26
Feb

“Hottest January ever” say climate experts, establishing a new comedy genre

You have to admire such delusional comments. The USA, the UK and many other parts of the world have been reporting cold weather records broken left, right and center. Yet some climate scientists are claiming, no, it’s been hot, damn hot, this winter.

Climate scientists yesterday stunned Britons suffering the coldest winter for 30 years by claiming last month was the ­hottest January the world has ever seen.

Don’t they understand that such comments just make a mockery of their AGW theory?

“Last November was the hottest November we’ve ever seen. November-January as a whole is the hottest November-January the world has seen.” Veteran ­climatologist Professor Nicholls was speaking at an online climate change briefing, added: “It’s not warming the same everywhere but it is really quite challenging to find places that haven’t warmed in the past 50 years.” Source: Daily Express

Who is Professor Neville Nicholls? He’s a climate scientist at Monash University, and is a Lead Author of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report chapter focusing on understanding and attributing climate change.

Uh oh – this scientist has been debunked before, and now he appears to be just plain trying to make a laughing stock of himself, with some degree of success. His contribution to the 4th assessment report highlighted his ignorance of fundamental physics.

Study Finds IPCC had Temperature – Drought Connection Backwards

As I mentioned in last week’s IPCC: International Pack of Climate
Crooks, in Chapter 9 of Assessment Report 4’s (AR4) Working Group One
(WG1) Report, the IPCC claimed that manmade CO2-driven higher
temperatures drive higher evaporation, and thereby cause droughts. As
readers are all too aware, droughts are favorite ingredients in most
alarmists’ recipes for manmade climate disaster

Later in the paper, Nicholls concluded that “the warming has meant
that the severity and impacts of the most recent drought have been
exacerbated by enhanced evaporation and evapotranspiration.”

Not surprisingly, as with many other AR4 irregularities that have
recently surfaced, this too has a non-peer-reviewed World Wildlife
Fund link to it
. So then, the basis for the claim that anthropogenic warming causes droughts put forth in the IPCC’s AR4 was a WWF report and its follow-up written the next year.

But that basis, conclude Natalie Lockart, Dmitri Kavetski and Stewart
W. Franks, authors of On the recent warming in the Murray-Darling
Basin: Land surface interactions misunderstood, is bogus. As stated
in its opening, their study “demonstrates that significant
misunderstanding of known processes of land surface – atmosphere
interactions has led to the incorrect attribution of the causes of the
anomalous temperatures, as well as significant misunderstanding of
their impact on evaporation within the Murray-Darling Basin.” And
after deconstructing the claims of both Nicholls and Karoly, concludes that:

As coauthor Stewart Franks explained to me in an email, “this is a
confusion of the well known physics of evaporation
– as higher air temperatures are driven by the lack of evaporation (as occurs during drought).” He explained further in a subsequent correspondence:

Of course, when there is a deficit of rainfall, this tends to be
accompanied by less cloud-cover, hence more sunshine, which does
increase the energy available for evaporation, but as soil moisture is
low, the bulk of the energy goes into heating the near-surface
atmosphere and hence higher air temperatures.

But amazingly, the story doesn’t end with how wrong the chapter was.

Professor Franks also pointed out that Neville Nicholls was one of the chapter’s Lead Authors, and David Karoly, whose work was also heavily cited in WG1 Chapter 9, was its Review Editor.

Quipped Franks: “Hence they cite and review their own papers as part of the clearly flawed IPCC process.”

Source: American Thinker

It’s reached a stage where if the IPCC makes a statement, you know it must be wrong or stupid, and that’s where the whole bandwagon breaks down.

Possibly related posts:

  1. ScienceNow Daily says 2009 hottest year south of equator. Climate Scientist says hogwash.
  2. If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense.
  3. The edifice crumbles: top climatologist openly breaks with Climategate conspirators
  4. IPCC apologizes for Himalayan glacier meltdown exaggeration, sort of
  5. What is the “likelihood” that the 2007 IPCC Report, section “the Physical Basis” is exagerrated?

30 Responses to ““Hottest January ever” say climate experts, establishing a new comedy genre”

  1. Marty69 says:

    Got to agree. January really must have been one of the hottest. Most mornings I just walked out to my car and finished up sweating – scraping the bloody ice and snow off the windows.

  2. Graham says:

    Just when the IPCC is trying to convince us that they really, really are sensible, one of their scientists escapes from confinement and starts spouting drivel again.

    So far the IPCC only acknowledge two errors, which just proves that they aren’t so hot at counting either. I was reading an article that suggests that the ‘cap and trade’ legislation in the USA is stuck, maybe for ever, in spite of attemps to divert round the democratic process.

  3. denverthen says:

    When I told my father about this, his response was indicative of precisely what you say: he was virtually paralysed with laughter.

    A “laughing stock” is exactly the right way to describe these clowns. But the sinister undercurrent is always there.

  4. Fred says:

    it is in fact true . . . at the global level.

    It is because the Oceans are cooling and throwing off huge amounts of stored energy and heating the air near the oceans.

    The land masses have been exceptionally cold.

    When the oceans start cooling, beware the next ice age.

    Look on the bright side . . it will be much easier to keep the beer properly chilled at the summer BBQ’s

  5. Taruni says:

    Its so good and humorous to see each one of these “experts” demolishing their whole scam by their pronouncements.We look forward to more of them committing self immolation.

  6. Henry chance says:

    One of the ones that lies with a straight face is Joe Romm. He declared November the hottest ever a few days after climate gate came out to get attention. This was a week before the end of the month. Scientists gather information before making declarations. It was also a month where whistler had 18′ of snow and set a record for November. The snow record for a fact was set before the month was over.

  7. Henry chance says:

    It is hot in Venezuela. El Nino has dried up the river and hydro power is now rationed. The Commie dictator is rotating blackouts and on TEEVEE is chewing the fat on electric and ranting on G Bush when the lights go out. Joke is on Chavez.

    Priceless.

    http://www.elnuevodia.com/chavezsequedasinluzenplenodiscurso-678052.html

  8. Mike R says:

    Hey, I think Baghdad Bob is alive and well, and apparently has a job writing the PR for the warmists.

  9. Graham says:

    If Dominic the warmist comes back I have some more homework for him.

    http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/2006/10/co2_acquittal.html

    • John D. Nier says:

      Send Dick Morris a copy…he is a rocket scientist. :-)

      • Tom Roe says:

        Probably the guy who designed the mars probe we slammed into the red planet. The crash idea was sold as cheaper than a traditional soft landing capable craft. We haven’t heard from it since it hit the surface. Another billion down the hole.

  10. DougS says:

    I think he’s right!

    It was so hot one day in January I couldn’t get my car off the drive. I thought it was snow but it must have been polar bear pelts from the poor dead, burned up creatures – must have floated in on all that melting ice from the North Pole!

  11. Tom Roe says:

    The Alarmists have become masochistic.

  12. Blueridge says:

    Do any of these Global Warming fear mongers understand that their case was plausable when we were all experiencing warm snow free winters?

    Trying to sell people ice in the middle of winter is a tough sell as is telling them it’s the hottest winter on record while there’s 2 feet of snow on the roof.

  13. Bob says:

    everybody should email Neville.Nicholls@arts.monash.edu.au and let him know how much his humour is appreciated!! he even looks like bozo the clown!!

  14. C# says:

    Remember when last October was the hottest, and then it turned out to be a scam?

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/ipcc-scientists-caught-producing-false-data-to-push-global-warming.html

  15. The IPCC will be cleaning up at the comedy awards this year. This must be the end of their credibility!. JD.

  16. Ian Graham says:

    I live near Toronto, ON and we FINALLY got a huge amount of snow yet temperature wise it’s around 0 to -1˚C. This winter has had very little snow and while at times it’s been cold, it’s mostly been warmer then normal. First time to this website… question… If you’re right about GW being a hoax and do nothing, great… but WHAT IF YOU’RE WRONG? What then? Are you going to miraculously save us? What is the NEGATIVE TO CLEANING UP THE WORLD considering how polluted we have made it in the last 50 years? We don’t take care of things, we allow corporations and politicians to bully us, and we have become lazy. So the arctic population up in northern Canada who are seeing major problems… are they wrong? And Greenland who also are reporting thin ice, etc… are they wrong? While I totally agree that the carbon tax, etc. can be very political, business manipulation, we do need to do something. Oh, and perhaps ask San Francisco, who are seeing waters rising and slowly taking over, if they think GW is a scam.

    • Tel says:

      The measurements of sea level in San Francisco show about 8 inches (0.2 m) of sea level rise over the past 100 years. There’s a graph here:

      http://www.magazine.noaa.gov/stories/images/sanfran26.jpg

      People are predicting 5 feet of sea level rise by 2100 but then people will predict all sorts of things and obviously no one buying coastal land actually believes any of this (including Al Gore).

      I predict that pink elephants will rise from the deep and kick us all in the shins and it will happen oh maybe 25 years time, maybe a bit longer. OK, some deniers might say it is unlikely by WHAT IF I’M RIGHT? Think of the the damage once those herds get loose. I demand billions of dollars research funding to study this problem BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!!!!

  17. John D. Nier says:

    Ian I live in San Franciso area, I can assure you there is no rising water other then when it’s high tide.

  18. Ian Graham says:

    John,
    The CBC did a full story on San Francisco and if you google it, the sea level has risen dramatically. To the point that the city is looking at how other cities in the world, like denmark, deal with houses that “float”.

    http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/planning/climate_change/SLR_strategy.pdf

    http://www.greaterthings.com/News/ClimateChange/SeaLevel/index.html

    http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/environmentscience/sea_change_2.html

    • Tom Roe says:

      Ian,
      I went to school in the Bay Area. San Francisco already has “houses that float” whole neighborhoods of them in fact. They are called houseboats and have been around for many decades. The logic behind your post is flawed i.e they are studying a solution so the problem must exist. If you have spent some time around academia and/or government you know that they will pay to study anything. Studying is another way of saying “we are spending money on favored people and ideas” Most of the so-called science in the massive IPCC reports is generated using this exact flawed formulation. They are saying to you that there is a huge amount of scientific work produced by an impressive number of scientists across many disciplines. How can you refuse to believe something this enormous? The size of the thing is being used to make you believe it’s real. In reality almost all of the science is conjectural. It is based on the second part of the scientific method “if x is true then what does it mean” Here lies the importance of the climategate emails showing that x was derived at dishonestly. The vast majority of the work that you are being shown is simply an exercise in “what if” The whole gigantic edifice falls apart if the answer to “what if” is “the underlying theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming is wrong” therefore “what if” is irrelevant. Most of us here have studied the evidence in favor of AGW and decided that it is not proven. Current observable climate change can be scientifically explained within the context of known natural variability. We have been succesful in debunking most of the major claims made by AGW proponents. The beast is slain. Those on the other side refuse to accept this and have gone to extraordinary lenghts to convince you otherwise. I ask you to keep an open mind on the topic and refuse to be bum rushed by cries of alarm. Imagine someone in Toronto claiming that you must organize against an imminent invasion from Costa Rica. You spoke up to ask a few questions and were shouted down as a denier. Would you keep asking the questions or accept the premise? We chose to keep asking and the answers are proving us right to do so.

  19. John D. Nier says:

    Ian it’s pure fantasy I can assure you. To even think about this is ridiculous. The sea is not rising, in fact it’s gone down, You need to quit believing every thing Al Gore and his buddies spout. Remember I live here, I’m not 2800 miles away, I see the SF Bay sometimes several times per day. It has not gone up, it will not go up. Even if it were to go up it would only be mere millimeters per year and wouldn’t even be noticable for several lifetimes or longer.

    First Read This: http://www.climategate.com/sea-levels-proven-to-have-fallen-for-past-six-years

    Then Read This:http://www.climategate.com/100-reasons-why-anthropogenic-global-warming-a-cult

  20. Ian Graham says:

    John, I’m glad you’re so confident. Are you a scientist or perhaps psychic for the future? What you’ve given me is all “climate gate” and quite honestly tells me nothing. And as for Al Gore… I’m not a supporter but do see many other REAL scientists sounding the alarms. Perhaps you could visit Nova Scotia and explain how some towns are now getting flooded? Or perhaps you should go visit your own backyard and see what scientists have been showing as sea level rise in San Francisco. It’s right there and if they’re wrong, you can explain to them why. They’re only scientist right? Again… if you’re wrong about climate change, then what?

    • Tel says:

      Nova Scotia has regularly flooded at least as far back as people bothered to keep notes. More detail here:

      http://www.ec.gc.ca/eau-water/default.asp?lang=En&n=4FCB81DD-1

      Although snowmelt itself has not caused flooding events in Nova Scotia, it has been a contributing factor in 65 instances since the first flood recorded in 1759. Flooding conditions associated with snowmelt often occur during winter rainstorms in December, January and February. Spells of warm weather accompanied by rain are not uncommon in Nova Scotia during these months. In fact, such conditions led to all 48 flood events recorded in the province during these three months, 36 of which involved snowmelt. Prolonged warm spells during this period can be particularly disastrous. For instance, the flooding in the aftermath of what was known as the longest January thaw, from January 3 to 18, 1956, caused province-wide damage.

      If you are going to use argument by authority, you really need to be a bit more specific about what qualifies an authority and why. On what basis is one scientist more real than another?

  21. John D. Nier says:

    Sorry Ian I don’ t get into circle jerk conversation with people like you anymore. Bye!

  22. Graham says:

    Ian – I’ve given you a link and I politely suggest you read it.

    Not even the IPCC believe that sea levels are rising any more.

    Clearly you disagree with the IPCC too.

  23. Tom Roe says:

    Ian. If you haven’t yet go read the emails. They are online in various formats but worth the time. If you read them and decide they don’t show a long-running conspiracy between prominent members of the climate science community to subvert climate science itself then so be it. You’ll have done your homework and come to a different conclusion than most of us have. On this blog you will find the answer to your “are you a scientist question” in the post regarding the Institute of Physics submission. They are largely scientists and they are expressing their serious concerns about the integrity of the climate science supporting AGW. Our thoughts prayers go out to the people of Chile in their hour of need.

  24. [...] “Hottest January ever” say climate experts, establishing a new comedy genre [...]

  25. Robert says:

    When I was a fraud prosecutor, the cockles of my heart would tickle when a defense attorney argued to the jury that his client, who had been caught in a lie, had told the truth on every other occasion and that the lie was just an aberration, a mistake, not really that important, etc. My rebuttal: “Suppose, ladies and gentlemen, that you order beef stew in a restaurant famous for that dish and, after a bite or two, you chomp down on a piece of meat–AND IT’S RANCID! Are you going to eat the rest of that stew?!!?” Never failed to convict.

This website is for sale for $10,000. Contact us if interested.