343 Responses to "Unforced Variations: March 2017"
Thomassays
169 nigelj says: “Thomas, just on your promotion of Ronald Reagon”
I was not promoting Ronald Reagan. That you (and probably others too) get that idea proves you are the cause of the “communication” problems here – not me.
That you “imagine” you were telling me something I didn’t yet know, or that I need to go to wikipedia to research such things proves beyond doubt again how far off the mark you really are about me, what I know, what I think, and what I actually SAY here. But you’re not alone mate. :-)
Thomassays
176 Barton Paul Levenson, keep showing your ignorance and poor judgement and your unscientific irrational ways Barton. Coincidence doesn’t equate to correlation. Check your old text books and lecture notes. LOL
The American Dream – you have to be asleep to believe in it.
George Carlin RIP, an American
(smiling broadly)
Thomassays
177 Barton Paul Levenson still spreading unscientific beliefs and cherry-picked distorted facts on RC
“Trump won the EC because millions of Democrats were prevented from voting.”
~100 million Registered Voters did not vote in November.
(see my prior LINKS that presented said Facts)
30-50% of those were Registered Democrats who were not barred from voting at the Polling booths. They were not removed from the electoral rolls either.
So Barton Those are the facts. Deal with them too!
(PS — actually I’m not saying that to Barton because that’s a waste of time – it’s just another heads up for the silent readers of RC. Keep aware and remain skeptical of outspoken others in order to Recognize the difference between a vapid emotional opinion / belief and genuine evidence and facts – be it about climate science or politics or economics or knitting. Smile)
Thomassays
183 Charles Hughes, thanks, I’m lol. Good one. You’re a genius! :-)
Thomassays
[enough – this is all OT]
Thomassays
188 Charles Hughes says: “If we can’t make sense of the politics of Climate Change we have no chance of surviving it.”
Excellent, now there is something we can agree on. Is there more perchance? :-)
“About the only thing I’ve learned lately is that Thomas had a brain scan and the doctors weren’t able to find anything.”
What I have learned is that Chuck is quite gullible and prone to believe almost anything people say on the Internet!
Evidence doesn’t play much of a role in his decision making processes. He’s not alone there folks.
Planting seeds, seeing if they sprout roots and leaves. :-)
Thomassays
189 Barton Paul Levenson says: “… not Hillary Clinton, who has proposed putting American troops on the ground in Syria”
That’s true for those who either do not know the true history of what HRC argued for, or choose to ignore it because it convicts with the belief system and worldview and faulty personal opinions.
This is exactly how deniers who vote and politicians who are manipulated by special interests get caught in their false beliefs about climate science and the reality of climate change today.
Learn from the experience of others and avoid falling prey to their serious mistakes is my advice. You cannot know too much knowledge that’s true. :-)
Thomassays
What a sight to see. So what’s the post count now MA?
You should tell your peers to not put words in my mouth or beliefs in my head that do not apply to me. I’d have nothing to say then. :-)
“I cant see how that’s only the responsibility of the US taxpayer to burden.” versus all nation’s taxpayers. (big sigh) See?
Lawrence Colemansays
It is dangerous to say that global emissions are stabilising, as the global CO2 graph is still accelerating and in all likelihood will keep accelerating until the end. Many people do not realise that even though global anthropogenic may be levelling we have already pushed the earth’s climate into a different paradigm. Now, anthopogically modified natural systems are in the driving seat.
Only solution is to aggressively and quickly remove CO2 from the atmosphere and get it down to below 300 ppm. However due to the massive inertia (and time lag of centuries) of the world’s seas and oceans, 300 may still not be enough and well below 270ppm could be required.
KIA 193: He will not harm the environment – congress will not let him even if he tried.
BPL: THIS congress? This Tea-Party, GOP-dominated congress? Of course they’ll let him. They’ll help him. He already said it was okay to dump fossil fuel wastes in streams. Not a peep from congress.
KIA: Obama put troops on the ground in Syria in 2016
BPL: He put in advisors. Trump will play Johnson to Obama’s Kennedy.
For any conspiracy theorists amongst you, the lead author has shared a paper with Willie Soon in the past. However a co-worker insists Qinghua Ding is clean, and one would certainly assume that the likes of Axel Schweiger and Eric Steig are.
Be all that as it may, the usual “skeptical” suspects are having a field day with this one. From the Nature Climate Change abstract:
The Arctic has seen rapid sea-ice decline in the past three decades, whilst warming at about twice the global average rate. Yet the relationship between Arctic warming and sea-ice loss is not well understood. Here, we present evidence that trends in summertime atmospheric circulation may have contributed as much as 60% to the September sea-ice extent decline since 1979. A tendency towards a stronger anticyclonic circulation over Greenland and the Arctic Ocean with a barotropic structure in the troposphere increased the downwelling longwave radiation above the ice by warming and moistening the lower troposphere. Model experiments, with reanalysis data constraining atmospheric circulation, replicate the observed thermodynamic response and indicate that the near-surface changes are dominated by circulation changes rather than feedbacks from the changing sea-ice cover. Internal variability dominates the Arctic summer circulation trend and may be responsible for about 30–50% of the overall decline in September sea ice since 1979.
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Every single Recent Comment is by Thomas.
BrettnCalgarysays
Thomas;
I have been reading and following this site from pretty much its inception, without ever posting. Today, I do so to ask, nay, beg you to stop spamming. My scrolling finger is getting tired, and I’m worried I might accidentally miss a useful comment sandwiched between a couple of your pixel dumps.
Charles Hughessays
This is exactly what’s appearing in my sidebar on RC. I just copied and pasted it. That’s IT. It’s all Thomas All The Time. Would someone please stick a cork in this clown? This is pathological behavior and it’s counter productive SPAMMING.
Recent Comments
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
zebrasays
Yeah guys:
Recent Comments
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Enabling an addict is not something you expect from people with enough education to recognize what they are doing.
nigeljsays
Thomas @200
“Bill Clinton : The 9/11 hijackers arrived under Clinton’s watch. How far down the rabbit hole to you want to go?”
I will go some way down. Bill Cinton was fully aware Al Qaeda was planning something big. He asked congress for more money to fund intelligence, but the Republican Congress refused. He warned the incoming Bush administration of a growing problem, and they ignored him. This is all in the official records. I’m not sure what more he could have done.
You have a good knowledge of history, but you have decided to “demonize” the Clintons for some reason. You are looking for the bad and desperately ignoring the good. It’s classic confirmation bias. It’s really obvious Clinton was an ok president, and it was reflected in his approval ratings even despite the Lewinsky issue. I’m not naive, like I said he had some major failings as well. I’m happy to acknowledge this. I think I’m much less biased than you.
This is also getting off topic, so I’m not going to duscuss the Clintons further, but confirmation bias is important. I have fallen into this rabbit hole on occasions myself. Climate denialists have a chronic case of confirmation bias, but it’s a risk for all of us. Take a step back Thomas and think about it
Thomas @197.
My own policy towards you is to ignore the substance of all your “Thomas says” which has been clogging up this thread for some months now and which I don’t even bother to read. Thus my comments @58 and @104 up-thread are an exceptions Thus my comments @58 and @104 up-thread are the exceptions.
(You may recall in the past that I have attempted to point out to you (as have others) that this thread, even as an open thread, is intended for the discussion of climate science and not politics or the detail of AGW mitigation. But you were obviously not persuaded.)
In addressing me directly @197, you perhaps ask for a more detailed response than that given @104 concerning GHG emissions. I did fail to pass judgement on that particular morsel of the “Thomas says” @23. And there is also a rather timely message concerning Arctic SIE, that being the subject which kicked off the “Thomas says” @23.
♣ Up in the Arctic, the Sea Ice Extent has now dropped away from this winter’s peak levels to the point that it can be stated with some confidence (certainly with the JAXA data) that the peak level of Arctic SIE occurred on the 6th/7th March (depending on whether you use JAXA or NSIDC figures), a maxiumum daily SIE level that sets a new lowest-on-record value (JAXA numbers) of 13,878,287 sq km which in the JAXA record sits 63,773 sq km below 2015 (the previous lowest) and 80,545 sq km below 2016. (NSIDC put these figures a little higher at 97,000 sq km & 102,000 sq km.) So not a particularly large step towards a less-icy Arctic winter.
(It should be noted that the “Thomas says” inflicted up-thread @23 pre-dates this maximum-ice date and that the annual icy peak proclaimed @23 was actually bested by two subesquent icy peaks.)
With the crazy Arctic SIE numbers of 2016, it will likely be ‘hold on to your hats!’ for 2017. (The JAXA SIE anomalies 2005-to-date plotted here [usually 2 clicks to ‘download your attachment’] becomes even more dramatic if you consider the change in variance through the year with 2016 passing on occasion 4sd below the 2003-15 mean during thr melt and 5sd during the freeze. By comparison, the 2012 minimum ice only got a little more than 2sd below the mean.)
One big question to ponder is this Janurary’s divergence in Sea Ice Volume between PIOMAS & CryoSat. Has the clockwork of PIOMAS stripped a cog this year? Or has CryoSat fallen fowl of the high snow levels sitting atop the ice? If it is the latter, be sure you have a really firm hold of your hat for the coming melt season.
♣ Concerning the comment by Thomas @23 “Global GHG emissions continue to rise.” and my reply @104 “That may not be true”; the insistence @197 that data (presumably CO2 data) from beyond MLO is considered in any such analysis is but more “Thomas says” and can be ignored.
The reckoning which lay behind my reply @104 runs as follows:- CDIAC Figures for CO2 emissions from fossil fuel & cement emissions over recent years show very low growth since 2013, to the point that it has been described as a “plateau,” or (more recently & specific to energy-related CO2 emissions) “flat”, that is a period of zero growth.
The inclusion of CO2 emissions from Land-Use-Change (again see CDIAC) adds extra noise into such an assessment suggesting that, up-to-2015, some growth in anthropogenic CO2 emissions do continue.
When considering all anthropogenic GHG emissions, it is probably best to evaluate CO2(e) emissions in terms of the increase in forcing from atmospheric levels of well-mixed GHGs and attribute any such rise to anthropogenic sources.
By this method, IPCC AR5 A.II data (to 2011) shows no ‘continuing’ rise in the AGW forcings from GHGs as ΔF has been flat since the 1990s and significantly below the levels of the 1970s & 1980s. Data for more recent years (eg from EPA) suggest this situation remains generally true to 2015. The data gives no support for the assertion “Global GHG emissions continue to rise” which can thus be dismissed as nothing but more “Thomas says.”
However, and importantly, while ‘global GHG emissions may not continue to rise,’ they do not yet fall.
nigeljsays
Thomas @209 says:
“I cant see how that’s only the responsibility of the US taxpayer to burden.” versus all nation’s taxpayers. (big sigh) See?’
What you said is open to interpretation. This is your problem, you are not clear. Not just me saying it either.
However you appear to think other nations should contribute to NASAs costs. This doesn’t make much sense really. The most NASA could do is ask for donations or some sort of partnering arrangement, but it sounds absurd to me.
Other nations have their own climate science to fund.
It’s true as you point out NASA does a lot, but this is simply because America is a big country, with large institutions, and a large satellite network.They are not however doing everything, or doing the world some favour.
And Americas contributions to various global bodies isn’t that great, with lot’s of bills unpaid.
While we are at this, could America fund my countries social agencies? We do a lot of “research” that benefits other countries.
So you see you are being absurd.
nigeljsays
Thomas, just adding to my other comment above on NASA. Maybe you are thinking if Trump cuts their funding, other countries could contribute? You never really say, so it’s hard to work out what you are getting at.
The trouble is this will create a dependency that gets cemented in, and its shocking if things have to get to that stage. However I support NASA and you guys in general, and I would not personally object if my country contributed.
LC at 210: exactly right about global CO2 emissions. As long as CO2 in atmosphere continues to rise we are in trouble. And it’s rising at record rates even as our species switches to twist bulbs, leds and prius driving.
talk about falling emissions is smoke and mirrors, the accumulation of emissions in the atmosphere are clearly continuing to rise as a disastrous rate. As you point out, maybe any rate of rise is disastrous. You are wondering if we need to get down to 270. Dr. Mann said in 2014 that we should keep it under 405. Uh-oh.
March 16, 2017 406.46 ppm per Scripps
March 16, 2016 403.93 ppm per NOAA-ESRL
what could it all mean?
Mike
Mr. Know It Allsays
This is what my recent comments shows right now, 2:34 pm pacific on 3/18/2017:
Unforced Variations: March 2017: mike
Unforced Variations: March 2017: nigelj
Unforced Variations: March 2017: nigelj
Unforced Variations: March 2017: MA Rodger
Unforced Variations: March 2017: nigelj
Unforced Variations: March 2017: zebra
Predictable and unpredictable behaviour: ChemEng
Predictable and unpredictable behaviour: zebra
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Charles Hughes
Unforced Variations: March 2017: BrettnCalgary
211 – The rule allowing coal companies to mine as they always have, was an Obama era rule designed to harm coal companies. We lived without it for our entire history and we’re doing OK. We’ll survive it. Sometimes bureaucrats overstep their authority, or enact overly punitive measures – like fining farmers $75K/day for building a pond or similar charges for an oil leak in your drive way – Trump was elected to stop this abuse of power. Many Rs in Congress don’t like Mr. T – Paul Ryan, McCain, just 2 examples.
218 – nj
Right after 911, I saw the August 2001 issue of one of the Janes military magazines. Almost the entire issue was devoted to stories about Osama bin Laden. I was amazed.
Any perception that BC was a good president occur because the R congress forced him to be one; and the dot com bubble gave him a false booming economy until it collapsed.
Thomassays
A key thing about AGW is the global bit. But what can individuals do about it?
Speak up is what you can do 24/7.
Any chance the RC scientists and their mates globally, the well known ‘celebrity’ types in Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt, Jim Hansen, the RC readers be they scientists or nobodies, and gosh even Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama could lend their support via letter or email or comment to a newspaper in their country, or whatever TO HELP STOP THE ADANI CARMICHAEL COAL MINE which is about to become the world’s largest output coal mine ever that will operate for the next 90 years?
“As long as CO2 in atmosphere continues to rise we are in trouble. And it’s rising at record rates even as our species switches to twist bulbs, leds and prius driving.”
Yes, and yes. But why is it rising so quickly?
I’d guess it’s because we have been having record-warm years, and warmth causes atmospheric CO2 to rise, for various reasons (involving temperature-modulated processes from solubility of carbonic acid in seawater to microbial metabolism to vegetation growth and decay).
If so, we’d be in even worse shape if not for the emissions mitigation that has ocurred. On the bright side, some of the recent warmth is due to natural variability (yes, of course, on top of the anthropogenic trend). That means that we could catch a natural break again, in which case the growth of CO2 concentrations would slow down again.
But yeah–basically, this is not a cheerful time from the perspective of climate and human GHG emissions.
nigeljsays
Jim hunt @213
I read a media article on the arctic science paper, but can’t find the darn thing. I’m pretty sure the writers of the paper claimed between 30 – 50% of arctic sea ice loss (as a whole) since the 1970’s was due to “natural variation” and they acknowledged the rest was due to AGW.
But it didn’t seem clear what was causing the onset of the particular climate conditions they claim are causing some of this ice loss. Something seems odd with the whole thing.
Thomassays
Yes, you could help stop the world’s largest ever Coal Mine operating for the next 90 years
Useful Contacts in the age of Global Communications and Global Warming include:
73: “He will not harm the environment – congress will not let him even if he tried.”
LOL! Dumbest thing I’ve heard all week.
Bob Semprinisays
I saw long ago in the days of USENET in the 1980s, that with open discussions the sincere people are very susceptible to trolls, as is happening now on this forum. The trolls don’t get tired and just go away, but sincere people do. It comes down to either erosion of the usefulness of the forum or adoption of some degree of moderating.
Thomassays
Besides the operators/contributors to RC there are some very sharp people with incredible talents when it comes to mathematics, stats, software & apps who can produce rigorous accurate scientificly valid and mathematical outputs – people like BPL, MA Rodger and many others have that ability and expertise. As does Gavin and Rasmus who have direct access to the most advanced “calculators” on the planet via their work.
There is also the well known logical rational truism of “The Straw that Broke the Camel’s Back” Basic Philosophy:101 and Basic Science in fact.
How about combining these two known knowns and applying it to the new Adani Carmichael Coal mine and the Galilee Basin in Qld Australia?
for example:
It is known how much Coal will be extracted from that Mine in the next 10, 20, 50 and 90 year period of time.
So it is known how much CO2e that Mine will add to the atmosphere over that same period of time when burnt in India power stations.
We know roughly what the world’s current Carbon Budget is today in order to remain under 2C increase over pre-industrial.
Therefore we could know exactly how much is the going to be the contribution made by the Carmichael mine and calculate a % impact and lay that out over a time scale using the expertise of the resident mathematicians and scientists here.
Therefore we would also know (roughly to degrees of certainty) how much that Mine will increase the global CO2 and CO2e PPM in the atmosphere.
Therefore we would know (roughly to degrees of certainty) how much the oceans will increase it’s acidity as well.
And also be able to calculate the potential added Sea Ice loss and SLR contribution from that one Coal Mine.
And the mind boggles at what other data could be known and presented to others so they can seriously think about what a difference one more coal mine can make.
Because much like the truism of “the straw that broke the camel’s back” there is this other scientific fact that AGW/CC Tipping Points of the Climate system do exist.
What if it’s the Adani Carmichael Coal Mine that is a major contributor that pushes the world over one of those Tipping Points – and that could be calculated right now?
Maybe a new ‘science based’ RC article on this subject could subsequently appear on RC to be shared with other like minded websites globally?
Just an idea. If anyone wants some raw data about the Adani Carmichael Coal mine and how large it’s production will be over time, and the existing research in Oz about that in environmental applications/approvals, plus previous multiple court cases trying to stop it going ahead etc, I am only too willing to help and provide the EXPERTS with a many Links to that information!
Cheers.
Thomassays
Nigel, do not blame me for your oversights in reading what was written – the following quoted below was part of the one comment regarding NASA/GISS and “climate science” funding by the US Taxpayer ONLY and not the entire world … it was all interconnected, in the same post, on the same subject the same theme.
Not my fault if you failed to see the obvious connections of what was being said and why.
A genuine IPCC would be internationally funded with genuine real working climate scientists withe tools they need to do their job eg “hiring staff and satelites and buoys from Nasa/Giss and other nations.”
It’s not like that because geopolitics and geo-economics is far more important than doing real science to present real evidence and genuine truths to the global public backed up by every national govt standing behind the work of a “genuine real and effective” UNFCCC / IPCC system.
Th 203: Barton Paul Levenson still spreading unscientific beliefs and cherry-picked distorted facts on RC
“Trump won the EC because millions of Democrats were prevented from voting.”
~100 million Registered Voters did not vote in November.
BPL: I’m well aware of it. Are you aware of why non-voters generally don’t vote? Hint: It’s not all pure apathy. In any case, I can always revise my statement to say “millions of active Democratic voters were prevented from voting.” You’re not an American, so perhaps you aren’t familiar with the long history of voter suppression in this country, the closing down of polling places easy to get to for students or people without cars, the “voter ID” laws which just happen to fall most heavily on the poor, the elderly, and minorities, etc.
Thomassays
For those keen on the integrity legal aspects of AGW/CC denier groups, FF mining companies, the Panama Papers, and “political intrigue/corruption/influence” then keep an eye on the news about Adani.
Meanwhile in other news Elon Musk of Tesla offered Australia a 100MWe Battery to help ensure Electricity Grid Stability and he would build it in 100 days or it’s free.
(search for South Australia electricity grid black outs AEMO battery renewable energy snowy river 2.0 etc)
Thomassays
For the uncontrollable critics and those who skip the Reference Links to valuable knowledge and 21st century Science:
Biblical verse Jeremiah 5:21 ‘Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not’.
In 1738 it was used by Jonathan Swift in his ‘Polite Conversation’ and is first attested in the United States in the 1713 ‘Works of Thomas Chalkley’.
The full saying is: ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know.’
Rob Honeycutt is famous for his many contributions, at Skeptical Science, in the comment threats on my blog, and elsewhere, in defense of climate science, where that defense is largely against the deniers of science and damagers of civilization. (He is also the guy who makes these famous messenger bags) He deserves a lot of credit for all the work he has done in this area.
Over the years, Honeycutt has developed a number of dialogs related to most, possibly all, areas of human caused global warming and climate change. Along with these dialogs, he has also developed some very helpful graphics.
And now, he has put them together in a book: 28 Climate Change Elevator Pitches: Short Explanations on the Scientific Basis of Man-made Climate Change.
Links in the original
Thomassays
223 Mr. Know It All … (smiling)
RE: Right after 911, I saw the August 2001 issue of one of the Janes military magazines. Almost the entire issue was devoted to stories about Osama bin Laden. I was amazed.
From before Jan 20th 2001 BC and the US Congress and DoD were in the drivers seat for 8 years leading up to that.
And from January 2001 US Corporations with the full support of the US Dept of State and the Dick Cheney WH were in full scale negotiations with the Taliban Govt of Afghanistan for Mining/FF extraction opportunities and pipelines all over the place.
Then in July 2001 on the signature of Pres GW Bush the US Government sent over $200 million in AID to the Taliban Government to help “grease” those corporate negotiations.
When it comes to the rank incompetence of America as a Nation State and it’s Governments and it’s dysfunctional politics and electoral system I am a very committed non-partisan and unbiased Critic of the bleeding obvious.
While repeating again that Ground Zero for AGW/CC Denial is the United States of America. That NASA/GISS is an American tax payer funded entity does not in anyway excuse the American people nor let them off the hook for the actions and inaction of their Governments or Congress.
Chris O'Neillsays
#223:
Any perception that BC was a good president occur because the R congress forced him to be one
GWB didn’t need congress to force him to be a war criminal.
I strongly suspect that Thomas and Mr Know It All are both unemployed.
And unemployable.
Mr. Know It Allsays
203 – Th
Sadly, in the USA, we can be thankful that many do not vote. In fact, probably a large percentage of those who do vote shouldn’t because they just aren’t informed. This is not something to be proud of, but it is what it is, and it explains why HRC won the popular vote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Url1HL6oExk
3/19/2017 @ 2:13 am pacific
Chris O'Neillsays
#162:
what John Howard did after Port Arthur and how he went about it convincing his own side of politics, .. and especially standing up in front of those people railing against him face to face and putting his case.
I won’t be holding my breath waiting for Donald Trump to convince his own side of politics that GHG emissions need to be brought down to virtually zero by 2050.
Chris O'Neillsays
#118
My point is that even if the USA increased renewables TEN FOLD THIS YEAR it would do absolutely nothing significant to slow CO2 spewing.
If I stopped paying my taxes this year it would do absolutely nothing significant to reduce the government’s deficit.
Guess I should stop paying my taxes then.
Chris O'Neillsays
#88
80 below in Vostok today.
Another clown who thinks weather and climate are the same.
SecularAnimistsays
If the climate scientists who maintain this site would post even half as often as “Thomas”, RealClimate might actually be a useful and even important website.
Nigel @226 – If you click through to my article you’ll not it references a wide variety of “media articles on the arctic science paper”.
Something does indeed “seem odd”. See the slideshow including tweets from Michael Mann for example. Or this, from Jeffrey Kargel?
Everything is interconnected, and some of these ‘teleconnections’ are relayed through the weather system. Part of the huge climatic changes affecting all of the Earth is due to processes that happened long before humans came on the scene. It does not mean that what is happening to Arctic sea ice is all normal and healthy and unperturbed by the drastic impacts humans are having on climate and weather by means of changes to the atmosphere.
Regular readers will be aware that the alleged “Global Warming Policy Forum” recently published what they describe with tongue in cheek as a “correction” to one of the many egregious inaccuracies published on their web site recently.
Last night the Mail Online web site followed suit by publishing an excuse for a “correction” to the self same egregious inaccuracy published on February 19th 2017 as part of David Rose’s self christened “Climategate 2” campaign in the Mail on Sunday.
One of the numerous problems with the Mail and the GWPF’s version of these recent events is that none of the UK Met Office insiders I have contacted have any idea what the Mail might be blathering on about.
KmcK at 225: yes, the record global warmth we have had for the past several years in undoubtedly contributing to the record rate of CO2 emissions. And yes, our species’ efforts to reduce emissions have probably reduced the amount of global CO2 emissions that can be directly attributed to the species. We are now looking at 5 consecutive years of global heat increase with some chance that 2017 will continue the streak. Nothing like that exists in the record. https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
The extraordinary run up in global temps that occurred circa 1935-1945 shows a streak of 2 hotter years, then a slight step down in global temp, then that pattern recurs. I hope/expect that 2017 will break the string, but that is based primarily on hope. We don’t know what the actual short and long term impacts are from atmospheric CO2 above 405 ppm actually are. We are going to find out. Dr. Mann said in 2014 that we should keep the number under 405. We have not done that.
The climate changes from a higher number of CO2 generally fall in one direction, toward more global warming, not less. It looks like tipping dominos to me. I expect there are some global constraints on CO2 accumulation, but I think those begin to kick in long after the planet has become a pretty miserable place for our species. I think our species’ risk management function is an epic fail on AGW so far. It looks like jumping off a cliff with umbrella. We may be able to slow descent, but a hard landing may still be coming.
I think we agree on all this. I just think there are significant differences between an umbrella and a parachute. They have a lot of similarities, but pretty different true functionality. Slowing CO2 emissions slightly from one source (humans) in a record CO2 run-up is like opening umbrella in a freefall. Parachute action would require that we start moving the needle in the other direction.
Dr. Mann said keep it under 405. How can we get back to 405 and stop the increase?
Warm regards
Mike
Thomassays
So Chuck’s a rocket scientist BPL? Well if that’s the case I should defer to him on all important issues in life. Thanks so much for the heads up.
169 nigelj says: “Thomas, just on your promotion of Ronald Reagon”
I was not promoting Ronald Reagan. That you (and probably others too) get that idea proves you are the cause of the “communication” problems here – not me.
That you “imagine” you were telling me something I didn’t yet know, or that I need to go to wikipedia to research such things proves beyond doubt again how far off the mark you really are about me, what I know, what I think, and what I actually SAY here. But you’re not alone mate. :-)
176 Barton Paul Levenson, keep showing your ignorance and poor judgement and your unscientific irrational ways Barton. Coincidence doesn’t equate to correlation. Check your old text books and lecture notes. LOL
The American Dream – you have to be asleep to believe in it.
George Carlin RIP, an American
(smiling broadly)
177 Barton Paul Levenson still spreading unscientific beliefs and cherry-picked distorted facts on RC
“Trump won the EC because millions of Democrats were prevented from voting.”
~100 million Registered Voters did not vote in November.
(see my prior LINKS that presented said Facts)
30-50% of those were Registered Democrats who were not barred from voting at the Polling booths. They were not removed from the electoral rolls either.
So Barton Those are the facts. Deal with them too!
(PS — actually I’m not saying that to Barton because that’s a waste of time – it’s just another heads up for the silent readers of RC. Keep aware and remain skeptical of outspoken others in order to Recognize the difference between a vapid emotional opinion / belief and genuine evidence and facts – be it about climate science or politics or economics or knitting. Smile)
183 Charles Hughes, thanks, I’m lol. Good one. You’re a genius! :-)
[enough – this is all OT]
188 Charles Hughes says: “If we can’t make sense of the politics of Climate Change we have no chance of surviving it.”
Excellent, now there is something we can agree on. Is there more perchance? :-)
“About the only thing I’ve learned lately is that Thomas had a brain scan and the doctors weren’t able to find anything.”
What I have learned is that Chuck is quite gullible and prone to believe almost anything people say on the Internet!
Evidence doesn’t play much of a role in his decision making processes. He’s not alone there folks.
Planting seeds, seeing if they sprout roots and leaves. :-)
189 Barton Paul Levenson says: “… not Hillary Clinton, who has proposed putting American troops on the ground in Syria”
That’s true for those who either do not know the true history of what HRC argued for, or choose to ignore it because it convicts with the belief system and worldview and faulty personal opinions.
This is exactly how deniers who vote and politicians who are manipulated by special interests get caught in their false beliefs about climate science and the reality of climate change today.
Learn from the experience of others and avoid falling prey to their serious mistakes is my advice. You cannot know too much knowledge that’s true. :-)
What a sight to see. So what’s the post count now MA?
You should tell your peers to not put words in my mouth or beliefs in my head that do not apply to me. I’d have nothing to say then. :-)
For MA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYajHZ4QUVM
192 nigelj …. oh my
“I cant see how that’s only the responsibility of the US taxpayer to burden.” versus all nation’s taxpayers. (big sigh) See?
It is dangerous to say that global emissions are stabilising, as the global CO2 graph is still accelerating and in all likelihood will keep accelerating until the end. Many people do not realise that even though global anthropogenic may be levelling we have already pushed the earth’s climate into a different paradigm. Now, anthopogically modified natural systems are in the driving seat.
Only solution is to aggressively and quickly remove CO2 from the atmosphere and get it down to below 300 ppm. However due to the massive inertia (and time lag of centuries) of the world’s seas and oceans, 300 may still not be enough and well below 270ppm could be required.
KIA 193: He will not harm the environment – congress will not let him even if he tried.
BPL: THIS congress? This Tea-Party, GOP-dominated congress? Of course they’ll let him. They’ll help him. He already said it was okay to dump fossil fuel wastes in streams. Not a peep from congress.
KIA: Obama put troops on the ground in Syria in 2016
BPL: He put in advisors. Trump will play Johnson to Obama’s Kennedy.
Th 206: What I have learned is that Chuck is quite gullible and prone to believe almost anything people say on the Internet!
BPL: Really? Chuck Hughes, the veteran of Tripoli Science Association and Tripoli Rocketry Association? You’re sure about that?
Why don’t you ever do research before posting these things?
Since nobody else seems to have mentioned this new paper in here yet I will!
“Is Arctic Ice Loss Driven by Natural Swings?”
For any conspiracy theorists amongst you, the lead author has shared a paper with Willie Soon in the past. However a co-worker insists Qinghua Ding is clean, and one would certainly assume that the likes of Axel Schweiger and Eric Steig are.
Be all that as it may, the usual “skeptical” suspects are having a field day with this one. From the Nature Climate Change abstract:
The Arctic has seen rapid sea-ice decline in the past three decades, whilst warming at about twice the global average rate. Yet the relationship between Arctic warming and sea-ice loss is not well understood. Here, we present evidence that trends in summertime atmospheric circulation may have contributed as much as 60% to the September sea-ice extent decline since 1979. A tendency towards a stronger anticyclonic circulation over Greenland and the Arctic Ocean with a barotropic structure in the troposphere increased the downwelling longwave radiation above the ice by warming and moistening the lower troposphere. Model experiments, with reanalysis data constraining atmospheric circulation, replicate the observed thermodynamic response and indicate that the near-surface changes are dominated by circulation changes rather than feedbacks from the changing sea-ice cover. Internal variability dominates the Arctic summer circulation trend and may be responsible for about 30–50% of the overall decline in September sea ice since 1979.
RC Bingo!
Every single Recent Comment is by Thomas.
Thomas;
I have been reading and following this site from pretty much its inception, without ever posting. Today, I do so to ask, nay, beg you to stop spamming. My scrolling finger is getting tired, and I’m worried I might accidentally miss a useful comment sandwiched between a couple of your pixel dumps.
This is exactly what’s appearing in my sidebar on RC. I just copied and pasted it. That’s IT. It’s all Thomas All The Time. Would someone please stick a cork in this clown? This is pathological behavior and it’s counter productive SPAMMING.
Recent Comments
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Yeah guys:
Recent Comments
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Thomas
Enabling an addict is not something you expect from people with enough education to recognize what they are doing.
Thomas @200
“Bill Clinton : The 9/11 hijackers arrived under Clinton’s watch. How far down the rabbit hole to you want to go?”
I will go some way down. Bill Cinton was fully aware Al Qaeda was planning something big. He asked congress for more money to fund intelligence, but the Republican Congress refused. He warned the incoming Bush administration of a growing problem, and they ignored him. This is all in the official records. I’m not sure what more he could have done.
You have a good knowledge of history, but you have decided to “demonize” the Clintons for some reason. You are looking for the bad and desperately ignoring the good. It’s classic confirmation bias. It’s really obvious Clinton was an ok president, and it was reflected in his approval ratings even despite the Lewinsky issue. I’m not naive, like I said he had some major failings as well. I’m happy to acknowledge this. I think I’m much less biased than you.
This is also getting off topic, so I’m not going to duscuss the Clintons further, but confirmation bias is important. I have fallen into this rabbit hole on occasions myself. Climate denialists have a chronic case of confirmation bias, but it’s a risk for all of us. Take a step back Thomas and think about it
Thomas @197.
My own policy towards you is to ignore the substance of all your “Thomas says” which has been clogging up this thread for some months now and which I don’t even bother to read. Thus my comments @58 and @104 up-thread are an exceptions Thus my comments @58 and @104 up-thread are the exceptions.
(You may recall in the past that I have attempted to point out to you (as have others) that this thread, even as an open thread, is intended for the discussion of climate science and not politics or the detail of AGW mitigation. But you were obviously not persuaded.)
In addressing me directly @197, you perhaps ask for a more detailed response than that given @104 concerning GHG emissions. I did fail to pass judgement on that particular morsel of the “Thomas says” @23. And there is also a rather timely message concerning Arctic SIE, that being the subject which kicked off the “Thomas says” @23.
♣ Up in the Arctic, the Sea Ice Extent has now dropped away from this winter’s peak levels to the point that it can be stated with some confidence (certainly with the JAXA data) that the peak level of Arctic SIE occurred on the 6th/7th March (depending on whether you use JAXA or NSIDC figures), a maxiumum daily SIE level that sets a new lowest-on-record value (JAXA numbers) of 13,878,287 sq km which in the JAXA record sits 63,773 sq km below 2015 (the previous lowest) and 80,545 sq km below 2016. (NSIDC put these figures a little higher at 97,000 sq km & 102,000 sq km.) So not a particularly large step towards a less-icy Arctic winter.
(It should be noted that the “Thomas says” inflicted up-thread @23 pre-dates this maximum-ice date and that the annual icy peak proclaimed @23 was actually bested by two subesquent icy peaks.)
With the crazy Arctic SIE numbers of 2016, it will likely be ‘hold on to your hats!’ for 2017. (The JAXA SIE anomalies 2005-to-date plotted here [usually 2 clicks to ‘download your attachment’] becomes even more dramatic if you consider the change in variance through the year with 2016 passing on occasion 4sd below the 2003-15 mean during thr melt and 5sd during the freeze. By comparison, the 2012 minimum ice only got a little more than 2sd below the mean.)
One big question to ponder is this Janurary’s divergence in Sea Ice Volume between PIOMAS & CryoSat. Has the clockwork of PIOMAS stripped a cog this year? Or has CryoSat fallen fowl of the high snow levels sitting atop the ice? If it is the latter, be sure you have a really firm hold of your hat for the coming melt season.
♣ Concerning the comment by Thomas @23 “Global GHG emissions continue to rise.” and my reply @104 “That may not be true”; the insistence @197 that data (presumably CO2 data) from beyond MLO is considered in any such analysis is but more “Thomas says” and can be ignored.
The reckoning which lay behind my reply @104 runs as follows:-
CDIAC Figures for CO2 emissions from fossil fuel & cement emissions over recent years show very low growth since 2013, to the point that it has been described as a “plateau,” or (more recently & specific to energy-related CO2 emissions) “flat”, that is a period of zero growth.
The inclusion of CO2 emissions from Land-Use-Change (again see CDIAC) adds extra noise into such an assessment suggesting that, up-to-2015, some growth in anthropogenic CO2 emissions do continue.
When considering all anthropogenic GHG emissions, it is probably best to evaluate CO2(e) emissions in terms of the increase in forcing from atmospheric levels of well-mixed GHGs and attribute any such rise to anthropogenic sources.
By this method, IPCC AR5 A.II data (to 2011) shows no ‘continuing’ rise in the AGW forcings from GHGs as ΔF has been flat since the 1990s and significantly below the levels of the 1970s & 1980s. Data for more recent years (eg from EPA) suggest this situation remains generally true to 2015. The data gives no support for the assertion “Global GHG emissions continue to rise” which can thus be dismissed as nothing but more “Thomas says.”
However, and importantly, while ‘global GHG emissions may not continue to rise,’ they do not yet fall.
Thomas @209 says:
“I cant see how that’s only the responsibility of the US taxpayer to burden.” versus all nation’s taxpayers. (big sigh) See?’
What you said is open to interpretation. This is your problem, you are not clear. Not just me saying it either.
However you appear to think other nations should contribute to NASAs costs. This doesn’t make much sense really. The most NASA could do is ask for donations or some sort of partnering arrangement, but it sounds absurd to me.
Other nations have their own climate science to fund.
It’s true as you point out NASA does a lot, but this is simply because America is a big country, with large institutions, and a large satellite network.They are not however doing everything, or doing the world some favour.
And Americas contributions to various global bodies isn’t that great, with lot’s of bills unpaid.
While we are at this, could America fund my countries social agencies? We do a lot of “research” that benefits other countries.
So you see you are being absurd.
Thomas, just adding to my other comment above on NASA. Maybe you are thinking if Trump cuts their funding, other countries could contribute? You never really say, so it’s hard to work out what you are getting at.
The trouble is this will create a dependency that gets cemented in, and its shocking if things have to get to that stage. However I support NASA and you guys in general, and I would not personally object if my country contributed.
LC at 210: exactly right about global CO2 emissions. As long as CO2 in atmosphere continues to rise we are in trouble. And it’s rising at record rates even as our species switches to twist bulbs, leds and prius driving.
talk about falling emissions is smoke and mirrors, the accumulation of emissions in the atmosphere are clearly continuing to rise as a disastrous rate. As you point out, maybe any rate of rise is disastrous. You are wondering if we need to get down to 270. Dr. Mann said in 2014 that we should keep it under 405. Uh-oh.
March 16, 2017 406.46 ppm per Scripps
March 16, 2016 403.93 ppm per NOAA-ESRL
what could it all mean?
Mike
This is what my recent comments shows right now, 2:34 pm pacific on 3/18/2017:
Unforced Variations: March 2017: mike
Unforced Variations: March 2017: nigelj
Unforced Variations: March 2017: nigelj
Unforced Variations: March 2017: MA Rodger
Unforced Variations: March 2017: nigelj
Unforced Variations: March 2017: zebra
Predictable and unpredictable behaviour: ChemEng
Predictable and unpredictable behaviour: zebra
Unforced Variations: March 2017: Charles Hughes
Unforced Variations: March 2017: BrettnCalgary
211 – The rule allowing coal companies to mine as they always have, was an Obama era rule designed to harm coal companies. We lived without it for our entire history and we’re doing OK. We’ll survive it. Sometimes bureaucrats overstep their authority, or enact overly punitive measures – like fining farmers $75K/day for building a pond or similar charges for an oil leak in your drive way – Trump was elected to stop this abuse of power. Many Rs in Congress don’t like Mr. T – Paul Ryan, McCain, just 2 examples.
218 – nj
Right after 911, I saw the August 2001 issue of one of the Janes military magazines. Almost the entire issue was devoted to stories about Osama bin Laden. I was amazed.
Any perception that BC was a good president occur because the R congress forced him to be one; and the dot com bubble gave him a false booming economy until it collapsed.
A key thing about AGW is the global bit. But what can individuals do about it?
Speak up is what you can do 24/7.
Any chance the RC scientists and their mates globally, the well known ‘celebrity’ types in Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt, Jim Hansen, the RC readers be they scientists or nobodies, and gosh even Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama could lend their support via letter or email or comment to a newspaper in their country, or whatever TO HELP STOP THE ADANI CARMICHAEL COAL MINE which is about to become the world’s largest output coal mine ever that will operate for the next 90 years?
Carmichael 16 March 2017 – Geoff Cousins leads stop Adani mine India tour: delivers letter from eminent Australians
https://www.acf.org.au/stop_adani_mine_india_tour
Cricket great Ian Chappell has stood by his opposition to the Adani mine proposal as part of a group of prominent Australians branded “elitist wankers” by a federal government MP and “a very small group of misled people” by the Indian miner.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/17/ian-chappell-stands-by-adani-mine-letter-despite-being-called-elitist-by-coalition-mp
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/delegation-to-confront-gautam-adani-over-galilee-coal-mine-20170315-guyn1i.html
http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/story/4471953/the-fight-to-build-australias-biggest-coal-mine/?cs=2452
India announces plan to step away from coal, casting doubt on approved Queensland Adani mine Updated 19 Dec 2016, 2:26pm
India has released a new power plan promoting a dramatic increase in renewable energy and raising doubts about the Indian-owned Adani Group’s massive coal mine in Queensland.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-19/indias-plan-to-step-away-from-coal-casts-doubt-on-adani-mine/8131240
Adani: Qld Premier, mayors hope to convince company to go ahead with Carmichael mine
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-18/adani-mine-support-shown-by-qld-premier-mayors-in-india/8366126
Oh yes, you could make a difference – ask your friends to say something on social media or write an email and send it to 100 people.
Mike, #222–
“As long as CO2 in atmosphere continues to rise we are in trouble. And it’s rising at record rates even as our species switches to twist bulbs, leds and prius driving.”
Yes, and yes. But why is it rising so quickly?
I’d guess it’s because we have been having record-warm years, and warmth causes atmospheric CO2 to rise, for various reasons (involving temperature-modulated processes from solubility of carbonic acid in seawater to microbial metabolism to vegetation growth and decay).
If so, we’d be in even worse shape if not for the emissions mitigation that has ocurred. On the bright side, some of the recent warmth is due to natural variability (yes, of course, on top of the anthropogenic trend). That means that we could catch a natural break again, in which case the growth of CO2 concentrations would slow down again.
But yeah–basically, this is not a cheerful time from the perspective of climate and human GHG emissions.
Jim hunt @213
I read a media article on the arctic science paper, but can’t find the darn thing. I’m pretty sure the writers of the paper claimed between 30 – 50% of arctic sea ice loss (as a whole) since the 1970’s was due to “natural variation” and they acknowledged the rest was due to AGW.
But it didn’t seem clear what was causing the onset of the particular climate conditions they claim are causing some of this ice loss. Something seems odd with the whole thing.
Yes, you could help stop the world’s largest ever Coal Mine operating for the next 90 years
Useful Contacts in the age of Global Communications and Global Warming include:
The Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP Prime Minister (Australia)
https://www.pm.gov.au/contact-your-pm
Twitter: https://twitter.com/turnbullmalcolm
The Hon Josh Frydenburg MP – Minister for Energy and the Environment (Australia)
Josh.Frydenberg.MP@aph.gov.au
The Hon Bill Shorten MP Leader of the Opposition (Labor Party – Australia)
Bill.Shorten.MP@aph.gov.au
Premier of Queensland Annastacia Palaszczuk MP (Labor Party Qld Australia)
https://www.thepremier.qld.gov.au/tools/contact.aspx
Email dpc@premiers.qld.gov.au
Twitter: https://twitter.com/annastaciamp
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/APalaszczukMP/
Shri Piyush Goyal is the Minister of State with Independent Charge for Power, Coal, New & Renewable Energy and Mines in the Government of India
Minister of State for Coal piyush.goyal@gov.in
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PiyushGoyal
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PiyushGoyalOfficial
http://mnre.gov.in/mission-and-vision-2/people/division-heads/
http://coal.nic.in/content/contact-us
Adani Mining Pty Ltd (India-Australia)
http://www.adaniaustralia.com/contact
http://www.adani.com/contact-us
reception.australia@adani.in
Twitter: https://twitter.com/adanionline
The Hon Narendra Modi Prime Minister (India)
http://www.pmindia.gov.in/en/interact-with-honble-pm/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/narendramodi
The President of India, Shri Pranab Mukherjee
http://presidentofindia.nic.in/contact-us.htm
E-Mail: purushottam.dass@gov.in
73: “He will not harm the environment – congress will not let him even if he tried.”
LOL! Dumbest thing I’ve heard all week.
I saw long ago in the days of USENET in the 1980s, that with open discussions the sincere people are very susceptible to trolls, as is happening now on this forum. The trolls don’t get tired and just go away, but sincere people do. It comes down to either erosion of the usefulness of the forum or adoption of some degree of moderating.
Besides the operators/contributors to RC there are some very sharp people with incredible talents when it comes to mathematics, stats, software & apps who can produce rigorous accurate scientificly valid and mathematical outputs – people like BPL, MA Rodger and many others have that ability and expertise. As does Gavin and Rasmus who have direct access to the most advanced “calculators” on the planet via their work.
There is also the well known logical rational truism of “The Straw that Broke the Camel’s Back” Basic Philosophy:101 and Basic Science in fact.
How about combining these two known knowns and applying it to the new Adani Carmichael Coal mine and the Galilee Basin in Qld Australia?
for example:
It is known how much Coal will be extracted from that Mine in the next 10, 20, 50 and 90 year period of time.
So it is known how much CO2e that Mine will add to the atmosphere over that same period of time when burnt in India power stations.
We know roughly what the world’s current Carbon Budget is today in order to remain under 2C increase over pre-industrial.
Therefore we could know exactly how much is the going to be the contribution made by the Carmichael mine and calculate a % impact and lay that out over a time scale using the expertise of the resident mathematicians and scientists here.
Therefore we would also know (roughly to degrees of certainty) how much that Mine will increase the global CO2 and CO2e PPM in the atmosphere.
Therefore we would know (roughly to degrees of certainty) how much the oceans will increase it’s acidity as well.
And also be able to calculate the potential added Sea Ice loss and SLR contribution from that one Coal Mine.
And the mind boggles at what other data could be known and presented to others so they can seriously think about what a difference one more coal mine can make.
Because much like the truism of “the straw that broke the camel’s back” there is this other scientific fact that AGW/CC Tipping Points of the Climate system do exist.
What if it’s the Adani Carmichael Coal Mine that is a major contributor that pushes the world over one of those Tipping Points – and that could be calculated right now?
Maybe a new ‘science based’ RC article on this subject could subsequently appear on RC to be shared with other like minded websites globally?
Just an idea. If anyone wants some raw data about the Adani Carmichael Coal mine and how large it’s production will be over time, and the existing research in Oz about that in environmental applications/approvals, plus previous multiple court cases trying to stop it going ahead etc, I am only too willing to help and provide the EXPERTS with a many Links to that information!
Cheers.
Nigel, do not blame me for your oversights in reading what was written – the following quoted below was part of the one comment regarding NASA/GISS and “climate science” funding by the US Taxpayer ONLY and not the entire world … it was all interconnected, in the same post, on the same subject the same theme.
Not my fault if you failed to see the obvious connections of what was being said and why.
A genuine IPCC would be internationally funded with genuine real working climate scientists withe tools they need to do their job eg “hiring staff and satelites and buoys from Nasa/Giss and other nations.”
It’s not like that because geopolitics and geo-economics is far more important than doing real science to present real evidence and genuine truths to the global public backed up by every national govt standing behind the work of a “genuine real and effective” UNFCCC / IPCC system.
Th 202: Coincidence doesn’t equate to correlation.
BPL: Every cloud has a silver lining.
Th 203: Barton Paul Levenson still spreading unscientific beliefs and cherry-picked distorted facts on RC
“Trump won the EC because millions of Democrats were prevented from voting.”
~100 million Registered Voters did not vote in November.
BPL: I’m well aware of it. Are you aware of why non-voters generally don’t vote? Hint: It’s not all pure apathy. In any case, I can always revise my statement to say “millions of active Democratic voters were prevented from voting.” You’re not an American, so perhaps you aren’t familiar with the long history of voter suppression in this country, the closing down of polling places easy to get to for students or people without cars, the “voter ID” laws which just happen to fall most heavily on the poor, the elderly, and minorities, etc.
For those keen on the integrity legal aspects of AGW/CC denier groups, FF mining companies, the Panama Papers, and “political intrigue/corruption/influence” then keep an eye on the news about Adani.
Adani companies are being investigated by Indian authorities and facing multiple financial crime and corruption probes for siphoning money offshore and artificially inflating power prices at the expense of Indian consumers.
http://mininglink.com.au/story/adani-companies-being-investigated-for-financial-crime-corruption
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-14/adani-carmichael-coalmine-to-shift-millions-to-cayman-islands/8350704
https://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/great-barrier-reef–3/adani/dont-trust-this-company-with-our-great-barrier-reef
https://adanifiles.com.au/
Meanwhile in other news Elon Musk of Tesla offered Australia a 100MWe Battery to help ensure Electricity Grid Stability and he would build it in 100 days or it’s free.
(search for South Australia electricity grid black outs AEMO battery renewable energy snowy river 2.0 etc)
For the uncontrollable critics and those who skip the Reference Links to valuable knowledge and 21st century Science:
Biblical verse Jeremiah 5:21 ‘Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not’.
In 1738 it was used by Jonathan Swift in his ‘Polite Conversation’ and is first attested in the United States in the 1713 ‘Works of Thomas Chalkley’.
The full saying is: ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know.’
Ref: http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/richard/abditorium/nonesoblind.htm
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2017/03/15/climate-change-elevator-pitches/
Links in the original
223 Mr. Know It All … (smiling)
RE: Right after 911, I saw the August 2001 issue of one of the Janes military magazines. Almost the entire issue was devoted to stories about Osama bin Laden. I was amazed.
From before Jan 20th 2001 BC and the US Congress and DoD were in the drivers seat for 8 years leading up to that.
And from January 2001 US Corporations with the full support of the US Dept of State and the Dick Cheney WH were in full scale negotiations with the Taliban Govt of Afghanistan for Mining/FF extraction opportunities and pipelines all over the place.
Then in July 2001 on the signature of Pres GW Bush the US Government sent over $200 million in AID to the Taliban Government to help “grease” those corporate negotiations.
When it comes to the rank incompetence of America as a Nation State and it’s Governments and it’s dysfunctional politics and electoral system I am a very committed non-partisan and unbiased Critic of the bleeding obvious.
While repeating again that Ground Zero for AGW/CC Denial is the United States of America. That NASA/GISS is an American tax payer funded entity does not in anyway excuse the American people nor let them off the hook for the actions and inaction of their Governments or Congress.
#223:
GWB didn’t need congress to force him to be a war criminal.
[edit OT]
213 – JH
Another paper suggesting that Arctic sea ice variation is normal:
https://judithcurry.com/2013/04/10/historic-variations-in-arctic-sea-ice-part-ii-1920-1950/#comment-310902
3/19/2017 @1:55 am pacific
I strongly suspect that Thomas and Mr Know It All are both unemployed.
And unemployable.
203 – Th
Sadly, in the USA, we can be thankful that many do not vote. In fact, probably a large percentage of those who do vote shouldn’t because they just aren’t informed. This is not something to be proud of, but it is what it is, and it explains why HRC won the popular vote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Url1HL6oExk
3/19/2017 @ 2:13 am pacific
#162:
I won’t be holding my breath waiting for Donald Trump to convince his own side of politics that GHG emissions need to be brought down to virtually zero by 2050.
#118
If I stopped paying my taxes this year it would do absolutely nothing significant to reduce the government’s deficit.
Guess I should stop paying my taxes then.
#88
Another clown who thinks weather and climate are the same.
If the climate scientists who maintain this site would post even half as often as “Thomas”, RealClimate might actually be a useful and even important website.
Nigel @226 – If you click through to my article you’ll not it references a wide variety of “media articles on the arctic science paper”.
Something does indeed “seem odd”. See the slideshow including tweets from Michael Mann for example. Or this, from Jeffrey Kargel?
Everything is interconnected, and some of these ‘teleconnections’ are relayed through the weather system. Part of the huge climatic changes affecting all of the Earth is due to processes that happened long before humans came on the scene. It does not mean that what is happening to Arctic sea ice is all normal and healthy and unperturbed by the drastic impacts humans are having on climate and weather by means of changes to the atmosphere.
The latest episode of David Rose’s “Climategate 2” saga in the Fail on Sunday is upon us!
“Don’t Panic! It’s Just Another Climategate 2 Correction!!”
Regular readers will be aware that the alleged “Global Warming Policy Forum” recently published what they describe with tongue in cheek as a “correction” to one of the many egregious inaccuracies published on their web site recently.
Last night the Mail Online web site followed suit by publishing an excuse for a “correction” to the self same egregious inaccuracy published on February 19th 2017 as part of David Rose’s self christened “Climategate 2” campaign in the Mail on Sunday.
One of the numerous problems with the Mail and the GWPF’s version of these recent events is that none of the UK Met Office insiders I have contacted have any idea what the Mail might be blathering on about.
KmcK at 225: yes, the record global warmth we have had for the past several years in undoubtedly contributing to the record rate of CO2 emissions. And yes, our species’ efforts to reduce emissions have probably reduced the amount of global CO2 emissions that can be directly attributed to the species. We are now looking at 5 consecutive years of global heat increase with some chance that 2017 will continue the streak. Nothing like that exists in the record. https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
The extraordinary run up in global temps that occurred circa 1935-1945 shows a streak of 2 hotter years, then a slight step down in global temp, then that pattern recurs. I hope/expect that 2017 will break the string, but that is based primarily on hope. We don’t know what the actual short and long term impacts are from atmospheric CO2 above 405 ppm actually are. We are going to find out. Dr. Mann said in 2014 that we should keep the number under 405. We have not done that.
The climate changes from a higher number of CO2 generally fall in one direction, toward more global warming, not less. It looks like tipping dominos to me. I expect there are some global constraints on CO2 accumulation, but I think those begin to kick in long after the planet has become a pretty miserable place for our species. I think our species’ risk management function is an epic fail on AGW so far. It looks like jumping off a cliff with umbrella. We may be able to slow descent, but a hard landing may still be coming.
I think we agree on all this. I just think there are significant differences between an umbrella and a parachute. They have a lot of similarities, but pretty different true functionality. Slowing CO2 emissions slightly from one source (humans) in a record CO2 run-up is like opening umbrella in a freefall. Parachute action would require that we start moving the needle in the other direction.
Dr. Mann said keep it under 405. How can we get back to 405 and stop the increase?
Warm regards
Mike
So Chuck’s a rocket scientist BPL? Well if that’s the case I should defer to him on all important issues in life. Thanks so much for the heads up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Parsons_(rocket_engineer)
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/the-last-of-the-magicians
http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/aerospace-engineering/rocketry/jack-parsons-occult-roots-jpl/
living in a world where scientists less and less trust each other … in and out of the climate science realm
Prof. Philip Mirowski Trust in Science workshop – “The Global Restructuring of Science as a Marketplace of Ideas”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2J13SDqmaNw