Even though global average tropospheric temperatures are rapidly falling now as La Nina approaches, it is usually the second calendar year of an El Nino event that is the warmest, especially in the satellite record of tropospheric temperatures. This is because it takes a couple of months for all of the unusually warm Pacific surface water to transfer its extra heat to the atmosphere, pushing peak atmospheric temperatures into the second calendar year of an El Nino event. While 2015 was only the 3rd warmest year in the satellite record (since 1979), 2016 might well beat out 1998 as the record warmest. And, of course, if we go into prolonged La Nina conditions for the next 2-3 years, we might well be debating the meaning and significance of a 20-year pause in global warming in another year or two. —Roy Spencer, 22 June 2016
Every El Ni√±o is different. We’ve shown that fact in many of the posts presented in the 2014/15 El Ni√±o series and those about the 2015/16 El Ni√±o. Weather around the globe is chaotic, so the background state globally in which each El Ni√±o forms will be different. As a result, the responses of ocean basin surface temperatures to El Ni√±os will vary from event to event, even strong El Ni√±os.
So far, the responses of global sea surface temperatures to the 2015/16 El Ni√±o have fallen short of those experienced during the 1997/98 El Ni√±o. The decay in many basins is also occurring sooner in 2016 than in 1998. However, the 2015/16 El Ni√±o released a tremendous about of warm water from below the surface of the western tropical Pacific, and all of that warm water is going to end up somewhere. Time will tell. –Bob Tisdale, Watts Up With That, 23 June 2016
All the hubris last month about polar bear x grizzly hybrids, based on an unusual-looking bear killed near Arviat, has turned out to be wishful thinking by those who’d like to blame everything to do with polar bears on climate change. An awful lot of “experts” now have egg on their faces. That “hybrid” was just a blonde grizzly, as I warned it might. ‚Äì Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, 21 June 2016
For weeks, environmentalists claimed a supposed polar bear-grizzly bear hybrid that was harvested in the Canadian Arctic was proof global warming was pushing polar bears far enough south to mate with grizzlies. As it turns out, that narrative is totally false. The results of a DNA test done on the bear revealed it was just a blonde grizzly bear, not a polar-grizzly hybrid. –Michael Bastasch, The Daily Caller, 22 June 2016
A new survey of 651 climate scientists’ opinions has been carried out by Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch. Whereas other surveys have asked scientists very simple and binary questions about their belief in climate change, this survey offers deeper and more nuanced insight into scientific opinion. The results show that many climate scientists acknowledge significant knowledge gaps and scientific uncertainties that are habitually ignored by the media and politicians. —Global Warming Policy Foundation, 22 June 2016
So there you have it. The demise of Melomys rubicola had nothing to do with temperature, rainfall or sea level rise. The animal was a victim of storm surges that progressively destroyed its habitat. No evidence ‚Äì not even a climate model ‚Äì is presented to support the claim that these storm surges had anything to do with increasing atmospheric CO2. It’s also questionable whether storm surges at a remote atoll even qualify as “climate change” ‚Äì note that they are described in the above quotes as “weather events”. –Roger Andrews, Energy Matters, 20 June 2016
Tesla shares fell 10% Wednesday, or more than the $2.8 billion value of SolarCity, as investors asked why one money-losing company would be better off buying another money-losing company. SolarCity was once a darling of the green energy set, but its shares have fallen more than 50% in the past year as its political advantage ebbs. So far Tesla looks more like a classic of the reverse income redistribution of green crony capitalism, in which middle-class taxpayers subsidize billionaires who make products to satisfy the anti-fossil-fuel indulgences of the upper classes. That Mr. Musk is reshuffling his Tesla balance sheet to subsidize his own solar venture is a sign that this may not be a sustainable business model. —The Wall Street Journal, 23 June 2016
