Archives de catégorie : better to know…?

better to know...?, climate-debate

Robust evidence for reversal of the trend in aerosol effective climate forcing

by J. Quass et al., 2022 in EurGeoscUnion

Abstract

Anthropogenic aerosols exert a cooling influence that offsets part of the greenhouse gas warming. Due to their short tropospheric lifetime of only several days, the aerosol forcing responds quickly to emissions. Here, we present and discuss the evolution of the aerosol forcing since 2000. There are multiple lines of evidence that allow us to robustly conclude that the anthropogenic aerosol effective radiative forcing (ERF) – both aerosol–radiation interactions (ERFari) and aerosol–cloud interactions (ERFaci) – has become less negative globally, i.e. the trend in aerosol effective radiative forcing changed sign from negative to positive. Bottom-up inventories show that anthropogenic primary aerosol and aerosol precursor emissions declined in most regions of the world; observations related to aerosol burden show declining trends, in particular of the fine-mode particles that make up most of the anthropogenic aerosols; satellite retrievals of cloud droplet numbers show trends in regions with aerosol declines that are consistent with these in sign, as do observations of top-of-atmosphere radiation. Climate model results, including a revised set that is constrained by observations of the ocean heat content evolution show a consistent sign and magnitude for a positive forcing relative to the year 2000 due to reduced aerosol effects. This reduction leads to an acceleration of the forcing of climate change, i.e. an increase in forcing by 0.1 to 0.3 W m−2, up to 12 % of the total climate forcing in 2019 compared to 1750 according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Recycling Eco-Myths Is the Existential Threat

by  P. Zane, Nov 17, 2023 in WUWT

The recycling myth – Save the planet by separating paper and plastic! – is a foundational falsity of the green movement.

By promising a relatively simple solution to an alleged problem, it has enabled the left to control behavior through a made-up morality that stigmatized dissent – Only bad people refuse to recycle.

Like most progressive interventions – from welfare policies that destroyed families while increasing dependency, to drug use reforms that have filled city streets with desperate addicts – recycling plans that sound good on paper (and plastic) have continuously collided with reality so that even liberal outlets such as the New York Times (“Your Recycling Gets Recycled, Right? Maybe, or Maybe Not”), NPR(“Recycling plastic is practically impossible — and the problem is getting worse”) and the Atlantic magazine (“Plastic Recycling Doesn’t Work and Will Never Work”) have finally admitted its failures.

The same dynamic is now at work regrading a far more significant green fantasy: the left’s push to decarbonize the U.S. and other Western industrial economies during the next few decades and attain an eco-purity calculus known as Net Zero. While brandishing the moral cudgel with full force – President Biden describes climate change as “an existential crisis,” i.e., every person and puppy will die if we don’t submit to his agenda – the left also suggests the transition will be easy-peasy: Just build some windmills, install some solar panels, and swap out your car, stove, and lightbulbs for cleaner and cheaper alternatives.

Though much of the cheerleading media downplays this fact, it is already clear that Biden’s enormously expensive, massively disruptive goal is a pipe dream. In a recent series of articles, my colleagues at RealClearInvestigations have reported on several of the seemingly intractable problems that the administration and its eco-allies are trying to wish away.

The dishonesty begins with the engine of the green economy – the vast array of wind and solar farms that must be constructed to replace the coal and gas facilities that power our economy. James Varney reported for RCI that the Department of Energy’s official line is that the installations required to meet Biden’s goal of “100% clean electricity” by 2035 will require “less than one-half of one percent of the contiguous U.S. land area” – or roughly 15,000 of the lower 48’s roughly 3 million square miles. However, Varney noted, “the government report that furnished those estimates also notes that the wind farm footprint alone could require an expanse nine times as large: 134,000 square miles. That is equivalent to the land mass of Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky combined – plus all of New England.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

While Media Obsess About Some Warmth, Globe Seeing Plenty Of Unusual Cold Events

by P. Gosselin, Nov 17, 2023 in WUWT

Surface temperatures measured where people live show there’s as much cold as there ‘s warmth, see temperature.global.com.

Christian Freuer’s Cold Report (EIKE)

and Electroverse.com

Snowpack extent in US reaches record levels!

America’s first Arctic air blast of the season broke hundreds of low temperature records and led to the largest snowpack extent there in early November in NOAA records.

A high snowpack blanketed the Rocky Mountains, northern Plains, Great Lakes and northern New England, resulting in 17.9% of the Lower 48 under a blanket of snow as the calendar turned to November – a new record in the books dating back to 2003.

Many places recorded their snowiest Halloweens ever.

At 22 inches, Muskegon, MI, not only recorded the snowiest Halloween ever, but also the snowiest October day and month. Glasgow, MT, recorded the snowiest start to the season with 36 inches.

The cold broke hundreds of low temperature records across the country, from Texas to Maine, dropping the average temperature in the Lower 48 to -0.5°C – more than 5 degrees Celsius below normal.

Historic November cold grips Argentina, Australia

A late cold spell has hit large parts of South America, especially Argentina. The country recorded the lowest November temperatures since records began.

A number of records for highs and lows have fallen. New lows include the 0.1°C at Córdoba Airport, which broke the record of 2°C set on November 4, 1992, the 1.6°C in Chamical, which broke the record of 4.5°C set on November 9, 2010, and the 2.8°C in Mendova, which beat the 3.2°C set in 1992.

New lows include Gualeguaychú’s 13.8°C, which broke the old record set in 1992, and Paraná’s 13.5°C, which beat the record set in 1936.

The cold was severe, up to 24 degrees Celsius below normal, and it was also widespread, affecting most of Argentina:

…

better to know...?

The Climatic Odyssey of Homo sapiens

by A. Préat, Nov 3, 2023 in ScienceClimatEnergie

 

At a time of climate change (or disruption for some), it’s high time to read Olivier Postel- Vinay’s excellent French book, ‘Sapiens and the climate, a turbulent history’ (original in French: ‘Sapiens et le climat, une histoire bien chahutée (2022)’, which looks at the climate changes our species has undergone since Homo became sapiens, i.e. over the past 233,000 years. What does this book tell us?

It shows us that our species has been confronted throughout its history and evolution with brutal climatic changes of durations and intensities that have no comparison with those of our own time.

This unusually meticulous essay is supported by well-documented historical accounts and facts, supplemented wherever possible by scientific data drawn mainly from archaeology, biology, chemistry, physics, geography, and geology. This perspective paints a detailed picture of the climatic changes faced by the first humans (hunter-gatherers), then by the first civilizations and finally by our modern societies.

See the .pdf The Climatic Odyssey of Homo sapiens

better to know...?, climate-debate

Shellenberger: Why Everything They’ve Said About The Environment Is Wrong

by M. Schellenberger, Nov 1, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

By now, almost everyone knows the conventional wisdom: climate change is an existential threat to human civilization.

Fires, floods, and hurricanes are worsening; the coral on the Great Barrier Reef is dying; we’re in a Sixth Mass Extinction; the only way to turn things around is with inexpensive renewables, and no longer eating meat; and we don’t need nuclear energy, which is too dangerous. [emphasis, links added]

It’s a powerful story, one that has motivated millions of people to march in the streets and governments to spend $1 trillion annually on green energy.

There’s only one problem with it: practically everything you’ve heard about climate change is wrong.Here’s a set of facts you won’t read in The New York Times:

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Mark Lynas ‘99% Consensus’ on Climate Change – Busted in Peer Review.

by  A. Watts, Nov 1, 2023 in WUWT

My name is Yonatan Dubi, I am a professor of chemistry and physics at Ben Gurion University, Israel. I am also one of Israel’s leading advocates for rational environmentalism and climate realism. Together with a few colleagues we have conducted a very nice research, detailing and quantifying the flaws in the famous consensus study by Lynas et al, which (falsely) claimed the ridiculous 99% consensus. After a year long journey, our paper was finally published in the peer reviewed journal Climate, the link is https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/11/11/215.

…

…

better to know...?, sciences-general

Scientific Method Restored to Science Education in North Carolina

by G. Wrightstone, Oct 27, 2023 in CO2Coalition

As a physicist, John Droz holds in high regard the Scientific Method, a 400-year-old approach to investigating reality.

Rooted in Isaac Newton’s work, which included creation of the calculus, the Scientific Method has long underpinned examination of the physical world and technological advancement.

Image: CK-12 Foundation, via Wikimedia Commons // CC BY-SA 3.0

 

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Do Human Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cause Significant Climate Change?

by F. Menton, Oct 25, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

It’s by far the most important scientific question of our age: Do human emissions of CO2 and other such “greenhouse gases” cause significant global warming, aka “climate change”?

Based on the belief that an affirmative answer to that question is a universally accepted truth, our government has embarked on a multi-trillion dollar campaign to transform our economy by, among other things, eliminating hydrocarbon fuels from electricity generation (without any demonstrated workable plan for the replacement), outlawing the kinds of vehicles we currently drive, suppressing fossil fuel extraction, banning pipeline construction, making all your appliances work less well, and much more. [emphasis, links added]

Express any doubt about the causal connection between human activities and climate change, and you could very well get labeled as a “climate denier,” fired from your academic job, demonetized by Google or Facebook, or even completely ostracized from polite society.

But is there actually any real proof of the proposition at issue? In fact, there is not.

I had two important posts on this subject back in 2021: one from January 2, titled: “Causation Of Climate Change, And The Scientific Method,” and the other from October 28, titled: “ ‘The Climate Is Changing And Human Activities Are The Cause’: How, Exactly, Do We Know That?”

…

See also: To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?

better to know...?, climate-debate

Do The Met Office Know What Extreme Weather Really Looks Like?

by P. Homewood, Oct 5, 2023 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

I have a prediction!

At the end of the year, the Met Office’s State of the Climate report will declare 2023 as a “Year of Extremes”.

It will highlight September as a particularly extreme month, with a heatwave (which peaked at temperatures several degrees lower than in 1906 and 1911); a monthly temperature no higher than in September 2006; and Storm Agnes.

I doubt whether anybody with any experience would find anything extreme about the weather last month. On the contrary, they will all be able to recall genuinely extreme autumn weather in the past.

For example, let;s look back to the 1960s, courtesy of Weatherweb:

….

better to know...?, climate-debate

Climate Alarmists’ New Normal: Catastrophizing Every Weather Event

by Dr. M.  Wielicki, Oct 2, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Catastrophizing the weather…

“Catastrophizing” the weather refers to the exaggerated portrayal or emphasis on the severity, frequency, or implications of weather events beyond what scientific data and historical context might suggest.

In essence, it involves making a weather event seem more disastrous or exceptional than it truly is. [emphasis, links added]

Over time, consistent exaggeration can erode public trust in weather forecasts and warnings. If people believe that threats are frequently overblown, they may become complacent and fail to take necessary precautions during genuinely severe events.

If authorities act on exaggerated weather forecasts, it could lead to the unnecessary allocation of resources, diverting them from regions or times where they might be genuinely needed.

The constant exposure to exaggerated disaster threats can induce unnecessary fear and anxiety among the public, potentially affecting mental well-being.

If every weather event is portrayed as a catastrophe, it becomes challenging for the public to discern which events pose genuine threats. This can dilute the urgency of actual severe weather warnings.

In the context of climate change, while it’s important to communicate the real risks associated with a warming planet, it’s equally essential to avoid undue alarmism.

Balanced, accurate communication ensures that the public remains informed, however, that is not what we commonly see.

For example, the recent rains in NYC have been noted as evidence of significant climatic shifts.

Meet The Alarmists:

…

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

How ‘Preapproved Narratives’ Have Corrupted Science

by A. Finley, Oct 2, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Scientists were aghast last month when Patrick Brown, climate director at the Breakthrough Institute in Berkeley, Calif., acknowledged that he’d censored one of his studies to increase his odds of getting published.

Credit to him for being honest about something his peers also do but are loath to admit. [emphasis, links added]

In an essay for the Free Press, Mr. Brown explained that he omitted “key aspects other than climate change” from a paper on California wildfires because such details would “dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell.”

Editors of scientific journals, he wrote, “have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives.”

Nature’s editor, Magdalena Skipper, denied that the journal has “a preferred narrative.” No doubt the editors at the New York Times and ProPublica would say the same of their own pages.

Mr. Brown’s criticisms aren’t new. In 2005 Stanford epidemiologist John Ioannidis wrote an essay titled “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.”

He contended that scientists “may be prejudiced purely because of their belief in a scientific theory or commitment to their own findings.”

“The greater the financial and other interests and prejudices in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings are to be true,” Dr. Ioannidis argued.

“Many otherwise seemingly independent, university-based studies may be conducted for no other reason than to give physicians and researchers qualifications for promotion or tenure.”

In addition, many scientists use the peer-review process to suppress findings that challenge their own beliefs, which perpetuates “false dogma.”

As Dr. Ioannidis explained, the more scientists there are in a field, the more competition there is to get published and the more likely they are to produce “impressive ‘positive’ results” and “extreme research claims.” …snip…

The peer-review process is supposed to flag problems in studies that get submitted to journals. But as Dr. Ioannidis explained in a Sept. 22 JAMA editorial, the process is failing:

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Critical Examination of Hurricane Intensification Predictions

by J. Steele, Oct 1, 2023 in WUWT

Why climate models not yet worth their salt!

As all hurricane researchers lament, model predictions of when and where hurricanes will intensify, have not improved much in the past 20 years. As recently as the early 2010s, weather model forecasts failed to predict 88 percent of rapidly intensifying tropical storms. Nonetheless National Public Radio (NPR) has ranted that hurricanes are “intensifying more quickly, turning from less-serious storms to very strong ones in hours or days. Superheated ocean waters hold a lot of extra energy, and a growing storm can draw from that enormous pool.” But such “superheated water” is not widespread as rising CO2 narratives suggest, but found only in very limited regions and usually associated with “barrier layers”.

Hurricanes intensify as they draw “superheated” subsurface waters  of 65.5°F or higher. However, when a hurricane’s suction pulls up cooler subsurface waters, the hurricane weakens. This negative feedback naturally limits the intensity of all hurricanes. In the upper panel of the attached graphic, Arnand (2023) illustrates where thin barrier layer exists, hurricane intensity hovers around Category 1. In contrast, where thick barrier layers form, cooler deep waters are prevented from reaching the surface, and instead allow superheated sub-surface waters to cause rapid intensification.

Denser fluids don’t naturally rise above less dense fluids! Barrier layer formation happens wherever freshwater overlays dense salty waters. Although solar heating would normally make subsurface waters less dense and rise to the surface, layers with higher saltiness makes the water more dense which inhibits warm convection. That traps and intensifies the subsurface heat, enabling hurricanes to intensify to Category 5.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

THE TRUTH ABOUT WEATHER EXTREMES What the Past Tells Us

by Alexander, Sep 2023 , in GWPF

Executive summary

This report refutes the popular but mistaken belief that today’s weather extremes are more common and more intense because of climate change, by examining the history of extreme weather events over the past century or so. Drawing on newspaper archives, the report presents multiple examples of past extremes that matched or exceeded anything experienced in the present-day world. That so many people are unaware of this shows that collective memories of extreme weather are short-lived.

Heatwaves of the last few decades pale in comparison to those of the 1930s – a period whose importance is frequently downplayed by the media and environmental activists. The evidence shows that the record heat of the 1930s was not confined to the US Dust Bowl, but extended throughout much of North America, as well as other countries such as France, India and Australia.

Major floods today are no more common nor deadly or disruptive than any of the thousands of floods in the past, despite heavier precipitation in a warming world (which has increased flash flooding). Many of the world’s countries regularly experience major floods, especially China, India and Pakistan.

Severe droughts have been a continuing feature of the earth’s climate for millennia, despite the brouhaha in the mainstream media over the extended drought in Europe during the summer of 2022. Not only was the European drought not unprecedented, but there have been numerous longer and drier droughts throughout history, including during the past century.

Hurricanes overall actually show a decreasing trend around the globe, and the frequency of landfalling hurricanes has not changed for at least 50 years. The deadliest US hurricane in record- ed history, which killed an estimated 8,000 to 12,000 people, struck Galveston, Texas over 100 years ago in 1900.

Likewise, there is no evidence that climate change is causing tornadoes to become more frequent and stronger. The annual number of strong (EF3 or greater) US tornadoes has in fact declined dramatically over the last 72 years, and there are ample examples of past tornadoes just as or more violent and deadly than today’s.

Wildfires are not increasing either. On the contrary, the area burned annually is diminishing in most countries. Although wildfires can be exacerbated by other weather extremes such as heatwaves and droughts, those extremes are not on the rise as stated above.

The perception that extreme weather events are increasing in frequency and severity is primarily a consequence of modern technology – the Internet and smart phones – which have revolutionised communication and made us much more aware of such disasters than we were 50 or 100 years ago. The misperception has only been amplified by the mainstream media, eager to promote the latest climate scare. And as psychologists know, constant repetition of a false belief can, over time, create the illusion of truth. But history tells a different story.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Climate Emergency Not Supported by Data, Leading Italian Scientists Say

by C. Morrison, Sep 15, 2022 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Four leading Italian scientists have undertaken a major review of historical climate trends and concluded that declaring a ‘climate emergency’ is not supported by the data.

Reviewing data from a wide range of weather phenomena, they say a ‘climate crisis’ of the kind people are becoming alarmed about “is not evident yet”. [bold, links added]

The scientists suggest that rather than burdening our children with anxiety about climate change, we should encourage them to think about issues like energy, food, and health and the challenges in each area, with a more “objective and constructive spirit” and not waste limited resources on “costly and ineffective solutions.”

During the course of their work, the scientists found that rainfall intensity and frequency are stationary in many parts of the world.

Tropical hurricanes and cyclones show little change over the long term, and the same is true of U.S. tornadoes. Other meteorological categories including natural disasters, floods, droughts, and ecosystem productivity show no “clear positive trend of extreme events.”

Regarding ecosystems, the scientists note a considerable “greening” of global plant biomass in recent decades caused by higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Satellite data show “greening” trends over most of the planet, increasing food yields and pushing back deserts.

The four scientists are all highly qualified and include physics adjunct professor Gianluca Alimonti, agro-meteorologist Luigi Mariani, and physics professors Franco Prodi and Renato Angelo Ricci. The last two are signatories to the rapidly growing ‘World Climate Declaration’.

This petition states that there is no climate emergency and calls for climate science to be more scientific. It also calls for the liberation from the “naïve belief in immature climate models.” In the future, it says, “climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.”

‘Extreme’ weather events attributed by climate models – somehow – to anthropogenic global warming are now the main staple of the climate alarmist industry.

As the Daily Sceptic reported on Monday, Sir David Attenborough used a U.K. Met Office model forecast in the first episode of Frozen Planet II to claim that summer Arctic sea ice could be gone within 12 years.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

17 years of near-zero trend in September sea ice demolishes claim that more CO2 means less sea ice

by Polar Bear Science, Sep  23, 2023

If the hottest year ever can’t precipitate ‘ice-free’ conditions in September, what’s it going to take? Arctic sea ice failed to nose-dive again this year, undoubtedly disappointing expects who have been anticipating a ‘death-spiral’ decline for ages. Arctic sea ice hit its seasonal low sometime around mid-September this year and although the precise value hasn’t been published, the average September ice coverage will likely be about 4.2 mkm2 once it gets announced in early October.

This means we have now had 17 years of a near-zero trend for September sea ice, extending the nearly-flat trend NSIDC sea ice experts acknowledged four years ago. This surely busts a huge hole in the prevailing concept that more atmospheric CO2 causes less summer sea ice. Note that CO2 levels measured in August 2023 were 419.7 parts per million (ppm), compared to 382.2 in August 2007, a rise of 37.5ppm with no corresponding decline in summer sea ice (and vs. 314.2 ppm in 1960). Measured in metric tons, CO2 emissions due to fossil fuels rose from 31.1 billion in 2007 to 37.1 billion in 2021 (last year of data), again with no corresponding decline in summer sea ice.

Background

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

New Paper Claims Antarctica Had The ‘Most Intense Heat Wave Ever Recorded’. It Didn’t

by P. Gosselin, Sep 27, 2023 in ClimatChangeDispatch

On September 24th, 2023, Kasha Patel, a writer for The Washington Post (WaPo) created a story that is likely in the top 10 most false and egregious climate scare stories ever published.

Titled, “Scientists found the most intense heat wave ever recorded — in Antarctica,” the story isn’t just false, it is doubly so because the research paper it is based on is also seriously flawed. [emphasis, links added]

In this case, peer review at Geophysical Research Letters (GRL) failed to catch and correct the most basic abuse of the definition of a “heat wave.”

The leading paragraph of the WaPo story said:

In March 2022, temperatures near the eastern coast of Antarctica spiked 70 degrees Fahrenheit (39 degrees Celsius) above normal — making it the most intense recorded heat wave to occur anywhere on Earth, according to a recent study.

At the time, researchers on-site were wearing shorts and some even removed their shirts to bask in the (relative) warmth. Scientists elsewhere said such a high in that region of the world was unthinkable.

WaPo also provided a normal temperature, for reference with some “unbelievability” from the lead author of the paper.

Temperatures in March, marking a change into autumn on the continent, are typically around minus -54 degrees Celsius on the east coast near…Dome C. On March 18, 2022, temperatures peaked to minus -10 degrees Celsius. That’s warmer than even the hottest temperature recorded during the summer months in that region — “that in itself is pretty unbelievable,” said Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Washington.

First, it is important to point out that the so-called “heat wave” really wasn’t warm at all; the shorts and shirt removal were completely for show, rather than science.

Since most people in the United States use the Fahrenheit temperature scale, which isn’t mentioned at all in the WaPo article citing the actual high temperature recorded, it was easy for reporter Kasha Patel to sneak by the idea that it was actually warm at the time.

-10 Celsius is actually 14 degrees Fahrenheit – which isn’t warm, much less a “heat wave” by any definition. Patel can’t be forgiven for not mentioning this in the article because anyone can get the conversion simply by typing it into Google, like this example.

But that isn’t the worst journalistic violation Patel makes.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Arctic 2023 Refuses To Melt…German Scientists Blame ‘Unusual Weather’

by P. Gosselin, Sep 17, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Sixteen Years Of No Decline

Arctic summer minimum sea ice extent refuses to drop further, surprising and frustrating the alarmist media.

German research vessel Polarstern of the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) is currently underway again in the Arctic where a decrease in sea ice had been expected there, or, probably more accurately said, hoped for. [emphasis, links added]

But this year the minimum Arctic sea ice extent has turned out differently, as Germany’s widely viewed (climate-alarmist) Tagesschau news had to report:

In view of the extreme summer, the question arose in advance: Will the Arctic also see a new negative record in melting ice this year? This time, the Arctic has been spared.

AWI director and expedition leader Antje Boetius tells Tagesschau that an unusual weather phenomenon prevented a record melt of Arctic sea ice this summer.

According to Boetius, a sequence of low-pressure systems has led to an entirely different ice movement. The so-called transpolar drift, which describes the drifting of ice along certain routes, took a different course this year, she said.

Ice from the Siberian region has been held together and compressed instead of drifting out and melting. For the AWI director, this shows that weather phenomena determine the development of sea ice, and that forecasting is more difficult than ever.

The Arctic, with its sea ice and life, has been lucky once again, says the biologist. But things could go the other way. “If we are unlucky, if weather phenomena play unfavorably, we can also be affected by large ice-free parts much sooner than expected,” Boetius adds.”

We notice that when the opposite happens, e.g. heat, storms, or more ice melt, then it’s all because of climate warming. But when it goes the other way, then it’s weather!

better to know...?, climate-debate

A Round-Up of the BBC’s Climate Howlers of the Past 12 Months

by C. Morrison, Aug 6, 2023 in TheDailySceptic

The annual Paul Homewood review of the BBC’s climate howlers is always an enjoyable read, even for those keen students who follow his investigative work during the year. But with the consensus starting to crumble for the insane Net Zero collectivist project, this latest instalment of Tall Climate Tales from the BBC seems to have attracted a wider audience. Talk TV and the Daily Express have both given extensive coverage to the latest set of BBC bloopers.

How we laughed when Julia Hartley-Brewer read from the list on her TalkTV morning show. Such as the report from the Norfolk village of Happisburgh where “extreme weather linked to climate change” has eroded the soft sand cliff rock. No mention of the finding of the British Geological Society that it is likely the Norfolk cliffs have been “eroding at the present rate for about the last 5,000 years”.

Or the report that the 2021 Atlantic hurricane season was the third most active on record. Nothing of the sort, of course, with Homewood observing that since 1851 there have been 32 years with a higher count of hurricanes. There was also an evidence-free claim in September 2022 on the BBC Verify that hurricanes were getting more powerful. The U.S. weather service NOAA states in its latest review that “there is not strong evidence for an increase since the late 1800s in hurricanes, major hurricanes, or the proportion of hurricanes that reach major hurricane intensity”.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

New Scientist: How worried should we be about climate change?

by D. Whitehouse, Aug23, 2023 in NetZeroWatch

How worried should we be, asks New Scientist in a Climate Change Special Issue. The 19th August issue is billed as a guide to a year of extreme weather – “a year of extremes,” when 2023 is barely half way over.

In a New Scientist Climate Special Report senior reporter Michael Le Page asks if climate change is worse than we thought it would be? Well, it depends upon who you ask – and New Scientist usually asks the same experts for their unwavering opinions which, as we shall see, are sometimes just a premonition they have.

The article in question quotes the usual crew: Peter Stott of the UK Met Office, Piers Forster of the University of Leeds, Zeke Hausfather of Berkeley Earth and Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. Together they have been quoted in the New Scientist 109 times.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

“97% Consensus” — What Consensus?

by G. Wrightstone,  Aug 31, 2023 in WUWT

You have likely heard that 97% of scientists agree on human-driven climate change. You may also have heard that those who don’t buy into the climate-apocalypse mantra are science-deniers. The truth is that a whole lot more than 3% of scientists are skeptical of the party line on climate. A whole lot more.

The many scientists, engineers and energy experts that comprise the CO2 Coalition are often asked something along the lines of: “So you believe in climate change, then?” Our answer? “Yes, of course we do: it has been happening for hundreds of millions of years.” It is important to ask the right questions. The question is not, “Is climate change happening?” The real question of serious importance is, “Is climate change now driven primarily by human actions? That question should be followed up by “is our changing climate beneficial or harmful to ecosystems and humanity?”

There are some scientific truths that are quantifiable and easily proven, and with which, I am confident, at least 97% of scientists agree. Here are two:

  1. Carbon dioxide concentration has been increasing in recent years.
  2. Temperatures, as measured by thermometers and satellites, have been generally increasing in fits and starts for more than 150 years.

What is impossible to quantify is the actual percentage of warming that is attributable to increased anthropogenic (human-caused) CO2. There is no scientific evidence or method that can determine how much of the warming we’ve had since 1900 that was directly caused by us.

We know that temperature has varied greatly over the millennia. We also know that for virtually all of that time, global warming and cooling were driven entirely by natural forces, which did not cease to operate at the beginning of the 20th century.

The claim that most modern warming is attributable to human activities is scientifically insupportable. The truth is that we do not know. We need to be able to separate what we do know from that which is only conjecture.

What is the basis for the “97% consensus” notion? Is it true? 

…

better to know...?, biology+acidification

Pacific coral reef shows historic increase in climate resistance

by Newcastle University, Aug 22, 2023 in EurekAlert

Coral reefs in one part of the Pacific Ocean have likely adjusted to higher ocean temperatures which could reduce future bleaching impacts of climate change, new research reveals.

A Newcastle University-led study focused on the Pacific Island nation of Palau and has shown that historic increases in the thermal tolerance of coral reefs are possible. The results demonstrate how this capacity could reduce future bleaching impacts if global carbon emissions are cut down.

Drawing on decades of field observations, the scientists modelled many possible future coral bleaching trajectories for Palauan reefs, each with a different simulated rate of thermal tolerance enhancement. They found that if coral thermal tolerance continues to rise throughout the 21st century at the most-likely historic rate, significant reductions in bleaching impacts are possible.

Published in the journal, Nature Communications, the results affirm the scientific consensus that the severity of future coral bleaching depends on carbon emissions reductions. High-frequency bleaching can be fully mitigated at some reefs under low-to-middle emissions scenarios where, for example, the Paris Agreement commitments are fulfilled. However, such bleaching impacts are unavoidable under high emissions scenarios where society continues to rely on fossil-fuelled development.

Study lead author, Liam Lachs, is a part of Newcastle University’s Coralassist lab. “Our study indicates the presence of an ecological resilience to climate change, yet also highlights the need to fulfil Paris Agreement commitments to effectively preserve coral reefs,” Lachs said. “We quantified a natural increase in coral thermal tolerance over decadal time scales which can be directly compared to the rate of ocean warming. While our work offers a glimmer of hope, it also emphasises the need for continued action on reducing carbon emissions to mitigate climate change and secure a future for these vital ecosystems.”

Study co-author, Dr James Guest, of Newcastle University’s School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, added: “We know that coral reefs can increase their overall thermal tolerance over time by acclimatisation, genetic adaptation or shifts in community structure, however we know very little about the rates at which this is occurring. This study uses data from a remote Pacific coral reef system and estimates the rate of increase in tolerance since the late 1980s. The results provide some hope that reefs can keep up with increasing temperatures, but only if strong action is taken on climate change.”

This study was the result of a collaborative visit the lead author undertook in 2021 to work with Professor Simon Donner’s Climate and Coastal Ecosystems Laboratory at the University of British Columbia, Canada. “This study shows the potential for some coral reefs to become more resilient to future climate change-fuelled heat waves,” Prof. Donner said. “That resilience, however, can also come at a cost, in terms of reduced reef diversity and growth. Without sharp cuts in greenhouse gas emissions over the next two to three decades, the reefs in the Pacific won’t provide the resources and protection from waves that Pacific peoples have depended upon for centuries.”

 

Continuer la lecture de Pacific coral reef shows historic increase in climate resistance →

better to know...?, climate-debate

The Political Origins Of The Climate Change Swindle

by L. Balzer, A, Aug 15, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

A Canadian oil magnate and friend of David Rockefeller, Maurice Strong [pictured] set up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1992.

Strong had been chairman of the 1972 Earth Day UN Conference, at which he advocated population reduction and the lowering of living standards in the interest of “saving the environment.” [emphasis, links added]

Strong asked, “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

He also boldly claimed, “Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.”

Strong had helped found the Club of Rome in 1968, which incorrectly believed that Earth’s population was out of control and using up resources too fast.

Their beliefs stemmed from the mistaken idea advanced by Thomas Malthus in his 1798 essay that the world’s population would outgrow the food supply.

In his 1968 book, “The Population Bomb“, Paul Ehrlich revived Malthus’ idea.

Ehrlich predicted,

“The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. Population control is the only answer.”

Although Ehrlich’s forecasts proved incorrect, many people, some of them billionaires, still believe the world’s population should be as low as one billion – not the current 7.5 billion. (Bill Gates stated this explicitly in a Ted Talk!)

They’re afraid that if Third World people get the energy they need to raise their living standards, the Earth’s population will rise further.

This couldn’t be more untrue. History has shown in every instance that when a population’s living standards increase, the birth rate decreases. This principle is known as the Demographic Transition.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

No, July Wasn’t The Warmest Month In Human History

by Dr M. Wielicki, Aug 14, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

What’s going on?

During the last month, we were bombarded with headlines such as:

This month is the planet’s hottest on record by far – and hottest in around 120,000 years, scientists say —CNN, July 27, 2023

July 2023 ‘Virtually Certain’ To Be Hottest Month In Human History —Forbes, July 27, 2023

So is there any validity to these claims… Was July the hottest month in human history? [emphasis, links added]

…snip…

Our civilization’s trajectory, from its humble beginnings in the wild to its current digital sophistication, serves as a testament to humanity’s relentless drive for advancement and ability to adapt.

The African Humid Period (AHP) and the rise of the Egyptian civilization…

The African Humid Period (AHP) is a climatic phase during the Holocene epoch characterized by much wetter conditions in large parts of Africa, especially the Sahara region, compared to the present day.

This significant shift in precipitation patterns had profound impacts on both the environment and early human societies of the continent.

The AHP roughly spanned from about 15,000 to 5,000 years ago, though exact timings can vary based on specific regions within Africa. It began at the end of the Last Glacial Maximum when ice sheets started retreating in the Northern Hemisphere.

One of the most dramatic manifestations of the AHP was the transformation of the Sahara desert. Today’s vast desert expanse was once a mosaic of grasslands, lakes, and rivers.

This “Green Sahara” supported a variety of wildlife, from large mammals like elephants and giraffes to a variety of fish in its waterways.

The wet conditions of the AHP supported a much denser human population in regions that are now desert. Archaeological evidence shows that these ancient Saharan communities engaged in fishing, hunting, cattle herding, and even agriculture.

The abundance of water and food allowed for relatively settled lifestyles compared to the more nomadic existences necessitated by the arid conditions that followed.

The primary driver behind the AHP is believed to be warmer summer temperatures and changes in the monsoon systems, which brought more rain to the African continent.

As these parameters shifted over millennia, the monsoons weakened, leading to the aridification of vast regions.

The African Humid Period serves as a reminder of the profound climatic variability our planet has experienced throughout relatively recent geological history at preindustrial levels of CO2, and the relative insensitivity of surface temperature and/or humidity and the concentration of GHG in the atmosphere.

…