metmike: Maybe you didn't know that there are several different climate models. The incredible disparity between their projections, by itself tells us how uncertain the science/theory is.
So far, they have ALL been too warm, some by a great deal.
Many of the gatekeepers and people that use the models, do so, not as science but to force political and economical model changes on society........based almost entirely on busted computer simulations of the atmosphere using a speculative theory that can be represented by mathematical equations that are subjectively chosen to get the result they want.
The most extreme projection departs greatly from any remotely plausible scenario when applying authentic science. But it's the best political choice by a wide margin!
The disparity in the solutions below tells us how uncertain that the climate science is…..but we are told “the science is settled and debate is over” What they should say is “the politics have been determined and the solutions are known”
Stop using the worst-case scenario for climate warming as the most likely outcome — more-realistic baselines make for better policy.
metmike: The graph below shows what a huge joke this field is. As if humans changing the amount of CO2 emissions could ever have this much power over the climate and weather. The reality is that the Climate Accord will have almost ZERO affect on the climate and weather ...............it's entirely a political tool to get to the objective.
The simulations of the atmosphere going out 100 years with apocalyptic end points are pure politics and zero authentic science.....disguised as science and accepted by mainstream scientists with a huge political and scientific bias which prevents them from using the scientific method........no matter how smart they are!
Seriously, as an objective atmospheric scientist for 39 years, studying climate change closely for 3 decades, when I look at the graph below, I don't know whether to laugh or feel depressed that my field of expertise was hijacked for a political agenda and is selling this garbage to people. Actually, the emotions include embarrassment and at the same time, utter amazement that they bamboozled the entire world and have actually won. The governments and many people actually believe all this stuff. Even a lot of smart people.
We should note, that the total junk science below is being used to sell us on the idea that in order to save the planet, we must follow everything in the Climate Accord.......and Green New Deal in the US.
The call is not for nations to cut emissions on their own but they must sign up with the Climate Accord and abide by the politics written in there............rich countries send money to poor countries, CO2 from rich countries is killing the planet, CO2 from poor countries.......is not killing the planet. What the heck, that's not science, that looks just like global socialism!
Keep in mind that I've been a practicing environmentalist for most of my life and all for helping the poor much more than we do. But can we please stop stealing people's intelligence on climate science and environmentalism to get them on board with a political scheme. I might actually support parts of it then because at least it would be authentic/honest.
by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
March Global Temperature -0.01 deg. C vs 30 year average
Started by metmike - April 3, 2021, 1:29 p.m.
April 2nd, 2021 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
The Version 6.0 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for March, 2021 was -0.01 deg. C, down substantially from the February, 2021 value of +0.20 deg. C.
"Right on time, the maximum impact from the current La Nina is finally being felt on global tropospheric temperatures. The global average oceanic tropospheric temperature anomaly is -0.07 deg. C, the lowest since November 2013. The tropical (20N-20S) departure from average (-0.29 deg. C) is the coolest since June of 2012. Australia is the coolest (-0.79 deg. C) since August 2014.
The linear warming trend since January, 1979 remains at +0.14 C/decade (+0.12 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land)."
metmike: How can we be having a climate crisis from excessive global warming.............when there hasn't been global warming for numerous years?
From the residual affects of previous global warming?
But the case is that it's the magnitude or rate of the so called unprecedented warming that makes it a crisis.
-0.1 deg C compared to the 30 year average during a cooling La Nina tells you how small the magnitude is. The change in global temperature is so small, that 1 (not even big) La Nina brought us back to the 30 year average!
The false narrative is that the warming is accelerating. The authentic science, screams loudly, telling us that is false.
Lets remind everybody what was supposed to happen, starting decades ago because of the climate crisis.
BTW, Google, recently took the headline off of the article below(after it was there for 20 years) so that it would not show up as frequently in searches. I had to go back to a previous post of mine to retrieve the headline.
UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.
Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.
He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.
As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday.
Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study.
″Ecological refugees will become a major concern, and what’s worse is you may find that people can move to drier ground, but the soils and the natural resources may not support life. Africa doesn’t have to worry about land, but would you want to live in the Sahara?″ he said.
UNEP estimates it would cost the United States at least $100 billion to protect its east coast alone.
Shifting climate patterns would bring back 1930s Dust Bowl conditions to Canadian and U.S. wheatlands, while the Soviet Union could reap bumper crops if it adapts its agriculture in time, according to a study by UNEP and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
Excess carbon dioxide is pouring into the atmosphere because of humanity’s use of fossil fuels and burning of rain forests, the study says. The atmosphere is retaining more heat than it radiates, much like a greenhouse.
The most conservative scientific estimate that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years, said Brown.
The difference may seem slight, he said, but the planet is only 9 degrees warmer now than during the 8,000-year Ice Age that ended 10,000 years ago.
Brown said if the warming trend continues, ″the question is will we be able to reverse the process in time? We say that within the next 10 years, given the present loads that the atmosphere has to bear, we have an opportunity to start the stabilizing process.″
He said even the most conservative scientists ″already tell us there’s nothing we can do now to stop a ... change″ of about 3 degrees.
″Anything beyond that, and we have to start thinking about the significant rise of the sea levels ... we can expect more ferocious storms, hurricanes, wind shear, dust erosion.″
He said there is time to act, but there is no time to waste.
UNEP is working toward forming a scientific plan of action by the end of 1990, and the adoption of a global climate treaty by 1992. In May, delegates from 103 nations met in Nairobi, Kenya - where UNEP is based - and decided to open negotiations on the treaty next year.
We didn't head their dire warnings.....and this is what happened:
Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds
From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.
An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.This image shows the change in leaf area across the globe from 1982-2015.Credits: Boston University/R. Myneni
Green leaves use energy from sunlight through photosynthesis to chemically combine carbon dioxide drawn in from the air with water and nutrients tapped from the ground to produce sugars, which are the main source of food, fiber and fuel for life on Earth. Studies have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis, spurring plant growth.
However, carbon dioxide fertilization isn’t the only cause of increased plant growth—nitrogen, land cover change and climate change by way of global temperature, precipitation and sunlight changes all contribute to the greening effect. To determine the extent of carbon dioxide’s contribution, researchers ran the data for carbon dioxide and each of the other variables in isolation through several computer models that mimic the plant growth observed in the satellite data.
Results showed that carbon dioxide fertilization explains 70 percent of the greening effect, said co-author Ranga Myneni, a professor in the Department of Earth and Environment at Boston University
I'm going to add an additional article here for the first time but mainly to make a point clear: THIS WAS WEATHER NOT CLIMATE! Despite how impressive it was.
Also, those that told us that climate change caused this can't explain the numerous times in the past that it happened just like this, before there was global warming.
The event was mainly due to the “Polar vortex”, which blasted the coldest air across central U.S. from the polar region in more than 30 years. At the same time, Alaska experienced its coldest February since 1999. The main driver for the weather across the contiguous U.S. during February was a strongly negative Arctic Oscillation (AO) during the first half of the month. This may have been the result of a sudden stratospheric warming event that occurred in January. The negative AO pattern favors a cold air outbreak over the central U.S., often referred to as the “polar vortex”.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) officially reported that during February, the average contiguous U.S. temperature was 30.6°F, 3.2°F below the 20th-century average. This ranked as the 19th-coldest February in the 127-year period of record and was the coldest February since 1989.
WOW, President Biden, today actually used that extreme cold that I displayed earlier/above and told us that it WAS from climate, not weather.
Seriously , he just did it. According to him, global warming caused the coldest month in 30 years. He really just did that.
Deaths from climate-related phenomena are at an all-time low. If you think deaths from climate catastrophes are an emergency, please point in the graph below to the start of the “emergency”.
Storminess has not gone up, and there’s been no increase in hurricane strength or frequency …
no “emergency” there.
Global weather disaster losses as a percentage of assets at risk (global GDP) are decreasing, not increasing.
Tide gauges show no increase in the rate of sea-level rise, and the claimed acceleration in satellite-measured sea level is merely an artifact of changing satellites.
Yields of all major food crops continue to rise, and humans are better fed, clothed, and housed against the vagaries of weather than at any time in the past.
The most destructive and deadly tornadoes have been decreasing.
The predicted increase in US droughts....never came!
The predicted extreme heat waves..............never came!
The predicted increase in global drought..............never came!
These were the 3 potential projections for temperature based on global climate models in 1986. The top line represents what the temperature should have done if we didn't cut back on CO2. The US did cut back some but the world did not.
Global emissions increased 67% from 1988 to 2019 with the developing nations completely dominating this increase. U.S. emissions have declined since 2007 with reductions totaling about 1 billion metrics tons through 2019. WOW, this means that temperatures should have increased at the level of the top line above.
The amount of CO2 increase and models based on it predicted the pink line by Hansen in the last 1980's.... A COMPUTER SIMULATION. Government and political policies that Biden is pushing, are based on the pink line. So is the Climate Accord and Green New Deal. The blue and yellow lines are whats actually happened on the real planet.
Since the 1980's, climate science has had many opportunities to reconcile this massive disparity between the too warm climate models and the real world observations. Intead of doing that, they actually increased the temperature on some of the models to make them even more wrong/hotter. This is absolute proof that the models do not represent authentic science but are instead, entirely a political tool to scare people so they can pass the political agenda based entirely on a fake climate crisis scare.
The warming has stalled out............again. Mostly from the weak La Nina but if weak La Nina's can do this and the previous pause was over a decade long, it's pretty dang obvious that we are absolutely NOT seeing accelerating warming...........instead, very slow beneficial warming during this current climate optimum.
Global temperatures as of March 2021 are -0.01 vs the 30 year average:
Also in that article above, was a comment that included this awesome link..Watch it............pretty compelling on several elements being misrepresented by the climate alarmists.
"This is my most concise expose of climate fraud. Please pass it around to everyone you know and your elected officials. The video is short, but cuts right to the heart of the matter."
I need to continue to make it clear that I'm a practicing environmentalist who cares deeply about the planet and who has dedicated his life to making the world a better place.
Please do not believe any propaganda that tries to convince targets of the false narratives, that people like me are trying to sabotage their effort to save the planet.
Being a good steward of the planet should be a top priority for everybody, no matter what your political affiliation is........based entirely on objective, authentic science and the truth.
Please join me in that effort!
The real environmental crisis's/insects dying-dead zones-aquifers drying up-plastics in the ocean-landfills/trash-over consumption of natural resources(metmike is a PRACTICING environmentalist): April 2019
"The claim by the Biden Administration that climate change has placed us in a moment of “profound crisis” ignores the fact that the energy policy changes being promoted are based upon computer model simulations which have produced average warming rates at least DOUBLE those observed in the last 40+ years.
Just about every climate claim made by politicians, and even many vocal scientists, has been either an exaggeration or a lie."
Biden And Kerry Get Humiliated by China
6 responses |
Started by metmike - April 25, 2021, 3:54 p.m. https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/68502/