Tag Archives: arctic

Good news about polar bears, thriving as the arctic warms!

Summary: An oddity of the press coverage of our changing climate is that the news is always bad. Here is an example of unreported good news, about polar bears not just avoiding extinction — but thriving (less hunting by their #1 enemy has helped). There has been much bad news this year; let’s enjoy the rare good news.

Polar Bear Science

If experts had been right about sea ice,
there would be no polar bears in Churchill

By Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science. Reposted with her generous permission.

The simple fact is that if polar bear experts had been right about the threat to polar bears from the loss of summer sea ice in the Arctic, there would be no polar bears in Churchill this fall. No bears for tourists to photograph, none for biologists to study, and certainly none for the BBC to film for an upcoming three-part TV special called “Arctic Live”.

The low-ice future that biologists said would doom polar bears to extinction by 2050 has already happened in 8 out of the last 10 years. The sea ice future has arrived. Polar bears have experienced those supposedly deadly low-ice summers for almost a decade but the global population did not drop by 2/3 as predicted and not a single one of the ten subpopulations predicted to be extirpated under those conditions has been wiped out.

How much more wrong can you be than that? Will the BBC mention this conundrum in their show? Will the polar bear experts they consult share this fact with viewers? We’ll all have to watch and see (show times and summaries of each program, 1-3 November.) Here are background facts that might enhance your viewing experience.

Continue reading

Five trillion is a red line. Cross it and the environment crashes.

Summary: Here are three stories about environmental destruction, all featuring “five trillion” as the horrific number. Scary stories. Are they accurate?

To understand a trillion, look at it in cash

What is a trillion dollars?

(1) Five trillion tons of ice has melted!

5 Trillion Tons of Ice Lost Since 2002” by climate propagandist Phil Plait at Slate.

“…land ice loss is perhaps most important as a political trigger; the sheer amount of land ice being lost every year is immediate, here, now. And the numbers are staggering … From 2002 to mid-November 2014 — less than 13 years — the combined land ice loss from Antarctica and Greenland is more than 5 trillion tons. Five. Trillion. Tons. That’s beyond staggering; that’s almost incomprehensible. It’s a volume of about 5,700 cubic kilometers, a cube of ice nearly 18 kilometers — more than 11 miles — on a side.”

This is vintage propaganda, giving big numbers with no context. Much as the Right does with the Federal deficit (which if converted into pennies could build a bridge to Mars!).

The total mass of Earth’s ice is roughly 33 thousand trillion metric tons (per table 2 of 2013 USGS; other estimates differ). Five trillion metric tons over 13 years is 0.112% per year.  At that rate the Earth’s ice will melt in 6,600 86,000 years. What level of technology will we have in a thousand years? Children in the year 3,000 will probably consider conflate burning oil and cow dung, both things done by primitive people in the dark ages.

Also, estimates of Antarctica’s ice loss differ widely. A December 2015 NASA study found that Antarctica gained ice mass from 1992-2008 (see the press release).

Continue reading

What we learned from the freak storm that “melted the North Pole” on December 30

Summary: Let’s compare the news about weather with data and scientists’ analysis. Sad see how ideology plus desperation for readers has brought talented journalists to write clickbait. No wonder their credibility has collapsed. Worse, after 26 years of this exaggerated reporting the public rates climate change near or at the bottom of their policy priorities.

“As to the permanent interest of individuals in the aggregate interests of the community, and in the proverbial maxim, that honesty is the best policy, present temptation is often found to be an overmatch for those considerations.”
— James Madison’s Speech in the Virginia Constitutional Convention, 2 December 1829.

Polar Ice Caps are melting

Contents

  1. Journalists warm up the story
  2. Stories after the storm
  3. Weather Porn
  4. Did the North Pole melt?
  5. Conclusions
  6. Other posts in this series
  7. For More Information

(1)  Journalists warm up the story

It’s time for another round of extreme weather hysteria, this time about the “melting North Pole.” It’s the kind of reporting that has made newspapers and TV news among the least-trusted institutions in America. Let’s start with an example of professionally done journalism to show how far the rot has spread: excerpts from “Freak storm in North Atlantic to lash UK, may push temperatures over 50 degrees above normal at North Pole” by Jason Samenow (editor and meteorologist) at WaPo, 28 December.

“Big Icelandic storms are common in winter, but this one may rank among the strongest and will draw northward an incredible surge of warmth pushing temperatures at the North Pole over 50° above normal.  This is mind-boggling.

… Ahead of the storm, the surge of warm air making a beeline towards the North Pole is astonishing. In the animation {computer model forecast} below, watch the warm temperature departures from normal, portrayed by red shades, explode towards the Pole between Monday and Wednesday.

“It’s as if a bomb went off. And, in fact, it did.”

Samenow demonstrates how weather reporting has become misleading. Forecasts are “mindboggling” and “astonishing”, and their results are described in tabloid-like terms (“a bomb went off”). He makes no comparisons with history to show that this storm looks unusual (see the some actual data below). Predictions create both fear and clicks in modern journalism.

That’s not the oddest aspect of the story. America has thousands of meteorologists and climate scientists, but journalists increasingly turn for lurid copy to climate activists lacking any professional qualifications. Preferencing the analysis of a fiction writer with actual climate scientists is low-grade propaganda, not journalism. But the WaPo does so…

“Environmental blogger Robert Scribbler notes this storm will be linked within a “daisy chain” of two other powerful North Atlantic low pressure systems forming a “truly extreme storm system.” He adds: “The Icelandic coast and near off-shore regions are expected to see heavy precipitation hurled over the island by 90 to 100 mile per hour or stronger winds raging out of 35-40 foot seas. Meanwhile, the UK will find itself in the grips of an extraordinarily strong southerly gale running over the backs of 30 foot swells.”

… Scribbler says such an anomaly “reeks of a human-forced warming of the Earth’s climate”, although some climate scientists aren’t convinced global warming is meaningfully impacting these types of storms.”

Continue reading

Climate news poorly reported in the news, about things you should know

Summary: Today we look at arctic sea ice and tornadoes. While they tell us important information about our world, how the news tells us about them tells us even more. As we become isolated into tribes our news becomes dominated by targeted clickbait. So it is with climate change, among our most serious issues but often grossly misrepresented by both Left and Right. Yet the climate agencies tell us what we need to know, if we’d only listen.  {1st of 2 posts today.}

The 2015 record low maximum of arctic sea ice

The media overflow with hype about small changes in climate metrics, often records with some combination of narrow criteria, little importance, and influenced by factors in addition to temperature. Putting big labels on these tends to mislead more than illuminate climate trends. These records produce clickbait for websites advertising to the Left, alarming stories given without vital context.

The latest story is about this year’s record low in the maximum arctic sea ice extent, producing the usual alarmist headlines. For reliable information we should first check with the NASA statement about it by scientist Walt Meier (red emphasis added):

“Scientifically, the yearly maximum extent is not as interesting as the minimum. It is highly influenced by weather and we’re looking at the loss of thin, seasonal ice that is going to melt anyway in the summer and won’t become part of the permanent ice cover … With the summertime minimum, when the extent decreases, it’s because we’re losing the thick ice component, and that is a better indicator of warming temperatures.

“The winter maximum gives you a head start, but the minimum is so much more dependent on what happens in the summer that it seems to wash out anything that happens in the winter” …

There is more valuable context to this story, as shown by a few pictures. Look at the record low seasonal maximum extent vs other years.  This shows the past 5 years; blue is 2015. A record by a small amount.

Continue reading

Twenty stories of good news about polar bears!

Summary:  Another in our series of good news about the climate, this time about polar bears (others are listed at the end). Good news generates few clicks, so you’ll not see this info in the news. This period of good news probably will not last forever, perhaps not even long. Let’s stop the playground politics and make good use of this time.

Say goodby to the poor photoshopped bear floating out to sea; but his real cousins are doing OK (so far).

Photoshopped polar bear in Science

Pitiful but photoshopped. In Science, 7 May 2010.

Twenty good reasons not to worry about polar bears.

By Susan Crockford, from her website: Polar Bear Science.
Reposted with her generous permission.

Introduction

Here’s a new resource for cooling the polar bear spin, all in one place. I’ve updated and expanded my previous summary of reasons not to worry about polar bears, now two years old. In it, you’ll find links to supporting information (including previous posts of mine providing background, maps and extensive references). Some important graphs and maps have been copied into the summary. I hope you find it a useful resource for refuting the spin and tuning out the cries of doom and gloom about the future of polar bears. Please feel free to share.  Here is a PDF of the this post.

This is the 1st anniversary of Canada providing population estimates and trends independent of the pessimistic prognostications of the IUCN/SSC Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) — so let’s celebrate the recent triumphs and resilience of polar bears to their ever-changing Arctic environment.

Continue reading

More good news about the climate, giving us a priceless gift.

Summary:  Today’s post shows more good news about our climate, about ice. The good news gives us time to act. Unfortunately both Left and Right prefer that we squander this gift of time. The Left denies the pause; the Right considers it a “stop”. Neither supports the climate science research and political organizing necessary to build a coalition capable of acting on the scale necessary. But we need not listen to them. {1st of 2 posts today.}

“Ask me for anything, except time.”
— Attributed to Napoleon.

Ice cubes

Contents

  1. The most valuable resource
  2. Polar Sea Ice
  3. Greenland’s Ice Cap
  4. News coverage from hysteria to journalism
  5. For More Information

 

(1)  Our most valuable resource

Time is the most valuable of resources. It gives us the ability to do research, to mobilize the public and build political coalitions. With time we can prepare; without it we can only react.

Nature has given us the gift of time in the pause of  the atmosphere’s warming since roughly 2000. Most forms of extreme weather have followed by stabilizing or improving: hurricanes, tornadoes, and wildfires (see links at the end). Even the “sea level rise slowed slightly in the past few years” (Columbia Earth Institute). And now even the sea ice and rate of Greenland glacial melting have stabilized (the subject of this post).

Both Left and Right have adopted science denial as their preferred tactic, using selective citation and exaggeration of science — filtered through activists. Yet we have time to act if we can break free of the ideologues that surround us.

Now to another update on the data.

(2)  Polar Sea Ice

The polar ice caps are sensitive indicators of the global climate. They’re influenced by a wide range of factors and have opposite trends. The good news is that the global sea ice area has been at 1979-2008 average for the past 2 years. See these graphs from the NSIDC.

Continue reading

Some good news about our changing climate. Enjoy it, for it might not last long.

Summary: A people can be shaped by controlling their information, altering their perception of the world by filtering what they learn. We see that today in the debate about one of the potentially largest challenges of the 21st century.  Climate scientists differ on their forecasts of future weather, which range from large to calamitous changes. Some activists find these inadequate, and resort to exaggerated claims about extreme weather today — and suppression of the good news. Today we look at the good news you might know. All these trends will change (that’s what climate does). But before we look ahead, let’s clearly see the world of today.

Extreme Weather

We don’t know what lies ahead

Contents

  1. Few hurricanes, weak hurricanes
  2.  It’s a slow year for wildfires (again)
  3. Another slow year for tornadoes
  4. Arctic sea ice rebounds
  5. The pause continues
  6. About trends in extreme weather
  7. For More Information

Click on the graphs to enlarge them.

(1)  Few hurricanes, weak hurricanes

No Named Storms First Time Since 1992 at Hurricane Peak“, Bloomberg, 10 September 2014 — Excerpt:

The statistical peak of the Atlantic hurricane season has arrived and for the first time since 1992 there isn’t a named storm in the basin. … In records going back to 1851, Sept. 10 is the day when the odds are greatest there will be at least one tropical storm or hurricane somewhere in the Atlantic.

… There have been times when quiet years have shown up in the midst of active eras, Phil Klotzbach, lead author of Colorado State University’s seasonal hurricane forecast, said from Walnut Creek, California. Last year produced 13 named storms, one more than the 30-year average, yet the power of those systems was so weak it is considered a relatively quiet season.

Using an index called the accumulated cyclone energy, 2014 has only had 45% of  the activity that it should have produced by this time, Klotzbach said. “But we are still ahead of the ridiculously quiet season of 2013,” he said. “I would say that we need at least one more quiet year to really be convinced that we are heading into an inactive era.”

The last major landfall on the US was Wilma in October 2005; cyclone activity is also low in Australia. Global tropical cyclone energy has fallen from its peaks of 1994 – 2006, per this graph from WeatherBell.

Global tropical cyclone activity, 31 August 2014

Ryan N. Maue, meteorologist, WeatherBell

Continue reading