All posts by admin

Reporting on winter 1939/40 by The New York Times

Reporting on weather/climate changes then and today.

Post 06 February 2018 by Dr. Arnd Bernaerts

About reporting weather news The New York Times (NYT) is unbeatable, at least in some cases. Nowadays it is about global climate change. Consider for example the recent paper concerning: “Climate Change Is Complex. We’ve Got Answers to Your Questions”, by JUSTIN GILLIS Illustrations by JON HAN (Q&A, 2016). Or remember the blog:  NYT- Dot Earth, excellently run by Andrew C. Revkin for nine years until 2016. All texts show a great commitment, thoroughness, and the willingness to get it right. The claim is (Q&A Part 1, No 5): “The warming is extremely rapid on the geologic time scale, and no other factor can explain it as well as human emissions of greenhouse gases.”  Whether that this assessment eventually hold the ground is still subject of debate. When considering another NYT reporting period on exceptional extreme weather situations, doubts are eminent that “human emissions of greenhouse gases” does not cover the climate change debate sufficiently.

The NYT received the Pulitzer Prize 1941 concerning its foreign news report. Indeed the in-depth coverage of war activities and weather condition since September 1939 is outstanding. The amount of information is breath taking. That includes weather, which was at numerous location never observe or a record over a 200 years period.

After an extreme unusual December 1939, a record cold January 1940 followed (see HERE & HERE) It was not the end of unusual frost and snowfall. Europe remained governed by General Frost during the following month February, as illustrated by Fig. 2,4,5,6,8,9, and a few examples selected from NYT reports:

__ February 13; Amsterdam . Europe suffered tonight in the paralyzing grip of the bitterest cold in more than 100 years. (NYT, Feb. 14, 1940)
__ February 13; Copenhagen . The temperature has dropped to 13 degrees below zero Fahrenheit (-25°C). (NYT, Feb. 14, 1940).
__ February 13; Baltic countries. In Estonia , Latvia and Lithuania more than 10,000 persons suffered severe frostbite. At least five persons froze to death in the three Baltic countries, where temperatures reached 54 degrees below zero Fahrenheit (- 47.7°C) recently for the first time in 160 years (NYT, Feb. 14, 1940).
__ February 20, 1940; In Sweden all cold records were broken in the last twenty-four hours with 32 degrees below zero Fahrenheit (-35.5°C), the coldest since 1805. The previous record in Stockholm was 22 F degrees below zero. Copenhagen tonight 2 degrees above zero Fahrenheit. (NYT, Feb. 21, 1940).

Should these facts neglected when discussing climate change today? That is unacceptable. It is foremost the duty of science to take the matter serious, but an ambitious newspaper should be able to ask questions about the causes of such events. Science would quickly face problems regarding the greenhouse theory. One would pretty soon realize that science is working with confusing explanations and even a serous newspaper as the NYT accepts that unquestioned. Let’s have a look at the Q&A, Part 1-No.1, which reads as it follows:  

“ 1. Climate change? Global warming? What do we call it?

Both are accurate, but they mean different things.
You can think of global warming as one type of climate change. The broader term covers changes beyond warmer temperatures, such as shifting rainfall patterns.
President Trump has claimed that scientists stopped referring to global warming and started calling it climate change because “the weather has been so cold” in winter. But the claim is false. Scientists have used both terms for decades.”

 Nothing in this respect is accurate. At best ‘climate’ is statistic. If science defines ‘climate’ as average weather, ‘climate’ is nothing else as statistic. Moreover weather can be typified into hundred and more items. But science has avoided to come up saying what weather is. The American Meteorology Society offers that weather is “The state of the atmosphere, mainly with respect to its effects upon life and human activities” (More HERE). Try to make an “average” of that and at best you have fake news. The only relevant weather criterion in so far is the rise and fall of air temperature, on a local, regional or global scale. The latter may be called global warming.  

That is all very sad. Changes of weather conditions will continue to occur, and human kind does not understand sufficiently why it happens, how to prevent what man is contributing, and take action to minimize threatening the global natural system anthropogenic. It is shocking that President Donald Trump is questioning the use of the term ‘climate change’ by science (Q&A, Part 1-No.1), and since long challenge “that scientists are engaged in a worldwide hoax to fool the public” (Q&A, Part 1-No.6).Understanding the impact of human ocean uses in all its facets inclusive naval warfare during the World War could prove that Mr. Trump is right. He is hardly the man to understand how weather works, but certainly would claim that he is a genius, because he has said so ever since. A further political disaster.   


Winter 2017/18 – Record cold regions – Not in Europe –

What cooled Europe winter 1939/40 – Naval War  

Post 28th January 2018

First there had been the extreme cold wave east of the Rocky Mountains around New Year’s Day few weeks ago. “This cold wave was exceptional,” said Gabe Vecchi, a geoscientist at Princeton University, “for being 7°F to 11°F colder than the coldest two weeks in recent decades and for occurring so early in the season, especially in light of the decrease in intensity and frequency of cold waves over the past century.” A study by the World Weather Attribution group analyzed weather records dating back to 1880 and found this cold weather snap that hit a swath of the U.S. from Maine to Minnesota tends to happen once every 250 years”  (Source).

Also Siberia is much colder than normal. The average temperature has run below the norm at 8-16 degrees, meanwhile stretching westwards to the Balkan with temperature dropping below -20°C in Central Ukraine, in Romania below -17°C, and in Bulgaria below -13°C (Details at IceAge). Some time ago US-TODAY reported  (16.Jan.2018) that in Oymyakon/Russia temperature sank to a mind-numbing (and body-numbing) 88F below zero (-66.7C) which  isn’t far from minus 89.9F, the coldest-ever officially recorded for a permanently inhabited settlement anywhere in the world and the frostiest in the Northern Hemisphere. So far – so cold, and is remotely a situation

somewhat similar situation as in winter 1939/40 as outline in our previous post HERE. But the difference was Europe (Fig. 2a / 2b). Than it was the coldest winter for more than 100 years und in some location diminishes other records; in Berlin the coldest January since 1709 (Fig. 3), in Moscow ever.    

In winter 1939/40 an Arctic cold also reached the United Kingdom in January 1940. According “harrogateadvertiser”   was the coldest – at some places -since 1838 and the paralysis of life was virtually complete by the development of an exceptional ice storm on January 28. Previously, the U.K. had been overrun by a Siberian current of air battling against the North Atlantic – the combative mood of the weather in keeping with Hitler’s European advances. January 20 to 21 had been the coldest night of the 20th century up till that time, with temperatures widely down to 0 F (-18 C) with deep snow cover the length and breadth of Britain. On the night of the 23rd, a minimum of -23.3C was recorded in Wales at Rhaydaer(Powys) a record low for that date. The month was the coldest month in England (-1.4C) since February 1895. The most alerting aspect is that the cold was man-made. Only 150 days of war theatre into WWII was needed to impel Europe into ice-age condition.

But climate research shows no interest to understand why. Neither the Met-Office is able to explain the extraordinary event, although January 1940 offered more than low temperatures, but will always be remembered for the Snowstorm and Ice-storm that struck the UK.


Other lows include -20°C at Canterbury, Welshpool, Hereford and Newport in Shropshire. The Thames was frozen for 8 miles between Teddington and Sunbury and ice covered stretches of the Mersey, Humber and Severn. The sea froze at Bognor Regis and Folkestone and Southampton harbours were iced over. The Grand Union Canal was completely frozen over between Birmingham and London. Central London was below freezing for a week and there was skating on the Serpentine on 6″ ice. (MORE)
However January 1940 will always be remembered for the Snowstorm and Ice storm that struck the UK.

SNOWSTORM On the 26th, two occlusions were moving up from the SW engaged the cold air over the UK. At the same time, the anticyclone over Scandinavia was intensifying blocking the fronts from pushing through the UK, they became stationary over Wales and SW England. This resulted in a great snowstorm across many northern and eastern areas. Vast areas of northern England reported between 30-60cm of level snow, the higher parts in excess of 60cm+. The snowfall lasted to the 29th of January


ICESTORM Ice storms are rare in the UK, but the worst incident was in January 1940, It was the coldest winter for a century when, on January 27, a savage ice storm swept much of southern Britain. The landscape seemed to be encased in glass, trees looked like frozen waterfalls, and the ice weighed them down until they broke and smashed to the ground. (The Times, 2007). Precipitations fell as freezing rain, which is reckoned to be the severest that has struck the UK in recorded history. The duration of the storm was remarkable lasting up to 48 hours in places. The effect of this prolonged ice storm was severe and damaging.


The climatic down-fall in the U.K. and Europe in winter 1939/40 is mainly, at least partly, the result of an intensive war at sea. Due to huge naval activities the reginal seas lost too much of their summer heat too early. The cold from the East cold easily reach Great Britain an exceptional ice storm. Now, in winter 2017/18 the opposite occurs. Various activities at sea, including the installation of huge off-shore wind farms ensure that the sea surface supplies a steady heat flow to the atmosphere, and is kept free from freezing. A better understanding and recognition of the physical abilities of regional sea and wider ocean areas would greatly help understanding climate change issues.

Added: 15 Feb. 2018 Added: 15 Feb. 2018

Cold snap in the USA and in Europe – 78 years apart.

U.S. Cold Snap New Year Day 2018

Europe’s Climatic Shift in winter 1939/40

 Posted: 03 January 2018  – Amended 06 January 2018 (below)

Is it worth to look at two events which have little more in common than their timing around New Year Day? Definitely not when taking the most obvious difference into account, as the first event World War II was in full swing for four months already. 

The current cold snap started briefly before years end 2017 left the US shivering in record-breaking temperatures on New Year’ Day 2018 is expected to worsen in the coming days.  Over 85% of the nation is below freezing, and nearly 1/3 is below 0 deg. F. The forecast is for cold air to continue to flow down out of Canada into the central and eastern U.S. for most of the coming week.

Almost eight decades ago cold affected Europe and the U.S.A. For several US Gulf States January was the all-time coldest month (Fig. 3 & 5) and ended in February. The cold in Europe had just started (Fig. 1), was the coldest for more than 100 years, and marked the beginning of a global cooling for three decades until the mid-1970s. As science failed to investigate the possibility of a man-made climatic shift due to naval war, it might be reasonable to raise the European war winter 1939/40 in the light of  the current U.S. cold snap, while current winter temperature in Europe are well above average, and are likely to stay that way (Fig. 6, 7, 8).

What surprises that meteorology is offering too little explanation why the current cold snap happened. We are convinced that climate science could explain the situation better, when it had paid more interest and attention to the WWII winter 1939/40, which was so unique in many respect that bulk of difference could offer many clues. The first 100 days naval war initiated numerous weather changes.

After all the interesting aspect of the exceptional war winter 1939/40 as not naval war, but the inevitable conclusion of ‘sea structure change’ was a serious contributor; see Chapter C1-C9 at: For how serious the winter in Europe was in making in the first half of January 1940, we provide a few examples from The New York Times Fig. 11-16.  

Amended 06 January 2018

Off the coast of Norway, from 20th to 21st December 1939 a drop in air pressure of 54,5 mb  (see Fig. below) occurred within 24 hours, which caused up to 12 Bft wind. Was naval war activities related?  

Few days later temperature fell dramatically from all over in Northern Europe;

More details HERE


First January week 2018: North America’s East Coast

First January week 2018: North America’s East Coast is shivering in a record-breaking freeze in the wake of a deadly “bomb cyclone” that dumped snow as far south as Florida.

In parts of US and Canada, temperatures were forecast to fall below -20F (-29C), on Friday night (4/5 Jan 2018).

A “bomb cyclone” or “weather bomb” is an unofficial term when the central pressure of a low pressure system falls by 24 millibars in 24 hours


“bomb cyclone.”

Reuters | Updated: January 07, 2018 13:52 IST (Extract)

Wind chill and freeze warnings stretched from New England to Ohio and Pennsylvania. In some of these places, exposed skin could freeze within 30 minutes,

In New Hampshire, the ambient air temperature on Mount Washington plunged to -36 F (minus 38C), two degrees short of a record low for Jan. 6.

The East Coast’s first snowstorm of 2018 was energized by a rapid drop in barometric pressure that some weather forecasters called a bombogenesis, or a “bomb cyclone.” The phenomenon gave rise to gusts of more than 70 mph (113 km/h) and produced snowfall totals of 22 inches (56 cm) in parts of Maine and 17 inches (43 cm) in parts of Massachusetts, the NWS said.

 Jan 8, 2018 – Extract -: The blast of arctic air that has engulfed the US east coast has broken  temperature records in several cities.

The National Weather Service said the temperature in Worcester, Massachusetts, fell to -22c on Sunday, (01/07/18) breaking a record of minus -19c set in 1942.

In Providence, Rhode Island, temperatures of -19c set a new record low.

And in Hartford, Connecticut, the temperature dropped to -23c, smashing the previous record of -17c.

Boston tied a low-temperature record set more than a century ago in 1896 of -18c.

Many residents in north-eastern states endured jaw-clenching temperatures and brutal wind chills on Saturday as cleanup continued from the storm that dropped as much as 46 centimetres of snow in some places on Thursday.
Source: 9News



The New York Times about human-caused climate change in December 2017 and 1939

Does fair reporting alone serve the truth? Not if one neglects the NYT Christmas story of 24th December 1939!

Posted: 21st December 2017

Towards the end of 2017 [14. Dec.*)], Brad Plumer and Nadia Popovich from  the NYT summarized a report by the American Meteorology Society about 27 extreme weather events 2016, down to “five items”, which researchers around the world analyzed, and found that human-caused climate change was a “significant driver” for 21 of them. The NYT titled the article: “How Global Warming Fueled Five Extreme Weather Events”. That is fair, but is it enough in the light of what the NYT reported about weather events during World War II, but never asked whether it was likely human-caused. More than seven decades have been lost to understand how much have the two World Wars contributed to climate change during the last century (Book 2004; Book 2012).  We give a chilling example: White Christmas 1939 in Finland, and subsequently a few more details.       

        *) In the International Edition on December 20th.

“Merry Christmas”

In Finland the average December air-temperature usually range between – 4°C (south) and -6°C (north) – Fig. 4. That was generally the case in the 1930s, but changed dramatically as soon as the first war winter had started in December 1939. On Thursday, 30 November 1939 the Russian Red Army attacked Finland with several million men, 1’000 tanks

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

and 500 fighting places in the Lake Ladoga region (NYT, 07 Dec.39). Only three weeks later it is reported that: At the Arctic front the Russians retreat in less than minus 30° C. (Neue Zürcher Zeitung, NZZ, 22 Dec.1939). North Finland temperatures down to -30° /-36° C. (Hamburger Anzeiger, 22 Dec.1939). From the Karelian Isthmus Harold Denny reported temperatures as low as -10°F (-23°C); NYT 25 Dec.1939. From a location – Kemijärvi in Central Finland – about 800km further north, of Helsinki, but still 400km south of the Barents Sea, James Aldridge reported from his experience on Christmas Eve  [NYT, 25 December 1939, extract; full report see Fig. 3]:                                                                                                                                                                   

 “The cold numbs the brain in this Arctic hell, snow sweeps over the darkened wastes, the winds howl and the temperature is 30 degrees below zero (minus 34.4 ° C). Here the Russians and Finns are battling in blinding snowstorms for possession of ice-covered forests. …I reached the spot just after the battle ended. It was the most horrible sight I had ever seen. As if the men had been suddenly turned to wax, there were two or three thousand Russians and a few Finns, all frozen in fighting attitudes. Some were locked together, their bayonets within each other’s bodies; some were frozen in half-standing positions; some were crouching with their arms crooked, holding the hand grenades they were throwing; some were lying with their rifles shouldered, their legs apart….(T)heir fear was registered on the frozen faces. Their bodies were like statues of men throwing all their muscles and strength into some work, but their faces recorded something between bewilderment and horror.”

As  shocking as the story is, it is not less shocking to recognize that climate science thinks it can ignore such report, which certainly has much to offer in explaining human-caused climatic changes!

The first 100 days naval war initiated numerous weather changes

Since the 1st of September numerous significant deviation from statistical means occurred; for example:
diversion of a cyclone, rain pattern, and wind shift. About 250 ships with 1 Million tons had been sunk (Fig. 7). Naval war ranged heavily in the Baltic, North Sea and from Orkney Island to the North Cap. Was it naval activities off the coast of Norway that caused a drop in air pressure of 54,5 mb within 24 hours (see Fig. 1, 6, 13 & 14)? Up to 12 Bft wind were reported. A few years later the meteorologist M. Rodewald regarded it as a sea-change for winter 1939/40, which it was not, at least not alone. From a meteorological point of view, almost every day in WWII offered exciting weather situations, which most likely was closely linked to treatment of ocean regions by naval war. Claiming instead “natural variability” sounds dumb, and is irresponsible. Naval war in the sea areas of Europe, particularly in the North- and Baltic Sea, could be easily identified as a significant contributor to many weather events and the mentioned Christmas story by NYT reporter James Aldridge. Not only have the war victims deserved an explanation, we all need to know! Actually, Christmas 1939 was only the very early beginning of the coldest European winter in more than 100 years, and several hundred ‘meteorological specialties’ during the further five war years, while climate science knows nothing about it, neither does show any interest. Let’s still hope for better times!



Not competent enough to read the wind-shift in W-Europe 1939

Unprecedented wind shift after WWII
commenced, one in over 100 years  

Post 03  Dezember 2017

As early as October 1939

 At the end of October 1939 the “Seewarte” (the German Naval weather service) analysts had realised that the wind pattern over Northern Europe had changed completely (Fig.1. Unfortunately they lacked the competence to read the signs. According to their observations:

    Hamburg reported winds from the North-Eastern quadrant on almost two thirds of the dates observed (33% easterly winds out of 65%) while North-Eastern winds accounted only for a quarter (26%) of several previous years’ averages. Otherwise the most frequent direction of the wind – South-West (24%) – accounted for 9% of all cases. Thus the observations at this station alone show what the weather charts of an extensive area will obviously indicate as well (Seewarte, Nov. 02, 1939), next Figure C5-8.

This is a very strong and clear indication that huge air masses moved  from Eurasia continent to West Europe. Unusually high evaporation affected by naval war, caused a shift in the wind direction. While the water of the seas was ‘stirred and turned’ the ‘steam’ rose upwards into the sky, causing an air inflow from easterly directions, which subsequently prevented low-pressure systems to travel along the west-wind-drift channel via North Sea and Central Europe into the eastern hemisphere.

The rare wind from North-East

Based on works of different authors, Drummond explains that, from 1788 to 1942, only 21 winters but of 155 had easterly residuals; only 7 since 1846 and only three since 1903, namely 1904 (SSE), 1929 (ESE), and 1940 (ENE). The latter is the most stunning one. In only three years, the wind changed to the north-east sector. That happened in 1814 (NE), 1841 (NE), and during the winter of 1939/40 (ENE). It must have had a cause, which should be identified. An interesting aspect could be that the other two war winters of 1940/41 and 1941/42 did not make it in the list of years with winds from the east. They had, like the other 153 winters, winds from the west, although they came along with a considerable cold average. That made the exceptional winter of 1939/40 even more interesting. For more details see HERE

An urgent need to research

It is difficult to understand that science has not picked up the wind-shift issue for a better understanding a possible link between naval war and climatic change. If the winter wind in Western Europe did blew only two times in about 150 years from NE something extraordinary must have happened. As the general situation had been ‘normal’ until World War II commenced in September 1939, the question is inevitable: Why so suddenly and why in Europe? The logical answer would be to assess all circumstances, and if there is no ground for any ‘natural’ reason, it seems irresponsible not to consider an anthropogenic cause. Actually war has a profound impact on air and sea. Particularly naval warfare during autumn churn the sea over huge areas, and thus release more quickly the heat stored during the summer season, with significant impact on the atmosphere and the sea water temperature. It is like stirrng the hot coffee to cool it down.  Subsequently icy air more easily can travel from Siberia to the Atlantic shore of Western Europe. It happened only few months in war, resulting in the coldest winter in many regions, in more than 100 years. It is high time to research the wind-shift seriously.

More at Booklet “War Changes Climate” Chapter A, Chapter B, Chapter  C I , Chapter C II Chapter D, Chapter E

The 945mb cyclone on 26th November 1939 caused by naval gunfight?

The sinking of the “HMS Rawalpindi” a serious contribution to “weather modification”?

Post: 18 November 2017

Causing mist and rain: Did the first surface shoot-out in the North Atlantic cause misty conditions, rainstorm and subsequently a 12 Beaufort storm? Contributed several dozen warships using all kind of explosives to a change in weather conditions? Was naval warfare partly to blame for the extreme forceful low pressure at the North Sea entrance on early morning of the 26th of November (Fig). For sure it did not come alone, but man contributed. For climate change research a unique opportunity to understand more about anthropogenic influence on weather. The case goes as it follows:

The weather was good. Ships could be seen up to the horizon.  That changed quickly. After a 40 minute long barrage of many hundreds of 11-inch (28 cm) shells, the scene was quickly covered by mist, followed by a heavy rainstorm.  Had the weather change been caused by the sinking the British armed merchant cruiser HMS Rawalpindi? The deadly assault came by surface action against the German battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau during the first months of the Second World War at 3.51 pm on the 23rd of November 1939? At 1600 hours a tremendous explosion broke the gallant merchant cruiser in two. Shells from one of Scharnhorst’s eighteen modern 11-inch guns had found Rawalpindi’s forward magazine. The battle ships didn’t sail alone but with several cruisers and submarine nearby. The location was South-east of Iceland.

Immediately and as long as they felt to be alone at the scene the Gneisenau picked up twenty-one survivors, Scharnhorst another six. When assuming the arrival of alien ships an due to increasing mist  they left the scene. In fact, HMS Newcastle, the next ship to the Rawalpindi on the patrol line, closed the position and also sighted the two German Battle-cruisers, but lost them again in a heavy rainstorm. The following day HMS Chitral found eleven more. All other 238 crew member died on Rawalpindi.

Feeding a strong Cyclone:  HMS Rawalpindi send a message to the Home Fleet Head Quarter before shelling started. There they acted swiftly and ordered all available ships to hunt the German ships. Three dozen ships where now on search for the enemy. In those early war days the sailors saw U-boats everywhere and threw depth-charges abundantly. At the same time a cyclone strengthened rapidly, crossing the North Atlantic very quickly. The air pressure dropped to lower than 945mb on early 26th of November.


The situation was exceptional. The sinking of the Rawalpindi was a serious naval blow for the Royal Navy, and an unknown contribution to “weather modification”. Not the percentage is important, the fact would matter. A small share, even a very small share, should be understood and explained. Anthropogenic climate change matters are too serious as not to undertake any efforts to understand the whole situation. The sinking of the Rawalpindi is only one significant event form many, many thousand naval warfare events, with traceable connections to weather and climate modification, during the two World Wars are still waiting for a thorough analysis and explanation.  



First war efforts 1939 caused rain

An easy way to explain anthropogenic rain making

Posted: 13 November 2017  – Source-Chapter C4

Immediately after WWII had begun, a rain zone center established itself along the war front between France and Germany, which was maintained during the months of September, October and November 1939. Across north-western Europe thousand naval vessels plowed through the sea day and night. Many thousand sea mines were laid every day. Uncountable exploded instantly. In early October 1939 161’000 troops, 24’000 vehicles an 140.000 tons of supplies had transferred by sea from the UK to France. Thousands of air planes were up in the air on training or military mission. Impossible that all the various human activities did not influenced the course of weather substantially, as is evident by the excessive rain in Western Europe over the first three month at war.   

With the start of the Second World War, rainfall rose exceptionally from Wales to Austria. Many stations saw double digit numbers above the statistical averages, which increased up to 360% in October and November at several locations.  The region became so much soaked with rain that in November 1939 Adolf Hitler gave up his plan (known as: “Deployment Instruction No. 1, Case Yellow”) to invade the Benelux countries and France before the end of the year. It is unbelievable that the climate community is unable and unwilling to interpret and explain these relationships. After all, it is about understanding man-made climate change. 

   Two factors could have contributed to generate the excess amount of rain. There is, on one hand, the land and air warfare, which produced large quantities of nuclides since September 1939 that could have very well been suited as condensation nuclei for the formation of raindrops. On the other hand, the naval warfare in all sea areas from the Biscay to the North Cape and the Baltic may have increased the evaporation process at sea. In autumn, these activities work like stirring the spoon in a hot coffee pot. The sea surface layer is turned over more often than usually. The warmer the surface layer, the more vapor and heat can be dissipated into the air. From September, the air above the sea surface at these latitudes is usually colder than the water. The agitation of the water by naval activities increased the evaporation rate on one hand, but on the other hand cooled down the water body more quickly. 

[Fig. left: One week naval war in October.          Fig. middle: Sea mines.             Fig. right: British submarine hunted]

A place where this could have happened was the Western Front between France and Germany after the outbreak of WWII, where more than 2 million soldiers had been put into position along the war front in autumn 1939. Although, neither big battles nor “shoot outs” occurred along the huge defence system along the river Rhine up to the Belgian border, everything was done to improve defence capabilities and to train and prepare two million soldiers for the worst. Therefore both fronts were busy day and night with transportation, construction, surveys, training and military encounters. The first substantial clash saw 700 French tanks and planes moving seven miles over the Saarland border, while 300 airplanes attacked German positions in the city of Aachen’s industrial region and munitions area, some 125 miles further north, (NYT, Sept. 07, 1939) encounters that occurred frequently since then over the next months.

Many thousand more military events offer climatology a wide field for demonstrating how quick and easy man interfered with the war weather in autumn 1939, and the war contributed to climate change.   

   The post is based on material from Chapter C4  at:

Poland prayed for rain in September 1939 – In vain.

Only two weeks at war the rain remained in the West. Science should have explained it
to the Poles since long that the war prevented raining. (Story 2)

Posted 01 November 2017 – Comments welcome!

What a horror! To ambush Poland on 1st September 1939 the Germans employed, or had available, forces estimated at approximately 1,250,000 men comprising 60 to 70 divisions. Their Air Force possessed 7,000 first-line airplanes. After just two weeks the Polish Army lost 20 divisions, some 100.000 dead or wounded, and another 100.000 prisoners (NYT, 10/15/1939). Three weeks later the numbers are 123’000 dead, 134’000 wounded, 700’000 prisoners (plus 220’000 taken by the Soviet Union). This mischief must, at least partly, be attributed to the weather conditions as well. The usual rain did not came, which may have hampered the advance of the highly merchandized German army significantly. The Poles prayed for rain, in vain.

Poland’s tragic in September 1939 had been so horrible that it seems inappropriate to talk about the weather. But it is necessary, as Poland deserves an explanation. The topic is lack of rain, and all those who suffered and prayed for rain, as their descendant up to today, should know, that it was not ‘natural’ but caused by Adolf Hitler’s ruthlessness, through war activities on land, at sea and in the air. And as science has failed desperately in this respect over more than seven decades, it is high time to remind them that they failed to serve the Polish people appropriate.  

Fact is that there was water in the air over Western Europe abundantly. From Dover to Germany the rain exceeded 200% above September average,  [Berlin-Dahlem (197 %); Frankfurt/Oder (197 %); Breslau (204 %); Ratibor (210 %); Karlsruhe i.B. (208 %); Stuttgart (199 %); Ulm (226%); Wuerzburg  (215 %); Muenchen (212%) ] with little to nothing left for Polish soil. This sharp demarcation had been so extreme, that science should have taken the chance to explain the situation by human input thoroughly. Here we can only raise some basic aspects.

Actually the sharp West-East demarcation can derive from warfare on land, in the air or at sea. Thousands of air planes were suddenly in the air, uncountable bullets, shells, mines and bombs got activated, thousand naval vessels sailed the sea. The sudden movements of several hundred warships at Heligoland could have attracted a low-pressure center to move in the German Bight (see last post) and further to Belgium, instead of moving to the southern Baltic bringing rain to Central Europe.

Although the maritime influence on the weather scene has –for sure – had a great influence from the first day of WWII, the September rain-matter is certainly strongly related to ‘all the stuff’ man pushed into the air, at sea, along the Maginot Line and West Wall, or the land war in Poland. 

By the third war week Warsaw was encircled. The Red Army marched into Poland from the East. Days of the Polish Republic were numbered. The Nazis had deployed 5,000 planes in Poland (NYT, 10/25/1939). On September 25, 1939, 240 German planes bombed Warsaw, dropping 560 tons of bombs, including the first 1,000 kg bomb. Meanwhile 1,000 batteries shelled the city. 30 transport aircraft dropped 70 tons of fire-bombs. Warsaw was on fire for many days. No rain arrived to end the burning down of the city. The silence of science speaks not for their competence.

A better understanding of the weather situation in Poland September 1939 is still possible. Actually September 1939 it was not necessarily a solely European matter, as Russia and Japan were at war in the Far East (August 9 – September 2, 1939), which subsequently saw weather extremes in California, and heavy rain in Western Europe until November 1939, which will be discussed in the next post.

Further Reading on Autumn 1939: Climate Change and Naval War, 2004 – Chapter 2_31


Cyclone attracted by naval activities at Heligoland early in WWII

Sea war meet climate in the 2nd war week;
1st Story on war winter 1939/40

General  – Posted 26th October 2017

          The most forceful meteorological blocking of the 20th Century, if not during the last 200 years, established at the onset of the Second World War in autumn 1939. It followed the coldest winter in Northern Europe for more than 100 years, at some locations even more than 120 years. Uncountable strange, bizarre, extraordinary events produced three war winters in row, which caught meteorology completely off guard. While it was impossible to investigate and discuss the events and possible correlation and links to human activities during war time, there is no excuse today. Nearly eight decades have passed since WWII ended. Nothing has been done, although the meteorological material collected was huge, offering an excellent basis for testing climate modelling. Actually nothing has been achieved in this respect, although many extraordinary weather events can be strongly linked to the impact of naval warfare in the marine environment. This Blog will work on the matter during winter 2017/18, based on the Booklet [ HERE: Chapter A. How to change Climate; link at the top = Ch A (1-8) ] and my book (pages 220) of 2012 online

1st Story Introduction– Cyclone at Heligoland

Presumably usual flow of circulation may have been affected by numerous war activities since the Deutsche Luftwaffe and Wehrmacht (German Air Force and Army) had begun the invasion of Poland at its western borders at 04:48 local time on September 1st, 1939. Here I want to discuss only one example, which strongly links naval activities to the movement of a cyclone.  The story lasted from September 10th to 13th, and could be entitled: Cyclone attracted by naval warfare activities in the Heligoland Bight (German Bight).  

Naval forces at Heligoland

A huge number of the Kriegsmarine vessels were stationed in the North Sea from day zero, and were highly active. The Royal Navy and Air Force showed up several times around the island of Helgoland and the German coast with submarine, bomber and sea mine laying missions. The German Navy was particularly engaged in planting contact mines from Holland ’s coastal waters (off Terschelling) northwards across the German Bight up to the entrance of the Skagerrak, at a distance of between 50 and 100 km off the coast of Schleswig-Holstein and Denmark , called the “Westwall”. The most north-westerly point announced by the Germans as ‘Dangerous zone’ was the position: 56° 30’ North and 4° 25’ East. That was about half the distance between Skagerrak and Scotland . The first minefield locations were off Terschelling, Esbjerg , near Helgoland and two places off Jutland . (NYT, September 5,1939) As many as 300 mines an hour could be laid by one single minelayer. (NYT, February 18, 1940), and the German Navy had presumably several dozens in service to plaster the North Sea off the German coast with ten-thousand sea mines.  

Cyclone attracted:

   In the north of Scotland a low arrived on September 10th, presumably bound to travel via Skagerrak eastwards to the Baltic and beyond. It almost did, but before entering the Skagerrak it swung southwards and moved straight to the center of naval activities, and further along Holland to the Belgium coast on September 13th, as shown in 2nd & 3rd Fig. above. And again just two days later on the 15th, at 8 a.m. , there was a small low-pressure center (1005 mb) north of Helgoland (not shown) close to the location of meanwhile already large sea mine fields.

The story has started and Poland did not get rain

From a climatic point of view the cyclone in the German Bight may have sucked some heat out of the sea, is it possible to make much out of it? Unlikely!  Unexpetively Poland was derived from rain it usually gets at the time of the year, while Western Europe from Germany to Grat Britain got three times as usually. The next post will raise this matter.



They warm-up the Arctic! Shipping, Off-Shore, Science etc.!

Do they want to know how they contribute to Arctic warming? Not in the least!

Posted: 04 September 2017 – Comments welcome!2_

Concerning the Arctic warming all are very proud. Some climate change expert claim that global 6_warming may reduce sea ice in the Arctic Ocean to insignificance pretty soon.  Off-shore industry sees advantage to move sea-bed explorations quickly further north. Merchant shipping watches with interest the vastly decreasing sea ice extent. And here we are! A Russian liquid gas tanker (LNG) “Christophe de Margerie” just set two Arctic records few weeks ago (Details). The ship not only traveled through the Arctic in record time, but has done so without the use of an icebreaker escort. She is the first of a total of 15 planned LNG carriers that will be gradually deployed.


Extreme warming in the Kara Sea and Barents Sea during the winter period 2000 to 2016 

Amended  30 September 2017

Svenja H.E. Kohnemann; Günther Heinemann; David H. Bromwich; Oliver Gutjahr 

Published Online: 31 August 2017
Preliminary Accepted Version_in PDF_ Pages 44     

That is a horrible aspect. At least it is not known which alterations shipping, naval forces, research vessels and off-shore industry cause ins the Arctic Ocean sea-body structure,  whether ice covered or not, and the subsequent impact on the annual sea ice and the polar-weather, called climate change. Bad that science has no idea about this human Arctic warming aspect. Worse, science has never rose, or ever been willing to raise and investigate the subject. At least you will face a hard time to3_ find anything in this respect. 

When considering the possible impact of ocean uses on climate change, any activities at sea north of the Polar Circle is a multifold higher than in any other Ocean region. Between the Arctic Ocean and the Equator the climatic impact of human activities the difference could be several hundred, if not thousand times, due to extreme narrow structure margin concerning water temperature and salinity. The temperature range in the upper 150 meter sea surface level is minus 2° to plus 4°C.  Arctic salinity is down to 30ppt in places, while the oceans vary between 34ppt and 36ppt. So far it is statistics, and they are ‘wrong’ if 1_not properly applied.

What the statistics do not show is the huge difference between the season, and the tremendous difference between a complete sea-ice cover, broken sea ice and open sea. The statistics show no difference between the freezing and melting period, both can extent over a half year. In the former case the immediate sea water level raises salinity significantly, instandly causing (as heavier water) a strong vertical current. During the melting, the surface layer is suddenly almost free of salinity, and because this water is much lighter than salty water, forms a stable and some meters deep water level, particularly as long as the sea ice remains intact. That may last for many weeks, or up to a few months.

5_Navigating and other ocean uses in Arctic sea areas without knowing the impact is irresponsible. Navigating through compact ice is even worse, as the force of ship screws may travel over long distances, with significant changes to sea temperatures and salinity. But science does not care. For decades they send research vessels deep into the Arctic 4_region. No wonder that the off-shore industry and shipping does not care either. But that has to change. Any LNG-, cruise-, research-vessel or other uses in the Arctic region should immediately be investigated of having a serious impact on Arctic warming and subsequently climate change.


Read for more information the book about the Early Artic Warming (1918-1939)

Related issue: Europeans warm their winters ( Post 2016/04/07)

Extreme warming in the Kara Sea and Barents Sea during the winter period 2000 to 2016″; Published Online: 31 August 2017