Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What's Happening to the Climate of the Arctic?
CO2 Science Magazine ^ | 11 December 2002 | Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso

Posted on 12/13/2002 2:44:49 AM PST by PeaceBeWithYou

A long succession of climate models has consistently suggested that CO2-induced global warming should be amplified in earth's polar regions and that the first signs of man's predicted impact on the world's weather should thus be manifest there. Many people have consequently accepted recently-reported high temperatures from various parts of the Arctic as evidence of the validity of contemporary climate model predictions and an indisputable sign that the dreaded climatic effects of mankind's CO2 emissions have in very fact arrived at the world's doorstep. Actual temperature data, however, tell a vastly different story.

Following the recent release of Russian meteorological observations poleward of 62°N, Polyakov et al. (2002) created an Arctic-wide temperature history that runs from 1875 to 2001, based on data obtained from 75 land meteorological stations. Over this 126-year period, their record depicts two major intervals of warming, each of approximately 15 years duration. When annual temperatures are expressed as six-year running means, the first of these warmings starts at about 1922 and the other at about 1985. The initial warming is by far the more dramatic of the two, with temperatures rising by nearly 2°C, while temperatures rise by not quite 1°C in the second. In addition, the most recent six-year mean temperature is 0.2°C less than the peak analogous temperature achieved at the end of the first warming. So what is one to conclude from these observations?

First of all, as we have long claimed for the entire world [see our Editorial of 1 July 2000: There Has Been No Global Warming for the Past 70 Years], the Arctic - which according to essentially all climate models is supposed to be the harbinger of things to come for the rest of the world - is not yet as warm as it was in the late 1930s and early 1940s. In fact, because temperatures were so high for so long back then, the authors report that linear regression trends calculated from the 1920s to the present show a small but statistically significant cooling tendency.

Starting all the way back at beginning of the 20th century, however - at the time when Mann et al. (1999) claim the great "unprecedented" warming of the past millennium began - Polyakov et al.'s Arctic temperature data do produce a subsequent warming. However, for the period 1901 to 1997, they note that the upward temperature trend of the Arctic calculated from their data is "statistically indistinguishable" from the upward temperature trend of the entire Northern Hemisphere calculated from the data of Jones et al. (1999). Hence, as they most appropriately note, this similarity "does not support amplified warming in polar regions predicted by models (IPCC, 2001)," and especially does it not support a polar warming that is amplified by a factor of two to three, as most models predict.

So why have the world's best climate models erred so egregiously in this most common of their predictions? Polyakov et al. suggest that the models' missing of the mark may be due to the insignificance of what their creators ironically suggest is the cause of the supposed polar warming amplification, i.e., strong positive feedback induced by the melting of snow and sea ice. They note, for example, that in addition to analyzing temperature records they examined long-term records of observations of fast-ice thickness and ice extent from the Kara, Laptev, East Siberian and Chukchi Seas, finding that "long-term trends are small and generally statistically insignificant, while trends for shorter records are not indicative of the long-term tendencies, in agreement with the trends of air temperature."

In concluding their brief review, Polyakov et al. remark that "if long-term trends are accepted as a valid measure of climate change" - and, we wonder, what else could possibly qualify as an alternative? - "then the air temperature and ice data do not support the proposed polar amplification of global warming." They also note there are some other independent indications that "the importance of the ice- and snow-albedo feedbacks may be exaggerated (Robock, 1983), which may explain why the amplification of global warming is not found in the Arctic."

Clearly, as Polyakov et al. suggest in summation, "the Arctic poses severe challenges to generating credible model-based projections of climate change," and until there are models that can pass its reality check, there would appear to be little reason to give them any credence.

Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso

References Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2001. Climate Change 2001, The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group 1 to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), edited by J.T. Houghton, Y. Ding, D.J. Griggs, M. Noguer, P.J. van der Linden, and D. Xiaosu. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Jones, P.D., New, M., Parker, D.E., Martin, S. and Rigor, I.G. 1999. Surface air temperature and its changes over the past 150 years. Reviews of Geophysics 37: 173-199.

Mann, M.E., Bradley, R.S. and Hughes, M.K. 1999. Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the past millennium: Inferences, uncertainties, and limitations. Geophysical Research Letters 26: 759-762.

Polyakov, I., Akasofu, S-I., Bhatt, U., Colony, R., Ikeda, M., Makshtas, A., Swingley, C., Walsh, D. and Walsh, J. 2002. Trends and variations in Arctic climate system. EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union 83: 547-548.

Robock, A. 1983. Ice and snow feedbacks and the latitudinal and seasonal distribution of climate sensitivity. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 40: 986-997.

Volume 5, Number 50: 11 December 2002



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: articice; climate; flawedmodeling; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last
To: Carry_Okie
Clearly, as Polyakov et al. suggest in summation, "the Arctic poses severe challenges to generating credible model-based projections of climate change," and until there are models that can pass its reality check, there would appear to be little reason to give them any credence.

Now if we could get the major news outlets to get that through their left leaning...oh never mind.

21 posted on 12/13/2002 6:46:41 PM PST by farmfriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
[U]ntil there are models that can pass [a] reality check, there would appear to be little reason to give them any credence.

DUH!
22 posted on 12/13/2002 6:51:21 PM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets; ancient_geezer
Here is just one reason(great find AG) that there are no accurate climate models(nor will there be anytime soon). Added to that is the fact that with current computer technology it would take 1034 years to calculate all of the data and known variables involved.

Imagine it.

Proccessing, please wait.

Estimated time remaining-

10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years

Big DUH!

23 posted on 12/14/2002 5:55:58 AM PST by PeaceBeWithYou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: KeyWest
It is the sun that is causing the current warming since temps on both Mars and Neptune have been rising.

Very interesting. If the temperature on other planets is rising in parallel with earth, that would be very convincing for the sun being the cause. Could you supply a reference for this?

24 posted on 12/14/2002 6:03:57 AM PST by FairWitness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
Mars-Cape Cod Times(AP)-Evidence points to Mars warming

Neptune-MIT News Office-Evidence of global warming seen on Neptune's largest moon

Pluto-CNN-Pluto may be undergoing global warming

Can't find it now, but Mercury's surface temperature was also repoted to be on the rise, perhaps someone has a link.

25 posted on 12/14/2002 7:11:33 AM PST by PeaceBeWithYou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
“Las' time we was on Mars, it be very cold!”

Sheila Jackson-Lee

26 posted on 12/14/2002 7:29:30 AM PST by johnny7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
Many thanks for the links. It appears we not only have "global warming", we actually have "solar system warming"!
27 posted on 12/14/2002 7:32:51 AM PST by FairWitness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
Summary: The sky isn't falling. Enviralmentalist whackos will *not* be pleased with this report.

The greenies will just ignore it, reality is irrelevent, only their agenda of centralized economic control matters.

28 posted on 12/14/2002 7:42:06 AM PST by Leto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
Thanks for the post.
29 posted on 12/14/2002 7:44:45 AM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
Thanks- all those articles have been in other pubs as well.

Mars was the first then Neptune and I did not see the Pluto one.

Most people do not realize how small, in astronomical measure, the band is where Earth resides that allows life to flourish. Just a slight heating or cooling of the sun makes a tremendous difference in the band's limits and temp on Earth. Mighty big furnace out there.
30 posted on 12/14/2002 8:06:17 AM PST by KeyWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou; Stand Watch Listen; RightWhale; Free the USA; Carry_Okie; SierraWasp; Ranger; ...
Thanks for the ping and the links!

Global Warming Hoax :

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Global Warming Hoax , click below:
  click here >>> Global Warming Hoax <<< click here  
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)



31 posted on 12/14/2002 12:03:38 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KeyWest
It occurs to me that if the Sun is the cause, warming should be found thruout the solar system(all planets/moons). I don't know if anyone has looked specifically at all of the planets and moons for warming. So far, AFAIK it seems to have been found only by accident.
32 posted on 12/14/2002 12:41:13 PM PST by PeaceBeWithYou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RushLake
It will not deter the stalinists from their mission of eliminating ownership of private property, population reduction, and the establishment of their own elite ruling class.

This is a part of Agenda 21.

33 posted on 12/14/2002 12:50:14 PM PST by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
bump
34 posted on 12/14/2002 1:41:58 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
I'm agnostic on computer climate models. You simply don't need to know all the variables with absolute certainty to draw useful conclusions. You have to understand the bounds on your predictions. The more intellectually dishonest researchers are, the more likely they are to get mentioned in the popular press.

I have done computer modeling and use computer models at work, all the time. I think I know shoddy work when I see it. The climatologist do not seem particularly eager for Validation and Verfication of their models.
35 posted on 12/14/2002 3:18:01 PM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
I agree. A computer model is only as good as it's input and programing, and the climate models leave much to be desired as they ignore important data(water vapor, solar variation, orbital positioning, etc.) and assume too much(warming, polar amplification, regional and topographical variance, etc.) to be remotely valid.

I wasn't attacking computer modeling per se, but the lack of validity in the climate modeling ones.

36 posted on 12/14/2002 4:22:54 PM PST by PeaceBeWithYou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
Found by those who were studying the specific planet/moon. I believe both Neptune and Mars were by grad students. Most astronomers are interested in things far beyond out solar system. That is where the grant money is.
37 posted on 12/15/2002 3:39:51 AM PST by KeyWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness
It appears we not only have "global warming", we actually have "solar system warming"!

Damn those SUVs!

Their Global Warming influence reaches high and low.

38 posted on 12/15/2002 3:56:12 AM PST by Ole Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou

Those bloody Marsians, Neptunians and Plutonians in their SUVs! Don't they realise they're destroying their planets!?


39 posted on 02/01/2007 4:44:59 AM PST by aliquis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: aliquis
The Martians are worried too!


40 posted on 02/01/2007 4:57:34 AM PST by mc5cents (Show me just what Mohammd brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson