Der Spiegel Demolishes Syria War-Climate Paper By Kelley et al.: ‘Hardly Tenable’…’Distraction From Real Problems’
Bojanowski writes that the decisive evidence in the paper is based on climate models, which show drier conditions for Syria as the greenhouse effect intensifies. However Bojanowski later points out that the climate system in Syria is highly complex and that even the IPCC questions the capability of models reliably simulating the climate system of Syria and that the models are in wide disagreement:
The region lies on the boundary of three climate regions where the weather patterns are hardly understood, the IPCC report says. Foremost the climate simulation models diverge widely from each other when it comes to precipitation. It thus appears unwarranted to use the results of models as a way of confirming the effect of greenhouse gases, believes [William]Briggs.”
Sparse data
Another problem with the study, Spiegel reports, is that the data used were way too sparse, and quoted climate scientist Tim Brücher of the Max Planck Institute for Meterology: “The data should have been handled more critically.”
“Renders a poor service on behalf of climate science”
Probably seeing the paper more as an embarrassment rather than a contribution to science, even warmist institutes were unable to refrain from critique. Bojanowski quotes Thomas Bernauer, a conflict researcher at ETH in Zürich: “The entire paper is problematic as it renders a poor service on behalf of climate science.”
“Study is problematic at a number of levels”
In total Bojanowski says scientists criticize the paper on five aspects, saying that after the criticism, nothing is really left of the paper. According to Spiegel, University of Hamburg expert Tobias Ide says, “The study is problematic at a number of levels.” Peace scientist Christiane Fröhlich of the same university says the civil war “had more to do with wealthy citizens provoking it“.
“A distraction” from the real causes
Francesca De Châtel, Syria expert at Radboud University in Nijmegen, called the paper “a distraction” from the real causes of the war, and pointed out that drought periods are more the norm for the region. The problems stem foremost from land mismanagement and shoddy agricultural practices. Bojanowski quotes De Châtel: “The role of climate change is not only irrelevant, emphasizing it is even damaging.”
No evidence linking drought to civil war
Also Norwegian doctoral candidate Ole Magnus Theisen states that there is no evidence of a relationship between drought and conflict, Spiegel writes.…
Fmr. UN IPCC Scientist Dr. Lennart Bengtsson Calls Out Spiegel On Climate Gloom: ‘Wrong…Hopelessly Naïve…Ought To Know Better’
…German Analysis: ‘Current Warm Period Is No Anthropogenic Product’ – Major Natural Cycles Show No Signs Of Warming!
German Analysis: “Current Warm Period Is No Anthropogenic Product” – Major Natural Cycles Show No Signs Of Warming!
Climate cycles and their extrapolation into the future By Dr. Dietrich E. Koelle (Translated/edited by P Gosselin) As the reconstruction of the climate’s development in the past by proxy data shows, there’s a series of temperature cycles that appear to be unknown, or ignored by many climate scientists. Among these are the larger climate cycles of 150 million to 180 million years (see Part 1 and Part 2), but also the shorter and for us the more important following cycles: 1000 years (900-1100) Suess cycle with +/- 0.65°C 230 years (230-250) deVries cycle with +/- 0.30°C 65 years (60-65) Ocean cycles with +/- 0.25°C In principle these cycles are sinusoidal in behavior as depicted in Figure 1. Bob Tisdale has also shown how the temperature increase of the 65-year cycle from 1975 to 1998 led to the assumption that it is due CO2 emissions because they too happened to be parallel. This has been naively extended all the way to the year 2100 and forms the basis for the climate models and the invention of the so-called “climate catastrophe”. Figure 1: Sine wave characteristic of the 60/65-year ocean cycle (Source: Bob Tisdale at WUWT). In this analysis we will attempt to see how the temperature development could be over the next 700 years, assuming of course that the mentioned climate cycles of the past will continue on into the future. This should not be (mis)understood as a forecast for the future climate. Up to now there is only the IPCC forecast that the global temperature will rise by 2 to 5°C by the year 2100 – based only on the expected CO2 increase. However that theory has failed to work over the last 18 ears because the various natural climate factors and cycles never got considered, or they were not allowed to be considered in the climate models. Included among these factors are the mean cloud cover (albedo) and the resulting effective solar insolation (watts per sqm) at the earth’s surface, or the sea surface, which is decisive for the temperature development.Next Figure 2 below depicts the 1000-year cycle and the 230-year cycle, which have been reconstructed from historical proxy data. They stem from a combination of results from various publications in the field of paleoclimatology over the last years. The …
44-Year Veteran Meteorologist Calls Climate Protection ‘Ridiculous’ …’A Deception’!
University Of Augsburg 44-Year Veteran Meteorologist Calls Climate Protection “Ridiculous”…”A Deception”!
I was notified by reader Ken of an interview conducted by German daily Augsburger Zeitung (AZ), appearing in the hard copy edition. 44-year veteran meteorologist Klaus Hager. Photo credit: University of Augsburg Interviewed was meteorologist Klaus Hager. He was active in meteorology for 44 years and now has been a lecturer at the University of Augsburg almost 10 years. He is considered an expert in weather instrumentation and measurement. The Augsburger Zeitung writes that “hardly any of his colleagues are as familiar with the weather as the 73-year old is“. “Fluctuations dominate climate, not trends” The Augsburger Zeitung wanted to know Hager’s views on climate change. Hager doesn’t hold back any punches, claiming that “people are being deceived” on the subject and that man’s influence on the climate is very small. On whether temperatures are warming in the Augsburg region, Hager says there is “no detectable trend showing this is so” and that it’s been cooling since 2005. When it comes to the climate variability, he agrees with Professor Lauscher of the University of Vienna: “Fluctuations dominate climate, not trends“. Warming an artifact of new instrumentation One reason for the perceived warming, Hager says, is traced back to a change in measurement instrumentation. He says glass thermometers were was replaced by much more sensitive electronic instruments in 1995. Hager tells the SZ (my emphasis): For eight years I conducted parallel measurements at Lechfeld. The result was that compared to the glass thermometers, the electronic thermometers showed on average a temperature that was 0.9°C warmer. Thus we are comparing – even though we are measuring the temperature here – apples and oranges. No one is told that.” Hager confirms to the AZ that the higher temperatures are indeed an artifact of the new instruments. Hager also calls climate change and climate protection “ideologically charged topics“. “People are being deceived especially when it comes to reducing CO2.” He tells the AZ that weather depends on dozens of single factors – all of various weighting. The AZ, seemingly stunned by it all, asks Hager: “So you’re saying that the calls for climate protection connected to CO2 are not serious?” Hager confirms, answering: The CO2 taxes that are being levied are actually a sin against national wealth. If you want to stop the alleged climate change, then you need to ask what …
Die Zeit Interview With Hans von Storch: ‘No Intensification In Storm Activity’…All ‘Within Range Of Natural Variability’
Die Zeit Interview With Hans von Storch: “No Intensification In Storm Activity”…All “Within Range Of Natural Variability”
The online center-left Die Zeit features an interview with Prof Hans von Storch, Professor at the Meteorological Institute of the University of Hamburg and Director of the Institute for Coastal Research at the Helmholtz Research Centre in Geesthacht, Germany. The focus was on mainly storm activity and its possible link to man-made climate change. In the end the very green-oriented Die Zeit did not get the sound bites it likely had hoped to get. All within natural varibility In the interview, in response to the question of storm frequency and intensity, von Storch, a renowned climate scientist with 40 years of experience, says: We see no intensification in storm activity at our latitudes, and our climate models also indicate that we cannot expect it. Also since 1950 they have not become systematically more frequent or stronger. Therefore we believe that Christian [October 2013 North Sea storm] moved within the range of normal variability.” Von Storch also tells Die Zeit that storms do not occur with a rather regular periodicity, saying that “sometimes there are decades when they rumble a lot, and some decades when they don’t.” The north German professor also tells Die Zeit it is very difficult to make comparisons between the storms of today and those of decades ago because the data recorded back then are nowhere near as complete: If you simply compared the pressure values with those from a few decades ago, then you would reach the conclusion: Yes, the storms have become more powerful. But that would be a faulty conclusion.” The reason for this, von Storch explains, is that the measurement of the storms core pressure was very inadequate and readings were often taken by ships that were not located near core of the storm. Today satellites provide very reliable data for comparisons.” Climate models do not indicate future intensification On the future of storms and increased intensity, von Storch tells Die Zeit no one can rule it out, of course, but thinks it’s “implausible“. “Our climate models do not lead us to expect it.” Von Storch also cautions against putting too much emphasis on model results: Ultimately, however, observations and not climate models decide. We always have to expect that we will know the truth only afterwards. We can’t predict everything with certainty.” “Pause” has …
Der Spiegel Dumps Cold Water On ‘Record Warm Year’ Significance … Sees Science Fraught With Widespread Uncertainty
Spiegel Dumps Cold Water On “Record Warm Year” Significance … Sees Science Fraught With Widespread Uncertainty
Now that a couple of surface temperature data sets are showing 2014 was a “record warm year,” people are wondering if it means the warming pause is over, and if so, how much climate sensitivity to CO2 there really is. Online Spiegel science journalist Axel Bojanowski (a geologist) has an analysis of 2014’s “record warm year” and asks if it means global warming has resumed after “a pause since the end of the 1990s”. He describes how climate scientists have been dumbfounded by the “unexpected warming pause”. A number of scientists blame the oceans for absorbing the heat out of the atmosphere. Japan’s meteorological services report that global surface temperature has risen 0.7°C in one hundred years, he writes. On the significance of the warm year, the Spiegel science journalist quotes the German Climate Consortium: “The following years will allow us to judge the extent global warming at the surface of the earth has resumed.” And even the most alarmist organizations are conceding the global warming pause is real. For example the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) indirectly admits to Spiegel that the global temperature has paused, but reminds us that the 14 warmest years on record occurred over the past 15 years. On the future of warming, Bojanowski describes a science fraught with uncertainty when it comes to future projections: The UN IPCC continues to predict a hefty global warming should carbon dioxide emissions not be drastically reduced. But there are major uncertainties in the calculations and for this reason short-term fluctuations will remain unexplainable.” Readers should note at this point that this too also has to apply for “short-term” warm fluctuations, such as the one from 1980-1998. That one too must have been in large part due to natural factors. Bojanowski sums up his analysis by pointing out there is also uncertainty not only at the earth’s surface, but in the troposphere as well, writing that “satellite meaurements are astonishing” researchers: Moreover satellite measurements for upper air levels, which have been taken since the mid 1990s, show hardly any warming. Because of this, scientists are debating if the sensitivity of air temperature with respect to greenhouse gases is possibly less than assumed.” Bojanowski also points to conflicting scientific literature and papers when it comes to the stability of the Antarctic and Greenland …
Top German Climate Scientists See No End To ‘Warming Pause’. Now Concede Oceans A ‘Major Climate Factor’
Climate Custers’ Last Stand…Top German Climate Scientists See No End To “Warming Pause”. Now Concede Oceans A “Major Climate Factor”
Germany’s so-called Climate Consortium here has published a telling statement on this year’s “record warm year” in Germany and the reasons behind it. The Climate Consortium represents the collective position of all Germany’s scientific climate institutes. Although the statement claims the record year “fits very well in the picture of a long-term global temperature increase” it now concedes major natural fluctuations in the climate system. Less than 3 years ago, on February 6, 2012, the same site posted the following in a hasty response to skeptic book Die kalte Sonne: Pure natural fluctuations - such as changes in solar activity – on the other hand cannot be mainly responsible for the global warming of the past decades.” What a difference a couple of years can make. Now they are blaming precisely these “natural fluctuations” for the “warming pause”. Yesterday’s statement was authored by Germany’s top appointed climate experts (some are well-known IPCC scientists): Jochen Marotzke, Paul Becker, Gernot Klepper, Mojib Latif and Monika Rhein. Does anyone think they will do the honorable thing and admit that Die kalte Sonne authors Prof. Vahrenholt and Sebastian Lüning claims had merit after all? Professional and honorable scientists would certainly do so. On the surface the latest German Climate Consortium statement does its best to give the façade of a warming planet, but in the text the truth comes gushing out. They write that at 10.3°C, Germany this year is set to break the previous 2000 and 2007 record (9.9°C) for the highest mean annual temperature since recording began in 1881. But the statement then cautions: However, only the global mean temperature is a reliable indicator of global warming. If one takes the preliminary data for the months of January to November 2014 as a reference, then, since systematic data recording began, fourteen of the last fifteen warmest years occurred in the 21st century. Moreover it is too early to talk about an end to the now 15-year long ‘warming pause’ and to assume an accelerating warming over the coming years. The global earth’s surface temperature is subject to year-to-year and decadal fluctuations. Only with the following years will it be possible to judge to what extent global warming of the earth’s surface will resume.” This is an interesting statement. The scientists now …
German Renewable Energy Keeps Blacking Out! Supply Often Less Than 2% Of Wintertime Demand
German Renewable Energy Keeps Blacking Out! Supply Often Less Than 2% Of Wintertime Demand
My last post featured a commentary by renewable energy expert Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt, who forcefully conveyed the folly of Germany’s mad rush into renewable energy, and the country’s hysterical obsession with its suicidal fast-track shutdown of its stable base-electric-power generation. What follows are German electrical power supply charts that clearly illustrate in no uncertain terms Prof. Vahrenholt’s points. To show just how unreliable wind and sun really are, the first chart shows Germany’s power production, broken down according to the respective sources, over the last 3 and half days: Power generation Germany vs date/time. Source: www.agora-energiewende.de/Graph. Dark blue – conventional power (fossil and nuclear) Medium blue – wind Yellow – solar Green – biomass Note how there has been a virtual blackout by sun and wind since December 3 as Germany’s weather has been dismally gray and windless over the period. Such conditions are not uncommon in Europe and can persist for 2 weeks or more. Note how there are times when sun and wind combined were less tha 2% of the needed supply. Unfortunately, power utilities simply cannot call Mother Nature up and place orders for power days in advance. They have to just take what Mother Nature sends, whether they want it or not, and German law says they have to pay for it even when they do not feed it in. Supply havoc for no benefit What follows next is a chart depicting Germany’s power supply from each energy source over an entire year (sorry about the suboptimal quality of the graphics). Here we see that especially in the summertime both wind and sun can make a major contribution. But once again their wildly fluctuating supply creates havoc and problems that far outweigh any “benefit” the theoretical, imperceptible 0.02 or so degrees of less warming the planet might see over the next 30 years. Large-scale exodus of Germany-based industry looms And when the sun does shine and the wind blows many conventional power plants have to be throttled down to near idle, but can never be shut down because they have to be ready to fire up again as soon as the sun and wind diminish. This means these conventional power plants often run very inefficiently and highly uneconomically. So it’s little wonder E.ON is ditching the loss-making business of forced part-time …
Germany’s Growing Green Dictatorship: Grandmothers Putting Climate Protection Targets ‘In Jeopardy’!
…Germany’s Environment Minister Calls On Citizens To Turn Off Lights During Sex – To Protect Climate!
Germany’s Environment Minister Calls On Citizens To Turn Off Lights During Sex – To Protect Climate!
What follows is no joke, and tells us how far the German government is prepared to go in order to get its citizens to be nice to the climate.
Germany’s Ministry of Environment headed by socialist Barbara Hendricks has produced a series of video clips aimed at getting citizens to save energy, and thus do the climate good at the same time.
One clip shows a teenage girl coming home late one evening, quietly tip-toeing past the open door of a lit up living room, only to awkwardly catch her parents in the act. Embarrassed, the daughter turns off the lights.
A voice comes on:
The world says thanks. 5% less energy consumption in German households makes one coal power plant redundant. Together it’s climate protection.”
Some readers may ask if it’s customary for Germans to do it fully dressed. According to the video, it seems so. Perhaps the German Ministry of Environment has also decreed sex only in unheated rooms.
German ARD public television reports that the Ministry spent a total of 1.5 million taxpayer euros on producing the 30-second videos.
It really is amazing that bureaucrats are now telling citizens under what conditions to have sex: fully dressed, in a cold room with the lights on.
Another video shows an overweight man filling up his SUV with a jet ski in tow:
The message here, other than men being stupid fat pigs, is:
The climate says thanks. The climate is happy about every single bicycle ride.”
Another video shows a woman closing the window so she does not have to hear the sounds of her power-tool operating husband being eaten by zombies.
After she closes the window, a voice says:
The world says thank you. Stop leaving the windows open in the winter time. Airing out the house all at once for a short time is better for the climate.”
So not only does the room have to be dark and unheated, but the windows also must be closed when having sex (with all your clothes on) in Germany.
This is the nanny state at work. But here the nanny in charge obviously has really gone completely idiotic. Surely Chancellor Angela Merkel is relieved that these videos are not productions made by her