Good news about climate change!

Summary: To start your week on a pleasant note, here are articles giving good news from climate scientists. It’s easily lost amidst the predictions of apocalypse soon. At the very least, these suggest that we have more time to prepare than commonly expected.

Good News!



  1. Update on the rising seas
  2. New research about the effect of more CO2
  3. The big picture about climate change
  4. For More Information

(1) Update on the rising seas

Many experts have disputed claims that rising sea levels were affecting Pacific islands, attributing the damage to their inhabitants wrecking their ecosystems. Slowly the news media takes notice: “Shape-shifting islands defy sea-level rise “, New Scientist, 10 June 2010 (gated) — The full article is gated. For more details see “Pacific islands growing, not sinking“, ABC News. Opening:

For years, people have warned that the smallest nations on the planet – island states that barely rise out of the ocean – face being wiped off the map by rising sea levels. Now the first analysis of the data broadly suggests the opposite: most have remained stable over the last 60 years, while some have even grown.

Even better news comes from new research that shows the oceans continue to rise at the same rates as during the past several centuries, although forecast to accelerate. See “Seas will rise no more than 69 centimetres by 2100“, New Scientist, 14 May 2013

A comprehensive study of the behaviour of ice sheets suggests that … sea levels will rise by 16 to 69 cm {7″ – 27″} by 2100. That’s not too far off the best estimate in the last report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007: it predicted 18 to 59 cm {7″ – 23″} by 2100.

See the actual research for details:

(2) Important new research about the sensitivity of global temperature to rising CO2 levels

One of the active fronts in climate science is research to determine the effect of rising CO2 on global temperatures, with several high-profile papers published this year.

(a) The news media reports the debate (updated)

Climate slowdown means extreme rates of warming ‘not as likely’“, BBC, 19 May 2013 — Excerpt:

Since 1998, there has been an unexplained “standstill” in the heating of the Earth’s atmosphere. Writing in Nature Geoscience, the researchers say this will reduce predicted warming in the coming decades. But long-term, the expected temperature rises will not alter significantly.

A second chance to save the climate“, New Scientist, 19 May 2013 — Opening:

Read more


Checking up on past forecasts about climate change, a guide to the future

Summary:  While we quake in fear at the stream of apocalyptic forecasts fed us by the news media, let’s look back at two previous forecasts about rising sea levels and melting sea ice. Perhaps we’d get better forecasts from our experts if we more often held them accountable for them.




  1. The opening of the NorthWest Passage
  2. A flooded New York City
  3. Key things to remember about global warming!
  4. Other climate forecasts
  5. For More Information

This is an update from Looking into the past for guidance about warnings of future climate apocalypses, 17 October 2010.


(1)  Opening the NorthWest Passage to shipping

Arctic Meltdown“, NASA press release, 27 February 2001:

… in 10 years’ time, if melting patterns change as predicted, the North-West Passage could be open to ordinary shipping for a month each summer.

These predictions come in a recently declassified report of a meeting of American, British and Canadian Arctic and naval experts in April last year, organised by Dennis Conlon of the US Office of Naval Research in Arlington, Virginia. Entitled “Naval Operations in an Ice-Free Arctic” …

Peter Wadhams of the Scott Polar Research Institute in Cambridge agrees that the Arctic could soon open up. “Within a decade we can expect regular summer trade there,”he predicts.

Eleven years later the “within a decade” prediction has proven false, with little (no?) commercial traffic yet on the NW Passage.

In 2012 the arctic ice melt was unusually extensive, beating the previous minimum in 2007 (see the data here).  NASA reported that satellites show that the key chokepoints of the Northwest Passage were mostly open in early August, and reached its minimum in mid-September. But NASA mentions an important detail about satellite data usually ignored by the news media (red emphasis added):

Read more

The seas are rising, and have been over ten thousand years. What comes next?

Summary: The world has been warming for the past two centuries, and the oceans have been rising for over ten millenia. The urgent task of climate scientists is to determine if these trends will accelerate, and if so by how much and when. Here we look at the history of rising seas, and what the new IPCC report warns us to expect. Rising seas are one of the most vivid and potentially most important of the climate changes expected during the 21st century.


Here are other posts in this series about second order draft (SOD) of the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

And this from earlier reports: When did we start global warming? See the surprising answer (it’s not what you’ve been told).



  1. Introduction
  2. Long-term sea levels, based on proxy data
  3. The past century (direct measurements,
    moderately reliable)
  4. Recent (reliable direct measurement)
  5. IPCC forecasts of the future
  6. For More Information about rising sea levels

About measurements: one inch = 25 mm = 0.025 meter

(1) Introduction

In this series we look at the latest work of the IPCC to see what the news media have hidden from us about the results of climate scientists. The world has been warming for two centuries, as all agree. But so much else they’ve told us is not accurate. Mostly due to their exaggerations, misrepresentations and omissions of the IPCC’s work — and the peer-reviewed literature on which it rests.

As we see in the comments to previous posts, this produces odd situation — increasingly common in today’s New America, with its broken OODA loop — of well-educated people astonished to learn what climate scientists have said for many years — because during that time they’ve read quite different things in the news media. Show them the text, the data — and watch the resulting incredulous shock.

The same process will happen the Right, as those on they (eg, the Tea Party) learn they rely on sources that lie to them. The surprise 2012 election results might have started this process. The results of these collisions between facts and dogma will play a large role in determining the fate of 21st century America.

Now, let’s turn to the seas. First we’ll look at sea levels over various time horizons. Then we’ll look at the latest IPCC report.

(2) Long-term sea levels, based on proxy data

From “Sea-level fluctuations during the last glacial cycle“, M. Siddall et al, Nature, 19 June 2003 — Gated.

Nature, 19 June 2003


(3) The past century (direct measurements, more reliable)

From the EPA’s Climate Change Indicators page:

Read more

IPCC says “It is likely that the sea level rise has accelerated”. The evidence is flimsy, showing a larger problem.

Summary:  Today we look at a weakness in the latest IPCC report, that illustrates a larger problem in the climate sciences.

Other posts in this series about second order draft (SOD) of the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).



  1. A weakness of the IPCC’s process
  2. This shows a far larger weakness in the climate sciences
  3. For More Information About Rising Sea Levels

(1)  A weakness of the IPCC’s process

The IPCC gets better” post lists some weaknesses of IPCC procedures, including this:

Mockton’s review also has long (very long) lists of peer-reviewed science overlooked by the IPCC (and ignored by the news media), because it ruins the narrative. This goes to the most serious criticisms of the IPCC: it’s narrow selection of sources, and blindness to many threads of research in the climate sciences.

… {this is} systematic misstating by IPCC authors of the climate science literature (eg, chapter lead authors often showcasing their own work and ignoring their critics). While just business as usual in academic science, the IPCC should not tolerable this when writing the foundation for high-stakes and high-cost public policy. It shows a lack of internal controls at the IPCC, and weakens their credibility — which is their greatest asset.

Let’s look at a high-profile example: rising sea levels — vivid, and so has become a widely used example of potential climate impacts (often hysterically so in the general media).  Judith Curry (chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology) examines rising sea levels as am example of the IPCC exaggerating the conclusions of current research.  This also illustrates a larger weakness in the climate change debate.

From Chapter 3 of the AR5 SOD (red emphasis added):

Two out of three reconstructions of GMSL (global mean sea level) from tide gauge data extending back to 1900 or earlier indicate non-zero acceleration. Estimates range from 0.000 to 0.013 [–0.002 to 0.019] mm yr–2, so it is likely that GMSL rise has accelerated since the early 1900s.

Prof Curry’s comment:

A fourth paper on this topic was recently published that was not referenced in Chapter 3 of the SOD {Gregory et al, below}.  So the addition of one more paper to the literature without an accelerating trend (2 out of 4) implies, according to the IPCC reasoning about uncertainty, that acceleration of sea level trend is ‘about as likely as not.’

Under this line of reasoning, the addition of one paper to the literature can change the assessment from ‘likely’ to ‘about as likely as not.’ And since the Gregory et al. paper seems to be superior from a methodological perspective, a more sophisticated assessment process would weight this paper more heavily. It looks to me like the IPCC needs to change this particular conclusion (especially the confidence level) in view of this new paper by Gregory et al.

Read more

The ice caps are melting! Only massive government action can save us!

Summary: Earlier this week we showed an example of crude propaganda about climate change (much like the dying children in “How to Cut Carbon Emissions“). Today we look at an example of excellent climate propaganda, and speculate about the wider significance of these matters.


Science uncovers many amazing new facts. Such as the startlingly rapid molding of a species found in “Early Canid Domestication: The Farm-Fox Experiment“, Lyudmila N. Trut, American Scientist, March-April 1999 — “Foxes bred for tamability in a 40-year experiment exhibit remarkable transformations that suggest an interplay between behavioral genetics and development”. Excerpt:

In the 6th generation bred for tameness we had to add an even higher-scoring category. Members of Class IE, the “domesticated elite,” are eager to establish human contact, whimpering to attract attention and sniffing and licking experimenters like dogs. They start displaying this kind of behavior before they are one month old. By the 10th generation, 18% of fox pups were elite; by the 20th, the figure had reached 35% . Today elite foxes make up 70 – 80% of our experimentally selected population.

Has something similar happened in America? How did we evolve from the unruly, difficult to manage Americans of the Founding era to the easily fooled — and so easily led — Americans of today? We see this in politics. Bush Jr tells us lies about Iraq and Afghanistan, and off we go to war. Obama tells us lies about Libya, and off we go to war. Now we’re bombarded with lies about Iran (similar to those about Iraq) and — stay tuned for the next act.

We see this in the climate wars fought to mold and harness public opinion. Much of mainstream media reporting has become little but exaggerations and misrepresentations about climate change, far beyond what’s in the science literature. Here we look at one such volley.

It’s like watching ‘Manhattan breaking apart in front of your eyes’, says one of the researchers for filmmaker James Balog. He’s describing the largest iceberg calving ever filmed, as featured in his movie, Chasing Ice. After weeks of waiting, the filmakers witnessed 7.4 cubic km of ice crashing off the Ilulissat glacier in Greenland. Chasing Ice, released in the UK on Friday, follows Balog’s mission to document Arctic ice being melted by climate change.
— From “Chasing Ice movie reveals largest iceberg break-up ever filmed“, The Guardian, 12 December 2012

Form a comment on the FM website:

“I found the photos of the 3 year melt at the Solheim Glacier (Iceland) to be particularly frightening. I’ve seen the impact of glacial melt with my own eyes and know that it is real. This interview and the related material have convinced me that the melt rate has accelerated dramatically.”

Here’s the trailer to Chasing Ice.



This has become the centerpiece in a barrage of propaganda. Feel the fear:

Read more

Run from the rising waves! (The latest climate catastrophe scare)

Summary:  The past month has brought forth a sudden burst of studies using models to forecast an acceleration in rising sea levels, accompanied by alarmist new stories.  Here we review them, seeking the common element.

There has long been an odd pattern to climate science articles and news, appearing in groups with a common theme.  Such as the recent burst of articles forecasting an acceleration in the two-century long rise of sea levels (since the end of the Little Ice Age).

Coincidence?  Or is this a desperate Hail Mary pass to terrify a public that remains skeptical of anthropogenic-caused catastrophic climate change — despite 24 years of propaganda about the coming catastrophe (since the staged 1988 Senate hearings that started the crusade)?

In fact, despite the news media’s biased coverage, most aspects of climate change research lie on the frontier of available data and theory (as usual in science debates).  We may face climate catastrophes during the next four score years. These risks certainly deserve study, better funded and managed than the poorly organized scattershot programs done today (details here).  On the other hand, the evidence to date hardly warrants massive public policy action.

Sea level rising 3-4 times faster on East Coast. Global Warming Deniers shouting their denials through snorkels.
Twitter post by Roger Ebert (journalist, film critic, screenwriter). Hat tip to WUWT.

“I don’t believe the biggest fear for man-made climate change believers is the sea level rise”
— Reader’s comment posted in reply to Shaping your view of the world with well-constructed propaganda

(1)  A sudden storm of rising sea level stories

See the For More Information section at the end for links to other posts about rising sea levels.

Update: in the comments are descriptions of current research about rising sea levels.

(a)  The evidence for sea-level rises in North Carolina“, New Scientist, 20 June 2012 — A sensationalized article about “Climate related sea-level variations over the past two millennia“, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 5 July 2011 — “Holgate says the rise could be as much as 1.5 metres {59”} by 2100, but he says that is ‘an extreme upper end’”. See the analysis of the NS article here.

(b)  There are two sides to every debate:  “Elephant seals help uncover slower-than-expected Antarctic melting“, press release announcing “Two years of oceanic observations below the Fimbul Ice Shelf, Antarctica“, Tore Hattermann et al, Geophysical Research Letters, in press (ungated version here). Excerpt:

Read more

Shaping your view of the world with well-constructed propaganda: about rising sea levels

Summary: Perhaps among the worst consequences of the anti-carbon crusade (fighting anthropogenic global warming and climate catastrophe) is the loss of confidence by the public in scientists and science media.  Many scientists have become advocates first, scientists second — abusing the public’s trust to produce what they consider desirable public policies.  Much of the science media — such as New Scientist and Scientific American — have become accomplices.  Here’s a case study, valuable for several reasons.

CGI is truth. Believe!

We will need science to guide us through the difficult years ahead, helping us to balance the conflicting needs of current growth, investments in the future, and protection against shockwaves.  We need to have confidence in scientists, and the journalists who convey their discoveries to us.  Their actions put this essential resource at risk.  Today we look at one example.  It’s useful both as an example of the skillful propaganda that fills our newspapers (from both left and right), but also as a look at an important climate change trend.

The evidence for sea-level rises in North Carolina“, New Scientist, 20 June 2012

Here are excerpts from the article, showing the truth behind the narrative.  The data in the article itself contradicts the story’s message.  Nor does it clearly compare the results of the different forecasting methods. The article opens misleadingly:

In one US state, it is now illegal for sea level rise to speed up. Although climate models predict that sea level rise will accelerate over the coming decades, North Carolina’s state senate has passed a bill saying that its Division of Coastal Management cannot “include scenarios of accelerated rates of sea level rise”.

The first line is either an insult or a joke (or the former pretending to be the latter).  Despite the gibe, extrapolation from history is a valid forecasting method.  This article refer to NC House Bill 819, which says:

The General Assembly does not intend to mandate the development of sea-level rise policy or rates of sea-level rise. … The Division of Coastal Management shall be the only State agency authorized to develop rates of sea-level rise and shall do so only at the request of the Commission. These rates shall only be determined using historical data, and these data shall be limited to the time period following the year 1900. Rates of sea-level rise may be extrapolated linearly to estimate future rates of rise but shall not include scenarios of accelerated rates of sea-level rise.

Next, in the tradition of AGW propaganda, they start with an issue not in question (the bill explicitly refers to the rise in sea levels during the past century):

Are sea levels rising?

In the next section New Scientist discusses the main issue: forecasts of accelerating rate of increase in sea level.  But their own evidence shows a reasonable basis for doubting them:

Read more