C3

Peer-Reviewed Confirmation: Growth of Human CO2 Does Not Result In Unusual Climate Warming

There is the following science consensus: the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis has never been empirically validated outside the confines of a computer simulation.

Essentially, across many parts of the world, the lack of warming and the lack of unusual warming - i.e. unprecedented, exceptional warming - confirms that the fear of human CO2-driven catastrophic warming is likely very misplaced.

Similar to the recent scientific findings of unexceptional modern warming for many parts of the world, such as in the U.S., across Antarctica, and multiple other regions of the world, scientists in China have analyzed a 350+ year climate record and found modern warming is not unusual versus the warming of earlier periods in the record. 

Per this study:

"In general, the average length of cold periods was shorter than that of warm periods. The cold period of 1869–1877 was the longest and coldest cool period had a mean of 17.63°C. The longest warm period extended from 1655 to 1668, and the warmest period in AD 1719–1730 had a mean of 20.37°C. However, we should point out that the rapid warming during the 20th century was not especially obvious in our reconstructed RLST."

The scientists also determined that human CO2 was not a factor driving the warming and cooling analyzed.

"Accompanied by significant peaks at 60.2 and 73 years, the continuously periodicities around 49–114 years in our regional temperature reconstruction might tentatively be related to PDO, Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation...as well as solar activity...The AMO was an important driver of multidecadal variations in summer climate not only in North America and western Europebut also in the East Asia...The 60.2-year peak associated with AMO demonstrated that multidecadal variations in late summer temperature in the NWSP NWSP [northwestern Sichuan Plateau, China ] might be controlled by AMO."

This 2016 study from China adds to the enormous amount of empirical evidence demonstrating that an all encompassing modern "global" warming from human CO2 does not exist.

The scientific evidence is unequivocal: There exist huge regional climate swaths of the globe that have mildly warmed in an unexceptional manner during the modern industrial/consumer era; and there exist multiple large areas that even lack any regional climate-significant modern warming whatsoever. 

Additional modern global and regional temperature charts; and historical temperature charts.

Peer Research Analysis: What Is Likelihood of 3 Meter Rise For California Coast Sea Levels By Year 2100?

Simply stated: Slim to none.

Experts in sea level research did a focused analysis on the predicted sea level projections for California by activist groups. These groups are suggesting that sea level rise could be as much as 3 meters by year 2100 due to human CO2 emission release into the atmosphere.

This peer-reviewed study - from experts not associated with an activist agenda group(s) - determined that the alarmist predictions of dramatic increases of California sea levels 'hold no water'.

This chart is from their study analysis, along with the below stinging rebuttal to the activist groups.

"In summing up these and other of their several findings, Parker and Ollier write that "the evidences from real sea level measurements do not support the IPCC models or the even more alarming predictions [made by the National Research Council and California Ocean Science Trust]. The latter, "they continue, "are founded on pure speculation, constructed on unproven assumptions, and do not provide a suitable basis for use in planning or policy making.""

Prior sea level articles.

Science Consensus Versus Climate Models: Southern Ocean Sea Ice Is Growing

Climate simulation models have proven to be unreliable when their predictions, scenarios, projections, etc. are compared to the observed climate realities. A recent example is in regards to the waters surrounding Antarctica.

The Southern Ocean is comprised of 5 sub-regions. This study reviewed the empirical evidence of sea ice extent and found that 4 of the 5 sub-regions experienced an expanded sea ice extent and the Southern Ocean overall did likewise. The study confirms the growing scientific consensus that sea ice has increased since 1979.

In contrast to the climate models and their prognostications, these scientific observations of climate reality are opposite of what the models expected. 

"Whatever the true cause or causes, one thing is certain, all of the climate models have failed to predict the observed increase in Southern Hemisphere sea ice extent. Rather, as reported in the most recent report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), CO2-induced global warming is supposed to reduce its extent by an average of between 16 and 67 percent in the summer and 8 to 30 percent in the winter by the end of the century (IPCC, 2013). Clearly, therefore, something must be fundamentally wrong with the climate models, for their predictions to be so far off from the observed sea ice trends."

Since climate models are dependent on the CO2 greenhouse gas being a major driving force in the simulations, it is not a surprise to those familiar with the subject that the simulated outputs continue to be deeply flawed.

Additional climate model and failed prediction articles.

Prediction FactCheck: Consensus Experts & Climate Models Predicted Higher CO2 Levels Would Result In More Forest Fires

Does the empirical evidence support the belief that human CO2 emissions released into the atmosphere will directly cause an increase in forest fires from global warming?

As the above plots show, whether it's the U.S. national forests or the state owned properties in fire-prone California, the number of fires incidents has significantly declined starting with the 1980s. This has taken place during 50 years of the largest growth of atmospheric CO2 levels - the largest possibly for millions of years.

The chart plots are from the recent extensive peer-reviewed study published by forestry researchers. 

"Both USFS and Cal Fire protected lands had the lowest number of fires in the early record but ignitions began to increase in the1960s and peaked between 1970 and 1990, subsequently declining on both USFS and Cal Fire lands. ... Major fires are dependent on the juxtaposition of such weather events with anthropogenic ignitions. Future fire regimes will be less affected by global warming than by other global changes, in particular population growth, because over 95% of ignitions are due to humans. As populations increase we expect a greater chance of ignitions during severe fire weather conditions."

In addition, the subject of forest fire devastation was recently re-analyzed using entirely different data. And further back, 'C3' and others have published multiple examinations of the available empirical evidence - here, here, here, here, here, here, here. 

Prediction FactCheck Verdict: Fail 

The expert and climate model predictions of CO2 and global warming wreaking fire havoc upon forested areas is absolutely without convincing empirical evidence. All facts point to an overall improvement in the count and extent of forest fire destruction since the peak destruction experienced during the early decades of the 20th century.

Additional fire and other weather phenomenon charts, failed-prediction articles, and peer-reviewed articles.

Note: Decade-end atmospheric CO2 levels superimposed on graphs from the 2017 Keely & Syphard study.

ScienceFactCheck: Does Ocean Acidification Dissolve Starfish?

The case of the dissolving starfish: Often, the actual science regarding research studies is misreported by the institutions - i.e. academia - that publish press releases on studies they have sponsored, which then the journalists spread and propagandize for their readers and viewers

A recent example of misreporting are the "scientific" news stories based on a study's press release that increased ocean acidification, presumably from human CO2 emissions, was dissolving the poor coastal starfish population.

Turns out, per an analysis of what this latest starfish scientific study actually stated, the research said nothing of the sort.

The news stories about the dissolving starfish represent reporting practice that is frequent and purposefully designed to mislead the public and policymakers.

In contrast, when ocean acidification research is well-conducted and well-reported, the opposite conclusion about the impact of lower pH levels is usually the result.

An example is a recent ocean acidfication study of the impact on a starfish relative, the lowly sea urchin.

"In light of these several findings, the Australian, New Zealand and U.S. researchers felt safe in stating that the sea urchins "did not only persist but actually 'thrived' under extreme conditions." And why was this so? Uthicke et al. opine that it was because (6) "increased algal productivity under increased pCO2 [Ed: increasing water acidification] provided more food at the vent, resulting in higher growth rates." And in light of this likelihood, they conclude their paper by stating that the processes they studied "are best identified in natural settings ... where ecosystems and individuals are exposed throughout their life to conditions similar to those in future oceans.""

Unfortunately, the journalistic practice of relying on questionable press releases is widespread, thus leading "journalists" to embellish and promulgate fake science and, of course, leading to ludicrous fear-mongering. The case of the "dissolving starfish" is a classic example.

Previous articles about peer-reviewed science and articles about questionable journalism.

CO2 Impact Analysis: Will Increased CO2 Be of Harm or Benefit To Major Grain Crops?

What does the science say in regards to the effect of elevated CO2 on major food sources across the globe?

It is well known that airborne CO2 acts as a vegetation fertilizer, which fortunately for the world, has produced a vast 'greening' of nature. Some 70% of greening is attributed to increased CO2 fertilization say the NASA researchers.

In regards to agriculture crops, a new study has again determined that increased CO2 will produce greater yields.

This peer-reviewed study focused of rice and maize.

"Rice is the most consumed staple crop in the world and maize is close behind in rank as the third most important cereal crop. Their annual yields are consumed by billions of persons worldwide.....Pingale et al. report that elevated CO2 positively influenced the growth and productivity of both crops. Plant growth and yield parameters such as leaf area, stem dry weight, panicle dry weight, cob dry weight and grain number per cob were all significantly increased under elevated CO2. And the end result of these several enhancements was a CO2-induced increase in both rice and maize grain yield."

The included column chart from the study depicts the yield increases for both crops.

Prior articles regarding peer-reviewed studies and greenhouse gases. 

Prediction Review: Has Modern Climate Change Negatively Impacted Bird Populations?

Expert predictions about the negative impacts of climate change on bird populations are assessed in this study.

The scientists investigated the bird species that populate the mountain habitats of the Pacific Northwest. These habitats are considered by wildlife experts to be "among the most immediately susceptible to [the] effects of climate change."

Was the "expert" prediction correct that modern climate change (i.e., global warming) would have a significant negative impact on bird specie populations?

In fact, this peer-reviewed analysis determined that modern climate change was not negatively impacting these vulnerable habitats and bird populations.

".....the team of ten researchers conducted a total of 8404 point-count surveys at 3177 distinct survey point locations across the three parks during the breeding seasons of 2005-2014. From those surveys, 39 species (24 migratory and 15 "residents" that overwinter in the parks) were identified for population stability analyses."....."all but one species were either stable or increasing across the sampled points in the three parks" throughout the period of study (see Figure 1 below). Furthermore, the authors say they "found little evidence for upslope range shifts across the sampled region," adding that "no species increased at higher elevations while declining at lower elevations."

Based on this study's results, one could surmise that modern climate change has been of benefit to the bird species in the Pacific Northwest.

 

Additional failed predictions.

Facts Don't Lie: Unprecedented Climate Change

There was climate change.

There is climate change.

And there will be climate change.

This peer-reviewed study produced the adjacent charts for the regional area of the American Southwest.

Although the study was primarily about climate modeling for future climate variability, it was focused on the severe climate variation of the Little Ice Age (LIA).

The charts provide ample factual proof, along with the study's own premise, that our modern climate change is not unprecedented.

Whether it be drought conditions or temperature extremes, the past climate was anything but stable.

Note that the bottom chart shows the modern recent warming (RW) finally returning to the levels of around 1000AD and the extended Medieval Climate Anomaly (MCA) period.

Simply stated: facts don't lie, and there is nothing humans can do to stop natural climate change; and, the extremes it produces without any help from CO2.

Additional historical charts.  

ScienceCheck: Global Warming Increases Hailstorms' Frequency & Intensity

China must not have gotten the climate model memo that all hailstorms were ordered to be more severe and to produce a greater amount of damage.  

Those "expert" climate models tell us what is supposed to happen in the world's climate due to the impact of human-induced global warming. Yet it seems that the models as climate soothsayers of severe weather events are essentially worthless.

Case in point, a new peer-reviewed study has examined the factual evidence regarding the increased frequency and increased intensity of hail storms that CO2-centric, global warming climate models predict; and the study has found the predictions to be without merit.

"A test of this model-based hypothesis was recently performed by Ni et al. (2017) for China. Using data from 2,254 locations that they obtained from the Chinese National Meteorological Information Center, the eight researchers examined trends in both the occurrence of hail days (frequency) and the mean size of hail (intensity) over the period 1980-2015"..."Ni et al. conclude that these observational changes "imply a weakened [frequency and] intensity of hailstorms in China in recent decades." And that finding does not bode well for climate models, which predict that just the opposite should be occurring."

The study's graphs depict that over the last 35 years the large-sized hail stones that wreak the most havoc on property and agriculture have been trending smaller, not larger across all recorded storms from the reporting 2,254 weather stations.

In addition, during the same extended period, the proportion of all hail storms that produce the extremely large stones has been clearly trending down.

ScienceCheck Conclusion: Climate models can't predict squat.

Fact Check: China's Modern Climate Change Evidence

China is the 4th largest country in terms of geographical size and the largest in population size. Accordingly, human-induced climate change from greenhouse trace gases would be of major concern to China's leaders. So, what does a fact check reveal of China's modern climate change due to human Co2 emissions?

 

Frankly, little, if any, emission impact on present climate change based on new Chinese peer-reviewed research.

(click on charts to enlarge)

The chart on the left represents a 341-year proxy temperature reconstruction for the southwest region of China.

Clearly, unprecedented temperatures occurred during the mid to late 1700s. This record shows that modern temperatures, which supposedly have been influenced by human emissions, are yet to rival temperatures from much earlier periods. 

Also, one can discern a cyclical pattern that the study's scientists attributed to nature climate oscillations - trace greenhouse gases do not explain this periodical climate pattern.

The chart on the right represents a 500-year streamflow analysis for a western region of China.

Again, a pattern of constant change, from low to high to low, appears to be due to natural climate variations. The late 20th and early 21st century observations seem remarkably similar to those in the distant past, suggesting that Co2 emissions are not a factor influencing streamflow.

Fact Check: As these two studies from China indicate, modern industrial/consumer emissions from fossil fuels are not a major component of climate change. This research adds to the huge compilation of prior peer-reviewed studies that confirm modern climate change is not out of the ordinary, and highly likely due to natural causes, not human-induced as speculated my many.  

Study Debunks "97% Consensus" Scare: Corals Prosper In Conditions of Warming & Acidification

"Reef-building corals thrive within hot-acidified and deoxygenated waters".

That is the title of a recently published peer-reviewed scientific study.

And that title pretty much sums up the study findings that corals exposed to greater natural extremes prosper as well as those exposed to less harsh conditions.

Be it extreme water temperatures, extreme acidity, and/or extreme deoxygenation, corals exhibit a real world adaptability to survive and thrive that is in contrast to long-held dogma of laboratory researchers.

CO2science.org has an informative write-up of the study, including the adjacent charts and the below summation.

"Consequently, in light of all of the above, it would be wise for policy makers to give more consideration to the impacts of ocean acidification and warming as observed from natural environment analogs as opposed to more restrictive laboratory based analyses. And when such consideration is given, it appears that corals are well equipped to deal with future changes in their environment, be they naturally or anthropogenically induced."

Of course, popular doomsday prophets continue to badger policymakers and the public with frightful scenarios that human CO2 emissions will destroy, or already have destroyed, the planet's coral reefs. 

Yet, the growing volume of actual scientific research, such as this highlighted study, clearly refutes the falsity of such alarmist prophecies.

The below link list of coral reef articles, which examine recent research and empirical evidence refuting the popularized orthodox doom-dogma; and have been completely ignored by MSM fake-news operations since they prove the fear-mongering is nothing more than that.

• "Scientists surprised that reef that survived the hotter holocene is already recovering from 2016 bleaching"
• "How climate scientists mislead the world about the great barrier reef" 
• "The End of the Ocean Acidification Scare for Corals"
• "Scientists are stunned by corals as big as cars and thriving marine life at Bikini Atoll site where 23 atomic bombs were dropped"
• "University researcher makes deep-sea coral reefs discovery in depths of the North-Pacific"
• "The Future Fate of Coral Calcification in a CO2-Enriched World"
• "Corals Found Deep in The Ocean Produce Their Own Sunlight to Survive" 
• "Great Barrier Reef: 2016 Coral Cover Loss and Local Sea Level Fall"
• "Coral Reef Sophistry"
• "Coral Reefs, Temperature and Ocean pH"

These listed reviews of scientific research and analyses indisputably destroy the "97% consensus" alarmism that anti-science prophets of doom spew, including that of Al Gore, Cameron Diaz, Bill McKibben, Emma Watson, Obama, Leo DiCaprio, Chuck Schumer, Jessica Alba, Mark Ruffalo, Pharrell Williams, Michael Mann, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and many other celebrities.

In essence, these celebrity "experts" essentially repeat simple scare-mongering of global warming and climate change without the merits of any known empirical evidence research. Again, they actually spew anti-science.

Besides the selection of 2017 article titles noted above, there is an abundance of peer-reviewed studies stretching back over the years in regards to coral scientific research that debunks coral reef alarmism.

Additional 'C3' articles of peer-reviewed research.  

Climate Doomsday Science: Study Finds That Worm Farts Could Be The Tipping Point

Worm greenhouse emissions (primarily methane) from our global ocean sediment buddies could lead to that proverbial tipping point - initiating a runaway global warming and catastrophic climate change scenario.

"The findings, which have been published in the journal Scientific Reports, point to a so far neglected source of greenhouse gases in the sea and could have a profound impact on decision makers."

One wonders if this is the missing causal link that climate models need to incorporate in order to address their continued prediction failure?

Included in this simply remarkable study are the methane emissions of clams. Certainly, the gaseous output from these two sea creatures will be disastrous for the world.

It should be obvious that these scientists need a lot more $$$ funding to determine the total extent of global ocean farting, which as they say: 

"...implying that globally, apparently harmless bivalve animals at the bottom of the world’s oceans may in fact be contributing ridiculous amounts of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere that is unaccounted for.”...“These small yet very abundant animals may play an important, but so far neglected, role in regulating the emissions of greenhouse gases in the sea.”

And then there is certainly the expensive research needed to determine if land-based worms, as pictured above, are another doomsday greenhouse culprit. If yes, big monies will be required to fund Monsanto so that a new class of global-warming pesticides can be brought to market in time to save civilization and our human species.

Or, like so many other climate "science" studies, maybe this one also isn't worth a fart.

h/t: WUWT   another source for this study

Catalonia: New Study Confirms Increased Risk of Cardiovascular Events During Cold Weather

Yet another study confirms the increased heart risk due to cold weather spells.

The study reviewed Catalonia emergency room admissions of those with cardiovascular events during both heat waves and cold waves. The total number of heart incidents was substantially higher during periods of cold versus warm/hot weather.

Per the study's analysis:

"...they used the self-controlled case series statistical methodology to assess the relative incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of hospitalizations during the hot and cold waves in comparison to reference time periods with normal temperature exposure. Heat waves were defined as a period of at least 3 days in July and August in which the daily maximum temperatures were higher than the 95th percentile of daily maximum temperature for those two months. Cold waves were similarly defined as periods of at least 3 days in January and February when daily minimum temperatures were lower than the 95th percentile of daily minimum temperatures for those two months. IRRs were adjusted for age, time interval and air pollution. The number of hospitalizations due to cardiovascular diseases during January and February over the period of study was 22,611, whereas there were only 17,017 during July and August."

The red outline rectangle in the above image reveals the much reduced number of cardiovascular events during warmer weather.

Couple the increased cardiovascular incidence during the cold months along with the increased incidence of influenza/colds/pneumonia during the same periods, it becomes overwhelmingly obvious that any type of global climate warming brings welcome relief from major health concerns and potential death due to the hands of colder temperature weather.

"And this being the case, perhaps we should all pray for a little global warming."

Additional peer-reviewed studies regarding health benefits of warmer weather and climates.

Fake Climate Science: Remember When Mainstream Media, Obama & Other "Experts" Claimed Severe Weather Was Increasing?

(click on chart to enlarge)

A new focused effort by a team of researchers analyzed 26 decades of hurricane activity, covering the end of the Little Ice Age (LIA) through 2012 for the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico water regions. 

As most scientists agree, be they orthodox or skeptic, the world has been modestly warming since the end of the LIA.

Yet the proponents of global warming alarmism "science" have claimed that severe weather, such as hurricanes, has increased dramatically due to this rather modest warming.

These expert claims were primarily based on simulations from climate models (and less so on the actual empirical evidence) which has become a sure fire methodology of producing bass-ackwards fake science.

This new empirical study presents the evidence from the last 260 years of hurricane activity and the result is irrefutable as the adjacent chart reveals. Not only has hurricane activity not increased across the wide areas examined, the activity has actually been on a slow declining trend.

"In their intriguing analysis published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, the four-member research team of Rojo-Garibaldi et al. developed a new database of historical hurricane occurrences in the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea, spanning twenty-six decades over the period 1749 to 2012. Statistical analysis of the record revealed "the hurricane number is actually decreasing in time," which finding is quite stunning...as the Mexican research team indicates, "when analyzing the entire time series built for this study, i.e., from 1749 to 2012, the linear trend in the number of hurricanes is decreasing"."

What truly makes this a head-exploding study for celebrity "scientists" is not only the fact the findings are the opposite of what they predicted, but that this Mexican scientific team tied the decline to natural solar events, not human CO2 emissions. (See more information on the study.)

Additional peer-reviewed articles and severe-weather charts.

Extreme Drought: British Columbia's Vancouver Island Climate Change Record

It is unequivocally true that climate change, both mild and extreme, is always happening - paleoclimatology research evidence establishes that. 

There is no debate that climate change existed prior to humans' impact on Earth, and will continue regardless of whether human CO2 emissions persist or cease.

Scientists continue to investigate past climate change events to better understand modern climate change, including extreme drought.

Case in point: scientists recently published peer-reviewed research that identified extreme drought periods on Canada's Vancouver Island, specifically the British Columbia Tsable River region.

Their research confirmed that since 1520AD, and prior to the instrumental record, extreme droughts took place that were of equal severity to those of modern droughts.

"Severe summer streamflow droughts are impacting many watersheds on Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Small coastal basins that are the primary water source for most communities and essential to Pacific salmon populations have been particularly affected...Explaining 63% of the instrumental streamflow variability...Our findings suggest that since 1520, 21 droughts occurred that were more extreme than recent “severe” events like those in 2003 and 2009. Recent droughts are therefore not anomalous relative to the ~400 year pre-instrumental record.....The influence of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation on instrumental and modeled Tsable River summer streamflow is likely linked to the enhanced role of snowmelt in determining summer discharge during cool phases."

Past extreme drought events are clear examples of continuous natural climate change that the modern era cannot escape. Humans do not cause climate change, it just happens.

Previous drought and climate-history articles. Link to above image.

Climate Models Versus Cyclones & Hurricanes: More Titanic-Like Climate/Weather Prediction Failures

Fortunately, the Titanic only sunk once because engineers and navigators did not continue to make the same mistakes over and over.

But "experts" and climate models provide a never-ending loop of sinking and re-floating of a wide assortment of climate change predictions, forecasts and scenarios.

The weather/climate researchers seem unable to embrace the humility and reality that their computer simulation predictions rarely stay afloat for any length of time before being sent down to deep and cold watery graves.

A recent noteworthy example of a failed prediction is the Hurricane Matthew event.

More specifically, climate model output has been predicting that CO2-induced global warming and climate change would produce more frequent, and more intense, cyclones/hurricanes that would continuously terrorize many coastal populations.

Yet those frightening predictions keep doing a 'Titanic' on the expert model forecasts.

And actually, there is a logical reason for that happening: climate models can't predict squat.

Per the latest peer-reviewed scientific research:

"...Camargo and Wing write that (5) "efforts on modeling improvements, from convective parameterizations to new numerical methods and dynamical cores, also need to continue to occur." And "most of all," as they continue, they say that (6) "what is needed is a better theoretical understanding of what sets the frequency of TCs," noting that (7) "we could make much more confident climate change projections if we had a firmer theoretical expectation of what should happen."

"In conclusion, therefore, they state that (8) "despite the recent advances, there is still need for a substantial community effort to improve simulation of TCs in climate models on all time scales."

Essentially, even after burning through multi-billions of taxpayer monies, the models still can't predict squat due to the inescapable fact that experts require a "firmer theoretical expectation of what should happen."

Message to Trump from climate scientists: "We don't know what we're doing but please send more money anyways, ASAP!"

Previous peer-reviewed and failed-prediction articles.

New Research Confirms Past Findings: Solar Activity Tied To Weather Events & Climate Changes

Extreme weather incidents - i.e. disastrous flooding from extreme precipitation - has always existed ... and well before the introduction of human industrial/consumer CO2 emissions ... the name Noah rings a bell, yes?

 

Image source

Much research has been done on determining the connection between solar activity and weather/climate conditions.

Studies investigating the relationship between the sun and flooding continue to be pursued. The newest research examined solar forcing and the floods of central Europe using river discharge data and varved sediments.

The peer-reviewed findings:

The three researchers discovered that flood frequency in both records is significantly correlated to changes in two types of solar activity," namely, (1) "the solar Schwabe cycle" and (2) "multi-centennial oscillations." And they thus further conclude that (3) "the unexpected direct response of variations in River Ammer flood frequency to changes in solar activity might suggest that the solar top-down mechanism is of particular relevance for hydroclimate extremes.

This study determined that flooding frequency over 5,500 years was tied to solar activity across inter-annual and multi-centennial timescales. 

Clearly, CO2 emissions and other human influences are not a prerequisite for extreme precipitation and the resulting flood disasters.

Prior severe weather/climate research and peer-reviewed articles.

Another Required Climate Prediction Do-Over: Researchers Admit More CO2 Means Plants Need Less Water

The consensus alarmist-scientist community has again been discomforted with new empirical evidence that confirms the findings of past research done by scientists skeptical of human-caused catastrophic global warming.

The new study, officially published in a publication from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows:

"....that water conserved by plants under high CO2 conditions compensates for much of the effect of warmer temperatures, retaining more water on land than predicted in commonly used drought assessments....the implications of plants needing less water with more CO2 in the environment changes assumptions of climate change impacts on agriculture, water resources, wildfire risk, and plant growth..."New satellite observations and improvements in our understanding hydrological cycle have led to significant advances in our ability to model changes in soil moisture," said Randerson. "Unfortunately, using proxy estimates of drought stress can give us misleading results because they ignore well-established principles from plant physiology."."

And ...,

"Recent studies have estimated that more than 70 percent of our planet will experience more drought as carbon dioxide levels quadruple from pre-industrial levels over about the next 100 years. But when researchers account for changes in plants' water needs, this falls to 37 percent, with bigger differences concentrated in certain regions."

You read that right. The "consensus" scientists were forced to cut almost in half climate models' simulated drought impact on the world's plant life when the actual empirical evidence was properly analyzed.

Of course, despite the contrary findings of this study, the article reminds readers that hypothetical fearmongering from computer simulations is still acceptable, such as:

"Is this good news for climate change? Although the drying may be less extreme than in some current estimates, droughts will certainly increase, researchers said, and other aspects of climate change could have severe effects on vegetation."

Image source. Prior postings regarding failed consensus predictions.

Latest Inconvenient Science: European Scientists Confirm Exxon Not To Blame For Climate Change

(click on to enlarge)

It would seem, despite the extreme denial of most anti-CO2 activists and UN bureaucrats, that the climate has always changed, frequently making dramatic shifts.

Even producing big shifts prior to the major morphing to a greenhouse gas emitting industrial/consumer society.

Despite the immense treasure of climate change empirical and anecdotal evidence of time past compiled by dedicated researchers, scientists are still conducting new research to delineate the scope and breadth of past changes.

This latest research, done by a group of European scientists, focused on the Northern Hemisphere's hydroclimatology responses to temperature change over 12 centuries. Their findings included:

"...report that (1,2) "proxy evidence does not support the tendency in simulations for wet regions to become wetter and dry regions drier in a warmer climate," that (3) their "hydroclimate reconstruction does not support a general unprecedented intensification of the hydrological cycle in the twentieth century, associated with both more extreme wet and dry conditions, as simulated by an ensemble of models," and that (4) "this finding is in line with recent analyses of instrumental data reporting limited evidence for an intensification of wet and dry anomalies under current global warming,"."  Nature 532: 10.1038/nature17418.

In summary, their extensive analysis of the hydrological evidence does not comport with the simulated findings of the most advanced CO2-centric climate models available (surprise, surprise).

Clearly, the accompanying graph depicts the never ending condition of natural climate change, providing further proof that human fossil fuel emissions - and Exxon - are not to blame.

Prior articles on historical climate change.

Climate Change Experts Flip-Flop, Again: Global Warming Will Now Cause Less Disease

The mountain of failed predictions and significant flip-flops seems to be never ending when it comes to climate change experts.

For years they predicted (i.e. carelessly speculated) that a warming climate would increase the incidence of the nasty dengue fever disease.

But now researchers are reporting that the incidence of the disease could actually be reduced with warming climate change.

“While climate change generally poses a major threat to humanity, it also may reduce the incidence of dengue in some areas,” said Dr Harley, an epidemiology researcher at the ANU Research School of Population Health. ... The findings are also relevant to other mosquito-borne viruses including Zika because the mosquitoes that carry dengue also transmit the Zika virus. ... “There is significant concern in countries on the margin of the tropical areas where dengue is mainly found, that with global warming dengue and other mosquito-borne viruses such as Zika will encroach and become common,” Dr Harley said. ... “Previous projections have suggested that climate change will increase transmission of mosquito-borne diseases globally. ... “Our work, using a mathematical model based on Queensland conditions, suggests that dengue transmission might decrease with greater warming.”

Naturally, this is good news that all global warming alarmists should embrace, with the exception of a single caveat regarding the study that should give pause. This latest flip-flop was based on a computer model, which is quite simply, nothing but simulated research using limited empirical evidence.

Previous failed-prediction and peer-reviewed articles.

Consensus? Orthodox Climate Science Performs A Major Flip-Flop

(click to enlarge - image source)

As has often been the case, official climate science is now agreeing with what skeptics identified several years ago: Antarctica is not warming.

The prestigious science consensus journal Nature has published a new peer-reviewed study that counters what that journal has been reporting about Antarctica for at least the last decade.

This should not come as a surprise to the observant.

The global warming doomsday scientists have relied on a compliant mainstream media to claim that their opinions represent the supposed 97% of settled science - an indisputable "consensus" that should not be debated. But, as in almost every scientific endeavor, the science is never, ever settled.

Yet the climate science orthodoxy continues to push the catastrophic scenario that Earth's major coastal and island regions will be submerged due to the melting of the polar ice sheets found in Antarctica. Unfortunately for the consensus alarmism, this new study indicates Antarctica's canary in the global warming fearmongering-fable has actually been cooling over the last 20 years, not warming (see chart).

Per an article on the study:

"Natural variability was responsible both for the decades-long warming since the 1950s and more recent cooling, according to research published today in Nature. The research, led by John Turner from the British Antarctic Survey, said while the start of Antarctic Peninsula cooling in 1998 had coincided with the so-called “global warming hiatus”, the two were not connected."

And what do they say next, after being severely humiliated with the empirical evidence that skeptics rely on? Well.....the consensus doomsday scientists bounce right back with their orthodoxy beliefs, based on the always wrong climate model computer simulations.

"Scientists were quick to declare the results of the Turner et al paper, which covered 1 per cent of the Antarctic continent, did not negate a long-term warming because of man-made climate change...“Climate model projections forced with medium emission scenarios indicate the emergence of a large anthropogenic regional warming signal, comparable in magnitude to the late-20th-­century peninsula warming, during the latter part of the current century,” the Turner research concluded."

Previous polar and sea ice articles.

Empirical Evidence: Climate Change Driven By Non-CO2 Factors, Experts Find

(click to enlarge -- image source)

It is indisputable that significant climate change is a never ending condition: Earth's climate, due to internal and external forces, is inconstant and variable across regions.

Chinese researchers determined that non-CO2 forcings are the principal causes of majors swings in a climate's temperature, be it cooling and warming. They also determined that the modern 20th century warming, which doomsday alarmists attribute solely to the trace gas CO2, is well below the confirmed warming that took place in earlier, pre-industrial periods.

Their research is based on the empirical evidence of a reconstructed temperature dataset using tree rings from China's northwestern Sichuan Plateau. This new dataset confirms what the multitude of previous studies have determined - significant climate changes are absolutely natural.

This study's conclusions:

"Seven major cold periods and three major warm periods were identified from this reconstruction, which might be linked with volcanic and solar activities. The Little Ice Age (LIA) climate can also be well represented and clearly end with climatic amelioration at the end of the 19th century. The 18th and 20th centuries were warm with less extreme cold years, while the 17th and 19th century were cold with more extreme cold years. Moreover, the 20th century rapid warming was not obvious in our RLST reconstruction, which implies that mean maximum temperature, as a unique temperature indicator, might play an important and different role in global change. Overall, the RLST variability in the NWSP might be associated with global land–sea atmospheric circulation (e.g., ENSO, PDO, or AMO) as well as solar and volcanic forcing"

 

Prior climate history articles.

ClimateFact Verified: Tropical Pacific Islands Are Not Being Drowned By Rising Seas

(image source)

Per a previous analysis of rising seas surrounding Pacific islands, the satellite measurements indicate that seas are rising but at a very meager rate. The current sea rise rate is significantly below what consensus climate science alarmists have predicted.

So, how do the doomsday claims that tropical islands are being lost to "rapidly" rising seas compare to reality?

Scientific peer-reviewed research can answer that question: The claims are bogus.

A new study examined the Jaluit Atoll of the Marshall Islands.

Back in 1958, Typhoon Ophelia passed by the atoll causing 14 deaths, plus resulting in the atoll shrinking in land area. Per the study:

"...the pair of New Zealand researchers set out to examine historical changes in 87 islands found within the Jaluit Atoll...over the period 1945-2010. During this time, the islands were subjected to ongoing sea level rise and the passage of a notable typhoon...which caused severe damage with its >100 knot winds and abnormal wave heights...caused a decrease in total island land area of approximately five percent, yet Ford and Kench write that “despite [this] significant typhoon-driven erosion and a relaxation period coincident with local sea-level rise, [the] islands have persisted and grown.” Between 1976 and 2006, for example, 73 out of the 87 islands increased in size, and by 2010, the total landmass of the islands had exceeded the pre-typhoon area by nearly 4 percent."

Simply stated, this study again confirms that doomsday prognostications based on climate model simulations have no relation to the actual Pacific island/atoll reality during periods of sea rise.

Additional peer-reviewed and ocean/sea articles  

Newest Research: Natural Climate Change Routs Mongol Invasion of Europe - 1242 AD

Recently, two science articles based on the latest research belies the notion, held by global warming alarmist proponents, that climate change is only a result of modern human CO2 emissions.

As skeptics of catastrophic global warming have long advised, climate change is primarily a result of natural forces that are not dependent on anthropogenic influences.

An example of this earthly natural climate change is the Little Ice Age (LIA), which had serious repercussions for many, including the Mongol invaders who terrorized Europe.

Researchers now believe that the underlying cause of the mysterious retreat by the Mongol invading forces of Hungary, during 1462 AD, was the bad weather - likely induced by the natural climate change associated with the LIA onset. Turns out the bad weather of climate change significantly reduced food and nutrition for the Horde's steeds and made for a very muddy terrain to battle on.

And then there is the new research from another planet in the solar system that proves natural climate change is not only a terrestrial phenomenon. 

Research derived from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter has established that the Mars ice age is in the process of ending due to a natural global warming for that planet.

In combination, these two research efforts add to the massive amount of scientific evidence that climate change is always occurring; and, most definitely does not require human consumer/industrial greenhouse gases to produce significant impacts on planetary environments and those associated civilizations.

Prior climate-history and peer-reviewed articles.

Scientific Research Confirms: Increased CO2 Improves Southern Hemisphere Forest Growth

Plant life across the world has improved and increased profoundly, everywhere, due to the higher levels of atmospheric CO2, in combination with the modest global warming since the Little Ice Age.

The most recent study confirming this benefit to the biosphere pinpoints exceptional growth and health for older forests in the Southern Hemisphere - specifically, the Cordilleras region of southern Chile.

Per the study:

"Urrutia-Jalabert et al. performed a series of analyses on tree ring cores they obtained from long-lived Fitzroya cupressoides stands, which they say “may be the slowest-growing and longest-lived high biomass forest stands in the world.” ... the authors write “the sustained positive trend in tree growth is striking in this old stand, suggesting that the giant trees in this forest have been accumulating biomass at a faster rate since the beginning of the [20th] century.” And coupling that finding with the 32 percent increase in water use efficiency over the same time period, Urrutia-Jalabert et al. conclude the trees “are actually responding to environmental change.” ... the researchers state “we believe that this increasing growth trend…has likely been driven by some combination of CO2 and/or surface radiation increases,” adding that “pronounced changes in CO2 have occurred in parallel with changes in climate, making it difficult to distinguish between both effects.”"

As is often the case, scientific research again confirms that the dogmatic consensus climate science, such as the "expert" prediction that the globe's biosphere would suffer great harm from anthropogenic CO2, has proven to be spectacularly wrong.

Additional peer-reviewed articles.

Inconvenient Science: Study of Wind Farm Impacts On EU Protected Species Determines 80% Reduction

(image source)

As multiple recent articles have documented, wind energy, in the form of wind farms, has been plagued with multiple serious issues. When compiling the list of issues, it demonstrates that wind power's future as a sustainable renewable energy resource is not so bright.

Articles such as these: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Adding to the negative issue impacts of wind energy is a new study out of Scotland that established an 80% reduction of the EU protected golden plover bird species in the vicinity of a wind farm.

Per the inconvenient study:

"Lead researcher Dr Alex Sansom said: 'Golden plovers breed in open landscapes and it is likely that the presence of wind turbines in these areas leads to birds avoiding areas around the turbines. This study shows that such displacement may cause large declines in bird numbers within wind farms ...'It will be important to examine whether these effects are maintained over the longer term at this site, and we should also use these detailed studies to examine the effects of wind farms on other bird species.'"

Prior specie related articles and peer-reviewed studies.

Unimpeachable Scientific Data: Treeline Study Confirms U.S. Warmer In Past

(image source)

The vast majority of paleo-climate studies have been unequivocal - there are multiple past periods of warmer than current temperatures when low atmospheric CO2 levels existed. Empirical evidence, such as the Greenland ice cores, point to three specific Holocene periods of ancient historical warming: the Minoan, the Roman, and the Medieval eras.

A new research study focusing on the U.S. Western area provides unimpeachable scientific data confirming warmer the temperatures that the previous studies have found.

"In a recent treeline study from central Colorado, Carrara and McGeehin (2015) employed a combination of 23 radiocarbon ages and annual ring counts from 18 Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine (Pinus aristata) remnants found above the local present-day limits of such trees near the Continental Divide in central Colorado, which work revealed that the majority of the tree remnants "were established above the present-day limit of bristlecone pine from prior to 2700 cal. years BP to no later than about 1200 cal. years BP." ... "...has also been found and described in a number of other studies cited by Carrara and McGeehin, namely, those of LaMarche and Mooney (1967), LaMarche and Mooney (1972), LaMarche (1973), Petersen and Mehringer (1976), Scuderi (1987), Carrara et al. (1992), Fall (1997), Lloyd and Graumlich (1997), Doerner (2007), Benedict et al. (2008), Carrara (2011), Madole (2012), Lee and Benedict (2012), Lee et al. (2014) and Morgan et al. (2014)." ..."Clearly, therefore, there exists a wealth of real-world data from the western United States that testifies of the fact that there is nothing unusual, unnatural or unprecedented about that region's current mean yearly maximum and minimum temperatures...".

This should come as no surprise since both empirical and anecdotal evidence establish that natural climate change, with wide variation and extremes, has been a constant for humanity since the beginning.

Take home global warming (and cooling) message: the climate is not stable and never will be - natural climate change rules.

Additional climate-history articles.

Evidence-Based Science: Study Determines Changes In Global Precipitation Minimal Over Last 150 Years

(source of image)

The unsubstantiated claim has been that human CO2-induced climate change was (and is) producing dramatic changes in precipitation levels across the world.

But is it true?

A research effort was undertaken to determine if indeed the evidence backed up the alarmist non-empirical claims/predictions.

The study's findings:

"...report that "most trends exhibited no clear precipitation change," noting that "global changes in precipitation over the Earth's land mass excluding Antarctica relative to 1961-90 were estimated to be: -1.2±1.7, 2.6±2.5 and -5.4±8.1 percent per century for the periods 1850-2000, 1900-2000 and 1950-2000, respectively." ... "stations experiencing low, moderate and heavy annual precipitation did not show very different precipitation trends," ... "deserts/jungles are neither expanding nor shrinking due to changes in precipitation patterns." ... "reasonable to conclude that some caution is warranted about claiming that large changes to global precipitation have occurred during the last 150 years."

Simply put, the exaggerated climate change claims of major disruption to rainfall/snow patterns are just that, exaggerations sans any empirical evidence. The evidence-based science is clear: Over the last 150 years, precipitation trends remain within normal variability.

Prior climate/weather change and peer-reviewed articles. 

Science Confirms Natural pH Variability of Seas Swamps Any Acidification From Human CO2

Doomsday climate models have been programmed to simulate greater ocean acidification levels as a result of increasing atmospheric CO2 from human emissions.

Simply stated, this predicted dangerous "acidification" is hypothesized to make the waters uninhabitable for most marine life.

And for this to become a reality, it means that a demonstrable and consistent decline in sea/ocean pH levels should be evident since the beginning of the industrial age.

In fact, as this study indicates, researchers are finding it exceedingly difficult to locate ocean/sea waters that exhibit a dangerous decline in pH values. In addition, as this chart shows (click on chart to enlarge), any slight change in pH from human sources is being swamped, multiple times, by natures own unpredictable wide variability.

Additional ocean-acidification and peer-reviewed articles.

New Study: Feeding The World's Hungry- Iran's Wheat Yields Expected To Increase Due To Elevated Atmospheric CO2

No longer will climate doomsday alarmists be able to deny the immense benefits that increased CO2 levels bring to the world - the science has spoken, which means it is settled, no?

With Earth's 'greeness' and vegetation health rapidly improving, the most significant development for humanity is the increased capability to feed the world's poor.

And recent research indicates that regions such as Iran's Azarbaijan region will experience large increases in crop production, including wheat, if CO2 fertilization trends continue.

This article has the summary:

--->"The three Iranian researchers report that when the effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 were considered, all regions experienced an increase in wheat yield, which "ranged from 5% to 38% across all times, scenarios and regions." And, therefore, they concluded that "we may expect a higher yield of wheat in northwest Iran in the future if technology development continues as well as in past years," which, one could logically conclude, is likely to be the case."

Previous peer-reviewed articles. 

Extreme Climate Change Prediction: The Po River Will Flood More: Not Happening

"Expert" predictions, especially those associated with climate change, fail more often than not.

The climate change consensus has long been predicting that global warming will bring more flooding to river regions.

       "...freshwater flooding is "the most impacting natural disaster in terms of number of people affected and economic damages," adding that "some studies in the literature (e.g. IPCC, 2013; Stern Review, 2007) seem to indicate that flood damages are expected to increase in the near future as a consequence of a global climate change," citing the additional studies of Hall et al. (2005) and de Moel et al. (2011)."

So, several scientists decided to actually analyse the available climate data for the Po River region of Italy to determine if the IPCC and other predictors had any merit.

As always, they found the predictions counter to reality:

     "...analyses revealed there was a significant increase in residential growth in and around the Po river, particularly near levees and dykes, which increased the exposure of persons and property to flood risk over the period of study. However, meteorologically speaking, Domeneghetti et al. report flood events have not increased. "Consistent with previous analyses (see e.g. Montanari, 2012; Zanchettini et al., 2008)," they write, "our trend detection analysis, which we carried out on long historical series observed for the Po river, does not detect any evidence of a statistically significant change in the flood hazard along the Po river and supports the stationarity of the hydrological series during the period of interest (i.e., last five decades)."

Additional extreme-weather and failed-prediction articles.

Note: Po River image source

Before Exxon (B.E): New Study Confirms Arctic Area Climate Change & Warming Is Natural

Radical-green, progressive Democrats are now resorting to intimidation and inquisition tactics to force others into conformity with their anti-science regarding climate change. Due to their failing miserably in winning the actual science debate, they turn to coercion on those whom disagree.

Unfortunately, they conveniently ignore (or are unaware) the empirical evidence that climate change is a constant, which has produced ancient and geological era extremes in weather and temperatures - extremes that science has confirmed with a cornucopia of peer-reviewed research.

These extremes even took place eons 'Before Exxon' (BE), the fossil fuel giant that Democrats routinely blame for modern climate change and global warming.

Above is a paleo-climate reconstruction from this study for northern Greenland. It clearly depicts the swings in 'BE' climate change from the warming of the MCA (medieval climate anomaly) to the cooling of the LIA (little ice age) and the extreme warming during the early 20th century (ETCW) from the 1920s to 1940s.

The study's author's make the following comments regarding the δ¹⁸O proxy:

"The δ¹⁸O values of the 20th century are comparable to the medieval period but are lower than that about AD 1420.  …. The solar activity and internal Arctic climate dynamics are likely the main factors influencing the temperature in northern Greenland."

Each of these extremes shown are a result of natural internal/external forcings prior to the gigantic consumer/industrial influx of human CO2 emissions starting post-1950.

Per the abundance of climate empirical research, blaming Exxon and other fossil fuel entities for global warming is simply anti-scientific. Climate change, including that of the late 20th century, does not require a change in CO2 - a trace atmospheric gas -to happen.

Additional historical-climate charts.

Accelerating, Extreme Global Warming? Another Example of It Being AWOL

A group of scientists who researched past climate conditions near the coast of Japan made an interesting discovery.

As the article reports, the climate in that area has not experienced any of the hypothetical CO2-caused warming that "experts" claim is global, extreme and accelerating.

The chart associated with the peer-reviewed study makes it pretty clear that dangerous and unprecedented warming is absent from this part of the world.

The study's authors used tree-ring samples from Japan and Russia. Their proxy reconstruction even has a fitted trend (see red curve) that suggests temperatures there seem cyclical and being driven by natural cyclical forces. Those are thought to include ENSO and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. 

When one thinks about what is reported in this study, it is amazing what scientists can unexpectedly discover from research and analysis when using non-thermometer climate measurements, such as tree rings. These proxies usually come from widely scattered locations, with probably a rather sparse number of samples. In addition, tree rings don't provide a daily or monthly climate recording, unlike thermometer instruments. Yet, at the end of the day, scientists can produce a temperature record and trends over extended periods from an exceptionally low minimum of datapoints, and then their results are widely accepted by the climate science community.

Sometimes one wonders about these studies. 

That said, these scientists identified another region of the world where dangerous and extreme warming rates are AWOL.

Additional historical charts.

Unprecedented Modern Global Warming? Study Discovers It's Not Happening In Chile

 

(click on to enlarge)

As the preponderance of scientific studies and reports have proven, our current modern warming is not unprecedented. Significant warming has taken place quite often in the past, as well as climatic cooling.

"The 600-year reconstructed record -- dating back to AD 1392. As indicated, the record shows pronounced periods of subdecadal to multidecadal variability. Specifically, Elbert et al. note the presence of cold phases "during parts of the Little Ice Age (16th and 18th centuries) and in the beginning of the 20th century." In contrast, they state that warm phases persisted "in the 15th century, around AD 1600 and in the 19th century," the latter of which they characterized as the "most prominent" of the entire record."

Additional peer-reviewed postings.

Remember When? IPCC Claims That 'Hockey Stick' Graph Proves Modern Warming Unprecedented

(click on graph to enlarge)

Michael Mann's infamous 'hockey stick' graph, used by the IPCC "experts" as propaganda to convince gullible elites that modern warming was unprecedented, has had its science and respectability torn asunder by a multitude of experts over the years.

The graph's lack of both science creditability and statistical robustness eventually caused the UN's IPCC to throw in the towel and exclude it from future climate reports.

Climate research in recent years has confirmed that the hockey stick deserved the ash heap of bad paleo-science it now resides in.

This has again been proven in the latest study, which shows the non-existence of the 'hockey stick' and the rather similar (yet less) modern warming versus that of the Medieval Period. The study's summer temperature reconstruction is adjacent.

More charts indicating modern warming is not unprecedented. A fantastic book regarding the 'hockey stick' and the IPCC.

Other peer-reviewed articles.

Remember When Experts Said Modern Climate Warming Was "Unprecedented"?

Article: This new study for the northern China Sea is just another recent example of empirical evidence supporting past research regarding the global warming experienced during both the Roman and Medieval periods.

And don't forget, that for a brief period, the IPCC's "consensus experts" attempted to claim that modern global warming was unprecedented. But that attempt failed miserably when it became obvious a mountain of peer-reviewed studies easily refuted the "unprecedented" claim.

Climate Science Reality: Antarctica's Albedo Increases - Causes Cooling From Larger Solar Radiation Reflection

Article: From the science-is-never-settled department, a new study utilizing satellite technology measures Antarctica's albedo. It is found to be increasing overall, thus increasing the solar radiation reflected back into space. Ergo, there be climate cooling forces at work despite record atmospheric levels of CO2.

Recent peer-reviewed study headlines.

FactCheck: Modern Global Warming Is Not Unprecedented Versus Roman & Medieval Periods

Article: The myth that modern global warming is "unprecedented" continues despite the overwhelming empirical evidence that debunks the myth. This study from China provides additional proof that natural climate change is a powerful driving force that produces warning phases without human intervention.

Study: Korean Hospitalization Admissions 10x Higher During Cold Waves Vs. Heat Waves

Article: Researchers analyze empirical evidence across 8 Korean cities. It is inescapable, cold extremes are much more dangerous for humans than heat waves. Cold waves boost admissions some 50% versus 5% for heat waves. From this peer-reviewed study, one can conclude that global warming will reduce the cold extremes, thus making it safer for human life.

Peer-Reviewed Study: Contrary To AGW Hypothesis Predictions, Tropical Cyclones On Declining Trend

Article: Since 1980s, the Australian region has experienced a tropical cyclone trend that would send shivers down the spine of any global warming alarmist. Just another confirmation to be added to the pile of empirical evidence that challenges catastrophic global warming claims.

Climate Scientists: There Is A New 'Cause' For The 'Pause' of Global Warming

Article: As anti-science deniers of the global warming pause, i.e. hiatus, keep denying its existence, actual climate scientists keep trying to understand its source - and the new Indian Ocean 'cause' adds to an ever-expanding list of 'pause' science research.

Remember When The IPCC's Climate Experts Predicted Pacific Islands Would Disappear Due To Global Warming

As always, the UN and its elite climate "science" agency are abysmally wrong ... once again ... failed predictions seem to be the preferred coin of the IPCC realm ... begs the question: will the IPCC even achieve 10% of their catastrophic global warming predictions being correct over the next few decades? ... highly unlikely, due to its political agenda and the absurd reliance on climate models that simply don't work as advertised.....

(click on image to enlarge)

Per this article, the catastrophic sea rise predictions of CAGW proponents are found to be without any merit.

The new study examined 118 years of empirical evidence and discovered that small Pacific islands are not disappearing under the waves of a rising ocean. Instead, the tiny atoll islands are actually growing larger.

It's another climate change 'Ooopsie'.

Other failed "expert" predictions, plus the known and stated political agenda.

Climate Antiquity: China Evidence Reveals Long History of Climate Change & War

A recent lame paper by researchers desperately trying to tie Syrian violence with global warming and climate change was completely eviscerated by a wide range of experts...in summation, it was an exceedingly stupid paper...plus, history of climate antiquity provides plenty of evidence that cooler temperatures provoke more war, rebellions and organized violence than warmer periods.....

(click on chart to enlarge)

This chart depicts historical precipitation and temperature reconstruction from northern China.

Overlaid on the chart by 'C3' are significant Chinese events from the past, along with identification of major solar states (minimums and maximums).

The scientists who compiled the precipitation/temperature records and produced the reconstructions had summarized that solar influence was climatically significant for China due to the affect on annual monsoons.

Using Wikipedia, major war/violence/political events were identified and then added to the chart (color bars).

To the more than casual viewer, it would certainly appear that a cooler climate regime has a higher association with extreme organized violence than a warmer period.

The chart's green curve indicates that those periods with less precipitation (i.e. droughts) are more common when cooler temps prevail - more arid conditions, with less food production make people (and societies) rather restless.

The unequivocal and indisputable climate research clearly demonstrates that climate change is constant; and when combined with historical accounts and anecdotal evidence, warmer climates tend to favor prosperity and peace outcomes while cooler periods provide more of the opposite.

Note: 'C3' originally wrote about this research in 2011. There was a recent article at Ice Age Now (and a YouTube video) using another 'C3' chart with significant Chinese events being overlaid on the Greenland ice core temp reconstructions (that prompted our doing the same for the above northern China chart). Wikipedia info page sources: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

Those Stubborn Facts: By 2050, Global Sea Level Increases May Range From 1.8" To 3.2"

The climate-doomsday cult has long stated that coastal areas of the world are being swamped by accelerating sea rise due to rapid "global warming"...fortunately, skeptics of global warming alarmism have been proven right by the latest empirical research....

Source: www.bing.com

EU researchers analyzed multi-mission satellite records in a new study and determined the following:

1. A huge bulge in the Western Pacific is responsible for much of the past "global" sea rise.

2. Since 2002, sea level rise has greatly decelerated.

3. Globally, on average, sea levels are currently increasing at a 2.31 mm/year rate (that's a 3.2 inches by year 2050 rate).

This research confirms what other scientists have already recently found by analyzing tide gauge records around the world.

For example, a group of scientists examined sea level rise around the North Sea. What they discovered was an absence of evidence confirming the doomsday predictions of soon-to-be submerged coasts.

==> "Based on their analysis of all the available data, the four researchers determined that "linear long-term trends in the Inner North Sea (1.6 mm/yr) are similar to global trends (1.7 mm/yr) but smaller in the English Channel (1.2 mm/yr)." And they report that "although the recent rates of sea level rise were high, there is no evidence yet that sea level rise has accelerated over the last decades in the North Sea region.""

A 1.7mm/year increase converts to a 2.16 inch rise by 2050AD and for the English Channel, 1.2mm/yr equals 1.8 inches by 2050.

Conclusion: Ahhh...those damnable stubborn facts. By 2100, and certainly 2050, the North Sea coastline (and others across the globe) will retain its majestic beauty, still existing as it is known today. Thus, proposed trillion dollar tax hikes and higher price schemes for fossil fuel usage are a total waste since lower cost adaption techniques can be effectively implemented to deal with the such meager rises the world likely faces.

Previous sea level articles.

Peer-Reviewed Study: Canadian Climate Warming - Not So Much, eh?

#climate2014 #peoplesclimate   Much angst and ink has been spent on the "catastrophic warming" of world's northern latitudes...yet when the scientific research is accomplished that alarmist warming screed appears to be without much merit.....

Canadian researchers analyzed temperature datasets from a total of 146 weather stations with goal of determining temperature extremes across the nation.

The researchers found the following:

1. Warming is stronger during the nighttime hours.

2. Warming is stronger in the winter months.

3. Warming is stronger in the Arctic latitudes.

4. Warming is strongest for extreme low temperatures.

"The scientists' conclusion was the following: "Overall, our results are consistent with those reported in previous studies, particularly in the sense that Canada has become much less cold but not much hotter."

In other words, most of the warming took place at the lowest temperatures; during the coldest hours; at the coldest regions; and during the coldest seasons.

And this peer reviewed finding confirms what many other regions of the world have experienced: global "warming" is not about ever hotter maximum temperatures, it is more about the warming of the coldest temperatures (i.e., warmer minimums).

Previous peer-reviewed articles.

Climate Models Can't Predict Squat: Simulations of Critical ENSO Asymmetry Are Lame

The consistent failure of the IPCC's climate models is widely recognized by the scientific experts...the models inability to predict future climate scenarios accurately is partly a result of thousands of key failures, including their being unable to simulate the asymmetry of ENSO....

Besides the current crop of IPCC climate models failing due to their being CO2-centric, the models also suffer failure from the thousands of sub-simulations they are required to perform.

It is known that there exists a major asymmetry of the El Niños versus the La Niñas. If climate models can't accurately simulate this asymmetric relationship it makes for poor global climate predictions.

Scientists published a recent study to determine the success of modeling the ENSO asymmetry - the results were not encouraging.

===> "With respect to their findings, Zhang and Sun report the following: (1) "the underestimate of observed positive ENSO asymmetry measured by skewness is still a common problem in CMIP5 coupled models," (2) "all the models are also found to have a weaker ENSO asymmetry than observations," (3) "CMIP5 coupled models have a significant cold bias in the mean sea surface temperature," (4-6) "biases in zonal wind stress, precipitation and subsurface temperatures ... are also too symmetrical with respect to ENSO phases," (7) "sea surface temperature warm anomalies over the far eastern Pacific are found to be weaker in the coupled models than in observations," (8) "most models also have a weaker subsurface temperature warm anomaly over the eastern Pacific," (9) "most models have a weaker precipitation asymmetry over the eastern Pacific," (10) "most AMIP models have a stronger time-mean zonal wind over the equatorial central and eastern Pacific," and (11) they "underestimate the observed positive skewness of zonal winds in the central Pacific.""

Conclusion: The multi-billion $$ climate models have proven time and again that they are incapable of predicting future climate with any level of accuracy. Policymakers would be best served by completely ignoring the computer simulations as they poorly match the empirical observations of the global and regional climates. However, the models still hold value for the researchers, but that is their only benefit.

Previous climate articles and charts.

Democrats Believe Antarctica Is Melting - Oops, Scientists Confirm South Pole Is Now Colder

Obama and his ilk fervently believe the South Pole is melting, soon to drown America's coast lines with a rising sea level...or, maybe Democrats are just pathological liars determined to scare Americans into voting for even bigger government...regardless, both the scientists and satellites document how wrong the liberal-left-greens are.....

(click on graph to enlarge)

Science is based on research and empirical evidence, not on speculative guesses or those "likely" predictions from computer simulations.

Over the last few decades, the IPCC and its computer climate models have speculated that Antarctica was melting due to all the human CO2 emissions released into the atmosphere.

CO2 emissions that were producing accelerating and dangerous global warming that was being "amplified" across the South Pole.

Democrats, the mainstream media and green progressives have continuously repeated these flimsy, fear-mongering predictions as science "truth," representing the mythical "consensus." Yet, they conveniently ignore the actual hard empirical evidence and real scientific research that the American public has paid for.

Case in point: The South Pole

A brand new peer-reviewed research study conducted by MIT scientists confirm what NASA's satellites have documented (see adjacent chart) - Antarctica is cooling. Ahem...those inconvenient stubborn facts just hurt, no?

"By contrast, the eastern Antarctic and Antarctic plateau have cooled, primarily in summer, with warming over the Antarctic Peninsula [C3 Ed: approximately 4% of Antarctica land mass]...Moreover, sea-ice extent around Antarctica has modestly increased.....In other words, the authors find that most of the Antarctic continent has cooled, rather than just the Southern Ocean..."

Note: Chart plots and trends produced using Excel. South Pole temperature anomaly dataset source (since inception date used). CO2 dataset source.

17 Scientists From 11 Countries: Research Confirms That IPCC Climate Models' Flood Predictions Are Spectacular Failure

Another IPCC climate model prediction fails the ultimate test...it's confirmed that the computer simulations of increased flooding did not materialize...and human CO2 emissions do not cause more and bigger floods.....

(click on image for source)

The supposed extreme climate change caused by human CO2 emissions is not producing the predicted increase of intensity and frequency of regional flooding.

A new study conducted by experts comes to an unsettling truth: the consensus climate science of the IPCC, CAGW alarmists and computer models has been spectacularly wrong.

"In a massive review of the subject conducted by a team of seventeen researchers hailing from eleven different countries, i.e., Kundzewicz et al. (2013), we learn the following:
(1) "no gauge-based evidence has been found for a climate-driven, globally widespread change in the magnitude/frequency of floods during the last decades,"
(2) "there is low confidence in projections of changes in fluvial floods, due to limited evidence and because the causes of regional changes are complex,"
(3) "considerable uncertainty remains in the projections of changes in flood magnitude and frequency,"
(4) increases in global flood disaster losses reported over the last few decades "may be attributed to improvements in reporting, population increase and urbanization in flood-prone areas, increase of property value and degraded awareness about natural risks (due to less natural lifestyle),"
(5) "the linkages between enhanced greenhouse forcing and flood phenomena are highly complex and, up to the present, it has not been possible to describe the connections well, either by empirical analysis or by the use of models," and
(6) "the problem of flood losses is mostly about what we do on or to the landscape," which they say "will be the case for decades to come.""

Previous climate-model and severe-weather articles.

From An Expert Lead Author: The Sordid IPCC History Of The 'Hockey Stick' Fabrication

(click on image to enlarge)

The adjacent image represents a temperature reconstruction from the Greenland ice sheet boreholes. The image was included in a peer reviewed paper that was published in 1998, which is approximately the same time the infamous 'hockey stick' graph was produced.

Although this paper confirmed the findings of a massive amount of previous research that the Medieval Warming generated higher temperatures than the current warming, the IPCC instead conferred star status to the statistically-tortured 'hockey stick' graph, which showed the previous warming to be less than the current era, and then was subsequently found to be without credible merit - a statistical travesty.

Why did the IPCC go with the unproven, statistical abomination that quickly smeared (irreparably?) the reputation of climate science?

"Christy’s assessment, when combined with the UEA emails, provides substantial insight into how this hockey stick travesty occurred.  My main unanswered question is:  How did Michael Mann become a Lead Author on the TAR?  He received his Ph.D. in 1998, and presumably he was nominated or selected before the ink was dry on his Ph.D.  It is my suspicion that the U.S. did not nominate Mann (why would they nominate someone for this chapter without a Ph.D.?)...Instead, I suspect that the IPCC Bureau selected Mann; it seems that someone (John Houghton?) was enamored of the hockey stick and wanted to see it featured prominently in the TAR."

Additional climate-history articles. The Michael Mann self-perpetuated, embarrassing "science" fiasco continues, as described here and here.

International Team of Scientists Discredit "Scary" Sea Level Rise Myth: Possibly 2.1 Inch Increase By Year 2050

Latest peer reviewed research determines that recent sea level rise along the coasts of northern Europe and the English Channel are within historical bounds experienced during the 19th and earlier 20th century periods.

Per the scientists from Australia, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, the actual empirical evidence points to a potential sea level rise by 2050 AD of 2.1 inches for the North Sea coast and 1.6 inches for the English Channel.

"In light of the findings of the international team of scientists participating in this significant study, it would appear that there is nothing unusual, unnatural or unprecedented about the rate of sea level rise throughout both the North Sea and the rest of the Global Ocean over the entire CO2-emitting course of the Industrial Revolution."

In summary, this study does not support the irrational, unsubstantiated current claims and predictions of sea level increases made by prominent GWN's who rely on projections from the discredited climate models. The recent and past sea level increase facts reveal the totally absurd and irresponsible, anti-science speculations of 36 to 120 inch rise for coastal waters.

Previous sea level articles and charts.