WMO Climate Panic: “If emissions don’t start falling there will be hell to pay.”

World Meteorological Organization Logo

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Climate scientists maxing out on panic.

Climate change ‘hitting harder and sooner’ than forecast, warn scientists ahead of UN meeting

Updated yesterday at 11:02am

Key points:

  • The new report revealed that global temperatures between 2015-2019 were the hottest on record
  • It noted carbon emissions in the same period had risen by 20 per cent
  • Its authors also warned of the alarming extent of sea-level rise and melting glaciers

A new report published ahead of key UN climate talks has warned the world is falling drastically behind in the race to avert climate disaster, with the five-year period ending in 2019 the hottest on record.

The data, compiled by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), says climate change is accelerating, with sea levels rising, carbon dioxide levels increasing and ice sheets melting faster than ever before. 

It warned that carbon-cutting efforts have to be intensified immediately and comes ahead of a major UN climate summit in New York on Monday that will be attended by more than 60 world leaders, as secretary-general Antonio Guterres pushes for countries to increase their greenhouse gas reduction targets.

“This reads like a credit card statement after a five-year-long spending binge,” said Dave Reay, chair in carbon management at the University of Edinburgh.

“Our global carbon credit is maxed out,” he added. 

If emissions don’t start falling there will be hell to pay.

Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-23/climate-change-accelerating-warn-scientists/11537240

The report is available here.

Carbon emissions rising 20% in four years, and still that pesky Arctic icecap refuses to melt.

It must be a real challenge for the climate community, thinking up new scary statements which are even more scary than last year’s scary statements, without accidentally including verifiable claims about consequences which might lead to embarrassment.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
141 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
PaulH
September 24, 2019 6:10 am

“…hell to pay”? Is that a technical term? 😉

Tom Gelsthorpe
Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 6:43 am

Yes, “hell to pay” is a technical term. It indicates how the climate change panic is a quasi-religious millenarian cult, rather than a scientific inquiry. Alarmists have grafted the Judeo-Christian story of a Lost Eden onto the Ancient Greek myth of Prometheus. Both stories are parables of original sin — Adam & Eve partaking of the forbidden Tree of Knowledge, and Prometheus stealing fire from the Olympian gods — with dire, eternal punishments for humanity in consequence.

We MUST stop burning things, DO PENANCE, and eschew worldly comforts, or the world plunge off a cliff. For all eternity our punishment will be to get screamed at by obsessive/compulsive Scandinavian teenagers until we agree to repent for ever and ever. Alas, even that might not work. We might have passed the tipping point! AHHHHH!!!

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Tom Gelsthorpe
September 24, 2019 8:34 am

Eventually the Climate Compact will have no choice but to partake of real knowlege from the “Tree”. They’ll have the apple shoved down their throats by nature herself. They already know the jig is up and this is why all the panic! There will be no stopping the whopping Asian and African CO2 emissions.

The panic has nothing to do with galloping CO2, however. The climateers are really desperate to initiate a big international policy success in time to claim credit for averting a crisis that was never going to happen. Their worry is they will be shown to have been responsible for the most colossal waste of trillions and 100s of millions of deaths these resources could have prevented.

It likely hasn’t hit compliant clisci troughers yet that when the reckoning is in, politicians will also turn on them saying “We, unfortunately, trusted these scientists”. The consensus PhDs will take the entire hit and rightly so for letting themselves be exploited in this horrible, immoral way.

Bryan A
Reply to  Tom Gelsthorpe
September 24, 2019 2:04 pm

WHEW
Thought it said “Shell to Pay”

K. Hunter
Reply to  Tom Gelsthorpe
September 25, 2019 10:10 am

Well, to be fair Tom it is only people like you and me, you know – ordinary folk unconcerned with the fate of the world, who must give up our use of energy. After all, that energy is required by the important people who fly around the world on private jets to lecture the commoners on their need to do without – for the ultimate benefit of humanity at large of course.

LdB
Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 7:10 am

Guess there is going to be hell to pay because emission aren’t going to drop 🙂

Adamsson
Reply to  LdB
September 24, 2019 9:18 am

That is one thing I can absolutely 100% guarantee.

Robert W Turner
Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 7:23 am

In other words, implement the impossible to repeal legislation now before nature exposes the scam.

Goldrider
Reply to  Robert W Turner
September 24, 2019 8:07 am

+1000!
Because “Winter is Coming . . . ” 😉

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Goldrider
September 24, 2019 1:35 pm

Grand solar minimum. I really hope the loonies are right because my lovely garden won’t survive. But I am 700 ft up, with a large wood pile….

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
September 25, 2019 12:54 am

Chas,
My wife and I took up a hobby of the ornamental plant, the Camellia, in 1982. We made authorised collection trips to Yunnan, China and Japan, from which two countries the Camellia originated.
We have observed the general growth properties over these 40 or so years, in a wide variety of settings. I have done years of graduate work in plant nutrition and soil chemistry to assist observation of the Camellia.
The bottom line is that the last decade has been superb for the Camellia. There is less visual stress shown by yellowed leaves, low vigour, low yields of blooms and fruit.
It is so easy to attribute this improvement to CO2 fertilization, but that would be unscientific. Trials need to be done. But the improvement cannot, either, be yet denied as due to CO2. Geoff S

Latitude
Reply to  Robert W Turner
September 24, 2019 9:22 am

That would be asking the UN to repeal the very legislation they put into place…guaranteeing CO2 emissions would increase

The whole thing is a farce….asking the UN to do something about it….when it’s the UN’s policies that increased it

…the UN does not want to stop climate change

Duane
Reply to  Robert W Turner
September 24, 2019 11:27 am

Too late … already exposed

Sara
Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 8:02 am

“…hottest on record….”

Not where I live. I keep track. A 2-week heat wave in July is normal. The only annoying thing about it was that last July, I had to call the fridge repairman because the circuit board for the freezer defrost cycle blew itself out and had to be replaced. I had to buy ice at McD’s, fer Pete’s sake!!!

So how much money are these wankers looking for this time???? 🙂 Just askin’. Excuse me while I go check the household thermostat to see if I need to run the furnace today. It was 51F overnight last night.

Hottest ever, my fat Aunt Harriet!!!

pigs_in_space
Reply to  Sara
September 24, 2019 2:18 pm

funny thing!
Back home in Ural it’s snowing like mad today, and it’s only just touched Equinox.

For the hottest year ever we’re trying pretty hard now.
Putting a brave face on for our kids going to school with snow 1 month early, and facing an 8 month winter, not a 7 month winter!

yea, right!
sure we could do with some of that extra “hottest ever” year when all we had all summer was pouring rain and freezing cold.

Tom Gelsthorpe
Reply to  Sara
September 25, 2019 5:00 am

News flash! It gets hot in summer, cold in winter, and wet during the rainy season. AHHHHH!!!

Let’s everybody panic and fork over more money & power to the grafters and layabouts at the U.N. They can fix everything. No more annoying fluctuations, no more temptations for recreational travel, rich foods, or even refrigerated food after the do-gooders take your freedom away.

Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 11:01 am

your sure this is the problem. grand solar Minimum and magnetic reversal dont have nothing to do with anything. 1958 there was a huge solar flare that scared the crap out of everybody. Did that happen?. Did the CIA and keep secrets from us about what they discovered after they investigated the 1958 incident from our son. I think that we need to come up with the truth your man mainstream.

MarkH
Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 1:36 pm

I think that’s the new tax bracket we’ll all be in.

On a slightly more serious note. Anyone telling you to panic is trying to control you. Power and control are what all of this us really about. I have a feeling it will get worse before it gets better. If it gets better.

Mohatdebos
Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 2:23 pm

Is there any way to calculate over time global average temperature using actual temperature readings versus “estimated” temperature readings?

Reply to  Mohatdebos
September 24, 2019 3:05 pm

Well, the warming here is ‘unprecedented’ *

Yesterday it was 19 C.
Today it was 20 C this afternoon.
By Christmas, it will be > 100 C
And we have had Interrupted Rainfall Event Theophratus this afternoon, too. Wet my car!
Tonight we have Darkness Anna-Molly-Joy

* In the last three days.

Auto
Mods – it’s all /Sarc.

MarkW
Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 3:21 pm

hell yes

Babs12
Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 4:28 pm

Lol I had to look it up 😉

And the “hell” we’re “paying”, is having to hear these weather zealots blather on.

mr bliss
Reply to  PaulH
September 24, 2019 5:53 pm

Indeed it is – and Dave Reay then when home to scare the living daylights out of his kids by telling them this latest climate horror story

Gerry, England
Reply to  PaulH
September 25, 2019 5:41 am

They need to get in line behind the chinese, indians, maldivians, etc

Sunny
September 24, 2019 6:21 am

We need the names of the worlds 99% of scientists who support such lies……. What temperature records? From which year to which year? What level is the worlds oceans rising? How did hundreds of years of mass coal burning in the years before the victorian industrial and during plus world wide coal burning years not change the climate? America wasn’t built buy using green Energy 😐 How come fossil fuels is a big world ending problem now?! Also how much does the u.n. and ipcc get per year to scare billions of people? The u.n can not help areas affected with civil war, but some how they know the factual science to save the world 😐

James Francisco
Reply to  Sunny
September 24, 2019 6:39 am

Sunny. Do you suppose there is a corralation between the number of wars the UN hasn’t been able to stop and the CO2 or temp record?

Sunny
Reply to  James Francisco
September 24, 2019 7:59 am

James Francisco, probably, the u.n needs to stay relevant, first it was war billions, but now they are after the green Trillions (bernie needs 16 trillion to save the usa 😐) They say we need to cut emissions, yet they take flights all over the world, use mobile phones, computers, cars, taxis, helicopters. When they start living in caves and grow their own food, then I mite believe them.

Rocketscientist
Reply to  Sunny
September 24, 2019 8:40 am

Living in caves… they will probably have mites. 🙂

James Schrumpf
Reply to  Sunny
September 24, 2019 9:03 am

If one looks at individual stations and what they’re doing, it’s quite interesting. For example, of the nearly 13,000 GHCN stations in the US, a little less than half of them show a cooling trend over the past 4-5 years.

On the average, of course, the trend of the average global anomaly is up a bit, but that’s only the average TAVG anomaly, which is doubly meaningless.

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  James Schrumpf
September 24, 2019 12:23 pm

James

If you wander over to the Deplorables site (Tony Heller’s realcmimatescience.com) you can see that the past five years are the hottest on record since the 1930’s. Pffffft!

He has a good new video on the claim by M Mann that the ice coverage is decreasing since 1979, showing the data back 100 years giving a “somewhat different picture”.

[“realcmimatescience.com” or “www/realclimatescience.com”

Coram Deo
September 24, 2019 6:23 am

THE NAZI ROOTS OF ENVIRONMENTALISM & THE CLIMATE CHANGE
video – 27 minutes 3 seconds
In the second episode of Close Encounters, Rupert Darwall and Ben Weingarten discuss Darwall’s new book ‘Green Tyranny: Exposing the Totalitarian Roots of the Climate Industrial Complex’ and a series of topics including the Nazi roots of the modern environmentalist movement, Sweden’s environmentalist power grab, the anti-capitalist underpinnings of the environmentalist movement, the links between the acid rain fraud and today’s global warming movement, why the Paris climate accord represent a battle for America’s soul and much more.

icisil
Reply to  Coram Deo
September 24, 2019 7:03 am
Michael S. Kelly LS, BSA Ret.
Reply to  icisil
September 25, 2019 3:51 am

That’s pretty funny!

French geographer
September 24, 2019 6:33 am

New taxes for fighting global warming ? No problem

HotScot
Reply to  French geographer
September 24, 2019 8:33 am

As much as I disliked that iteration of Yes Prime Minister that clip is brilliant.

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  HotScot
September 24, 2019 11:26 am

And produced by the BBC.. somebody was asleep at the wheel

Editor
September 24, 2019 6:41 am

Notice how these so called scientists and anyone still a AGW warmist , fail to notice the obvious warming phases aligns with El-Nino phases. When El-Nino fades, temperature drops, and even more when there is a La-Nina phase.

CO2 doesn’t do squat to temperature trends.

ATheoK
Reply to  Sunsettommy
September 24, 2019 11:54 am

Plus 100+

B d Clark
September 24, 2019 6:41 am

The only data I have seen contradicts these claims ,for the 4 year period.are they trying to confuse the false data in the summer of heatwaves which technically were not heat waves and the temps were recorded in known hot spots in inner citys which bare no relation to temps recorded 20 miles away,a 20% increase in c02 that might be the case but the starting point was tiny around 0.410 and is around 0.417 now ,theres no correlation to a increase in temps when there has been no overall temp increases,this is yet again another example of the vicious circle un predicts with no evidence,to convince governments who fund the un and scientists a self fulfilling agenda, the governments who are not taken in by this bulls–t need to make public exactly what’s going on here.

Andy Espersen
Reply to  B d Clark
September 24, 2019 8:08 am

There are many more “data contradicting these claims”, B d Clark. Wasn’t it hotter only a thousand years ago? Wasn’t it hotter still ca 2000 years ago? Wasn’t it the very hottest ever (in this interglacial) during the climatic maximum ca 8000 years ago when sea levels were about 2 metres higher than today? And didn’t global temperatures (and sea levels) fluctuate with cooler periods in between these hot periods? – though over all, the globe is mercilessly cooling down as we head for the next ice age. I have no doubt that these alarmists honestly believe their stupendous lies about global temperatures – the best liar is one who believes his own lies.

B d Clark
Reply to  Andy Espersen
September 24, 2019 8:18 am

Yes I’ve seen most of the data,that’s why I say the only data I see contradicts this report, I think an ice age is unproven in the short and medium turn, but I do believe a maunder cooling event is at the beginning of making its presence felt,the more the alarmism grows the more I believe theres going to be a significant cooling event,the IPCC and the un are well aware of the data for a cooling event,

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  B d Clark
September 24, 2019 11:31 am

you overstate the amount of CO2 by a factor of 10.. it is 0.0415%

B d Clark
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
September 24, 2019 11:53 am

yes I said 0.417 I should of said 0.0417 my bad

Sunny
September 24, 2019 6:44 am

I forgot to add, did they admit, that there own models are wrong? I thought we had until 2050?

dennisambler
Reply to  Sunny
September 24, 2019 7:44 am

They now believe their models and present them as facts and “the latest science.”

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2019/09/a-climate-modeller-spills-the-beans/

TRM
Reply to  dennisambler
September 24, 2019 4:45 pm

Thank you very much. WUWT should have an interview with Dr Nakamura.

RicDre
Reply to  Sunny
September 24, 2019 7:54 am

“I forgot to add, did they admit, that there own models are wrong? I thought we had until 2050?”

Many of the new AR6 models are running even hotter then their earlier models so we are starting to see new “It’s worse than we thought!!!” stories.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/04/new-climate-models-predict-warming-surge

Jeremiah Puckett
September 24, 2019 6:45 am

I sure am getting sick of hearing these sheep in the USA who say they’ll resign the Paris Agreement as soon as Trump is out of office. They tell me 195 countries… Blah, blah, blah. Okay, what of the 195 countries?? Countries like Zimbabwe signed on, but have no real carboy footprint to reduce so why count them? Countries like Germany made bold promises and aren’t living up to them. Countries like China and India promised to EXPONENTIALLY INCREASE emissions reaching “peak by 2030” with no promise to reduce in the future. So, what countries are we speaking of??

Latitude
Reply to  Jeremiah Puckett
September 24, 2019 8:24 am

190 countries get paid to increase their emissions….it’s a scam

Mark Broderick
September 24, 2019 6:45 am

“climate change is accelerating, with sea levels rising, carbon dioxide levels increasing and ice sheets melting faster than ever before. ” ?

Where ?

Jeremiah Puckett
Reply to  Mark Broderick
September 24, 2019 6:58 am

Good question! And where? We don’t see it at the base of the statue of liberty. We don’t see it over the Arizona in Honolulu. We don’t see it on Waikiki Beach. We don’t see it at the Sydney Opera House. We don’t see it in Boston. We don’t see it in the cliffs of Dover. Reality sea level has been rising for centuries at about 5 to 8 in per 100 years and that’s what it’s doing now. They act like a massive wall of water is coming.

noaaprogrammer
Reply to  Jeremiah Puckett
September 24, 2019 7:55 am

… and this is why the Chicken Littles are not taken seriously by many people who take a look out of their seaside homes and see the ocean tides come and go at the same levels as the tides have always done since they began living there.

So these chickens have to run around as with their heads cut off before the facts come home to roost.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Jeremiah Puckett
September 24, 2019 6:50 pm

I was curious myself, living on an island in the Pacific Northwest, whether the island would become an archipelago soon. I first looked for old aerial photos for Whidbey island, looking for something I could compare to Google Maps. I found a spot with a good beach photo, at Greenbank. Then I found it on Google Maps. The Google Maps image looks like it was taken at low tide, the old photo from 1963 looks like high tide. But I compared the debris line with the roads, which haven’t changed in 56 years. I can’t see any difference at all.

I also looked for old photos of the Deception pass Bridge, at the north end of Whibey. Found one taken in 1940, which shows the base of the south span. It’s not a high res photo, but I was able to compare it to a 2013 photo of almost the same angle. The high water mark looks to be exactly the same (give or take a couple inches).

This area is geologically active, sitting on the Juan de Fuca plate, but I couldn’t tell from the literature I found if there is subsidence or any significant land movement. All I could find was an uplift event approximately 3000 years ago.

So, where is the catastrophic sea level rise?

Deano
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
September 24, 2019 10:51 pm

Boy I sure do love Whidbey Island. I was stationed at the Naval Air Station there in Oak Harbor during my time in the Navy. We went up to Deception Pass often during my time there.. That`s truly God’s country!!

Goldrider
Reply to  Mark Broderick
September 24, 2019 8:08 am

Sometimes I think they live in a parallel universe. Or something.

Reply to  Mark Broderick
September 24, 2019 8:15 am

Indeed, where? I’ve looked in vain: https://wordpress.com/post/silvercityburro.com/572

Marc
September 24, 2019 6:53 am

Its the Greater Lie Theory on steroids. To keep the ball in the air when the gravity of facts keeps trying to pull it back down you must keep increasing the size of the lies. And then you must move quickly to the next lie before the former lie can be exposed. The climate hucksters seem to have taken a page out of the old Enron playbook.

Pachygrapsus
September 24, 2019 7:00 am

Remember the early 2000s, when the temperature trend was downward, and alarmists screamed about “cherry picking” because 1998 was a strong El Nino year, so you couldn’t include it in your analysis? Somehow, they seem to have forgotten that objection, because their new “accelerated warming” and “accelerated sea level rise” claims are based on short, 5 or ten year periods that include an even more powerful El Nino.

Bryan A
September 24, 2019 7:01 am

IF our “Global Carbon Budget” is “Maxed Out” as indicated, why are countries like China (>30% of global emissions and rising) and India given free reign to continue releasing CO2 at ever increasing rates for the next 15 years?
AND China is vaunted as a Climate Leader??
Why does an obviously DEVELOPED nation like China get the pass like a third world developing nation???

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Bryan A
September 24, 2019 12:36 pm

That is easy to answer because China will keep on bringing hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and deprivation.

If some country wants to commit economic suicide, that is their choice. They have a policy of non-interference in the domestic affairs of others and insist on the same respect from those others.

Which serious science policy people in the back rooms truly believes this is about “saving the planet”? It is about money, power and control. They have some and they’d like some more.

Jeremiah Puckett
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
September 24, 2019 9:00 pm

Yup! The Communist Manifesto is all about control. Control education. Control where people live. Control what they buy. Control the economy. Control transportation. Control your job and income. Control, control, control.

willem post
September 24, 2019 7:03 am

Fossil Fuel Percentage Unchanged for Over 43 years

In the 1970s the big worry was fossil fuels would soon run out, and so we should “use them wisely”. But in the 1980s the risk changed to one of an overheating planet, and so we should not use them at all. This article shows unchanged fossil energy use from 1970 to 2013, a period of 43 years.
http://notrickszone.com/2018/01/12/green-energy-revolution-a-flop-fossil-fuels-share-of-total-energy-use-unchanged-in-40-years/ – sthash.ppb98WN4.dpbs

Fossil fuels have been 78 to 80 percent of total primary energy for at least 43 years, despite trillions of dollars having been spent on RE during the past 20 years. It appears there is plenty of FF for at least the next 80 to 100 years, albeit at higher prices.

FF CO2 emissions are only about 36.183 b Mt, FF/53.4 b Mt, all sources = 68% of all manmade emissions in 2016. Considering the extreme steepness of the FF CO2 reductions to stay within 2 C by 2100, which are impossible to implement (see graphs in URLs), even steeper reductions to reduce ALL manmade CO2 would be impossible as well, even if the entire world were to build only nuclear and hydro plants as of right now. See URLs.

http://euanmearns.com/global-co2-emissions-forecast-to-2100/#more-21109
https://www.carbonbrief.org/what-global-co2-emissions-2016-mean-climate-change
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-global-co2-emissions-set-to-rise-2-percent-in-2017-following-three-year-plateau
http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-world-making-almost-no-progress-towards-renewable-energy

Flight Level
September 24, 2019 7:04 am

In 2017 WMO called a very watery conference on climate change and aviation. Where it was unclear if planes impact warming or warming impact planes. More money being needed to conclude, whenever, if ever. As usual. More money, more panic, more money.

This said, in case we missed it, is there an official WMO issued advisory bulletin on how we have to fly to dodge the tremendous and very urgent absolutely dangerous effects of global warming ?

Like, when it’s so hot in Germany that we have to use engine anti-icing from ground up on September mornings?

How comes the WMO avoids discussion with those who know a thing or three on first-hand weather?

Somehow, despite that many hot talks, glycol prices are already taking the elevator. It’s so warm here that the weather guys talk of winter operations mega-mayhem. Once again that is.

C’mon WMO guys, quit your disorder and join reality for crying out loud !

Latitude
September 24, 2019 7:04 am

So?….the UN put policies in place that guarantee “carbon dioxide levels increasing”

and then expect people to take them serious

Speed
September 24, 2019 7:07 am

From the US EPA …

“In 2017, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions totaled 6,456.7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents, or 5,742.6 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents after accounting for sequestration from the land sector.
“Emissions decreased from 2016 to 2017 by 0.5 percent (after accounting for sequestration from the land sector). This decrease was largely driven by a decrease in emissions from fossil fuel combustion, which was a result of multiple factors including a continued shift from coal to natural gas and increased use of renewables in the electric power sector, and milder weather that contributed to less overall electricity use.
“Greenhouse gas emissions in 2017 (after accounting for sequestration from the land sector) were 13 percent below 2005 levels.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks

The US is reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Transportation and electricity generation are the largest US contributors. Electric vehicle sales are still small but rising — automobile and truck manufacturers are spending billions to develop new electric products. For generation, natural gas is replacing coal while wind turbines and photocells are being added to the mix.

Now, what about building some safe, clean and reliable nuclear generating plants to put the last nail in the CO2 coffin?

commieBob
September 24, 2019 7:10 am

What prediction?

The observed temperatures are below those predicted by the models. How can they say climate change is happening faster than predicted?

Global warming is demonstrably happening a lot slower than predicted. In fact, for a couple of recent decades, global warming wasn’t happening at all. Once we have the most recent El Nino out of the way, I’m guessing that global warming will stall out again.

IMHO, these guys think we’re in for a bout of global cooling and they’re getting desperate.

Douglas Fenning
September 24, 2019 7:12 am

When will these Climate change fanatics realise that the Industrialised nations cannot effect change any faster than they are doing. The new industrialised nations are trying to improve their populations living standards and will not slow down. That trying to force the situation will only bring conflict. That more human lives could be put at risk by acting precipitously. That the UN has no ability to coerce or govern the world and in all likelihood would cause more harm than good. Or do they want up to 2 billion lives put at risk upon there hands. Science should be focusing on cleaner energy forms as should the UN and National governments and in my opinion nature will not supply them.

Bruce Cobb
September 24, 2019 7:12 am

“So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.”

Stephen Schneider saw a “double ethical bind” wrt telling the truth about climate change, but that has conveniently morphed into giving them carte blanche to full-on LIE, and that is precisely what they’re doing.

JohnWho
September 24, 2019 7:14 am

Assuming “emissions” mean carbon dioxide emissions, hasn’t the US reduced its emissions over the last 20 years or so?

Are China and India paving our way to Hell now?

bonbon
September 24, 2019 7:17 am

This started before Greta appeared.
The summit keynote was given by nobody else than Mark Carney, the Governor of the Bank of England, who in Jackson Hole had called for regime change to go for direct money pumping, helicopter money, cryptocurrency, the whole package! Presenting a paper, a contract of the 130 largest banks, which represent $47 trillion in assets, representing the principle of “responsible banking.”
Now this is essentially a long-prepared scheme which started with the Paris Accord in 2015, in which its Article 2 basically says that the only way to implement climate change measures is by directing financing into it. This was then picked up in 2016 by the Green Finance Initiative, GFI, claiming that they want to make London the hub of international green financing, and then this thing systematically spread out, whereby they now say, in this compact that they want to implement the Paris Accord by having two-thirds of all coal eliminated by 2030; that they want to implement new standards of investments, by basically forcing clients to choose between following these principles or being exposed that they are not following this list, and then they would have quote “a reputational risk,”
Now, who are these honorable men? Lloyds Banking Group (caught in securities fraud, stock “misselling”, etc.); Danske Bank (currently in a massive money-laundering scandal); ABN Amro (looter of cities through deceptive interest-rate swaps deals before and after the 2008 crash); Deutsche Bank, the London destroyer of German banking; Citigroup, Wall Street’s biggest serial bankrupt; Barclays, a leader in rigging the LIBOR rate from 2007-15; BNP Paribas and Societe Generale, etc

What these bankers mean by “hell to pay” is unless the GFI takes off with immediate green investments only, their system will implode, and we the taxpayer will have to pay their way out of hell. Get it?

They will shed Walrus tears that it was necessary to use children to make us pay.

Have just a quick look at ZH – the crash warnings are all over the site.

shrnfr
Reply to  bonbon
September 24, 2019 7:47 am

Indeed, they should stop being shellfish about those tears.

Rob_Dawg
September 24, 2019 7:29 am

Maybe Greta Fasberg can shame CO2 into not being so inconsiderate of her feelings.

September 24, 2019 7:38 am

Neither India or China will reduce their coal fired power station programme and plant exports! They will argue that such a policy would only raise global temperatures! This would be their contribution to the IPCC programme. Hansen would have to agree with them. After all he did write a recent Paper explaining that the Pause occurred because of the increase in Developing Country emissions of particulate carbon and sulphates which creates what, in the 70’s was called Solar Gloom. These emissions lead to a reduction in solar radiation reaching the Earth’s surface and thus cooling. Removing these emissions, as was done in the West from the Clear Air Acts of the 50’s onward, generated probably the major proportion of any warming prior to the increased Developing World industrialisation, and not any increase in CO2 concentrations. The alarmist temperature/CO2 curve used in CAGW theories and reporting is not anywhere near as steep as they were claiming, and many still are. This explains why even they have had to reduce the CO2 sensitivity within their models from 4 plus to somewhere below 2!

alan k welch
September 24, 2019 7:50 am

The IPCC, BBC and British Guardian Newspaper all seem to be cherry picking. They quote a 5 mm/year rise in sea level over the period 2014 to 2019 as an indication of acceleration. If you use Nerems (dodgy) methodology to calculate acceleration over this period, it comes out as a deacceleration of over 1 mm/year2. 5 years is much too short a period to derive any meaningful values. Even 25 years is too short. I used the NASA data as listed in https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/ to derive slopes and accelerations over 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 year periods the results being listed below..
Dates Jan to Jan
Slopes mm/year
Accelerations mm/year2 (-ve indicates deacceleration)

Jan – Jan Slope Acc
1993-1998 3.36 0.000
1998-2003 3.84 0.742
2003-2008 2.41 -0.658
2008-2013 3.48 1.241
2013-2118 4.99 -1.137

1993-2003 2.72 0.114
1998-2008 3.25 -0.266
2003-2013 2.73 0.217
2008-2028 4.52 0.286

1993-2008 2.90 0.039
1998-2013 3.00 -0.075
2002-2018 3.63 0.318

1993-2013 2.87 0.012
1998-2018 3.45 0.120

1993-2018 3.21 0.097

Even the 2 20 year periods, which overlap by 15 years, show accelerations varying by a factor of 10.
I discussed Nerem’s approach in my paper
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17lXnNtsLSlzSOx7tRvbDPwYMDibpvXKG/view?usp=sharing
the above being a corrected version, some silly typos having crept in, apologies for that. The current discussion about sea level rise acceleration may all be a red herring. In my paper I point out that the Tidal Gauge readings could also be part of a very long period sinusoidal curve. I eye balled in a 770 year curve with an amplitude of about 480mm. This is easily comparable with both Tidal Gauge and Satellite readings and would not go amiss with the actual periods between historic warm periods of about 1000 years.
Some additional thoughts on the NASA results. 25 years is much too short a period to ascertain any definite trends. And completely too short a period to pursue any enhanced acceleration up to 2100. The NASA results are usually given as a single value every 10 days but behind each value there is an enormous amount of data. Each 10 days between 300,000 and 500,000 readings are taken and a rolling 60-day average calculated. One not often quoted value is the standard deviation for each 10 days set of readings. This is generally about 100mm and the spread of readings can be worked out using probability functions. This can also be shown graphically using the Excel function NORMINV(Probability,Mean,Standard_dev) to generate a normally distributed set of random numbers. For example, assuming the mean value was 50mm and the SD 100mm a set of 10000 random values matching these parameters can be generated by inserting NORMINV(RAND(),50,100) in cells A1 to A10000 and then inserting a histogram plot. Each time it is executed a new histogram is produced. I ran cases of 100, 1000 and 10000 values and found 10000 was more than adequate to show the trends and variations. Life is too short to go any higher!
These runs show, as would be expected, that using bins in the histogram of 20mm range that less than about 8% of results fall in the maximum bin and that actual values can range from about -400mm to +500mm. A typical histogram is shown in the figure below
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RZj_KHRfv0D3X3eYFe0PMmMyWQNMfdQD/view?usp=sharing
Seeing a typical histogram makes the consistency of all the NASA results over the 25 years even more remarkable.

PeterM
September 24, 2019 7:51 am

“Dave Reay, chair of carbon management at Edinburgh University”

OK, someone please tell me there really isn’t a department of/program of carbon management at Edinburgh University….please “say it ain’t so”….please…..

B d Clark
Reply to  PeterM
September 24, 2019 7:57 am
DANNY DAVIS
September 24, 2019 7:54 am

Presumably – ZH is Zero Hedge https://www.zerohedge.com eh?

bonbon
Reply to  DANNY DAVIS
September 24, 2019 8:12 am

Yup.

ralfellis
September 24, 2019 8:03 am

‘hell to pay’.
Yup – they will send Greta the Gremlin to scowl at you….

R

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  ralfellis
September 24, 2019 8:27 am

And if that doesn’t work, she will scream at you, cry, and throw a tantrum.

Joel Snider
September 24, 2019 8:03 am

Gee – and natural emissions are more than twenty times as great as the human contribution.

No one ever seems concerned about those.

griff
Reply to  Joel Snider
September 24, 2019 9:04 am

which natural emissions?

volcanoes only turn out 1% of what humans do…

Joel Snider
Reply to  griff
September 24, 2019 11:34 am

Well, gosh, Grift – there’s the oceans, there’s animal respiration – I believe those together account for something a bit less than 60% and 40% respectively – there’s also degradation of biomass, both plant and animal – that whole carbon-based life-thing.
You can only hurt your case by contributing. Because it basically highlights your core dishonesty.

Joel Snider
Reply to  griff
September 24, 2019 12:16 pm

And as long as we’re addressing your red-herring, one good fart from a constipated volcano can eradicate about five years of ‘mitigation’ efforts – which of course begs the question ‘ How much less effect on the climate do mitigation efforts have even than human C02 emissions’.

I can tell you one certainly has a negative effect on the economy and general quality of human life, in the greatest tradition of progressive ‘all pain, no gain’ policies.

Barbara
Reply to  griff
September 24, 2019 12:21 pm

These natural emissions (https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/outreach/faq_cat-1.html#23):

“The Earth has a natural CO2 cycle that moves massive amounts of CO2 into and out of the atmosphere. The oceans and land vegetation release and absorb over 200 billion metric tons of carbon into and out of the atmosphere each year. When the cycle is balanced, atmospheric levels of CO2 remain relatively stable. Human activities are now adding about 7 billion metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere every year, which is only about 3-4% of the amount exchanged naturally. But that’s enough to knock the system out of balance, surpassing nature’s ability to take our CO2 emissions out of the atmosphere. The oceans and land vegetation are absorbing about half of our emissions; the other half remains airborne for 100 years or longer. This is what is causing the rapid buildup of CO2, a buildup that dwarfs natural fluctuations.”

I’d like to know the error bars on the 200 billion metric tons exchanged annually.

(Edited) SUNMOD

Barbara
Reply to  Barbara
September 24, 2019 1:24 pm

Aargh. 200 BILLION.

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  griff
September 24, 2019 1:41 pm

FGS griff. Can you please post something factual, even if you draw the wrong conclusions. As I’ve told you before, stop lying.

Bryan A
Reply to  griff
September 24, 2019 9:57 pm

NATURAL CO2 SOURCES

Natural CO2 sources account for the majority of CO2 released into the atmosphere. Oceans provide the greatest annual amount of CO2 of any natural or anthropogenic source. Other sources of natural CO2 include animal and plant respiration, decomposition of organic matter, forest fires, and emissions from volcanic eruptions. There are also naturally occurring CO2 deposits found in formation layers within the Earth’s crust that could serve as CO2 sources.

ANTHROPOGENIC CO2 SOURCES

Anthropogenic CO2 sources are part of our everyday activities and include those from power generation, transportation, industrial sources, chemical production, petroleum production, and agricultural practices. Many of these source types burn fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas), with CO2 emissions as a byproduct. Of these CO2 sources, electric power generation contributes the greatest amount of anthropogenic CO2 to the atmosphere.

Myth: Carbon dioxide comes only from anthropogenic sources, especially from the burning of fossil fuels.

Reality: Carbon dioxide comes from both natural and anthropogenic sources; natural sources are predominant.

Latitude
Reply to  Joel Snider
September 24, 2019 9:51 am

…human emissions are cumulative…..but only from 1st world countries

Joel Snider
Reply to  Latitude
September 24, 2019 10:50 am

The thing is there’s no absurdity anymore – I’ve actually HEARD that rationalization.

Latitude
Reply to  Joel Snider
September 24, 2019 1:01 pm

…what should scare the horse piss out of you is that people actually believe it

Joel Snider
Reply to  Latitude
September 24, 2019 2:17 pm

Oh it does – I have a t-shirt that says: “Nothing scares me less than C02. Nothing scares me more than people who are scared of C02”.

I get dirty looks here in Portland.

bonbon
September 24, 2019 8:09 am

Someone urgently ought to read this poem to the FFF, XR and Greta – although the biting irony may be lost on them :

Lewis Carroll’s tale of the Walrus, the Carpenter and those Oysters.
https://www.jabberwocky.com/carroll/walrus.html

Both the Carpenter and Walrus were very sorry, weeping, indeed, to have made them trot so quick after playing them such a trick, when answer came there none.

Gwan
Reply to  bonbon
September 24, 2019 3:44 pm

bonbon ,
You have hit the nail on the head with this great poem .
The climateers make such a fuss and then lead their followers to a dead end road .
I am certain that the call that is being made to de carbonize the world and cut back growth will only lead to poverty and famine .
With a growing world population growth is essential otherwise every one will become poorer and poverty will be the norm.
The worlds population is still growing and all those extra people will need food and shelter education and health care for a start . Estimated at another 2 billion in the next 30 years .
How dare you Gretta deny these people food and shelter that you have been lavished with .
Don’t you think that is rather selfish of you ?
Graham

who are future

observa
September 24, 2019 8:17 am

“If emissions don’t start falling there will be hell to pay.“

Don’t worry there already is what with Thunderberg and the fan club getting more hysterical by the day. Pretty hard to get any peace and quiet away from all the apopleptic doomsdayers now.

Kenan Meyer
September 24, 2019 8:21 am

There’s a real climate threat, which each of these alarmists choose to turn a blind eye to and it could happen any day:

https://youtu.be/2jy3JU-ORpo

If these religious psychopaths really cared about “saving the planet” , saving mankind, then they’d be out on
streets demonstrating hysterically every day against the threat of nuclear winter. That nobody seems to have the slightest interest in avoiding the last catastrophe on planet earth tells me that the ever growing alarmism has absolutely nothing to do with climate change. Clearly there must be other motives.

PS: In case you don’t know; for the first time in history the Pentagon now believes it can “win” a nuclear war (whatever winning means to them)

bonbon
Reply to  Kenan Meyer
September 24, 2019 8:41 am

Sure there are other motives, and Bank of England chief Carney makes them perfectly clear – see abobe.
As regards the Pentagon, they assess climate is a bigger threat than terrorism.

So Foggy Bottom is still dazed. A dose of Dr. Strangelove ?

Mark Broderick
Reply to  Kenan Meyer
September 24, 2019 8:42 am

Pathetically stupid scenario…..

wilt
September 24, 2019 8:21 am

The most disturbing thing is that apparently the WMO has completely missed that the most intensive El Nino of at least the last 100 years has occurred during the 2015-2019 period. A temperature rise of 0.5 degree Celsius within a year, followed by a gradual decrease of the same magintude. For comparison: an increase of 0.5 degree Celsius as a result of increased CO2 would according to alarmist predictions take several decades.

Barbara
September 24, 2019 8:22 am

So, I found this interesting, from page 8 of the Five-Year Report:

“MORE HEAT BEING TRAPPED IN THE OCEAN The capacity of the ocean to absorb heat is a critical part of the climate system. It is estimated that more than 90% of the radiative imbalance associated with anthropogenic climate change is taken up by the oceans.”

They go on to make claims about reaching “new records,” but acknowledge pre-2005 data was sparse with large uncertainties.

Bigbub
Reply to  Barbara
September 24, 2019 9:19 am

Interesting, since the oceans are opaque to absorbing the radiative wavelengths of the energy imbalance associated with anthropogenic climate change.

Jim Veenbaas
September 24, 2019 8:34 am

When will this insanity stop? Alarmists have indoctrinated an entire generation to believe that the future is hopeless, that some kind of environmental Armageddon is just around the corner. It’s flat out child abuse. When will the leaders of the alarmists be held accountable for the damage they have done to a generation of children, not 100 years down the road, but the damage they have done today?

Jean Parisot
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas
September 24, 2019 9:02 am

Malthusian rot all the way down.

Prjindigo
September 24, 2019 8:38 am

The WMO said it wasn’t happening last month.

This will be hilarious, I think the IPCC just ran out of leash.

The article plainly states that the IPCC is claiming its happening based on data the WMO collected but the IPCC doesn’t have the mandate to act in the WMO’s place. If it was happening and the WMO collected the data the WMO would have said so.

Schrodinger's Cat
September 24, 2019 8:40 am

“There is no climate crisis” – 500 scientists write to UN.
“Climate models are unfit for purpose”

According to No Tricks Zone and other web sites.

Perhaps we have some sanity at last. Don’t expect the BBC to report this anytime soon.

Barbara
Reply to  Schrodinger's Cat
September 24, 2019 9:36 am
Sunny
Reply to  Barbara
September 24, 2019 10:31 am

Barbara… Thank you so much for posting the letter… The best thing about it firstly the truth, second is the names of the scientists… greta and the other greens have never given names of the claimed 99% of all scientists…

Nechit
September 24, 2019 8:49 am

Just a few weeks ago the WMO general secretary was saying back off from all this alarmist nonsense:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/09/06/wmo-secretary-general-warns-against-climate-doomsters-and-extremists/

Curious George
September 24, 2019 8:58 am

The WMO a sister organization of the UN. Why should it be different?

griff
September 24, 2019 9:03 am

‘still that pesky Arctic icecap refuses to melt’

Really? given a record melt event in Greenland this year, record temperatures in the Canadian arctic and the second lowest arctic sea ice level in modern times?

Nothing at all going on in that there arctic? you sure?

Sunny
Reply to  griff
September 24, 2019 11:28 am

Griff… I am new to the climate… but has the greenland/artic. Never melted before? Has all the worlds glaciers and ice been frozen intact since the day they froze?? Has there never been a hot day since we started keeping records? Why is any weather instantly a record now?

MarkW
Reply to  Sunny
September 24, 2019 5:09 pm

” I am new to the climate”

That’s ok, so is griff.

Latitude
Reply to  griff
September 24, 2019 2:29 pm

Griff I know how you hate details…….NSIDC > “Cumulatively, the 2019 season sum of melt area for every day is tracking well behind 2012, the satellite-era record for total melt-day area, and slightly behind 2016 (Figure 1b). However, total ice mass loss for 2019 is nearly equal to 2012 because of low winter snowfall. Early melting of the surface in 2019 quickly removed the snow accumulation from winter, and deeper melting this month has eroded older snow and ice over large areas of the western side of Greenland.”

MarkW
Reply to  griff
September 24, 2019 5:09 pm

Seven years, and we still haven’t come close to tying, much less beating the record low of 2012.

gmak
September 24, 2019 9:06 am

Yawn.

Al Miller
Reply to  gmak
September 25, 2019 9:18 am

Yawn 2- We need to re-focus and not let inciters like “Griff” try to focus us on CO2- we know that’s a lie, it’s always been about control, money an power. Of course sick opportunists join in and make money on windmills etc.
The real crime here is that scientists aren’t speaking up about the complete perversion of their trade.

Troe
September 24, 2019 9:22 am

Really they have no shame. The emotional rantings of an emotionally disturbed teenager presented as a plea to follow science. We have entered a new phase of mob mentality comparable to the Cultural Revolution in Mao’s China.

Personally I prefer the young people fighting for liberty in Hong Kong. They deserve our unabashed support.

Paul Penrose
September 24, 2019 9:23 am

Which records? The 150 year instrumental record that realistically has a +/-1 degree C level of accuracy at best? How about the geological record, which shows the earth has sustained much higher temperatures in the past billion years or so (even if you take into account the even lower accuracy of those measurements)?

If worldwide temperatures don’t take an immediate, noticeable (to the average person), and sustained upward turn over the next couple of years, there WILL be hell to pay. But it will be the CAGW activist’s heads on the block, not the rest of us.

MarkW
Reply to  Paul Penrose
September 24, 2019 5:12 pm

+/- 1C is only for the instruments themselves.
When you add in the fact that we would need to increase the number of sensors by at least 2 to 3 orders of magnitude to come close to adequately covering the globe, and a more realistic number is more like +/- 5C.

Coeur de Lion
September 24, 2019 9:24 am

What has happened to Katowice? Wasn’t that supposed to do something? Oh yes, there was the IPCC’s SR1.5 report which seems to have gone quiet ? Have you read it? We’ve to stop using coal within eleven years? The GWPF produced a press release – 5 May I recall – which destroyed its painful 700 pages. Anyway, it’s good fun – full of impossible transnational coercive measures
that will never happen. All the ‘scientists’ are chosen by gender and nationality, favouring ‘small island’. (a West Indian term )

markl
September 24, 2019 9:44 am

The me message is becoming more shrill, more often, and louder. The desperation is palpable.

DHR
September 24, 2019 10:30 am

“The new report revealed that global temperatures between 2015-2019 were the hottest on record.”

Except in the US where the Climate Reference System shows clearly that temperature of the coterminous States has not changed since 2005; gone down a bit actually.

More American exceptionalism.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  DHR
September 24, 2019 11:25 am

“More American exceptionalism.”

Yes! The United States of America is cooling in this era of CO2. So exceptional. Or maybe it’s just the fact that the US temperature record is much less bastardized than the rest of the world.

Gordon Dressler
September 24, 2019 10:37 am

Quote from the above boxed article:
“Key points:
— The new report revealed that global temperatures between 2015-2019 were the hottest on record
— It noted carbon emissions in the same period had risen by 20 per cent”

Both of the above statements are provably false.

The first claim has been refuted so competently by recent WUWT that posts that I need not address it further.

As for the second claim, according to the downloadable database on CO2 emission data from (http://www.globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions via https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions
for the period of 2015-2019, inclusive and extrapolating the 2015-2017 trend line to estimate 2018 and 2019 (full year) CO2 emissions, atmospheric CO2 levels rose by only 9.7%. Not even close to 20%.

Independently, the Keeling curve of continuous measurements of atmospheric CO2 concentration obtained at Mauna Loa observatory (https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2 and find up-to-date curve atcomment image ) documents a yearly average of 403 ppm for 2015 and September 23, 2019 reading of 415.4 ppm. If we extrapolate that trend to the end of 2019, we arrive at a 2019 yearly average of about 413 ppm, or a 2015-2019 (inclusive) change of 1.0% . . . nothing near 20%, and note that the Keeling curve also includes natural emissions of CO2.

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
September 24, 2019 10:50 am

Ooops . . . error in last paragraph of my post above . . . should be a 2015-2019 (inclusive) change of 2.5%, not the stated 1.0%.

And for clarification, the second paragraph is specific to anthropogenic-only CO2 emissions (the database cited does not include natural emissions of CO2).

knr
September 24, 2019 10:58 am

Its all standard practice in the run up the to a climate doom conference to see these reports popping out . Indeed to such an extent that like chicken little their claims have little effect as reality keeps on failing to match their claims .

Caligula Jones
September 24, 2019 11:35 am

Last week: “The General-Secretary of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) says that the alarmist narrative on climate change has gone off the rails and criticised the news media for provoking unjustified anxiety.”

This week: “The data, compiled by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), says climate change is accelerating, with sea levels rising, carbon dioxide levels increasing and ice sheets melting faster than ever before”

As much as we can blame the MSM, it does appear to be getting rather mixed signals from the “experts”.

Although if the MSM was like the MSM of old, it would at least have a grown-up who would spot the difference from week to week. Now, its an arts school grad with a degree in clown makeup re-writing a WWF press release.

Derek Wood
Reply to  Caligula Jones
September 24, 2019 1:23 pm

Love that, Caligula Jones! Particularly your appreciation of the educational level of the “journalists” who produce this sort of tripe!

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Derek Wood
September 24, 2019 1:32 pm

I took media writing in college back in the 80s. Gave me a great background in everything including using the brand new technology called a “word processor”.

I tried my hand at media writing but it wasn’t for me and went into statistics.

But I do keep up with friends who (mostly) had a good run and a decent(ish) living.

Until clickbait came along.

Its almost heartbreaking when an old friend sends me a link to his newest listicle. I used to proofread his Hollywood-produced scripts…(which may also be an indictment of Hollywood of course).

Take a good look at who gets called a “senior” writer these days. It’d be funny if the “senior” editors weren’t barely 30 themselves.

September 24, 2019 11:54 am

… lots of mole hills made into mountains in that report.

Such frauds.

Hokey Schtick
September 24, 2019 1:17 pm

Everyone’s losing their minds. I blame climate change.

Ian Hawthorn
September 24, 2019 1:42 pm

The desperation is that they have to force governments to take sufficient action that they can claim to have saved the planet when the temperature doesn’t go up. If not then when the temperature doesn’t go up they’ll look like fools and their lucrative careers will go down the toilet.

September 24, 2019 2:24 pm

If emissions don’t start falling soon, THE CANARY GET IT….STOMP, STOMP.

Sheri
September 24, 2019 2:32 pm

Harder and earlier means THE THEORY IS WRONG. It did not predict properly and must be re-evaluated to find out what REALLY causes the problem.

Gunga Din
September 24, 2019 2:43 pm

This week: “The data, compiled by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), says climate change is accelerating, with sea levels rising, carbon dioxide levels increasing and ice sheets melting faster than ever before”

I wonder just what “data” was complied?

For my little spot on the globe, I checked the record high for today via the NWS. 92* “set” in 2010. (Ties are not included anymore.)
Then I looked at the records for today I captured in April, 2012 and July, 2012. They did include ties.
There was a change I’d never noticed before.
The record high was still 92* but the April list had the year it was set as 1908 and did not list 2010.
The July list had dropped 1908 and added 2010.
Odd.

MarkW
September 24, 2019 3:22 pm

“2015-2019”

Gotta make sure we only measure El Nino years.

William Haas
September 24, 2019 4:19 pm

The reality is that, based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, the climate change we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. It is all a matter of science. There are many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one of them. If the UN really wanted to cut back on the use of fossil fuels they would be pushing nuclear energy to replace fossil fuel burning power plants but they are not doing that.

MarkW
September 24, 2019 5:04 pm

I don’t know about emissions, but temperatures have been falling for the last 3 years.

Serge Wright
September 24, 2019 9:31 pm

Why this sudden UN affinity with Hell ?

– When it comes to sea level rise, “come Hell or high water”, the UN clearly supports Hell.
– UN policy on pumped hydro would require us to be all damed in Hell, although UN policy on wind farms will make sure there is no “bat out of Hell”.
– UN policy on de-industrialising economies suggests they want “all Hell to break loose”.
– We know they want their detractors to “burn in Hell”, yet they rigidly stick to a policy to try and make “Hell freeze over”. You can’t have it both ways.

Whilst their position on hell might be confusion, if there really is hell to pay, my question is who will pay hell ?. After crippling our economies with useless green subsidies that drive up power prices there will be no money to pay anyone. Perhaps instead the UN should “do a deal with the devil” ask ask him for a loan. After all, they are the only ones that want “a snowballs chance” in that place. Although it would be easier on everyone if the UN simply “GO TO HELL” !

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Serge Wright
September 25, 2019 6:30 am

“the UN clearly supports Hell.”

Yep.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/hrc/pages/currentmembers.aspx

Johann Wundersamer
September 29, 2019 7:08 am

Flight Level September 24, 2019 at 7:04 am

when it’s so hot in Germany that we have to use engine anti-icing from ground up on September mornings?

______________________________________

Because when there’s so hot Germany days that moisture in the atmosphere can’t dimm blue sky

– then the clear nights gather humidity on tarmac and soil while released heat at TOA flees into solar / outer solar space.

– heatwaves are defined > 3 consecutive day’s with temps higher than 30°C.

– tropical nights are defined night temps not under 20°C.

______________________________________

heatwaves + tropical nights aren’t bound to come in lockstep.

%d bloggers like this: