Best – warming – headline – evah
Anthony Watts / February 28, 2012
I've been getting a lot of pressure to cover the story by warmspinner Richard Black over at the BBC about a supposed feedback between Arctic sea ice and colder, snowier, winters in the UK and the EU. For example, WUWT "elftone" says:
Richard Black of the BBC – despite getting his head handed to him on a platter twice recently – is spinning like crazy about snowy winters. The cause is shrinking arctic ice. No, really :). I'm amazed he's able to stand:
I've been resisting covering this for a little bit, because I knew sooner or later some MSM media fool would mangle this story into something unrecognizable (they always do). I was right, and the result is the most hilarious global warming headline ever:
They really have lost the plot, haven't they?
After a few hours, probably responding to people calling up the newsroom and laughing uncontrollably, some editor changed the headline to read "Melting Arctic causes snowier winters in Europe, the US ".
The Internet though, has a memory for such things. The original link was: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/world/global-warming-is-making-the-world-colder/story-e6frea8l-1226283672088?from=public_rss
But if you click on that you get the revised headline with revised URL.
It is still cached in some places, like this law blog: http://legalnews.findlaw.com/article/0dc48OwedZ44D?q=NASA
UPDATE: I've posted the Georgia Tech press release on the science here. While the idea posited isn't totally implausible, I need to see more examples to be convinced. – Anthony
February 28, 2012 in Current News, Humor, Ridiculae, Satire. Tags: Arctic, BBC, environment, Northern Hemisphere, Polar ice packs, Polar Regions, Sea ice
WHO Declares a Global Ebola Health Emergency
Magical Plastic
Confirmed by space radar: North Korea's nuclear test site collapsed
← Cambridge professor Michael Kelly on "deniers" and climate change: "science has been consistently over-egged to produce alarm."
Sea ice decline posited to be driving snowier NH winters →
132 thoughts on "Best – warming – headline – evah"
cui bono says:
Buffoon Broadcasting Corporation.
Nerd says:
http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2012/02/study-cloud-heights-may-be-a-negative-feedback-to-warming/
They're getting really desperate…
Garry Stotel says:
I believe it is called a "negative feedback"… Although, the warmists are not to be told…
This story, unbelievably made headline news on the BBC radio station (6 Music) I am listening to today!
David Ball says:
If he was wearing a tutu, this might actually have some entertainment value. They have really covered all the bases on this. " In the future, we will be having weather of some kind". If you predict every possibility, you cannot be wrong. Abject fail.
LeeHarvey says:
Next headline:
'Climate Scientists Hopelessly Confused – Say More Money is Only Remedy'
…at least I'd have to give them credit for honesty.
They've actually lost the plot. Their collective heads are now so far up their collective […], they seriously expect that they can say "warming makes it colder!" and your average layperson isn't going to nearly laugh themselves to death.
Great stuff guys, you're making yourself look more and more like the fools you are. Keep it coming.
GregO says:
The world is "dangerously warming" the alarmists say – caused by Mankind and his CO2 emissions.
And then the "climate is changing" the alarmists say – caused by Mankind and his CO2 emissions.
And now we hear "climate is warming causing cold" the alarmists say – caused by Mankind and his CO2 emissions.
I get the sense I am witnessing a group people at a party, mildly drunken, playing charades to the question: "Mankind's CO2 causes…"
i just got dumber
This would leave M4GW in a bit of a quandry.
Maybe it's the Coming Ice Age making the world warmer?
Sounds like a title directly from the fingertips of Bill Nye, the antiscience guy…
theduke says:
Well, yes, then the warming is not really "global," now is it?
Carmen D'oxide says:
If you can't understand things, be a journalist.
If you can't be a journalist, be a headline writer.
Its all global warming all the time now, with every crystal that falls from the heavens.
Pull My Finger says:
Somewhere Orwell is smugly laughing to himself.
Steven Goddard says:
The record sea ice in the Bering Sea is also caused by missing sea ice in the Arctic.
"How it happens
If less of the ocean is ice-covered in autumn, it releases more heat, warming the atmosphere.
This reduces the air temperature difference between the Arctic and latitudes further south, over the Atlantic Ocean.
The dwindling Arctic summer ice may have severe consequences for wildlife
In turn, this reduces the strength of the northern jet stream, which usually brings milder, wetter weather to Europe from the west.
It is these "blocking" conditions that keep the UK and the other affected regions supplied with cold air.
The researchers also found that the extra evaporation from the Arctic Ocean makes the air more humid, with some of the additional water content falling out as snow."
So, the nice cozy warm ice blanket keeps the heat in the ocean, which prevents the jet stream and cold snowy winters in Europe, when the summer ice extent is greater than it was. To everything there is a season (turn, turn, turn)
I'm going to read "1984" again.
Frank K. says:
Thankfully, here ins the U.S., the great Defunding of CAGW climate "science" is coming in November…
What I find somewhat distressing about these episodes in the MSM is that supposedly professional earth science organizations, such as the the now Gleick-free AGU, say nary a word about these idiotic press releases when they become hopeless mangled. THEY should be the ones doing the corrections…[sigh]
shrinking ice?
NSIDC website, FEB 2012
Arctic sea ice extent in the Bering Sea was the second highest in the satellite record for the month of January. Ice extent in the Bering Sea was 562,000 square kilometers (217,000 square miles), which is 104,600 square kilometers (40,400 square miles) above the 1979 to 2000 average. The record high ice extent for the month occurred in January 2000, at 629,000 square kilometers (242,900 square miles).
Headlines I'd like to see
Daily Bacon promotes heart health
Smoking extends life expectancy by 10 years
FDA reccomends vegetables be replaced by beer in food pyramid
Global Warming results in longer wangs
Free Money and Sex
elftone says:
Yup, that actually was worth the wait, Anthony :). I'm going to print that one out for those times when I need a good laugh, and can't get to the BBC's environment page.
Steve Hutton says:
They covered this on BBC TV news yesterday evening. How they did it without laughing I'll never know.
Baldrick says:
Bullsh!t Baffles Common-sense … from the 'I'm not real smart but I can lift heavy things' brigade.
Ken Hall says:
So Black has forgotten his earlier articles from about 3 years ago stating that global warming means snowy winters will be a thing of the past? Now global warming is the cause of more snow…
And they make these 180 degree U-turns with a completely straight face and expect to still be taken seriously! No wonder that they have had to resort to fraud, theft and deception out of desperation.
What is so satisfying is that Gleick did not even discover any evidence of wrongdoing, whatsoever. That is why the faked document had to be over hyped, and (by the irrational warmists) retrospectively "validated" by them to still support their own paranoid delusions.
Personally, I do not feel like I am in a war. and I dislike anyone on any side using such emotive and hate filled metaphors, for they are NOT useful or positive or helpful to anyone. That said, if Michael Mann et al feel like they are involved in a war, then I am more than happy for their weapons to be lies, U-Turns, deceptions, and slander. Their strategy to obtain their truth is is basically, "this is the conclusion, now how do we validate and prove it? For no other conclusion is acceptable"
I will stay on the side of whose "weapons" are truth, The Scientific Method and sceptical, open, yet critical minded evaluation of empirical evidence, wherever that may lead. Our strategy to obtain truth is the strict adherence to the scientific method, "How can we use these tools to accurately ascertain what is ACTUALLY happening in the climate?"
I am NOT in a war! I am NOT. I do not need to be. I am not fighting anyone. I am in a pursuit of truth, a race to gain accurate data and fill in the blanks of our knowledge.
You do not have to be in a defensive frame of mind, 'defending a belief,' if all you are doing is looking for truth, wherever it leads, for the truth's strongest defence is itself!
Reg. Blank says:
Standard doublethink.
Like that "climate change" doesn't just mean variations over time in the weather (well, duh!,) but it also means political change using climate guilt as a hook.
I notice on the NSIDC website that all causes of sea ice loss are stated as fact, when it comes to atmosphere temps it says 'likely'
to me "likely" is the Legal bods saying you can get away with writing this without being sued for making a false statement.
Carlsberg had to resort to "Probably" the finest lager, meaningless but gets across the right message for the gullible.
"Dr Len Shaffrey, University of Reading: "This is very early days for this research""
You would think that would prevent them from saying silly things until the money runs out.
The Infidel says:
Its was rerun here in Australia on the abc, from the skit, it take it they claimed, the ice melted, the air then cooled, which pushed the "jetstream" south, thus allowing siberian winds to head over England and make snow.
I believe they tried something similar not long ago, exept it was the "gulf stream" that would be stopped by the cold, fresh water moving south, thus the lower air would cool and cause mini ice age.
Oh and then there is the one that Europe is going to freeze all the way down to North Africa, whilst at the same time, Alaska is going to see a re-emergence of sub tropical rain forests. Oh and this will increase the tilt of the earth to push Antarctica firther north thus melting all the ice there and opening it up to being reforested again.
How am I going for a noobie? can I get a job as a climate alarmist scientist yet? How much in grants do you think I can get, 1 mill, 5 mill? or maybe I can get all of Bill Gates' money, yeah, billionaire sounds good, I'm in, I wanna be rich and have a huge house that uses the same power as a small town to run. Anthony, can you give me a reference please? and a cash cheque for 1 million Australian dollars. (chuckle)
PaulM says:
The second author of the PNAS paper that led to this story is Judith Curry.
John Marshall says:
The UK has had a mild winter so far, apart from a couple of weeks ago with a record low of -18C in Lincolnshire. The story claimed that the warming Arctic was causing the jet stream to change bringing colder air into the UK for colder winters. The winters of 09/10 were cold and snowy but as we all know Arctic ice is increasing not melting but this small fact escapes Black and his cohorts. Also missed, or not mentioned, was the record cold/snowy winter in central and eastern Europe. We in the UK are shielded from the worst of the cold by the Gulf Stream but this vital fact is ignored by the BBC/Black
Per Strandberg says:
Tabloid news based on tabloid science at its best!
Snotrocket says:
I've heard Black three times today on BBC news giving out this nonsense. Now I'm confused as to who to believe, him or Dr David Viner, senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia: "within a few years winter snowfall will become a very rare and exciting event"
Jenn Oates says:
Bwahahahahahah!
Wait…they really believe that? Uhhhhh…
Nevermind. 🙂
PaulM says (February 28, 2012 at 7:25 am)
Good lord! So it is.
Mardler says:
Heard this myself this morning on the Today program from the Biased Bull***t Corporation and my personal BS detector overloaded.
The problem is that the great unwashed believe this hook line and stinker more strongly now than ever before; the sceptical argument is lost in the noise and most people don't want to hear it.
Indeed, if anyone is delusional enough to think that we are winning the argument and the warmistas are losing you really don't understand. Alarmism is alive and very well; it is rampant in the MSM but especially the Beeb where virtually every program has a reference to man made climate change whether it fits the program's raison d'etre or not.
I'll keep saying this 'til it happens: we need a breakthrough and that will only happen when a prominent MSM preacher is convinced that the alarmist junk science is just that – junk. Until then look for more & more garbage scientific studies, more grants to The Team, more politicains calling for more green/CO2 policies, more government intervention and the ruination of our economies.
Well the 'cold' has to go somewhere, doesn't it?
This is an climategate e-mail from 2008 (the reply is worth reading too)
The purpose is to lay suspension bridge cable between some
Arctic Ocean islands in order to prevent sea ice moving south.
We plan to construct it such a way that the cable allows ice
to move northwards but cuts its passage when sea ice turns
moving southwards. The problem is that ice can melt
completely, and in fact this is our expectation before the end
of this decade, say by 2009.
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=1079.txt&search=arctic
So if global warming is causing colder N. Hemisphere winters, why is Joe Romm complaining that the MSM is not attributing the mild winter in the lower 48 states to, er, global warming. 🙂
Ps: That sentence could have ended after Romm.
Patrick Davis says:
Almost as bad as Australias' Tim Flannery's radical climate change 'solution', I am confident I can do better than this idiot for AU$180k part-time.
http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/climate-plan-could-change-sky-colour/story-e6frfkp9-1111116384553
If open arctic seas are releasing heat from the oceans then that is a cooling effect as energy unlocked from the ocean soon dashes off to space. A knock-on effect is it is raising the albedo in the UK by creating snowfall. That is also a cooling effect as incoming energy is reflected back to space. Something someone is sure of is wrong.
Next up, global warming causing Antarctica to thaw and release its cold will end the interglacial and lead to continental mile-thick glaciations and iced-over oceans.
On the upside, the ice on the oceans and land will finally break the anthropogenic trends of dramatically more frequent and immensely more powerful hurricanes and tornadoes.
Sounds like it should have been cold in Europe during the MWP. Since we know Greenland was warmer and that means a lot less ice in the Arctic, the same scenario should have existed.
But wait, according to the same dolts, the MWP was local to the NH most specifically Europe. I wonder if there are any better examples of cognitive dissonance in existence?
P.F. says:
Doublethink: a person can hold two opposing ideas in his or her mind at the same time, fully believing in both ideas. "Newspeak" is the official language used to express the ideas of doublethink.
Not Richard Black (@notrichardblack) says:
"We had to publish this nonsense before the funding year ends…."
Richrd Black (presumably with a straight face) states that Arctic sea ice 'has not recovered' from the 2007 minimum.
Well – if he'd care to look properly at the sea ice graphs produced by the Danish Met Office, and NANSEN – he might notice that it has recovered CONSIDERABLY – but hey – don't let the facts get in the way of a good story…
Sparks says:
It's about time WUWT has brought to the limelight the brilliant science and groundbreaking global warming studies being reported by Richard Black over at the BBC, it's freaking hilarious…
The subtlety was missed on this one…..
"…interfering with atmospheric currents…"
This phrasing is clever in that it would suggest a problem rather than a benefit, which in fact it is (if you consider a negative feedback a plus, OR, you're happy with nature doing what it does), and the manipulation of the logic to the benefit of that camp.
How is it "interfering"? I can see that it is effecting, or impacting, or influencing, reacting to or with, but interfering? The usage here is suggestive of an intention, however subliminal, and it typical of the CAGW presentation. THIS is PR spin in its most clever camouflage.
scf says:
That headline would be a great addition to the climate fail files.
"Melting Arctic causes snowier winters in Europe, the US ".
Does that vapor somehow skip right over Canada?
How about this beauty at the end of RB's article: "A few years ago, one projection [for an ice free Arctic summer] even showed 2013 was possible, though this now appears unlikely." This guy never gives up the"meme".
GaryM says:
This headline should get second place at least.
"Climate change is set to shake the earth"
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/climate-change-is-set-to-shake-the-earth-20120228-1tzr2.html#ixzz1nfxZ70bx
But if…
ilma630 says:
Mardler, I think you're right that it's no longer a scientific argument, but one of PR. It may even require a court case against one of the MSM to mandate/correct their output, or a concerted legal challenge to the accumulation of their output, demonstrating that they have deliberately deceived for financial gain (newspaper sales). This then raises questions of press freedom, and who arbitrates what is 'truth', which is as precarious as the current situation.
I have always thought that the BBC should face a court case to require them to adhere to their legally enshrined charter "to be impartial in ALL matters", so taking away their own self-defined definition of where the partiality line lies.
Telboy says:
Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty was the archetypical warm-monger –
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." The same goes for data.
The Pompous Git says:
GaryM said @ February 28, 2012 at 9:23 am
From that piece:
How can what happens in the thin envelope of gas that shrouds and protects our world possibly influence the potentially earth-shattering processes that operate deep beneath the surface? The fact that it does reflects a failure of our imagination and a limited understanding of the manner in which the different physical components of our planet – the atmosphere, the oceans, and the solid earth, or geosphere – intertwine and interact.
What next — stories about how the planet is about to be consumed by a giant invisible mutant space goat?
nc says:
Ric Werme, in your guide to WUWT I think you should add a new reference, "The Team," including Black so we can have a quick reference to quotes, news releases, back pedaling by the different players.
Ray Boorman says:
Sounds like it should have been cold in Europe during the MWP.
Yes, Richard, & the increasing glaciers in Europe, plus the frost fairs on the Thames during the "Little Ice Age" were also caused by global warming. Methinks the Hockey Stick will have to be redrawn. Can't wait to hear how M.E. Mann spins this.
More Soylent Green! says:
You aren't supposed to notice that the story keeps changing. You're just supposed to be afraid.
AdolfoGiurfa says:
I have no doubts anymore: There is a NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: Fools, because of global warming, increase their foolishness. It is a negative feedback as it follows entropy: The less energy in their system the less thoughtful they become.
Peridot says:
I saw the BBC TV report yesterday about the Jet Stream changing course due to melting sea ice and leading to the very cold winters in the northern hemisphere. But, I was interested to see, for the first time on BBC News, the report ending with the assertion that this research was not certain and that there were many factors involved in our weather.
Perhaps they have realized they are getting bad reviews of their climate coverage.
Magnificent – the one we've all been waiting for and yep, there's someone out there …
Sparks says: (February 28, 2012 at 8:28 am): It's about time WUWT has brought to the limelight the brilliant science and groundbreaking global warming studies being reported by Richard Black over at the BBC, it's freaking hilarious…
A Richard Black Reference Page, perhaps? Maintaining it would be a brain-endangering task, though.
Rick K says:
So global warming is making the world colder, eh? True. Just yesterday I put a chicken in the oven to bake it before making a sandwich. Naturally, it came out frozen. But it WAS larger… so it all worked out.
I barely have time to keep up with the good links, or are you referring to the category pages? The categories come straight from WUWT's category list, see http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/categories.html . If Anthony or posters create a "the team" category, my software will create a Table of Contents for it.
In the meantime, ridiculae is often good for rolling your eyes and references to quotes the quotee would like to take back.
Steve Fox says:
The problem is that the great unwashed believe this hook line and stinker more strongly now than ever before
Mardler, I'm not sure about that. My impression is that many people I know disbelieve AGW. If anything, it's the 'great washed' who are still committed, precisely because they are really terribly conformist (think 'good team players' like Muir Russell). In addition, public figures are rather stuck with their own burblings. When politicians and journalists have drivelled on for several years about how climate change is the great moral issue of our time, changing course is like turning a supertanker round. It takes a lot of time and room.
In addition, anyone who has witnessed the (very funny) spectacle of a group of people changing their mind collectively about something knows this is a very delicate process. Lots of nervous sidelong glances and baby steps need to happen before anything substantively new can be agreed.
mwhite says:
This story was also on the BBC news channel yesterday
Fronted by David Shukman.
Klockarman says:
"Global warming is making the world colder"
Sounds like something the Ministry of Truth's newspeak in Orwell's 1984. On the wall outside of the Ministry of Truth where it says:
IGNORANCE IS
they can just add to the bottom:
GLOBAL WARMING IS COLD
reason says:
C'mon. How many times do we hear Our Betters in Congress tell us that the only way out of America's national debt crisis is increased spending?
They all scribble in the same coloring book.
When Mullaly took ,over FordMC in the US he couldn't persuade his well paid mnagers to tell the truth about their problems with their part of the product line. Eventually he persuaded one of them that it would be a good idea if he did at the next board meeting. So it passed and after that meeting everyone began to change their reports. Voilà.
Winston Smith needs job security.
DaveG says:
Another article designed to keep a failing scam alive.
The rent/grant seeking Warmist doom and gloom crowd strike again. Is cold because its warm. The sea ice in the Arctic is back to its previous maximum extent as can be found on the Danish Arctic ice reports(Greenland /Iceland/ Arctic)2011. This report is pure alarmist junk science and is one of the main reasons the 2012 TOP science blogs in the USA, Canada. UK. New Zealand and Australia are They show factual in depth science reporting,they are open to all comments pro and con with out censorship and they are all skeptical of the IPPC and the over inflated effects of man made global warming,the get rich CO2 tax schemes and the high spending UN.
Scarface says:
Global Wambling just set a new record low imho.
I think their credibility has hit rock bottom now.
TomRude says:
"If only Global Warming could also cool my favorite ice creams!" Ben & Jerry
Robert of Ottawa says:
I honsetly took a triple-take on thet headline. It simply did not compute;I am stil ROTFLMAO.
Bobuk says:
What was the sea ice extent in 1947.
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/1947winter.gif
From The Pompous Git on February 28, 2012 at 10:06 am:
Small naked singularity traveling at relativistic velocities that we'd never detect in time for any meaningful attempt at evacuation, giant invisible mutant space goat, same difference.
Heck, some paranoid highly-advanced civilization could have destroyed all of humanity thousands of years ago, we just won't be aware of it until their little present arrives.
Erny72 says:
AdelaideNOW makes me cringe at the best of times (it's what passes as a newspaper in my home town), but that headline really proves that there are backwater locals who interfere with galahs when no one is looking.
I'll bet the grammar was primary school atrocious and there was somereference to the affect global warming=cooling would have on the local football team's summer training session…
I just can't look.
Robinson says:
This one did make the main morning news. Black was on Radio 4 this morning wittering on about it.
Global Warming: Is there nothing it can't do?
It is very clear, make no mistake about it:
Global warming causes everything!
Ah, but what causes global warming?
Answer: Everything.
There, now we can save hundreds of billions of dollars and can all this stupid pointless 'climate research'.
Knutsfordian says:
I live in the North West of England. This winter has so far been the warmest for some years. We had one half-inch fall of snow a few weeks ago which only lasted a day before it all melted. Temperatures have hardly fallen below zero all winter.
AndiC says:
So what they are saying now is (indirectly), CO2 causes global cooling
Crikey – we're saved from cataclysmic CAGW – now are we headed for cataclysmic CAGC ? The next ice-age perhaps?
Must put another log on the fire
Physics Major says:
I think they stole that headline from The Onion.
Paul Westhaver says:
Seem to me, that taking a conservation of energy approach to the atmospheric temperatures in the upper 45 degrees of the Northern Hemisphere, may yield a net sum gain of zero.
Heat of fusion liberated from the atmosphere that reduces ice, yields colder air to enable snowfall.
Seems reasonable to me but it does not imply global warming, only conservation of thermal energy.
Stephen Skinner says:
Therefore – more arctic ice will make the world warmer? So what happened in 1962 and 63, because there must have been an even greater Arctic ice melt than now, because it was colder and snowier than now? And what happened to the prediction that winters will be warmer and snow free?
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
"However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".
"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.
Disko Troop says:
Is there a Global Warming Toilet Cleaner? There seems to be no limit to what it can do. As a lot of the Warmista seem to have already gone round the bend it seems a logical by-product.
(Add extra commas, double dashes and parenthesis to taste)
brokenhockeystick says:
This is clearly the start of a shift by the establishment in the meme. They've clearly recognised that its going to cool for a few decades, so they need to subtly change the meme from "bad mankind causes CAG
W" to "bad mankind causes CAGC"
B. Jackson says:
Wasn't this the premise behind the movie, "The Day After Tomorrow"?
Funny headline, but warmists truly believe global warming makes the world colder.
"ABC Blames Global Warming for Extreme Cold Temperatures and Snow"
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2011/01/24/abc-blames-global-warming-extreme-cold-temperatures-and-snow
Warmists also believe global warming will cause another ice age, and believe gw will turn the Earth into another Venus. They have every base covered.
B. Jackson – almost. The premise of "Day After Tomorrow" as far as I could tell was "Global Warming Makes HULK GAIA SMASH!"
It was wierd watching that movie in theatres. There is a scene where the Random Gathering of Protagonists was taking refuge in…I don't know…the New York Central Library or somesort. There is a tense, dramatic scene, where people are having to run from an extremely cold blast of super-chilled air, visible only by the racing line of frost across various surfaces, and their means of escaping the deadly menace was…wait for it…slamming shut very heavy doors which sealed them into a warm room, where others were burning books in order to stay alive.
This scene happened, and I couldn't help but laugh to myself at the farce that, "oh no, Evil Blast of Very Cold Air can't possibly seep through the spaces around the door!" Then I realized I was the only one in the theatre laughing.
For those that didn't see the movie, let me enlighten you that this same Evil Blast of Very Cold Air had already taken out scores of other people with no books to burn…including successful seepage through many other doors, as well as an Army helicopter, which first was stalled out mid-air when Evil Blast froze the fuel.
This Global Warming thing reminds me a lot of the story of the 6-year old kid who wanted a tampon for his birthday. When asked why, he answered that in the TV-ads they say that with a tampon you can horse-back ride, go swimming anytime you want, ride bycicles, run and so on. He wanted this gadget that enables one to do all these fun things. Therefore global warming is like a tampon.
Oops. I bet someone is going to be shunned for this slip. I'm quite sure its against all the AGW club rules to release studies that show a negative feedback dampening effects to one aspect of warming instead of the alarmist cries of positive feedback which amplifies warming by a factor of three.
Gee Willikers says:
Warm globally, cool locally!
London247 says:
There are several mentions in the above comments of the mutant space goat which was noted in Douglas Adams' "Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe" trilogy.
It would be reasonable to conclude in such a context that the warmist proponents are B- Ark class material.
This could result in the term B-arkers for those supporting AGW. Regrettably this could result in unfavourable associations such as
1- Barking mad
2- EmBarking on flights of fantasy ( First class and taxpayer funded obviously)
3- And the old adage, "Dogs bark, but the caravan carries on" or re-interpreted as "Warmists cry AGW, but the climate carries on regardless".
/sarc off
You Guys are unreal says:
It was a daft headline, but can nobody read? It does not say that the planet is cooling, it is only commenting on changed snowfall patterns due to warming.
It is hardly a long and tough to digest article, but it would appear that nobody hear can understand it. AGW predicts more weather extremes, overlaid on a rising global temperature. More hurricanes, heavier rain/snowfall in some places, less rain/snow in others etc.
We are talking about GLOBAL averages.
Hello? And this is a 'science' blog?! Did IQs just drop suddenly?
REPLY: No sense of humor with this one – A
"Acme Goal Post Mover"
c/o Richard Black, BBC, London.
Kip Hansen says:
The Northeast US is suffering from lack of snow and cold this winter…lots of stories about daffodils coming up too soon, etc.
Touchy, aren't we.
"AGW predicts more weather extremes, overlaid on a rising global temperature. More hurricanes, heavier rain/snowfall in some places, less rain/snow in others etc."
Elevator Summary (LOL): AGW causes everything and you guys are dunderheads, nana nan boo boo, …….. 8^D
From You Guys are unreal on February 28, 2012 at 3:57 pm:
Well when you showed up the global average IQ of the site was suddenly shot to Hell for the day…
csanbon says:
For its writer, the headline makes me think of a quote credited to Yogi Berra that Anthony posted a few days ago, "If you don't think too good – don't think too much"
John M says:
This type of stuff has been around…
"Global warming blamed for unusual cold spell"
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=61512&sid=17581089&con_type=1
Greenpeace said so.
Re: You Guys are unreal and IQs…
What was that old joke? Maybe if You Guys left here and went over to DeSmogBlog, the average IQ of both blogs would go up.
"They really have lost the plot, haven't they? After a few hours, probably responding to people calling up the newsroom and laughing uncontrollably, some editor changed the headline"
When I see something like that headline, I can't help wondering if it wasn't a skeptic who wrote it, with an eye to what it said, and that it was changed to conform to the party line.
The idea that an ice free arctic will change the weather is probably correct for all time scales.
Consider the north shore of Lake Superior. The weather/climate changes a lot if the lake develops a substantial ice cover. Open water releases heat to the atmosphere and has a moderating effect on the local weather. Once an ice cover prevents this, it gets a lot colder along the shore. The arctic will be the same.
The freezing, or lack thereof, in the arctic will be controlled by ocean currents. The solar contribution in the high arctic winter ranges from small to zero. If the ocean doesn't freeze, it is because heat is coming in via currents. So, for some reason, the ocean currents have changed in part of the arctic and we have something like a large polynya.
Given the time scale on which ocean currents operate, it seems reasonable that the currents might have changed due to the heating in the late 20th century. To me it looks like a system with a large negative feedback whose transfer function has a time constant measured in years or decades.
Ian Ogilvie says:
From much experience I can sadly confirm that the Adelaide Advertiser is one of the junkiest newspapers in Australia. I cringe at what I am likely to be confronted by every time I see a story with the prefix "by science journalist…": who, it appears, is randomly picked by spinning the bottle.
The loopinees of this headline seems to have entered even their conscousness and embarrassed them to the point that the whole story was deleted from their print edition. Damn, I would have framed it and hung it on the wall.
Orwellian, indeed!
With respect to the CAGW hypothesis, "Ending Is Better Than Mending!"
No Whining says:
Unhinged hysteria is making global warmists' pontifications more credible
Jeff Alberts says:
Definitely would not like these two. Beer and smoking are both nasty.
Adelaide's Lament says:
(spoken) It says here…
(sung) The average unhinged warmist,
Basically insecure,
Due to some long frustration may react
With psychosomatic symptoms,
Difficult to endure,
Producing their deranged conception of facts.
Just from waiting around for the planet to grow uncold,
The warmists become bitter scolds.
You can out them wherever you figure the doctored data lurk,
You can give them a shot for ethics they've not got, but it just won't work.
When they're tired of getting the fisheye from you denier jerks,
(sung) The warmists remaining unheard,
Offends their regal sense,
Spawns psychotic tendencies, see note. (spoken) Tendencies see no– Oh! See note.
(sung) Chronic, spasmodic syndromes,
Toxic with nonsense,
Affecting their grants, proposals, stipends, and votes.
Just from worrying whether their payoff is on or off,
The warmists become quite wroth.
You can pump them all day with some FOIAs and the bloggers' biz,
But their payday never gets anywhere near as large as they'd wish.
If they're getting a kind of a name for themselves, and it ain't "scientists",
And furthermore,
Just from bawling and mewling and calling out that consensus exists,
The warmists are in a sinking ship.
When they get on the News at Six each night, they can hear warning bells chime.
Their departments are under subpeona and they're out of time.
When they're let go at term's end for behaving like slime,
The warmists will go down in their ship, their ship, their leaking old ship,
Their "peer review", and their proxies, and their models that failed to predict the dip!
From their lack of thoughtful reflection and a feeling their schtick's grown old,
The warmists dug themselves a deep deep hole!
DavidA says:
@You Guys are unreal, there's a headline pictured above which specifically says global warming is making the [b]world[/b] cooler.
Incomplete satellite monitoring and badly sampled data from very sparse populations of weather-stations then used to make predictions for somewhere else? Umm….I thought even the modellers were leery of making detailed regional forcasts.
The 2011 AGU* Charney Lecture by Graeme Stevens contains an excellent example of the perils of commiting to any kind of a useful regional forcast.
http://www.agu.org/sections/atmos/sectionawards/charneylecture.shtml
I found it quite listenable as a background audio. I think the 'Swedish problem' was described after the half-way point.
*No, I have no connection to the AGU. Never met them. Never likely to.
Doug Cotton says:
You've got to be more understanding and forgiving. They just meant "Carbon dioxide is Making the World Colder." and the text was meant to read …
"The IPCC has just discovered that they forgot that the Sun's radiation has a lot of infra-red in it and of course water vapour and carbon dioxide absorb some of this and send wonderful backradiation back to space containing some of the potent solar energy that would otherwise have warmed the Earth a bit more.
"So they have now decided that carbon dioxide helps to cool the Earth and doesn't do any warming because all that backradiation they talked about is really just standing waves that don't transfer any energy. So now we need only $50 billion a year to build and maintain coal burning generators in all those third world countries we need to control."
Anything is possible says:
Only one headline I can think of that might possibly top that……
"Global warming helping Cubs win World Series"
Wucash says:
Yeh, I saw that headline on BBC too… rolled my eyes knowing it was Dickie Black's work again.
I'm wondering, do "correspondants" have different code of ethics to journalists? There's no way Black's reporting on AGW is balanced. The Fakegate just showed that to those who didn't want to believe before.
This had been on German news a week ago as well. They said that a number of recent studies would all support the conclusion.
Brian H says:
Check out Pope's feedback equilibrium theory, according to which Arctic Ice Rulz!
herman@popesclimatetheory.com
His bottom line is surprisingly optimistic; the current regime is responsible for the abnormally prolonged interglacial we are enjoying, and it is likely to continue for the foreseeable future. Or even longer than foreseeable!
observa says:
Down Under we heard about the lack of snow plows closing Heathrow a year ago because airport management listened to the usual doomsayers that Northern Hemisphere kiddies would grow up without making snowmen. We had a similar experience with the long drought that has turned to floods the last couple of years and the same alarmist prognostications that the world's second largest river basin, the Murray Darling would never fill again just like our dry dams. Chief among them was our Climate Change Commissioner Tim Flannery who has gone to ground recently (or mud as the case may be) and is nowhere to be heard. He's the scientific chap who was spruiking seven feet or so rising sea levels and then purchasing a waterfront property on the estuarine Hawkesbury River. Well it is true Tim may face the prospect of a deluge but it won't come from the sea –
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/playground-weekender-music-festival-cancelled-due-to-wet-weather/story-e6frfku0-1226285205772
As one dry commenter opined recently- 'I'm having a lot of trouble clearing away all this water to find the drought underneath'
Well if you don't bother with snow ploughs listening to the alarmists, naturally if you're gullible government you have to do something about their prediction of never ending drought-
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/desal-plant-cant-shut-despite-heavy-rain/story-e6frfku0-1226285073771
Same sad story, different hemisphere.
It would be remiss of me not to point out that southern Australia has just finished the last day of its typically hot dry summer season and is now looking forward to its usual autumn and winter rainfall in order to replenish its water catchments.
Alex the skeptic says:
When I first read the title "Global warming is making the world colder" I thought it was some parody written by someone in the skeptical camp. But when I saw that it was really, really another bit of (post-normal) science coming from the warmist camp I just could not believe my eyes.
Is this the end of the end of the scam?
Update on my complaint about old Richard Black's bias over Fakegate.
Still no reply. Almost as though the BBC isn't really serious about it's commitment to serving the public. Very curious.
Here's what I wrote on their complaints website:
"The article was biased by way of selective reporting.
Richard Black refused to report on Climategate until the story was cold as he was unsure of the providence of the leaked emails. This was quite justifiable.
However, in this story the documents were stolen and at least one was fabricated. Again his established procedure would be proven to be justified. Yet he abandoned that practise.
To avoid bias (and fulfil his duty as a journalist) he should have checked his sources and consulted with DeSmog Blog, Heartland Institute and Watts Up With That. He did not do those things.
Instead he misled his readership in order to disparage a competitor's website (Watts Up With That). This is a clear bias against the winner of the Science Blog of the Year. As a less lauded science and environment blogger himself the motivation is suspect."
Man Bearpigg says:
Carmen D'oxide says:
If you can't be a journalist, be a headline writer
If you cant do either become a climate scientist for Pacific Institute.
I for one greatly enjoyed our Global Warming induced mild winter of 2012 than our Global Warming induced mini-ice age of 2011. Who knows what Global Warming has in store of 2013!? I don't know but I bet it is no better or worse than than the last 43 winters I've experienced.
Oh, almost forgot! Global Warming causes too many Daffodils, Dandilions appeal to UN to prevent Climate Herbocaust! Al Gore appeals to World Court to grant flowering plants the same basic rights as humans.
Kat Phiche says:
I've actually replicated this hypothesis/theory/BS at home. If I stand in front of the refrigerator with the door open, I get colder while the refrigerator heats up the rest of the room. Maybe if I reverse my window AC and have the cold air blow outside, I could combat global warming. Guess I'd have to do this during the winter to really have an affect. Yeah, that's the ticket!
Alan D McIntire says:
Sounds like a rehash of a hypotheis of Ewing and Donn
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/pdf_extract/123/3207/1061
Back in the 1950s, they hypothesized that an ice-free Arctic Ocean leads to increased snowfall at high latitudes. With higher precipitation, portions of this snow may not melt during the summer and so glaciers form and grow. Finally the glaciers calve into the Arcitc ocean, ultimately causing the ocean to freeze over.
.When low-temperature ice covers the Arctic Ocean there is little evaporation and the polar regions become deserts. This low precipitation allows high-latitude snowfalls to melt during the summer.
So what we get, according to their theory, is an oscillation between an ice free arctic and growing glaciers, and an ice covered arctic and receding glaciers.
rosa (@thinkingal22) says:
Don't you think this is how the Creator designed it all…..? Cooling, heating, cooling, heating, to create a steady supply of water to the earth? Seems Intelligent to me. Why interfere?
George Lawson says:
Mr Black should write on facts, not speculation
I am not a scientist, nor am I an expert in assessing the masses of data that is produced to support the AGW argument. I am nevertheless a very strong sceptic, believing as I do that humankind does not possess the power to change the earth's weather patterns as the warmists believe. My views are supported by the many excellent articles and viewpoints presented by logical sceptical scientists in the WUWT blogs. I do however hope I possess a modicum of logic which enables me to evaluate reports such as the one put out by Richard Black supporting the research that is supposed to prove that warmer weather in the Arctic creates colder weather with snow further south. As a very interested enthusiast therefore, I would like to raise a couple of questions arising from the article.
'The progressive shrinking of Arctic sea ice' etc
How does this equate to the following statement in his article?
'There was a marked deterioration in ice cover between the
summers of 2006 and 2007, which still holds the record
for the lowest extent on record;
and: 'If less of the ocean is ice-covered in autumn, it releases
more heat, warming the atmosphere'
I thought it is supposed to be the heat in the atmosphere that is causing the ice to melt in the first place, not from a warming Arctic sea. If it is from a warming sea then I presume the sea is warming across all oceans and not just in the arctic. Are we to assume that the sea in the Southern Ocean is not warming since the ice is not melting there, if not, why not? And if it is the warming atmosphere that is melting the ice, then why would the relatively colder temperature of the sea make the air want to rise if it is the warmer air that is supposed to have melted the ice in the first place?
And how can any article on a research project be considered to have any credibility when the article contains so many uncertainties of which the following are just a few:
'small, natural changes in the Sun's output can also affect winter weather'
'declining Arctic ice cover was just one of several factors that could increase blocking'
'The picture is further complicated by the involvement of the Arctic Oscillation'
'The oscillation is not understood well enough to predict'
'May be changing due to escalating greenhouse gas concentrations'
'A few years ago, one projection even showed 2013 was possible, (Ice free Arctic) though this now appears unlikely'
'So a related question is whether UK winters will get colder'
'It's possible that future winters will be colder and snowier, but there are some uncertainties'
Doesn't all this suggest that the author is clutching at straws to promote his pre-concieved position on AGW at all costs regardless of how his objectives are achieved? He obviously does not have an open, enquiring mind on the subject, which begs the question, is he really a science journalist, or simply a flag waver on the AGW theory for the warmists and the BBC?
George;
good questions, but here's a version of the thesis which uses Arctic Ice as a control mechanism:
popesclimatetheory.com . Basically, open AO produces more evaporation, then more snow, then cooling and more ice, then less evaporation, then less snow, then warming and less ice — round and round in a "negative feedback" cycle which has kept the world within narrow benign temp ranges for longer than is usual for interglacials — which normally peak fast and then cool fast.
[Oh, BTW, "begs the question" means "is a circular argument", not "demands an answer to the question". Common misuse of the phrase. ]
Friendly Advice says:
Has anyone seen the new video titled:- Ecosystems a Genocidal Fraud ? It's an awesome new documentary that just kills the very centre of environMENTALism as it proves scientifically that there is no such thing as an eco system,it explains where these catch phrases came from and the crazy people that picked it up and ran with it.Unfortunately it's being taught to the kids at school so it's up to al parents to watch this video for free at the CEC website Citizens Electoral Council.It does'nt matter where you live on this planet,crazy green legislation is coming your way and will cost you much more than money believe me. Try going to cecaust.com.au
Mark Barter says:
Clearly they give the game away when they say
Whether conditions will get colder still as ice melts further is unclear
Isn't that what they are trying to say, that melting ice alters the jet stream and brings colder temps but then they say they can't be sure ????
Looks to me like the same old method of compare two measurements and claim one measurment causes the other which is not science especially when there are other factors that could bring about the same result.
Once again though, they are relying on the computer models for their proof. When will these morons wake up to the fact that we know that models can only output data based on the info and ASSUMPTIONS you put into them. Slightly alter one piece of data and you get a completely different scenario.
If they want to convince us, put the model forward for inspection so someone can see if there are any unjustified assumptions.
Francis X. Farley says:
global warming is a series of EXTREME weather events, hot and cold, where warm temps offset cold temps and some years cold offsets warm. Yearly averages are compared, a trend toward warming might be noted. For example, starting at a 70 degree average the graph line wavers across the page, up one year down the other until it is notede that the last average reached 71 degrees. This accounts for that one degree increase in atmospheric heating. In some years, the average may have dropped to 69 degrees, a loss in atmospheeric heating and a gain in cooling. Something like that.
Mark;
I've mentioned the "Number Watch" site's Laws page before, specifically:
The law of computer models
The results from computer models tend towards the desires and expectations of the modellers.
The larger the model, the closer the convergence.
So all those gigaflops of added complexity are causing convergence with the modellers' assumptions. I wonder if it's asympototic, or linear …