“[Since] the late 1970s. The vast majority of the globe’s vegetated area is greening, with 25-50% of that area showing a statistically significant change, while only 4% of the vegetated area is significantly browning…”
“Carbon Pollution” (aka Carbon Dioxide) not so “dirty” after all!
Guest essay by Dr. Patrick J. Michaels
It’s hard to say how many punny posts we came up with using those words when Carol Browner was Bill Clinton’s EPA Administrator, but here we use it in the context of a recent Science paper by J-F. Busteri and 30 named coauthors assisted by 239 volunteers. It found, looking at global drylands (about 40% of land areas fall into this category), that we had undercounted global forest cover by a whopping “at least 9%”.
239 people were required to examine over 210,000 0.5 hectare (1.2 acre) sample plots in GoogleEarth, and classify the cover as open or forested. Thing of being condemned to looking at that many satellite views of real estate. Anyway, Here’s the resultant cool map:
This has been the subject of a jillion recent stories, blog posts, tweets and whatever concerning Bastin et al. So let’s add a bit…
View original post 299 more words
More inconvenient climate change (aka global warming) news…
Heavy ice is making it impossible for fishermen from the Twillingate area to get to their crab fishing grounds. It may not open up until mid-May. (Twitter/@jeddore1972) Source: CBC
The title of this post sounds contradictory to most of what the media is saying about Arctic ice being in a tailspin, setting records for low extents, etc. And reports of ice blocking Newfoundland also fly in the face of media claims.
I will let you in on a secret: Arctic Ocean ice is doing fine and well above the decadal average. The only place where ice is below normal is outside the Arctic Ocean, namely Bering and Okhotsk Seas in the Pacific. Claims of disappearing ice pertain not to the Arctic itself, but to marginal Pacific seas that will melt out anyway in September.
I noticed the pattern this April when it became obvious that including Bering and Okhotsk in…
View original post 513 more words
Yet another fake climate scare fails to materialise. But don’t expect DiCaprio, CNN, BBC, ABC or their chums at Greenpeace and WWF to be celebrating this one. Their guaranteed silence telling.
Polar bear numbers have risen since 2005, no matter how you look at it:
USGS estimated 24,500 (average) polar bears in 2005.
IUCN estimated 26,500 (average of 22,000-31,000) in 2015
(assessment completed in July, released in November).
Subpopulation surveys completed or reported after July 2015 (Baffin Bay, Kane Basin, Barents Sea) added ~2,000 bears.
This brings the adjusted average total at 2015 to ~28,500.
Explained in full in this published paper, pgs 20-21:
Crockford, S.J. 2017 V3. Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus). PeerJ Preprints 2 March 2017. Doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2737v3 Open access. https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.2737v3
Yet again, “Climate Change” fingered as the great demon that causes unending planetary horror.
However, it appears its evil byproducts – modelled heat and CO2 – are in fact increasing, not decreasing wheat crop yields in Australia…
“Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences tips record national crop” (Sep 2016)
And their prediction was spot on:
“Australia’s winter grain crop officially a record at 59 million tonnes.” (Feb 2017)
What planet do the CSIRO climate-obsessed, doomsday scenario “scientists” live on?
Sounds to me that they live on the ever-forgiving and lucrative planet of horror-scenario computer models providing endless government (taxpayer funded) “climate” research grants…
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to the Australian CSIRO, “The lines will cross” in 20 years, heralding the end of biotechnology’s ability to improve wheat yields.
Climate change to blame for flatlining wheat yield gains: CSIRO
By Anna Vidot
Updated Thu at 11:59am
Australia’s wheat productivity has flatlined as a direct result of climate change, according to CSIRO research.
While 2016 set a new national wheat harvest record, the national science organisation’s findings indicate that result masks a more troubling long-term trend.
While Australian wheat yields tripled between 1900 and 1990, growth stagnated over the following 25 years.
Zvi Hochman, a senior research scientist with CSIRO Agriculture and Food said the team considered whether other factors could have shared the blame, such as investment in research and development (R&D), changing patterns of land use, and soil fertility.
But those could all be ruled out: investment in grains R&D…
View original post 329 more words
“Climate scientists regularly embarrass themselves with “end of snow” predictions, because they are an inevitable consequence of the “projections” (don’t say predictions) of their runaway climate models.”
Dr David Viner of CRU should have taught the climate catastrophists a lesson or three. Although, that was back in 2000. Short memories them climate “scientists”, perhaps ?!
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
UCLA thinks that by the end of the century, Climate will reduce the Sierra Nevada snowpack by 85%.
Climate change puts California’s snowpack in jeopardy in future droughts
UCLA research shows how warming trends affect the Sierra Nevada now and in the future
Belinda Waymouth | March 09, 2017
Skiing in July? It could happen this year, but California’s days of bountiful snow are numbered.
After five years of drought and water restrictions, the state is reeling from its wettest winter in two decades. Moisture-laden storms have turned brown hillsides a lush green and state reservoirs are overflowing. There’s so much snow, Mammoth Mountain resort plans to be open for business on Fourth of July weekend.
The Sierra Nevada snowpack, which provides 60 percent of the state’s water via a vast network of dams and reservoirs, has already been diminished by human-induced climate change…
View original post 570 more words
Hasn’t he changed his tune since admitting that catastrophic climate predictions are great for the reinsurance business:
From a previous post:
Climate change alarmism is big business for ‘reinsurance’ billionaire Warren Buffett. But he doesn’t believe in it:
– Warren Buffett: “The public has the impression, because there has been so much talk about climate, that the events of the last ten years have been unusual…they haven’t!
– Warren Buffett: “We’ve been remarkably free of hurricanes in the last five years [Now eleven years or 4003 days]. If you’ve been writing hurricane insurance it’s been all profit.”
– Warren Buffett: “I love apocalyptic predictions, because … they probably do affect rates…”
– Warren Buffett: “we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them.”
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Warren Buffet has repeated his inconvenient message from last year, that climate has not affected his insurance business – though he is concerned about future climate change.
Warren Buffett says global warming is not impacting the way Berkshire writes insurance
Monday, 27 Feb 2017 | 3:34 PM ET
Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett on Monday said he has not yet seen sufficient evidence that climate change is affecting weather events to a degree that would make him change the way his conglomerate’s insurance businesses write policies.
Events such as Hurricane Sandy have raised concerns that global warming is increasing the intensity and frequency of so-called superstorms.
“I have not seen anything yet that would cause me to change the way we look at evaluating quakes, tornadoes, hurricanes by atmosphere. Now, that may happen some day,” he told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”
View original post 198 more words
“So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems…” Tim Flannery 2007
YET ANOTHER dud-prediction realised from
Global Warming Climate Change alarmist extraordinaire, Tim Flannery.
WHEN will he be, literally, put in the dock for crimes against climate/science truths, costing taxpayers literally $Billions in dud-predictions with his insane litany of ideologically driven climate falsehoods?!