'C3' Charts Videos Data BlogRoll
Quotes Bad Weather Bad Predictions Archvs./Catgrs.
| 'C3' the Skeptic | Blame it all on CO2 | George Carlin on the 'Greens' |
Joe Biden & The Doomsday Democrats: Anti-Fossil Fuel Extremists Who Ignore NOAA's Real World Climate Evidence
Rarely does a day pass without the Biden administration or some Congressional Democrat spewing scientific nonsense about our supposedly current global warming "existential" threat from fossil fuel CO2 emissions. But the latest empirical evidence and research does not support the Democrat doomsday narrative.
Way back in January 2005, the empirical evidence started rolling in from NOAA's USCRN project - the U.S. state-of-the-art climate reporting system - designed with the sole purpose of identifying climate change signals. The good news is that this land-based system has the best monthly temperature observations versus any other system currently used across the globe.
However, the bad news for the disaster-porn press and Democrats is that NOAA's USCRN datasets show no doomsday signal. This NOAA chart from January 2005 through August 2022 clearly reveals that there is no signal of any global warming existential threat that Democrats keep yammering about as a "clear & present" danger to Americans.
By using the USCRN's own data, one can measure and plot the rolling 60-month temperature changes to determine if CO2 emissions are causing monthly temperature changes to increase, which would fit the Democrats' narrative.
Instead, the scientific empirical evidence reveals that the rolling 60-month temperature changes are actually declining, not increasing as experts want the public to believe.
In addition, by using NOAA's monthly atmospheric CO2 readings, it provides undeniable proof that the correlation between the 60-month temperature changes and the 60-month rolling averages of atmospheric CO2 levels is highly suspect, bordering on non-existent. (In fact, there is a negative correlation between the two resulting in a R2 of 0.002.)
Besides the increasing temperature changes claimed by Democrat "experts", they claim that temperatures are rapidly accelerating higher, thus supposedly proving their existential threat beliefs. Instead - yet again - the USCRN empirical evidence of temperature trends counter that cult-like belief.
In an examination of rolling 60-month temperature trends on the below chart, it is critically non-ambiguous that temperature trends change constantly in both amount and direction over time; and, categorically proves there is no established current positive correlation with the ever-increasing atmospheric CO2 levels. (Again, the R2 between the two variables is ludicrously tiny.)
And the trend (red linear line) of the of the rolling 60-Mth trends confirms the direct opposite of what Joe Biden and the Democrats say and what the MSM reports. If fossil fuel CO2 emissions actually had the impact on global temperatures as claimed, the trend would be significantly upward sloping.
The following chart depicts the actual cooling trend that the U.S. has experienced since April 2014 - 8+ years. And the cooling trend is not just the U.S. Both NOAA's global temperature dataset and its ocean dataset are in cooling trends over the same time period. In addition, both major satellite (RSS and UAH) climate measurement systems report global lower atmospheric cooling trends since 2014.
Yet, Biden's Democrats, the MSM press, and the bought agenda "scientists" ignore all of the above unmistakable, scientific evidence that refutes their CO2 global warming doomsday narrative.
Additional regional and global temp charts.
Notes: The cooling trends noted (or extended 'pause' if one prefers) are not climate significant other than in the context that politicians mislead the public by conveniently ignoring the real world evidence and saying the opposite is true. The top chart is sourced from NOAA's national temperature web site, which is also the source for all the monthly temperature data used in the remaining charts above. Monthly CO2 data sourced from this NOAA site. Excel was used to plot the data; to calculate the correlations, rolling trends, averages, and the linear trends. The top chart of monthly USCRN temperature anomalies has an R2 of 0.03 in regards to the monthly atmospheric CO2 ppm levels.
Democrats' New Climate & Green Energy Legislation Has Zilch Impact On Climate Change, Per The UN's Science
Biden and the Democrats' newest legislation is chockful of handouts for their green energy cronies donors that will have a "significant" impact on global warming, or so say the Democrats.
But when this legislation is analyzed by experts, using the UN's own climate models, the CO2 emission reductions will only - in a best case scenario - reduce total global temperatures an immeasurable 0.0002°C by the year 2100 (77 years from now); and, the more likely worst case scenario will reduce global temps by a ludicrously small amount - 0.000006°C.
This column chart plots these expected temperature reductions on a per year basis versus actual per year temperature changes for recent periods, including the per year change over the last 77 years.
And for even all the politicians who refuse to do the due diligence of analyzing their own legislation - and instead rely on bogus claims from lobbyists - it should be wildly obvious that their giveaways of taxpayer monies for "green" energy efforts will do zilch for the climate.
Unfortunately, this gigantic flush of $400 billion in taxpayer monies for such a miniscule real return on climate change is only the beginning for the Democrat climate cult.
This article points out that the crazies need at least 1,200,000,000,000,000 in taxpayer dollars or ONE QUADRILLION TWO HUNDRED TRILLION DOLLARS in order to be on a very speculative path to their utopian climate. That amount is 13 times larger than the entire global GDP.
Crazy Democrat climate-cultists, anyone?
Since Oct 2014 Humans Emit 230+ Billion Tonnes of CO2 Emissions But Atmosphere Temps Do Not Increase
Per the 'consensus' climate model science - and its faithful apostles - a gigantic CO2 emission plume produced by civilization is supposed to increase global temperatures, especially in the lower atmosphere.
But quite the opposite has happened over the past 7 years and 9 months when some 230 billion CO2 tonnes were expelled from fossil fuel combustion.
More specifically, the global lower troposphere has been in a very slight cooling trend since October 2014; and the atmosphere over the tropics for about a year longer.
Using a combination average of the two primary (RSS and UAH) satellite global measurement datasets, the below plot shows the declining trend in temperatures in contrast to the growth of atmospheric CO2 levels reported by NOAA. (The R2 of the temp anomalies and CO2 ppm levels doesn't exceed +0.01, indicating that CO2 has had little, if any, influence on recent global warming/cooling.)
Utilizing the same combined average dataset, the moving 5-year changes in temperature anomalies can be calculated, as well as the 5-year changes in NOAA's dataset of CO2 levels. The below chart very clearly shows a distinct declining trend of the 5-year temperature changes while the trend of the 5-year changes in CO2 levels is increasing. (The R2 for the 5-year changes is not a very robust +0.20.)
Finally, the next chart plots for both the temperature anomalies and CO2 levels the moving 5-year trends. Essentially, the temperature plot exhibits a trend that continues to decline over the vast majority of months since 2014. And it's very obvious the moving 5-year CO2 trend over the 7 years, 9 month span is absolutely not driving the temp trend. (The R2 between the two is a measly +0.05.)
None of the above tells us that the current global cooling will continue. Like anything else with the global climate, this current state has a high likelihood of changing - that's a given.
But the above does tell us that the globe and civilization are not on some out-of-control freight train headed towards the cliff of an imminent system-wide doomsday meltdown. Not-Going-To-Happen would be a safe bet without one having to cross their fingers.
Conclusion: Politicians/bureaucrats who state there is an imminent existential threat from CO2 induced global warming and climate change are best thought of as flat-out liars, based on the actual scientific climate data.
Note: Source for RSS and UAH temperature data; source for NOAA CO2 data. Excel used to calculate combine RSS/UAH monthly temp anomalies average, trends; and used to plot the data.
Additional global temperature charts.
Those Stubborn Facts: Per NOAA, Global Cooling Since 2014 Refutes Politicians' Cult Of The 'CO2 Control Knob'
As Joe Biden considers a ludicrous "national climate emergency" and the hysterical climate-porn doomers are getting even more hysterical about a summer heat wave, the most recent NOAA climate data show the world cooling since the end of December 2014 (NOAA's temperature anomalies chart).
(click on to enlarge)
If Joe Biden and Democrats think they can control heat waves by reducing CO2 emissions, they might first check the actual empirical evidence as to the possible efficacy of that.
For example, the correlation of global temperature anomalies and atmospheric CO2 levels is a negative 0.20 (yes, a -0.20 correlation) over the 90 months since December 2014.
Essentially, per NOAA science, imbecilic politicians need to finally realize there is no magical CO2 control knob that bureaucrats can twist and turn to produce desired short and intermediate-term climate and temperature results. Seasonal weather outcomes are NOT controlled by CO2.
Note: More specifically, regarding the current cooling trend, it actually started in April 2014 per NOAA's global (land & ocean) monthly dataset.
Tropical Storms & Cyclones Over Last 50 Years: Expert Verifies There Is No Upward Trend For Ocean Storms
But the scientific empirical evidence will not stop the #ClimateScamBS from the doomer-cult in Congress from spreading their fear-porn lies.
U.S. Govt Debunks Biden & AOC's Disinformation Claims of The Global Warming Existential Threat
NOAA's updated global oceans temperature dataset through June 2022 reveals slight cooling (ZERO warming) since the end of 2013 for the world's oceans.
(click on to enlarge)
Democrats' assault-policies on fossil fuels by hyperbolic lies and disinformation propaganda are without any empirical evidence merit.
Principal Democrat climate disinformation propagandists: Joe Biden and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (AOC).
Note: NOAA ocean temperature dataset
The RCP8.5 Global Warming Scenario Versus Actual Cooling: Climate Model Misinformation That Duped Biden & Other Elites
In a prior article, information was provided confirming that the young Democrat Congressperson, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, should not be in the climate-doomsday prediction business.
Unfortunately, she is not alone in her uncritical acceptance of a cult-like claim that the world will end soon, due to 'devastating' global warming from human CO2 emissions. This cult includes Joe Biden, along with most of the globe's left-wing power brokers, the wealthy elites, celebrities and partisan journalists.
Biden et al share the same necessary traits that produces a gullibility for cultish doomsday stories: namely, the total disdain of actual empirical evidence in combination with an extraordinary blind faith in the elites' experts - aka, the expertocracy.
And just like the experts' recent infamously wrong Covid infection/lockdown models, the climate expertocracy loves their own climate models, despite the models' continuous failure to predict global temperatures accurately.
Case in point, the climate RCP8.5 scenario pathway was generated by computer models (specifically, the CMIP5 model) that the expertocracy relies on for their climate-porn fearmongering.
The climate-porn takes many forms in their scary stories of highly speculative climate change impacts, with the end result always being that any global warming is an existential threat to all species, including humanity.
This absurdly wrong but highly favored scenario for global warming is plotted in the accompanying chart. Note the RCP8.5 model's linear trend versus reality, the HadCrut5.0 gold-standard of actual global temperature observations.
While the RCP8.5 scenario predicts nothing but an accelerating warming trend for the 21st century, the HC5 observation dataset plot in contrast reveals that the globe has experienced a cooling trend for almost 8 years since August 2014. (And NOAA's global temp dataset has been on a cooling trend since March 2014 through end of June 2022.)
By the way, this is not the only cooling trend in the 21st century. The HC5 dataset has recorded at least six separate occasions since 1999 (representing 40% of the months) when there was a rolling 36-month cooling trend of multiple months. In contrast, the climate expert modeled RCP8.5 scenario produced zero periods of a 36-month cooling tend.
Back to the August 2014-May 2022 cooling span.
Another characteristic of the modeled RCP8.5 scenario over the 94 months ending May 2022 is that it exhibits a monthly average anomaly change of +0.00271°C versus the HC5 average monthly anomaly change of only +0.00029°C. That is a 9 times per month larger outcome for the modeled scenario than the HC5's real world result.
If those average monthly changes for both were to continue for the next 100 years, the RCP8.5 result would hypothetically be 2.9°C degrees higher than the HC5.
Yet, despite the above empirical science clearly indicating the incapacity of the RCP8.5 model to produce a reasonable representation of either global warming or global cooling trends, the uniformed elites continue to base future policy decisions on this model. This is especially true for the president of the United States and the vast majority of Democrats in Congress.
Why they continue to rely on obviously faulty computer models for climate/energy policy - or Covid policy for that matter - beggars belief.
An interesting article from 2015 regarding the RCP8.5 scenario.
An aside. Defenders of climate model output often fall back on the rationale that the models worked almost to perfection to predict past temperatures. Well, of course they did, due to the simple fact that the programmers knew in advance what the past temperatures were. But when the the models have to predict an uncertain future they do not fare well.
Case in point is the RCP8.5, which was introduced in 2013 and predicted past temps amazingly well. But by late 2014, the model results were starting to deviate consistently from actual observations. That explains why in reality we have an actual cooling trend from Sept 2014 to May 2022 while the RCP8.5 predicted the exact opposite.
Note: RC8.5 model scenario dataset; HC5 dataset. Excel used to calculate and plot linear trends.
What Existential Threat? Climate Doomers Are Ignorant That Climate Change History Repeats
Today's climate change doomers who preach that global warming from the highest atmospheric CO2 levels in modern times is leading to an existential threat of catastrophic and world-ending disasters are most definitely not well versed in real world climate history.
The past extreme climate events in the U.S. are noteworthy as examples of past climate change that rival any events occurring in the 21st century. Take the case of 1934.
In the first 6 months of 1934, the U.S. was suffering from a severe drought of little precipitation across a wide area of the contiguous states.
And the current lack of 2022 YTD precipitation, as documented by NOAA below, looks eerily similar.
Despite the similarity, the 1934 drought event suffered from a lack of precipitation that was at least 2.2 times more intense (when comparing precipitation anomalies) than the current 2022 event. The 1934 YTD period was the 2nd driest ever, while the 2022 YTD ranks only as the 23rd driest.
Yet, the more intense 1934 period event took place under a condition of atmospheric CO2 levels that was significantly lower than today's level.
Unfortunately, those that are in charge of U.S. climate and energy policies will remain ignorant of the way that climate history repeats itself, thus guaranteeing their polices will be an abject failure.
Prior article one and article two regarding: "What Existential Threat?".
What Existential Threat? Climate Is In A Constant State of Change, From One Extreme To Another
Why do politicians think the climate was ever "stable" in the past? When you have the likes of Pres. Joe Biden(D) and Sen. Mitt Romney(R) believing that, one realizes the world's elites are really stupid. That's truly scary, not constant natural climate change.
Chart source - NOAA. (click on chart to enlarge)
What Existential Threat?: US Temps Cooling Since 2014
Journalists' and Democrats' EXISTENTIAL threat of climate change: They must be very afraid of cooling temperatures, eh?
Plot of the precision USCRN climate stations as reported by NOAA.
Despite warm June 2022 temperatures across much of the U.S., the overall cooling trend continues from March 2014.
It does make one wonder sometimes if human CO2 emissions cause temperatures to decline instead of the experts' predicted global warming.
Note: USCRN dataset. Excel used to plot and calculate linear and 6th degree polynomial trends
AOC's 'World Ending' Prediction vs Climate Reality: How Do They Compare?
Most will remember Democrat superstar Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's famous prediction that she stated during a January 2019 interview. It's now been 40 months since her prediction that in 12 years the world will end - 2131AD - from climate change.
And how has her prediction fared against reality?
In an attempt to be somewhat charitable to the Congressperson, her knowledge of climate reality and her prediction prowess are rather suspect to say the least.
Below are a series of five temperature charts that plot global temperatures the 40 months prior to her prediction, and the 40 months since her prediction, plus single atmospheric CO2 chart.
This first chart is a plot of global monthly temperature anomalies and linear trends for both the HadCrut 5.0 land/ocean surface areas and the UAH 6.0 atmosphere satellite global area. The timeframe for this chart is from Oct 2015 through the end of January 2019, which represents the 40 months prior to AOC's prediction.
This next chart plots the same temperature anomalies but for a different timeframe - the 40 months since her prediction (February 2019 through May 2022).
The third chart in the series looks similar to the first two, but instead of plotting the actual monthly anomalies, this chart plots the 12-month differences - i.e. change - between anomalies. For example, the difference between the October 2015 anomaly and that of October 2016; then the difference between November 2015 and that of November 2016; and so on. The timeframe for this chart is from October 2015 and January 2019.
This fourth chart is the same as the above third chart but with a different timeframe, February 2019 - May 2022 (the 40 months after her prediction).
The last temperature anomaly chart in the series is for the full 80 months of anomalies from October 2015 through May 2022.
Lastly, the following chart depicts the NOAA monthly atmospheric CO2 levels (ppm) for the full 80 months ending May 2022. In contrast to the declining global temperature trends, clearly the CO2 levels continue to increase at a monotonous pace.
Conclusion: Based on the empirical evidence, the world is not going to end by 2031AD. Unless one is concerned with the overall global cooling trend, it is irrational and illogical to even suggest that global warming from CO2 emissions poses an existential threat to humanity or civilization in the near/intermediate future. Those establishment elites who continue to utter this type of climate nonsense should be summarily thrown on the ash heap of anti-science liars.
Note: Excel used to calculate/plot all measurements and linear trends. One extra chart can be found in comments. As of 6/29/22, the May 2022 HadCrut 5.0 temperature dataset still has not been published, as a result a May HC5 anomaly estimate of +0.74 was used.
The Last 30 Years U.S. Climate Warming: It's Not Unprecedented. It's Not A Crisis
Various institutions, politicians, bureaucrats, scientists, and legacy mainstream news outlets have long been trying to convince Americans that we are facing an existential crisis because of unprecedented climate warming - due to our lifestyle's CO2 emissions. Yet Americans remain skeptical, and for good reason.
The below chart (and the other two) is produced by NOAA's 'Climate At A Glance' site. It documents that the U.S. has experienced a warming climate since 1895.
Overall, our 48-state continental area has warmed at a non-existential "crisis" rate of 1.61°F per century.
The majority of warming appears to have occurred during the winter months (bottom spikes on chart), especially since the late 1970s. The warming of summer months (top spikes on chart) seems much less obvious in contrast.
(click on to enlarge)
This next chart displays the warming trend (blue line) for the last 30-year period ending December 31, 2021. The last 30 years have exhibited considerably more warming with a trend per century rate of +5.4°F. Surely this must be the "unprecedented" warming that threatens all Americans with a civilization-ending climate disaster!
But hold on. Despite all the predictions, proclamations, and protestations that the U.S. and Americans face utter ruin from this recent upsurge in warming, the empirical evidence from the scientists at NOAA shows indisputably that the recent 30-year warming is not unprecedented. This level of warming has happened before.
This below chart displays the warming trend from 1912 through 1941 - as calculated by NOAA - which confirms the past warmed at a faster pace than the recent warming - +6.12°F per century rate versus the +5.54°F rate. Important note: Our society did not collapse, nor did our ancestors die off in droves as a result.
And this faster warming period, ending in 1941, took place during a time when CO2 atmospheric levels increased an anemic 11ppm versus the robust 61ppm increase for the 30-year period ending in 2021. That's a 5-times difference, suggesting that the actual CO2 emission-warming factor is not the dominant climatic influence claimed by the doomsday alarmists.
While a high warming trend at any given date might seem dangerous to the average politician or a mainstream news script reader, it is in reality not the case, since short-term accelerating trends always revert to a short-term decelerating trends. It is this natural ebb and flow of warming and cooling that maintains a very stable climate.
For example, per NOAA, at the end of 1941 there existed a +6.12°F trend that would have produced a +4.9°F warming by the end of 2021, if it continued on uninterrupted from climate cooing periods. Instead, the average U.S. temperature increased by +1.9°F for that 80-year span of time. (Within 6 months of the end of 1941, the 5-year U.S. temperature trend had dropped to a minus 21.3°F.)
Conclusion: The known empirical evidence indicates Earth has been warming since the end of the Little Ice Age. The warming has frequently been interrupted by periods of flat and/or cooling temperatures. As documented by NOAA climate scientists, the recent 30-year warming is not unprecedented. Nor does the current warming present an existential crisis or threat to Americans since future climatic patterns, oscillations, and cycles will very likely temper or reverse temperature increases.
More Empirical Evidence That Recent Climate Change Warming Is Not A Threat
As earlier posts (post#1, post#2, post#3) have documented, recent global warming - aka climate change - has been rather uneventful, especially in the context of the last 6-7 years. But how does climate warming in the modern era with its high CO2 emissions compare to earlier periods of the 20th century during a low CO2 emissions era?
Using the same HadCRUT global temperature dataset as used in post #3, we compare the actual temperature change differences over multiple periods for the 20.5 year span ending June 31, 2021 versus the 20.5 year ending June 31, 1931.
This first chart has rolling 12-Month (1yr) temperature changes on the left, comparing those changes for for the span of time from January 1910 through June 1931 versus they same span length for the January 2000 through June 2021 span; and, on the right is a column chart of total cumulative growth of CO2 (ppm) in the atmosphere during those respective spans of calendar time.
The correlation between the temperature change and the CO2 ppm growth is shown on the CO2 chart. Both correlations are negative, strongly indicating that CO2 growth has no impact on short-term temperatures.
In addition, the linear trends of the the two calendar series of 12-month temperature change are almost identical (the trend for 2000-2021 span is actually cooling). This despite the simple fact that the last 20.5 years has witnessed a cumulative growth of atmospheric CO2 that is 6X greater than the 20.5 years ending at June 1931.
(click on chart to enlarge)
This next chart is the comparison of rolling 60-month (5yr) temperature for the two calendar time spans.
Next is for the rolling 120-month (10yr) temperature for the two calendar time spans.
Finally, the 240-mth (20yr) temperature change empirical evidence comparison.
As these last two charts reveal, the linear trend for the span ending June 2021 is negative (ie - cooling) in contrast to the clear warming trend for the period ending June 1931. And the correlation between CO2 and temperature change remain the inverse for 2021 to what one would expect if CO2 was the actual driving force behind modern climate warming temperature change.
Conclusion: Warming of the climate has been taking place since least the 1850s, albeit sporadically. But the warming changes over the last 20 years are not indicative of any sort of an existential climate crisis being produced by human activity.
In fact, the temperature change empirical evidence since January 2000 confirms that the growth of CO2 atmospheric CO2 levels are seemingly irrelevant. In contrast, the earlier period ending June 1931 presents a much stronger case that CO2 emissions could have had an influence on producing a warming linear trend over an extended period.
Additional global and regional temperature charts.
Note: Excel used to calculate and plot all charts. Data sources: Modern CO2 levels & historical levels. UK's HadCrut4.6 monthly global temps.
Global Warming Acceleration Proves NOT To Be An Existential Threat, Per The Empirical Evidence
(click on chart to enlarge)
Global warming is the grand bugaboo for all catastrophic climate change alarmists. In reality, though, this existential threat is without science merit.
For decades, the alarmists have predicted that there is an existential threat because temperatures are rapidly increasing due to human CO2 emissions. Their belief is that global temperatures are accelerating towards a 'tipping point' that will be civilization ending ..... and very soon, they say.
But, as this chart of accelerating/decelerating temperature trends reveals, not much has changed in a climate significant, long-term manner, due to the feared increase in atmospheric CO2.
(As an aside, it was in 1988, when NASA first presented the "existential" threat concept to gullible politicians.)
In a nutshell, global temperatures will accelerate - and then decelerate - regardless of the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. As can be observed, the 12-month per century temperature trend is extremely volatile, yet the 240-month (20-year) trend is relatively stable in contrast.
When viewed in context, the empirical evidence clearly demonstrates that the wild extreme swings in acceleration/deceleration for short-term temp trends does not translate into a wildly rapid acceleration of longer-term temperature trends.
And for further context, the current 20-year trend is at 1.46°C, which is significantly lower than the 2.43°C 20-year trend established way back in February 2004.
Yes, despite all the hair-pulling hysteria about the many multiple gigatonnes of CO2 emitted, the 20-year warming trend decreased by some 40% over the last 17 years.
Therefore, without that rapid acceleration of longer-term temperature trends, the existential threat of a climate tipping point is non-existent.
If the existential threat is non-existent, when should a potential climate tipping point become an issue of greater scrutiny and of serious debate?
Well, maybe when the aqua 240-month (20-year trend) trend starts rapidly increasing and then surpassing the red line (6.4°C) on the chart, which represents the minimum constant per century trend required every single month (from August 1, 2021 thru December 31, 2099) to produce a 5°C increase in global temps by 2100.
Notes: Excel was used for all slope calculations and then plotting of trends on chart. Green CO2 line on chart represents the CO2 atmospheric level cumulative growth (in ppm units) over time. Data sources: Modern CO2 levels & historical levels. UK's HadCrut4.6 monthly global temps.
IPCC's Gold-Standard Temperature Data: Last 7.25 Years World Has Been Cooling
(click on chart to enlarge)
The UK's global land and ocean dataset of temperature measurements confirms there has been a 7 year and 3 month span of cooling, as of the end of month, June 2021. Plus, the correlation between the global temps and atmospheric CO2 levels is negative for that period: -0.036
This is totally contrary to what politicians and crony-green capitalists have claimed, and also what "experts" have predicted.
Why are so many in the establishment's elite class wrong?
Simply, it's cult like anti-science belief in an unproven hypothesis that human CO2 emissions cause global warming that results in civilization-ending climate change. Or, they believe that the unproven hypothesis is a means to higher taxes and greater control over the masses.
Take your pick.
Prior global cooling article regarding NOAA's confirmation of a world not warming.
Additional temperature charts.
Notes: The UN's IPCC has relied on the UK's HadCRUT4 near surface temperature data as the gold-standard of empirical global-warming measurements for years. Excel used to plot the datasets & to calculate the trend/correlation. Sources of HC4 global temp data and CO2 data.
NOAA's Empirical Evidence Confirms The World Has Not Warmed Over Last 6+ Years
Does the world only have 100 days before it's too late to save Earth from global warming and climate change per 'climate czar' John Kerry's recent claim? Nope.
NOAA's up-to-date empirical climate evidence debunks that hyperbolic claim easily.
Unfortunately, as the public has discovered with the multitude of claims and exaggerations that have been wrong about the Covid disease over the last 18 months, similarly, politicians, bureaucrats and climate "experts" have been stupendously wrong - for decades - with their false predictions that fossil fuel CO2 emissions will soon cause the end-of-the-world, as we know it.
While the world's climate has exhibited a warming trend since the end of the Little Ice Age, the warming has not been constant. There are scattered throughout the decades actual extended cooling periods that retrace the prior warming.
In fact, since 2014, multiple NOAA temperature datasets confirm that the world has been cooling over the last six years, as of June 2021.
At this point, it's noteworthy to mention that today's government and academia climate experts, and their models, are unable to anticipate or explain these extended cooling periods, since their hypothesis of never-ending rapid warming due to human CO2 emissions has not matched well with climate reality.
Below are the charts using NOAA's own climate empirical evidence confirming cooling trends that are now over six years in length.
First up, NOAA's global land and ocean temperature. From August 2014 through June 2021, there exists a cooling trend.
(click on chart to enlarge)
Next, NOAA's global ocean temperature measurements. From March 2014, there exists a cooling trend.
Next, NOAA's global land temperature measurements. From November 2014, there exists a cooling trend.
Next, NOAA's U.S. temperature measurements. From March 2014, there exists a cooling trend.
Finally, the UAH satellite (NOAA partners with UAH) lower troposphere satellite measurements. From March 2015, there exists a cooling trend.
To make it clear, the above documented cooling trends cannot be extrapolated into the future. However, that these trends exist runs counter to the consensus orthodoxy science; and, the trends belie the belief that there is a high correlation between the hypothetical atmospheric CO2 control knob and temperatures.
For the record, the actual correlations are significantly low for each NOAA temperature dataset, ranging from a -0.0511 to 0.0176. These stubborn facts completely debunk the mythical "control knob" that bureaucrat scientists would be able to utilize in order to manage climate change.
Conclusion: The NOAA empirical evidence is undeniable. The world is currently not warming and the liars' claim that a soon-to-be climate catastrophic collapse for humanity is total bunk.
Notes: Excel used to plot the datasets & to calculate the trends/correlations. Sources of NOAA temp data, UAH temp data and CO2 data.
Climate & Energy Headlines - 7/4/21
Video of recent headlines of interest that you may have missed.
(click on image for video)
Article links to headlines shown in video.
Does The Level of Atmospheric CO2 Cause Climatic-Weather Extremes? Nope!
(click on to enlarge)
The real world, scientific empirical evidence simply does not support the anti-science, fringe claims that the trace gas CO2 is directly responsible for extreme weather events.
And yet, with the recent very hot temperatures hitting the U.S. Pacific Northwest region, the usual fear-mongering suspects will claim that these new temperature records are a result of dangerous global warming from CO2 fossil fuel emissions.
While temperature records will be set in 2021, the fact remains that recent temp records are not a new thing. NOAA scientists have documented past extreme temperature records (and precipitation records too) in all U.S. states going back to the 1890s.
There is a long history of new extremes and events regardless of the levels of atmospheric CO2.
As the adjacent chart reveals, our 21st century of record-setting temperature and precipitation events are not extreme when put in the context of of past climate change and global warming records for the U.S. Note that the 10-year average for both is less than once per year.
Visually, it is more than obvious that increasing CO2 levels is not the cause of dangerous climate tipping points, be it new temperature or new precipitation records. And statistically, the r-squared's provide the empirical evidence that the impact of CO2 on record-setting climate/weather events is laughably small, if any.
This does not change the fact that the world is warming and has been since the mid-1800's. But as far as CO2 producing climatic-change weather events that will end the world in the near future remains without any empirical merit.
It's another case of those stubborn facts that climate alarmists hate.
Note: Source of state records
Droughts: New Mexico
Global Warming Temperature Characteristics of A Climate Emergency: 1941 Versus 2020
Be it Climate Doomsday, Climate Emergency or Climate Crisis: It's not just a matter of the global warming that has taken place since the late 1800s.
More importantly, it's how much the temperatures are changing over a period of time and the speed at which they are doing so that are the central characteristics determining if the climate is actually headed towards a disequilibrium state of doom.
If the Earth's climate is approaching a disequilibrium, or is already in a disequilibrium of existential climate instability, global temperature change and acceleration rates would have to be unprecedented.
By using the IPCC's gold-standard (HadCrut) of global temperature measurements, it can be determined if the global temperatures at the end of 2020 are exhibiting an amount of change and/or acceleration that are unprecedented.
(click on to enlarge)
As these two accompanying charts establish, modern (red) temperature change and the rate at which it has changed are essentially similar at the 20-year mark to the pre-1950 (blue) changes and associated rates of change.
[The 240-month trend rate ending at December 2020 ranks only as the 362nd highest, and the 240-month temperature change ending for December 2020 ranks as the 340th largest, which means that neither are outside the realm of natural climate variability seen before.]
Yet, these similar global climate temperature characteristics for 2020 and 1941 exist despite atmospheric CO2 levels being one-third higher at the end of 2020 versus that of the year-end 1941 level.
And there was not a single, rational politician or responsible journalist of 1941 claiming that the Earth was facing a climate emergency.
The simple truth, based on the scientific empirical evidence: Our modern climate does NOT exhibit the two key characteristics required for an 'unprecedented,' runaway, tipping point global warming of climate change doomsday. And it's not even remotely close to being a possibility.
Additional global and regional temperature charts.
Notes: Excel used to calculate/plot HadCrut 4.6 temperature anomaly changes and per century temp trends; also used to depict CO2 levels.
NOAA Debunks Biden's Administration Basis For The Green New Deal - Global Temperatures Are in Decline
NOAA's database of global temperature observations confirm that the Trump administration policies did not cause an increase in global warming, much to the chagrin of Democrats and their climate experts.
(click on to enlarge)
Instead, at the end of 2020 there existed a 5-year cooling trend - for both land and ocean - that has extended into the first two months of 2021.
This lengthy cooling trend essentially debunks the need for the Biden 'Green New Deal' since the purported climate existential threat, emergency, crisis, apocalypse and/or extinction menace does not exist.
The empirical evidence from government agency cannot be more clear: dangerous, rapid global warming from human CO2 is without any merit.
Additional global and regional "warming" charts.
Note: Charts produced at this NOAA climate site.
CO2 Emissions: Why Transnational Government Agencies Are Unable To Control CO2
It's not difficult to determine why the UN and their climate change agreements always fail to reduce the growth of CO2 emissions.
Until the Chinese Communist Party decides to respect the global environment and all of humanity, the likelihood of any future climate agreement being successful is a '1' on a 1 to 1-billion scale.
Are U.S. Climate Temperatures Accelerating To New Highs?
The much touted climate Armageddon by politicians, which is supposed to happen within the next 9 to 12 years, is a pure science fiction plot unless global warming across the continental U.S. exhibits a consistent trend of temperatures accelerating to new highs over recent decades.
But have accelerating maximum temperatures in the U.S. actually happened on a consistent basis?
Nope.
A simple review of recent decadal empirical evidence - from NOAA climate scientists - indicates clearly the U.S. climate is not suffering from a condition of accelerating maximum temperatures that the politicians, bureaucrats and mainstream media have been propagandizing.
|
(click on to enlarge)
|
The following charts establish that during the majority of recent decades, the trend for maximum temperatures is not of dangerous accelerating rates but instead periods of decreasing rates. And although the 2020s decade is still in its earliest years, this decade's trend so far for U.S. maximum temperatures is downward, in a continuation from the two prior decades. During both the 1990s and 1980s, the warming trends of maximum temperatures in the U.S. are evident. But neither decade exhibits an accelerated temperature trend that would be the harbinger of climate doomsday that has been prophesied. |
|
The 1970s were another decade of cooling maximum temps, and although not shown, so were the 1960s. One has to go back all the way to the 1930s and 1940s to find two decades in a row that had maximum U.S. temperatures increasing at a positive rate. In addition, an important observation is that every single decade sees a significant upward trend for atmospheric CO2 levels. Yet max temperatures in the U.S. often do much the opposite. |
|
|
Again, the empirical evidence simply does not exist that would support claims of a mass extinction for our American society from an accelerating, terrible global warming. This simple look at decadal trends of maximum temperatures simply refutes the claims of existential threat and completely undercuts the demands for the end of fossil fuels. Additional temperature charts. Notes: Excel used to: convert Fahrenheit to Celsius; plot monthly U.S maximum temps & CO2 levels; to calculate/plot temp & CO2 linear trends. |
|
The Changing U.S. Maximum Temperatures: An Existential Threat?
(click on to enlarge)
It's no mystery that NOAA over the many years has reported to policymakers and politicians that temperature changes in the U.S. are a potential problem.
And it's no mystery that the establishment politicos and policymakers have turned that warning into claims that we face an existential threat to life - as we know it - within 9 years.
But does the NOAA climate evidence for the U.S., in regards to changes in U.S. temperatures, support the existential threat claims?
Well, actually it doesn't.
Because in order to establish that there is even a hint of climate doom that we are facing, the actual temperature changes reported by NOAA should at least resemble the hyperbole about the climate's supposed dangerous global warming changes.
The above chart plots the actual 12-month changes of the maximum monthly temperature dataset across the continental U.S. since January 1965. In addition, it depicts the annual increase in the cumulative human CO2 emissions released over the same time span.
As can be seen, there is no systematic temperature change pattern evident that even produces a 'hint' of an existential threat.
Yes, temperature change in the U.S. has increased at certain points but as the three-year moving average (blue curve) reveals, that increase always reverts to a decrease - a natural return to the mean, so to speak.
So, after 56+ years that experienced a gigantic cumulative global release of CO2 emissions that is close to 1.3 trillion metric tonnes, the hypothetical CO2-induced global warming that would cause a climate doomsday remains a wild exaggeration, without any empirical merit.
With the above no-doomsday factual data in mind, what type of empirical evidence of temperature change would cause one to conclude that the empirical evidence resembles the hysterical claims of a potential existential threat? Below is a plot of hypothetically very small, but growing, 12-month temperature changes that are applied to every single month of the January 1965 to February 2021 dataset.
Result? An obvious, consistent pattern worthy of the legitimate concern: "Houston, we have a problem" with the climate.
(click on to enlarge)
Since climate reality does not exhibit this pattern, any hyperbolic claims by NOAA (and NASA) climate "scientists" and the establishment elites are nothing more than climate-porn lies designed to generate public fear.
Ahhh... 'those stubborn scientific facts' continue to be the nemesis of the establishment narrative.
Additional temperature charts.
Notes: Indeed, global and US temps have increased since the Little Ice Age, but the amount and pattern of temp change does not exhibit an existential threat from CO2 emissions. Cumulative CO2 data include an estimate for 2020 global emissions. Excel used to: convert Fahrenheit to Celsius; calculate and plot 12-month temperature changes, 36-month average; to calculate/plot cumulative CO2 emissions.
Climate-Porn Nonsense: The Existential Threat of Becoming The Next Venus
How likely is it Earth will become the next Venus, in regards to hellish temperatures?
Zilch.
Regardless of which climate-porn cult figure is proselytizing, the end result is a stream of soon-to-be climate change doomsday scenarios within the next 9 to 12 years.
The "doomsday" is always categorized as an "existential threat" due to the "extreme" global warming from human CO2 emissions, which will deliver onto us those Venus-like temperatures.
NOT.GOING.TO.HAPPEN.
Unfortunately, even those who definitely should know better can't resist the temptation to spread the ludicrous claims of Venus-like temperatures that will "cause" oceans to begin to boil.
As the adjacent chart reveals, both atmospheric and surface temperatures of Earth are a fraction of those associated with Venus (the orange 430°C and red 460°C lines).
Since the beginning of the satellite climate measurement capability, Earth's lower troposphere temperature dark blue line) has fluctuated between -2.5°C and -5.8°C and the surface temperature of the Tropics (aqua line) have fluctuated between +17.8°C and 19.0°C. and as the end of 2020, those temperatures were -5.1°C and 18.4°C, respectively.
As the empirical evidence displayed on the chart indicates, Earth's temperatures have fluctuated within a very limited range over the last 40+ years, without even a hint of the pending Venus-like "doomsday."
And this has taken place during a span of very high human emissions from fossil fuel combustion. On the chart, note that the monthly changes (black dots) in Earth's CO2 levels over that 464-month span are plotted.
Despite the releases of the huge amounts of human CO2 into the atmosphere, the actual climate change impact on Earth's absolute temperatures is the antithesis of a possible Venus style "existential" threat of runaway tipping point temperatures.
View additional temperature charts. Note: Above chart plots created using Excel. Absolute LT temperatures based on 50/50 combination of RSS/UAH satellite temp measurements. Absolute tropical temperatures based on HadCrut Tropical land/ocean temp measurements.
50/50 Average RSS & UAH Lower Troposphere Temperatures + Monthly CO2 Atmosphere Changes
Plot of RSS/UAH combination of average monthly satellite lower troposphere changes. CO2 ppm level changes also plotted.
Click here for links to dataset sources of RSS, UAH, Noaa CO2.
Additional temperature charts.
Climate Doomsday Propaganda Refuted: Scientists Determine CO2 Does NOT Increase Extreme Precipitation Events
Climate doomsday cultists are constantly reminding that CO2 emissions are causing an increased frequency and intensity of precipitation events. But these claims are categorically wrong, per the empirical science.
From a review of a recent peer-reviewed journal article:
"According to the seven researchers, the lower Yangtze River basin has experienced "wet periods with precipitation above the mean value ... in 1845-1891, 1907-1917, and 1935-1959," whereas dry periods occurred in "1892-1906, 1918-1934, and 1960-2011." But there were also a total of 28 anomalously wet and 28 anomalously dry years across the record...And upon further examination, Xu et al. report that "anomalous events frequently occurred in the 1880s, 1890s and 1910s (5 events per decade), but seldom in the 1980s and 2000s (only 1 event per decade)." Consequently, it would appear that the frequency of anomalous wet and dry years has declined in recent decades, having been more common in the earlier part of the record than the latter."
As the empirical mountain of scientific evidence grows, it establishes the corresponding reality that the climate doomsday propaganda has a greater propensity to being refuted. Doomsday anti-science never fares well when exposed to the bright light of empirical fact-based research.
Additional failed climate change predictions.
Hottest & Coldest Temperatures By Continent, As of 2020
One would think with the constant narrative barrage of climate change "doomsday" that there would be overwhelming empirical evidence proving that "catastrophic" global warming was creating continental wastelands of devastation from extreme temperatures.
But in reality, that isn't the case at all, as can be observed on the adjacent map image (click on image to enlarge).
When examining the hottest/coldest temperature records for the major continental masses, there has not been a new extreme temperature record established since 1994, per Wikipedia.
In fairness, there are smaller island and peninsula geographic areas that are surrounded by oceans that have new temp records since 1994. But those isolated incidents do not represent what is happening on the principal land mass of continents.
The fact that the "expert" predicted global warming doomsday from the trace greenhouse gas CO2 is not being observed at the continental level, even after decades of massive fossil fuel emissions, indicates that the global climate is not experiencing a "tipping point" of instability, which would result in an "existential" threat.
In summary, it's another case of those stubborn facts refuting the anti-science orthodoxy of dogmatic doomsday propaganda.
Latest Evidence: NOAA & Smithsonian Confirm Modern Era Temps Well Below Those of Past
As many climate scientists and skeptics have reported extensively, today's global temperatures are not unusual or exceptional in terms of warmth.
In fact, current global temperatures are so below what has occurred in the past, scientists at both NOAA and the Smithsonian Institution have been forced to deal with that reality.
Their updated (adjacent) temperature graph, as published in this article, clearly depicts modern temps significantly below those of past warmer periods.
Besides being below those of the past, the graph demonstrates that the idea of a "stable" climate is bunk. The climate is always changing and that also applies to today's climate.
It's another case of 'those stubborn facts' that is so hated by green-activists and wealthy renewable energy cronies.
Miss Me Yet?
Click on image to download video headline links
Rank Covid-19 Hysteria & Fearmongering By Democrats/Liberals Refuted By The Science
Joe 'Basement' Biden is the tip of the propaganda spear when it comes to stupidity and the pathetic anti-science hysteria being pushed by the 'Karens' of the world.
The most dangerous and contagious aspect of the Covid-19 is the viral fearmongering emanating from the bullhorn of MSM and major social media sites.
And millions of supposedly "smart" and educated Americans have swallowed the proverbial hook-line-sinker of the propaganda bait.
Yet, over the last three days we've learned what the objective empirical data and science is now confirming what the skeptical, anti-hysteria scientists and medical professionals have been stating:
1. W.H.O.: The 'Lockdowns' don't really work that well
2. CDC: The 'Facemasks' don't really work that well
Literally, W.H.O. and the CDC have inconveniently debunked the major liberal/left narratives that have caused some 8 months of unprecedented catastrophic pain for most Americans who are not in the top 5% of economic/wealth privilege.
Instead of continuing to push the anti-science mandated policies that are found to be of questionable effectiveness in stopping Covid transmission and deaths - but have been certainly devastating in their societal impact on the quality of life - Democrats and liberals need to start embracing informed policy choices based on actual evidence and the real science.
Maybe it's time for left-of-center Americans to finally break their addiction to the 24/7/365 fearmongering and hysteria of CNN and MSNBC and instead start reading what the top epidemiologists are finding, reporting, and suggesting as policies - targeted, precise pandemic measures.
Covid-19: The Fauci Fiasco
One has to wonder if Anthony Fauci et al should be considered as enemies of the state?
Fauci's Covid flip-flopping and constantly being wrong since January has become a national disgrace. And the leaders of the CDC, NIH and FDA are sitting in that same Fauci boat named 'Fiasco,' still pulling the oars in the opposite direction of what's best overall for Americans.
Below are a sample of recent Tweets that confirms the obvious: American infectious disease experts are an embarrassment, if not a world laughingstock.
Anti-Prosperity Democrats Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Are Wrong: Climate Change & Global Warming Are Natural, Not A Result of CO2
(click on to enlarge)
Out of touch, and well outside the boundaries of the U.S. mainstream moderate electorate, Democrat Joe Biden and his fringe left colleagues have been declaring that the world - as we know it - is soon going to end due to a global warming and a resulting climate change apocalypse.
But is that a reasonable, rational pro-science expectation?
Instead of focusing on the major reason of a natural rebound progression of global warming since the Little Ice Age, the anti-growth, anti-prosperity Democrats point to the smaller human related impact: fossil fuel emissions (CO2) from modern industrial/consumer activities.
The Democrat Party's anti-growth, anti-prosperity, anti-CO2 platform has become a dominant party position ever since the June 1988 climate doomsday Congressional testimony of NASA's chief climate scientist, James Hansen.
It was from that Congressional testimony that the doomsday prophecies of unprecedented global temperature change from CO2 became the lodestone of the party's faithful.
So, how good have those doomsday global warming change prophecies been since June 1988 (32 years ago)? In a one-word summation: lousy.
This first chart shows the temperature change plots of the IPCC's gold-standard global temperature dataset, along with the monthly cumulative growth of atmospheric CO2 levels (ppm) since June 1, 1988 through June 2020. Multiple periodicities of temperature change include 1-year (twelve month); 5-year (60 months); 10-year (120 months); 15-year (180 months); and, 20-year (240 months).
For example, the chart's 15-year temperature change ending June 2020 is almost identical to the 15-year temperature change ending June 1988. Respectively, those changes were +0.13°C and +0.11°C.
That tiny difference certainly confirms that over the past 30 years there has not been an extreme impact on longer-term temperature change despite some 850 billion tonnes of CO2 being emitted into the atmosphere since 1988.
And the chart absolutely reflects an up/down pattern of temperature change for all periodicities, but clearly it does not demonstrate any significant relationship to the very substantial, monotonous linear growth of CO2 levels.
To clear the clutter of multiple curves crisscrossing each other on the first chart, this next chart depicts the 36-month average (3-year average) of each temperature change curve found on the prior graph.
(click on to enlarge)
These plots also confirm an up/down pattern for all periodicities, plus confirms an absence of relation between the atmospheric CO2 level linear growth and temperature change.
Based on this empirical evidence of rather stable cyclical temperature change, plus the evidence from the prior article that global warming acceleration/deceleration also follows a cyclical pattern, it can be fairly surmised that human CO2 emissions are having little, if any, climate significant impact on global temperatures.
Although NASA's top climate scientist in 1988 predicted climate disaster was upon us due to intense global warming from CO2, after 30+ years it's time to admit he was wrong and it's time for the Democrats to stop pushing this anti-science, anti-prosperity, doomsday propaganda.
As usual in climate science, it's just another case of those stubborn facts that are so inconvenient.
Additional temperature charts here, here and here.
Note: Plots, temperature change and 36-month average calculations done with Excel. Sources: global HadCrut dataset and NOAA's CO2 dataset
Trump Correct On Climate Change "Doomsday": Climate Just Happens & Is Not An Existential Threat
(click chart to enlarge)
The Trump administration remains steadfast in its reliance on the actual climate scientific evidence that refutes Biden's hyperbole of climate doomsday and anti-science prophecies that plague the left-wing Democrats.
As the adjacent chart reveals, the empirical evidence is irrefutable: global warming trends indicate a 'situation normal' as the global climate continues to have spurts of accelerate warming and deceleration towards rapid cooling.
In contrast to Trump, Biden - and his Democrat cult of doomsday soothsayers - completely mislead the public with claims of global devastation within the next 9 to 12 years from civilization's continuing fossil fuel emissions due to energy production.
Climate doomsday is not an empirically-based claim but an irrational belief without data.
This charts plots the monthly observed warming/cooling trends - i.e. data - and the cumulative growth of the atmospheric CO2 levels (see green dots) since 1850.
Clearly, the scientific evidence indicates the following:
- Prior to the 1950's start of massive consumer/industrial fossil fuel CO2 emissions, global climate change warming/cooling took place over the short-term with great frequency and intensity.
- After 1950, despite the massive emissions, the great frequency/intensity of climate change continued with similar short-term patterns.
- Yet, neither period of large climate short-term swings resulted in longer-term significant climate change. The 120-month, 180-month, and the 240-month trends reveal a very insignificant and slow change up and down. Put in the context of the climate volatility of short-term periods, the long-term volatility borders on being exceptionally unnoticeable and boring.
- And after NASA's chief climate scientist claimed before Congress in 1988 that global temperatures would lead to tremendous climate destruction from CO2 emissions, the same climate change ups/downs simply continued as in the past (see 1988 arrow on chart) establishing that NASA "experts" were not so expert.
- The incredible growth of human CO2 emissions are demonstrably shown to be unrelated to short-term climate swings of warming and cooling; and, if the emissions are truly impactful on long-term climate, it is an insignificant impact when compared to the natural ups/downs of climate change.
- Most importantly, neither the short-term or long-term trends substantiate Biden's belief that a climate doomsday tipping point is soon to happen and wreak havoc. Instead, what the data reveal is a climate that will naturally cycle through extreme points but returns to normal from the built-in negative feedback.
Just another case of those stubborn facts.
Additional temperature charts here, here and here.
Note: Plots and slope calculations done with Excel. Sources: global HadCrut dataset and NOAA's CO2 dataset
It's Indisputable Empirical Evidence: Trump's Policies Are Slowing Global Warming & Climate Change
(click to enlarge)
It is a known fact that during the Obama and Biden administration, global warming accelerated to a very high rate, which in turn resulted in the overall climate change accelerating.
Since January 2017, the Trump administration has slashed regulations and introduced new energy policies that unleashed American firms to innovate and invest at a spectacular speed.
The end result has not only produced an actual cooling trend for global 'warming,' and thus a slowing of climate change, but Trump's policies have produced the long-sought energy independence and security that former President Jimmy Carter only dreamed of.
This chart reflects the empirical evidence of the Trump successes.
If only Democrats' Obama and Biden had embraced smart and innovative energy/climate polices during their tenure, the world would have been that much further along in addressing global warming.
Note: Source of HC4 global dataset plotted, from January 1850 thru June 2020. Excel used to calculate and plot slope and 10-yr moving average.
April 5, 2020 Versus June 15, 2020: Comparing U.S. State Covid-19 Death Rates
(click on to enlarge)
As the chart suggests, there are a large number of states that dealt with the Covid pandemic in a manner that caused excessive deaths.
Once the coronavirus pandemic has finally passed, a federal commission should be established to investigate those state government politicians and health bureaucrats that completely failed their citizens during this crisis. The total ineptness shown by some state officials should be identified, named and shamed.
At a minimum, one would hope that the constituents of the states that became needless Covid killing grounds should vote responsible politicians and their associated party out of office.
This is doubly true since many of the same states and politicians allowed their major cities to be looted and burned-out during the recent BLM riots.
Click on chart to enlarge.
Notes: The death data plotted on adjacent chart is from the Covid Tracking Project and state population figures used to calculate the deaths per 100K is from Wikipedia. Why April 5 date? Out of convenience - that was the very first date that 'C3' had calculated the death/100k figure for all states, plus D.C.
Remember When Climate Experts & MSM Were Fear-Mongering About The Amazon Being Destroyed By Droughts Caused By CO2? Never Mind
(click on to enlarge)
Back around 2005-2010, the climate change experts and the mainstream media were going on and on about the Amazon devastation due to droughts.
The implication was that the droughts were due to human caused climate change, and the droughts, in turn, would cause more climate change that would then cause the droughts to worsen - a prospective positive feedback loop prediction that did not bode good tidings for humans.
But skeptics around the world challenged these conclusions for obvious reasons.
Major regional droughts have always happened and they were not driven by human CO2 emission activity in the form of fossil fuel consumption. Plus, surprise, droughts have this habit of ending, which are then followed by periods of plentiful rain.
The 2005 and 2010 Amazon droughts were no different.
As it turns out, the skeptics were right again and the climate experts; and the expert/MSM coalition were again victims of their own failed prediction hubris.
In a recent peer-reviewed study, nine scientists reconstructed the precipitation totals for the eastern equatorial Amazon basin of Brazil.
The adjacent chart depicts their findings. Simply stated, there are periods of excess rainfall and there are subsequent periods of drought over the 230-year period. The dramatic precipitation fluctuations are part of the natural cycle and those droughts taking place in the 21st century are part of this natural pattern.
From a review of the study:
"Examination of the precipitation record reveals, in the words of the authors, that it is "dominated by interannual and subdecadal variability, not unlike the instrumental precipitation totals for the eastern Amazon study area." Focusing on such variability captured in the reconstruction, Granato-Souza et al. note the existence of two extended wet episodes, a mid-twentieth century period from 1942-1956 and an earlier late nineteenth century period between 1882 and 1903, and one exceptional extended dry episode that occurred during the years 1864 and 1881.....A longer-term perspective of the moisture regime clearly indicates there is no compelling support for that contention given that both wet and dry periods of greater duration and magnitude have naturally occurred throughout the record despite atmospheric CO2 concentrations being much lower than they are today."
See prior articles on droughts and failed predictions.
Peer-Reviewed Study: Repeat Coral Bleaching Just Happens, No Humans or CO2 Needed
(click on image to enlarge)
A warm water coral reef provides the latest evidence that coral bleaching events occur with some regularity, and that there is always a reef recovery, no matter how severe the bleaching.
A team of 15 researchers analyzed extracted coral reef cores from the equatorial Pacific's Jarvis Island.
The evidence they gathered indicates bleaching events were even taking place early in the 20th century, and that there appears to be a periodic 5-year repeat of the coral bleaching.
Per a review of the peer-reviewed study:
"In contemplating the above findings, Barkley et al. say that their historical bleaching reconstruction "reveals a coral reef community that has bleached frequently, and at times catastrophically, yet appears to have maintained a healthy state over time."..."Barkley et al. note that "the record implies that the Jarvis coral community has bleached with varying degrees of severity every five years, on average"....while...."it was ranked among the healthiest of all ocean ecosystems, notwithstanding it has experienced repeated episodes of moderate to severe bleaching every five years."
"According to the authors, recurring bleaching events were also identified prior to the six decades of time focused on in their study (1960-2016). As noted, Barkley et al. report that "two cores extend back to the turn of the 20th century, and the earliest stress bands appear in these cores in 1912, indicating that bleaching occurred on Jarvis over 100 years ago."
"And, it suggests rising atmospheric CO2 and rising ocean temperatures over the course of the past century have had no measurable impact on either the frequency or severity of El Niño warming events."
Prior articles debunking predicted specie extinction myths
COVID-19 Deaths/100K By State: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly
(click on to enlarge)
The Bad: At least as of May 5, 2020, the following states have proven to be rather inept in their containment of the lethal novel coronavirus: New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Louisiana, District of Columbia, Michigan, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Illinois, Delaware, and Indiana.
These will be known as the 'Dirty 13' states.
The Ugly: Plus, a number of the above states have revealed themselves to be smitten with authoritarian dictatorial powers that is leading to unnecessary incitement of the populace.
Coronavirus health policy mismanagement and Venezuela-style totalitarianism is not a real good combination look for any state in America.
The Good: It should be noted that those states that never enacted stay-at-home orders have some very envious results with lower than expected per capita deaths. Our supposed "experts" essentially predicted that the opposite would happen.
And those states that have already let their stay-at-home polices expire, either in late April or early May, have relatively good results when compared to the per capita deaths experienced in the 'Dirty 13' states.
Colorado is the only state with a Democrat governor that has decided to let its stay-at-home order expire. At 14.8 deaths per 100K, it is the closest to the 'Dirty 13.'
But that 14.8 translates into a living statistic of 99,985.2 per 100K. Thus, anyone currently living in that state has a hypothetical 99.985% chance of not subcumming to the CoronaCCPvirus.
In order for America's economy to survive and for getting people back to their prior quality of life standard, any state with a per capita death rate less than 20.0/100K ought to seriously consider ending their stay-at-home policy and get on with a 99.985% or better chance of life.
Note: May 5, 2020 deaths for each state were from this source.
Evidence Emerging That U.S. Blue State Liberal Ineptness Has Led To Excess Coronavirus Deaths
Below is the full list of U.S. states, and a large sample of European countries and territories, ranked by the number of coronavirus deaths per 100 thousand. The dataset for this table was pulled from www.worldometer.com, including the populations to calculate the deaths per 100k. (Data as of mid-afternoon April 23.)
As can be seen, quite a few U.S. states have achieved a low death count ranking, with many doing a better job than European counterparts.
At the bottom of the table, those countries and states that achieved a worse ranking than the overall position of the U.S. are highlighted in green and blue colors.
Note that every single U.S. state (and D.C.) at the bottom (highlighted in blue) are states with Democrat governors with major metropolitan centers controlled by Democrat mayors. As this evidence would suggest, inept polices by Democrat politicians have serious consequences for quality of life, especially during emergency periods.
When examining the U.S data more closely, there are 38 states that have less than 10 deaths per 100k (as of April 23, 2020). The average for those 38 states comes in at 3.7 deaths per 100k, which is quite respectable compared to many of the larger European countries.
Is The Established Pattern of Weekly Deaths For Flu & Pneumonia Since 2013 Changing Due to Coronavirus?
Are U.S. weekly total deaths increasing due to coronavirus? The answer is that they are doing the opposite since the peak of the flu season, which may surprise a lot of people
Weekly U.S. flu deaths are also showing a decline after this season's flu peak
And weekly pneumonia deaths were also on the decline from the flu peak. But in the very last week on the chart they jumped significantly.
One reason for this outcome may be the result of coronavirus infection deaths also being coded with associated pneumonia. Or actual COVID-19 deaths being inaccurately labeled as pneumonia deaths.
These mortality statistics are heavily revised each week by the CDC as more complete information is submitted to CDC by the states.
The adjacent chart is a plot of this dataset from the U.S. CDC. Click on chart to enlarge.
(The very latest week of statistics was not included in the chart since it included a datapoint of only 27,500 total deaths for the week - that would be a record extreme low since 2013.)
The adjacent chart is a plot of dataset from this CDC website page.
CoronaCCPVirus: The Mainstream Media & Democrat Claim That It's All Trump's Fault
Do the facts regarding the COVID-19 virus support the claim that Trump is responsible for excess virus infections and deaths in the U.S.?
Not in the least.
The claims are a mere combination of political lies and self-serving propaganda, per the empirical evidence, as of the morning of April 19, 2020 from Worldometer.com.
Using the coronavirus and population data from that site, the adjacent table was constructed to identify the documented death and case characteristics for the 15 well established Western European countries versus the U.S.
While each individual country is much smaller than the U.S., the total of the 15 countries is similar in population size to that of America.
When the aggregate of European deaths and cases are compared to the U.S. totals, it is readily apparent that the overall results lean slightly in Trump's favor.
And that result is also seen in the per capita comparisons.
If Trump is to be held to perfect 20/20 hindsight by his critics, then that hindsight should be applied in a relative manner regarding the performance of the Western European country core.
As with every major issue that has confronted the nation over 3+ years, the never-ending obsession and hatred of Trump, by both Democrat and press elites, has completely derailed any chance of a rational and constructive collaboration on COVID-19 solutions.
Americans are suffering terribly at this time. History will show that the Democrats and the MSM truly have become enemies to the public interest and well being. Enemies to the point of taking the side of the lone perpetrator of the world's coronavirus outbreak, against the U.S.
Self-Inflicted Harm By Coronavirus Stupidity: From Computer Models To The Idiocracy of "Elites"
(click on to enlarge)
As this blog has pointed out multiple times, over the last 10+ years, computer simulation models are essentially worthless for policymaker decision making.
Mountains of evidence exist that models can't predict squat, which is a simple concept that seems not to be grasped by way too many policymakers and about 100% of the MSM press.
Model prediction failure is true, whether the issue is climate change or the COVID-19 pandemic or other policy issue.
Why then are computer simulation models used?
Their effectiveness lies not in prediction success but rather as convincing propaganda by scientists and media in order to induce fear and irrational hysteria.
And there is no doubt the past four weeks of the 'CoronaHysteria' has established, yet again, that computer models are proven to be terrible tools for predictions but great for propaganda purposes.
Adding to the misery of bad modeling output is the successful promulgation of the propaganda by the country's self-anointed elites, thus insuring stressful mayhem for the public coupled with vast unintended consequences.
Such as closing down an entire nation's economy that produces massive, record setting unemployment numbers and psychological wreckage in just a few short weeks.
And unfortunately, the elites' blind faith in "consensus" expertise leads to all sorts of proclamations and statements that are, more often than not, proven to be wrong, divisive, and exceptionally stupid to say in a group larger than two, let alone on a widely disseminated public forum that cable news provides.
One recent example of this level of elite stupidity is the following nugget of wisdom that MSNBC "journalist," Andrea Mitchell, seems to be pushing:
MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell and the Washington Post's Philip Rucker decided on Monday to place the blame for the current pandemic on President Trump and conservative red states "...that there were a number of people in red states early on who didn't heed the warnings to socially distance because they believed the President's false comments."
Study: The Surprising Decline of Severe Weather Hail Events During Period of Modern Global Warming
(click on to enlarge)
It is a sacrosanct belief of end-of-world cultists that the global warming since the onset of the large growth in consumer/industrial CO2 emissions would bring in its wake devastating and extreme severe-weather events.
But that has not been the case as a new peer-reviewed study discovered.
Researchers investigated the frequency of severe thunderstorms and hail events to determine if the significant regional warming across the Tibetan Plateau (TP) area had generated more such events.
From a review of the study...."despite considerable warming over the period 1960-2012, Zou et al. determined that there has been a statistically significant decline of 3.1 storms days per decade across the TP. Hail days, on the other hand, showed a slight increasing trend of 5.8% per decade from 1955-1980, but thereafter declined by a much larger 18.3% per decade over the period 1980-2012.....Consequently, they conclude that their results "imply that global warming is likely to cause a decrease in the conditions required for severe thunderstorm and hail formation in the TP over the next century.""
For those who keep abreast of climate empirical science, this is not a one-off study. The scientific literature overflows with studies refuting the doomer-alarmist predictions that an increased frequency and intensity of severe climate change weather events would develop - after 30+ years, it has simply not happened.
While this list is not comprehensive in any way, shape or form, it is indicative of the existing severe weather research available that refutes the spurious claims.
Additional severe weather charts.
The Climate Emergency 'Tipping Point': Does The Empirical Science Verify or Reject The Doomsday Fears?
(click on to enlarge)
Fortunately for those who believe in empirical science, the facts are indisputable. The earth is not at risk of rapid global warming that would set off a soon-to-be 'climate emergency or 'climate crisis' tipping point.
We live in an era where cult-like beliefs have caused a great number of people to accept what resembles a prophecy about the world ending within 12 years, from a global warming 'tipping point' for the climate.
This fear-mongering myth takes the form that humanity is causing - due to fossil fuel emissions - a rapid acceleration of global temperatures that will wreak havoc and destruction as the tipping point is reached.
But is there actual empirical evidence that this doomer prophecy is playing out with a soon-to-be ending to civilization?
The included chart is a plot of the IPCC's gold-standard empirical global temperature data representing how fast/slow global temperatures are moving - it's a climate warming speedometer, so to speak.
A breakdown of the chart:
The Debunking Never Ends: "Expert" Computer Climate Models Fail In Arctic, Study Finds
(click on to enlarge)
In the real world, climate model simulations have been self-debunking over recent decades due to the constant prediction failures.
And the latest embarrassing example of model prediction failure is very relevant to the doomsday Arctic meltdown myth that the anti-science 'climate emergency' cult pushes.
A new peer-reviewed study by a group of researchers set out to determine the accuracy of top-tier climate model predictions of Arctic warming rates versus the actual Arctic warming rate. Their research involved the output of the same 36 climate models used for the UN's IPCC work.
This chart is a snapshot of their work, which visually portrays the computer climate model simulations over a 138-year period, from 1880 to 2017, and how they consistently overestimate how fast the Arctic is warming since around 1950.
Per the study's findings: "...the model-estimated rate of secular warming (the solid red line) increased quite sharply across the 138-year period, rising from a value of around 0 °C per decade at the beginning of the record to a value of 0.35 °C per decade at the end. Observations, in contrast, started off with a higher warming rate than that of the models (a rate of 0.13 °C per decade; the solid black line), but dipped below the rate of warming predicted by the models around the middle of the record, thereafter experiencing a lower rate of warming relative to the models through the end of the record. By the end of the record, the model-predicted secular rate of warming was 67% higher than that determined from observations (0.21 °C). Thus, the figure shows an increasing disparity between modelled and observed warming rates that starts around the middle of the record and grows to 0.14 °C per decade by the mid-2010s."
"Huang et al. state the obvious, that "anthropogenically induced secular warming has been overestimated by the CMIP5 GCMs during the most recent warming period, and the overestimation is aggravated with time." What is more, given the error bars shown on the figure, in the very near future the observed warming rate will likely soon fall outside the significance levels of the ensemble model mean, removing any remaining credibility left in the model projections of future Arctic warming."
Based on the well documented abundance of failures of even the most sophisticated climate models, it should now be considered criminal malfeasance or malpractice that any politician or bureaucrat utilizes said models for setting policies. While doomsday climate-crisis cultists propagandize using the untenable and unreliable model projections, those that represent the public should be employing more sober analysis and commonsense for policy development and implementation, if any.
A terse synopsis: Climate models can't predict squat.
Prior peer-reviewed and climate model articles.
For One of Life's Little Amazon Frustrations - Order Package Not Delivered
The virtue-signaling corporate juggernaut that is Amazon sometimes acts in a very anti-consumer manner.
For example, trying to request that a missing Amazon order package be re-shipped since it was never delivered, contrary to what Amazon reports, is made rather difficult by the giant online retailer. Especially since they no longer provide a url link on their web site to address the non-delivery issue when Amazon reports the package as being delivered.
Instead, try the below method to get that replacement package sent, per this web page.
What to Do When Your Amazon Order Shows as Delivered but is Actually Missing
UPDATE AS OF NOVEMBER 2019! As of November 2019 here is what you have to do if your order shows as delivered but never arrived: Call Amazon at 888-280-4331 You will be asked to let Amazon verify your account by having Amazon text the number they have associated with your account (while you are on the phone) and once you have verified it, the automated system will guide you through some options, one of which is “about an order”, followed by “are you calling about an item?” Answer ‘yes’ to this, and then the system asks you about the item, and gives you the option to say that it never arrived. At this point the system will offer you a refund or a replacement.
You can also try using the Amazon Customer Service Chatbot if you prefer not to use the phone, although we have not tested it recently.
Another Doomsday Myth Busted: Sea Coral Not Harmed By Warming & Acidification, Per New Study
The doomsday climate change alarmists keep having their science-denying chops busted and it has happened again.
A new study on the climate change impact on sea coral habitat is very inconvenient for the cult of anti-empirical science deniers.
For way too long, these deniers have completely ignored the actual science being conducted to determine if the combination of global warming and seawater 'acidification' from fossil fuel emissions would lead to the harm and devastation of sea coral.
The new study again confirms what the science deniers simply do not want to hear. Red Sea corals are robust enough to adapt to changing climate conditions in their environment.
From the review of the new peer-reviewed study by Bellworthy, J., Menoud, M., Krueger, T., Meibim, A. and Fine, M. 2019.
"In a recent study on the combined effects of so-called ocean acidification and warming on corals, Bellworthy et al. (2019) exposed mature colonies of the [Red Sea] reef-building coral Stylophora pistillata to extreme seawater conditions of pH 0.4 units lower and temperatures 5°C warmer than they are today....."Notably, they add that under the experimental conditions "S. pistillata planulae were resistant in terms of their settlement, physiology and survival, even when parents were exposed to severe ocean acidification and warming during the gamete maturation, fertilization and brooding period"....."And because that resistance was evident to even the most extreme predictions of future ocean acidification and warming (Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5), it would appear a solid bet that these corals will be around for centuries to come."
Additional peer-reviewed science articles & prior sea/ocean postings.
The Simple & Sad Truth About Computer Climate Models: They Can't Predict Squat
This NASA climate model chart certainly confirms why expert computer climate simulations are held in such contempt and ridiculed; and also why they should not be utilized for policy work performed by politicians and bureaucrats.
The failure of climate models at what they were originally intended to accomplish has forced the major climate research agencies into a constant state of both "upgrading" their wildly expensive climate models and "correcting" past actual temperature measurements.
This particular model was instrumental in starting the egregious and shrill propaganda war against economic growth and prosperity way back in 1988. It's creation has led to the point where today teenage doomsday cult personalities are provided top-level platforms to fear-rant - by those who should know better - to rail against the bountiful wonders of modern civilization.
This NASA model has had a long history being wrong, and when correct at specific periods, it's due more to blind luck of the natural temporary El Niño global warming phenomenon, which is not sustainable over lengthy time spans.
The model chart presents three simulated global temperature scenarios that portray the end result of growing greenhouse gas emissions, with the focus on fossil fuel CO2 emissions. The scenarios developed by NASA include:
Scenario 'A': The business-as-usual (BAU) scenario that represented total emissions growing without any constraints.
Scenario 'B': Representing the reduction of total emissions by moderate amounts.
Scenario 'C': Representing a scenario that had global emissions being maintained in the future at year 2000 levels.
As the observed NASA and HadCRUT global temperature plots on the chart reveal, the observed temperatures are not anywhere close to NASA's BAU scenario 'A'. Yet, as can be seen below, it's continued to be business-as-usual for a very long time, at least since the 1988 introduction of this model to the public.
Sources: 2019 BP Energy Statistical Review & NOAA CO2 ppm levels
This December 2019 article lays out the essentials of past greenhouse gas growth and the continuing growth of CO2, which shows no signs of a permanent global curtailment.
In summary, this NASA/GISS model was never an effective tool for climate change prediction, let alone establishing a realistic national or global policymaker climate strategy. And over the decades since 1988, all the later generations of climate models have been no better as they also way over estimate the warming impact of greenhouse emissions.
Prior climate model postings. Additional climate model charts.
Archives
- September 25, 2022 - October 1, 2022
- August 7, 2022 - August 13, 2022
- July 31, 2022 - August 6, 2022
- July 17, 2022 - July 23, 2022
- July 10, 2022 - July 16, 2022
- June 26, 2022 - July 2, 2022
- January 30, 2022 - February 5, 2022
- August 29, 2021 - September 4, 2021
- August 1, 2021 - August 7, 2021
- July 25, 2021 - July 31, 2021
Categories
- 1 Peer-Reviewed Studies (901)
- 2 Those Stubborn Facts, Evidence-Based, Connect The Dots (210)
- 3 Modern Temps: Unequivocal - Real or Fake? (49)
- 4 Modern Temps: Accelerating, Dangerous or Not? (507)
- 5 Modern Temps: Unprecedented or Similar To Past? (319)
- AGW: Alarmism, Doomsday Cult, Hysteria (554)
- AGW: Atmospheric, Ocean Oscillations (51)
- AGW: Diseases, Poverty, Starvation, Death (55)
- AGW: Drought, Flood, Crop Failure, Forest Fires (163)
- AGW: Dust, Sandstorms, Desertification (1)
- AGW: Earthquakes, Volcanos, Tsunamis (5)
- AGW: Geoengineering, Carbon Sequestration, etc. (3)
- AGW: Glaciers, Polar Ice Sheets, Sea Ice, Permafrost (223)
- AGW: Global Cooling, Pause, Hiatus, Plateau (214)
- AGW: Greenhouse Gases CO2, Methane, Water Vapor (254)
- AGW: Heat Wave, Cold Wave, Temp Extremes (22)
- AGW: Hurricanes, Tornados, Cyclones, Typhoons (88)
- AGW: Oceans Rising, Warming, Acidifying (186)
- AGW: Positive & Negative Feedbacks, Sensitivity (44)
- AGW: Rain, Snow, Wind, Hail, Fog (86)
- AGW: Severe Weather Events (272)
- AGW: Species Extinction, Polar, Coral, etc. (119)
- AGW: Sun, Solar, Cosmic, UV, Orbital (131)
- AGW: Temperature - Instrumental Records (544)
- AGW: Temperature - Proxy Records (304)
- AGW: Terrorism, Wars, Riots, Rebellions (3)
- AGW: Tropical & Boreal Forests, Tundra (40)
- Big Government Control, Regs, Taxes, Subsidies (280)
- Charts/Images/PDFs/EmbedVids (1139)
- Climate Change History (426)
- Climate Change Models, Computer Simulations, Scenarios (464)
- Covid-19 (9)
- Cronies, Politicians, Partisans, Hacks, Politics (50)
- Deceivers, Deniers, Hypocrites, Liars, Shills (87)
- Democrats, Elites, Progressives, Liberals, Socialists (370)
- Energy Savings: Electric Vehicles, Batteries & Other (21)
- Energy: Fossil, Nuclear, Hydro, Other Power (6)
- Energy: Green Renewable, Intermittent Power (81)
- Failed Predictions, Guesstimates, Forecasts (574)
- Greens: Religion, Authoritarian, Fascism, Totalitarianism (53)
- Harm To Science Credibility/Reputation (287)
- Hockey-Stick Science, Cherry Picking, Fabrication (32)
- Mainsteam Media Bias/Distortion/Deceit (226)
- Non-Climate Issues (79)
- Public Polls, Surveys (2)
- Republicans, Conservatives, Libertarians (38)
- Topical Headlines (20)
- UN/World Govt: Agenda, Propaganda, IPCC, Treaties (710)
- Videos/Podcasts (41)
- Xtra Catg: Are Coral Reefs Dying/Endangered (41)
- Xtra Catg: Are Ice Sheets Going To Disappear (119)
- Xtra Catg: Are Leftists/Elites/Libs Violent, Repressive, Deceitful, Corrupt, Stupid (188)
- Xtra Catg: Are Oceans Becoming Acidic (28)
- Xtra Catg: Are Oceans Rising (130)
- Xtra Catg: Are Oceans Warming (40)
- Xtra Catg: Are Polar Bears At Risk (28)
- Xtra Catg: Are Wealthy Investors Global Warming Hypocrites/Liars/Crooks (18)
- Xtra Catg: Bad Science, Quackery, Unicorns (19)
- Xtra Catg: Big Govt (55)
- Xtra Catg: Can CO2-Based Energy Be Easily Replaced (12)
- Xtra Catg: Can Global Temperatures Be Reduced or Controlled (10)
- Xtra Catg: Can Scientists Predict Climate Results (320)
- Xtra Catg: Cancun/Copenhagen/Durban Global Warming Fiascoes (72)
- Xtra Catg: Cap & Trade/Carbon Offsets/Carbon Taxes (53)
- Xtra Catg: Climate Fraud/Lies, Climategate, Fakegate (231)
- Xtra Catg: Connect The Dots (124)
- Xtra Catg: Developing Nations/Impoverished Peoples/Poverty (49)
- Xtra Catg: Does the public accept/reject alarmism (7)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Black Carbon/Soot/Aerosols (36)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Evidence-Facts Vs. CO2-AGW (521)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Geoengineering (4)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Jobs/Profits/Taxes/Reparations (139)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Kyoto/Regulations/Sustainability (129)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Non-CO2 Climate Change Causes (337)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Science Corruption/Censorship/Deceit (243)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Science Error/Speculation/Fiction (182)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Science Fact/Evidence (1443)
- Xtra Catg: Global Warming: Urban Heat Island Bias (25)
- Xtra Catg: Green Idiocy/Fraud/Crony/Shill (17)
- Xtra Catg: Hysteria: Climate Tipping Points, Alarmist Predictions (58)
- Xtra Catg: Obama's America (29)
- Xtra Catg: Science / Academia Journals Bias/Distortion (7)
- zTwitter (2)
- zz2012 Election Headlines (47)