Pirate's Cove

It’s a perfect time for Don Paul to drop this unhinged Warmist screed at the Buffalo News. They’ve had off and on lake effect snow, which will continue. Today’s high was forecast to be 24F, when their average high is 50F. The low will be 21F, when the average is 36F. Obviously, we get

Don Paul: We have met the global warming enemy and it is us

A long-awaited document was released last week by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/NOAA administered U.S. Global Change Research Program. This is one of the most encyclopedic compendiums of its kind, and it was issued despite some indications of hostility toward its findings by the current administration. The research project has roots which precede this presidency, and could not readily be snuffed out if that were anyone’s intention in the administration due to approved funding and congressional mandate.

Climate Matters, a private organization in Princeton, saved me the trouble of reading the entire exhaustive report, but here are the top 10 findings within this first volume: (snip through those 10)

Item 4 is an especially key finding, and I’ve written of this in past articles. There is overwhelming evidence human activity is responsible for the ongoing average global warming, and no real evidence of natural warming would be occurring without our activity and the increase in the atmosphere’s greenhouse effect linked to that activity. In fact, at an American Meteorological Society conference held in the National Center for Atmospheric Research, climate scientists demonstrated to me and many colleagues climate models initialized with the carbon dioxide levels we had around the year 1900, even with natural warming agents such as solar forcing maxed up, demonstrate the world would have been slightly cooling since 1900. There is no explanation for the warming other than “us” and what we have added to the air.

Don goes on this and that, even trotting out the old “the oceans ate my warming” meme. He Blames the wildfires out west, which were declared to be arson in many cases, on Hotcoldwetdry.

The climate models which began to proliferate numerically and dramatically improve in quality during the 1980s have done pretty well, with more warming impacts being slightly greater in scope than lesser. They should never be confused with meteorological models, because climate models are designed to filter out the “noise” of day-to-day fluctuations and operate on a smoothed timescale.

The same models that consistently fail, and do not even work when applied to past warming.

So, the notion “we/meteorologists have trouble with a seventh day in the 7-day outlook, so why should anyone believe climate predictions a century out?” is a red herring and irrelevant.

And that’s his whole point: the models can’t accurately predict 7 days out, but we should totes trust them for 50-100 years out. I wonder how much he would freak if I asked him if he’s taken responsibility and given up his own use of fossil fuels and made his life carbon neutral? Good luck with that during a frigid Buffalo winter.