donsutherland1

The U.S. Tax Code is filled with tax expenditures that benefit specific industries and companies. Conventional energy producers also receive large tax benefits.

The scientists aren’t politicizing the science. The science is solid. Others outside the field have been doing so.

The anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have contributed to the rising atmospheric concentration of such gases. They made the marginal difference. That concentration is driving the ongoing warming. As for the world ending in 12 years, that’s nonsense that has almost nothing to do with climate change. It is exaggeration that exploits it for political ends that are largely disconnected from it e.g., an economic reordering that deals with non-climate goals. Such tactics fall on the opposite side of the spectrum as denial, with both undercutting the science. Denial ignores the science. The economic reordering gives life to conspiracy theories wielded to discredit the science.

“Trapping” is used to describe the slowing release of heat to space. On account of that process, some of the heat that would otherwise escape is re-radiated to the earth. The end result is the observed warming that is now underway and its evidence assessed by science as all but unequivocal. The deflection to common usage of technical terms—even by physicists to readily communicate complex concepts with the public so that they are readily understood—cannot undermine the breadth and depth of scientific understanding of contemporary warming and its principal cause.

CO2’s heat-trapping properties are not non-existent. They have been documented. Instead, what had happened is that there had to be a trigger to start the release of stored greenhouse gases. That trigger was natural e.g., an increase in solar insolation, which led to warming, which in turn allowed for some stored greenhouse gases to be released into the atmosphere, which led to further warming, etc. Today, humanity is the trigger via its burning of fossil fuels. Atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases is rising and leading to warming. That process is underway and the body of evidence is large. There are no mysteries of physical laws involved.

To be sure, Dr. Curry does not fall into the category of a “denier.” Her objections are narrower and more specific based on what I have read. There are some people in social media who have taken the anti-science route, which differs from honest skepticism.

Differences of opinion over nuance or degree of magnitude are not a big issue. The big issue is those who reject the basic areas that are supported by what is an overwhelming body of evidence/absence of any compelling alternative explanation in combination with a rigid refusal to bring their ideas to peer review for scrutiny. If they have something of value, they should bring it before the scientific community for examination. Instead, they are little different from those who chose to stick with the idea of an earth-centric solar system long after Copernicus and later Galileo demonstrated that it is solar-centric. In the end, when one dismisses scientific understanding out of hand despite the evidence for it and also refuses to submit one’s own ideas for peer review, one ceases to engage in science. When one rationalizes the latter (refusal to seek publication) with unfounded and unsustainable fears of bias, etc., one merely engages in conspiracy theories. The true denier often satisfies both those conditions.

There’s little doubt that science is a field of continual discovery/knowledge acquisition. In practically all areas more can be learned, including in the area of climate. Nevertheless, the two big ideas on the climate—1. That the climate is warming globally and 2. Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are the principal reason—are largely settled. More precision remains possible. Greater understanding of feedbacks can be obtained. All of this knowledge can lead to still better forecasts of multiple related variables and outcomes. Crankywxguy’s argument was not a good faith assertion that more remains to be learned: the climate papers are filled with expressions of such a need. It was an attempt to wield the claim to undermine what is known without having to provide a compelling plausible alternative. Finally, with regard to the paper, it notes that climate change contributed to the outcome. It provides a range of probabilities. It leverages the climate models for insight. Even with simple mathematics, alone, one could reach a reasonable judgement based on what is known from the data concerning mean temperatures and standard deviations. In a world where the mean temperature is higher than it was and variability is constant, the probability of a high temperature is increased. If variability is increasing—as has been shown to be occurring on a modest basis in many areas—the probability of that warm outcome is further increased.

The blogger misses at least three important points: 1. While record highs can occur at anytime, the ratio of record highs to record lows has been increasing. The former is now consistently more numerous than the latter. That’s what one would expect to see in a warming climate. 2. The cold air mass in Russia did not even begin to compare with the historic heat that toppled national records in Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, along with widespread all-time and monthly record highs. The cold air mass generated some daily record low readings but no monthly record lows (at least none had been reported as of August 4). Globally, there was no balance between the heat and cold during July. The just released climate bulletin from Copernicus revealed: Global average temperatures for July 2019 were on par with, and possibly marginally higher than, those for July 2016, the warmest previous July and warmest of all months on record. https://climate.copernicus.eu/another-exceptional-month-global-average-temperatures and https://climate.copernicus.eu/surface-air-temperature-july-2019 3. Temperature homogenization for the GHCN v4 dataset deals with, among other things, UHI. The modifications from v3 were peer reviewed. That review did not sustain the blogger’s hypothesis concerning its treatment of UHI.

Among serious scientists, there’s very little “distrust.” The papers being published show remarkable consensus on the overall reality of climate change and the leading role anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have played in driving it. Areas of uncertainty exist, especially as they relate to potential feedbacks. Finally, rapid attribution has become necessary for the science to transcend the claims of those who seek to confuse or mislead the public over what’s happening. These papers aren’t perfect, but mathematics and the current climate models provide reasonable insight, even if it isn’t precise.

That’s a false analogy. To “know everything” about climate is not the required level of knowledge to possess an understanding of some major elements of the climate and its evolution. In fact, the notion that science must understand 100% about something to reach conclusions is a rationalization for refusing to accept what science does understand. Indeed, a lot is not well understood when it comes to the processes that drive tropical cyclone intensification, yet enough is known for some really solid forecasting. As more knowledge is developed, forecasting will improve further.

The United States is a relatively small part of the world. A map illustrating the increasing global frequency of heat waves can be found here: https://maps.esri.com/globalriskofdeadlyheat/#

There’s no violation of Wien’s Law. The temperature at 7 km-10 km in the atmosphere where the trapping has been observed (cooling above/warming below) falls within those parameters.

The paper describes the synoptic pattern involved. It was a warm one. Such patterns do not disappear in the context of climate change. The probability of their occurrence can change and their impact can change. The best estimate is that the given pattern resulted in an outcome that was 1.5C - 3.0C warmer than otherwise would have been the case due to climate change.

The attribution report can be found here: https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/wp-content/uploads/July2019heatwave.pdf In sum, without the contribution of ongoing climate change, the heat would have been much less likely and, in some places, all but improbable.

I will need to look into this when I return to the U.S. in about three weeks.

Unfortunately, the Park has issues.

The Middle Atlantic and southern New England region concluded a very warm July. In New York City, the mean temperature was 79.5°, which was 3.0° above normal. That was tied with 1983 as New York City's 11th warmest July on record. The last time July was warmer was in 2013 when July had a monthly average temperature of 79.8°. Such warmth has typically been followed by a warmer than normal August. Since 1869, New York City had 20 prior cases with a July mean temperature of 79.0° or above. The August mean temperature for those cases was 76.4° with a standard deviation of 2.2°. However, in the 11 cases in which the July average temperature was 79.5° or above, the August mean temperature was also 76.4°, but the standard deviation was just 1.2°. July 2019 falls into the latter warmer category. This data suggests that simply based on historical outcomes, August 2019 will very likely be warmer than normal in the region. Those historical outcomes are supported by teleconnections data and by at least some of the longer-range guidance. The historic heat that smashed high temperature records in much of western Europe and then Scandinavia will continue to affect Iceland and Greenland for another day or two. Near-record to possibly record surface mass balance (SMB) loss could occur during that period. Already, rapid losses in SMB have been occurring. Professor Jason Box, ice climatologist at the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland observed, "On the Arctic Circle, southwestern Greenland ice sheet, 2019 melt to-date is 1.3x that of the previous record melt at that location in 2010. 1.4x that in 2012." High temperatures in Greenland included Ilulissat: 66°; Kangerlussuaq: 72°; Kulusuk: 59°; Narsarsuaq: 66°; Nuuk: 50°; and, Thule: 54°. Anchorage has concluded its warmest month on record following its warmest June on record. The July 2019 mean temperature was 65.1°. That easily surpassed the old record of 62.7°, which was recorded in July 2016. The ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly was -0.2°C and the Region 3.4 anomaly was +0.4°C for the week centered around July 24. For the past six weeks, the ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly has averaged -0.27°C and the ENSO Region 3.4 anomaly has averaged +0.40°C. Neutral-warm ENSO conditions are now evolving. There is considerable uncertainty about the ENSO evolution later this summer into the fall. Some of the guidance shows the development of neutral-cool ENSO conditions. The SOI was +3.14 today. Today, the preliminary Arctic Oscillation (AO) figure was -1.647. A general tendency for blocking could persist through mid-August with perhaps some occasional fluctuations to positive values. This persistence of blocking will promote a generally warm or perhaps very warm remainder of summer. Since 1950, there was only a single year that saw the AO average -1.000 or below in May and -0.500 or below in June (the preliminary June 2019 average was -0.665): 1993. 1993 featured much above normal readings in the East during the late summer (August 15-September 15 period) and predominantly cooler than normal readings across the western third of the nation during much of the summer. In addition, since 1950, there have been four prior cases when the AO averaged -0.500 or below in both June and July: 1957, 1958, 1993, and 2009. In three (75%) of those cases, August wound up warmer than normal. August 1993 was the warmest case. The mean anomaly from those cases suggests that the Middle Atlantic and southern New England areas could be approximately 0.5° to 1.5° above normal overall during August. Overall, 1993 remains the base case for the pattern that should generally prevail from mid-August to mid-September. Currently, the CFSv2 suggests that a warmer than normal pattern could develop around mid-August. On July 30, the MJO was in Phase 3 at an amplitude of 0.434 (RMM). The July 29-adjusted amplitude was 0.600. August will likely be warmer than normal across the Middle Atlantic and southern New England areas. The CFSv2, which understated the degree of warmth in July, suggests near normal conditions in August. However, based on the preponderance of date, it is likely an outlier. The potential exists for some cooler than normal to near normal readings from the middle of the first week of August into the latter portion of the second week of August. However, no notably cold readings appear likely. Afterward, warmer anomalies should return. The warmest anomalies relative to normal will likely occur during the second half of the month. Those warm anomalies will likely persist into at least the start of September. Finally, On July 30, Arctic sea ice extent was 5.998 million square kilometers (JAXA). That broke the daily minimum record of 6.132 million square kilometers, which was set in 2012. It is also the earliest figure under 6.000 million square kilometers. The previous earliest figure occurred on August 3, 2012 when Arctic sea ice extent was 5.911 million square kilometers. Based on the average statistical decline and on sensitivity analysis, it is likely that Arctic sea ice extent will fall below 4.000 million square kilometers at its minimum for only the second time on record. Some probabilities from the sensitivity analysis: 4.500 million square kilometers or below: 84% 4.000 million square kilometers or below: 63% 3.500 million square kilometers or below: 36%

DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ ATL _ IAH __ DEN _ PHX _ SEA 1.4 1.2 0.9 0.2 0.5 0.5 -0.3 0.3 1.5

This is what denial looks like. The BBC reported: The top 10 warmest years on record in the UK have all occurred since 2002, a new analysis from the Met Office says. Its State of the UK Climate report shows that 2014 remains the warmest year in a temperature sequence now dating back to 1884. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49167797 The underlying report, which is packed with data, can be found at: https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/joc.6213 Tom Nelson tweeted the following response, "Sounds like complete BS to me: 'UK's 10 warmest years all occurred since 2002' - BBC News" https://twitter.com/tan123/status/1156527168572272640 When it comes to science, "sounds like" isn't a sufficient basis for arriving at a conclusion. It is nothing more than an evasion aimed at circumventing the rigor of the scientific method and its emphasis on evidence.In other words, he reached a conclusion without evidence, without data, without anything of substance to inform it. Put another way, his conclusion is little more than a conspiracy theory based on the implied premise that science and scientists are misleading the world. With respect to such conspiracy theories, the Oxford Research Encyclopedias explains: Conspiracy theories that accuse government of perverting science often view the conspirators as having socialist or totalitarian aims. Some Americans, Canadians, and others have objected to the government inclusion of fluoride into drinking water (Carstairs & Elder, 2008; Newbrun & Horowitz, 1999; Oliver & Wood, 2014b). They argued first that there was a conspiracy of silence to hide the negative side effects from an unsuspecting public (Connett, Beck, & Micklem, 2010), but also that fluoridation was the first step in a growing expansion of government control over an individual’s life, part of a trend in America toward socialism or totalitarianism … once the precedent was set for using public drinking water to medicate the population, the government would argue for the addition of birth control medication, or sedatives or an "anti-hostility" drug. (Reilly, 2006, p. 329)... Climate change denialist conspiracy theories often follow the same logic as other conspiracy theories accusing government. These conspiracy theories make a series of interrelated and often interchangeable claims: (1) that ideological organizations, including government, have used grant money to pervert the science; (2) that the peer-review process has become tainted by an oligarchy of scientists seeking to suppress dissent; (3) that climate science is less about science and more about socialist ideology; and (4) that larger international groups have faked climate science as a scheme to achieve global wealth redistribution or one-world government (Douglas & Sutton, 2015; Goertzel, 2010, 2013; Hurley & Walker, 2004). https://oxfordre.com/climatescience/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228620-e-328 In the end, when it comes to such flippant responses of denial, the public should reject them absent credible and sufficient evidence to support them. They should not be accepted at face value, especially in the absence of evidence. The absence of evidence reveals them for what they are, one variant in a range of conspiracy theories aimed at discrediting science and scientists.

On July 30, Arctic sea ice extent was 5.998 million square kilometers (JAXA). That broke the daily minimum record of 6.132 million square kilometers, which was set in 2012. It is also the earliest figure under 6.000 million square kilometers. The previous earliest figure occurred on August 3, 2012 when Arctic sea ice extent was 5.911 million square kilometers.

During the natural climate cycles of the past 2,000 years, the timing of peak cold and warm periods (top 51 years) during each cycle differed globally. This time, the ongoing current warm period is starkly different. Instead, the timing of the peak warming (so far, as the warming is continuing) is astonishingly uniform. This suggests an outcome (impact of growing greenhouse gas forcing) that has largely overwhelmed "regionally specific mechanisms." A newly published paper explains: In contrast to the spatial heterogeneity of the preindustrial era, the highest probability for peak warming over the entire Common Era (Fig. 3c) is found in the late twentieth century almost everywhere (98% of global surface area), except for Antarctica, where contemporary warming has not yet been observed over the entire continent. Thus, even though the recent warming rates are not entirely homogeneous over the globe, with isolated areas showing little warming or even cooling, the climate system is now in a state of global temperature coherence that is unprecedented over the Common Era... Against this regional framing, perhaps our most striking result is the exceptional spatiotemporal coherence during the warming of the twentieth century. This result provides further evidence of the unprecedented nature of anthropogenic global warming in the context of the past 2,000 years. The above chart is from the referenced paper. The complete paper can be found at: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1401-2.epdf

It should be noted that even if temperatures are measured in whole degrees, averaging over the entire global network over yearly periods can result in values that involve hundredths, thousandths, etc. In any case, the January-June 2019 vs. January-June 1998 average was nearly 0.3 degrees C.

I believe we have a shot during the second half of August into the start of September.

Yes. London’s temperature peaked at 100 at Heathrow Airport.