Its crazy that that this is happening the same time we've got record high ocean temperatures, record high global temperatures, a hurricane about to hit California and wet bulb temps in the Southern states.
Climate Change
- Thread starter Addict2sex
- Start date
Time to reduce carbon footprint for real. But climate
sheeple and climate deniers won''t care.
Yup, lets go after the oil&gas industry first and then all the people who profited from it.
Then we can move forward.
Hawaii’s Green Agenda–And Poor Decisions–Primed The State For Deadly Maui Fire
While climate hawks were quick to blame the tragic Hawaiian fires on climate change, some of the state’s green policies and questionable decision-making before and during the tragedy helped set the stage for a disaster that has so far claimed over 100 lives.
Along with other Democrats and some members of the media, Democratic Gov. Josh Green repeatedly suggested in the wake of the disaster that climate change and its effects were the primary cause, with Green himself stating explicitly that climate change is “the ultimate reason that so many people perished.” [emphasis, links added]
However, a growing list of actions and green policy decisions made by elected and unelected officials of key Hawaiian institutions, public and private, in the years leading up to the fires appear to have played a major role.
Dylan Housman on X: "Now that we know the Hawaii wildfire was caused by downed powerlines, here's a fun look back at essentially all of American media immediately blaming climate change https://t.co/vbH6qTbT7s" / X (twitter.com)
For years before the fires, government agencies understood that Western Maui, the hardest-hit area, was particularly susceptible to wildfires because of high concentrations of non-native grasses in the area, according to The New York Times.
An assessment report from 2020 stated that the region had a 90% chance of wildfires each year on average, a percentage calculated with the pervasive non-native dry grasses in mind.
Despite its understanding that the abundance of dry grass in the region posed a threat, the state allowed it to grow without doing much to trim it or otherwise keep it under control, according to NBC News.
As a result, huge swaths of the region became open-air tinderboxes, particularly in West Maui.
For example, the state appears to have dragged its feet in negotiations with Hawaiian Electric, the state’s utility company whose downed power lines reportedly started the blaze.
Hawaiian Electric had identified an urgent need as early as 2019 to make infrastructure upgrades and manage vegetation to reduce the possibility that its equipment could spark a fire, and it proposed to spend $190 million to do so last June, according to The Wall Street Journal.
In response to the proposal, state bureaucrats and regulators bogged the proposal down in red tape and reviews, according to the WSJ. …snip…
“Hawaii’s obsession with climate took the utility’s eyes off the ball,” Kish continued. “Rather than concentrating on what they can fix, they focused on the climate industrial complex and its unworkable solutions.”
Hawaiian Electric interpreted the signals sent by the state’s commitment to reach 100% green electricity generation by 2045, deciding to expend significant resources to achieve this aim, according to the WSJ.
The firm invested vast resources in green technologies, but ultimately spent less than $245,000 on wildfire-specific projects on the island between 2019 and 2022 after it had determined that it had to do more to mitigate the risks posed by errant sparks, according to the WSJ.
“While there was concern for wildfire risk, politically the focus was on electricity generation,” Mina Morita, chair of the state utilities commission from 2011 to 2015, told the WSJ.
A 2020 audit of the company’s management systems found that its risk considerations were mostly focused on financial risks, with minimal analysis of operational risks, while the division within the firm that oversaw power-line operations had significant management problems, according to the WSJ.
Hawaiian Electric did not respond immediately to a request for comment.
The fires began in earnest the morning of Aug. 8, as a downed power line reportedly sparked some dry grass and started the fire which would grow into one of the deadliest wildfires in American history.
West Maui Land Co. requested at 1 p.m. from the state’s Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) for permission to divert stream water to their reservoirs so that firefighters on the front lines could have access to more water to battle the resurgent flames, according to a letter it wrote to the DLNR on Aug. 10.
In response to that request, the department’s Commission on Water Resource Management, which is led by an advocate of “indigenous knowledge” and has said that water management requires “true conversations about equity,” told the company to contact a downstream farmer to ensure that a temporary diversion would not impact his taro farming operation in undesirable ways, according to the letter.
The company tried to make contact with the farmer, but communications were spotty and time was of the essence, the letter asserts.
The agency eventually approved the company for the diversion at 6 p.m., some five hours after the request had been made, according to the letter.
By that point, the fires were raging out of control, shutting down a key roadway and making it impossible for the company to access the siphon that would have allowed it to divert the water into the right places for the firefighters to access, the letter states.
Lahaina’s fire hydrants went dry, and the firefighters on the front lines had no choice but to flee as their town went up in smoke, according to Hawaii News Now.
The alleged hesitation to approve a water diversion was not the only critical mistake made as the catastrophe unfolded.
Lahaina’s emergency-alert sirens never sounded, a decision that Maui Emergency Management Agency (EMA) Chief Herman Andaya has publicly defended with vigor, even as many residents reportedly did not know of the fires until seeing them or smelling smoke.
Andaya had zero prior career experience in crisis management before getting the job for Maui County.
He did, however, serve as the chief of staff for the former mayor of Maui between 2011 and 2017, and also worked for the Maui housing administration from 2003 to 2007.
Top image via drone footage YouTube/screencap
Read full post at Daily Caller
Hawaii's Green Agenda–And Poor Decisions–Primed The State For Deadly Maui Fire - Climate Change Dispatch
While climate hawks were quick to blame the tragic Hawaiian fires on climate change, some of the state’s green policies and questionable decision-making before and during the tragedy helped set the stage for a disaster that has so far claimed over 100 lives.
Along with other Democrats and some members of the media, Democratic Gov. Josh Green repeatedly suggested in the wake of the disaster that climate change and its effects were the primary cause, with Green himself stating explicitly that climate change is “the ultimate reason that so many people perished.” [emphasis, links added]
However, a growing list of actions and green policy decisions made by elected and unelected officials of key Hawaiian institutions, public and private, in the years leading up to the fires appear to have played a major role.
Dylan Housman on X: "Now that we know the Hawaii wildfire was caused by downed powerlines, here's a fun look back at essentially all of American media immediately blaming climate change https://t.co/vbH6qTbT7s" / X (twitter.com)
For years before the fires, government agencies understood that Western Maui, the hardest-hit area, was particularly susceptible to wildfires because of high concentrations of non-native grasses in the area, according to The New York Times.
An assessment report from 2020 stated that the region had a 90% chance of wildfires each year on average, a percentage calculated with the pervasive non-native dry grasses in mind.
Despite its understanding that the abundance of dry grass in the region posed a threat, the state allowed it to grow without doing much to trim it or otherwise keep it under control, according to NBC News.
As a result, huge swaths of the region became open-air tinderboxes, particularly in West Maui.
For example, the state appears to have dragged its feet in negotiations with Hawaiian Electric, the state’s utility company whose downed power lines reportedly started the blaze.
Hawaiian Electric had identified an urgent need as early as 2019 to make infrastructure upgrades and manage vegetation to reduce the possibility that its equipment could spark a fire, and it proposed to spend $190 million to do so last June, according to The Wall Street Journal.
In response to the proposal, state bureaucrats and regulators bogged the proposal down in red tape and reviews, according to the WSJ. …snip…
“Hawaii’s obsession with climate took the utility’s eyes off the ball,” Kish continued. “Rather than concentrating on what they can fix, they focused on the climate industrial complex and its unworkable solutions.”
Hawaiian Electric interpreted the signals sent by the state’s commitment to reach 100% green electricity generation by 2045, deciding to expend significant resources to achieve this aim, according to the WSJ.
The firm invested vast resources in green technologies, but ultimately spent less than $245,000 on wildfire-specific projects on the island between 2019 and 2022 after it had determined that it had to do more to mitigate the risks posed by errant sparks, according to the WSJ.
“While there was concern for wildfire risk, politically the focus was on electricity generation,” Mina Morita, chair of the state utilities commission from 2011 to 2015, told the WSJ.
A 2020 audit of the company’s management systems found that its risk considerations were mostly focused on financial risks, with minimal analysis of operational risks, while the division within the firm that oversaw power-line operations had significant management problems, according to the WSJ.
Hawaiian Electric did not respond immediately to a request for comment.
The fires began in earnest the morning of Aug. 8, as a downed power line reportedly sparked some dry grass and started the fire which would grow into one of the deadliest wildfires in American history.
West Maui Land Co. requested at 1 p.m. from the state’s Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) for permission to divert stream water to their reservoirs so that firefighters on the front lines could have access to more water to battle the resurgent flames, according to a letter it wrote to the DLNR on Aug. 10.
In response to that request, the department’s Commission on Water Resource Management, which is led by an advocate of “indigenous knowledge” and has said that water management requires “true conversations about equity,” told the company to contact a downstream farmer to ensure that a temporary diversion would not impact his taro farming operation in undesirable ways, according to the letter.
The company tried to make contact with the farmer, but communications were spotty and time was of the essence, the letter asserts.
The agency eventually approved the company for the diversion at 6 p.m., some five hours after the request had been made, according to the letter.
By that point, the fires were raging out of control, shutting down a key roadway and making it impossible for the company to access the siphon that would have allowed it to divert the water into the right places for the firefighters to access, the letter states.
Lahaina’s fire hydrants went dry, and the firefighters on the front lines had no choice but to flee as their town went up in smoke, according to Hawaii News Now.
The alleged hesitation to approve a water diversion was not the only critical mistake made as the catastrophe unfolded.
Lahaina’s emergency-alert sirens never sounded, a decision that Maui Emergency Management Agency (EMA) Chief Herman Andaya has publicly defended with vigor, even as many residents reportedly did not know of the fires until seeing them or smelling smoke.
Andaya had zero prior career experience in crisis management before getting the job for Maui County.
He did, however, serve as the chief of staff for the former mayor of Maui between 2011 and 2017, and also worked for the Maui housing administration from 2003 to 2007.
Top image via drone footage YouTube/screencap
Read full post at Daily Caller
Hawaii's Green Agenda–And Poor Decisions–Primed The State For Deadly Maui Fire - Climate Change Dispatch
No, Hurricane Hilary Is NOT A Sign Of Climate Change
Hurricane Hilary update as of 8/17/2023…
Hurricane Hilary … is expected to turn toward the northwest on Friday and north-northwest on Saturday, taking it on a course roughly parallel to the coast of Baja California.
The center of the hurricane will approach Mexico’s Baja California Peninsula over the weekend. [emphasis, links added]
Hilary is predicted to peak as a Category 4 hurricane on Saturday, then rapidly weaken to a tropical storm by the time it arrives in Southern California on Monday.
It is not expected to be a hurricane on its final approach.
The storm will bring heavy rains to Baja, California, with rainfall amounts of three to six inches possible throughout the peninsula, and localized totals of 10 inches. Flash flooding and mudslides are possible in mountainous areas.
The storm’s remnants are likely to bring flooding rain as well as strong winds to some parts of California, including the Los Angeles Basin.
Heavy rainfall is expected to impact the Southwestern U.S. starting Friday through early next week, peaking on Sunday and Monday.
The storm will also cause large swells along the coast in the next several days, which could pose a hazard for surfers and boaters.
Source: https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_ep4+shtml/024719.shtml?tswind120#contents
Hurricane tracks in the eastern North Pacific…
Tropical cyclones in the eastern North Pacific typically follow a westward or west-northwestward direction due to the subtropical ridge’s influence, a dominant high-pressure system.
However, shifts in the subtropical ridge’s strength or position can make hurricanes veer northward.
Additionally, if elongated areas of low pressure, known as mid-latitude troughs, descend into the eastern Pacific, they can redirect a hurricane toward the north.
The presence of occasional pockets of warmer sea surface temperatures off the California coast might allow a tropical cyclone to maintain its intensity on a northward path.
Winds in the upper atmosphere can also influence cyclones to move from south to north.
Moreover, some hurricanes transform into post-tropical systems upon encountering cooler waters and different atmospheric conditions, making them more likely to follow a northern trajectory influenced by broader weather patterns.
While direct hits from full-strength hurricanes are rare in Southern California, the remnants can still produce significant rainfall and weather disruptions.
Source: https://www.actionnews5.com/2021/06/30/breakdown-why-hurricanes-are-less-common-west-coast/
Past tropical cyclones impacting southern California…
Hurricanes that hit Southern California are rare due to the typically cold ocean waters off the California coast, which tend to weaken tropical systems.
However, there have been a few instances in recorded history where remnants of tropical cyclones, and in one instance the cyclone itself, have impacted the region.
Here’s a brief history of notable events:
Although this is an uncommon event, just like in the 1939 Long Beach Tropical Storm, this has nothing to do with anthropogenic GHG emissions.
Read the full post at Irrational Fear
No, Hurricane Hilary Is NOT A Sign Of Climate Change - Climate Change Dispatch
Hurricane Hilary update as of 8/17/2023…
Hurricane Hilary … is expected to turn toward the northwest on Friday and north-northwest on Saturday, taking it on a course roughly parallel to the coast of Baja California.
The center of the hurricane will approach Mexico’s Baja California Peninsula over the weekend. [emphasis, links added]
Hilary is predicted to peak as a Category 4 hurricane on Saturday, then rapidly weaken to a tropical storm by the time it arrives in Southern California on Monday.
It is not expected to be a hurricane on its final approach.
The storm will bring heavy rains to Baja, California, with rainfall amounts of three to six inches possible throughout the peninsula, and localized totals of 10 inches. Flash flooding and mudslides are possible in mountainous areas.
The storm’s remnants are likely to bring flooding rain as well as strong winds to some parts of California, including the Los Angeles Basin.
Heavy rainfall is expected to impact the Southwestern U.S. starting Friday through early next week, peaking on Sunday and Monday.
The storm will also cause large swells along the coast in the next several days, which could pose a hazard for surfers and boaters.
Source: https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_ep4+shtml/024719.shtml?tswind120#contents
Hurricane tracks in the eastern North Pacific…
Tropical cyclones in the eastern North Pacific typically follow a westward or west-northwestward direction due to the subtropical ridge’s influence, a dominant high-pressure system.
However, shifts in the subtropical ridge’s strength or position can make hurricanes veer northward.
Additionally, if elongated areas of low pressure, known as mid-latitude troughs, descend into the eastern Pacific, they can redirect a hurricane toward the north.
The presence of occasional pockets of warmer sea surface temperatures off the California coast might allow a tropical cyclone to maintain its intensity on a northward path.
Winds in the upper atmosphere can also influence cyclones to move from south to north.
Moreover, some hurricanes transform into post-tropical systems upon encountering cooler waters and different atmospheric conditions, making them more likely to follow a northern trajectory influenced by broader weather patterns.
While direct hits from full-strength hurricanes are rare in Southern California, the remnants can still produce significant rainfall and weather disruptions.
Source: https://www.actionnews5.com/2021/06/30/breakdown-why-hurricanes-are-less-common-west-coast/
Past tropical cyclones impacting southern California…
Hurricanes that hit Southern California are rare due to the typically cold ocean waters off the California coast, which tend to weaken tropical systems.
However, there have been a few instances in recorded history where remnants of tropical cyclones, and in one instance the cyclone itself, have impacted the region.
Here’s a brief history of notable events:
- 1939 Long Beach Tropical Storm: This is the only tropical storm that made direct landfall in California in the 20th century. The storm made landfall on September 25, 1939, near Long Beach. It resulted in 45 deaths and significant flooding.
- 1976 Pacific Hurricane Kathleen: Kathleen transitioned into an extratropical storm before reaching California, but it brought heavy rainfall to the region. The storm was responsible for two deaths in California and caused significant flooding in the southern part of the state.
- 1983 Tropical Storm Octave: While the core of this storm did not make landfall in California, its remnants led to significant flooding in Arizona and also impacted parts of Southern California.
- 1997 Hurricane Linda: This was an extremely powerful Category 5 hurricane that, at one point, was projected to possibly impact Southern California. While it ultimately stayed offshore, the storm still generated large swells that affected the coast.
- 2012 Hurricane Fabio: The remnants of Fabio led to increased moisture and scattered thunderstorms over parts of Southern California, though the core of the storm remained offshore.
- 2015 Hurricane Dolores: This hurricane’s remnants brought rain to Southern California, with some areas receiving over one inch of rainfall.
Although this is an uncommon event, just like in the 1939 Long Beach Tropical Storm, this has nothing to do with anthropogenic GHG emissions.
Read the full post at Irrational Fear
No, Hurricane Hilary Is NOT A Sign Of Climate Change - Climate Change Dispatch
The trouble the world will have to pay for gasoline gluttony
has little to do with the amount of emissions from cars. It
is the depletion of a finite non-renewable energy resource
that is going to doom us.
You are right. Why try and reduce gun casualties. What a silly idea.
It's just a coincidence. It's happened at least 3 or 4 times already in the last 72,000 years. So it's a regular occurrence.
NO.
It's merely a sign of the world becoming less and less inhabitable for humans.
But climate change? Naaaah.
It is not silly if they do more than just try. It would be
a good start if gun nuts are showing willingness to give
up ownership of their guns.
With climate change the task to reduce carbon emission
is even more straight-forward. You don't have to try real
hard as it can be done right away. If everyone just starts
cutting back expenses at the pump emission will surely drop
and gas prices will plummet as well.
Even after Bay Du Nord development is under suspension we
still allow Equinor to drill around in deep water to increase potential
reserve. All it takes to reduce future emission growth is for our
government to deny permits and licenses for oil drilling and exploration
in ecologically fragile environment. Biden can also easily reduce oil
production or at least cap its growth by tightening regulations on drilling
in the Permian Basin, Gulf of Mexico and Alaska.
In Ontario we also can easily reduce gas consumption by incrementally
reduce oil imports from the Middle East to eastern Canada. All it takes
is just a willingness of people to cut back on gas expenses.
People don't have to stop using oil any time soon to reduce emission.
Just exercise moderation in producing and burning it would get the
job done.
I think this xitter reply is an apt response to someone who keeps posting from fossil fuel disinformation sites trying to gaslight Hawaii.
All of BC and NWT have declared a state of emergency for fires caused by the oil&gas industry.
Yellowknife RCMP respond to two arson calls overnight Tuesday; four girls charged
The Yellowknife RCMP responded to two calls relating to arson in the city during the night of Aug. 15.
Around 10:03 p.m., RCMP officers on patrol spotted a fire near Long Lake and called the Yellowknife Fire Department. The cause of the fire has been determined to be arson. A witness reported seeing two men running from the area wearing black clothing. The NWT Police Dog Service attended in an effort to track the suspects but they were not located. No further description of the men could be provided and this matter remains under investigation, according to the Mounties.
At 11:21 p.m., the Yellowknife RCMP received a call reporting that four females were attempting to light a fire in a small green space on Burwash Drive. RCMP officers immediately responded and located the four youth females. RCMP arrested all four and found aerosol cans and lighters in their possession and near the scene. Video of this incident was captured on a nearby camera at a private residence. All four of the female youths have been charged with arson.
“It should go without having to be said, incidents like these pose a very serious risk to our community. A significant fire behind the city’s line of defence could have devastating consequences and take valuable resources away from the ongoing wildfire fighting efforts that are underway,” said Cpl. Matt Halstead of NWT RCMP media relations. “It is completely beyond understanding that in the face of everything going on in the territory and the threat approaching our city, that people would actively attempt to start fires and endanger our community members. The RCMP will investigate these incidents to the fullest.”
Anyone who has information about these incidents is asked to contact the Yellowknife RCMP at 669-1111 or Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477) or www.nwtnu.crimestoppersweb.com. In the event of an emergency call, 911.
Yellowknife RCMP respond to two arson calls overnight Tuesday; four girls charged (nnsl.com)
The Yellowknife RCMP responded to two calls relating to arson in the city during the night of Aug. 15.
Around 10:03 p.m., RCMP officers on patrol spotted a fire near Long Lake and called the Yellowknife Fire Department. The cause of the fire has been determined to be arson. A witness reported seeing two men running from the area wearing black clothing. The NWT Police Dog Service attended in an effort to track the suspects but they were not located. No further description of the men could be provided and this matter remains under investigation, according to the Mounties.
At 11:21 p.m., the Yellowknife RCMP received a call reporting that four females were attempting to light a fire in a small green space on Burwash Drive. RCMP officers immediately responded and located the four youth females. RCMP arrested all four and found aerosol cans and lighters in their possession and near the scene. Video of this incident was captured on a nearby camera at a private residence. All four of the female youths have been charged with arson.
“It should go without having to be said, incidents like these pose a very serious risk to our community. A significant fire behind the city’s line of defence could have devastating consequences and take valuable resources away from the ongoing wildfire fighting efforts that are underway,” said Cpl. Matt Halstead of NWT RCMP media relations. “It is completely beyond understanding that in the face of everything going on in the territory and the threat approaching our city, that people would actively attempt to start fires and endanger our community members. The RCMP will investigate these incidents to the fullest.”
Anyone who has information about these incidents is asked to contact the Yellowknife RCMP at 669-1111 or Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477) or www.nwtnu.crimestoppersweb.com. In the event of an emergency call, 911.
Yellowknife RCMP respond to two arson calls overnight Tuesday; four girls charged (nnsl.com)
No, THE WEEK, Antarctica is Not a ‘Bellwether’ for Climate Change
The headline of August 14th article in THE WEEK, distributed by MSN News, was “How Antarctica has become the enduring climate change bellwether.” The claim is false, being based not on peer reviewed science or real-world data, but rather it reflects nothing more than the opinion of the author. Actual data refutes the claimed connections between climate change and what is occurring in Antarctica this year.
First, let’s look at some of the false claims in the article.
Antarctica’s climate change issues were recently highlighted by a new study from the journal Frontiers in Environmental Science. The study, co-authored by experts from the University of Exeter, the British Antarctic Survey, the University of Johannesburg and others, concluded that it’s “virtually certain that future Antarctic extreme events will be more pronounced than those observed to date” unless steps are taken to abate climate change.
…
One of the biggest issues in Antarctica is undoubtedly the rapid melting of its ice. It was recently reported that sheets of Antarctic ice are melting three times as fast as they did 30 years ago. Sea ice levels hit a record-low in 2017, and “the four lowest annual minimum sea ice extents of the satellite era have occurred since, with both 2022 and 2023 setting new records,” the study said.
The “…new study from the journal Frontiers in Environmental Science.” cited by Justin Klawans of THE WEEK isn’t scientific research, it’s an opinion piece, nothing more than a compendium of other research, combined with opinions about the other research. Opinion is not science. The title itself, “Antarctic extreme events,” is a dead giveaway, but the “Publisher’s note”, which distances itself from the study says all you really need to know about it:
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
This is the kind of disclaimer for opinion pieces or sales pitches, not scientific research.
Second, it should be noted that the reporter Justin Klawans referenced yet another THE WEEK article, known as a “Speed Read” for his claims, rather than doing original research himself.
And the article he referenced, seen in a screencap below, was chock full of inaccuracies itself.
The biggest inaccuracy is that the piece cites an Earth Science System Data report and CNN, saying (bold mine): “The worst melt was in 2019, when the ice sheets lost a combined 675 billion tons, CNN writes.”
The inaccuracy here is the lack of reporting the true perspective of 675 billion tons of melt. Here are the numbers.
According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC): “The Antarctic Ice Sheet measures nearly 4.9 kilometers (3 miles) at its thickest point and contains about 30 million cubic kilometers (7.2 million cubic miles) of ice.”
Using reference values, a cubic kilometer of ice weighs approximately 0.92 metric gigatons, meaning that the Antarctic ice sheet weighs about 24,380,000 gigatons, or 24380000000000000 tons. Doing some simple math, let’s look at how much 675 billion tons of melt actually is compared to all of the massive ice in Antarctica:
675000000000 tons ÷ 24380000000000000 tons = 0.00002768662
X100 for percentage = 0.002768662% of the total mass of Antarctic ice.
In simpler terms, the ice sheet melt in 2019 was about 0.003% of the total ice in Greenland and Antarctica. Scary, isn’t it? That number is well withing standard deviation, and essentially zero in the grand scheme of things.
In THE WEEK article it was claimed: “It was recently reported that sheets of Antarctic ice are melting three times as fast as they did 30 years ago.”
The numbers: 0.00002768662 x 3 = 0.00002768662 for the percentage, times 100 = 0.008305986%
So, three times nearly nothing is still nearly nothing at 0.008%
Of course, the media never bothers to mention the real comparison or the percentage, because that would destroy the narrative. Nor do they mention that during the next winter, much of that melted ice comes back when water refreezes or snow deposits onto the ice sheet during winter storms.
At Climate at a Glance, both Greenland and Antarctica melt has been covered in these two graphs:
Figure 1: (click to enlarge) Comparison of satellite data for Greenland (top) and Antarctic ice mass loss (bottom). Cumulative ice mass loss on the left and that same data compared to the total mass of ice on the right. Data source: http://imbie.org. Graphs originally by Willis Eshenbach, adapted and annotated by Anthony Watts.
So, if you are worried about the loss of ice in Greenland or Antarctica as meltwater contributing to sea level rise as the media would have you believe, don’t be. Further, events that occur in single years, or even in multiple years are indicative of climate, which require a 30-year period of data to be valid as a trend.
Finally, there’s this from THE WEEK:
There’s conclusive evidence that the temperature in Antarctica is rising, according to the study. The most extreme heat wave ever seen globally, the study stated, “occurred over East Antarctica in March 2022 when surface temperature anomalies of up to [101.3 degrees Fahrenheit] were observed.” The highest-ever temperature on the Antarctic mainland was recorded in February 2020, when a reading of 64.9 degrees Fahrenheit was observed.
Note what they added: [101.3 degrees Fahrenheit]. It is important to understand that isn’t an actual air temperature that day, it’s a departure from normal, and normal is still very near the freezing point of 32°F when you subtract 101.3 – 64.9 = 36.4°F.
Is it surprising that on the very northernmost tip of Antarctica, well removed from the main ice mass, there might be a weather event that would create that warmer temperature? Buried in the article is the reason: “The wave of warm area seems to be tied to a “foehn,” or a rush of air that comes down from a slope or mountain and compresses air to warm it, the WMO’s climate extremes expert told The Associated Press.”
Again, weather, not climate, and that temperature was certainly not a threat to melting the huge volume of the Antarctic ice sheet, hundreds to a thousand plus miles away, as seen in Figure 2 below:
Figure 2: Distance from Trinity Peninsula, Esperanza base to Antarctic Ice Sheet – Image: Google Earth.
But the media won’t tell you that. They also won’t tell you that the melting they report and the threats from sea-level rise they insinuate are minuscule. Nor do they tell you that sea ice levels are driven by wind and ocean currents, which shift from year to year, and that sea ice does not displace water, and thus contributes nothing to sea level rise. Nor will they tell you that their measurements start from a peak in sea ice measurements just a couple of years after the continent’s ice sheet has set repeated records of sea ice extent, also during the recent period of modest warming. Indeed, NOAA reports that the overall trend for sea ice is close to zero in recent decades. Nor do they tell you that while West Antarctica and the Antarctic Penisula are losing ice, due in large part to subsurface volcanic activity, the vast bulk of the continent is gaining ice mass.
The sensationalizing of climate science, as the left-wing media has so successfully done, undermines real science, and the real facts.
The sadder truth is, the mainstream media are complicit in the ongoing, widespread distortion of science encouraged by the politically powerful. This does serious disservice to the American people, whom they are supposed to be protecting as “the fourth estate,” viewing big government initiatives with a jaundiced eye and skepticism in order to provide a check on wealthy, politically connected, elites. Big government cheerleading has replaced investigative journalism.
No, THE WEEK, Antarctica is Not a ‘Bellwether’ for Climate Change - ClimateRealism
The headline of August 14th article in THE WEEK, distributed by MSN News, was “How Antarctica has become the enduring climate change bellwether.” The claim is false, being based not on peer reviewed science or real-world data, but rather it reflects nothing more than the opinion of the author. Actual data refutes the claimed connections between climate change and what is occurring in Antarctica this year.
First, let’s look at some of the false claims in the article.
Antarctica’s climate change issues were recently highlighted by a new study from the journal Frontiers in Environmental Science. The study, co-authored by experts from the University of Exeter, the British Antarctic Survey, the University of Johannesburg and others, concluded that it’s “virtually certain that future Antarctic extreme events will be more pronounced than those observed to date” unless steps are taken to abate climate change.
…
One of the biggest issues in Antarctica is undoubtedly the rapid melting of its ice. It was recently reported that sheets of Antarctic ice are melting three times as fast as they did 30 years ago. Sea ice levels hit a record-low in 2017, and “the four lowest annual minimum sea ice extents of the satellite era have occurred since, with both 2022 and 2023 setting new records,” the study said.
The “…new study from the journal Frontiers in Environmental Science.” cited by Justin Klawans of THE WEEK isn’t scientific research, it’s an opinion piece, nothing more than a compendium of other research, combined with opinions about the other research. Opinion is not science. The title itself, “Antarctic extreme events,” is a dead giveaway, but the “Publisher’s note”, which distances itself from the study says all you really need to know about it:
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
This is the kind of disclaimer for opinion pieces or sales pitches, not scientific research.
Second, it should be noted that the reporter Justin Klawans referenced yet another THE WEEK article, known as a “Speed Read” for his claims, rather than doing original research himself.
And the article he referenced, seen in a screencap below, was chock full of inaccuracies itself.
The biggest inaccuracy is that the piece cites an Earth Science System Data report and CNN, saying (bold mine): “The worst melt was in 2019, when the ice sheets lost a combined 675 billion tons, CNN writes.”
The inaccuracy here is the lack of reporting the true perspective of 675 billion tons of melt. Here are the numbers.
According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC): “The Antarctic Ice Sheet measures nearly 4.9 kilometers (3 miles) at its thickest point and contains about 30 million cubic kilometers (7.2 million cubic miles) of ice.”
Using reference values, a cubic kilometer of ice weighs approximately 0.92 metric gigatons, meaning that the Antarctic ice sheet weighs about 24,380,000 gigatons, or 24380000000000000 tons. Doing some simple math, let’s look at how much 675 billion tons of melt actually is compared to all of the massive ice in Antarctica:
675000000000 tons ÷ 24380000000000000 tons = 0.00002768662
X100 for percentage = 0.002768662% of the total mass of Antarctic ice.
In simpler terms, the ice sheet melt in 2019 was about 0.003% of the total ice in Greenland and Antarctica. Scary, isn’t it? That number is well withing standard deviation, and essentially zero in the grand scheme of things.
In THE WEEK article it was claimed: “It was recently reported that sheets of Antarctic ice are melting three times as fast as they did 30 years ago.”
The numbers: 0.00002768662 x 3 = 0.00002768662 for the percentage, times 100 = 0.008305986%
So, three times nearly nothing is still nearly nothing at 0.008%
Of course, the media never bothers to mention the real comparison or the percentage, because that would destroy the narrative. Nor do they mention that during the next winter, much of that melted ice comes back when water refreezes or snow deposits onto the ice sheet during winter storms.
At Climate at a Glance, both Greenland and Antarctica melt has been covered in these two graphs:
So, if you are worried about the loss of ice in Greenland or Antarctica as meltwater contributing to sea level rise as the media would have you believe, don’t be. Further, events that occur in single years, or even in multiple years are indicative of climate, which require a 30-year period of data to be valid as a trend.
Finally, there’s this from THE WEEK:
There’s conclusive evidence that the temperature in Antarctica is rising, according to the study. The most extreme heat wave ever seen globally, the study stated, “occurred over East Antarctica in March 2022 when surface temperature anomalies of up to [101.3 degrees Fahrenheit] were observed.” The highest-ever temperature on the Antarctic mainland was recorded in February 2020, when a reading of 64.9 degrees Fahrenheit was observed.
Note what they added: [101.3 degrees Fahrenheit]. It is important to understand that isn’t an actual air temperature that day, it’s a departure from normal, and normal is still very near the freezing point of 32°F when you subtract 101.3 – 64.9 = 36.4°F.
Is it surprising that on the very northernmost tip of Antarctica, well removed from the main ice mass, there might be a weather event that would create that warmer temperature? Buried in the article is the reason: “The wave of warm area seems to be tied to a “foehn,” or a rush of air that comes down from a slope or mountain and compresses air to warm it, the WMO’s climate extremes expert told The Associated Press.”
Again, weather, not climate, and that temperature was certainly not a threat to melting the huge volume of the Antarctic ice sheet, hundreds to a thousand plus miles away, as seen in Figure 2 below:
Figure 2: Distance from Trinity Peninsula, Esperanza base to Antarctic Ice Sheet – Image: Google Earth.But the media won’t tell you that. They also won’t tell you that the melting they report and the threats from sea-level rise they insinuate are minuscule. Nor do they tell you that sea ice levels are driven by wind and ocean currents, which shift from year to year, and that sea ice does not displace water, and thus contributes nothing to sea level rise. Nor will they tell you that their measurements start from a peak in sea ice measurements just a couple of years after the continent’s ice sheet has set repeated records of sea ice extent, also during the recent period of modest warming. Indeed, NOAA reports that the overall trend for sea ice is close to zero in recent decades. Nor do they tell you that while West Antarctica and the Antarctic Penisula are losing ice, due in large part to subsurface volcanic activity, the vast bulk of the continent is gaining ice mass.
The sensationalizing of climate science, as the left-wing media has so successfully done, undermines real science, and the real facts.
The sadder truth is, the mainstream media are complicit in the ongoing, widespread distortion of science encouraged by the politically powerful. This does serious disservice to the American people, whom they are supposed to be protecting as “the fourth estate,” viewing big government initiatives with a jaundiced eye and skepticism in order to provide a check on wealthy, politically connected, elites. Big government cheerleading has replaced investigative journalism.
No, THE WEEK, Antarctica is Not a ‘Bellwether’ for Climate Change - ClimateRealism
Wow!No, THE WEEK, Antarctica is Not a ‘Bellwether’ for Climate Change
The headline of August 14th article in THE WEEK, distributed by MSN News, was “How Antarctica has become the enduring climate change bellwether.” The claim is false, being based not on peer reviewed science or real-world data, but rather it reflects nothing more than the opinion of the author. Actual data refutes the claimed connections between climate change and what is occurring in Antarctica this year.
First, let’s look at some of the false claims in the article.
Antarctica’s climate change issues were recently highlighted by a new study from the journal Frontiers in Environmental Science. The study, co-authored by experts from the University of Exeter, the British Antarctic Survey, the University of Johannesburg and others, concluded that it’s “virtually certain that future Antarctic extreme events will be more pronounced than those observed to date” unless steps are taken to abate climate change.
…
One of the biggest issues in Antarctica is undoubtedly the rapid melting of its ice. It was recently reported that sheets of Antarctic ice are melting three times as fast as they did 30 years ago. Sea ice levels hit a record-low in 2017, and “the four lowest annual minimum sea ice extents of the satellite era have occurred since, with both 2022 and 2023 setting new records,” the study said.
The “…new study from the journal Frontiers in Environmental Science.” cited by Justin Klawans of THE WEEK isn’t scientific research, it’s an opinion piece, nothing more than a compendium of other research, combined with opinions about the other research. Opinion is not science. The title itself, “Antarctic extreme events,” is a dead giveaway, but the “Publisher’s note”, which distances itself from the study says all you really need to know about it:
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
This is the kind of disclaimer for opinion pieces or sales pitches, not scientific research.
Second, it should be noted that the reporter Justin Klawans referenced yet another THE WEEK article, known as a “Speed Read” for his claims, rather than doing original research himself.
And the article he referenced, seen in a screencap below, was chock full of inaccuracies itself.
The biggest inaccuracy is that the piece cites an Earth Science System Data report and CNN, saying (bold mine): “The worst melt was in 2019, when the ice sheets lost a combined 675 billion tons, CNN writes.”
The inaccuracy here is the lack of reporting the true perspective of 675 billion tons of melt. Here are the numbers.
According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC): “The Antarctic Ice Sheet measures nearly 4.9 kilometers (3 miles) at its thickest point and contains about 30 million cubic kilometers (7.2 million cubic miles) of ice.”
Using reference values, a cubic kilometer of ice weighs approximately 0.92 metric gigatons, meaning that the Antarctic ice sheet weighs about 24,380,000 gigatons, or 24380000000000000 tons. Doing some simple math, let’s look at how much 675 billion tons of melt actually is compared to all of the massive ice in Antarctica:
675000000000 tons ÷ 24380000000000000 tons = 0.00002768662
X100 for percentage = 0.002768662% of the total mass of Antarctic ice.
In simpler terms, the ice sheet melt in 2019 was about 0.003% of the total ice in Greenland and Antarctica. Scary, isn’t it? That number is well withing standard deviation, and essentially zero in the grand scheme of things.
In THE WEEK article it was claimed: “It was recently reported that sheets of Antarctic ice are melting three times as fast as they did 30 years ago.”
The numbers: 0.00002768662 x 3 = 0.00002768662 for the percentage, times 100 = 0.008305986%
So, three times nearly nothing is still nearly nothing at 0.008%
Of course, the media never bothers to mention the real comparison or the percentage, because that would destroy the narrative. Nor do they mention that during the next winter, much of that melted ice comes back when water refreezes or snow deposits onto the ice sheet during winter storms.
At Climate at a Glance, both Greenland and Antarctica melt has been covered in these two graphs:
Figure 1: (click to enlarge) Comparison of satellite data for Greenland (top) and Antarctic ice mass loss (bottom). Cumulative ice mass loss on the left and that same data compared to the total mass of ice on the right. Data source: http://imbie.org. Graphs originally by Willis Eshenbach, adapted and annotated by Anthony Watts.
So, if you are worried about the loss of ice in Greenland or Antarctica as meltwater contributing to sea level rise as the media would have you believe, don’t be. Further, events that occur in single years, or even in multiple years are indicative of climate, which require a 30-year period of data to be valid as a trend.
Finally, there’s this from THE WEEK:
There’s conclusive evidence that the temperature in Antarctica is rising, according to the study. The most extreme heat wave ever seen globally, the study stated, “occurred over East Antarctica in March 2022 when surface temperature anomalies of up to [101.3 degrees Fahrenheit] were observed.” The highest-ever temperature on the Antarctic mainland was recorded in February 2020, when a reading of 64.9 degrees Fahrenheit was observed.
Note what they added: [101.3 degrees Fahrenheit]. It is important to understand that isn’t an actual air temperature that day, it’s a departure from normal, and normal is still very near the freezing point of 32°F when you subtract 101.3 – 64.9 = 36.4°F.
Is it surprising that on the very northernmost tip of Antarctica, well removed from the main ice mass, there might be a weather event that would create that warmer temperature? Buried in the article is the reason: “The wave of warm area seems to be tied to a “foehn,” or a rush of air that comes down from a slope or mountain and compresses air to warm it, the WMO’s climate extremes expert told The Associated Press.”
Again, weather, not climate, and that temperature was certainly not a threat to melting the huge volume of the Antarctic ice sheet, hundreds to a thousand plus miles away, as seen in Figure 2 below:
But the media won’t tell you that. They also won’t tell you that the melting they report and the threats from sea-level rise they insinuate are minuscule. Nor do they tell you that sea ice levels are driven by wind and ocean currents, which shift from year to year, and that sea ice does not displace water, and thus contributes nothing to sea level rise. Nor will they tell you that their measurements start from a peak in sea ice measurements just a couple of years after the continent’s ice sheet has set repeated records of sea ice extent, also during the recent period of modest warming. Indeed, NOAA reports that the overall trend for sea ice is close to zero in recent decades. Nor do they tell you that while West Antarctica and the Antarctic Penisula are losing ice, due in large part to subsurface volcanic activity, the vast bulk of the continent is gaining ice mass.
The sensationalizing of climate science, as the left-wing media has so successfully done, undermines real science, and the real facts.
The sadder truth is, the mainstream media are complicit in the ongoing, widespread distortion of science encouraged by the politically powerful. This does serious disservice to the American people, whom they are supposed to be protecting as “the fourth estate,” viewing big government initiatives with a jaundiced eye and skepticism in order to provide a check on wealthy, politically connected, elites. Big government cheerleading has replaced investigative journalism.
No, THE WEEK, Antarctica is Not a ‘Bellwether’ for Climate Change - ClimateRealism
If you increase all the scales by 1000 everything looks like a flat line!
And no more climate change!
This has to be one of the most idiotic posts, CM.
Do you actually believe this stuff?
and once again we see how climate reporting is driven by an agenda , rather than by news
Journalistic integrity has been been abandoned
the journalist has a choice of which of these two graphics to publish in order to "educate/ inform the public"
ideally they would choose both in order to "educate/ inform the public"
instead they go with the left graphic in order to "
if they were accountants, doctors, lawyers, they would be dis-barred / have their license suspended
Last edited:
Suspected human-caused wildfire prompts evacuations in B.C.'s south Okanagan
An out-of-control wildfire southwest of Okanagan Falls, B.C., has led to evacuation orders for more than 250 properties in the Regional District of Okanagan-Similkameen.
The Upper Park Rill Creek wildfire was discovered around 6 a.m. Friday and had already grown to approximately 740 hectares – or 7.4 square kilometres – by early evening, according to the BC Wildfire Service.
"This has been an aggressive new start for this fire," said Shaelee Stearns, fire information officer for the wildfire service, during an RDOS news conference Friday.
"We've seen substantial growth upon the discovery of this fire and continue to see that aggressive fire behaviour."
B.C. wildfires: Evacuation orders southwest of Okanagan Falls | CTV News
An out-of-control wildfire southwest of Okanagan Falls, B.C., has led to evacuation orders for more than 250 properties in the Regional District of Okanagan-Similkameen.
The Upper Park Rill Creek wildfire was discovered around 6 a.m. Friday and had already grown to approximately 740 hectares – or 7.4 square kilometres – by early evening, according to the BC Wildfire Service.
"This has been an aggressive new start for this fire," said Shaelee Stearns, fire information officer for the wildfire service, during an RDOS news conference Friday.
"We've seen substantial growth upon the discovery of this fire and continue to see that aggressive fire behaviour."
B.C. wildfires: Evacuation orders southwest of Okanagan Falls | CTV News
