A spokesperson, identified as a “warning preparedness meteorologist” from Environment Canada threatened us with climate doom, but only managed to show total ignorance of climate science. He said,
“warming trends across the country will mean more severe blasts of rain, wind, snow and heat from Mother Nature.”
This is false. There is no increase in these events or any other weather related phenomena. German meteorologist Dr. Karsten Brandt says such claims are “Without scientific merit”. In the US, 2012 ranked 54th in “extreme weather events”. Besides, with warming, the potential for more severe weather decreases, in complete contradiction to EC’s claim. The geographic pattern is different, but easily explained if you know anything about climate.
The warming he claims is not happening. The record shows no warming for the last 15 years, but also lacks correlation with CO2 levels, which contradicts the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) hypothesis. Higher temperatures overall are because we are at a peak of warming that began in 1680. In the last 20 years, amplification is artificial, caused by a dramatic reduction in the number of weather stations used and deliberate lowering of the old surface temperature record to make the slope of the temperature curve steeper than reality. They limit adjustments to the older record because of an independent measure provided by satellite data after 1980. Despite that, they still have different results.
Change in weather patterns is due to a change in major upper level winds. This caused the changing arctic ice conditions and individual events identified as abnormal, such as the US east coast storm Sandy.
Globally, severe weather occurs at the boundary between warm tropical air and cold polar, traditionally called the Polar Front. Temperature contrast across the boundary determines the amount and severity of storminess. Because of the difference, the strongest winds in the atmosphere the Circumpolar Vortex (Jet Stream) occur, along the boundary. They say warming will be greater in the polar air. This will reduce the temperature difference and, therefore, reduce the potential for severe weather. The historic record shows severe weather increases with a cooling world.
EC should also know that current weather patterns are different because of significant change in the Jet Stream flow.
Instead of low amplitude Zonal waves, there are larger amplitude Meridional Waves pushing cold arctic air toward the Equator and allowing warm tropical air into Polar latitudes. The result is record high and low temperatures and extremes of precipitation across the middle latitudes (35 – 65°).
EC continues to ring the false alarm even though the scientist central to the corruption at the IPCC and national weather agencies such as the United Kingdom Met office (UKMO) and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) adjusted their views in the face of evidence. A group of 20 ex-NASA scientists, finally free of political control, say,
1.The science of what is causing global climate change or warming is clearly not settled and never has been.
2. There is no convincing physical evidence to support the man-made climate change hypothesis. The standard test of a hypothesis is whether it is supported by real observations, which seems to have been ignored by climate alarmists.
This contradicts the IPCC, but EC continues to promote their discredited claims.
EC was involved with the IPCC from the start. An EC Assistant Deputy Minister chaired the formation session of the IPCC in Austria in 1985. He was part of the EC bureaucracy that diverted so many funds to climate change that they closed weather stations and caused a serious decline in service and operations.
All government research funding, except climate funding, goes through ‘arms length’ agencies to prevent political interference. It went through EC. The ADM who chaired in Austria was part of EC when they established the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (CFCAS). He became Chair shortly after retiring from government, a position he still holds. They parcelled out $120 million of government money to researchers who worked to prove the hypothesis contrary to normal scientific procedure. EC acted as a political advocate pushing much inaccurate information on the public. They inserted a pamphlet in leading newspapers across Canada with inaccurate information at a reported $2 million.