A New 1787-2005 Temperature Reconstruction Determines The Coldest 50-Year Period Was 1940-1993

by K. Richard, Mar 4, 2024 in NoTricksZone


The warmest 50-year period in northeastern China occurred from 1844-1893.

Li et al., 2024

“Compared with single years, in general, high or low temperatures that persist for many years will more significantly affect the growth of trees [30]. When we defined years with T12-1 ≥ −10.73 °C (Mean + 1σ) and T12-1 ≤ −12.61 °C (Mean − 1σ) as extreme warm years and cold years, respectively, the reconstruction for the period of 1787–2005 contained 31 cold years and 36 warm years (Table 4). The extreme cold/warm events lasting for three or more consecutive years were discovered in 1965–1967 and 1976–1978/1791–1798, 1844–1849 and 1889–1891. An 11-year smoothing average of the reconstructed T12-1 series was performed to reveal multi-year and interdecadal variations and to detect the several prolonged cold and warm periods (Figure 5d). After smoothing with an 11-yr moving average, cold periods occurred in 1822–1830 (mean T12-1 = −12.7 °C) and 1957–1970 (mean T12-1 = −12.7 °C), while a warm period occurred in 1787–1793 (mean T12-1 = −10.4 °C) (Figure 5d). Rapid and sustained cooling was observed in the reconstructed series in the years 1790–1826 (T12-1 range −10.3 °C to −12.8 °C, mean = −12.0 °C) and 1939–1969 (T12-1 range −11.6 °C to −12.7 °C, mean = −12.1 °C), where the rates of cooling were about 0.067 °C/year and 0.035 °C/year, respectively (Figure 5d). The two cooling events may be due to the decrease in solar activity [48,49,50]. Using a 50-year time scale, the highest temperature occurring during 1787–2005 was from 1844 to 1893 (T12-1 range −12.79 °C to −9.41 °C, mean = −11.15 °C), similar results were also obtained by Zhu et al. and Jiang et al., while the lowest temperature was from 1940–1993 (T12-1 range −13.57 °C to −10.26 °C, mean = −12.13 °C) (Figure 5d) [33].”

How Geology And Rocks Tell The Story Of Earth’s Climatic Past

by. J. Duhamel, Mar 4, 2024 in ClimateChangeDispatch


I am a geologist which means I have rocks in my head and some of those rocks have recorded the climate history of Earth. Here is their story.

We will start with the big picture.

The graphic below [after the jump] shows the estimated temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) content for the past 600 million years. [emphasis, links added]

The blue line is the estimated temperature; the black line is the estimated CO2 content of the atmosphere.

Notice that for much of the past 600 million years, the temperature has been about 12°C warmer than it is now and life has flourished. (Note that the climate crazies claim that if the global temperature increases by 2°C above present, we will die.)

CO2 temps graph

Click to enlarge

The dips in the temperature curve are ice ages. Ice ages have occurred on a cycle of about 145 million years. Ice ages consist of glacial epochs and warmer interglacial periods. We are now in an interglacial period. (In the popular vernacular, glacial epochs are often called “ice ages.”)

The glacial epoch cycle happens whenever our solar system, in its travels around the center of our galaxy, goes through some spiral arms of the galaxy with very dense clusters of stars that bombard the Earth with more cosmic rays, which produce more clouds and other effects in the atmosphere, which limit the amount sunlight that gets to Earth’s surface.

Carbon NetZero: A Ridiculous Solution to an Imaginary Problem VIDEO

Dr. Patrick Moore, March 4, 2024 in FriendsofScience  


VIDEO 57’54”

3 900 vues 28 févr. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlcAKE04YvM

Carbon NetZero: A Ridiculous Solution to an Imaginary Problem – Dr. Patrick Moore presents a bit of his personal history as a Greenpeace Warrior, and now a compendium of his work as a warrior for common sense on climate and environmental problems. Drawing on some of the work from his book “Fake and Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom,” Dr. Moore exposes many of these climate and environmental myth

Warming Earth Has Changed U.S. Hardiness Zones

by  K. Hansen, March 4, 2024 in WUWT


Several times I have had readers at WUWT ask in comments:  “If the climate is changing, why haven’t the planting zone maps changed?”

Well, they have and they do.  The U.S. Department of Agriculture issues a new U.S.D.A. “Plant Hardiness Zone Map” periodically.  A new version of the map was just released on Nov. 15, 2023.  I became aware of it because my wife is an avid gardener and follows our local agricultural County Cooperative Extension news.

When she followed the link to the new Plant Hardiness map and checked our very local area, she was surprised to see that it had “warmed” here by 5°F.   Here is the bit of the page she was looking at:

She was a bit perplexed by this news, as we have been having not “hot” years but cooler years recently. It took me a minute to sort through it to see that the drop down was not clear on what temperature change they were talking about.  That temperature change elevated us one half a zone from zone 5b to zone 6a.

 

 

EXCLUSIVE: A Third of U.K. Met Office Temperature Stations May Be Wrong by Up to 5°C, FOI Reveals

by C. Morrison, March 1, 2024 in TheDailySceptic


Nearly one in three (29.2%) U.K. Met Office temperature measuring stations have an internationally-defined margin of error of up to 5°C. Another 48.7% of the total 380 stations could produce errors up to 2°C, meaning nearly eight out of ten stations (77.9%) are producing ‘junk’ or ‘near junk’ readings of surface air temperatures. Arguably, on no scientific basis should these figures be used for the Met Office’s constant promotion of the collectivist Net Zero project. Nevertheless, the state-funded operation frequently uses them to report and often catastrophic rises in temperature of as little as 0.01°C.

Under a freedom of information request, the Daily Sceptic has obtained a full list of the Met Office’s U.K. weather stations, along with an individual class rating defined by the World Meteorological Office. These CIMO ratings range from pristine class 1 and near pristine class 2, to an ‘anything goes’ or ‘junk’ class 5. The CIMO ratings penalise sites that are near any artificial heat sources such as buildings and concrete surfaces. According to the WMO, a class 5 site is one where nearby obstacles “create an inappropriate environment  for a meteorological measurement that is intended to be representative of a wide area”. Even the Met Office refers to sites next to buildings and vegetation as “undesirable”. It seems class 5 sites can be placed anywhere, and they come with a WMO warning of “additional estimated uncertainties added by siting up to 5°C”; class 4 notes “uncertainties” up to 2°C, while class 3 states 1°C. Only 13.7%, or 52 of the Met Office’s temperature and humidity stations come with no such ‘uncertainty’ warnings attached.

The above graph shows the percentage totals of each class. Class 1 and 2, identified in green, account for just 6.3% and 7.4% of the total respectively. Class 3 identified as orange comes in at 8.4%. The graph shows the huge majorities enjoyed by the darkening shades of red showing classes 4 and 5. It is possible that the margins of error identified for classes 3, 4 and 5 could be a minus amount – if for instance the measuring device was sited in a frost hollow – but the vast majority are certain to be pushed upwards by heat corruptions.

 

Europe’s Consensus On Climate Is Crumbling

by W. Münchau, Feb 29, 202 in ClimateChangeDispatch


At stake in the European elections in June this year will be everything that defines the modern EU: a large volume of net zero legislation, a values-based foreign policy, and ever-more intrusive business regulation.

Polls suggest the centrist majority that has supported these policies is growing slimmer. [emphasis, links added]

Ursula von der Leyen [pictured above] has been the quintessential representative of that majority. Born in Brussels, German by nationality, proposed by France, she was the perfect candidate for European Commission president in late 2019.

Now she is seeking a second term. Whether she will succeed will depend to a large extent on whether the centrist four-party coalition that supported her in 2019 will hold.

All over Europe, we are now seeing a backlash against the kind of policies the Von der Leyen Commission represents.

The far right is part of that response, but the main political shift has been inside Von der Leyen’s own political group, the European People’s Party (EPP), of which the German CDU/CSU is the largest member.

This backlash follows one of the most hectic political phases in recent EU history. When Covid struck in early 2020, Von der Leyen was instrumental in setting up the EU’s recovery fund to help countries deal with the economic consequences of the pandemic.

Then came the Green Deal, a hefty tranche of legislation on renewable energy, land use, forestry, energy efficiency, emission standards for cars and trucks, and a directive on energy taxes.

There was also a tightening of standards on pesticides, air quality, water pollution, and wastewater.

Farmers are resisting this program because it affects their livelihoods. Industrialists, too, are unhappy. A big part of the Green Deal was its industrial policy; the flagship legislation was the Net Zero Industry Act.

The industry used to be the EU’s strongest supporter.

But with the new laws came new bureaucracy: now, all EU-funded investment must include a green component of at least 30 percent, while a carbon border adjustment mechanism, to take effect in 2026, will penalize imports that do not meet EU carbon-emission standards. Together, EU legislation in the last few years amounts to a near-total corporate regime change.

Compliance with some regulations is virtually impossible for companies without dedicated legal teams. It is going to get worse.

Under discussion right now is a supply-chain law that would make European companies responsible for human rights abuses in their supply chain – including the suppliers of their suppliers.

I expect that the hyperactive phase of this green agenda will end with the elections in June. Some of it might even go into reverse. I am even starting to doubt whether the EU will ever enforce the 2035 target for phasing out fossil-fuel-driven cars.

This is an industrial-policy disaster in the making because Europe’s carmakers are having trouble selling their electric cars.

Geologically Generated Ice Cycles And Climate-Related Phenomena

by J.E. Kamis, Feb 28, 2024 in ClimateChangeDispatch


The term “Ice Age” implies that covering Earth’s surface with ice and then melting it is a single event.

As explained below, this process is not a single event but rather a reoccurring cycle that has three distinct phases: Ice Melt/End Phase, Ice Increase/Recovery Phase, and Normal Ice Extent/Stable Phase.

Ice Melt/End Phase

Approximately every 100,000 years, the Earth’s glaciers and seas reach their maximum extent. Suddenly and within 5,000 years nearly all the ice melts. I term this the Ice Melt Phase.

So, what causes this rapid melting of the ice? It is a geologically induced pulse of heat and gas emitted from all of Earth’s geological features. A more detailed explanation of the Ice Melt Phase follows.

In 1941 Serbian mathematician Milutin Milankovitch discovered that every 100,000 years, the Earth’s orbit around the sun, tilt angle of its axis, and wobble-type movement around the axis changes. Scientists called this process a Milankovitch Cycle.

Milankovitch concluded that these astronomical changes affected Earth’s long-term climate. Others have shown that these astronomical changes also act to greatly increase the gravitational stress on Earth.

Figure 1. 50,000-mile-long interconnected network of ocean floor fault zones and ice extent during an Ice Cycle. (Image credit Wikipedia, some labeling by J. Kamis).

In my opinion, this stress activates all of Earth’s geological features, most importantly the 50,000-mile-long interconnected network of deep ocean-floor fault zones (Figure 1). These fault zones form the boundary between continents and large segments of ocean-floor rock layers.

Meteorologist Debunks TIME Mag’s Claim That Jan 2024 Was Hottest On Record

by A. Watts, Feb 19, 2024 in ClimateChangeDispatch


An article in TIME Magazine (TIME) claims that January 2024 was the hottest ever on record for the planet. Titled, 2024 Had the Hottest January on Record Following 2023’s Hottest Year on Record the article is based on a single source of temperature data.

Data from multiple other sources of temperature measurements refute this claim. [emphasis, links added]

TIME refers to the Copernicus EU climate service as the source for its alarming claim. Copernicus EU issued a press release claiming:

January 2024 was the warmest January on record globally, with an average ERA5 surface air temperature of 13.14°C, 0.70°C above the 1991-2020 average for January and 0.12°C above the temperature of the previous warmest January, in 2020.

The month was 1.66°C warmer than an estimate of the January average for 1850-1900, the designated pre-industrial reference period.

The problem with that is that they are using a reference period of 1850 to 1900 that no other climate data source uses; a period, not coincidentally, more than 100 years of global warming ago when the Earth was cooler than today.

For example, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) produced a map of the globe that shows a significantly lower global temperature for January 2024.

The GISS global value was just 1.20°C compared to the 1.66°C claimed by Copernicus is different because NASA GISS is using a base period of 1951 to 1980.

Copernicus seemingly cherry-picked the reference period to fit the climate crisis narrative, and TIME was too uninterested in seeking and presenting the truth to investigate the extraordinary claim, instead reporting it as an unchallenged fact.

The Hockey Stick Trial: How Science Died In A D.C. Courtroom

by R .Darwall, Feb 20, 2024 in ClimateChangeDispatch


“Science,” wrote the philosopher Karl Popper, “is one of the very few human activities – perhaps the only one – in which errors are systematically criticized and fairly often, in time, corrected.”

The sub-title of Popper’s 1963 book Conjectures and Refutations, in which he argued that science progresses through inspired conjectures checked by attempts to refute them through criticism, is “The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.” [emphasis, links added]

Now, a six-person jury in Washington, DC has refuted Popper’s formulation of the uniqueness of science, finding in favor of climate scientist Michael Mann in the defamation suit he brought against Rand Simberg and Mark Steyn dating back to 2012.

Central to Mann’s case was his attempt to reconstruct global temperature over the previous millennium – the iconic “hockey stick” graph.

The graph shows global temperatures purportedly falling for centuries and suddenly shooting upward with the advent of the Industrial Revolution.

Mann’s hockey stick representation was derived principally from selected tree-ring data based on the assumption that tree rings constitute accurate proxies for temperature and are not contaminated by confounding factors such as rainfall, seasonal variability, and levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

The results that Mann produced are also sensitive to decisions on and application of statistical techniques.

There can be little doubt of the hockey stick’s historical importance in developing and propagating what became the dominant scientific paradigm of climate change.

Climate Model Bias 1: What is a Model?

by A. May, Feb 29, 2024 in WUWT


There are three types of scientific models, as shown in figure 1. In this series of seven posts on climate model bias we are only concerned with two of them. The first are mathematical models that utilize well established physical, and chemical processes and principles to model some part of our reality, especially the climate and the economy. The second are conceptual models that utilize scientific hypotheses and assumptions to propose an idea of how something, such as the climate, works. Conceptual models are generally tested, and hopefully validated, by creating a mathematical model. The output from the mathematical model is compared to observations and if the output matches the observations closely, the model is validated. It isn’t proven, but it is shown to be useful, and the conceptual model gains credibility.

Models are useful when used to decompose some complex natural system, such as Earth’s climate, or some portion of the system, into its underlying components and drivers. Models can be used to try and determine which of the system components and drivers are the most important under various model scenarios.

Besides being used to predict the future, or a possible future, good models should also tell us what should not happen in the future. If these events do not occur, it adds support to the hypothesis. These are the tasks that the climate models created by the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP)[1] are designed to do. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)[2] analyzes the CMIP model results, along with other peer-reviewed research, and attempts to explain modern global warming in their reports. The most recent IPCC report is called AR6.[3]

In the context of climate change, especially regarding the AR6 IPCC[4] report, the term “model,” is often used as an abbreviation for a general circulation climate model.[5] Modern computer general circulation models have been around since the 1960s, and now are huge computer programs that can run for days or longer on powerful computers. However, climate modeling has been around for more than a century, well before computers were invented. Later in this report I will briefly discuss a 19th century greenhouse gas climate model developed and published by Svante Arrhenius.

Besides modeling climate change, AR6 contains descriptions of socio-economic models that attempt to predict the impact of selected climate changes on society and the economy. In a sense, AR6, just like the previous assessment reports, is a presentation of the results of the latest iteration of their scientific models of future climate and their models of the impact of possible future climates on humanity.

Introduction

Modern atmospheric general circulation computerized climate models were first introduced in the 1960s by Syukuro Manabe and colleagues.[6] These models, and their descendants can be useful, even though they are clearly oversimplifications of nature, and they are wrong[7] in many respects like all models.[8] It is a shame, but climate model results are often conflated with observations by the media and the public, when they are anything but.

Green Billionaires Press Hollywood to Promote Armageddon Climate Messages in Movies

by C. Morrison, Feb27, 2024 in TheDailySceptic


 

Green billionaires are pouring money into discreet campaigns to persuade Hollywood writers to catastrophise the climate in future film and television scripts. One of their main vehicles is Good Energy, which tells writers that showing anger, depression, grief or other emotion in relation to the climate crisis, “can only make characters more relatable”. Los Angeles-based Good Energy is funded by numerous billionaire foundations including Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Sierra Club and the Climate Emergency Fund; the latter operation is part-funded by Aileen Getty and is one of the paymasters of the Just Stop Oil pests.

Good Energy aims to weave climate alarm into all types of film-making, “especially” if it is not about climate. With the support of Bloomberg, it recently published ‘Good Energy – A Playbook for Screenwriting in the Age of Climate Change’. It claims the Playbook is “now the industry’s go-to guide to incorporating climate into any storyline or genre”. As with almost all green campaigning groups, Good Energy would not exist without the support of billionaire funding. These operations seek a supra-national collectivist Net Zero solution to a claimed climate emergency. Good Energy acknowledges it would not exist without this funding, adding, “as collaborators and champions, each has provided a unique contribution for which we are endlessly grateful”.

Susan Crockford: State of the Polar Bear Report 2023 (pdf)

by S. Crockford, 2023


Key Findings
* There were no reports from the Arctic in 2023 indicating polar bears were being harmed due to lack of summer sea ice habitat, in part because Arctic sea ice in summer has not declined since 2007. 
 
* Contrary to expectations, a study in Svalbard found a decrease in polar bears killed in defense of life or property over the last 40 years, despite profound declines in sea ice over the last two decades. 
 
* A survey of Southern Hudson Bay polar bears in 2021 showed an astonishing 30% increase over five years, which adds another 223 bears to the global total. 
 
* A concurrent survey of Western Hudson Bay polar bears in 2021 showed that numbers had not declined since 2011, which also means they have not declined since 2004. Movement of bears across boundaries with neighbouring subpopulations may account for the appearance of a decline, when none actually occurred. 
 
* The IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group has ignored a 2016 recommendation that the boundaries of three Hudson Bay subpopulations (Western HB, Southern HB, and Foxe Basin) be adjusted to account for genetic distinctiveness of bears inhabiting the Hudson Bay region; a similar boundary issue in the western Arctic between the Chukchi Sea, and the Southern and Northern Beaufort subpopulations, based on known movements of bears between regions, has been acknowledged since 2014 but has not yet been resolved. 
 
* The US Fish and Wildlife Service and the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group, in their 2023 reports, failed to officially acknowledge the new-found South-East Greenland population as the 20th subpopulation, despite undisputed evidence this is a genetically distinct and geographically isolated group. Numbers are estimated at 234 individuals.

After All the Media Hype, Wildfires Across Southern Europe Were Completely Normal in 2023

by C. Morrison , Feb25, 2024 in TheDailySceptic


Writing in the Daily Telegraph last July, Suzanne Moore reported that the “world is on fire – and we can’t ignore it any longer”. She was noting the usual outbreaks of summer wildfires in southern Europe and suggested a retreat by cautious holiday makers in Rhodes away from one conflagration was “what climate refugees look like”. The Guardian was in similar hysterical mode observing that the lesson from Greece was “the climate crisis is coming for us all”. Such was the level of Thermogeddon interest last summer it is curious that final figures for areas burnt during the year are missing from mainstream media. In the five largest southern European countries for which the EU provides separate data – Portugal, Spain, France, Italy and Greece – 2023 was only the 20th highest in the modern satellite burnt acreage record going back to 1980.

This is perhaps not surprising. Fire ‘weather’ is a potent tool in stoking up general climate anxiety and helps promote the need for a collectivist Net Zero political solution. The Guardian used video footage of tourists moving away from one wildfire last year to claim “survival mode” could easily pass for a “TV climate crisis awareness raising campaign”. An Agence France-Presse report in the Guardian quoted EU spokesman Balazs Ujvari as stating that fires are getting more severe. “If you look at the figures every year in the past years, we are seeing trends which are not necessarily favourable.”

Let us look at some of the figures, starting first with the graph below compiled by the investigative climate writer Paul Homewood.

Why Climate Scientists were Duped into Believing Rising CO2 will Harm Coral and Mollusks

by J. Steele, Feb 24, 2024 in WUWT


Coral build reefs by producing limestone, or calcium carbonate. The great diversity of shell building mollusks, like clams and oysters, also build their shells out of calcium carbonate.  So, scientists assumed that these organisms just pulled carbonate ions from the surrounding sea water and joined it with abundant calcium ions to make reefs and shells, a process referred to as “calcification”. Thus, many scientists then expressed their heart-felt concerns that more CO2 will reduce the ocean’s carbonate ions and thus stress coral reef building and mollusk shell building.

Indeed, the increasing absorption of human produced carbon dioxide by the oceans can very slightly lower pH. In other words, more CO2 increases the oceans’ concentration of H+ ions. It is also unassailable science that when CO2 enters the water, it interacts with water molecules to produce both H+ ions and bicarbonate ions.  However, those H+ ions can then interact with carbonate ions and convert them to also form bicarbonate ions and reduce the pool of available carbonate ions. So, NOAA and hundreds of internet websites falsely told the world that “Ocean acidification slows the rate at which coral reefs generate calcium carbonate, thus slowing the growth of coral skeletons.”

However, climate scientists were apparently very ignorant regards the physiology of reef building and shell making.  In order for charged ions to pass through an organism’s lipid membranes and enter its calcification chambers, a specialized channel or transporter is required. But for over a decade now, the search for carbonate transporters has failed to find any such transporters in any of these organisms. However, abundant bicarbonate transporters (green rectangles) have been found and deemed important for making reefs and shells.

Impacts and risks of “realistic” global warming projections for the 21st century

by N. Scafetta, Feb 2024, in GeoscienceFrontier


  • Highlights

    The IPCC AR6 assessment of likely impacts and risks by 21st-century climate changes is highly uncertain.

    • Most climate models, however, run too hot, and the SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios are unlikely.

    • New climate change projections for the 21st century were generated using best-performing climate models,

    • Empirical climate modeling of natural cycles, and calibration on lower troposphere temperature data.

    • Net-zero emission policies are not necessary because SSP2-4.5 is sufficient to limit climate change hazards to manageable levels

A Curious Paleo Puzzle

by W. Eschenbach, Feb 23, 2024 in WUWT


 

A final possibility, of course, is that the warming has little to do with CO2 and that the CO2 levels are a function of temperature and not the other way around …

I titled this post “A Curious Paleo Puzzle”. That’s the puzzle. How can an increase of 13 W/m2 in CO2 forcing cause an increase of 115 W/m2 of upwelling surface longwave radiation?

All suggestions welcome.

 

….

Observed humidity trends in dry regions contradict climate models

by Simpson et al., Dec 26, 2023 in PNAS


Significance

Water vapor in the atmosphere is expected to rise with warming because a warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture. However, over the last four decades, near-surface water vapor has not increased over arid and semi-arid regions. This is contrary to all climate model simulations in which it rises at a rate close to theoretical expectations, even over dry regions. This may indicate a major model misrepresentation of hydroclimate-related processes; models increase water vapor to satisfy the increased atmospheric demand, while this has not happened in reality. Given close links between water vapor and wildfire, ecosystem functioning, and temperature extremes, this issue must be resolved in order to provide more reliable climate projections for arid and semi-arid regions of the world.

Abstract

Arid and semi-arid regions of the world are particularly vulnerable to greenhouse gas–driven hydroclimate change. Climate models are our primary tool for projecting the future hydroclimate that society in these regions must adapt to, but here, we present a concerning discrepancy between observed and model-based historical hydroclimate trends. Over the arid/semi-arid regions of the world, the predominant signal in all model simulations is an increase in atmospheric water vapor, on average, over the last four decades, in association with the increased water vapor–holding capacity of a warmer atmosphere. In observations, this increase in atmospheric water vapor has not happened, suggesting that the availability of moisture to satisfy the increased atmospheric demand is lower in reality than in models in arid/semi-arid regions. This discrepancy is most clear in locations that are arid/semi-arid year round, but it is also apparent in more humid regions during the most arid months of the year. It indicates a major gap in our understanding and modeling capabilities which could have severe implications for hydroclimate projections, including fire hazard, moving forward.
 …
Also here (NotricksZone)

UK Met Office Fails to Retract False Claim of “More Intense” Storms Due to Climate Change

by C. Morrison, Feb 23, 2023 in WUWT


The Met Office is refusing to retract a claim made by a senior meteorologist on BBC Radio 5 Live that storms in the U.K. are becoming “more intense” due to climate change. This is despite admitting in Freedom of Information (FOI) documents that it had no evidence to back up the claim. The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) noted the “false” claim seriously misled the public and demanded a retraction. The Daily Sceptic covered the story last Thursday and has since contacted the Met Office on three occasions seeking a response. “False information of this kind does much to induce climate anxiety in the population and I am sure you would agree such errors should be corrected by any reputable organisation,” it was noted. No reply was received – no retraction has been forthcoming.

The storm claim was made by Met Office spokesman Clare Nasir on January 22nd and led to an FOI request for an explanation by the investigative journalist Paul Homewood. The Met Office replied that it was unable to answer the request due to the fact that the information “is not held”. Interestingly, the Met Office’s own 2022 climate report noted that the last two decades have seen fewer occurrences of maximum wind speeds in the 40, 50, 60 knot bands than previous decades. The Daily Sceptic report went viral on social media with almost 3,000 retweets on X, while GWPF’s demand for retraction was covered by the Scottish Daily Express.

The lack of action by the state-funded Met Office is very interesting. Extreme weather is now the major go-to explanation for the opinion that humans largely control the climate, despite a general lack of scientific evidence. Backing away from this ‘settled’ narrative risks damaging a potent tool nudging populations across the world towards the collectivist Net Zero political project. Mainstream media usually take care to fudge their reporting of any direct link, using phrases such as ‘scientists say’ and sprinkling words ‘could’ and ‘might’ in the copy. The mistake Nasir made was to forget this basic requirement of broadcast fearmongering.

There appears to be an arrogance around the Met Office, an arrogance it shares with many other organisations and scientists promoting Net Zero …

….

Reviewing Elon Musk and His Position on the Climate ‘Crisis’

by Climate Change and Music, Feb 19, 2024 OPEN LETTER


GREAT SYNTHESIS

With respect to “Climate Change”, this website and my contribution to the discussion focuses on the data. I have a standing request/challenge to anyone (scientist or not) to provide an empirical Temperature/CO2 data set that shows CO2 driving the climate on any statistically significant historical time scale. Scientific proof requires empirical data. The Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) theory does not have that empirical data (because that data does not exist).

The Great Barrier Reef could Die This Year?

by E. Worrall, Feb18, 2024 in WUWT


 

The Great Barrier Reef is in no danger of dying, at most it will change location a little. The reef is composed of an organism which has survived for at least 200 million years, through unimaginably catastrophic global extinction events and disasters, including the asteroid which killed the dinosaurs.

The reason that coral is so good at surviving great upheavals is that while adult coral is immobile, coral spawn is immensely mobile.

Every so often corals spawn. Corals produce immense clouds of microscopic eggs and sperms, which germinate into highly mobile microscopic coral larvae which seek out new places to colonise.

The Great Barrier Reef itself has moved location countless times over the millennia, the reef has only been at its current location for a few thousand years. Some Australian shorelines are composed of coral which lived thousands of years ago, during the Holocene Optimum, when the sea level was significantly higher than today. The Great Barrier Reef had and has no trouble changing location when climate change impacts sea conditions, such as when the world cooled after the end of the Holocene Optimum, and the sea waters retreated to today’s level.

And in fact, Australian coral coverage hit a record high a record high in 2022 – as an organism which is responsive to conditions, coral cover fluctuates wildly when conditions change.

Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions

by M. Ebell & S.J. Milloy, 18 Sep 2019 in CompetitiveEnterpriseInstitute


Thanks go to Tony Heller, who first collected many of these news clips and posted them on RealClimateScience

SUMMARY

Modern doomsayers have been predicting climate and environmental disaster since the 1960s. They continue to do so today.

None of the apocalyptic predictions with due dates as of today have come true.

What follows is a collection of notably wild predictions from notable people in government and science.

More than merely spotlighting the failed predictions, this collection shows that the makers of failed apocalyptic predictions often are individuals holding respected positions in government and science.

While such predictions have been and continue to be enthusiastically reported by a media eager for sensational headlines, the failures are typically not revisited.

Chile Forest Fires–Climate Change?

by P. Homewood, Feb 15, 2024 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat


The wildfire is the worst disaster to hit Chile for more than a decade. At least 131 people have died, with a further 370 still missing. The hillside neighbourhoods it ripped through, destroying more 15,000 homes, are now a scorched wasteland of broken cement and steel.

Firestorms of this magnitude are a terrifying phenomenon, moving so fast and with such energy that they can kill people hundreds of metres away through radiant heat alone. But it is not unique.

Hawaii, California, France, Portugal, Canada, Greece and Australia have all been hit in recent years. In July 2022, when temperatures reached 40C for the first time in the UK, the residents of Wennington in east London witnessed nearly 20 houses burn down in a matter of minutes. The spark was a compost heap that had spontaneously combusted.

Experts are now asking: What’s causing these infernos? And is there anything that can be done to stop them?

Chile’s forest fire, like most, was preceded by unusually high temperatures, low humidity, and strong winds.

Arctic “Just-So Stories”: Bad Science by Climate Alarmists

by J. Steele, Feb 14, 2024 in WUWT


The Arctic Ocean was nick-named the “upside down Ocean” by Fridtjof Nansen. Nansen was a famous Norwegian zoologists, oceanographer, and Arctic explorer as well as winner of the 1922 Nobel Peace Prize. During his failed expedition to reach the North Pole, his boat, the Fram, got frozen in Arctic sea ice but eventually was exported by Arctic currents, along with Arctic sea ice, into the Atlantic through what is now named the Fram Strait.

Nansen named the Arctic Ocean the “upside down ocean” because contrary to other oceans, the surface waters are the coldest, while between 100 and 900-meters depths the ocean is warmer due to inflows and storage of warm salty Atlantic waters. Sea ice cover prevents the ventilation of that stored heat. However, increases in open water allows more heat ventilation which has raised Arctic air temperatures 2 to 7 times faster than the global average. Open waters have been increasing due to changes in wind direction and currents. Open water is not proof of melting.

NASA estimates that globally added CO2 has increased downward infrared and added “a little over 0.8 Watts per square meter” of energy which their Just So stories claim melted sea ice. But researchers (e.g. Kim 2019) have reported that over open water more winter heat, about 2 Watts per meter squared, is being ventilated heat away more than absorbed. That suggests radiative cooling!

La géologie, une science plus que passionnante … et diverse