Veteran Meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls: “99% Of Antarctica Is Cooling – PIK Obsessed With Catastrophe”

 Veteran meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls at the European Institute For Climate and Energy (EIKE) presents an analysis of Antarctica.
==================================

Climate Panic Orchestra Now Playing In Antarctica
by Klaus Eckart Puls
(Translated/edited by P Gosselin)

Now that we are at the Antarctic late summer and autumn (February-April), extensive calving of the ice sheets have been occurring along the Shelf-Ice belt [1a], as it has been for thousands of years. As usual, the (German!) media is now pouncing on the opportunity to announce that anthropogenic global warming (AGW), and with it the climate catastrophe, has reached the South Pole region.

However, a simple fact-check reveals that this claim is simply untrue: Antarctica is cooling and the ice belt is growing!

Antarctica is melting?

The ever catastrophe-obsessed Potsdam Institute For Climate Impact Research (PIK) [1] announced: “Scientists of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research consider it possible that the climate system of the the West Antarctic may have tipped and that ice melt will be unstoppable.

Recently, DER SPIEGEL [2] wrote: “The results of the European Space Agency ESA are alarming: The Larsen-B ice shelf in Antarctica has lost three quarters of its ice area. The Envisat satellite has observed this.” Responsible for the melting is global warming.”

First off, satellite data should not be doubted.

Everything else concerning the subject of climate in the media is simply mixing of half-truths, ignoring of contradictory facts, twisting of facts, and emotionally charged fear and panic mongering.

With this type of deficient communication, factual information would surely benefit the reader – especially those less familiar with natural sciences. So we present the following points to add a more focused perspective.

(1) The Antarctic peninsula is about 1% of the total Antarctic area.
(2) The so-called LARSEN-B and WILKINS area [2] measures in the range of mere thousandths when it concerns the entire Antarctic area, see Figure 1.


Figure 1: Antarctic ice shelf [3]

(3) 99% of the Antarctic region is showing a cooling temperature trend [4].

(4) Even the constantly claimed warming trend on the Antarctic peninsula, including LARSEN and WILKINS ice shelves, cannot be detected using current evaluations [5]. See a recent NoTricksZone post: “It’s The Claim “Antarctica Is Warming” That Is Disintegrating – And Not Much Else“:

Figure 2: Temperature development Larsen Ice Shelf (NASA GISS) [5]

A warming of 2.5°C over the last 50 years is nowhere to be found. And any warming that did occur, did so without exception before 1980. Taking this into account, attributing the break-up of the Larsen Ice Shelf to global warming is already quite adventurous, to put it mildly.”

(5) The entire Antarctic ice area is as a whole growing in size [5].

(6) The reason for the break-up of ice in the areas of LARSEN-B + WILKINS is in no way due to warming as suggested by the SPIEGEL article [2]” because there simply isn’t any over Antarctica. See footnote [4]:

Almost all of Antarctica has gotten colder over the last 30 years. The only exception is the Antarctic peninsula. This is due to meteorological reasons: The Antarctic peninsula is in the west-winds zone of the southern hemisphere. This southern hemisphere west-wind belt is subject to stochastic cyclic atmospheric pressure fluctuations, as is the case for all other global wind systems. Here, analog to the atmospheric fluctuations of the middle latitudes of the northern hemisphere known as the North Atlantic Oscillation NAO, the Antarctic Oscillation Index AAO is calculated.”

Figure 3: AAO indices [4]

The course of the AAO-Index from 1948 to 2002 is shown in Figure 3. Before about 1980 there was a dominance of meridional weather systems. Since then zonal weather systems have overwhelmingly predominated. This means there’s been a strengthening of the west-wind circulation and thus storm activity. At the same time more mild air from the Pacific gets fed into the Antarctic peninsula. Thus storms with warm air contribute to more ice melting on the Antarctic peninsula, along with high waves which mechanically break up the ice at a faster rate. Examples in the recent times are the ice breaks (icebergs) at the Wilkins Ice Shelf at the west coast of the Antarctic peninsula.”

Thus the causes are meteorological, and they have nothing to do with any kind of “climate catastrophe”.

Klaus-Eckart Puls, EIKE

Sources:

[1a]  Eisberg voraus; http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/publikationen/klaus-puls-dipl-meteorologe/puls-publikation/eisberg-voraus-weltuntergang-auch/
[1]  www.pnn.de/campus/549280/
[2]  SPON: 10.04.2012, Satellit dokumentiert zehn Jahre Eisschmelze; http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/0,1518,826669,00.html
[3]  WIKIPEDIA; http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schelfeis
[4]   http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/news-cache/klima-kaelte-trend-in-der-antarktis/
[5]  http://notrickszone.com/2012/04/12/its-the-claim-antarctica-is-warming-that-is-disintegrating-and-not-much-else/

[6] http://notrickszone.com/2010/11/10/a-wind-in-antarctica/

 

15 responses to “Veteran Meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls: “9915 Of Antarctica Is Cooling – PIK Obsessed With Catastrophe””

  1. Ed Caryl
  2. slimething

    Eat your heart out Steig.

  3. Brian G Valentine

    I had the impression, I don’t know if it is correct, that there is a predominant east to west glacier movement on the continent, and snow build up in the East of the continent will continually force part of the glacier West, splitting of pieces of it, of course, off the Western continental shelf.

    I recall back in 2008 that estimates gave a 2% ice buildup on the continent, 1% loss, so 1% net accumulation. I don’t know if that is still valid.

    1. Ed Caryl

      The movement is more from the center outward.
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14592547

    2. Ed Caryl
  4. DirkH

    I can’t decide whether everybody at PIK is devastatingly stupid or corrupt.

    1. Casper

      Wrong alternative, Dirk. They’re only cynic…

  5. Brian G Valentine

    Doktor Madam Chancellor Angela Merkel:

    Hören Sie alles, das nicht von den Schwarzsehern kommt?

    1. Ulrich Elkmann

      “Schwarzseher” in current German parlance can also mean someone who does not pay the obligatory TV & radio fees that finances the state media. You don’t suggest that Our Iron Chanceloress would even acknowledge the existence of such vile criminals?

      1. Brian G Valentine

        Here in the USA, I suppose the word for this would be “scofflaw.”

        In the USA anybody who refuses to fund National Public Radio NPR is a HERO.

        – Interviews with people like James Hansen.
        – “Climate” indoctrination of children.
        – Leaving the impression that “tornadoes” come from global warming.
        – Hatred for anybody who doesn’t want “carbon taxes.”

        1. DirkH

          From what I’ve seen NPR is like our Deutsche Welle and especially their subchannel Deutschlandradio Kultur; Noam Chomsky could be their director.

  6. DirkH

    Oh, and one thing: Puls says
    “First off, satellite data should not be doubted.”

    Sadly, this is no longer true for EU satellites, after we have seen the dramatic upwards adjustment of the entire sea level data history of Envisat this month, shortly before the satellite “failed”.

    I think we should write off the entire EU climate science sector including all satellites they run. As the EU is a centrally controlled, nondemocratic entity, built after the model of the soviet union with the explicit intent of destroying the nation states, it also controls all of the science done under its regime for political purposes, just like the Soviet Union did. An EU funded scientist is to one hundred percent a political scientist in the services of the policies the EU desires, and will distort and destroy his data at a whim when the calfactors of the EU command it.

    We have even seen the attempts of the boss of CERN to suppress any climate-related utterance by the members of the CLOUD experiment.

    As long as the EU is continuing on its eco-religious path, it would be madness to accept ANY finding of ANY EU-funded scientist as scientific. All of their results are biased, tainted or censored.

    1. Brian G Valentine

      Makes me wonder if the EU will (or maybe already secretly has) built up a Climate Emergency force (complete with heavy armament) to demolish everything John Schellnhuber finds offensive.

      1. DirkH

        Funny that you ask.
        http://www.eurogendfor.eu/

      2. Brian G Valentine

        Give them credit for not dressing in brown.