C3

The Natural Medieval Warming Melts Arctic Northwest Passage Sea Ice, But Modern Warming Does Not

Over recent years, the Arctic has warmed much like it did during the natural Medieval Warming Period - during prior warm phases, mother nature melted the Northwest Passage sea ice completely, but not yet in the modern era

(source image1, image2, image3 - click to enlarge)

Read here. Canadian Arctic experts have conclusively determined that the Arctic's Northwest Passage has frequently been devoid of sea ice during summer months.

This lack of sea ice was the result of natural warming that produced excessive temperatures. They conclude that temperatures during the Medieval Period, and multiple earlier periods, were significantly warmer than modern temperatures - from 1 to 3 degrees warmer.

"Numerous sites have been surveyed along the length of the Northwest Passage. The eastern and western approaches have become reliably ice-free in summer under historical climatic conditions, whereas in the central part summer sea ice has been persistent. The radiocarbon-dated bowhead whale remains indicate that the whales were able to range along the length of the Passage during two intervals (centered on 9000 years ago and 1000 years ago) and that they were able to access the central part from the east about 4000 years ago. During the first of these intervals (9000 before present) ice cores indicate that summer temperatures were about 3°C warmer than mid 20th Century. Therefore, a warming of 3°C exceeds the opening threshold. Medieval Warm Period temperatures were probably about 1°C warmer than mid-20th Century, which is likely close to threshold conditions for an opening of the passage."

When compared to the historical and ancient past, the modern Arctic warming and subsequent summer sea ice melt is not unusual, and is likely the result of the same natural climatic patterns and oscillations that produced such conditions in the past.

As revealed in the adjacent series of images, the modern sea melt (image3 at the bottom) still has not freed the Northwest Passage of summer ice as the experts believe the earlier warming periods easily did (image1 and image2).

Conclusions: Modern Arctic warming is not unusual versus the Medieval Warming. Current Arctic and Northwest Passage sea ice melt is less than what occurred in the past, per the empirical evidence. Since both modern and historical Arctic warming, and sea ice melting, are similar, one can surmise that natural warming is the principal cause of today's Arctic conditions. Plus, anthropogenic black soot and greenhouse gases may have exacerbated the current sea ice melting.

Previous climate-history and polar-sea-ice-sheet postings. Historical and modern temperature charts.

The AGW Hypothesis Proven False Per Latest Data: Climate Sensitivity To CO2 Emissions Likely Very Low

A high climate sensitivity to growing human CO2 emissions is absolutely essential to the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW or AGW) hypothesis - the climate empirical evidence refutes the high sensitivity claim though

(click image to enlarge)

In climate science reality, the actual global temperature observations over the last 15 years do not support the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) hypothesis.

Central to the CAGW hypothesis is that increasing human CO2 emissions will raise atmospheric levels of this greenhouse gas. Subsequent to the atmospheric CO2 increase, global warming will automatically and consistently increase.

Once the globe starts warming, the AGW hypothesis states that a high climate sensitivity to CO2 will initiate a dangerous positive feedback loop: the rising temperatures will increase water evaporation; the powerful atmospheric greenhouse gas water vapor will then increase; then global temperatures will increase even more, the melting of ice sheets occurs; thus, less solar energy will be reflected into space; and global temperatures will then increase even more; and etc., etc.

This powerful and relentless positive feedback loop will produce unequivocal, robust, significant, unprecedented, irrefutable, rapid and accelerating global warming. At least that is what every "expert" climate model based on the CAGW hypothesis predicted.

But did the above prediction/scenario/forecast happen? Nope, not even close. In fact, the opposite happened.

The adjacent chart depicts the last 30 years of increasing CO2 levels and global temperature trends. This actual climate evidence is sliced into two time periods: the 15 years ending July 1997 and the 15 years ending July 2012. The real world evidence reveals the following:

1. The far right column (grey) shows that CO2 levels were increasing at a 147 ppm per century rate by the end of July 1997. Actual CO2 levels were at the 364 ppm mark.

2. For the 15 years ending 1997, global temperatures were increasing at +1.08°C per century trend (red column).

3. Since July 1997, the growth of CO2 levels has increased to a 197 ppm per century trend, and now stands at the 395 ppm mark.

4. After 30 years of increasing human CO2 emissions and faster growing atmospheric CO2 levels, the last 15 years have witnessed the previous global warming morph into a global cooling tend (blue column) at a -0.24°C per century trend.

Conclusions: The climate scientist and climate models that have long predicted catastrophic global warming from CO2 emissions are proven to be undeniably incorrect. The AGW hypothesis does not reflect climate reality. The actual empirical evidence proves the CAGW hypothesis to be irretrievably wrong. The climate sensitivity to CO2 levels is, at best, tiny. The natural forces of the climate will produce negative feedbacks that completely overwhelm the hypothetical CAGW positive feedback loop. Thus, while CO2 emissions will likely induce a slight warming, the natural climatic forces will dictate and dominate our climate future.

Finally, any "science" association, journalist, politician, celebrity, weatherperson, bureaucrat and pundit who says that dangerous global warming is happening, is unequivocal, is rapid, is irrefutable, is unprecedented, is robust, is significant and is accelerating can only be one thing: he or she is a pathological liar.

Additional modern, regional, historical and fabricating-fake temperature charts. Severe-weather charts and list of past severe-weather events.

Data used: HadCRUT and CO2

Proposals To Burn World's Forests To Reduce Human CO2 Emissions Not A Smart Idea, Say Scientists

Because climate doomsday scientists and activists continue to frighten the hysterical-prone media and bureaucrats, there are now those who consider burning the world's forests to generate electricity to be a viable solution - another questionable proposal from CAGW devotees

(image source)

Read here. The hysterical fears associated with CAGW belief often leads to bizarre regulations and proposals to reduce and/or eliminate human CO2 emissions.

One such bizarre "green" proposal is to harvest the world's existing forests and burn the wood in power plants to generate electricity. This idea by extreme green fanatics borders on a "sacrificing the patient to cure a speculative disease" type of mentality.

A team of researchers (Schulze et al.) analyzed this bizarre proposal and concluded the following:

"..."such an increase in biomass harvest would result in younger forests, lower biomass pools, depleted soil nutrient stocks and a loss of other ecosystem functions," such that "the proposed strategy is likely to miss its main objective, i.e. to reduce GHG emissions, because it would result in a reduction of biomass pools that may take decades to centuries to be paid back by fossil fuel substitution, if paid back at all." In the long run, therefore, they feel that "depleted soil fertility will make the production unsustainable and require fertilization, which in turn increases GHG emissions due to N2O emissions," which ultimately makes the large-scale production of bioenergy from forest biomass, in their opinion, "neither sustainable nor GHG neutral."...they caution that society should fully quantify direct and indirect GHG emissions associated with energy alternatives and associated consequences prior to making policy commitments that have long-term effects on global forests; for they ominously warn "there is a substantial risk of sacrificing forest integrity and sustainability for maintaining or even increasing energy production with no guarantee to mitigate climate change.""

New HadCRUT Data Indicate Huge CO2 Emissions Have Little Impact On Last 15 Years of Global Cooling

HadCRUT is the IPCC's gold-standard for measuring global temperatures - over last 15 years (180 months) the globe has cooled with a -0.24C per century trend, not warmed as predicted

(click image to enlarge)

HadCRUT released their latest global temperature dataset today, which confirmed what both NOAA and NASA reported earlier this month - that global temps declined during July 2012.

In addition, the plot of the HadCRUT and CO2 data for the last 15 years, through July 2012, is very revealing.

Contrary to what the mainstream press reports and exaggerates about "global warming," the world has actually been in a stable-to-cooling phase since the El Nino temperature spike of 1997/98.

Of course, if the NYTimes or WAPO or CNN or CBS or the AP were ever to report the actual cooling trend over the last 15 years (despite the massive amounts of human CO2 emissions) this would establish that they have been grossly misleading the public for years about consensus "global warming."

And as the press fully realize, the public that primarily relies on traditional media outlets are extremely gullible with little intellectual curiosity. Thus the media gets away with hysterical fear-mongering, half-truths and deceptions.

Conclusion: Long story short - human CO2 emissions are not causing rapid, accelerating global warming, per the IPCC's favored HadCRUT temperature dataset. Over the last 15 years, global temperatures have been relatively stable, with a slight global cooling trend being exhibited. All the IPCC's and NOAA's climate experts, their climate models and the professional doomsayers have been absolutely wrong about their catastrophic climate predictions, for over a decade now - and not a single mainstream press outlet reports this. Solid advice to gullible: don't believe anything the mainstream press outlets "report."

Additional modern, regional, historical and fabricating-fake temperature charts. Severe-weather charts and list of past severe-weather events.

Data used: HadCRUT and CO2

Newest Greenland Research Indicates Why IPCC's Climate Models Are Wrong About Sea Level Rise

Almost all of the climate doomsday scientists have predicted that coastal areas, such as New York City, would soon be submerged by the rising sea levels - obviously, these hysterical IPCC climate model and "expert" predictions have failed and the Greenland researchers now know why

(image source)

Read here. The IPCC was long ago charged with the objective of "proving" that greenhouse gases were the cause of global warming. The IPPC also took the lead in the well financed campaign to frighten the world's populace with scary disaster scenarios due to CO2-induced warming.

One such climate calamity that the IPCC (and multiple other doomsday alarmists) promulgate is that the coastal regions of the world would be swamped by the melting polar ice sheets.

However, like all other doomsday predictions, the seas rapidly and relentlessly rising and then submerging areas such as New York City has not happened, and is not even close to happening as the adjacent chart indicates. So, why have the sea level predictions failed so spectacularly?

Greenland.

The experts on Greenland's ice sheet have now discovered that the climate models are entirely wrong about the whole concept of ice sheet melting:

"Danish researchers are calling for the models used it [to] forecast sea level rise to be changed after their research shows that Greenland’s ice-cap is not melting more quickly, but rather in bursts...The group’s research, which has been published this week in the Science magazine, shows that the speed at which Greenland’s ice-cap melts, rises and falls in different periods...Up to now scientists have believed that Greenland’s ice was melting faster and have used the hypothesis in developing many of the climate models that are now used to calculate future sea-water levels.“The bottom line is that it’s not going to happen as quickly as people have feared...”"

Previous sea-level and failed-prediction postings. Additonal sea-level charts.

Plankton Not At Risk From Ocean Acidification Experts Find - Another IPCC Prediction Drowns In The Facts

The world's coastal regions abound in plankton and, of course, the IPCC climate doomsday scientists predicted their demise due to ocean acidification from too much human CO2 emissions

(image source)

Read here. The IPCC prediction that the sea's plankton are at survival risk because of ocean acidification has gained much attention in the mainstream press. But does this prediction have scientific merit?

The Nielsen et al. team of researchers decided to investigate if the prediction was sound in terms of science.

"The authors write that "the atmospheric CO2 concentration is rising, and models predict that by the end of the century it will have increased to twice the amount seen at any given time during the last 15 million years," stating that "this will cause a decrease in average surface water pH of 0.4," while noting that planktonic protists will be among the organisms to be affected first by this change."..."tested whether reduced pH would affect plankton communities over an incubation period of 14 days."...researchers determined that nutrient uptake and photosynthetic parameters "were all unaffected by pH treatments 8.3-7.7," treatments that they say "match the predicted 21st century changes in CO2 and pH." In addition, they found that "cellular carbon and total particulate organic carbon were both completely unaffected by pH treatment within this range," and that "the same was true for the succession of all 25 enumerated protist species." [Lasse Tor Nielsen, Gustaaf M. Hallegraeff, Simon W. Wright, Per Juel Hansen 2012: Aquatic Microbial Ecology]

Conclusion: As multiple scientific studies have now shown, the ocean acidification hysteria is just that. Marine life seems extremely capable in its adaptive abilities, such that the risk from lower sea pH levels due to excess CO2 is tiny. This is also now true for the world's plankton communities in spite of the IPCC's prediction.

Previous ocean-acidification, failed-predictions and peer-reviewed postings.

Prior To Large Human CO2 Emissions: Unrivaled, Unprecedented Medieval Warming In Switzerland

The unprecedented Medieval Warming Period is again confirmed by new Switzerland research - the MWP and subsequent cooling are both products of natural forces and not a result of large human CO2 emissions

(click image to enlarge, source)

Read here.  The vast majority of scientific research documents the major warming and cooling periods prior to the 20th century. These periods of climate change exhibited large temperature swings across many regions of the world, well before the growth of industrial/consumer CO2 emissions.

A new study by Larocque-Tobler et al. provides more evidence that the Medieval Warming was not only significant, but remains unprecedented in some regions. Likewise, the subsequent Little Ice Age cooling was significantly colder than experienced in the 20th century.

"Working with a lake sediment core extracted in AD 2005 from the deepest point of Seebergsee in the northern Swiss Alps,... mathematically analyzed the taxonomy of chironomid assemblages they identified in the sediments and used the results to reconstruct mean July air temperatures for the past 1000 years. This work revealed a Medieval Warm Period that began some time before AD 1000 (where their temperature history had its beginning) and lasted until about AD 1250, the peak temperature of which was approximately 0.9°C greater than the peak temperature near the end of their record..." [I. Larocque-Tobleration, M.M. Stewart, R. Quinlan, M. Trachsel,    C. Kamenik, M. Grosjean 2012: Quaternary Science Reviews]

Conclusion: Natural climate variation can cause dramatic climate change, which the unprecedented Medieval Warming Period represents. This level of extreme climate change can happen regardless of the amount and growth of human CO2 emissions.

Previous climate-history and peer-reviewed postings. Historical and modern temperature charts.

Climate Models Predicted An Increase In Severe Precipitation Events: IPCC Wrong Again On Extreme Climate Change

New study confirms that IPCC's climate doomsday predictions regarding extreme climate change and severe precipitation events have failed

(image source)

Read here. The vast majority of scientific research using actual climate evidence continues to disprove the doomsday predictions of the IPCC's climate modelers. The hypothesized catastrophic climate disasters that would be considered outside normal climate variation are just not happening.

The latest study confirming the failed predictions of the IPCC was completed by Tramblay et al. regarding extreme rainfall incidents in Morocco.

"Morocco is a North African country highly vulnerable to extreme precipitation events. In the present study, past trends in extreme precipitation and future projections using an ensemble of regional climate models (RCM) are evaluated." [Yves Tramblay, Wafae Badi, Fatima Driouech, Salaheddine El Adlouni, Luc Neppel, Eric Servat 2012: Global and Planetary Change]

"The authors write that "climate change is likely to produce more extreme precipitation events,"...they say that "for the Mediterranean basin, several studies indicate a possible amplification of precipitation extremes associated with a decrease of precipitation totals...which "could lead to an increased probability of occurrence of events inducing both floods and droughts"...employed data for ten measuring stations - Casablanca, Rabat, Larache and Tanger (Atlantic coast), Tetouan, Al Hoceima, Nador and Oujda (Mediterranean region), and Fes and Ifrane (Atlas mountainous area) - which they carefully analyzed for signs of the predicted precipitation-related phenomena..."Quoting the six scientists who performed the work, "the Mann-Kendall test indicates no significant trends in the data series for all the stations at the 5% significance level," and in like manner they report that "the Deviance test results between stationary generalized extreme value [GEV] models and non-stationary GEV models with time as covariate [also] indicate no evidence of trends in extreme precipitation for all the Moroccan stations.""

'C3' Editor Conclusions: The IPCC predicted extreme climate change as represented by severe precipitation events is not happening. This research out of Morocco seems to corroborate previous research done across the globe indicating a lack of discernible trend for severe precipitation events.

Previous severe-weather, failed-predictions and peer-reviewed postings. Severe-weather charts.

Modest Global Warming Since Little Ice Age - Natural Rebound of 337 Years Amounts To Only 2.2 Degrees

Greenland's recording of both natural cooling and warming climate change proves that modern global warming is modest at best - as the evidence indicates, in the scheme of past climate change, current warming is well within natural variation

(image source)

The Little Ice Age (LIA) is a well documented climate change period that was a global phenomenon. For the Northern Hemisphere, the coldest temperatures were reached during the mid-to-late 1600's, and then a much needed warming rebound started. 

The adjacent painting depicts London in 1677, which is almost the same moment when Greenland reached its coldest temperatures after some 600 years of cooling (per the Greenland ice core dataset).

For 337 years since the bottom of the LIA, the world has been slowly but surely warming. That rebound warming though has only amounted to an approximate 2.2C degree increase as indicated by the ice core temperatures (Kobashi et al. estimated a current ice core decadal temperature of -29.9C degrees).

So, in the scheme of climate change, how does this most recent warming compare to previous warmings (and coolings)?

Using the temperature reconstructions from the Greenland ice sheet, it can be determined what the temperature change and duration was for each of the last 10 cooling periods and the last 10 warming periods (including the period since the LIA). From this information we know the following:

• Climate change warming periods ranged in duration from 240 to 680 years
• Climate change warming periods ranged in temperature increases from +0.8 to +3.7 degrees

• Climate change cooling periods ranged in duration from 205 to 690 years
• Climate change cooling periods ranged in temperature increases from -1.1 to +3.1 degrees

In contrast to the previous 9 significant warming periods, the modern warming has lasted only 337 years (from trough to current peak) with a temperature rise of only 2.2C degrees. It has been the 5th highest warming of the 10 and is only average in duration.

In contrast to the previous 9 cooling periods, the Little Ice Age lasted 643 years (from peak to trough) with a temperature decrease of 1.6(C) degree. It was the 3rd coldest cooling of the 10 and is one of the longest in duration.

Conclusion: Over some 9,000 years, the ice sheets of Greenland have faithfully recorded natural climate change and the associated temperature changes. These past changes, both warming and cooling, have produced greater temperature changes and lasted longer than the current modern warming and the more recent Little Ice Age. Although increasing CO2 levels from human emissions may have enhanced our modern, modest global warming, the lion's share of the warming rebound is likely from natural forces, which produced the same in the long ago past, multiple times.

Note: We used a 200 year minimum span to identify significant duration periods of warming and cooling.

July 2012: "This is what global warming looks like" - When Facts Demolish Clownville

NASA just posted their July 2012 global temperature dataset - the hysterical global warming claims made in July don't comport with what looks more like global cooling

(click on image to enlarge)

As the adjacent chart depicts, global warming continues to be a non-issue over the last 15 years (180 months through July 2012).

If this trend of global warming continues, the world would only warm by a measly +0.6 degree. And as the blue polynomial curve indicates, the global temperature trend actually suggests a global cooling environment.

Regardless of those inconvenient "global warming" facts, the NASA climate research unit and James Hansen continue to embarrass the entire science community with their hysteria, hyperbole and serial fabrications. And July's commentary about heat waves and "global warming" is a painful reminder of the embarrassing Bozo-science that NASA can produce.

The NASA-GISS unit should be de-funded, and those monies be given back to the real NASA so they focus on space again (and making some more of these really cool videos!).

xxxxxxxx

xxxxxx 

Additional modern, regional, historical and fabricating-fake temperature charts.

Zero Sea Level Rise In Middle of Indian Ocean, Island Dwellers Blame High CO2 Levels

The IPCC's climate doomsday scientists predicted global accelerating sea level rises from increased CO2 - it's not happening at Diego Garcia, an Indian Ocean island

(image source)

Read here.The UN and the IPCC long ago predicted that rising sea levels from CO2-induced global warming would swamp ocean islands and coastal areas. As a result, 50 million refugees would be roaming the world by 2010, chased away from their homes by the rising tides.

However, as everyone in the world not living in a cave discovered, that IPCC prediction (as so many others) was totally bogus.

Yet, the IPCC's climate doomsday scientists continue to claim that sea level rises are accelerating even though all empirical evidence proves them wrong, including the new study performed at the Diego Garcia atoll.

"...Dunne et al. examined what they describe as "the up-to-date evidence of recent sea-level change in the Chagos Archipelago from tide gauge, satellite altimeter records, and ocean models."..."there is no evidence of any statistically significant sea-level rise either from the Diego Garcia tide gauge (1988-2000 and 2003-2011) or in the satellite altimetry record (1993-2011)."...they say "there is no evidence of subsidence in the islands," adding that on Diego Garcia there was actually crustal uplift of 0.63 ± 0.28 mm/year between 1996 and 2009, as recorded by GPS. And they add that "there is no evidence of changes in the wind or wave environment in the past 20 years."...these results suggest that this has been a relatively stable physical environment, and that these low-lying coral islands should continue to be able to support human habitation, as they have done for much of the last 200 years."" [Richard P. Dunne, Susana M. Barbosa, Philip L. Woodworth 2012: Global and Planetary Change]

Conclusion: The IPCC's continuing predictions of accelerating sea level rises from human CO2 emissions remains nonsense. There is absolutely no empirical evidence supporting this climate doomsday hysteria, which the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia study robustly confirms. So, in the spirit of the wacky climate science world of the IPCC (and James Hansen), it's obvious that high CO2 levels have caused the oceans to remain stable.

Previous sea-level and peer-reviewed postings; and sea-level charts.

Evidence of Prior Unprecedented Global Warming Discovered In Scotland, Medieval Period Low CO2 Levels Likely At Fault

It is well formulated by the the IPCC climate doomsday hive-mind that only CO2 can produce unprecedented global warming, plus any other extreme climate change - thus, the low Medieval CO2 levels must be the actual cause of Scottish temperatures being 1 degree higher than modern temperatures

(image source)

Read here. The global warming alarmists have established a multi-billion dollar industry based purely on the hypothesis that high atmospheric CO2 levels cause unprecedented warming. This means that no other natural, solar and/or cosmic factors could be responsible.

Yet, in study after study, researchers keep discovering long ago periods (when CO2 levels were low) that experienced extremely high temperatures - indeed, unprecedented warming. The latest such study to do so, was the research conducted on limpet shells from the waters off Scotland's coast.

"Seasonal sea-surface temperature (SST) variability during the Medieval Climate Anomaly (MCA), which corresponds to the height of Viking exploration (800–1200 AD), was estimated using oxygen isotope ratios (δ18O) obtained from high-resolution samples micromilled from archaeological shells of the European limpet...Our findings illustrate the advantage of targeting SST archives from fast-growing, short-lived molluscs that capture summer and winter seasons simultaneously...SST averaged from shell time series would be weighted toward the fast-growing summer season, resulting in the conclusion that the early MCA was warmer than the late 20th century by ~ 1 °C." [Donna Surge, James H. Barrett 2012: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology]

Because of the restrictive orthodoxy of the IPCC green fundamentalists, the only conclusion that can be drawn from this new study, and others that find unprecedented warming in other regions, is that indeed the magical CO2 greenhouse gas has the power to cause extreme temperatures even under low CO2 conditions. This must be since the IPCC consensus has determined no other forces could possibly produce such high temperatures.

Of course, when one considers the above IPCC science, one quickly realizes how moronic their CO2 hypothesis is. It's so moronic, that even the IPCC realized it, and that's why the hockey-stick temperature representation came about. Since their CO2 hypothesis could not explain the Medieval Warming, they just found themselves a "scientist" who would erase the earlier Medieval high temperatures - and voila, the infamous hockey-stick came about.

Conclusion: This new study and previous research provides an abundance of scientific evidence that the Medieval Warming existed across many regions of the Northern and Southern Hemisphere. It was an unprecedented global warming. This warming was not due to high CO2 levels, which ultimately means that other natural/solar/cosmic forces are the primary cause of both extreme climate and temperature changes of the past, in the present and for the future.

Previous climate-history and peer-reviewed postings.

No Snowpack Evidence of Extreme Climate Change Found In The Andes of Chile, Say Scientists

A significant change in snow accumulation is considered a key sign of extreme climate change by climate doomsday "experts" - the southern Andes mountain range has not experienced a major snowpack change

(image source)

Read here. The familiar refrain from the chorus of the fringe climate doomsday community is that human CO2 emissions are provoking drastic extreme climate change across the world. Unfortunately, witless reporters from the traditional media outlets parrot the doomsday hysteria without any due diligence.

However, a large body of scientists do not accept the "doomsday" claims, thus they continue their research to better understand the past and current climate conditions. A new study by Masiokas et al. did just that by researching the snow accumulation in the southern Andean mountain range to determine if modern climate conditions were much different than those of the historical past.

This new peer-reviewed study determined that today's mountain snowpack differs very little with those found in previous centuries.

"..."compiled and combined an extensive dataset of different precipitation proxies in an attempt to cross-validate the resulting time series and estimate, as reliably as possible, and extend as far back as possible, the information on winter snow accumulation levels in the central Andes of Chile and Argentina,"...extend a regional 1951-2010 snowpack record back to AD 1866, after which "snow accumulation variations since AD 1150 were inferred from precipitation-sensitive tree-ring series."...the eight researchers determined that "variations observed in the last 60 years are not particularly anomalous when assessed in a multi-century context." In fact, they report that "periods ending in the late 1100s, during the early 1300s and late 1400s, during the early and late 1600s, and during the mid 1700s and mid 1800s appear to have been at least as extreme as the early 20th century period and well above the highest levels seen in recent decades of the instrumental record."" [M. H. Masiokas, R. Villalba, D. A. Christie, E. Betman, B. H. Luckman, C. Le Quesne, M. R. Prieto, S. Mauget 2012: Journal of Geophysical Research]

Conclusion: Per the Andes mountain range snowpack, the research indicates very little, if any, extreme climate change is evident, despite record levels of atmospheric CO2.

Previous severe-weather, climate-history and peer-reviewed postings.

New Study Indicates Low CO2 Emission Levels Could Be Cause of Extreme Climate Change & Civilization's Death

Some 4,000 years ago, during a period of low atmospheric CO2 levels, the Harappan Civilization collapsed - researchers determined that extreme climate change was the culprit

(click to enlarge image, source)

Read here. The climate doomsday scientists and alarmists have claimed that high levels of atmospheric CO2 levels (from human CO2 emissions) causes extreme climate change and severe weather events.

However, empirically, there is no basis for such claims, as the actual scientific documentation of the modern era of extreme weather/climate does not corroborate the extremist hysterical claims.

While there exists no solid evidence that higher atmospheric CO2 levels cause extreme climate change, there is certainly a plethora of evidence that extreme climate change does happen during a low CO2 environment. Case in point: researchers just completed a new study, which determined that the disappearing of the ancient Harappan Civilization was due to extreme climate change - during a low CO2 environment.

"An international, interdisciplinary team of geologists, archeologists, mathematicians and geomorphologists collected samples from the area once occupied by the little-known civilization...analysis suggested that climate change that weakened monsoon rains and tamed the tributaries of the Indus River and reduced run-off from the Himalayan mountains enabled the Harappans to practice agriculture on the river banks...But when monsoon rains began to decline, the rivers and regular flooding the civilization relied on to maintain a strong agriculture dried up, and they were forced to move east toward the Ganges River basin and were no longer able to sustain large cities."

Conclusion: Extreme climate change happens. It happened in the past. It will happen in the future. Although there is more historical evidence pointing to a relationship between low CO2 and climate change, it is likely not caused by either low or high levels of atmospheric CO2. More likely, it is a result of combined natural/cosmic forces that are unaffected by human CO2 emissions and cannot be controlled by the insane politician-priestly class and their bureaucrat-scientist acolytes.

Extreme Climate Change: Empirical Evidence Indicates CO2 & Global Warming Are Not Causing Severe Weather Events

The recent hot U.S. summer has prompted many climate doomsday scientists to claim that human CO2 is causing extreme climate change, as represented by high temperatures and severe weather events - however, the actual empirical evidence does not support the alarmist claims

(click on image to enlarge)

Indeed, for many parts of the U.S. there has been a long, hot and dry summer. In other parts of the world though, very cold and very wet weather has ruled - Alaska, London and Australia have had much colder weather than normal, for example.

Despite global temperatures being somewhat average when compared to the last 15 years, that has not stopped the usual climate doomsday alarmists to claim that human CO2 emissions are causing new temperature extremes and severe weather events, both in the winter and summer months.

As the adjacent plot of NOAA data reveals, the claim that rising atmospheric CO2 levels are causing extremes and and more frequent severe weather events just does not hold any water, at least for the U.S. To summarize the key points of the chart:

1. CO2 emissions started their rapid increase during the 1950s

2. The supposed doomsday scientists' "safe level" of CO2, 350 ppm, was not reached until 1988

3. The majority of extreme, record setting temperature events, hot and cold, took place prior to the 1950s

4. The peak of record setting 24-hour snowfall events happened during both the 1960s and the 1990s

5. The peak of record setting 24-hour rainfall events happened during the 1990s

6. The 1990s and the 1960s did not produce  many max/min temperature records, which alarmists state are the actual cause of those severe weather record setting incidents

7. The 1930s easily had the most states establishing their maximum and minimum temperature records, yet this extreme temperature climate failed to produce the predicted severe record setting rainfall and snowfall incidents

8. The decade of the 2000s, with the highest atmospheric CO2 levels ever, failed to produce any noteworthy temperature records but one, and severe weather records plummeted from the pace established during 1990s

9. So far, the 2010 decade looks to be a piker when viewed in the context of temperature and severe weather events

10. CO2 levels above the "safe" 350 level appear to be fairly 'safe' for U.S. residents. There were more extreme climate/weather records produced prior to 350 being reached (Note: all rain/snow records during the 1980s took place prior to 1988 - the magically dangerous 350 ppm year)

Conclusion: The empirical evidence of extreme climate change being a result of rising atmospheric CO2 levels is essentially flimsy at best. Although global warming has been happening since the Little Ice Age, its impact on extreme temperatures and severe weather incidents has not been substantial over recent decades. In fact, it is highly likely that modern severe weather events really pale to the well documented events that occurred during the 1930s, when CO2 levels were "safe."

Previous severe-weather postings. Additonal severe-weather and modern temperature charts

Climate Modeling Failure: Latest IPCC Climate Models To Be Used in 2013 Report Fail At Temperature Predictions Also

Climate modeling failure continues to be the dominant symptom of the current institutionalized climate science - unfortunately, it now appears the IPCC's past climate / temperature prediction fiascoes will continue in the 2013 report

(click on image to enlarge, source)

Read here. Climate scientist John Christy recently testified before the U.S. Senate. His testimony pretty much eviscerated the claims by doomsday scientists that this summer's U.S. heat wave was "unique" and "unprecedented," and mocked the incredibly lame, non-scientific statement of: "this is what global warming looks like."

In addition, his written testimony included several very interesting charts, including the adjacent graph. This chart represents the latest IPCC climate models' predictions of global temperatures versus the actual observed temperatures.

Just like earlier climate models, these latest computer "wonders" are unable to come close to what the real world climate does. For policymakers, these models continue to be, quite frankly, worthless.

But that won't stop the IPCC from filling the 2013 report with all sorts of climate calamities, catastrophes and disasters, all of them predicated on worthless climate model outputs.

Previous climate-model postings and charts.

'Days Until Election' Headlines Administration Update

For the 'C3' global warming skeptic readers, who happen to also be Obama-skeptics and political junkies, the 'C3' daily 'Days Until Election' Headlines now has an alphabetized list of those past headlines, here

C3 Editor

Global Warming Science Facts: Top 3 Reasons Not To Worry About Rising Sea Levels

Good news, the global warming science facts and reality prevail - the scary, dangerous rising sea level predictions are essentially a myth

(click images to enlarge)

#1. The actual sea level rise has just been a fraction of the scary Hollywood movie disaster scenarios

#2. Climate doomsday scientists, such as James Hansen, Heidi Cullen and Stefan Rahmstorf, predicted mythically high ocean levels, not because of science reality, but instead to emulate what Hollywood was doing to attract greater public attention

#3. Per the advanced satellite technology and ocean science, the real empirical evidence points to a sea level increase by 2100 that will literally be chump change, not the envisioned Hollywood (or Hansen et al.) mega-disaster 

Since late 1992, satellites have been monitoring ocean levels constantly. The chart on the left plots the actual sea level rise (using inches instead of millimeters) in contrast to the IPCC's predicted sea level rise by 2100 AD, and common predictions of doomsday experts. The dotted aqua line is where sea levels will be if the current trend continues until 2100.

When the current sea level trend (+0.12 inch/year) is put into the context of the mega-scary predicted levels, the hysterical concerns about coastal flooding disasters are rationally reduced, dramatically. But to keep those irrational concerns high, here's how government-funded scientists portray the same sea level increase since 1992.

The chart on the top right compares the IPCC and other alarmist predictions, from the end of 2006 to April 2012, the most recent satellite measurement available. The blue bar is the actual amount the sea levels have increased, versus what the IPCC predicted increase for sea levels by April 2012. IPCC predicted sea level. The chart's higher red bars show increases by April 2012 for the often made alarmist predictions that the mainstream press reports uncritically (as gospel).

[Note: Why 2006? The IPCC 2007 report based its sea level prediction on measurements prior to 2007. We used the December 2006 satellite measurement as the base month, then calculated the April 2012 sea level increase (actual and all predicted values) from that 2006 base month. We first converted all measurements to inches then calculated each month's average sea level from multiple monthly measurements - satellites measure ocean levels 2-4 times per month.]

Conclusions: The high technology of satellite measurements produces some very clear global warming science facts. Since 1992, rising sea levels are on a very modest upward trend. Since the IPCC report of 2007, actual sea level increases are significantly below all "expert" predictions. The empirical evidence clearly points to future sea level increases that are very moderate (less than 1 foot by 2100) and can easily be adapted to by every government.

Previous sea-level and failed-prediction postings. Other sea-level charts.

Unprecedented Global Warming: New Study Establishes Summer Temps Hotter During Medieval Warming Period

The IPCC's now discredited 'hockey stick' temperature record attempted to change paleo-climate history by finding modern temps to be unprecedented - another new study confirms Medieval Warming Period was hotter

(click on image to enlarge, source)

Read here. Paleo-climate research continues across the world and the vast majority of new studies confirm that earlier periods were warmer than our current climate. And the newest research establishes the same for Canada's Yukon region.

""Bunbury and Gajewski obtained sediment cores from Jenny Lake that "yielded chironomid records that were used to provide quantitative estimates of mean July air temperature."... This effort revealed the existence of "relatively warm conditions during medieval times, centered on AD 1200, followed by a cool Little Ice Age, and warming temperatures over the past 100 years." And from the authors Figure 8, reproduced below, it can be estimated that the Medieval Warm Period at Jenny Lake extended from about AD 1100 to 1350, and that the most recent (AD 1990) of their temperature determinations was about 0.8°C cooler than the peak warmth of the Medieval Warm Period." [Joan Bunbury, Konrad Gajewski  2012: Quaternary Research]

Conclusion: The Medieval Period had the unprecedented global warming, not our modern period. The Medieval warming took place during a time of low atmospheric levels of CO2, well before the modern growth of CO2 emissions.

Prior climate-history and peer-revewed postings. Additional historical and modern temperature charts.

Connect The Dots: Global Warming Causes Amazing Stupidity & Desperation

Obviously, it has to be the global warming that causes liberals, leftists, greens and Democrats to be so astoundingly stupid - there desperation is beyond bizarre as they now think melting streelights are sign of AGW

Stupendously pathetic, and it won't be long before Senator John Kerry brings this to the attention of Congress as an example of "dangerous" climate change.

Are there any sane green activists left?

Did Penn State-West "Scientist" Blatantly Lie To U.S. Senate About Climate Change? The IPCC Corruption Of Science Continues

Based on the actual IPCC science findings, the factual empirical evidence and climate reality, Roger Pielke Jr. comes close to using the dreaded four-letter word: L-I-A-R ... the IPCC corruption of science regarding climate change is never ending it seems

(image source)

Read here. Does misrepresenting a science this badly in Congressional testimony constitute perjury? Stating one's opinions is one thing (and quite acceptable), but misleading by omission of key facts and inaccurate statements is a whole 'nuther ball game.

"The politicization of climate science is so complete that the lead author of the IPCC's Working Group II on climate impacts feels comfortable presenting testimony to the US Congress that fundamentally misrepresents what the IPCC has concluded. I am referring to testimony given today by Christopher Field, a professor at Stanford, to the US Senate."

"This is not a particularly nuanced or complex issue. What Field says the IPCC says is blatantly wrong, often 180 degrees wrong."

"Field's assertion that the link between climate change and disasters "is clear," which he supported with reference to US "billion dollar" economic losses, is in reality scientifically unsupported by the IPCC. Period."

"Field conveniently neglected in his testimony to mention that one place where droughts have gotten less frequent, less intense or shorter is ... the United States."

"Field says nothing about the serious issues with NOAA's tabulation. The billion dollar disaster meme is a PR train wreck, not peer reviewed and is counter to the actual science summarized in the IPCC."

"In fact, there has been no trend in US hurricane frequency or intensity over a century or more, and the US is currently experiencing the longest period with no intense hurricane landfalls ever seen. Field fails to report any this and invents something different. Why present testimony so easily refuted?"

"Field fails to explain that no linkage between flood disasters and climate change has been established...In fact, floods may be decreasing worldwide and are."

"However, it utterly irresponsible to fundamentally misrepresent the conclusions of the IPCC before the US Congress. He might have explained why he thought the IPCC was wrong in its conclusions, but it is foolish to pretend that the body said something other than what it actually reported."

Conclusion: A principal reason that the American public consistently puts "global warming" and "climate change" as low priorities is the well documented lies, misrepresentations and omissions that the IPCC and its Climategate scientists choose to put forth, and the climate realities they choose to hide. As a result of this style of science corruption, the public does not believe this branch of science any longer. The U.S. Congress would do the nation a huge favor if it defunded climate science research by about 50%, with new marching orders to clean house and come back for new funding when objective, empirical-based climate science is paramount.

Per NOAA, Global Warming Is Not Accelerating, CO2 Is Not Earth's Temperature "Thermostat"

Doomsday climate scientists and alarmists state that CO2 causes "accelerating" global warming and it is the globe's "thermostat" - the actual NOAA temperature dataset debunks those anti-science claims

(click on image to enlarge)

The IPCC's climate doomsday science has claimed that human CO2 emissions are causing long-term, rapid global warming. It is also suggested by alarmist scientists that CO2 is the world's thermostat, which can control global temperature changes.

However, as the adjacent plot of long-term global temperature change reveals, the IPCC's conclusions do not comport with the empirical evidence. From this chart of NOAA data, the following can be surmised:

• 1. Atmospheric CO2 levels have indeed increased rapidly (see black curve)
• 2. Twenty year changes in global temperatures, as represented by the NOAA data, have a long-term pattern of moving from cooling to warming to cooling modes, regardless of CO2 levels
• 3. Recent changes in global temperatures indicates they are in the cooling mode, not "accelerating" up (see blue curve), despite the vast increase in human CO2 emissions over the last two decades
• 4. Per the data, the long-term global warming trend is barely a +0.2C degree by year 2100 - that's one-fifth of a degree
  
• 5. There is absolutely zippo evidence that CO2 acts as a "thermostat" - the bogus thermostat claim is a galactic-sized black hole of anti-science nonsense

Additional modern, regional, historical and fabricating-fake temperature charts.

Note: The above chart plots the 20-year (240-month change) in NOAA global temperatures. For example, the plot's datapoint for June 2012 is the difference between the actual June 2012 anomaly and the actual June 1992 anomaly.