We must hope Dr. Soon is right …

And the global warming apocalypse is not nigh. Real-world evidence certainly supports him.

Jeffrey Foss, PhD

Everyone has heard the bad news. Imminent Climate Apocalypse (aka “global warming” and “climate change”) threatens humanity and planet with devastation, unless we abandon the use of fossil fuels.

Far fewer people have heard the good news. The sun has just entered its Grand Minimum phase, and the Earth will gradually cool over the next few decades.

Why should we all hope Earth will cool? Because nobody with any trace of human decency would hope the Earth will actually suffer catastrophic warming.

Many of us believe in the threat of global warming, but live in the hope that we can switch to “renewable energy” before it is too late. But this is a false hope. Despite our best efforts over several decades, renewables such as wind and solar energy still meet only 2% of global energy needs, while hydro adds only 7% or so.

So avoiding the alleged Climate/Global Warming Apocalypse by relying on renewable energy would require surviving on less than 10% of our current energy requirements. But that is impossible. It would also be really catastrophic: billions could die.

Our global economy runs on energy, and over 80% of it is still fossil fuels, with nuclear and other non-renewables providing another 10%. If we switch to renewables tomorrow, 90% of our energy will be lost, and the global economy will sink like the Titanic. Keeping nuclear power would merely add a second lifeboat as the great ship sinks. Even if the energy loss were spread out over decades, the final result would still be the same.

Humankind could not produce enough food, clothing and shelter. Jobs would vanish. Massive starvation, disease and death would result. Hard physical labor would once again become the norm. Even though life could be maintained for some portion of humanity, liberty and happiness would be lost.

Let’s stop pretending. The prescribed cure for Climate Apocalypse is far worse than the purported disease. If we don’t use coal, oil and natural gas for energy, many of the 7 billion of us now alive must die. Those who survive will be impoverished and enslaved, toiling and scavenging for food by day, and fearing the darkness by night – except for the privileged few who still have money, energy and power.

The sudden and dramatic growth of human life, liberty, and happiness since the industrial revolution was achieved by replacing muscle power with coal and oil power. Before that, Hillsdale College professor of history Burt Folsom points out, only the wealthy could afford whale oil and candles. Everyone else had to go to bed early, and often hungry, when the sun went down, sleeping to recover enough energy to work – only to repeat the daily cycle yet again. Freedom of thought and travel had little real worth when we were too tired to think or walk.

The petroleum age saved whales from the brink of extinction – and brought cheap kerosene to the masses, so that they could read at night, bringing light into their lives and their brains.

The premature switch to renewable energy recommended by the false prophets of Climate Apocalypse is really just one step in an industrial counter-revolution devoutly desired by those discontented with modern life in free market democracies – and ready to erase our hard-won prosperity and freedom.

The Climate Apocalypse global warming bad news is rewarded by big money from the government and servile amplification from traditional big news media – while the good news of global cooling is silenced and unheard, stifled by both traditional media and most of today’s social media platforms.

We should all be suspicious of the motives of those who push this bad news, and welcome those who push back. Dr. Willie Soon is one scientist, although by no means the only one, who has the courage to stand up to big money, big government, big (pseudo) science, big media and big environmentalism to spread the good news. It’s high time we all heard it.

The good news from Dr. Soon and his fellow solar scientists is that the increase in global temperatures since 1800 was caused by two centuries of increasing solar output – not by human use of coal and oil.

But then solar output began to fall around 2000, in a repetition of a well-known 200-year cycle of solar activity, and global warming stopped. That’s more good news that too few people know. The purveyors of Climate Apocalypse have no explanation for this two-decade failure of their prophecy, which fortunately for all of humanity shows the superiority of solar science over apocalyptic warming foretold by computer models, hysteria and headlines – but not by real-world evidence.

Finally, solar science says we should expect steady but manageable global cooling until about mid-century, when solar activity will recover and temperatures begin to warm once again. Once again, this will be due to solar activity, and not to fossil fuels or carbon dioxide emissions.

In the best news of all, that means humanity’s successful pursuit of life, liberty, happiness, and better living standards and healthcare needn’t be stopped by Climate Apocalypse – or its prescribed cure. The only thing we have to fear is the fear of Climate Apocalypse itself.

Equally important, a warmer or cooler planet with more atmospheric CO2 and plentiful, reliable, affordable fossil fuel and nuclear energy would be infinitely preferable to a cooler planet with less CO2 and only expensive, intermittent, weather-dependent wind, solar and biofuel energy.

At the very least, humankind has an historic opportunity to witness a crucial test between two scientific hypotheses of enormous consequence. The next decade or two will reveal whether Earth warms or cools.

Surely all right-minded people must hope that it cools – and that the fear-mongering of imminent global warming apocalypse cools as well.

I might add that no one should wish the current severe Chicago-style polar vortex cold on anyone. I extend my sympathies and prayers to all who are now suffering from the cold. But be of good cheer in the knowledge that this cold-snap at least puts the lie to vastly worse climate scare global warming stories.

I also wouldn’t wish on anyone the “Green New Deal” energy reality of February 1, 2019 – when wind power provided 1.5% of the energy that kept lights on and homes warm in America’s Mid-Atlantic region, solar provided zero, and derided and despised coal, natural gas and nuclear power provided a whopping 93% or that energy! Imagine the cold, misery and death toll under 100% pseudo-renewable energy.

Dr. Jeffrey Foss is a philosopher of science, Professor Emeritus at the University of Victoria, Canada, and author of Beyond Environmentalism: A Philosophy of Nature.

clip_image002 Source: PJM Interconnection regional electricity transmitter

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 1 vote
Article Rating
235 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 2, 2019 12:35 pm

The only reason to hope for a cooling is to put a stake through the heart of the CAGW rubbish. Otherwise, global warming is both desirable and beneficial. Even the alarmists must admit that the hypothesis of global warming holds that the major warming will occur at in the Arctic and Antarctic with the tropics resistant to temperature rise. The Stephan – Boltzman equation shows the radically steepening resistance of the earth’s climate to warming and the shear unlikelihood of the preposterous “tipping point” to a warmer climate regime.
After record lows over the last few days, I concur with the latest Trump tweet and say, bring on the warming!

ferd berple
Reply to  Robert Austin
February 2, 2019 1:22 pm

The only reason to hope for a cooling is to put a stake through the heart of the CAGW rubbish.
=================
It will not work. Cooling will be seen as proof of Climate Change. If anything it will simply reinforce the fears driving the madness of the crowd.

Fear and Greed. These are the drivers. Fear of Climate Change. Greed in the wealth and prestige to be made in promoting Fear.

This is no different than thousands of years ago. The high priests talked to the gods and thus controlled the weather. The people lived and died depending upon the success of the priests in creating a successful harvest. For this the people were required to sacrifice to the priests.

IPCC, UN, politicians, Mann, Gore, Dicaprio, the Pope, the Press, renewables industry; they are priests in this new religion. Preaching fear of Climate Change and the path to salvation. Each in turn gaining power, prestige, wealth.

The people are expected to sacrifice their fossil fuels and lifestyles to appease the gods of nature. The people are promised a successful harvest of Wind and Solar renewables as their salvation. Should salvation not arrive, it will because the people did not sacrifice enough.

Eventually the priests will be overthrown as the civilization begins to collapse and the old temples are torn down. We are seeing signs of this already. Trump the US, Ford in Ontario, yellow vests in France. However, one should not expect the priests to go quietly. The priests will cry or for blood, for the usurpers to be brought down and sacrificed, lest the gods be angered and the people suffer.

ferd berple
Reply to  ferd berple
February 2, 2019 1:36 pm

The priests will cry out for blood, for the usurpers to be brought down and sacrificed, lest the gods be angered and the people suffer.
===========
Mueller is the obvious example. The priests are crying out loudly that the people will suffer unless Evil is sacrificed, and Mueller has been tasked with smelling out the evil.

The more people change, the more civilization advances, the harder it is for people to see that we have not changed in thousands of years.

TruthMatters
February 2, 2019 12:44 pm

I hope these breathless exopthalmic exhortations will end and America may return to being a manufacturing economy.
https://imgur.com/9lHY8Bl

Stevek
February 2, 2019 12:55 pm

Renewables won’t be able to keep up unless dramatic technical advances like a fusion breakthrough.

There are a billion people in India. It is hot and they all want AC which will use lots of electricity.

u.k.(us)
Reply to  Stevek
February 2, 2019 1:31 pm

Never been there, but it sounds like if it is not hot, it is monsooning ?
Any reports from ground zero ??

Reply to  Stevek
February 2, 2019 3:20 pm

So much demand for ACs the government bans anti coal charities….Check out this link https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/greenpeace-says-it-shut-its-offices-due-to-block-on-bank-account-1987414

February 2, 2019 1:08 pm

Agree that earth has started cooling.
However, I don’t see any results here of any tests…?
Try finding my results
click on my name or follow discussion here:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/31/bill-nyes-latest-climate-warning-the-us-will-have-to-grow-its-food-in-canada/#comment-2610623

jjs
February 2, 2019 1:20 pm

Looks like mister “philosopher”of science is seeing the writing on the wall. Better start back peddling and find some kind of new shtick to keep the grant money flowing until he get that nice academic retirement package.

Trillions spent on nothing while billions of people are still struggling to find something other than misery in their lives to no fault of their own. I’m discussed by the whole thing and all the pagan high priests involved.

Robert of Ottawa
February 2, 2019 1:35 pm

Well I dn’t think a cool Earth is a good idea at all.

Make Canada Warm Again.

Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
February 2, 2019 1:56 pm

Robert,
We need some red hats with MCWA logo to troll the progressives.

February 2, 2019 1:53 pm

I hope the world stays at least as warm as it is for the next twenty years. I’m in the camp that believes all life, including Man, thrives when temperatures are warmer than they have been. After that, I don’t care what happens. I would say the world could go to hades, but I don’t want it following me.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  jtom
February 2, 2019 2:28 pm

jtom
Yes, the evidence seems to point to carbon-based life forms preferring the warm side of the temperature spectrum.

Don Perry
February 2, 2019 2:08 pm

I came to appreciate reliable energy when the temperature dropped to -27 F and our power went out for nine hours. Not knowing how long it would be before the power came back, we relied on wood in the fireplace and boiling pots of water on our gas stove to keep from truly freezing. It only dropped to 58 degrees in the house, but my 76-year-old body did not respond well. All I could think about was, “what if this continued for a week, a month, a year”. Cold is terrifying.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Don Perry
February 2, 2019 10:08 pm

Don Perry: From the aptly named Robert Frost:

Fire and Ice

Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.

http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173527

Clyde Spencer
February 2, 2019 2:33 pm

Don Perry
Yes, the fact that as humans evolved we lost body hair and developed efficient sweating is strong evidence that we evolved in a climate warmer than what most experience in the mid-latitudes. However, there is a limit to how much clothing one can take off, while there is no limit to how much you can put on. Fortunately, we also have advanced brains.

u.k.(us)
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
February 2, 2019 4:45 pm

“…Fortunately, we also have advanced brains.”
==============
Now prove it 🙂
I dare ya.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  u.k.(us)
February 2, 2019 5:47 pm

u.k.(us)
What other than a creature with an advanced brain could rationalize their irrational behavior?

u.k.(us)
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
February 2, 2019 6:02 pm

Now you’re just rationalizing.

gnome
February 2, 2019 2:38 pm

They guy is a dangerous lunatic. Cold is much worse than warm.
The only reason to hope for some cold is so that the warmists are shown to be the anti-scientific morons they are.
If lunatics like this get away with it the hoax will go on forever.

damp
February 2, 2019 2:50 pm

Coming Anthropogenic Climate Apocalypse: CACA.

Donald Kasper
February 2, 2019 3:12 pm

You have no graph of CO2 to sunspot directly, just Powerpoint overlays, squinting and babbling. A direct graph of the past 150 years of CO2 versus sun spot count shows no correlation whatsoever. With lower sunspot count the global mean temperature anomaly is just more variable, so the relationship graphs as a pyramid, perhaps induced by it being less likely to have high sunspot counts. So the correlation is a blob. Give me an email address and I will email the spreadsheet and public data it contains and you can try to refute it. At this point, you are promoting cliche climatology.

Michael Hammer
February 2, 2019 3:32 pm

All this debate misses a rather huge elephant in the room. What arrogance to effectively dismiss human progress. Do we really think that in even 50 years coal, oil and gas will be the mainstay of energy production whether or not rising CO2 has a major impact on climate. Think back 50 years – no personal computers, no laser diodes, no DVD’s TV sets were based on CRT’s, no mobile phones, no digital cameras. I could go on almost ad infinitum. Don’t start me on the advances in medicine! Sure energy was based on fossil fuels then as it is now but there was no strong imperative to look for alternatives, coal and oil were cheap and plentiful and there were more exciting areas to explore.

So is this a speculative argument? Not at all, we already have a scientifically proven alternative for base load power – thorium reactors. Prototypes have been built and work. It’s still a significant engineering task to build commercial large scale reactors but significant engineering tasks are tackled every day. The risk is low. Remember, thorium reactors can’t melt down like uranium reactors, there is less radioactive waste and what is produced is dangerous for a far shorter time. The fuel is far more plentiful than is the case for uranium. The only barrier is public fear and political timidness.

Beyond that there is hot fusion, still a risky scientific endeavour but one that is certain to be solved eventually. Another alternative is cold fusion – widely ridiculed and possibly even riskier than hot fusion but the more recent reports show so many confirmations that it is becoming almost impossible to ignore. Not to mention, other energy sources not conceived of as yet. There is a reason science fiction so often comes true – its because once humans conceive and can articulate an idea a research focus follows and sooner or later we always find a way to make it happen.

Bottom line, CO2 is a green house gas, green house gases do cause warming, the direct impact of doubling CO2 is around 1C of warming. This is all VERY well established INCONTROVERTIBLE science. Those who feel inclined to disbelieve need to read up some basic spectroscopy. The BIG question is, are climate feedbacks positive or negative. If positive then maybe 3C per doubling is possible (maybe just) , but if negative its more likely to be closer to 0.3C which is trivial. Everything I know about stable real world systems and the combined role of water vapour and clouds convinces me that the feedbacks are strongly negative which is why I am sceptical of AGW. BUT IN THE END – SO WHAT!!!!

If the greens were rational and serious about looking after the environment, they would not be pushing windmills and solar panels despoiling our landscape and damaging our society. They would be pushing for the funding to go towards immediate commercialisation of thorium power plus strong increase in funding for alternative baseload energy technologies. Whether AGW was right or wrong, such a focus would advance human society and help reduce poverty. That they don’t tells me one of two things. Either they are completely ignorant and scientifically naive in which case their opinions should be ignored, or their true motivation has nothing to do with protecting the environment and human wellbeing. In that case, AGW is simply a convenient tool to support their real agenda, a case of the ends justifying the means – at least in their eyes. The second is a far more sinister, at least there is a solution to ignorance, its called education.

Why do we keep playing their game??????

John West
Reply to  Michael Hammer
February 3, 2019 5:11 am

Well said sir.

I would just add that there’s a baby elephant in the room with respect to this particular discussion. Energy from the Sun is fairly constant in total (TSI), but varies significantly in components (UV, Vis, IR). The components act on the climate in very different ways, therefore, these variations have the potential to cause variations in climate. The TSI causes global warming argument is a straw man of the Sun’s variations significantly contributing to climate change argument in my opinion.

Walter Sobchak
February 2, 2019 3:50 pm

“If we don’t use coal, oil and natural gas for energy, many of the 7 billion of us now alive must die. Those who survive will be impoverished and enslaved, toiling and scavenging for food by day, and fearing the darkness by night – except for the privileged few who still have money, energy and power.”

The warmunists think this is a feature, not a bug.

Pft
February 2, 2019 3:51 pm

A pro -CAGW article . Yes its real but the dim sun buys some more time. Seems it belongs elsewhere

The next glacial period will cause billions to perish from famine. Our climate history over the last 600K periods show cycles of around 100K glacial followed by 15-20K interglacial periods. We are near the end of the current interglacial if history is a measure unless mans CO2 is helping delay the next glacial period (uncertain)

Meanwhile tens of thousands satellites plan to be launched to support 5G introducing carbon black to the stratosphere which could accelerate tropospheric cooling and push us closer to a glacial period. Nary a concern from the climate alarmists

February 2, 2019 4:17 pm

Sustained warming stopped in about 2002-2005 as shown here:
TPW UAH & CO2 thru Nov 2018comment image

The numerical sources for these graphs show that the warming trend had been contributed to by increasing water vapor trend and the warming stopped when the water vapor trend stopped increasing. Nearly all of the increased water vapor (about 7% since 1960) resulted from increased irrigation. Irrigation is limited. Water vapor is self-limiting. The higher WV is a likely factor in the current high precipitation.

The increasing CO2 is ignored which demonstrates that burning fossil fuels has little if any effect on climate.

TPW http://data.remss.com/vapor/monthly_1deg/tpw_v07r01_198801_201812.time_series.txt UAH v6.0 http://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0.txt
CO2 ftp://aftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/products/trends/co2/co2_mm_mlo.txt

Sheldon Walker
February 2, 2019 4:39 pm

.
❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶
❶①❶①
❶①❶① . . . The cloak of stupidity . . .
❶①❶①
❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶①❶
.

Alarmists have a secret weapon, to help them to avoid the truth.

People who are interested in global warming, can be divided into 2 categories.

Those who are open-minded, and willing to learn new things about global warming.

And those who are close-minded, and unwilling to learn new things about global warming.

Unfortunately, there are many people in the 2nd category. We call them “Alarmists”.

Alarmists have a secret weapon, to help them to avoid the truth. It is called, “the cloak of stupidity”.

This is like Harry Potter’s “cloak of invisibility”, but it is used to avoid “new” ideas.

Like Harry Potter’s magic, the “cloak of stupidity” spell is invoked by saying some magic words, “denierus protectus”.

Many Alarmists shorten this to just “denier”.

https://agree-to-disagree.com/the-cloak-of-stupidity

David Dirkse
Reply to  Sheldon Walker
February 2, 2019 4:52 pm

LOL Walker, a trained psychologists recognizes that you are “projecting.”

People that reject the current science of climate (such as you) are wearing the cloak of stupidity.

Sheldon Walker
Reply to  David Dirkse
February 2, 2019 7:19 pm

David Dirkse,

I don’t reject the current science of climate. I only reject the stupid bits.

As well as my many other qualifications, I have a psychology degree.

I have even co-authored a paper with Dunning and Kruger. They are pretty pissed off with the way that Alarmists claim that anybody who disagrees with them, suffers from the Dunning-Kruger effect.

We came up with a new name, the Dummy-Booger effect, to describe people who claim that others suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect, while being totally unaware that they are suffering from it themselves.

The Dummy part is easy to understand. The Booger part refers to how Alarmists are like people who pick their nose in public, and then flick the boogers (dried nasal mucus), at other people.

u.k.(us)
Reply to  Sheldon Walker
February 2, 2019 5:00 pm

Any more stupid than letting your sleeve get caught in the PTO of a tractor, and having your hand or arm torn off.
Stupid like that ?

u.k.(us)
Reply to  u.k.(us)
February 2, 2019 5:17 pm

“Stupid” was way, way, way the wrong word to use, sorry all.

Tom
Reply to  Sheldon Walker
February 2, 2019 8:02 pm

Sheldon: Most people have “cloaked” some or all of their most cherished beliefs; there are many of them here on this blog.

Johann Wundersamer
February 2, 2019 5:04 pm

And the global warming apocalypse is not nigh. Real-world evidence certainly supports him.

Whom:

Jeffrey Foss, PhD

Everyone has heard the bad news. Imminent Climate Apocalypse (aka “global warming” and “climate change”)

aka climate denial alias Klima Wandel Leugner

as in Holocaust Leugner

threatens humanity and planet with devastation, unless we abandon the use of fossil fuels. And Holocaust denials.
___________________________________________________

Johann Wundersamer
February 2, 2019 5:17 pm

“Many of us believe in the threat of global warming, but live in the hope that we can switch to “renewable energy” before it is too late.”
___________________________________________________

Seid ihr irre oder was. Many of that green belivers wish us denials / Leugner back to KZ Mauthausen.

So schauts aus.

wayne Job
February 2, 2019 6:56 pm

Just read through all of the comments, I was somewhat surprised that many people including a solar scientist do not believe that the suns variability does not cause our global temperature to vary.
I ask all as the sun is our only heater.what else could it be?. It would seem to me that the suns behaviour varies many things on all the planets in our solar system.

The suns magnetic field controls our magnetic field which is behaving rather badly at the moment, causing concern with the amount of radiation getting through,a big worry for airline pilots.
The correlation between a quiet sun, the heating of the earths core and an increase in volcanic activity is also a concern, as many huge extinct volcanoes are stirring. If a big one goes bang it could not only kill a lot of people, but also give us some serious climate change.

Planetary cycles and our and our relationship to the rest of our galaxy cause other small changes, but the sun remains our only heater, turn it off for one day it would not be nice. Cheers

John Doran
Reply to  wayne Job
February 4, 2019 4:42 am

+42
John Doran.

malkom700
February 3, 2019 1:38 am

Ill-conditioned climate skeptics are right that it is not realistic to quit fossil fuels, especially for political reasons. At the moment, we have one option, geoengineering.

Reply to  malkom700
February 3, 2019 5:43 am

Another option would be to do nothing, especially for scientific reasons.

A C Osborn
Reply to  malkom700
February 3, 2019 8:10 am

Only if you are completely stupid.

Reply to  malkom700
February 3, 2019 10:04 am

The option to do nothing is appropriate because the only thing being considered (curtailing the use of fossil fuels) will have no effect on climate and besides that, the warming trend essentially ended around 2002-2005.

The current (since about 2002-2005) apparent plateau/eventual downtrend and two previous 30+ year downtrends in temperature with relentlessly rising CO2, demonstrate that CO2 has little if any effect on average global temperature.

It is disturbing that so many (but not all) climate experts got it wrong. I wonder how much wider the separation between the rising CO2 and not rising temperature will need to get to open their eyes. The lack of influence of CO2 on average global temperature is demonstrated graphically atcomment image
This graph shows that there has been little or no sustained change in average global temperature since about 2002. Data from Law Dome (Antarctica) and Mauna Loa show that CO2 has increased since 2002 by 40% of the increase 1800 to 2002

February 3, 2019 5:26 am

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/21/mao-et-al-2019-show-an-upcoming-0-6-deg-c-decline-in-global-land-surface-temperatures-by-the-early-2100s/#comment-2600214
[excerpt]

The historical temperature record is indeed shaky in detail, but probably not that bad in general – that is, before all the fraudulent temperature “adjustments” in recent years. There are a few long surface-temperature records, such as the Central England Temperatures (CET). Then there are some good longer-term proxies (but not tree rings).

We also have historical record, for example the grapes grown in Britain in Roman times and the Norse settlements in Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period. There were the ice fairs on the Thames, and the huge death toll from starvation and exposure during the Little Ice Age, and the torture and burning of thousands of witches for alleged weather sorcery (which did not provide much heat and did not solve the cold crisis).

In general, past warm periods coincided with higher solar activity, and colder periods coincided with low solar activity and few or no sunspots. Based on that general correlation, and the current crash in solar activity, Earth will probably cool moderately, starting anytime soon.

Regarding predictions, I wrote in an article published 1Sept2002 in the Calgary Herald:

“If [as we believe] solar activity is the main driver of surface temperature rather than CO2, we should begin the next cooling period by 2020 to 2030.”

I will stand with this prediction – for moderate, natural cooling, similar to that which occurred from ~1940 to the Great Pacific Climate Shift of 1977, despite increasing atmospheric CO2. As stated previously, I hope to be wrong, because humanity and the environment suffer during cold periods.

Regards, Allan

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
February 3, 2019 5:32 am

Here is another prediction of imminent global cooling, published in 2003.

New Little ICE Age Instead of Global Warming?
Theodor Landscheidt,
First Published May 1, 2003 Research Article PAYWALLED
https://doi.org/10.1260/095830503765184646

Abstract
Analysis of the sun’s varying activity in the last two millennia indicates that contrary to the IPCC’s speculation about man-made global warming as high as 5.8°C within the next hundred years, a long period of cool climate with its coldest phase around 2030 is to be expected. It is shown that minima in the secular Gleissberg cycle of solar activity, coinciding with periods of cool climate on Earth, are consistently linked to an 83-year cycle in the change of the rotary force driving the sun’s oscillatory motion about the centre of mass of the solar system. As the future course of this cycle and its amplitudes can be computed, it can be seen that the Gleissberg minimum around 2030 and another one around 2200 will be of the Maunder minimum type accompanied by severe cooling on Earth. This forecast should prove ‘skillful’ as other long-range forecasts of climate phenomena, based on cycles in the sun’s orbital motion, have turned out correct, as for instance the prediction of the last three El Niños years before the respective event.

observa
February 3, 2019 7:55 am

Where’s our illustrious ‘dams are never going to fill’ ex Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery to walk around like King Canute telling people not to worry it’s all fake news-
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-03/townsville-flooding-catastrophe-dam-spillway-gates-fully-open/10774312
The drought is all because those rescue workers aren’t paddling canoes and rowing boats you reckon Tim?