The icecaps of Greenland and Antarctica: are they melting?

NASA scientists have published a paper warning that there is growing evidence that the melting at the polar caps is accelerating. From the press release:

The pace at which the polar ice sheets are losing mass was found to be accelerating rapidly. Each year over the course of the study, the two ice sheets lost a combined average of 36.3 gigatonnes more than they did the year before. In comparison, the 2006 study of mountain glaciers and ice caps estimated their loss at 402 gigatonnes a year on average, with a year-over-year acceleration rate three times smaller than that of the ice sheets.

Several things to note after reading the actual paper:

Climate science hearing changes nothing

There was a hearing in Congress today on climate science, though it apparently changed nothing: the Republican leadership in the committee is going to proceed with legislation to try to roll back the EPA regulations relating to carbon dioxide imposed by the Obama administration.

The most interesting detail I gleaned from the above article however was this quote, written by the Science journalist himself, Eli Kintisch:

The hearing barely touched on the underlying issue, namely, is it appropriate for Congress to involve itself so deeply into the working of a regulatory agency? Are there precedents? And what are the legal and governance implications of curtailing an agency’s authority in this way?

What a strange thing to write. If I remember correctly, we are a democracy, and the people we elect to Congress are given the ultimate responsibility and authority to legislate. There are no “legal or governance implications.” If they want to rein in a regulatory agency, that is their absolute Constitutional right. That Kintisch and his editors at Science don’t seem to understand this basic fact about American governance is most astonishing.

Water and ice at the bottom of the Antarctic Ice Sheet

The uncertainty of science: Unexpectedly large amounts of flowing water and refrozen ice found at the bottom of the Antarctic icecap. Key quote:

It’s too early to know whether this new finding means that global warming will melt ice sheets slower or faster than scientists have predicted. But the work does suggest that current models of ice sheet dynamics are missing a huge factor, said glaciologist Donald Blankenship of the University of Texas, Austin. “The take-home message of this work is that [the bottom of ice sheets] can no longer be ignored” in the models, he says.

Two High-priority Climate Missions Dropped from NASA’s Budget Plans

Two high-priority climate missions dropped from NASA’s budget by the White House. And what’s most amazing: No one’s squealing!

“Removal of these missions was not what we desired and not what the administration desired, but it was a clear recognition and acknowledgement of the budget issues we face as a nation,” [said Steve Volz, associate director for flight programs at NASA’s Earth Science Division]. “It’s cleaner to be allowed to delete the scope that goes along with the dollars than to have to figure out how to do more with less.”

Another climategate whitewash

The inspector general of the Department of Commerce has just issued a review of NOAA’s response to the climategate emails and has essentially given the agency a clean bill of health. You can download the full report here [pdf].

It’s. just. another. whitewash. Let me quote just one part of the report’s summary, referring to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to NOAA in June 2007 in which the agency responded by saying they had no such documents:
» Read more

House cuts off funds to IPCC

Listen to the squealing: Scientists criticize the House vote to cut off funds to the IPCC. Key quote:

Without the federal support, [Stanford ecologist Chris Field] said, “We’d have no ability to organize meetings, we’d have no ability to coordinate chapters.”

In other words, no more jaunts to Cancun in the midst of winter. What a shame!

Considering the insincere effort of the IPCC and its scientists to correct its numerous errors, as well as their admitted political agenda, it seems completely appropriate to stop funding it with U.S. tax dollars. If these environmentalists want to issue a report, they should pay for it themselves.

Holdren of the Obama administration:
Deniers no, Ignorant yes!

The following story is why the advocates of global warming are losing the debate: At House hearings yesterday, Obama’s science advisor John Holdren admitted that using the term “deniers” to describe scientists who had doubts about global warming is inappropriate. “It was not my intent to compare them to Holocaust deniers, and I regret it,” he replied. “In the future I will find other terms to use.”

Sounds good, doesn’t it? Shortly thereafter, however, during the same hearing, Holdren then said this about a list of 100 climate scientists [word file] who remain skeptical about global warming:

“I haven’t seen the list,” Holdren began. “But in the past, most of the names on such petitions have turned out not to be climate scientists, and one could assume that they had not spent much time reviewing the literature.”

Without any knowledge, he slams these scientists, accusing them of being ignorant of the science.
» Read more

The great wind scam

The great wind scam. Key quote:

“With demand for power at record levels because of the freezing weather, there have been days when the contribution of our forests of wind turbines has been precisely nothing,” wrote Richard Littlejohn in the Daily Mail Dec. 27. “It gets better,” Mr. Littlejohn continued. “As the temperature has plummeted, the turbines have had to be heated to prevent them from seizing up. Consequently, they have been consuming more electricity than they generate.”

The Sun’s continuing wimpiness

Get those winter coats out of storage! Yesterday NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center published its monthly update of the Sun’s sunspot cycle. I’ve posted the newest graph below, showing the continuing slow rise in sunspots (blue/black lines) in comparison with the consensis prediction made by the solar science community in May 2009 (red line).

Though the sunspot count made a slight recovery in January, it was not enough to make up for the plunge in December. Essentially, the Sun continues to act like a sleepy kitten that really doesn’t want to wake up. This suggests that even the newest and wimpiest prediction for the next solar maximum, from solar scientists at the Marshall Space Flight Center, is still overstating the Sun’s upcoming sunspot activity.

In the past a wimpy Sun has been linked to cold weather, for reasons that scientists as yet don’t quiet understand. And this next solar maximum continues to look like the wimpiest in more than 200 years (see the graph on this page)!

January sunspot graph

A fresh perspective from the new chairman of the House subcommittee that oversees National Science Foundation (NSF), NASA, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Commerce

Mo Brooks (R-Alabama), the new chairman of the House subcommittee that oversees National Science Foundation (NSF), NASA, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Commerce, gives his perspective on science and the budget. Two quotes of interest:

Q: Do you believe that federal research should be exempt from a rollback in federal spending to 2008 levels?
Brooks: I would love for that to happen. But we just don’t have the money. … We have no choice but to look at everything. If we don’t balance our budget over a short period of time, the federal government is going to collapse and there won’t be money for any of these things. So if we’re going to save money for research and advancement in science, we’re going to have to get our house in order now.

Q: Do you think the government should increase funding on research once things turn around?
Brooks: Do you mean if the budgetary situation turns around? I don’t see that happening in the next 4 to 5 years. We’ve got a $1.5 trillion budget deficit, and Admiral Mullen, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has declared it the number one security threat to the country. And if our creditors would cut us off, there would be zero money for national defense or NSF or anything else.

Note how the interviewer, from Science, can’t seem to get his head around the idea of budget cuts.

Q: Is human activity causing global warming?
Brooks: That’s a difficult question to answer because I’ve talked to scientists on both sides of the fence, especially at the University of Alabama at Huntsville. Some say yes, and some say no. I’m also old enough to remember when the same left-wing part of our society was creating a global cooling scare in order to generate funds for their pet projects. So 30-some years ago, the big scare was global cooling, and once they drained the government, they shifted to global warming. So I’m approaching the issue with a healthy degree of skepticism. If the evidence is there to prove it, then so be it.

Sand dunes and dry ice on Mars

Time for some more sightseeing on Mars. A recent news release from Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter noted the discovery of seasonal avalanches on Mars. This new image of the northern martian sand dunes illustrate again how the surface of Mars changes seasonally. The white patches on the ridges of the sand dunes is frozen carbon dioxide, dry ice that condenses on the crowns of the dunes every winter. When spring comes, the dry ice evaporates, and as it does so it disturbs the underlying sand, which then tumbles down the sides of the dunes, producing the dark streaks.

Ice-capped sand dunes

The process is less dramatic, however, than the avalanches seen in the previous news release, as suggested by this image below, showing the same dunes in summer without the dry ice. The dark streaks in the second image are not significantly different from the first, indicating that the process that forms them is slow and subtle.

Sand dunes with ice-cap

New research finds that the Himalayan glaciers are not melting

New research finds that the Himalayan glaciers are not melting. Key quote:

The new study by scientists at the Universities of California and Potsdam has found that half of the glaciers in the Karakoram range, in the northwestern Himlaya, are in fact advancing and that global warming is not the deciding factor in whether a glacier survives or melts.

The last part of the above quote, on global warming, is almost certainly an overstatement of what we do or don’t know. Warming will cause glaciers to melt, but how much and when are factors that are still not understood. Moreover, we are still not sure how much warming has even occurred.

The solar maximum keep shrinking

Solar scientists at the Marshall Space Flight Center have once again revised downward their prediction for the intensity of the next solar maximum. Key quote:

Current prediction for the next sunspot cycle maximum gives a smoothed sunspot number maximum of about 59 in June/July of 2013. We are currently two years into Cycle 24 and the predicted size continues to fall.

If this prediction holds, the upcoming solar maximum could be the lowest since the cycle came back to life in around 1715 following the Maunder Minimum.

the solar cycle

Climate change study had ‘significant error’: experts

Climate scientists admit that a climate change study which claimed the Earth would warm by more than 4 degrees Fahrenheit in about a decade had “significant errors”. Key quote:

Scientist Scott Mandia forwarded to AFP an email he said he sent to Hisas ahead of publication explaining why her figures did not add up, and noting that it would take “quite a few decades” to reach a warming level of 2.4 degrees Celsius. “Even if we assume the higher end of the current warming rate, we should only be 0.2C warmer by 2020 than today,” Mandia wrote. “To get to +2.4C the current trend would have to immediately increase almost ten-fold.”

2010 Sea Level: Largest drop ever recorded?

2010 sea level: The largest drop ever recorded? Key quote:

2006 was the first year to show a drop in the global sea level. 2010 will be the 2nd year to show a decrease in sea level. That is correct, 2 of the past 5 years are going to show a decrease in sea level. 2010 could likely show a significant drop global sea level. By significant I mean it is possible that it will likely drop between 2-3 mm from 2009.

All IPCC predictions insist that increased carbon dioxide will cause sea level rise. All these predictions are now wrong, as carbon dioxide is still increasing in the atmosphere but the sea level has actually been going down.

Penguin tracking bands do harm

The bands that scientists attach to penguins to track them actually do harm. The data also suggests that certain climate research might also be skewed because of this. Key quote:

Overall, the team found, bands were bad for penguins. Banded penguins had a 16% lower survival rate than unbanded birds over the 10 years, the researchers report online today in Nature. Banded birds also arrived later at the breeding grounds and took longer trips to forage for food. As a result, they produced 39% fewer chicks. . . . [The researcher noted] that his team’s results suggest that research using banded penguins may be biased. For example, he says, several high-profile studies have used banded penguins to investigate the impact of climate change on the birds. The findings of those studies aren’t necessarily wrong, but the numbers need to be reconsidered, he says.

1 26 27 28 29 30 33