US Climate Is Getting Less Extreme, Not More

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

I covered this story the other day, and inevitably it is making headlines across the media (as it was intended to):

The claim is not based on any actual data, but on weather attribution models.

But what does the actual data tell us?

Much of the world lacks long term, high quality data. But one country that does have it in abundance is the US, and it tells us a completely different story to the one presented in the latest report.

Heatwaves, for instance, used to be much worse than now, and not only during the dustbowl years of the 1930s. Climate fraudsters love to begin their trends from the 1960s, when the world was cooling. But as the graph below shows, there is nothing out of the ordinary about recent heatwaves:

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-heat-waves

Then we can turn to drought. The record exhibits large swings, but plainly droughts are not getting worse – on the contrary, the 1920s, 30s and 50s were much worse than now:

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/national/time-series/110/pdsi/all/12/1895-2022?base_prd=true&begbaseyear=1901&endbaseyear=2000

Floods? I’m afraid not. The data provided by the EPA is the inevitable mixed bag; after all nature does not do straight lines. Some places, such as the North East show a worsening trend, whilst others have been decreasing. Such regional changes may well be associated with oceanic cyclical changes, such as the AMO and PDO, which are known to affect US rainfall patterns. But if the weather attribution models are right, we would expect to see worsening flood trends everywhere.

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-river-flooding

And storms?

There are no trends in the frequency of hurricanes or major ones:

https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/All_U.S._Hurricanes.html

And violent tornadoes are much less frequent now:

https://www.spc.noaa.gov/wcm/#data

The US is of course only one country, albeit a large one. And maybe other parts of the world are experiencing more extreme weather. But if the weather attribution models are right, all of the world, including the US, should be seeing the same effects.

The fact that the US, and for that matter the UK, is not seeing such effects fundamentally undermines their credibility.

5 31 votes
Article Rating
74 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ferdberple
January 13, 2023 6:13 am

All heat engines – which includes weather – are driven by a temperature difference. Not by absolute temperature.

A car engine, a steam engine, a hurricane, a tornado. They rely on energy flowing from a hot area to a cold area. Sort of like a waterwheel needs water flowing from a high point to a low point.

Simply heating the world will not make storms more extreme because global warming is warming the cold places more than it is warming the warm places. As a result weather will become less extreme.

BurlHenry
Reply to  ferdberple
January 13, 2023 6:42 am

Ferdberple:

No, the warmer it gets, the more often extreme events WILL occur, somewhere around the world. For example, The MWP was characterized by extreme droughts, flooding, etc.

The book “El Nino in History” by Cesar N.Caviedes (2001) describes the many disasters associated with warmer temperatures, such as droughts, floods, famines, and sunken ships, due to the wild weather.

PCman999
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 13, 2023 7:27 am

Your comment doesn’t match reality – the wildest weather that happens is during fall (hurricanes) and winter (blizzards). Summers here in southern Ontario and most places are warm and quiet with the occasional thunderstorm, that isn’t as windy as one in the fall.

BurlHenry
Reply to  PCman999
January 13, 2023 12:09 pm

PCman999:

I was not speaking of normal weather, only of periods where there are El Ninos

Mike
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 13, 2023 8:19 pm

What’s that got to do with global warming? I suggest you re-read and try to understand fredberple’s comment.

BurlHenry
Reply to  Mike
January 14, 2023 4:59 am

Mike:

Fredberple stated that as global warming increases, the weather will become less extreme.

Historically, this incorrect. If the warming is enough to form an El Nino, extreme weather is the norm.

Professor Caviedes in his book “The El Nino in History” listed observed Climatic effects of El Ninos: excessive rain, floods, land erosion, drought, crop failures, famines, severe winters, cold waves, heavy snowfalls, increased price of heating oil, institutional instability. fall of governments

Duane
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 13, 2023 8:17 am

All weather everywhere all the time is subject to extreme droughts, flooding, etc.

It’s called “weather”.

BurlHenry
Reply to  Duane
January 13, 2023 12:12 pm

Duane:

Not true: They occur only during El Nino or La Nina conditions

Bryan A
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 13, 2023 12:19 pm

Snark snark snark

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 13, 2023 9:50 am

“According to any textbook on dynamic meteorology, one may reasonably conclude that in a warmer world, extratropical storminess and weather variability will actually decrease.”
— Richard Lindzen

BurlHenry
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
January 13, 2023 12:31 pm

AGW is Not Science:

Historical records prove that the textbooks and Lindzen are both wrong. See Professor Caviedes’ book, descriptions of what the weather was like during the MWP, and “Net-Zero Catastrophe Beginning?”, for examples.

https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2022.16.1.1035

Mike
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 13, 2023 8:25 pm

Again, ENSOs increase temperature differentials – which drives big weather. It has nothing to do with global warming. Generally a warmer planet (from GLOBAL warming) overall may not decrease extremes but it certainly won’t increase them unless the warming is not uniform.

BurlHenry
Reply to  Mike
January 14, 2023 5:32 am

Mike:

Fortunately for us, El Ninos over the past 170+ years have all been temporary events, which I must agree do not contribute to global warming.

However, all El Ninos coincide with decreased levels of SO2 aerosols in our atmosphere, meaning that the cleaner the air becomes, the warmer it will get.

So, the actual cause of our warming planet is the result of global Clean Air efforts to reduce industrial SO2 aerosol pollution, and now, Net Zero, which bans the burning of fossil fuels and their attendant SO2 aerosol emissions.

See my paper referenced earlier, above.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 13, 2023 9:02 pm

The same exact claims about the weather getting more extreme were made in the “ice age cometh” global COOLING scare in the 70s.

So apparently what we’re supposed to believe is that some “climate nirvana” existed in about 1945, any departure from which in any direction (a) is our fault; (b) is caused by our fossil fuel use; and (c) is going to make the weather “more extreme.” 🙄

BurlHenry
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
January 14, 2023 7:13 am

AGW is Not Science

NOT a good summation!

Departures from the “1945 Nirvana” due to volcanic eruptions and their cooling SO2 aerosol emissions are certainly not our fault, although increased fossil fuel use and their SO2 aerosol emissions have the same cooling effect.(our fault)

In the opposite direction, volcanic-induced El Ninos can cause warming after their SO2 aerosols have settled out of the atmosphere, due to the cleaner, less-polluted air, and global Clean Air efforts to reduce industrial SO2 aerosol levels also cause warming, for the same reason (our fault).

And if the cleansing is carried too far, in the absence of large volcanic eruptions (as now), more extreme weather will occur, as during the MWP, when there were very few volcanic eruptions (~10 /century). .

slowroll
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 13, 2023 10:39 am

Anyone with a smattering of meteorology knows that warmer temps would beget less extreme weather. Weather events are caused by temperature/pressure differentials, not uniformly warmer temps. Global implies uniform, does it not?

Why are you true believers obsessed with catastrophism?

BurlHenry
Reply to  slowroll
January 13, 2023 12:56 pm

Slowroll:

“Why are you true believers obsessed with catastrophism?”

Because of the Historical record!.

However, CO2 does NOT cause any warming, It is all caused by decreased levels of reflective (dimming) SO2 aerosols in our atmosphere.

Reply to  slowroll
January 13, 2023 1:56 pm

Global implies uniform, does it not?

nope. never

Mike
Reply to  Steven Mosher
January 13, 2023 8:29 pm

Yep, always.

”relating to the whole world; worldwide.”

”relating to or encompassing the whole of something, or of a group of things.”

Last edited 22 days ago by Mike
Reacher51
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 14, 2023 8:33 am

BurlHenry:

Guess what the Little Ice Age was characterized by? Extreme droughts, flooding, storms, etc. It seems that the cooler it gets, the more often extreme events will occur somewhere around the world.

The book “Global Crisis: War, Climate Change and Catastrophe in the Seventeenth Century,” by Geoffrey Parker gives a detailed account of cold related climate disasters all over the world and their effects on world history. These include droughts, floods, famines, and storms that sunk ships aplenty. It is very illuminating.

Last edited 22 days ago by Reacher51
Steve Case
Reply to  ferdberple
January 13, 2023 7:50 am

Yes indeed, and the IPCC tells us:

     IPCC AR4 Chapter 10 page 750

     “Almost everywhere, daily minimum temperatures are projected
     to increase faster than daily maximum temperatures, leading to
     a decrease in diurnal temperature range.” 

rah
Reply to  Steve Case
January 13, 2023 8:12 am

Add to that water vapor the warming in the Arctic also caused by more water vapor and you get less contrast in temperatures and pressures between air masses and thus a decrease in extreme weather events.

Kim
Reply to  ferdberple
January 13, 2023 8:34 am

Absolutely correct. I remember learning this principal from doing a research project for a college class back in 1986, several years before “global warming” became a major issue. For whatever reason (ignorance? malfeasance?), the purveyors of the concept that the Earth’s weather events are becoming more extreme as warming occurs completely ignore the concept.

mikelowe2013
Reply to  ferdberple
January 13, 2023 11:30 am

Perhaps the apparent increase in wild weather is due to more efficient coverage by national reporting systems. Certainly, television stations seem to be staffed by ever-younger “reporters” who thrive on alarmism. And we in remote New Zealand seem to be peppered with extreme reports from worldwide sources.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  mikelowe2013
January 14, 2023 6:04 am

Yes. As I’ve said many times. The only thing getting getting g worse about the weather is the HYPE about the weather.

Richard Greene
January 13, 2023 6:41 am

COMING CLIMATE CHANGE CRISIS PROPAGANDA IS SO EFFECTIVE THAT IT PREVENTS MOST PEOPLE FROM ENJOYING TODAY’S WONDERFUL CLIMATE. 

U.S. HURRICANES MAKING LANDFALL HAVE BEEN IN A DOWNTREND SINCE THE LATE 1800s. 

MAJOR US TORNADOES HAVE BEEN IN A DOWNTREND SINCE THE 1950s. 

US HEAT WAVES, DROUGHTS AND FOREST FIRE ACRES BURNED PEAKED IN THE 1930s. 

THE 1930s STILL HAVE THE MOST US STATE MAXIMUM HEAT RECORDS OF ANY DECADE, BY FAR. 

Redge
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 13, 2023 9:54 am

I realise you’re trying to get your message across, Richard, but there’s NO NEED TO SHOUT

Richard Greene
Reply to  Redge
January 13, 2023 1:54 pm

Sorry, I originally typed this many years ago, in all caps, and am much too lazy to re-write it. I didn’t realize it was in a bold font too.

BurlHenry
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 13, 2023 12:39 pm

Richard Greene:

SO WHAT? THE UNITED STATES IS NOT THE WORLD

Richard Greene
Reply to  BurlHenry
January 13, 2023 1:58 pm

I don’t keep track of e weather for the entire world

Typhoons making landfall in Japan are also down since the 1950s.

And SO2 emissions is a minor climate change variable often NOT moving in the direction YOU claim it should move in … such as when temperature is rising from 1975 to 1980 (with SO2 emissions going up) and when the temperature is constant from 2015 to 2013 (with SO2 emissions going down).

BurlHenry
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 13, 2023 6:12 pm

Richard Greene:

As I have repeatedly pointed out to you, the period between 1975 and 1980 was NOT a period of rising temperatures, as you insist.

This was a period where there were fears of a return to an ice age, because of the cold temperatures (caused by increasing levels of industrial SO2 aerosol levels.in the atmosphere)

What is the temperature source for your stupid claim? It certainly is not HadCrut or NASA/GISS.

.

guidvce4
January 13, 2023 6:48 am

Simply put, for all of us “laymen” not of science persuasion types, is that the climate cult is desperately trying to convince the sheeple that the fantasy of “globull warming” is bad is actually destroying the planet. So, its the usual BS from the leftists in an attempt to control the folks with propaganda. And it is being shown to be just that…BS. Nothing scientific about it, just more scare tactics for the folks from the usual suspects, the morons running things lately.
Ain’t buying it. The ranks of the skeptics are growing, and the climatunistas know it, and they are getting desperate. Wait and see what comes out of Davos. It should be a whopper.
Just sayin’.

Ron Long
Reply to  guidvce4
January 13, 2023 9:30 am

You’re onto something, there, guidvce4, in that government agencies are saying things to scare people and maintain control. For instance, California, right now (see California Drought.gov) is showing all of California under moderate to severe drought, while the reality is floods at lower elevations (see weather expert Ellen DeGeneres) and 226% above normal snowpack in the Sierras. How stupid must the majority of the Kalifornia population be to tolerate this behavior (Willis exempted, of course).

Richard Greene
Reply to  guidvce4
January 13, 2023 1:59 pm

“the climate cult is desperately trying to convince the sheeple that the fantasy of “globull warming” is bad is actually destroying the planet:

The sad fact is almost 8 billion humans have first hand experience with some or all of the global warming from 1975 to 2015, which harmed no one, and made some colder climates more tolerable, yet they can still be conned about predictions of climate doom from global warming … predictions which have been wrong since the 1979 Charney Report.

Last edited 23 days ago by Richard Greene
Walter
January 13, 2023 6:52 am

They push extreme weather so hard, because the greenhouse warming wasn’t enough to scare people. Once you realize this, you understand that climate science died a long time ago.

Redge
Reply to  Walter
January 13, 2023 9:57 am

“climate science” was still-born, it’s Frankenseancers that keep shouting “It’s alive, alive…”

nutmeg
January 13, 2023 6:56 am

For hurricane numbers, some people get thrown by the spike in the mid 2000’s. Showing the numbers by decade gives a better perspective of both the cyclical pattern and how quiet the last few decades have been compared to previous times.

Duane
Reply to  nutmeg
January 13, 2023 8:18 am

Of course, people forget that after the spike in 2004-2005, it flatlined for the next decade plus .

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Duane
January 13, 2023 9:57 am

Not a single US hurricane landfall for some 11 years followed that “spike.”

The longest such period on record. Of course, you didn’t hear a PEEP about THAT in the “news.”

Richard Greene
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
January 13, 2023 2:06 pm

caused by “climate change”

PCman999
Reply to  nutmeg
January 13, 2023 10:46 am

I think the spikes are fine and informative – tells people not to freak out just because of one bad year.

2hotel9
January 13, 2023 7:15 am

Computer models are designed to drive a political agenda, not to show anything about climate, environment or weather. Period. Full stop.

vuk
January 13, 2023 7:26 am

It got extreme enough for the frostbitten ‘todger’ of Montecito climate warrior.

strativarius
Reply to  vuk
January 13, 2023 7:43 am

Who after revealing his mother was in the room is now down there with the likes of Jimmy Savile and Rolf Harris.

Redge
Reply to  strativarius
January 13, 2023 10:02 am

Rolf’s still playing with his didgeridoo

strativarius
January 13, 2023 7:41 am

“weather attribution models.”

One name, no two names, stand out there

The Grantham Institute for Climate Change and the Environment at Imperial College

Friederike Otto

Fast Freddie’s favourite game is a digital form of rolling the bones. And she has has ‘tailored’ her bone-rolling to beat back any doubts about the link between extreme weather events and climate change. 

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  strativarius
January 13, 2023 9:58 am

GIGO, nothing more.

Steve Case
January 13, 2023 8:06 am

Here’s a LINK to The Wisconsin Climatology Office showing a chart of highest temperatures by year for Milwaukee since 1870.

You don’t need to be a genius to see the up & down trend in temperature over the last 150 years. My personal experience here in Milwaukee for the last 20 – 30 years is the winters have been warmer. Nasty -20°F cold snaps don’t happen anymore, and some summers don’t even get above 90°F.

Drake
Reply to  Steve Case
January 13, 2023 1:10 pm

I started to fish through the site BUT I don’t want to spend and hour trying to find the chart for LOWEST PER YEAR. Since you stated that Milwaukee COLD was less severe than in the past could you, who apparently are familiar with the site, provide the link to Lowest temperatures by year.

Steve Case
Reply to  Drake
January 13, 2023 8:31 pm

Here ya go:

Lowest Temperature by Year Milwaukee since 1870 LINK

Drake
Reply to  Steve Case
January 14, 2023 10:57 pm

Thanks, so 2020 you appeared to have a cold snap like the good old days.

I must agree it also appears you had a good 20 stretch of NO frigid spells.

All that winter warmth must have really been a b!tch to live through.

How has it been this year?

Steve Case
Reply to  Drake
January 15, 2023 2:13 pm

Besides the very short cold snap in December, it’s been rather warm. A while ago I sat outside and enjoyed some Brandy at around 39°F and a nice breeze out of the South, nippy to be sure, but compared to the ’60s & ’70s it was quite balmy for January 15th.

aaron
Reply to  Steve Case
January 13, 2023 5:02 pm

Lows increase much more than the mean & highs increase much less. Activists mislead by looking a fixed threshold. A more honest measure is deviation from mean. https://twitter.com/aaronshem/status/1611141654853079043

Arctic Blasts are becoming less intense & less frequent, smaller in area, and shorter in duration. Global warming does not cause extreme cold outbreaks. The expectation is for arctic blasts to decrease in frequency, intensity, area, and duration. That is also what is observed. https://twitter.com/kristianstromm2/status/1603327248144154625

Swings get smaller.

Last edited 23 days ago by aaron
Steve Case
Reply to  aaron
January 15, 2023 2:15 pm

Arctic Blasts are becoming less intense & less frequent…
_____________________________________________

Pretty much what it looks like in Milwaukee.

rah
January 13, 2023 8:08 am

For Christmas I got a flip up, tear off Calander from the History Channel.
Here is what the entry was for yesterday.

“Jan 12, 1888: Blizzard brings tragedy to Northwest Plains

On January 12th, 1888 the so called Schoolchildren’s Blizzard killed an estimated 230 people, many of whom were children on their way home from school, across the Northwest Plains region of the United States.

The storm came with no warning, and the temperature fell 55 degrees in just twenty-four hours. It was Thursday afternoon, and there had been unseasonably warm weather the previous day from Montana east to the Dakotas and south to Texas.

Suddenly, within a matter of hours, Arctic air from Canada rapidly pushed south. Temperatures dropped to 40 below zero in much of North Dakota. Along with the cold air, the storm brought high winds and heavy snows. The combination created blinding conditions. The storm is still considered one of the worst blizzards in the history of the area. “

Editor
January 13, 2023 8:38 am

Homewood ==> The Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI), from 1895 to date, shows that the U.S. is actually experiencing LESS drought, overall, trending towards more moisture a tiny bit.

  • This doesn’t mean what we might think, neither does the drought index itself. The U.S. Drought Monitor site regularly shows vast areas as abnormally dry…which also doesn’t mean what you think. Definition: “Abnormally Dry — Going into drought: short-term dryness slowing planting, growth of crops or pastures”
aaron
Reply to  Kip Hansen
January 13, 2023 5:11 pm

Satellite measures only estimate the soil moisture of the top 2”. Soil moisture is much more complex. Increasing IR might dry the top as soil moisture is actually increasing. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021GL092856

Gravimetric data is showing increased water retention on land. 77km^3/yr globally.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1704665115

Last edited 23 days ago by aaron
abolition man
January 13, 2023 8:45 am

Paul,
You failed to cite the marked increase in the storms raging between the ears of the ignorati!
The “ouragan mental” has been increasing at an exponential rate, and has been proven to be entirely attributable to climate weirding! The low pressure at the eye of these cyclones actually pulls wax, dirt behind the ears, and other substances into the intercranial space; which is then left in a completely destroyed jumble of garbage and trash! The clean up from these disasters could take years; many will never recover, and should be left in a nice, padded safe space!

n.n
January 13, 2023 9:12 am

Neither hotter nor catastrophic, net zero anthropogenic climate effect. All’s normal on the western, and, in fact, the global front. Go green, emit, breathe.

Mike Maguire
January 13, 2023 9:32 am

Everything caused by the climate crisis

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/91691/

Even extreme cold is caused by global warming!

Screenshot 2023-01-13 at 11-27-11 Everything caused by the climate crisis - MarketForum.png
AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Mike Maguire
January 13, 2023 10:03 am

Mislabeled graph. Should read “WEATHER Related” in all captions. NONE of what they refer to is due to “climate.”

Joseph Zorzin
January 13, 2023 9:39 am

“Floods? I’m afraid not. The data provided by the EPA is the inevitable mixed bag; after all nature does not do straight lines. Some places, such as the North East show a worsening trend”

I’m in Wokeachusetts and have lived here my entire life- now 73 and I don’t see any increase in flooding. Most flooding that has occured was due to failed old dams built in the early days of industrialization (which started in the North East) or poorly engineered roads and other development that never should have been built on the flood plains. Back several decades ago, after some major floods- the army corps of engineers developed a plan to build hundreds of dams along all the branches of the major rivers, especially the Connecticut River in western Mass. They would have created lakes for recreation, wildlife and public water supply, offered power and of course flood protection. Some were built but it didn’t take long before the environmental fanatics put a stop to it. The same fanatics who now want to stop every form of energy production- including wind on land and solar farms that would be built on farm and forest land. Their solution is to put solar on every building- they really think that will get us to nut zero nirvana.

Tim Gorman
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 13, 2023 2:43 pm

Here in Kansas (and surrounding states) numerous reservoirs were built on major rivers to act as buffers to runoff after the floods we saw in the 50’s. We’ve never seen flooding like that since then (fingers crossed).

California should learn a lesson from that. Not only would more reservoirs offer increased buffers to California drought periods they would offer some buffering against the flooding they are seeing today.

Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 14, 2023 6:50 am

Idiots. I guess they just figure we all should just go to bed when the Sun goes down like it’s the 1700s.

AGW is Not Science
January 13, 2023 9:44 am

Lol – “UNDERMINES their credibility?!”

You’re too generous; that suggests they had ANY credibility to begin with.

aaron
January 13, 2023 4:44 pm

Temperature extremes are also decreasing, both high and low. Arctic Blasts are becoming less frequent, less intense, shorter in duration, and smaller in area. Temperature swings are getting smaller.

https://twitter.com/aaronshem/status/1611141654853079043

Tom Abbott
January 13, 2023 5:01 pm

From the article: “Climate change makes heat waves, storms and droughts worse–Say weather attribution models”

Weather attribution = Unsubstantiated, speculation, assumptions and assertions about the connection between CO2 and the Earth’s weather.

Your guess is just as good as any guess by a weather attribution specialist.

Last edited 23 days ago by Tom Abbott
TheFinalNail
January 14, 2023 12:34 am

The report covers climatic events in specified locations globally; in response the author points to historical records covering the US.

This is the same guy who uses Central England Temperature data to dispute UK-wide records.

Wake up people.

Last edited 22 days ago by TheFinalNail
Matt Kiro
Reply to  TheFinalNail
January 14, 2023 2:35 am

The author clearly states why he is using the US records. It is the best long time comprehensive record for such a large area. And if such a large area has shown no increase in extreme weather events, then there needs to be an explanation for this opposite trend from the doomsday predictions. And if it can’t be explained, their whole theory falls apart

TheFinalNail
Reply to  Matt Kiro
January 14, 2023 2:54 am

The author clearly states why he is using the US records. It is the best long time comprehensive record for such a large area.

Which is exactly why it’s an inappropriate record to use. Read the report he’s referring to. It’s about specific events in specific locations.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  TheFinalNail
January 14, 2023 6:53 am

THERE ARE NO “climatic events.”

Just WEATHER.

Stop drinking the Kool-Aid.

Pat from Kerbob
Reply to  TheFinalNail
January 14, 2023 11:19 am

The USA hurricane landfalling data tracks with the WORLD hurricane data, flat or declining so for at least that data point your argument is garbage.
As usual

The best records in the world don’t show your emergency so your solution is to gas light it.

And you can’t understand why you lose every argument.

Pat from Kerbob
January 14, 2023 11:25 am

My own non-climate surgeon observations are that two decades ago it was non-controversial to suggest “global warming” would lead to less extreme weather as the poles warmed more than the equator. The co2 people said the poles would warm more.

Seems like the north has but not the south?

Available data seems to support what RickWill postulates on here about progression leading to warming in the north which leads to more moisture transport and the eventual regrowth of ice sheets on our way to the only existential crisis we face?.

Ryan
January 16, 2023 2:57 pm

but, but, but, climate change is causing cancer and other health issues!!!

Pull the other one main stream media!!!

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights