Help Us Go Viral!

Who's Online
Guest Users: 642

Stats
7974 Pages Viewed
1256 Unique Visits

New Users
eng61
My Account
Please Support Us With A Purchase






  • Home
  • Climate Change/Global Warming

Bombshell Claim: Scientists Find "Man-made Climate Change Doesn't Exist In Practice"


ZeroHedge.com

A new scientific study could bust wide open deeply flawed fundamental assumptions underlying controversial climate legislation and initiatives such as the Green New Deal, namely, the degree to which 'climate change' is driven by natural phenomena vs. man-made issues measured as carbon footprint. Scientists in Finland found "practically no anthropogenic [man-made] climate change" after a series of studies. 

“During the last hundred years the temperature increased about 0.1°C because of carbon dioxide. The human contribution was about 0.01°C”, the Finnish researchers bluntly state in one among a series of papers.

This has been collaborated by a team at Kobe University in Japan, which has furthered the Finnish researchers' theory: "New evidence suggests that high-energy particles from space known as galactic cosmic rays affect the Earth's climate by increasing cloud cover, causing an 'umbrella effect'," the just published study has found, a summary of which has been released in the journal Science Daily. The findings are hugely significant given this 'umbrella effect' — an entirely natural occurrence  could be the prime driver of climate warming, and not man-made factors

The scientists involved in the study are most concerned with the fact that current climate models driving the political side of debate, most notably the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) climate sensitivity scale, fail to incorporate this crucial and potentially central variable of increased cloud cover. 

"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has discussed the impact of cloud cover on climate in their evaluations, but this phenomenon has never been considered in climate predictions due to the insufficient physical understanding of it," comments Professor Hyodo in Science Daily. "This study provides an opportunity to rethink the impact of clouds on climate. When galactic cosmic rays increase, so do low clouds, and when cosmic rays decrease clouds do as well, so climate warming may be caused by an opposite-umbrella effect."

In their related paper, aptly titled, “No experimental evidence for the significant anthropogenic [man-made] climate change”, the Finnish scientists find that low cloud cover "practically" controls global temperatures but that “only a small part” of the increased carbon dioxide concentration is anthropogenic, or caused by human activity. 

The following is a key bombshell section in one of the studies conducted by Finland's Turku University team

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: New Sun-Driven Cooling Period of Earth ‘Not Far Off’


Nils-Axel Morner, a former head of the Paleo-Geophysics and Geodynamics Department in Stockholm, says the notion that CO2 drives climate is an enormous fraud and the fact is a new solar-driven cooling period for the Earth is ‘not far off’.

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Top Climatologist: Our Models Can't Be Trusted

Warming predictions not even close to reality


WND.com

A leading climatologist is warning that nearly all of the computer simulations at the heart of the predictions of catastrophic, man-made global warming cannot be trusted with respect to a key measure.

At a meeting in the Palace of Westminster in London, Professor John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville told MPs and peers the climate models are way off in their predictions of rapid warming at high altitudes in the tropics.

“They all have rapid warming above 30,000 feet in the tropics – it’s effectively a diagnostic signal of greenhouse warming,” he said. “But in reality it’s just not happening. It’s warming up there, but at only about one third of the rate predicted by the models.”

Christy’s remarks were highlighted by the Global Warming Policy Foundation, a non-partisan think tank in London. The group says that while it is “open-minded on the contested science of global warming,” it is “deeply concerned about the costs and other implications of many of the policies currently being advocated.”

Read a paper presenting Christy’s key findings
 

Christy said a similar discrepancy between empirical measurements and computer predictions has been confirmed at the global level.

“The global warming trend for the last 40 years, starting in 1979 when satellite measurements began, is +0.13C per decade or about half of what climate models predicted,” he said.

But Christy says climatologists aren’t paying attention to the real-world data.

“An early look at some of the latest generation of climate models reveals they are predicting even faster warming. This is simply not credible,” he said.

Many other scientists have pointed to failed predictions based on the models, noting a “pause” for the past two decades in the rise of average global temperatures.

Scientists who promote the theory of anthropogenic climate change contend a rise in the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere due to human activity is causing catastrophic warming.

But a new scientific study found that the current CO2 levels of 410 parts per million were last seen on Earth 3 million years ago. Researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research concluded that temperatures were up to 7 degrees Fahrenheit warmer globally and sea levels were 65 feet higher.

Meanwhile, the millennial generation in America apparently is taking the climate models to heart. Two-thirds have nothing saved for retirement, and there are indications that the predictions of doom by politicians and many climatologists are to blame.

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

America Needs President Trump’s Climate Science Committee



 

WattsUpWithThat.com
 

Independent scientists must review alarmist “science” that is driving anti-fossil fuel policies

John Droz

America is in the midst of a cataclysmic battle – and yet you’ve likely heard very little about it.

Right now, the 30-year US global warming fight is coming to a pivotal juncture – within the next few days. It is vital that we take immediate action to support President Trump on an important initiative.

Dr. William Happer (an eminently qualified scientist in the White House) has proposed the Presidential Committee on Climate Science [or Presidential Commission on Climate Security] (PCCS).

The PCCS will bring together multiple qualified scientists who will review such significant issues as global warming’s alleged impact on national security, agriculture, sea levels and extreme weather. Their assignment will be to separate real, evidence-based science from agenda-driven political science.

Those who want a genuine scientific assessment of global warming / climate change claims fully support the PCCS.

They know claims that American and the world face imminent disaster from soaring planetary temperatures, rising seas, more frequent and extreme storms and droughts, species extinctions and other human-caused climate calamities have never been subjected to full-throttled scientific review in a public forum. That’s because every attempt to have such a review has been opposed and silenced.

Those who oppose a real scientific assessment of climate chaos claims are against the PCCS. Not surprisingly, so far the most vocal and dominant voices oppose any scientific review of their claims. (See here, here and here.)

They know their “science” is based on computer models and is contradicted by real-world evidence.

We need to make it clear to the President that citizens are following the PCCS matter, and that citizens fully support this excellent idea. There are two ways to send the President a message on this vital topic:

Phone the White House comment line: 1-202-456-1111

Email the White House explaining your support using this link.

Doing both would be even better!

The President’s decision is expected within the week, so please do this quickly.

To give you some perspective on the PCCS matter, I wrote two new documents:

1) Answers to some of the PCCS critics’ objections, and

2) Background on the 30-some year history of US climate alarmism (and how the PCCS fits in).

I hope there will be a segment about the PCCS on Fox News, an article or editorial in the Wall Street Journal, and more sensible articles on other media outlets (like this, this, this, and this).

These faulty to even fraudulent global warming and climate change claims are the driving force behind the Green New Deal’s plans to terminate fossil fuel use, ban cattle raising, and eliminate cars and airplanes; force us to rely on wind and solar power that would blanket millions of acres with turbines and panels; and replace our free enterprise system with socialist policies that would take money from you – and give it to someone else.

Get involved. Write to President Trump – and ask him to appoint his PCCS immediately.

John Droz, Jr. is a physicist and director of the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (AWED), which promotes energy policies and programs that are technically, economically and environmentally sound.

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

FLASHBACK: Climate Hoaxers Warned of Impending Doom by Year 2000 if ‘Global Warming’ Not Addressed

We're Still Alive


 

By Peter D'Abrosca
BigLeaguePolitics.com

A 1989 Associated Press article has re-surfaced citing “environmental officials” who scare-mongered about the end of the earth as we know it if “global warming” was not addressed by the year 2000.

“A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000,” the piece said.

The report is particularly relevant today, as it echoes the same type of rhetoric pushed by the radical political left. Recently, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) proposed a “Green New Deal” with the hefty price tag of $93 million to the taxpayer, in order to save the world from the same impending doom that climate scientists have been warning about for decades. The apocalypse, as it turns out, is quite fickle. It has eluded us, despite the warnings from the esteemed members of the scientific community.

“Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ‘eco- refugees,’ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP,” according to the report. “He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.”

That 10-year window came to pass. So did another one. And soon, another will have done the same. Still no doom and gloom.

The piece continued:

As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday.

Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study.

hifting climate patterns would bring back 1930s Dust Bowl conditions to Canadian and U.S. wheatlands, while the Soviet Union could reap bumper crops if it adapts its agriculture in time, according to a study by UNEP and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

Excess carbon dioxide is pouring into the atmosphere because of humanity’s use of fossil fuels and burning of rain forests, the study says. The atmosphere is retaining more heat than it radiates, much like a greenhouse.

The most conservative scientific estimate that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years, said Brown.

None of that has happened.

But that has not stopped the political left from continuously fear-mongering. Still, they will call Republicans “climate deniers” or “science deniers” if you rebuke their alarmism this time around.


Follow Peter D’Abrosca on Twitter: @pdabrosca

Like Peter D’Abrosca on Facebook: facebook.com/peterdabrosca

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Climate Hoax: Not A Single G-20 Country Is Close To Hitting CO2 Emission Targets


Investors.com

Environmentalism: A new report calls the lie on the grand Paris climate change treaty. None of the promised cuts in CO2 emissions that 200-plus countries made will come close to preventing a climate "catastrophe." And many of the industrialized nations aren't even living up to the promises they did make.

Two years ago, when the Paris agreement took effect, then-President Obama declared that "history may well judge it as a turning point for our planet."

It was a turning point in the level of empty rhetoric, perhaps. But it won't make a bit of difference to the planet.

This farce was made abundantly clear in an annual report by Climate Transparency, an international group focused on the G-20 nations.
 

Empty Promises

What did it find? "None of the G-20 (emissions targets) is in line with the Paris Agreement." The report shows an enormous gap between what the countries have pledged to do, and the far lower CO2 emissions levels that the U.N. says are needed to keep the planet from warming by 2 degrees Celsius.

In other words, even if every country lived up to their Paris pledges, it wouldn't come close to preventing "catastrophic warming."

It gets worse. As the report shows, most G-20 countries aren't on track to meet the modest greenhouse gas reductions they pledged to achieve by 2030.

As the Climate Transparency report notes, the EU "is not on track to meet its 2030 target." Nor is Mexico, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan or Turkey.

A number of G-20 countries actually saw their emissions increase in 2017, including Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and Turkey.

There's more:

Saudi Arabia's emissions will likely double by 2030, compared with 2014. Turkey continues to increase coal-power capacity even though it "runs strongly counter" to its pledges. Japan also has several coal plants in the pipeline. Brazil's deforestation rate has increased, despite its Paris promises to the contrary. Russia's "target is so weak that it would not require a decrease in (greenhouse gas) emissions from current levels."

And, to top it off, CO2 emission in China, already the world's largest emitter, will likely continue to increase until 2030, the report finds. It notes that coal consumption in China "increased again in 2017."
 

Faulty Doomsday Scenarios

Longtime IBD readers know that we are highly skeptical of all the climate change doomsday scenarios. They're all based on 100-year forecasts made by computer models that have trouble predicting what's already happened. And then there's the fact that climate scientists keep getting caught fudging numbers and making basic math errors. The latest involves a highly publicized study on ocean warming. These errors, by the way, always seem to go in one direction: toward making global warming look more ominous. (Related: Is Global Warming a Hoax? Climate Change Facts and Fiction.)

But even if the dire prediction environmentalist make is true, trying to cut CO2 emissions to prevent it is pointless. As we noted in this space recently, the U.N. says global CO2 emissions must be cut in half within 12 years, and reduced to zero in 32 years.

It should be abundantly clear now that not a single G-20 nation is taking the climate change issue seriously — no matter how much they preach about it, and no matter how many empty promises they make.
 

A Better Way to Deal with Climate Change

That's fine by us, since we think it's a waste of money. President Trump was right to pull the U.S. out of this farce rather than lend it any more undue credibility.

There is a better and far more sensible and frugal approach to deal with "climate change." Forget about wasting money in a futile attempt to quickly decarbonize every economy on the planet. Instead, deal with localized changes if they ever occur. Adaptation to hostile climates is something humanity has shown an amazing ability to achieve, even without modern technology.

The only drawback to this approach is that politicians won't be able to pat themselves on the back for "saving the planet."

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Headline-Grabbing Global Warming Study Suffers From A Major Math Error


By Michael Bastasch | Energy Editor
DailyCaller.com
 

  • The media fawned over a recent global warming study that had a major math error, researchers found.
  • It turns out, the math error made it appear as if oceans warmed more than previously thought.
  • Major media outlets uncritically covered the study, sounding the alarm on global warming.

The recent headline-grabbing study that claimed global warming was heating the oceans up faster than expected suffers from a major math error, according to two researchers.

The study, which was published in a prestigious scientific journal at the end of October, put forward results suggesting global warming was much worse than previously believed. The media ate the results up.

Independent scientist Nic Lewis found the study had “apparently serious (but surely inadvertent) errors in the underlying calculations.” Lewis’ findings were quickly corroborated by another researcher.

Numerous media outlets uncritically highlighted the study’s findings. The Washington Post, for example, reported the work suggested “Earth could be set to warm even faster than predicted.”

The Post’s coverage of the “startling” climate study was echoed by The New York Times, which claimed the study suggested global warming “has been more closely in line with scientists’ worst-case scenarios.”

The BBC warned “[t]his could make it much more difficult to keep global warming within safe levels this century.”

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Climate Change Audit: Global Warming Figures Based on 'Careless, Amateur' Data

First ever audit on official data finds major errors making it 'effectively useless'


By Jay Greenberg
Neonnettle.com

The first ever audit on the official data used for Climate Change has found the figures to be "riddled with errors," making it "effectively useless."

The world's most important temperature data, HadCRUT4, is used by international governmental bodies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

This dataset is what the dramatic claims about “man-made global warming” are based on, with governments using the data to justify spending trillions of dollars on “combating climate change” while it's also the basis for the Paris Climate Accord.

For the first time, however, the data has been audited by Australian researcher John McLean, who says it’s far too inaccurate to be taken seriously, even by climate scientists.

According to a groundbreaking analysis by McLean, the figures should never have been used by a body as influential as the IPCC or by the governments of the world.

It’s very careless and amateur, he says.  About the standard of a first-year university student.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)
Please Support Us With A Purchase








Please Make A One Time Donation
You can send a check
or money order to:
The KTAO Project
P.O. Box 1086
Crestone, CO 81131
or donate online:
Or Better Yet Become A Supporting Member
Worthy of Support












Help Us Go Viral!

Who's Online
Guest Users: 642

Stats
7974 Pages Viewed
1256 Unique Visits

New Users
eng61
My Account
Please Support Us With A Purchase