Claim: Northern States to have Global Warming by 2050

Artists impression of Minnesota after global warming.
Artists impression of Minnesota after global warming. Source Minnesotans for Global Warming.

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

A new study suggests that by 2050 people in Northern states might enjoy real Summers.

Cities of the future: visualizing climate change to inspire action

Our Climate Future

Millions marching the streets, daily articles in every newspaper and heartfelt pleas: never before has the topic of climate change been so omnipresent. The problem: We only have 11 years until passing the point of no return. If carbon emissions remain unabated, the Earth will be 1.5° C warmer by 2100 and the costs of climate change under a business as usual scenario will exceed $12 trillion by 2050. But what does this mean? 

The imminence of the climate threat requires unified actions across all sectors of society. However, a growing body of evidence suggests that facts and data, which are often hard to understand, do not necessarily persuade people to act. Behavioral change is much more likely to be inspired by visualizations that make climate issues tangible.

Introduction

With our analysis, we aim to do just this. Rather than describing quantitative change variables, we paired the predicted climate conditions of 520 major cities in 2050 with analogues conditions of cities around the world today. We thereby demonstrate concrete scenarios for the future of the life in those cities. By making data relatable, we hope to motivate citizens and policy makers to adapt their decision making accordingly.  

Read more: https://crowtherlab.pageflow.io/cities-of-the-future-visualizing-climate-change-to-inspire-action

If you wade through their tedious web presentation you finally get a website, which after a little navigation yields the actual study;

Understanding climate change from a global analysis of city analogues

Published: July 10, 2019

Jean-Francois Bastin , Emily Clark, Thomas Elliott, Simon Hart, Johan van den Hoogen, Iris Hordijk, Haozhi Ma, Sabiha Majumder, Gabriele Manoli, Julia Maschler, Lidong Mo,Devin Routh, Kailiang Yu, Constantin M. Zohner, Thomas W. Crowther

Combating climate change requires unified action across all sectors of society. However, this collective action is precluded by the ‘consensus gap’ between scientific knowledge and public opinion. Here, we test the extent to which the iconic cities around the world are likely to shift in response to climate change. By analyzing city pairs for 520 major cities of the world, we test if their climate in 2050 will resemble more closely to their own current climate conditions or to the current conditions of other cities in different bioclimatic regions. Even under an optimistic climate scenario (RCP 4.5), we found that 77% of future cities are very likely to experience a climate that is closer to that of another existing city than to its own current climate. In addition, 22% of cities will experience climate conditions that are not currently experienced by any existing major cities. As a general trend, we found that all the cities tend to shift towards the sub-tropics, with cities from the Northern hemisphere shifting to warmer conditions, on average ~1000 km south (velocity ~20 km.year-1), and cities from the tropics shifting to drier conditions. We notably predict that Madrid’s climate in 2050 will resemble Marrakech’s climate today, Stockholm will resemble Budapest, London to Barcelona, Moscow to Sofia, Seattle to San Francisco, Tokyo to Changsha. Our approach illustrates how complex climate data can be packaged to provide tangible information. The global assessment of city analogues can facilitate the understanding of climate change at a global level but also help land managers and city planners to visualize the climate futures of their respective cities, which can facilitate effective decision-making in response to on-going climate change.

Read more: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0217592

Reading a bit further, we encounter this gem;

The proportion of shifting cities varied consistently across the world. Cities in northern latitudes will experience the most dramatic shifts in extreme temperature conditions (Fig 2C and Fig 2D). For example, across Europe, both summers and winters will get warmer, with average increases of 3.5°C and 4.7°C, respectively. These changes would be equivalent to a city shifting ~1,000 km further south towards the subtropics, i.e. a velocity ~20 km.year-1, under current climate conditions (Fig 2C and Fig 2D). Consequently, by 2050, striking changes will be observed across the northern hemisphere: Madrid’s climate in 2050 will be more similar to the current climate in Marrakech than to Madrid’s climate today; London will be more similar to Barcelona, Stockholm to Budapest; Moscow to Sofia; Portland to San Antonio, San Francisco to Lisbon, Tokyo to Changsha, etc(Fig 3S2 Table).

Read more: Same link as above

Let’s imagine for a moment the unlikely possibility that this study is correct.

What is so bad about moving 1000km closer to the tropics?

People like myself voluntarily live in very warm climates. Its not so bad – no freezing your proverbials off on cold winter mornings.

And its not like people wouldn’t have time to adjust.

Florida is the place people retire, because of its gentle warm climate. Most people who move to Florida don’t have any trouble adjusting.

As for more rainfall seasonality, so what? Just build a few more reservoirs. Surely the engineering capabilities of 2050 will be up to the job of collecting a little more rainwater.

I actually enjoy reports like this – all doom and gloom and hyperbole in the introduction, but when you lift the cover on the cage of their monster it turns out to be an inconsequential little mouse.

No wonder they built a funky web presentation to try to make their report look impressive.

113 thoughts on “Claim: Northern States to have Global Warming by 2050

  1. LOL…Ask any Canadian, in January, if 1.5 C warmer would be better…..The majority answer would be….” 1.5 ? How about 8 or 9 !”

      • I”ve been watching that little reptile since it first appeared on the news. I think it’s a crocodilian known as a gharial. They have a long flat snout with knobs at the end of it. So far, it hasn’t eaten any of the ducks in the lagoon where it has taken refuge.

        Wait until cold weather comes up, starting in September. It’ll be happy to be led into a warm, cozy environment somewhat close to the tropics from which it came.

    • Warming hasn’t arrived in MT, WY, ND or SD. This year July is the new June. I’ve never seen the non-irrigated land so green and lush this time of year in my young 68 years. Places that are normally dry by now (I-90 between Butte and Deer Lodge, l-90 East of Livingston) are green like it was May or June.

  2. “Combating climate change requires unified action across all sectors of society. However, this collective action is precluded by the ‘consensus gap’ between scientific knowledge and public opinion.”

    The open sentences make this a political document, not a study.

    • What on earth is the matter with you people??!! Are members the human species really that short-sighted and…well…ignorant as to view the impacts of global climate change as a positive thing for their own self interests?

      This will bring untold destruction and misery to countless millions around the globe. From rising sea levels to the mass extinction of critical plant and animal species to increased frequency and power of hurricanes…. Your precious Florida will be half submerged under the sea, and our own Canadian polar bear will meet the same fate, but “at least we”ll have nice warm Canadian winters”. You people have the same mindset of cigarette smokers in the 1950’s. WAKE UP!!!!

      • Steve,

        what is wrong with YOUR statement is that you have ZERO credibility when you go around making silly statements that are not supported by the research.

        Sea Level was around 2 meters higher a few thousand years ago, no disaster is found.

        Mass extinction isn’t happening at all, no disaster found.

        No increase in hurricanes and power at all, no disaster found.

        Polar Bear numbers at the highest in 30 years, even with the low last 12 years of summer ice, they still expanded their numbers by thousands, no disaster found.

        You have the mindset of a warmist cultist spewing the usual unsupported pessimistic lies and baloney.

        The only disaster found are people like you who behave like eye swirling lemmings to the obvious and blatantly false warmist propaganda.

  3. I know some folks in Minnesota that sure would like some global warming after last winter.

  4. I know it’s been discussed and referenced often but now we have about 30 years of climate doom behind us and it’s time to do another “climate prediction fail” accounting except push it on a grand scale. By now there must be hundreds of failed scenarios that have come and gone without one being realized. I’m sure most people have a feeling the doom and gloom prognostications are nothing more than scare mongering but do they realize just how many are wrong?

  5. I’ve checked and according to their prediction my city will feel more like Houston come 2050. Now I know that Houston has had its share of weather issues, and no doubt will have more to come. Plus it gets hot down there (although not much hotter than we I am now), but it’s not like it’s some kind of uninhabitable, post-apocalyptic wasteland. Also, unlike Houston we’re not near the coast, so we have no real concerns about hurricanes and such.

    • Better get some grapefruit trees planted eh. If (when) they die during the winter, just send these quacks the bill.

      • Well, I’m sure that this will come as a COMPLETE SURPRISE to you, but based on the updated hardiness zones chart, which shows most areas being warmer now than they have been in the past, we were told locally that we should be able to plant palm trees (at least certain types) and that with a modicum of care those should now be able to survive our winters. Several local businesses ran with this idea and got the necessary permits in order to be able to plant palm trees as part of their landscaping (apparently there are government rules about this kind of thing; who knew?), which they then proceeded to do. And they looked pretty cool at first. But then EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM DIED during the first winter. Once again, who knew?

  6. So people are too dumb to understand the climate so we have a paint by numbers game. Oh and although it hasnt happened yet, we see global consistency in this trend (pssst… the models show it is surprisingly consistent). We haven’t had any warming for 20 yrs but the next 30, we will be back on track.

  7. RE: Seattle will resemble San Francisco by 2050……
    It already does. Proliferation of drug addicts and criminal drug trafficking in wretched illegal encampments that are true environmental disasters, human urine and excrement on the sidewalks, used needles in the parks, proliferation of diseases once thought to be eradicated through sanitation and vaccination, lawlessness aided and abetted by the socialist democrat politicians that selectively prohibit the police from enforcing the laws, etc ad nauseam.

    The Depraved New World…..

    • Even the climate isn’t ‘that much different- cold, windy and wet vs cold windy and foggy.

    • It already does. Proliferation of drug addicts and criminal drug trafficking in wretched illegal encampments that are true environmental disasters, human urine and excrement on the sidewalks, used needles in the parks, proliferation of diseases once thought to be eradicated through sanitation and vaccination, lawlessness aided and abetted by the socialist democrat politicians that selectively prohibit the police from enforcing the laws, etc ad nauseam.

      You should have more feeling for these people, they’re the first climate refuges.

  8. You are absolutely right – people move to warmer places to escape the cold. If Stockholm has the same climate as Vienna, maybe the Swedes would love it.

    I live in Newfoundland, Canada and we are 10 C mid afternoon 11 July 2019. We are having a much cooler summer than normal and would welcome a bit of warmth.

    • IDEM!
      We are having a totally crap summer in Russia too.
      It doesn’t stop raining, and there’s been a cold northerly airstream since early this spring.

      I have never picked so many mushrooms as this week, with all the rain.

      Back home it’s forecast to be 3C tonight IN MID JULY, with the longest days and white nights.
      If we’re supposed to be boiling to death with global warming, someone got the setting on the thermostadt wrong!

  9. “We thereby demonstrate concrete scenarios for the future of the life in those cities.”

    What’s “concrete” about contrived, speculative scenarios?

    • Well what do we expect from “scientists” that use colloquial speech in their publications? It’s more likely their heads are filled with concrete than their scenarios being concrete.

  10. That “consensus gap” appears to be mainly between the ears of said article authors, which include an Urban Geographer, a Historian, and a collection of others who have ZERO knowledge of Climate, Meteorology, or anything remotely concerning actual Science! More Garbage about a so called “Point of No Return”, which I guess is Asinine Occasional Crouton’s “End of the World”, but 2050 is the latest “Oh My God, Its Impossible for Life” date in many recent Climate Alarmist publications. I guess they continue to push for dates that expect 50% of present day people to be dead and the rest will have forgotten the predictions. Well, since the predictions of Doom for the last 50 years have failed to materialize, why not add another 50 years to the out dates?

  11. Northern States are more affected by the Polar Jet Stream meandering than the states in the south. The extent of PJS meandering is a direct consequence of the Polar Vortex strength, weak vortex has less control of the PJS, hence the northern states will have more cold and warm periods alternating. But as the case is, the climate alarmist make more noise during the warm ones, but lately even cold spells have been attributed to the global warming, or is it climate change.

    • Pretty much this. Living in the Canadian prariries all my life, my observation has always been: you can get a pretty good idea of the weather here (in a gross sense) just by following the jet stream forecasts/activity. Anecdotally speaking, of course. If it’s to the north of of you (or east/west, depending on your location and the directional trend of the stream there), it’ll be relatively warmer. Conversely, to the south. If you’re under it or near to the fringe of it, it’ll be variable/near-normal and probably windy. Beyond that, it just seems to be details and fine-tuning.

  12. “For example, across Europe, both summers and winters will get warmer, with average increases of 3.5°C and 4.7°C, respectively”

    Nonsense as well as all of the claims.

    How do mid latitude areas like Europe magically warm more than double global temperature would rise? What’s this new law of physics that doesn’t exist?

    The warming over recent decades for months especially in Summer and Winter has risen less than the global temperatures have for these areas. Maximum temperature records also struggle to beat more than global rise in temperature for local weather stations. This is nothing more than alarmist rubbish based on no facts at all.

    How do they expect some cities to even rise more than 5c unless there are near the poles, certainly will not happen and has never happened with the global warming seen so far.

    “These changes would be equivalent to a city shifting ~1,000 km further south towards the subtropics”

    Over the last 50 years or more there has been barley a shift in 100-200km further south. The planet won’t suddenly change 5 times greater for no reason what so ever and has failed to demonstrate anything at all that this would happen.

    The irony being if anything liked this did happen it would mainly benefit the general population because the sub-tropics and tropics will have had very little rises compared.

    • “shifting to warmer conditions, on average ~1000 km south (velocity ~20 km.year-1”
      Let’s see 1000 km / 31 years to 2050 = ~32 km/y.
      They can’t even seem to get the simple math right.

  13. So, 1.5 C warmer…IF IT HAPPENS, would be mostly at night and at the poles. And with the expected oceanic cycle cooling expected between 2020 and 2050 it most likely will not happen.

    Nobody would be carping about half a degree average warming in any of the 50 States except maybe Nevada and New Mexico (Hawaii would not get more than 0.2 C warmer)…and those have low humidity and likely wouldn’t notice the difference.

    Alarmist Warmunists are certain about the warming based on increased evaporation in the tropics…which will somehow cause more droughts. NONE of the dry regions that emerge in the climate models (since 2000) are emerging in reality.

    We will probably get cooling, but I”m rooting for about 2 C warming BEFORE the next inevitable interglacial cooling.

    • What surprised me was the 1.5 C figure. That’s not too far out of line with UAH’s 1.3 C per century (It’s just under 1.9 C per century). I’d say most people wouldn’t be too alarmed by that, not to mention virtually most people living today would be gone by 2100 so, who really cares if it’s a bit warmer in Minnesotastan.

  14. “If carbon emissions remain unabated, the Earth will be 1.5° C warmer by 2100 ”
    The first of many false assumptions this work is based on. When the foundation is faulty the superstructure should not be trusted. There is no correlation of warming to emissions. There is no correlation of atmospheric CO2 concentration to human emissions. Human emissions cannot be shown to account for more than about 5% of atmospheric CO2. The rest of the study is wasted effort.

  15. Regarding the “GAP between the science and public acceptance”…..WHAT ABOUT THE GAP between all of the CAGW science prognostications and reality.

    I’m not seeing even one successful prediction over the last 30 years….WHICH qualifies as a minimal Climate time intetval.

    Most of the predictions are totally off the wall laughable…like Mann’s flooding of South Manhattan years before now.

    No reasonable person – even without any science background – could take these liars seriously.

    The only thing BARELY keeping the Climate Models in the game at all….is manufactured data….NONE OF WHICH CAME DIRECTLY FROM ANY ACTUAL THERMOMETER READING before ~ 2006.

    • All the climate cult ever proves is how delusional they are. It’s basically a paradigm at this point.

  16. If those cities will move 1000km by 2050 when does the trip start?
    Are at zero miles now?
    When will mile 1 occur?

  17. From the article: “We only have 11 years until passing the point of no return. If carbon emissions remain unabated, ”

    Now see what you did, AOC! This person has taken you seriously when you claimed we only had 12 more years to the point of no return with regard to CAGW. Then you said you were just kidding, but now look, this person took you seriously and is now babbling inconherently about future catastrophe.

    When you are kidding, AOC, be sure to point it out right away otherwise weaker minds will think you are serious and will be misled into saying and doing stupid things.

  18. “Our approach illustrates how complex climate data can be packaged to provide tangible information.”
    Yes. They’re trying to sell something, and packaging is a big part of selling. The claim is that they are providing “tangible information”. Riiiiiight. Looks like propaganda. Feels like it. Smells like it. Tastes like it. Sure glad I didn’t step in it.

    • Um, if you already tasted it, stepping in it would be the least of your troubles, Bruce.

    • My point exactly. I live in The Netherlands. Which is a tiny mostly flat country. It measures 200km by 300 km appr. One interesting fact is that the average temperature difference between the north and the south is 2 degr. C. Which is according to the IPCC the difference between habitable and certain death. The people from the North have all kinds of opinions about the South and it’s inhabitants (remember they are only 300km or 190 miles apart.)
      Being uninhabitable, scorching, certain death and end of humanity are not amongst those opinions.
      And when the Dutch national teams plays in their characteristic orange outfits we are all one!

      You have to be stark raving to hold the opinion that one side of The Netherlands is already in a warming crisis based on the temp delta. Totally bonkers.

  19. How much of the urban warming is due to the Urban Heat Island effect? As cities grow larger, they get warmer. link

  20. The ‘study’ showed that Manchester’s temp will be similar to Montevideo, but they don’t seem to have spoken to the ’scientists’ that have been saying that ice melt will slow the Gulf Stream and make Northern Europe colder.

    They might as well have used tarot cards, but the MSM have lapped it up in the U.K.

  21. The PLoS paper lists 15 authors. The first author listed as the Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Supervision, Writing” author. The other 14 including the senior author are listed as “review & editing”.

    Strangely none of them saw this error in their Results section discussing their Fig 2A :
    “Overall 78% of the 520 Future Cities studied present a climate within the hypervolume representing covered combinations of climate conditions. Therefore, 22% of the Future Cities’ climate conditions would disappear from this current climatic domain (Fig 2A). As such, 22% of the world’s cities are likely to exist in a climatic regime that does current exist on the planet today.

    And as far as hotter and drier goes, I can tell you for certain none of these Swiss academics have ever spent a June-July-August in Phoenix, Arizona. They followed that cucked-up sentence (above) with this gem statement:
    “The situation is even more pronounced in the tropics, with 30% of cities experiencing novel climate conditions essentially because the climate will get drier.”

    Someone should go tell the IPCC WG1 authors that the hydrologic cycle is going to slow and thus the tropics are going to get drier. First the history, AR5 WG Chapter 2, p 202 has this statement along with the historical graphing of the precipitation data:
    “As a result the period 1951–2008 shows no significant overall trend in tropical land precipitation in any of the datasets (Table 2.10). Longer term trends (1901–2008) in the tropics, shown in Table 2.10, are also non-significant for each of the four data sets.”

    As for “future”, the IPCC’s chicken-bone and voodoo models say this about tropical precip:
    “In the tropics, precipitation changes exhibit strong regional contrasts, with increased precipitation over the equatorial Pacific and Indian Oceans and decreases over much of the subtropical ocean. However, decreases are not projected to be larger than natural 20-year variations anywhere until the end of this century under the RCP8.5 scenario. ”
    and this:”Over large landmasses, the direct effect of CO2 on precipitation is the opposite owing to the small thermal inertia of land surfaces (Andrews et al., 2010; Bala et al., 2010; Cao et al., 2012; Bony et al., 2013)” (AR5 Chapter 12, pages 1079-1080).

    As far as the hydrologic cycle goes, the IPCC AR5 says this:
    “Projected climate changes from simulations assessed in this report (shown schematically in FAQ 12.2, Figure 1) generally show an increase in precipitation in parts of the deep tropics and polar latitudes that could exceed 50% by the end of the 21st century under the most extreme emissions scenario. In contrast, large areas of the subtropics could have decreases of 30% or more. In the tropics, these changes appear to be governed by increases in atmospheric water vapour and changes in atmospheric circulation that further concentrate water vapour in the tropics and thus promote more tropical rainfall. “ (FAQ 12.2 | How Will the Earth’s Water Cycle Change, Chapter 12, AR5)

    So it appears that in communicating “climate change” by environmental studies groups, any old stuff can be made up to fit a narrative, even if it doesn’t adhere to IPCC scripture, as long as an alarmist message is presented.

    • Yes indeed Joel O’Bryan,
      these people with their utter belief in ‘IPCC’s chicken-bone and voodoo models’ (nice phrase 😉 ) show themselves to be non-credible alarmists.

    • And James Snook – July 11, 2019 at 12:20 pm – appears to endorse Tarot cards.

      My own idealized mechanism for infallible predictions is to ensure that many chimpanzees have darts available, and typewriters, and also whisky.
      Much whisky. And time.
      Thus ensuring all predictions are made. Some will be found to be infallible

      Note – mods – this is a thought experiment only; no anthropoid ape was inebriated [or even inconvenienced] in making this infallible prediction about the Climate Emergency.

      Auto
      I will keep the secret about which will be infallible . . .

  22. My bet would be on the side of we will have problems breathing the air because of too much CO2 before CO2 causes a 1.5C increase in temps. CO2 still only emits @ three different wavelengths. Only two of those is in the thermal range and only one of those is relevant. 92% of what the earth emits is still invisible to CO2. And only a little less than 1/2 of that will be emitted in the direction of the planet.

    With more CO2 it will just get in the way of the emissions as they head back towards earth.

  23. Visualization is important. If only we could “see” CO2 like St. Greta can, then we would know how dangerous and evil it is. Maybe some more climate movies, showing how bad the “climate crisis” will be in say, 2040, if we fail to act. Yes, more climate movies. That’s the ticket.

  24. ROFLMAO! These quacks need sued, seriously. They are a waste of tax dollars and are publicly proclaiming the equivalent of shouting “fire” in a crowded theater.

    So who plans on starting an orange grove in Washington D.C.? Hey, maybe someone should start a vineyard in Oslo, or an alligator farm in Des Moines. I look forward to buying my coffee straight from the plantations in Lubbock, TX and growing Avocado in my front yard.

  25. As I moved in younger years from Berlin / Germany to mediterranean coast in South of France I had about 1.300 kms to drive to south 😀

  26. 2019 plus 11 years = 2030! The alleged point of no return scenario for these alarmists.
    2019 plus 31 years – 2050! Where alleged climate change impacts cost $12 trillion per year!
    * Right now, an estimated $1.5 trillion per year is wasted on ineffectual efforts in a pretense to address global warming. Those are not global warming caused costs!
    * Every year between now and 2050 will allegedly incur an additional $387 billion dollars of global warming costs.

    N.B. Using the recent fashionable name of “climate change” identifies the intended scam.
    N.B. Isn’t it amazing when desperate alarmists pull numbers, facts, imaginary scenarios and specious claims from their nether regions!?

    “Our Climate Future
    Millions marching the streets, daily articles in every newspaper and heartfelt pleas: never before has the topic of climate change been so omnipresent.”

    Another research claim basing itself upon complicit media endless hype.

    “The problem: We only have 11 years until passing the point of no return.”

    Use a thoroughly bogus claim.

    “The imminence of the climate threat requires unified actions across all sectors of society. However, a growing body of evidence suggests that facts and data, which are often hard to understand, do not necessarily persuade people to act.”

    Make a false claim about difficulty of understanding data. Meaning that there are zero directly observable climate effects; so the alleged researchers muddy up the obvious while implying alarmists versions of data will eventually have value.

    An admission that alarmists crying wolf for thirty years is near ineffective.

    “Behavioral change is much more likely to be inspired by visualizations that make climate issues tangible.
    Introduction
    With our analysis, we aim to do just this. Rather than describing quantitative change variables, we paired the predicted climate conditions of 520 major cities in 2050 with analogues conditions of cities around the world today. We thereby demonstrate concrete scenarios for the future of the life in those cities. By making data relatable, we hope to motivate citizens and policy makers to adapt their decision making accordingly. ”

    When crying wolf fail, ramp up the alleged dangers; i.e. now these alleged researchers are shrieking ‘wolves’ are coming.
    The exact same dangers that fail to motivate people; only more, sooner and directly relatable. Yeah, right…

    Diarrhetic buzzard excrement dressed up with spoiled shaving soap.
    Apparently compiled by alarmists with Pre Traumatic Stress Syndrome, who are unable to communicate their excessive fears.

  27. “Stockholm will resemble Budapest, London to Barcelona, Moscow to Sofia, Seattle to San Francisco, Tokyo to Changsha.”

    One might have thought that these yahoos might have checked some basic facts, but no. Here is the difference in annual average temperature for the city pairs:

    Stockholm – Budapest: 4.6 C
    London – Barcelona: 5.9 C
    Moscow-Sofia: 6.0 C
    Seattle-San Francisco 3.4 C
    Tokyo-Changsha 3.0 C

    So global warming is apparently going twice as fast in Europe as in East Asia or North America, for it couldn’t possibly be that these people do not realize that the north-south temperature gradient is very different in different places, could it? Or that it depends on things like the distance to the nearest coast, ocean currents, altitude etc.

    In any case these figures mean that in Europe for the next 30 years the temperature is supposed to rise as much every five years as it has in the last 150 years, starting immediately (in the US and China however apparently only every ten years).

    For if the temperature rise should continue at the same rate as the last 150 years the climate in Stockholm for example will only have migrated about halfway to Visby (which lies about 120 miles south) by 2050.

    • Hey you left out the best part. That is Prince Charles!

      God save the Queen, and let us pray that she out lives her son.

  28. Highly dubious claims at best.
    Contrary to popular belief, it DOES get hot in MN in the summer. (depending on your definition of hot) Not so much that it gets into the triple digits, (although it has, in my lifetime) BUT the combination of heat and humidity pumped in from the Gulf of Mexico can make for a miserable August, that would make an Arizonan plead to go back to Phoenix, where at least it is a dry heat.
    Human caused climate change will never offset the effect of the big lake (Superior, just for clarification) which currently sits as I type this at a balmy 40F degree water temperature, and has a dramatic effect on all surrounding areas up to 50 miles from the water.
    So, I guess if it starts to feel like Knoxville, TN here in my neck of the woods, I’ll just go have a dip in the lake.
    But I am still going to raise a big red BS flag for this piece of trash, as I prefer to stay away from Duluth. Many decades of Democrat rule there have turned it into a giant money-sucking, wallet-emptying, “tax-everything, and then tax it some more” nightmare of epic proportions, and I don’t know why anybody in their right mind would want to live, shop, or work there.
    As the saying goes, “It’s a nice place to visit…”

  29. I was watching Shepard Smith, a Fox News host on tv about an hour ago and he was standing in front of a large weather map pointing out the tropical storm there and he highligted the temperatures of the water in the Gulf of Mexico and said “See, that is caused by climate change, obviously”.

    So I guess just like Greta, Shepard can see climate change.

    I guess Shepard must be a true believer. Yesterday, someone questioned CAGW and Shepard about had a fit right on the air sputtering and searching for a good retort, which ended up being an appeal to authority. Shepard is going on hearsay, not facts.

  30. I live in Central Ohio. 1000Km south of here is Tallahassee Florida. In honor of that here is Freddie “Boom Boom” Cannon with his 1959 hit: “Tallahasse Lassie”:

    • The one bad thing about having to move to Tallahassee is that we would have to leave behind our beloved Ohio State Buckeyes and become Florida State Seminoles. I think we will stoutly resist that.

  31. “Most people who move to Florida don’t have any trouble adjusting.”

    Ah, because of the blessed A/C, courtesy of … hydrocarbons!

  32. “Florida is the place people retire, because of its gentle warm climate”

    Uh no (except in the winter). FL is brutally hot and humid in the summer, unless you live on the coast with daily onshore breezes.

  33. Has there ever been in the history of the world a branch of science more ridiculed than climate science?

    • Plate tectonics, natural selection, bacteria cause ulcers, and relativity off the top of my head.

  34. Wow, so according to these folks an additional 0.02% CO2 will somehow reduce the difference in day/night length in higher latitudes by 50%. Must somehow be able to reduce the tilt of the earth’s axis. After all, the biggest difference in climate between the north and south is how much the weather changes with the seasons.

  35. But of course all the “scientists” making these claims use fossil fuels every day as before, because they are doing the good work of getting the word out to the world of the impending disasters. I love how they always claim that things will get drier, or wetter, but they never know which.

  36. “the Earth will be 1.5° C warmer by 2100.” Wrong. That’s from estimated 1850 temperatures.
    Rewrite as ‘the Earth will be 0.5° C warmer by 2100 compared to 2019.’ Wow, not as scary?

  37. “and cities from the tropics shifting to drier conditions.” If the GHG theory was true (but it isn’t) you need water vapour forcing to pump up the heat trapping because 413 ppm isn’t enough, then the tropics would have to have even more water vapour not less. The climate scientists can’t even get their theory correct.

  38. So now it is Global Warming Again?
    I thought the official Alarmist Meme was Climate Change?
    As Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming kinda stalled out and has not happened.
    Right there the speculation that increased atmospheric CO2 causes warming died.
    So then it was Climate Change,without specifying what change is manmade,yet always prattling on about Global Warming, where yesterdays storms were weather and all todays storms are “Unprecedented”.

    Do these hacks even believe their own story?

  39. There is always a large gap between the date we are all doomed because of climate change and the date we are “informed” of this impending disaster. The gap is to enable those spouting this rubbish not to be blamed when it doesn’t happen because people will have forgotten who said it (except maybe Al Gore). Life would not exist without CO2. Beleve it or not, the sun has an effect on climate temperatures. Now, who would have thought that?

  40. Since 1880 we’ve had roughly 0.8C and yet in London the temperature will rise 6C in 30 years i.e. 2C per decade?

    Calling BS on this

      • It can warm more than 20 C in just a morning, but the point with the OP is about monthly or seasonal temperatures.

        A 6c rise in monthly temperatures is extremely BS in just over 30 years at a rate about 20 times greater than global temperatures. It is mathematically and physical impossible against the rules of science and logic. Most of the warming is occurring in winter and overnight closest to the poles, so beneficial and not harmful to life.

        It is very clearly nonsense, but nonsense gets a free pass with no supported scientific evidence when it suits the cause and agenda in climate science. The level of scrutiny is zero when for the cause and quite the opposite side of the scale when against it.

  41. For the sake of completnes an opinion of a climate scientist regarding this paper:
    James Annen says: https://twitter.com/jamesannan/status/1149225140372279296
    The temperature of London increased about 0.2 K/dec during 1970…2018. To hit the paper-claimed value of 2K to 2050 the warming must speed up with a factor of 3 in the next years. It’s not described how.
    In a study ( https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa75d7) also from the ETH Zurich the authors in 2017 concluded, that one can’t match 2 annnual variables, the authors of the recent paper managed 19!?
    Methods: did they caclulate only the present year (2000) and the future year (2050) for every location or also the years in between? IMO not described.
    All in one: garbage.

    • That there are “extinct” climates, i e climates that do not exist anywhere today, but have existed in the past is a commonplace in paleontology. Google “disharmonious assemblages”.

      This surely applies to future climates as well.

      • Yes, I didn’t dispute this. However, I downscaled the CMIP5 mean to the region of London and found for RCP4.5 ( which they used in the paper) a warming rate of 0.23 K/ dec for 2000-2050. I could not find any hint in the paper how they calculated 0.66 K/dec for 2K warming (from their linked data base) between these years.
        So in the 1st approach the results seem to be garbage or “a load of bollocks” as it was expressed by James Annen.

        • Read how they got the result. They used PCA for 19 climate variables and selected 6 of them as “the most significant”:

          “The main contributing variables to the four components are the temperature seasonality (axis 1), the minimum temperature of the coldest month (axis 1), the maximum temperature of the warmest month (axis 2), the precipitation seasonality (axis 2), the precipitation of the driest (axis 4) and of the wettest (axis 3) month, and the temperature diurnal range (axis 4, Fig 1).”

          Note that (average) temperature is NOT one of their “contributing variables”. It is quite possible for two places to have completely different climates and still be similar in most or all of their “contributing variables”. For example Stockholm and Budapest (one of their city pairs) have pretty much the same maximum and minimum precipitation and preciptation seasonality, that is three of their six variables already. However the annual cycles are utterly different, Stockholm is driest in March, Budapest in September, but that is NOT one of their variables. Budapest also has a much longer and warmer summer, and about 4.5 C warmer annual average. Neither is one of their variables. And so on.

          All they have managed to do is to show how NOT to use Principal Component Analysis.

          • Yes, I know.. They made a pdf- analyses and catched one of 19 variables to blame it on the GMST of the location to lift up the modeled T increase. Didn’t you get the clue? Sorry..This approach belongs on the heap of fake-science. Not the only one….Asking for a novel peer review.

  42. Climate – weather – climate – weather. Weather is what we remember.

    Like the summer of ’93 – remember it well – it was the afternoon of Sunday, July 18. We were volunteer campground hosts at the US Forest Service Diamond Lake Campground, Oregon. Elevation: 5,200 feet. That year, Crater Lake National Park a few miles away had about 600 inches of snow. It’s weather, one just gets used to it…..

Comments are closed.