Time To End The Denial

  • Great Lakes ice coverage at an all-time record high
  • Antarctic sea ice coverage at an all-time record high
  • Arctic sea ice extent up 60% last summer
  • Coldest winter in at least 25 years in the US

This is exactly what the experts predicted. Time to end the denial.

IPCC Third Assessment Report

15.2.4.1.2.4. Ice Storms

Milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms

IPCC Third Assessment Report – Climate Change 2001 – Complete online versions | GRID-Arendal – Publications – Other

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Time To End The Denial

  1. jimash1 says:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ice-breaker-uscg-ship-chops-frozen-hudson-article-1.1595932

    ““We haven’t seen this much ice in several years; it’s been a very significant ice season,” said Lt. Ken Sauerbrunn, 29, who was appointed skipper of the vessel in June.
    Arctic blasts hitting the region have left ice as thick as 12 inches on the surface of the Hudson. Without ice breakers like the Sturgeon Bay, shipping lanes would freeze up, halting commerce on the river.

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ice-breaker-uscg-ship-chops-frozen-hudson-article-1.1595932#ixzz2sBT8zlVv

  2. Dave says:

    RIchard Aster of CSU dept. of geoscience was on New Mexico in Focus the other night, assuring viewers that the growth in antarctic ice was “temporary”. He also stated that there was kind of a pause in temperature increase but not really.

  3. Mohatdebos says:

    I am sure New York Times will find someplace in Australia that is really hot. That would be newsworthy, the Hudson River freezing is not worthy of reporting.

    • jimash1 says:

      Really. I only knew about it because I visited some friends upstate.
      It was cold up there, but snowier in New Jersey.

  4. MrX says:

    The really annoying thing is that while I’m all too happy that the AGW proponents are wrong, I’d rather the climate get warmer. Why has this ever been believed to be a bad thing, I have no idea. Warmth has always been associated with prosperity and the liberal messaging has taken the fun and hope out of warming.

    • stewart pid says:

      Ahhh …. Mr X you are forgetting that it will be nice and warm for a while and then when we hit the “tipping point” we will all be like lobsters in the pot and done like dinner

    • Gail Combs says:

      It is getting really bad when you are trying to figure out which is worse.

      1. A sudden climate change to glaciation that will shut the fanatics up.
      2. The De-industrialization, Depopulation goals of the fanatics.

      I am thinking the first is the lesser of two evils.

      • Brian H says:

        Here’s another good’un, Gail: cooling will increase storminess, convincing Warmists it’s really warming. It will be nasty. Warming will reduce storminess, but intensify demands to “Mitigate! Mitigate!” against extreme weather.

        It’s insoluble, without deleting Warmism and Warmists, with prejudice.

  5. Mkelley says:

    Here in Southern Montana, I am nearing 4 months with almost continuous snow and ice cover. I am glad I am here, though, instead of over in the Bakken where it gets really cold.

  6. Drewski says:

    Well Steve for once I agree with you.

    I also think we should stop the delusion.

    Goddard: Great Lakes ice coverage at an all-time record high
    Reality: As of January 28, individual lake ice cover was as follows:  Lake Superior (51%), Lake Michigan (35%), Lake Huron (63%), Lake Erie (92%), and Lake Ontario (21%). In 1979, ice cover reached 95% for ALL the lakes and in 2012, it was 5% – the lowest ever recorded. Overall, annual average ice cover on the Great Lakes has shown a decline of 71% between 1973 to 2010. http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/ice/

    Goddard: Antarctic sea ice coverage at an all-time record high
    Reality: Well since 1979 anyway. At the same time, part of the interior has seen record warm winter events, with several daily temperature records set at the South Pole. To keep things in perspective, over the same period since 1979, Arctic sea ice has lost far more than Antarctic sea ice has gained. Overall, the extreme sea ice extent may be linked to strong variations in the westerly wind flow, the main circulation around Antarctica. Strong westerly flow favors ice growth in autumn and early winter, and this was the case; however, as sea ice approached a maximum, the westerly wind pattern abated, allowing ice to drift even further north than usual, in some places urged on by southerly winds. http://sealevel.colorado.edu/aggregator/sources/9

    Arctic sea ice extent up 60% last summer
    Reality: The 2013 “recovery” reached the 6th lowest extent on record and was still down 40% over the 1981 to 2010 average. Arctic sea ice extent for December 2013 was 700,000 square kilometers or 270,300 square miles below the 1981 to 2010 average, making it the 4th lowest December extent in the satellite data record. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/snow-and-ice/extent/

    Coldest winter in at least 25 years in the US
    Reality: In 2013, Australia observed its warmest year since national records began in 1910; Argentina had its second warmest year since records began in 1961, behind only the record extreme warmth of 2012; New Zealand recorded its third warmest year since its national records began in 1909; Finland tied as the fifth warmest year on record and Russia observed its sixth warmest year since records began in 1891. Globally, November was the warmest November on record and 2013 was the 4th warmest year on record. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

    Also, there have been few significant cold records broken this past month, such as all-time record minimums or all-time monthly minimums. This, of course, can’t be said about the warmth in the West, where numerous all-time monthly maximums have been set in California, Oregon, and Alaska.

    • If you keep spewing hot air, maybe it will warm up.

    • Ernest Bush says:

      Why are you cherry picking the dates. How about an average based on 1974 to 2013, the length of time the Arctic has been under satellite observation. Then let’s see what your percent looks like. Even that length of time means nothing since since we have recorded observations from explorers dating back a couple hundred years indicating much less ice in the Arctic than now.

      Of course, your biggest problem is citing NOAA as a reliable source of your data. Everyone around here knows you are quoting fiction, i.e. lies, from “adjusted data.” We all agree with Steve Goddard’s hot air comment when looking at your supposed facts.

      • Drewski says:

        NOAA was not the only source I cited. How many sources did Steve cite? And how is it that one section of the US is colder than it has been for 25 years – without any substantial cold records – can be more meaningful than other parts of the US as well as other countries of the world setting all-time heat records?

        If I am blowing hot air, it is because I am breathing it in first.

        • gator69 says:

          You are definitely inhaling something that has been heated! 😆

          Found that paper yet little buddy? 😉

        • Drewski says:

          The ones where Morner states glaciation affects rotational speed of the Earth, or the one where American Revolution America had less trees than modern America or the one where the Himalayan glaciers aren’t melting?

          Or all the other ones you can’t understand?

        • gator69 says:

          “Or all the other ones you can’t understand?”

          Natural variability denier, are you addressing me? The one and only paper I have ever asked you to produce, is one… just ONE… peer reviewed paper that refutes natural variability as the cause of recent or any global climate changes.

          Are you as stupid as you pretend? 😆

        • Drewski says:

          Well AGW,
          I would be stupid if I allowed myself to — yet again — find papers for you that indicate current warming trends are overwhelming natural variability (as I have at least 5 times in the past). And then discover you are too ignorant to fathom them.

          To me, a stupid person is one who clings to non-peer-reviewed and outlandish scientific views done by non scientists or wacko scientists solely because they take an opposite track to well established science (incredibly small in number as they may be). Science, that BTW, has been built empirically for the past 3 decades and is supported by ALL reputable scientific organizations, societies, clubs and knitting bees as well as the big oil companies and national defense organizations whose job is to assess risk.

          But go ahead AGW, believe in the studies by your dowsing buddy Morner, even if no one in his old organization will, or the well-respected Principia Scientifica, or the anxiety experts and puzzle makers. Enjoy your delusion.

          The nurses at the old folks home where my uncle stay say that deluded people are the happiest.

        • Current non-warming trends overwhelm natural variability. Brilliant

        • polly says:

          No matter how many sources you cited, what if they were all twisted?
          I am a biogical scientist working in academic and we rely on NIH funding for basically keeping our jobs. I am no climate scientist so I cannot judge how much of those science is real. But sadly based on my own experiences, in order to get funding, we don’t tell all the observations on papers and grant applications. Every now and then we were lucky and came across something that’s real and sound good, but not that frequently. We are thinkg about how to “package” our “results” to make them nice almost all the time. I don’t think climate science will be any different.

    • rw says:

      Come by next year, and we can run through this again. And then the next year, …

      My prediction stands: even you will shut up sometime between 2016 and 2020, inclusive.

    • Andy Oz says:

      Don’t bring Australian heatwaves into the argument.
      2013 was not the “hottest” because the BOM has disposed of most historical data pre 1988, so that ascertion is meaningless. The 1896 and 1939 Australian continent wide heatwaves inconveniently smash 2013. Lest We Forget!
      http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/104122085?

    • Drewski says:

      Sorry,
      I meant AWG, not AGW (Always Wrong Gator).

      Force of habit.

      • gator69 says:

        ROFLMAO!!!

        Another Drewski fail. I keep hearing from you about these ‘papers’, and as I shredded your early attempts, you now just claim victory and slither off.

        You are delusional to even claim that such a paper actually exists. Sheep of a feather… 😆

        • Gail Combs says:

          It will be interesting in about 6 to 7 years when the anemic cycle 24 goes into a minimum.

          Actually given the direction the weather is headed it could be real interesting in just a few years. I am hoping for some really cold nasty Octobers and Novembers just before elections.

          If the Antarctic Sea Ice continues to increase at the rate it is going we are not going to see much in the way of El Niños.

        • Drewski says:

          Wow AWG,
          You get happier every time we converse.

          I didn’t think that was possible.

        • gator69 says:

          Stupid people make me giggle, what can I say? 😆

        • Drewski says:

          Gail,
          Do you not realize that El Ninos don’t start in the Antarctic — right?

          And regarding solar minimums:
          November 1, 2013. The sun’s activity is in free fall, according to a leading space physicist. But don’t expect a little ice age. “Solar activity is declining very fast at the moment,” Mike Lockwood, professor of space environmental physics at Reading University, UK, told New Scientist. “We estimate faster than at any time in the last 9300 years.

          The current long-term decline in solar activity set in after the last grand solar maximum peaked in 1956 , says Lockwood. The decline has accelerated recently, and the absence of sunspots this summer has set alarm bells ringing.

          {Wow 58 years ago and still temperatures have risen – wow again}

          But Lockwood says we should not expect a new grand minimum to bring on a new little ice age. Human-induced global warming, he says, is already a more important force in global temperatures than even major solar cycles:  http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24512-solar-activity-heads-for-lowest-low-in-four-centuries.html#.UvBEBPmSzZ4
          And: http://nextgrandminimum.wordpress.com/category/solar/

        • gator69 says:

          Are you drunk? Hopefully it’s that and not stupidity, as you can find sobriety in the morning.

          Hand waving not accepted.

          😆

        • Drewski says:

          AWG,
          I cite well-respected scientific journals and articles from New Scientist, NOAA, NASA, U of Colorado, Rutgers and others and you cite. . . . what exactly?

          You have a one trick pony with a broken leg. Time to put her down.

        • gator69 says:

          No, it’s time for you spooks to provide proof this change is not natural. Then we talk about other possible scenarios. .

        • Drewski says:

          AWG,
          Even your constant reference to “scientific proof” shows your ignorance.

          Evidence is the word you are fumbling for and you have repeatedly shown us all that you are incapable of understanding it when it is presented to you.

        • gator69 says:

          So you admit that there is no way in which to differentiate our climate from a natural climate. OK, now you have my consent to raise taxes, panic, starve innocent humans, deny clean water and in general piss away all of our real assets.

          Got it! 😆

  7. Paul Malick says:

    The US Govt actions prove there is no GW. Rebuilding coastal communities continues. I live in upstate NY. I am a big fan of GW. Sadly it will not occur.

  8. Oscar Park says:

    If you consider the technology available and the amount of information currently exchanged, modern science as we know it will go down in history as laughing stocks. Nobody will remember the politics involved.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s