Guest amateur climatologizing by David Middleton
In my daily search for stupid and/or ignorant news articles about climate change, I ran across a couple of recent “gems” from Business Insider.
Gem #1 Our “Fabulous” Climate
Trump suggests the climate may actually be ‘fabulous’ after an ominous UN report on looming disaster
Sinéad Baker Oct. 10, 2018
- President Donald Trump on Tuesday sought to cast doubt on a UN report on climate change that had dire warnings about how little time we have to stop a global catastrophe.
- Trump suggested that the world’s climate might actually be “fabulous” and that he’d seen reports expressing that position.
- The UN report outlines the effects of global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
- Trump has previously called climate change a “hoax,” and last year he announced he would pull the US out of the Paris climate accord.
President Donald Trump on Tuesday cast doubt on a United Nations report warning that we have just 12 years to curb climate change by suggesting it wasn’t more credible than reports that say the environment is “fabulous.”
[…]
Sinéad Baker’s qualifications as a climate scientist:
- City, University of London, Master’s, Investigative Journalism, 2017 – 2018
- Trinity College, Dublin, Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), English Literature and Philosophy 2012 – 2016
Note to Sinéad: The current climate *is* fabulous. All of the warming since the 1600’s has lifted Earth’s climate comfortably out of the Little Ice Age, which was the coldest climate of the Holocene, barely warmer than the Pleistocene Bølling-Allerød glacial interstadial in Central Greenland.
Compared to most of the rest of the Holocene, the current Fabulous-ocene could only be more fabulous if it was a bit warmer.
Regarding the “dire warnings about how little time we have to stop a global catastrophe”…
And who could have possibly guessed that there are only 0.6 °C of separation between a “Fabulous Climate” and “The Ice Age Cometh?”
Gem #2 The Earth Will Deny Climate Science and Cool Back Down
This one is a veritable treasure trove…
Trump says he thinks the Earth will cool back down, denying his own administration’s climate change report
Alex Lockie Nov. 5, 2018
- President Donald Trump said he hasn’t seen his own government’s National Climate Assessment, but he doubts its grim conclusions and thinks the climate can change back on its own.
- The Trump administration’s own scientists say it’s overwhelmingly clear that humans are causing climate change and that its repercussions could ravage the US and the world.
- But Trump said he thinks the climate, the hottest in modern human history, can change back on its own.
President Donald Trump said he hasn’t seen his own government’s National Climate Assessment, but he doubts its grim conclusions and thinks the climate can change back on its own.
[…]
The US military and other sections of the government have had to grapple with the reality of rising water levels that threaten naval bases and populations around the globe.
[…]
While Trump admitted humans “certainly contribute” to the hottest climate in modern human history, he also said he could produce scientific reports that dispute human-caused climate change.
In response to the UN report, Trump said in October that the climate may actually be “fabulous,” and not in danger.
“Is there climate change? Yeah,” said Trump to Axios.
“Will it go back like this?” Trump asked, making an up and down waving motion with his hand. “I mean will it change back? Probably, that’s what I think.”
“I believe it goes this way,” he said, again waving his hand up and down.
“We do have an impact, but I don’t believe the impact is nearly what some scientists say, and other scientists dispute those findings very strongly,” Trump said.
[…]
Trump has championed policies, like the use of coal for power, that scientists blame for releasing carbon dioxide, a key greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. In defense of his preference for coal, Trump has said he doesn’t want to combat climate change at the expense of US jobs.
These were some of the reasons why Trump pulled the US out of the global Paris agreement to combat climate change in 2017.
While Trump correctly stated that the Earth’s climate changes regularly over time, it does so on a geologic time scale, rather than in a matter of generations. And scientists warn that our extensive burning of greenhouse gases has set off a period of warming that has thrown the Earth’s natural cycle out of whack.
Alex Lockie’s qualifications as a climate scientist:
- Georgia State University, Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), Rhetoric and Composition/Writing Studies, 2012 – 2015
His LinkedIn page also says he’s an expert in writing, social media and copy editing.
Where to start?
The US military and other sections of the government have had to grapple with the reality of rising water levels that threaten naval bases and populations around the globe.
Just imagine if the Navy had to deal with the Holocene Highstand!
But Trump said he thinks the climate, the hottest in modern human history, can change back on its own.
“The hottest in modern human history?” Modern humans possibly date back more than 800,000 years. We know that several previous Pleistocene interglacial stages were at least as hot, if not hotter, than the Holocene interglacial stage.
So… We can probably assume Mr. Lockie wasn’t referring to the hottest climate in modern-human history, he must have been referring to the hottest climate in modern history, which it may very well be.
Modern history, the modern period or the modern era, is the linear, global, historiographical approach to the time frame after post-classical history.[1][2] Modern history can be further broken down into periods:
- The early modern period began approximately in the early 16th century; notable historical milestones included the European Renaissance, the Age of Discovery, and the Protestant Reformation.[3][4]
- The late modern period began approximately in the mid-18th century; notable historical milestones included the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Industrial Revolution, the Great Divergence, and the Russian Revolution. It took all of human history up to 1804 for the world’s population to reach 1 billion; the next billion came just over a century later, in 1927.[5]
- Contemporary history is the span of historic events from approximately 1945 that are immediately relevant to the present time.
This article primarily covers the 1800–1950 time period with a brief summary of 1500–1800.
[…]
It may currently be as warm as, or even slightly warmer than, it was during the Medieval Climatic Optimum…
Even if it does get a little warmer than the Medieval Climatic Optimum, as I explained to Sinéad, being hotter than the 1500’s to 1800’s is a “good thing.”
Glaciers were generally advancing from the Holocene Climate Optimum (ca 9-5 ka) until the mid-1800’s. This period is known as Neoglaciation.
Retreating Glaciers = Good
Advancing Glaciers = Bad
But Trump said he thinks the climate… can change back on its own.
Note to Alex: It can… and has… repeatedly…
.
It can warm all by itself, ignoring low CO2 levels…
It can cool all by itself, ignoring high CO2 levels…
While Trump correctly stated that the Earth’s climate changes regularly over time, it does so on a geologic time scale, rather than in a matter of generations.
Alex, did you not read a word I just wrote? The Little Ice Age occurred over a matter of decades, as did the Younger Dryas glacial stadial and all of the Dansgaard–Oeschger, Heinrich and Bond events.
And scientists warn that our extensive burning of greenhouse gases has set off a period of warming that has thrown the Earth’s natural cycle out of whack.
We don’t even break out of the noise level of “the Earth’s natural cycle”…
All of this…
May have played a small role in this…
Trump has championed policies, like the use of coal for power, that scientists blame for releasing carbon dioxide, a key greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. In defense of his preference for coal, Trump has said he doesn’t want to combat climate change at the expense of US jobs.
Note to Sinéad & Alex… You have jobs.
President Trump is correct on both counts. The climate is fabulous and it will eventually cool back down and become decidedly un-fabulous.
FORECASTING THE FUTURE. We can now try to decide if we are now in an interglacial stage, with other glacials to follow, or if the world has finally emerged from the Cenozoic Ice Age. According to the Milankovitch theory, fluctuations of radiation of the type shown in Fig. 16-18 must continue and therefore future glacial stages will continue. According to the theory just described, as long as the North and South Poles retain their present thermally isolated locations, the polar latitudes will be frigid; and as the Arctic Ocean keeps oscillating between ice-free and ice-covered states, glacial-interglacial climates will continue.
Finally, regardless of which theory one subscribes to, as long as we see no fundamental change in the late Cenozoic climate trend, and the presence of ice on Greenland and Antarctica indicates that no change has occurred, we can expect that the fluctuations of the past million years will continue.
Donn, William L. Meteorology. 4th Edition. McGraw-Hill 1975. pp 463-464
What are my qualifications for criticizing Business Insider’s climate science experts? A BS in Earth Science (Geology) earned during That 70’s Climate Science Show and 37 years experience in the Climate Wrecking Industry.
Now, I have to get back to my job and find some more oil… MAGA!
Selected References
Berner, R.A. and Z. Kothavala, 2001. GEOCARB III: A Revised Model of Atmospheric CO2 over Phanerozoic Time, American Journal of Science, v.301, pp.182-204, February 2001.
Jameson, J., C. Strohmenger. Late Pleistocene to Holocene Sea-Level History of Qatar: Implications for Eustasy and Tectonics. AAPG Search and Discovery Article #90142 © 2012 AAPG Annual Convention and Exhibition, April 22-25, 2012, Long Beach, California.
Ljungqvist, F.C.2009. Temperature proxy records covering the last two millennia: a tabular and visual overview. Geografiska Annaler: Physical Geography, Vol. 91A, pp. 11-29.
Ljungqvist, F.C. 2010. A new reconstruction of temperature variability in the extra-tropical Northern Hemisphere during the last two millennia. Geografiska Annaler: Physical Geography, Vol. 92 A(3), pp. 339-351, September 2010. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0459.2010.00399.x
MacFarling Meure, C., D. Etheridge, C. Trudinger, P. Steele, R. Langenfelds, T. van Ommen, A. Smith, and J. Elkins (2006), Law Dome CO2, CH4 and N2O ice core records extended to 2000 years BP, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L14810, doi:10.1029/2006GL026152.
Moberg, A., D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén. 2005. Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data. Nature, Vol. 433, No. 7026, pp. 613-617, 10 February 2005.
Oerlemans, J. Extracting a climate signal from 169 glacier records. Science (80-. ). 2005, 308, 675–677, doi:10.1126/science.1107046.
Pearson, P. N. and Palmer, M. R.: Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations over the past 60 million years, Nature, 406, 695–699,https://doi.org/10.1038/35021000, 2000.
Royer, et al., 2001. Paleobotanical Evidence for Near Present-Day Levels of Atmospheric CO2 During Part of the Tertiary. Science 22 June 2001: 2310-2313. DOI:10.112
Rundgren et al., 2005. Last interglacial atmospheric CO2 changes from stomatal index data and their relation to climate variations. Global and Planetary Change 49 (2005) 47–62.
Tripati, A.K., C.D. Roberts, and R.A. Eagle. 2009. Coupling of CO2 and Ice Sheet Stability Over Major Climate Transitions of the Last 20 Million Years. Science, Vol. 326, pp. 1394 1397, 4 December 2009. DOI: 10.1126/science.1178296
Zachos, J. C., Pagani, M., Sloan, L. C., Thomas, E. & Billups, K. Trends, rhythms, and aberrations in global climate 65 Ma to present. Science 292, 686–-693 (2001).
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The 2020 presidential race will be in part, a platform on climate change by the Democrats. This is just a pure gift to DJT who gets the CAGW narrative, and can easily convey that message to the masses who already know something don’t add up with the this dead horse. Even better would be if Big Al would throw his hat in the ring again and promise a huge national carbon tax for the country. It would be so wonderful to see daily tweets from Trump, just pillorying the Democrats with basic climate science facts and asking everyone who they would rather vote for: someone proposing ridiculous carbon taxes and limiting fair access to energy for everything from heating/cooling their house and driving their car for work/pleasure, or someone pledging to do the opposite and grow the economy and jobs. I don’t think many, other than the same city folk who will vote Democrat no matter what, is going to vote for high carbon taxes. Bring it on.
From your lips.
===========
Pucker up Kim…XOXOXO
What an incredibly great breath of fresh air. To realize that CO2 does not warm anything detectably and that CO2 is a serious plus to the environment and mankind. As the planet has spent most of the last 600 million years well above current temperatures and clearly life has thrived, how can warmer climes be bad?
So when will he defund them?
David Middleton:
Thank you for your very good article. Also thanks for the many competent comments.
I am in Thailand, where it is 30° C during the day. There are a remarkable number of tourists on the beach, coming from all over the world where it is much colder.
There are few if any tourists heading north into the cold and snow, with the exception of skiers and snowboarders. It is obvious that humanity prefers warm temperatures.
Furthermore, excess winter mortality rates prove that the world is colder than optimum.
There are no significant excess summer mortality rates.
It is also abundantly clear that CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are not dangerously high, but rather are dangerously low, too low for the continued existence of life on earth. More CO2 is beneficial, it is that simple.
It is also abundantly clear that climate is insensitive to increasing CO2 concentrations. The only measurable impact of increasing atmospheric CO2 is improved crop yields, which are entirely beneficial. Increasing atmospheric CO2 may result in some minor warming, which will also be net beneficial to humanity and the environment.
I dictated this note on my phone, and apologize for any typos.
Heh, we will cool, folks, but when, even Trump doesn’t know.
===================================
We are in fact living in a golden age. Never before in human history have crop yields been so high, or so many humans been well nourished. Grain crops are so high we turn a signficant proprtion into fuel because we just can’t eat it all. A combination of a warm climate, high CO2 levels, better farming methods and the application of science have brought us to this happy state, but you wouldn’t think so if you listen to the prophets of doom. Personally I think another degree and a doubling of CO2 will bring us to a utopia never dreamed of. We will be able to banish starvation and malnutrition from the planet, and the human race will be able to be gainfully employed in making the world a better place for all. The wealth generated by this cornucopia, will enable us to clean up the environment and save all the threatened species from extinction.
David ( the self declared amateur) attacks journalists who simply point out the facts by citing their lack of scientific credentials while upholding Trump’s “intuitive” alternative science with an array of cherry picked data.
Could David present his ‘evidence’ for peer review like every good scientist does instead of slinging mud in the pseudo scientific ether ?.
Oh? So since David Middleton did not have an imprimatur from your church, it is a bad argument?
Oh? So since David Middleton did not have an imprimatur from your church, it is a bad argument? The duplicate comment filter is still acting up.
The post was filled with examples… Try reading it. If there’s something I wrote, you think is wrong, quote the exact passasge and we can discuss. Otherwise…
Ahhh ,yes David, as I said,cherry picked examples. In typical amateur style you’ve ignored the evidence to the contrary. Since you disagree with the combined global scientific view, go argue with the big boys in the real world rather than shouting taunts from the parapet.
Btw,I like the Pythonesque reference to your bunker syndrome.
Maybe you missed this…
To WTF:
WTF is the matter with you?
I have studied this subject completely independently from David Middleton and have reached very similar conclusions to David.
Reading your comments, I conclude that you are a troll. You have displayed no intellect and no honesty.
I suggest that you go back to WhereverTF you came from.
How comes that Midden Heap came to my mind reading this?
He did present the evidence, you just didn’t grasp it.
You don’t have to be a certified expert with a university degree to call a spade a spade.
“What did you say? The traffic light is red? I don’t care because you are not a cop. You can’t know what a red light means.”
Non
So you disregard what the vast majority of scientists are in agreement upon ?
Great, then the burden of proof is with you, posting stuff here is meaningless.
You need to leave the comfort of this bubble and actually present some peer reviewed evidence.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot… do you have any specific arguments? Or are you just here to contribute generic babble?
If you disagree with something, quote the exact words you disagree with and explain why you think it’s wrong.
David,
You refuse to engage with my “specific argument”, which is that ALL of your posts are such an insult to the scientific method and that you can’t engage with the scientific community.
Instead, because your efforts are ignored, you attack science itself, eg peer review, data collection, research funding ,etc, culminating in conspiracy theories.
This is why you are stuck in this sheltered workshop conducting experiments with swallows and coconuts.
WTF, so you think “climate science” is actually science? Pray tell, why?
Well DUH…Climate Science is actual Science because it has the word Science in it … DUH
Isn’t it filled with Lectrolytes or something that plants crave
So… Whiskey Tango Foxtrot is just here to provide generic babble.
Alpha Mike Foxtrot Whiskey Tango Foxtrot…👋
You seem to be immune against any form of argument or fact. Have you read at all what David has posted here? I doubt it. Strongly.
You seem to be completely unaware of the corruption and deception that is associated with”peer reviewed” studies.
So you are either ignorant or you like occasional deception and corruption.
https://www.nature.com/articles/546033a
I do assume that reading is some sort of chore for you, so look at this:
More than likely he is in denial of any data that goes contrary to his climatology related beliefs. Mess with his orthodoxy too much and he is likely to go full nutzi on you
“… journalists who simply point out the facts. That’s a good one. There aren’t many of them on the BBC.
I haven’t read past the first few comments, not least because I agree with them in general. That said, one chart did worry me, as a layman (layperson?). It’s the chart showing temperature anomaly in the modern era (Sang…(Eemian))which appears to show carbon dioxide concentration leading the temperature change. Am I misreading this?
I should have included figure numbers.
Are you referring to this?
The last Pleistocene interglacial stage is called the Sangamonian in North America, Eemian in Europe and MIS-5e in marine isotope stage lingo.
The Sangamonian is not the modern era. It was about 130,000 to 120,000 years ago and CO2 clearly lagged behind temperature.
Or are you referring to this?
This is the modern era. CO2 also clearly lagged behind temperature by about 150 years.
Hi,
Thanks for that. It’s the first one, but my mistake may be that I was reading it “left to right”, I think.
Ian
I haven’t always been consistent in the direction of the x-axis. When it’s in years before present (BP), Excel defaults to the most recent time being towards the left. When it’s in calendar years, Excel defaults to the most recent time being towards the right.
Most modern era time series are in calendar years. Most paleo-reconstructions are in years BP (generally 1950).
Thanks.
The last Pleistocene interglacial stage is called the Sangamonian in North America, Eemian in Europe and MIS-5e in marine isotope stage lingo.
Perhaps the correct interglacial will be called the sanctimonious
I found out today that while there are people who, quite rightly, believe we live on a “globe” earth and openly ridicule flat-earthers, they ardently believe CO2 traps “heat” (LOL) which causes global warming.
Two science-illiterate journalists disagree with Pres. Trump on climate change.
Two Nobel laureates agree with the President
Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize in Physics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXxHfb66ZgM
Kary Mullis, Nobel Prize in Chemistry
+1^10
Dr Cherry picker
“Two science-illiterate journalists” ( plus the global scientific community ) “disagree with Pres. Trump on climate change.
Two Nobel laureates agree with the President”
Scientists are in Group 1 or Group 2
WTF is in Group 3, the noisy fool
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwqIy8Ikv-c
31,487 scientists and Pres. Trump are in Group 2
WTF exposed his/her profound ignorance and joined the two science-illiterate journalists! (applause and laughter)
David,
A truly fabulous post, many thanks.
Since Donald Trump became president I have been a bit disappointed that he has said little about climate change. But that seems to have changed with a number of interviews.
Pretty everything he has said about climate change is spot on (sadly, unlike many of his statements on other subjects). Like all serious sceptics, he does not deny the reality of climate change. I would say he is right in the middle of mainstream sceptical opinion.
Thank you President Trump! And please, please get elected for a second term. The world desperately needs to know the truth about climate change.
Chris
“Climate is fabulous” – I wonder if someone alerted Trump to derivatives of my many harangues on “The Great Greening ^тм” and my “Garden of Eden Earth^тм” by 2050 with peak population at ~9B, bumper harvests, abundant resources and global prosperity? This is the scenario that the Totes are desperate to head off, or to run to the head of the parade and take credit for. They know that the ‘Garden’ spells the end for marxy sparxy and Malenthusiasm Dystopes who will shrink back to the odd mental patient with a sandwich board.
Okay, here is a practical solution for current events policy problems. Bring in 50,000 Latin American immigrants to Alberta and have them drive large oil trucks across the border in 2-mile round trips to move captive Canadian oil across the border and into various crude oil pipelines in North Dakota. They can escape their caravan problems and get free health care in Canada too.
A very Democrat Party solution! Teddi”Rapist Murderer” Kennedy fully approves!
David Middleton, thank you for a really superb posting. You offer a well-reasoned rebuttal to each of the alarmist claims in the Business Insider articles that you addressed, supported with simple-to-understand, science-based graphs of data. Most impressive that you placed IPCC/alarmist data in juxtaposition with what time and scientific observations have revealed has, and is, actually happening.
Super kudos to you for this work and making it readily to all truth-seekers. It is now part of my “go to” reference articles for debating the issue of climate change with others.
Ooops . . . “readily available to all truth-seekers”, that is.
The second figure in this post, re ‘temperature anomaly’ over the last 12k yrs, shows ‘jerks’ in the trace that correspond to events in the Holocene, as is indicated in boxes. The ‘jerks’ indicate possible abrupt change, but little more than that. However what may seem a somewhat normal changes in trend, are in reality the cataclysmic events that geology shows they have been.
Correlating across other evidence, particularly archaeological and tectonic, a very different picture emerges. Climatic changes were very likely a secondary residual effects (though loss/gain of polar ice may be a contributing effect).
See correlations here related to that figure: https://melitamegalithic.wordpress.com/2018/11/13/some-correlations-to-the-past/
Note the correlation to the Eddy cycle as a major influencing force (source unknown).
Climate Study:
“Hoffman et al. compiled estimates of sea surface temperatures during the last interglacial period, which lasted from about 129,000 to 116,000 years ago. The global mean annual values were ~0.5°C warmer than they were 150 years ago and indistinguishable from the 1995–2014 mean. This is a sobering point, because sea levels during the last interglacial period were 6 to 9 m higher than they are now….”
“…reconstructions of [last interglacial period] global temperature remain uncertain, with estimates ranging from no significant difference to nearly 2°C warmer than present-day temperatures. …”
Study cite:
Regional and global sea-surface temperatures during the last interglaciation
Jeremy S. Hoffman1,*,†, Peter U. Clark1, Andrew C. Parnell2, Feng He1,3
Science 20 Jan 2017:
Vol. 355, Issue 6322, pp. 276-279
DOI: 10.1126/science.aai8464
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6322/276
I’d say 97% of the time, the weather is certainly fabulous. If worked out year after year, that makes the climate pretty fabulous, too. I think President Trump is right.