“Climate Emergency Fund has quickly become the ATM that radical environmental activists turn to fund their latest disruptions,” Caitlin Sutherland, executive director of the conservative watchdog Americans for Public Trust…
CEF boasts a star-studded cohort of financial backers and board members, including Rory Kennedy, daughter of the late senator Robert F. Kennedy, Aileen Getty, the billionaire philanthropist and heiress of the Getty family fortune earned in the petroleum industry, and even Hollywood’s Adam McKay, who pledged it $4 million in September 2022 and directed the 2021 climate allegory film Don’t Look Up.
CEF celebrity funders also include Jeremy Strong, who plays Kendall Roy in the HBO TV series Succession, comedian Chelsea Handler, actor and Silicon Valley star Thomas Middleditch, and Abigail Disney, daughter of ex-Disney executive Roy E. Disney, according to CEF’s annual 2022 report.
You Were Warned! Flashback Oct 2002: Watch: Morano on Fox & Friends talks climate activists vandalizing iconic paintings – Funded by Hollywood & Billionaires & Millionaires…
This is an example of a custom excerpt, which will replace “blurb” functions. …
By Dr. Lubos Motl
Richard Lindzen’s talk in Prague
Richard Lindzen, prof emeritus at MIT, is the most famous atmospheric physicist among the climate skeptics. I know him from Greater Boston, and because he spends several months in every year in Paris, I have convinced him that Czechia (Prague but even Pilsen) is worth seeing.
Václav Klaus, whose new book about the climate was coincidentally published these days, was moderating Lindzen’s lecture in the Autoclub of the Czech Republic, which was the main “business part” of his trip to our land. He was lecturing in a relaxed atmosphere (he kindly offers the files for his presentation through his e-mail rlindzen at mit.edu) and was primarily focusing on tricks by which the alarmists are influencing the public.
Lindzen sketched events some 25-30 years ago which elevated several fringe climatologists to the focal points of a new industry and a newborn massive political movement. Natural scientists like James Hansen were able to accumulate finances for themselves and the new movement only at the point when others, like Michael Oppenheimer, had helped create an alliance of about 1100 non-governmental organizations in 120 countries along with allied lawyers and began to spread libelous books that their targets couldn’t effectively defend themselves against.
The main tool of the manipulation is the constant repetition of slogans and forcing of absurd thesis as the substitute for original propositions which are easily acceptable by the listener (the so-called bait-and-switch trick, or a trick lure-and-replacement). In the case of the climate, the bait is the seemingly obvious proposition that the climate is changing and man contributes something, but the agreement of scientists and most laymen with that is misinterpreted as their support for the statement (the substitute or switch) that there exists a serious problem linked mainly with the consumption of energy, which justifies fear, immense expenses, deep changes in the society, and also the deceleration of the progress in climatology (which Lindzen, an expert, is especially disturbed by). While the efforts to impose a full government control over the energy sector began in the 1960s, the reality is that the energy consumption is clearly positively correlated with the GDP per capita and other self-evidently desirable variables.
Lindzen showed numerous graphs implying that the global mean temperature is an artificial quantity whose changes (smaller than one degree C even after 100 years) are negligible relatively to the spatial variability …
Guest essay by Dr. Patrick J. Michaels It’s hard to say how many punny posts we came up with using those words when Carol Browner was Bill Clinton’s EPA Administrator, but here we use it in the context of a recent Science paper by J-F.
Natural Forcing Of Arctic Climate
Increasingly Affirmed By Scientists
Three years ago a cogent paper was published in the prestigious scientific journal Nature that was surprisingly candid in its rejection of the position that the substantial warming and sea ice reduction in the Arctic occurring since the late 1970s should be predominantly attributed to anthropogenic forcing.
Dr. Quinhua Ding and 6 co-authors indicated in their paper that internal processes — natural variability associated with planetary waves and the North Atlantic Oscillation — are drivers of the recent Arctic warming and sea ice reduction, concluding that “a substantial portion of recent warming in the northeastern Canada and Greenland sector of the Arctic arises from unforced natural variability.”
“Rapid Arctic warming and sea-ice reduction in the Arctic Ocean are widely attributed to anthropogenic climate change. The Arctic warming exceeds the global average warming because of feedbacks that include sea-ice reduction and other dynamical and radiative feedbacks. We find that the most prominent annual mean surface and tropospheric warming in the Arctic since 1979 has occurred in northeastern Canada and Greenland. In this region, much of the year-to-year temperature variability is associated with the leading mode of large-scale circulation variability in the North Atlantic, namely, the North Atlantic Oscillation.”
“Here we show that the recent warming in this region is strongly associated with a negative trend in the North Atlantic Oscillation, which is a response to anomalous Rossby wave-train activity [planetary waves related to the Earth’s rotation] originating in the tropical Pacific. Atmospheric model experiments forced by prescribed tropical sea surface temperatures simulate the observed circulation changes and associated tropospheric and surface warming over northeastern Canada and Greenland. Experiments from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 models with prescribed anthropogenic forcing show no similar circulation changes related to the North Atlantic Oscillation or associated tropospheric warming. This suggests that a substantial portion of recent warming in the northeastern Canada and Greenland sector of the Arctic arises from unforced natural variability.”
Since 2014, there have been several more scientific papers that have been published documenting the significance of natural forcing processes in the Arctic and how they may override a clear detection of an anthropogenic influence.
But 2017 already seems to be an exception. Papers that document the dominance of natural forcing —
Guest post by David Middleton
Sea level rise isn’t something that only future generations will have to deal with. It’s already causing significant challenges. If you doubt that, check out what’s happening in Miami right now.
“Sea levels in South Florida could rise up to two feet over the next four decades”… No they can’t and this is not happening right now.
For sea level to rise “two feet over the next four decades,” it would have to accelerate to the pace of the Holocene Transgression:
It would take an average rate of sea level rise nearly twice that of the Holocene Transgression for sea level to rise more than 1.5 meters (~5 feet) over the remainder of this century.
Sea level isn’t behaving any differently than it has throughout the Holocene.
Sea level was 1-2 meters higher than it currently is during the Holocene Highstand. All of the sea level rise since 1700 is insignificant relative to the natural variability of Holocene sea levels.
Sea level rise in the Miami area is not accelerating and it is rising at a rate of about 1 foot per century.
The satellite data indicate virtually no statistically significant sea level rise in the Miami area:
I intentionally retained the “seasonal terms and mean” and did not smooth the data because the seasonal variability is …
Habitat for polar bears is abundant worldwide as the prime feeding season passes its peak and mating season for sexually mature bears winds down. Battle among polar bear males for the right to mate, from this 2011 DailyMail story here .
Despite a 20 percent increase in atmospheric CO2, and model predictions to the contrary, sea ice in the Antarctic has expanded for decades. Such observations are in direct opposition to the model-based predictions of the IPCC. This should give pause for thought about climate alarmism in general.
While there have been thousands of legacy media stories about the very real decline in summer sea-ice extent in the Arctic Ocean, we can’t find one about the statistically significant increase in Antarctic sea ice that has been observed at the same time.
Also, comparisons between forecast temperature trends down there and what’s been observed are very few and far between. Here’s one published in 2015:
Observed (blue) and model-forecast (red) Antarctic sea-ice extent published by Shu et al. (2015) shows a large and growing discrepancy, but for unknown reasons, their illustration ends in 2005.
For those who utilize and trust in the scientific method, forming policy (especially multi-trillion dollar policies!) on the basis of what could or might happen in the future seems imprudent.
Sound policy, in contrast, is best formulated when it is based upon repeated and verifiable observations that are consistent with the projections of climate models. As shown above, this does not appear to be the case with the vast ice field that surrounds Antarctica.
According to the most recent report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), CO2-induced global warming will result in a considerable reduction in sea ice extent in the Southern Hemisphere. Specifically, the report predicts a multi-model average decrease of between 16 and 67 percent in the summer and 8 to 30 percent in the winter by the end of the century (IPCC, 2013).
Given the fact that atmospheric CO2 concentrations have increased by 20 percent over the past four decades, evidence of sea ice decline should be evident in the observational data if such model predictions are correct. But are they?
Thanks to a recent paper in the Journal of Climate by Josefino Comiso and colleagues, we now know what’s driving the increase in sea-ice down there. It’s — wait for it — cooling temperatures over the ocean surrounding Antarctica.
This team of six researchers set out to produce an updated and enhanced dataset of sea ice extent and area for the Southern Hemisphere