|
Post by marchesarosa on Nov 1, 2011 12:10:01 GMT 1
Jeff Id on the alarmist drought n' flood predictions. ....seeing that the earth is about 70% covered with ocean water and that rain storms are constant, how is it that warmer Earth might somehow ‘dry’ the atmosphere and cause less fresh water to fall from the sky?
Just how stupid are we non-scientists?
.....Less water from the sky though? So we’re going to thirst to death while drowning from higher oceans. That is a tough message to sell. I’m thinking if they just “communicate” better, it may work out.noconsensus.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/is-it-the-message-or-the-presentation/
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Dec 3, 2011 13:07:41 GMT 1
A little photographic evidence of the changing coastal habitat for those who think insurance claims are a valid index of hurricane frequency and strength.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Dec 3, 2011 13:15:37 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Dec 13, 2011 17:28:40 GMT 1
Klotzbach and Gray Suspend December Hurricane Forecast "We strongly believe that the increases in atmospheric CO2 since the start of the 20th century have had little or no significant effect on Atlantic basin or global TC activity as extensively discussed in our many previous forecast write-ups and recently in Gray (2011). Global tropical cyclone activity has shown no significant trend over the past thirty years." hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/forecasts/2011/dec2011/dec2011.pdf
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Dec 17, 2011 2:53:23 GMT 1
Don’t sell your coat!Posted on December 16, 2011 by Anthony Watts wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/16/dont-sell-your-coat/#more-53179This guest post is well worth a read – Anthony Guest post by Harold AmblerWhat follows is an excerpt from my new book Don’t Sell Your Coat, available here: www.amazon.com/Dont-Sell-Your-Coat-Surprising/dp/0615569048/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&tag=wattsupwithth-20&qid=1324046707&sr=8-3I want to examine the moral component of meteorological journalism. As I mentioned near the beginning of this book, I used to be an avid watcher of The Weather Channel. For a good couple of decades, the network was not only an important component for the fledgling cable industry, but an excellent source of information about current weather and climate, as well about atmospheric science itself. An interesting thing took place during the 1990s, though. Weather Channel viewership was found to spike during hurricanes, and not merely among viewers in areas that could be affected by the individual storm being discussed. A lot of folks evidently loved watching the progress of tropical storms, the stronger the better. Hurricanes became, over time, a revenue producer for the network. Experts were hired and given regular on-air time, and hurricane segments were given their own titles, their own graphics, and their own music. People loved it. Much of this was quite innocuous, and arguably inevitable. Hurricanes are indeed interesting, and for a period of about 15 years it was widely believed, even by many scientists, that manmade global warming was ramping up the number, intensity, and duration of storms. In the last few years, however, links between recent atmospheric warming and hurricane activity, as we have seen, have been reconsidered. In the meantime, though, the false link had lodged in the popular imagination, and The Weather Channel was more or less avidly exploiting it. The network’s presenters didn’t overtly come out and say that individual storms were generated by tailpipe and smokestack emissions, but they didn’t really have to at this point. The misconception was so pervasive and so widespread that merely trumpeting the “unusual” power of the storms themselves sufficed. In the meantime, the network slowly upped its on-air mentions of the phenomenon of global warming during the daily program cycle and eventually devoted a new segment to the phenomenon known as “Forecast Earth.” Video alarmism regarding atmospheric phenomena is, perhaps, to be expected by a network like The Weather Channel. After all, it is hardly alone. The major cable news networks routinely send meteorologists and other reporters into the path of hurricanes, so that they can be seen amid the rising waters, gusting winds, and torrential rains. Get it out of your head: weather didn’t used to be friendly. It didn’t used to rain just enough, snow just enough, with the wind blowing just enough, and the Sun shining just enough. Things didn’t recently go to Hell in a hand basket. That is just a story. And it’s not a particularly hard story to prove false.... more
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 26, 2012 17:46:35 GMT 1
Review from Dr Pat Michaels Atlantic Hurricanes: The Long and the Short of Itwww.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2012/03/16/atlantic-hurricanes-the-long-and-the-short-of-it/Last May, we reviewed a paper on Atlantic basin tropical cyclone trends by Gabriele Villarini and colleagues that focused on a breed of storms called they called “shorties”—small tropical storms that lasted less than two days. The authors concluded that while the number of identified “shorties” has been increasing with time, the increase was primarily the result of changing (improving) observational practices not a changing climate. Now, we review a new paper that looks at the other end of the spectrum of Atlantic tropical cycles— “biggies” (our term)—intense Category 4 and 5 hurricanes. In a new paper, Andrew Hagen (University of Miami) and Chris Landsea (National Hurricane Center) conclude that changing observational practices have resulted in more Cat 4&5 hurricanes being identified in recent decades compared to past ones. Again, the increase is not due to a changing climate but changing detection technologies. Whether talking about the total number of tropical cyclones (which is increasing because of detection technology) or their intensity (which is increasing because of detection technology) only a person unaware of this important research would say that there has been a climate-related trend...... Reference Hagen, A. B., and C. W. Landsea, 2012. On the classification of extreme Atlantic hurricanes utilizing mid-20th century monitoring capabilities. Journal of Climate, doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00420.1, in press. more here www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2012/03/16/atlantic-hurricanes-the-long-and-the-short-of-it/
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 29, 2012 13:57:20 GMT 1
From Prof Roger Pielke Jr A Handy Bullshit Button on Disasters and Climate ChangeThe full IPCC Special Report on Extremes is out today, and I have just gone through the sections in Chapter 4 that deal with disasters and climate change. Kudos to the IPCC -- they have gotten the issue just about right, where "right" means that the report accurately reflects the academic literature on this topic. Over time good science will win out over the rest -- sometimes it just takes a little while. A few quotable quotes from the report (from Chapter 4): "There is medium evidence and high agreement that long-term trends in normalized losses have not been attributed to natural or anthropogenic climate change" "The statement about the absence of trends in impacts attributable to natural or anthropogenic climate change holds for tropical and extratropical storms and tornados" "The absence of an attributable climate change signal in losses also holds for flood losses" The report even takes care of tying up a loose end that has allowed some commentators to avoid the scientific literature: "Some authors suggest that a (natural or anthropogenic) climate change signal can be found in the records of disaster losses (e.g., Mills, 2005; Höppe and Grimm, 2009), but their work is in the nature of reviews and commentary rather than empirical research." With this post I am creating a handy bullshit button on this subject (pictured above). Anytime that you read claims that invoke disasters loss trends as an indication of human-caused climate change, including the currently popular "billion dollar disasters" meme, you can simply call "bullshit" and point to the IPCC SREX report. You may find yourself having to use the bullshit button in locations that are supposed to be credible, such as Nature Climate Change and the New York Times. This might may feel uncomfortable at first, because such venues are generally credible, but is absolutely necessary to help certain corners of science and the media to regain their credibility. The siren song of linking disasters to human-caused climate change exerts a strong pull for activists in all settings, but might be countered by the widespread and judicious use of the disaster and climate change bullshit button.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 31, 2012 18:37:51 GMT 1
IPCC now too moderate for professional scaremongers | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog
What happened to “listen to the science”?
A GLOBAL lobby group has distributed a “spin sheet” encouraging its 300 member organisations to emphasise the link between climate change and extreme weather events, despite uncertainties acknowledged by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
An “action pack” distributed by Global Campaign for Climate Action said members “shouldn’t be afraid to make the connection”, despite the sometimes low level of confidence in the official documents of the IPCC. The action pack, which was produced to coincide with the release of the latest full IPCC report into the link between climate change and extreme weather events, rekindled claims that overstating the case damaged the credibility of the science…
The full report … presented a cautious appraisal and said it was unable to answer confidently whether climate was becoming more extreme.
But GCCA told its member organisations to “use the precautionary principle to argue that we must take potential risks seriously even if the science doesn’t offer high confidence”.........
---------
Who needs evidence when you have conviction?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 1, 2012 1:15:22 GMT 1
2011 US Tornado Year Analyzed – no trend indication, still below 1974 for strong to violent tornadoesNOAA have this to say Improved tornado observation practices have led to an increase in the number of reported weaker tornadoes, and in recent years the number of EF0 and EF1 tornadoes have become more prevalent in the total number of reported tornadoes.
With increased national Doppler radar coverage [introduced between 1992 and 1997], increasing population, and greater attention to tornado reporting, there has been an increase in the number of tornado reports over the past several decades. This can create a misleading appearance of an increasing trend in tornado frequency. To better understand the true variability and trend in tornado frequency in the U.S., the total number of strong to violent tornadoes (EF3 to EF5 category on the Enhanced Fujita scale) can be analyzed. These are the tornadoes that would have likely been reported even during the decades before Doppler radar use became widespread and practices resulted in increasing tornado reports.
The bar chart below indicates there has been little trend in the frequency of the strongest tornadoes over the past 55 years.more... wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/31/2011-us-tornado-year-analyzed-no-trend-indication-still-below-1974/#more-60468
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 10, 2012 15:45:41 GMT 1
Historical Global Tropical Cyclone LandfallsWeinkle et al. 2012 is now online at the Journal of Climate. I provided a summary of the paper a few months ago when it was accepted, including these factoids: Over 1970 to 2010 the globe averaged about 15 TC landfalls per year Of those 15, about 5 are intense (Category 3, 4 or 5) 1971 had the most global landfalls with 32, far exceeding the second place, 25 in 1996 1978 had the fewest with 7 2011 tied for second place for the fewest global landfalls with 10 (and 3 were intense, tying 1973, 1981 and 2002) 1999 had the most intense TC landfalls with 9 1981 had the fewest intense TC landfalls with zero There have been only 8 intense TC landfalls globally since 2008 (2009-2011), very quiet but not unprecedented (two unique 3-year periods saw only 7 intense landfalls) The US is currently in the midst of the longest streak ever recorded without an intense hurricane landfall Here is the abstract: Historical global tropical cyclone landfalls Jessica Weinkle, Ryan Maue and Roger Pielke, Jr. Journal of Climate dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00719.1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 1, 2012 23:50:52 GMT 1
Latest update on Hurricane data from Ryan Maue, Meteorologist at Florida Sate University Still going down!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Nov 16, 2012 20:20:11 GMT 1
Little change in global drought over the past 60 years, Letter Nature, vol 491, 437Sheffield, Wood & Roderick (2012) “Drought has not been an effective way of measuring climate change over the past 60 years,” Michael Roderick "since the PDSI uses a formula that assumes higher temperatures cause more droughts, it was hardly surprising that it finds a link." Roger Pielke Jr Simon Brown of the UK Met Office in Exeter says Sheffield’s analysis is probably right. “There has been a growing acknowledgement that the PDSI should not be trusted when doing climate change studies,” Sheffield’s findings raise important questions, says Steve Running at the University of Montana in Missoula. “If global drought is not increasing, if warmer temperatures are accompanied by more rainfall and lower evaporation rates, then a warmer wetter world would [mean] a more benign climate.” ABSTRACT
Drought is expected to increase in frequency and severity in the future as a result of climate change, mainly as a consequence of decreases in regional precipitation but also because of increasing evaporation driven by global warming. Previous assessments of historic changes in drought over the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries indicate that this may already be happening globally. In particular, calculations of the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) show a decrease in moisture globally since the 1970s with a commensurate increase in the area in drought that is attributed, in part, to global warming. The simplicity of the PDSI, which is calculated from a simple water-balance model forced by monthly precipitation and temperature data, makes it an attractive tool in large-scale drought assessments, but may give biased results in the context of climate change6. Here we show that the previously reported increase in global drought is overestimated because the PDSI uses a simplified model of potential evaporation that responds only to changes in temperature and thus responds incorrectly to global warming in recent decades. More realistic calculations, based on the underlying physical principles that take into account changes in available energy, humidity and wind speed, suggest that there has been little change in drought over the past 60 years. The results have implications for how we interpret the impact of global warming on the hydrological cycle and its extremes, and may help to explain why palaeoclimate drought reconstructions based on tree-ring data diverge from the PDSI based drought record in recent years. joannenova.com.au/2012/11/nature-paper-global-droughts-unchanged-in-60-years/
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Nov 17, 2012 9:08:17 GMT 1
Lots of confused messages in this subject area.
1. Just looking at the physics, if the entire globe got warmer you'd expect fewer extreme weather events, not more, because weather is driven by phase changes of atmospheric water. If the atmosphere gets warmer there will be less water vapor in the freezing range, so less violent convection at cloud level. Evidence? Fewer summer thunderstorms in the UK in recent years than in the past. Unequivocal reporting - everyone knows what a hailing thunderstorm is, and we live on a crowded island with good weather records! Hurricanes are driven by the same mechanism, but originate over water rather than land, so less well observed in the past.
2. Yes, you would expect weather changes if the climate changes. Obviously. But the politically motivated association of climate change with human activity is probably false and certainly not established fact, so any connection between extreme weather, however it is defined or measured, and human activity, is tenuous at best.
3. The human and financial impact of extreme weather will increase with time as coastal communities grow, acquire more fragile valuables like cars and televisions, build higher and more densely, and inhabit more marginal land (low-lying, poorly drained, unstable....) Decreased perinatal mortality and increased consumer wealth in Bangladesh is a Good Thing until the place floods, when it becomes a Disaster.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 12, 2013 15:12:41 GMT 1
New government report from NOAA says the United States' 2012 summer drought was NOT caused by global warming. Who knew? wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/11/new-government-report-says-2012-summer-drought-not-caused-by-global-warming/NOAA asks: What caused the 2012 Central Great Plains Drought?
NOAA’s answer: The central Great Plains drought during May-August of 2012 resulted mostly from natural variations in weather.
• Moist Gulf of Mexico air failed to stream northward in late spring as cyclone and frontal activity were shunted unusually northward. • Summertime thunderstorms were infrequent and when they did occur produced little rainfall. • Neither ocean states nor human-induced climate change, factors that can provide long-lead predictability, appeared to play significant roles in causing severe rainfall deficits over the major corn producing regions of central Great Plains.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 13, 2013 18:08:40 GMT 1
Contiguous U.S. Palmer Modified Drought Index (PMDI) 36-Month Period Ending in February, 1898-2013 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Climatic Data Center This is for the USA, of course. We all know that the UK was wet, wet, wet last year, at least AFTER the hosepipe ban was announced! The yellow bars indicate drought years (note the "Dust Bowl" era). The green bars are *not* drought years! Since last year in the USA was hyped by some as an Anthropogenically Caused Extreme Drought Situation the actual data might surprise some folk. Thanks to Steve Goddard for this data. stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/04/13/angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin/
|
|