Remember when the Liberal carbon tax was a conservative idea?

[chuckChuck]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/aug/11/extreme-weather-common-blocking-patterns

The rise in blocking patterns correlates closely with the extra heating being delivered to the Arctic by climate change, according to the research which is published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academies of Science (PNAS). Coumou and his colleagues argue there are good physical reasons to think there is a causal link, because the jet streams are driven by the difference in temperature between the poles and the equator. As the Arctic is warming more quickly than lower latitudes, that temperature difference is declining, providing less energy for the jet stream and its meanders, which are called Rossby waves.

Prof Ted Shepherd, a climate scientist at the University of Reading, UK, but not involved in the work, said the link between blocking patterns and extreme weather was very well established. He added that the increasing frequency shown in the new work indicated climate change could bring rapid and dramatic changes to weather, on top of a gradual heating of the planet. “Circulation changes can have much more non-linear effects. They may do nothing for a while, then there might be some kind of regime change.”

[chuckChuck]

Most scientists are funded by government. only objective is to protect their jobs, not unlike any other government worker who will vote ndp/liberal governments as best way to ensure their phony jobs are protected.

Aren't the majority of climate scientists in independent Universities which are funded by the public and the private sector?

[chuckChuck]

Just saw this posted by a person working up north...typical example of the CORRUPT WORTHLESS data being used...

The CBC JUST PUT OUT A LEAKED REPORT SAYING THE NORTH IS WARMING AT TEMPERTURES 2.5 TIMES GREATER THAN THE REST OF THE WORLD.... THIS IS WHAT I PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS IN THE ARCTIC...The air quality monitoring stations that were installed after 2000 are a point of faulty data collection. The person who installed them (i helped them find locations for the ones in Inuvik and Yellowknife) were placed in locations to to get 'hits' ... when I asked the person in charge why he wanted them in locations where it would obvious give high readings he told me they want 'hits' so they can get more funding. I thought that was bad science so I would only approve a site that was average air quality for the town of Inuvik by a soccer pitch and no buildings or traffic near it... since they are going to use that single point to represent the surrounding 500 km I felt that was best... the person complained to the SAO and Mayor ... but I held firm on my assertion that the location away from direct sources of pollution was a better location to collect a representative sample. Since I moved away they moved the air quality station next to the boiler end on one of the larger buildings in Inuvik (Midnight Sun Rec Center) obviously to get 'hits' ... the air quality monitoring station in Yellowknife (see pictures) is next to one of the larger sewage lift stations (think pig barn) in the city... I would get calls a couple times a year from environment Canada asking about a high numbers...LOL! so the data from any of these sources are suspect... not because I don't believe data... quite the opposite ... I collect and analyze data professionally... there are serious problems when the data is collected to get 'hits'... the report 'leaked' by CBC has been fixed with 20 years of manipulated data... we are being miss-lead.
If this is happening on Canadas Arctic... where else has the data collected been placed so the monitoring system will get 'hits'?

No source information makes the above claim not credible. People can write anything they want on a blog.

Air quality monitoring stations are often put near sources like power stations, oil facilities and refineries to measure air quality.

Furthermore Climate scientists use several sources of data to measure climatic changes including satellites.

It is explained here: https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-do-scientists-measure-global-temperature

[chuckChuck]

Last time CO2 levels were this high, there were trees at the South Pole

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/apr/03/south-pole-tree-fossils-indicate-impact-of-climate-change

"Trees growing near the South Pole, sea levels 20 metres higher than now, and global temperatures 3C-4C warmer. That is the world scientists are uncovering as they look back in time to when the planet last had as much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as it does today.

Using sedimentary records and plant fossils, researchers have found that temperatures near the South Pole were about 20C higher than now in the Pliocene epoch, from 5.3m to 2.6m years ago.

Many scientists use sophisticated computer models to predict the impacts of human-caused climate change, but looking back in time for real-world examples can give new insights.

The Pliocene was a “proper analogy” and offered important lessons about the road ahead, said Martin Siegert, a geophysicist and climate-change scientist at Imperial College London. “The headline news is the temperatures are 3-4C higher and sea levels are 15-20 metres higher than they are today. The indication is that there is no Greenland ice sheet any more, no West Antarctic ice sheet and big chunks of East Antarctic [ice sheet] taken,” he said."

"Fossil fuel burning was pumping CO2 into the atmosphere extremely rapidly, he said, though it took time for the atmosphere and oceans to respond fully. “If you put your oven on at home and set it to 200C the temperature does not get to that immediately, it takes a bit of time, and it is the same with climate,” Siegert said, at a Royal Meteorological Society meeting on the climate of the Pliocene.

He added that global temperature had already risen by 1C since the industrial revolution, when CO2 levels were 280 parts per million (ppm). CO2 was now at 412ppm and rising, suggesting the planet would be locked into rises of 3C-4C in the next few centuries. Ice melting, he said, took even longer and the huge sea level rises indicated by the Pliocene evidence would probably take a few millennia to come about."

“If we keep carbon emissions going at the current rate, by the end of the century we will have 1,000ppm,” said Siegert. The low 280ppm level of CO2 in the run-up to the industrial revolution was rooted in carbon being removed from the air by plants and animals and then buried. “It formed coal seams, gas and oil fields. And what we have been doing for the last 150 years is digging it all up and putting it back into the atmosphere, it’s crazy.”

[AlbertaFarmer5]

The extreme persistent blocking patterns that we have been experiencing in the last few years may be caused by rapid warming in the arctic and a declining temperature differential with mid lattitudes. Notice I said may because climate scientists are still trying to figure this out. David Philips Canada's most prominent climate scientist says there is a link with climate change. If so then recent droughts and extended wet cold periods that caused crop losses have a large climate change bill attached.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sweltering-summers-linked-to-rapidly-warming-arctic/

"A separate paper published today in the journal Scientific Reports suggests that the massive 2016 Fort McMurray wildfire in Alberta—Canada’s costliest disaster on record—was likely linked to a persistent planetary wave pattern existing in the Northern Hemisphere at that time. This wave pattern helped drive a high-pressure system over western Canada that favored unusually hot, dry conditions for the region. The weather was worsened by the effects of a particularly severe El Niño event, which was still in full swing at the time.

The new paper suggests that the same wave structure could have helped drive the conditions fueling other wildfires that cropped up across the Northern Hemisphere in 2016, although it doesn’t specifically investigate those links. It also suggests that a similar planetary wave structure could have influenced an unusual spate of wildfires in Greenland last summer.

Mike Flannigan, a wildfire expert at the University of Alberta, said in a recent conversation with E&E News that some researchers are concerned about future increases in blocking patterns over western North America, which has seen some of its most intense wildfires on record in the last few years.

Flannigan pointed to recent research, including a 2017 paper in Scientific Reports, suggesting Arctic-driven changes in the jet stream could increase the frequency of atmospheric blocking and extreme weather events.
Advertisement

Many of the extreme heat waves that have dominated European news the last few summer have been associated with stationary weather patterns, as well, said climatologist Judah Cohen, director of seasonal forecasting at the analytics group Atmospheric and Environmental Research.

“We’ve had quite a few summers that you can rattle off that we’ve had this extreme heat—for them, anyway—and seems to be associated with very persistent high-pressure blocks,” he told E&E.

This summer is no exception. According to a recent blog post from the World Meteorological Organization, extreme heat in northern Europe the last few months is linked to a stationary high-pressure system.

As 2018 follows in the footsteps of other recent summers—marked by record-breaking heat events, raging wildfires and other disasters—there’s a growing importance attached to research on extreme summer weather. It’s clear that the global influence of climate change is driving more extremes around the world and will continue to do so."

What large climate change bill? Are you aware that crop yields, both in Canada and the rest of the world continue to increase dramatically? Canada's total grain production is up 36% in the past 10 years, how can that even be possible?

And please remember that you keep telling us dumb farmers that we can't use weather as proof of global warming(or lack thereof depending on ones persuasion), but somehow it is quite acceptable for you to use weather as proof of global warming, as you just did. Can you possibly tell us how unprecedented these blocking patterns are? Have you checked the historical weather data?

[chuckChuck]

So when persistent blocking weather patterns cause more severe droughts or periods of wet weather in some regions that prevent planting, reduce crop yields and quality do farmers make more money or less money?

In 2011 when extreme wet conditions occurred and many farmers in southern Saskatchewan and Manitoba couldn't seed, did they make more profit or less profit on their farms?

Severe flooding happened in 1999 as well, that prevented seeding in much of the same area.

1999 and 2011 were unprecedented flooding events that the old timers had never seen before. Crop yields on the farms affected were severely reduced. And the cost to these farms was very high in lost revenue.

[Robertbarlage]

Ah wrong chuck old timers saw this exact flooding in the 50s maybe your old timers aren’t that old.

[blackjack]

Climate change caused the floods in Calgary...it caused the forest fire in Fort McMurray...c2 it was just weather.

Edit:I remember my father saying they had no rain 60,61 and then in 62 the skies opened up seven inches in one rainfall.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

So when persistent blocking weather patterns cause more severe droughts or periods of wet weather in some regions that prevent planting, reduce crop yields and quality do farmers make more money or less money?

In 2011 when extreme wet conditions occurred and many farmers in southern Saskatchewan and Manitoba couldn't seed, did they make more profit or less profit on their farms?

Severe flooding happened in 1999 as well, that prevented seeding in much of the same area.

1999 and 2011 were unprecedented flooding events that the old timers had never seen before. Crop yields on the farms affected were severely reduced. And the cost to these farms was very high in lost revenue.

As you keep telling us dumb farmers, Western Canada is a big place. While in 1999 the weather ( not climate remember, one year is not climate), was horrendous for my little area, Canada wide, it looks like it was a record breaking big yield by a wide margin, and that record stood for years afterwards. Hardly an economic cost. And the old timers here also say that the late 50's were way wetter than anything since, anecdotal, and I haven't looked at the local data to verify, but having the all of the hay crops float away in our topography is certainly unprecedented in my time.

But, more importantly, why is the standard of evidence impossibly high for any realist with actual verifiable data, yet the alarmists can call any anecdotal weather event evidence, even when the data clearly shows that there is nothing unprecedented about it, and the economic results contradict those claims?

Please do yourself a favour, Email or call Murray Hartman, of Alberta Ag and see if he will share his findings on weather for Lacombe. It clearly shows that we are seeing declines in extremes of all types over the past 110 years. And better weather by all measures associated with growing crops as well.

As a side note, there are climatologists who have found that historically, as the globe transitions from a warming to cooling cycle, or vice versa, that there will be more extremes during that period. I haven't tried to verify that locally though.

[furrowtickler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYoOcaqCzxo

Watch carefully chuck ...

If some of it is to difficult to understand, just remember “data selection”

[Guest]

do you guys ever get the feeling you are arguing with a fencepost
they do not hear facts, ever
goes right over their heads
luckily , the rest of the world and canadians are waking up to the "new tax" plus gst

[AlbertaFarmer5]

do you guys ever get the feeling you are arguing with a fencepost
they do not hear facts, ever
goes right over their heads
luckily , the rest of the world and canadians are waking up to the "new tax" plus gst

Yes, and a few times I have sworn off of wasting any more time doing so. But to my surprise, and Chucks credit, he actually responded to my requests, so I feel obliged to at least point out the errors.