by S. Hsiang et al., June 2017, Science
Estimates of climate change damage are central to the design of climate policies. Here, we develop a flexible architecture for computing damages that integrates climate science, econometric analyses, and process models. We use this approach to construct spatially explicit, probabilistic, and empirically derived estimates of economic damage in the United States from climate change.
by Indur M. Golkany, Ph.D., 2009, in J. of America. Phys.&Surgeons
Proponents of drastic greenhouse gas controls claim that human greenhouse gas emissions cause global warming, which then exacerbates the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, including extreme heat, droughts, floods, and storms such as hurricanes and cyclones.
In fact, even though reporting of such events is more complete than in the past, morbidity and mortality attributed to them has declined globally by 93%–98% since the 1920s
by Paul Homewood, June 30, 2017
For years, RSS have been an embarrassment to the climate establishment. Their satellite data has consistently shown the pause in global temperatures since 1998, which so many scientists have attempted to explain.
At the same time, the surface datasets of GISS, NOAA and HADCRUT have diverged, with the help of adjustments, to show much greater warming.
The pressure on RSS to conform has been immense, and now the inevitable has happened. Highly conveniently they have found huge errors in their previous version, and have now adjusted to a new version, v4, which miraculously finds that global warming has continued unabated after all!
by Dennis T. Avery, June 30, 2017 in ClimateChangeDispatch
Statistician Bjorn Lomborg had already pointed out that the Paris CO2 emission promises would cost $100 trillion dollars that no one has, and make only a 0.05-degree difference in Earth’s 2100 AD temperature. Others say perhaps a 0.2 degree C (0.3 degrees F) difference, and even that would hold only in the highly unlikely event that all parties actually kept their voluntary pledges.
by Kenneth Richard, June 29, 2017 in NoTricksZone
For the last 3 years, human CO2 emissions rates have not risen. In fact, according to the IEA, we burned slightly more fossil fuels in 2014 than we did in both 2015 and 2016.
Despite the lack of growth – even slight decline – in human emissions rates during 2014 – 2016, the atmospheric CO2 parts per million (ppm) concentration grew rapidly – by more than 8 ppm (397 ppm to 405 ppm).
by David Whitehouse, June 29, 2017
Between the start of 1997 and the end of 2014, average global surface temperature stalled. This 18-year period is known as the global warming pause, also sometimes referred to as the global warming hiatus. The rise in global temperatures that alarmed climate campaigners in the 1990s had slowed so much that the trend was no longer statistically significant. It has been the subject of much research and debate in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
by Paul Homewood, June 29, 2017
Sea level alarmists often claim that the rate of sea level rise is increasing. They need to do this to convince the public that the innocuous 7” or so of sea level rise experienced in the 20thC is suddenly going to turn into meters by 2100.
See also here
by Y. Xie, J. Huang and Y. Liu, June 26, 2017 in CO2Science
One of the many conundrums facing climate alarmists — who predict that dangerous future global warming will result from increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO2 — is the existence of the aptly-named “warming hiatus.” Also referred to as the “warming pause,” this phenomenon describes a nearly two-decade-long leveling off of global temperatures despite a ten percent increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration since 1998. The significance of these observations resides in the fact that all climate models project that temperatures should not be levelling off, but should be increasing (despite interannual variability) in direct consequence of the ongoing rise in atmospheric CO2.
by Michel de Rougemont, June 28, 2017 in WUWT
We hear that global warming is highly dependent on the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, this gas that is required to sustain life on Earth and that is also emitted when burning flammable stuff, such as wood, coal, mineral and organic oils, or methane.
If you are told “this depends on that”, you are invited to examine available data observed over time to draw a representation of this on the y-axis vs. that on the x-axis.
So, in all logic, you should be interested in a representation of the temperature evolution in dependence of the atmospheric CO2 concentration.
Yes, you should, but, looking hard into the latest IPCC Report (the fifth of Working Group I, to be precise), no diagram of that sort can be found among its 1535 pages.
by Anthony Watts, June 27, 2017 in WUWT
Global temperatures have generally settled to +0.26°C compared to 1981-2010 climatology continuing downward glide thru 2017 (black line).
by E.M. Smith, June 26, 2017
Until cloud and precipitation data are adequate AND accounted for properly AND the error bands are low enough to cover 1/10 degree increments, we can’t say there is ANY effect from CO2 on temperature. It is at most a conjecture, and not a very good one. You can not ignore the major driver of changes of temperatures (as shown in the above graph) and then attribute temperature changes to something else by supposition.
by Cliff Mass, June 17, 2017
Should scientists and the media exaggerate the current and future impact of human-forced global warming to encourage people “to do the right thing”?
A number of scientists and media folks believe the answer is yes.
For me, the answer is an emphatic no, for reasons I will explain below. Let’s consider some of the arguments for and against and you can decide for yourself
by David Whitehouse, Financial Post, June 22, 2017
Some are adamant that the “hiatus” does not and never has existed, and will never change their minds. But the evidence is irrefutable. As a large number of influential climate scientists have just said in the journal Nature Geoscience, since the turn of the century there has been a substantial slowdown in warming that computer climate models did not predict or can explain. In fact, such models predict a warming twice that observed.
by P. Gosselin from F. Bosse and F. Vahrenholt, June 18, 2017
In May the sun was very quiet as sunspot number was a mere 18.8, which is only 36% of what is typical for the month this far into the cycle. Seven days saw no sunspot activity at all.
The following chart shows the current cycle, Solar Cycle 24 (red), compared to the mean of the previous cycles (blue) and the similarly behaving SC 5 (black).
It’s clear that the current cycle is significantly weaker than the mean and far weaker than the cycles we saw throughout most of the warming 20th century.
by N.-A. Mörner, June 2017, in J. Coastal Research
Fortunately, as revealed in a number of recent studies, proof of such an acceleration of sea level rise remains elusive (see the many reviews we have posted on this topic under the subheading of Sea Level here). The latest work to demonstrate that there is nothing unusual, unnatural or unprecedented about current rates of sea level rise comes from a paper written by sea level expert Nils-Axel Mörner (Mörner, 2017) and published in the Journal of Coastal Research.
by Ernst-Georg Beck, Discussion paper, May 2008
Since the 19th century, use of chemical methods has provided reliable atmospheric CO2 gas analyses results that have been obtained predominantly from the northern hemisphere. These direct chemical analyses results provide information on past atmospheric CO2 concentrations in addition to the modern direct atmospheric CO2 measurements since 1958 and the indirect reconstructions of past atmospheric CO2 from ice cores. Comprehensive literature indicates that the chemical methods have provided a systematic accuracy within ± 3 Vol% since 1857.
by Willis Eschenbach, June 24, in WUWT
Now, people often discuss procedures like “removing the effects of the El Nino from the global temperature record”. What they mean is that they have noted the similarity between the temperature of the NINO3.4 region and the global temperature. Figure 1 shows that relationship as seen in the CERES data.
by Lauren Lipuma, June 23, 2017, in WUWT
In a new study, scientists puzzled by the sudden ice loss matched satellite images of Antarctica with weather data from the second half of 2016 to figure out what caused so much of the ice to melt. They found that a series of remarkable storms during September, October and November brought warm air and strong winds from the north that melted 75,000 square kilometers (30,000 square miles) of ice per day. That’s like losing a South Carolina-sized chunk of ice every 24 hours.
in Climato-Réalistes, 24 mai 2017
Richard Lindzen a donné mardi 23 mai 2017 à l’ESCPI (École supérieure de physique et de chimie industrielles de la ville de Paris) une conférence intitulée « Les origines et les bases de l’alarmisme climatique » .
Au cours de cette conférence le Professeur Richard Lindzen montre que les affirmations sur le changement climatique sont très exagérées et inutilement alarmistes.
Cette conférence est la réplique de celle qui avait été donnée aux Etats-Unis le 25 avril 2017 sous l’intitulé : « Thoughts on the Public Discourse over Climate Change ».
Le texte en français de cette conférence (traduction de Camille Veyres) est accessible ici.
by ‘Uskek’ , 16 juin 2017, in Climato-Réalistes
Les mesures satellitaires prétendent mesurer l’élévation du niveau de la mer avec une précision millimétrique. Or La précision des radars altimétriques s’exprime en centimètres. Comment dans ces conditions parvient-on à mesurer un taux d’élévation du niveau de la mer de 3,4 mm par an sur la période 1993-2015 ?
by B.D. Santer et al., June19, 2017 in Nature Geoscience
We conclude that model overestimation of tropospheric warming in the early twenty-first century is partly due to systematic deficiencies in some of the post-2000 external forcings used in the model simulations.
by Reinformation.TV, 21 juin 2017
Un papier scientifique publié cette semaine par Nature Geoscience du groupe « Nature », peu suspect de complaisance à l’égard des climatoceptiques, constate que le réchauffement climatique a été surestimé par les modèles de prédiction qui justifient l’action concertée contre les émissions de gaz à effet de serre. L’article a la particularité d’avoir pour auteur principal Ben Santer, l’un des pionniers du mouvement qui accuse l’activité humaine du réchauffement climatique.
by Ken Gregory in Friends of Science, June 22, 2017
Pdf version available here
A website called ‘Skeptical Science.com’ is popular among climate alarmists. The website alleges to refute claims by climate skeptics that global warming is not a crisis. The website features a list of 10 “Most Used Climate Myths” by climate skeptics at the top left part of the webpage. I review and rebut each rebuttal of the 10 alleged myths.
by Leo Goldstein, June19, 2017 in WUWT
When something pretending to be a science cannot adequately define a quantity for its central subject, this something is inarguably a pseudo-science. This is certainly the case in the self-professed “climate science.” It proposes the hypothesis of a dangerously warming climate, but does it define a meaningful climatic temperature that can be robustly calculated from the observations at the current time? To the extent that it does define climatic temperature (meaningfully or not), does it pay much attention to this quantity? The answer to both these questions is a resounding NO.
by Kip Hansen, June 19, 2017 in WUWT
As both the word and the concept “average” are subject to a great deal of confusion and misunderstanding in the general public and both word and concept have seen an overwhelming amount of “loose usage” even in scientific circles, not excluding peer-reviewed journal articles and scientific press releases, I gave a refresher on Averages in Part 1 of this series. If your maths or science background is near the great American average, I suggest you take a quick look at the primer in Part 1 before reading here.
