CONTRARY to popular thinking and clever marketing, there is no “consensus” on the theory of dangerous man-made climate change. Too many variables exist within the climate system to allow for certainty of future scenarios.
THIS doesn’t deter the $2,000,000,000,000 US per year (2 Trillion) Climate Crisis Industry who manufacture catastrophic climate scenarios (pushed far enough into the distant future as to not be held accountable) with a guarantee of climate calamity unless their utopian ‘green’ dreams are realised.
BUOYED by their recent House Congress win in the 2018 mid-term elections, the hard-Left of the American Democrat party, led by pinup-socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, have doubled-down on their pet global warming theory, proposing the radically-dystopian climate agenda, a Green New Deal.
FOR all the economic pain and social upheaval that inevitably ensues when draconian climate policy is enacted, it is only fair and reasonable for the taxpayer to ask one simple question about a climate which demands so much of their hard-earned money – “what is broken?”.
THE best way to answer this is to look at the current state of a set of common environmental metrics and analyse their relationship with carbon dioxide – the colourless, odourless, tasteless trace gas at the centre of the supposed “climate crisis”.
CLIMATE CHANGE METRICS
- EXTREME WEATHER (Heatwaves, Cyclones, Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Drought, Floods)
- SEA LEVELS
- POLAR BEARS
- GLOBAL GREENING
- GLOBAL FOOD PRODUCTION
- GLOBAL TEMPERATURE
IN the interests of “cherry-picking”, there are a myriad of environmental metrics that make up the climate system. The examples cited for the purpose of this report are the more common associations picked up by the press and interest groups to facilitate climate change discussion and ‘debate’.
*THE empirical evidence featured in this post is taken from the latest data supplied by government scientific agencies and peer-reviewed studies. Hyper and direct links supplied per sample.
STATE OF ARCTIC SEA-ICE : 2018 SUMMER MINIMUM
ARCTIC SEA-ICE EXTENT (September 2018)
MINIMUM sea-ice extent has been trending up over the past decade. The EXACT opposite of what the press and ‘97% experts’ have been telling you :
ARCTIC SEA-ICE EXTENT TO DATE
ARCTIC sea-ice extent is very close to the 1981-2010 median:
ARCTIC sea-ice extent is essentially unchanged since January 2006:
ARCTIC SEA-ICE VOLUME
THE area of the Arctic covered with thick sea ice has greatly expanded over the past eleven years:
SO far this month, ice volume gain has seen a record high:
AND January 9 Arctic sea ice volume has been increasing for over a decade:
*Support data Via Real Climate Science
MINIMUM sea-ice volume has been rising since 2007:
ARCTIC temperatures correlate almost perfectly with ocean circulation cycles, and show no correlation with atmospheric CO2 levels.
ALARMIST MAINSTREAM MEDIA ARCTIC HYSTERIA
CLIMATE ‘experts’ describe these record large increases in ice as an unprecedented meltdown:
MORE on Arctic Sea-Ice Expansion :
- ARCTIC SEA-ICE EXPLOSION : Largest Increase In November Sea Ice Volume On Record | Climatism
- ARCTIC Supply Service Cancelled : Canadian Coast Guard’s Largest Icebreaker Thwarted By “Extreme Ice” | Climatism
- ICEBREAKER Encounters Most Difficult Arctic Ice Conditions In 15 Years | Climatism
- ICE, ICE BABY! Huge Expansion Of Thick Arctic Ice Over The Last Ten Years | Climatism
- ARCTIC Ice Flash Freezing | Climatism
- STUBBORN : Arctic Sea Ice Just Won’t Play The Game | Climatism
- GLOBAL WARMING SMACKDOWN! Tankers Trapped In Midsummer Arctic Sea Ice | Climatism
- CLIMATE CHANGE Predictions Are “Toast”! Arctic Sea Ice Volume Highest In 14 Years | Climatism
THE South Pole has been a thorn in the side for warming alarmists with the giant ice continent gaining mass and cooling for decades. This despite a 20 per cent increase in atmospheric CO2, and model predictions to the contrary.
2015 NASA STUDY
GUARDIAN REPORT 2015
2016 NATURE STUDY
WHAT’S DRIVING ANTARCTIC SEA-ICE GROWTH?
THANKS to the Journal of Climate by Josefino Comiso et al, we now know what’s driving the increase in Antarctic sea-ice. It’s – wait for it – cooling temperatures over the ocean surrounding Antarctica…
2016 SEA-ICE LOSS
DURING 2016 there was substantial sea-ice loss which still reflects on the record and has become a popular talking point for warmists aiming to discredit the Antarctic with its stable and ‘inconvenient’ ice growth over many decades.
HOWEVER, sound ‘science’ confirmed this was due, not to human-induced “climate change” but thanks to a ‘perfect storm’ of tropical, polar conditions’ :
“This was a really rare combination of events, something that we have never seen before in the observations,” Stuecker said.
LATEST DECEMBER 2018 / JANUARY 2019 ANTARCTICA ANOMALY NSIDC
ANTARCTICA monthly sea-ice extent is very close to the 1981-2010 median:
ANTARCTICA daily sea-ice extent, close to the 1981-2010 median:
THESE charts at odds with NSIDC SH anomaly 1978-2018… (There has been some massive ice growth since I last checked the “blue marble” charts. Both are now back to the 1981-2010 median!?)
2018 ANTARCTIC, BACK-ON-TRACK
APRIL 2018 : BBC was reporting on a big increase in Antarctic snowfall with “The effect of the extra snow locked up in Antarctica is to slightly slow a general trend in global sea-level rise.”
SOUTH POLE ON STILTS!
ANOTHER unique way of knowing that the Antarctic ice mass is growing significantly, year in, year out, is by the structural design of the Amundson-Scott South Pole Station:
THIS is the third station built at this site. The other two have been buried by snow! (see black dome of previous station now partially buried, top right of pic)
FOR the last several decades, Antarctica has been accumulating about 8 inches of snow every year and as temps never get above freezing, the snow never melts!
THE new building comprises 7 modular buildings that sit on stilts. Every year they jack up the buildings over the accumulating snow to prolong the life if the station:
THE South Pole represents 90% of the earth’s ice, and it’s getting thicker. A problem for climate alarmists and their contradictory UN climate models.
BUT, KEEP PANICKING!
ANY sign of ‘warming’ at the inconvenient South Pole sends the climate-theory-obsessed mainstream media into a collective meltdown.
A recent and ongoing example being the discovery of melt occurring along the Western Antarctic ice shelf caused by recently discovered undersea volcanoes, not by evil mankind’s gasses:
WEST-ANTARCTIC DOOMSDAY MEDIA …
- West Antarctic ice sheet collapse ‘unstoppable’ [ABC]
- Irreversible Changes Now Affect Antarctica and the World [Live-science]
- ‘Nothing can stop retreat’ of West Antarctic glaciers [BBC, By Jonathan Amos]
- West Antarctic ice collapse ‘could drown Middle East and Asia crops’ [The Guardian, Suzanne Goldenberg]
- Antarctica’s ice collapse threatens metres of sea level rise within decades [The Ecologist]
- Global warming: it’s a point of no return in West Antarctica. [The Guardian Eric Rignot]
MORE on Antarctica :
- BIAS BY OMISSION : No Mention Of Mother Nature’s Undersea Volcanoes In The Latest Antarctic ‘Global Warming’ Scare Story | Climatism
- ANTARCTICA : It’s Time We Had That Talk | Climatism
- Both Arctic & Antarctic Sea Ice Now at Historic HIGH Levels – Ice Age Now
LATEST ANTARCTIC “MELT” SCARE STORY JUST IN (Worth a read) :
- Taking down the latest Washington Post Antarctic scare story on 6x increased ice melt | Watts Up With That?
EXTREME WEATHER, the Climate Crisis Industries most revered weapon of mass hysteria has been scuttled, once again, by their very own authority, the UN IPCC! The latest report – SR15 – released in October 2018 by the UN’s holiest ‘science’ body finding, yet again, that there is “little basis or evidence” for claiming that heatwaves, drought, floods, hurricanes, cyclones, tornadoes have increased due to greenhouse gas emissions!
BUT, alas! Just as the “low confidence” extreme weather findings from the last SREX report (IPCC AR5 2013) were/are conveniently dismissed by the mainstream media and climate crusaders, so too will the latest ‘inconvenient’ findings from the SR15 ‘Special Report’.
WE know this to be true because the mainstream media and virtue-signalling politicians still manage to blame man-made ‘Climate Change’ for every
weather climate event – exceptional or tepid.
IPCC AR5 / SREX (2013) :
- No steel roof required: IPCC dials back the fear of extreme weather | Climatism
- Pielke Jr. Agrees – ‘Extreme weather to climate connection’ is a dead issue | Watts Up With That?
ACCORDING to the EPA, the low-CO2 1930s had (by far) the worst heatwaves in US history:
AUSTRALIAN TROPICAL CYCLONES
AUSTRALIAN tropical cyclones are declining in both intensity and frequency as CO2 rises:
NASA’s MSU satellite measurement systems, generate the RSS and UAH datasets, which measure the average temperature of every cubic inch of the lower atmosphere (0-10 kms), which happens to be the exact place where anthropogenic global warming is meant to occur, according to anthropogenic global warming theory.
AUS MAY TEMPS -0.4C BELOW AVERAGE
UAH temperature anomaly for May was almost half a degree centigrade (-0.4C) below the 4o year average!
SATELLITES have the obvious benefit of measuring only the atmosphere and the effect that carbon dioxide emissions may be having on the atmosphere. Satellite data is not polluted by UHI (Urban Heat Island effect) – artificial heat generated from city infrastructure; asphalt carparks, airpots, highways, AC vents etc.
TONY Heller did a survey of the ten oldest stations in New South Wales And Victoria, circled below. Three rural stations were not included because of obvious problems with the data, but none showed any warming:
The two urban stations at Melbourne and Sydney both showed strong warming, and both have disastrously poor siting of their thermometers in the middle of large cities.
By contrast, all of the rural stations show a long term cooling trend, with some recent warming. (Note that there is no data for the most recent years with some of the rural stations.)
THE Sun is 4.6 billion years old.
THE Sun has surface area is 11,990 times that of the Earth’s. Its diameter is around 1,392,000 kilometres (865,000 miles), about 110 times wider than Earth’s.
THE mass of the Sun is approximately 330,000 times greater than that of Earth. You can fit 1.3 million earths into it.
THE Sun contains 99.86% of the mass in the Solar System.
THE Sun generates huge amounts of energy by combining hydrogen nuclei into helium. This process is called nuclear fusion.
THE Sun’s surface temperature is 5,500 °C.
THE Sun’s core is around 13600000 degrees Celsius.
LIGHT from the Sun reaches Earth in 8 minutes and 20 seconds.
THE Aurora Borealis and Aurora Australis are caused by the interaction of solar winds with Earth’s atmosphere. The solar wind is contains charged particles such as electrons and protons. They escape the Sun’s intense gravity because of their high kinetic energy and the high temperature of the Sun’s corona (a type of plasma atmosphere that extends into space).
ALL that power and life-sustaining magnificence! And yet, the Sun is completely dismissed as a key driver of climate by the climate crisis industry. Why? Because, you cannot control the Sun, therefore you would be laughed out of town if you tried to tax voters for climate changes or weather extremes caused by the Sun.
THEREFORE, your lifestyle and emissions are to blame – CO2 the patsy – tax away and obey!
“Scientists now claim that a 0.0001 mole fraction increase in CO2 over the past century controls the climate. This is because the Sun can’t be controlled, scientists can’t pretend they know how to prevent bad weather, and politicians can’t use sunspots as an excuse to raise taxes and control energy policy.” – Tony Heller
CLIMATE alarmist outfit “Union Of Concerned Scientists“ recognises the Sun as a key driver of climate only up until the late 1970’s, before politics, ideology, power and control entered the ‘science’ of climate. The late 1970’s also corresponds nicely with a cyclical rise in global temps following the well-catalogued 70’s “global cooling” scare :
“Over the time-scale of millions of years, the change in solar intensity is a critical factor influencing climate (e.g., ice ages). However, changes in the rate of solar heating over the last century cannot account for the magnitude of the rise in global mean temperature since the late 1970s.” – Union Of Concerned Scientists
BIAS BY OMISSION
WHAT the “Union Of Concerned Scientists” won’t show you is that there have been similar warming periods of equal magnitude before the era of ‘human emissions’…
THE 2013 UN IPCC report claimed with at least 95 percent certainty that human activities – chiefly the burning of fossil fuels – are the main cause of warming since the 1950s.
“Drafts seen by Reuters of the study by the U.N. panel of experts, due to be published next month, say it is at least 95 percent likely that human activities – chiefly the burning of fossil fuels – are the main cause of warming since the 1950s.”
IDENTICAL WARMING TRENDS
THE 64 thousand dollar questions for IPCC cheerleaders:
- Which side is which time period?
- What caused the warming before CO2 became an issue to be essentially identical to the period when it is claimed to be the main driver?
- How is the IPCC 95% certain one side is caused by man and the other is not?
By Paul Homewood
Hadcrut now have numbers out for February, giving an anomaly of 0.523C, measured against the 1961-90 baseline, slightly down on January’s 0.556C.
This means that the last six months have been below 0.59C.
It is clear that temperatures are settling down at a similar level to the period between 2002 and 2007, following the record El Nino of 2015/16. Bear in mind as well that the degree of accuracy, according to the Hadley Centre, is about +/-0.1C. As such, it cannot be said that there has been any statistically measurable warming since 2001, or indeed previously.
It is possible temperatures may drop further in coming months, with weak La Nina conditions established, although these are predicted to disappear by the summer.
Satellite measurements from UAH also show a similar picture:
GLOBAL temps continue their cooling trend, rebounding off the 2015/16 Super El Niño – the strongest since accurate measurements began, caused by surface waters in the Pacific Ocean, west of Central America rising up to 3C warmer than usual.
THE latest UAH V6.0 February anomaly of +0.20 brings temperatures back to the levels they were at after the 1998 El Niño.
MEASURING GLOBAL TEMPERATURES – Satellites Vs Thermometers? Read the rest of this entry »
BETWEEN the start of 1997 and the end of 2014, average global surface temperature stalled. This 18-year period is known as the global warming “pause” or “hiatus” and has been the subject of much research and debate in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
THE rise in global temperatures that alarmed climate campaigners in the 1990’s had slowed so much that the trend was no longer statistically significant. This despite one-third of Man’s entire influence on climate since the Industrial Revolution occurring since February 1997.
THE pause took a pause during the 2015/16 super El Niño which was the strongest such event in recorded history and helped to make 2015 and 2016 the warmest years in the modern warm period. However, 2017 witnessed the biggest drop in global temps in recorded history, seen across most data sets, bringing temps back inline with 1997-2014 averages, rendering “the pause” alive and well, to date.
THERE has been a recent surge in media reports aiming to debunk and bury the inconvenient hiatus, not predicted by any climatologist, science agency, government body, media outlet or UN computer model.
A few of the latest attempts by the mainsteam media at re-writing climate history…
BEFORE it “never happened” – established, peer-reviewed climate science was all over the pause.
IN fact, before it was disappeared, the hiatus was central to the IPCC report…
THE “PAUSE” TIMELINE
1997 – 2015 TEMPS
PEER-REVIEWED PAUSE “SCIENCE”
FOLLOWING on from the landmark paper by warmist scientists in Nature Geoscience that concedes the world has not warmed as predicted this century, comes a new paper from Scafetta et al, confirming that the global warming “pause” or “hiatus” indeed lives on!
via GWPF :
The period from 2000 to 2016 shows a modest warming trend that the advocates of the anthropogenic global warming theory have labeled as the “pause” or “hiatus.” These labels were chosen to indicate that the observed temperature standstill period results from an unforced internal fluctuation of the climate (e.g. by heat uptake of the deep ocean) that the computer climate models are claimed to occasionally reproduce without contradicting the anthropogenic global warming theory (AGWT) paradigm. In part 1 of this work, it was shown that the statistical analysis rejects such labels with a 95% confidence because the standstill period has lasted more than the 15 year period limit provided by the AGWT advocates themselves. Anyhow, the strong warming peak observed in 2015-2016, the “hottest year on record,” gave the impression that the temperature standstill stopped in 2014. Herein, the authors show that such a temperature peak is unrelated to anthropogenic forcing: it simply emerged from the natural fast fluctuations of the climate associated to the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon. By removing the ENSO signature, the authors show that the temperature trend from 2000 to 2016 clearly diverges from the general circulation model (GCM) simulations. Thus, the GCMs models used to support the AGWT are very likely flawed. By contrast, the semi-empirical climate models proposed in 2011 and 2013 by Scafetta, which are based on a specific set of natural climatic oscillations believed to be astronomically induced plus a significantly reduced anthropogenic contribution, agree far better with the latest observations.
As explained in part 1 of this study , in the last decade future climate scenarios have been used to develop and politically enforce energy expensive policies to contrast catastrophic climate warming expectations for the 21st century. This has been done mostly by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [2, 3, 4]. Several studies based on general circulation model (GCM) simulations of the Earth’s climate concluded that the 20th century climate warming and its future development depend almost completely on anthropogenic activities. Humans have been responsible of emitting in the atmosphere large amount of greenhouse gases (GHG) such as CO2 throughout the combustion of fossil fuels. This paradigm is known as the Anthropogenic Global Warming Theory (AGWT).
However, before trusting GCM projections about future climatic changes, it is necessary to validate these models by testing whether they are able to properly reconstruct past climate changes. In Ref. , the authors have argued that since 2001 AGWT was actually supported by the belief that the “hockey stick” proxy temperature reconstructions, which claim that an unprecedented warming occurred since 1900 in the Northern Hemisphere, were reliable [2,5] and could be considered an indirect validation of the available climate models supporting the AGWT . However, since 2005 novel proxy temperature reconstructions questioned the reliability of such hockey stick trends by demonstrating the existence of a large millennial climatic oscillation [7-10]. This natural climatic variability is confirmed by historical inferences  and by climate proxy reconstructions spanning the entire Holocene [12, 13]. A millennial climatic oscillation would suggest that a significant percentage of the warming observed since 1850 could simply be a recovery from the Little Ice Age of the 14th – 18th centuries and that throughout the 20th century the climate naturally returned to a warm phase as it happened during the Roman and the Medieval warm periods [9, 11, 14- 16].
To test the reliability of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) GCMs, in Ref.  it was shown that for the period 1860-2016 they predict an excessive warming relative to four independent global surface temperature reconstructions. This was a first significant discrepancy between observations and models. Then, it was noted that AGWT advocates had claimed that discrepancies between observation and modeled predictions could occur because of an unforced internal variability of the climate system that the same GCMs are able to predict .
These people were very explicit by providing the following scientific criterion to validate the models: “The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 year or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create a discrepancy with the expected present-day warming rate” .
By using such a 15-year interval criterion, in Ref.  we tested the CMIP5 GCMs against the observations in the periods 1922-1941, 1980-1999 and 200-2016. The first two periods were selected because they are characterized by a strong and compatible warming rate but by very different rate of anthropogenic GHG emissions. On the contrary, the 2000- 2017 period is characterized by a very strong increase of anthropogenic GHG emissions while the temperature has been quasi stationary. Our statistical analysis  confirmed with a 95% confidence that the GCMs fail to properly reconstruct the temperature trends in 1922-1941 and in 2000-2017. Thus, according to the very criterion proposed by the AGWT advocates themselves, the GCMs used to support the AGWT are demonstrated to be flawed.
Herein, a detailed study of the natural climatic variability observed after 2000 in six available global temperature records versus the performance of the GCMs is carried out. We also critically analyze the year 2015-2016, which has been famed as the hottest year on record. We show that this anomaly is simply due to a strong El-Niño event that has induced a sudden increase of the global surface temperature by 0.6 oC. This event is unrelated to anthropogenic emissions. In fact, an even stronger El-Niño event occurred in 1878 when the sudden increase of the global surface temperature was 0.8 oC: see Figure 2 in Ref. . Finally, for the post 2000 period we compare the predictions of the CMIP5 GCMs used by the IPCC , against that of two semi-empirical models proposed a few years ago [15,19].
These models were based on a specific number of natural oscillations suggested by astronomical considerations plus an anthropogenic warming effect strongly reduced by 50% relative to the GCM predictions. We stress that the latter result is consistent with recent scientific literature findings  confirming that the real climate sensitivity to CO2 doubling is about half, that is between 1 oC and 2 oC, than what predicted by the GCMs supporting the AGWT, which is about 3 oC .
Warmist paper Millar et al confirming the warming slowdown in the first fifteen years of this century, contradicting UN IPCC Climate model simulations :
97% Of Climate Scientists Got it Wrong Related :
- Delingpole: Climate Alarmists Finally Admit ‘We Were Wrong About Global Warming’
- How scientists got their global warming sums wrong — and created a £1,000,000,000,000-a-year green industry that bullied experts who dared to question the figures | The Sun UK
- Climate scientists admit they were wrong on climate change effects | Watts Up With That?
The Writing Was On The Wall :
- 97% of climate models say that 97% of climate scientists are wrong | Climatism
- Establishing Propaganda Is Vital For Climate Action | Climatism
Global Warming “Pause” Related :
- The Pause | Search Results | Climatism
- Establishing Propaganda Is Vital For Climate Action | Climatism