10.02 °C of Warming & Human Extinction by 2026!!! Film at 11.

A combination of EMP exchanges, super volcanoes going off, asteroid hits and the Sun going nova.
Oh, and human caused global warming as a contributing factor.

Doomist and serial unteachable trollop McClode claims the links in Carana’s article “prove” everything…
Yeah, riigghht. Drink a lot of that “end of times” koolaid, McClode?

“Dr. Natalia Shakhova et al. wrote in a paper presented at EGU General Assembly 2008 that “we consider release of up to 50 Gt of predicted amount of hydrate storage as highly possible for abrupt release at any time”

“consider”
“Highly possible”
“abrupt release at any time”

Weasel words and fallacious prediction claims.
All absurdities!

“and over the next ten years this 5 Gt is already responsible for more warming than all the carbon dioxide emitted by people since the start of the industrial revolution”

This from an article written in 2008!?
We are a few months short of that ten years; yet there is no indication that hydrates are releasing or that any abrupt release is imminent. Alarmists take minor realms of distant possibilities and immediately turn them into dire pending threats.

Meanwhile, hydrate atmospheric bomb ignores research over the last five years discount hydrate release potential. Research papers that attempt to cover more for the lack of disasters predicted versus any serious examination of hydrates.

From the IPCC AR5, a total lack of surety:

“f/ There is low confidence on magnitude of carbon losses through CO2 or CH4 emissions to the atmosphere from thawing permafrost. There is limited confidence in projected future methane emissions from natural sources due to changes in wetlands and gas hydrate release from the sea floor. {6.4.3}”

The IPCC AR5 discounts methane hydrate release; leaving only those doomists who prefer such scenarios.

Please also note Carana’s use of somebody else’s total atmospheric methane weight instead of the regularly used (parts per billion/million volume) ppbv/ppmv
e.g.:

Please note that USA’s methane emissions have been declining:

Not that the EPA’s numbers/presentations are at all trustworthy; they are simply available.

Carana makes use of a major contributor to GCMs’ overestimates of feedbacks: “Extra water feedback”; where extra atmospheric CO2 requires “extra water feedback” multiplier for alleged temperature increases.

“an additional warming over the next few years of 2.1°C due to extra water vapor in the atmosphere therefore does seem well possible over the next few years.”

As with every one of Carana’s citations and claims, weasel words preface and internally bolster his absurd claims; e.g. “does well seem”, such scientific language.

Then there is Carana’s reliance upon the delusional prof. Peter Wadhams:

“Albedo changes in the Arctic (1.6°C)
Warming due to Arctic snow and ice decline (i.e. of both sea ice and the snow and ice cover on land) may well exceed 2.6 W/m², calculated Professor Peter Wadhams in 2012.”

Ignoring prof Wadham’s and Carana’s ignorance that there are two polar regions; where is the Arctic snow and ice decline?
The Arctic’s cyclical decline since 1979 appears to have turned the corner in 2007 and are now cyclically increasing.
Polar regions following opposite cycles have been noted in planetary research where one polar region waxes and the other pole wanes.

Hemispheric snow and ice coverage remains similar to polar coverage. So similar that one must suspect that polar cycles are actually hemispheric cycles.

Arctic ocean albedo, while a distinct change from ice albedo; is still an indicator of Earth’s rapid heat loss, not substantive warming.
Hemispheric snow coverage losses expose substantial albedo changes that do contribute to warming.
As the Arctic, or actually Northern Hemisphere cools, one expects that snow cover to return to normal pre-1980 levels.

” Falling away of the aerosols masking effect (2.5°C)
With dramatic cuts in emissions, there will also be a dramatic fall in aerosols that currently mask the full warming of greenhouse gases. From 1850 to 2010, anthropogenic aerosols brought about a decrease of ∼2.53 K, says a recent paper.”

Don’t you just love these “research papers” that attribute Western Civilization’s clean fossil fuels and alleged renewables lower particle emissions to the entire globe?
• No mention of China, India, Pakistan, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, etc. etc. etc.
• No mention regarding 1,600 coal plants under construction or are scheduled to be constructed.
• No mention that all renewables require 100% backup by fossil fuels or nuclear power facilities.

Instead, it’s invent a claim, allegedly prove that claim in a Northern Hemisphere Western Civilization country; then assume the entire world is identically following suit.

“Rise due to carbon dioxide from 2016 to 2026 (0.5°C)
The purple element reflects warming due to the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by 2026. While the IEA reported that energy-related carbon dioxide emissions had not risen over the past few years, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have continued to rise, due to feedbacks that are kicking in, such as wildfires and reduced carbon sinks. Furthermore, maximum warming occurs about one decade after a carbon dioxide emission”

“Maximum warming occurs about one decade after a carbon dioxide emission”!?
How does that work?
CO2 molecules are in hibernation for ten years, or so?

Or is that all of the alleged forcings and multipliers take ten years to reach some sort of maximum?
Today’s CO2 emissions do not take full effect for ten years…
Can one be more specious? It makes that whole future CO2 claim waffle word sophistry.

Meanwhile that “rise due to carbon dioxide” claim completely overlooks that no-one to date has actually measured carbon dioxide’s atmospheric effect.

It’s a religious belief and prediction, not science.

“February 2016 rise from 1900 (1.62°C)
The magenta element at the top reflects the temperature rise since 1900. In February 2016, it was 1.62°C warmer compared to the year 1900, so that’s a rise that has already manifested itself ”

Isn’t amazing what cherry picked numbers can accomplish!?
From the decidedly non-global mercury thermometer 1900 temperature anomaly estimate to February 2016’s swaged manipulated adjusted abused El Nino peak temperature anomaly.

Which completely ignores:
A) temperature comparisons of wildly different equipment
B) Grossly different temperature station anomaly comparisons
C) NOAA, MetO, BOM serial abuses of temperature records
D) Absolute defiance to recognizing and tracking error propagation.
N.B.;
– a) Different temperature instruments.
– b) over different and constantly changing temperature stations.
– c) Different temperature recording practices and methods.
– d) Temperature stations that increased until the 21st century then suffered drastic declines.
– e) Temperature stations included or excluded depending upon NOAA confirmation bias expectations.
– f) Error tracking and propagation includes:
– – 1) multiple unique temperature instrumentations.
– – 2) at multiple unique different locations.
– – 3) at mostly lower elevations, (courtesy NOAA selective temperature station removal)
– – 4) Serial temperature adjustments: adjustments that immediately define assumed errors.

One should note that an alleged temperature record over one century long includes propagated errors that are additive as well as running averages.
Generating error bounds well beyond Carana’s and McClod’s specious temperature alarmist doom claims.

Just how old are these dogs?

And why shouldn’t warmistas make completely ridiculous and over the top predictions?
Look where the fear mongering has got them so far.
Look how much their dismal record of forecast accuracy has cost them in credibility within the minds of the credulous.
By all indications, they have nothing to lose, and everything to gain by keeping the ridiculousness knob turned up to somewhere between “Three Stooges” and “Overweight Mimes”.