The Great “Extreme Weather” Climate Change Propaganda Con

extreme-weather-news1st

The “Extreme Weather” meme has earned its place in climate change history as the fundamental driver of climate scaremongering, used deceptively and effectively to promote the catastrophic man-made climate change theory by instilling fear, doom and gloom directly into the human psyche through simple imagery and repetitive correlation rhetoric.

Even though “weather” is not climate, the daily bombardment via news and multi-media of climatic disaster clips provide more than enough evidence for the casual observer to convince them that the climate is in fact changing as a direct result of human CO2 emissions.

Much of the mainstream media gleefully encourages and promotes the catastrophic man-made warming narrative. Hence, sensationalising a typhoon in the Phillipines or a forest fire in California has become fair-game in the virtuous and IMHO nefarious push to enhance the supposed human CO2-induced climate catastrophe.

However, when you look at hard data and scientific evidence pertaining to extreme weather through the lens of “Government data” and “Peer-Reviewed Science”, as opposed to scary pictures and videos, absorbed via billions of iPhones and hysterical climate-obsessed mainstream media, things are not quite as bad as they seem. In fact, by most metrics, extreme weather events are becoming ‘less’ extreme as CO2 increases. This should come as relieving news to all, though sadly, yet predictably, such data will come as extremely inconvenient news to the virtuous “Save The Planet” lobby and especially those invested in the trillion dollar global warming climate change industry that feeds and thrives off doomsday scenarios.

*

Below are listed the more common metrics associated with the much maligned and deceptively ascribed “extreme weather” meme. A term which I would label as a very clever weapon of mass climate propaganda to elevate hysteria, emotions and fear with the ultimate end to mould groupthink belief in human CO2-induced climate change…

HURRICANES

The US is currently experiencing a record 12 year (4,380 days) drought of major landfall hurricanes (Cat3+). The last major hurricane to hit was “Wilma” in 2005:

2016-hurricane-drought.jpg

The major hurricane drought for Category 3 or greater storms continues. Updated December 2016 by Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. (via WUWT)

Interesting historical reference point:

NOAA keeps hurricane records back to 1850. The average number of US hurricane strikes per presidency is about eleven. Obama’s presidency had five hurricane strikes, the last being “Matthew” (Cat 1 at landfall, October 8,2016).

Grover Cleveland (1885 – 1889 & 1893 – 1897) and Franklin D Roosevelt (1933 – 1945) both presided over 26 hurricanes, almost six times as many as Obama:

Hurricane count by President.jpg

The presidency of Barack Obama had the lowest frequency of US hurricane strikes of any president:

Hurricane count by President2.gif

Charts via Steve S Goddard – Only updated to 2014

NOAA – Chronological List of All Hurricanes

During Obama’s presidency, atmospheric CO2 levels were between 384-400 ppm. At the time of Grover Cleveland, atmospheric CO2 levels were at 294 ppm. (NASA CO2 Data)

*

TORNADOES

Last years tornado season marked the fifth consecutive year of below normal tornado activity in the US:

US Tornadoes.png

NOAA | Storm Prediction Center WCM Page

NOAA

Over the past 55 years there has been a large reduction in frequency of stronger tornadoes:

ef3-ef5-t_thumb

There has been no trend in EF-1+ Tornadoes 1954-2014:

EF1-EF5-t.png

Historical Records and Trends | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) formerly known as National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)

Paul Homewood, of the excellent climate blog NALOPKT, notes that NOAA has not bothered to update Tornado data for 2015/16. “Could it be they would rather the public did not find out the truth?”

Last year may set the record for the least number of Tornadoes on record:

torngraph-big.png

http://www.spc.noaa.gov/wcm/#data

In summary, with an interesting caveat from NOAA:

  • No trend in EF-1+ Tornadoes 1954-2014 tornadoes.
  • Large reduction in frequency of stronger tornadoes over the past 55 years.
  • 2016 perhaps a record for the least number of Tornadoes on record.

ALL THIS despite rising CO2 and advanced technologies, including doppler radar and greater attention to reporting – Tornado chasers, increased population etc – which can create “a misleading appearance of an increasing trend in tornado frequency.” – NOAA

*

TROPICAL CYCLONES

Jamal Munshi of Sonoma State University published this paper last June, A General Linear Model for Trends in Tropical Cyclone Activity:

ABSTRACT

The ACE index is used to compare tropical cyclone activity worldwide among seven decades from 1945 to 2014. Some increase in tropical cyclone activity is found relative to the earliest decades. No trend is found after the decade 1965-1974. A comparison of the six cyclone basins in the study shows that the Western Pacific Basin is the most active basin and the North Indian Basin the least. The advantages of using a general linear model for trend analysis are described.

Trop Cyclone trends.png

A General Linear Model for Trends in Tropical Cyclone Activity by Jamal Munshi :: SSRN

Again, despite rising CO2, there is no trend in tropical cyclone activity after the decade 1965-1974. With a sharp decline in activity over the past two decades.

AUSTRALIAN TROPICAL CYCLONES

Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology graph shows a significant downtrend in all tropical storms, with no discernible trend for severe tropical cyclones:

Screen Shot 2017-02-22 at , February 22, 11.52.48 AM.png

Tropical Cyclone Trends | Bureau Of Meteorology

Again, it’s clear from the BoM graph that as CO2 has increased, the frequency and strength of cyclones has decreased.

NB, the (warmist) BoM is still yet to update its cyclone graph from 2011. Are they simply lazy? Have no data since 2011? Or are they trying to hide inconvenient climate data that doesn’t fit the CO2-induced extreme weather narrative? You decide.

*

SNOW

Snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event.”
“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”
Dr David VinerSenior scientist, climatic research unit (CRU)

Climate change alarmists (experts) use tangible and emotional climatic horror scenarios to scare you into belief. One of the more classic instances of such fear-mongering, gone horribly wrong, was that by Dr David Viner – esteemed climatologist from the UK’s CRU, in 2000.

From the Independent’s most cited article: Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past by Charles Onians:

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.

After over 15 years, the Independent removed that article, and the URL used to come up like this:

snowfall-thing-of-the-past-404.png

It originally read like this:

snowfall-thing-of-the-past Original.png

The original link now boots back to their homepage.

Our friends at WUWT have preserved the entire article as a PDF for posterity:

Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past – The Independent (PDF)

In fairness, perhaps the good Dr Viner was colluding consulting with the virtuous partners of climate catastrophe expertise, the UN IPCC…

IPCC Less Snow.png

IPCC Third Assessment Report – Climate Change 2001 – Complete online versions | GRID-Arendal – Publications – Other

Warmer winters IPCC.png

IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The (warmist) CSIRO jumped on the “end of snow” bandwagon in August 2003:


Simulations of future snow conditions in the Australian alpine regions were prepared for the years 2020 and 2050…

Conclusion:

The low impact scenario for 2020 has a minor impact on snow conditions. Average season lengths are reduced by around five days. Reductions in peak depths are usually less than 10%, but can be larger at lower sites (e.g. Mt Baw Baw and Wellington High Plains).

The high impact scenario for 2020 leads to reductions of 30-40 days in average season lengths.  At higher sites such as Mt Hotham, this can represent reductions in season duration of about 25%, but at lower sites such as Mt Baw Baw the reduction can be more significant (up to 60%)…

We have very high confidence (at least 95%) that the low impact scenarios will be exceeded and the high impact scenarios will not be exceeded.

In 2014, the New York Times signalled “The End of Snow”:

ScreenHunter_314 Feb. 07 11.00

The End of Snow? – NYTimes.com

BACK TO THE REAL WORLD

2017 Northern Hemisphere snow cover extent was amongst the highest on record last month:

NH Snow extent.png

Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab

Winter Northern Hemisphere snow extent is trending upwards, despite rising CO2 emissions:

Winter SNow NH.png

Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab

SNOW EXTENT UPDATE 2017

January snow extent update… 10th highest on record.

“Global Warming”?

Again, as CO2 has increased, NH Snow extent has increased :

Screen Shot 2017-04-02 at , April 2, 4.25.07 PM.png

Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab

And for Australia’s CSIRO who assured the end of snow by 2020/2030…

Screen Shot 2017-02-22 at , February 22, 8.05.58 PM.png

Heavy snow forecast for the Australian Alps despite ski season ending a month ago

Australia’s snowfields have been overdosed by snow over the past 5+ years.

*

FLOODS / DROUGHT 

“So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems…” Tim Flannery 2007

This planet is on course for a catastrophe.
The existence of Life itself is at stake
.”
– Dr Tim Flannery,
Climate Council

Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology 2008:

IT MAY be time to stop describing south-eastern Australia as gripped by drought and instead accept the extreme dry as permanent, one of the nation’s most senior weather experts warned yesterday.

“Perhaps we should call it our new climate,” said the Bureau of Meteorology’s head of climate analysis, David Jones….

“There is a debate in the climate community, after … close to 12 years of drought, whether this is something permanent…”

The Bureau’s David Jones in 2007:

As Jones wrote to the University of East Anglia the year before: “Truth be know, climate change here is now running so rampant that we don’t need meteorological data to see it. Almost everyone of our cities is on the verge of running out of water and our largest irrigation system (the Murray Darling Basin is on the verge of collapse…”

The CSIRO, 2009:

A three-year collaboration between the Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO has confirmed what many scientists long suspected: that the 13-year drought is not just a natural dry stretch but a shift related to climate change

”It’s reasonable to say that a lot of the current drought of the last 12 to 13 years is due to ongoing global warming,” said the bureau’s Bertrand Timbal. 

THE REAL WORLD (as of 2016 data)

For the continent of Australia as a whole, there is more rain, not less – and certainly no permanent drought:

aus-rainfall.jpeg

2016:

Winter was Australia’s second wettest on record – just missing out on a new high by a couple of millimetres, leaving many regions already sodden.

“It’s about as wet as it has been in the past 110 years [of records] across Australia,” David Jones, head of climate predictions at the Bureau of Meteorology, said.

Floods! Near-record rainfall! When will the head of climate predictions at the Bureau of Meteorology (David Jones) explain why his 2008 prediction of a “new climate” of drought turned out so, so wrong?

THE CONSEQUENCES OF PROFESSIONAL CLIMATE ALARMISTS’ DUD-PREDICTIONS

How warmists cost us billions

The price of global warming alarmism is enormous. Take the cost of the mothballed desalination plants, built after warmists persuaded politiciansthe rains would dry up:

Sydney’s privatised desalination plant, which is costing residents more than $500,000 a day to keep on standby, will not be needed for at least another four or five years. The sale of the plant last year to a private company for $2.3 billion means residents are locked into paying about $10 billion in fees for the next 50 years, whether the plant is operating or not. Not one drop of water has come out of the Kurnell facility since it stopped operating more than a year ago. With dam levels at 93.4 per cent, the plant has been placed into “water security” mode, a long-term shutdown which is likely to continue for some time.”My best estimate is it will still be about four to five years before we turn the desalination plant on,” Sydney Water’s managing director Kevin Young told 7.30 New South Wales

Mind you, big cities did need more water security as they grew. Dams were the cheap option, but who made those almost illegal?

How warmists cost us billions | Herald Sun

More: The legacy of Tim Flannery..White elephant desalination plants | Climatism

Australia is now awash with water. Nearly every dam is full. And we are left with x4 mothballed desal plants that cost $12Billion to build and are costing the taxpayer $1million per day (each) under contract until 2030/50.

Unfortunately, the worst Flannery and his climate change alarmist comrades can ever be accused of, for the litany of failed alarmist dud-predictions resulting in massive taxpayer-dollar waste, is an excess of “Save the planet”virtue.

CALIFORNIA

Last September, New York’s Daily News forecast centuries of global warming drought for California:

One of the myriad incorrect assertions by climate-change deniers is that scientists who have proven manmade causes for the current global warming ignore periods of warming in the Earth’s past that were not caused by industrial pollution.

Since it’s essentially, and of course ironically, entirely non-scientists who make this claim, the deniers would do well to read a recent UCLA study that indicates California’s current six-year severe drought could be exacerbated enough by global warming to extend the dry period for centuries.

Five months later the “Permanent” drought is over and the prediction drowned:
California has now seen more moisture in the last 8 weeks than it typically does in an entire year… San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, and several other cities have recorded one of their wettest Januarys on record and an incredibly wet 8 weeks overall.

And for those who desire to claim the recent California floods are “unprecedented” and “extreme”, the below graph shows that inflow to Oroville so far this year is far from unprecedented, with a much greater total in 1997.

oroville_inflow_1995-2017feb_620.png

And we can see from the state rainfall totals that January 2017 was nothing special:

Orville Precip.png

HISTORICAL DROUGHT PERSPECTIVE

USA drought during the low-CO2 1930’s:

conus_palmerindex_june_1934.png

USA drought during 400ppm “unprecedented”-CO2 levels of 2017:

Drought USA 2017.png

Drought – January 2017 | State of the Climate | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

 *

For the next few “Extreme Weather/Climate” categories, feel free to click on the links to read government data and peer-reviewed science sourced to unfold any concern(s) you may have…

HEATWAVES

Shock news : Australia has always had heatwaves | Climatism

SEA LEVEL RISE

NASA “Sea Level Rise” Fraud | Climatism

44th Pacific “Sinking Islands” Extortion Forum (COP21 Update 2015) | Climatism

If Sea Level Rise were such a threat, ask yourself one simple Q: Why would Barack Hussein Obama (spruiker-in-chief of climate change alarmism) purchase the Hawaii seaside mansion where Magnum PI was filmed?

While warning us of ‘rising oceans’ in SOTU, did Obama just buy a beachfront mansion? | Watts Up With That?

Maybe its because, outside of his eco-pantheist ideology and Leftist, wealth redistribution agenda, Obama too, knows very well that Islands like Hawaii “Shape-shift” i.e. they grow with Sea Level Rise. In fact, 80% of Island nations around the world are growing, not “Sinking” as climate activists and alarmists will have you believe.

*

RECENT “EXTREME WEATHER” RELATED SCIENTIFIC STUDIES

China’s not so extreme weather study:

China’s weather now better

The biggest study of China’s extreme weather finds the frequency of hail storms, thunderstorms and high wind events has actually halved since 1960.

In one of the most comprehensive studies on trends in local severe weather patterns to date, an international team of researchers found that the frequency of hail storms, thunderstorms and high wind events has decreased by nearly 50 percent on average throughout China since 1960…

“Most of the data published on trends in severe weather has been incomplete or collected for a limited short period,” said Fuqing Zhang, professor of meteorology and atmospheric science and director, Center for Advanced Data Assimilation and Predictability Techniques, Penn State. “The record we used is, to the best of our knowledge, the largest, both in time scale and area of land covered.”

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/global-warming-helps-chinas-weather-now-better/news-story/12b5c26ab1a5f27fffc3b416f95cee7c

When will warmist scientists admit the apocalypse they predicted simply isn’t coming?

Oh and just as a side, Al Gore’s “Extreme Weather” poster child sufferers – POLAR BEARS – are doing more than fine…as CO2 rises!

*

If we rely on the above scientific hard data and peer-reviewed evidence, it should hopefully become clearer that colourless, odourless, plant food and trace gas CO2 – the gas of life – does not control the climate or the weather.

*

In my opinion if the temperature gradient between the polar regions and tropics were to increase because of polar cooling, expect to see more and genuine extreme weather occurrences. Ergo, has slight global warming since the 1970’s actually decreased the frequency and strength of extreme weather events? The above evidence strongly supports this case. Especially in the case of Northern Hemisphere Hurricanes, Tornadoes and drought.

Ironically and to this point, in 1974 climatologists blamed extreme weather on “Global Cooling”.

The panic was so real during the “Global Cooling” scare of the 1970’s that UN scientists wanted to melt the Arctic by spreading black soot on it!

Arctic UN Black soot.jpg

02 Feb 1972 – Scientists fear for Arctic Sea ice – Trove

And today, the UN, all those expert climatologists and their sycophant media gleefully blame any extreme weather event, not on “global cooling” but now “global warming”. Nuff said.

*

TO FINISH. A message, in their own words, from the promulgators of climate change fear, doom and gloom – the UN’s very own IPCC …

Direct from their IPCC SREX report released 2012 :

We Do Not Know If The Climate Is Becoming More Extreme

•••

Recommended / Related :


Sea ice off Newfoundland thickest ever yet another polar bear comes ashore

Arctic “Tipping Point” UPDATE…

“Ice too thick for coast guard’s heavy icebreaker” said a 20 April 2017 CBC report on the state of ice in the Strait of Belle Isle. The pack is thick first year ice (four feet thick or more in places) and embedded with icebergs of much older, thicker ice. The ice packed along the northern shore of Newfoundland is hampering fishermen from getting out to sea and is not expected to clear until mid-May.”

polarbearscience

Amid reports that ice conditions between Newfoundland and southern Labrador are the worst in living memory, another polar bear was reported ashore in the area — just after biologist Andrew Derocher explained to the CBCthat bears only come on land when sea ice conditions “fail.”

Strait-of-belle-isle pack ice_April 19 2017_Nordik Relais“Ice too thick for coast guard’s heavy icebreaker” said a 20 April 2017 CBC report on the state of ice in the Strait of Belle Isle. The pack is thick first year ice (four feet thick or more in places) and embedded with icebergs of much older, thicker ice. The ice packed along the northern shore of Newfoundland is hampering fishermen from getting out to sea and is not expected to clear until mid-May.

NASA Worldview shows the extent of the pack ice over northwest Newfoundland and southern Labrador on 19 April 2017 (the Strait of Belle Isle is the bit between the…

View original post 949 more words


Slingo Speaks: ‘…no extreme weather or climate event can be attributed solely to climate change”

Comment from the high priestess of global warming alarmism:

“No extreme weather or climate event can be attributed solely to climate change.” – Julia Slingo, fmr UK Met chief

Watts Up With That?

Weather and climate: in the eye of the storm

By Julio Slingo,  published in the Financial Times, 13 April 2017 (h/t to Larry Kummer)

Julia Slingo is the former chief scientist of the Met Office.

In 1972, fresh from a physics degree at Bristol University, I joined the UK’s national weather service, the Met Office. I liked meteorology because I could look out of the window and see physics in action. Clouds forming in a blue sky, and the wind blowing so often from the west

— it was not immediately obvious why that should be, and I was intrigued. (I learnt later that the UK lies right in the path of the jet stream, a band of westerly winds that circles the mid-latitudes. The jet stream arises from the rotation of the Earth — the Coriolis Force — and because the planet is heated at the equator and cooled…

View original post 2,114 more words


Call for Trump to dump the Paris climate deal

“It is clear that the EU’s extreme green policies are doing huge damage to EU industry and EU competitiveness, and are driving energy-intensive industries out of the EU entirely, taking their jobs and their investments with them.

At the same time these policies have a trivial effect on the climate. Billions spent on “green” investments amount to little more than gesture politics and virtue-signalling from politicians spending other people’s money.”

Keywords: “Other people’s money”

Roger Helmer MEP

f9200a5d8b8d4f11b48429b583344348

I have joined 19 other members of the European Parliament from six EU member-states to write an open letter, (see below), to President Donald J. Trump calling for early implementation of his campaign pledge to pull the USA out of the Paris Climate Treaty.

In the letter, we say that a US withdrawal from the Paris accord “would effectively neuter it, to the benefit of us all.”

We applaud the new and more positive approach which President Trump is taking to climate and energy issues and we are pressing for similar policies on this (European) side of the Atlantic.

The letter also raises concerns about the EPA’s “endangerment” finding with regard to CO2, and urges the President to revisit the issue.  We argue that the finding has no sound basis in science, but provides a pretext for damaging and extreme environmental policies.

It is clear that the EU’s…

View original post 436 more words


New ‘Karl-buster’ paper confirms ‘the pause’, and climate models failure

“The gap between observations and models persists. The observed trend deviated by as much as −0.17 °C per decade from the CMIP5 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5; ref. 19) ensemble-mean projection1—a gap two to four times the observed trend.

The hiatus therefore continues to challenge climate science.”

– Nature Climate Change (PEER-REVIEWED STUDY)

“This paper published today in Nature Climate Change by Hedemann et al. not only confirms the existence of “the pause” in global temperature, but suggests a cause, saying “…the hiatus could also have been caused by internal variability in the top-of-atmosphere energy imbalance“.
That’s an important sentence, because it demonstrates that despite many claims to the contrary, CO2 induced forcing of the planetary temperature is not the control knob, and natural variability remains in force.”

The “pause/hiatus” in Global Warming is now nearing 20 YEARS. This despite *record* man-made CO2 emitted over the same period.

Don’t be at all surprised if – CNN, BBC, ABC, CNBC, LATimes, NYTimes, WaPo, The Age, SMH and the rest of the “climate change” obsessed sycophant media don’t report this massively inconvenient climate news. – Too many reputations, jobs, govt grants and funding are now at stake.

Watts Up With That?

The “uncertainty monster” strikes again

We’ve been highly critical for some time of the paper in summer 2015 by Karl et al. that claimed “the pause” or hiatus went away once “properly adjusted” ocean surface temperature data was applied to the global surface temperature dataset. Virtually everyone in the climate skeptic community considers Karl et al. little more than a sleight of hand.

No matter, this paper published today in Nature Climate Change by Hedemann et al. not only confirms the existence of “the pause” in global temperature, but suggests a cause, saying “…the hiatus could also have been caused by internal variability in the top-of-atmosphere energy imbalance“.

That’s an important sentence, because it demonstrates that despite many claims to the contrary, CO2 induced forcing of the planetary temperature is not the control knob, and natural variability remains in force.

Also of note, see the offset as designated…

View original post 1,026 more words


UN “Green Climate Fund” Running Dry

“Developing nations don’t like this gimmickry one bit. They want “new money.”  That’s why they signed up for the UN’s Paris climate agreement in the first place.

“Redistribution of wealth through wasteful UN bureaucracies does nothing meaningful to alter the temperature of the Earth or to mitigate the impacts of alleged global warming – even should the climate modelers ever get the science right about temperature sensitivity to CO2 (don’t hold your breath).”

Keywords : “Redistribution of wealth.”

“Global Warming” aka “Climate Change” has nothing to do with the “environment” or “saving the planet”. Rather, its roots lie in a misanthropic agenda engineered by the environmental movement in the mid 1970’s, who realised that doing something about “global warming” would play to quite a number of the Lefts social agendas.

EXAMPLES OF UNITED NATIONS and THE LEFTS MISANTHROPIC RHETORIC:

“The Earth has cancer
and the cancer is Man.”
– Club of Rome (premier environmental think-tank, consultants to the United Nations)

“Effective execution of UN Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world
has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both
governments and individuals and an unprecedented
redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift
will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences
of every human action be integrated into individual and
collective decision-making at every level.“
– UN Agenda 21

Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” From the 1976 report UN’s Habitat I Conference.

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)

“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.” – Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Earth Summit, 1992.

https://climatism.wordpress.com/2014/01/24/in-searching-for-a-new-enemy-to-unite-us-we-came-up-with-the-threat-of-global-warming/

PA Pundits - International

By Craig Rucker ~

During his final days in office, President Obama transferred hundreds of millions of dollars to the UN’s “Green Climate Fund.”

Other nations haven’t been quite so generous – and it doesn’t seem likely President Trump will hand the UN more, if any, money in the future.

Industrialized nations have been busy shuffling around their existing foreign aid dollars and reassigning them to fulfill their UN climate pledges.

Developing nations don’t like this gimmickry one bit. They want “new money.”  That’s why they signed up for the UN’s Paris climate agreement in the first place.

Economic powerhouses like China and India, which lead the world in CO2 emissions, are exempt from chipping in – yet want the U.S. to pay up.  This is particularly ironic as China held $1.12 TRILLION dollars of U.S. debt at the end of October.

All this underscores just how bad a deal…

View original post 134 more words


China Gas Output Rises to Record as Coal Production Rebounds

UPDATE on “The end of coal, fossil fuels and the rise of unreliables – wind/solar.”

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

image

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-17/china-coal-production-rises-as-government-avoids-output-limits

From Bloomberg:

China’s natural gas production surged to a record last month and coal output rebounded as economic growth accelerated power use in the world’s largest energy user.

View original post 350 more words


7 REASONS Why Activist Orgs Like NatGeo (Sadly) Cannot Be Trusted On Anything “Climate Change”

Nat GEop.jpg

A MUST READ unemotional and clinical scientific rebuttal of National Geographic’s latest climate change hysteria and groupthink propaganda rhetoric…

Yet another example of why – sadly – mainstream media activist outlets like the once respected NatGeo cannot be trusted on anything global warming climate change.

•••

7 part series via our friends over at Paul Homewood’s excellent site – notalotofpeopleknowthat:

1. Seven things to know about climate change–National Geographic

NG1.png

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/04/seven-things-to-know-about-climate-change/

National Geographic has long lost any scientific credibility on climate change issues. It’s new project, “Seven things to know about climate change”, does nothing to restore it.

NG2.png

NG3

In fact, as their graph clearly shows, temperatures have been steadily rising the 19thC, long before CO2 emissions could have made any noticeable difference.

Why is there no mention that the Little Ice Age, culminating in the late 19thC, is known to be probably the coldest period in Earth’s history since the end of the last Ice Age?

They also mention satellite measurements, but strangely forget to state that atmospheric temperatures last year were no higher than in 1998.

Seven things to know about climate change–National Geographic | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

•••

2. Second Thing To Know About Climate Change–Nat Geographic

PART 2 – Colourless, odourless, trace gas and plant food – carbon dioxide (CO2) hysteria… (Climatism comment)

NATG4.png

NG5.png

They fail to explain why global temperatures fell between 1940 and 1980, at the same time as CO2 emissions were rising rapidly.

They also forget to mention the role that the great ocean cycles played in 20thC warming. The post 1940 cool down coincided with the shift of both PDO and AMO to cold phase.

Similarly post 1980 warming was in large part the result of a return to warm phase for both cycles.

NG6.png

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/cgi-bin/gcos_wgsp/tsanalysis.pl?tstype1=91&tstype2=20&year1=1900&year2=2016&itypea=0&axistype=1&anom=0&plotstyle=0&climo1=&climo2=&y1=&y2=&y21=&y22=&length=&lag=&iall=0&iseas=1&mon1=0&mon2=11&Submit=Calculate+Results

•••

3. Third Thing To Know About Climate Change–Nat Geographic

PART 3 – The fake “97% consensus” revered worldwide by the likes of Barack Obama, cooked up by cartoonist and professional climate activist John Cook. Following on from the bogus Doran/Zimmerman study of 2009: http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/fp-comment/blog.html?b=business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/lawrence-solomon-97-cooked-stats (Climatism comment)

ng7.png

NG8.png

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/04/seven-things-to-know-about-climate-change/

The main cause of global warming? Err, well no actually.

According to the Cook study quoted, only 65 papers found explicitly found that humans are the primary cause of recent global warming.

I make that 1.6%, not 97%.

Full details are here.

Virtually all scientists accept that man has some effect on climate, even if only through urbanisation. The Cook study is therefore pretty much worthless anyway, as the authors knew before they published it.

But the fact that only 65 papers identified humans as the primary cause is extremely damning to the supposed consensus.

If humans are actually responsible for less than half of recent warming, the whole scare story falls apart.

Prof Mike Hulme of the Tyndall Centre summed up just how meaningless Cook’s study was:

The [Cook et al.] article is poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed. It obscures the complexities of the climate issue and it is a sign of the desperately poor level of public and policy debate in this country that the energy minister should cite it. It offers a similar depiction of the world into categories of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ to that adopted in [an earlier study]: dividing publishing climate scientists into ‘believers’ and ‘non-believers’. It seems to me that these people are still living (or wishing to live) in the pre-2009 world of climate change discourse. Haven’t they noticed that public understanding of the climate issue has moved on?

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/09/02/andrew-montford-the-97/

•••

4. Fourth Thing To Know About Climate Change–Nat Geographic

PART 4 – Starting your Arctic sea ice extent graph at the century maximum of 1979… (Climatism comment)

NG9

NG10.png

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/04/seven-things-to-know-about-climate-change/

Even their graph of Arctic sea ice extent shows that the ice has stabilised since 2007. They are, of course, hoping that readers will not notice this.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/04/seven-things-to-know-about-climate-change/

They start their graph in 1979, at the end of a period when the Arctic had been getting colder for three decades.

In Climate, History and the Modern World, HH Lamb wrote (in 1982):

The cooling of the Arctic since 1950-60 has been most marked in the very same regions which experienced the strongest warming in the earlier decades of the 20thC, namely the central Arctic and northernmost parts of the two great continents remote from the world’s oceans, but also in the Norwegian-East Greenland Sea….

A greatly increased flow of the cold East Greenland Current has in several years (especially 1968 and 1969, but also 1965, 1975 and 1979) brought more Arctic sea ice to the coasts of Iceland than for fifty years. In April-May 1968 and 1969, the island was half surrounded by ice, as had not occurred since 1888.

Such sea ice years have always been dreaded in Iceland’s history because of the depression of summer temperatures and the effects on farm production….. The 1960’s also saw the abandonment of attempts at grain growing in Iceland, which had been resumed in the warmer decades of this century after a lapse of some hundreds of years…

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/10/08/hh-lamb-cooling-in-the-arctic/

And during the earlier decades of warming, which he mentions, we know that temperatures around the Arctic were at similar levels to today.

For instance, Nuuk in Greenland:

Nuuk.png

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016/10/17/greenland-temperature-trends-1873-2015/

The warming and cooling cycles in the Arctic have nothing at all to do with global warming, but follow the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, a perfectly natural event, which NOAA says has been occurring for at least the last 1000 years.

NG12

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/cgi-bin/gcos_wgsp/tsanalysis.pl?tstype1=91&tstype2=0&year1=1895&year2=&itypea=0&axistype=0&anom=0&plotstyle=0&climo1=&climo2=&y1=&y2=&y21=&y22=&length=&lag=&iall=0&iseas=1&mon1=0&mon2=11&Submit=Calculate+Results

As for the Antarctic, the land ice mass there is actually growing, according to satellite altimeters.

They also mention glaciers, but do not tell their readers that glaciers worldwide grew massively between the Middle Ages and the mid 19thC, in other words during the Little Ice Age. (See here.)

They began retreating around the mid 19thC, and observations show that the rate of recession was greater then and in the early 20thC than it is now.

As glaciers melt, we are finding the remains of forests, carbon dated to the Middle Ages, as far apart as Alaska and Patagonia. Clearly glaciers are simply returning to their natural state prior to the Little Ice Age.

•••

5. Fifth Thing To Know About Climate Change–Nat Geographic

PART 5 – The Great “Extreme Weather” Climate Change Propaganda Con

“by most metrics, extreme weather events are becoming ‘less’ extreme as CO2 increases.”

https://climatism.wordpress.com/2017/02/22/the-great-extreme-weather-climate-change-propaganda-con/

(Climatism comment)

ng5a

NG5b

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/04/seven-things-to-know-about-climate-change/

There is no doubt that the “extreme weather lie” is one of the most fraudulent aspects of the whole climate scam.

Even the IPCC’s SREX report could not find any evidence that that extreme weather was increasing.

National Geographic’s claim is based on the above graph from Munich Re, showing the number of “global natural disasters”. But how are these defined?

Clearly every single flood, storm and so on is not counted. According to Munich Re themselves:

Taking very small events out of the equation, 750 relevant loss events [in 2016]such as earthquakes, storms, floods, droughts and heatwaves were recorded in the Munich Re NatCatSERVICE database.

So what determines a “relevant event”. The answer of course is heavily weighted to economic cost. While this may have relevance to the insurance industry, it has little bearing on climate trends.

As the European Environment Agency explained in their “Damages from weather and climate-related events” report in 2012:

  • The observed damage increase is primarily due to increases in population, economic wealth and human activities in hazard-prone areas and to better reporting.
  • It is currently difficult to determine accurately the proportion of damage costs that are attributable to climate change.

Roger Pielke Jnr, a leading expert on the cost of disasters, has repeatedly shown claims that extreme weather is getting worse to be worthless. His graph below sums the whole topic up well.

Note that it is based on Munich Re’s own database.

NG5c.png

https://twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/684740869707071488

Of course, Munich Re have a vested interest in pretending that weather disasters are on the increase, as it allows them to push up their insurance premiums.

Despite a supposedly calamitous year for disasters, Munich Re actually made a profit of Eu2.6bn in 2016, well ahead of its target of Eu2.3bn.

Most of this profit came from the reinsurance business, which made Eu2.5bn.

•••

6. The Sixth Thing To Know About Climate Change–Nat Geographic

PART 6 – “There are many threats facing eco systems, but a barely noticeable increase in temperature is not one of them.”

NG6a1

NG6a2

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/04/seven-things-to-know-about-climate-change/

In 1982, HH Lamb wrote about how the ranges of birds and fishes had moved poleward in the first half of the 20thC.

When the Earth started cooling around 1960, this movement was reversed. All that animal and plant species are doing is returning to where they were a half a century or so ago.

NG6a3

HH Lamb: Climate, History and the Modern World – p264
There are many threats facing eco systems,
but a barely noticeable increase in temperature is not one of them.
•••

7. The Seventh Thing To Know About Climate Change–Nat Geographic

sg7a.png

sg7b.png

It is hard to know where to start with this load of garbage!

1) If climate change was not a serious danger, would 195 countries have signed the Paris Agreement, pledging to keep the warming below 2C?

Clearly National Geographic have failed to read what actually was agreed at Paris.

For a start, the Agreement itself actually states that, under the “pledges” made, emissions will continue to rise. To meet the 2C scenario, they would need to be cut by at least half.

sg7c.png

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/12/12/paris-agreement-will-lead-to-rise-in-ghg-emissions/

sg7d.jpg

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016/09/26/why-the-uk-should-not-sign-the-paris-agreement/

Secondly, the vast majority of the 195 countries, including China and India, are designated as “developing” countries. As such, the Paris Agreement places no obligation on them at all to cut emissions, as it does on developed nations.

2) Switch to renewables

sg7e

They claim that we can save the planet by switching to renewable energy. Yet even their own graph shows that, although the use of renewable energy will roughly double by 2040, this will be dwarfed by the increasing use of fossil fuels.

The reason for this is very simple – the demand for cheap, reliable energy is growing fast amongst developing countries, as their economies expand and the expectations of their people for a better standard of living grow.

Renewable energy, such as wind and solar, is utterly incapable of meeting this demand.

The sort of emission cuts needed “to do something” would condemn billions of people to grinding poverty.

3) In the US, solar now employs more people than coal, oil and gas combined.

Given that solar only provides 0.4% of the US’s energy, this fatuous statement shows just how inefficient solar power really is.

sg7f
BP Energy Review 2016

4) We can do something about it!

Who is this WE?

In the last decade or so, emissions have been slowly dropping in the US and EU, and now only account for 27% of global CO2.

Meanwhile, emissions in China and the rest of the world have been rocketing upwards.

sg7g

BP Energy Review 2016

Even if US and EU emissions dropped to zero, it would only take global emissions back to their level in 2002, and make next to no difference to the climate.

This whole series from National Geographic has from start to finish been based on a combination of irrelevant, fake and cherry picked data.

Sadly this seems to sum up the low standards that it has now sunk to.

•••

National Geographic Climate Change Alarmism Related :