Advertisements

TOP 10 Climate Change Alarmist Myths Unearthed : #3 OCEAN ACIDIFICATION

CLIMATE CHANGE Alarmist Myths Unearthed OCEAN ACIDIFICATION


“CLIMATE alarmism is a gigantic fraud: it only survives by suppressing dissent and by spending tens of billions of dollars of public money every year on pseudo-scientific propaganda.” – Leo Goldstein

*

CLIMATISM TOP 10 ALARMIST MYTHS – Intro

EXCESSIVE or exaggerated alarm about a real or imagined threat is fundamental in driving the human CO2-induced global warming climate change narrative.

THE most popular climatic and weather-related events, as marketed by the Climate Crisis Industry, fall well within the bounds of natural variability. So, in order for such events to make the headlines, attract taxpayer funding for ‘research’, and advance the misanthropic, man-made climate change agenda, they must be accompanied by inflated language, an urgent tone, imagery of doom, and in many cases, fraudulent data.

IN this series we take an objective/sceptical look at ten of the more popular metrics used by warming alarmists to push the CAGW (catastrophic anthropogenic global warming) narrative, testing the veracity of the all-too-often wild and alarmist claims associated with each…

CLIMATE CHANGE Alarmist Myths Unearthed 3.png


#3. OCEAN ACIDIFICATION

“Corals evolved during the Cambrian Era six hundred million years ago, with CO2 levels 4000% of what they are now. They are made of Calcium Carbonate (CaCO3) – and could not exist without substantial amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere. Unless the chemical properties of CaCO3 have changed, the corals [and crustaceans] will be just fine.” – Tony Heller

*

WITH a stubborn atmosphere failing to warm as predicted, another climate threat was needed to sustain the Climate Crisis industry and keep lazy reporters supplied with junk science to feed their catastrophic climate narrative.

ENTER “Ocean Acidification”!

SOUNDS scary right? From the onset, the term “ocean acidification” was deceptive by design. And the only valid ‘science’ in the pseudoscientific study of “Ocean Acidification” is the ‘science’ of scare-mongering.

OCEANS are alkaline. The correct scientific term for any pH change toward zero is “less alkaline”. Obviously not the scariest of descriptors to shock the public into belief.

“OCEAN ACIDIFICATION” was first referenced in a peer-reviewed study in Nature in 2003, resulting in an explosion of journal articles, media reports and alarmist publications from environmental orgs. It has since gone viral, endorsed by scientists from numerous alarmist institutions including the Royal Society, the IPCC and NOAA who coined it “climate change’s evil twin” in a 2016 report.

*

A 2016 paper published in the ICES Journal of Marine Science put the issue of “ocean acidification” under the microscope, and found Scientists exaggerating the carbon dioxide threat to marine life…

Applying organized scepticism to ocean acidification research

“Ocean acidification” (OA), a change in seawater chemistry driven by increased uptake of atmospheric CO2 by the oceans, has probably been the most-studied singlem_cover topic in marine science in recent times. The majority of the literature on OA report negative effects of CO2 on organisms and conclude that OA will be detrimental to marine ecosystems. As is true across all of science, studies that report no effect of OA are typically more difficult to publish.

Excerpts from the paper:

Scientific or academic scepticism calls for critical scrutiny of research outputs before they are accepted as new knowledge (Merton, 1973). Duarte et al. (2014) stated that “…there is a perception that scientific skepticism has been abandoned or relaxed in many areas…” of marine science. They argue that OA is one such area, and conclude that there is, at best, weak evidence to support an OA-driven decline of calcifiers. Below, I raise some of the aspects of OA research to which I contend an insufficient level of organized scepticism has been applied (in some cases, also to the articles in this theme issue). I arrived at that conclusion after reading hundreds of articles on OA (including, to be fair, some that also raise these issues) and overseeing the peer-review process for the very large number of submissions to this themed issue. Importantly, and as Duarte et al. (2014) make clear, a retrospective application of scientific scepticism such as the one that follows could—and should—be applied to any piece of/body of research.

(Climatism bolds)

Applying organized scepticism to ocean acidification research | ICES Journal of Marine Science | Oxford Academic 

FROM an article in The Times :

An “inherent bias” in scientific journals in favour of more calamitous predictions has excluded research showing that marine creatures are not damaged by ocean acidification, which is caused by the sea absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

It has been dubbed the “evil twin of climate change” and hundreds of studies have claimed to show that it destroys coral reefs and other marine life by making it harder for them to develop shells or skeletons.

The review found that many studies had used flawed methods, subjecting marine creatures to sudden increases in carbon dioxide that would never be experienced in real life.

Dr Browman, who is also principal research scientist at the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research, found there had been huge increase in articles on ocean acidification in recent years, rising from five in 2005 to 600 last year.

He said that a handful of influential scientific journals and lobbying by international organisations had turned ocean acidification into a major issue.

“Such journals tend to publish doom and gloom stories . . . stated without equivocation,” he said. The bias in favour of doom-laden articles was partly the result of pressure on scientists to produce eye-catching work, he added.

“You won’t get a job unless you publish an article that is viewed as of significant importance to society. People often forget that scientists are people and have the same pressures on them and the same kind of human foibles. Some are driven by different things. They want to be prominent.”

(Climatism bolds)

Scientists‘ are exaggerating carbon threat to marine life | The Times

*

Patrick Moore: Ocean ‘Acidification’ Alarmsim in Perspective

From Moore’s report: Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

GLOBAL WARMING THEORY CHECK : Global Temps Continue Century-Record Plunge, Despite Rising Emissions!

Global Warming Freeze CLIMATISM


ACCORDING to NASA data, the recent 0.56°C plunge in global temperatures, following the 2015/16 super El Niño, is the greatest two-year cooling event in a century. “You have to go back to 1982-84 for the next biggest two-year drop, 0.47°C—also during the global warming era.”

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), the exact place where global warming theory is meant to occur.

MAY TEMPS +0.18C ABOVE AVERAGE

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.

GREENHOUSE GAS THEORY CHECK?

THE latest UAH V6.0 May anomaly of +0.18 brings temperatures back to the levels they were at the beginning of the Century, reinforcing the current 18+ year global warming “pause”, despite record and rising CO2 emissions…

UAH Global Temperature Update for May, 2018- +0.18 deg. C « Roy Spencer, PhD

UAH Global Temperature Update for May, 2018- +0.18 deg. C « Roy Spencer, PhD

Latest Global Average Tropospheric Temperatures

Since 1979, NOAA satellites have been carrying instruments which measure the natural microwave thermal emissions from oxygen in the atmosphere. The intensity of the signals these microwave radiometers measure at different microwave frequencies is directly proportional to the temperature of different, deep layers of the atmosphere. Every month, John Christy and I update global temperature datasets that represent the piecing together of the temperature data from a total of fifteen instruments flying on different satellites over the years. A discussion of the latest version (6.0) of the dataset is located here.

The graph above represents the latest update; updates are usually made within the first week of every month. Contrary to some reports, the satellite measurements are not calibrated in any way with the global surface-based thermometer records of temperature. They instead use their own on-board precision redundant platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs) calibrated to a laboratory reference standard before launch.

Latest Global Temps « Roy Spencer, PhD

CO2 CONCENTRATION Vs TEMPS – Correlation?

CO2 Vs Temp Correlation 1979-2018 CLIMATISM

CO2 Vs Temp Correlation 1979-2018 CLIMATISM

*

GLOBAL TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS – JUDGE FOR YOURSELF!

Satellites Vs Thermometers?

satellite-v-thermometer-628x353.png

*

SATELLITES

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, the exact place where global warming theory is meant to occur. Read the rest of this entry »


Global Warming Causes Volcanic Eruption: 2010

THANKS for clearing that one up for us all Chaam!

THE great irony is that the CO2-centric warming loons can ludicrously blame man-made CO2 for causing volcanoes, but are conveniently silent about what volcanoes spew out – CO2! And loads of it, all day everyday, above and below the oceans.

CO2 = Volcanoes – simply another crazed theory spewed out by pseudoscientific climate hacks in an attempt to bolster the crumbling climate scam and cling onto government grants no matter how stupid the theory.

🌋

Cha-am Jamal, Thailand

Reference: Ice cap thaw may awaken Icelandic volcanoes, April 17, 2010

1. Global warming scientists have come up with the idea that carbon dioxide causes volcanic eruptions in Iceland. The argument goes that carbon dioxide emissions cause global warming, global warming in turn causes glaciers in Iceland to melt, and melting glaciers lighten the weight of the ice cap on volcanoes and thereby trigger eruptions (Ice cap thaw may awaken Icelandic volcanoes, Bangkok Post, April 17, 2010).
2. It is clearly a sinister attempt to ride the media wave created by the volcanic eruption under the Eyjafjallajoekull glacier and to use that fear factor to sell the war against carbon dioxide. The reality is of course very different. Melting glaciers do not cause volcanic eruptions. Volcanic eruptions cause melting glaciers.
3. We now know that much of the glacier melt that the global warming people tried to pin on carbon…

View original post 141 more words


CLAIM : Climate Change Could Trigger Volcanic Eruptions Across The World

Volcano CO2 CLIMATISM


COLOURLESS, odourless, tasteless, non-reactive, trace gas and plant food ‘carbon dioxide’ – the miracle molecule that, according to ‘scientists’, causes these phenomena, amongst a million other things (see link 20) !

  1. Incredible shrinking sheep
  2. Boy Scout tornado deaths
  3. Lobster Cannibalism
  4. Longer days
  5. Shorter days
  6. Collapse of gingerbread houses in Sweden
  7. Surge in fatal shark attacks
  8. Bigger tuna fish
  9. Fish shrinkage
  10. Glacier grows (California)
  11. Glaciers on Snowden
  12. WAR!!
  13. Longer days
  14. Shorter days
  15. Screwed-up love making
  16. The Sinking of The Titanic
  17. No more red-haired people
  18. Pear-shaped women
  19. Incontinent, impotent bald guys with extra hair growing from his toes
  20. A few other things caused by global warming…

AND now, according to ‘esteemed’ taxpayer funded climate ‘scientists’, carbon dioxide has the power to shift tectonic plates summoning deadly Volcanoes!

WOW! What a gas.

ALL of a sudden, taxing and demonising this essential trace gas that plants use as food to grow and create oxygen, makes a whole lotta sense! Not.

*

HUMOROUS observation via Ms. Donna on Twitter :

*

TAXPAYER funded ‘scientists’ should be studying the effects of Volcanoes on our climate, not the other way around!

The effect of volcanoes on climate and climate on volcanoes

by Javier

The effect of volcanoes on climate

The relationship between volcanoes and climate is a very complex one. From reading the media one gets the impression that they are some sort of climatic wild card. They are used to explain the cooling after the Pinatubo eruption, or the Little Ice Age cooling as a detriment to the solar hypothesis. But they are also used to explain the warming leading to mass extinctions in the distant past.

Excellent read here via WUWT …

•••

Related :

See also :

“Hottest Year Evahh” related :

Origins Of The Global Warming Scam :

•••

PLEASE Donate To Climatism To HELP Keep The Good Fight Alive!

(Climate rationalists are still waiting for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Click link for more info…TQ! Jamie.

Donate with PayPal

•••


GREEN ENERGY FAIL : €Trillions Spent On #Unreliables In Europe Yet Emissions Keep Rising!

***

CLIMATE change bedwetters love to trash Donald Trump for pulling out of the failed Paris Climate Treaty designed to lower CO2 emissions that are apparently causing dangerous global warming climate change.

HE has been labeled a “planet killer” amongst a plethora of standard smear and slime attacks aimed at anyone who dares question the veracity and motives of the $1.5TRILLION Climate Industrial Complex.

*

WHERE Trump is 100% correct and the climate bedwetters 100% wrong is that US emissions have been falling, largely thanks to the shale gas boom.

THE graph climate alarmists and unreliable-energy rent seekers don’t want you to see:

*

WHY on earth would Trump sign up to an economy and job-destroying Paris ‘deal’, when the two biggest ‘polluters’ on the planet – China and India – get a free pass to burn unlimited emissions until 2030?!

AND, why would Trump sign up to the latest UN wealth redistribution scam when Europe, the epicentre of punitive climate change policy and green energy madness, fail to meet their own emissions ‘commitments’ despite spending trillions of €uros of other peoples’ money on failed ‘green’ energy?

EUROPE’S GREEN FAILURE: CO2 EMISSIONS RISING

*

BUT, AREN’T WIND AND SOLAR ‘POWER’ MEANT TO LOWER EMISSIONS?

URELIABLE-energy propagandists claim that wind, solar and other weather-dependent ‘energy’ sources will “Save The Planet” by lowering plant-food (CO2) emissions. But, the opposite is, in fact, occurring…

WHY?

ONE inconvenient reason for the rise in emissions, that you won’t hear reported on MSM news, ever, is because…

“Adding More Wind And Solar Power Ultimately Raises CO2 Emissions, As More Fossil Fuel Backup Capacity Must Be Built”

Source : IF CO2’s Your Poison, Renewable Energy Is No Antidote | Climatism

*

CLIMATE bedwetters need to take a deep, hard look at themselves through the epicentre of green central planning and draconian climate change policy overreach – Europe – where despite spending literally trillions of €uros, of other peoples’ money, on unreliable-energy – wind and solar – emissions have been rising, not falling! Read the rest of this entry »


BRITAIN 🇬🇧 Squanders £7bn a Year on Stone Age Wind Power

“In all, subsidies for wind power and standby will be costing the country more than £7bn a year, equivalent to about £270 per household.”

SKYROCKETING power bills, energy poverty and the decimation of pristine landscapes, all to feed the egos of climate theory obsessed politicians and line the pockets of rent-seeking, subsidy-sucking mega-green corporations.

CO2 reductions for all this pain? ZERO, actually increased emissions as more fossil-fuel energy sources are needed to cover for the times when the wind don’t blow and the sun don’t shine! 🤦‍♂️

STUDIES: Wind Power Installation Amplifies The Growth Of Fossil Fuel Energies https://shar.es/anXezw

STOP THESE THINGS

It takes a ‘special’ kind of person to still believe that a country can run itself on sunshine and breezes.

Idolatry, zealotry, and good old-fashioned pig ignorance are worn like badges of honour amongst the wind and sun cult.

Claims range from the ‘wind is always blowing somewhere’, ‘wind power is cheaper than coal’, and ‘competitive’ with everything under the sun blah, blah, blah.

Another mantra is that, either wind power receives no subsidies at all or, if that’s grudgingly conceded, then the subsidies to wondrous wind dwarf those shoveled out to evil fossil fuels. (On the latter they struggle to come up with a shred of evidence to support their case, and ignore the fact that coal miners and gas extractors and pay very substantial sums in royalties to governments.)

True it is that the manner in which subsidies are filched from unwitting power consumers and siphoned off to…

View original post 595 more words


THE SUN : Climate Control Knob, Enemy Of The Climate Cult

THE SUN and Planets 2000px-Planets2013

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.”

Experts surer of manmade global warming but local … | Reuters

IDENTICAL WARMING TRENDS

THE 64 thousand dollar questions for IPCC cheerleaders:

  1. Which side is which time period?
  2. 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?
  3. How is the IPCC 95% certain one side is caused by man and the other is not?

Read the rest of this entry »