Category: Uncategorized

Uncategorized 28 May 2017

White Tails

via The Deplorable Climate Science Blog
http://ift.tt/2i1JH7O

Whitetail deer are very rare around here. I spotted some right at sunrise about half a mile away.

via The Deplorable Climate Science Blog http://ift.tt/2i1JH7O

May 28, 2017 at 03:36AM

Uncategorized 28 May 2017

Much more sea ice in NW Hudson Bay this year than 2016 or 2015 at 27 May

via polarbearscience
http://ift.tt/1oHvY57

In recent years, sea ice loss over Hudson Bay has begun with open water in the NW corner (which is just as likely due to prevailing offshore winds as ice melt) rather than along the east coast but this year that patch of ice is smaller than its been for the last two years. In addition, despite two patches of open water at either end of the Beaufort Sea, most of the coast of Alaska is still covered in thick ice — much more than existed last year, yet masses of polar bears did not die as far as I know (actually, WHB bears came ashore in excellent condition last year).

Sea ice Canada 2017 May 27

Compare to previous years:

Last year at 27 May (2016), where there was also more open water in the Beaufort Sea (driven not by melt but by the strong currents of the Beaufort Gyre) and in Kane Basin (between NW Greenland and Ellesmere Island):

Sea ice extent Canada 2016 May 27 CIS

27 May 2015 saw open water in NW Hudson Bay almost as far south as Churchill:

Sea ice Canada 2015 May 27_CIS

All of that dark green in the charts below is thick first year ice that’s at least 1.2 m thick and brown is ice >1 year old that is 2m thick or more.

Hudson Bay ice stage of development weekly at 22 May_2017 rotated.jpg

Western Arctic ice stage of development weekly at 22 May_2017 Polar bear biologist Andrew Derocher, who’s research team has been ear-tagging male WHB male polar bears in the NW sector this spring, confirms that the bears are drawn to the fragmented ice and edges of the open water in the NW where they are most likely to catch bearded seals.

Tracking #polarbears by ear tag radio: highly fragmented sea ice but bears are likely hunting hard now. Skinny "green" male heading north. http://pic.twitter.com/x1WVba80Xg

— Andrew Derocher (@AEDerocher) May 23, 2017

Here is his plot of males (purple) and females (blue) at 24 May 2017:

Purple #polarbear locations = ear tag radios & blue = collar (adult females). Most close to "home" but one far to SE. Break-up coming. http://pic.twitter.com/SoDnG8VQGB

— Andrew Derocher (@AEDerocher) May 24, 2017

via polarbearscience http://ift.tt/1oHvY57

May 28, 2017 at 03:29AM

Uncategorized 28 May 2017

Climate Scientists Trying To Discredit Trump’s EPA Chief End Up Proving Him Right

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
http://www.thegwpf.com

A study meant to debunk a claim made by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt in his confirmation hearing ended up doing the opposite — it proved him right.

The study, published Thursday in the journal Nature, found that Pruitt’s claim of a “leveling off of warming” over the past two decades is unsupported by satellite-derived temperature data, which measures the lowest few miles of the atmosphere.

Researchers supposed debunking of Pruitt, however, centers on a selectively quoted line from his testimony, which cuts out the administrator’s reference to the global warming “hiatus.”

Scientists have been debating the “hiatus” in warming for years, trying to parse out its causes and, in some cases, if it’s due to bad measurements in surface temperature readings. But the “hiatus” is extremely apparent in satellite temperature readings, stretching for about two decades.

“Mr. Pruitt claimed that ‘over the past two decades satellite data indicates there has been a leveling off of warming,’” reads the study, quoting Pruitt’s confirmation hearing testimony from January.

But Pruitt actually said: “over the past two decades satellite data indicates there has been a leveling off of warming, which some scientists refer to as the ‘hiatus.’”

Pruitt was clearly referring to the “hiatus,” or lack of significant warming, in the satellite temperature record that started in the late 1990s and continued until the recent El Nino began in 2015.

“This study seems to be an unwarranted kneejerk reaction to Pruitt’s ‘leveling off’ of warming comment,” Dr. Roy Spencer, a climate scientist who operates one of the satellite datasets relied upon by the study, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“But Pruitt’s comment in testimony wasn’t that precise, and it’s true that the previous warming became much weaker and approached zero over a period of approximately 20 years until the 2015-16 warm El Nino event,” Spencer said.

Pruitt has come under attack from environmentalists and some scientists for his comments on global warming. Most recently, opponents criticized Pruitt for saying that he didn’t believe carbon dioxide was the main driver of recent warming.

Major media outlets, including The Washington Post, picked up this new study’s results, criticizing Pruitt and his management at the EPA. WaPo reported, “Scientists just published an entire study refuting Scott Pruitt on climate change.”

Researchers found that “the tropospheric warming from 1979 to 2016 is unprecedented relative to internally generated temperature trends on the 38-year timescale,” according to the study.

Based on what Pruitt actually told Congress in January, however, the study essentially proves that he was correct.

Meteorologist Ryan Maue pointed out on Twitter that data presented in the study shows a slowdown in warming in the last 20 years. Maue also noted how authors used several studies on the “hiatus” in their citations, but refused to use the term in the study.

The study’s authors used climate models to show the warming trend in satellite data couldn’t be explained by natural warming, which excludes man-made greenhouse gases.