Climate scientist Peter Stott is still trying to connect extreme weather to climate

Watts Up With That?

From the UNIVERSITY OF EXETER and the “weather is not climate” department comes this press release that comes with a blindingly obvious title. So far, the efforts trying to link “climate change” to extreme weather events usually come up short. Often they come amplified in social media by activists like Bill McKibben who sees climate change occurring behind almost every weather event and uses that as a tool to keep his followers excited and active. But the reality is that extreme weather just hasn’t been on the increase. Hurricane frequency is flat and accumulated cyclone energy has been down, and hasn’t reached levels seen in the 1990’s, US landfalling hurricanes of Category 3 or greater continue in an unprecedented 10 year drought,  tornadoes aren’t increasing, in the U.S. at least, heat waves aren’t getting worse, even though activists like to falsely claim so, much of…

View original post 685 more words

Advertisements

In Honor of Secretary of State John Kerry’s Global Warming Publicity-Founded Visit to Greenland…

Bob Tisdale - Climate Observations

…A Few Model-Data Comparisons of Greenland Surface Air Temperatures

Mass losses from Greenland’s ice sheets have been one of the focuses of alarmists for decades. In fact, last week, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry visited Greenland on a (boreal) summertime tour of parts of Greenland in an apparent political publicity stunt. See The Washington Post article John Kerry just visited the most stunning example of our changing climate by Chris Mooney. It’s chock full of alarmist babble. Great for a laugh.  Why a laugh?  Read on.

One of the principal contributing factors to the losses of Greenland’s ice sheets is surface temperature. So we’ll focus this model-data comparison on the surface air temperatures of Greenland.  And speculation from the climate science community about Greenland surface temperatures and their impacts on ice sheet mass loss there and the contribution of those losses to sea level rise are based on climate…

View original post 1,757 more words

Internal changes in hydroclimate influencing global temperature on centennial scale

In a new study in Nature Communications by Michael L. Griffiths et al found that ENSO and related hydroclimate phenomena in the western Pacific produce significant changes in global temperature on a centennial scale. The study presents a 2,000-year multiproxy reconstruction of the western Pacific and concludes that there is a

likelihood that century-scale variations in tropical Pacific climate modes can significantly modulate radiatively forced shifts in global temperature.

So maybe it’s not all CO2 after all.

No compelling evidence of human effect on regional precipitation

A new study in Nature Climate Change by Beena Balan Sarojini et al concludes that despite their best efforts to do so, researchers cannot find any compelling evidence of anthropogenic fingerprints on regional precipitation. President Obama would do well to read the new study along with the rest of the well-documented science that shows no significant changes in extreme weather due to human influence (see Extreme Weather is Not Increasing). Indeed Sarojini et al conclude that despite

“expectations that significant changes in regional precipitation should have already occurred as a result of human influence on climate, compelling evidence of anthropogenic fingerprints on regional precipitation is obscured by observational and modelling uncertainties and is likely to remain so using current methods for years to come. This is in spite of substantial ongoing improvements in models, new reanalyses and a satellite record that spans over thirty years. If we are to quantify how human-induced climate change is affecting the regional water cycle, we need to consider new ways of identifying the effects of natural and anthropogenic influences on precipitation that take full advantage of our physical expectations.”

The language of so-called scientists here is quite amazing. Despite the fact that they cannot detect any compelling evidence of human caused changes to regional  precipitation, they still insist it “should” have already occurred. But it hasn’t. So perhaps they should be considering the possibility that their “expectations” and models are incorrect.

The Climate Alarm Death Knell Sounds Again

It’s looking like Climate Sensitivity is even lower than the last Nic Lewis estimate of 1.5ºC and way below the hysterically wrong and oft-repeated IPCC gross exaggerations. New results reported by Nicolas Bellouin could spell the end of global warming hysteria.

Watts Up With That?

climate-sensitivity-crystal-ball

By PAUL C. “CHIP” KNAPPENBERGER and PATRICK J. MICHAELS

Currently, details are few, but apparently the results of a major scientific study on the effects of anthropogenic aerosols on clouds are going to have large implications for climate change projections—substantially lowering future temperature rise expectations.

In a blog post from the Department of Meteorology of the University of Reading, Dr. Nicolas Bellouin describes some preliminary results from a research study he leads investigating the influence of aerosols on cloud properties.  The behavior of clouds, including how they are formed, how long they last, how bright they are, etc., plays a very large role in the earth’s climate system, and is considered the weakest part of global climate models. The climate model cloud deficiency results from a combination of scientific uncertainty about cloud behavior, as well as the modeling challenges that come from simulating the small spatial and temporal scales over…

View original post 691 more words

The cloud-climate conundrum

Climate Etc.

by Judith Curry

Four new papers remind us of the very large uncertainties surrounding cloud-climate feedbacks.

View original post 3,554 more words

The sea levels are now reducing in the “hotspots of acceleration” of Washington and New York

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Giordano Bruno

Hopefully everybody remember Sallenger’s “hot spots” of sea level acceleration along the East Coast of the US.

Asbury H. Sallenger Jr, Kara S. Doran & Peter A. Howd, Hotspot of accelerated sea-level rise on the Atlantic coast of North America, Nature Climate Change 2, 884–888 (2012), doi:10.1038/nclimate1597

This was one of the many examples of bad science misinterpreting the sea level oscillations by cherry picking the time window.

As 6 more years of data have been collected, let see if the hotspots are now the “hottest on record” or if they have cooled down.

The logic of Sallenger & co. was based on the comparison of the rate of rise of sea levels over the first and second half of time windows of 60, 50 and 40 years, i.e. the comparison of the rate of rise over the first and the last 30, 25 and…

View original post 288 more words