Lest anyone has wondered why the climate movement has shifted its focus over to children, it is because too many adults just refused to buy into the climate-Armageddon hoax.
It’s a fact: Children are very easy to manipulate and deceive.
Children – and adults with stunted intellectual development – are much easier to convince than adults who have been around the block of life a few times. Children are naive, inexperienced, lack insight and highly impressionable. This makes them vulnerable and thus really easy targets for climate radicals.
88 victims of sadism
Nothing illustrates this better than a recent story appearing in the Daily Mail here, where it is reported how a German sadist, via Skype, was able to successfully convince 88 young women to give themselves potentially lethal 230-volt shocks!
If one sicko is able to convince people to practically electrocute themselves, then imagine how easy it is for the media/organized activists to convince kids a climate doomsday is coming. It’s all based on the same bloody. The approach is the same in both cases:
1) First there’s an offender who derives pleasure through power over the victims
2) The offender claims to have great authority
3) The offender requests that their victims submit and obey
4) The offender claims it’s for a good cause
5) The offender promises the victims great reward for submitting
6) disaster results
1. Pleasure from sense of power
Just as the German ‘socket sadist’ derived his pleasure from the sense of power over his victims and sexual gratification, the climate radicals derive their pleasure from the control they have over today’s children.
2. Claim of authority
While the German socket sadist claimed to be a researcher conducting an experiment that would advance science and thus the common public good, climate radicals falsely claim to possess the scientific truth, and that they have everything under control and can be trusted.
“The victims believed he was a scientist and there was no danger to them to carry out the experiment, that’s why they agreed,” the Daily Mail quoted prosecutors. “But he appeared so serious,” one victim later said.
The socket sadist refused to be challenged. If his victims resisted cooperating, then they were made to feel guilty and inadequate. With climate radicals, they label dissenters as deniers and villains. The climate radicals also do not tolerate any questioning or dissent.
3, Request to sacrifice
The German socket sadist asked his young female victims to hurt themselves – all in the name of science. The climate radicals demand that their followers collectively subject themselves to hardship and accept going without the amenities we enjoy, while exempting themselves.
4. Do it for a good cause
The socket sadist promised his victims it was in service of science, a good cause they could feel good about. Likewise, the climate radicals falsely promise kids they will see a much brighter future- but only if they submit and do as they’re told. It’ll save the planet if they do, they are told.
5. False promises of reward
While the “socket sadist” allegedly made false promises of money (up to €3,000) to his victims and assured them they were participating in the noble cause of advancing science, the highly organized and authoritarian climate radicals promise the kids that if they do as they are told, the planet will be rescued, will become a green paradise, and peace will reign.
And they won’t have to school on Fridays.
6. Will turn into a mess
Just as the socket sadist case turned into a disaster, so will the extreme climate movement of zero carbon emissions by 2050.
Ironically, defense lawyers for the socket sadist, Klaus W Spiegel and Matthias Bohn, are now claiming their client had diminished responsibility for his actions as he suffers from Asperger Syndrome and autism. Sound familiar?
In Berlin today, some 200 scientists shivered at a scientists4future demonstration in front of the Chancellor’s office in order to protest government inaction on combatting global warming.
German activist scientists silently demonstrated before the Chancellor Merkel’s office to protest inaction over warming. Cropped image: ScientistsForFuture.
One prominent attendee was FridaysForFuture activist Prof. Volker Quaschning, who proudly took the day off from lecturing on taxpayer expense. Here’s what he tweeted just before attending the modest demonstration:
Quaschning, a HTW Berlin professor, is seen above at a bus stop on his way to the demonstration, holding the propaganda temperature stripe chart to protest the German government’s inaction on fighting global warming. Unfortunately the professor looks rather silly all dressed up for winter cold in gloves, knit hat, scarf and coat – to protest warming!
200 scientists shiver to protest warming
The activist Berlin professor wasn’t the only scientist trying to stay warm today while protesting climate warming. Two hundred other scientists also showed up in front of Chancellor Merkel’s office, all bundled up in winter clothes, demanding a stop to the warming and that they be listened to – instead of the working class taxpayers.
Low IQ scientists in Berlin outside freezing, dressed in winter clothing, protesting warming! https://t.co/dOwWfFHoEy
The scientists4future all appeared with their mouths taped shut in order to symbolize a “silent protest”. Or perhaps the tape was to keep their teeth from chattering as they shivered in the bitter November cold.
Of course, the scientists didn’t stick around too long. Reportedly they left for an early start to the weekend – in the warm comfort of their homes.
Today the German government voted to pass measures that among other things will make heating and fuel more expensive for ordinary citizens starting next year.
It’s been acknowledged by mainstream scientists for years now that at certain locations on planet Earth, rising carbon dioxide levels cause cooling. It’s now been determined that rising CO2 also causes “negligible” cooling (or warming) depending on the season.
A few years ago a seminal paper (Schmithüsen et al., 2015) was published in Geophysical Research Letters that indicated raising the concentration of CO2 causes a negative greenhouse effect, or cooling, in central Antarctica.
The forcing from the CO2 greenhouse effect ranges from -2.9 W/m² to +1 W/m², and the forcing for the Arctic (central Greenland) is said to be “comparably weak”.
Now scientists have found that CO2 – to the extent that it has a “negligible” influence on temperature – causes the climate to cool from winter to summer and to warm from summer to winter.
For the most part, CO2 varies due to temperature and water vapour level changes. The variance can range from 403 ppm during the drier winter to 377 ppm during the summer.
Nowhere do these observations support the paradigm that says real-world temperature (and water vapour) changes are driven by variations in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
Winter has not even officially arrived, but already large areas of the northern hemisphere are seeing “historic snowfalls”, frigid temperatures and even avalanche alarms.
The Northern Hemisphere has certainly caught a major cold, one certainly not caused by the human CO2 virus. Instead of fever, parts of the northern hemisphere are in hypothermia!
Alarmists, media desperate
Though global warming scientists will never admit it, they are really surprised and stunned. All that is left for them is to make up some cockamamie warming-causes-cold explanations and hope there are enough severely stupid among the media and masses to believe it.
“United States — Rewrite the Record Books”
Beginning in North America, “sub-zero temperatures are now blasting” millions of Americans following “the three historic snowstorms which buried parts of the U.S. last month,” reports weather site electroverse.net here.
Electroverse writes that “lows throughout the week will be more like January temperatures” with readings below zero for many U.S. states and “temps down into the teens are even forecast as far south as Texas.” Yesterday, 97 records toppled.
“It’s a big deal,” Electroverse writes in its headline.
Solar activity suspected
It’s not the sort of thing we are supposed to be expecting from a “warming planet”. Some climate experts blame natural factors, like solar activity, for the cold, and that these warnings have long been known since the sun has entered a new period of calm.
Freeze watches and warnings also extend as far south as Florida. And it’s only early November. And don’t expect to see many FFF activists to show up at rallies protesting hot weather any time soon.
Polar Bear Science site here also reports that the Hudson Bay in Canada has started freezing up earlier than normal three years in a row!
Europe starting to get clobbered by snow, 2m in Alps
Meanwhile cold has also spread across Europe, though not quite as brutal as what we’ve been seeing across North America.
In central Europe, the Austrian online heute here reports that “huge amounts of snow” are on the way for the Alps. German site Wetteronline.de reports here of “new, severe snowfalls in the Alps” with “up to two meters of fresh snow are possible in places up to the weekend” in Switzerland, Austria and Northern Italy, “This is good news for winter sports enthusiasts – but the danger of avalanches is increasing.”
Biggest November snowstorm in 40 years
Even global warming child activist Greta Thunberg’s Sweden is getting hard hit by extreme cold and snow. Electroverse reports the Nordic country is suffering “its biggest November snow storm in 40 years.”
On November 10th, Mika tweeted that temps in northern Sweden fell 10 -34.5°C.
Today is the coldest morning so far during the ongoing winter season:
-34.5°C in Sweden, -31.1°C in Norway and -30.6°C in Finland (not shown on the map). pic.twitter.com/PoH2Ddnde4
The German Ruhrkultur site reports how also Finland just saw “the coldest autumn temperature and the highest snow depth in at least 60 years” and that ” the temperature in Enontekiö, a municipality in Finnish Lapland, dropped to 28.2°C on Tuesday 5 November.”
Deepening cold across Siberia as well
“On November 11 in Yakutia, the daily temperature never rose above −30°C (-22F),” reported SOTT site here. “Some parts of Siberia were even colder: In Evenkia and the northern regions of the Krasnoyarsk Territory, the temperature dropped to −41 … −44°C.”
SOTT comments (sarcastically): “I wonder how much ice will melt at −44°C (-47F).
With all the early winter weather, it’s ridiculous to claim the globe is burning up. So it’s no wonder the alarmists have taken their climate ambulance to the far side of the globe, NSW Australia, and kept their narrow focus on brush fires.
The two recent dry summers seen in Europe have led to alarmists believing that the climate doomsday has arrived. But The European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) looks at the past to see if this sort of thing is really unusual.
=======================
German forests growing much faster today than 1000 years ago. Photo: NTZ
By Axel Robert Göhring
(Text translated/edited by P. Gosselin)
Drought completely normal during High Medieval Ages.
Researchers from the German Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Dynamics at the University of Greifswald have shown that drought in the High Middle Ages was completely normal during the summer. Even if hardly any real scientist dares to say anything against the climate madness, many do their work properly and deliver many small mosaic pieces for dismantling all the fraud.
Last spring, however, one could hear “top physicist” Harald Lesch at the Markus Lanz’s ZDF show claim how climate change would hit quite badly in summer, how the drought of the “record summer” 2019 would have violent effects, especially on the holy German Forest (forest die-off scare came knocking again…).
So what about drought in the holy German Forest 2019? Is it real, or “interpreted”?
Well, it’s probably real. But why not? In summer it is hot and dry even in the temperate climate zone of Europe. Mr. Lesch & Co. showed a heat peak and claimed it is man-made climate change. And when a cold peak appears, then it is only weather – or even proof of climate change. Weather extremes are somehow more frequent today.
Dry summers in Europe not uncommon, new study
Biologist Martin Wilmking and his team from the University of Greifswald in the German state of Vorpommern now have shown that dry summers a thousand years ago were not uncommon in northern Germany. In fact, they were much warmer than today – and this without combustion engines, industry and motor traffic.
Prof. Wilmking and his biologists evaluated so-called proxy data, i.e. verifiable effects of climate in animate or inanimate nature. Specifically, the team worked on annual rings in living beech trees and thousand-year-old archaeological timber: the long established field of expertise is dendroclimatology (Greek: dendron – the tree).
Trees growing faster today
The authors prove once again that our forests are growing much faster today than in the past, because agriculture (also traffic & industry) provides them with a lot of fixed nitrogen (ammonium salts).
The modestly increased CO2 content of today’s air also allows the trees to open the stomata of the leaves for a shorter period of time, thus limiting water losses. In other words, our industrial civilization is considerably HELPING the forest by supplying it with building materials and even water indirectly. This is nothing new for avid EIKE readers, as we have pointed out more than once that the planet has become much greener in recent decades.
Often dry in the prosperous High Middle Ages
If one includes the faster growth of today’s trees, one can conclude in comparison using the annual ring curves of the historical woods that it was often dry in summer in the High Middle Ages. Even the Rhine, the largest river in Europe, became dry near Cologne. Yet the High and Late Middle Ages were not a phase of decline like the Early Middle Ages. On the contrary, the courtly knightly culture flourished in Western and Central Europe. There are tens of thousands of stone castles in Germany, Switzerland, Bohemia and Austria – several in the Saale valley near EIKE’s home city of Jena.
And if you take a boat trip on the Rhine or Moselle rivers – ruins of stone castles can be seen everywhere. They all date back to the time after 1000 AD. The stone castles are a testimony to a significant increase in Europe’s economic performance, which can be traced back to the warmth of the Climate Optimum. The development lasted until the late Middle Ages, when it then became much colder again.
Politically correct theories assume that the booming economy overtaxed nature and thus undermined itself. Certainly not wrong, but without the cold, nature could have recovered faster from the overexploitation.
Warmer is better
Also findings from graves, for example near Berlin, prove that Brandenburg citizens from the Renaissance period were significantly sicker than their ancestors of the High and Late Middle Ages. The saying rings true: “Cold is bad, warm is good.”
International and NASA solar scientists find their Total Solar Irradiance reconstruction extending to 1700 can “correlate well” with Earth’s global temperature records, including a positive net TSI trend during 1986-2008. A new Grand Solar Minimum is expected to commence during the 2030s.
Surface climate records that have been uncorrupted by coastal (ocean-air)/urbanization biases suggest there has been a long-term oscillation in temperature since 1900, with peaks during the 1920s-1940s and again during recent decades (Lansner and Pepke Pedersen, 2018).
An analysis by Soon et al. (2015) (full paper) indicated Northern Hemisphere surface temperatures from rural locations (unaffected by artificial urban heat) aligned well with trends in solar activity since the 19th century. However, models of greenhouse gas forcing did not correlate well with the long-term hemispheric record.
A new paper (Scafetta et al., 2019) also finds the global temperature record aligns well with trends in TSI when using the observation-based ACRIM satellite data rather than the model-based (and IPCC-preferred) PMOD data for trends in recent decades.
“By adjusting the TSI proxy models to agree with the data patterns before and after the ACRIM-gap, we found that these models miss a slowly varying TSI component. The adjusted models suggest that the quiet solar luminosity increased from the 1986 to the 1996 TSI minimum by about 0.45 W/m² reaching a peak near 2000 and decreased by about 0.15 W/m² from the 1996 to the 2008 TSI cycle minimum. This pattern is found to be compatible with the ACRIM TSI composite and confirms the ACRIM TSI increasing trend from 1980 to 2000, followed by a long-term decreasing trend since.”
“This model was extended using the ACRIM composite since 1981 and an average between VIRGO and SORCE TIM since 2013. This particular TSI model appeared to correlate well with the Earth’s global surface temperature records since 1700 [Hoyt et al., 1993, . … The TSI data from 1978 to 1981 appeared too corrupted because of uncorrected degradation of theNimbus7/ERB sensors during the solar maximum of cycle 21. For this reason, it was more appropriate to dismiss the data from this period because modifying TSI data using proxy models, as done by PMOD, would be arbitrary. We proposed that any reliable TSI composite should begin from late 1980 with the ACRIM1 record.”
“The same harmonic solar model suggests that the sun may now be heading toward a new grand solar minimum in the 2030–2040 time frame. Final evidence that TSI may have increased from 1980 to 2000 comes from Earth’s climate studies. Secular climate records correlate well with TSI curves such as the one depicted in Figure 13 and on longer ones covering the entire Holocene [1,23,60,64]. In particular, the warming observed from 1970 to 2000, followed by a temperature standstill since 2000, is a good fit for a natural 60-year cycle prediction superimposed to other contributions [20]. This pattern correlates better with a TSI evolution similar to the ACRIM composite [17–21,62,65] than with the CMIP5 general circulation climate model predictions of continuous anthropogenic warming [22]. The CMIP5 climate models use a high climate sensitivity to CO2 forcing and low secular TSI variability proxy models, such as the one proposed in [3], which was calibrated using the PMOD TSI composite model after 1980.”
German online weekly FOCUS here reports how cuts by wind energy giant Enercon will lead to 3000 layoffs. According to Enercon chief executive Hans-Dieter Kettwig, “politicians have pulled the plug on wind energy.”
German wind energy industry in turmoil. Photo: By Pierre Gosselin
Subsidies cut
Once lavished with huge incentives, the German wind industry is being hit hard after the government recently ended the huge subsidies that were once aimed at expanding the installation of wind energy capacity. Power grid operators had been struggling to keep the grid stable due to erratic feed-in and the subsidized feed-in of wind energy caused German electricity prices to become among the most expensive worldwide.
Fierce opposition from hundreds of protest groups
Moreover, hundreds of citizen protest groups have sprouted and since become a formidable force pushing for the stop of proposed wind projects. Not only have wind parks scarred the German landscape and destroyed biotopes nationwide, they have also been shown to be a real health hazard to humans living in their proximity through the low frequency infrasound they emit. Enough is enough, citizens say.
3000 job cuts in the works
FOCUS reports: “The crisis in the German wind energy industry is worsening. According to the ‘Süddeutsche Zeitung’, hard cuts at the largest German manufacturer Enercon will cost 3000 jobs.”
Next year Enercon will also cut contracts with suppliers, sending a wave of job losses across the industry. “If supply contracts are terminated as planned, many of these companies are threatened with extinction,” FOCUS reports.
FOCUS notes that the layoffs will hit regions that are already economically weak. “At the Aurich and Magdeburg locations, 1500 jobs will be cut, according to the company. At the company headquarters in Aurich, 250 to 300 jobs are affected.”
Stricter regulations for wind parks, greater setback distances
Not only have the subsidies for German wind parks been cut back, but also setback rules will become more strict in order to protect homes and residents from landscape blight and infrasound. In the future, wind parks will need to keep a greater distance away from residential areas. The current CDU/CSU/SPD government wants to keep at least one kilometer between wind power installations and residential areas in the future. This will make many proposed projects impossible.
German Greens demand the industrialization of scenic landscape
The stricter setback rules have been sharply criticized by the wind industry, and particularly by German Green party leader, Annalena Baerbock: “The planned distance rules for wind turbines are devastating,” she told network Germany RND.
“Contrary to all public announcements, the federal government is thus making further expansion of wind power impossible. This is tantamount to a boycott of the Paris Climate Treaty and its own climate targets.” Baerbock also told RND: “The federal government claims to want to get out of coal but at the same time is stopping the expansion of wind power.”
Probably the most disturbing aspect of wind energy is its destructive impact the green energy source has on the environment, never mind its sporadic supply, adverse health impacts and high costs.
As Germany ignored all warnings about wind energy’s shortcomings and its threats, government officials charged ahead blindly and obstinately, without a plan, into the uncontrolled development of the power source.
Germany wrecks its landscape
What follows is a photo video montage of how a beautiful natural landscape near the (once) scenic central German community of Wartenberg was tragically transformed into an industrial eyesore.
The photos were taken by Herrmann Dirr
The “Vogelsberg” wind project was carried out by a cooperation consisting of utility HessenEnergie, “scrupelous” forest owners and the community of Wartenberg.
The video posted on YouTube starts by showing a once idyllic scenery the area offered before the wind project came along and stamped it out. At about the 1:20 mark we begin to see the destruction inflicted on nature to build the project and then how today it is an almost inhospitable area for much wildlife.
Ruining communities to “save the planet”
It’s a classic example of how people professing to have good intentions, yet lacking in vision and judgement, allow themselves to be hijacked by populist green ideology and end up ruining everything they touch around them. They tell us they will rescue the planet, but only end up ruining their communities. It’s a disgrace.
These “leaders” operate according to true populism. They make promises that sound good to the masses who cannot think one step ahead and see the true consequences.
Vermont’s, Bernie Sanders’s disaster
It all reminds me how a few years back my home state of Vermont (whose source of power was in large part green hydro to begin with) deforested and dynamited its green mountain tops which took nature millions of years to sculpture, and then installed large wind turbines. Also see here and here.
How Vermont protects the environment by installing wind turbines. Photos taken near Lowell.
Silent spring for Vermont wildlife. Making way for green energies. Stupid as stupid gets.
An expert psychoanalyst appeared on German television to provide his view on Greta’s high-octane anger, see (German) video below:
At her speech at the UN, Greta’s voice was filled with worry and acute anger. When asked about the source of the intense emotions, German psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and book author Hans-Joachim Maaz commented:
What’s really bad about it, is the marketing, what is being made of her, how she is being, shall we say, used or misused for certain interests. […] I don’t find this is appropriate. I would surely critically ask the parents what they intend by all this, that they are tolerating this, that they are indeed promoting Greta’s personal problem. I find this ethically problematic.”
Anger has other sources
About the pain and anger in her performance in New York that was accompanied by emotionally charged accusations that her youth and life have been destroyed by the climate situation, Maaz says: “That’s just not real. It’s not the case. She just hasn’t had any such really serious experience that would justify such anger. But she harbors such affects within herself and they certainly have a totally other source.”
The German psychiatrist adds:
That they fundamentally allow her to storm in such a direction, without taking her problems into account, without giving her help – that I find to be highly troublesome.”
Large regions of the globe have been cooling or not warming in recent decades according to several new scientific papers.
A new paper shows the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), sea surface temperatures near southern Chile, and the entire region between 50-70°S have cooled or not warmed since the early 1980s (Collins et al., 2019).
The region was more than 2°C warmer 1000 years ago and today’s temps (12.1°C) are the coldest of the last 2300 years (Collins et al., 2019).
Other new papers indicate the North Atlantic sea surface temperatures (SSTs) between southeast Greenland and Denmark have cooled at a rate of 0.78°C per decade since 2004 (Fröb et al., 2019).
The North Atlantic region (Labrador Sea to Icelandic Basin) hasn’t warmed overall (net) since the 1950s (Buckley et al., 2019), which includes no net warming of winter temperatures in Northern Europe and North America since the 1980s (Chen and Luo, 2019, Gan et al., 2019).
Should it be called “global warming” if it isn’t actually global?
By Die kalte Sonne
[German text translated/edited by P Gosselin]
IPCC authors “politically handpicked”
The IPCC climate status report serves as an important reference for climate policy and public discussion. However, very few people are aware that the authors of the report are politically hand-picked. Although anyone can apply as an author to the national IPCC committees, the selection process is not transparent behind closed doors. The IPCC had to take a lot of criticism for this, but persists in its exclusionary line.
Thus critics have no chance to participate in the climate referee reports.
Huge uncertainty persists
The 6th IPCC report (Assessment Report 6, AR6) is currently being prepared. The first round of reviews has been completed and work on the second draft is in full swing. One of the central topics of each report is the warming effect of CO2, so-called CO2 climate sensitivity. Hardly anything has changed in the last 30 years. The value is still very poorly known and ranges from “we have to keep an eye on it” to “catastrophically strong warming”. In numbers: 1.5°C to 4.5°C warming per CO2 doubling.
Climate sensitivity in the lower range
In recent years it has become increasingly clear that the value is probably located in the lower half of the IPCC range. So it will be interesting to see how the AR6 deals with this. But don’t hold your breath because the IPCC seems to be true to its alarmist line, despite many published references to a lower warming by CO2.
Model Chaos
Paul Voosen spoke on this in Science on 16 April 2019. The IPCC modelers had “improved” some processes in their climate simulations and were then quite surprised that the models suddenly ran much hotter than before. The CO2 climate sensitivity was now suddenly above the range previously thought possible, namely 5°C. The climate sensitivity of the models was suddenly much higher than before. Wow! The alarmists celebrated a feast of joy. However, more serious colleagues obviously threw sand in the alarmist gears and reported concerns.
For nearly 40 years, the massive computer models used to simulate global climate have delivered a fairly consistent picture of how fast human carbon emissions might warm the world. But a host of global climate models developed for the United Nations’s next major assessment of global warming, due in 2021, are now showing a puzzling but undeniable trend. They are running hotter than they have in the past. Soon the world could be, too.
In earlier models, doubling atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) over preindustrial levels led models to predict somewhere between 2°C and 4.5°C of warming once the planet came into balance. But in at least eight of the next-generation models, produced by leading centers in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and France, that “equilibrium climate sensitivity” has come in at 5°C or warmer. Modelers are struggling to identify which of their refinements explain this heightened sensitivity before the next assessment from the United Nations’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). But the trend “is definitely real. There’s no question,” says Reto Knutti, a climate scientist at ETH Zurich in Switzerland. “Is that realistic or not? At this point, we don’t know.
[…] Many scientists are skeptical, pointing out that past climate changes recorded in ice cores and elsewhere don’t support the high climate sensitivity—nor does the pace of modern warming. The results so far are “not sufficient to convince me,” says Kate Marvel, a climate scientist at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City. In the effort to account for atmospheric components that are too small to directly simulate, like clouds, the new models could easily have strayed from reality, she says. “That’s always going to be a bumpy road.”
“Modelers at a loss”
CO2 climate sensitivity remains uncertain, modelers are at a loss. They had planned everything so beautifully for the AR6. Shortly before the end of the work, they quickly installed a new aerosolset, which then knocked everything down. The models suddenly showed hardly any warming for the 20th century. Ouch!
Perhaps the modelers were closer to the truth than they had thought, since there was now plenty of room for natural climatic factors, which they had previously set to zero as a precaution. So the models were completely changed again. And that finally led to the crazy high values of 5°C per CO2 doubling. Read for yourself:
Late in the model’s development cycle, however, the NCAR group incorporated an updated data set on emissions of aerosols
The aerosol data threw everything off when the model simulated the climate of the 20th century, it now showed hardly any warming. “It took us about a year to work that out,” says NCAR’s Andrew Gettelman, who helped lead the development of the model. But the aerosols may play a role in the higher sensitivity that the modelers now see, perhaps by affecting the thickness and extent of low ocean clouds. “We’re trying to understand if other [model developers] went through the same process,” Gettelman says.”
What consequences does the modeling chaos have for AR6?
In assessing how fast climate may change, the next IPCC report probably won’t lean as heavily on models as past reports did, says Thorsten Mauritsen, a climate scientist at Stockholm University and an IPCC author. It will look to other evidence as well, in particular a large study in preparation that will use ancient climates and observations of recent climate change to constrain sensitivity.”
“Total failure by climate models”
The AR6 will not be able to rely on the simulations and must therefore focus more on other areas of argumentation. But one thing is as certain as an “amen” in Church: The IPCC will claim that the temperature forecasts have become much more reliable than in the previous report, despite the total failure of the climate models. Although this makes no sense at all, it is politically necessary.
The way out: The new hockey stick curve that PAGES2k was able to publish in Nature Geoscience just in time, at the end of July 2019.
:
Figure: Global temperature reconstruction of the last 2000 years according to PAGES2k 2019.
If you thought Michael Mann’s hockey stick had suffered its final blow recently, then you are mistaken. Fact is: A new hockey stick was born in July 2019. Exactly to be used in the IPCC report. It is rumored that the curve was already included in the first draft of the AR6, although it wasn’t even released then. Mysterious.
MWP only 0.3°C warmer than Little Ice Age?
The Medieval Warm Period is ironed flat and is only 0.3°C warmer than the Little Ice Age. Wow. Are these the “ancient climates” which Voosen addresses in his contribution and form the new basis of argumentation?
PAGES2k shortcomings
A closer look at the PAGES2k database reveals a number of shortcomings. First, a large number of tree rings are used, of which only a few have been formally published as case studies. Example: The study uses tree rings from the French Maritime Alps, although a specialist publication on the region clearly advises against using such tree rings there as temperature proxies.
This is not an isolated case. If one goes through the PAGES2k database in detail, one finds a whole series of dubious practices, which were obviously overlooked by the peer review. Read about them in the following papers:
Lüning, S., L. Schulte, S. Garcés-Pastor, I. B. Danladi, M. Gałka (2019): The Medieval Climate Anomaly in the Mediterranean region. Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology, doi: 10.1029/2019PA003734
Lüning, S., M. Gałka, F. Vahrenholt (2019): The Medieval Climate Anomaly in Antarctica. Palaeogeogr., Palaeoclimatol., Palaeoecol., doi: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.109251
Lüning, S., M. Gałka, F. García-Rodríguez, F. Vahrenholt (2019): The Medieval Climate Anomaly in Oceania. Environmental Reviews, online Just-IN, doi: 10.1139/er-2019-0012
Lüning, S., M. Gałka, F. P. Bamonte, F. García-Rodríguez, F. Vahrenholt (2019): The Medieval Climate Anomaly in South America. Quaternary International, 508: 70-87. doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2018.10.041.
Lüning, S., M. Gałka, F. Vahrenholt (2017): Warming and cooling: The Medieval Climate Anomaly in Africa and Arabia. Paleoceanography 32 (11): 1219-1235, doi: 10.1002/2017PA003237.
Authors ignoring important publications
It is also noticeable that the PAGES2k paper does not cite any of the recent publications on the medieval climate anomaly, although the medieval climate is one of the most important topics in the area of palaeoclimatology. At least two of the publications were accessible to PAGES2k authors (others appeared later), but were ignored for unknown reasons. The papers were able to demonstrate medieval warming throughout the southern hemisphere. Some smaller areas also cooled at the same time, similar to today’s active temperature seesaws and coastal upwelling areas.
Questionable database
In the northern hemisphere the Medieval Warm Period was always known. In this respect, it is an absolute mystery as to how the new hockey stick fix came about, if not through a questionable database.
Conclusion: “climate chaos”
It is time for the IPCC to open up to criticism. The climate models are out of control, as are the paleo-climatic reconstructions. What remains is climate chaos. It is time for a scientifically sustainable new beginning in which criticism is seriously heard and integrated. The exclusion of critics was a historic mistake that is now falling on the IPCC’s feet.
The Trump-bashing German mainstream media are already going into deep depression over the 2020 US election. An ARD public television commentary by Washington correspondent Sebastian Hesse admits things are looking really dire for the US Democrats, and is now even seeing “a landslide victory for Trump”.
German ARD news media somber over Trump’s 2020 election chances. Image ARD tagesthemen
Forget the media in US . They lack the bird’s eye view and are deep in denial with the situation being so bleak for the Democrats.
Seeing a “landslide victory”
But in Europe the news media are beginning to see it. A commentary by Washington ARD correspondent Sebastian Hesse at ARD public television – Germany’s version of the BBC – openly comments: “Trump’s re-election is likely,” adding: “If next week were elected, who would win the race? Forecast: a landslide victory for Donald Trump.”
Will take a miracle
While the Democrats and Republicans begin to rumble in the political kick boxing ring in the lead-up to next year’s 2020 Presidential election, the vastly Trump-hating European media are watching with a view from their seats in the bleachers. And they’re in disbelief at what they are seeing.
They see a Democrat party that’s already battered, bleeding – with eyes puffed shut – tired and about to go down for the count. Their only hope is a Hail Mary, a miraculously lucky punch landing.
It wasn’t supposed to be that way. Two and half years ago the snotty German media were all predicting enfant terrible Donald Trump would be a one-term president, if even that. What happened?
“Trump has delivered”
According to the ARD’s Hesse: “Trump has delivered.” He “has mobilized the conservatives by appointing conservative judges and “especially on issues that are close to America’s traditionalists’ hearts: Abortion, immigration, possession of weapons. […] Only George Washington had brought more new judges.”
“Unprecedented consistency”
Trump has also fought for building the wall on the border, doing away with paralyzing environmental legislation and patriotism at every opportunity “with unprecedented consistency”, Hesse sniffs.
The ARD correspondent adds: “The non-partisan floating voters who have made their mark on Trump may find him alienating or even repulsive as a person. But they make their choice soberly according to the simple formula: Am I feeling better today than four years ago?”
“Jobs, jobs, jobs”
Hesse also concedes “the economy has been buzzing since Trump took office” and the US has seen “growth rates like nowhere else in Europe, the stock market boom and above all jobs, jobs, jobs.”… “For the time being, many Americans feel that they are doing well under Trump.”
Opponents “are all in trouble”
Hesse currently sees Trump’s most promising opponents “are all in trouble”:” Joe Biden, because the Ukraine affair is also going home with him. Elizabeth Warren, because her agenda is also too left for many democrats. And Bernie Sanders, who already suffered a heart attack in the pre-election campaign.”
Forget impeachment
But what about the impeachment? German leaders and media are hoping that perhaps the impeachment process will stzop Trump. Here Hesse notes soberly: “Well, there is not even an impeachment procedure yet. And if there is one, it will most likely fail because of the Republican majority in the Senate”.
Hesse summarizes: “The bottom line is that only three developments could bring down Trump: outrageous revelations in the wake of the impeachment investigation. A noticeable economic downturn. And the most improbable: a convincing challenger, to whom the hearts and votes will fly to. All three are not in sight. The man in the White House doesn’t need to think about packing his suitcase!”
As reported in 4 separately-published papers, scientists have discovered a mechanism whereby islands can build themselves up naturally, thwarting the threat of sea level rise. Tuck et al. (2019) affirm the “implications of island building are profound, as it will offset existing scenarios of dramatic increases in island flooding.”
Earlier this year, Duvat (2019) identified a global trend in island shoreline net growth despite recent sea level rise.
The welcome news is that none of the islands larger than 10 ha – and just 1.2% of the 334 islands larger than 5 ha – have decreased in size since the 1980s. Nearly 90% of the world’s islands have been stable to expanding in coastal area during recent decades.
In four other new papers, 3 of them with Auckland University Ph.D candidate Megan E. Tuck as lead author, scientists have discovered a mechanism whereby islands have the capacity to “morphodynamically respond to rising sea level” via wave-driven “overwash processes”.
The implications are profound. The most concerning impacts of sea level rise may effectively be thwarted by natural processes and consequently “many islands are less vulnerable to inundation than currently perceived.”
Positive developments in marine science like this are indeed worth reporting in 4 papers and 3 separate scholarly journals within the same calendar year.
This good news also deserves much more coverage than the public is likely to see.
“Here, we present evidence from physical model experiments of a reef island that demonstrates islands have the capability to morphodynamically respond to rising sea level through island accretion. Challenging outputs from existing models based on the assumption that islands are geomorphologically inert, results demonstrate that islands not only move laterally on reef platforms, but overwash processes provide a mechanism to build and maintain the freeboard of islands above sea level. Implications of island building are profound, as it will offset existing scenarios of dramatic increases in island flooding. Future predictive models must include the morphodynamic behavior of islands to better resolve flood impacts and future island vulnerability.”
“Coral reef islands are unconsolidated deposits of reef-derived sand and gravel that are considered vulnerable to the impacts of global sea-level rise because of their low elevation (< 3 m) and exposure oceanic wave energy. Previous research has shown that sea-level rise will drive an increase in wave overtopping on reef island shorelines, which will be an increasing hazard for atoll island communities. Here, we show that wave overtopping on reef islands is a geomorphically important process that facilitates sediment deposition on the island surface and vertical building. Field evidence from 26 overwash deposits show that vertical island accretion can be driven by king tides, long-period swell, local storms, tropical cyclones and tsunami. Deposit depths ranged between 0.06–1.93 m and increased island elevations by between 4–400%. Recognition that overwash processes can contribute to vertical island building is instructive in considering the potential for islands to adjust to future increases in sea-level and to incorporate this critical morphodynamic response in future flood risk modelling for low islands.”
“[R]esults show that the rate and magnitude of physical adjustment is strongly dependent on the rate and magnitude of sea-level rise and wave conditions. Results challenge existing models of future island susceptibility to wave driven flooding, demonstrating that washover processes can provide a mechanism to build and potentially maintain island freeboard above sea level. These insights highlight an urgent need to incorporate island morphodynamics into flood risk models in order to produce accurate assessments of future wave-driven flood risks and better resolve island vulnerability.”
“Low-lying coral reef islands are considered extremely vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. However, future island morphodynamic adjustments in response to anticipated sea level rise and changing wave conditions are currently poorly resolved. Assertions of island vulnerability are based on outputs from flood risk models that simulate sea level rise on present day island topography despite evidence that many reef islands are highly dynamic landforms. Utilizing a physical modelling methodology, three experiment programs were undertaken to model gravel island morphodynamics in response to increasing sea level and changing wave conditions. Modelling outputs present new insights into the modes and styles of island change, primarily the first experimental evidence that reef islands can keep pace with sea level rise through island building driven by washover processes. Results suggest that many islands are less vulnerable to inundation than currently perceived and may endure on reef platforms despite sea level rise.”
Sales of so-called environmentally friendly electric cars have been slumping, despite all the Friday protests and loud cries for cleaner mobility.
Citing a report released by PricewaterhouseCoopers, German news portal t-online.de here reports how “suddenly demand is in the basement: even in China – the world’s largest market for e-cars – sales figures are collapsing”.
It turns out electric cars, with their long charging times, short range and surprisingly high CO2 lifetime budget, are still not attractive enough to consumers in these times of “climate crisis”.
Though sales have picked up in Germany somewhat, but that it’s still “at a very low level,” T-Online reports.
Climate protests, hysteria, fail to sway
Germany is one of the leading Fridays For Future protest countries worldwide, with tens of thousands of protesters turning out weekly. Yet that has not translated into any meaningful change in terms of electric car sales. People have not been swayed by all the climate hysteria and remain uncomfortable with all the technical and environmental drawbacks of plug-in electric cars. Read here.
Big markets dive
T-Online sees the really big trouble for electric cars elsewhere, that is in the markets where they have been traditionally strong: China, Norway and the USA. The German news site reports: “And that’s where the wind has changed, according to a report by management consultants PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC).”
Global: plug in electric fell 23.8%!
“According to the report, 321,573 battery-powered electric cars were sold worldwide in the third quarter of 2019. This is a decline of 2.8 percent compared to the previous year. Sales of plug-in hybrids even fell by a quarter (23.8 percent) to 102,097 units sold. There are various reasons for this,” reports T-Online.
Huge sales drop in China
T-Online reports that the world’s largest market for electric cars, China, “collapsed drastically between July and September 2019.” Adding: ” Sales of electric cars fell by 15.7 percent, of hybrid cars by 20 percent and of plug-in hybrids by as much as 27.3 percent.”
20% Q3 drop in US
Things are not better in the USA. Recently S&P Global reported: “Sales in the US plug-in vehicle market in Q3 2019 were down roughly 20% compared with Q3 2018, but year-to-date sales for 2019 were slightly ahead of sales through the third quarter in 2018.”
Future of electric plug-ins uncertain
Overall there’s growing uncertainty when it comes to the future of mobility and as to which technology will emerge as the most viable, and when.
Countries worldwide are woefully lagging behind in the installation of electric car infrastructure. Policymakers are thus uneasy about investing hundreds of billions into an electric car infrastructure, knowing that it may well be made obsolete by other fuels, such as hydrogen. Investment delays in turn lead to delays in sales.
Recently many readers may have noticed how alarmists and activists have been using the so-called stripe chart (see following chart) to illustrate the warming the planet has recently experienced.
The popular stripe chart was created by “lead scientist” Ed Hawkins of the National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Reading, NCAS, UoR.
The stripe chart depicts the global temperature trend, but only since 1850, and is designed of course to make the recent warming look dramatic through the use of darkening fire red stripes on the right side.
But note that the real temperature difference between dark blue and dark red is ONLY about 1°C!
Naturally a regular, boring old line curve is all one needs, but it just doesn’t produce the dramatic panic reaction propagandists love to see from their gullible followers.
For the very easily duped masses among us, who skipped too much school and whose low intellect allow them to be easily swayed by pretty colors, the red stripes of the present are all it takes to mislead and create the desired panic.
The colored 150-year stripe chart is a classic propaganda tool for brainwashing the many dimwitted among us.
2000-year stripe chart
If colors work well to drive home a point, then let’s use them to illustrate global temperature trends going back 2000 years. So, what happens when we create a stripe chart going back 2000 years:
The above rough stripe chart is based on R.W. Spencer 2007, going back 2000 years. Clearly we see the long Medieval Warm Period in the middle and today’s warm spell on the right side.
Suddenly all the drama disappears and the propaganda is exposed for what it is. Today’s warming is in reality nothing new.
So the next time someone shows you this cherry-picked, only back to 1850, propaganda stripe chart, then show them what it looks like going back 2000 years. Imagine what a stripe chart of the entire Holocene would look like. Be my guest. I’d be happy to post it.
Note that the 2000-year one I created above is rough only. You’re welcome to improve on it.
Many readers have surely read articles by Japanese blogger/contributor Kirye here at NoTricksZone since about a year and a half.
Japanese climate blogger Kirye thinks Japan will be the last developed country to ever question climate change.
Kirye, who wishes to remain anonymous, lives in Tokyo and has answered some questions about her blogging and climate science in Japan.
Interview
When and how did you become a skeptic?
It started back in 2013, I think. I read Dr. Kiyohiko Ikeda‘s books, and what he said was a surprise to me. So I started reading other books about climate change, like Svensmark’s “Chilling Stars”. It wasn’t long before I realized that we weren’t being told the whole truth about climate.
Are you a scientist or an expert?
Of course not. I’m just a layperson, like many other bloggers, who happened to notice some things were not making any sense. I got interested in it and realized that there are many serious scientists who have very different views. The main media in Japan never tell us that. In fact, they are ignoring the record cold in North America right now. As a writer, I feel we need journalists who actually do the job of investigating.
Are many people in Japan skeptical about climate science?
I don’t like the expression ‘skeptics’. They are in fact climate realists. If the question is: Are there many climatic realists in Japan, then I would answer as follows: Unfortunately not. Most people simply believe what they are told by the media. Japan is rather culturally and media isolated. Many people here do not understand English well enough to read dissenting material from abroad. The information they receive gets filtered beforehand. It’s not like in the US, or Britain, where people get to hear both sides.
When do you think people in Japan will become more skeptical about climate science?
Not in the foreseeable future, I think. As I said, Japanese people are rather isolated from the outside world, and so rely on the mainstream media for their information. There are some very good realist scientists in Japan, but they are shut out by the media. Climate realism will reach Japan only after alarmism ends in US and Europe.
The planet has warmed over the past century. What’s behind it?
I’m not a scientist, just a layman. Nobody really knows. We only know that there are many different scientists with many different explanations – many having to do with the natural oceanic and solar cycles, and not CO2. Well, I agree with Dr. Lindzen’s opinion. And as you can see from past posts, I even checked the Japanese countryside stations. Many of them have not warmed for about 20 or more years.
Much of the manmade component is probably the urban heat island effect and poor land use.
What are the most convincing facts that tell us there’s no alarm?
That’s easy to answer. Just look at the temperature of the Holocene. It was often much warmer than it is today over the past 10,000 years. The temperature of the last 30 years is nothing unusual. What’s 30 years compared to the last 10,000?
Also typhoons, hurricanes etc. show in fact a downward trend. And the tide gauges at coastlines show no alarming story.
And if you haven’t noticed, the science is so politicized.
Why do you check temperature data?
I simply believe in searching for the truth. I can’t stand it when honest scientists who are simply trying to get to the truth get attacked and hurt. Some scientists say it’s all trace gas CO2. I can’t overlook such absurdity.
So, I think laymen have to do journalism now because major media have abandoned journalism in Japan. This world is far from perfect, but we can work to make it better.
Fortunately, I can check the data and present the results with charts. I will keep doing this.
According to Greenland ice sheet instrumental records, there was a dramatic cooling trend during summer months from the late 1980s to early 2000s (Chylek et al., 2004).
“The average temperature of the warmest month and the summer average (June, July and August) temperature show a decreasing trend of 3.0 and 2.2°C/decade between 1987 and 2001.”
Greenland had been gaining +40 Gt of ice per year during 1961-1990 (Fettweis et al., 2017).
Coincident with the cooling, the ice sheet was still thickening and gaining mass – +11 Gt (gigatons) per year – as recently as 1992-2002 (Zwally et al., 2005).
Annual anthropogenic CO2 emissions rates tripled during this 41-year period, and atmospheric CO2 rose by nearly 60 parts per million (317 ppm to 375 ppm).
After 2002, the Greenland ice sheet began losing mass as the ice sheet temperatures warmed.
This warming and mass loss trend have often been attributed to the rise in CO2 emissions by those promoting anthropogenically-driven global warming (AGW).
But if rising CO2 emissions are the causal mechanism for the post-2002 warming and mass loss, why did the Greenland ice sheet cool and gain about 1.35 trillion metric tons of ice for the duration of 41 years as CO2 emissions rates tripled from ~2.5 GtC/yr (gigatons of carbon per year) to ~7.5 GtC/yr?
Succinctly, why would an ice sheet both lose and gain mass as CO2 rises?
What follows is an example of how German decisionmakers go about protecting the environment: chop down hundreds of acres of forests and pour thousands of tons on concrete reinforced with hundreds of tons of steel on huge beds of gravel, all hauled in by hundreds of truck loads. Then install skyscraper tall industrial bird-killing monstrosities.
Result: an idyllic forest gets turned into an industrial complex that can be seen and felt from miles away – in order to protect the climate.
It would be a gruesome task to calculate the environmental and CO2 budget for the following described wind park project in the Münsterwald forest near the western Germany city of Aachen.
When finished it will consist of seven 200-meter tall turbines in what once was a natural, forested area and undisturbed biotope.
To get to the site, a “gigantic” swatch of forest had to be cut through the heart of the forest. According to the ZDF public television report (see below), “alone here 1000 trees had to be cut down.
Largescale deforestation
And according top Rainer Hülsheger of the state association for natural landscape protection: “At least 12,000 square meters of forest needed to be cleared in order to build one wind turbine alone.”
Angry environmentalists say that the forest simply was never even suitable for a wind park to begin with. Yet, the ZDF reports how the forest belongs to the city, and so the revenue-generating project got the green light.
Threat to endangered species
The ZDF report shows the sheer insanity that it takes to install wind turbines in the middle of forests, and how they endanger rare bird species such as the black storch and red kite.
Entire biotope severely damaged
For the wind project in Euskirchen, according to the ZDF (2:35), “The planned 24 wind turbines in the co called Kammerwald cut through an entire biotope system from Rheinland towards Belgium.”
Forest is the best place, says Aachen city offical
Why are the turbines being installed in the forests? According to Aachen city official Elmar Wiezorek, placing the turbines in fields posed an even greater environmental hazard: “The forest had the least problems.”
But Herbert Klinkenberg of a citizens initiative protecting the wind projects calls it all “a catastrophe”. ZDF sums it up: “Climate protection at the expense of nature.”
In an interview with the Hamburg daily Abendblatt here, retired German climate researcher Prof. Hans von Storch commented on the global climate debate, saying “Greta’s message is ridiculous” and that “Greta Thunberg’s demand that we panic has something of an end of world sect.”
Climate scientist Prof. Hans von Storch. Image cropped here, CC BY 2.0
Dismisses “world doom” climate scenarios
According to the Abendblatt, Hans von Storch, the former director of the Helmholtz-Zentrum Centre for Materials and Coastal Research, warns in the interview of the consequences of global warming but at the same time “urges an objective debate and thinks little of the scenarios of world doom that are often drawn at present.”
Playing into the hands of the hard right
The retired professor also warns that “an increasing polarization on this topic could also harm democracy, and so benefit the right wing AfD party.
According to the Abendblatt, “von Storch criticizes Greta Thunberg and hersupporting entourage harshly” and believes that her calls for people to get used to going without modern conveniences “to be of little use because it would hardly have any effects, but would have major disadvantages for the personal development of people.”
Doesn’t share doomsday views
When asked by the Abendblatt whether he shares the doomsday views of a “climate crisis” and that there needs to be an “uprising, or extinction”, von Storch says he does not share that outlook and reminded that today’s modern technology has made it possible for people to live by the millions in areas that would otherwise be inhospitable, like Phoenix, Arizona. “That was impossible in the past; today there are air conditioning systems.”
Selective listening
On Greta Thunberg’s demand that we “listen to the science!”, the award-winning German scientist slaps it down, hinting at a non-consensus among scientists: “She demands listening to scientists who should reinforce what she believes and says anyway.”
The last 40 years of global temperature changes can be radiatively explained by a natural reduction in cloud cover.
From 1979 to 2011, satellite data provide documentation of a reduction in cloud cover and aerosol depth that allowed an additional 2.3 W/m² of positive shortwave energy to be absorbed by the Earth’s surface rather than reflected to space.
This change in absorbed solar radiation can account for the energy imbalance and warming during this period far better than the much smaller 0.2 W/m² forcing associated with a +22 ppm CO2 change over 10 years(representing just 10% of the overall trend in downwelling longwave).
Other satellite observations reveal a pronounced 6.8 W/m² positive solar forcing particularly concentrated during the 1984-2000 period due to a decrease in reflected shortwave energy (via clouds).
From 2014 to 2017, the reduction in cloud cover resulted in an additional 0.83 W/m² shortwave forcing, which explains the imbalance and the stark warming during this post-“pause” period.
A new paper underscores the salience of cloud cover reduction in explaining not only the modern warming but the temperature variation that occurred in recent decades.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy
_(431).jpg){kind=link}
Recent Comments