When Science is Amusing

giphy

And I’m not talking about those shows on the Science channel or Neil deGrasse Tyson tweets.

Over the years I have enjoyed reading about Arctic expeditions that claim to be able to sail to the North Pole in an effort to highlight the loss of arctic sea ice from Anthropogenic Global Warming Human Caused Climate Warming Climate Change. The idea is to promote the more liberal notion the planet is undergoing irreparable harm from humans driving their cars and producing much needed electricity from fossil fuels that power the advancements of our society.

You know its no longer a laughing matter when the leader of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis, is considering declaring personal acts that go against the belief of Climate Change as sins.  No word yet on his decision to declare the child sexual predator acts of priests and church officials to be a sin worthy of a scarlet letter in the same way.

Still, pot smoking activists, running up huge college debts to go into science fields that require travel on ships to prove a point show exactly why overuse of recreational drugs while you’re young, is a bad idea.  Then again, they must be doing it for us more rational people’s entertainment.

It was amusing to see another article about a ship attempting to sail through the Northwest passage because it had little summer ice and could be easily navigated, only to see the ship lost.. wait.. crushed.. by .. ice.  This got me thinking about the predictions of the past from scientists and agencies in the mid 2000’s of summer ice completely melted that anyone could sail to the North Pole.

Mother Nature, of course, had other ideas. In researching these predictions of dire consequences from an ice free summer arctic, I found a couple of interesting things.

In this article from 2007:

Louis Fortier, scientific director of ArcticNet, a Canadian research network, said the sea ice is melting faster than predicted by models created by international teams of scientists, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

They had forecast the Arctic Ocean could be free of summer ice as early as 2050. But Fortier told an international conference on defence and security in Quebec City yesterday that the worst-case scenarios are becoming reality.

“The frightening models we didn’t even dare to talk about before are now proving to be true,” Fortier said, referring to computer models that take into account the thinning of the sea ice and the warming from the albedo effect – the Earth is absorbing more energy as the sea ice melts.

According to these models, there will be no sea ice left in the summer in the Arctic somewhere between 2010 and 2015.

Here we have scientists using multiple computer models predicting the future.  When one model starts to somewhat resemble observed behaviors, scientists pick that one as the course Nature will follow.  To ensure their message gets out, the gullible leftist media is summoned to help push the narrative.  The media, ignorant of most things in world, can’t question the soundness of the research, so they gleefully share it since it fits the narrative.

History has shown that when scientists predict the future, a fortune can be made betting against them.  Fast forward to 2018, and sea ice extent is higher than the lowest recorded extent from 2012  (note: since 1979 when satellites were first used to record the ice extent)

 

Overall trends show that while extent has been declining somewhat, the rapid declines predicted over 10 years ago failed to materialize.

 

In short, while there might be less ice, there is still quite a bit left.  Scientist’s new tactic is to suggest that older ice is rarer making the ice vulnerable to the influences of CO2.  Uh huh.  First they tell us it’s all going away.  The new line is that there isn’t enough old entrenched ice and that new ice isn’t strong enough against the impending melting factors.

The CO2 angle was debunked when a new study made it past the editorial gauntlet explaining that the 2012 melt was actually due to changing wind patterns that caused the ice to melt faster than normal, a pattern which seems to occur with some frequency.  Now we just need to wait to see where the new goal posts are going to be planted.

A paper published in 2012 by the US Naval Postgraduate School Department of Oceanography predicted that as early as 2016, the arctic would be nearly ice free in the summer. Again this is based on modeling designed to predict the future.

Still, the authors make this stunning revelation:

“Given the estimated trend and the volume estimate for October–November of 2007 at less than 9,000 km3, one can project that at this rate it would take only 9 more years or until 2016 ± 3 years to reach a nearly ice-free Arctic Ocean in summer. Regardless of high uncertainty associated with such an estimate, it does provide a lower bound of the time range for projections of seasonal sea ice cover.”

Even with a high uncertainty, and the history of failed predictions going back to 1988, the scientists are sticking to their guns.  Any scientist who fails to adhere to the narrative and point out they need to re-examine the methods are immediately scorned and declared heretics against the cause (see Climate Gate emails).

The religious belief of catastrophic climate change – speculative harms derived from failed computer models – has unelected activists in the UN telling us that we need to do more to combat climate change even though the real purpose is a wealth redistribution scam scheme.

The only good news is that the public has shown very little interest, mainly due to doomsayers predictions falling short.  Since the election of Trump, more and more scientists are starting to question the entrenched establishment and contrary science against the narrative is published with more frequency to the chagrin of the hardliners in publishing power.  Hopefully, the hardliners will be out before the ice melts.

When liberals cry about the impending doom of the planet, it’s hard to take them seriously when the scientists intentionally disregard scientific principles in favor of advocacy towards a political solution.  It’s even harder not to laugh when they attempt to demonstrate just how bad things are and end up sinking their own ships..so to speak.

5 thoughts on “When Science is Amusing

  1. The Global Warming thing made sense to me until around 1995. Then I started looking hard at the modeling. I have made some pretty sophisticated social interaction models that predict reasonably well. But even when I have a couple of hundred variables and several thousand cases the models won’t really predict 50 years into the future and I am very careful to note the problems.
    The Climate model junk has never even accurately predicted 5 years without readjustment. It became obvious that the models are not fully specified. Not even close. You’d get more accuracy with a straight-line linear trend that starts in 1880. The predictions are political BS.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s