climate-debate

Decades of Crying ‘Fire!’ in the Climate Theatre Have Left the BBC with Net Zero Credibility

by C. Morrison, Nov 13, 2025 in WUWT

Let us travel back to April 2012 and revisit an important milestone in BBC climate reporting – what is thought to be the last recorded sighting of genuine journalistic inquiry. Richard Knight noted an extremist claim that up to 150 mostly animal species are lost every day, but then went on to observe that if the claim was really true, should we not expect the International Union for Conservation in Nature to list more than 801 extinct species in the last 512 years. Fast forward 10 years and Esme Stallard was honking without any alternative view that “the extinction of species is now happening between 1,000 and 10,000 times quicker than scientists would expect to see”. Humans could be causing the “sixth mass extinction”, scientists are said to have warned. Over the last two decades, climate science reporting at the BBC has been reduced to cherry-picking the worst ‘scientists say’ clickbait remarks to promote the hard-Left Net Zero fantasy. Debate has been abolished, the scientific inquiry process trashed and the intelligence of the British public insulted on a daily basis. It’s almost as if the BBC decided to convince everyone that a woman can have a penis.

In the wake of the BBC’s decision to mark its own homework by referring climate change reporting to its Editorial Guidelines and Standards Committee, we would do well to acknowledge the sheer enormity of the crime against investigative journalism that has been perpetrated for over two decades. It is an appalling story of journalists kowtowing to a prevailing narrative. They have been willing and able to take a central role in inducing a mass climate psychosis in the general public that has been designed for purely political purposes.

…

climate-debate

About COP30, selection of articles (list subject to change)

COP30_ NOV 10-NOV21/2025 Belém, Brazil

Shock COP Dirty Secret: At Least Half the Balsa Wood in Wind Turbine Blades is Illegally Logged in Amazonian Rainforests
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/11/11/shock-cop-dirty-secret-at-least-half-the-balsa-wood-in-wind-turbine-blades-is-illegally-logged-in-amazonian-rainforests/

COP30: President Lula Calls for an End to Climate Denialism
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/11/11/cop30-president-lula-calls-for-an-end-to-climate-denialism/

COP30 In Belém Exposes Climate Elites’ Rank Hypocrisy
https://climatechangedispatch.com/cop30-belem-climate-hypocrisy/

Absurdity Reigns At COP30 As Leaders Gaslight On Climate And Energy
https://climatechangedispatch.com/cop30-climate-gaslighting-energy-hypocrisy/

Poll Shows Voters Skeptical Of COP30 Climate Talks In Brazil
https://climatechangedispatch.com/us-adults-no-confidence-cop30-climate-poll/

German Energy Professor: COP 30 Is A Failure…”Only Europe Remains Committed”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/11/12/german-energy-professor-cop-30-is-a-failureonly-europe-remains-committed/

Claim: COP30 “Vibe Shift” Wrecking Climate Progress
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/11/13/claim-cop30-vibe-shift-wrecking-climate-progress/

At COP30, UN Declares War On Free Speech To Silence Climate Dissent
https://climatechangedispatch.com/cop30-orwellian-information-integrity-climate-dissent/

White House Shreds Newsom Over ‘Disrespect’ Remark At COP30 Climate Summit
https://climatechangedispatch.com/white-house-blasts-newsom-cop30-climate-summit/

COP30 Dispute Erupts over the Legal Definition of a Woman
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/11/13/cop30-dispute-erupts-over-the-legal-definition-of-a-woman/

Ten Years After the Paris Climate Agreement, Climatism is Crumbling
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/11/14/ten-years-after-the-paris-climate-agreement-climatism-is-crumbling/

Did Bill Gates Really Drop a Bomb on Climate Catastrophism?

Un Official Orders Brazil To Get It Together Over Absolute Climate Fest Dumpster Fire

At COP30, Countries Sign First-ever Declaration to Control info on Climate

Live at 1pm ET : Worst COP Ever? – The Climate Realism Show #182

Absurdity Reigns At COP30 As Leaders Gaslight On Climate And Energy

German Energy Professor: COP 30 Is A Failure…”Only Europe Remains Committed”
Claim: COP30 “Vibe Shift” Wrecking Climate Progress
At COP30, UN Declares War On Free Speech To Silence Climate Dissent

White House Shreds Newsom Over ‘Disrespect’ Remark At COP30 Climate Summit

COP30 Dispute Erupts over the Legal Definition of a Woman
Ten Years After the Paris Climate Agreement, Climatism is Crumbling
Climate Alarmist Backlash And COP30 Declaration Show Cancel Culture Isn’t Over
Did a Battery Fire Just Kill the COP30 Climate Conference?
Freedom Melts Faster Than Glaciers: COP30’s Declaration on ‘Information Integrity

more articles will be added….

climate-debate

Alarmists play long game at COP30

by D. Wojick, Nov 11, 2025 in WUWT

Climate alarmism has been seriously stalled by a combination of President Trump and unfavorable economic conditions. So, the diplomats laboring at COP30 are working on long-term issues, hoping for better “weather,” as it were. They are still very busy negotiating the future.

Major policy initiatives often take a decade or more, so while subdued, the work has not slowed down. Rumors of the death of alarmism are greatly exaggerated. The greens are just biding their time.

Most of the issues are about money, of course, although the call for increased 2030 emission reduction targets is also on the table. The money issues mostly have to do with long-term objectives and mechanisms. This includes various global taxes such as on shipping emissions and airfare.

An unavoidable, immediate money issue is raising the supposed $100 billion annual payment by “developed” countries to “developing” countries. (This distinction between donor and recipient countries is based on two lists from 1992 that are long out of date.)

But even here, what was once talk of trillions has moderated to a mere hundreds of billions in the short term. Instead, they are supposed to develop a roadmap to get to $1.3 trillion a year some time from now.

On the new emission targets, there has been a distinct lack of ambition. Many developing countries have yet to submit theirs. One reason may be that these grand plans are all written as being contingent on funding from the “developed” countries. Raising these numbers could be a bad move politically.

…

climate-debate

The Curious Case of the Missing Data

by I. Williams, Nov 09, 2025 in WUWT

I shall end with two unanswered questions. The reason for that lies in a story with eight decimal places of recondite mystery and scarcely believable deductions. One last glimpse of reality: the mean temperature of the world at the moment (early November) is hovering around 14 deg C, which is never used because it does not convey a sufficient element of danger in the global warming message. Fourteen degrees Celsius or fifty-seven Fahrenheit are not messages of imminent doom. Either one is the annual mean temperature of Bordeaux, San Francisco or Canberra.

Therefore the Wise Ones have decided that any global temperature given to the masses must always be shown as a difference from the mean of the half-century 1850-1900, which, they say, is representative of our world in smoke-free pre-industrial times. That period also happens to be towards the end of the Little Ice Age, which, the Met Office says, had ‘particularly cold intervals beginning in about 1650, 1770 and 1850.’ Cold spell beginning in 1850? Interesting.

Thus it was that on 10 January this year the Met Office told us that ‘The global average temperature for 2024 was 1.53±0.08°C above the 1850-1900 global average,’ This  is an extraordinarily accurate figure but the World Meteorological Organisation has much the same: ‘The global average surface temperature [in 2024] was 1.55 °C … ± 0.13 °C … above the 1850-1900 average, according to WMO’s consolidated analysis.’ Ignore the scarcely believable accuracy of those second decimal places, there’s worse to come.

The obvious question is: Why were those fifty years chosen as the fundamental reference period? The answer is easily found: ‘Global-scale observations from the instrumental era began in the mid-19th century for temperature,’ says the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in their Fifth Assessment Report (Section B, page 4.) An associated IPCC Special Report (FAQ1.2 para 4) explains that ‘The reference period 1850–1900 … is the earliest period with near-global observations and is … used as an approximation of pre-industrial temperature.’ Note the categoric statements that sufficient data is available in that nineteenth century fifty-year period to calculate the global mean temperatures.

In 1850, may I remind you, Dickens was writing David Copperfield, California was admitted to the Union as the 31st state and vast areas of the earth were still unexplored. 1900 brought the Boxer Rebellion (China), the Boer War (South Africa) and the Galveston hurricane (USA). There were still quite large areas awaiting intrepid explorers.

I was curious about how in olden times those global temperatures were actually measured, but after a painstaking search of websites and yet again proving that AI-derived information can be both wrong and misleading, I turned in despair to the Met Office enquiry desk. Their reply was long and very detailed. No actual data, but several clues as to where to search. Very interesting clues.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Consensus, likelyhood and confidence

by WUWT, Nov 10, 2025

Is the scientific confidence on climate change greater than 99% or less than 1%? And does the IPCC truly have confidence in its own conclusion? At first glance these questions may seem trivial and pointless. Even a bit embarrassing. Yet, upon closer examination, it turns out that only 0.6% of peer-reviewed scientific papers explicitly endorse the IPPC’s central position – namely, that there exists a consensus that human activities, especially by the emission of greenhouse gases,  are the dominant cause  of recent global warming. Yes, there is a general consensus that humans influence the climate, but only in an explicitly unquantified sense and probably rather small. And that is something quite different.

The IPCC deserves credit for indicating in most of its assessments, the degree of “likelyhood” of their statements and the degree “confidence” the author’s have in their own conclusions. However, those reported levels of likelyhood and confidence are notably low, and often fall below what might be considered appropriate for statements presented with scientific authority. It seems that for most of the author’s of the IPCC Assessment reports the science is not settled.

You probably don’t believe this right away. So please read the article below.  It is largely adapted from the paragraph’s 1 and 3 of Chapter 3 of my book “Crisis or Hoax”. Published by Bookbaby (printed) and Amazon (e-book). An earlier version of this article was published on the Dutch website “Climategate”.

Consensus, likelyhood  and confidence

 1. A consensus of 97%  or more?

On May 16, 2013, U.S. President Obama tweeted, “97% of scientists agree. Climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.”

The tweet became extremely important and may have been the most quoted tweet ever. His successor, Twitter fanatic Donald Trump did not even come close. At first glance, it seems an odd time for such a tweet. In May 2013, the average global temperature had barely risen for 14 years. But Obama wasn’t reacting to the weather or the climate either; he was reacting to an article by John Cook (et al.) that had appeared the previous day (!), on May 15, 2013, in the peer-revied journal Environmental Research Letters It was entitled “Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature”. (J.Cook et al, 2013). The lead author was an assistant professor of communication sciences.

…

climate-debate

2025 Hurricane Forecast Was Overly Alarmist (Again)…Atlantic Season Ending Near Normal

by P. Gosselin, Nov 08, 2025 in NoTricksZone

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicted that an above average Atlantic huricane seacon for 2025.

Now that the season is winding down, we are able to start concluding and summarizing the season: it’s going to come in as near normal activity. The forecast made earlier this year was a bit on the hyped side.

Huricane season forecasts have not really improved, despite all the claims that models are better than ever:

“In my 30 years at the National Weather Service, we’ve never had more advanced models and warning systems in place to monitor the weather,” said NOAA’s National Weather Service Director Ken Graham. “This outlook is a call to action: be prepared. Take proactive steps now to make a plan and gather supplies to ensure you’re ready before a storm threatens.”

NOAA’s outlook for the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season, which goes from June 1 to November 30, predicted a 60% chance of an above-normal season, and a 10% chance of a below-normal season. The agency forecast a range of 13 to 19 total named storms (winds of 39 mph or higher). Of those, 6-10 were forecast to become hurricanes (winds of 74 mph or higher), including 3-5 major hurricanes (category 3, 4 or 5; with winds of 111 mph or higher).

Near average season

…

climate-debate

Greenland Continues To Defy Alarmist Warming And Ice Melt Narratives

by K. Richard, Nov 06, 2025 in NoTricksZone 

According to a new study, Greenland temperature stations indicate there was an abrupt 2.9°C warming trend from 1922-1932 (10 years) that was almost identical to the 3.1°C warming trend from 1993-2007 (14 years).

Between the two warming periods (identified as WP1 and WP2 in the study) was an overall ~3°C cooling from 1933-1992.

Thus, as the temperature charts from the study illustrate, there has been almost zero net warming across Greenland in the last century.

This temperature trajectory is consistent with the Box (2009) analysis that said “the annual whole ice sheet 1919–32 warming trend is 33% greater in magnitude than the 1994–2007 warming.”

“The course of the AT [air temperature] anomaly between 1900 and 2015 relative to the reference period (1986–2015) at the stations UPV, ILU, NUK, QAQ and TAS, the 20CRv3 area average for the globe, the Arctic, Greenland as well as 20CRv3 interpolated to WEG_L shows two distinguished WPs [warm periods]. These two periods are observed at all stations and show a continuous increase over more than 5 years. Based on this, we determine WP1 between 1922 and 1932, and WP2 between 1993 and 2007. During WP1, the AT anomaly increased on average by 2.9 °C across stations, while in WP2, it increased by 3.1 °C, though WP2 spans a longer period (14 years compared to 10 years for WP1). The average annual increase for both WPs across all stations is 0.2 °C yr−1.”

Interestingly, the authors estimate Greenland ice sheet (GIS) melt has added just 1.08 cm to global sea levels since 1900. This is too small to justify alarmist narratives about dramatic warming and ice melt contributions to sea level rise.

energy and fields

Unlocking America’s Rare Earth Riches Could Finally Break China’s Grip On Minerals

by P.  Driessen, Nov 03, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch

China rare earth mining
You’d be crazy to buy a car based on its shiny exterior, dazzling instruments, and gorgeous leather interior – but without examining the engine or taking a test drive.

And yet that’s how America has handled the metals and minerals that are vital to our defense, medical, communication, automotive, aerospace, lasers, computer/AI/data centers, and every other sector of our economy. [emphasis, links added]

They’re worth multi-trillions of dollars and are the foundation for jobs, living standards, national security, “green” energy, and more.

In the Stone Age, humans relied on flint and obsidian. The Bronze Age utilized copper, tin, and lead, plus gold and silver. The Iron Age prioritized iron and carbon. Today, we need almost every element in the Periodic Table, plus countless non-metallic minerals.

However, without any attempt to determine what deposits might lie beneath, decision-makers have made hundreds of millions of acres of America’s “public lands” off limits to exploration and mining, primarily in Alaska and the eleven states west of the Dakotas.

They’re managed by federal agencies for nearly every activity and value except potential subsurface treasures.

In fact, well over two-thirds of those lands have been effectively placed under lock and key: an area larger than Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming combined!

Of course, some places are so unique, magnificent, or ecologically priceless that they should be off limits to resource extraction – from Arches to Zion National Park. But America cannot afford wide buffer zones around them, much less buffer zones around the buffer zones.

Moreover, countless other areas have also been closed off – some by acts of Congress, others by presidential or bureaucratic decree, or unending wilderness and wildlife studies. All with virtually no consideration of subsurface values.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

The ‘Climate Crisis’ of 1695

by R. Barmby, Nov 03, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch 

Centuries-old thermometer records show central England warmed 2°C in 40 years—twice the rate of modern warming.

Thames River Frost Fair
No one would fault you for believing that between 1980 and 2020, we experienced a warming of the climate at a rate that is unprecedented in the last 2,000 years. [some emphasis, links added]

That widespread claim is based on reconstructed (non-thermometer) temperatures up to 1850 and observed (thermometer) temperatures thereafter.

However, sealed thermometer technology predates 1850 by approximately 200 years, and when that data is used, the widespread claim melts away.

Take a close look at the chart below: it is the longest thermometer record in the world, dating back to 1659. The data were compiled by the MET Office, the United Kingdom’s national meteorological service.

With three and a half centuries of instrument data, it transcends being a weather record; it is a climate change record for central England.

The temperature readings were taken on multiple thermometers by many different people, who were probably considered the techies in their day, and none of whom were employed to prove that human influence was warming the planet.

Compare the 40-year temperature trends (black dashed line) of 1695 to 1735 to those of 1980 to 2020.

The warming trend from 1695 to 1735, 2°C over four decades, was double that of 1980 to 2020, at 1°C over four decades.


The earlier warming period was preindustrial—an era whose technology was epitomized by humans circling the globe in wooden sailing ships. Spaceships orbiting the planet, along with heavy manufacturing and prodigious energy production, mark the latter period.

Earlier Englishmen survived from 1695 to 1735, experiencing twice the warming of the last 40 years, and with much less technology.

Had King George II been asked if warming in central England during his reign by 2°C in 40 years was an existential threat to his kingdom, he might reply instead that it was a time of plenty that resulted in English domination.

George II chased Bonny Prince Charles out of Scotland, the French out of North America, and the Spanish around the globe just because they cut off an English naval captain’s ear.

There was no hysteria over the 2°C warming in the early 1700s in Great Britain, even though there were many cultural similarities to today’s global community.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Bill Gates, 893 Companies Ditch Climate Initiative…Call For “Return to Economic Rationality”

by P. Gosselin, Nov 1, 2025 in NoTricksZone 

Nearly 900 companies—including dozens of large international corporations—have quietly withdrawn from the Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi), reports Blackout News here.

The move is being touted as an “overdue return to economic common sense.”

The SBTi requires its members to set scientifically validated climate targets, essentially aligning their emissions goals with international standards.

The recent exodus of 893 firms signals a growing discontent. According to the reporting, many companies are questioning the practical feasibility of the initiative’s stringent requirements. The core argument?

Political climate policies that ignore technical and financial limitations end up jeopardizing long-term economic viability and weakening global competitiveness, stability and profitability as the bedrock for any meaningful long-term investment.

Great Britain, the USA, and China have seen the highest number of companies ending their participation.

The hundreds of corporate withdrawals mark a pivot toward economic realism and suggests that self-determined, pragmatic strategies are replacing politically mandated ones, asserting that a credible, long-term environmental policy must first respect economic strength.

Bill Gates calls off “humanity’s demise”

…

climate-debate

Physician: Adaptation, Not Alarmism, Is The Most Effective Climate Solution

by G. Wightstome, Oct 30, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch 

Real public health threats versus climate hysteria.

Relying on human ingenuity to coexist with a changing climate – either warmer or cooler – and tending to long-recognized public health threats are the best ways to ensure the well-being of the planet and its inhabitants, according to an Australian physician and expert in climate and public health. [emphasis, links added]

“The ingenuity of Homo sapiens at adapting to climate has permitted people to populate almost the entire globe from the freezing Arctic to the steamy tropics, notes Dr. D. Weston Allen, lead author of a paper supporting a proposed repeal of a federal designation of carbon dioxide (CO2) as a pollutant.

“If we stick to doing what we do best – adaptation – we will continue to thrive.”

Citing nearly 400 references, the paper was filed as a formal comment by the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia, with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in support of its proposal to rescind the regulation known as the Endangerment Finding.

Dr. Allen says that civilizations did well in past eras of relative warmth during Minoan and Roman times and the Medieval Warm Period.

And, he says, cool periods often brought suffering, the most recent being the Little Ice Age, which experienced “frequent widespread crop failures, mass starvation, disease and depopulation.”

“The Black Death of 1346-1353 wiped out 30%-60% of Europe’s population and up to 200 million people across Eurasia,” he writes.

However, natural changes in the climate and industrialization that spread in the 1800s and accelerated in the 20th century fostered unprecedented prosperity and health.

“Global rewarming since the 18th century, associated with increasing prosperity, better housing, sanitation, food and water supplies, has greatly benefited human health and wealth,” says Dr. Allen.

“Deaths from typhoid and tuberculosis declined dramatically during the pre-antibiotic 20th century warming (1910-1945). Mortality from all causes fell as temperatures rose. From a billion people in 1800, the global population doubled by 1927, doubled again to 4 billion in 1974, and again to 8 billion in 2022.”

Fuels for new technologies and industry – first coal, then oil and natural gas as well – made modern living possible.

…

climate-debate

As COP30 Looms, Trump Challenges Unhinged ‘Climate Crisis’ Narrative

by Editorial Board, Oct 29, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch 

Will The 30th U.N. Climate Conference Be The Last?

The United Nations’ 30th Conference of the Parties, known as COP30, will be held next month in Belem, Brazil. It will be a nearly two-week festival of intellectual depravity, in which fiery sermons are preached, nags are given an undeserved forum, backs are slapped, glasses clinked, and participants tell each other and the world how important they are. [some emphasis, links added]

We hope that it’s an endangered species falling hard toward extinction.

While the crisis-mongers are supping luxuriously and congratulating themselves for saving a world that’s in no danger from human fossil-fuel exhaust, their crusade is losing momentum.

…

Polls are showing that fewer Americans believe it’s a “very serious” or serious problem. When issues are ranked by the public, climate is far behind others, such as healthcare and the economy.

…

climate-debate

New Study: Great Barrier Reef Coral Cover ‘At Its Highest Since Monitoring Began In 1985’

by K. Richard, Oct 28, 2025 in NoTricksZone 

Another alarmist narrative debunked by observations.

Coral coverage was supposed to be existentially devastated by the modern tenths-of-a-degree increases in sea surface temperatures and recurring bleaching events.

However, a new study points to assessments of coral cover percentages in the Great Barrier Reef and concludes is “at its highest since monitoring began in 1985.”

Further, the analysis reveals there is “no consistent correlation between rising temperatures and reduced coral cover,” and that “most corals [are] demonstrating rapid recovery” from bleaching.

…

energy and fields, minerals and ores

A geoscientist shortage could undermine U.S.-Australian deal on critical minerals

by R. Kurmeloys, Oct 29, 2025 in Science

Universities aren’t training the specialists needed to exploit the country’s rich resources

 

The Mount Holland lithium mine in Western Australia is just one of the nation’s roughly 350 mines.PHILIP GOSTELOW/BLOOMBERG VIA GETTY IMAGES

When the United States and Australia last week announced an $8.5 billion deal for the island continent to develop new supplies of critical minerals used in clean energy technologies and military hardware, many analysts focused on what the pact might mean for geopolitics and global trade. But some researchers raised concerns about a different resource: the geoscientists needed to find and extract the minerals. Even as demand for these specialists is growing, they say, Australia’s universities are having difficulty attracting earth science students and are shuttering programs.

The government wants to reverse the trend, and last week’s deal sharpened the economic stakes. “If you can’t find those resources to begin with, there ain’t nothing to sell,” says earth scientist David Cohen, former president of the Australian Geoscience Council.

Under the deal, Australia will supply raw and processed critical minerals, such as cobalt and nickel, to the U.S. as part of a broader effort to break China’s near-complete hold over that market. Australia already has some 350 mines and is the world’s largest producer of hard-rock lithium, a critical mineral used in current battery technology, and zirconium, used to make heat-resistant alloys.

But an ongoing slump in Australia’s geoscience training efforts could hamper the search for new deposits. Over the past 15 years, Cohen notes, the number of Australian universities awarding geoscience degrees recognized by professional accreditation bodies has dropped from 21 to 13. Macquarie University and the universities of Wollongong and Newcastle have recently closed their earth science departments or merged them with others, and there’s growing concern about the program at the Queensland University of Technology, notes geologist Hugo Olierook of Curtin University. At Australian National University, recruitment struggles and other issues have meant that “if you adjust for inflation, our budget is 50% of what it was in 2020,” says computational and observational geodynamicist Rhodri Davies.

“The future for home-grown talent is bleak,” Olierook told Australia’s Science Media Centre after last week’s deal.

Researchers say the decline threatens Australia’s scientific capability to address a wide range of issues beyond mining, including climate change, water quality and supply, and energy development. And unless the trends change, the nation will face a “capability gap” in the geosciences by 2035, found a report released in September by the Australian Academy of Science. Other countries around the world are experiencing similar declines, meaning Australia likely can’t solve the problem simply by importing talent, says Cohen, who also serves as treasurer of the International Union of Geological Sciences.

…,

 

climate-debate

UN COP FLOP’: Most Countries Will Miss Climate Targets Ahead Of Major Summit

by A. Streb, Oct 28, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch 

Countries are twiddling their thumbs over climate goals.

ver 100 countries have missed the deadline to tighten their climate targets ahead of November’s United Nations conference as President Donald Trump has rolled back some U.S. climate policies. [emphasis, links added]

Though the Paris Climate Agreement requires countries to set more stringent climate targets, many have yet to submit updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) plans as COP30 inches closer.

The climate talks will be held in Belém, Brazil, from Nov. 6 to Nov. 21, 2025, but the Trump administration has yet to select a delegation to attend as it continues to enact majorderegulatory moves in the energy space.

“Most nations realize the cost of cutting carbon dioxide is painful and unnecessary. It is no surprise that nation after nation [is] trying to skirt their prior greenwashing pledges,” James Taylor, president of The Heartland Institute, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Most countries missed the Feb. 10 deadline, though the U.N. reportedly was accepting of this as long as it meant they were working on their climate goals, according to The Associated Press.

…

Morano previously told the DCNF that Democrats and Europeans seem to be retreating from aggressive climate policies as the American “public is not tolerating virtue signaling about saving the planet anymore.”

Several corporate media outlets and some Democrats have recently shifted away from climate policy and are instead focusing their message on rising electricity prices and reliability.

climate-debate

Hiding the Endangerment Finding’s Systemic Biases – Politico’s Failed Attack on DOE’s Climate Science Report

by M. Lewis, Oct 28, 2025 in WUWT

Politico recently published an article by Benjamin Storrow, Chelsea Harvey, Scott Waldman, and Paula Friedrich titled “How a major DOE report hides the whole truth on climate change.” The reporters’ objective is obvious and their strategy simple. They aim to discredit the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal to repeal the December 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Findingby discrediting a Department of Energy (DOE) draft report which is cited in the repeal proposal’s climate science discussion.

From a statutory perspective, that strategy is not a winner. The EPA’s proposal to repeal the Endangerment Finding (plus motor vehicle emission standards adopted by the agency in April 2024) relies chiefly on legal arguments that do not presuppose specific climate change assessments.

However, the Politico article could sway the court of public opinion, which in turn could influence future litigation. Such influence would be undeserved. The article ignores foundational biases compromising the scientific basis of the 2009 Endangerment Finding. Further, its criticisms of the DOE report repeatedly misfire or backfire, and none comes close to refuting any of the report’s conclusions.

Background    

The 2009 Endangerment Finding purported to determine that carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from new motor vehicles “cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” The Finding was the impetus for the Obama administration EPA’s adoption, in 2010, of GHG emission standards for model year 2012-2016 motor vehicles. To one degree or another, the Finding undergirds all subsequent climate policy regulations proposed or promulgated by the Obama and Biden administrations.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

How Climate Dogma Is Keeping The World’s Poor In The Dark

by P. Keeney, Oct 27, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch 

Poverty in India
Among all the discussions about climate change, one aspect of the debate gets far too little attention: the moral and practical costs that climate alarmism places on the developing world. [emphasis, links added]

For those in the West, energy is so plentiful that it’s almost invisible. We flick a switch, start a car, or refrigerate food without considering the miracle of power that makes it all possible.

But for billions of people in Africa, South Asia, and Latin America, energy is not just a convenience in the background; it’s the difference between subsistence and progress, between darkness and light, between education and ignorance.

It is easy for comfortable Westerners to moralize about “ending fossil fuels.” For the world’s poor, that slogan means ending development itself.

Wind and solar can supplement power in modern economies, but they cannot satisfy the needs of industrialization. A solar panel may charge a phone or light a hut, but it cannot operate a factory, a hospital, or a modern water system.

The idea of “leapfrogging” fossil fuels and moving straight to renewables is delusional.

As Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg points out in his book “False Alarm,” a solar panel:

“can provide electricity for a light at night and a cell phone charge, but it cannot deliver enough power for cleaner cooking to reduce indoor air pollution, refrigeration to keep food fresh, or the machinery needed for agriculture and industry to lift people out of poverty.”

For the rural poor in Africa or South Asia, what they need is not less energy but more reliable, affordable, and plentiful energy similar to what the West has long enjoyed.

Yet Western governments and financial institutions have become increasingly obstructive. Under pressure from climate activists, the World Bank and other lenders have reduced fundingfor coal and natural gas projects—the very fuels that helped Western countries prosper.

Wealthy nations, which industrialized through the use of fossil fuels, now refuse the same opportunity to others. It’s a form of moral imperialism: a policy of “Do as we say, not as we did.”

The consequences are significant. In sub-Saharan Africa, around 600 million people still lack electricity. Women cook with wood or dung, inhaling toxic fumes that claim thousands of lives each year.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Bill Gates Retreats From Climate Doom, Tells Activists To Focus On Urgent ‘Social Issues’

by T. Catenacci, Oct 29, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch 

Gates, who spent a fortune warning about ‘climate disaster,’ now says it ‘will not be the end of civilization’.

Billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates, who spent tens of millions of dollars funding far-left climate initiatives and authored a book warning of “climate disaster,” is now changing his tune on global warming and urging activists to divert their attention to other progressive causes. [emphasis, links added]

In a lengthy blog post published Tuesday morning, Gates said climate change remains a serious issue, but that “it will not be the end of civilization.”

Gates then bluntly said the money that has been designated for climate is “not being spent on the right things.”

“Sometimes the world acts as if any effort to fight climate change is as worthwhile as any other,” Gates wrote. “As a result, less-effective projects are diverting money and attention from efforts that will have more impact on the human condition: namely, making it affordable to eliminate all greenhouse gas emissions and reducing extreme poverty with improvements in agriculture and health.”

In other words, leaders need to focus less on fighting long-term global warming and more on near-term economic issues.

That means Gates is prepared to divert millions of dollars in funding from climate issues to other social issues, a shift that could have significant reverberations across the American climate-advocacy ecosystem.

…

minerals and ores

Trump Moves To Break Communist China’s Grip On Rare Earth Minerals

by  S. Milloy, Oct 27, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Surface mining
It’s great news that the Trump administration agreed this week with Australia to take steps toward breaking Communist China’s chokehold on rare earth minerals. [emphasis, links added]

In addition to a July announcement of a project to extract rare earths from coal mined in Wyoming, President Donald Trump is moving us in a desperately needed direction. But our vulnerabilities to China go much deeper, and much more and faster action is needed.

Rare earth minerals are essential for modern technology. The good news is that they are available virtually everywhere. The bad news is that they generally require strip-mining to produce ore, and then the ore must be processed and refined.

Because environmentalists oppose both mining and processing, neither activity has been undertaken on a meaningful scale in the U.S. for decades.

And while a few Western nations allow rare earth strip-mining, about 90 percent of rare earth processing occurs in China, where there is no green activism or bureaucracy to obstruct operations.

This means that virtually all our technology is dependent on China, including military technology such as the advanced F-35 fighter jet. Imagine not being able to build warplanes without China’s cooperation. Even if China were neutral toward the U.S., this situation would be unacceptable.

China plans to become the lone global superpower by 2049, if not sooner. Toward that goal, China is quietly but certainly preparing itself for confrontation, if not war.

This is evidenced, in part, by China’s focus on electrifying its economy to reduce its dependency on the global oil and natural gas market, which is dominated by the U.S.

China has also cleverly worked to avoid war against a superior foe by simply checkmating the U.S. and Western nations through economic and energy dependence, and even sabotage.

After being mildly criticized by Australia during COVID, China announced that it would use trade as a weapon and then promptly stopped trading with Australia.

More recently, in response to U.S. and European efforts to build EV batteries domestically, China announced export limits on the rare earths and processed graphite needed to make batteries.

The Trump administration moved to stymie this part of the Chinese plan through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) enacted last July.

Our China-dependent technology includes all the wind turbines, solar panels, grid batteries, and EVs that greens have induced us to buy over the past two decades.

Worse than just the $250 billion in solar subsidies China expected to reap from U.S. taxpayers through the Green New Scam is the fact that electricity prices and equipment availability in the U.S. would be almost entirely dependent on the goodwill of China.

…

climate-debate

Recent Global Warming Mostly Due To Natural Factors, New Study Finds

by P. Gosselin, Oct 26, 2025 in NoTricksZone 

Recent warming is mostly due to natural climate factors…only 1/3 is attributable to the rising GHG concentrations. 

CO2’s impact on warming is likely wildly overstated. 

A recent paper by Ad Huijser, “Global Warming and the ‘impossible’ Radiation Imbalance,” published in Science of Climate Change, presents a detailed analysis that challenges the widely held assumption that rising greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations are the sole, or even the primary, drivers of recent global warming.

Hat-tip Report 24.

By comparing observed energy trends with theoretical forcings, the study concludes that natural factors play a significant and dominant role in the warming observed since the mid-1970s.

The Discrepancy: GHG Forcing vs. Observed Warming

The study scrutinizes the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) hypothesis, which attributes all observed warming solely to human-caused GHG emissions. Using satellite data from the CERES program and Ocean Heat Content (OHC) data from the ARGO float program, the author analyzed the Earth’s Top of Atmosphere (TOA) radiation imbalance—the net energy flux into the Earth’s thermal system.

Natural factors dominate

The central finding is that the assumed radiative forcing trend from GHGs is insufficient to account for the magnitude of the observed TOA radiation imbalance. The discrepancy suggests that another, significant factor must be involved in heating the planet.

…

climate-debate

Is Subdued COP 30 a Trump effect?

by D. Wojick, Oct 27, 2025 in WUWT

The mainstream press run-up to COP 30 is the most subdued I have ever seen, and I have seen them all. No grand global plans or calls for astronomical sums of cash. Likely a Trump effect — but as a scientist with no hard evidence, I will not claim that, just point out the possibility).

The big thing missing is easy to see. This is the strident call for trillions of dollars in “financial flows” from developed to developing countries via various UN funds.

If payments are mentioned at all, they now tend to be in hundreds of billions a year, not trillions. Mind you, a few hundred billion is still ridiculous, but it is way less than trillions, definitely a new low profile.

President Trump has done several big things to contribute to this lack of financial grandeur. He is pulling America out of the Paris Accord, effective this January. He denounced climate alarmism as a colossal scam to the UN General Assembly, in their face as it were.

On the financial side, he has terminated the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which was throwing billions of dollars a year around the world in climate money. Many other US agencies have also terminated climate spending.

Thus, it is perfectly clear that no climate change “financial flows” will be coming from America for at least the next few years. The other developed countries, some of which are still rabid on climate, are in no position to make up for the loss of America.

Moreover, and this may be another reason for the somber COP, these other developed countries are experiencing serious economic problems. Ironically, some of these are energy cost crunches brought on by ill-conceived climate policies. This is certainly true for the EU and UK.

Mind you, the monster-dollar “financial flows” rhetoric was mostly motivational. It had little to do with the actual work program of the COP, so that will still proceed, albeit cautiously, when it comes to costly national commitments.

…

climate-debate

No, Washington Post, Climate Change Isn’t Killing Washington, DC’s Trees—Urban Stress Is

by A. Watts, Oct 27, 2025 in WUWT

In The Washington Post’s (WaPo) article, “Climate change is coming for D.C.’s trees, and the city won’t look the same,” the authors claim that climate change is killing off Washington, DC’s tree canopy. This is false. While the article mentions other effects that contribute to the decline of the urban tree canopy, they miss or dismiss the primary causes, preferring to blame climate change instead.

The authors argue that rising temperatures and erratic weather patterns are forcing arborists to abandon native species in favor of more “climate-tolerant” trees from the southern United States. The Post asserts that without urgent adaptation, the District’s iconic maples, lindens, and elms could “vanish by 2100.” It also states that “urban development and climate change have contributed to the annual loss of thousands of D.C. trees and threaten the long-term survival of some of the region’s native tree populations.” That may sound convincing, however, in fact, it is deeply misleading.

The majority of DC’s tree stress has little to do with global climate change. Rather, urbanization is the culprit. The city’s heat, pollution, and dense infrastructure have transformed what was once a temperate forest into an artificial microclimate. This is the urban heat island effect (UHI) at work. As Christy and Spencer demonstrated in their peer-reviewed study in the Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, as much as 65 percent of apparent “warming” in urban areas is attributable solely to human development, not global greenhouse gases. Pavement, buildings, and waste heat raise nighttime temperatures, putting added stress on trees that evolved in cooler, more permeable soils.

As Climate at a Glance: Urban Heat Islands notes, “most of the apparent warming in U.S. cities results from localized effects of urbanization, not global climate change.” This localized heating can be several degrees higher than in nearby rural areas, making it a huge stressor for trees already dealing with limited water and root space.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

U.S Surface Temperature

by WUWT, Oct 2025

August ’25 | 0.54°F (0.30°C)

US Climate Reference Network (Updated when Gov shutdown ends)

Click for description of the data/larger graph

The US Climate Reference Network record from 2005 shows no obvious warming during this period. The graph above is created monthly by NOAA.

The graph shows the Average Surface Temperature Anomaly for the contiguous United States since 2005. The data comes from the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) which is a properly sited (away from human influences and infrastructure) and state-of-the-art weather network consisting of 114 stations in the USA.

These station locations were chosen to avoid warm biases from Urban Heat Islands (UHI) effects as well as microsite effects as documented in the 2022 report Corrupted Climate Stations: The Official U.S. Surface Temperature Record Remains Fatally Flawed. Unfortunately, NOAA never reports this data in their monthly or yearly “state of the climate report.” And, mainstream media either is entirely unaware of the existence of this data set or has chosen not to report on this U.S. temperature record.

The national USCRN data, updated monthly as shown in the above graph can be viewed here and clicking on ClimDiv to remove that data display in the graph: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/national-temperature-index/time-series/anom-tavg/1/0

24-hour precipitation and temperature data for individual stations can be viewed with graphs, by clicking ‘PLOT’ on the Current Observations page: ncei.noaa.gov/access/crn/current-observations

better to know...?

Is Public Criticism of Climate Claims a Criminal Offence in Today’s Britain and Europe?

by E. Worrall, Oct 26, 2025 in WUWT

“… It is perfectly OK to have different opinions on climate change. What becomes problematic is when a society can no longer agree on facts …”

…

…

…

My point is, to declare some facts are beyond challenge, especially “facts” produced by artefacts as flimsy as climate models, is to strike at the foundations of freedom of expression and scientific inquiry. Forcing broadcasters to embrace a uniform, government approved version of unassailable facts, then claiming they still somehow have freedom of expression, is utter nonsense.

better to know...?, Cooling

Antarctic Amundsen-Scott Station Sees Coldest October in 44 Years…Mainstream Media Silent!

by P. Gosselin, Oct 24, 2025 in NoTricksZone 

This is not supposed to be happening, according to the climate models.

While the headlines relentlessly holler about “exploding global warming” and “dramatic melting” of the polar caps, the South Pole is telling a starkly different story.

Here reports Germany’s Report 24.

On October 15, the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station registered an astonishing temperature of minus 61.3 degrees Celsius and it isn’t even winter there. It’s springtime and temperatures  should be on the rise.

Coldest October since 1981

According to Report 24, the numbers are clear: It was the coldest October measured at the station since 1981.

This extreme cold is not an isolated event. As the article points out, even CNN reported in 2021 that the continent had experienced its coldest winter since records began.

The data from stations like Amundsen-Scott, Vostok, and Dome C show that instead of a linear, CO₂-driven heating trend, the South Pole is dominated by naturally occurring, extreme temperature fluctuations, including pronounced cold snaps.

Natural factors dominate

This directly contradicts the dominant narrative that “extreme heat is the new normal” and challenges the core assumption that the trace gas CO₂ is the overwhelming, all-determining factor in our climate system. Climatological mechanisms like stratospheric waves, polar vortex stability, and cloud cover appear to be the actual drivers of weather events.

Even growing colder

For decades, we’ve been told that polar regions would experience the strongest warming. Yet, the Antarctic region has stubbornly resisted, in some parts even growing colder.

The Report 24 article argues that this recurring cold record is a “nail in the coffin of the CO₂ dogma.” If carbon dioxide were truly the dominant climate control knob, such an extreme, decades-long cold minimum shouldn’t be happening.

The underlying models—like the IPCC forecasts from the 1990s—have systematically overestimated temperature trends. When faced with such real-world deviations, one must ask: are the climate models flawed, or is the CO₂-centric theory of climate incomplete?

For those politicians and policymakers who are basing sweeping, economy-altering decisions on the idea that the “science is settled,” the stubborn cold of the South Pole presents a critical challenge that can no longer be ignored.

See full article at report 24 

La géologie, une science plus que passionnante … et diverse