Good Grief: Mother Jones Links “Climate Change” To Missing Malaysian Airplane

Am I surprised? Shocked? Not in the least. I’m surprised it took a big website this long to create a link. (via Climate Depot)

One Reason It May Be Harder to Find Flight 370: We Messed Up the Currents

How climate change factors into the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines flight.

Scientists say man-made climate change has fundamentally altered the currents of the vast, deep oceans where investigators are currently scouring for the missing Malaysian Airlines flight, setting a complex stage for the ongoing search for MH370. If the Boeing 777 did plunge into the ocean somewhere in the vicinity of where the Indian Ocean meets the Southern Ocean, the location where its debris finally ends up, if found at all, may be vastly different from where investigators could have anticipated 30 years ago.

According to interviews with three climate scientists who specialize in the region of the world where investigators are focusing their search, the winds of the Southern Indian Ocean bordering the Southern Ocean have been shifting southwards and intensifying over the last 20 to 30 years, in part due to a warming atmosphere and the hole in the ozone layer. Ocean currents are also tightening around Antarctica, shifting whole climate systems towards the South Pole.

The entire article is an assumption that anthropogenic causes have changed the winds and the currents, which is Bad because the Earth was always exactly the same prior to Progressives deciding that Mankind is evil and Other People should be forced to stop driving fossil fueled vehicles.

But it’s that very deepness, coldness, and power that allows these oceans to absorb so much of the heat that manmade climate change is generating. “The Southern Ocean takes up something like 70 percent—plus or minus 30 percent—of all the anthropogenic heat that goes under the ocean,” says Russell. “This is one of the few areas of the global ocean that is immediately and definitely playing a role in the temperature on land, because it’s taking up all this anthropogenic heat and carbon. The whole ocean is doing that, but here it’s doing it more than it ought to, which is giving us a moment of grace.”

If you call it “carbon”, you’re practicing politics, not science. There’s no proof of anthropogenic causation, just assumptions by hardcore Progressives. If you cannot explain why this is happening more in the Southern Ocean, it’s not science. It’s politics.

It’s also a way to attempt to explain away the 17+ year pause in statistically significant warming.

The westerly winds here have increased by about 20 percent over the last 20 years, according to Russell’s 2006 investigation into the trends, messing with the overall system that we rely on for our climate stability—and potentially shortening this so-called “grace” period where the oceans are giving us a helping hand. “It can do loads of things to the climate system,” says Matthew England, joint director of Climate Change Research Centre at the University of New South Wales. “It can decrease the amount of carbon you can get into the oceans…It can also affect the temperatures off the Antarctic ice shelf, which is a real worry.”

Interestingly, there really isn’t that much data prior to 20-30 years ago into the winds and ocean patterns in that region. Satellites weren’t focused on that area. Few ships and planes plied the area. Few research expeditions researched the area. Oh, and Antarctica is growing, not shrinking. But, Warmists have a narrative, and they have to work everything that happens into the mix.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Good Grief: Mother Jones Links “Climate Change” To Missing Malaysian Airplane”

  1. Kevin says:

    I’m sick of you making fun of global warming, Teach. This Mother Jones story makes perfect statistical sense. We started spewing horrible CO2 pollution into the air ~1850. Before that, we had not lost a single plane in the ocean. Not one.

    Now that we’ve been raping the Earth for 160 years, we lose one every decade or so. Coincidence? Of course not. It’s global warming.

  2. Dana says:

    If “The Southern Ocean takes up something like 70 percent—plus or minus 30 percent—of all the anthropogenic heat that goes under the ocean,” then Russell is saying that the “Southern Ocean” could be taking every last bit of it up, plus 30% of 70% being 100%.

    Plus or minus 30% isn’t exactly what anyone would call scientific accuracy; a range like that covers orders of magnitude, nearly half again, or half less, than the original figure. Translation: the speaker really doesn’t have a clue. Or, were I to be a less polite person, I might suggest a bodily orifice out from which he pulled them.

  3. Come on, Kevin, you have to get with the times. It’s climate change, as in, there is a potential for snow and ice in NC at the end of March.

    Wait, Dana, you expected science from Warmists?

  4. david7134 says:

    Actually, in doing some reading because of Jeff’s comments, I found that there is real concern for the fact that the earth is closer to the sun. In fact, we are at the limit of a habitible orbit. The variation in climate that we see would perfectly fit the model associated with this science in defference to the utter bull of the CO2 concerns. This would make for snow in early spring and then super hot summers. Guess what we can do about it? Nothing.

  5. Jeffery says:


    I assume you’re talking about this:

    They certainly do not claim that the Earth’s orbit is deteriorating, with the Earth moving ever closer to the Sun.

    Because the Earth’s orbit is elliptical, the Earth is closest to the Sun during the Northern Hemisphere winter (91,402,640 mi) and farthest away during the Northern Hemisphere summer (94,509,460 mi).

    “The variation in climate that we see would perfectly fit the model associated with this science in defference to the utter bull of the CO2 concerns.”

    Not exactly sure what you were trying to type, but if I try to interpret it, you’re saying that a new scientific discovery allows one to “perfectly fit” climate change to the changing orbit.

    It’s a trivial point, and I’m almost embarrassed to ask, but could you furnish the citation that describes this major change in the Earth’s orbit? Thanks.

  6. Weds. morning links

    A recent study has shown that if American parents read one more long-form think piece about parenting they will go fucking ape shit. Risk of mudslide ‘unforeseen’? Warnings go back decades Radia Perlman: Don’t Call Me the Mother of the Interne

  7. david7134 says:

    Sorry Jeff, but your model does not work and the “elliptical nature of our orbit is not that great. Deal with it.

Pirate's Cove