New paper finds Arctic sea ice strongly linked to varying storm activity

Warmists often claim changes in Arctic sea ice are a consequence of allegedly-anthropogenic global warming. However, a paper published today in the Journal of Geophysical Research finds that "dramatic interannual changes" in Arctic sea ice extent are due to varying storm activity in the months of May-July, which impacts "cloud cover and ice motion, and consequently sea ice melt." The authors find fewer cyclones in the Arctic Ocean "appear to favor a low sea ice area at the end of the melt season." Thus, the alleged connection between AGW and Arctic sea ice extent becomes all the more elusive.

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 116, D15105, 10 PP., 2011

Dramatic interannual changes of perennial Arctic sea ice linked to abnormal summer storm activity 

Key Points:

Interannual changes of Arctic sea ice are related to varying storm activity
Fewer summer storms favor low sea ice at the end of the melt season
Storms impact the cloud cover and ice motion, and consequently sea ice melt

James A. Screen et al

The perennial (September) Arctic sea ice cover exhibits large interannual variability, with changes of over a million square kilometers from one year to the next. Here we explore the role of changes in Arctic cyclone activity, and related factors, in driving these pronounced year-to-year changes in perennial sea ice cover. Strong relationships are revealed between the September sea ice changes and the number of cyclones in the preceding late spring and early summer. In particular, fewer cyclones over the central Arctic Ocean during the months of May, June, and July appear to favor a low sea ice area at the end of the melt season. Years with large losses of sea ice are characterized by abnormal cyclone distributions and tracks: they lack the normal maximum in cyclone activity over the central Arctic Ocean, and cyclones that track from Eurasia into the central Arctic are largely absent. Fewer storms are associated with above-average mean sea level pressure, strengthened anticyclonic winds, an intensification of the transpolar drift stream, and reduced cloud cover, all of which favor ice melt. It is also shown that a strengthening of the central Arctic cyclone maximum helps preserve the ice cover, although the association is weaker than that between low cyclone activity and reduced sea ice. The results suggest that changes in cyclone occurrence during late spring and early summer have preconditioning effects on the sea ice cover and exert a strong influence on the amount of sea ice that survives the melt season.

New paper finds lows of Arctic sea ice in 2007 and 2012 were due to storms

A new paper published in The Cryosphere finds that the 2 recent lows in Arctic sea ice over the past decade during 2007 and 2012 were strongly related to storm activity, rather than a long-term effect of climate change. According to the authors, "Strong summer storms on the Siberian side of the Arctic Ocean may have been important contributions to the recent [Arctic sea ice minimums] in 2007 and 2012." Arctic sea ice strongly rebounded in 2013 by up to 78% in comparison to 2012, suggesting the 2007 and 2012 lows were just natural variation. 

The paper adds to many other peer-reviewed publications finding Arctic sea ice extent is due to natural variability from winds and storms, not AGW.

The Arctic sea ice minimums in 2007 [purple] and 2012 [orange] were strongly related to storm activity, not AGW.

The Cryosphere, 8, 303-317, 2014 www.the-cryosphere.net/8/303/2014/ doi:10.5194/tc-8-303-2014 Cyclone impact on sea ice in the central Arctic Ocean: a statistical study

A. Kriegsmann^1,* and B. Brümmer^1
1Meteorological Institute, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
^*now at: Climate Service Center, Hamburg, Germany
Abstract. This study investigates the impact of cyclones on the Arctic Ocean sea ice for the first time in a statistical manner. We apply the coupled ice–ocean model NAOSIM which is forced by the ECMWF analyses for the period 2006–2008. Cyclone position and radius detected in the ECMWF data are used to extract fields of wind, ice drift, and concentration from the ice–ocean model. Composite fields around the cyclone centre are calculated for different cyclone intensities, the four seasons, and different sub-regions of the Arctic Ocean. In total about 3500 cyclone events are analyzed. In general, cyclones reduce the ice concentration in the order of a few percent increasing towards the cyclone centre. This is confirmed by independent AMSR-E satellite data. The reduction increases with cyclone intensity and is most pronounced in summer and on the Siberian side of the Arctic Ocean. For the Arctic ice cover the cumulative impact of cyclones has climatologic consequences. In winter, the cyclone-induced openings refreeze so that the ice mass is increased. In summer, the openings remain open and the ice melt is accelerated via the positive albedo feedback. Strong summer storms on the Siberian side of the Arctic Ocean may have been important contributions to the recent ice extent minima in 2007 and 2012.

Observations contradict claim 2007 Arctic sea ice extent was due to greenhouse gases

A new paper published in Earth Interactions finds that satellite observations show the low Arctic sea ice extent of 2007 was associated with a large increase in solar surface radiation and a decrease in infrared radiation from greenhouse gases from 2006 and 2007. Thus, the observations contradict AGW alarmist claims that the 2007 low Arctic sea ice extent was related to man-made greenhouse gases, and instead suggests natural factors such as solar surface radiation [modulated by clouds] were responsible.

Other natural phenomena including ocean oscillations, Arctic cloud cover, winds and storms, and solar activity have been linked to changes in Arctic sea ice extent, not man-made CO2. 

Since the 2007 low, Arctic sea ice has greatly recovered to the second highest extent in a decade, and the highest in nine years, again indicating natural variability, not CO2, is the control knob of Arctic sea ice. At the unmentionable South Pole, Antarctic sea ice extents have blown through the highest recorded levels ever for each of the past 5 years, again indicating natural variability, not CO2, is the control knob of polar sea ice.

The authors also find major problems in the "reanalysis" data of downwelling summertime shortwave [solar] radiation and downwelling summertime longwave radiation [IR from greenhouse gases] in comparison to the actual satellite observations, finding,

"large spreads, particularly for downwelling shortwave radiation. In many cases, the differences in significant trends between the 5 reanalysis products are comparable to the estimated trend within a particular product. These discrepancies make it difficult to establish a consensus on likely changes occurring in the Arctic solely based on results from reanalyses fields." 

and that comparing "observations against these reanalysis products present an ambiguity.
Thus, agreement within reanalysis fields needs to be further checked against observations to assess possible biases common to all [reanalysis] products."

In other words, believe the direct satellite observations, but not the data reanalysis "products." And the direct satellite observations show the opposite of what AGW alarmists claim is responsible for Arctic sea ice changes [which is a decrease, not increase of downwelling IR associated with the 2007 low].

Earth Interactions 2014 ; e-View

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/EI-D-14-0012.1

An Evaluation of Surface Atmospheric Changes over the Arctic Ocean for 2000-09 Using Recent Reanalyses

Ayan H. Chaudhuri

Atmospheric and Environmental Research Inc, 131 Hartwell Ave, Lexington MA 02421. Email:achaudhu@aer.com; Phone: 781-761-2382

Rui M. Ponte

Atmospheric and Environmental Research Inc, 131 Hartwell Ave, Lexington MA 02421. Email: rponte@aer.com; Phone: 781-761-2231

Abstract

We examine 5 recent reanalysis products (CFSR, MERRA, JRA-25, ERA-Interim and ASR) for (1) trends in near-surface radiation fluxes, air temperature and humidity, which are important indicators of changes within the Arctic Ocean and also influence sea-ice and ocean conditions, and (2) fidelity of these atmospheric fields and effects for an extreme event, namely the 2007 ice retreat. An analysis of trends over the Arctic for the past decade (2000-2009) shows that reanalysis solutions have large spreads, particularly for downwelling shortwave radiation. In many cases, the differences in significant trends between the 5 reanalysis products are comparable to the estimated trend within a particular product. These discrepancies make it difficult to establish a consensus on likely changes occurring in the Arctic solely based on results from reanalyses fields. Regarding the 2007 ice retreat event, comparisons with remotely-sensed estimates of downwelling radiation observations against these reanalysis products present an ambiguity. Remotely-sensed observations from a study cited herewith suggest a large increase in downwelling summertime shortwave [solar] radiation and decrease in downwelling summertime longwave [greenhouse gas] radiation from 2006 and 2007. On the contrary, the reanalysis products show only small gains in summertime shortwave radiation, if any, however all the products show increases in downwelling longwave radiation. Thus, agreement within reanalysis fields needs to be further checked against observations to assess possible biases common to all [reanalysis] products.

Why media hype on AGW shifting the jet stream is "premature"

Science 20 February 2015: 

Vol. 347 no. 6224 pp. 818-821 

DOI: 10.1126/science.347.6224.818

• Feature

Arctic impact

Weather experts were on high alert in December 2009. A region of high pressure had settled over Greenland, forming a roadblock in the path of the circumpolar jet stream. Thwarted, the jet stream meandered, bending southward into a large loop and shunting cold Arctic air toward the center of the United States. Meteorologists were familiar with this “Greenland block.” It was a climate pattern historically favorable for winter storms—and as if on cue, record snowfalls blanketed the eastern United States over the next few months.

Against the backdrop of “Snowmageddon” and other powerful winter storms that have blasted the United States, Europe, and Asia in the past few years, a different kind of tempest has been swirling within the Arctic science community. Its core is a flurry of recent research proposing that such extreme weather events in the midlatitudes are linked through the atmosphere with the effects of rapid climate change in the Arctic, such as dwindling sea ice. The idea has galvanized the public and even caught the attention of the White House. But some Arctic researchers say the data don't support it or that the jury is at least still out. Even some of its proponents agree that the media hype is premature.

Now, scientists are starting to tackle the issue in earnest. Atmospheric links between the poles and midlatitudes are becoming a marquee topic at Arctic-related conferences. Last December alone it drew researchers to a workshop in Barcelona, Spain, and a dedicated session at the annual American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco, California. “A lot of scientists have worked individually, in isolation, pursuing their own ideas,” says Judah Cohen, a climate scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge—one of several researchers who hope that a coordinated effort will measure the reach of the north.

THE IDEA THAT THE ARCTIC could have a regional, even hemisphere-scale impact on the atmosphere represents a paradigm shift for climate scientists. “When I was in grad school, [the thinking was that] the tropics are everything,” Cohen says. “The tropics, the ocean—that was it, there was no other player.”

The Arctic Ocean, after all, is small and cold; the tropical Pacific Ocean is vast and, of course, warmer. To influence the atmosphere on a global scale, very large amounts of heat and moisture must flow from ocean to air. That heat engine is huge in the Pacific and powers the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the planet's dominant interannual climate pattern. ENSO also has a helpful supply chain: Even as heat escapes from the eastern tropical Pacific to the atmosphere, currents flowing in from the western tropical Pacific provide a fresh supply.

But there is a new kind of engine forming in the Arctic. The rapid loss of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean due to global warming—the area of summer ice has shrunk more than 11% per decade since 1979—has created an expanse of dark open water newly available to absorb the sun's energy. This extra energy input and the corresponding flux of moisture and heat to the Arctic atmosphere are helping drive a strong local positive feedback to global warming, called Arctic amplification. As a result, surface temperatures are rising twice as fast in the Arctic as at lower latitudes.

View larger version:

• In this window
• In a new window

• Download PowerPoint Slide for Teaching

Heavy blizzards that paralyzed Central Europe in February 2012 may have been part of a larger pattern.

PHOTO: © BOGDAN CRISTEL/REUTERS/CORBIS

But is the loss of sea ice influencing more than just local warming? In 2012, climatologists Jennifer Francis of Rutgers University, New Brunswick, in New Jersey and Stephen Vavrus of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, proposed that Arctic amplification driven by sea ice loss could significantly affect midlatitude weather by slowing the jet stream (Science, 18 April 2014, p. 250). The mechanism they suggested was this: A faster warming Arctic means a reduced temperature gradient between the Arctic and midlatitudes, which in turn weakens west-to-east winds. The result is a slowdown of the jet stream, allowing it to meander more and form elongated waves (called Rossby or planetary waves) that jut to the north or south. Among other effects, Francis and Vavrus proposed, the deep waves in the jet stream could enable a winter storm to push farther south and then linger in one location, possibly dumping record amounts of snow.

A handful of newer studies support one key part of this hypothesis: that large-amplitude Rossby waves in the jet stream are indeed linked, statistically, to extreme weather in the midlatitudes. For example, Vladimir Petoukhov of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany and colleagues in 2013 correlated summer heat waves in Europe with instances of slow-moving, high-amplitude Rossby waves. And last year, James Screen, a climate modeler at the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom, and Ian Simmonds of the University of Melbourne in Australia co-authored a paper that reported a strong statistical correlation between amplified, slow Rossby waves and months from 1979 to 2012 with extreme weather events. More waviness, they found, made the western United States more susceptible to heat waves and the eastern United States to extreme cold.

But other parts of the hypothesis remain controversial—particularly the part of the chain that links these changes to Arctic amplification. Some evidence supports Francis and Vavrus's idea that a decreasing temperature gradient between the midlatitudes and the Arctic might slow the jet stream and make it wavier.

Yet climate dynamicist Elizabeth Barnes of Colorado State University, Fort Collins, reported in 2013 that she could find no uptick in the instances of Rossby waves in the last couple of decades, the period encompassing extreme sea ice loss and Arctic warming. And in a 2013 study, Screen and Simmonds found no statistically significant changes in these waves from 1979 to 2011, despite a declining north-south temperature gradient.

Some theorists have proposed another mechanism by which dwindling sea ice could shape midlatitude weather: by forcing changes in a multiyear atmospheric cycle called the Arctic Oscillation. In a positive Arctic Oscillation phase, the jet stream is strong and less wavy, and cold air stays in the Arctic. In a negative phase, the jet stream is weaker and wavier, and the cold air spills southward. Some analyses suggest that in the last few decades the Arctic Oscillation has increasingly been in a negative phase, which might drive not just storminess but also longer term cooling in the midlatitudes.

But evidence that the retreat of sea ice has influenced the Arctic Oscillation is scarce. “Since any Arctic effect [on the jet stream] is buried in large random climate [variations], and the record is short,” such a link is simply impossible to prove at the moment, says James Overland, an oceanographer at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, Washington.

FRANCIS ACKNOWLEDGES the lingering uncertainty about how the changes in the Arctic could drive bouts of extreme weather farther south. But, she says, as the mystery attracts more researchers, they are finding clues. Last year, climate scientist Masato Mori of the University of Tokyo and colleagues modeled how sea ice loss in the Barents and Kara seas north of Russia could increase blocking events—and the resulting severe winters—over Eurasia. And Baek-Min Kim of the Korea Polar Research Institute in Incheon and colleagues showed in a model how changes in sea ice loss in the Barents and Kara seas could set off a chain of events that produced a negative phase of the Arctic Oscillation.

Another paper published last year, this one by Kazutoshi Sato of the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology in Yokosuka and colleagues, suggests that ice loss in the Barents Sea and cold Eurasian winters are actually part of an even bigger climate pattern originating in the North Atlantic Gulf Stream. Recent observations show that the current is pushing warm water farther to the north. That shift, Sato and his colleagues found, may produce planetary waves that both warm the Barents Sea and cause a cold anomaly over Eurasia.

“That's a pretty robust linkage there,” Francis says. “It's not going to happen every single year, but it's pretty convincing that there are real physical mechanisms disrupting the jet stream.”

IT'S TOO EARLY TO TAKE SIDES about whether the Arctic influence is real, many researchers say. Last December's Barcelona workshop grappled with that “two camps” misconception, Screen says. “I don't like to frame it like that,” he says. “The majority [of people] are somewhere in the middle.” In fact, a few are in an entirely different camp: blaming changes in Eurasian snow cover, rather than the retreat of Arctic ice, for the midlatitude weather extremes (see sidebar, p. 821).

“We have records of sea ice only going back 30 years, with dramatic losses in the last decade or so,” Screen says. A statistical analysis of that brief period of observations, he says, is unlikely to settle the debate. Instead, scientists need to turn to other sources of knowledge, such as models and theory, “to better understand what we might be seeing in the observations.”

Overland, for his part, calls this the “preconsensus period.” He says meetings such as the workshop in Barcelona (which both he and Screen attended) have shown encouraging signs of progress. For one, researchers plagued by inconsistent definitions of terms such as waviness are finally getting a chance to straighten things out. And he felt that the Barcelona workshop did come to at least one consensus: that if there are links between Arctic amplification and midlatitude weather, they're amplifications of already existing and known climate patterns—Greenland blocking and a region of persistent high pressure called the Siberian high—so there's no need to build brand-new physics into the models.

SORTING OUT THOSE “known knowns” is exactly what researchers should be doing, Barnes says. “In my mind, we've put the cart before the horse a bit” by focusing on weather extremes, she says. “We're missing the theory, the dynamics, the mechanistic understanding.” She suggests that the community go back to basics to determine how Arctic warming could influence the jet stream dynamics. “It's certainly not sexy like telling you that we're going to have more extreme cold events—but in terms of the science, it's the way forward.”

One key to success, she says, is teasing out the effects of the Arctic on the jet stream from those of other atmospheric powerhouses, such as the chaotic atmospheric flow at midlatitudes and the ENSO pattern in the tropics. Indeed, researchers need to look beyond the potential impacts of Arctic change, Overland says, and aim for a better picture of atmospheric dynamics as a whole.

“We're just getting into that time where people get interested,” Barnes says. “If you look over the literature in the last 10 years, there's a lot of focus over how tropical warming will influence the jet stream, but not a lot on how Arctic warming will influence it. As a community our eyes were turned to the south, and now we're looking north. That, to me, is what's exciting.”

Climate models robustly predicted the opposite of what has caused the record cold US weather

An article published today "Winter weirdness: Is Arctic warming to blame?" notes "this winter has brought unseasonable warmth to Alaska, frigid temperatures to much of the Eastern US, and more drought to California. The jury is still out on whether a warmer Arctic is behind the extreme weather." "When persistent weather patterns have brought drought or heat waves or repeated invasions of cold air to usually mild locations in winter, these links to the Arctic have become a go-to explanation among many commentators and policymakers."

But is there any credibility to such claims?

The author interviews several climate scientists active in this debate including Dr. Elizabeth Barnes, who has previously debunked claims that 'Arctic amplification' causes extreme weather, as well as dueling hyper-alarmist Jennifer Francis, and others, demonstrating there is trace to no credible scientific evidence supporting such claims.

Of particular note, the article points out that climate models actually predicted the opposite pattern to occur with the jet stream drawn north, with fewer jet stream dips, and no change in jet stream blocking:

"These [modeling] studies suggest that a warming Arctic will draw the jet stream's average track north. Blocking patterns will decrease. Moreover, the models indicate no "robust" decrease in the jet stream's speed, notes Elizabeth Barnes, a climate scientist at Colorado State University in Fort Collins who focuses on the jet stream's behavior and the factors affecting it. To be sure, the models could be wrong, she acknowledges. But when different teams with different models converge on the same answer, that inspires more confidence in the result."

Interesting how climate fraudsters like Michael Mann claim the opposite of what the observational evidence shows & climate models predict. It's all for the cause

Furthermore, the article notes "Long-term swings in Atlantic sea-surface temperatures, known as the [natural] Atlantic multidecadal oscillation, appear to have the same effect on the jet stream's meanders and blocking patterns that Arctic warming and sea ice are purported to have.

When the AMO enters its warm phase – its condition since the 1990s – the jet stream tends to weaken and buckle. Blocking patterns increase, and colder temperatures prevail at mid-latitudes.

"This also supports the colder winters of recent years," Magnusdottir says, adding that the results seem robust, since they show up in real-world data as well as in computer simulations."

Winter weirdness: Is Arctic warming to blame?

This winter has brought unseasonable warmth to Alaska, frigid temperatures to much of the Eastern US, and more drought to California. The jury is still out on whether a warmer Arctic is behind the extreme weather.

By Pete Spotts, Staff writer / February 9, 2014  CSMonitor.com

Ice from her breath forms around the face of a woman in Minneapolis. Temperatures plunged in early January as the polar vortex enveloped much of the Eastern US.

For Alaskans who have basked in record warmth, Atlantans who abandoned cars during a January snowstorm, or Californians enduring drought, this winter's extremes have been nothing if not memorable.

Drought or unusual warmth is in sync with the effects that climate scientists expect from global warming. But what about wintertime invasions of Arctic air into the US Deep South or into China, where, a new study indicates, record cold events became more frequent over the past 10 to 20 years?

For some climate scientists, January's extremes and the atmospheric patterns that nurtured and sustained them are fresh bits of information to apply to these intriguing questions: Has global warming's effect on the Arctic set the stage for persistent weather patterns that lead to extremes? If so, is the decline in Arctic sea ice the stage manager for the wintry events?

Nearly two years ago, two researchers identified atmospheric features that appear to tie a warming Arctic to mid-latitude weather extremes. Since then, when persistent weather patterns have brought drought or heat waves or repeated invasions of cold air to usually mild locations in winter, these links to the Arctic have become a go-to explanation among many commentators and policymakers.

Researchers working on the issue, however, caution that while they are uncovering intriguing hints of this tie-in,Ice from her breath forms around the face of a woman in Minneapolis. Temperatures plunged in early January as the polar vortex enveloped much of the Eastern US.

Nor is it merely an arcane debating point. If the proposition holds up, in principle it could help improve seasonal forecasts for temperature and precipitation.

"That would have huge economic implications," says Cecilia Bitz, a climate scientist at the University of Washington in Seattle who specializes in the role that Arctic sea ice plays in the climate system.

The state of this science today is comparable to that of tropical cyclones and global warming following hurricane Katrina in 2005, suggests Jennifer Francis, an atmospheric scientist at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J. For those phenomena, dueling studies appeared, and evidence for an existing fingerprint of global warming on patterns of tropical cyclone activity was equivocal.[actually not, cyclone activity is at record low levels and climate models predict decreased cyclone activity from global warming]

"We are in the same situation," says Dr. Francis, who, along with colleague Stephen Vavrus at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, published the hypothesis about Arctic links to weather extremes in the journal Geophysical Research Letters in March 2012.

The duo starts by noting that warming in the Arctic has occurred at two to three times the pace of warming for the rest of the Northern Hemisphere, reducing the temperature difference between the Arctic and mid-latitudes. As the contrast shrinks, the jet stream slows.

The jet stream is a river of high-altitude winds that steers and spawns storms and in effect serves as an atmospheric boundary for cold Arctic air. A slower jet stream produces longer meanders, the pair says. This would bring cold air farther south and warm air farther north than otherwise would be the case.

At the same time, the two say, circulation patterns that block the migration of these meanders appear more frequently and persist. This would cause specific weather patterns to either creep along or dally for days to weeks.

Other researchers have connected a warming Arctic to weather extremes in specific regions. At a two-day workshop on the topic at the University of Maryland in College Park last September, climate scientist James Screen of the University of Exeter in England pointed to studies that link shrinking sea ice to cold winters in North America and Eurasia, wet summers in Europe, extreme rainfall in the Mediterranean, and the behavior of the East Asian monsoon.

But Dr. Screen also cautioned against claiming too much for the connections – at least at this point. An apparent link doesn't say much about cause and effect, he and others noted.

The case for the link between the shrinking extent of Arctic sea ice and cold winters in Eurasia was the strongest, he offered. Even here, however, the influence is barely detectable and often not statistically significant.

The caution that he and others express centers in no small part on the radically different effects that Francis and Dr. Vavrus see compared with a decade's worth of modeling studies.

These studies suggest that a warming Arctic will draw the jet stream's average track north. Blocking patterns will decrease. Moreover, the models indicate no "robust" decrease in the jet stream's speed, notes Elizabeth Barnes, a climate scientist at Colorado State University in Fort Collins who focuses on the jet stream's behavior and the factors affecting it.

To be sure, the models could be wrong, she acknowledges. But when different teams with different models converge on the same answer, that inspires more confidence in the result.
The scientists' caution also hinges on the relatively short time that the Arctic has undergone rapid warming, Francis adds, noting that it has occurred only in the past 10 or 15 years. Model projections can help, but "it's going to take maybe another decade" before any signs of an Arctic influence can be confidently detected, she says.

Francis and colleagues also have looked specifically at sea ice loss and winter weather extremes, finding a link.

In effect, the ever-shrinking amount of sea ice in the fall makes more moisture available for snow. Increased snowfall over the North American or Eurasian Arctic earlier in the fall-winter season cools the air more quickly than a later snowfall would.

This more southerly mass of cold air affects pressure patterns in ways that boost the likelihood of blocking patterns and cold snaps.

This idea appears to draw some support from modeling work that was published last August and conducted by Yannick Peings and Gudrun Magnusdottir of the University of California, Irvine.

When they plugged the average Arctic sea ice decline between 2007 and 2012 into the model, it yielded cold conditions at mid-latitudes, mainly over Asia. The model also produced some increase in the depth of the jet stream's meanders, although the statistical significance was small. All this tended to take place in February.

But by 2090, according to their model projection, the Arctic warmed so much that wintertime cold extremes at mid-latitudes remained only as frequent as they were in 2010.

Further work by Dr. Magnusdottir and colleagues has added another wrinkle. Long-term swings in Atlantic sea-surface temperatures, known as the [natural] Atlantic multidecadal oscillation, appear to have the same effect on the jet stream's meanders and blocking patterns that Arctic warming and sea ice are purported to have.

When the AMO enters its warm phase – its condition since the 1990s – the jet stream tends to weaken and buckle. Blocking patterns increase, and colder temperatures prevail at mid-latitudes.

"This also supports the colder winters of recent years," Magnusdottir says, adding that the results seem robust, since they show up in real-world data as well as in computer simulations.
Others looking for predicted circulation patterns have a hard time finding anything. In a study published last month in Geophysical Research Letters, Dr. Barnes of Colorado State and colleagues used three independent approaches to identifying blocking patterns in climate data. They reported finding trends in isolated regions and at specific periods, but no trend was significant and common to all three approaches.

"Blocking is so variable from year to year that there's no evidence that anything out of the ordinary is occurring," Barnes says. Nor has she found trends in changes to the jet stream's meanders or travel time around the hemisphere.

Does this mean that Francis and Vavrus are wrong? "Not at all," Barnes says. [For more on Francis & Barnes see Dr. Curry's post here]

The evidence may be masked for now by the "noise" of natural variability. And other factors affect the jet stream. Perhaps "you have a tug of war going on" between the influence of sea ice and something else, Barnes says.

For her part, Francis acknowledges that for now, several of the links tying Arctic warming to patterns that foster bouts of extreme weather are still weak. On the other hand, no one is finding that the meanders in the jet stream are getting any smaller, she adds.

"Everybody's seeing a hint that this is happening," she says, "but we can't say it's definitely happening yet."

Related:

Scientific workshop concludes there is no proof of a link between Arctic climate change and the polar jet stream

New paper debunks claims that 'Arctic amplification' causes extreme weather

Papers finding climate models are unable to simulate the Polar Vortex

Record cold from global warming causing 'polar vortex' debunked

New paper relates natural 60 year climate cycle to the effects of solar activity and cosmic rays

'Polar vortex' that caused record cold is related to solar activity, not man-made CO2

Freezing Is the New Warming

The Polar Vortex bankrupts renewable energy company

New consensus rediscovers 'polar vortex' jet stream dips are due to global cooling

Does Global Warming Theory Predict Record Cold?
January 6th, 2014 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D. 

NO.

Is global warming causing the polar vortex?

Posted on January 7, 2014 | 325 Comments

by Judith Curry In a word, no.

JC message to Jennifer Francis:  I’ve found that your credibility is reduced and your own motivations are questioned when you attack the motives of another scientist [Barnes], particularly a young scientist without any apparent agenda beyond doing good science and advancing her academic career.  The high ground is a much better place to be, and not just in a hurricane.

Arctic sea ice and extreme weather

Freezing Is the New Warming

Freezing Is the New Warming

By Robert Tracinski - January 13, 2014 Real Clear Politics

This is looking like another bad year for global warming.

The year began with the news that an Australian "climate researcher" leading a tourist expedition to Antarctica got his ship trapped in the sea ice. Which is embarrassing, because the purpose of his expedition was to study the melting of sea ice supposedly caused by 20th-century global warming. The current expedition was meant to retrace the route Douglas Mawson took in 1912—but they were stopped 70 kilometers short of where Mawson landed. So they needed to have an icebreaker ship sent to rescue them. Then the icebreaker got caught in the ice, and someone had to rescue the rescuers. You can't make this stuff up.

The award for best headline on this story goes to Andrew Bolt, "Warmists Trapped by Irony."
(Second prize goes to Mark Steyn for this line: "On Douglas Mawson's original voyage, he and his surviving comrade wound up having to eat their dogs. I'm not sure there were any on this expedition, so they'd probably have to make do with the Guardian reporters.")

More widely, this is yet another embarrassment for the global warming theory as a whole. Melting ice at the poles, and particularly at the South Pole, is necessary to produce the rising sea levels which are supposed to be among the catastrophic consequences of global warming. So if the ice is still so thick they're getting caught in it, it's bad PR for their theory.

Even worse PR for global warming is the fact that North America just spent a week getting sucked into a "polar vortex" that brought temperatures down to record lows not seen in decades—precisely the kind of weather the warmthers told us we shouldn't be having.

Of course, we will be given the usual reminders that "weather isn't climate," that there is a difference between the short-term temperatures of any given day, month, or year, and the long-term trend. But the warmthers lost all credibility on this issue back in the late 1990s, when they touted every warm summer, every heat wave, and every big hurricane as proof that global warming was finally here. Apparently, weather is climate, but only when it's hot outside.

More to the point, the actual long-term temperature trend is that the globe isn't warming and hasn't been for more than 15 years. Bouts of record-cold temperatures in the midst of a claimed warming are merely reminders of this fact.

In fact, the lack of warming is forcing some defenders of the creed to draft cold weather itself as proof of warming.

Bryan Walsh, the science writer for Time magazine, explains:

"[N]ot only does the cold spell not disprove climate change, it may well be that global warming could be making the occasional bout of extreme cold weather in the US even more likely. Right now much of the U.S. is in the grip of a polar vortex, which is pretty much what it sounds like: a whirlwind of extremely cold, extremely dense air that forms near the poles. Usually the fast winds in the vortex—which can top 100 mph (161 k/h)—keep that cold air locked up in the Arctic. But when the winds weaken, the vortex can begin to wobble like a drunk on his fourth martini, and the Arctic air can escape and spill southward, bringing Arctic weather with it. In this case, nearly the entire polar vortex has tumbled southward, leading to record-breaking cold."

Never mind that Time said the opposite decades ago, when the polar vortex was cited as evidence of global cooling.

The important thing is the arbitrariness of it all. The warmthers have spent a decade shifting the goalposts, changing the name of their supposed catastrophe from global warming to climate change and most recently to "global weirding," for which any extreme weather event can be drafted as evidence. Which is even more convenient because extreme weather events—storms, hurricanes, heat waves, cold snaps, droughts—are not actually "weird." They are constantly happening somewhere in the world as part of the normal variation of weather and climate.

So if any weather event can be drafted as evidence for their theory, why not go all the way and cite cold weather as evidence of warming? But then notice this paragraph from Walsh's Time report, where he gets around to telling us the fine print of the scientific disclaimers.

"Still, this research is fairly preliminary, in part because extreme Arctic sea ice loss is a fairly recent phenomenon, so scientists don't have the long data sets they need to draw more robust conclusions about the interaction between Arctic warming and cold snaps. In fact, the most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that it was likely that the jet stream would shift towards the north as the climate warmed, and that the polar vortex would actually contract....

"And while a muddle like that would seem to make the science less rather than more reliable, it's actually one more bit of proof that climate change is real."

Translation: We have no idea what's happening and can't really explain anything about the climate or the weather—but that's just more proof that we're right!

Or how about that Antarctic ice? The leader of the ice-bound Antarctic expedition had previously offered this theory about the increase in sea ice near the South Pole.

"Ultimately, global warming covers a vast array of different responses by our planet. And one of the fascinating things that we're seeing is suggestions that large parts of the oceans off East Antarctica are actually getting fresher. And yet you've got this expanding sea ice, and one of the ideas we're testing out here is this idea that when you're melting the sea ice around the East Antarctic coastal fringes, at depth—not from air temperature but from warmer oceans—what you're doing is you're putting that fresh water from the Antarctic ice sheets into the oceans. It's lighter, it's less dense than salt water, so it floats to the surface relatively, and then it's more vulnerable to freezing. And hence you get an expansion of sea ice cover. So that's one idea that we're testing at the moment."

So sea water is freezing because it is melting.

Note that there is never any pause to acknowledge that maybe scientists should investigate the hypothesis that warming isn't as big or inevitable as they have predicted. No, it's on to the next ad hoc rationalization. That's the basic pattern: an unproven theory reinforces itself in the face of contradictory evidence by generating additional unproven theories.

What interests me is how global warming is degrading, in plain sight, into a textbook case of pseudoscience—all while remaining an unassailable article of belief among those who think of themselves as pro-science.

One of the famous characteristics of pseudo-science is that it is "unfalsifiable." That is, the theory is constructed in such a way that there is no evidence that could possibly refute it. The classic example is Freudian psychoanalysis, which tells you that you have an Oedipus Complex, and if you deny it, that's just proof that you're repressing it. Or take the creationist theory that God created the world to appear as if it was older than it really is. So if we find evidence that the dinosaurs lived 100 million years before the events of the Bible, that's just because God planted the evidence there. Try refuting that one!

Or try refuting global warming. Temperatures have stopped warming for more than a decade? That's just a temporary "pause" in the warming that we just know is going to come roaring back any day now. Antarctic ice is growing? That's actually caused by the melting of ice, don't you know. A vicious cold snap that sets record low temperatures? That's just because the North Pole is actually warming. So if the winter is warm, that's global warming, but if the winter is cold, that's global warming, too. If sea ice is disappearing, that's global warming, but if sea ice is increasing, that's global warming.

Now we can see what they mean when the warmthers say that global warming is supported by an ironclad scientific consensus. The theory is so irrefutable that it's unfalsifiable!

Which is to say that it has become a cognitive spaghetti bowl full of ad hoc rationalizations, rather than a genuine scientific hypothesis. 

Robert Tracinski is editor of The Tracinski Letter and a contributor to RealClearMarkets.

from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/01/13/freezing_is_the_new_warming_121202.html

Time Mag struggles to explain why Europe's record cold is natural & 'climate change not (entirely) to blame'

The usual warmist pathetic mantra is employed:

1. If there's record cold, it's due to a confluence of natural circulation patterns and weather

2. If there's heat, it's due to man-made climate change

3. Even if there's record cold, it's really also due to man-made climate change, because you see, melting ice "releases huge amounts of heat." Never mind that it's the other way around: heat is absorbed by the phase change of solid ice melting to liquid water. Hence, when ice cubes melt in my Mai Tai, it doesn't boil.

Europe's Deep Freeze: Why Climate Change Is Not (Entirely) to Blame

By Bryan Walsh TIME.com 2/14/12

Back at the beginning of January, I wrote that this season was already shaping up to be season that winter forgot in the U.S. About a month later, that prediction is coming true. The average temperature in the continental U.S. in January was 5.5°F above the 20th century norm, and snow was almost nonexistent — the National Weather Service reported that 157 out of 166 American cities had below-average amounts of the white stuff. The groundhog Punxsutawney Phil may have predicted six more weeks of winter when he popped up from his hole on Feb. 2, but for most of the U.S. winter never really began — and the unusually mild days seemed like a coming attraction for global warming.

Across the Atlantic, much of Europe is suffering through a winter of historic — and deadly — proportions. Over 600 people have died from the intense cold that has gripped the continent over the past few weeks, with the most severe toll recorded in Eastern Europe. Over 5,000 Russians have suffered from hypothermia or frostbite while the country has seen 20 days of unusually cold weather when temperatures fell 13°F to 25°F below normal and Moscow on Feb. 13 endured temperatures of -4°F. (It could be worse though — temperatures in the northern Russian city of Toko fell to -63°F.) In Central Europe, the commercially vital Danube River froze for hundreds of miles, from Austria to its mouth in the Black Sea, forcing officials to take chain saws to the ice. Things are so bad in Hungary that the central bank has been compressing billions of old notes into briquettes that can be burned for heat. If the climate's still warming — and it is — word didn't get to Europe. (See photos of Europe gripped by a deadly cold.)

So how can two parts of the world be experiencing such radically different winters? It's not climate change — or at least, mostly not. The weather pattern that's bringing all of that frigid air to Europe — and holding it in place — is largely due to a naturally occurring climatic pattern called the Arctic Oscillation (AO), which describes how air pressure is distributed over the Arctic regions and the mid-latitudes of the northern hemisphere. The pattern comes in two phases: a negative one where there is high air pressure over the North Pole and low pressure at the mid-latitudes, and a positive phase when the pressure systems has reversed. Essentially, the AO describes how the winds are blowing — and as the AO changes, it can bring warmer or colder wintertime weather to the U.S. and Europe.

At the start of winter, the AO was in a positive phase, which kept cold Arctic air from bleeding south. That helps explain why temperatures were so warm in January in the U.S. — the cold never had a chance to make it very far south. But over the past several weeks the AO turned negative, which moved the jet stream south and brought extreme cold weather to Europe and much of Asia. The effect was amplified by a strong and persistent high-pressure system that has remained stuck across Russia, which brings more cold Siberian air into Western Europe. The result has been a freezing February for most of the continent. (See photos of disappearing flows and glaciers.)

Why hasn't the shift to a negative AO brought cold weather back to most of the continental U.S.? Thank — or blame, if you like to ski — another pressure pattern, the North Atlantic Oscillation. The pattern has remained positive, which tends to keep winters in the eastern U.S. mild and wet. La Niña is still in effect as well, which tends to shift storms away from the American Southeast. That's one more reason why there's been so little snow this season in the U.S. — quite unlike the past two winters, when a strongly negative AO led to record-breaking Snowpocalypses.

The extreme cold in Europe — and the balminess in the U.S. — should serve as a reminder that as powerful as climate change is, our daily weather tends to be driven by short-term meteorological phenomena. But global warming isn't completely blameless — some scientists believe that the rapid melting of Arctic sea ice might actually be influencing winter-weather patterns in the northern hemisphere. As the cap of sea ice melts — and Arctic sea ice hit its second lowest level on record this summer — huge amounts of heat are released from the sea into the colder air above, causing the air to rise. That can alter air pressure between the Arctic and the mid-latitudes, changing wind patterns. It's the Arctic paradox: as the top of the world warms rapidly, it could actually create conditions that favor negative AO, which could in turn lead to cold winters in the U.S. and Europe even as the climate as a whole continues to heat up. (See "Rain Forest for Ransom.")

The precise effects of climate change and melting Arctic sea ice on winter weather is still far from clear, however. We'll need more research and more winters. But in the meantime, the human cost of Europe's deep freeze shouldn't be forgotten. Environmentalists write a lot about the need to adapt to a warmer future, but that still goes for extreme cold as well. It's little surprise that the death toll was highest in poorer nations like Ukraine and Romania, but there's still no reason that hundreds of people — most of them homeless — should be dying from the cold in present-day Europe. Even in a warmer world, winter can still be deadly.

Arctic Propaganda Emergency: New film showcases Arctic scaremongering

From a post today at Greg Laden's "science" propaganda blog:

Arctic Emergency: Scientists Speak

Cue the violins, which play continuously throughout this annoying propaganda film

Greg Laden's post about the "Arctic Emergency" propaganda film above says there's "lots to talk about here," so I posted this comment to start off the discussion, which was immediately deleted by Laden:

Here's something to discuss: Climate alarmists who don't even know their own field of science. 

Examples: 

CO2 causes extreme weather. Even IPCC disagrees 

Warming causes more jet stream dips. Jennifer Francis & Jeff Master's claims that warming causes more cold waves/polar vortex dips debunked: 

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/search?q=francis+jet 

Arctic will warm up to 16C - ridiculous claim refuted by paleoclimate evidence when CO2 levels were 15X higher & much more than even falsified climate model projections 

Why no mention of record high Antarctic sea ice? The unspeakable continent 

At 11:40 a climate scientist claims current CO2 levels are 800 ppm, just a little exaggerated by double. At that point I stopped watching this pathetic scaremongering propaganda. Almost every claim made was either false, or exaggerated, or without scientific evidence, or based upon climate model projections already falsified at 98%+ confidence levels. 

Meanwhile, the Arctic isn't listening to the alarmists and is staging a big recovery in sea ice this year, of course never mentioned in this new propaganda film, which instead claims Arctic sea ice loss is accelerating. Arctic sea ice is controlled by winds, storms, and ocean oscillations, not CO2. Other inconvenient unspeakable truths that for some reason aren't mentioned in the film include Antarctic sea ice at record high levels, and that global sea ice is above the mean.

The "Arctic Emergency" for 2014 sea ice 

Global sea ice above the mean

And Arctic temperatures have been well below the 1958-2002 mean temperatures for more than 100 consecutive days so far during this summer's melt season:ic.twitter.com/JFF7bg5XU

Not at all surprised Laden deleted the comment; climate alarmists are deathly afraid of debate with skeptics, and also are rarely known for telling the truth:

WUWT Search Results for: greg laden

Greg Laden Once Again Expresses Something Other Than Fact

Posted on December 20, 2013 by Bob Tisdale

In a recent visit to Steve Goddard’s blog, I came across the post Climate Scientists Always Trying To Rewrite Their Own History. It’s about a Tweet by Greg Laden, in which Laden states: .@LesJohnsonHrvat @SteveSGoddard @PeterGleick AGW Models do NOT …Continue reading →

Posted in Antarctic, Modeling, Sea ice | 90 Comments

An ethical challenge for Greg Laden – put your money where your mouth is

Posted on November 10, 2013 by Anthony Watts

We’ve had issues with Mr. Laden before, and being called on it hasn’t changed his bad behavior, hopefully he’ll learn something this time. This is a pretty simple black and white issue, so I’ll do it with bullet points. Yesterday, … Continue reading →

Posted in Announcements, Climate ugliness | Tagged Philippine Red Cross, ScienceBlogs | 234 Comments

Howler of the day – pure comedy gold from Greg Laden

Posted on March 28, 2013 by Anthony Watts

Note to Greg, Tom Nelson found it for me, no crystal ball or Oz powers needed.

Posted in Climate ugliness | Tagged Denialism, Winged Monkey, Wizard of Oz | 77 Comments

Reader poll – should I sue the pants off Greg Laden?

Posted on January 18, 2013 by Anthony Watts

UPDATES have been added below. I spent yesterday conferring with lawyers about the smear that Greg Laden made against me (see here) that was compounded by it being reprinted and Tweeted at Climate progress by Joe Romm. I think Romm … Continue reading →

Posted in Climate ugliness | Tagged ClimateProgress, False Light, Greg Laden | 471 Comments

Greg Laden, liar.

Posted on January 16, 2013 by Anthony Watts

UPDATE: Joe Romm, perhaps fearing he’d be drawn into a defamation lawsuit with Laden for not checking to see if Laden’s claims were true has made a rare update to ClimateProgress in my favor.  See below. UPDATE2: Reader poll on … Continue reading →

Posted in Climate ugliness | Tagged Greg Laden, Joseph J. Romm, Science Blogs, ScienceBlogs | 181 Comments

Greg Laden caves – makes nice with Tallbloke

Posted on December 20, 2011 by Anthony Watts

Tom Nelson points out that Laden seems to have caved to impending legal action. His essay now is a world apart from the angry and accusatory rhetoric of a few days ago. I think maybe Laden and the owners of … Continue reading →

Posted in Climate reconciliation, Climate ugliness | Tagged Christmas, Greg Laden, Jesus, Law, Legal Information,Roger Tattersall, Tattersall, Tom Nelson | 178 Comments

Quote of the week – beyond ‘noble cause corruption’

Posted on April 15, 2014 by Anthony Watts

A lot of popcorn is being consumed these days watching the wailing of the Lewandowsky lemming team as they furiously throw themselves over cyber-cliffs in support of a retracted paper that was doomed from the start by it’s own ethics … Continue reading →

Posted in Climate ugliness, Noble Cause Corruption, Quote of the Week, Stephan Lewandowsky | Tagged Frontiers in Psychology, Henry Markram, John Cook, Mike Marriott, noble cause corruption, Recursive Fury, Stephan Lewandowsky | 77 Comments

Reality is Absent from Michael Mann’s Activist Article on Typhoon Haiyan

Posted on November 18, 2013 by Bob Tisdale

UPDATE: I’ve corrected a few typos that carried over into two of the graphs and, at the end, I’ve added a model-data comparison of the sea surface temperature anomalies for the Indian and Pacific Ocean subset. # # # A … Continue reading →

Posted in hurricanes, Michael E. Mann | 89 Comments

Some historical perspectives on Typhoon Haiyan-Yolanda

Posted on November 11, 2013 by Anthony Watts

While we wait for wacky antagonist Greg Laden to make a decision on whether he’ll chip and and help the relief effort, here are some useful bits of information that help put this storm into the perspective of “worst ever” … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | 114 Comments

Super Typhoon Haiyan/Yolanda – another overhyped storm that didn’t match early reports

Posted on November 9, 2013 by Anthony Watts

NOTE: readers of this thread may be interested in this: An ethical challenge for Greg Laden – put your money where your mouth is ================================================================ Here is the sort of headlines we had Friday, for example this one from Huffington Post …Continue reading →

Posted in Alarmism | Tagged Andrew Freedman, Maximum sustained wind, Philippine, typhoon, Yolanda | 224 Comments

The Catastrophic AGW Memeplex; a cultural creature

Posted on November 2, 2013 by Anthony Watts

The hypothesis for a single, simple, scientific explanation underlying the entire complex social phenomenon of CAGW Guest essay by Andy West Whatever is happening in the great outdoors regarding actual climate, inside, truly inside, in the minds of men that …Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged CAGW, Memeplex | 281 Comments

I’m gobsmacked

Posted on July 30, 2013 by Anthony Watts

Andrew Montford at Bishop Hill writes: The Guardian has thrown all my preconceptions into disarray by printing an article about sceptics that is not only thoughtful, but is polite too! Sceptics such as Andrew Montford and Anthony Watts agree with the mainstream …Continue reading →

Posted in Climate News | Tagged Andrew Montford, Anthony Watts, Greg Laden, Guardian | 132 Comments

Peter Gleick Makes Progress… by Hoping People Die

Posted on July 18, 2013 by Anthony Watts

Post by Brandon Shollenberger Rhetoric in climate change debates has never been highbrow.  There’s lots of name calling, gotcha games and other petty behavior.  Still, there’s something about suggesting people you dislike should die that turns most people off.  That’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Climate ugliness | Tagged Ann Coulter, Greg Laden, Michael Mann, Peter Gleick, Rush Limbaugh, Twitter |126 Comments

The Gleick effect – proving there is no bad publicity

Posted on December 30, 2012 by Anthony Watts

Guest Post by Joe Bast In a December 28 post, blogger Greg Laden, a self-described “biological anthropologist and science communicator,” ranked The Heartland Institute’s efforts to expose global warming alarmism as one of the “top climate stories of 2012”. I …Continue reading →

Posted in Fakegate | Tagged climate change, Climate change denial, Global warming, Greg Laden, Heartland Institute, Peter Gleick, Ted Kaczynski | 185 Comments

The Gleick Tragedy

Posted on February 28, 2012 by Anthony Watts

The original Gleick Confesses thread was getting unwieldy with almost 1000 comments, so this one will serve in its place and will continue to be updated. New content on other topics will appear below. Satirical logo by our own charles … Continue reading →

Posted in Fakegate | Tagged Heartland Institute, Peter Gleick | 242 Comments

The Fakegate Timeline – from soup to nuts

Posted on February 28, 2012 by Anthony Watts

UPDATED: NEW TIMELINE FILES POSTED 2/29 3PM PST There have been a number of different people working on timelines recently. Reader A. Scott has contributed a complete and highly detailed timeline of the Gleick Keystonian Caper aka Fakegate. It is …Continue reading →

Posted in Fakegate | Tagged Breandan DeMelle, climate change, Climate Ethics, David Appell, DeMelle, Greg Laden,Peter Gleick, Richard Littlemore, thinkprogress | 85 Comments

The Heartland Institute Sends Legal Notices to Publishers of Faked and Stolen Documents

Posted on February 20, 2012 by Anthony Watts

From a Heartland media release: FEBRUARY 19 — The Heartland Institute has sent legal notices http://heartland.org/press-releases/2012/02/19/heartland-institute-sends-legal-notices-publishers-faked-and-stolen-docume  to numerous Web sites, blogs, and publications asking them to take down the stolen and forged documents and what it views as malicious and … Continue reading →

Posted in Fakegate | Tagged DeMelle, DeSmogBlog, Director of communications, Fake Memo, Greg Laden,Heartland Institute, Jim Lakely, ScienceBlogs | 201 Comments

UK police seize computers of skeptic blogger in England

Posted on December 23, 2011 by Anthony Watts

UPDATE: 12/21/11 4PM  -BBC covers Tallbloke, finally, Richard Black still silent-  Norfolk constabulary to share hand-off Climategate investigation, and  Greg Laden caves – see below Dec 14th -The first blogger to break the Climategate2 story has had a visit from …Continue reading →

Posted in Climategate, FOI, Government idiocy | Tagged Blog, Climatic Research Unit email controversy, Freedom of Information Act, Greg Laden, Law enforcement in the United Kingdom, London, Metropolitan Police Service, Norfolk Constabulary, Police, Tallbloke, United States, United States Department of Justice, WordPress | 896 Comments

WUWT at the top of the heap?

Posted on June 4, 2010 by Anthony Watts

UPDATE: 6/5/10 All of the tech issues from yesterday have been resolved. WUWT is now listed as the Top blog in the Sciences category by Wikio. My thanks to everyone who helps make WUWT a success. ======================================================= From Greg Laden’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Announcements | 61 Comments

“The good news is, if this sucker blows, global warming is not going to be a problem. “

Posted on January 9, 2009 by Anthony Watts

Some worrisome news from Greg Laden’s Science blog, also in the running for Best Science Blog Note: Image below was not part of the original story Seismic Activity at Yellowstone by Greg Laden You have already heard that there has … Continue reading →

Posted in Earth, Science | 198 Comments