Climate denialists on Texas weather 2011: Ain’t no heat wave, on average

You couldn’t make this stuff up.

In defense of his claim that Texas has not warmed over the last century (“Texas temperatures not rising; Wisconsin temperatures not rising”) and, therefore, Texas does not suffer from global warming, and therefore there is no global warming and no ill effects from warming, Steve Goddard posted this today:

Year-To-Date In Texas

Posted on August 7, 2011 by stevengoddard

Almost as warm as 1927, 1925 and 1953. Only a degree cooler than 1911.

It’s heading for 105°, but since it was 15° one day in February, that averages to 60°, so Texas is okay, according to Goddard.  In their drive to fuzz up the facts and surround policy debates with snark, the denialists will deny anything, leave no weather record untwisted, and deny the sweat on the nose on their face.  According to Goddard, snow in the Great Basin means no drought in Las Vegas, as shown by there being no drought affecting Lake Powell.

Remember Straight Dope’s Cecil Adams’s old line?  “Fighting ignorance since 1973 (it’s taking longer than we thought.)”  Yeah, that applies to climate denialists in quantity.

Here’s what’s going on in Texas right now:

Vodpod videos no longer available.

  •  Texas A&M says the drought of 2011 is the worst ever 1-year drought in Texas history; note how their press release describes the event, and the increasing heat:

    Preliminary reports from the National Climatic Data Center indicate that July 2011 was the warmest month ever recorded statewide for Texas, with data going back to 1895, [State Climatologist John] Nielsen-Gammon reports. The average temperature of 87.2 degrees broke the previous record of 86.5 degrees set in 1998. The June average temperature of 85.2 was a record for that month and now ranks fifth warmest overall.

    Rainfall totals were also unusually light across the state. The July monthly total of 0.72 inches ranks third driest, surpassed by the 0.69 inches recorded in both 1980 and 2000. This is the fifth consecutive month in which precipitation totals were among the 10 driest for that month, says the Texas A&M professor.

Drought and searing heat in Texas.  Caused by climate change?  That’s difficult to say, difficult to trace.  Made worse by climate change?  Most likely.

Dallas media track the consecutive days over 100° F.  It’s a form of misery index — people can recover from a day or two over the century mark.  But more than a couple of days and the heat begins to take a heavier toll on people, on plants and animals, on houses, on cars, on crops, on everything we do in Texas.  It’s difficult to make news make sense on weather stories.  Tracking the number of days over 100° gives a quick graphic for television news, and puts the story into the vein of a sports record story, a narrative people know.

Here’s how things stack up in Dallas, in terms of days over 100°:

Rank Year Consecutive 100° days
1 1980 42
2 2011 37 (and counting)
3 1998 29
4 1952 25
5 1999 24
6 1954 20
7 2006 19
8 2010 18
8 1978 18
10 1956 17

If one looks at the heat streaks, one cannot help but notice that all of the top ten streaks have come since 1952, and that three are in the last decade, five since 1998.  Brutal heat streaks appear to be coming more frequently, many close on the heels of previous heat streaks, and with greater severity.

That is what one would expect from global warming.

Moreover, the recent streaks show greater oscillations.  2011 also saw snow and freezing weather in Dallas, a rarity.  Greater oscillations in weather also would be expected from global warming.

Goddard offers a comparison of January to June temperatures — the coolest part of the calendar year, and leaving out most of the heat-streak days — and on that basis of a half-comparison, he suggests (doesn’t say — he doesn’t want to be caught lying outright) that there isn’t a warming problem in Dallas in 2011.

Heat stroke?  It’s a figment of your socialist imagination.  14 dead?  They probably were smokers.  Global warming?   Not if Steve Goddard can find a statistic somewhere that can be manipulated to appear to deny it.

What do his charts show for July and August of those years?

Finally, there is this:   Assume for a moment that there has been no significant warming in Texas as a complete landmass over the past 100 years:  Does that mean Texas is not battered by any warming that occurs elsewhere?

Of course not.  The current drought in Texas is thought to be triggered in no small part by the La Niña effect, a chilling of the surface of the Pacific in a broad band that stretches west of Peru for about 5,000 miles to the far South Pacific.  La Niña is a counterpart to El Niño, a warming of the same band of water that produces different, not-average weather effects.  The cycles are not well understood as to cause — there are good hypotheses being tested — but it has been observed that, especially in the latter part of the 20th century and the first decade of the 21st, these cycles are speeding up.  The best, not-disproven hypothesis is that these cycles react and speed up due to global warming.

So, to the best of our hypothesizing today, the Texas drought is a function of global warming, in timing, frequency and severity.

This demonstrates the ultimate problem with using a local temperature readings to make authoritative statements about global warming, even averaged over about a hundred million acres like Texas:  Problems of global warming are not always simply problems of temperature, and non-local causes may cause local effects that will not show up in temperature, especially local effects in precipitation, in timing and amounts.

Botanists, foresters, range scientists and biogeographers noticed effects of warming 50 years ago, with the migration of species northward, and up mountainsides.  Wildlife managers noticed altered migrations of game birds and non-game birds about the same time, migration alterations that continue to today.  Plant zones used by farmers and gardeners demonstrate a good deal of change, generally favoring warming, over the past century.  Evidence for warming is quite solid without a single temperature reading.

A bastion of average temperature non-increases, if Texas is one, may still be hammered by warming and its effects in the Pacific, and especially in the Gulf of Mexico.  Is it fair to say the entire system shows no signs of warming?

So we should ask:  Are temperatures and precipitation averages, frequencies, timing and totals, about average for the last century or two?  Then  the case for global warming is a bit weaker.

Dallas will eclipse the previous record string of 100° F days in the next week.  All of Texas is in severe drought, and most of the state is in extreme drought.  Sounds as if there is something going on with the climate.

Last year the denialism sites lit up with a report that a fourth grade student in South Texas had a science project that disproved global warming, and which won an award from the National Science Foundation.  It was a sad hoax.  The speed with which these sites pounced on the report should have warned us that a school of thought devoid of practical results from the lab bench or observation in nature gets too desperate for results, and will cut corners to claim them.  Goddard’s reports repeat the bad methodology of that hoax.

Richard Feynman once wrote, wryly, “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”  Goddard and other denialists appear to read that wrongly, thinking that experts are not to be trusted, and that all experts are ignorant of all things, and therefore stupid.

Politics and especially the politics of science cry out for someone to read Feynman — actually read what he wrote.  Feynman said we should not assume all scientists are infallible.  He did not write that all scientists are fallible and wrong.

12 Responses to Climate denialists on Texas weather 2011: Ain’t no heat wave, on average

  1. […] “Climate denialists on Texas weather, 2011:  Ain’t no drought, on average” (Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub) […]


  2. […] “Climate denialists on Texas weather, 2011:  Ain’t no drought, on average” (Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub) […]


  3. Pangolin says:

    Big Steve if you have a point you need to be more specific.

    The best single source evidence that Climate Change happens in decades is the Greenland and Antarctic Ice cores. Those ice cores make it very clear that climate can change from one regime to another in as little as a decade. My guess is those transition decades were pretty rough on the humans or pre-humans that lived through them.

    Significantly the Arctic Ice cap has undergone major changes in the last thirty years and is clearly changing weather patterns: climate change effects visible from year to year.


  4. Big Steve says:

    I don’t know where you live, but down here in Texas, it stays hot. When it is hot and it doesn’t rain, we call that a drought. When it is hot and it rains a lot, we call that a hurricane. Right now, it is hot and it isn’t raining. That isn’t front page news. It is the weather. We have just entered hurricane season. Check back in a few weeks. btw, climate change is not measured year by year or decade by decade. At the very least, true climatologists measure global warming/cooling by comparing one century against an aggregate of tens or hundreds of centuries. I’ll keep laughing at you as long as you keep pointing to specific years as your proof.


  5. Ed Darrell says:

    Two La Nina’s in two years suggests its GW related. El Ninos used to occur maybe once a decade, La Nina’s once every two decades. We’re really packing 20 years of drought into two in Texas


  6. Pangolin says:

    “…….if you ignore everything else happening around the world you couldn’t tie this drought to GW.”_Scrooge

    If you ignore gravity you can fly also.

    Look at the increase in daily minimum temperatures and there you will see your global warming signature. It’s not just that it’s very hot during the day; it’s also that the temperatures are no longer cooling off to the previous norms at night that is killing people, plants and livestock.


  7. Scrooge says:

    Looks like Steve Goddard touched a nerve telling the author of this blog it aint so hot in TX. We don’t seem to hear much about Goddard anymore. I thought it was because he had lost whatever credibility he might have had at one time. But anyway if you ignore everything else happening around the world you couldn’t tie this drought to GW. It would have to either be extended or happen with more frequency. It looks like this one may be extended. But with NCAR projections saying this will be the norm around 2050 we can expect the frequency of these droughts to increase.


  8. Ed Darrell says:

    What graph are we talking about ? I included every pixel from the post.

    What graph?

    Why didn’t Goddard respond to the Texas State Climatologist?


  9. Pangolin says:

    I’m thinking Ed didn’t include Steve’s graph because the graph is garbage.

    It’s not properly labeled.
    It’s compressed on the time scale so that you can’t see if the lines indicate a point with error bars or individual temperature points.
    It does not indicate if the temperatures are daily (weekly? Monthly?) highs, lows, averages, or any other time scale information.
    It specifies a one-point latitude and longitude possibly indicating a single recording station, possibly not.
    It’s conclusions are in deep contrast to virtually all peer-reviewed literature to date and yet make no references to either a journal article or any peer reviewed process.
    The temperatures are listed in Kelvins which are useless to most blog readers for a graph, created for, and posted on, a blog.

    I’m sure there are other problems with it but the main point is that it’s junk, published on a junk-science website whose sole purpose is to throw chaff into the air and confuse anybody trying to get legitimate information. I can get equally valid climate change information from the drunks down at the park for the price of a 40 oz malt liquor.

    Steven Goddard is engaged in Gish Galloping and he knows it. He will continue to throw out bogus claims because he’s rewarded for doing so. He’s actually so regularly, and provably, wrong that he got kicked off of WUWT as an embarrassment.


  10. Ed Darrell says:

    Got a link, Steve? Put it in. Your claims contrast with the state climatologist, John Nielsen-Gammon, as noted above — explain why your stuff is better than his.

    I included your entire post. If a link or graph is not there, it’s because you didn’t put it in your post. Why didn’t you?


  11. You conveniently excluded my NCDC graph showing that there is no trend in Texas summer temperatures since 1895. Why is that?

    Texas droughts in the 1950s were much more extensive and longer lasting.


Please play nice in the Bathtub -- splash no soap in anyone's eyes. While your e-mail will not show with comments, note that it is our policy not to allow false e-mail addresses. Comments with non-working e-mail addresses may be deleted.

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

You are commenting using your 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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: