New Video : Arctic Fake News – Viewing The Arctic With One Eye Closed

15 Responses to New Video : Arctic Fake News – Viewing The Arctic With One Eye Closed

1. Andy DC says:

   July 8, 2017 at 2:22 pm

   Most weather stations have a reliable record going back less than 150 years. If you check our recent weather and compare it to what has happened over the last 150 years, it is almost always very much within the range of natural variability. Very little new under the sun when it comes to weather events. Even what alarmists call “extreme weather” has happened time and time before, often in a far worse form.

   But 150 years is a blink of the eye in geological terms. If we had good records going back 1,000 years, 10,000 years or 100,000 years, we would no doubt find that natural variability far exceeds what our 150 year record shows. We probably have no concept of what natural variability even entails. So the alarmists are totally off the deep end when they try to imply that there is something dramtically new or different about our climate.

   Reply
2. TomRude says:

   July 8, 2017 at 2:31 pm

   The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. is publishing this astonishing piece of propaganda:
   http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/more-summer-sun-helping-greenland-ice-melt-1.4191700
   Written by Nicole Mortillaro one of their agenda pusher…
   Of course this stuff is rarely open for commenting as they know it would be debunked easily… No mention of record accumulation this winter…

   Reply
3. Carl says:

   July 8, 2017 at 2:33 pm

   Latent heat would explain why the summer anomaly is not also high. The argument you use would indicate that NASA is underestimating warming.

   Reply
   • tonyheller says:

     July 8, 2017 at 3:37 pm

     The summer anomaly is negative. But thanks anyway for the spectacularly stupid comment.

     Reply
     • GW says:

       July 8, 2017 at 6:09 pm

       LOL

       Reply
       • gator69 says:

         July 8, 2017 at 6:18 pm

         If you want a really good laugh, check out Carl’s blog…

         Here’s the deal. Part of the science is settled. Pump enough carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and Earth becomes an unlivable hothouse. Check out the weather on Venus – including the night side. With all those reflective clouds, the surface of Venus doesn’t receive any more sunlight than we get here on Earth. (That’s why many mid century science fiction stories featured a swampy, but habitable Venus.)

         Reply
         • GW says:

           July 8, 2017 at 6:48 pm

           While reviewing the political aspect of his site, I at first thought he was some well-meaning liberal arts type idealist who has no rigorous scientific training. But he in fact actually claims to be a “scientist by training” ! And yet he doesn’t correctly understand the concept of latent heat, and thinks Venus is hot due to CO2 content and Not because it’s stmosphere is 100x more dense ! But no mention of the fact Mars atmosphere is also nearly all CO2 but is a frozen wasteland due to the fact the atmosphere pressure is about 1/2 of earth’s. Also no mention of the fact that there is absolutely No Empirical Evidence that any warming, regardless of the source, has caused any increase in water vapor (positive feedback, climate sensitivity, etc) which is the entire AGW Alarmist argument to Runaway, Catastrophic
           GW !

           I don’t know where he received his “scientific training,” but I sure wouldn’t send my kid there !
         • neal s says:

           July 8, 2017 at 6:57 pm

           GW claims Mars “atmosphere pressure is about 1/2 of earth’s”. I think pressure at Mars surface is about 6 millibars as compared to roughly 1000 millibars at Earth.
         • GW says:

           July 8, 2017 at 7:36 pm

           Yes. I misread the reference I looked up. .6% and not .6 (60%). Mea Culpa.
4. Kris Johanson says:

   July 8, 2017 at 4:10 pm

   Please spend a little more time explaining this when you get a chance. I get the part about latent-vs-sensible heat, and the need to measure heat-vs-temperature, but in the 2nd half of the video you’re condensing a lot of information (good information)

   Reply
   • Kris Johanson says:

     July 8, 2017 at 4:12 pm

     Also thanks for doing these time-consuming videos. I’ve done some of these for high school science classes, and I know how much time goes into prep and editing even a 7-minute video

     Reply
   • tonyheller says:

     July 8, 2017 at 5:13 pm

     Summer temperatures at the North Pole can’t drop much below freezing. As soon as water starts freezing, it releases heat to the atmosphere. This restricts the summer anomaly to about -1C, whereas winter anomalies can go up to +25C before latent heat becomes an issue.

     Reply
     • Kris Johanson says:

       July 8, 2017 at 7:22 pm

       Okay, so the ice acts as a temperature stabilizer/limiter, suddenly throwing off lots of kilojoules just at the point it freezes, thus creating sort of a ‘floor’ air temperature during Summer.

       By contrast during Winter, the air temperature changes are just causing ice to heat up and cool, not melt and re-freeze, thus you’re not dealing with the enthalpy of fusion at all and the resultant stabilizing heat-sink effect.

       I’m think I’m slowly getting there…

       Reply
       • cdquarles says:

         July 13, 2017 at 10:05 pm

         Plus, those swings are weather related. Locally, I have seen it go from 20F below average to 20F above average in 48 hours due to a strong southerly fetch over 48 hours. I have seen it go the other way, too. Winter weather here is the most variable. Summer weather is the least variable. The transition seasons go from highly variable to less variable (spring) and form less variable to highly variable (fall/autumn). Wind speed, wind direction, aerosols (mostly water clouds but not solely water clouds) and local dew point matter to your weather. Your climate is a summary of your locally realized weather. Oh, yeah, this long/short season business bothers me some, since our calendar is an astronomical one, our seasons are also. The length of them is strictly determined by orbital mechanics. Weather is what it is when it happens.

         Reply
5. just a thought says:

   July 9, 2017 at 6:03 pm

   Thank you, Tony. I’ve been waiting a long time for someone to point out that the data of interest is heat, not temperature.

   For the trolls who don’t know the difference…
   http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_classroom/light_lessons/thermal/differ.html

   Reply