Scientific American is neither

A response to "Physics Doesn't Care Who Was Elected President" that appeard recently in "scientific American".

"Scientific American is part of Springer Nature, which owns or has commercial relations with thousands of scientific publications (many of them can be found at www.springernature.com/us). Scientific American maintains a strict policy of editorial independence in reporting developments in science to our readers.

© 2016 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, A DIVISION OF NATURE AMERICA, INC.

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED."

Science magazine or corporate PR tool? You decide. How's their truthiness compare to the evidence they present?


Sea rise is fixed at 3.2 cm/century.

Has there been an update to this?

1) "Carbon dioxide passed the 400 parts per million milestone. Permanently"

Co2 was 440ppm or 40 ppm higher than now, 200 years ago. See Beck 2008. Here's fig 1.0 from it:
http://climate-math.science/.images/beck_Fig_1.png

"permanently" [citation required] Earth's carbon store goes up and down, just as this graph shows.

"2016 is going to be the hottest year on record"

July 1936 still the hottest July in the NOAA's records. You can check this for yourself.

"Extreme weather events have become more likely"

No hurricanes hit Florida for a decade right after they announced this the last time.

"Sea level rise is making flooding more common"

Sure. When the land sinks, the sea appears to rise. That's why Miami and Beijing are sinking, while the Florida keys don't have ay unusual sea rise (or erosion or condos or groundwater pumped out)

"Arctic sea ice is disappearing. Fast"

They've been saying this for 35 years now. Let's look, shall we?

NASA Sayt photo, arctic ice, 35 years apart, URL in photo. Fuck me, no ice loss.

http://climate-math.science/.images/nasa_arctic_ice.png

Graph of global sea ice - note the uptick.

http://climate-math.science/.images/nsidcglobalseaiceareasince2000.gif

"Canada has to redraw maps to accommodate new sea ice"

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/arctic-sea-ice-gains-can-be-seen-on-new-government-map-of-canada-1.3036224

The US doesn't really have a lot of sea ice. Canada has it all. We had to redraw the maps because there's more now.

You can believe what you want but evidence of sea ice loss is a little had to comeby. It's like they didn't even look or something.

"The Antarctic ice sheet is becoming unstable"

Yeah it gets bigger every year and sets a consistent new expense record. You bet it cleaves now and again.

http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

"The oceans have been record warm—and it’s killing coral"

Nope.

1) There has been a cooling trend in the oceans according to this NOAA graph:

http://climate-math.science/.images/annot-ocean.png

2) NASA can't find the "missing heat"

"A hypothesis that the heat was sequestered in the ocean abyss was proven incorrect by NASA in October of 2014 - "the cold waters of Earth's deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005", according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have stopped in 1998."

http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/october/nasa-study-finds-earth-s-ocean-abyss-has-not-warmed

3) "Corals can turn certain genes on and off to cope with heat" http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2014/04/23/science.1251336

4) "With each location they found that the seawater became increasingly more acidic as they moved toward land."

This is pollution, not acid rain. Open ocean reefs are fine. Corala neat man are dead. Except in cuba who can't use US chemicals ands don't have the agricultural runoff that's killing coral worldwide.

http://nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?org=NSF&cntn_id=130129&preview=false

5) "All over the world, coral reefs are dying at an alarming rate. But off Cuba, they are flourishing."

http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-02-02/coral-coast-cuba-flourishing-rare-glimmer-hope-threatened-ecosystem

Now, pay strict attention here. The great barrier reef is in trouble and Australia has a plan to fix it:

Hre is the costing report and final report of the Au gov:

http://www.gbr.qld.gov.au/documents/costings-report.pdf
http://www.gbr.qld.gov.au/documents/gbrwst-finalreport-es-2016.pdf

Summary: The greatest water quality risks to the Reef are: excess nutrients (especially nitrogen from fertiliser), fine sediments, and pesticides.

Temperature is not mentioned. Like the caribbean, it's agricultural runoff that's killing it.

In the past 15 years we've learned to keep coral reliably in captivity.

It uses a lot of Co2. Don't try keeping it without it.

What we've learned kills corals: nitrates, phosphates, silt.

Agricultural runoff is phosphate, nitrates and silt. Australia's plan to fix the GBR is to reduce: nitrates, phosphates and dilt.

Tell me again it's "global warming". I dare you.

"Oh, and oceans are also acidifying".

Yeah near man they are. This is the pollution that no president will say the name of. Pollution doesn't exist any more, it's al climate now. Obama can literally in a field of oil from a leaky pipe and complain how bad this is for the climate. See above.

Hey fool, that's pollution and it doesn't affect the weather. It just kills everything.

Let's keep ignoring it and focus on some now long disproved bad math.

"Scientific American" is neither. Why would anyone read that shit?


Dunning Kruger at it's finest.

"By Brian Kahn, Climate Central on November 10, 2016"

Climate Central, who rewrote the book "How to lie with statistics" one discredited graph at a time:

http://climate-math.science/.images/shit-graph.png

Science. Get some.

http://climate-math.science/97/