Wind and ice in Antarctica as seen through the eyes of science deniers at WUWT

Anthony Watts and the readers at WUWT are nothing if not inconsistent.

Anthony has put up another of his "Claim:" headlines as he's been doing lately to denote that a new scientific paper has been released for him and his readers to disbelieve.  (Anthony Watts rejects science that he thinks might result in his having to pay more taxation. Yeah, that's what he said.)  The WUWT article is archived here.

Anthony's latest is a new paper by Jinlun Zhang linking the increase in winter sea ice in southern oceans with more intense polar winds.  From ScienceDaily:

"The overwhelming evidence is that the Southern Ocean is warming," said author Jinlun Zhang, an oceanographer at the UW Applied Physics Laboratory. "Why would sea ice be increasing? Although the rate of increase is small, it is a puzzle to scientists."

His new study shows that stronger westerly winds swirling around the South Pole can explain 80 percent of the increase in Antarctic sea ice volume in the past three decades.

The polar vortex that swirls around the South Pole is not just stronger than it was when satellite records began in the 1970s, it has more convergence, meaning it shoves the sea ice together to cause ridging. Stronger winds also drive ice faster, which leads to still more deformation and ridging. This creates thicker, longer-lasting ice, while exposing surrounding water and thin ice to the blistering cold winds that cause more ice growth.

Antarctic sea ice concentration changes from 1981 to 2011.
(Credit: U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center)
Source: ScienceDaily.com

Windy inconsistency

I call "inconsistent" because Anthony denigrates the study with his "Claim:" headline and many of his readers do the same.  They want to dispute the finding that intensified winds can explain most of the increase in winter sea ice down south, but jump on the idea that wind can cause a decrease in summer ice in the Arctic. For example from a WUWT article on the record sea ice melt of 2007 (archived here):

In simpler terms, polar wind patterns changed and blew sea ice further south to warmer waters than it normally would. Sea ice can easily be wind driven.

I wonder if that’s the same mechanism that caused loss of Arctic sea ice in the 1920-30′s?

Another example from WUWT on the record sea ice melt of 2012 (archived here):

Many climate activists have sought to downplay the significance that the Arctic cyclone played on this year’s summer sea ice in the Arctic. But this new inconvenient video report from NASA now makes the warmists’ attempt to deny the cyclones role in 2012′s Arctic sea ice conditions — impossible.

Of course the above is just another one of Anthony Watts' strawman arguments.  His "many climate activists" most probably wouldn't have denied that a storm played a part in breaking up sea ice in the Arctic last year. As noted by Neven on his sea ice blog last year in relation to that cyclone:

The effects of this storm on the sea ice concentration maps are in plain sight. Slowly sea ice area and extent data are trickling in and for now the changes are quite large. 

What is a fact is that it didn't cause the record low in Arctic sea ice extent.  The record low ice extent wouldn't have been the record it was if not for global warming.

From the WUWT comments

The comments are archived here with the main WUWT article.  Here is a sample:

StuartMcL complains about the colour scheme of the diagram and proposes a (conspiracy) theory:

September 18, 2013 at 6:09 pm
Every other climate related chart that I’ve seen shows reds for warmer and blues for colder. I wonder why this one uses the opposite. It wouldn’t be to make it look more “scary” would it?

Bob Tisdale hasn't read about the study, which uses observations, and doesn't like models (though he uses them when it suits him) and says:

September 18, 2013 at 6:17 pm
Modeling study? Are the current batch of climate scientists incapable of studying data?
Oh, for the good old days before fatally flawed climate models.

James Allison acknowledges the role of wind in both polar regions though he doesn't get it quite right when he says:

September 18, 2013 at 6:20 pm
So there we have it – wind pushes ice away from the Arctic however pushes it toward the Antarctic.

Jeff D is very disturbed that scientists keep on looking for explanations and insist on adding to the world's knowledge.  To scientific illiteratis like JeffD, scientific research is anathema:

September 18, 2013 at 6:29 pm
They cannot let the increase in ice stand. They have to come up with some cock and bull study to make us believe that it is still worse than we thought. Will the insanity ever end..

Mike Jowsey is a plain vanilla science denier and says:

September 18, 2013 at 6:35 pm
I guess he didn’t get the memo – the climate is not warming.

4 eyes is a proudly semi-illiterate member of the illiterati and says:

September 18, 2013 at 6:49 pm
Truly settled science – no doubt. These guys should be de-funded. Immediately. Since the science was settled years ago there is no need for anymore work. Especially if it’s this quality. This must be embarassing for the scientists who follow the scientific method and make models that history match the facts.

Surfer Dave thinks that all models are bad and says:

September 18, 2013 at 5:52 pm
“model experiment” is an oxymoron. Why do they think their model comes anywhere near to reality? How does one calibrate such a model before doing an “experiment” with it. Totally bogus “science”.

Peter Foster theorises from his armchair that he knows more about Antarctic oceans than does Jinlun Zhang, Senior Principal Oceanographer from the Polar Science Center of the University of  Washington and says:

September 18, 2013 at 7:12 pm
I wonder if Zhang has ever been to Antarctica. i wonder if he has ever spent time working on the sea ice or on a ship sailing through it. No matter how strong or cold the wind, if the sea surface water is not cold enough it will not freeze and once it does freeze the wind has no effect on the thickening of the ice. That occurs by radiation of heat through the ice from the water underneath. Sea ice thickens by water freezing from underneath. But then you would think a scientist studying sea ice would know that wouldn’t you. Perhaps that is the difference between the armchair theorists and practical scientists.

By the way, is there any actual data on the circumpolar wind strength from sub Antarctic islands or is this just guess work on Zhang’s part.

Tez doesn't quite understand a letter he got from a "Professor" working on the Ross Ice Shelf and says:

September 18, 2013 at 7:26 pm
They dont know why the sea ice is growing. Wind patterns is just as much a guess as the theory that it is due to the melting ice shelves cooling the adjacent waters.

A Professor currently working on the Ross Ice shelf wrote to me stating that the increased sea ice was due the the ozone hole allowing cold air from high above to descend on the Arctic ocean. (which Tez later corrected to Antarctic)

This increase is difficult to explain away in a warming world and I dont think they have found the answer yet.

(The ozone hole in the south affects the polar winds.  Here is an article at Climate Central that discusses a recent paper by Waugh et al (2013) in Science: The Impact of Stratospheric Ozone Recovery on the Southern Hemisphere Westerly Jet, DOI: 10.1126/science.1155939)

Jim Steele offers his own brand of pseudo-science, talking of katabaitc (sic) winds "blowing equator-ward" and disputing Zhang's findings (excerpt):

September 18, 2013 at 7:33 pm
Besides the false claim that ice is growing where it is warming, the model actually offers a good explanation for the change in Arctic sea ice. Most of the Antarctic sea ice is driven by the katabaitc winds blowing equator-ward from the continental interior. Unconstrained by other continents, most of the Antarctcc sea ice expands unimpeded with much less ridging than witnessed in the Arctic. For that reason most of Antarctic’s sea ice is thin first year ice with very little ridging that is claimed by the model. Each winter the Antarctic sea ice extent is much greater than observed in the Arctic, but Antarctic sea ice also melts more rapidly each summer precisely because there is so little ridging .

From the Australian Antarctic Division (my bold italics):

Radiative cooling over the Antarctic ice sheet produces very cold, dense air that flows away from elevated areas and is replaced by subsiding air from above. The resulting katabatic winds accelerate downhill, enhanced by the confluence of glacial valleys. Katabatic winds blow with great consistency over large areas. At the coast they lose their driving force and soon dissipate offshore.

Low-pressure systems near the Antarctic coast can interact with katabatic winds to increase their strength. Resulting wind speeds can exceed 100 km/h for days at a time. Wind gusts well over 200 km/h have been measured.

And a diagram illustrating the wind flows down from the mountain ranges in Antarctica, from Stephanie in Antarctica:

Bill Illis says "it's not happening" (extract):

September 18, 2013 at 5:37 pm
First, the oceans around Antarctica are not warming. All the datasets show no warming going back more than 100 years and there is clearly recent cooling given the sea ice conditions.

Oakden Wolf responds to Bill Illis's denial, writing (with insight into the collective mind of WUWT) in part (my paras):

September 18, 2013 at 8:26 pm
Wow. History. I read Bob Illis’ comment that the Southern Oceans had not warmed for 100 years, and that seemed wrong. I did a little digging, and discovered a remarkable WUWT thread from about three years ago, “Dr. Curry warms the Southern Ocean”, in which this issue was discussed at length. And I was reminded that I participated in that thread, and offered SEVERAL references indicating the Southern Ocean was warming.

My references were only mildly considered, and they were dismissed with quite inadequate effort, because the principal in that thread was hunting bigger game than I, a small fish to fry.

Nonetheless, the references remain, and they are quite compelling that the Southern Ocean is warming. I note that one key paper, which I provide the citation and link to below, was not addressed at all in that somewhat forgotten thread. So I’ll also provide the abstract for that one.

Gille, Sarah T., 2008: Decadal-Scale Temperature Trends in the Southern Hemisphere Ocean. J. Climate, 21, 4749–4765. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI2131.1

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008JCLI2131.1...

... So I think it’s fairly clear that the Southern Ocean has been and is warming, and efforts to understand the slight increase in Antarctic sea ice extent need to incorporate that.

Zhang, Jinlun. "Modeling the impact of wind intensification on Antarctic sea ice volume." Journal of Climate 2013 (2013). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00139.1

HotWhoppers: Double Doozy from Denmor

The other day when the HC deniers were kindly promoting this blog as part of their daily science and medicine S&M antics, I got the feeling that poor old denmor was a bit miffed that I hadn't paid him more attention.  So here's a double doozy from denmor.  

Not that long ago denmor graduated from simpleton cartoons and crude name-calling. Now he's learning the art of 'copy and paste', usually of long slabs of senseless rants against science from insignificant little denier blogs.  This time he comes up with two pieces of idiocy in the same short post.  Both from "the world's most viewed" anti-science blog - WUWT.

1. Are engineers and geo-scientists who work in the oil sector less likely to accept climate science?

Um - yeah?  No?  Not quite the point of the research? And if it were true, what did you expect?

A recent study reported that 36% of geoscientists and engineers surveyed, most of whom are reliant on or whose work relates to the Alberta tar sands or petroleum sector in general, are adamant that humans are causing global warming and we need to take decisive action. (They "view the Kyoto Protocol and additional regulation as the solution").

That can be seen as equivalent to: thirty years ago 36% of engineers (not medical researchers) who develop the packaging for cigarettes being adamant that smoking is a health hazard and urging international agreements be put into effect to force people to quit.

Source: HotCopper.com S&M forum


The anti-science illiterati give a decent round of applause.  (HC rids itself of educated people as fast as they stray into their corner of cyberspace.  Often without a mod having to press a keystroke.)

The Lie

Poor denmor (probably all unknowing given that deniers rarely read let alone absorb scientific papers) quotes from a  blog article that quotes from another article that refers to a research paper in the social sciences/management journal "Organization Studies". (No respectable denier - except Brad - would go straight to the source.) Let's be generous and say, because he was too lazy or incompetent to read the paper in question, denmor wasn't aware that he was spreading a lie.  He also seems blissfully unaware that very few oil engineers and geo-scientists would be involved in climate research.  All scientists and engineers probably look the same to him.

Looking at the categories ('Frames') in the paper, there were 'only' 24% (Frame 2) who "believe that changes to the climate are natural, normal cycles of the Earth".  All other groupings (68% of respondents) included people who knew that humans are at least a partial cause of global warming, with a full 36% being adamant that "humans are the main or central cause" of global warming.  (Eight per cent were unable to be categorised.  One group, the 'economic responsibility' frame (10%), included rampant deniers as well as people who thought that climate change is both natural and human caused.)

Beknownst (or unbeknownst) to denmor, the researchers deliberately targeted an industry (petroleum) and locale (Alberta Canada) that  is economically tied to CO2 pollution so they could get a big enough cohort across the full spectrum (including deniers).  They were keen to find out more about how people of different viewpoints frame/rationalise their thinking within the context of organisational management.

HotWhopper Petrol Award

Before leaving the topic, let's award an honourable mention to the resident anti-vaxxer jantimot (who by now is probably also feeling left out).

Source: HotCopper.com S&M forum

Jantimot probably thinks he's in the majority of the general population.  Instead he would be aligning himself with the majority of petrol heads who work in the pollution sector of whom only 24% chant the 'it's all natural' refrain.  (I'm not sure how or if aligning himself with ecological vandalism of tar sands fits with his homeopathic purity.)

Goodness knows why jantimot implies climate scientists are extrovert compared to petroleum engineers and geo-scientists.  (You need go no further than Ian Plimer to find a geo-scientist who loudly contradicts himself pontificates on topics way beyond his expertise.)

Not everyone jumps at the chance to work in tar sands, especially not people who understand the ramifications of CO2 pollution.

2. Bombshell!!!! The Arctic froze this winter!!!!

denmor 'blown away' again;

Source: HotCopper.com S&M forum

Who'd have thought.  A record low ice in summer followed by a record ice gain in winter!

(Imagine a litre flask half full of water.  How much extra water does it take to fill it?  Now imagine an empty litre flask.  How much extra water does it take to fill it?)

There were too many climate bloggers to count who accurately predicted that deniers would fall for the 'amazing winter recovery' after last summer's record low ice cover.  (So much for deniers who say you can't predict the future!)

As 'proud to be a denier' Dr Inferno pointed out way back in  way back in September last year:

Arctic Sea Ice Increases Past FOUR MILLION Square Kilometers For The First Time Since Records Began!

It took another four and a half months before Anthony Watts of WUWT woke up to the fact of this startling turnaround.  But as denmor reported, Tony has finally picked up the message and heralded it to the world, writing:

...Arctic sea ice has made a stunning rebound since the record low recorded in the late summer of 2012...

...With a few weeks of growth still to occur, the Arctic has blown away the previous record for ice gain this winter. This is only the third winter in history when more than 10 million km² of new ice has formed. 

Duh!

Now some readers may be wondering where in the Arctic all this extra ice can have formed.  Does it mean that the ice is starting to extend down to near the equator?  After all, there's only so many square kilometers available in the Arctic.

If you are one of these readers, check how the ice cover has changed from 13 February thirty, twenty and ten years ago compared to 13 Feb 2013 - from The Cryosphere Today.

Umm - there's less ice this year? How can that be?

Still think denmor's onto something?  Click here and look at this interactive chart and follow the 2012 (dark pink) and 2013 (yellow) lines before making as big an idiot of yourself as denmor and Anthony Watts.

Here's a snapshot - you might just be able to make out the yellow line for 2013, in among the lower quarter of the records to the left of the image.  The dark pink line for 2012 is fairly clear.

For more fun and enlightenment, read Tamino's take on all this - and see what his readers think about Anthony's bombshell!