The Madden-Julian Oscillation: a weather system Wikipedia lists under Climate Change

by Robert W. Endlich

A significant weather system which affects the globe was not even discovered until the 1970s, perhaps because it is stronger in the Southern Hemisphere than the Northern. This system, the Madden-Julian Oscillation, is an area of enhanced rainfall with these characteristics:

The enhanced precipitation anomaly starts in the Indian Ocean; it always moves eastward, and usually moves from Indian Ocean into mid-Pacific at speeds of 9-19 Miles/Hour. In addition to the enhanced precipitation area itself, there is an associated area of suppressed precipitation, an out-of-phase area ahead of it, usually way out ahead of it. The disturbed weather areas usually last 30 to sometimes 90 days.

The convective precipitation signature of this system is strongest within 15 degrees north and south of the Equator. Continue reading “The Madden-Julian Oscillation: a weather system Wikipedia lists under Climate Change”

A 1D Model Of Global Temperature Changes, 1880-2017

Dr. Roy Spencer

[Dr. Spencer’s post originally appeared on his blog on February 22nd, 2018.  The link to his 2/23/18 update of the post is here.]

http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/1D-model-1880-2017-results-Tsfc-plot-revised-1-550x303.jpg

UPDATE(2/23/18): The previous version of this post had improper latitude bounds for the HadCRUT4 Tsfc data. I’ve rerun the results… the conclusions remain the same. I have also added proof that ENSO is accompanied by its own radiative forcing, a controversial claim, which allows it to cause multi-decadal climate change. In simple terms, this is clear evidence the climate system can cause its own, natural, internally-generated climate changes. This is partly what has caused recent warming, and the climate modelling community has assumed it was all human-caused. Continue reading “A 1D Model Of Global Temperature Changes, 1880-2017”

Breaking: Fatal Courtroom Act Ruins Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann

[This article by John O’Sullivan regarding Michael ‘Hockey Stick’ Mann’s libel lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball originally appeared at Principia-Scientific followed by Technocracy.News and is reproduced for your information and entertainment.  Who can forget “Mike’s nature trick” to hide the decline.  For those of us who are skeptical about catastrophic, anthropogenic, climate change, this is really big, and it was a wonderful 4th of July gift.]

Published on July 4, 2017

Written by John O’Sullivan

Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S. Continue reading “Breaking: Fatal Courtroom Act Ruins Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann”

Global Warming – Listener’s Dissenting View: Climate One | KRWG by Bob Endlich

The data I show here demonstrates the claims by CLIMATE ONE and their parent organization, the Commonwealth Club, are refuted by data and publications in the public domain. Claims of the “Settled Science” of catastrophic warming are without foundation, if you look at the data. In science, the debate is never over and the science is never settled.

STILL Epic Fail: 73 Climate Models vs. Measurements, Running 5-Year Means

by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

[This short post was published by Roy W. Spencer on June 6th, 2013 and has been reproduced here with the permission of the author.  Ed.]

In response to those who complained in my recent post that linear trends are not a good way to compare the models to observations (even though the modelers have claimed that it’s the long-term behavior of the models we should focus on, not individual years), here are running 5-year averages for the tropical tropospheric temperature, models versus observations (click for full size):

CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-means
In this case, the models and observations have been plotted so that their respective 1979-2012 trend lines all intersect in 1979, which we believe is the most meaningful way to simultaneously plot the models’ results for comparison to the observations.

In my opinion, the day of reckoning has arrived. The modellers and the IPCC have willingly ignored the evidence for low climate sensitivity for many years, despite the fact that some of us have shown that simply confusing cause and effect when examining cloud and temperature variations can totally mislead you on cloud feedbacks (e.g. Spencer & Braswell, 2010). The discrepancy between models and observations is not a new issue…just one that is becoming more glaring over time.

It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out in the coming years. I frankly don’t see how the IPCC can keep claiming that the models are “not inconsistent with” the observations. Any sane person can see otherwise.

If the observations in the above graph were on the UPPER (warm) side of the models, do you really believe the modelers would not be falling all over themselves to see how much additional surface warming they could get their models to produce?

Hundreds of millions of dollars that have gone into the expensive climate modelling enterprise has all but destroyed governmental funding of research into natural sources of climate change. For years the modelers have maintained that there is no such thing as natural climate change…yet they now, ironically, have to invoke natural climate forces to explain why surface warming has essentially stopped in the last 15 years!

Forgive me if I sound frustrated, but we scientists who still believe that climate change can also be naturally forced have been virtually cut out of funding and publication by the ‘humans-cause-everything-bad-that-happens’ juggernaut. The public who funds their work will not stand for their willful blindness much longer.

________________________________

Roy W. Spencer received his Ph.D. in meteorology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1981. Before becoming a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville in 2001, he was a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, where he and Dr. John Christy received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites. Dr. Spencer’s work with NASA continues as the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite. He has provided congressional testimony several times on the subject of global warming.

Dr. Spencer’s research has been entirely supported by U.S. government agencies: NASA, NOAA, and DOE.  He has never been asked by any oil company to perform any kind of service. Not even Exxon-Mobil.