The great thing about Warmists is that they never let things like science stand in the way of defending their cult. They keep coming up with great new ways to push their dogma (except for practicing what they preach). We hear things about missing heat, that the oceans are soaking it up, that Gaia is punishing some “carbon polluting” nations, that hot is causing more snow and cold. And, right on time to witness yet another year where it is super duper cold in Alaska, Europe, and Asia with lots of snow and the Antarctic has seen record growth, we get
Much of the unevenness in warming due to climate change is a result of a variation in the atmosphere’s heat capacity. The claim, made by researchers in Norway, is likely to be seen as ammunition against climate sceptics who have questioned why some parts of the world are apparently not warming.
Most scientists agree that the world is getting warmer due to anthropogenic carbon emissions. Some areas, such as the Arctic, appear to be warming faster than others. The phenomenon is temporal as well as geographical: in general, night-time temperatures have increased more than daytime temperatures. (snip)
In the atmosphere, heat capacity is dependent on the depth of the planetary boundary layer, which can be between 50 and 2,000 metres thick. Davy’s group hypothesized that the observed asymmetry in global warming could be at least partially accounted for by variations in the boundary layer: regions with a shallow boundary layer would have a relatively low heat capacity, and would warm faster, while regions with a deep boundary layer would have a relatively high capacity, and warm more slowly.
Yet, while parts of America bake, big parts of Europe freeze, and have the same planetary boundary layer. Or will Warmists claim that CO2 output has changed the PBL in certain areas? Which would be dangerously close to the reality of the urban heat island effect. Because much of the depth of the PBL is due to wind speed, which can be changed due to land use, as well as what the land temperature is, which can be much higher in urban areas than in the surrounding countryside.
But, really, the whole point in this exercise is for believers in AGW to find yet another way to explain away why their predictions of planetary doom keep failing.