Frigid contrasts

Two views. One of the UN's chief salesman and the other of those who read data, including that of the UN. Here is the scare story, first:

Ban: Warm Antarctica temps show eco-issues

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said warmer temperatures in Antarctica highlight the dangers of climate change and the need to address them.

Ban has made climate change a priority issue and is seeking international commitments to counter it as an international conference in Bali next month draws closer.

"It is here where our work, together, comes into focus," Ban said in a statement issued from New York. "We see Antarctica's beauty -- and the danger global warming represents, and the urgency that we do something about it."

To bolster his point, Ban said glaciers on King George Island have shrunk by 10 percent, recalled the collapse and disappearance of the "Larsen B ice sheet" several years ago, and warned that the Western Antarctic Ice Shelf is at risk.

"It is all floating ice, one fifth of the entire continent. If it broke up, sea levels could rise by ... 18 feet," he said.

The people who live and work in Antarctica (and at Ohio State) don't seem to be following the party line, if the line made any sense. If the sun explodes, that would be bad too.

Anyway, some disappointed scientists and bloggers:

Antarctic Temperatures Disagree with Climate Model Predictions

A new report on climate over the world’s southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models. This comes soon after the latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that strongly supports the conclusion that the Earth’s climate as a whole is warming, largely due to human activity. [Interesting semantics - strongly supports the conclusion.... Think about what this means and is supposed to mean.]

It also follows a similar finding from last summer by the same research group that showed no increase in precipitation over Antarctica in the last 50 years. Most models predict that both precipitation and temperature will increase over Antarctica with a warming of the planet.

David Bromwich, professor of geography and researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University, reported on this work at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science at San Francisco.

“It’s hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now,” he said. “Part of the reason is that there is a lot of variability there. It’s very hard in these polar latitudes to demonstrate a global warming signal. This is in marked contrast to the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula that is one of the most rapidly warming parts of the Earth.”

Bromwich says that the problem rises from several complications. The continent is vast, as large as the United States and Mexico combined. Only a small amount of detailed data is available – there are perhaps only 100 weather stations on that continent compared to the thousands spread across the U.S. and Europe. And the records that we have only date back a half-century.

“The best we can say right now is that the climate models are somewhat inconsistent with the evidence that we have for the last 50 years from continental Antarctica.

“We’re looking for a small signal that represents the impact of human activity and it is hard to find it at the moment,” he said. ..... LINK
Source: Ohio State University, no longer #1 football school.

I stopped at that point for a reason. Notice, "we're looking" for confirmation of warming, not merely examining data. The "best" he can say is the model is inconsistent (meaning wrong.) Must be a grant at stake. Why else openly reject basic scientific method. At least they are honest about a bias.

The Ohio guy mumbled on about the hole in the ozone affected the sun getting in/temperature, but I think he had things reversed. He calls the hole "ozone depletion" and mentions that 2006 had the largest depletion which should have resulted in more warmth, no? That was a brutally cold period.

I think it was pretty well established by NASA research that the ozone hole is a result of temperature changes in the antarctic, not a cause of them. The colder it is, the bigger the hole. I did a blog on that in the past. I recall because the NASA scientist who wrote the report was cute in her little polar outfit. 2005 and 2006 were cold.

Anyway, the antarctic receives as much solar radiation as the tropics over any given year. [Another NASA tidbit. Great for fruit bar fights] The radiation is reflected away, which causes the cold ground temperature. The article suggests (along with a lot of theories) that the recent decades of higher westerly winds has had a significant affect upon the westerly side, where the shelf broke off.

Below is the beginning of a piece by a group claiming to be the longest climate change web blog, or some such thing. LINK They are not a nay-saying group, nor do they seem to be scientists or hoaxers. I add them to show perspective. Even true believers can work without filters.

World Climate Report

The Web’s Longest-Running Climate Change Blog

September 5, 2007

Antarctica: Warming, Cooling, or Both?

Filed under: Polar, Antarctic —

The ice caps are melting – right? If you visit thousands of websites on climate change, watch Gore’s film or many similar documentaries, you would be left with no doubt that the icecaps are warming and melting at an unprecedented rate. However, with respect to Antarctica, you might be surprised when you examine what the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says in their 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

Believe it or not, IPCC reports “Antarctic sea ice extent continues to show inter-annual variability and localized changes but no statistically significant average trends, consistent with the lack of warming reflected in atmospheric temperatures averaged across the region.”

Furthermore, they note “Current global model studies project that the Antarctic ice sheet will remain too cold for widespread surface melting and is expected to gain in mass due to increased snowfall.”

A major article on this subject appears in a recent issue of the Journal of Climate by William Chapman and John Walsh of the University of Illinois. [Sure hope this is a real journal] The two scientists extensively review the literature on temperature trends in Antarctica and conclude “These studies are essentially unanimous in their finding that the Antarctic Peninsula has warmed since the 1950s, when many of the surface stations were established.” They note

“Recent summaries of station data show that, aside from the Antarctic Peninsula and the McMurdo area, one is hard-pressed to argue that warming has occurred, even at the Antarctic coastal stations away from the peninsula and McMurdo.” Furthermore, they write “Recent attempts to broaden the spatial coverage of temperature estimates have shown a similar lack of evidence of spatially widespread warming.”

We completely agree having covered this subject at World Climate Report many times in the past – there is some warming in Antarctica but it is largely confined to the relatively small peninsula extending away from the bulk of the continent and is largely confined to the winter season (see below – the Antarctic Peninsula extends toward to southern tip of South America....)

The fluctuation of continental near-ground temperatures for the last 35 years, by one study I looked at, was remarkable. The standard deviations impressive, except at the South Pole itself where the changes are almost nil. A cursory look at the data shows some warming on the shore areas, especially the Peninsula, which I take it is that part that aims at South America, where Shackleton eventually got free of the ice. Some interior areas showed big down movements, but not a real trend.

The next few years will be interesting as the solar eruption cycle should be finishing and we will see less radiation hit the earth. We may see some cooler oceans.

SIDEBAR: I took a look at heating degree days for NYS, a NYSERDA site has it. I find it hard to believe, but November, thus far, required significantly more heating than 'normal.' Did it seem cold to you? Last November, was significantly warmer than this year!