Early risers and climate alarm

Some people get up early to do stunts about the weather. I got up early to work on the second chapter of a booklet about the failure of philosophers of science to warn us about the problem with alarmist climate science. The morning’s work so far.

This chapter gives some insight into the way alarm about the climate has persisted despite a strong record of failed predictions and prophecies. Some of the most striking examples are selected among the vast number that would fill a very large book. These alarms can be regarded as a laughing matter in hindsight because they demonstrate the ongoing power of the various “end of the world” obsession that has spawned cults over and over again through history. The following chapter examines a list of issues in more detail because they are raised all the time with the appearance of scientific backing.

The failure of general circulation models

Models are treated more thoroughly in Chapter x and they are treated briefly here because the failed predictions of models provide the excuse or the inspiration for most of the alarming stories that are told about every other issue of concern. The biggest problem for alarmism is the very little evidence of any harm from the one degree of warming that we have experienced since the industrial revolution and the vary obvious benefit of the warming since the Little Ice Age when the river Thames froze and crops failed all over Europe. The models predict or project suitably alarming futures and they are clearly very fit for that purpose (fitness for purpose is the primary criterion for the merit of models as explained in Chapter x). Everyone knows that the models “run hot” and that is conceded in the IPCC literature but they do not concede that the degree of “hotness” disqualifies them as tools for policy and planning. Roy Spencer produced the chart that demonstrates the failure of the models up to 2013 and I have yet to see a comparable chart produced by the IPCC since that time to show that the models have become more realistic.

Examples to follow

The population bomb
Mass starvation
Resource exhaustion
Nuclear winter
Acid rain
Global cooling
The end of ice and snow
Disappearing islands and coastlines
Climate refugees – one failed case in NZ.

The population bomb
The current climate of alarm emerged out of other concerns about the future of the planet voiced above all by the Stanford University professor Paul Ehlrich who 1968 published The Population Bomb:

By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people.

In 2005, the United Nations Environment Programme published a report in which it claimed that the world would have at least 50 million “climate refugees” by 2010.

Time for a yoga session and a nourishing breakfast.

People are invited to submit their favourite examples of failed predictions (with links).

Comments have provided valuable references in the past, I am thinking especially of a page full of links to examples of scientists abused and harassed. Now that I am writing with a plan these things can get slotted into the proper place in the manuscript.

The idea is to have a 40,000 word booklet written for the any interested person with an electronic “shadow” with more complex arguments and a mass of links to every topic under the climate sun.

Most of the philosophy will be in the shadow and the booklet will just provide a simplified overview.

The plan

THE DOGS THAT DIDN’T BARK. PHILOSOPHERS ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL!

Introduction –

1 The seldom-counted costs of fighting “carbon pollution”.

2 Failed Prophecies of Doom

3 The alleged damage of warming. False alarms all the way down.

4 The 97.4% consensus on warming and CO2. What it really means.

5 How we got into this situation – the Dots .

6 The language of alarmism

7 Philosophy and the rise of post normal science

8 Winsberg on philosophy and climate science

9 The political organization of climate science:

Conclusion

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe. Bookmark the permalink.

44 Responses to Early risers and climate alarm

  1. Ben

    Here is the CMIP5 comparison site, discontinued in 2018 so the results include 2017 temperature models and data.

    https://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/comparing-cmip5-observations/

    Here is the next stage updated by a blogger to include 2018 data.

    http://clivebest.com/blog/?p=8788

  2. Ben

    Possibly the best technical climate science site around.

    Very good discussion on how the ocean actually warms from both sunlight and back radiation.

    https://scienceofdoom.com/

  3. Bruce of Newcastle

    I’ve done lots of statistical modelling and if you put in a wrong parameter it tends to snowball right through your model.

    The ensemble climate models assume high CO2 climate sensitivity. Then they fit to the 20th Century data using other variables to tweak the output to fit the data. Because their sensitivity is too high they have to then

    – tweak downwards the effect of clouds, since cloud cover generally fell across the century.
    – tweak up the effect of aerosols to not over-warm the output.
    – tweak down the effect of the Sun or the rise in output over the century would also blow out the output (currently they have a crazily low value of 0.05 W/m^2 for solar variability).
    – tweak down the effect of UHI because it too would blow out the output, since urbanisation and population density increased markedly across the century.

    So by overloading the effect of CO2 they were forced to massively distort four other major variables to make the output fit the 20thC.

    Consequently since the turn of the millenium, when solar activity changed significantly and the ocean cycles (a fifth variable which they ignore entirely) also changed downwards, the models just kept going higher.

    That’s why I think that if climate scientists use low climate sensitivity (eg Lindzen’s value of 0.7 C/doubling of pCO2) the effectiveness of the models will be much improved since the other five variables can be allowed to revert to their real world impacts. At the moment BoM’s model is very sophisticated but totally useless for anything beyond a week, let alone seasonal forecasting.

  4. Helen

    Bruce, you are amazing. Thankyou.
    Rafe, top job, it will be a great book, cant wait to read it.

  5. Tel

    The ensemble climate models assume high CO2 climate sensitivity. Then they fit to the 20th Century data using other variables to tweak the output to fit the data.

    They fit to ADJUSTED 20th Century data.

    First they tweak the data, then they tweak the model. Now they have moved to tweaking the satellite data to match those. There’s no part of the whole stack that isn’t tweaked.

  6. old bloke

    The next big scare – CO2 makes you fat!

    Carbonated drinks release ghrelin (the “hunger hormone”) which makes people eat more. That was on a medical report on “Michael Mosley, Trust Me I’m A Doctor” on SBS TV last night.

    So, expect a carbon tax alongside your sugar tax on your favourite fizzy drinks.

  7. Indolent

    How about the ozone hole, which I believe was the dry run for “climate change”. They changed all the refrigerants to something more volatile, some people made motza and then it went down the memory hole.

  8. Mark M

    1954:

    The world’s temperature has gone up two degrees Fahrenheit in the past 100 years, most of the rise developing since 1890.
    A new survey of world warmth has been made by United Nations scientists working for UNESCO and their conclusions are that not only is the world getting warmer, but the rise in temperature is probably caused by industrial man.

    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/161614751

    Back when scientists could tell the truth …

    Summers are cooler, wetter AUSTRALIA’S climate is changing, according to C.S.I.R.O. scientists.
    May 4 1954

    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/23429551

  9. Rafe Champion

    Thanks to all. Most of the treatment of models will be in the shadow book, people in the street just need to know that they are seriously wide of the mark and they are simply fiddled to fit the data in hand with practically zero value for the future. Drawing a line through the existing data will do better than the output from the models [so much for billions of dollars of development] but the existing data have been fiddled to exaggerate or even create a rising temperature.

    There is frontier work on models happening in Australia in the hands of David Evans and Ivan Kennedy but that is not ready for release at the moment.

  10. Mark M

    1910: THE END OF THE WORLD.
    A telegram from St. Petersburg states that a fearful crime, the result of superstition, has been committed at Tirespol, in the Government of Cherson.
    There are in the neighbourhood several hermitages inhabited by sectarians.
    Two years ago a report was spread that in the beginning of Li 97 (indecipherable) the end of the world would come, and the day, of judgment.
    Seventeen hermits are said to have emigrated out of fear.
    Nothing more was heard of them, and nobody knew where they had gone.
    A sectarian named Kewalend has now confessed that on the entreaties of these supposititious emigrants, who wished to gain a martyr’s crown, he had walled them up alive.
    He described the spot, which was then examined by the police, and the man’s story was confirmed in
    the most horrible manner.

    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/146209612

  11. Mark M

    New Models Suggest Much Faster Global Warming

    “The new models suggest that previous estimates were too conservative, and that doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide will produce 5 degrees C. or more of global warming in the future. Climate scientists are not sure why…”

    If the more aggressive climate change models look convincing that will put additional pressure on the IPCC to say something more urgent.

    And that in turn will require at least the appearance of a timely reply or response on the part of politicians.  

    https://oilprice.com/The-Environment/Global-Warming/Shocking-Evidence-Suggests-Much-Faster-Global-Warming.html

  12. RobK

    Physicist John Reid has a new book out about the trouble with modelling fluids. He has set up a new blog with reference to the book.
    http://fluidcatastrophe.net

    APRIL 26, 2019

    Welcome

    The Fluid Catastrophe by John Reid is primarily about the failure of theoretical Fluid Dynamics to account for turbulence.  It is published by Cambridge Scholars Publishing and is available here: https://www.cambridgescholars.com/the-fluid-catastrophe

    Contemporary fluid dynamics is all about the mathematical description of a theoretical construct called the fluid continuum. In the real world there is no such thing as a fluid continuum. All real fluids are comprised of atoms and molecules and are are ultimately subject to the laws of quantum mechanics. All real fluids are non-Newtonian; they are granular and stochastic not discrete and deterministic.

    This  misconception has kept Fluid Dynamics trapped in the nineteenth century, unable to deal with  planetary scale fluid phenomena such as ocean waves, ocean circulation, climate, paleoclimate and the dynamics of the Core and Mantle of the Earth.  These topics are discussed in the book which also addresses the analysis of time series and discrete time spectral analysis without using Newtonian concepts of differentiability and continuity.

    The code for processing time series in order to generate many of the graphs in the book are included in the Appendices. Those programs are now available online. Just click on Software under PAGES for a description and download. You will need Python to run them. Key extracts from the book are also linked under PAGES.

    This blog is intended as a forum for discussion of various topics raised in the book, many of which are little more than speculations at this stage. Comments are welcome, however off-beat they may be, but ad hominem attacks are not.

    I have read the book and thoroughly recommend it.

  13. Aynsley Kellow

    Rafe,
    Graduate students in science faculties learn no philosophy of science, and therein lies the problem,

    Three key deficiencies, in my humble opinion:
    1. There were no historical data on global aerosols, so they were simply assumed at a level that made the model runs seem realistic. (I think Bernie Lewin covers this).

    2. The data for the 70% of the earth’s surface that is ocean consists of readings of water temperatures that are assumed to be an accurate proxy for the temperature of the air above the water – adjusted for the change from mostly canvas buckets to mostly steel buckets, and an increasing number of measurements from the intakes of cooling water on steamships (but recorded at varying and unspecified depths). We have had Argo floats for 15 years or so, but there are still some buckets in the data. (Karl et al, 2015 tried to remove The Pause in time for Paris).

    Lack of evidence for the ‘tropical hotspot’ and rising water vapour necessary to get positive feedback and higher climate sensitivity. (Paltridge et al debunked this in a paper using the available radiosonde data – paper rejected by Journal of Climate by editor who now leads the Greens in the British Columbia parliament).

  14. Elizabeth (Lizzie) Beare

    I’ve done lots of statistical modelling and if you put in a wrong parameter it tends to snowball right through your model.

    Yes. Epidemiologists have to be very aware of this.

    There is nothing like the study of epidemiology (statistical population medicine) to alert you to the problems with modelling, even when you think you have everything well under control. I studied it for one year intensively, and two years all up. Thus I have always had deep reservations about ‘modelling’ anything as complex as the world’s climate.

  15. RobK

    Further to the reference of John Reid’s book “The Fluid Catastrophy”, the following highlights the bits regarding climate change. (The book covers many more topics)

    “CLIMATE CHANGE”

    1)There is no significant trend in global average temperature. The apparent trend is due to spurious regression (Chapters 8 and 9)
    2)The apparent correlation between global average temperature and atmospheric CO 2 concentration is also spurious. (Chapter 8)
    3)Items 1 and 2 are both a consequence of global average temperature being a centrally biased random walk with a red-noise variance spectrum. (Chapter 7)
    4)The bomb-test curve shows that about 80 percent of recent increases in atmospheric CO 2 concentration are due to ocean upwelling and only 20 percent are due to human activity. The ratio of the total contribution of anthropogenic CO 2 to the total in the ocean-atmosphere system since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution is only 1 percent. This would have no measurable effect. (Chapter 12)
    5)Predictions of temperature increases based on numerical coupled ocean-atmosphere general circulation models (i.e. climate models) are meaningless because such deterministic models cannot account for turbulence, which is stochastic. Because of this they include unrealistically large values of parameters such as eddy viscosity in order to remain stable and so can never faithfully emulate reality. (Chapter 3, Figures 3.1 and 3.2)
    6)Climate modellers ignore the effect of subaqueous volcanic activity on ocean circulation despite that fact that 85 percent of volcanic activity occurs beneath the ocean and that heating from a major oceanic eruption would dwarf all other ocean processes. This aspect of ocean circulation and climate has not simply been forgotten; it is conscientiously avoided. It is the elephant in the room. (Chapter 13)

    Based on the above we can conclude that, at multidecadal time scales, unexplained variations in global temperature and in global mean sea level may be attributed to subaqueous volcanism and are unrelated to human activity.

  16. Elizabeth (Lizzie) Beare

    The Year 1000 also saw the rise of millenarian religious movements and a wait for the ‘end of days’.
    Year 2000 had its own millennial moment with the Y2K freakout. Yes, there was an issue to be addressed but the total melt-down doomsday scenario was overblown.

    There is a human tendency to look for ‘end points’ – we see this coming out these days in ‘tipping point’ scenarios, with the point always receding, as in millenarian predictions, to a date sometime in the future once the previous one has gone by and been found wanting. Also found in the ‘five minutes to midnight’ doomsday clocks’.

  17. Thomas Ray

    Sounds much like a book I read while in pursuit of my BA in Economics at the University of Oklahoma: “The Doomsday Myth” http://www.hooverpress.org/The-Doomsday-Myth-P224.aspx . While the book references various supply shortages, I guess the shortage in the Climate Change realm is the shortage of truth.

  18. Bruce

    For a dose of the “hard core” science, start here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k70sjpHwJnU

    This bloke has quite a series of these videos.

    Then there are the regular visits by large rocks from space: INSTANT planet-wide “climate change”.

  19. Rex Mango

    Entire climate conundrum can be resolved into three simple questions. First scientific, second moral and third philosophical.

    1. Are humans heating the planet? Answer, after more than forty years extensive research, jury still out.
    2. If the answer to first question yes, can anything be done about it, ie burning less fossil fuels? Morally no, as that involves millions of premature deaths in Third World.
    3. If the answer to both one and two is yes, which they aren’t, should something be done to cool the planet? Again no, as the assumption is the world is at a perfect temperature and this never changes of it’s own accord. Heating it might be good.

  20. Rafe Champion

    Thanks Thomas, and others again. I followed some links in the book you cited, among them is one for Bill Shorten and Chris Bowen to read. Gambling With Other Peoples Money🙂

  21. Rex Mango

    Entire climate conundrum can be resolved into three simple questions. First scientific, second moral and third philosophical.

    1. Are humans heating the planet? Answer, after more than forty years extensive research, jury still out.
    2. If the answer to first question yes, can anything be done about it, ie burning less fossil fuels? Morally no, as that involves millions of premature deaths in Third World.
    3. If the answer to both one and two is yes, which they aren’t, should something be done to cool the planet? Again no, as the assumption is the world is at a perfect temperature and this never changes. Heating it might be good.

  22. Iampeter

    THE DOGS THAT DIDN’T BARK. PHILOSOPHERS ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL!

    Philosophers don’t deal with technical questions like climate science. The purpose of philosophy is to teach you how to think, which in turn will help with specific areas of specialization, like climate science.
    But the issue is indeed philosophical and no amount of, “but predictions failed” is going to persuade anyone of anything.
    You’re making the same mistake Libertarians and many conservatives do when they try to fight socialism with economic facts. The issue isn’t economics, anymore than the issue in climate alarmism is scientific.
    The issue is with the branch of philosophy called ethics.

    Because we’ve had two thosand years of Christian inspired altruism, teaching everyone that morality consists in sacrificng the individual to some greater good, everyone supports ideologies requiring sacrifice.
    No amount of economic or scientific arguments will sway people from doing what they think is right.

    In other words, it’s not economics or science, it’s ethics, stupid.

    Until you can reject altruism and embrace self interest, embrace the idea that every individual is an end in itself not the means to somebody elses ends, you can’t fight environmentalism anymore than you could fight socialism or any other leftists, collectivist ideology.

  23. Bruce

    A few words from the “wise”:

    No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” – Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment

    “The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.” – Prof. Chris Folland, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

    This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution. – Christiana Figueres, Executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change.

  24. Colonel Crispin Berka

    One of the quickest ways to tell attempts to prevent climate change are misguided is to look at the variance in the IPCC’s global warming predictions. Nearly anything that happened in the 12 years after 2001, even 0.05°C of global cooling, would have been within the bounds of what was predicted by at least one model run in the ensemble. You don’t even need to check what the actual temperature trend was to see that the models are useless.

    Shannon’s definition of information is that it is the reduction of uncertainty.
    Therefore projections of climate models convey basically no information.
    Therefore they cannot be used to justify grand political interventions in energy and natural resources, and yet they are the *only* reason anyone ever gives for such policies.

    Must also echo Ben’s endorsement of ScienceOfDoom. It’s a great collection of observational data mostly taken from standard texts on atmospheric physics or other empirical sources. Anyone who doesn’t know there is a greenhouse effect and that CO2 is part of it can read the data about the planet that they probably can’t collect in their back yard. Much of the key spectrographic data was published before 1983 so is relatively unencumbered by modern pressures. The site’s author also gives the standard explanation of the data so you get some idea of the natural processes which generate these observations.

    There is frontier work on models happening in Australia in the hands of David Evans and Ivan Kennedy but that is not ready for release at the moment.

    There’s probably a very good reason for that. To my knowledge nobody has been able to create an accurate model of climate. The alarmists can’t do it. The amateurs can’t do it. The professional climate skeptics with direct access to satellites can’t do it. Nobody can do it, so I’d be surprised if Evans and Kennedy have. The main holdup is that climate is a long term average of weather and our sensor networks were woefully inadequate to the task until 1979, so we have to wait a long time to test any models.

  25. duncanm

    Does anyone have a handy link to the historical IPCC predictions versus reality.

    A quick google – all I can find is the latest predictions — but I’m more interested in the predict revisionism.

    It’d also be interesting to see how their latest models work from a different start date — like 1980 or something.

  26. mem

    The 97.4% consensus on warming and CO2. What it really means.

    There never was a consensus. It was a confected result designed to promote the propaganda of consensus. It would be be more accurate to describe this section as “The propaganda of consensus and the 97.4% lie.”

  27. Kneel

    “One of the quickest ways to tell attempts to prevent climate change are misguided is to look at the variance in the IPCC’s global warming predictions. ”

    Or even to look at the IPCC’s “best estimate” for the next several decades and how it evolved over time – AR4 is lower than AR3 is lower than AR2 is lower than AR1. AR5 doesn’t even have a best estimate, with projections covering -0.3 to +0.5 per decade. Meanwhile, projected anthropogenic CO2 has been climbing at the same time. This means that the driver (CO2) is more than thought, while the result is less than anticipated. Yet somehow, this is twisted to “worse than we thought”.

    “Shannon’s definition of information is that it is the reduction of uncertainty.”
    And despite $70 BILLION+ spent on climate research, there has been NO reduction in the projected uncertainty – actually an INCREASE in uncertainty! Gone from +2.0 to +4.5, to +1.5 to +4.5 per doubling.

    Even more concerning is the change to historical data – the difference between the temperature in 1930 and in 2000 has increased between 2005 and 2015, at least according to most “temperature products” like HADCRUT, NASA GISS, NOAA, BoM, CSIRO etc etc. That change alone has made things “worse than we thought”.

  28. mem

    Measuring world temperatures to a tenth of a degree is sheer nonsense for starters, with the use of averages further adding to this nonsense. Australia for example covers tropical, subtropical and temperate zones. Squeezing stats to extract a figure for the total continent is beyond stupid but it is a means by which the elite (climate boffins) can wield power over the population. As are the models.

    The capture of the media and institutions to lay the ground work for climate propaganda is a huge issue. All carefully orchestrated /coordinated to eliminate opposition and skepticism. Ever wonder why you read headlines in the New York Times about it being the hottest day ever in Australia (somewhere back of Bourke) when New Yorkers are digging themselves out of snow? This is not a coincidence.

  29. Rafe Champion

    Even measuring within a degree is a stretch, there are charts of the temp in recent decades with standard error bars through the points and you can see at a glance that there is no statistical trend. I want one of those charts right now and of course I can’t find where I stored the link.

  30. Rafe Champion

    On top of that the modern thermos provide a continuous record of the temperature in contrast with the old records with mercury that moved slowly to the max and then slowly down to the min. The modern records can show spikes that the old system never recorded. I wonder what the chart looks like – how much the spikes exceed the smoothed reading that the mercury provided previously. Apart from that (which might not be an issue) there is the blatant re-writing of the records in the BOM and the selective decommissioning of weather stations overseas.

  31. Dr Fred Lenin

    See where musks tesla fraud is in dep trouble ,sales down 31 per cent ,no mention of batteries coming to the rescue ,borrowed 2.7 billion just to pay its liabilities . Like all climate things a loser and a fraud ,one day there will be retribution and lots of smart asses will end up in prison for a long time.
    Shortens EV plan is sheer idiocy , you destroy a reliable ower system replace it with a half assed fraud thing then impose incresed demand on it ,the reliable system we had before the clowns moved in would hndle the increased demand at a stretch but he communist one has no hope of coping . Polliemaggots are varmints and need eradication.

  32. iggie

    And here is an example of how the temperature increased.
    Darwin Apt temps prior to 2010 (GISS v2).
    https://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=501941200004&dt=1&ds=1
    And Darwin Apt temps now (after the ‘plateauing’ effect became a concern – GISS v5).
    https://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/stdata_show.cgi?id=501941200000&ds=5&dt=1

    If you look carefully you can see the unadjusted v3 temps in the background. Enough said.

  33. J.H.

    I gotta admit that Tim Flannery is my favorite Dud Prediction Prophet of Doomb… Who could forget gems of Soothsaying perfection than these pearlers….. “Perth will become the world’s first “Ghost Metropolis”, and of course…. ” Even the rain that falls will not fill up Australia’s dams and reservoirs”

    Well Perth is thriving and the dams of Australia all filled up when it dutifully rained.

  34. Faye

    The worldwide scourge of Climate Change propaganda and brainwashing affects millions of people through a form of mass “hypnosis”.
    It is a warlike atrocity purposefully engineered by a determined group of people wanting to basically own what people think.
    There are the sincere accepting people who actually worry deeply about it especially if they have children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. And how the CCC Climate Change Cult abuse children with it, is criminal. They have been dumping on the children for decades.
    Would you want to write about this subject in your booklet if you haven’t thought of it already? Would it fit in your No. 6 or No. 9?

  35. amortiser

    My favourate prediction bust is the Maldives inundation. We must remember that the science is settled. It is beyond questioning. The models have been constructed based on this settled science so logically any predictions coming from those models eg sea level rise must be correct. Hence based on the output of the models the Maldives was predicted to be underwater in 30 years from a prediction in Sept 1988.

    Given that CO2 emissions rose even faster than expected over this period it is extraordinary that the Maldives survived to 2018. Did they backtrack after the prediction failed? Not in your life!! They doubled down. They now say that the situation is even worse that they thought and the Maldives will be inundated by 2100. I seem to detect something wrong with this reasoning. Maybe someone can point out my error.

    https://climatechangedispatch.com/four-weeks-left-until-the-maldives-drown/amp/

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9p51t2MHcms

  36. Mark M

    Climate forecasts: collect them all!

    Climate tipping points are like buses. We miss one, and another comes along soon …

    https://fabiusmaximus.com/2018/11/12/collect-all-climate-forecasts/

    2004: Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

    “A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

    The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

    ‘Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,’ concludes the Pentagon analysis.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver

  37. duncanm

    we’ll all be inundated!

    .. or maybe not

  38. Empire 5:5

    The Fluid Catastrophe by John Reid is primarily about the failure of theoretical Fluid Dynamics to account for turbulence.

    I attended a water treatment industry conference in 1993 where the evening beer talk was all “turbo”. I soon learned from the engineers that “turbo” was turbulence, a mystery unaccounted for in the modelling. It was driving them to distraction.

    Will read Reid.

  39. Empire 5:5

    Rafe and Bruce – you do God’s work. Thank you.

  40. Empire 5:5

    What we really need to do is shift the narrative from generation to transmission and distribution. This would rouse doubt in the gaia mesmerised mass and surface the impossibility of mitigation. Humans are inherently practical in self interest when stressed.

    At this stage, attempting to collapse greenhouse zombieism won’t work. That psyop has been by any measure, a roaring success.

  41. mem

    Faye
    #3012262, posted on May 14, 2019 at 6:12 pm
    The worldwide scourge of Climate Change propaganda and brainwashing affects millions of people through a form of mass “hypnosis”.
    It is a warlike atrocity purposefully engineered by a determined group of people wanting to basically own what people think.

    Indeed it is a foul collusion perpetrated initially by a small cabal of like minded “chaps” that were in key academic and media positions to potentially realize their plot (maybe they were recruited by Club of Rome) but I think more likely they just freelanced. The green energy renewable push latched on readily to suck the subsidies and now of course it is being bolstered by the merchant bankers (and worryingly also national banks) who can see billions out of trading carbon credits.. In between all this are the political parties that go with the flow and see opportunities to win votes but nevertheless harbor silent skeptics that can see an inevitable end to the folly. With the advent of Trump and now the rising Nigel Farage, both skeptics, one suspects the end is nearer than many may think for the big green blob.

  42. mem

    from another site:
    From the top 3 climatologists sources cited below, answer these questions

    1) What is the average world temperature
    2) What should it be?
    —————————————-
    Average Temp Jan 2019

    54.88 degrees NOAA https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/s
    58.064 degrees https://ds.data.jma.go.jp/t
    57.78 degrees NASA

    If they don’t know the average world temp within 3 degrees of each other, how can they accurately conclude that the average temperature has increased 1/2 degree over the past 100 years?

    Do the math peoples.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.