Category Archives: Sea Level

Some Background Regarding An El Nino


Currently the weather is being strongly affected by an El Nino. El Nino is but one part of a weather/climate system known as the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO). There are three phases of ENSO — El Nino, La Nina and neutral.   ENSO is important because of its ability to change the global atmospheric circulation, which in turn, influences temperature and precipitation across the globe. The global atmospheric circulation is called the Walker Cycle and we will look  at that in the next posting.

Many of you already are fully informed about the ENSO but my guess is that some of you are not. I thought it might be helpful to provide some background information. (1)

First of all, we are talking about the Pacific Ocean. The Pacific Ocean from South America to the Maritime Continent(2), a distance of about 10k miles along the equator. Usually the trade winds blow along the equator toward the west. This moves the hot surface water to the Western Pacific. The sea surface is about ½ meter higher in Indonesian than it is in Ecuador. 
Usually, sea-surface temperatures off South America’s west coast range from the 60°s to 70°s F, while they exceed 80°F in the “warm pool.” This description is essentially that of the neutral phase.

On occasions the easterly winds weaken and the hot water begins to flow eastward toward South America. This is the beginning of an El Nino. It typically starts in the May-June timeframe as the water flows eastward. It reaches it peak strength about December. January through March/April typically are the months that the El Nino begins to lose it strength. Some El Ninos maintain strength longer such as the 1998/1999 El Nino, which is considered one of the strongest ever.

Continue reading

Media Buried These Stories On “Global Warming”


The Investors Business Daily posted “Three More Global Warming Stories Media Don’t Want You To See”. The stories are about the so-called consensus, the loss of Greenland ice and climate model performance.

The Scientific Consensus on the theory of man-made global warming.

First is a peer-reviewed paper showing that only 36% of 1,077 geoscientists and engineers surveyed believe in the man-made global warming crisis as defined by the United Nations’ Kyoto model.

According to the paper, the Kyoto position expresses “the strong belief that climate change is happening, that it is not a normal cycle of nature, and humans are the main or central cause.”

Thirty-six percent is not insignificant. But it certainly is a long way from the oft-cited 97% “consensus” among scientists that man is causing temperatures to change.

Researchers behind “Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change,” which appeared in Organization Studies, also found “the proportion of papers” collected from a science database “that explicitly endorsed anthropogenic climate change has fallen from 75%” between 1993 and 2003 “to 45% from 2004 to 2008.”

The Heartland Institute’s James Taylor reminds us in Forbes that “survey results show geoscientists (also known as earth scientists) and engineers hold similar views as meteorologists. Two recent surveys of meteorologists revealed similar skepticism of alarmist global warming claims.”

Continue reading

12 Reasons To Be A Skeptic


James Delingpole is a Brit that writes for Brietbart.com. He has a sharp mind that he uses to take the obvious and throw it back at the pretenders often with good humor. Somewhat like Mark Steyn. They are a formidable pair and I am glad they are on our side.

The Delingpole posting that I want to discuss was written before the COP21 Paris meeting of the massive group of hanger-ons that go to these conferences on stopping global warming. But, the points he makes in this posting “Twelve Reasons Why The Paris Climate Talks Are A Total Waste” are essentially timeless within the current discussion of the catastrophic man-made global warming theory.

I may summarize the discussion in some of the twelve reasons. So I do recommend that you link to his original posting to read the reasons in their entirety. Don’t ignore the links that are included in this listing.

1   There has been no ‘global warming’ since 1997.

So, of all the children round the world currently being taught in schools about the perils of man-made global warming, not a single one has lived through a period in which the planet was actually warming

Continue reading

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science–An Unbiased Report


The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issues a report every three or four years about global warming. This UN agency’s charter is not to examine the science of global warming but rather to show that man produced greenhouse gases will result in catastrophic damage to the globe.   IPCC does as directed by giving little consideration to data, science or reports that would contradict the charter.

A relatively new report, compiled by the Nongovernmental International Panel cover of part2FrontCover2on Climate Change (NIPCC) has been written to answer the IPCC’ reports. The first installment is Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science (CCR-II). This installment is an independent, comprehensive, and authoritative report on the current state of climate science. It is the fourth in a series of scholarly reports produced by the (NIPCC), an international network of climate scientists sponsored by three nonprofit organizations: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), and The Heartland Institute. Real data and unbiased studies were used in the preparation of this installment.

You can link to Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science (CCRII) by clicking here.

cbdakota

 

 

 

The Perilous Business Of Predicting The Future


The National Review.com posted “Why Climate Change Won’t Matter in 20 Years”. They subtitled the posting “The perilous business of predicting the future.” The subtitle accurately depicts what happens when politicians or anyone for that matter, think they can safely make the future an extension of the present.

First of all, the warmers should be willing to take seriously the abject failure of their vaunted climate models to make prediction on any time frame. Yet they insist that the Earth in 2100 will be x degrees hotter and the sea level will be y meters higher than today because the climate models told them so. The odds are that they might do just as well talking to Madame Charmaine, the village palm reader.

The author of this posting, Josh Gelernter, put in a lot of effort into showing why projecting the present as a representation of the future is very unlikely to be successful. So I will let him speak:

“Michael Crichton — the brilliant novelist and thinker — posed this horsespulling streetcarquestion in a speech at Caltech in 2003, re climate predictions for 2100. What environmental problems would men in 1900 have predicted for 2000? Where to get enough horses, and what to do with all the manure. “Horse pollution was bad in 1900,” said Crichton. How much worse would someone in 1900 expect it to “be a century later, with so many more people riding horses?”

Continue reading

Fireworks At Senate Subcommittee Testimony On Global Warming


Some fireworks at yesterdays hearing  of the Senate’s subcommittee on Commerce Science and Transportation.  Senator Ted Cruz is the Chairman of the subcommittee.  He invited 4 guests to demonstrate that the current theory of catastrophic man-made global (CMGW) warming is far from proven.   Cruz’s guest were Judith Curry, John Christy, William Happer and Mark Steyn.

The fireworks came about after Senator Markey made is own presentation.  Clearly Markey does not have much in the way of the science but he is able to parrot what the warmers tell him.  The Youtube that follows is very interesting:

Continue reading

A Complete List Of Things Caused By Global Warming


Many religions have a devil that is the source of all evil. The Church of Catastrophic Global Warming (CCGW) has devils and they are the human race with the exception of Al Gore, and his fellow travelers, of course. And those global-warming-vector-172887devils wield a terrible power—global warming which is the cause of all things evil. For example, President Obama (1) (2), the previously named Al Gore (3), Prince Charles (4), Bernie Sanders (5) and others have told us that, directly or indirectly, global warming is causing the terrorism and unrest in the world. And that it will get worse. Unless, and for sure, the enlightened are allowed to lead us away from our wicked path.

Fortunately, our President struck a powerful blow to the terrorist in Paris by the mere fact that a COP 21 meeting was convened. And that meeting is said to be the last chance to prevent the terrorist from taking over.

Continue reading

Social Cost Of Carbon–The Administration’s New Way To Justify Regulations


The Obama administration has instituted new criteria for supporting their climate change regulations. It is called the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC).   The eventual cost of an increase in atmospheric CO2 is calculated for each regulation. corncropUnknownThe calculation is based upon their model’s forecasts of temperature, sea level, storms, droughts, etc. All the bad things they believe will happen if the rise of atmospheric CO2 is not stopped. You can be certain that each regulation could prevent millions, perhaps billions, of dollars damage according to their SCC calculation.

The SCC calculations use several discount rates that most rational economist would say were not germane. SSC presumes that the next generations will not have more knowledge and money to adapt to what ever actually happens. For example at the turn of the last century, do you think the forecasters would have come up with airplanes, nuclear energy, penicillin, satellites, for several example of things that have made enormous changes? And the many people that would be lifted out of poverty and provided a much-improved life?

Continue reading

“How Reliable Are The Climate Models” (Reblogged from WUWT)


I am reblogging a posting from WUWT by Mike Jonas titled: How reliable are the climate models?” The first chart in the WUWT posting illustrated the climate model unreliability.  The fact that climate models are not reliable has been covered on my blog, Climate Change Sanity, and many others. Often we talk about the fact that water vapor is the major “greenhouse” gas and not carbon dioxide (C02). Yet this issue is not the only reason these models have gone astray.   The WUWT blog discusses a number of other physical properties that have an effect on the “coupled nonlinear chaotic system” that is our atmosphere, that the models do not attempt to model.

The models are the basis for all the things that are forecast to happen —sea level rise, weather chaos, etc –  with their forecasts of very high global temperatures cause by CO2. Do we have a problem? Maybe but the climate models are unable to tell us anything.

cbdakota

WATTS UP WITH THAT

How reliable are the climate models?
Guest Blogger / 3 days ago September 17, 2015
Guest essay by Mike Jonas

michaels-102-ipcc-models-vs-reality

There are dozens of climate models. They have been run many times. The great majority of model runs, from the high-profile UK Met Office’s Barbecue Summer to Roy Spencer’s Epic Fail analysis of the tropical troposphere, have produced global temperature forecasts that later turned out to be too high. Why?

The answer is, mathematically speaking, very simple.

The fourth IPCC report [para 9.1.3] says : “Results from forward calculations are used for formal detection and attribution analyses. In such studies, a climate model is used to calculate response patterns (‘fingerprints’) for individual forcings or sets of forcings, which are then combined linearly to provide the best fit to the observations.”

To a mathematician that is a massive warning bell. You simply cannot do that. [To be more precise, because obviously they did actually do it, you cannot do that and retain any credibility]. Let me explain :

 

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THIS WUWT POSTING

Flashback To ABC 2009 Special On Climate Change–See Their 2015 Predictions.


gwpredictions_cartoonThanks to the Daily Caller we can enter into the minds of the radical warmers and their surrogates, the national media. The Daily Caller posted “Flashback: ABC News Envisioned Apocalyptic 2015 Triggered By Climate Change”. Using the “best” minds on the planet to graphically display the terror that climate change will cause, ABC ran a special in 2009 called “Earth 2100 “. The special follows a baby girl born in 2009 through her life span with stops along the way to describe how the planet was suffering through the effects of climate change.   The first stop was 2015. You may wonder how you are missing all of these tragic happenings that the warmer scientist say would happen in 2015. But it is more likely that being a rational human, you will realize, once again, how far from the truth the great prognosticators are. These people have not changed since 2009. They just keep restarting their “end of the earth” smoke and mirrors” narratives, ignoring the need to apologize for how bad their last prediction was.

The Daily Caller quotes from the special:

“ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff says the show “puts participants in the future and asks them to report back about what it is like to live in this future world. The first stop is the year 2015.”  A Harvard University professor says, “We’re going to see more floods, more droughts, more wildfires.”  Other voices can be heard saying that “Flames cover hundreds of square mile” and “We expect more intense hurricanes.” Another voice says, “Well, how warm is it going to get? How much will sea level rise? We don’t know really know where the end is.”

 

Continue reading