Scientists Find No Change in Global Warming Rate Since 1970 Despite “Hottest Year Ever” in 2023

A sensational science paper has blown holes in alarmist claims that global temperatures are surging. Just published results in Nature show “limited evidence” for a warming surge. “In most surface temperature time series, no change in the warming rate beyond the 1970s is detected despite the breaking record temperatures observed in 2023,” the paper says. Written by an international group of mathematicians and scientists, it is unlikely to be acknowledged in the mainstream media where general hysteria reigns over the anomalous 2023 experience. As we have seen, constant misinformation is published to scare the general public and this is exemplified by climate comedy-turn Jim ‘jail the deniers’ Dale forecasting almost daily Armageddon and exhorting people to “join up the dots”.

In science, one swallow does not make a summer and in climate science it is impossible to show a trend by picking on short periods or individual weather events. This paper is an excellent piece of climate science work since it takes the long statistical view and challenges the two-a penny clickbait alarmists looking for a headline on the BBC. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is a biased body but it understands the importance of long-term climate trends by stating, much to the chagrin of Net Zero-promoting activists, that it can find little or no human involvement in most extreme weather events either in the past or in the likely immediate future. But these findings, along with the paper on the warming trend, are inconvenient to those promoting the unproven claim that humans control the climate thermostat by utilising hydrocarbons.

The paper is highly technical and mathematically-inclined readers can study the full workings out in the open access publication. It notes that global temperature datasets fluctuate due to short-term variability and this often creates the appearance of surges and slowdowns in warming. It is important to consider random noise caused by natural variation when investigating the recent pauses in temperature and the more recent “alleged warming acceleration”, it adds. In fact there have been a number of plausible explanations given for the recent spike, with attention focused on the massive Hunga Tonga submarine volcano adding 13% extra water vapour to the stratosphere, a strong El Niño and even the reduction in atmospheric particulates caused by recent changes in shipping vessel fuel. Several “changepoints” were used by the mathematicians and it was found that “a warming surge could not be reliably detected any time after 1970”.

Keep reading

‘Anti-Energy Lawfare’: Millions in Dark Money Fueling Local Climate Lawsuits Across the Country, Congressional Investigation Finds

California law firm Sher Edling received more than $3 million in unreported dark money to push high-profile climate litigation on behalf of dozens of Democratic-led cities and states, according to a Monday congressional report obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

Sher Edling, the Senate Commerce Committee and House Oversight Committee report found, received $2.9 million last year from the Collective Action Fund for Accountability, a shadowy group managed by the New Venture Fund. Because the contributions were made in 2023, the New Venture Fund, a Washington, D.C.-based dark money organization, isn’t required to disclose them until it files its next annual 990 form with the IRS in mid-November. Sher Edling also received a previously unreported check worth $235,000 in 2022 from the Tides Foundation, a grantmaking organization that wired a staggering $667 million to dozens of progressive causes in 2022, its most recent tax filings show.

The newly uncovered funds shed light on how powerful progressive interests continue to work hand in hand with Democrats to punish oil and gas companies. Sher Edling was founded in 2016 to take up risky first-of-their-kind lawsuits against the oil and gas industry, accusing the industry of causing global warming and arguing it is financially responsible for extreme weather events such as hurricanes and tornadoes.

Most of Sher Edling’s cases are working their way through state courts, even as the oil industry has pushed for them to be litigated in federal courts. If successful, the suits could force oil companies to pay billions of dollars in climate damages to local and state governments. Sher Edling would receive a large portion of that settlement money, according to its legal services contracts.

As 501(c)(3) nonprofits, the New Venture Fund and Tides Foundation aren’t legally required to disclose their donors. Together, the two groups received $1.3 billion in contributions and grants from anonymous donors in 2022 alone. As a result, it’s largely unclear who exactly employed the organizations to send grant money to Sher Edling.

Since it was founded in 2016, Sher Edling has agreed to represent dozens of states and cities in climate-related cases, including Delaware, Minnesota, Rhode Island, New Jersey, New York City, Chicago, Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Baltimore, and Honolulu. In the cases, Democratic prosecutors have argued the oil and gas industry is responsible for global warming and that it has deceived consumers about the downstream impacts of their petroleum products for decades.

Critics have blasted the litigation, labeling it a backdoor effort to bankrupt oil and gas companies and peg the industry for local emissions. Still, activists say the lawsuits are a critical part of the broader effort to curb reliance on fossil fuels and boost green energy.

Keep reading

Media Uses Hurricane Helene To Promote “Global Warming” Agenda

Even as the death toll from Hurricane Helene continues to rise, pundits in the mainstream media are rushing to use the disaster as an excuse to promote their narrative that “global warming” is real.

As reported by Just The News, a number of prominent anchors, commentators, and other television personalities have used the occasion of the hurricane to spread lies about so-called “global warming,” also referred to as “climate change.”

“We are living in an era of extreme weather that requires new language,” said CBS News’ Major Garrett.

He went on to falsely claim that the world has seen an increase in the number of every kind of natural disaster, despite this having been debunked by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

CNN’s Angela Fritz declared that Hurricane Helene was caused by “fossil fuel pollution,” claiming with no evidence that “the atmosphere, warmed by more than a century of fossil fuel pollution, is hotter now than it was in pre-industrial times.”

However, studies have shown that carbon dioxide emissions are created by just about every single process in existence that provides basic necessities to the population, including the shipping of materials and products, ranging from food to clothing.

Fritz went on to further claim that “More than 90% of warming around the globe over the past 50 years has taken place in the oceans, and it’s making storms more likely to undergo these rapid intensification cycles.”

But this claim has also been disproven, with Dr. Matt Wielicky, former assistant professor in the Department of Geological Sciences at the University of Alabama, explaining how two consecutive similar tropical storms that impacted North Carolina in 1916 were even worse than Helene despite lower carbon emission levels overall.

“The 1916 event occurred even though atmospheric CO2 levels were approximately 120 ppm lower than they are today,” Wielicki confirmed.

“Blaming the fossil fuel industry for all weather-related disasters overlooks the complexity of natural climate variability and the role of poor urban planning in flood-prone regions.”

The subject of global warming was brought up at the vice presidential debate on Tuesday night, with CBS News’ moderators blaming global warming for the hurricane.

After both candidates gave their answers on the statement, the moderators falsely claimed that the “scientific consensus” is that global warming is real, even though there is no such consensus.

Keep reading

Plain truth: Carbon credits are worthless

The first thing people have to know is there is absolutely zero scientific evidence  that CO2, cars, oil, coal, natural gas, methane, or anything else that is being blamed for the climate has any direct relationship with temperatures, sea levels, or storm activity. 

Temperatures have risen and fallen the last 160 years, just as they have for billions of years, while we have used all of these products. 

Droughts come and go today, as they have throughout history.  The reason there are so many deserts is long droughts throughout history. 

Floods and storms come and go, as they always have.  The Earth is 70% covered by water because of huge periods of precipitation, unaffected by humans.

So, essentially, reducing carbon is a government policy created in search of a solution when the problem hasn’t been identified. 

Carbon credits were created as a means for billionaires, governments, and companies to pretend they were doing something to control the climate and to offset their huge carbon footprint.  The market has moved around billions of dollars as a fictional solution.  It is essentially fraud. 

When a billionaire like Bloomberg or Bill Gates purchases carbon credits or plants trees, it does nothing to reduce the carbon emitted by their jets and mansions.  The carbon is exactly the same. 

When GM, Ford, and Chrysler purchase credits from Tesla to pretend they comply with government emission rules, it does not reduce the carbon from big trucks, but it makes Musk richer. 

Even though it is obvious that carbon credits are worthless, the WSJ, economists, bureaucrats, and other green pushers are still pretending they do something. 

Keep reading

IPCC Misled On Climate Data: New Report Shows Humans Not Behind Rising Temps

Data in a report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) suggests that Earth’s warming trend over the past two decades may not be attributable to human-related activity. [emphasis, links added]

Experts analyzing the report point to changes in the planet’s albedo — the fraction of the Sun’s energy reflected by Earth — as the factor driving the rise in global temperatures.

Albedo fluctuations have caused Earth to reflect less solar energy and absorb more, leading to the warming trend frequently cited by activists, advocates, and policymakers focused on addressing climate change.

As global leaders increasingly pursue aggressive policies to mitigate climate change, data suggesting human activity is not the primary driver could reshape public policy worldwide.

In a recent interview with SCNR, Ned Nikolov, Ph.D., a scientist specializing in climate, cosmology, and astrophysics, expressed concerns about the integrity of IPCC reports, accusing the panel of manipulating climate data.

Nikolov’s research, based on satellite data from NASA’s Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) project, reveals the IPCC misrepresented trends in solar and long-wave radiation by inverting the data.

He argues that instead of accurately depicting that the Earth is absorbing more solar energy due to reduced cloud cover — an observation supported by NASA — the IPCC altered the data to show the opposite, suggesting less absorbed solar energy.

Nikolov argues that this data inversion is no accident and suggests that the IPCC may have deliberately falsified this data to fit the widely accepted narrative of man-made climate change.

The IPCC did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Keep reading

MSM Journos Inadvertently Reveal Shocking Truth About Global Warming 

In recent years, particularly around mid-July (the peak of the Northern Hemisphere summer), there has been a noticeable surge in headlines featuring the “hottest day” ever on record in corporate media outlets – which is of course pushed by climate alarmist journalists citing questionable studies. This timing coincides with hot weather, so naturally, it’s quite convincing to persuade readers that the world’s oceans are boiling and planet Earth will ignite into a fireball unless drastic actions are taken – such as more climate taxes, ‘carbon credits,’ banning cow farts, prohibiting new petrol-powered vehicle sales by X date, and pushing spending bills to procure more solar panels from China, to save the planet.

The problem is that corporate media only focuses on recent history – and not “in context” (as they love to say). Context is particularly important when it comes to climate change – as their narrative collapses when looking at a long enough timeline.

To wit… a funny thing happened when the Washington Post tried to map out half a billion years of global temperatures and the “disaster of global warming” …

Keep reading

Shrinking island, vanishing polar bears — the climate scare stories that turn out to be false

Looking back on more than 20 years of climate agitation, two themes emerge: a stubborn unwillingness by campaigners to acknowledge any inconvenient science, and ever-shifting favorite stories, first elevated and then dropped by the wayside.

The one constant: a fixation on scaring the public, which has in turn shaped bad climate policies.

At the start of this century, the polar bear was the emblem of climate apocalypse.

Protesters dressed as polar bears, while Al Gore’s hit 2006 film “An Inconvenient Truth” showed us a sad, animated polar bear floating away to its death.

The Washington Post warned that polar bears faced extinction, and the World Wildlife Fund’s chief scientist even claimed some polar bear populations would be unable to reproduce by 2012. 

And then in the 2010s, campaigners just stopped talking about polar bears.

Keep reading

Proposed Australian plans for “energy efficient” homes will destroy private home ownership

The ClimateWorks Centre has devised a “renovation wave” plan for household upgrades and preparing occupants for more frequent extreme temperatures, heatwaves and climate-related events.

It is claimed that upgrading homes built before 2003 to be more energy efficient with better insulation, electrifying appliances and heating, and adopting rooftop solar can save Australian households up to $2,200 annually on energy bills. The majority of existing residences across Australia (11 million homes) can benefit from thermal efficiency upgrades, making a renovation wave a feasible and impactful initiative, so it is claimed.

It is also claimed that by designing or renovating homes to account for expected climate impacts, such as increasing temperatures and extreme heat events, can mitigate the effects of climate change.

ClimateWorks Centre’s report identifies 16 archetypes of homes that cover approximately 80% of single-storey detached homes and townhouses, and over 50% of apartments. These archetypes provide a framework for homeowners, policymakers, and industry stakeholders to prioritize renovation efforts.

By investing in climate-ready homes, Australia can create a more resilient and sustainable built environment, while also addressing the cost-of-living crisis and mitigating the impacts of climate change, so they say.

Keep reading

Biden Admits Inflation Reduction Act was NEVER Intended to Reduce Inflation

PSA:  Joe Biden is still the president of the United States. Biden has been hiding on a beach in Delaware ever since his disastrous debate with Donald Trump that hard-launched Kamala Harris as the Democrat nominee. Biden is speaking off the prompter once again and revealing hard truths that have been concealed from the public. The Inflation Reduction Act, the largest spending measure in American history, was never intended to reduce inflation.

“We should have named it what it was!” Biden said at an event in Westby, Wisconsin, where he unsuccessfully attempted to tout the success of Bidenomics. The president referred to the Inflation Reduction Act as “the most significant CLIMATE CHANGE LAW ever,” adding, “by the way, it is a $369 billion bill, it’s called the–we we we should’ve named it what it was.”

Keep reading

Carbon dioxide and a warming climate are not problems, peer-reviewed paper says

According to a peer-reviewed paper published in the American Journal of Economics and Sociology in May 2024, “Carbon dioxide and a warming climate are not problems.”

The authors, Andy May and Marcel Crok, argue that the sceptical position on dangerous man-made climate change is supported by a comprehensive literature review.  In other words, those who are disparagingly labelled by the establishment as “climate change deniers” have credible evidence on their side.

Writing an overview of their paper, May and Crok said:

The case that human greenhouse gas emissions (mainly carbon dioxide) control the climate as claimed in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) or that the resulting climate change is dangerous, is very weak.

How do we show that assertion is weak? There are many options. The AR6 WGI [Working Group I] and WGII reports define climate change as the global warming since 1750 or 1850 … The Little Ice Age, a phrase rarely used in AR6, extends from about 1300 to 1850. It was a very cold and miserable time for humanity, with a lot of well-documented extreme weather in the historical record from all over the Northern Hemisphere. It was also a time of frequent famines and pandemics. We show that arguably today’s climate is better than then, not worse.Carbon Dioxide and a Warming Climate are not problems, Andy May Petrophysicist, 30 May 2024

May and Crok’s paper is behind a paywall.  However, they have made the submitted version, which contains all the changes suggested by the peer-reviewers, publicly available: See HERE.

Keep reading