Posted: April 19, 2017 Filed under: Alarmist media, Climatism, CO2 (Carbon Dioxide), Fact Check, Global Temperature | Tags: Activist Media, belief, Climate Change, CO2, Global Temperature, National Geographic, propaganda, pseudoscience
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
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.
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)
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.
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)
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?
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)
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.
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…
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:
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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 :
Posted: October 27, 2016 Filed under: Alarmism Debunked, Climate Changes, Climate Fraud, Climate History, Climatism, CO2 (Carbon Dioxide), Data Tampering, Empirical Evidence, Fact Check, Government Grants/Funding, Govt Climate Agenda, Green Agenda, NASA, Scientific Fraud, Sea Level Rise | Tags: Cimate Fraud, Climate Change, Data Fraud, Data Tampering, Gavin Schmidt, Global Warming Scam, nasa, pseudoscience, Scientific Fraud, sea level rise, Sea Level Rise Scam
‘Sea Level Rise’ is just one in a long line of propaganda metrics used by the climate crisis industry to promote the narrative that your CO2 emissions are causing unprecedented climate change.
What ‘sea-level rise’ alarmists won’t tell you is that seas have risen 400 feet (120m) over the past 20,000 years, since the end of the last Ice Age. And over the past 200 years have been rising at a steady rate of 1.7-1.8 mm/year according to NOAA.
Climate change and sea level rise over the past 20,000 years :
Annotated graph via Tony Heller’s Real Science humorously notes the impact your SUV has had on sea-level rise versus Nature over the past 20,000 years :
Distinguishing Between Natural And Man-Made Sea Level Rise | Real Science
Sea Level Rise acceleration?
There has been no acceleration of sea-level rise since industrialisation. And critically, something other than
evil plant food “Carbon Dioxide” caused seas to rise around 1790.
Important to note that 85% of man-made CO2 was emitted after 1945 :
It wasn’t CO2: Global sea levels started rising before 1800 « JoNova
What we know about rising seas :
- Seas have been rising for the past 20,000 years, since the end of the last Ice Age.
- Something other than CO2 caused the current steady rise around 1790.
- No acceleration since 1790.
With that hard science and peer-reviewed data in the vault, enter the climate fiddlers from the ‘Ministry of Truth’ – NASA…
Tony Heller of Real Climate Science has spent thousands upon thousands of hours of unpaid work exposing the relentless fraudulent adjustments and data tampering pushed out of government (taxpayer funded) climate institutions – NASA, NOAA, NSIDC, NCDC, CSIRO, BoM, UN IPCC to name a few.
The fraudulent data is then fed to the sycophant, global warming alarmist mainstream media, published as gospel, and voilà – the “Climate Change Crisis” is born!
This recent post via Real Climate Science on NASA tampering of Sea-level rise highlights the blatant malfeasance that these government funded institutions will undertake in order to push the man-made
global warming climate change agenda, and keep the “Greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud in history” rolling and the billions upon billions of taxpayer funds flowing…
In 1982, NASA showed that sea level rise dropped off sharply after 1950.
NASA said that there was a high correlation with global surface temperature (i.e. global warming occurred from 1880 to 1940 and slowed considerably after 1950.)
In 1990, the IPCC said there was no convincing evidence of an acceleration in sea level rise during the 20th century.
The 1995 IPCC report showed no warming from the 1950’s to the 1990’s.
The NASA/IPCC data wrecked two essential parts of the global warming scam – post-1950 warming and post-1950 sea level rise. So they found people who were willing to change the data to match the models. The current NASA sea level data is based on this confirmation bias fishing expedition.
This acceleration is an important confirmation of climate change simulations
Church J, White N.. A 20th century acceleration in global sea-level rise. Geophys Res Lett 33: L01602
The overlay below shows how they changed the post-1950 data to match the theory.
Church and White discovered a mysterious break in sea level in the year 1926, when sea level rise rates suddenly increased by almost 250% to 1,94 mm/year.
I can’t find one single tide gauge anywhere on the planet which shows this post-1926 acceleration. The Church and White study is utter nonsense.
But the NASA fraud gets worse. Their tide gauge data says 1.94 mm/year, but their web site shows 3.4 mm/year.
Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Sea Level
Only 10% of NOAA tide gauges show that much sea level rise, and all of those are in places where the land is rapidly sinking.
Sea Level Trends – MSL global stations trends table
NOAA says sea level is rising half as fast as NASA’s claims.
absolute global sea level rise is believed to be 1.7-1.8 millimeters/year
Sea Level Trends – Global Regional Trends
NASA sea level claims are blatant fraud – being done right in front of our faces.
NASA Global Temperature Fraud Related :
Sea Level Rise Fraud Related :
Mainstream Media Sea Level Rise Alarmism :
Sea Level Rise Related :
NASA / NOAA Data Fraud Related :