The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change
A thread by Dr. Roger Pielke Jr on X (formerly Twitter) today.
Fifth US National Climate Assessment is outIncludes this to justify reliance of RCP8.5:"The scenarios do not have relative likelihoods assigned and are all plausible futures"This is simply false— The Honest Broker (@RogerPielkeJr) November 14, 2023
Fifth US National Climate Assessment is outIncludes this to justify reliance of RCP8.5:"The scenarios do not have relative likelihoods assigned and are all plausible futures"This is simply false
Link to NCA 2023
The Biden clan preaching to the choir.
and passing the collection plate.
Ir is worse than you know….Joke Biden and the demrat party are using gubment funds to “get out the vote”. Guess which vote….aimed at food stamp recipients and federal prisoners.,,,,and others who are likely to vote demrat if pushed.
I call it the National Scare. It has always been this.
A State scaring its citizens, is this a form of state terrorism?
I took apart every example in NCA2014 chapter one in essay Credibility Conundrums in ebook Blowing Smoke. They were all contrived, and most also grossly misrepresented. No reason to think the new NCA would not be as bad.
Thanks, Roger, for the time and expertise you relied on to prepare the critique of the 5th U.S. National Climate Assessment Report.
And thanks, CTM, for posting his thread here at WUWT.
The international war on fossil fuels is political. So is this report.
Major warning on censorship.
I can no longer forward some news email to Gmail accounts. Wordpess and Substack
Will not go into details here. For reference this link is 2 years old and mechanism of censorship has changed.
Example, I could forward the Hersch Nordstrem substack email in Feb, but not now. Acquaintance looking to replace Gmail.
WordPress emails are also not forwarding. Watts up stuff
A top, it looks like a random email/spam/…. bug to cover tracks.
That only makes undesired(per google) emails disappear.
How far and wide the current issue and how it’s done, not really sure….
Try Proton Mail. They have both free & paid email along with other services like VPN. Secure and your emails are private.
My self I have never had Gmail. Will pass proton mail comment on.
Big issue, anyone with Gmail or any 2nd source email that uses Google with different label/cover will not be getting wordpress or substack news emails.
My backup email thru my local fiber provider, has same issue. Did not realize it was Gmail clone with a different face till now. Not happy…
Google is the reincarnation of the devil disgused as a BOT. It throws random changing email bug’s into the system for cover, and the only bad things happen to those on Google’s misinformation list. Exactly what is happening in process changes and is well hidden.
Understand it as politicians in White Lab Coats that you can’t fire. Kept in different administrations with an ongoing slant to politics, same with the transgendered movement – it’s all politics and bad science. It’s how to indoctrinate children into being in your party, until it all falls apart and we wonder why people don’t trust science. It’s earned its scorn.
As an elderly observer, my take is that social media teaches and spreads ignorance, while most teachers try to teach learning. Teachers are losing.
As this progresses, many young teachers of today are now infected by the social media versus learning combat and have no idea how to resist evil. It is not good.
while most teachers try to teach learning
That may have once been the case, but I fear it is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. More and more teachers are only interested in pushing their agenda in the classroom.
If you do see the truth give it a wave.
Here is a document from a government agency that is truthful. The key point being:
These tests show that standard climate models are rejected by time series data on global temperatures.
However it is produced by the Norwegian Government group, Statistics Norway.
A rare find for a government body and will no doubt get a lot of attention to dismantle it.
The number recent billion dollar disasters is not much related to weather events, more likely…..
I recently asked a colleague why he thought the Federal Reserve is a bad idea. I pointed out that its original mandate was to stabilize the dollar and prevent runs on banks by loaning money to them for a brief time, which is a good thing. It mitigates recessions. In our discussion I recounted the widely misrepresented and misunderstood Troubled Asset Relief Program quickly passed by Congress in 2008 to loan</b up to $700 billion to purchase assets from struggling banks and other large financial institutions during the subprime mortgage crisis that led to one of the biggest recessions in history. They ended up loaning only $426 billion and within a year most of the loans were repaid. Ultimately the federal government turned a profit, being paid $441 billion on the $426 billion loaned. That means it didn’t cost taxpayers anything.
Contrast that with the $831 billion “stimulus” act passed by a Democrat House and Senate and signed by a Democrat President, Barack Obama, at the urging of “never let a good crisis go to waste” Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. That was a giveaway to fund pet projects of Democrat legislators languishing on their desks because they were so ridiculous they couldn’t get the votes to pass them until a useful emergency came along. The “stimulus” not only didn’t stimulate the economy, which was already recovering thanks to TARP and other measures from 2008, it shackled taxpayers with enormous additional, unnecessary debt.
The pioint is that Congress has proven that it can act quickly to fund large loans to stem a financial crisis. We don’t need a Federal Reserve to do that. In fact the Federal Reserve’s quantative easing and excessively low interest rate loans was the largest contributor to the glut of money that fueled widespread property speculation and the housing bubble that caused the subprime mortgage crisis, among several factors. I think we conclusively proved in 2008 that the Federal Reserve is not only unnecessary, it’s dangerous.
Except Congress cannot create money. In 2008 TARP was only possible because of the Fed. True, we could create some other entity with the same powers and give it a different name, but why?
What’s with those dudes carrying the solar panel? Installing it on a home? Stealing it?
Why wearing a mask? Covid? On the assessment web site, I see more of that scene- but no explanation.
As for covid, the latest YouTube video by John Stossel interviewing Sen. Rand Paul really nails it.
Under the photo of the dudes is a weird photo of the ground cracking- with some nails and string (?) trying to hold it all together? I took a screen capture and attach it. Seems like lame propaganda- oh, we gotta save the Earth- it’s cracking apart! duh!
Among the many lies on that assessment:
In addition to reducing risks to future generations, rapid emissions cuts are expected to have immediate health and economic benefits (Figure 1.1). At the national scale, the benefits of deep emissions cuts for current and future generations are expected to far outweigh the costs.
So it’s going to cost quadrillions of dollars but the benefits will be much greater than that! Oh, wow! What total idiot is going to believe that?
In liberal cities total idiots are the majority.
On a national scale deep emissions cuts will lead to lights out in many places. Is that a benefit? I guess people can save money on their electric bill.
Building Local Power With Neighborhood Microgrids – Union of Concerned Scientists (ucsusa.org)
Photo credit is to Nick Hagen: https://www.nickhagenphotography.com/about
from that site:
Parker Village’s interest in a microgrid stems from a desire for community independence and self-sufficiency. It envisions a neighborhood powered by onsite solar and energy storage batteries to generate its own power versus relying on utilities’ large, often polluting, fossil fuel power plants.
They actually believe it’s possible to establish a local microgrid that will be dependable and affordable? Amazing. Good luck with that.
As long as they are spending their own money to do this, it’s no big deal to me. I like it when other people volunteer themselves to be crash test dummies.
Glancing at the full assessment- I’m feeling only nausea. I’ve never in my 74 years seen so many lies, bullshit and propaganda- and on such a fancy web site!
JZ, it is IMO worse than nausea inducing. NCA have been called out time and again, yet amplifies the same false climate nonsense NCA after NCA. Supposedly a consensus estimate from 19 Federal agency official inputs. Which shows you how corrupted those 19 federal agencies actually are.
As an example, the details of which you can read over at Judith’s under guest post True Cost of Wind. In 2015, EIA put out a press release on their then ‘new’ LCOE economics asserting that onshore wind was finally at LCOE parity with CCGT. After removing obvious EIA errors, the LCOE of onshore wind was about 2.5x CCGT. That is NOT a small error, and FAR from parity.
And was deliberate, because each of the four needed obvious ‘corrections’ was widely known. One example. EIA had facility lifetimes at 30 years for all. CCGT is warrantied for 40, while big onshore wind rarely lasts the warrantied 20 years. Hence the multibillion Siemens Gamesa write off. That is blatant factual EIA misrepresentation.
Is there a single more dishonest way to measure “disasters” over time, than by using value of what was destroyed?
The monetary assessment is more a reflection of the increasing population and monetary inflation than the effects of 0.5 deg C temperature increase in the last 50 years.
Not just inflation, but the monetary value of homes built by the shore has been increasing way above the inflation rate for decades.
Skimmed through it. Pretty much a pack of lies presented with a level of certainty that’s completely unscientific. I saw no mention of natural variability as a factor. Deception primarily happens through sins of omission. Those are glaringly obvious to anyone familiar with the subject.
The brainwashed will be further indoctrinated by this blatant propaganda.
A billion dollar weather event in 2023 is a lot less damage than a 2020 billion dollar event.
As the climate numpties spiral up their collective a/hole trying to achieve NetZero while US keeps creating money out of nothing, severe weather events will be measured in trillions by 2050.
Bloomberg estimated $US200 trillion to end warming by 2050.
There are 2 billion households, which is $US100,000 per household.
The poorer countries in the developing world where 90% of the people live can’t afford anything.
So that means $US1 million for the households in the developed world spread over 27 years or about $US35,000 extra per household.
Even the households in the developed world can’t afford that.
Most households, even in the developed world would rather have a million dollars in the bank and a degree or two of warming.
Oops…$US35,000 extra per household per year.
OK, I need help with something. Looking at a propaganda item published by the state of Wokeachusetts. It was a plot of temperature averages in the state since 1900. It came from NOAA. So I went there and replotted it from 1895-2023. But I can’t make sense of it. It looks as if the average temperature was barely over 44F in 1895 but now it’s around 56F and it was about 58F a few years ago. I don’t get it. That can’t be right. Based on this chart or one with slightly different dates- the state is now claiming the average temperature in the state since 1900 is up about 3.5 F. I’ve looked at countless tables and charts in my life but this just makes no sense.
Given the proximity to the North Atlantic, it would be expected that the ocean temperature in the region would be a good indicator of land surface trends.
Attached is the SST for a 5X5 degree block off the coast for the satellite era. It has a solid upward trend of about 4C/century.
The North Atlantic is warming up quite fast – the reason there is more snow across land that gets below 0C.
Snowfall records will be a feature of weather reporting for the next 9,000 years. Boston either set or close to the 24 hour record in 2022: This year could have even more given the higher surface temperature in September.
Well, I can barely follow what you’re saying- though I don’t doubt you. Let me ask another question- let’s say the temperature in WK (Wokeachusetts) really has gone up 3-4 degrees F since 1900- even if that’s true, I seem to recall seeing recently that the globe’s temperature (assuming its even possible to determine it)- has gone up about 1.1 F since 1900 (including over the ocean of course) but the temperature over the land has gone up 1.6 F since 1900. Just assuming such determinations can be done- is that “the consensus”? I just need something to work with when debating people here in WK.
Climate has always changed and always will. The peak solar intensity in the northern hemisphere is increasing. The summer solstice solar intensity at 42N bottomed 600 years ago. It has been increasing since then. There is 9,000 years of increase in the peak intensity to come. The land has to warm up at least until the snowfall overtakes the snow melt and ice accumulates. WK could be too close to the ocean to get permanent ice but anywhere north of 40N has propensity to accumulate ice.
Earth’s orbit is one of the most predictable components of climate change. So the changes in solar intensity are highly predictable and eventually overwhelm the other internal variations apart from plate tectonics and a massive meteor impact.
WK is not a good place to sustain an argument that it is not warming. Most warming is occurring in the higher northern latitudes. On land, most of the warming is in January.
The attached shows the GHCN land temperature for a 5X5 block over WK. You will see that the January temperature is coming up faster than the July temperature – the temperature range is getting narrower. That is because there is more ocean heat transfer from warmer oceans to cooler land in January.
Based on this data, the average for December, January and February is still below freezing. Surely a bit of “global warming” in WK will make it slightly more livable. Enjoy the stronger sunshine. The peak sunshine where I live at 37S is in slow decline but we will not see snow – more winter wood gets burnt.
The reason ocean temperature is a useful indicator for trends is because it does not have urban heat effects. WK is close enough to be strongly influenced by the ocean. Some of the rise on land will be urban heat.
“the January temperature is coming up faster than the July temperature”
Nobody here in WK will complain about that- I’ve noticed it. I recall once in the ’80s working (trying to) in a forest at about -22 F. Got frost bite in my lungs from that. Nothing like that since. And I don’t mind warmer summers too.
Nobody here in WK will complain about that- I’ve noticed it.
Then why is anyone in WK worries about climate change if it makes the Sate more livable. Some more warming might slow the migration to Florida.
Because WK, in my opinion, is the epicenter of the new cult. It’s a one party state like no other in America. There is zero resistance. All politicians, all the media, all the academics- every conceivable organization are all singing the climate alarmist song- now so loud it’s like an opera. 🙂
correction of above- I’d heard/saw that the global temp has gone up 1.1 C and that over land 1.6 C- can’t remember where I saw it
Point out every lie every time, point out cheating every time. At some point these mongrels will be held accountable, it won’t be pretty and I will enjoy every minute of it.
The trouble with you skeptical folks is you refuse to trust the settled science and the scientists-
Australia’s research sector chases rankings over quality and is ‘not fit for purpose’, chief scientist says (msn.com)
I released my own NCA on X today. Image attached.
The video is here.
Well thank the lord these hard workers in the photo have a mask on! (good lord…UGH!)
Yeah, we never get hail storms in MN. Good lord. As a meteorologist I can just scream, pull hair out and spit!
RCP8.5 is increasingly regarded among climate scientists as unrealistic but that doesn’t stop the leftists running the clown show in the White House from relying on it; clear evidence that the “national assessment” is political, not scientific.
Welcome aboard WUWT, keepkalm. Sorry it took so long to get your first comment out of the comment-pending-approval file.
RCP8.5 is considered implausible by the IPPC and yet in a personal conversation with Dr Elizabeth Kendon, she had this to say:
RCP8.5 was chosen as it gives a high signal to noise ratio – and so allows us to extract the climate change signal above natural climate variability.We can then use this to estimate the change per degree of warming, which can be applied to other emissions scenarios.We appreciate RCP8.5 is a high end scenario, with lower emissions scenarios now considered more likely – however understanding plausible high end changes are needed for some users to support precautionary planning.
RCP8.5 was chosen as it gives a high signal to noise ratio – and so allows us to extract the climate change signal above natural climate variability.
We can then use this to estimate the change per degree of warming, which can be applied to other emissions scenarios.
We appreciate RCP8.5 is a high end scenario, with lower emissions scenarios now considered more likely – however understanding plausible high end changes are needed for some users to support precautionary planning.
(“Variability conceals emerging trend in 100yr projections of UK local hourly rainfall extremes“)
are needed for some users to support precautionary planning.
In other words, the heck with accuracy, we need to scare the pants of the peons, otherwise they might not support sending more money to our bank accounts.
According to USAToday (believe them at your own risk) the NCA says:
Now we can say that the global warming that is caused by a doubling of the CO2 in the atmosphere should be between 4.5 degrees Fahrenheit and 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit.
IPCC AR6, uses a best estimate of 3°C, a likely (66%) range of 2.5–4°C and a 90% uncertainty range of 2–5°C. So the bottom of the ECS range is the top of the IPCC AR6 range.
Read articles by Nic Lewis
Maybe in the coming days someone will explain why NCA goes so far off the IPCC reservation.
“Climate misinformation for the Biden Administration”
Who knew that was possible???
How accurate have past assessments been?
Very accurate +/- 1,000,000%
Somebody isn’t minding the store …
You must be logged in to post a comment.