Guest No Schist Sherlock by David Middleton
Climate change is going to make life on Earth a whole lot worse, report predicts
“The evidence was absolutely mind-blowing to me,” said the lead researcher.
Nov. 19, 2018 / 2:54 PM CST
By Maggie FoxThink recent climate disasters have been bad? Just wait, researchers at the University of Hawaii predicted Monday.
[…]
No Schist Sherlock!
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
This looks a lot like “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.”:
Retreating Glaciers = Good
Advancing Glaciers = Bad
What’s that? That’s not what the researchers at the University of Hawaii were predicting? They were just blaming everything on climate change and claiming it will all get worse?
The disasters they looked at included drought, warmer temperatures, floods, heavy rain and blizzards, heat waves, fires, sea level rise, storms, changes in the natural land cover and changes in ocean chemistry. “We found 27 attributes of human health impacted by climate hazards, of which death, disease and mental health were the most commonly observed,” Mora’s team wrote in their report, published in the journal Nature Climate Change.
People can die from heat stress, drown during hurricanes, starve during droughts and suffocate in fires. Disease patterns can change as the insects that carry disease proliferate and spread yellow fever, malaria and dengue. The destruction of forests spreads disease, also, the team said.
Like none of that happened before Al Gore and Jimbo Hansen invented Gorebal Warming in 1988?
Climate change over the past 150 years is buried well-within the Pleistocene noise level…
Charles covered the University of Hawaii “research” in this post.
I think global warming is amazing…
..to convince that many people that 1 degree of warming is dangerous
Our 57 branches of government should take this up at once.
Perhaps the 3 chambers of congress will get it done.
… or maybe the 1,000’s of US Agencies can help:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_agencies_in_the_United_States
RS
Which is a greater threat to humanity?
https://youtu.be/5qJPTjMnwNk
Clearly it’s climate change /Sarc x 1042
I’ve always wondered why science fiction movies always show the asteroid starting to heat up while it’s still about half way between the earth and the moon.
It’s because of global warming – the missing heat has spread out into space and was last seen heading for the asteroid belt.
You mean all that CO2 being evacuated into space is heating up the space rocks early??
The Day After Tomorrow was on tv last night. Only took a few weeks for the glaciers to return. It was our fault since we were using up our treasured natural resources and spewing co2 which caused polar ice to melt and the fresh water upset the salinity of the oceans and stopped the conveyor current which regulates ocean temperatures. Luckily for the US survivors our 3rd world neighbors down south took us in where we could keep warm. What a great propaganda story with the invasion from the south presently at our borders.
The stupidity of that movie was obvious since they never made even a minimal case for those super cells over the continents, since AIR has so little capacity for “heat” in it, it was IMPOSSIBLE to have Hurricanes over land, which there were FIVE in that silly movie.
At one point in the film, Ian Holm’s character says, “That goes against the laws of physics.” Then everyone shrugs and goes on the the FREAKING IMPOSSIBLE circumstances without any explanation of how or why the laws of physics can be violated and the bad things continue to happen.
The scriptwriters were essentially giving the finger to reality or even plausibility at that moment.
At least they admitted that the scenario couldn’t really happen thanks to Physics
Now if someone could give Al Baby a Physic (or at lease a colonic)
JimG1
It was a movie?!
The irony of that movie is that the Glacier calving during the intro credits was all CGI – and was then pinched by Gore for use (as real-life action) in his Incompetent Truth movie. (As reported here at WUWT at the time).
I often wonder where all the extra water comes from. The same amount of water has been here for millions of years.
Great site https://cometresearchgroup.org/comets-diamonds-mammoths/
Clearly impacts…https://cometresearchgroup.org/comets-diamonds-mammoths/
https://www.google.at/search?q=asteroid+moving+tail+visible&oq=asteroid+moving+tail+visible&aqs=chrome.
truly amazing what that “Mental Health” portion of the effect can influence the changes in the Political Climate we see today
That’s argument #1 Really? A warmer world is a disaster? More Rain, longer growing seasons, more arable land, an atmosphere fortified with more CO2 making crops more resistant to arid conditions and more productive? Really? This is a looming disaster? You’re pulling my leg right?
Wait, wait, wait, wait!!!! Someone has some evidence? Why is this not all over the front pages? Sorry, I probably need to back up …
I can hardly believe, after all this time, someone has some e.v.i.d.e.n.c.e. I know I sound excited. Can I have a grant to something, something. Please.
First they take models that have predicted way more warming than the world has actually seen.
Then they double or triple the amount of warming.
Then they feed that ludicrous number into another model that predicts how weather patterns are going to change in this mythical warmer world.
Climate scare has been especially great for easy paper counts for raises, promotion, and tenure in the academic volume-based system. This is the new grade inflation with cannabis and opioids.
We have been sliding slowly into the next Glaciation phase for a few thousand years, the interglacial period is slipping away.
Sunsettommy,
Yes, and when the next inevitable ice age arrives, the political left will find some way to blame it on man. Ironically, they may be right to assign blame, not for the cause but for not anticipating the inevitable. The warmists just don’t understand that the actual anomaly is a mostly glacier free Northern US, Europe and Russia, and of course there’s Canada …
You would think that the Canadians, Norwegians, Swedes and other Northern countries would be more objective about this, given that their very existence is at stake. If CO2 was as powerful at warming as the IPCC claims, these vulnerable countries should be promoting putting as much CO2 into the atmosphere as humanly possible. Either they know it would not make any difference or they are so deluded by politically driven alarmism that logic no longer applies.
The word you are looking for is stupid. they are stupid.
I want all of my grandchildren to be mind-blowing lead researchers. Guess what I smoke.
The competition?
This just in: True polar wander caused the Pleistocene (not glacial/interrglacial oscillations). Woodworth and Gordon (2018).
Not only does this help explain the poor correlation of Milankovitch, it calls into question our paleogeographic reconstructions.
I always wondered about the deflection of the Hawaii hot spot. You will notice it on google maps and zoom out in satellite mode. It happens for no apparent reason about 32°14’45.5″N 172°28’33.5″E. A shift in the axis makes perfect sense. Now, does the chronology and the dating of the seamounts line up?
No, that was much further back, about 45 million years ago and due to a change in the relative movement of the hotspot and the Pacific plate. True polar wander would not have any effect on the hotspot track since the pole would move relative to both hotspot and plate.
The deflection of the Hawaii hot spot is already adequately explained by continental drift.
Only a massive impact event has enough energy to shift the Earth’s axis. It’s called conservation of angular momentum. Have you ever tried to change the rotation axis of a spinning wheel?
Sorry, that is not quite correct: for a near-perfect sphere there is no preferred axis of rotation and the spin axis can very easy change independent of the total angular momentum of the sphere. Any easy way to see this is to spin a billiard ball . . . you find it very hard actually, to spin a billiard ball such that it has a constant axis of rotation (referenced to the number printed on the ball’s surface) due to the very slight torques imparted as the ball moves (skids) slightly on the table top. This can also be demonstrated with marbles.
The Earth, of course is an oblate spheroid, not a perfect sphere, so it has a relatively minor amount of rotation stability about its current spin axis. It is not even an axisymmetric oblate spheroid, but any Earth radius falls between the polar minimum of about 6,357 km and the equatorial maximum of about 6,378 km (3,950 – 3,963 mi). The difference 21 kilometers (13 mi) correspond to the polar radius being approximately 0.3% shorter than the equator radius.
It is nearly certain that tectonic plate movements (“continental drift”) alone can shift the axis of Earth’s spin (relative to a fixed surface reference spot) over time.
Perhaps you might try and actually read the paper. If they are right, which is very doubtful, the polar wander would amount to 28 millimeter per year. That means about 500 yards since the last glacial maximum. Think that is enough to melt the Laurentide icecap (particularly since those 500 yards would be mostly northwards.
And the whole thing is shaky in my opinion. They assume that hotspots do not have any relative movement, that the magnetic pole coincides with the rotation pole and that the equatorial sedimentary belt is centered over the geographical equator. All of which are approximately true but not to a precision of 0.25 degrees per million years.
By the way when all known short term effects are removed there is a remaining polar wander of about 10 mm/year currently. This may be true polar wander, or it could be an isostatic effect, or both.
http://news.rice.edu/2018/11/18/true-polar-wander-may-have-caused-ice-age/
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2018GL080787
David, thank you very much for providing the two references.
FWIW, Wikipedia states: “More rapid past possible occurrences of true polar wander have been measured: from 790 to 810 million years ago, true polar wander of approximately 55° may have occurred twice” and references this statement to:
Maloof, Adam C.; et al. (2006). “Combined paleomagnetic, isotopic, and stratigraphic evidence for true polar wander from the Neoproterozoic Akademikerbreen Group, Svalbard, Norway”. Geological Society of America Bulletin. 118 (9): 1099–1124. Bibcode:2006GSAB..118.1099M. doi:10.1130/B25892.1.
The Maloof et. al. article is paywalled, but the abstract is available at https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/gsabulletin/article-abstract/118/9-10/1099/125331/combined-paleomagnetic-isotopic-and-stratigraphic?redirectedFrom=fulltext
55 degrees of true polar wander seems incredible to me. I don’t know if this now-12-years-old article’s finding are still valid, or if they been invalidated by more recent scientific research.
I will echo that in the big climatic picture going back to the Holocene Optimum the climate has overall been in a cooling trend with spikes of warmth such as the MODERN WARM PERIOD, MEDIEVAL WARM PERIOD, ROMAN WARM PERIOD, and MINIOAN WARM PERIOD.
Each successive period of warmth moving forward in time not as warm as the previous one.
Definitely. As if the previous warm periods were bad?
Agreed. The warmest period of all, the Holocene Climate OPTIMUM. And why do you suppose they call it that – because the weather was so awful?! The best climate for life on Earth is, and always has been, the warmest climate. The ridiculous notion that “warming,” in particular from an extreme COLD period, is “bad,” is so colossally stupid I’m amazed how many otherwise intelligent people accept it.
If human fossil fuel burning actually postponed the inevitable cooling of the climate, we should be congratulating ourselves for it, not punishing ourselves. Of course, CO2 doesn’t do jack to temperature here in the real world, where “all other things” are most certainly NOT “held equal,” so that (just like AGW in general) is just another hypothetical.
Exactly. I’ve been saying Warmer Is Better for 20+ years now, to no actual avail. Fear of warmth is a kind of mass insanity perped by evil dwarks and accepted by millions of idiots in stark contrast to their own personal experience.
How do you (we) induce common sense? WUWT is a noble effort and deserves all kudos, but how can it (we) possibly cure delirium populus?
Actually, most of the population doesn’t care. It’s the ‘watermelon’ chicken-littles who in cahoots with the grant miners and ‘the government will save you’ idiots who actually care (for various reasons)
IPCC official, Ottmar Edenhofer, speaking in November 2010: “But one must say clearly that we redistribute, de facto, the world’s wealth by climate policy. … one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute, de facto, the world’s wealth…” “This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy, anymore.” http://www.nzzDOTch/aktuell/startseite/klimapolitik-verteilt-das-weltvermoegen-neu-1.8373227
AGW never had anything to do with climate. That’s just the rational for a certain segment of society to control the rest. That and the green movement’s anti-first world dogma.
“Like none of that happened
before Al Gore and Jimbo Hansen
invented Gorebal Warming in 1988?”
Get you facts straight Middeton:
Al Gore invented the internet,
not global warming.
And that’s “Mr.” Jimbo Hansen,
show some respect !
They are right, if they mean it getting colder.
“The evidence was absolutely mind-blowing to me,” said the lead researcher.
As the great philosopher Dan Quayle once said “A mind is a terrible thing to lose.”
They took every climate ghost story and combined them, ignoring conflicting scenarios within those papers, and determined that soon we’ll have flooding drought firenado snowmaggedon.
Or, as I like to put it, we are all going to die in a fiery flood. Which can actually happen on Hawaiian Islands. Perhaps that is what has them so unhinged?
You forgot Sharknado!
Tim Worstall addressed this in the context of the Extinction protests in London (hey, no one wants to go extinct). His article at PJ Media is The Late Great (Again) Planet Earth. My synopsis with images added is
https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2018/11/20/the-problem-with-climate-chicken-littles/
Correction: The article is by Michael Walsh
Tim Worstall wrote the debunking of the “Green New Deal.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-green-new-deal-already-failed-in-australia-and-the-uk
But this time it is different.
Climate Change nuts are going to make life a lot harder than trace amounts of C02.
No concern for the misery and strife THEY cause, though.
Yes that’s the real irony of all this climate change blather. The supposed “do-gooders” will do far more damage to humanity with their “policies” than all the CO2 level changes the Earth has ever experienced, regardless of source.
That’s not a bug, it’s a feature. Remember a large portion of the alarmist “do-gooders” happen to be Malthusians, they want there to be less people, so the more damage to humanity they can inflict the sooner they can reach their population reduction goals.
This comes across like a scam. Pay more up front in cash now to avoid higher prices later. Later as in like no one to be found and you left cursing the con game with no benefit.
Those of us who– quite rightly– refuse to believe the “warmists” should be careful not to become “cold-ists” (an awful term, I know) in response to them. The future will eventually bring about big changes! That’s all we know.
Politicians make life worse!
“Mora’s team combed through more than 3,200 studies to try to paint a broad picture of what climate change is going to do to people over the coming century”
3,200 studies of the projected future effects of global warming! And every one of those projected effects have been, are now, and ever will be negative. And every one of those studies showed that those negative consequences have been, are now, and will ever be, the direct result of human activity in burning fossil fuels.
Could it be that all those studies were motivated by a common intent to show negative consequences and ignore anything that might look positive, or even just neutral? Golly, no, that would just be too cynical. After all, they are all climate scientists, and we must trust in their honesty and objectivity.
Furthermore, we must trust in the ability of their models to accurately represent future climate states and the consequences thereof. After all, we (tax payers in industrialized countries) paid for the whole show. They wouldn’t waste our money on an elaborate scheme just to prove that we’re headed for doom. Would they? Perish the thought!
It’s unstoppable, it’s earthly evolution and like the dinosaurs, man will become extinct. All the lefties can celebrate. Life with out man, ah, the pure earth will return. Cockroaches can roam freely once again.
By cockroaches, you mean lefties?
Hivemind, stop being so insulting….. You owe cockroaches an apology
If warming is bad for us (they say), the corollary is that cooling is good. Hah!! I know which I prefer.
I’m a 100+ day per year skier, so I like it cold.
I don’t ski. I like to swim, however. so warmer is better in my book.
I don’t ski or swim but that 9 F expected at my place Monday………….. just……….really………..sucks.
“… And climate hazards have already affected mental health …” (Maggie Fox).
Now that, I can believe.
The key historical lesson of the 20th Century should be that the greatest threat to humanity is Socialism in any of its various forms.
That many “so-called” or self-proclaimed intellectuals today champion socialism clearly demonstrates their utter lack of what they claim to have, that is they lack any form of true intellect. Our universities are now chock full with this tenured class of socialist morons whose goal is to keep feeding at the trough of the government-backed indentured student loan system.
Of course by “climate change”, they mean the made-up manmade catastrophic climate boogeyman. Of course that will get worse, since it only exists in their fevered imaginations. When you watch a Stephen King movie, you know things will get worse, not better. Because being scared of monsters is fun. And the “Climate Change” monster is the biggest, baddest, scariest monster ever invented.
Global Warming Alarmists have as much interest in scientific methods and facts as do fundamentalist Bible-based creationists and flat Earth advocates.
I think you are misinformed. Every fundamentalist Bible-based creationist I know has a great interest in scientific methods and facts. That is why they talk about such things as carbon-14 being detected in diamonds, mineral concentrates from the dacite which formed in 1986 within Mount Ste. Helens give K-Ar ‘ages’ from 0.34 ± 0.06 Ma (feldspar-glass concentrate) to 2.8 ± 0.6 Ma (pyroxene concentrate), and the Moon’s current distance and rate of recession from the Earth give it a maximum age of slightly over 1 billion years.
Perhaps you should have said global warming alarmists have as much interest in scientific methods and facts as evolutionists and cosmologists. That is what I have observed.
SR
at least he got the comparison of Alarmists to flat-Earthers correct 😉
The article’s graphic of text attributed to the American Museum of Natural History states: “In the past, warm cycles lasted about 10,000 years, and it’s been about that long since the last last cool period.”
Sheesh, even this prestigious (?) institution can’t get their facts right when it comes to paleoclimatology reconstructions . . . or maybe this text dates back to the 1960’s and 1970’s when the climate alarmist were predicting catastrophic global cooling and they needed to say this.
In any event, check out this graph overlaying the current interglacial period with the previous four interglacial periods:
From this overlay, one can first see that 4 of these 5 periods have had warming intervals that lasted at least 15,000 years. Only one was a short as 10,000 years (the green curve designated as “243,800 YBP”). One interglacial (the purple curve designated as “418,400 YBP”) had a warming interval that lasted about 27,000 years before temperatures began to fall.
Second, one sees that interglacial warm periods (time from start of warming above the range of glacial period temperatures until return to the top of such range) have been from about 17,000 years to about 40,000 years.
The current interglacial warming period has lasted some 17,000 years (discounting the ~3,000 year-long transient midway up the total warming trend, with the coldest part of this transient known as the Younger Dryas event).
Finally, one can also see that despite the warming trend over the last 2,000 years, the odds (based on just this overlay) are 3:4 that we should now be in a long-term trend of decreasing global temperatures.