The top seven global warming alarmist setbacks in 2013

Daily Caller News Foundation
Hold your champagne glasses high this holiday season,

because the end of 2013 marks the 17th year without global warming. This year has been trying for climate scientists and environmentalists who have been trying hard to explain away the 17-year hiatus in global warming and link “extreme weather” to rising greenhouse gas emissions — despite strong evidence to the contrary. There has been a breakdown in the manmade global warming consensus, and some even argue we are headed for an ice age. In honor of the 17th year without global warming, The Daily Caller News Foundation has put together seven setbacks for global warming alarmism. 

 1) Studies show that the world was warmer than it is today during the Roman Empire and when the Vikings were plundering Europe and North America. In fact, even in the 19th Century, there were discussions surrounding the fact that the Vikings could settle the northernmost reaches of Greenland and North America because there was less ice coverage. 

 2) During the second week in December, the U.S. saw more than 2000 record low temperatures and record snowfalls, according to the National Weather Service and HamWeather records center. There were 606 record low temperatures, 1,234 low maximum temperatures and 285 record snowfalls across the country. In the meantime there were only 98 high temperature records and 141 high minimum temperature records. 

 3) Satellite data shows that the polar bears have at least one reason to be happy this year – Arctic sea ice coverage was up 50 percent over last year’s record low coverage. Contrary to Al Gore’s prediction that there would be no polar ice cap by this year, sea ice coverage spanned nearly 2,100 cubic miles by the end of this year’s melting season, up from about 1,400 cubic last year. 

 4) Global cooling is on the way, according to an increasing number of scientists. German scientists have predicted that based on declining sunspot activity and natural climate oscillation the world will cool over the next century. Temperatures will eventually drop to levels corresponding with the “little ice age” of 1870. 

 5) Other scientists have also been coming around to the global cooling side of things. The BBC reported that Professor Mike Lockwood of the Reading University predicts that at the current rate of decline in solar activity, another “Little Ice Age” could envelope Northern Europe. 

 6) The United Nations climate bureaucracy’s latest global warming report was called “hilarious” by a leading scientist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. Richard Lindzen said the UN’s report “has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence” because they continue to proclaim with ever greater certainty that mankind is causing global warming, despite their models continually being wrong. “Their excuse for the absence of warming over the past 17 years is that the heat is hiding in the deep ocean,” Lindzen said. “However, this is simply an admission that the models fail to simulate the exchanges of heat between the surface layers and the deeper oceans.” 

 7) The Senate testimony of Dr. Roger Pielke of the University of Colorado completely undercut environmentalists and Democrats trying to claim that global warming was causing “extreme weather.” “It is misleading and just plain incorrect to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or droughts have increased on climate timescales either in the United States or globally,” Pielke said. “It is further incorrect to associate the increasing costs of disasters with the emission of greenhouse gases.” The other witnesses on the panel did not refute Pielke’s data.

 Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/20/the-top-seven-global-warming-alarmist-setbacks-in-2013/#ixzz2o7UzoBlu

HEADLINE-GRABBING GLOBAL WARMING STUDY SUFFERS FROM A MAJOR MATH ERROR

• The media fawned over a recent global warming study that had a major math error, researchers found.
• It turns out, the math error made it appear as if oceans warmed more than previously thought.
• Major media outlets uncritically covered the study, sounding the alarm on global warming.

The recent headline-grabbing study that claimed global warming was heating the oceans up faster than expected suffers from a major math error, according to two researchers.

The study, which was published in a prestigious scientific journal at the end of October, put forward results suggesting global warming was much worse than previously believed. The media ate the results up.

Independent scientist Nic Lewis found the study had “apparently serious (but surely inadvertent) errors in the underlying calculations.” Lewis’ findings were quickly corroborated by another researcher.

Numerous media outlets uncritically highlighted the study’s findings. The Washington Post, for example, reported the work suggested “Earth could be set to warm even faster than predicted.”

The Post’s coverage of the “startling” climate study was echoed by The New York Times, which claimed the study suggested global warming “has been more closely in line with scientists’ worst-case scenarios.”

The BBC warned “[t]his could make it much more difficult to keep global warming within safe levels this century.”

The Atlantic Ocean is pictured, during an unusually warm autumn day, from the coastline at sunset in Biarritz, France October 24, 2017. REUTERS/Regis Duvignau.

However, Lewis found the new paper’s findings stemmed from a math error. Lewis said “a quick review of the first page of the paper was sufficient to raise doubts as to the accuracy of its results.”

“Just a few hours of analysis and calculations, based only on published information, was sufficient to uncover apparently serious (but surely inadvertent) errors in the underlying calculations,” Lewis wrote in a blog post published on climate scientist Judith Curry’s website.

Lewis found the study’s authors, led by Princeton University scientist Laure Resplandy, erred in calculating the linear trend of estimated ocean warming between 1991 and 2016. Lewis has also criticized climate model predictions, which generally over-predict warming.

Resplandy and her colleagues estimated ocean heat by measuring the volume of carbon dioxide and oxygen in the atmosphere. The results: the oceans took up 60 percent more heat than previously thought. The study only sent alarm bells ringing, especially in the wake of the United Nations’ latest climate assessment.

“The planet warmed more than we thought. It was hidden from us just because we didn’t sample it right. But it was there. It was in the ocean already,” Resplandy told The Post at the end of October.

After correcting for the error, however, Lewis found the paper’s ocean warming rate “is about average compared with the other estimates they showed, and below the average for...

My view on climate change.

First of all, let's start with the term "Climate Change". Does anybody dispute climate change is occurring? I have never heard an argument stating that our Earth has a static climate. This is what the left has retreated to, they went from the term Global Warming to the term Climate Change because they simply could not argue that the earth was warming once their fake data manipulation was exposed.

Now whether the earth is warming or not is not a disputable fact, it is either warming or it is not warming.  How we measure worldwide temperature is another issue.  With new technologies, we have new ways to measure the changing temperature, these new technologies (like satellite) cannot however measure the past, so we have to transition older measuring tools to new measuring tools.  Here is where we have disputes and the potential for biased methods of transitioning the old data to the new data.  The people who are responsible for the data are dependent on funding from pro anthropogenic climate change organizations, this is akin to tobacco executives reporting the cancer rate of people who smoke cigarettes.
NONE OF THIS has anything to do with whether or not activities of mankind is affecting the climate of the Earth.  The facts are that the Earth has been warming and cooling all on its own for billions of years. The Earth has been warmer than it is now before humans existed and it has been cooler than it is now. The earth is a living planet that has its own mechanisms and cycles, it is our arrogance that allows us to believe that we affect the balance of this celestial body.

High Priest AlGore

Everything I have read from "Scientists" is always an opinion piece that obscures the facts by cleverly interchanging the terms Global Warming, Climate Change and anthropogenic climate change.  They have no proof for anthropogenic climate change, thus they obscure the argument.

I would not care about any of this if this reckless theory was not helping to usher in the demise of western civilization.  The entropic forces that wrestle with western civilization like Global Warming, Socialism and media malfeasance threaten modern civilization.  Fight entropy, reject the religion of warming.

I welcome anyone to submit an article that proves anthropogenic climate change, I have yet to see one.   I will not blindly follow opinions from people I do not trust, Neither should you.

24 Things the Media Claim Were Caused by ‘Global Warming’

It seems like with global warming embedded in our politics (for now), anything we don’t fully understand can now be ‘legitimately’ blamed on the weather. Forget the trusty old excuse about the dog eating your homework: A sampling of news stories tells us instead that global warming might really be the cause of all our problems. Allegedly, thanks to global warming:

Your breakfast got even less exciting. Your morning coffee is going to be more expensive. Also, the cost of cereal could climb by as much as 30 percent because of global warming according to an Oxfam report(their recommendation to General Mills and Kellogg’s: “intensify” effort to cut greenhouse gases, which ironically would also likely increase the cost of cereal and beverages). Thankfully, populations of feral cats and dogs are liable to increase, and these could suffice as possible “bridge food” for climate change refugees.

History and culture have been redefined. Leonardo DiCaprio’s Jack Dawson didn’t make it off the Titanic in 1912 thanks to global warming. Two years later the world engaged in WWI, followed by the Great Depression, and WWII, all of which apparently slowed the pace of global warming. In current cultural events, the arts world has been subjected to climate change…the musical. And a horror movie. Some congregations have been subjected to a new topic for bad sermons. And employees are less productive at work.

America’s adversaries have been aided. Climate change has boosted Russianrice, corn and sunflower seed crops and promises to unlock some of the natural resources trapped in Siberian permafrost. And rather than failed diplomacy, climate change was the catalyst for Boko Haram. Meanwhile, North Korea has emerged as an example of combating climate change.

Nature got a little bit wilder. Salamanders are shrinking in size, but the return of bus-sized snakes is more likely. Meanwhile the coquis frog in Puerto Rico croaks a little higher, butterflies in Ohio are showing up a bit earlier, and there is an abundance of rock snot in West Virginia streams and not enough tissues to deal with it. It also has been discovered that global warming killed a16-year-old polar bear (even though the average lifespan of a polar bear is 15-18 years).

Vacation plans are being ruined. Airline passengers might want to use those seatbelts on their next flight because of greater turbulence. Thanks to global warming, life in Asia is generally miserable and England will be too wet, and too dry…and too cold…and too hot. That hike you may have been planning to the peak of Mt. Everest will be harder, in case it wasn’t hard enough already, and out of good eco-conscience you probably shouldn’t run another marathon because of all the unnecessary CO2 emissions. And the migration of the Baird’s sparrow away from North Dakota to Canada is threatening to cut into the hordes of tourists coming to bird watch.

Satellites: Earth Is Nearly In Its 22nd Year Without Global Warming

After September of this year, the Earth will be entering its 22nd year without statistically significant warming trend, according to satellite-derived temperature data.

Since September 1994, University of Alabama in Huntsville’s satellite temperature data has shown no statistically significant global warming trend. For over 20 years there’s been no warming trend apparent in the satellite records and will soon be entering into year 22 with no warming trend apparent in satellite data — which examines the lowest few miles of the Earth’s atmosphere.

Satellite data from the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) group also shows a prolonged “hiatus” in global warming. After November of this year, RSS data will be in its 22nd year without warming. Ironically, the so-called “hiatus” in warming started when then vice President Al Gore and environmental groups touted RSS satellite data as evidence a slight warming trend since 1979.

For years, climate scientists have been debating the “hiatus” in...

FORMER NASA SCIENTIST: GLOBAL WARMING IS NONSENSE

A former NASA scientist has described global warming as

"nonsense", dismissing the theory of man-made climate change as "an unsubstantiated hypothesis" and saying that it is "absolutely stupid" to blame the recent UK floods on human activity.

Professor Les Woodcock, who has had a long and distinguished academic career, also said there is "no reproducible evidence" that carbon dioxide levels have increased over the past century, and blamed the green movement for inflicting economic damage on ordinary people.

Professor Woodcock is Emeritus Professor of Chemical Thermodynamics at the University of Manchester and has authored over 70 academic papers for a wide range of scientific journals. He received his PhD from the University of London, and is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry, a  recipient of a Max Planck Society Visiting Fellowship, and a founding editor the journal Molecular Simulation. (h/t Climate Depot)

Professor Woodcock told the Yorkshire Evening Post:

"The term 'climate change' is meaningless. The Earth's climate has been changing since time immemorial, that is since the Earth was formed 1,000 million years ago. The theory of 'man-made climate change' is an unsubstantiated hypothesis [about] our climate [which says it] has been adversely affected by the burning of fossil fuels in the last 100 years, causing the average temperature on the earth’s surface to increase very slightly but with disastrous environmental consequences.

"The theory is that the CO2 emitted by burning fossil fuel is the 'greenhouse gas' causes 'global warming' - in fact, water is a much more powerful greenhouse gas and there is 20 time more of it in our atmosphere (around one per cent of the atmosphere) whereas CO2 is only 0.04 per cent.

"There is no reproducible scientific evidence CO2 has significantly increased in the last 100 years."

He also said:

"Even the term 'global warming' does not mean anything unless you give it a time scale. The temperature of the earth has been going up and down for millions of years, if there are extremes, it's nothing to do with carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, it's not permanent and it's not caused by us. Global warming is nonsense."

Professor Woodcock dismissed evidence for global warming, such as the floods that deluged large parts of Britain this winter, as "anecdotal" and therefore meaningless in science.

 "Events can happen with frequencies on all time scales in the physics of a chaotic system such as the weather. Any point on lowland can flood up to a certain level on all time scales from one month to millions of years and it’s completely unpredictable beyond around five days."

Also, the only reason we regularly hear that we have had the most extreme weather "since records began" is that records only began about 100 years ago.

 "The reason records seem to be being frequently broken is simply because we only started keeping them about 100 years ago. There will always be some record broken somewhere when we have another natural fluctuation in weather.

"It's absolutely stupid to blame floods on climate change, as I read the Prime Minister did recently. I don't blame the politicians in this case, however, I blame his so-called scientific advisors."

When asked how can say this when most of the world's scientists, political leaders and people in general are committed to the theory of global warming, Prof Woodcock answered bluntly:

"This is not the way science works. If you tell me that you have a theory there is a teapot in orbit between the earth and the moon, it's not up to me to prove it does not exist, it's up to you to provide the reproducible scientific evidence for your theory.

"Such evidence for the man-made climate change theory has not been forthcoming."

This lack of evidence has not stopped a whole green industry building up, however. At the behest of that industry, governments have been passing ever more regulations that make life more difficult and expensive.

"...the damage to our economy the climate change lobby is now costing us is infinitely more destructive to the livelihoods of our grand-children. Indeed, we grand-parents are finding it increasingly expensive just to keep warm as a consequence of the idiotic decisions our politicians have taken in recent years about the green production of electricity."

Professor Woodcock is the latest scientist to come out against the theory of man-made global warming. James Lovelock, once described as a "green guru", earlier this monthsaid that climate scientists "just guess", and that no one really knows what's happening.

Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, also said that she was "duped into supporting the IPCC" and added "If the IPCC is dogma, then count me in as a heretic."

Original article: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/04/26/Former-NASA-Scientist-Global-Warming-is-Nonsense

4 Reasons Why 'Climate Change' Is a Flat-Out Hoax

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

Ordinary people like me don't understand climate science, but we can spot cheating a mile away. Without the assistance of a complicit Western media in burying multiple indisputable cases of outright scientific fraud, man-made global warming theory would have been blown out of the water years ago.


One of the most brazen instances of inexcusable scientific misconduct is documented by photographic evidence gathered during a three-month investigation by a veteran meteorologist. As reported in this PDF, the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) placed hundreds of official global warming thermometers in locations entirely unsuitable for gathering natural temperatures:

● Adjacent to hot engines of parked vehicles

● On asphalt-covered roofs

● Near hot exhaust vents of air conditioning units

● On heat-retaining airport tarmacs and paved parking lots

● Next to heat-retaining rock formations and brick buildings

Global warming is measured in tenths of a degree, so every artificial upward nudge creates a deceptive picture of actual temperatures. To avoid artificially elevated readings, NOAA's own official site location standards require that thermometers be placed at least 100 feet from any paved or concrete surface, and in a level, open area with natural ground cover. Those standards were clearly subverted, and every voter should demand to know why.

No supporter of man-made global warming theory who sees the photographs in the PDF linked to above – all of which have been downplayed, or outright ignored, by the complicit Western media – can fail to ascertain that the theory they support is being kept on life support by scientific fraud.

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

As reported in Forbes, the following unguarded statement was made by one of the climate crisis industry's loudest drum-beaters, the late Dr. Steven Schneider, lead author of numerous alarming U.N. climate reports and former professor of climatology at Stanford:

We need broad-based support to capture the public's imagination, we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.

In other words, one of the climate crisis lobby's most loyal sycophants told his like-minded colleagues that they not only must conceal evidence that casts doubt on global warming theory, but also craft their research in dishonest ways designed to create terror in the minds of a trusting public. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that dishonesty and concealment of contrarian views have no place in legitimate science.

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

As reported by Fox News, a 2015 report published in the journal Nature Climate Change compared 117 computer model projections during the 1990s with the amount of actual warming that occurred. Of the 117, only three were roughly accurate, while 114 over-estimated the recorded warming. (The lopsided results suggest that those doing the modeling may have been guilty of...

Government Data Show U.S. in Decade-Long Cooling

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s most accurate, up-to-date temperature data confirm the United States has been cooling for at least the past decade. The NOAA temperature data are driving a stake through the heart of alarmists claiming accelerating global warming.

Responding to widespread criticism that its temperature station readings were corrupted by poor citing issues and suspect adjustments, NOAA established a network of 114 pristinely sited temperature stations spread out fairly uniformly throughout the United States. Because the network, known as the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), is so uniformly and pristinely situated, the temperature data require no adjustments to provide an accurate nationwide temperature record. USCRN began compiling temperature data in January 2005. Now, nearly a decade later, NOAA has finally made the USCRN temperature readings available.

According to the USCRN temperature readings, U.S. temperatures are not rising at all – at least not since the network became operational 10 years ago. Instead, the United States has cooled by approximately 0.4 degrees Celsius, which is more than half of the claimed global warming of the twentieth century.

Of course, 10 years is hardly enough to establish a long-term trend. Nevertheless, the 10-year cooling period does present some interesting facts.

First, global warming is not so dramatic and uniform and alarmists claim. For example, prominent alarmist James Hansen claimed in 2010, “Global warming on decadal time scales is continuing without letup … effectively illustrat[ing] the monotonic and substantial warming that is occurring on decadal time scales.” The word monotonic means, according to Merriam-Webster Online, “having the property either of never increasing or of never decreasing as the values of the independent variable or the subscripts of the terms increase.” Well, either temperatures are decreasing by 0.4 degrees Celsius every decade or they are not monotonic.

Second, for those who may point out U.S. temperatures do not equate to global temperatures, the USCRN data are entirely consistent with – and indeed lend additional evidentiary support for – the global warming stagnation of the past 17-plus years. While objective temperature data show there has been no global warming since sometime last century, the USCRN data confirm this ongoing stagnation in the United States, also.

Third, the USCRN data debunk claims that rising U.S. temperatures caused wildfires, droughts, or other extreme weather events during the past year. The objective data show droughts, wildfires, and other extreme weather events have become less frequent and severe in recent decades as our planet modestly warms. But even ignoring such objective data, it is difficult to claim global warming is causing recent U.S. droughts and wildfires when U.S. temperatures are a full 0.4 degrees Celsius colder than they were in 2005.

The Green New Fascist Deal

The “Green New Deal” is a fascist utopian plan written by environmentalist lawyers that is purportedly designed to tackle the global warming apocalypse which capitalism, particularly of the American kind drunk on fossil fuels, has precipitated through economic recklessness and colonial racism. CO2, a trace gas measured in parts per million, is the primary culprit of a semi-apocalyptic global warming crisis that can only be averted through an all-wise cadre of Democratic green lawyers. That such utopianism, political legalism, and apocalypticism is presented as hard science demonstrates the general madness of the present time that is largely rooted in the Social Darwinian scientism of the 1800s, wherein German zoologist Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919) was peddling a racist political biology together with strong ecological values that he characterized as Monism -- which speaks of a monistic oneness or holism with nature along totalitarian lines that modern science was supposedly offering the constituents of the Second Reich. While Haeckel coined the term “ecology” in 1866, he mixed racial eugenics with his environmentalism. Today, environmentalism proffers anti-humanism, population control, ecological totalitarianism, and indigenous multicultural tribal racism that “The New Green Deal” is chock full of.

Austrian Nazi forester Guenther Schwab (1904-2006) was one of the most successful original popularizers of apocalyptic environmentalism in the 1950s and 60s, which included the CO2 global warming scare. Thanks to the great success of Schwab’s writings, real green Nazis like Werner Haverbeck, August Haussleiter, and Werner Vogel, among others, helped him lay the foundations for the German Green Party in the late 1970s. Yet, it was German researcher Hermann Flohn (1912-97) who took the global warming theory that had been bandied around by earlier European researchers and gave it teeth to increasingly bite its way into the main storyline of the West as the 20th century drew to a close. Flohn is considered to be one of the most critically important climate scientists of the 20th century, whose research merited a number of prestigious awards.

Flohn’s very German odyssey actually began in 1941, when he published an article on global warming titled, “The Activity of Man as a Climate Factor” during the dizzying heights of Nazi rule. The Dust Bowl years of the 1930s on the American plains was an exceptionally warm period that prompted environmental discussion among many Nazis at the time, who deemed such an ecological disaster as a symptom of diseased industrial capitalism which had ruined the soil. While Flohn was not a Nazi Party member, he received his doctorate in 1934 and began work for the German Meteorological Service at a time when National Socialism was attempting to bring into line German universities within its ideological purview. Later, Flohn became the Luftwaffe’s chief meteorologist under green Nazi Hermann Goering’s watch. The great irony is that the global warming of the 1930s came to an abrupt halt (which lasted until 1975) just in time for the 1941 invasion of Russia when the Wehrmacht essentially froze to death just outside the gates of Moscow.

During the war, it stands to good reason that Flohn’s high atmospheric weather research would have not only placed him in close proximity with high-altitude Nazi human experiments, but probably also would have put him in regular contact with Werner von Braun and his SS rocket boys. After the war, Flohn continued to ratchet up the CO2 global warming scare as more dangerous than even nuclear energy. Such connections seem to suggest that the global warming apocalypse may have been originally introduced in a targeted way into American research labs through Operation Paperclip, when SS Nazi and German scientists were imported into the United States to help Uncle Sam build rockets to compete in the Cold War. The SS was the greenest arm of the swastika.

Even as early as 1935, Nazi Germany was the greenest regime on the planet. Their ecological projects worked hand in hand with their wild Social Darwinian biological programs connected to eugenics and scientific racial hygiene. Cleaning up the blood also included cleaning up the environment. Indeed, Nazi biologist Ernst Lehman defined fascism accordingly, “We recognize that separating humanity from nature, from the whole of life, leads to humankind’s own destruction and to the death of nations. Only through a re-integration of humanity into the whole of nature can our people be made stronger. That is the fundamental point of the biological tasks of our age. Humankind alone is no longer the focus of thought, but rather...

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.

Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA’s Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.

“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”

In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.

The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter the global warming debate.

Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is “not much”). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.

The new NASA Terra satellite data are consistent with long-term NOAA and NASA data indicating atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds are not increasing in the manner predicted by alarmist computer models. The Terra satellite data also support data collected by NASA’s ERBS satellite showing far more longwave radiation (and thus, heat) escaped into space between 1985 and 1999 than alarmist computer models had predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist computer models have predicted.

In short, the central premise of alarmist global warming theory is that carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth’s atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being trapped in the earth’s atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict.

When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, show a “huge discrepancy” between alarmist climate models and real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global warming alarmism truly are.

James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.

UN’S NEW REPORT SHOWS THERE’S ‘LITTLE BASIS’ FOR A FAVORITE CLAIM OF CLIMATE ACTIVISTS

• The media regularly links extreme weather to man-made global warming.
• The UN’s new report debunks that often used talking point.
• The report, once again, shows “there is little basis for” such claims.
• The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change’s (IPCC) newly-released climate report, once again, found little to no evidence global warming caused many types of extreme weather events to increase.

“The IPCC once again reports that there is little basis for claiming that drought, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes have increased, much less increased due to” greenhouse gases, University of Colorado professor Roger Pielke, Jr. tweeted Sunday night.

For example, the IPCC’s report noted that “there is only low confidence regarding changes in global tropical cyclone numbers under global warming over the last four decades.” Pielke pointed out this inconvenient data.

Roger Pielke Jr.

✔@RogerPielkeJr

Replying to @RogerPielkeJr

Tropical cyclones:
"Numerous studies towards and beyond AR5 have reported a decreasing trend
in the global number of tropical cyclones and/or the globally accumulated cyclonic energy"

9:42 PM - Oct 7, 2018

• 11
• See Roger Pielke Jr.'s other Tweets

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Much like the IPCC’s 2013 climate assessment, the new special report confirmed what Pielke and others have said for years about the relationship between global warming and extreme weather.

But don’t expect to hear that from many other media outlets, especially those that often cite individual weather events as evidence of man-made warming.

For example, The Washington Post’s write-up of the IPCC’s report focused on the mainline findings — namely, that “the world is woefully off target” to keep future global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

The New York Times highlighted the IPCC’s warning of “a world of worsening food shortages and wildfires, and a mass die-off of coral reefs as soon as 2040.” Neither WaPo nor NYT mentioned the report’s findings on extreme weather.

The IPCC’s new report is meant to sound the alarm on global warming ahead of the UN climate summit, which is to be held in Poland this December. Delegates are expected to make further commitments to implement the Paris climate accord that calls for limiting future warming below 2 degrees Celsius by 2100.

Aside from dire predictions, however, the IPCC’s new report also noted that many types of extreme weather events are not getting worse.

When it comes to droughts, for example...

Researchers Have 'Invalidated' EPA's Core Global Warming 'Finding'

A peer-reviewed research report published last week by three highly qualified researchers with the agreement of seven others similarly accomplished charges that the entities reporting historical and current worldwide temperatures have adjusted their data to show global warming which has not actually occurred.

The trio has concluded that this data is "not a valid representation of reality," and that as a result, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 2009 "Endangerment Finding" — essentially that global warming has been occurring and continues to accelerate due to human activity — is, in the study's words, "invalidated." The establishment media's silence has been deafening.

The media non-coverage of the research report — "On the Validity of NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU Global Average Surface Temperature Data & The Validity of EPA’s CO2 Endangerment Finding" — is consistent with its virtual refusal to acknowledge the existence of many other studies released in 2016 and so far this year which have cast serious doubt on human-caused global warming as supposedly "settled science."

At Breitbart in early June, UK-based writer and longtime climate change skeptic James Delingpole referred readers to a collection of "80 Graphs From 58 Papers Invalidate Claims Of Unprecedented Global-Scale Modern Warming" published this year alone. The person who accumulated that collection, Kenneth Richards, is a "professor of environmental economics and policy and an affiliated professor of law at the IU Maurer School of Law."

Richards' recent post arrived just five months after a December post documenting "60 (2016) Scientific Papers Affirm Today’s Warming Isn’t Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable." The pace of climate change-skeptical studies is increasing.

Readers relying solely on the establishment press would be aware of none of this. How many papers by qualified authors need to be published before the "97 percent" consensus on human-caused warming disintegrates? (Answer: It already did years ago, but the press won't admit it.)

Late Wednesday, the Daily Caller finally broke the ice, and...

SCIENTIST CALLS OUT MEDIA ‘MISINFORMATION’ ON WILDFIRES AND GLOBAL WARMING

With wildfires engulfing over 620,000 acres of California, there’s been a concerted media campaign to single out man-made global warming as the primary force behind the deadly blazes.
But that’s not what the data suggests, according to University of Washington climate scientist Cliff Mass.

“So there is a lot misinformation going around in the media, some environmental advocacy groups, and some politicians,” Mass wrote in the first of a series of blog posts analyzing the California wildfires.

“The story can’t be a simply that warming is increasing the numbers of wildfires in California because the number of fires is declining. And area burned has not been increasing either,” Mass wrote.

Related: Big Government and Environmentalists Are Causing Massive Fires in Western States

Firefighters are struggling to put out the largest fire in recent decades, the Mendocino Complex fire, that’s consumed over 300,000 acres in northern California. Environmentalists and some scientists have pushed a media narrative that blazes across the state to global warming.

“Climate change is making wildfires more extreme. Here’s how,” PBS Newshour warned viewers on Monday, quoting Pennsylvania State University climate scientist Michael Mann.

“You warm the planet, you’re going to get more frequent and intense heat waves. You warm the soils, you dry them out, you get worst drought,” Mann said. “You bring all that together, and those are all the ingredients for unprecedented wildfires.”

The San Francisco Chronicle ran with similar coverage: “Scientists see fingerprints of climate change all over California’s wildfires.” The Chronicle also quoted Mann, who further argued global warming weakened the jet stream, causing extreme weather patterns to persist.

“These factors work together to produce the sorts of persistent extreme weather events — droughts, floods, heat waves, wildfires — that we’re seeing across the Northern Hemisphere right now,” Mann said.

However, Mass combed through California wildfire statistics, finding state figures showed a decrease in acres burned in four out of five regions. U.S. Forest Service data for public forests and lands in California shows mixed trends, with some regions having just as big of fires as in the 1920s.

“The bottom line of the real fire data produced by the State of California and in the peer-reviewed literature is clear: there has been no upward trend in the number of wildfires in California during the past decades,” Mass wrote on his blog.

“In fact, the frequency of fires has declined,” he wrote. “And in most of the state, there has not been an increasing trend in area burned during the past several decades.”

“Clearly, climate change is only one possible factor in controlling fire frequency and may not be the most important,” Mass wrote.

While seasonal weather is an important ingredient for wildfires, it’s not the only factor, making it particularly hard to attribute fires to global warming. Land management and population growth are also major factors, since most fires are...

A group of 15 scientists and meteorologists have put forward a scathing rebuttal to the Obama administration’s recent climate report which said the U.S. is already being harmed by global warming

A group of 15 scientists and meteorologists have put forward a scathing rebuttal to the Obama

administration’s recent climate report which said the U.S. is already being harmed by global warming.

Scientists skeptical that mankind is causing the Earth’s climate to change say that such claims are based on false theories and flawed models. The White House report is a “masterpiece of marketing” that is trying to scare people into action, scientists said.

“As independent scientists, we know that apparent evidence of ‘Climate Change,’ however scary, is not proof of anything,” wrote the 15 scientists and meteorologists,including Dr. Don Easterbrook of Western Washington University and Dr. George Wolff, who formerly chaired the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee.

“Science derives its objectivity from robust logic and honest evidence repeatedly tested by all knowledgeable scientists, not just those paid to support the administration’s version of ‘Global Warming,’ ‘Climate Change,’ ‘Climate Disruption,’ or whatever their marketing specialists call it today,” they continued.

The White House’s “National Climate Assessment” (NCA), released last week, claimed that the U.S. was already being affected by global warming though warmer temperatures and increasing extreme weather events.

But the 15 skeptical scientists said the White House is trying to lay the blame for global warming at the feet of the fossil fuels industry when there is little evidence to back up that claim. The Earth’s climate is very cyclical and has gone through many changes in the past, the scientists said, without humans emitting carbon dioxide.

“This NCA is so grossly flawed it should play no role in U.S. Energy Policy Analyses and CO2 regulatory processes,” the skeptics wrote. “As this rebuttal makes clear, the NCA provides no scientific basis whatsoever for regulating CO2 emissions.”

“We are asked to believe that humans are drastically changing the earth’s climate by burning fossil fuels,” they added. “The problem with their theory is very simple: It is NOT true.”

Global Warming Is Socialism In Drag...

- Steve Forbes

Climate Change and Environmental Socialism

Susan Stamper Brown
As world leaders at the UN Climate Summit reached an agreement to tighten the shackles of oppressive global warming regulations late November, God laughed, and the moisture from his breath touched the earth, painting the place where the Christmas story began, the Holy Land, white with snow December 13.

The same day, the Arab Spring region witnessed an Arab winter, when dusty desert streets were dusted with the first snowfall in 112 years. And last week, Australia's summer landscape became a winter wonderland.

Be it hot, cold, or in between, disciples of the pseudo-religion of global warming, will cite these natural occurrences as proof of man-caused climate change, forgetting the One who created it all did not forget to make allowances for man's existence on this planet.

All is not lost, for Australians have seen the light; given their new government was elected by a landslide running on an anti-global warming, anti-carbon tax platform. The new leadership unapologetically opposes further carbon tax and climate change contributions to the UN regulations they perceive as "socialism masquerading as environmentalism."

And what else could it be, considering the cold-hard facts pointing to a cooling planet? NASA recently confirmed East Antarctica registered the lowest temperature ever recorded on planet Earth, at minus 135.8 degrees. Besides the Lower 48 having been pummeled with record cold weather, Climate Depot reported by the end of November there were nearly 1000 record low maximum temperatures, 205 snowfall records, including blizzards and heavy snowfalls in Italy, Greece, the South Pole, Bulgaria, Macedonia, the Balkans, Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, Alaska, and Russia. In addition, the global sea ice area is the largest it has been in 25 years and the Arctic ice mass is the largest in 10 years.

With evidence piling up inch-by-snowy-inch that the planet's temperature is headed south, activists had no choice but to rebrand the name of their scheme to transfer huge bundles of Western wealth to Third World tyrants from global warming to "climate change."

Facts matter little to those like Greenpeace, who recorded a video to terrify kids wherein Santa laments, "Dear children, regrettably I bring bad tidings. For some time now melting ice here at the North Pole has made life intolerable...and there may be no alternative but to cancel Christmas... My home in the Arctic is vast disappearing and unless we all act urgently, I have to warn you of the possibility of an empty stocking forevermore..."

I'm not sure where Greenpeace thinks Santa lives, but I recently visited his stomping grounds up here in Alaska and it looks okay to me. The weather outside is definitely frightful and it's snowing like crazy as I type. I'd dare say those who scare children might end up on Santa's naughty list, finding lumps of coal in their stockings Christmas morning. Now wouldn't that be ironic?

Seriously, the facts are in; notable scientists are warming up to the premise of global cooling. The Atmospheric Sciences Group head at the University of Wisconsin, Anastasios Tsonis, says the pattern of cooling will run through 2030, or maybe 2060, according to the head of Russia's Pulkovo Observatory, Habibullo Abdussamatov, or Saarland University's Horst-Joachim Luedecke, predicts temperatures will fall until the year 2100, "to a value corresponding to the Little Ice Age of 1870." Ludecke and others believe humans play a nominal role in the heating or cooling of the earth.

If only President Obama and Democrats would 

CERN, Higgs Boson and Anthropogenic Global Warming

The Physicists at CERN are currently getting a lot of fanfare and media attention for the identification of the  Higgs boson particle.

But when the physicists at CERN discuss their findings on Anthropogenic Global Warming, the media are not interested.  The media have no intellectual curiosity when CERN says that "cosmic rays will probably be able to account for somewhere between a half and the whole of the increase in the Earth's temperature that we have seen in the last century."  This is essentially saying that the sun causes global warming.  It is also not unlike telling the kids in wintertime that the fireplace is keeping the house warm.  

More articles to read on this:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2011/08/25/did-cloud-just-rain-on-the-global-warming-parade/

http://www.infowars.com/cern-scientists-gagged-on-politically-incorrect-global-warming-data/

http://www.eutimes.net/2011/09/cern-the-sun-causes-global-warming/

Climate Scientists Write To UN: There Is No Climate Emergency

A group of 500 esteemed scientists and professionals in climate science have officially notified the United Nations that there is no climate crisis and that spending trillions on a non-problem is ‘cruel and imprudent’.

This letter will not make it into national or global media, nor will it cause the UN to change its ways. If these same scientists understood Technocracy, they would change their battle strategy. ⁃ TN Editor

Professor Guus Berkhout
The Hague
guus.berkhout@clintel.org

23 September 2019

Sr. António Guterres, Secretary-General, United Nations,
United Nations Headquarters,
New York, NY 10017, United States of America.

Ms. Patricia Espinosa Cantellano, Executive Secretary,
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,
UNFCCC Secretariat, UN Campus, Platz der Vereinten Nationen 1,
53113 Bonn, Germany

Your Excellencies,

There is no climate emergency.

A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors.

The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose. Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly, grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, continuous electrical power.

We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation.

We ask you to place the Declaration on the agenda of your imminent New York session.

We also invite you to organize with us a constructive high-level meeting between world-class scientists on both sides of the climate debate early in 2020. The meeting will give effect to the sound and ancient principle no less of sound science than of natural justice that both sides should be fully and fairly heard. Audiatur et altera pars!

Please let us know your thoughts about such a joint meeting.

Yours sincerely, ambassadors of the European Climate Declaration,

Professor Guus Berkhout The Netherlands
Professor Richard Lindzen USA
Professor Reynald Du Berger French Canada
Professor Ingemar Nordin Sweden
Terry Dunleavy New Zealand
Jim O’Brien Rep. of Ireland
Viv Forbes Australia
Professor Alberto Prestininzi Italy
Professor Jeffrey Foss English Canada
Professor Benoît Rittaud France
Morten Jødal Norway
Professor Fritz Vahrenholt Germany
Rob Lemeire Belgium
The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley UK

There is no climate emergency

A global network of 500 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate polities should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.

Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming
The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.

Warming is far slower than predicted
The world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate, and at less than half the rate to be expected on the basis of net anthropogenic forcing and radiative imbalance. It tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.

Climate policy relies on inadequate models
Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. Moreover, they most likely exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.

CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crop worldwide.

Global warming has not increased natural disasters