Tag: climategate

Last year the mainstream public prints were full of Net Zero-inspired nonsense claiming that the Gulf Stream could collapse by 2025. Classic green fear-mongering of course inspired by the 2004 Hollywood blockbuster The Day After Tomorrow with its harrowing portrayal of weather-related natural disasters. The overturning of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) could plunge the North Atlantic into a new ice age and have dire weather impacts across the globe, according to a new study. The author, Peter Ditlevsen of the University of Copenhagen, told the constantly-alarmed Guardian: “I think we should be very worried.” But this was a scare story too far and even some scientists expressed doubt about it last year. Now, a new study has been published that points out this alarm about the collapsing Gulf Stream was contingent on unreliable climate models and any collapse could occur from now to infinity.

In other words, nobody knows, not least because the uncertainties are too large “to predict tipping times of major Earth system components from historical data”. Pick your data and the AMOC collapses tomorrow or the day after never. The new study is important since it effectively debunks much of the climate ‘tipping point’ alarm that is commonly used to scare humanity to adopt the insane requirements of Net Zero.

The paper is mainly concerned with the AMOC and the Gulf Stream but also refers to the Amazon rainforest and the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets. It will be very difficult to dismiss or get retracted since the four authors are connected to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, a noted green activist scientific operation. Last year, for instance, when the AMOC scare was raging through mainstream media, Potsdam Professor Stefan Rahmstorf said the Ditlevsen study added to the evidence that the AMOC collapse “is much nearer than we thought”. We can’t even rule out crossing the tipping point in the next decade or two, he added.

Keep reading

How did you vote in the 2024 global People’s Climate Vote?

The People’s Climate Vote…

You’ve never heard of it?

Well, according to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the people have spoken. Between September last year and May of this, thousands of people all over the world were selected by dialling mobile phone numbers at random. Those who didn’t hang up were asked a series of questions about their climate views. According to the results, 80% of the global population believe their country should strengthen its commitments to addressing climate change. Seventy-eight per cent of the world believes their countries should provide more protection from extreme weather events. And only 17% believe their countries are addressing climate change “very well”.

One has to admire the UN’s chutzpah in calling a somewhat lame opinion poll not just a “vote” but a “people’s vote”. And it reflects the green blob’s growing desperation to connect the global climate agenda with the world’s eight billion people – a connection which is lacking in nearly every country that has put climate change agreements before its population’s interests. The problem of the democratic deficit has long beset the green blob. The UN and its agencies, national governments, global NGOs, national civil society organisations, news media organisations and academics have all decided that society and the global economy must be radically transformed. But this transformation has rarely been put to the test – the ballot box – to gauge the public’s appetite for either the transformation itself, or for the principles underpinning it.

Various attempts to overcome this problem have been tried. In Britain, the green blob – as represented by Westminster lobbying outfit, The Green Alliance – was fully aware of scant public demand for its policies. The Alliance’s 2018 report ‘Building the political mandate for climate action’ revealed that MPs’ “feel under very little pressure on climate change”, and “voters are not asking their representatives to act”. How then, to secure democratic legitimacy, or, at the least, avoid the appearance of bypassing democracy? The bright idea developed by the Green Alliance and others was the U.K. Climate Assembly, convened by Parliament the following year, and overseen by green blob organisations, such as the Alliance itself.

Keep reading

Last year the mainstream public prints were full of Net Zero-inspired nonsense claiming that the Gulf Stream could collapse by 2025. Classic green fear-mongering of course inspired by the 2004 Hollywood blockbuster The Day After Tomorrow with its harrowing portrayal of weather-related natural disasters. The overturning of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) could plunge the North Atlantic into a new ice age and have dire weather impacts across the globe, according to a new study. The author, Peter Ditlevsen of the University of Copenhagen, told the constantly-alarmed Guardian: “I think we should be very worried.” But this was a scare story too far and even some scientists expressed doubt about it last year. Now, a new study has been published that points out this alarm about the collapsing Gulf Stream was contingent on unreliable climate models and any collapse could occur from now to infinity.

In other words, nobody knows, not least because the uncertainties are too large “to predict tipping times of major Earth system components from historical data”. Pick your data and the AMOC collapses tomorrow or the day after never. The new study is important since it effectively debunks much of the climate ‘tipping point’ alarm that is commonly used to scare humanity to adopt the insane requirements of Net Zero.

The paper is mainly concerned with the AMOC and the Gulf Stream but also refers to the Amazon rainforest and the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets. It will be very difficult to dismiss or get retracted since the four authors are connected to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, a noted green activist scientific operation. Last year, for instance, when the AMOC scare was raging through mainstream media, Potsdam Professor Stefan Rahmstorf said the Ditlevsen study added to the evidence that the AMOC collapse “is much nearer than we thought”. We can’t even rule out crossing the tipping point in the next decade or two, he added.

The authors warn that “uncertainties” arise from models and mechanistic methods along with historical data. These all need to be taken into account and propagated thoroughly “before attempting to estimate a future tipping time of any potential Earth system”. In plainer language this can be read as a need to check the ‘garbage in’ before notifying the BBC and the Guardian of the ‘garbage out’. The big problem lies in the “multiple levels of uncertainty” inherent in extrapolating from historical data. Referring to the Ditlevsen paper that caused such a stink last year, the authors say they show that the uncertainties, mostly around sea surface temperature data, were too large to predict a tipping point for the AMOC.

Keep reading

Many valued readers advised against wading more deeply into Unlearn CO2, that doubtful and ridiculous tome of climate lunacy that first came to my notice a week and a half ago. Why should we waste our attention on the ravings of crazy people, they asked? Surely, our time is better spent pondering what the well-informed, the measured and the mature have to say.

I understand the objection, but I must reluctantly disagree. Climatism is a political programme bound to a broad social movement. Most of its momentum comes not from The Science or The Experts, but from diffuse cultural forces that we should probably try to understand, if only because they are driving our entire civilisation straight into the ground. Against all advice, I will therefore steer the plague chronicle into this ridiculous quagmire of leftoid green babble, with a look at our first lesson in Unlearnings, namely “Unlearn Repression.”

This superficial and disorganised essay is the work of an infuriating young woman named Katharina van Bronswijk. She’s a psychotherapist best known for her 2022 book, Climate in Our Heads. Fear, Anger, Hope: What the Ecological Crisis is Doing to Us. It belongs to that genre of inevitably unreadable monographs, in which the author herself appears on the cover, looking windswept, pioneering and undaunted.

Keep reading

A study conducted by a team of Australian and Chinese researchers has found that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are “driving increased plant growth that’s greening the Earth,” even in locations affected by drought.

The peer-reviewed study published in the journal Global Ecology and Conservation proves that the phenomenon called “global greening” is an undeniable fact. Researchers said the rate of global greening has increased slightly, and drought has only slowed but not stopped the process.

According to the research team, global greening could be attributed to carbon dioxide fertilization along with land management, such as irrigation. The study revealed that greening acceleration occurred in 55.15 percent of the globe, while browning, which is the opposite of greening, occurred in only 7.28 percent.

The researchers explained that when combined with meteorological variables, data showed that “CO2 change dominated the LAI [greening] trend.”

However, the fact that carbon dioxide emissions are linked to plant growth is not a new finding.

Carbon dioxide accelerates global greening

In 2016, a study that used NASA satellite data and published in the journal Nature Climate Change revealed that at least 25 percent to 50 percent of the Earth’s vegetated lands showed significant greening over the past 35 years.

According to Gregory Wrightstone, the executive director of the CO2 Coalition, global greening is one of the benefits of global warming that is often ignored and dismissed because it doesn’t fit the narrative that climate change is causing a crisis.

Keep reading

The United States Historical Climatology Record provides raw data on the mean temperature in the U.S. from 1895 to 2023. Over the past 128 years, the average temperature reading has fluctuated up and down slightly, but there haven’t been any significant warming trends over that time, and the fluctuations have not been extreme at all.

The warming effects of carbon dioxide may be demonstrated on a small scale, but these small-scale experiments are just a speck in the grand scheme of things and cannot be extrapolated at scale, especially when the resiliency and adaptability of the planet is capable of absorbing minuscule human effects. Sometimes a recipe cannot be scaled linearly.

The raw data confirm that man made activities haven’t had an impact on average temperatures across a century or so. To make matters worse, modern day climatologists are toggling the data to account for alleged biases that they believed occurred during the collection of temperature data many decades ago. The real biases in temperature reporting are occurring today, as climatologists try to affirm what they want to see.

Keep reading

The summer is more than half over up in the Arctic region and overall temperatures this season are repeating a pattern that began many years ago in that they are running at nearly normal levels which happens to be quite close to the freezing mark. The cold season in the Arctic has featured above-normal temperatures in the Arctic region in a pattern that has also been very consistent in recent years. It is the temperatures in the summer months of June, July, and August, however, which are the most important when it comes to Arctic sea ice extent as this is the melting season up in that part of the world. As long as temperatures remain nearly normal during the summer (melting) season, the chance for any additional significant drop off in sea ice will be limited. Indeed, given this consistent summertime temperature trend in recent years, Arctic sea ice has shown resiliency both in terms extent and in volume. One possible explanation of this persistent temperature pattern across the Arctic region with nearly normal summertime conditions and warmer-than-normal in the other nine months of the year (i.e., the cold season) is increased levels of water vapor in the atmosphere.

Keep reading