AP’s Seth Borenstein at it again! Claims ‘global warming means more Antarctic ice’ — Meet the new consensus, the opposite of the old consensus

Climate Depot Analysis

AP’s Seth Borenstein ([email protected]) is at it again. Borenstein continues to serve in his role as chief apologist for the man-made global warming industry. This time, in an October 10, 2012 AP article, Borenstein is working overtime to explain away record Antarctic sea ice growth in 2012. See: Experts: Global warming means more Antarctic ice – (Headline via Tom Nelson’s website)

As man-made global warming morphs more and more into unfalsifiable science and “extreme” weather claims, expect more tortured spin from activists like Borenstein. (See: ‘Long sad history of AP reporter Seth Borenstein’s woeful global warming reporting’) (Also, The New York Times also has an activist badly posing as a reporter: See: NYT reporter Justin Gillis Antarctic ice claims called ‘a joke’ by climatologist — Gillis’ polar sea ice claims called ‘a total irrelevancy’ & ‘ludicrous)

In a prime example of how the warmists cannot get their story straight, Borenstein’s article turns former Vice President Al Gore’s Antarctic claims and 60 Minutes’ claims on their head.

[See: Borenstein refutes Gore! Jan 2012 Gore Claim: ‘Scientists expected that as climate change accelerated, Antarctica would be one of the fastest warming areas of planet. This prediction has proven true’

’60 Minutes’ refuted by Borenstein’s article! Flashback 2007: 60 Minutes goes to Antarctica; World’s fastest-warming place — 2007: ‘Scott Pelley looks for – and finds – evidence of global warming in Antarctica where the bottom of the world is literally melting away’

Oops. AP’s Seth Borenstein reports that of the world’s regions since 1960 ‘Antarctica has warmed the least, according to NASA data’]

What Borenstein ignores about the Antarctic in his latest article is very telling. The following are a few key studies Borenstein omitted while he was crafting his warming equals more ice narrative.

See: UN IPCC cites study claiming: ‘The climate change projections over 21st century reveal that the annual mean sea ice extent decreases at similar rates in both hemispheres’

Flashback 2007: Antarctic temperatures disagree with climate model predictions Study: ‘No increase in precipitation over Antarctica in the last 50 years’ — ‘Most models predict that both precipitation and temperature will increase over Antarctica with a warming of the planet. David Bromwich, researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State U.: ‘It’s hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now,” he said.

Study claiming AGW destroying Great Barrier Reef debunked: Study ‘reveals a number of doubtful assumptions, undisclosed conditions & strong conflicting evidence is unmentioned’

Reef Alarmists Jump The Shark

by Walter Starck

October 9, 2012


The Great Barrier Reef is doomed again. A recent widely publicised scientific study reports the dramatic finding that it has lost half its coral in last 27 years. 48% of loss is attributed to storm damage, with bleaching & crown-of-thorns starfish being responsible for 10% and 42% respectively. The average annual rate of coral loss over the 27-year period was estimated to be 3.38% and growth was put at 2.85%, leaving a net decline of 0.53% per year. Further effort and research on starfish control is suggested to be the most promising means of reversing the decline. Elimination of the loss due to starfish would leave a net gain of 0.89%.

Examples of this include: The margin of error in visual surveys of coral cover is high and unassessed; yet, they are presented to hundredths of a precent without any qualifying explanation, as if they are precisely accurate. Coral cover is highly variable between reefs and over different areas or at different years on the same reef.

Is this just another appeal for funding?

There is abundant reason to question the validity of the findings. The imminent demise of the GBR has been an ongoing claim for nearly half a century and has funded a small industry of researchers, bureaucrats and activists devoted to “saving” the Great Barrier Reef from a variety of imagined “threats”. In recent decades this industry has cost the Australian taxpayer well over $100 million per year and the cost has been increasing. Although no practical solutions have ever been found, the demand for hypothetical solutions to imaginary problems seems unlimited.

If this situation were based on a conscious deliberate fraud, it would be bad enough; but, unfortunately it involves something even worse. It arises from a widespread and profound groupthink belief that the reef really is under dire threat and that all the money and effort is actually “saving” it from destruction. Even so, this latest study has implications well beyond just another appeal for funding and deserves to be given serious consideration.

To give credit where due, though, reef alarmists have at least managed the extraordinary feat of jumping the shark while shooting themselves in the foot at the same time.

Regardless of the reef-salvation industry’s industry’s motives, its efforts can only be viewed as either honest but incompetent