A new paper has been published in the Analysis section of Nature called Reconciling controversies about the ‘global warming hiatus’. It confirms that the ‘hiatus’ or ‘pause’ is real. It is also rather revealing. It attempts to explain the ‘Pause’ by looking into what is known about climate variability. One could be a little sarcastic in saying why would Nature devote seven of its desirable pages to an event that some vehemently say never existed and maintain its existence has been disproved long ago. Now, however, as the El Nino spike of the past few years levels off, analysing the ‘pause’ seems to be coming back into fashion. –Dr David Whitehouse, GWPF Science Editor, GWPF Observatory, 4 May 2017
We have had countless news stories over the winter about heatwaves in the Arctic and record ice melt. Meanwhile, back in the real world, Arctic sea ice is just where it has been for the last few years. Average April ice extent has now been stable since 2004. Most of the Arctic basin is covered by ice at least two meters thick or more. Arctic temperatures have been 20C or more below zero all year so far, and are currently below average. And the Greenland ice sheet continue to grow at record rates. –Paul Homewood, Not A Lot Of People Know That, 4 May 2017
Is there a mutiny in the works between the IUCN Red List and the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) over polar bear population estimates or has there simply been a breach of ethics? What else explains the fact that some of the subpopulation estimates used by the PBSG to support the status of ‘vulnerable’ for the IUCN Red List in 2015 are unacceptable to them in 2017? And why are the PBSG refusing to embrace the Red List global estimate of 22,000-31,000? Welcome to conservation ‘science’ practiced by IUCN polar bear specialists. –Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, 1 May 2017
A new WCS study reveals evidence that some corals are adapting to warming ocean waters ‚Äì potentially good news in the face of recent reports of global coral die offs due to extreme warm temperatures in 2016. —Wildlife Conservation Society, 2 May 2017
Critics of the Paris climate change deal stepped up their offensive Wednesday to pressure President Trump to keep his campaign promise and withdraw from the international pact on global warming. The free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute think tank in Washington is leading the charge to ensure Trump leaves the deal, releasing an exhaustive analysis on why staying in the deal would harm the U.S. economy. “The argument that we can simply renegotiate the Paris Climate Treaty is false; that’s not an option under the deal,” said Chris Horner, co-author of the study and senior fellow at CEI. “The agreement’s language in Article 4 is clear and deliberate. According to this treaty, any revision must be more stringent — we cannot revise downward, and we are required to make it worse, every five years, forever. This is a truly terrible deal for U.S. consumers and the economy.” –John Siciliano, Washington Examiner, 3 May 2017
Trackback from your site.