Archives par mot-clé : Wrong Science

Prophets Of Doom: Why A New 2024 Climate Report Is Fueled By Fear, Not Facts

by Dr M. Wielicki, Oct , 2024 in ClimateChange Dispatch 


The recent article published in BioScience, “The 2024 state of the climate report: Perilous times on planet Earth,” is a parade of exaggerated claims and half-truths, a propaganda piece designed to scare the public into adopting misguided policies while turning a blind eye to the real drivers of human progress. [emphasis, links added]

While it projects an image of scientific rigor, a closer look reveals that most of these dire warnings don’t even align with the IPCC‘s latest report, particularly when scrutinizing the IPCC AR6’s scientific foundations.

With Summer Heat Waves, The Media’s Having A Field Day Pushing Climate Change Lies

by Editorial Board, One 18, 2024  in ClimatChangeDispatch


city sun heat wave

There’s a summer heat wave going on, which gives journalists the opportunity to fill up their stories with climate change boilerplate. [emphasis, links added]

It no longer matters whether any of it is true. Just the opposite, in fact. If you point out the truth, you’re accused of being a denier.

Sure, the data doesn’t show an increase in the number or intensity of hurricanes or tornadoes or wildfires. Yet every time one or the other strikes, the press robotically connects that event to “climate change.”

Every tornado season, we hear about how climate change is making them more frequent and more deadly. Except the facts don’t support the narrative.

 

Source: ustornadoes.com

Meteorologist: Why Claims Of The Ocean Having A ‘Record-Breaking Hot Streak’ Are Falsetts,

by A. Watts, June 15, in ClimateChangeDispatch


A recent ScienceNews (SN) article claims that ocean temperatures are out of control in a year-long record-breaking hot streak. This is false. [emphasis, links added]

Numerous ocean temperature datasets show no such record-breaking values. The source SN cited to support its claims was thoroughly discredited when it made similar “record-breaking” claims last year.

The entire claim of the article is based on one dataset, which is seen below in the SN article:

L A Times Cherry Picks & Misrepresents NOAA Climate Data to Exaggerate March 2024 U.S. and Global Temperature Outcomes

by L. Hamlin, Apr 19, 2024 in WUWT


The L A Times article and headline shown below exaggerate the March 2024 U.S. and global temperature outcomes by cherry picking and misrepresenting data that mischaracterizes what the data actually shows.

 

The Times article makes the following claims regarding the U.S. for the period January through March 2024:

“In the United States, March was the 17th warmest in the 130-year data record, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The average temperature in the contiguous U.S. was 45.1 degrees — 3.6 degrees above average.”

The Times article does not present readily available NOAA measured  Maximum Contiguous U.S Temperature for the month of March from 1895 through 2024 as shown below.

Meteorologist: Climate Change Not Increasing Hurricanes, Wildfires, Or Migration

by A. Watts, Apr 18, 2024 in WUWT


An article by the website ProPublica titled The Flooding Will Come “No Matter What” linked to Hurricane Katrina, storm refugees, and climate change, claiming that the storm was evidence of the beginning of a “climate migration” in America. [emphasis, links added]

The connection is false. Data refutes a climate connection to any particular hurricane or trend in migration.

The article does a lot of rambling coverage of a family that was displaced by Hurricane Katrina back in 2005, saying:

Another great American migration is now underway, this time forced by the warming that is altering how and where people can live. For now, it’s just a trickle. But in the corners of the country’s most vulnerable landscapes — on the shores of its sinking bayous and on the eroding bluffs of its coastal defenses — populations are already in disarray.

The article goes on to follow the trials and tribulations of a single family who had their home destroyed during Hurricane Katrina.

ProPublica believes this case is evidence of climate change causing a “migration,” because the family has not moved back to the same location.

The article itself cites no data or study to support its claim about Hurricane Katrina. Rather, it simply states the author’s opinions as if they were established facts.

Later the article similarly describes families displaced by the 2018 Camp Fire in Paradise, Calif., as climate refugees, writing:

As the number of displaced people continues to grow, an ever-larger portion of those affected will make their moves permanent, migrating to safer ground or supportive communities. They will do so either because a singular disaster like the 2018 wildfire in Paradise, California — or Hurricane Harvey, which struck the Texas and Louisiana coasts — is so destructive it forces them to, or because the subtler “slow onset” change in their surroundings gradually grows so intolerable, uncomfortable or inconvenient that they make the decision to leave, proactively, by choice.

First, it should be noted that weather events such as hurricanes are not proof of climate change, and ProPublica is falsely conflating short-term weather events with long-term climate change.

Further, as discussed in Climate at a Glance: Hurricanes, even the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admits to finding no increase in the long-term frequency or severity of hurricanes.

Also, after Katrina, the United States went through its longest period in recorded history without a major hurricane strike and recently experienced its fewest total hurricanes in any eight-year period.

There has been no increase in the number or intensity of tropical cyclones since 1972 as the planet has modestly warmed. Indeed, for some basins, the data suggests tropical cyclone frequency has declined over the past century.

Data presented in more than 100 previous Climate Realism posts herehere, here, and here, for example, clearly show that hurricane trends have been relatively flat over the past 50 years of modest warming, and the trend in powerful Atlantic hurricanes is downward (see the figures below).

BBC’s Coral Propaganda

by P. Homewood, Apr 16, 2024 in NotALotOfPeopleKnowThat


The BBC is corrupt, and this report is fraudulent:

It has triggered the fourth global mass coral bleaching event, according to the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Bleaching happens when coral gets stressed and turns white because the water it lives in is too hot.

Coral sustains ocean life, fishing, and creates trillions of dollars of revenue annually.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-68814016

For a start, there has been no “devastating toll”, as the BBC pretends, from the possibility that the world is slightly warmer than a few years ago. (Given margins of error, there is no certainty about this.)

But more importantly, Rannard grossly misrepresents the science. Coral does not “turn white” because the water is too hot. Nor is this is a rare occurrence, as the “fourth global mass coral bleaching event” implies.

On the contrary, bleaching is a common event, which can take place for all sorts of reasons, including when the water gets too cold.

As the leading coral reef expert Dr Peter Ridd has explained, “bleaching” is merely part of a natural process, when coral expels algae in order to switch to a different type which is more suitable adapted to new conditions.

According to Ridd, coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef last year reached record levels, despite four supposedly catastrophic bleaching events in the six years prior to 2022. Neither has there been any significant change in corals worldwide.

Rannard’s article has nothing to do with science; it is just more scaremongering propaganda.

This interview with Peter Ridd which followed his annual review on corals last year is worth watching:

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

by J. Steele, Feb 14, 2024 in WUWT


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

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

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

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).

Calls for Met Office to retract false ‘more intense storms’ claim

by GWPF, Feb 13, 2024


London, 13 February – The UK Met Office has been accused of seriously misleading the public about climate-driven storms in the UK.

On 22nd January, the day after Storm Isha, a senior meteorologist from the Met Office stated on BBC Radio 5 Live Breakfast that “when we see these storms they are more intense and that’s down to climate change”.

However, after being challenged through a FOI request to provide evidence for the claim that storms have become more intense, the Met Office was forced to admit they have no such evidence.

In its response, the Met Office also referred to its own UK Storm activity report which clearly states that “there is no compelling trend in maximum gust speeds recorded in the UK since 1969.”

We call on the Met Office to publish a full retraction of what is evidently a false and misleading claim.

NOTES FOR EDITORS

Met Office: Recent trends and future projections of UK storm activity: “This report found that there is no compelling trend in maximum gust speeds recorded in the UK since 1969, measured as the number of days more than 20 weather stations recorded gust speeds above 40, 50 or 60 knots.”

Met Office: State of the UK Climate 2022 (page 47):  “Storm Eunice [in 2022] was the most severe storm to affect England and Wales since February 2014, but even so, these storms of the 1980s and 1990s were very much more severe.”

Paul Homewood: Met Office cannot provide evidence for “more intense storms” claim

Hottest 12 Months for 125,000 Years Claim Lacks Any Scientific Evidence

by C. Morrison, Jan 7, 2023 in TheDailySceptic, 


Last year humanity lived through the hottest 12 months in at least 125,000 years, reported an hysterical CNN, a frame of mind replicated throughout much of the mainstream media. Scientists have compared 2023’s “climate change fallout” to a “disaster movie”, added the U.S. cable news channel. All poppycock, needless to say, with a political Net Zero motive, and little if any scientific evidence to back it up. Accurate temperature records barely started before the 20th century, and recent measurements by fixed thermometers have been heavily corrupted by growing urban heat. It is in fact possible using proxy measurements to get a good idea of general temperature movements over the last 125,000 years. All the evidence points to periods of much higher temperatures, notably between 10,000 to 5,000 years ago. The latest science paper examining this trend has just been published, and it points to summer temperatures at least 1.5°C higher around 5,000 years ago in the eastern Mediterranean, at a time when civilisation was developing rapidly.

61 NoTricksZone Articles On Studies, Datasets From 2023 Show Climate Models Are Rubbish

by P.  Gosselin,  Ec 31, 2023 in NoTricksZone


Most climate models are worse than garbage, a number of real measurements, peer-reviewed studies and data show. Their phony results are mainly used to spread fear. 

 

The outputs of model simulations often get confused by the media and public as real measurement results. But often they are generated nefariously to promote panic.

Recall the pandemic models showing showing 100s of millions would die if we didn’t lockdown. In reality COVID 19 was no worse than a regular flu.

What follows are 61 NTZ posts from 2023 that show that climate model results have nothing to do with reality. Their outputs are garbage. 

1. Typhoons are supposed to be getting more frequent and worse. They are not.

2. Sea levels rise is accelerating, models say. Fact: at many places they are falling.

3. It’s the hottest in 125,000 years. Wrong, e.g. it was fore example 4-7°C warmer in Austria 2000 years ago.

4. CO2 is the main driver. It is not. Models severely underestimate clouds.

5. Water vapor causes warming. But here’s a study that suggests the opposite.

6. CO2 leads to warming and drought. But the opposite is true: greening and cooling.

7. Winters in Tokyo are warming, the models tell us. But JMA data in fact show they are cooling.

8. Models show rapidly rising sea levels. But tide gauges and studies show it’s not true.

9. Models say Venice is gonna sink. It’s not happening, a study shows.

10. Models say that Holocene sea levels are higher than ever today. But mid-Holocene levels were 1-3 meters higher.

 

 

51. Remember how the models predicted Greenland would melt rapidly and cause sea levels to rise by meters? Well, since 1992, it has only contributed 1.2 CENTIMETERS!

52. Oops, also volcanic activity got neglected by the models too.

53. Two Portuguese scientists (Khmelinskii and Woodcock, 2023) identify at least 8 assumptions in the “greenhouse gas hypothesis” that lack scientific validation.  Models can’t work if the assumptions are grossly false.

54. Models got the aerosol forcings wrong too. ..10 times larger.

55. Antarctica has cooled. Models are wrong on that, too.

56. Models have been failing for 4 decades. Remember above how we remarked they worked better in the 1980s.

57. Modern sea ice extent is nearly the highest it’s been in 9000 years.

58. The rise of CO2 over the past 120 years hasn’t really altered the greenhouse effect. Someone tell the modelers.

59. A new paper finds that the models have it backwards: warming drives CO2!

60. Definitely today is NOT the warmest its been in 125,000 years, not even 10,000 years.

61. German Helmholtz UFZ ground moisture models insist the ground is still dry, even after weeks of heavy rains and floods.

Junk Science Alert: Met Office Set to Ditch Actual Temperature Data in Favour of Model Predictions

by C. Morrison, Dec 23, 2023 in WUWT


The alternative climate reality that the U.K. Met Office seeks to occupy has moved a step nearer with news that a group of its top scientists has proposed adopting a radical new method of calculating climate change. The scientific method of calculating temperature trends over at least 30 years should be ditched, and replaced with 10 years of actual data merged with model projections for the next decade. The Met Office undoubtedly hopes that it can point to the passing of the 1.5°C ‘guard-rail’ in short order. This is junk science-on-stilts, and is undoubtedly driven by the desire to push the Net Zero collectivist agenda.

In a paper led by Professor Richard Betts, the Head of Climate Impacts at the Met Office, it is noted that the target of 1.5°C warming from pre-industrial levels is written into the 2016 Paris climate agreement and breaching it “will trigger questions on what needs to be done to meet the agreement’s goal”. Under current science-based understandings, the breaching of 1.5°C during anomalous warm spells of a month or two, as happened in 2016, 2017, 2019, 2020 and 2023, does not count. Even going above 1.5°C for a year in the next five years would not count. A new trend indicator is obviously needed. The Met Office proposes adding just 10 years’ past data to forecasts from a climate model programmed to produce temperature rises of up to 3.2°C during the next 80 years. By declaring an average 20-year temperature based around the current year, this ‘blend’ will provide ”an instantaneous indicator of current warming”.

It will do no such thing. In the supplementary notes to the paper, the authors disclose that they have used a computer model ‘pathway’, RCP4.5, that allows for a possible rise in temperatures of up to 3.2°C within 80 years. Given that global warming has barely risen by much more than 0.2°C over the last 25 years, this is a ludicrous stretch of the imagination. Declaring the threshold of 1.5°C, a political target set for politicians, has been passed based on these figures and using this highly politicised method would indicate that reality is rapidly departing from the Met Office station.

Hottest In 125,000 Years?

by P. Homewood, Dec 26, 2023 in WUWT


https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/this-year-virtually-certain-be-warmest-125000-years-eu-scientists-say-2023-11-08/

Just about all of the media have been peddling the “Hottest for 125,000 years” claim, which suggests a very concerted effort by the climate establishment in the run up to COP28.

The claim is self evident and baseless nonsense for a number of good reasons:

  • There is no such thing as “a global average temperature”
  • Even now we have very sparse coverage of temperature measurements. Prior to satellites, we had virtually no data  outside of the US, Europe and a few other built up areas
  • The temperature record we do have is thoroughly corrupted by UHI, and only dates back to the late 19thC
  • Natural variations, including ENSO, volcanic activity etc, can easily cause temperature swings of a degree Celsius from year to year, and decade to decade. But historical proxies don’t have the fine resolution to pick these up, they merely give an idea of average temperatures over decades and even centuries. Consequently you cannot compare one year now with the general climate of, say, 2000 years ago.

But forget about all of these theoretical objections, because the climatic evidence we do have is overwhelming, and it tells us that the climate has been much warmer than now for most of the last 10000 years, since the end of the ice age.

Here are ten powerful, incontrovertible pieces of evidence:

1) Greenland

 

….

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:

The Latest On Global Warming Is … There Is No Global Warming

by Editorial Board, Oct 25, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch


A new study out of Norway is exactly what was needed to shut down the climate alarmists. Its findings show that man has not set fire to his home planet.

Right from the top, in the abstract not 10 lines into the study, the authors get to the point. [emphasis, links added]

“Using theoretical arguments and statistical tests we find,” the researchers say, “that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be strong enough to cause systematic changes in the temperature fluctuations during the last 200 years.

In other words, our words, the greenhouse effect is so weak that it should be sidelined as an argument.

From there, the bad news only gets worse for priests of the climate religion.

“​​Even if [recently] recorded temperature variations should turn out to deviate from previous variation patterns in a systematic way, it is still a difficult challenge to establishhow much of this change is due to increasing man-made emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases.

The researchers, from Statistics Norway, the government’s official data agency, also address the apparent “high degree of consensus among many climate researchers that the temperature increase of the last decades is systematic (and partly man-made),” while noting that it “is certainly the impression conveyed by the mass media.

Of course, the climate zealots won’t like the study.

Rainfall, Cyclone Data Show No Clear Upward Trend, Contradict IPCC Claims

by P. Gosselin, Mar 19, 2023, in NoTricksZone


Feel helpless when trying to assess the veracity of “climate doom is looming” claims? Don’t give up trying to understand the relevant basics because you don’t need to be a scientist to do so.

There is a rather simple way to get an idea about what this is all about. Even without a scientific background, most people have at least a good common sense. And that’s all it takes to get a grasp of how energy flows back and forth between earth’s surface and the skies.

Today in Part 5, we look at the linkage between the allegedly CO2-driven rise of air and sea surface temperatures on the one side and the disconnect between these increases and their strangely weak to insignificant impact on rainfall and hurricane intensity”.

Preceding chapters see Part 1 1), Part 2 2), Part 3 3), Part 4 4).

Variability of cloud effects vs “greenhouse gas” effects

In the last chapter, we have seen that there are some discrepancies between the global warming trend as claimed by the official climate science and the local evolution of rainfall, which should be a direct consequence of higher temperatures since this causes more evaporation. This seems not to be the case e.g. for Germany, see Fig. 1:

Paul Ehrlich And The Madness Of Climate Alarmists

by J.  Woudhuysen, Jan 12, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch


All forecasters make mistakes. But few forecasters have been as consistently wrong as biologist Paul Ehrlich.

So it was quite surprising to see, on January 1, the once venerable CBS series, 60 Minutes, inviting Ehrlich on the show to give his take on the state of the planet.

Focussing on ‘the vanishing wild’, the interview was essentially a forecast of doom, with Ehrlich warning that Earth is in the midst of a ‘sixth mass extinction’ and that its wildlife is ‘running out of places to live’. [emphasis, links added]

Ehrlich, a Stanford University entomologist, is most infamous for his 1968 doom-mongering tome, The Population Bomb.

In the tradition of Thomas Malthus, the prologue begins with the following warning:

‘The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s, hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date, nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.’

In reality, since The Population Bomb was published, rates of starvation have fallen off a cliff, while the world’s population has doubled.

Ronald Bailey, the science correspondent at Reason magazine, notes that the global crude death rate (deaths per 1,000 people) fell ‘from 12.5 in 1968 to seven in 2019, before ticking up to eight in the pandemic year of 2020’.

Ehrlich has been prolific in promoting mistaken forecasts. With Richard L Harriman, he also wrote How To Be a Survivor: A Plan to Save Spaceship Earth (1971).

Then, with his wife Anne, he issued more lurid warnings in books including Extinction: The Causes and Consequences of the Disappearance of Species (1981) and The Population Explosion (1991).

HadCRUT Data Manipulation Makes 2000-2014 Warming Pause Vanish


by K. Richard, Jan 12, 2023 in PrincipiaScientifIntern


The Met Office and the Climate Research Unit are at it again, making adjustments to the temperature records to increase the claimed rate of warming.

From 2009 to 2019, there were 90 peer-reviewed scientific papers published on the global warming “pause” or “hiatus” observed over the first 15 years of the 21st century.

The HadCRUT3 global temperature trend was recorded as 0.03°C per decade during the global warming hiatusyears of 2000-2014 (Scafetta, 2022).

This was increased to 0.08°C per decade by version 4, as the overseers of the HadCRUT data conveniently added 0.1°C to 0.2°C to the more recent anomalies.

Today, in HadCRUT5, the 2000-2014 temperature trend has been adjusted up to 0.14°C per decade when using the computer model-infilling method.

So, within the last decade, a 15-year temperature trend has been changed from static to strong warming.

See more here notrickszone.com

Claim: Computer Models Predict a Third of Vertebrates will Die by 2100

by E. Worrall, Dec 17, 2022 in WUWT


 

My question – which part of this real world story of ecological disaster and recovery shouts fragile food web?

In my opinion the European supercomputer food web experiment is way too unrealistic to draw real world conclusions. New connections in the real world food web appear all the time, no food resource remains underutilised for long, even when the underutilised resource is a deadly toxic toad. Any breaks in the food web caused by climate change or disease or whatever, in the real world are rapidly filled.

There are a handful of species which are so specialised they actually would die if their food source was removed. For example, Koala Bears are so specialised at eating Eucalyptus leaves, they would likely all die if say a Eucalypt version of Dutch Elm Disease killed off all the Eucalyptus trees.

But are 17.6% of vertebrate species so specialised they cannot adapt to a small change in temperature? Are 27% of vertebrates about to die out? That seems highly implausible.

A few degrees of warming, if it occurs, is not an asteroid scale ecological catastrophe, or a million year duration volcanic eruption, it is a mild shift in climatic conditions, which life will have no problem adapting to if the paleo record is any guide. Just like life has already adapted to the many climatic shifts, introduced species and other disruptions which have occurred in Earth’s geological past.

MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen Rejects ‘Climate Change’ As ‘A Quasi-Religious Movement Predicated on An Absurd ‘Scientific’ Narrative’

by R. Lindzen, Dec 5, 2022 in WUWT


Dr. Richard Lindzen’s new paper: An Assessment of the Conventional Global Warming Narrative – Published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation – September 22, 2022: Climate change is “a quasi-religious movement predicated on an absurd ‘scientific’ narrative. The policies invoked on behalf of this movement have led to the US hobbling its energy system.” – “The Earth’s climate has, indeed, undergone major variations, but these offer no evidence of a causal role for CO₂.”

“Unless we wake up to the absurdity of the motivating narrative, this is likely only to be the beginning of the disasters that will follow from the current irrational demonization of CO₂.”

By: Admin – Climate Depot

Click to access 2022-09-22-Lindzen-global-warming-narrative.pdf

 

CO₂ is a particularly ridiculous choice for a ‘pollutant.’ Its primary role is as a fertiliser for plant life. Currently, almost all plants are starved of CO₂. Moreover, if we were to remove a bit more than 60% of current CO₂, the consequences would be dire: namely death by starvation for all animal life. It would not likely lead to a particularly cold world since such a reduction would only amount to a couple of percent change in the radiative budget. After all, a 30% reduction of solar radiation about 2.5 billion years ago did not lead to an Earth much colder than it is today, as we earlier noted in connection with the Early Faint Sun Paradox.

The Earth’s climate has, indeed, undergone major variations, but these offer no evidence of a causal role for CO₂. For the glaciation cycles of the past 700 thousand years, the proxy data from the Vostok ice cores shows that cooling precedes decreases in CO₂ despite the very coarse temporal resolution (Jouzel et al.,1987, Gore, 2006). Higher temporal resolution is needed to show that warming preceded the increase in CO₂ as well (Caillon et al, 2003). For earlier variations, there is no suggestion of any correlation with carbon dioxide at all, as shown in Figure 9a, a commonly presented reconstruction of CO₂ levels and ‘temperature’ for the past 600 million years or so.

The Top FIVE Climate Change LIES

by L. Fox, Nov 28, 2022 in ClimateChangeDispatch


Laurence Fox breaks apart the lies repeatedly fed to the public and details the manipulation by the billionaire-funded lobby groups and activists.

If you’re skeptical about climate change or the impact of the environment on our planet, this video is for you.

Climate Lie Number One: Wind Power Is NINE Times CHEAPER Than Gas

Climate Lie Number Two: Island Countries Are SINKING Into The Sea

Climate Lie Number Three: Net Zero WILL Make YOUR Bills Cheaper

Climate Lie Number Four: Storms Are Getting MORE Frequent And MORE Intense

Climate Lie Number Five: Climate Change Is KILLING People

WATCH:

An Extreme(ly Nice) Summer

by P. Homewood, Nov 18, 2022 in Not aLotofPeopleKnowThat


I see the BBC/Met Office are up to their extreme weather scam again! (Timed to coincide with COP27 of course):

 

 

To pretend that winter storms are an example of Britain’s weather becoming more extreme is utterly dishonest, as the Met Office’s State of the Climate 2021 clearly showed that wind storms have grown less frequent and intense over the years since peaking in the 1990s.

image

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/about/state-of-climate

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.