Climate experts blamed this past record cold winter in the east, on an expanded polar vortex caused by global warming and Arctic ice loss.
For years, climate contrarians have pointed to snowfall and cold weather to question the scientific reality of human-induced climate change. Such misinformation obscures the work scientists are doing to figure out just how climate change is affecting weather patterns year-round.
The Arctic connection and the polar vortex: A look at recent North American winters
Winters have generally been warming faster than other seasons in the United States and recent research indicates that climate change is disrupting the Arctic and ice around the North Pole.The Arctic summer sea ice extent broke all records during the end of the 2012 sea ice melt season. Some researchers are pointing to a complex interplay between Arctic sea ice decline, ocean patterns, upper winds, and the shifting shape of the jet stream that could lead to extreme weather in various portions of northern mid-latitudes — such that some places get tons of snow repeatedly and others are unseasonably warm.
In the Arctic, frigid air is typically trapped in a tight loop known as the polar vortex. This super-chilled air is not only cold, it also tends to have low barometric pressure compared to the air outside the vortex. The surrounding high-pressure zones push in on the vortex from all sides so the cold air is essentially “fenced in” above the Arctic, where it belongs.
As the Arctic region warms faster than most other places, however, the Arctic sea ice melts more rapidly and for longer periods each year, and is unable to replenish itself in the briefer, warmer winter season. This can destabilize the polar vortex and raises the barometric pressure within it.
They sound so sincere! Only problem is that they blamed very similar winters in the 1970s on global cooling, and Arctic ice gain.
Telltale signs are everywhere —from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest.Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported by other convincing data. When Climatologist George J. Kukla of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory and his wife Helena analyzed satellite weather data for the Northern Hemisphere, they found that the area of the ice and snow cover had suddenly increased by 12% in 1971 and the increase has persisted ever since. Areas of Baffin Island in the Canadian Arctic, for example, were once totally free of any snow in summer; now they are covered year round.
Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world. Indeed it is the widening of this cap of cold air that is the immediate cause of Africa’s drought. By blocking moisture-bearing equatorial winds and preventing them from bringing rainfall to the parched sub-Sahara region, as well as other drought-ridden areas stretching all the way from Central America to the Middle East and India, the polar winds have in effect caused the Sahara and other deserts to reach farther to the south. Paradoxically, the same vortex has created quite different weather quirks in the U.S. and other temperate zones. As the winds swirl around the globe, their southerly portions undulate like the bottom of a skirt. Cold air is pulled down across the Western U.S. and warm air is swept up to the Northeast. The collision of air masses of widely differing temperatures and humidity can create violent storms—the Midwest’s recent rash of disastrous tornadoes, for example.
TIME Magazine Archive Article — Another Ice Age? — Jun. 24, 1974
In 1977 National Geographic also blamed the almost identical weather pattern as 2015 – on global cooling.
A ridge of high pressure over California, a deep dip in the jet stream on the East Coast.
Heat and drought in California
Bitter cold and deep snow in the East.
People like the “Union of Concerned Scientists” sound so sincere and serious, but in fact they are simply propagandists who write sciency sounding stuff to fool politicians, journalists and other global warming useful idiots.
Cold air is trapped in the arctic “where it belongs”?
Naughty, naughty, cold air. The Union of Concerned Scientists will tell you where you belong. Just like they tell the rest of us. Mind your manners.
The polar vortex is blocked by a temperature increase of ozone in certain areas related to the Earth’s magnetic field and solar activity.
There’s a misspelling in that first image – it’s the Union of Confused Scientists.
climate contrarians
Classic projection.
Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against unpleasant impulses by denying their existence in themselves, while attributing them to others.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Weak Solar cycle in ’72—-The scientists were aware of that and said the cooling would be temporary. The scientists weren’t “predicting global cooling”…These were magazines trying to make money by publishing dramatic HEADLINES just as tony heller is doing now. Try to find a scientist back in the ’70’s that “predicted global cooling”
MORE ON THE #AGWstooges
http://co2gasoflife.com
Let me get this straight: The cooling that used to cause cooling is now causing warming because the warming has caused the cooling that the cooling used to cause? a x b = 1, but a x b = -1, and -a x b = 1. Must be the common core maths. It even fails the complex conjugate test. Must be me, but it doesn’t seem to work no matter how it is analysed. Kind of like picking up a dog turd by the clean end. Never going to happen.
What a great analysis! Love your train of thought!
This Unholy Alliance of Climatologists, Popes, Politicians, the UN and the National Academies of Science Cannot Change Reality:
If the conclusions of this paper [1] are correct, as strongly suggested by nine pages of precise experimental data and thousands of precise experimental data points they represent, . . .
then the Pontifical Academy of Sciences is as guiltily as other National Academies of Sciences (NAS) worldwide and the United Nations (UN) in deceiving the public about the source of energy that:
1. Made our chemical elements
2. Birthed the solar system 5 Ga ago
3. Sustained the origin and evolution of life on Earth after ~3.8 Ga ago, and
4. Still sustains every atom, life and the climate of every planet in the Solar System today . . .
the same FOUNTAIN OF ENERGY Copernicus identified at the gravitational center of the solar system in fifteen forty-three (1543).
Reference:
1. Oliver K. Manuel, “Solar energy,” Advances in Astronomy, submitted 1 Sept 2014, privately published 17 Mar 2015): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Solar_Energy.pdf
Omanuel why not make a video Youtube presentation . Some people with a lower IQ, like me ,need a visual explanation to get the idea.
The fountain of energy that Copernicus reported at the gravitational center of the solar system in 1543 is a pulsar.
By a strange coincidence, 2009 Climategate emails exposed the reality that frightened world and religious leaders had hidden from the public successfully for 500 years:
http://junkscience.com/2015/06/28/you-are-known-by-your-allies-big-popey/comment-page-1/
I like that phrase, “Sciency sounding stuff”.
Actually the concerned scientists “scientific explanation” is an excuse. After all, not many years ago they were saying there would be milder winters and less snow, ski areas would have to close, and “children wouldn’t know what snow was.” So their predicament is a little like coming into a classroom with your homework undone. You’d better have your excuse-making skills highly honed, and put on quite a performance. (Fifty years ago I was rather good at this art, which is a form of story-telling.) (Maybe the teacher knew it was BS, and I knew it was BS, and the whole class knew it was BS, but most everyone enjoyed my performances.)
Their explanations have glaring problems, and they actually get low grades at story-telling. For example, if you watch the ice grow you see that the entire Arctic Sea is ice-covered by early December. From then on the ice grows outside the Arctic Ocean. Therefore whatever effect less ice on the Arctic Ocean might have on the jet stream should cease, or at least greatly weaken, once the ice forms, however what we see is that the meridianal pattern persists. Conclusion? Something else is causing that pattern.
There are a lot of meteorologists studying very hard to understand why zonal patterns flip to meridianal patterns, and back again. I’m sure it annoys them no end to have these bozos come along and act as if they understand everything.
These poor fellows could use some advice, when it comes to excuse-making. When it comes to defending the indefensibly I was smarter than they, back when I was aged twelve, and I’d take these pathetic fools aside and give them some pointers about story-telling, but I’m attempting to mend my ways, and try to avoid associating with knaves.
re: “For example, if you watch the ice grow you see that the entire Arctic Sea is ice-covered by early December.” — I have learned from the alarmists that it isn’t the amount of ice, but it depends on whether you have finely crafted, high quality, Grade-A, American ice, or cheap, easily-melted, third-world ice made in Chinese sweat shops.
The truth is they are just dreaming it up as they go along. That is why there are over sixty mutually exclusive reasons given for the pause, and about a hundred denials that there is one…all at once.
Everything they claim is debunked, but they never gat hauled onto the carpet for just repeating the old lies and making up new ones.
Every grant they receive is wasted money used to come to erroneous conclusions, but instead of being laughed out of science, they get written up on the front page.
If producing phony scientific results and scaring children with lies ever become crimes, every one of these loons will be locked up in no time.
How about “falsifying public records” with their so-called adjustments?
One might suppose that to be a crime. But if one was holding one’s breathe waiting for the prosecutions to begin…one better have a good set of lungs.
I’ve been holding my breath since Climate Audit exposed Hansen’s adjustments, and forced NASA to readjust the adjustments back in August 8, 2007.
http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/08/a-new-leaderboard-at-the-us-open/
Little wonder I’m turning purple. Nearly 8 Years!
They always glibly state, “As the Arctic region warms faster than most other places…” as if the warming is a done deal. The problem is that the warming isn’t all there. What should be especially troubling is that the Argo buoys don’t seem to be showing the seawater warming. Wasn’t that a big part of the Albedo theory? That less ice would have the water warm up because the water was exposed to sunshine?
https://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/figure-2-comparison-w-arctic.png
Attention is drawn to the latest study posted that The HockeySchtick
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/
“New paper shows N. Greenland was warmer during early 20th century (1920-1940) & during Medieval Warm Period ”
Also available for discussion at JoNova
http://joannenova.com.au/2015/06/greenland-warmer-1000-years-ago-warmer-in-the-1920s-too/
Global cooling? Global warming?
It’s got me bemused
By their pseudo-science fiction
I’m completely confused.
But perhaps my confusion
Was their intention,
So that I would not question
Each new climate invention.
http://rhymeafterrhyme.net/climate-denying-the-witchcraft/
I think that you make a good point,
that theories the experts anoint,
are authored by fools,
from Ivy League schools,
while smoking a Bob Marley joint!
I wonder why the jetstream was so naughty in 1899, when it was -15 in DC, -10 in Atlanta, GA and -2 in Tallahassee, FL, with blizzard conditions in Florida. I guess that was friendly natural cold, while the cold over the last 2 winters was Mann-made, powered by old, white bigots and evil fossil fuels.
We should regulate who can call themselves “scientists,” the way we regulate who can call themselves medical doctors, dentists, geologists, etc. Any asshole can call himself or herself a scientist. What qualifications does a person need? Right now, none.
Ummm
Geologists ARE scientists, please.
Your comment is totally illogical. And starting a stupid comment with “Ummm” just makes you look stupider.
Well, you do need to send some money to call yourself a member of the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Other than that…zip.
If you study political science…..
I do not think there is any actual need for any science credentials or training.
Look at Gavin’s credentials. He is listed as a climate scientist, but with degrees in math.
“but with degrees in math.”
Yes, so he’s good at manipulating numbers..
…a first step becoming a “climate scientist™” !
They got a few years of warmer, then a few years or snow – and now they are dreaming up “Dead Parrot” excuses ready for the dead parrot talks this winter.
But very soon we’ll have the same areas currently experiencing snow having a warmer period – and then they’ll be having to dream up excuses for their excuses.
The alarmists are the dead parrots, zombie parrots that incessantly cry wolf.
“Academia stinks. Academia is a heartless, cold bureaucracy. Colleges and Universities… are a breeding house for parrots.”
-Christopher Langan
Contrary to predictions, children today do indeed know what snow is; but do they know what science is? I don’t think so. The word ‘scientist’ increasingly connotes not a seeker for truth, but a propagandist.
Well in medicine a SYMPTOM is subjective evidence generally described by the patient or non- medical observer to the health care provider.
A SIGN is observable by the health care provider and thus objective evidence.
It seems to me that Climate astrologers can use the signs they SELECT and skew their recordings of the signs the patient has presenting in their medical record to diagnose what ever condition they desire. If they were physicians they would have their licenses pulled by a medical board or run out of practice by law suits in a heart beat.
If they were physicians, they would be forced to flee to Argentina and work as carpenters.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is no such thing.
They are a charity, and anyone can join just by signing up and sending them some dough. Heck, for $35 or more they will even toss in their book, and all money sent is tax deductible since they are a registered charity.
Now, call me skeptical (’cause I am), but this does not really comport with what most people would suppose when they hear the name of the organization, does it?
No requirement to be a scientist at all.
https://secure3.convio.net/ucs/site/Donation2?df_id=1420&1420.donation=form1&s_src=footer&_ga=1.212309716.1554162516.1427084159
Anthony Watt’s dog, Kenji is a member ! 🙂
And one of their most intelligent.
Ok, I just watched Joe Bastardi’s latest Saturday Summary.
http://www.weatherbell.com/saturday-summary-june-27-2015
I have been watching these for months now and have been impressed with how well those folks at Weathrbell do. After watching for some time I think I understand Joe’s argument concerning AGW.
So I’m going to present it here as I have interpreted it concerning the test Joe says is here right now for the AGW argument and ask that those more knowledgeable about this stuff could check and see if I have Joe’s argument correct.
Here is what I have been getting out of his Saturday Summaries:
Right now the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) is in it’s warm phase. (Thus the Blob of warm air hanging out off the coast of AK making that state and in fact the NW of the N.American Continent down to Northern CA warmer than normal and pushing the dip in the jet stream east and magnifying it’s amplitude thus bringing the colder than normal air to the central and eastern US right down to northern Florida at times.) Meanwhile in the Atlantic the AMO (Atlantic Mulidecadal Oscillation) is already switching to it’s cold phase. At the same time we are having an El Nino that will raise temps some. But in the next year or two the PDO should start switching to it’s cold phase and when it does eventually in the next few years both the PDO and AMO will be in their cold phases. At that time, according to the data the conditions in the US and the Northern Hemisphere should be shifting to colder period that will deepen for the next 20 years, just like occured back in the 1970’s when the great scare was the possibility of a coming ice age.
In the shorter term after an El Nino, as is occurring right now, there is always a dip in temperatures called an La Nina. If that dip is deep as Joe thinks it will be based on past data of such events because the El Nino is strong, then the warmists argument will be blown out of the water. The La Nina will lead right into the time when the Temperature Occilations in both oceans are moving into their cold phases.
If however, as the warmists predict, the La Nina is weaker than would normally be expected because of man caused climate change there by estabishing a higher base line and the AMO and PDO shifts to cold do not lead to the as low of temperatures as associated with those events in the past, then the warminst will have won a major point.
Rah, I do not get the Joes’ Weatherbell (yet) still working on Hubby to switch from Wunderground)
There are a couple things I see missing.
First is the oceans are heated thanks to the shorter wave radiation of the sun (visible to extreme UV). The shorter the wavelength the deeper the radiation warms the ocean.
Second although total solar insolation (TSI) is reputed to be constant according to the revisionist L.S., the distribution of energy among different wavelengths is not and the most change is in the wavelengths that not only penetrate the ocean the furthest but in the wavelengths that change ozone levels.
From NASA:
Source: Solar Radiation………..Energy Flux…Solar Cycle Change……%
TSI (mostly Visible & Infrared)…1366 W/m2………..1.2 W/m2……….0.1%
MUV (200-300 nm) ……………….15.4 W/m2……….. 0.17 W/m2……..1.0%
FUV (126-200 nm)…………………50 mW/m2………..15 mW/m2…….30.0%
EUV (0-125 nm)……………………..10 mW/m2…….10 mW/m2………100.0%
What the change is from a Grand Solar Maximum to a normal or Grand Solar Minimum at this point is unknown.
El Nino is the pacific ocean’s method of removing heat and La Nina is the heat gaining phase (all in conjunction with the trade winds and cloud cover) An Illustrated Introduction to the Basic Processes that Drive El Niño and La Niña Events
According to Pinker et al’s Figure 5, reproduced below for reference, solar radiation over the oceans increased by about 5 w/m2 between 1983 and 2001 while solar radiation over land areas decreased slightly.
La Niñas Do NOT Suck Heat from the Atmosphere
Bob’s The 2014/15 El Niño – Part 5 – The Relationship Between the PDO and ENSO is worth a read.
Unfortunately Bob Tisdale has fallen for L.S ‘adjustment’ of solar data.
https://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2011/06/17/comments-on-easterbrook-on-the-potential-demise-of-sunspots/
…….
Another point of interest from John Kehr.
Word Unimpress hates John’s website so search for the inconvenient skeptic