NASA’s Temperature Data Fibbing … And Thomas Friedman’s Junk Renewable Energy Economics

Good to see that this NTZ site is contributing to articles on climate change and renewable energies by larger media outlets.

For example Charles Battig at the American Thinker here cited NoTricksZone in his report on Thomas Friedman’s editorial on the supposed “success” of Germany’s renewable energies. In his editorial, Friedman stupidly ignores all the glaring reports and data of Germany’s reneable energy failure, and tries to sell the entire mess as a grand success. In Battig’s words, “He knows how to put the proverbial ‘lipstick on a pig’.” And adds:

A recent German government report notes that Germany’s system ‘rewards the most inefficient plants, doesn’t contribute to protecting the climate, jeopardizes the energy supply and puts the poor at a disadvantage.’  A Nobel Peace Prize for this, Mr. Friedman?

Germany is building new coal power plants to replace the energy provided by nuclear power plants being shut down.  They are to be powered by lignite, a brown coal of low caloric content.  German’s newest and most energy-efficient gas turbine plants are forced into an uneconomical standby status as Energiewende  policies mandate the preferential use of wind and solar.  Thus, cheap lignite-powered plants are built and produce high levels of pollutants that are the exact opposite goals of the government’s green policies.

As for Friedman’s ‘stability of our planet and climate’ concern, he might console himself with the fact that the global satellite temperature record of the past 18 years and 5 months shows a statistically flat line, even as atmospheric carbon dioxide has risen about 10 percent.

Three oinks to Friedman’s lipstick report. It is a green porker.”

NASA data alterations

Meanwhile, H. Sterling Burnett at the Heartland Institute here has a story on all the temperature data fibbing going on at NASA lately. Though he does not link to NTZ directly, the source of the information behind the tampering shenanigans going on in Switzerland is NTZ here, a story that was shared or liked more than 2000 times.

Burnett writes:

Science journalist Markus Schär of the Swiss news weekly Weltwoche discovered the Swiss Meteorological Service (SMS) tampered with its datasets as well.

For example, in Sion and Zurich, SMS adjustments resulted in a doubling of the temperature trend. Schär notes there has been an 18-year-pause in rising temperatures, even with data- tampering. As a result, Schär calls the adjustments a ‘propaganda trick, and not a valid trend.’

In light of significant urbanization resulting in an expanded heat island effect near many temperature gauges, Schär argues the adjustment of raw data to report higher temperatures than are actually measured is unjustifiable. ‘The corrections … appear so massive that they represent half of the entire temperature increase,’ said Schär.

Even with fudged data, governments have been unable to hide the fact winters in Switzerland and in Central Europe have become colder over the past 20 years, defying predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other climate alarmists.”

Also reporting on the Swiss data fibbing was Newsmax.

Lancet Medical Journal: Comprehensive Study Shows Cold Waves 20 TIMES MORE LETHAL Than Heat Waves!

Here’s another compelling reason why we should all be hoping that the earth will warm and not cool over the coming decades. (After all, there is no way the temperature is going to stay stagnant).

The print edition of yesterday’s UK Daily Mail has a short report on an international study on the effects of temperature on death rates. The comprehensive study was conducted by the Dr. Antonio Gasparrini of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. It examined 74 million deaths in 13 countries.

Also read it at Science Daily (Can’t link because I’m writing from a mobile device – just Google it).

The result, The Daily Mail writes:

7.71 per cent of the deaths were caused by non-optimal temperatures. Cold was responsible for 7.29 per cent of deaths, while 0.42% were attributable to heat, according to the study, published by the Lancet medical journal.”

In other words, deaths from cold were some 20 times than those from heat.

What is interesting is that the study found that most of the deaths occurred when the temperatures were “moderately hot and cold”. This may be due to people underestimating the “moderate” anomalies, and thus failing to take the corresponding precautions. On extremely hot or cold days, on the other hand, the level of awareness is heightened due to media hype, and so people tend to behave accordingly, i.e. drink more fluids, or really bundle up.

Cold is the last thing we need

The study tells us one thing: Cold is the last thing we want to see, and any warming needs to be welcome. Unfortunately recent temperature data and climate trends bode ill, as a number of distinguished scientists are forecasting cooling over the coming decades due to ocean and solar cycles swinging into their cool modes.

Given the results of the study, which are obvious to most normal thinking people, one would need to be a total moron, or just plain mean-spirited,  to be rooting for cooling.

“There Are People Who Believe They See Unabated Global Warming In the 1/100°C Range” …Warming Has Ground To a Halt

Stefan Rahmstorf: No pause, anywhere!

[Translated by P. Gosselin)

“No pause, anywhere!” announced Stefan Rahmstorf in his latest article at KlimaLounge. And he added: “As our long-term readers know, there’s been a steady global warming since the 1970s, though it has been superimposed by the usual short-term fluctuations, it has not slowed down or accelerated by any significant means. […] As there has not been any slowdown, there has not been any pause or hiatus of any kind in warming.”

But this is easy to check over. To do this I’ve gotten the data on global temperature from the NOAA, plotted them and added the linear trends for the periods of 1970-2015, 1980-2015, 1990-2015, 2000-2015 and 2005-2015. (By the way, NOAA also uses the NASA GISS dataset for global temperature).

NOAA

What is seen above is that the trend since 1970 has been in decline. The rise in the trend lines is becoming less and less., i.e. flatter and flatter. Meanwhile the global warming scientists have been telling us for year/decades that global warming would accelerate more and more as greenhouse gases increased.

In fact just the opposite has been true.

Here once again is the NOAA data in its original form from the NOAA site for the period of 1998-2015.

NOAA1998-2015

There are actually people who see in it an unabated global warming (in the range of 1/100 of a degree). Hard to believe. Yes, you only have to believe in it, and suddenly you’ll see it. It’s like the blotch images in psychology.

Natural Cycles In A Random World Are Unmistakable…Future Holds Nothing To Fear

By Ed Caryl

Recently, Roy Spencer posted a graph that appeared to be a data record of some kind for the last 100 years. Then he revealed that it was generated in Excel with a simple random number function. The graph showed details that resembled things like El Niño’s and La Niña’s, pauses, and sudden warming and cooling.

I decided to repeat his graph introducing cycles into the mix. We know that the climate follows ~60 (AMO ocean cycle), ~210 (de Vries or Suess solar cycle), and ~1000 year (un-named) cycles (approximately). The following is a graphic of what happens if these cycles are introduced into the random number generator. The graph extends to 1014 simulated years by month. The random number generator is constrained to + and – 0.5, and each month adds 0.9 of the value of the previous month. The cycles use the sine function (SIN()) with input from the fractional year value, multiplied by 0.1 to produce a 62 year cycle, 0.029 to produce a 215 year cycle, and 0.006 to produce a cycle just over 1000 years. For this last cycle the COS function was used to shift the cycle phase by 90 degrees. Each month, 1/40th of each cycle value is added along with the 0.9 of the previous month. This produces a graph that roughly resembles earth’s climate over the last 1014 years with extension to the next 200.

Simulated Climate 1014 years

Figure 1 is a simulation of the last 1014 years, with the applied climate cycles shown.

Zoom on last 214 years

Figure 2 is a magnification of the last 214 years from Figure 1. Blue is monthly data, black is the annual average, the red trace is the simulated AMO 62-year cycle.

Each re-calculation will completely change the data, but similar features always appear. In this iteration, an El Niño appears at 1999, that looks just like the real El Niño of 1998. We see a warming trend in the early twentieth century, and another in the late twentieth century, just like the real warming trends.

In figure 1, we see a Medieval Warming period and two periods of Little Ice Age. A minimum is seen that resembles the Dalton Minimum of the early 1800s, and the cool 1910s and 1970s appear. Even the cool Maunder Minimum appears in the correct place. Most of this result is not coincidence because the 62-year cycle is timed to match the real AMO, and the 204-year and 1000-year cycles roughly match real solar activity.

In this simulation, two successive warming periods very like the actual twentieth century warming periods, can occur from natural cycles alone, no extra “forcing” from CO2 is required.

So, what will the future bring? Now that we have this model, that reflects the past, as we know it, with general accuracy, can we project that into the future? Sure…this is just an Excel spreadsheet after all. I pasted on 200 more years. As I did so, Excel of course recalculated the whole table. So here is a second example of the last 214 years that it came up with, in case someone accuses me of “cherry-picking”. Note that we get much the same pattern of warming and cooling, with a couple of El Niño’s in approximately the right place in the last 20 years.

Zoom #2

Figure 3 is another calculation of the same period as in figure 2. The black trace is an annual average of the monthly data. All three cycles are shown.

Note the resemblance between figures 2 and 3. Each is a different calculation using different random numbers, yet the small addition of non-random sine wave cycles pushes the output into shapes that resemble the climate that happened in this period.

The next 200 years

Figure 4 is the future, as projected by our model. The black trace is an annual average of the blue monthly data. All three cycles are shown.

As you can see, the future holds nothing to fear. There will be a few El Niño’s in the next ten years, then a moderate cooling as we come off the peak of the 62 and 204 year cycles. There will be more of those in mid-century, as the AMO rises again, then more cooling for a period at the end of the century as both of those cycles bottom out. No extensive warm periods will appear until late in the twenty-second century, as both peak again.

This model is not new. On the side-bar of this blog, an illustration from Nicola Scafetta’s model is similar, with the addition of some shorter cycles. An earlier post on this blog from a paper by Prof. H. Luedecke and C.O. Weiss (cited above) also used a similar model. The chief addition is random “weather”.

No CO2 molecules were harmed in the generation of these graphs. Nor, for that matter, were they considered.

For those with Excel expertise, I have posted the file to Dropbox here.

Energy Physicist Implores NOAA To Return To Credibility… “Get Out Of Adjusting Business”!

Response to NOAA’s claim adjustments are improvements
By Mike Brakey

The email from NOAA’s Derek Arndt confirms that they conducted a massive rewrite of U.S. data in 2014. He also confirmed that the 1913 Maine climate data was indeed lowered a whopping 40F as noted in my article, Black Swan Climate Theory.

My response is based on actual unadjusted temperature data from the Lewiston-Auburn area of Maine, which I secured from a local source and provided in prior emails. (I have attached that data and links to the websites the data was extracted from).  As shown in Chart 1, between 1895 and 1937, the Lewiston-Auburn region (Zone 19 in Chart 2) was typically ¾0F warmer than Maine’s overall state average, based on NOAA data I downloaded in 2013.

Brakey_1

Chart No. 1 & 2.

This data is the black line on Chart 1. I would expect the Lewiston-Auburn area to be slightly warmer than Maine as a whole because it is in southern Maine. Based on the 2013 data, Maine’s average temperatures were about ¾0F colder or less than those for Lewiston-Auburn during the period from 1904 to 1939, and again from 2008 through the present.

The green shaded area shows what the NOAA data would have looked like if that ¾0F difference had remained constant through 2015.  Looking at the year 1913, I might agree with Mr. Arndt that they had an error and I would understand a temperature correction of approximately  ¾0F, but not 40F.

Contradictory data

I am suspicious of the NOAA data, both the original from 2013 and the revised, between 1940 and 2008 because the Maine average temperatures are so significantly less than those for the Lewiston-Auburn region. The other oddity is that there was a downward trend in temperatures for Lewiston-Auburn starting in 1998. However, both sets of NOAA data show temperatures rising for the state of Maine during that same time period.

As well-intended as I believe most NOAA associates likely are, I implore NOAA to please make available the plain, unexciting, unfiltered temperature data (as typified by the green line in Chart 1 above).  If the RAW temperature data is always made available, I would be happy to entertain any theories and projections NOAA or IPCC wishes to make…as long as we all know the true base line (similar to what we have for the green line in Chart 1 with Lewiston-Auburn historical temperature data).

In conclusion, I implore NOAA to return credibility to its website, by getting out of the statistical smoothing and adjusting business and by just providing the scientific community with the basic unfiltered temperature data at all of its site locales. Let’s stay away from all the havoc created between Charts 3 and 4.

Brakey_3
Chart no. 3 & 4.

Watch the entire series of YouTube videos on how I found the NOAA adjustments.

NOAA E-Mail Confirms Large-Scale Rewrite Of U.S. Temperature Data In 2014 …”Improvements In The Dataset”

On Mike Brakey’s recent post on the NOAA’s 151 degrees of fudging of the temperature datasets for the state of Maine, one reader was “so incensed” that he e-mailed the NOAA and his congressman.

Well, he got a reply from Derek Arndt at NOAA, which he sent to Mike Brakey, who in turn sent me Arndt’s reply – which I post as follows:

Hi Mr. XXXXXXXXX

In early 2014, we changed to a new version of the dataset upon which our US temperatures are drawn. The new dataset took advantage of a lot of older data that hadn’t been digitized (from paper) when the old dataset was constructed. It also took advantage of advancements in quality assurance that detect station moves, changes in observing practices, etc.

We began sharing with the community these upcoming changes as early as 2011: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/GrDD-Transition.pdf  In early 2014 we published a more complete methodological paper:

Vose, R.S., Applequist, S., Durre, I., Menne, M.J., Williams, C.N., Fenimore, C., Gleason, K., Arndt, D. 2014: Improved Historical Temperature and Precipitation Time Series For U.S. Climate Divisions Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-13-0248.1

Maine was one of the states that saw the biggest differences in temperature. This is probably why blogs focus in on it. In addition to the general reasons for changes that other states witnessed:

  • The new method used stations in neighboring Canada to inform estimates for data-sparse areas within Maine (a great improvement)
  • In the old dataset, the year 1913 was particularly problematic, resulting from a keying (transcription) error from many years ago that is now corrected. 1913 is often held up as evidence of “tampering” when in fact it is probably one of the biggest improvements in the dataset, and brings our value much more in line with what was observed at the time.

Thanks for contacting us. It is a privilege to serve you.

Deke

 

151 Degrees Of Fudging…Energy Physicist Unveils NOAA’s “Massive Rewrite” Of Maine Climate History

UPDATE: DUE TO ELEVATED INTEREST, THIS ARTICLE WILL BE A STICKY POST FOR ANOTHER DAY OR TWO.

Fellow New Englander, engineering physicist and energy expert, Mike Brakey has sent a summary analysis of NOAA past temperature “adjustments” for Maine.
=====================================

Black Swan Climate Theory
By Mike Brakey

Here in the U.S. I have documented manipulations similar to those in Switzerland and other locations worldwide that NTZ wrote about yesterday.

Over the last months I have discovered that between 2013 and 2015 some government bureaucrats have rewritten Maine climate history between 2013 and 2015 (and New England’s and of the U.S.). This statement is not based on my opinion, but on facts drawn from NOAA 2013 climate data vs NOAA 2015 climate data after when they re-wrote it.

We need only compare the data. They cooked their own books (see numbers below).

Brakey_1

Figure 1: NOAA cooled the years of Maine’s past by an accumulated 151°F! (55,188 heating degree day units).

The last four months have been some of the coldest you might ever recall in our lifetime. So far 2015 is the fourth coldest in Maine’s history over the last 120 years. Data from 2013 confirm that so far – from January 1 to April 29 – 2015 has required 4249 heating degree days.

That rivals 1904, 1918 and 1923 over the last 120 years.

But when I recently looked at NOAA’s revised 2015 data, these last four months now would not even put us in the top twenty of coldest months. The federal government went into the historical data and lowered those earlier years – and other years in the earlier decades – so that they can keep spending $27 billion a year on pushing global warming.

They assumed no one would archive temperature data. But I did. My research indicated they used the same algorithm across the United States at the same time. Fortunately I had archived their data from 2013 for Maine and recently compared it to their 2015 data (see above table).

As an engineering physicist and heat transfer specialist, I have worked with heating and cooling degree days for forty years. It is alarming when one discovers multi-million dollar websites have been corrupted with bogus data because the facts do not match up with agendas.

It tremendously harms the industry you and I both work in. Worse, it harms the public. If the public knew the climate data facts indicated it was not getting warmer locally, and that it might actually be getting cooler, it would have all the more reason to insulate and become more energy-efficient in their homes.

I have put together a Maine history of climate temperatures in a narrated PowerPoint Presentation placed on YouTube titled, Black Swan Climate Theory.

Below is a brief sampling of my findings:

Brakey_5

Table 1: Sampling of findings.

So far 2015 Maine temperatures, as of April, are running neck-and-neck with the coldest years in Maine’s history: 1904 (40.6°F), 1918 (42.1°F) and 1925 (42.3°F). These temperatures cited come right from the federal government’s own NOAA climate data (from 2013). I archived them on my computer for future reference.

2015 so far among coldest on record

A BLACK SWAN event is forming in 2015 (following chart):

Brakey_2

Figure 2: Plot comparing the new, altered dataset to the 2013 dataset. Black curve is the plot of the 2013 dataset. The blue curve is the plot of the 2015 new, altered data.

Based on the first four months of 2015, there is an excellent chance 2015 Maine temperature might average, on an annual basis, well under 43.0°F. Not only have Maine temperatures been on a decline since 1998, we are now seeing temperatures reminiscent of the bitter turn of the early 1900s.

“Massive rewrite”

It appears NOAA panicked and did a massive rewrite of Maine temperature history (they used the same algorithm for U.S. in general). The new official temperatures from Maine between 1895 and present were LOWERED by an accumulated 151.2°F between 1895 and 2012.

“Out-and-out fraud”

In my opinion, this is out-and-out fraud. Why did they corrupt national climate data? Global warming is a $27 billion business on an annual basis in the U.S alone.

Brakey_4

Now NOAA data revised in 2015 indicate that 1904, 1919 and 1925 in Maine were much colder than anything we experience today. (See the scorecard above comparing the NOAA data that are 18 months apart). Note how for 1913 the NOAA lowered the annual temperature a whole 4°F!

For the balance of the years, as they get closer to the present, the NOAA tweaks less and less. They have corrupted Maine climate data between 1895 and present by a whopping accumulated 151.2°F.

Unfortunately NOAA is remaining true to that old saying, “Figures don’t lie but liars figure.”

A multi-million dollar website has been corrupted. I can no longer rely on the tax-payer funded NOAA for clean, unfiltered, climate data for my ongoing research.

Conclusion

I can no longer trust the climate data and energy information ultimately drawn from the U.S. government. Locally, I now have to determine if they got their data from NOAA.

This makes research a lot tougher.

Mike Brakey

Swiss Weekly Calls Temperature Rise A “Propaganda Trick” (Not A Trend) …”We Are Making A Warming”!

At the print edition of Swiss news weekly “Weltwoche”, science journalist Markus Schär writes that not only has the global temperature trend suspiciously been tampered with, but so have the datasets of the Swiss Meteorological Service:

WeWo

View of print Weltwoche article on global temperature “adjustments”.

To illustrate Weltwoche shows two datasets in its article from two different locations in Switzerland:

Swiss temperatures WeltWoche

The chart above shows the mean annual temperatures and trends for Sion and Zurich before (left) and after “adjustment” (right). The “adjustments” resulted in a doubling of the temperature trend.

At the start of the article Schär characterizes Thomas Stocker’s claim that the “so-called” 18-year global temperature pause is misleading information spread by “lobbyists” as scientifically invalid, and does so for three reasons: 1) It’s not “so-called” because datasets show there’s been no warming in over 18 years, 2) the pause is acknowledged by leading experts, and 3) IPCC experts have already acknowledged it, and have even come up with “over 50 explanations” to explain it.

Schär then focusses on the reports of temperature adjustments at various locations around the world that have led to a depiction of more rapidly warming global temperatures:

The Australian last year uncovered that state meteorologists adjusted an 80-year temperature series of Australia so that a cooling of 1°C per century was changed to a warming of 2.3°C.”

Schär also wrote of NASA’s dataset:

British science journalist Christopher Booker, who called the manipulation of temperature data ‘the biggest science scandal ever’, showed how among other things that the record value for 2014 came about because the responsible NASA institute had flipped the data trend for rural measurement stations in Brazil or Paraguay.”

According to Schär at Weltwoche, also Swiss temperature data have been adjusted to show stronger warming, calling the work a “propaganda trick, and not a valid trend“.

Schär calls into question the basis used for justifying the upwards adjustment, especially with respect to the fact that stations today are more urbanized and under influence of the urban heat island effect. He writes of the Swiss data:

It is correct that meteorologists homogenize their data, i.e. filter out external influences. But here the question is: How and with what intention are they doing this? […]

The meteorologist significantly lowered the data from the 19th century and strongly raised those of around 1980.”

The result, Schär writes; was a doubling of the temnperature increase rate. Schär also reports on how German meteorologist Klaus Hager earlier determined that the newer electronic measurement instruduced since the 1980s showed “on average 0.93°C higher temperatures.”

So why the upward adjustments when we have all the instrumentation and siting issues?

Schär writes that the Swiss meteorologists have rejected Hager’s claim that the new electronic instrumentation is delivering warmer temperatures, insisting that “the thermometers in the new automatic network are showing ‘slightly lower temperatures’ than those in the ‘poorly ventilated’ Stevenson screens.” Schär continues:

The corrections, however, appear so massive that they represent half of the entire temperature increase.”

Despite the data fudging by Swiss meteorologists (and those worldwide), no one is able to hide the fact that winters in Switzerland and in Central Europe have gotten colder over the past 20 years, defying predictions of warming made earlier by climatologists.

But that’s no problem for the climatologists, Schär writes.

Temperatures no longer have to rise in order to spread the fear of climate catastrophe. In the science magazine ‘Einstein’ on Swiss television, Stephan Bader of the Swiss Meteorological Service showed that winters in the Alps were getting cooler over the past years: But he also added that it was due to climate warming: Scientists at the Alfred Wegener Institute ‘suspect’ the cold snaps came from the melting of Arctic ice (which has stopped).”

Propaganda trick, anyone?

 

German DWD Weather Service’s Own Data Contradict Its Alarmist Claims Of “Uninterrupted Warming”

The DWD German Weather Service used to be a highly professional outfit. But over the last few years it seems to have been taken over by activists who have an agenda that is foreign to weather forecasting.

Statements released by the DWD over the recent years often contradict each other. For example in a recent press release the DWD claimed that the trend to a warmer climate remains uninterrupted, both globally and for Germany.

But this is in stark contradiction to the real global data which shows a stagnation approaching 20 years. Moreover the DWD’s own data on mean temperatures for Germany also show a clear stagnation. The warming trend is in fact interrupted:

P_1

Figure 1. Both global temperature and Germany’s annual mean temperature show interrupted warming. Chart: K.E. Puls.

Although 2014 saw a record warm year in Germany, the overall temperature trend over the last 17 years is one of cooling, as Figure 2 shows:

P_2

Figure 2: Germany’s annual mean temperature has been cooling over the last 17 years. Source: EIKE/K.E. Puls.

In 2012 the DWD wrote that the long term trend of rising temperatures was uninterrupted in both Germany and worldwide. But then just one year later, the DWD wrote in a May 7, 2013 press release (Hat-tip K.E. Puls):

The earth’s mean temperature has stagnated at a high level for 15 years…”

Is the temperature rise uninterrupted, or is it not?

On June 3, 2012, Gerhard Hofmann of the DWD confirmed on German public radio that the global temperature had not increased in 14 years.

Also Germany’s winters have also cooled over the past 28 years:

P_5

 Figure 3: German winters contradict Germany’s DWD national weather service. Source: Josef Kowatsch, using DWD data.

 Summer temperatures also have not been going up in Germany either:

P_6

Figure 4: Summer temperatures have been cooling over the past decade. Plot source: Josef Kowatsch; Chart K.E. Puls.

So where does the DWD get the idea that the climate warming has been uninterrupted? Answer: Certainly not from its own data.

 

Clear And Gathering Evidence Of Cooling: Three-Year Mean Antarctic Sea Ice Highest On Satellite Record!

Now that it’s spring, it’s as good a time as any to look at polar sea ice. Climate scientists have told us time and again that global warming would first be been at the Earth’s poles.

Well, if that is true, then we need to start worrying about cooling.

In the Arctic the following chart shows a clear stabilization taking place over the past 8 years with an upward trend over the last five years:

Source: Cryosphere Today, Arctic Climate Research, University of Illinois

It needs to be pointed out that there are many factors impacting sea ice. Among them are ocean currents and cycles, and prevailing weather patterns. In summary, however, the once feared “death spiral” remains totally absent.

Had the past five years been centered about the -1.75 million sq km anomaly in the Arctic, then the warmists may have had a point. But that is not the case as the Arctic sea ice is close to 1 million square kilometers above the alarm level.

A number of high-profile scientists and meteorologists also are now projecting growth in Arctic sea ice over the next 10-20 years as major oceanic oscillations shift to their cooler phases.

Record-smashing Antarctica, warming totally AWOL

If you are a global warming alarmist, then the situation is even more confounding at the south end of the Earth. Especially at the Earth’s southern pole is warming totally AWOL.

Antarctic sea ice 4 2015

Source: arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere

Because Antarctica is surrounded by water, trends there do behave differently then what goes on in the land-surrounded Arctic.

Consider the following stunning points about Antarctica:

1. Antarctic sea ice has been above normal for almost 3 years uninterrupted.
2. Three years uninterrupted above normal sea ice is unprecedented over the satellite record.
3. Record after record sea ice highs have been set during that period.
4. The trend for the last 10 years has been stunningly strong.
5. The long-term 30-year trend is strongly upwards.

From Antarctic sea ice trends, there’s absolutely no indication that there’s any warming going on down there. If scientists had been warning of cooling, they’d be having a much easier time today convincing the public.

Indeed Antarctica is the very place that AGW alarmist scientists don’t want anyone to look at. In fact today there’s almost no climate data they want you to see – only the “adjusted” surface temperatures that they themselves cook, manipulate and alter.

Global sea ice trend positive since 2006!

Finally charts and data on total global sea ice show absolutely no alarm. Global sea ice has been at a normal level for almost 3 years now. Overall the recent trend is upward, thus indicating cooling – and not warming:

Global sea ice 2015_4

Source: arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere

The above global sea ice anomaly chart shows that there was a brief downward trend from 2004 to 2012, but that loss has since been completely wiped out. The overall trend since 2006 is upwards. In fact the mean of the last 2 years is as high as it was 35 years ago.

Don’t listen to the doom and gloom of the government bought climate scientists. You can look at the data yourself. A good place to do this is over at Anthony Watts’s sea ice page here.

 

What Caused the Global Warming Pause or Why Hate the Hiatus?

Depending on which global temperature data one looks at, temperatures have not increased in the last 18 or so years. The reasons proposed have been various, ranging from natural cycles to increased aerosols, to heat escaping to space or the deep ocean.

Perhaps there are some other reasons that have not been considered. The following is a simple list, with illustrations. The list is divided into two sub-lists. Things that are natural and things that are anthropogenic or man made.

SOME NATURAL REASONS

 1. It’s The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO)

AMO
The AMO has been at the top of it’s warm phase since 1998. The index doesn’t get much higher than it is now. It can only go down from here. It was at a similar peak during the warm 1930s through the 1960s. It was negative during the cool 1970s. The peaks of the AMO tend to be flat for a couple of decades before flipping cool. We don’t know what drives the AMO. Data here.

2. It’s The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)

PDO
The PDO has been trending down since the early 1980s. It also was up during the 1930s and negative during the 1970s. The AMO and the PDO are the natural ocean cycles that climate scientists talk about. The PDO reached a peak in the 1980s and has been declining since. This index is volatile. The PDO has a huge effect on weather on the Pacific Coast of North America. Data here.

 3. It’s The AMO and PDO together

AMO+PDO
They are sometimes roughly added together. (Even though they are not measuring the same thing.) If one adds them together, it can be seen why the late 1930s were warm and the 1970s cool. The sum (green trace) reached a peak in 2000 and is now declining because of the declining PDO. (Computed by author.)

4. It’s the sun

SSN Average

The sunspot number (SSN) average has declined since the mid-1990s. One can see a cause for the 1970s cooling in the SSN, but not for the 1930s warming. The early 20th century cooling may have been caused by the low SSN around the turn of the century. The sun is excused for the recent pause because the total solar index (TSI) changes only by a fraction of a Watt/m2 over large changes in SSN. But other factors may be in play. (Source: WDC-SILSO, Royal Observatory of Belgium, Brussels.)

Oulu Neutron Count

5. It’s cosmic rays

The neutron count is an indicator of the cosmic ray flux at the top of the atmosphere. Here is the neutron count at Oulu, Finland since 1965. It is thought that cosmic rays seed cloud formation. Therefore high recent count is providing cooling clouds. Graphic downloaded from here, the Sodankyla Geophysical Observatory, University of Oulu, Finland.

SST & Albedo

6. It’s clouds and earth’s albedo

Albedo and cloud cover reached a peak in the 1998-2000 era, at the beginning of the pause. Clouds, especially high clouds, reflect solar energy. Each 1% of albedo change translates to 1 W/m2. There is another graphic of albedo from the EarthShine project, here. All the albedo data show a significant rise in albedo after 1998. The cosmic ray/neutron count may not match the albedo/cloud cover, but cloud cover really did increase. Graphic used by permission of Dr. J. Floor Anthoni, and seen here.

PAUSE IS ANTHROPOGENIC

I mean by anthropogenic that man may have caused the pause by manipulating the temperature data. These manipulations seem to enhance the warming trend in support of politics, though the stated intent for many was to enhance accuracy. Here are some examples:

TOBs adjustments

7. It’s the time of observation (TOBs) adjustment

Observing times have been gradually changed from afternoon to morning hours. The bias from this adjustment was about 0.2°C for TMax and 0.25°C for TMin. This impacts the historic data, but also, this adjustment is now finished. Most measurement sites now use morning observing times and no more changes will be made, hence the pause. No more warming will come from this source. The TOBs adjustment is clearly visible in the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RAW AND FINAL USHCN DATA SETS graphic below, though it is only half of the total. Figure from here.

Difference between raw and final

8. It’s all adjustments including TOBs

This graphic shows the result of all adjustments: homogenization, sensor changes (CRS vs MMTS), and TOBs. Note also that the warming due to all these changes is about 0.5°C, much of the warming that is supposed to have taken place since 1950. Note that these changes went flat during the 1990s decade.  Note the similar shaped curve to the TOBs adjustment with a flat shape in recent times. There should be no more warming from this source. Figure from NOAA/NCDC here.

9. It’s the number of stations

Number of stations

Since 1980, the number of stations reporting temperature data has declined by half. Some of the decline was due to the collapse of the Soviet Union. This resulted in loss of data from the Russian high arctic and Siberia, among the coldest land stations in the Northern Hemisphere. Some of these stations have resumed reporting in recent years, but most have not.

Other stations in Africa and Asia were closed by newly independent former colonies. World-wide, many stations closed instead of being upgraded. On average the remaining stations are at lower elevations and in warmer, populated areas. This situation has now stabilized. Figure from NASAGISS here. A discussion of this problem is here.

These are nine possible reasons for the pause. One or two are sufficient. Nine is overkill.

 

Cooling Europe! Temperature & Vegetation Data Show Central European Springs Starting Later!

Yesterday I wrote here about how parts of Europe woke up to snow! Global warming alarmists have been telling us that winters would get milder and that spring would arrive earlier and earlier each year.

For example just two years ago Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) scientist Friedrich-Wilhelm Gerstengarbe told German ZDF television that spring would be arriving earlier and earlier – because of global warming.

Unfortunately this is turning out not to be the case. The opposite is in fact happening.

Josef Kowatsch and Stefan Kämpfe at the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) write that spring in Central Europe has been cooling for almost 30 years now – and not warming – and it’s been arriving later and later.

To determine the spring trends, Kowatsch and Kämpfe looked at the mean temperature for February in Germany, which is a country that is ideally situated in Central Europe. Cold and snow at the end of February have a considerable impact on when vegetation starts to blossom. What follows is a chart depicting the February mean temperature for Germany over the last 28 years.

Figure 1: Data from the DWD German Weather Service show that the February trend has been cooling more than 0.5°C per decade over the last 28 years.

Figure 1 does not show any signs of spring coming earlier in Central Europe. The next chart looks at the Germany February trend for the last 22 years:

Figure 2: The 22-year February trend for Germany also shows a marked decline in temperature. Cold weather naturally acts to delay the onset of spring.

Kowatsch and Kämpfe write that if it were not for urban sprawl, the cooling trend would be even more pronounced:

Without population growth, industrialization and urbanization, the temperature measured today in Germany would be about 1°C cooler because almost every weather station is sited near the edge of a city or even in the city or airports. They are benefitting from various warming effects, which we will not look into in this article.”

The Germany February temperature trend for the last 17 years also shows a stark cooling:

Figure 3: Germany February temperature trend over the last 17 years.

Okay, February is only a single month that is crucial in determining how quickly spring in Central Europe gets started. Kowatsch and Kämpfe also posted the DJF winter temperature trend. Here we also see no warming over the last 28 years:

Figure 4: Winter mean temperature trend for Germany. Data taken from the DWD German Weather Service. We should be calling it cooling, and not warming!

How often do the German media show the above charts? Never. Kowatsch and Kämpfe write that the media have been warming-brainwashed, and the data clearly show that “spring has been starting later and later over the past 30 years“.

Not only do the temperature data show spring coming later and later, but so does the vegetation. Kowatsch and Kämpfe at EIKE provide the following chart:

Figure 5: Between 1990 and 2015 the budding of wild goose berries is now happening about 10 days later because the high winter months January and February (blue) have cooled. The green curve shows when the wild goose berries began to blossom, example in 2013 they did not blossom until after 1 April.

An analysis of the month of March in Germany also shows a cooling trend, Kowatsch and Kämpfe have determined:

 Figure 6: March mean temperature for Germany has fallen more than a degree Celsius over the last 27 years.

This year February and March have been relatively mild, but Kowatsch and Kämpfe write that they have been near the mean of the last 30 years. They also write that behavior of various animal species also show spring coming later.

They summarize:

Winter and pre-spring have gotten somewhat cooler since the late 1980s, especially February. The temperature trend lines are negative. Therefore the start of spring is currently being delayed and is coming later than the relatively warm 1990s.

Overall the start of spring 2015 is at the mean of the last 120 years and corresponds to claims made in the biological literature, spring literature, and in German spring songs.

After almost 30 years of winter cooling we see: In the open unbuilt areas of Germany, where today there are no longer any weather stations, the following remains valid: Spring awakens in March.

Spring awakens in March as it did 150 years ago at the end of the Little Ice Age.”

No April Fool’s Prank! Parts Of Europe Wake Up To Snow! Minus 40°C At 5000 Meters Elevation! Snow For Easter

There’s no doubt Europe’s 2014/15 winter was a mild one, which was welcome as the continent had reeled from a string of 5 consecutive colder than normal winters in a row, from 2008 to 2013.

Unfortunately we cannot say the same for spring this year, at least so far. A blast of cold air is now gripping much of the continent and people in many areas this morning are waking up to snow (see here).

This is no April Fool’s prank

Worse, the cold snap is expected to continue through Easter. This morning the online Pforzheimer Zeitung (Pforzheim Newspaper) writes that Good Friday will see “snowfall down to the flatlands” as cold polar air refrigerates Europe. “At 5 kilometers elevation in the atmosphere, -40°C will prevail…”. (Obviously the extra CO2 won’t be trapping a whole lot of heat up there.)

At Twitter Swiss meteorologist Jörg Kachelmann this morning reminded followers and mocked how just two weeks ago a number of weather experts had predicted a warm spring for March, April, May”. Kachelmann is a noted harsh skeptic on long-term seasonal forecasts, claiming they are hardly worth the paper they are printed on.

On the other hand Joe Bastardi in an earlier Saturday Summary predicted weeks ago that cold would grip Europe at the end of March, early April. Dead on!

German WDR public broadcasting this morning reported “numerous car accidents” due to “snow and ice” on streets and motorways in the state of North Rhine Westphalia. The Schwäbische.de here reports of snowfall causing problems in Bavaria, southern Germany. The online Stuttgarter Nachrichten writes that the month of April has started with snow for Germany’s southwestern state of Baden Wurttemberg.

Wetter.de has posted an animation of the air flow across Europe over the next five days. A large high off the coast in the Atlantic in combination with a powerful low over eastern Scandinavia will be pumping masses of polar air through Europe. By Sunday, one sees that a white Easter is a real possibility – an event that rarely occurs in Central Europe. German DWD Weather Service forecasts snow at higher elevations over Easter, with nighttime temperatures falling to as low as -4°C, reports web.de.

The snow and cold fly in the face of global warming alarmists predictions of springtime arriving earlier and earlier. Climate alarmist Potsdam Institute scientist Friedrich-Wilhelm Gerstengarbe told German ZDF television two years ago that spring would be arriving earlier and earlier – because of global warming.

Of course the cold is due to the prevailing weather patterns, just as was the case for the mild winter. It has nothing to do with climate change, as global warming alarmists often would have us believe.

Dead At Birth! German Warmist Scientists Slap Down Rahmstorf/Mann AMOC Paper: “Offers No Strong Indication”

The Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research has been loudly trumpeting its latest paper on Atlantic ocean overturning circulation today, claiming there’s been an “exceptional twentieth-century slowdown“. The authors, who include Stefan Rahmstorf and Michael E. Mann, even suggest that the “possible cause of the weakening is climate change“.

Some sites, like Climate Central here, have been unable to contain their glee over the news of the potential climate-change induced oceanic shifts being served up by the PIK. For example the site called the findings “dramatic” and writes (my emphasis):

If the climate relationships identified by the researchers, led by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, hold true, growing melt rates in Greenland ‘might lead to further weakening of the AMOC within a decade or two, and possibly even more permanent shutdown’ of key components of it, the scientists warn in their paper.”

The “new” weakening Atlantic meridional overturning circulation.
Credit: Nature Climate Change.

Spiegel and the FAZ pour cold water on paper

Fortunately other media sources have been somewhat more critical and report that there’s skepticism on the paper – coming from warmist circles, no less.

Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) here for example writes that Rahmstorf is puzzled that a part of the north Atlantic has cooled over the last 100 years: “The cooling was stronger than what most computer models calculated it would be,” the FAZ reports. Models wrong again!

The FAZ then writes that, “An independent expert assesses the estimation skeptically”, adding:

Climate scientist Martin Visbeck of the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research in Kiel sees Rahmstorf’s assertion of the results critically: ‘The study’s focus on the sub-polar part of the Atlantic and the spectral analysis are interesting,’ he says. But there are other AMOC assessments that point to a completely other development. The paper does not offer any strong indication of the development of the AMOC during the past fifty years.”

When a warmist dismisses another warmists’s science, then you know it’s likely pretty slipshod.

Der Spiegel reports that the study is lacking

German flagship online news weekly Der Spiegel echoed the FAZ, quoting Michael Hofstätter of the Austrian national weather service: the Zentralanstalt für Meteorologie und Geodynamik (ZAMG) in Vienna. Spiegel writes that Hofstätter also “rates the Rahmstorf study with skepticism“.

Spiegel reminds its readers: “Most studies are assuming that the current is in fact stronger.” Spiegel continues:

The temperature fluctuations could also be a ‘temporary natural variation,’ Hofstätter told the online service of the ORF. The measurements covered a time period that was too short to allow concrete forecasts.”

Other websites censored reports of skepticism and uncertainty

For example the end-of-climate conspiracy theorists at German alarmist site Klimaretter of course could not be bothered to mention the study is disputed even by fellow warmist scientists.

Dr. Mann blocks critic at Twitter

Michael Mann also did not want to hear any non-alarmist opinion as well. At Facebook he blocked fair comments left by Jaime Jessop, who kept a screen-shot:

Overall the latest paper by Rahmstorf and Mann did not even survive birth.

Anthony Watts has lots more here.

 

European Institute For Climate And Energy: Ocean Cycles Are Main Driver, No Relationship Between Arctic Sea Ice And European Winters!

Two days ago I wrote about the first part of an analysis (on Germany winter temperatures) by Kowatsch and Kämpfe appearing here at EIKE. Winter temperatures in Germany have been falling for a quarter of a century now. Much to my satisfaction, that post has been widely shared among social media.

Today I’m writing about the second part: What is the primary driver behind Europe’s variability, i.e. what causes periods of cold winters and periods of milder winters? The main drivers, Kowatsch and Kämpfe conclude, are oceanic cycles.

Figure 1 below shows a plot of German winters since 1881. Shown is the temperature lower curve and the number of days with westerly winds (upper curve) – along with their corresponding smoothed curves.

Figure 1: Germany’s mean winter temperature (lower blue curve) follows the course of the frequency of days with mild westerly winds (W, SW and NW, violet upper curve). Both are accompanied by a smoothed curve).

It’s no surprise that the more days a winter has with winds coming from the west (Atlantic), the milder the winters turn out to be. A correlation here does not surprise us. Here the mechanism that drives Europe’s winters is the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), which is the pressure difference between southwest Europe (Portugal to the Azores) and northwestern Europe (Iceland).

When the NAO is very positive it means there is a powerful Azores high and a powerful Icelandic low which serve to pump Atlantic air eastwards into Central Europe (Figure 2, right). If the Azores high and the Iceland low are both weak, then cold air from Eastern Europe or Siberia can make its way over across Europe and the winters tend to be much colder (Figure 2, left).

Figure 2: Prevailing weak NAO pattern shown left leads to cold Europe winters. Strong positive NAO pattern shown right leads to mild winters (Source: UKMO).

Next Figure 3 shows the NAO chart for the past winter, which was most of the time was highly positive, meaning many mild westerly winds swept in from the Atlantic and over Europe.

Figure 3: Winter 2014/15 saw an overwhelmingly positive NAO, thus producing a mild winter for Western and Central Europe.

So what drives the NAO air pressure difference? Kowatsch and Kämpfe have analyzed this and found there is a strong correlation between NAO and the Atlantic Multidecadal Osciallation (AMO). Figure 4 below shows the inverse relationship between the AMO and the winter-time westerly wind frequency over Europe:

Figure 4: The higher the AMO value, the less westerly weather that occurs.

Not only does the AMO drive the NAO, but it is also is a major factor driving Arctic sea ice extent. Arctic sea ice extent does not drive the winters over Europe, as some scientists have been hypothesizing over the recent years. Rather it is the AMO that is driving the Arctic sea ice and the European winters as well.

Although good satellite sea ice data records for the Arctic go back only 35 years, one sees a distinct relationship between the AMO and wintertime Arctic sea ice, see Figure 5 below:

Figure 5: As AMO values rise (green curve), sea ice area (blue) reduces significantly.

EIKE adds:

And there are clear indications that this relationship applies over the long-term as well. During the 1930s, i.e. during the last AMO positive phase, large melting of the sea ice and strong melting of the Greenland glaciers were observed.”

And when the severe winters of 2009/10 and 2012/13 caused the proponents of the global warming theory to scramble for an explanation, they concocted and put out the tale that “melting Arctic sea ice was disturbing the large scale circulation and thus favored winter cold at the middle latitudes“.

The scientists claimed that especially the low levels of Arctic sea ice in September were suddenly responsible for causing cold winters. Yet, the following chart shows no relationship at all:

Figure 14: The extent of September Arctic sea ice has no impact whatsoever on winter temperatures over Central Europe (Germany). Arctic sea ice cover in blue; Germany winter temperatures in red. The same is true for other times of the year (autumn ice cover or winter ice cover to winter temperatures show no relationship).

EIKE warns that the climate system is much more complicated than meets the eye: “Still the complicated and yet to be researched relationship between ocean currents, AMO, sea ice and large weather patterns have with a high probability an impact on Europe’s climate and weather, and there exists no easy explanations”. Studies have shown that solar activity also play a role in Europe’s winters.

At the end, Kowatsch and Kämpfe look at the (lack of) success that institute’s and experts have had in forecasting the winter of 2014/15. It shows that the science of forecasting is lacking terribly. Of the 7 forecasts examined, 2 were completely faulty, 3 were poor, and 2 were only about half correct and would not earn a grade any higher than a C -.

Climate Models Turn Out To Be “Fairy Tales” … Long-Term Central Europe Winters Show Distinct COOLING Trend!

Josef Kowatsch and Stefan Kämpfe at the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) analyze the winter data from Germany’s DWD Weather Service an conclude that winters have been cooling.

The two authors present a lengthy analysis of German winter trends and what factors impact them the most. Today I will focus on the first part of their article, i.e. winter trends in Central Europe – mainly Germany. What follows is an abbreviated summary version.

Because of Western Europe’s proximity to the Atlantic, mild winters are nothing unusual and have occurred many times in the past. Two mild winters in a row occurred from 1909/10 to 1912/13, 1918/19 to 1920/21, 1934/35 to 1936/37, 1947/48 to 1949/50, 1987/88 to 1989/90. The article by Kowatsch and Kämpfe looks at if German winters are really getting warmer and less snowy, as is frequently claimed. They are not.

Now trend in snow coverage

An important indication for the character of a winter in Germany is the number of days with a snow cover on the ground that is at least 1 cm. That can be traced back thanks to the records of the Potsdam station, which goes back to 1893/94. There snow can fall already in October and well into April, and so it makes sense to look at the seasonal snow coverage days, where by the season goes from October 1 to April 30:

Figure 1: The number of snow coverage days – which fluctuates wildly – has been unchanged over the long-term. There’s no indication of reduced snow coverage days for Potsdam. The low snow year 2014/15 in the German lowlands is not included in this chart; yet it will show significantly more snow coverage days than the extremely low snow winter of 1974/75. (Source: PIK).

When one considers only the meteorological winter (DJF), no trend is detectable for snow coverage. However there are periodic fluctuations (Figure 2):

Figure 2: In the 1910s to the 1930s 1910er as well as at the end of the 20th century, there were generally fewer snow coverage days, instead the winters were wetter, milder. (Data source: PIK).

Over a large regional scale (entire northern hemisphere) reliable data on snow cover are available since 1967. During this almost 50-year period snow coverage fluctuated strongly, yet there is no declining trend:

Figure 3: Since 1967 there has been no reduction in wintertime snow cover days over the northern hemisphere (Source: NOAA).

German winter temperatures – cooling!

Next we will look back at German winters over the past 28 and 18 years, and do so without considering the urban heat island effect despite the ongoing landscape alteration by man: Every day some 108 hectares are being built upon in Germany and thus creating growing heat islands around temperature measurement stations.

Germany’s winter of 2015 is currently pegged by the German DWD Weather Service as being 1.8°C above normal. Thus it’s the second warmer than normal winter in a row. However, the German DWD neglects to tell the public one thing: Over the long-term winter temperatures have dropped. It’s getting colder. See Figure 4. Data come from the German DWD Weather Service in Offenbach.

Figure 4: Winter temperatures have been falling in Germany for almost 30 years. The two recent mild winters have not changed that trend.

Result: Despite the alleged “global warming”, which is supposed to make itself evident especially in the winters, German winters are ignoring the forecasts made by the so-called climate scientists. It’s going to take an impressive series of mild winters just to flatten the trend.

This is proving to be terribly inconvenient for climate scientists who banked on warming. In the meantime cooling phases are being ignored, or data are even being falsified.

With the German winter temperature, the trend downwards would be even steeper if the UHI were properly accounted for. Yet, already some scientists are seizing upon the fact that the last 2 winters have been mild as “proof of warming”.

Next the single winter months (DJF) are examined individually (all data come from the DWD). Here’s December for the last 30 years:

Figure 5a: The trend is slightly downward, mainly owing to the especially cold December of 2010.

If one factored in the UHI, then the trend would be even more pronounced.

What follows is the 28-year trend for January:

Figure 5b: January has gotten markedly cooler over the years.

January also shows no warming in sight. One finds warming only in the climate models, and nowhere else. The next chart depicts the trend for February:

Figure 5c: Here the downward trend is unmistakable.

The February trend tells us one thing: Springtime is not arriving earlier. February 2015 in Germany was just a bit above normal.

Fairy tale models – truth being covered up

Kowatsch and Kämpfe summarize: “Winter in Germany is taking on a course of its own and is ignoring the forecasts made by the IPCC and the PIK. Warming? Where? In any case they are not to be found in German winters.” The two authors ask:

Where is the global warming which we are supposed to be massively combatting in Germany over the last ten years? Foremost the winter months were supposed to especially warm up. We were warned that there would be no more snow in the flatlands and that winter sports would be possible only at high elevations. […] It turns out these were forecasts from the category of Germany fairy tales. However, what’s worse is that this truth is being covered up and hidden from the German public. Not a single one of our charts is being shown by the media.”

No warming in Central England in 30 years

Kowatsch and Kämpfe also show the same is true in Central England; no temperature rise in 30 years:

Figure 6: No increase in 30 years, which is a climate-relevant period.

Tomorrow I will post on the factors that Kowtsch and Kämpfe say drive western European winters: Ocean cycles (and not Arctic sea ice).

If This Cold Is Warming, Then ISIS Is Peace … USA’s Stunning Shock-Freeze Contradicts NOAA Warmth Claims

Not only last winter was a brutal one for the USA, which saw the Great Lakes freeze over, this year is also turning out to be an epic one as record cold temperatures continue their unrelenting grip across the nation and massive snowfalls bury large regions across the east.

The UPI’s Fred Lambert recently wrote the bitter cold extends all the way to Siberia and had killed dozens across the US. Lambert writes:

According to the Weather Channel, the cold air mass now seizing the country stretches as far west as Russia, moving down through Canada and into the United States in what some meteorologists call the “Siberian Express.”

New all time records

The UK’s Mail online here reports that New York City’s 1°F reading set yesterday broke it’s 65-year old all-time cold record temperature. In Minnesota the mercury plummeted to -41°F. The Mail continues:

The temperature in Boston is below freezing, as the city is set to break the record of 16 days below 32F set in 1961.

In Florida, strawberry and orange crops have frozen over because of the harsh winter weather.”

The online English daily presents a spectacular series of winter photos. Even Niagara Falls has frozen over!

Unexpected freeze

As of Wednesday, over 85% of the Great Lakes was frozen over with experts predicting 100% ice cover in perhaps just a matter of a few more days. The USA Today here quotes George Leshkevich of the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory:

Nobody expected 2014 to be as bad as it was, almost record breaking for ice cover and this year it’s the same thing with these very cold temperatures.”

“Historical ice cover record”

This morning mlive.com here shows images of Lake Huron, which it writes: “Lake Huron is almost entirely covered in ice. It is only 2.7 percent away from its historical ice-cover record.”

All this in the “6th warmest winter”?

Strangely, despite all the record freezing, the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) claims that it has been the sixth-warmest winter on record. NCDC officials may want to go back and check their thermometers, as these claims are looking a lot like “padded room” quality.

If this cold and ice are warming, then ISIS is peace.

Meteorologist Joe Bastardi explains the breathtaking, acrobatic tricks the NOAA used to produce the reality-disconnected result (see 1:30 mark).

Next cold blast to arrive next week

Dr. Ryan Maue at Twitter tells us that the cold wave is not yet done:

Maue Twitter

Note Maue warns of more records to possibly come. Obviously the US weather never got the message that it is supposed to be the 6th warmest on record.

 

“The New England Glacier”! Dr. Ryan Maue: “Arctic Cold On Lockdown…Brutal”. Global Warming Gets Obliterated! Great Lakes “100% Frozen Over Next Week”!

If you google “warmer winters”, you’ll find plenty of articles that contain statements like the following:

But scientists say the milder winters also are consistent with global warming caused by the massive buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere due to human activities such as burning oil and coal. The carbon dioxide acts like a greenhouse roof, trapping heat on the Earth’s surface.”

And there are also plenty of articles from earlier on claiming that cold winters with lots of snow would become rare in the future, all in line of course with scientists expected from global warming.

But suddenly the exact opposite is happening, and it is deeply embarrassing the climate experts. The USA is now being gripped by widespread and especially severe cold and snow.

Switzerland’s Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ) reports today:

After the heavy snowfalls of the last couple days, the American east coast is expecting a cold front with record minus temperatures.”

Germany’s national DW public radio recently reported, “USA: The Winter Just Doesn’t Want To End” and on how people on the east coast “aren’t getting any breaks” from the bitter cold and snow.

DW describes how transportation is being severely hampered and federal workers in Washington D.C. are staying home because of the weather: The DW adds:

Also Boston continues to ail from the harsh winter. After the heavy snowstorms and temperatures down to minus 23° Celsius during last weekend, the National Weather Service forecast more snow ahead for Tuesday and Wednesday. Already the current February is already the snowiest in the history of the east coast city.”

Ryan Maue: “The New England Glacier”

So when can Americans along the east coast start dreaming about a pause in winter and the promises of cherry blossoms? According to Dr. Ryan Maue at Twitter, not for awhile. The expert meteorologist provides a temperature anomaly chart from the ECMWF for the end of February:

Maue Twitter

Chart source: ECMWF

From the charts Maue sees a possible additional 1 to 2 feet of snow, and he is already describing the massive snow over Boston as “the New England Glacier”. He tweets: “Arctic cold on lockdown … brutal“!

100% frozen over – next week!

By next week Maue foresees about a quarter billion people in North America “at/below freezing conditions” (including Canada).

Another indication of the winter’s severity is the ice cover over the Great Lakes. Maue tweets here:

Just obscene & no stopping it … Great Lakes are going to be 90-95% then 100% froze over … Next week.”

Fluctuating Atlantic … German Experts Say “Things Could Become Very Bitter For The IPCC Forecast Models”!

The latest post by Frank Bosse and Fritz Vahrenholt looks at solar cycle 24 in January, and the climate impacts of the North Atlantic. The two authors write that the IPCC models may be in for a bitter surprise.
==================================

The sun in January 2015 and Atlantic prognoses

By Frank Bosse and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(Translated, edited by P Gosselin)

Solar report January 2015

Last month the sun reached a sunspot number of 67.0 and thus was once again below normal in activity: It reached 85% of what is normal for the particular cycle month.

Fig. 1: The mean activity of the sun since systematic observations have been conducted is shown in blue and the current cycle (24th cycle, red), along with the relatively similar Cycle No. 1 of 260 years ago.

The red curve shows that the sunspot maximum is now over. Up to now that was not so easy to identify because instead of the usual pronounced maximum (compared to the mean curve in Fig. 1), there have been two peaks with a pronounced dip between them.

Observation of the sun’s polar magnetic fields brings certainty rather than guesses. We reported on this in detail before the end of the year. In short the polar fields have a zero polarity during the solar sunspot maximum. The difference of north polar field and south polar field is zero, yet it can occur often when the fields do not reverse at the same time. During the current cycle the fluctuation about the zero line was quite intense:

Figure 2: The difference between the polar fields of the sun, source: leif.org.

The zero value was first approached in fall 2012, in early summer 2013, and again at the beginning of 2014. The maximum dragged on for some 15 months. But now the trend appears to be clearly away from zero and the maximum to be behind us for good. The month with the highest activity was month no. 63 of the cycle, February 2014, with a SSN= 102.8.

We are seeing an unusually weak cycle with a delayed start and delayed maximum. Another thing is noteworthy: The polar fields are building up only very slowly, especially the solar north pole is dipping as before close to zero. Could that be an indication of an even weaker cycle to follow? It is still too early to determine this, but we will know in a few years. What follows is a comparison of all the cycles:

Fig. 3: The summed deviations from the mean value (blue in Fig. 1) for all cycles for all months up to the current one. The right bar in Fig. 3 is growing deeper into negative territory. This indicates a strongly reduced solar activity since approx. 2006.

North Atlantic harboring a bitter surprise?

As some readers may recall, we reported earlier here on the North Atlantic and we suspected that a relatively significant reduction in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) could be in the pipeline. Since then there have been additional mesurements of this near surface warm current, which impacts the Atlantic part of the Northern Hemisphere and to some extent other large regions of the Northern hemisphere. Our earlier prognoses are now confirmed:

Fig. 4: The AMOC strength between 2004 and spring 2014. Source: climate-lab-book.ac.uk.

It is the decisive element that controls the AMO, and probably the approximately 65-year temperature oscillation. Earlier it had been positive, the transition from negative to a positive phase precisely coincides with the time frame that most climate models were parameterized: between 1975 and 2004.

Fig.5: The AMO since 1870, Source: climatedataguide.ucar.edu. The signal is determined by measuring surface temperatures of the entire North Atlantic and the deviation from the linear long-term trend. The AMO thus expresses an internal variability.

The additional added heat from the variable oscillation may have led to the models having calculated an excessive forcing from greenhouse gases, just as the AMO will also not be accounted for in the newest CMIP5 models when it comes to the global and northern hemisphere temperatures.

Getting back to the AMOC, if it weakens, it will lead to a falling heat content in the North Atlantic at depths from 0 to 700 meters and so less heat getting conveyed towards the North Pole. This is precisely what has been observed since 2007:


Fig. 6: The heat content of the upper 700 meters in the region of impact of the AMOC, Chart source: Climate Explorer.

It is highly likely that the focus of the AMOC-effect can be found in the sub-polar gyre, which is a relatively small area of the sea in the North Atlantic located off the southern tip of Greenland: 45°N…60°N; 50°W…20W°. Here we are seeing truly dramatic events:

Fig. 7:  The heat content of water between 300 meters depth and 125 m of the sub-polar circulation. The depth limit was chosen in order to exclude falsifications from the effects of atmospheric processes. (Image source: Argo Marine Atlas)

Beginning in the spring of 2014 (after the end of the available direct measurement in Fig. 4) we see the occurrence of a steep drop. Also the forecast of the British Met Office for the next years is now taking this development into account and foresees with some certainty for the next ten years global temperatures at the lower end of the models’ ranges. It is also stated very carefully that a temperature stall could occur over the next 10 years, which for the models would be a real large-scale catastrophe. Just as we wrote back in January, 2014:

The AMO] is not accounted for in the IPCC models and would limit the trend rise in global temperatures since the beginning of the impact of greenhouse gases to about 1°K/ century.  How much longer will we have to wait before the IPCC finally accepts the multidecadal oscillations, as it already has here and is shown in other works?”

The North Atlantic is indeed a special region and could contribute much to understanding our climate. Also a greater impact by the sun than what has been considered up to now would be possible. A new paper by authors in China and Scandinavia examined high resolution proxy summer temperature data from northern Iceland and came to the result that the fluctuations there over the last 3500 years correspond to solar activity, and do so significantly over long time frames (centuries and millennia).

Fig. 8: The coincidence between North Atlantic summer temperatures and solar activity in the gray range over the last 3500 years (top), with the correlation (middle) and significance (bottom – the lower the p -value, the greater the certainty) of the relationship . Source: Figure 5 of the above-mentioned paper.

When one looks very closely at Fig. 8, one sees a time delay in temperature with respect to solar activity characteristic numbers. And when one now looks at Figure 3 of post and notice the especially high activity until the end of the 1980s and the rather dramatic drop afterwards, what do you think the solar drive will do to the Atlantic temperatures?

Things could become very bitter for the IPCC forecast models! With much excitement we look forward to how the climate unfolds.

 

German Experts: New Paper By Gleisner Shows 2013 Cowtan And Way Arctic Data Hole Paper Was A Lemon

German experts Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt tell at their Die kalte Sonne site us why the 2013 Cowtan and Way paper has proven to be a flop.
========================================

Failed spectacularly: Arctic data hole theory for the warming pause collapses
By Sebastian Lüning and Fritz Vahrenholt
(Translated, edited by P Gosselin)

For quite some time climate scientists have been desperately seeking an explanation for the unexpected warming pause. On November 15, 2013 in the Süddeutsche Zeitung Christopher Schrader declared that the solution had been found: There was no pause; the data had only been missing from the Arctic.

Climate change without pause
According to the data, the earth had not warmed over the past years. However, this impression is likely related to missing data from the Arctic. And there the temperature appears to have risen much more strongly than the global average.[…] These [temperature] measurements have large holes: Approximately one sixth of the earth is not covered. Foremost in the Arctic there are not enough thermometers. But according to all signs it is warming considerably more quickly than the rest of the planet. An English and a Canadian scientist now show how this hole can be closed up with estimated values and how the supposed warming pause practically disappears. Kevin Cowtan of the University of York and Robert Way of the University of Ottawa refer to satellite data. […] Thus ultimately Cowtan and Way arrived at the result that the Arctic warmed eight times faster than the rest of the planet. Before that it had been thought that it was warming three times faster.”

Unfortunately Schrader did not mention that the two scientists were climate activists who were close to the IPCC-friendly Internet platform Skeptical Science. Yet, he still was unable to let slip out a couple of critical words about the two authors:

However the process is too complicated in order to find widespread recognition. Doubt will be stirred up among many because both authors have no name in climate science. Kevin Cowtan is a theoretical physicist and computer specialist at the Department of Chemistry at his University. Robert Way is still busy writing his doctorate dissertation.

It’s been a full year since the appearance of the dubious paper by Cowtan and Way, one that was highly praised by Stefan Rahmstorf. So just how was this pioneering paper received by the science community? On January 29, 2015 the answer from their colleagues appeared in the Geophysical Research Letters. The dodgy Arctic data fill-in model has failed spectacularly and has been soundly rejected. The answer to the pause is not to be found in the Arctic as Cowtan and Way suspected, rather it is to be found at the lower geographical geographical latitudes, as a team of scientists of the Danish Meteorological Institute in Copenhagen led by Hans Gleisner reports in a new publication. What follows is the paper’s abstract:

Recent global warming hiatus dominated by low-latitude temperature trends in surface and troposphere data
Over the last 15 years, global mean surface temperatures exhibit only weak trends. Recent studies have attempted to attribute this so called temperature hiatus to several causes, amongst them incomplete sampling of the rapidly warming Arctic region. We here examine zonal mean temperature trends in satellite-based tropospheric data sets (based on data from (Advanced) Microwave Sounding Unit and Global Navigation Satellite System Radio Occultation instruments) and in global surface temperatures (HadCRUT4). Omission of successively larger polar regions from the global mean temperature calculations, in both tropospheric and surface data sets, shows that data gaps at high latitudes cannot explain the observed differences between the hiatus and the prehiatus period. Instead, the dominating causes of the global temperature hiatus are found at low latitudes. The combined use of several independent data sets, representing completely different measurement techniques and sampling characteristics, strengthens the conclusions.