Tag: climategate

Mysteries Surrounding The 2024 Atlantic Hurricane Season. CO2 Definitely Not the Driving Factor

According to the NOAA US weather agency, the hurricane season lasts from June 1 to November 30 of each year. During this time, the conditions needed for extreme areas of pressure to build up prevail. First and foremost, the water temperature of the Atlantic is decisive, but so is wind shear.

Storms were actually predicted for this year too. However, there have been almost no storms so far.

At X, US meteorologist Ryan Maue ponders the possible reasons and asks colleagues to think about why the models have failed so far this year. Some storms moved far from land to the north, where they weakened and only affected parts of the east coast of the US or Canada. At some point, they arrived in Europe as an area of low pressure.

Sahara dust

Maue suspects various reasons: The eruption of the Hunga Tonga volcano or a lot of Saharan dust over the Atlantic. Maue notes that the absence of hurricanes does not completely contradict the conventional theories on climate change. Fewer storms are expected, but possibly more severe ones. They have so far failed to materialize, which is a blessing for the people who may be affected. The Sahara itself is also currently experiencing a very rare weather phenomenon. It is raining heavily for the conditions there. 

Keep reading

City of Berkeley, California Attempts to Raise the Cost of Gas Stoves to ‘Disincentivize’ Their Use

Remember months back when the Democrats were caught trying to ban gas stoves? And remember how after they were caught doing this, they insisted it wasn’t true and mocked anyone who even brought it up?

Chuck Schumer even went in front of cameras and condescendingly said, “No one is coming for your gas stoves.”

Well, like many other supposed ‘conspiracy’ theories over the last few years, it turned out to be true. And now we’re learning that the left’s war on gas stoves is still happening.

Berkeley, California is trying to make it difficult to even buy one.

FOX News reports:

California city attempts to raise cost of gas stoves to ‘disincentivize’ natural gas infrastructure

The Wall Street Journal editorial board slammed the city of Berkeley’s attempts to raise the cost of installing gas stoves in commercial and residential buildings.

“Democrats insist they aren’t coming for gas stoves, but look at how the People’s Republic of Berkeley is trying to tax them into obsolescence,” The Wall Street Journal wrote in an editorial published Thursday.

The Biden-Harris administration received criticism from consumers and businesses after it announced energy efficiency regulations targeting gas-powered stovetops as part of its broader climate agenda. It later backed off from a more aggressive proposal announced in 2023.

“It is the intent of the People to disincentivize obsolete natural gas infrastructure and associated greenhouse gas emissions in existing commercial and large residential buildings, thereby reducing the environmental and health hazards produced by the consumption and transportation of natural gas,” the initiative supporting the measure in Berkeley says, per the Journal.

Isn’t it strange how this thing they insisted wasn’t happening is in fact, actually happening?

Keep reading

Reality Check: No, we didn’t just have “the hottest week in 100,000 years”

The buzz in the Climate Change news is that the five hottest days in the last 100,000 years all happened last week, according to the World Meteorological Organization.

You can read an article about it from Forbes:

The Fourth of July was the hottest day on Earth in as many as 125,000 years—breaking a record set the day before—as the return of the El Niño weather pattern collides with soaring temperatures at the start of summer, researchers say.

Or, if you prefer, you can read Climate alarmists rending their garments on Twitter.

Now, first off let’s be clear – we haven’t had the “7 the hottest days”  in the last 100,000 years since July 4…

…or, more accurately, there is absolutely no way for anyone to reliably know if we have or not.

Actually think about what they’re saying when they make this claim.

They are claiming that they know, for a fact, the global average temperature to two decimal points over the last 36 million days.

Couple of things to bear in mind here before we go any further.

1 – Humans have only had the ability to accurately measure the temperature of anything for maybe four-hundred years.

2 – Official “global temperature” records only began in 1880.

3 – Beyond  that point we only have partial, local and pretty inaccurate readings back to the mid-17th century.

That’s 400 years, give or take.

So, how do climatologists get the data for the other 99,600 years?

Well – they  guess.

Keep reading

Leaders of climate science societies are suffering from mass delusion

Wallace Manheimer argues that there is no scientific basis for expecting a climate crisis from increased carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere within the next century and the emphasis on a false climate crisis is becoming a tragedy for modern civilisation.

His research debunks many fashionable claims surrounding politicised “settled” climate science. And he argues that “Net Zero” policies would be disastrous, unreliable and expensive, both in the United States and globally.  He has also expressed dismay at learned societies making definitive claims despite the availability of contrary information.

Last year, Manheimer published a book titled ‘MASS DELUSIONS: How they harm sustainable energy, climate policy, fusion and fusion breeding’.

In June 2024, a paper authored by Manheimer titled ‘Science Societies’ Climate Statements: Some Concerns’ was published in the Open Journal of Applied Sciences. A summary of which, authored by Manheimer, was published last year in The Washington Times.

In The Washington Times’ article, Manheimer described how statements by scientific societies, such as APS, are often used to justify extreme measures for addressing a supposed climate emergency. However, these proclamations are frequently almost universally false and do real harm.

Manheimer highlighted APS’s statement on climate change, which asserts that anthropogenic greenhouse gases have become the dominant driver of global warming. However, he disputes this claim, citing a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) graph of world temperature from 1880 to 2022 showing that temperature increases before and after carbon dioxide’s rise in the atmosphere were similar. Additionally, he references historical and archaeological evidence of warmer periods, including the Holocene optimum, Roman optimum and medieval optimum, which contradict the notion of a catastrophic, human-induced climate crisis.

Keep reading

What harm will Bill Gates’ anti-methane vaccine cause to animals and the environment?

A US start-up, ArkeaBio, has created a prototype vaccine that it claims cuts methane emissions by 13% in a first trial involving 10 cows. The vaccine targets methane-producing bacteria in a cow’s digestive system.

“When it comes to climate change, a simple vaccine can be a powerful tool,” ArkeaBio says.

Climate cultists praise the development as significant because methane is a potent greenhouse gas, with a global warming potential much higher than carbon dioxide.

However, the very process they are trying to stop – the production of methane from methanogens in animals’ gut biome – is also the same microorganisms and process that has the potential to capture carbon dioxide and produce a renewable energy source – methane.

As usual, the climate change cultists are making no sense.  Perhaps it is because it is Bill Gates backing the project and it has nothing to do with “climate change mitigation” and everything to do with vaccines.  So how safe are these vaccines?

Keep reading

No, Oregonians Are NOT Being ‘Hit Hard’ By Climate Change

A recent article posted by Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB), titled “Climate change will keep hitting Oregonians hard, but the exact impact will depend on where you live,” claims that Oregon will be impacted severely on multiple fronts by climate change. Areas of concern include increased wildfires, sea level rise, and water shortages, among others. [emphasis, links added]

This is mostly false, as many of the problems listed are not worsening, and those that are have nothing to do with climate change.

OPB writes that different regions of Oregon will face different effects from climate change, which is reasonable; coastal communities will have to worry about sea levels more than those in Eastern Oregon, for example.

But the caveats listed by OPB are interesting. The story doesn’t just discuss geographic and natural climate differences, but also differing effects based on demographics, such as, “how many people live there, and how much money their local governments have on hand.”

Those two variables, and others like population growth and relative incomes, are independent of long-term climate change and even short-term weather events.

Regardless, the article goes on to make several false claims regarding the direct effects of climate change:

“The Oregon Coast faces sea-level rise, algal blooms and shellfish biotoxins. The northern Willamette Valley faces heat waves, higher landslide risks and increased water demands as the population grows. Northeastern Oregon faces longer fire seasons, scorched crops and increasing numbers of destructive pests.”

For the sake of brevity, we will not go into each assertion made in this post, but almost every one of these supposed hazards is overblown at best, and or simply not occurring, at worst.

Beginning with sea level rise, the average absolute sea level rise globally is about 1.7+/-0.3 millimeters per year.

Two out of the five available National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sea level monitoring stations in Oregon are slightly above that rate, at 1.78 +/- 0.58 and 2.52 +/- 0.61 mm/year, or the rest are below the average global rate. These rates equate to a rise of about 0.58 ft and 0.83 ft over 100 years, respectively (See chart below).

Keep reading

What a Carbon-Neutral, Socialist Digital Dystopia Would Look Like

Imagine a world where, the Green New Deal has given way to a grim existence where individual aspirations and family bonds are eroded by constant government intervention and an economy that no longer works for the people. The promised vision of a green, sustainable world has instead become a nightmare of scarcity, control, and despair, leaving society trapped in a Socialist cycle of dependency with little hope for the future.

This oppressive control stems from an executive order that granted the government sweeping, COVID-like powers to shut down the economy and impose severe restrictions on everyday life. The central government now controls essential resources such as power and water, with meters installed in every home to strictly limit usage. Each family is allotted a minimal amount of energy and water, barely enough to get by, and any attempt to exceed these limits is met with harsh penalties.

The state has also established a force of “climate police” who enforce these draconian laws. They regularly check for violators, looking for those who might disable the government-installed detectors in an attempt to take an extra shower or use more electricity than their ration allows.

Adding to this atmosphere of distrust, neighbors are encouraged to inform on one another. Those who report violations are rewarded, while those caught breaking the rules face public shaming or worse. The government even goes so far as to pit communities against each other by awarding a virtual certificate of achievement to the commune that uses the least water and power. This certificate, a meaningless digital token, is sent by the police as a so-called honor, but in reality, it serves as a tool to further divide and control the population.

Parents no longer have absolute rights over their children. The state has taken control of their education, with schools indoctrinating children into the government’s climate ideology, treating it as an unquestionable truth. It has become illegal for parents to provide their children with any information that contradicts the government narrative, labeled as “disinformation.” Although parents are closely monitored by government surveillance, this technology is almost unnecessary because children have been conditioned to believe that it is their duty to report any violations by their parents. The result is a society where the bond between parent and child is eroded, replaced by a climate of fear and distrust, with families living in constant anxiety over the possibility of being turned in by their own children.

Keep reading

New Research Shatters the Climate Change Myth

A revolutionary new study conducted by independent researcher Dai Ato has upended the climate change narrative. His groundbreaking multivariate analysis concludes that sea surface temperatures (SST), not human activities, are the primary drivers of atmospheric CO₂ levels.

The study, published in Science of Climate Change, shows that since 1959, no human impact on CO₂ levels has been observed. This finding debunks the central argument of climate alarmism and exposes the climate change movement as a massive con to enrich green corporations.

Sea Surface Temperatures: The Real CO₂ Driver

Dai Ato’s multivariate analysis focused on atmospheric CO₂ increases since 1959, comparing the influence of sea surface temperatures (SST) with human-generated CO₂ emissions. The results were clear:

  • SST is highly correlated with CO₂ increases (r = 0.749), while human emissions had no significant impact.
  • Ato found that natural variations in SST, not human actions, govern the fluctuations in CO₂ levels. This finding aligns with past research highlighting the oceans’ role in the carbon cycle, contributing 330 gigatons of CO₂ annually, compared to 37 gigatons from human emissions.

Keep reading

The science is in. Climate alarmism can end. Since 1959 increases in atmospheric CO2 is due to sea surface temperature

Last month, Japanese researcher Dai Ato published a study that examined the relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) levels and human emissions, with sea surface temperature as a key factor.

The findings reject the theory that human-caused emissions are the primary driver of atmospheric CO₂ increase. Instead, the study concludes that sea surface temperature plays a dominant role in regulating CO₂ levels and no human impact is observed.

Ato’s study was published on 16 August in Science of Climate Change, a not-for-profit independent scientific journal dedicated to the publication and discussion of research articles, short communications and review papers on all aspects of climate change.

The multivariate analysis used publicly available data from prominent climate research and energy-related organisations. He found that human emissions were not a determining factor in any of the regression models. 

A regression model is a statistical technique used to estimate the relationship between a response (dependent) variable and a set of explanatory (independent) variables. 

The study concluded that sea surface temperature (“SST”), not human emissions, was the independent determinant of the annual increase in atmospheric CO₂ concentration.

“This study is the first to use multiple regression analysis to demonstrate that the independent determinant of the annual increase in atmospheric CO₂ concentration was SST, which showed strong predictive ability. However, human CO₂ emissions were irrelevant. This result indicates that atmospheric CO₂ has fluctuated as natural phenomenon, regardless of human activity,” the study says.

“The global SST has been the main determinant of annual increases in atmospheric CO₂ concentrations since 1959. No human impact was observed.”

Keep reading

CO2 Has Been Indicted by Consensus, Not Real Science or Critical Thinking

When asking those who believe that CO2 is a major climate antagonist to make their strongest argument, their most common response is: “CO2 has been identified as the primary Climate culprit by the majority of experts (e.g., climatologists) and scientific organizations (e.g., the IPCC).” This is clearly a consensus claim.

I’ve repeatedly warned that one of the major fights we are in, is to defend genuine Science, as its enemies are actively trying to replace it with political science. This situation is a dead giveaway, as consensus is the currency of politics, NOT Science!

Put another way, the claim of consensus is deference to authority. They are saying don’t ask any questions! Just be quiet as others know a lot more about this matter than you do. Further, they continue, it’s not possible that all those experts would be lying to us!

Both of these are very reasonable viewpoints. However, whether or not they should end the conversation is the question. Let’s look at a recent very close Science parallel for enlightenment. Here is a layperson’s history of what happened…

There are roughly 8 Billion people on the planet who periodically experience stomach ailments (i.e., gastrointestinal distress). The concern often is: will these common human pains turn into something much more major — like an ulcer?

An ulcer is a perforation of the stomach lining, which is a serious matter, and there are about 4 Million cases of these in the US, every year — so it is relatively common.

For nearly 200 years the medical establishment believed that stomach ulcers (technically peptic ulcers) were caused by stress. The hypothesis was that stress produced excess (gastric) acid in the stomach, which (in turn) eventually ate away some of the stomach’s lining. (The first connection between these was made in 1822.)

Keep reading