Climate ‘Scientists’ Make the Election Pollsters Look Accurate…and 10x as Smart

https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/04/02/climate-scientists-make-the-election-pollsters-look-accurate-and-10x-as-smart/

Back in the 1970’s coming ice age scare, the climate alarmists were recommending spreading black soot over the North Pole in order to MELT THE ARCTIC SEA ICE!!! That isn’t a joke. Today they are hysterical about the natural variation of it being on the down-swing. Note how no matter what the situation, the answer is always greater government involvement and spending more of other people’s money.Capture13

While melting the Polar Ice Caps and stockpiling food back in the 1970s would have been one of the greatest misallocation or resources since Stalin collectivized the Soviet Farms, the political left just doesn’t seem to learn from history. In an effort to prepare for the “Endless California Drought,” California ironically didn’t build desalination plants to produce clean fresh water to address the water shortage, they implemented strict water rationing and built wind and solar farms. That may make sense to a population that buys “skinny jeans” to lose weight, and drive “smart cars” and use “smart phones” and live is “smart homes” on the “smart grid” to make these pseudo-intellectuals feel intelligent. To a real person, intelligence is demonstrated by developing proper and feasible solutions to existing real problems.

Capture14

Californians must have failed basic geometry, or slept through the class where the lecture was the “shortest distance between two points is a straight line.” To solve a water shortage, the most effective way to address the problem is by building desalination plants. California has an unlimited supply of water called the Pacific Ocean, they just need to process it for drinking. I fail to make the connection between a water shortage, CO2 and building wind and solar farms. If feeling smug and sanctimonious made it rain, then California would have its solution. Unfortunately, self-defeating symbolic efforts may make misguided Californians feel good about themselves, it doesn’t solve the water problem.

Anywho, that isn’t the point. The point is that by following the advice of climate “experts” California was focused on an endless drought when they should have been focused on the coming floods. California has a cyclical history of droughts and floods, man- made CO2 didn’t repeal that natural cycle. Californian droughts ALWAYS end, they always have, and they always will, regardless of the amount of man-made CO2. The real problem Californians now face is that their dams and other river/water control infrastructure have been severely …

Pause Or Not, Climate Models Continue To Grossly Overstate Global Temperature Trends

What follows is a wrap up of an article written by skeptic climate and weather site wobleibtdieerderwaermung.de here.

It writes that for thousands of years it has been the solar and ocean cycles that have been influencing the weather worldwide and in Germany.

And looking at data objectively, it is pretty clear that there is little relationship between weather/climate and the rising CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere, as the global warming pause between 1997-2016 shows:

Linear trend of RSS temperatures. No warming in 224 months despite the current powerful El Niño-event. “The least-squares linear-regression trend on the RSS satellite monthly global mean surface temperature anomaly dataset shows no global warming for 18 years 8 months since May 1997, though one-third of all anthropogenic forcings have occurred during the period of the Pause.“ Source: The Pause hangs on by its fingernails.

Naturally climate models continue to grossly overstate the trend for global temperature:

IPCC-Modellprognosen der globalen Temperaturen im Vergleich zu den gemessenen Temperaturen im laufenden Fünfjahresmittel: Die Klimamodelle weisen offensichtlich eine zu hohe Klimasensitivität für den steigenden Anteil des lebenswichtigen CO2-Anteils in der Atmospäre auf

IPCC climate models obviously have assumed an excessively high value for CO2 climate sensitivity. Source: On Natural Climate Variability and Climate Models.

The IPCC climate model projections diverge increasingly from the measured reality, year after year.

In fact new studies have clearly exposed three decisive errors in the programming of climate models:

1. The cooling effect of aerosols has been over-estimated by a factor of 2: Hamburg Max Planck Institute for Meteorology: Aerosols cool less than originally thought.

2. The warming effect of CO2 in in the atmosphere is as a result overestimated by a factor of 2 or three. See: Die kalte Sonne site here (German).

3. The complex effect of fluctuations in solar activity are poorly accounted for in climate models. Solar Forcing of Climate – NIPCC

The consequences: All parameters when used realistically lead to a considerably lower global and regional warming — especially in the future, see following chart:

Vergleiche der Klimamodellprojektionen für die globalen Temperaturen mit der gemessenen Realität

Source: Peer-reviewed pocket-calculator climate model

It’s time to end the hysteria surrounding CO2 and its grossly exaggerated effects on climate and the ridiculous efforts of protecting the climate on every point on the planet every day for 30 years (whose statistical average is the World Meteorological Organization’s definition of climate). Very little can be accomplished trying, and the price would be enormous and ruinous.

– See more at: http://notrickszone.com/2017/04/08/pause-or-not-climate-models-continue-to-grossly-overstate-global-temperature-trends/#sthash.ozs3j696.dpuf…

Oh No! Study warns of CO2 at 5,000 parts per million by the year 2400! ‘To cause unprecedented warming’

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2017/04/05/study-offers-dire-warning-climate-change/cyozAC0fjeamFAWhiEXAFL/story.html

WASHINGTON — Continuing to burn fossil fuels at the current rate could bring atmospheric carbon dioxide to its highest concentration in 50 million years, jumping from about 400 parts per million now to more than 900 parts per million by the end of this century, a study warns.
And if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated beyond that point, the climate could reach a warming state that hasn’t been seen in the past 420 million years.
Some research suggests that, if humans burned through all fossil fuels on Earth, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations could hit 5,000 parts per million by the year 2400.
The new study speaks to the power of human influence over the climate. It suggests that after millions of years of relative stability in the absence of human activity, just a few hundred years of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are on track to cause unprecedented warming.

Study: ‘Weaker Sun Could Reduce Global Temperatures By Half A Degree’

 http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=c920274f2a364603849bbb505&id=7598e5ccd1&e=f4e33fdd1e

 

‘Weaker Sun Could Reduce Global Temperatures By Half A Degree’
Experts Call For The Creation Of ‘Red Teams’ To Challenge Un Climate Science Panel
Sun's impact on climate change quantified for first time

For the first time, model calculations show a plausible way that fluctuations in solar activity could have a tangible impact on the climate. Studies funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation expect human-induced global warming to tail off slightly over the next few decades. A weaker sun could reduce temperatures by half a degree. —Swiss National Science Foundation, 27 March 2017

1) Swiss National Science Foundation: ‘Weaker Sun Could Reduce Global Temperatures By Half A Degree’
Swiss National Science Foundation, 27 March 2017

2) Red Teams Can Save Climate Science From Itself
Global Warming Policy Foundation, 31 March 2017

3) Experts Call For The Creation Of ‘Red Teams’ To Challenge UN Climate Science Panel
The Washington Post, 31 March 2017

4) U.S. House Of Representatives Approves Honest And Open Science Act
U.S. Committee on Science, Space and Technology, 30 March 2017

5) US Coal Production On The Rise As Gas Prices Go Up
U.S. Energy Information Administration, 29 March 2017

6) China’s Coal Power Generation Rising For Second Year: Citi
Platts, 31 March 2017

7) Surprise: Thousands Of Polluters In Northern China Fake Emissions Data, Resist Checks
South China Morning Post, 31 March 2017

8) South Africa Gives Green Light For Shale Gas Fracking In The Karoo
News24, 31 March 2017

9) Editorial: Lessons From Trump On Coal
The Australian, 31 March 2017

Prominent scientists operating outside the scientific consensus on climate change urged Congress on Wednesday to fund “red teams” to investigate “natural” causes of global warming and challenge the findings of the United Nations’ climate science panel. The suggestion for a counter-investigative science force – or red team approach – was presented in prepared testimony by scientists known for questioning the influence of human activity on global warming. It comes at a time when President Donald Trump and other members of the administration have expressed doubt about the accepted science of climate change, and are considering drastic cuts to federal funding for scientific research. –Chelsea Harvey, The Washington Post, 31 March 2017

The U.S House of Representatives today approved H.R. 1430, the Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act of 2017 (HONEST Act), introduced by Science, Space, and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas).

In New Study Leading Warmist Scientists Determine Sun Plays Major Role – Projects Warming Delayed by Decades

Climate scientists at Switzerland’s renowned ETH Zurich and the University of Bern have long warned of the risks of man-made global warming.

But in a brand new study their results now appear to have compelled them to postpone the expected global warming – by a few decades!

They now claim that a weaker sun (now expected over the coming decades) could reduce temperatures by half a degree Celsius.

Moreover the scientists clearly concede that the earth’s climate system is nowhere near as well understood as some scientists would like to have us believe and that the sun indeed plays a major role after all – enough so to override and postpone the effects of the often hyped greenhouse gases.

This will be hugely disappointing news for the catastrophe-hopers and cheerleaders, who hold front row tickets to the announced climate catastrophe, which according to some should be happening already.

The Swiss scientists say that sun’s impact on climate change has now been quantified “for first time” (see postscript below).

The Swiss scientists say that their model calculations show a plausible way that fluctuations in solar activity could have a tangible impact on the climate. The Swiss National Science Foundation-funded studies now expect human-induced global warming to tail off slightly over the next few decades. A weaker sun could reduce temperatures by half a degree.

The sun a factor after all

There is human-induced climate change, and there are natural climate fluctuations, the scientists acknowledge, and say one important factor in the unchanging rise and fall of the Earth’s temperature and its different cycles is the sun. As its activity varies, so does the intensity of the sunlight that reaches the earth’s surface. Previously IPCC reports assumed that recent solar activity was insignificant for climate change, and that the same would apply to activity in the near future.

“Significant effect”

However, researchers from the Physical Meteorological Observatory Davos (PMOD), the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (EAWAG), ETH Zurich and the University of Bern are now qualifying this assumption. Their elaborate model calculations now provide a robust estimate of the contribution that the sun is expected to make to temperature change in the next 100 years and a significant effect is apparent.

They expect the Earth’s temperature to fall by half a degree when solar activity reaches its next minimum.

Project head Werner

Recent Research Shows Climate Models Are Mostly “Black Box” Fudging, Not Real Science

Climate models fail on the test stand By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt [German text translated/edited by P Gosselin) 20 years ago climate models were celebrated as a huge breakthrough. Finally we were able to reproduce reality in the computer, which had been becoming ever more powerful and faster.

Source: Recent Research Shows Climate Models Are Mostly “Black Box” Fudging, Not Real Science

Analysis: The poor quality of the CO2 alarm

If ever there was a top noble cause, you might think ‘saving the planet’ would be it, and that it would attract our brightest and best to rally round its flag and trumpet its alarums. But I don’t see that happening. I see low quality science (e.g. the MBH Hockey Stick), I see low quality scheming (e.g. the Climategate Revelations), I see crass financial and political opportunism (e.g. renewables and the Gore revival), and I see wanton cruelty and foul propaganda (e.g. bio-fuels and the 10:10 video ‘No Pressure’). Then the sundry alarmer blogs and trolls and ‘activists thinly disguised as journalists’, and materials designed to frighten children make me feel that sadists rather than heroes have been attracted to rally round the flag of CO2 Alarm. All in all, it is overwhelmingly unedifying, and that is quite curious by itself.

Now that is all by way of lead-in to explain why I found much to agree with in a recent post by Scott Adams, and would commend it to all who come this way:http://blog.dilbert.com/post/158549646496/how-leonardo-dicaprio-can-persuade-me-on-climate

He is not impressed by the presentation of the Great Alarm. Here’s a couple of extracts:

‘If you want to convince me that climate change is real, the best approach is to abandon the current method that packages climate models in a fashion that is identical to well-known scams. (Or hoaxes, if you prefer.)

Let me say this doubly-clear. When I say climate models are packaged in a fashion that is identical to known scams, I am not saying they are scams. I’m saying they are packaged to look exactly like scams. There is no hope for credibility with that communication plan.

To make my point visual, imagine walking into your kitchen and finding an intruder wearing a ski mask and holding a gun. You assume this person is not your friendly neighbor because he is packaged exactly like an armed burglar. If you shoot that intruder, and it turns out to be your neighbor playing a prank, you probably won’t go to jail because it isn’t your fault. The problem was that your neighbor packaged himself to look exactly like an armed burglar.’

And:

‘My point is that Leonardo DiCaprio would have a tough time persuading me that climate science is both real and serious. But it isn’t his fault, because science has packaged climate science to look like a hoax, and …