A Scholarly Paper By Experts

Four years ago, scholarly experts predicted that cherry trees in Washington DC would begin their blooming process in January.

Screenshot 2016-01-29 at 09.29.14 AM-down

Could cherry blossoms one day be blooming in winter? – The Washington Post

Last year was the latest start to the blooming season record, with the Potomac frozen over on March 7.


Photo above taken on March 7, 2015


Bloom Watch | National Cherry Blossom Festival

At the end of January 2016, the cherry trees are surrounded by a foot of snow.

Screenshot 2016-01-29 at 09.39.01 AM


“Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts’

  • Richard Feynman

About stevengoddard

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

12 Responses to A Scholarly Paper By Experts

  1. darrylb says:

    Of course,
    In the science world the rule is ‘Publish or Parrish’

    -And all one has to do is say ‘climate change’ then go past go and collect 200K for the study,
    Then when you go around again you land on Community Chest, which lets you go pass go, collect another 200k and land on Park Place, after which you get a Get out of Jail Free card for your not allowing your data to be seen. Then yet another ancillary 15k for your article being printed in the NYT which subsequently permeates the main stream media.
    And if we challenge it as good skeptics should, we get a go straight to jail or at least receive letters of denial!

    So, having said that Steve, and noting a post on a previous thread showing the Argo float system as been showing net cooling in the upper ocean half mile since about 2,000—

    I want to make aware an article which has filtered through the MSM by Peter Gleck et al and Published in Nature Climate Change headlined Heat in the Upper Ocean has Doubled in the last decades.

    I brought this to the attention of Judith Curry and she said she would look into it and post for discussion at Climate Etc.

    The over reach on that paper is absolutely mind boggling.

    • But the heat, if any, has shown a marked preference for just the South Atlantic and Indian Oceans. The other oceans, of much greater size, have remained about the same in temps.

      • darrylb says:

        The net in the Atlantic is slightly down, I do not have into regarding the Indian
        Circulation (s) of course is a significant factor which I believe is not analyzed enough.

  2. RAH says:

    Scholarly persons are also claiming that Greenland today is about the way it was then the Vikings settled there and it wasn’t the climate changing colder that drove them away. Go Figure.

  3. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    I am an environmentalist and was an outspoken critic of “right-wing” capitalists until Climategate revealed the talents of Stalin himself producing otherwise inexplicable abrupt changes in the foundations of solar and nuclear physics that hid the source of solar energy after WWII:


    This information was also posted on Disqus and ResearchGate and became one of the most read papers there, until both my Disqus and ResearchGate accounts were locked:


    Without understanding the unreported events at Konan, Korea that changed the course of world history in Aug-Sept 1945 (just before major nations and national academies of sciences were united on 24 Oct 1945) we could not figure out why National Academies of Sciences worldwide unanimously adopted the same false changes in nuclear and solar physics immediately after WWII:

    1. Dr. Carl von Weizsacker’s nuclear binding energy equation exaggerates proton repulsion, underestimates neutron repulsion and does not predict nuclear stability. Aston’s nuclear packing fraction correctly predicted nuclear stability score WWII.

    2. Iron, not hydrogen, is the most abundant element in the Sun as mainstream astronomers knew in 1945. Ordinary stars make and discard hydrogen to interstellar space. Interstellar clouds of hydrogen do not collapse into stars.

    My Disqus and ResearchGate accounts were locked, probably because it showed why lock-step, “consensus scientists” would not openly discuss precise experimental data that explained “Solar energy” and the supernova birth of the solar system:

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280133563_Solar_Energy or

    Click to access Solar_Energy.pdf


  4. Andy DC says:

    There has been no meaningful trend in date of cherry blossoms blooming for many years. Some of the earliest dates were in the 1940’s.

  5. Steve Case says:

    That simply cannot be true. 2015 was the hottest year ever. I would say that the untitled spreadsheet above needs to be reviewed and corrected.

    Oh, by the way (Off Topic) Jason 3 was launched about 2 weeks ago. I don’t know when it will be boosted into its final orbit, but I’d bet money the rate of sea level rise will be found to have increased significantly when its finally brought on line.

    • darrylb says:

      Steve C. This old brain is not sure if you are being sarcastic or genuine.
      That said, of course all current and past temp records depend upon who is presenting them and what the measurement tools are.

      Sea level rise is shown to be higher by satellite than by tide gauges.
      It should be pointed out that satellite does not measure sea level with respect to shoreline the latter being the actual concern.

      Repeating something I wrote a while ago, and this is a concern of mine.
      There have been, traditionally, two causes given for the rise, glacial melt and thermal expansion. I have seen four papers and looked at one extensively that stated as much as a calculated 42% of the rise is from groundwater or sub surface water which eventually runs off.
      That should be a concern for everyone. It is a known fact that aquifers are being depleted and natural processes for putting the water back is very long.

      Also, of course, many records have stated that sea level rise has been occurring at least since the heart of Little Ice Age

      • ristvan says:

        DarrylLB, most of those groundwater studies are so poor they don’t even get consideration in the SLR closure papers. (Struggling with the fact that satellite SLR > sum (ice mass loss + thermosteric rise)).
        Most groundwater is self replenished from annual precipitation. The evidence is in water well levels all ober the world, with some exceptions mainly in India, Bangladesh, and US.. The well levels on my farm have not changed in 100 years (we have a working well drilled in 1917 to supply a since demolished farmhouse on our upper pastures). Some aquifers are depleting, like the largest in the world, the Ogallala. But of its total volume, only 15% is extractable water. Mostly it is sand and gravel. Not going to affect SL at all. Will eventually affect western Kansas and Nebraska irrigation.
        To see the inverse of this groundwater nonsense, read my essay PseudoPrecision in ebook Blowing Smoke. Groundwater explanations for a supposed slow down in SLR. Thoroughly debunked. Tony Heller quality of debunking.

  6. willys36 says:

    I looked at their table and I don’t see any trend whatsoever! It is like the Twilight Zone; if a high school freshman wrote that article with that ‘evidence’ he would flunk the assignment.

  7. I don´t see what the big deal is. Cherry blossoms bloom in August in São Paulo.

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 )

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