Study: ANTARCTIC PENINSULA COOLED NEARLY 1°C DURING 1999–2014

CO2 Science Magazine

Warming trends that were once among the highest recorded on earth have slowed and even reversed to show cooling.

Paper Reviewed – Oliva, M., Navarro, F, Hrbácek, F., Hernández, A., Nývlt, D., Pereira, P., Ruiz-Fernández, J. and Trigo, R. 2017. Recent regional climate cooling on the Antarctic Peninsula and associated impacts on the cryosphere. Science of the Total Environment 580: 210-223.
Figure 1. Temporal evolution of the difference between the mean annual air temperatures and the 1966-2015 average temperature for each station (3-year moving averages). Source: Olivia et al. (2017).

Climate alarmists generally contend that current temperatures are both unnatural and unprecedented, as a result of global warming caused by anthropogenic CO2 emissions; and they claim that this “unnaturalness” is most strongly expressed throughout the world’s polar regions. In this regard, they often point to warming on the Antarctic Peninsula (typically the Faraday/Vernadsky station) as the proverbial canary in the coal mine, where over the past several decades it has experienced warming rates that are among the highest reported anywhere on Earth.

However, in recent years two studies have challenged this assessment. Carrasco (2013) reported finding a decrease in the warming rate from stations on the western side of the Antarctic Peninsula between 2001 and 2010, as well as a slight cooling trend for King George Island (in the South Shetland Islands just off the peninsula). Similarly, in an analysis of the regional stacked temperature record over the period 1979-2014, Turner et al. (2016) reported a switch from warming during 1979-1997 to cooling thereafter (1999-2014). And now, in 2017, we have a third assessment of recent temperature trends on the Antarctic Peninsula confirming that the canary is alive and well!

As their contribution to the debate, Olivia et al. (2017) report in the journal Science of the Total Environment how they “complete and extend [the study of Turner et al.] by presenting an updated assessment of the spatially-distributed temperature trends and interdecadal variability of mean annual air temperature and mean seasonal air temperature from 1950 to 2015, using data from ten stations distributed across the Antarctic Peninsula region.” And what did that assessment reveal?

In describing their findings, the eight European researchers write “we show that [the] Faraday/Vernadsky warming trend is an extreme case, circa twice those of the long-term records from other parts of the northern Antarctic Peninsula.” They …

New Paper: N. Hemisphere Temps Rose 4–5°C Within ‘A Few Decades’ 14,700 Years Ago – 40 Times Faster Than Today’s Rates

 Temperatures, Sea Levels ‘Naturally’ Rise

 30 – 40 Times Faster Than Today’s Rates


Modern Temperatures Only Rising 0.05°C/Decade


Since 1850, CO2 concentrations have risen from 285 ppm to 400 ppm.  During these ~165 years, the IPCC has concluded that surface temperatures have warmed by 0.78°C.  This is a warming rate of only 0.05°C per decade for 1850-2012 — which happens to be the same rate of warming over the 1998-2012 period.


IPCC AR5 (2013):     “The globally averaged combined land and ocean surface temperature data as calculated by a linear trend, show a warming of 0.85°C over the period 1880 to 2012, when multiple independently produced datasets exist. The total increase between the average of the 1850–1900 period and the 2003–2012 period is 0.78 °C, based on the single longest dataset available 4 (see Figure SPM.1). … [T]he rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012; 0.05 °C per decade), which begins with a strong El Niño, is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012; 0.12 °C per decade).”

Modern Sea Levels Only Rising 0.17 Of A Meter/Century


IPCC AR5 (2013):     “[T]he rate of global averaged sea level rise was 1.7 mm yr between 1901 and 2010

Historical Hemispheric Temperatures Rose 2.0°C/Decade


According to a new paper, the Bølling Warming event 14,700 years ago raised the surface temperature for the entire Northern Hemisphere by 4 to 5°C within a few decades.  This is a hemispheric warming rate of approximately 2.0°C per decade, which is 40 times faster than the 0.05 °C per decade global warming rate since 1850 (and 1998).


Historical Sea Levels Rose 5.3 Meters/Century


Central Greenland’s surface temperatures rose by as much as 12°C during this time frame (14,700 years ago to 14,500 years ago).  Consequently, glaciers and ice sheets disintegrated rapidly and sea levels rose by about 18 meters (“12-22 m”) in 340 years.  An 18 m rise in 340 years is the equivalent of 5.3 meters per century, which is more than 30 times faster than the rate of sea level change (0.17 m per century) between 1901 and 2010.


Ivanovic et al., 2017     “During the Last Glacial Maximum 26–19 thousand years ago (ka), a vast ice sheet stretched over North America [Clark et al., 2009]. In subsequent millennia, as climate warmed and this ice sheet decayed,

EPA chief sued for doubting global warming hysteria

EPA chief Scott Pruitt has been sued for his recent comments on CNBC’s Squawk Box. The lawsuit is here. The media release is below. ### For Immediate Release: Apr 13, 2017 Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337 EPA’S PRUITT SUED TO BACK UP CLIMATE CHANGE CLAIMS Pruitt Should Put Up Evidence Supporting Stance or Cease Climate … Continue reading EPA chief sued for doubting global warming hysteria

Source: EPA chief sued for doubting global warming hysteria

Cheers! Trump Is Dismantling the Obama ‘Climate Change’ Agenda

The leftist mainstream media are outraged that President Donald Trump appears to be sticking to his campaign promise to “cancel” U.S. participation in the Paris climate accord. The headline in The Washington Post is “Trump’s energy review blocks Group of Seven from consensus.” Politico’s headline is “Trump’s climate demands roil U.S. allies.” This follows Trump’s recent actions to rescind the foundation of Barack Obama’s climate change obsession.

Once again President Trump is being called a radical, when he is, in fact, restoring common sense to government policy. As Forbes reports, Trump’s recent seven-page executive order “lays the groundwork for rescinding” Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which is currently “suspended by the Supreme Court while a Washington appeals court considers its fate.” While Obama was known for his executive overreach (he lost in the Supreme Court more than any other president, including a record number of unanimous defeats), Trump is scaling back government interference in the marketplace that had been justified in the name of battling climate change.

“And so what President Trump did was he instructed the EPA to begin the process, through the regulatory process, of undoing something that should have been done through the legislature but wasn’t,” argues Competitive Enterprise Institute senior fellow Chris Horner in a recent radio appearance. “This is the meta issue for the left,” he added. “It gives them what they have been demanding in the name of so many things, in the name of saving the planet.”

ClimateDepot.com is an indispensable website that keeps track of all relevant global warming news, and provides both sides of the debate. One very useful service it provides is the names and quotes from environmentalists, including former “warmists”—global warming believers—such as physicist Freeman Dyson: “An Obama supporter who describes himself as ‘100 per cent Democrat,’ Dyson says he is disappointed that the President ‘chose the wrong side.’ Increasing CO2 in the atmosphere does more good than harm, he argues, and humanity doesn’t face an existential crisis. Climate change, he tells us, ‘is not a scientific mystery but a human mystery. How does it happen that a whole generation of scientific experts is blind to obvious facts?’”

Then there is Nobel Prize Winning Physicist Dr. Ivar Giaever: “Global warming is a non-problem,” he argues. “I say this to Obama: Excuse me,

‘March for Science’ fully admits: ‘The march is explicitly a political movement’

https://www.marchforscience.com/faq/

Q: How does the march define being political? A: “The march is explicitly a political movement, aimed at holding leaders in politics and science accountable. When institutions of any affiliation skew, ignore, misuse or interfere with science, we have to speak out. Science should inform political decision making. At the same time, political decisions deeply influence the type of science we are able to do and the type of people who are allowed to conduct science and benefit from scientific advancements.”

‘March for Science’ Group Laments Trump’s Bombing Of ‘Marginalized’ ISIS Fighters

http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/13/march-for-science-group-laments-trumps-bombing-of-marginalized-isis-fighters/

By MICHAEL BASTASCH

The organization behind the “March for Science” tweeted the Trump administration’s bombing Islamic State fighters in Afghanistan is “an example of how science is weaponized against marginalized people.”

The march’s Twitter account sent out the tweet lamenting the bombing in reply to a post by activist Zellie Imani with the Black Liberation Collective — a group of students dedicated to “bringing about freedom and liberation for all Black people.”

The “March for Science” is being organized by activist scientists and environmentalists opposed to the Trump administration’s policies and proposed cuts to federal agencies. The march is planned for D.C. on Earth Day April 22.

March organizers eventually deleted the tweet, but not before meteorologist Ryan Maue captured screenshots.

 

The U.S. military for the first time dropped the largest non-nuclear bomb on Islamic State, or ISIS, targets in Afghanistan Thursday.…