Google+ Followers

Monday, February 27, 2017

Proving Al Gore Wrong Again! Report: Humans Sparked 84 Percent Of US Wldfires, Increased Fire Season Over 2 Decades



Related image








The media release is below.


###
Humans sparked 84 percent of US wildfires, increased fire season over 2 decades
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT BOULDER


Humans have dramatically increased the spatial and seasonal extent of wildfires across the U.S. in recent decades and ignited more than 840,000 blazes in the spring, fall and winter seasons over a 21-year period, according to new research.


After analyzing two decades’ worth of U.S. government agency wildfire records spanning 1992-2012, the researchers found that human-ignited wildfires accounted for 84 percent of all wildfires, tripling the length of the average fire season and accounting for nearly half of the total acreage burned.


The findings were published today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.


“There cannot be a fire without a spark,” said Jennifer Balch, Director of CU Boulder’s Earth Lab and an assistant professor in the Department of Geography and lead author of the new study. “Our results highlight the importance of considering where the ignitions that start wildfires come from, instead of focusing only on the fuel that carries fire or the weather that helps it spread. Thanks to people, the wildfire season is almost year-round.”


The U.S. has experienced some of its largest wildfires on record over the past decade, especially in the western half of the country. The duration and intensity of future wildfire seasons is a point of national concern given the potentially severe impact on agriculture, ecosystems, recreation and other economic sectors, as well as the high cost of extinguishing blazes.
The annual cost of fighting wildfires in the U.S. has exceeded $2 billion in recent years.
The CU Boulder researchers used the U.S. Forest Service Fire Program Analysis-Fire Occurrence Database to study records of all wildfires that required a response from a state or federal agency between 1992 and 2012, omitting intentionally set prescribed burns and managed agricultural fires. Human-ignited wildfires accounted for 84 percent of 1.5 million total wildfires studied, with lightning-ignited fires accounting for the rest.


In Colorado, 30 percent of wildfires from 1992-2012 were started by people, burning over 1.2 million acres. The fire season length for human-started fires was 50 days longer than the lightning-started fire season (93 days compared to 43 days), a twofold increase.


“These findings do not discount the ongoing role of climate change, but instead suggest we should be most concerned about where it overlaps with human impact,” said Balch. “Climate change is making our fields, forests and grasslands drier and hotter for longer periods, creating a greater window of opportunity for human-related ignitions to start wildfires.”


While lightning-driven fires tend to be heavily concentrated in the summer months, human-ignited fires were found to be more evenly distributed across all seasons. Overall, humans added an average of 40,000 wildfires during the spring, fall and winter seasons annually — over 35 times the number of lightning-started fires in those seasons.


“We saw significant increases in the numbers of large, human-started fires over time, especially in the spring,” said Bethany Bradley, an associate professor at University of Massachusetts Amherst and co-lead author of the research. “I think that’s interesting, and scary, because it suggests that as spring seasons get warmer and earlier due to climate change, human ignitions are putting us at increasing risk of some of the largest, most damaging wildfires.”
“Not all fire is bad, but humans are intentionally and unintentionally adding ignitions to the landscape in areas and seasons when natural ignitions are sparse,” said John Abatzoglou, an associate professor of geography at the University of Idaho and a co-author of the paper. “We can’t easily control how dry fuels get, or lightning, but we do have some control over human started ignitions.”


The most common day for human-started fire by far, however, was July 4, with 7,762 total wildfires started on that day over the course of the 21-year period.


The new findings have wide-ranging implications for fire management policy and suggest that human behavior can have dramatic impact on wildfire totals, for good or for ill.
“The hopeful news here is that we could, in theory, reduce human-started wildfires in the medium term,” said Balch. “But at the same time, we also need to focus on living more sustainably with fire by shifting the human contribution to ignitions to more controlled, well-managed burns.”


###
Co-authors of the new research include Emily Fusco of the University of Massachusetts Amherst and Adam Mahood and Chelsea Nagy of CU Boulder.
The research was funded by the NASA Terrestrial Ecology Program, the Joint Fire Sciences Program and Earth Lab through CU Boulder’s Grand Challenge Initiative.

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

AL Gore Fake News: Global Warming Edition?

 Image result for al gore liar

Fake news has become part of the daily lexicon due to efforts of once respected news outlets such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN to destroy the candidacy and now the presidency of Donald Trump.  Fake news is produced with the singular goal of advancing a political agenda – the agenda of the left.

Fake news has also permeated another cause near and dear to the left: climate change, formerly known as global warming.

The Daily Mail reported on a high-level whistleblower at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) revealing fake news from the government agency.  Specifically, NOAA "[r]ushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change."
Why the NOAA publication?  U.N. scientists in 2013 noted a "pause" in global warming since 1998, confounding Al Gore, Prince Charles, Barack Obama, Leo DiCaprio, and others riding the global warming bandwagon.  This pause was problematic in that it threw the entire man-made global warming proposition back to the drawing board.  Why was there such a pause?  Industrial activity hadn't slowed.  CO2 emissions were as robust as ever.  The U.S. still hadn't joined the Kyoto treaty.  Why would there be a pause?

The idea of a "pause" goes against the central premise of the climate change movement – that the planet is warming, that the warming is due to human activity, and that the warming can be stopped or reversed only by government intervention in terms of taxes and regulation.

The pause was reported in 2013: "[s]ince 1998, there has been an unexplained 'standstill' in the heating of the Earth's atmosphere."  Not the "true planetary emergency" that Al Gore warned about in 2006.

When real scientists encounter contradictory data, they look at their original assumptions and hypothesis.  That's the scientific method.  Instead, the climate scientists changed how the data was collected, using a new method that would confirm their preconceived notions.  Rather than collecting sea surface temperatures from buoys, they used ship-based temperature readings, which tend to be warmer, as the ship naturally warms the water around it.  As the whistleblower put it, "they had good data from buoys.  And they threw it out and 'corrected' it by using the bad data from ships."

It's much like a dieter not liking the reading from his bathroom scale.  Why not buy a new scale that reads five pounds lighter?  VoilĂ : the diet is working, and the pounds are coming off.  That is precisely what the climate scientists did to disprove the pause.

Not only that, but the NOAA scientists failed to preserve their actual work.  A key element of good scientific research is preserving the data in the event that the results need to be verified.  Another group of scientists should be able to reproduce the research by following the initial study methodology and arrive at similar results.  If not, then someone is wrong.  Without the original data, we are left with a leap of faith that the NOAA scientists correctly recorded and analyzed the data.

If climate scientists were beyond reproach and the implications of this recent study were insignificant, we might give them a pass over their data destruction.  But as with Hillary Clinton and her emails, past behavior underscores the need for more, not less scrutiny.

Remember the "Climategate" scandal in 2009?  Leaked emails (sound familiar?) from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit showed scientists fudging data to fit a predetermined outcome and subverting the peer review process, preventing publication of papers contradicting the preferred doctrine of man-made global warming.  It's much like what NOAA is doing now.

What a shame that science and scientists have been corrupted, substituting thoughtful inquiry for rigged data and fake results.  This might explain why 91 percent of Americans aren't worried about global warming.  Or vehement Democrat opposition to Trump's EPA nominee, Scott Pruitt.

Is global warming real?  Maybe.  If so, where are the models that predict and prove it?  This should not be a matter of models rigged, after the fact, to conform to preconceived notions.

Is the climate changing?  Of course it is.  It always has and always will.  The question is whether humans influence the change in a significant or negligible way.

Good science is the only way to answer these questions.  Current NOAA fiddling with the data and Climategate from a few years ago demonstrate that proper science is being stepped on and that these questions are not being addressed or answered in an honest or transparent way.  Replacing science is raw politics, where the results are predetermined regardless of the actual facts.
Brian C Joondeph, M.D., MPS is a Denver-based physician and writer.  Follow him on Facebook  and Twitter.

Boom… Al Gore Warmists Admit Rapid Warming Not Unusual Since Last Ice Age

That giant sucking sound is the black hole-like collapse of the notion that today’s climate is warming far more rapidly than in the past. Too bad for the (below) Guardian headline from a couple days ago.
Image result for al gore wrong prediction
Key admission:
Heinrich events [since the last Ice Age] were followed by brief periods of rapid warming. The Northern Hemisphere warmed repeatedly by as many as 15 degrees Fahrenheit in just a few decades.
The media release and abstract are below.
###
How an Ice Age paradox could inform sea level rise predictions
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
ANN ARBOR — New findings from the University of Michigan explain an Ice Age paradox and add to the mounting evidence that climate change could bring higher seas than most models predict.
The study, published in Nature, shows how small spikes in the temperature of the ocean, rather than the air, likely drove the rapid disintegration cycles of the expansive ice sheet that once covered much of North America.
The behavior of this ancient ice sheet — called Laurentide — has puzzled scientists for decades because its periods of melting and splintering into the sea occurred at the coldest times in the last Ice Age. Ice should melt when the weather is warm, but that’s not what happened.
“We’ve shown that we don’t really need atmospheric warming to trigger large-scale disintegration events if the ocean warms up and starts tickling the edges of the ice sheets,” said Jeremy Bassis, U-M associate professor of climate and space sciences and engineering. “It is possible that modern-day glaciers, not just the parts that are floating but the parts that are just touching the ocean, are more sensitive to ocean warming than we previously thought.”
This mechanism is likely at work today on the Greenland ice sheet and possibly Antarctica. Scientists know this in part due to Bassis’ previous work. Several years ago, he came up with a new, more accurate way to mathematically describe how ice breaks and flows. His model has led to a deeper understanding of how the Earth’s store of ice could react to changes in air or ocean temperatures, and how that might translate to sea level rise.
Last year, other researchers used it to predict that melting Antarctic ice could raise sea levels by more than three feet, as opposed to the previous estimate that Antarctica would only contribute centimeters by 2100.
In the new study, Bassis and his colleagues applied a version of this model to the climate of the last Ice Age, which ended about 10,000 years ago. They used ice core and ocean-floor sediment records to estimate water temperature and how it varied. Their aim was to see if what’s happening in Greenland today could describe the behavior of the Laurentide Ice Sheet.
Scientists refer to these bygone periods of rapid ice disintegration as Heinrich events: Icebergs broke off the edges of Northern Hemisphere ice sheets and flowed into the ocean, raising sea level by more than 6 feet over the course of hundreds of years. As the icebergs drifted and melted, dirt they carried settled onto the ocean floor, forming thick layers that can be seen in sediment cores across the North Atlantic basin. These unusual sediment layers are what allowed researchers to first identify Heinrich events.
“Decades of work looking at ocean sediment records has shown that these ice sheet collapse events happened periodically during the last Ice Age, but it has taken a lot longer to come up with a mechanism that can explain why the Laurentide ice sheet collapsed during the coldest periods only. This study has done that,” said geochemist and co-author Sierra Petersen, U-M research fellow in earth and environmental sciences.
Bassis and his colleagues set out to understand the timing and size of the Heinrich events. Through their simulations, they were able to predict both, and also to explain why some ocean warming events triggered Heinrich events and some did not. They even identified an additional Heinrich event that had previously been missed.
Heinrich events were followed by brief periods of rapid warming. The Northern Hemisphere warmed repeatedly by as many as 15 degrees Fahrenheit in just a few decades. The area would stabilize, but then the ice would slowly grow to its breaking point over the next thousand years. Their model was able to simulate these events as well.
Bassis’ model takes into account how the Earth’s surface reacts to the weight of the ice on top of it. Heavy ice depresses the planet’s surface, at times pushing it below sea level. That’s when the ice sheets are most vulnerable to warmer seas. But as a glacier retreats, the solid Earth rebounds out of the water again, stabilizing the system. From that point the ice sheet can begin to expand again.
“There is currently large uncertainty about how much sea level will rise and much of this uncertainty is related to whether models incorporate the fact that ice sheets break,” Bassis said. “What we are showing is that the models we have of this process seem to work for Greenland, as well as in the past so we should be able to more confidently predict sea level rise.”
He added that portions of Antarctica have similar geography to Laurentide: Pine Island, Thwaites glacier, for example.
“We’re seeing ocean warming in those region and we’re seeing these regions start to change. In that area, they’re seeing ocean temperature changes of about 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit,” Bassis said. “That’s pretty similar magnitude as we believe occurred in the Laurentide events, and what we saw in our simulations is that just a small amount of ocean warming can destabilize a region if it’s in the right configuration, and even in the absence of atmospheric warming.”
###
http://junkscience.com/2017/02/boom-warmists-admit-rapid-warming-not-unusual-since-last-ice-age/

Al Gore New Claim: Global Warming Disappearing Oxygen From Oceans




Here are the reported results:
Here’s the data coverage from the study. Sure looks unsystematic.
The media release and abstract are below.
###
Global ocean de-oxygenation quantified
The first in-depth study on the observed global ocean oxygen content was just published by Kiel scientists in Nature
HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR OCEAN RESEARCH KIEL (GEOMAR)
Oxygen is an essential necessity of life on land. The same applies for almost all organisms in the ocean. However, the oxygen supply in the oceans is threatened by global warming in two ways: Warmer surface waters take up less oxygen than colder waters. In addition, warmer water stabilizes the stratification of the ocean. This weakens the circulation connecting the surface with the deep ocean and less oxygen is transported into the deep sea. Therefore, many models predict a decrease in global oceanic oxygen inventory of the oceans due to global warming. The first global evaluation of millions of oxygen measurements seems to confirm this trend and points to first impacts of global change.
In the renowned scientific journal Nature the oceanographers Dr. Sunke Schmidtko, Dr. Lothar Stramma and Prof. Dr. Martin Visbeck from GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel just published the most comprehensive study on global oxygen content in the world’s oceans so far. It demonstrates that the ocean’s oxygen content has decreased by more than two percent over the last 50 years. “Since large fishes in particular avoid or do not survive in areas with low oxygen content, these changes can have far-reaching biological consequences,” says Dr. Schmidtko, the lead-author of the study.
The researchers used all historic oxygen data available around the world for their work, supplemented it with current measurements and refined the interpolation procedures to more accurately reconstruct the development of the oxygen budget over the past 50 years. In some areas previous research had already shown a decrease in oxygen. “To quantify trends for the entire ocean, however, was more difficult since oxygen data from remote regions and the deep ocean is sparse,” explains Dr. Schmidtko, “we were able to document the oxygen distribution and its changes for the entire ocean for the first time. These numbers are an essential prerequisite for improving forecasts for the ocean of the future.”
The study also shows that, with the exception of a few regions, the oxygen content decreased throughout the entire ocean during the period investigated. The greatest loss was found in the North Pacific. “While the slight decrease of oxygen in the atmosphere is currently considered non-critical, the oxygen losses in the ocean can have far-reaching consequences because of the uneven distribution. For fisheries and coastal economies this process may have detrimental consequences,” emphasizes the co-author Dr. Lothar Stramma.
“However, with measurements alone, we cannot explain all the causes,” adds Professor Martin Visbeck, “natural processes occurring on time scales of a few decades may also have contributed to the observed decrease.” However, the results of the research are consistent with most model calculations that predict a further decrease in oxygen in the oceans due to higher atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and consequently higher global temperatures.
The new study is an important result for the ongoing work in the Collaborative Research Center (SFB) 754 funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) at the Kiel University and GEOMAR. The SFB 754’s aim is to better understand the interaction between climate and biogeochemistry of the tropical ocean. “From the beginning of March onwards, four expeditions aboard the German research vessel METEOR will investigate the tropical oxygen minimum zone in the eastern Pacific off Peru. We hope to obtain further data on regional development which will also help us to better understand the global trends,” emphasizes Dr. Stramma, the expedition coordinator for the SFB.
###
http://junkscience.com/2017/02/claim-global-warming-disappearing-oxygen-from-oceans/