MSM scares itself, confuses ‘unprecedented’ weather model temperature with actual temperature – Rise because of that?

Are from Loads of crap journalists are too stupid or too lazy to do basic research Department.

Last week, two left-leaning media outlets, MSN (via The Washington Post aka WaPo)and stay alert based on UK Guardians run stories saying that the North Pole, and the South Pole, have experienced “unprecedented” high temperatures. These claims cannot be verified as they are the result of a set of weather model simulations, which show variations in above-normal temperatures for the regions, not actual surface temperatures. measured by terrestrial weather stations.

Guardians worried title, courtesy of the author Fiona Harvey:

Heatwaves at Earth’s poles alarm climate scientists

Antarctic regions hit 40C above normal at the same time as the Arctic regions hit 30C above normal

She writes:

Astonishing heat waves at both poles of the Earth are causing alarm among climate scientists, who have warned of “unprecedented” events that could signal rapid climate decay more and more suddenly.

At the same time, weather stations near the north pole are also showing signs of melting, with some temperatures 30 degrees Celsius above normal, hitting levels usually reached at the end of the year.

At this time of year, Antarctica will rapidly cool after summer, and the North Pole will only gradually emerge after winter, as the days lengthen. For both poles to display such hot at the same time is unprecedented.

Their key phrase here is: “weather stations near the north pole.” The northernmost weather station is Warning, Nunavut and it is 817 km (508 mi) from North Pole. That’s like trying to get a temperature in Indianapolis from a warmer temperature reading in Atlanta.

MSN / WaPo Authors Jason Samenow and Kasha Patel had this amazing headline:

Temperatures are 70 degrees warmer than usual in eastern Antarctica. Scientists were amazed.

The coldest place on the planet experienced a bout of warm weather this week unlike any ever observed, with temperatures on the eastern Antarctic ice sheet soaring between 50 and 90 degrees above sea level. with normal. The warmth broke records and stunned scientists.

“This event is completely unprecedented and has raised our expectations about the climate system,” said Jonathan Wille, a researcher studying polar meteorology at the University of Grenoble Alpes in France. Antarctic”.

“Antarctica climate has been rewritten,” tweeted Stefano Di Battista, a researcher has published studies on temperatures in Antarctica. He added that such temperature anomalies would be considered “impossible” and “inconceivable“Before they actually happen.

Both articles refer to “climate” in the context of blaming or contributing to these weather phenomena.

To those who are not used to reading about these “events”, it certainly seems like proof that the planet is on its way to destruction due to global warming aka “climate change” and the The polar ice sheet is in danger of disappearing into nothingness.

The reality is completely different.

The MSN article includes the following image:

It always pays to read the fine print, and in this case, MSN the caption for that Figure 1 image (when you click it at MSN to enlarge it) says:

Simulation of mid-normal temperature difference in Antarctica from the US model (GFS).

That’s right, it’s not the actual temperature measured at the surface of that lost iceberg, it’s simulate the temperature model from a single climate model, GFS . model.

If we look at the same “model simulation” just four days later, from the same source, suddenly that “flashing” image disappears, and the temperature is frigid again as shown in Figure 2 below.

And, looking at the actual data, there are no “heat waves” at all. Here’s the data from the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station for that time:

It always pays to check the data. Note the -56°F “heat wave” on March 18 circled in red. There’s nothing in FTP Site for AWS Data suggest any “heat waves”. So much for the accuracy of the models and the intelligence of so-called climate scientists and journalists.

Once again, the media proves itself to be incapable of basic research and distinguishing between short-term model simulations of a weather event and long-term evidence-based climate change. Indeed, the “dizzy” temperature rise is most likely nothing more than a mathematical glitch in the model, and not the actual weather as the actual data do not support the claim.

Recording actual weather on the eastern Antarctic ice cap is difficult because there are very few actual surface weather stations on the eastern Antarctic ice sheetand nothing in the North Pole. See more at this map.

In the Arctic, it’s a similar story after last week’s alarm model simulated a “heat wave”, temperatures returning to the dreaded normal as seen in Figure 3 below:

Surface weather stations in both the Arctic and Antarctic are relatively recent developments in meteorology. In the Arctic, ice floats on the ocean. It’s unstable, moves, and breaks in the spring making it nearly impossible to keep a weather station in place, far less performing. US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) started deployment of floating weather stations and web cams in 2002 in the Arctic, but gave up due to “funding constraints” in 2015.

In Antarctica, due to extreme temperatures, blowing snow and lack of sunlight to power solar cells, Automated Weather Stations (AWS) have little and far between. Plus, such weather stations are just present in Antarctica since 1978. Harsh environments often bury these weather stations in snow, leaving them with faulty temperature data or completely inoperable due to covered solar panels. AWS must dig out of the snow every year.

When AWS stations are covered with snow, if they still report, they usually report warmer than normal temperatures because snow is an effective insulator.

Given the paucity of stations at the poles, this is why meteorologists often rely on mathematical simulations of the atmosphere to “guess” the temperature of the air at the north and south poles – they don’t always trust the actual or accurate data there.

So in a nutshell, we have a few points to consider about Arctic and Antarctic weather data:

• We do not have actual weather data for many places in the North and South poles.
• The weather data we have may be compromised or disrupted by extreme weather conditions affecting weather stations on the ground.
• Compared to more than 100 years of larger global climate data, we might have at best 40 years of data for the poles.

Since we have the best data and observations in 40 years from the poles, will science be able to determine if weather events like the one modeled on Antarctica are “unprecedented” or not?

We simply don’t know if they are, because we haven’t been looking for that long.

Indeed, science can’t say for sure whether last week’s spike in temperature at the poles was real or simply the product of a faulty model simulation, a glitch in the numerical model’s output. Even if it were real, a brief rise in temperature is not the same as a long-term climate change, which is defined as a trend. 30 years or more Data.

Somehow, however, climate scientists were “wary” and “astonished” by a weather event of the day simulated from a computer model.

Scientists (and journalists) who use those terms may be better off keeping their opinions private until they have factual data to confirm their “unprecedented” claims. . Carl Sagan rightly chose, paraphrasing Laplace’s principle, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.”

These researchers and the corporate media made their claims extraordinary, presenting no unusual evidence that the South Pole or the North Pole experienced an unusual warming. Output from simple model simulation is not proof.