In The End, Their Credibility Will Melt Away Quite Suddenly

Posted: April 29, 2014 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, sea ice

.
.
Sounds like a ‘tipping point’ 🙂

Real Climate Science

In 2007, leading experts said that the Arctic will be ice-free by 2013, and that it will all melt away quite suddenly.

ScreenHunter_67 Apr. 29 00.32

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’

The green circle below shows the date of that prediction. Since then, the average Arctic sea ice area has grown by more than two million km². There has been no trend for 10 years

ScreenHunter_68 Apr. 29 00.34

iphone.anomaly.arctic.png (512×412)

These climate experts talk very confidently about things they understand nothing about, it gets repeated by useful idiots in the press, and then they both get paid to drag civilization back to the dark ages..

View original post

Comments
  1. oldbrew says:

    ‘Dramatic – stunning – too conservative’ — the usual garbage.

  2. Kon Dealer says:

    The dramatic outcome of these “predictions”, (or are they “projections”?) should be on the front page of “The Guardian”, where they were when they were first made.

    What do you think our intrepid, investigative Climate correspondent, Dana Nutcaselli, thinks about these new climate “revelations”?

  3. oldbrew says:

    There’s always room for another excuse along the lines of:

    “the opposite of what we said would happen means exactly the same as what we said would happen…er, can you come back in 10/20/50/100* years?” Or something.

    [* delete as appropriate] 😉

  4. Joe Public says:

    Place your bets now, for the date when Jonathan Amos will provide an update.

    From an ice floe; surrounded by hungry polar bears.

    [reply] Sounds risky

  5. Jerry Lundry says:

    These recent findings on Arctic ice area seems to be consistent with the status of the two natural climate cycles that most impact climate on decadal and milenium time scales. These are the so-called 30-year cycle (apparently driven by the Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the 1,400-1,500 year cycle.

    (Note: below, I use the USHCNv2 database as a surrogate for earth temperature.)

    From the 30-year cycle, there was a temperature minimum in the mid-1970s and a maximum in 2003. So, the current downward trend in temperture (which will continue for two more decades if “Past is prologue to future.”) leads one to anticipate increasing Arctic ice.

    The 1,400-1,500 year cycle is weaker than the 30-year cycle. It had a minimum in the 18th century, and is headed toward a maximum in a projected CY 2400.

    If these two cycles continue, then there will be a general temperature increase from the 1,400-1,500 year cycle, but the 30-year cycle will provide local minima and maxima imposed on the longer-term trend. It appears Arctic ice responds to the 30-year cycle.

    The shorter El Nino-related cycle (roughly 6 years) imposes another variation on these more general trends, as does the annual temperature cycle.

  6. J Martin says:

    @ Jerry. Surely there are other relevant cycles, some around the 200 year mark ?

  7. Jerry Lundry says:

    J Martin,

    In broad response to your question, I have found reference to 13 temperature/climate cycles:

    1 day
    1 year
    5 years (El Nino)
    22 years (sunspots, also sometimes referred to as an 11 year cycle)
    60 years (Pacific Decadal Oscillation, often referred to as 30-year (30 yrs cooling, 30 yrs warming))
    120-140 year (Atlantic Decadal Oscillation, ditto, 60-70 years cooling & 60-70 years warming)
    1,000 years
    1,400-1,500 years
    2,500 years
    23,000 years (Milankovitch earth axis precession)
    41,000 years (Milankovitch earth axis tilt)
    100,000 years (Milankovitch earth orbit eccentricity)
    140,000,000 years (passage of the Solar System through the spiral arms of the Milky Way Galaxy)

    So, in answer to your question, the cycle closest to your 200 years is the 140-160 year.

    I would be interested in hearing the reason(s) you asked specifically about a “200” year cycle.

    Except for the first two in the list above, there are variations in the duration of these periods among various authors, even large variations in some.

    For the 4th, 5th, and 6th, I prefer to use the duration of a complete cycle, rather than a half-cycle, even though in the example of the Sunspot Cycle, the two 11 year half-cycles are said to have the same effect on Earth temperatrure,

    I would like to obtain the temperatrure amplitude of these cycles, and have done so — very crudely in some cases — for eight of them.

  8. oldbrew says:

    @ Jerry L : ‘the approximate 210-year de Vries solar cycle’

    http://www.co2science.org/articles/V11/N23/EDIT.php

  9. Jerry Lundry says:

    Thanks, Oldbrew. I hadn’t heard of that one.

  10. Gail Combs says:

    J Martin,
    Dr Feynman et al found an 88 year and 200 year cycle in the Nile river flood records and the northern Europe and Far East Aurora records.

    http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=1319

    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006JD007462/abstract

  11. For a moment I thought the headline was about climate alarmism!