal and rapid population growth, the threshold could be exceeded as early as 2040. But these projections reflect the effects of rising emissions on temperatures simulated by climate models, which are being challenged by recent observations. Human-caused warming depends not only on increases in greenhouse gases but also on how “sensitive” the climate is to these increases. Climate sensitivity is defined as the global surface warming that occurs when the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere doubles. If climate sensitivity is high, then we can expect substantial warming in the coming century as emissions continue to increase. If climate sensitivity is low, then future warming will be substantially lower, and it may be several generations before we reach what the U.N. considers a dangerous level, even with high emissions. The IPCC’s latest report (published in 2013) concluded that the actual …
Naomi Klein: ‘Climate activists have to get comfortable attacking capitalism’
Obama EPA chief apologizes for her generation’s role in climate change
McCarthy, who was born in the 1950s, used Miami Beach as a backdrop to demonstrate that people do not have to use projections to see climate change nowadays, because it is happening before their eyes.
Thursday is “king tide” day for Miami Beach, when the tide in Biscayne Bay reaches its highest level of the year.
The tide frequently floods Miami Beach’s streets, though temporary pumps were moving the water back out to the bay Thursday, Fusion reported. Federal officials say climate change has caused an increase in flooding, and it will only get worse.
“Climate change isn’t about faraway places in faraway dangers, it’s about impact today to the the safety of our communities, to the viability of our commercial enterprises, and most importantly it is about the public health of the families across the United States of America,” McCarthy said.
Local leaders joined McCarthy for the event Thursday, along with Sens. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
They emphasized that the impacts of climate change, and measures to mitigate them, should not be a bipartisan debate.
“If there are any doubters, you should listen to the NASA scientists that testify that measurements — that’s not forecasts, that’s not projections, it’s measurements — over the last 50 years [show] five to eight inches of sea level rise in South Florida,” Nelson said, according to Fusion. “75 percent of our population in this state is on the coast.” …
Report: ‘Long-lost’ satellite images shed new light on global sea ice…enormous holes found in the Arctic ice back in the 1960′s
NASA launched the first of seven Nimbus spacecraft to study Earth from space in August 1964 and fifty years later experts at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado are recovering long-lost images from old Nimbus data tapes and black-and-white film. The preliminary findings from long-lost images from the 1960’s have produced some big surprises with respect to global sea ice. In much the same way archeologists dig up artifacts that can rewrite history, these long-lost satellite images have to potential to rewrite our knowledge of ever-changing global sea ice cycles.
…
Nimbus satellite observations were transmitted as an analog signal and then burned onto film and stored in canisters labeled only by orbit number (i.e., no indication of geography). The only way to retrieve this imagery data into useable format was to scan all of it which meant 250,000 images. Now the satellite imagery data is completely digital and can be managed and manipulated by scientists in order to get a look at the past. Preliminary work with the now-digitized satellite data has been from the period 1964 to 1969 and the year 1970 is now being analyzed.
…
Indeed, early findings have been quite surprising with respect to both the Arctic and Antarctica sea ice extent. According to NASA scientists, there have been “enormous holes” found in the Arctic ice that “we didn’t expect and can’t explain” in a decade considered to be colder-than-normal (i.e., the 1960’s). The Antarctica sea ice extent findings are perhaps even more amazing. Using these long-lost satellite images, it appears that the Antarctica sea ice extent reached record highs in 1964 only to be followed by record lows just two years later in 1966 and also the earliest maximum sea ice extent was seen in 1969. As is often the case with more data, it often leads to more questions than answers. Video discussion on this by NASA scientists at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvGIE1y3cXA.
…September Snow Cover Was Highest On Record In North America
…Heartland Institute Climate Experts Comment on 18 Straight Years of No Global Warming
…The ‘pause’ of global sea ice. Up by ~76% in 2013 & 2014 from the 2007-2012 minima
“There hasn’t been one explanation yet that I’d say has become a consensus [on why Antarctic sea ice is at record levels], where people say, ‘We’ve nailed it, this is why it’s happening,’” said Claire Parkinson, a senior scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. “Our models are improving, but they’re far from perfect. One by one, scientists are figuring out that particular variables are more important than we thought years ago, and one by one those variables are getting incorporated into the models.”
The models are indeed “far from perfect” since the models in fact predicted Antarctic sea ice would decrease, not increase. A few climate scientists have admitted the record high Antarctic ice levels have had the effect of “limiting confidence in [the models’] predictions,” yet none have admitted that the models predicted the opposite of an Antarctic sea ice increase, that the models falsely predictedAntarctic sea ice would decline more than Arctic sea ice, and that Antarctica would warm faster than the Arctic, all falsehoods.
…
New paper finds clouds have a large net cooling effect on climate – Published in Atmospheric Research
…John Kerry to Climate Doubters: Catastrophe Ahead – ‘If [skeptics are] wrong: catastrophe…Life as you know it on Earth ends’
…CLIMATE TRUTH FILE: 2014 – Skeptical Talking Points from A-Z on Global Warming – Point-By-Point
Small sampling from report:
CO2 is not the tail that wags the dog. CO2 is a trace essential gas, but without it life on Earth would be impossible. Carbon dioxide fertilizes algae, trees, and crops to provide food for humans and animals. We inhale oxygen and exhale CO2. Slightly higher atmospheric CO2 levels cannot possibly supplant the numerous complex and inter-connected forces that have always determined Earth’s climate. As University of London Professor Emeritus Philip Stott has noted: “The fundamental point has always been this. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically selected factor (CO2) is as misguided as it gets.”
When global temperatures are the question, the answer is not the sun or CO2. It is the sun, volcanoes, tilt of the Earth’s axis, water vapor, methane, clouds, ocean cycles, plate tectonics, shifting ocean currents, albedo (Earth’s changing reflective properties), atmospheric dust, atmospheric circulation, cosmic rays, particulates like carbon soot and volcanic dust, forests and grasslands, urban and other land use changes. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, not just CO2.
#
The claim that “97% of scientists agree” is in part based on 77 anonymous scientists who responded to a survey. The survey started by seeking opinions from 10,257 scientists. However, only 77 responded. So the 97% “consensus” claim is not based on thousands of scientists or even hundreds of scientists – but only on 77. Out of those 77 scientists, 75 answered the survey to form the mythical 97% “consensus.” In 2013 and 2014, other claims of an alleged 97% climate ‘consensus’ emerged, prompting UN IPCC lead author Dr. Richard Tol to publish a critique and declare: ‘The 97% is essentially pulled from thin air, it is not based on any credible research whatsoever.’
#
What about EPA climate regulations, will they impact the climate?
Not a chance. The EPA’s unilateral “carbon dioxide endangerment” regulations would have no impact on global carbon dioxide emissions, let alone global temperatures. The EPA regulations are pure climate symbolism in exchange for a more centrally planned energy economy. The EPA’s own data reveal that any potential climate impact of the regulations would be “so small as to be undetectable.”
For complete climate guide see: https://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Climate_Truth_File_100614_Online.pdf…