In a new paper (Stein et al., 2017), scientists find that Arctic sea ice retreat and advance is modulated by variations in solar activity. In addition, the sea ice cover during the last century has only slightly retreated from the extent reached during coldest centuries of the Little Ice Age (1600s to 1800s AD), which had the highest sea ice cover of the last 10,000 years and flirted with excursions into year-round sea ice. –Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, 2 March 2017
Watts Up With That has a funny instance of warmist deception. You may have seen the headline, I did: Antarctica hits record high temperature at balmy 63.5¬∞F. Where? Base Esperanza. Where is Base Esperanza in relation to what we normally think of as Antarctica? A long, long distance away. Base Esperanza is close to Tiera Del Fuego and not far from Africa, so warm temperatures there are not exactly shocking. Plus, the weather phenomenon that caused the recent high temperature is well understood and has nothing to do with global warming. Now we get to the really fun part: the photo that accompanied the alarmist MSN article. “If you magnify the picture 500%, the penguins become extremely pixilated, the ice chunk less so, and the background rocks even less so, a fingerprint of 3 different photographs with different resolutions that have been overlain.” So the whole thing is a fake. –John Hinderaker, PowerLine, 6 March 2017
The continuing debate [about the global warming slowdown] does highlight the limitations of science as a means of checking “alternative facts”. Telling if the entire Earth is getting warmer is a different ball game. Simply collecting readings from weather stations is not going to be enough. Finally, there is the problem of deciding if any detected trend is real or just a fluke. The textbook way of deciding is to use so-called significance tests, statistical methods that show the chance of getting the observed results, assuming they are a fluke. The argument over the strength of global warming shows how difficult climate research really is. It also shows the naivety of thinking that on “hot button” issues such as global warming, science can debunk fake news in a flash. –Robert Matthews, The National, 4 March 2017
The bill stipulates EPA advisers “shall have no current grants or contracts from the [EPA] and shall not apply for a grant or contract for 3 years following the end of that member’s service on the Board.” “This bill would ensure that scientists advising EPA on regulatory decisions are not the same scientists receiving EPA grants,” said Texas Republican Rep. Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. Smith also introduced a bill to prevent EPA from using “secret science” to develop major regulations. Republicans argue EPA and other agencies shouldn’t be able to base regulations on non-public scientific data. –Michael Bastasch The Daily Caller, 6 March 2016
A German High Court has decided that the Federal Environmental Agency has the right to publicly denounce science journalists who report critically about climate issues. In the US, government agencies are calling some journalists “Fake News” in order to discriminate against them. In Germany that would be impossible, right? Wrong. A federal agency, which is under the responsibility of the Ministry of the Environment, has attacked journalists in the same way. Unfortunately, however, there is no court in Germany to protect the freedom of the press. –Michael Miersch, Deutsche Wildtier Stiftung, 6 March 2017
