Archives par mot-clé : Fun?/Discussion

Official Temperature Data Isn’t ‘Data’ At All

by H.S. Burnett, Apr 21, 2024 in WUWT


  • Official Temperature Data Isn’t ‘Data’ At All
  • Video of the Week: This is hilarious! Is there nothing that climate change can’t do?
  • Human Impact on the Carbon Cycle Is Minimal
  • Islands Still Growing in the Midst of Climate Change
  • Podcast of the Week: Save the Whales, Kill the Turbines – The Climate Realism Show #104
  • Climate Comedy
  • Recommended Sites

Calls for inquiry into Climate Change Committee

by P. Homewood, Mar 11, 2024 in NotaLotofPeopleKnowThat

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.

When polar bears die, they die of starvation: new Nature paper is propaganda, not news

by S. Crockford, Feb 13, 2024 in PolarBearScience

Is it a coincidence that a paper reporting the results of a no-news study on polar bears, but which predicts future starvation due to climate change, was published two weeks to the day ahead of a climate change marketing event made up by the activist organization Polar Bears International? I doubt it.

And do I think the high-profile journal Nature Communications would not only agree to publish such a useless bit of propaganda but also rig the timing to advance the climate change emergency narrative? Silly question. And the media worldwide are of course lapping it up, happy for an excuse to promote the perils of climate change, see here, here, and here using images of fat polar bears. Image above is from the BBC headline, 13 February 2024.

They believe this strategy is effective because they think the public is stupid, but they are deluding themselves. Most people are now laughing at their obvious acts of desperation.

Polar bears are highly specialize for consuming large amounts of fat that they get from Arctic seals, whales, and walrus. Only a few vocal researchers outside main-stream polar bear science insist that polar bears could ever survive year-round by eating terrestrial foods (e.g., Ilses et al. 2013; Iverson et al. 2014; Gormezano and Rockwell 2013a,b; Prop et al. 2015; Rogers et al. 2015; Tartu et al. 2016).

Sheenjek, Alaska: A Jacoby-MBH Series

by S. McIntyre, Dec13, 2023 in ClimateAudit

MBH98 used three Jacoby tree ring chronologies from Alaska: Four Twelve (ak031) – discussed here, Arrigetch (ak032) and Sheenjek (ak033). Sheenjek will be discussed in this article.

In our compilation of MBH98 in 2003, we observed that the Sheenjek chronology archived at NOAA Paleo was not the same as the “grey” version used in MBH98.   While we used the MBH98 version to benchmark our emulation of the MBH98 algorithm, we used the version archived at NOAA in our sensitivity analysis, both in our 2003 article and in our early 2004 submission to Nature.  In his reply to our submission, Mann vehemently protested that the “introduc[tion of] an extended version of another Northern Treeline series not available prior to AD 1500 at the time of MBH98” “introduce[d] problems into the important Northern Treeline dataset used by MBH98”:

Finally, MM04 introduce problems into the important Northern Treeline dataset used by MBH98. Aside from incorrectly substituting shorter versions of the “Kuujuag” and TTHH Northern Treeline series for those used by MBH98, and introducing an extended version of another Northern Treeline series not available prior to AD 1500 at the time of MBH98, they censored from the analysis the only Northern Treeline series in the MBH98 network available over the AD 1400-1500 interval, on the technicality that it begins only in AD 1404 (MBH98 accommodated this detail by setting the values for AD 1400-1404 equal)

The other “Northern Treeline series” referred to here was Sheenjek chronology ak033.crn.  I checked Mann’s assertion alleging that the data was “not available prior to AD1500 at the time of MBH98”. This was contradicted by NOAA, who confirmed that the chronology that we had used had been available since the early 1990s.

In the figure below, I’ve compared three Sheenjek chronology versions:

  • the MBH98 version from 1580-1979 (plus 1980 infill);
  • the ModNegExp chronology (dplR) calculated from measurement data (ak033.rwl), which, in this case, has been available since the 1990s. It covers period 1296-1979.
  • the archived chronology at NOAA (ak033.crn). Also covering the period 1296-1979.

The issues relating to Sheenjek are different than observed at Four Twelve.

Continuer la lecture de Sheenjek, Alaska: A Jacoby-MBH Series

In Climatology, Whatever Happened To Evidence-Based Science?

by J. Hellner, Nov 21, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Isn’t it time that journalists and students are taught to do research and ask questions about the climate instead of just regurgitating talking points pushing the green agenda?

We are constantly told that storms, floods, droughts, and other natural disasters are growing in frequency and intensity—so why don’t we see specific examples? [emphasis, links added]

Like the severe drought and warm period in Europe in 1540 when temperatures were 9–13 degrees above today’s averageduring the Little Ice Age?

For eleven months, there was practically no rain, and temperatures were five to seven degrees [Celsius] [9–13°F] above the normal values of the 20th century; in many places, summer temperatures must have exceeded 40°C (104°F).

Many forests in Europe went up in flames, choking smoke darkened the sun, and not a single thunderstormwas reported in the summer of 1540.

Water was already scarce in May, wells and springs dried up, mills stood still, people starved, and livestock was slaughtered. Estimates are that in 1540, half a million people died, mostly from dysentery.

Or what about the massive fires in the United States in 1871? In 1871, the Midwestern United States had a severe drought and warm weather, clearly not caused by humans and our use of natural resources.

As a result of this heat and drought, there were severe fires throughout the Midwest, including the Great Chicago Fire.

The temperature was 85 degrees on October 8, 1871. This year the high was 55 degrees, or thirty degrees cooler.

Why isn’t Chicago warmer, after 152 years, with all the cement, people, and gas vehicles and equipment if they all cause warming?

The Chicago fire alone caused $200 million in damages, which is the equivalent of over $5 billion today.

I am 70 years old, and I don’t recall serious fires during my lifetime in the Midwest.

The narrative that humans and our use of natural resources are to blame for warming temperatures, in turn creating an existential threat to our survival, is contrary to the data and facts; scientific honesty would be forming a narrative based on the evidence, instead of forcing “evidence” to fit a story.

What about the Medieval Warm Period 1,000 years ago where temperatures were similar to today? What caused that warming since it clearly wasn’t man’s use of natural resources?

Climate Self-Regulation: Is The Earth Cooling Itself?

by E. Gardey, Jul 14, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Climate change activists are dogmatic. Greenhouse gases released by human activity are warming the Earth by trapping heat in the atmosphere.

Thus, doom and gloom and civilizational collapse await us if we don’t decrease the number of cows, gas-guzzling cars, and factories.

But is it really that straightforward? [emphasis, links added]

In a Wall Street Journal column published Sunday, Andy Kessler proposes that Earth’s atmosphere is actually able to regulate itself such that temperatures remain relatively constant despite changes in greenhouse gases or the radiation of the sun.

The mechanism for doing so, Kessler believes, is a negative feedback loop. This is a natural process by which the negative effects of a reaction cause that reaction to slow down or stop.

The hypothesis on climate self-regulation, which is termed the Iris Effect, was first proposed by atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen in 2001. It postulates that cirrus clouds in the tropics dissipate in reaction to rising temperatures. 

Additional radiation can then escape from Earth’s atmosphere, causing a cooling effect. Kessler calls this a “safety valve.

In an interview with Kessler, Lindzen, a professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology said, “This more than offsets the effect of greenhouse gases.

Skepticism Of Human-Caused Climate Change Rising Globally

by C. Morrison, Apr 21, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Skepticism about human-caused climate change continues to increase around the world.

A recent poll conducted by a group within the University of Chicago found that belief in humans causing all or most climate change had slumped in America to 49% from the 60% level recorded just five years ago. [emphasis, links added]

Similar falls have been recorded elsewhere, with a recent IPSOS survey covering two-thirds of the world’s population revealing that nearly four people in every 10 believe climate change is mainly due to natural causes.

Perhaps the most surprising statistic from the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago (EPIC) survey is that 70% of Americans are unwilling to spend more than $2.50 a week to combat climate change.

Nearly four in 10 Americans said they were unwilling to pay a couple of dimes.

Despite decades of relentless green doomsday agitprop designed to corral populations into living under a collectivist Net Zero-ordered society, it appears that the vast majority of Americans are unwilling to pay even the chump change in their back pockets to stop climate change.

Surveys such as EPIC and IPSOS speak to the fundamental flaw in the ‘settled’ science surrounding the suggestion that humans burning fossil fuels are causing the climate to break down.

The hypothesis is unproven – not a single science paper provides conclusive proof.

Natural causes and the proposition that carbon dioxide becomes ‘saturated’ beyond certain atmospheric levels are more convincing explanations for scientific observations.

Fears that mainstream climate science is heavily corrupted by faulty data, pseudoscientific modeling, and outright political cherry-picking are becoming more widespread.


Why You Should Ignore The Latest IPCC Climate Report

by R. Barmby, Mar 31, 2023 in ClimateChangheDispatch

You have a fever with jaundice, feel crappy, and are vomiting.

You go to the emergency room at the local hospital.

The ER doctor does not run any tests, but based on the symptoms his diagnosis is acute alcoholism and prescribes abstinence or you will drink yourself to death.

“What about some tests, or a second opinion?” you ask. The doctor informs you that “the administration in this hospital has two rules: firstly, the only diagnosis we give out for these symptoms is chronic alcohol abuse; and secondly, we delete any data to the contrary from your file.”

You check into rehab but the fever, jaundice, and nausea persist. Six days later you die from acute fulminant viral hepatitis (Hep B). But sober.

A reasonable person would not accept a diagnosis dictated by the hospital administration and the deletion of conflicting data. Especially if you knew acute alcoholic hepatitis and acute viral HBV hepatitis present the same symptoms and it takes blood tests to differentiate them with certainty.

And that’s why you should ignore the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reportbecause two similar rules govern their analysis and reporting. The cure is also similar: Net Zero CO2 by 2050.

The IPCC Report Cycle

The IPCC’s 1988 mandate from the United Nations was to review, “The state of the knowledge of the science of climate and climatic change”.

In that mandate, the UN expressed “concern that human activities could change global climate patterns, threatening present and future generations…” and also includes the conjecture “…emerging evidence indicates that continued growth in ‘greenhouse’ gases could produce global warming…”

For the last 35 years, the IPCC has developed this mandate into an industry of perpetual reporting on a six-year cycle designed to instill constant fear of human-caused global warming.

The foundation of each reporting cycle, which in its whole is termed an Assessment Report (AR), is the report from Working Group I (WG I) as that is the physical sciences basis addressing the UN mandate.

It is then followed by a report from Working Group II (WG II) which assesses the impacts of climate change and then Working Group III (WG III) dictates what needs to be done to mitigate the damages caused by climate change.

Each of these reports consists of between two thousand to three thousand pages, and each is condensed into a Summary for Policy Makers (SPM). Ultimately a Synthesis Report combining all three Working Groups is issued, again with its SPM.

The 1.5 C Temperature Fiction, Already Exceeded

by J. Marohasy, Mar 21, 2023 in WUWT

From Jennifer Marohasy’s blog

March 21, 2023 By jennifer

It is all over the news, another climate change report from the IPCC – the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Of course, it tells us that the end is nigh unless we do something to prevent temperatures exceeding 1.5 degrees Celsius. Meanwhile, not one of the contributors has any proven capacity to accurately forecast the weather more than a few days in advance, nor much of an idea of the quality of the temperature data inputted into the simulation models claiming the Earth is burning up. Yet they claim to be able to forecast temperatures years in advance and repeat over and over the value of 1.5 C as representing a tipping point.

The reality is that annual maximum temperatures across Australia were mostly falling, and by much more than 1.5 C, from at least 1910 to 1960 and then increasing, and by more than 1.5 C, since 1960.

There are few locations across Australia where temperatures have been recorded at the one place and using standard equipment (including in a Stevenson screen with a mercury thermometer) much before 1908. Darwin in the Northern Territory and Richmond in Queensland are special because they have long and relatively reliable temperature records. Making a single adjustment to the Darwin temperature record to correct for the move from the post office to the airport (after the post office was bombed in WW II), it is evident from the chart that both temperature series show cooling and then warming over the last century and by much more than 1.5 C over periods of less than a decade.

The Global Warming Doomsday Religion Is A Suicide Pact To Wreck Our Economy

by W. Crockett, Mar 14, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

There is no scientific evidence that the minuscule 0.01% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) since 1780 has had any effect on the Earth’s average temperature.

Nonetheless, in the 1980s, a religious/political movement against man-made or anthropogenic CO2 arose.

It was driven by catastrophic predictions from a gaggle of impenetrable and undecipherable computer climate models operated by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and quickly metastasized into a worldwide mass movement with all the fervor of a new evangelical religion.

Composition of the Atmosphere: The tropospheric atmosphere is composed of 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 1% argon, 0.4 to 4% water vapor, and several trace gases.

The largest trace gas is carbon dioxide at 0.041%, followed by methane at 0.0018%, and nitrous oxide at 0.0003%. The volume of atmospheric molecules is also expressed in terms of parts per million (ppm): nitrogen 780,000 ppm, oxygen 210,000 ppm, and argon 10,000 ppm.

Scientists have also speculated that water vapor constitutes something between 4,000 and 40,000 ppm, depending on time and location. By contrast, the trace gas CO2 has only 410 molecules per million (.041%); methane (CH4) has only a minuscule 1.8 molecules per million; and nitrous oxide (N2O) is only a barely detectable 1/3 molecule per million.

All atmospheric molecules create a blanket of heat that slows the loss of infrared radiation to space. The sun’s short-wave radiation passes through the troposphere generally unimpeded by nitrogen, oxygen, and argon molecules to the surface, which increases the kinetic motion (heat) of all impacted surface and atmospheric molecules.1

The increased molecular motion, in turn, increases full spectrum (blackbody) infrared radiation (IR) in all directions. All atmospheric molecules, including water vapor and CO2, take up the additional heat by conduction (contact), from both the surface and surrounding atmospheric molecules.

A Primer On The IPCC’s Implausible Climate Scenarios

by R. Pielke, Mar 17, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Next Monday the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will release its so-called “Synthesis Report” which will integrate the findings of six different reports that it has released since 2014.

I have not participated in the IPCC nor have I seen the new report.

However, I have little doubt that one of the main issues that we will be discussing next week when the report is released will be the implausible climate scenarios that underpin much of the work of the IPCC over the past 9 years.[emphasis, links added]

Research I’ve been involved in — along with colleagues Matthew Burgess and Justin Ritchie — shows that theemissions scenarios that have guided the work of the IPCC and the broader climate research community are widely off the mark.

In short, they are far too extreme, both in what they project for today and especially into the future.

Our work is part of a growing consensus in the literature about the implausibility of extreme climate scenarios — a consensus so strong that it was acknowledged in the most recent IPCC assessmentreports, even though it complicated their messages.

The ubiquity of out-of-date scenarios throughout recent IPCC reports and the underlying literature that is has assessed means that the IPCC Synthesis Report, summarizing its work since 2014, runs the risk of promoting out-of-date science.

The Global Warming Doomsday Religion Is A Suicide Pact To Wreck Our Economy

by D.W. Crockett, Mar 14, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

There is no scientific evidence that the minuscule 0.01% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) since 1780 has had any effect on the Earth’s average temperature.

Nonetheless, in the 1980s, a religious/political movement against man-made or anthropogenic CO2 arose.

It was driven by catastrophic predictions from a gaggle of impenetrable and undecipherable computer climate models operated by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and quickly metastasized into a worldwide mass movement with all the fervor of a new evangelical religion.

As Eric Hoffer observes in his book, The True Believer, “Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in God, but never without belief in a devil.”

In this new “doomsday” mass movement, millions of people truly believe that man-made CO2 is a modern-day devil that will cause glaciers to melt, seas to rise, and coastlines to submerge. They also believe that mankind can, and must, save the planet from this catastrophe by reducing emissions of the devil CO2 to net zero.

Those who don’t believe are labeled “climate deniers,” a derogatory reference to those who deny that the Nazis perpetrated the Holocaust.

Unfortunately, most politicians in the U.S., Canada, and Europe, as well as the press and heads of many large corporations have blindly joined this Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) religion to stamp out the CO2 devil.



World Energy: There Is No Energy Transition, Just Unreliable Energy Addition

by L. Weijers, Mar 12, 2023 WillemPost

As Liberty Energy CEO Chris Wright explained in his viral video a few weeks ago, dishonest terminology surrounds the climate debate.  One of these terms is “Energy Transition”.

The term’s use gives the impression that there exists a quick, easy and scalable alternative to eliminate fossil fuel use without serious impact on people.

Current primary energy distribution, by source, and forecasts by organizations, such as the EIA in their International Energy Outlook 2021, show that this “energy transition” is non-existent.


Also see Liberty’s ESG report on Bettering Human Lives,

No present quantity of primary energy generated by oil or gas or coal is currently replaced by renewables. 

A couple of headlines from the Liberty report that you don’t hear a lot:

  • Global primary energy use is about to grow by almost 50% between 2020 – 2050, due to impoverished people rising from poverty;
  • Oil consumption rises in all EIA scenarios. In their “Reference Scenario”, oil consumption rises at about 1 million barrels of oil per year for the next 30 years, almost the same steady yearly increase of the last 5 decades;
  • Natural gas consumption will continue to growth through 2050.

The reason for this growth is simple: fossil fuels are abundant, cheap and efficient to provide reliable and dense energy at scale.

They have helped to generate a quality-of-life revolution for a portion of humanity, THE GOLDEN BILLION.

 people in poverty who have missed out on this blessing rightfully want what you and I already have.

Sadly, few entities report on this blessing we take for granted.

Good news about renewables is breaking records, however, much of it is bogus.

There are marketing strategies/ruses renewable advocates have used that make it appear as if renewables have a larger market share than in reality:

New WUWT Global Temperature Feature: Anomaly vs. Real-World Temperature

by A. Watts, Mar 13, 2023 in WUWT

One of the most frightening aspects of global warming, aka “climate change” is the graphs produced from temperature data for public consumption and trumpeted by an unquestioning and compliant media. When it comes to measuring climate, in order to actually see any temperature differences over the last century, they must be highly magnified using the temperature anomaly method.


The Observatory Antarctic Sea Ice: ‘The beginning of the end!’ – again

by Dr D. Whitehouse, March 2, 2023 in NetZeroWatch


CNN are not the only media outlets to report on this years’ record low sea ice around Antarctica in apocalyptic terms, other media extremists are available. For Sky News it’s the accelerating melt of polar regions. For the BBC “There is now less sea-ice surrounding the Antarctic continent than at any time since we began using satellites to measure it in the late 1970s.” All this is technically true, but misleading. When it’s put into context one sees a different picture.

So let’s have a look at the actual satellite data of Antarctic sea ice collected monthly since 1979. The NSIDCgives two data sets for what it calls i) sea ice extent, and ii) sea ice area. So let’s examine both of them.

The first graphs is sea ice area, the second sea ice extent.

From the empirical data it is evident that there is hardly any change of sea ice over the 44-year time span. Since 2016 there is a dip with possibly more variability (of which more later), and the lowest month (February) does show a record low, but by hardly anything (and also look at the data for 1992). Does this actual data look like the beginning of the end to you? Where is CNN’s 90% loss or Sky News acceleration?

Millions of sq km; Source: National Snow & Ice Data Center

New geological study proves that the green energy movement is impossible to achieve

by R.A. Bishop, Feb 17, 2023 in LifeSite.AmericanThinker

The comprehensive study found that the current estimated metal reserves are woefully deficient in almost every category.  The table below lists base and rare earth metals requirements to build the new grid and E.V.s.  Deficits are yellow-highlighted.  For example, copper is an integral part of a high-voltage grid system, coming up short by a shocking 3.7 billion tons.  Can we dig enough open mile-deep ore pits to meet that shortfall?  Improbable.

Table 1 Below is the study’s table estimating the years to produce the required metals at the current production rates.  For example, lithium would take almost 10 millennia to achieve.  In addition, these scarce minerals must be mined, transported, and processed, relying exclusively on fossil fuels, which would create more carbon emissions and deplete hydrocarbon reserves.

It is Time to Bury the Grand Solar Minimum Myth

by J. Vinos, Feb 19, 2023 in WUWT

Fourteen years ago, a new climate myth was born. A grand solar minimum (GSM) was in the making that would not only reverse global warming but plunge the planet into a new Little Ice Age, surprising the warming alarmists and causing undue suffering. The time has come to bury that myth.

1. The origin of the myth

The deep solar minimum of 2008-2009 was a complete surprise to solar physicists. They did not know that solar activity could become so low because it had not occurred during the time of solar observations with modern instrumentation. In 2009, a solar scientist named Habibullo Abdussamatov published a paper in Russian in which he argued that the following years would see a major cooling based on the onset of a new GSM. His evidence was

  • The low solar activity of the then ongoing solar cycle (SC) minimum 23-24.

  • A bicentennial cycle in solar activity that supposedly decreased solar activity after 1600 and after 1800

  • The pause in global warming since 1998

Figure 1. From Abdussamatov 2009. “The Sun defines the climate”. Nauka i Zhizn, N1, pp. 34-42.

This prediction reached the West and became very popular, like any catastrophic prediction, actually. Articles about the arrival of a GSM proliferated on climate blogs, such as the one on WUWT: The ‘Baby Grand’ has arrived.

Other scientists, such as Livingston & Penn and de Jager & Duhau, joined Abdussamatov in 2009 in proposing the arrival of a GSM, though being more cautious about its climatic effects. It went so far as to threaten the global warming narrative at a time under assault from the Pause and Climategate. Thus, none other than Stefan Rahmstorf came to their defense saying that according to the models

“a new Maunder-type solar activity minimum cannot compensate for global warming caused by human greenhouse gas emissions.”

(Feulner & Rahmstorf 2010)

2. 2012-2015, the myth’s golden years

CMIP6 GCM Validation Based on ECS and TCR Ranking for 21st Century Temperature Projections and Risk Assessment

by N. Scafetta, Feb 3, 2023 in MDPI, Earth Science

Global climate models (GCMs) from the sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phases (CMIP6) have been employed to simulate the twenty-first-century temperatures for the risk assessment of future climate change. However, their transient climate response (TCR) ranges from 1.2 to 2.8 °C, whereas their equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) ranges from 1.8 to 5.7 °C, leading to large variations in the climatic impact of an anthropogenic increase in atmospheric CO2 levels. Moreover, there is growing evidence that many GCMs are running “too hot” and are hence unreliable for directing policies for future climate changes. Here, I rank 41 CMIP6 GCMs according to how successfully they hindcast the global surface warming between 1980 and 2021 using both their published equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) and transient climate response (TCR) estimates. The sub-ensemble of GCMs with the best performance appears to be composed of the models with ECS ranging between 1.8 and 3.0 °C (which confirms previous studies) and TCR ranging between 1.2 and 1.8 °C. This GCM sub-ensemble is made up of a total of 17 models. Depending on the emission scenarios, these GCMs predict a 2045–2055 warming of 1.5–2.5 °C compared to the pre-industrial era (1850–1900). As a result, the global aggregated impact and risk estimates seem to be moderate, which implies that any negative effects of future climate change may be adequately addressed by adaptation programs. However, there are also doubts regarding the actual magnitude of global warming, which might be exaggerated because of urban heat contamination and other local non-climatic biases. A final section is dedicated to highlighting the divergences observed between the global surface temperature records and a number of alternative temperature reconstructions from lower troposphere satellite measurements, three-ring-width chronologies, and surface temperature records based on rural stations alone. If the global warming reported by the climate records is overestimated, the real ECS and TCR may be significantly lower than what is produced by the CMIP6 GCMs, as some independent studies have already suggested, which would invalidate all of the CMIP6 GCMs.

Climate Fear Mongering Bad Analyses Cause Bad Remedies

by J. Steele, Oct 28, 2022 in WUWT

A review of how the media has been fear mongering a fabricated climate crisis which is only misdirecting and obscuring the best remedies needed to address environmental issues, and instead promoting solutions that are ultimately dangerous.

Jim Steele is Director emeritus of San Francisco State University’s Sierra Nevada Field Campus, authored Landscapes and Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism, and proud member of the CO2 Coalition.

Thanks for having me here. First, I am not a climate scientist. I am an ecologist, and I humbly note ecology requires a higher degree of thinking to untangle the many contributing causes of complex problems.

While director of San Francisco State University’s Sierra Nevada Field Campus, I was monitored 6 meadow systems in the Sierra Nevada for the Forest Service. One meadow began to dry, vegetation withered, and wildlife began disappearing. When I showed students and colleagues this meadow’s deterioration, I was struck by their knee jerk response. Despite just a half-hour visit, most declared this was just what global warming theory predicted. Rising CO2 was making the land warmer, drier and causing animals to go extinct.

In contrast, as an ecologist I had to consider landscape changes, geological history, changes to hydrology, biological interactions, as well as weather and natural climate changes. And I had been observing those effects for 15 years.

Historical temperatures revealed maximum temperatures were warmer in the 1930s. I eventually determined it was the disruption of stream flows and the water table that caused all the problems.

We restored the streams, raised the water table and the meadow became more resilient during droughts and wildlife became more abundant. Lowering CO2 emissions would have had no impact.

Willie Soon on the Tom Nelson Podcast

by C. Rotter, Oct 20, 2022 in WUWT

This CO2 stuff is…pure delusion. You cannot find any signature of that.

Dr. Soon was an astrophysicist at the Solar, Stellar and Planetary Sciences Division of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, from 1991-2022. He served as receiving editor for New Astronomy from 2002-2016, astronomer at the Mount Wilson Observatory from 1992-2009. He is also on the editorial board of Geoscience, an MDPI publication since 2020 as well as serving as Review Editor of Frontiers in Earth Science starting 2022. Dr. Soon has also held the role of visiting professors at various institutions including University of Putra, Malaysia, Institute of Earth Environment of Xian, China and State Key Laboratory of Marine Environmental Science at Xiamen University. Since September 2021, Dr. Soon is also affiliated with Hungary’s Institute of Earth Physics and Space Science.
Dr. Soon earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees in science and a Ph.D. in aerospace engineering from the University of Southern California.

“The whole point of science is to question accepted dogmas. For that reason, I respect Willie Soon as a good scientist and a courageous citizen.’’ — Freeman Dyson in the Boston Globe, November 5, 2013

About Willie Soon:
103 of his peer-reviewed papers:
“How much has the Sun influenced Northern Hemisphere temperature trends? An ongoing debate”:
CERES news:
Please help support independent science by donating to
Tom Nelson’s Twitter:
About Tom:
Notes for climate skeptics:

he IPCC’s Climate Math Doesn’t Add Up. Will Anyone Notice?

by R. McKitrick, Oct 14, 2022 in ClimateChangeDispatch

The high and rising costs of climate policy — now including the inability of jurisdictions that bet big on renewables to guarantee enough energy for their citizens to survive the coming winter — don’t just entitle us to question the basis for it: they demand we do so.

Ultimately, the justification for renewables is the view that carbon dioxide emissions have a big effect on the climate that will cause devastating harm at some point in the future. [bold, links added]

Scientists measure the effect using a concept called “Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity” or ECS, which estimates how much long-run average warming will occur as a result of doubling the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Some important new evidence pointing to a low ECS value just emerged in the scientific literature.

ECS has long been uncertain. In 1979 the U.S. National Academy of Sciences estimated it to be between 1.5 and 4.5 degrees Celsius, with a best estimate of 3.0 degrees C.

That range, which runs from “no big deal” to “very bad outcomes,” was accepted by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its first report in 1990 and thereafter until 2007 when, citing greater warming projections in newer models, it raised the bottom end to 2.0 degrees C.

But over the next few years, literature developed using, not model simulations, but observed warming rates since the late-1800s to estimate ECS.

Its results typically centered around 2.0 C or less. So in 2013, the IPCC reduced the bottom end of the range back to 1.5 C and declined to offer a best estimate. In other words, after three decades climate science hadn’t narrowed the uncertainty at all.

The economic implications of ECS being 2 C rather than 3 C are enormous.

Regime Pseudoscientists Enforce Climate Change Narrative

by M. Rectenwald, Oct 12, 2022 in ClimateChangeDispatch

It does this by pathologizing said subjects and their views.

For example, the field has been mobilized to discredit so-called conspiracy theorists by attempting to identify the mistaken mental processes that conspiracy theorists exhibit. [bold, links added]

The methods and results of such studies have proven to be less than stellar, to say the least.

Now, the field is also being wielded to discredit “climate change deniers.”1 By pathologizing the thinking processes of these stubbornly mistaken subjects, the views of said subjects can be safely dismissed.

After all, the theory of anthropogenic climate change (ACC) is obviously true, or so says the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the planetary authority on the matter.

Likewise, those who doubt or deny ACC must be crazy. The point of psychological studies is to discover just what is wrong with these people and how, if possible, to change their minds.

Of course, such studies focus exclusively on the “deniers,” without ever considering climate change believers and whether something is wrong with them. The field lacks even a semblance of symmetry.

Never mind that “the science” is dubious or that climate change is ludicrously being blamed for heart attacks, obesity in children, increased violence, and terrorism, among other medical and social maladies.

Believing in a causal connection between a questionable climate change theory and these phenomena must be perfectly rational, according to this kind of research.

Such is the thrust of a recent study of Australian climate change skeptics conducted by a lecturer in psychology and a professor of geology at the University of the Sunshine Coast.

Entitled “Associations of Locus of Control, Information Processing Style and Anti-reflexivity with Climate Change Scepticism in an Australian Sample,” the study examines climate change skeptics in terms of thinking styles rather than “values” and “sociodemographic” factors.

Since past research has found values and sociodemographic factors to be intractable, the researchers in this study seek to identify factors that presumably can be changed and that should likewise prove useful for the study.

Global temperature hiatus may not have ended after all, new study suggests

by D. Whitehouse, Sep 23, 2022 in NetZeroWatch

The so-called hiatus in global annual average temperature between 2002 – 2014, once controversial to some but now well-established in the peer-reviewed literature, ended in 2014 with the start of a series of record-breaking El Nino events that spiked global temperature with a subsequent fall-back. Now a new study into the effect of man-made aerosol pollution adds to likely reasons for the end of the hiatus, and may point to lower estimates for future global warming.

An international research team writing in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, uses satellite data to show that concentrations of aerosol particles have decreased significantly since 2000. This is good news as cleaner air benefits health, but it also reduces particles’ which have a cooling effect on the terrestrial climate.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), by 2019 the global temperature had risen by 1.1 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels due to increasing greenhouse gasses from burning fossil fuels. At the same time the combustion of fossil fuels emit aerosols which cool our climate by reflecting sunlight and increasing the reflectivity of clouds.

Professor Johannes Quaas, a meteorologist at Leipzig University, and colleagues from Europe, China, and the US have published robust observational evidence of significant reduction of aerosol pollution and improved global air quality.

India, China Emissions Make Mockery of Western Policies

by  V. Jayaraj, Sep 23, 2022 in CO2Coalition

Amidst the European energy crisis, it’s easy to miss other events that are of significance to the discussion about the climate-change movement.

Among them are a series of setbacks to green policies in China and India.

These countries — representing three billion people — have delayed implementation of renewable energy commitments and aggressively increased the production and consumption of fossil fuels.

At the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit, Chinese and Indian leaders — along with their counterparts from Russia and Turkey — explicitly declared that they cannot be coerced into reducing fossil fuel consumption, calling for an “increased investment in oil and gas production and exploration.”

As usual, the mainstream media neither published this news in headlines nor discussed how the proliferation of fossil fuels in these countries make the so-called net zero measures in the West irrelevant to the objectives of climate alarmists.

As the world’s second biggest coal user and home to 1.3 billion people, India has deemphasized its commitment to transitioning to renewable energy.

According to reports, the country fell significantly short of its solar-installation targets, jeopardizing its overall transition goals.

India’s Economic Times reported that at least 25 gigawatts (GW) of solar power projects that were expected to be operational or nearly complete faced delays or uncertainties.

The deferrals of solar installations now make it impossible to attain the planned addition of 450 GW in renewable capacity by 2030.

The Times says India “added 10 GW of solar capacity in 2021, while it needs to add close to 30 GW every year to be able to meet the target.”

The National Solar Mission — India’s internationally renowned solar energy strategy — is in disarray, with only half its promised capacity in place.

India considers coal plants an integral part of its energy sector.