Saturday, May 3, 2014

Volatile Weather Is Not New

Children are besieged with doomsday scenarios associated with global warming, and chronic anxiety ensues.
"North Carolina-based psychotherapist Chris Saade, co-director of the Olive Branch Center, a grief/wellness counselling firm, says he’s seen a huge jump in the number of patients under 18 who come to him with concerns about the environmental crisis. “Unlike adults who can put their heads in the sand about what we have been doing to our planet, these kids are very aware of what’s going on,” adds Saade, who has led more than 200 psychological retreats in the United States and has offered grief counselling through his private practice for more than 20 years. “Because of the Web, it’s not hidden any more. Children often ask me questions that we, as adults, try to evade: What is going to happen to the human race?”
It appears that the counselors are buying into the doomsday talk also.

The lack of actual warming has caused the mantra to be replaced with the warning of "weather volatility". But volatile weather has been around a long time. This diagram from NASA shows how the Mississippi River has changed its course over the past 1000 years (probably due to extensive periodic flooding and associated washout alternating with stablized beds).



The leftist terror tactic a la Al Gore seems to be working, at least on those who have been mal-educated in the past 25 years and are not analytically inclined.
"Dr. Anthony Levitt, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre’s director of research in the department of psychiatry, agrees climate-change anxiety increasingly enters into the discussions he has with many of the young people who come to see him. “Younger people [teens to mid-20s] appear to be much more accepting of the science and facts than older people,” Levitt observes. He’s also seen an uptick in climate-change-related anxiety in parents with younger children.

“For most people who are anxious about climate change, the anxiety is escalated by the fact they do not see an answer or a way to make a change. Worry plus powerlessness leads to distress,” says Levitt, who is also a professor in the psychiatry department at the University of Toronto.
More and more anecdotal evidence of historical warm spells is emerging, for example, from burnt tree rings in sequoias in the US western states, where fires became more common during the Medieval Warm Period when the region was warmer and dryer.



If you look closely at the unburned portion of the tree, the rings show significant variation in width (e.g. extreme left, between 1277 and 1311).

Another study has found that Mongolia was wet and warm during the Medieval Warm period, giving Genghis Khan the ability to form the strength for conquest.

These examples obviously are anecdotal rather than universal. Still they are data points which disagree with the doomsayers, meaning that the doomsayer data is not universal, either. If you think that the doomsayer data is consistent, consider this:



The IPCC originally had Medieval Warming and the Maunder Minimum in the data; apparently they now do not, even though other scientists are investigating events in the Medieval Warming period.



Most of the past 8 - 10,000 years have been within 0.5 to 1.0 degree from the 2004 point..

A point aside: given all the natural fires in the past, the CO2 generation must have been high tonnage, one would think. And so would allowing fires to eliminate the high build-up of ground fuel in forests due to the forest services war on fires for over a half century, creating the late 20th century mega-fires in the western states and a huge tonnage of CO2.

5 comments:

Martin said...

>The lack of actual warming

It hasn't stopped. I've told you about going down the up escalator before.

Stan said...

Hello, Martin - You know how I will respond, don't you?

I still consider that graphic to be bogus; draw a line through the years 1998 to 2012 (the last year shown). Yes, I know: they want to declare that segment to be noise level. But that is precisely the deception: we absolutely must consider the upward trend to be necessarily continuous, so we choose lines which deprecate the data. They even describe their own deception inadvertently:

"This animation shows how the same temperature data (green) that is used to determine the long-term global surface air warming trend of 0.16°C per decade (red) can be used inappropriately to "cherrypick" short time periods that show a cooling trend simply because the endpoints are carefully chosen and the trend is dominated by short-term noise in the data (blue steps). Isn't it strange how five periods of cooling can add up to a clear warming trend over the last 4 decades? "

Isn't it strange how cherrypicking the placement of the lines and the cherrypicking of the timeframe add up to hysterical claims of doom?

One can draw lines through any number of years and get prejudicial data. And in fact this graph shows only the uptick which is claimed since 1973, a prejudicial graph to be sure. Long term, historical, lines show no need for the hysteria which is being foisted off on our youth.

It is the IPCC removal of variability in the long term which is the problem here. Either their original data was WRONG, or they are WRONG now. And because the change is in favor of DOOM, which is what keeps them in business, it is parsimonious to believe that the change was made to keep them in business. Follow the money, derived from DOOM and GLOOM and DISASTER as business products.

Martin said...

Can you show me anyone making "hysterical claims of doom" other than the media? This too I have explained to you before, many times: there is a difference between scientific predictions, and media hysteria. Oftentimes, in fact most times, when you dig behind the hysterical media story, you will find a calm and sober scientific study with lots of caveats. That's just the way the media is, and the science should not be smeared with the media's indescretions.

Regardless, the uptick in temperature or lack thereof is inconsequential for precisely two reasons:

1. There is more heat coming than going, so even if there is no uptick, at some point there will be
2. The "climate" is not just air; 80% of the climate system is the ocean, and much if not most of the warming is ending up there

Stan said...

Again, I question both the data and the motivation.

1. I have previously questioned the use of satellite data to generate universal data for the whole earth. I believe that there is (a)side re-radiation (cubic function due to spherical nature) not captured; (b) incomplete coverage of the earth at any given moment; (c) self-fulfilling nature of the entire endeavor.

2. Here is the NOAA graph for oceanic temperature rise; what is missing? Oceanic temperatures prior to roughly 1955, including temperatures during the Maunder Minimum and the medieval warm period. Prejudicial.

3. When will the calm and sober scientists speak out comprehensively against the hysterical doom-meisters? The media DOOM MONGERS work to the benefit of the calm and sober scientists, who require grants to be in place to feed these scientists. I question the motivations of the calm and sober scientists for what they DO NOT DO: quell the panic which the media spreads... daily. The Left is intimately involved and is attempting to use the SILENCE of the calm and sober scientists in their political pursuits of wealth elimination and transfer.

Want proof of that? I can dig out the statements made by these people. Right now it is dinner time.

Stan said...

BTW, Martin,
Despite the tone of the above, it's always good to see a comment from you... even if it's always regarding AGW, on which we disagree! I hope all is well with you.