Data Falsifies ABC News’ Claim that 2023 Displayed Dangerous Heat Trends

From ClimateREALISM

By Linnea Lueken

A recent article at ABC News titled, “2023 was the year of record heat temperatures,” makes a slew of claims about global warming in 2023, including that extreme heat is becoming more common and more disastrous. These claims are misleading. While the planet has modestly warmed since the end of the Little Ice Age, and high temperatures were recorded this year in various locations, there is no evidence that recent temperature trends constitute an emergency or signify global change. New local records for both heat and cold are set almost every year. Many of the examples cited by ABC News are misattributed to greenhouse gas emissions, as opposed to other human causes and a variety of natural influences that climate scientists acknowledge contributed to this year’s warmth.

A team of four contributors write that “record-eclipsing temperatures will no longer be an anomaly if greenhouse gas emissions that fuel global warming continue at the current pace,” and that “hotter-than-normal temperatures could soon become the norm if fossil fuel extraction does not significantly decrease before 2030.”

ABC also mentions the goal of keeping warming to no more than 1.5 °C – but this value is arbitrary, as admitted by climate scientists and discussed very recently at Climate Realism in “Reason is Right, There is No ‘Climate Cliff’.” ABC neglects to mention that this threshold is not a scientifically established one, but rather a political talking point.

ABC spends the bulk of the article citing the “most consequential” stories about extreme heat this year, including two sections that deal with “warmest month on record” claims and “record stretches of triple-digit temperatures” describing heat records in El Paso, Phoenix, Death Valley National Park, and one four day stretch of allegedly “hottest day ever recorded” worldwide.

While it is true that average temperatures are rising (unevenly), and that the American southern states had some above-average temperatures this year, ABC’s claims are misleading and problematic.

It is notable that most of the temperature records that were broken were exceeded by a tenth of a degree or less, which is hardly alarming. In addition, the claims about record temperatures in cities in the United States are misleading since they are based on measurements from urban temperature stations, which Climate Realism and The Heartland Institute have repeatedly shown are woefully biased by the Urban Heat Island effect. For example, Phoenix, Arizona’s “record-breaking heatwave,” was clearly the result of the urban heat island effect is at work. Climate Realism discussed this fact in “OilPrice.com Contributor Misses the UHI Influence on Phoenix Warming Trend,” and “Record Phoenix Warmth Not Reflected in Surrounding Weather Station Data.” The summer record high lows at night came from a single station located at major airport. It is widely recognized by researchers that there can be a massive temperature difference between desert cities like Phoenix and the surrounding rural areas at night– up to 20 degrees.

Despite the many summertime heat records, the summer of 2023 was only the 13th warmest summer on record since measurements began in 1895. Climate Realism has likewise repeatedly refuted claims about particular days, months or the whole summer being the hottest ever herehere, and here, for example.

Another section for ABC News’ story, “extraordinary marine temperatures,” correctly states that Atlantic Ocean temperatures were above-average. Unfortunately, rather than soberly discussing the larger trend and possible causes, ABC News cites absurd claim that ocean temperatures off the Florida coast were 101 degrees as proof of the danger. This is particularly egregious fearmongering, as this temperature was recorded by a single buoy located partially inland in the Everglades. No other device recorded this high of a temperature. As discussed at Climate Realism, the buoy was in very shallow water, and may have even been beached at the time of the recorded temperature. Publicly available data from the buoy shows that the record temperature was set at low tide during the hottest part of the day. It is also not the hottest temperature recorded by this buoy, which was in 2017 at 102°F.

ABC claimed Florida’s ocean temperatures caused a mass bleaching event, and worked as “super fuel for hurricanes.” Neither of these claims is accurate. Some coral did bleach this summer, but it is unclear that temperatures were the sole or even primary cause. In addition, coral bleaching is not the same thing as coral death. Most corals are evolved to prefer warmer equatorial waters. The worst disaster for corals and other marine life in the past has been when the Florida Keys suffered freezing cold temperatures. Even after the 2010 die-offs, the reefs bounced back, and there is no reason for believing this won’t be the case this year as well. More importantly, there is no reason to believe that modest warming will cause permanent disappearance of corals in Florida.

Similarly, while warmer waters can fuel strong hurricanes, it’s more complicated than that. Climate Realism has shown the actual data on hurricanes amid global warming dozens of times, there has been no increase in strong cyclones. Also, contrary to the impression left by the ABC News story, there were no record setting hurricanes in Florida this year.

In the section titled “Record melting at the poles” ABC references the usual fearmongering about Antarctica, particularly the so-called “doomsday glacier.” Antarctica is a poor case study for climate alarm, as the continent’s ice refuses to behave the way alarmists claim it should. Antarctica has not displayed any sign of the warming seen other places on the planet, with the exception of some ocean temperatures that have led to melting in the Peninsula region. However, overall there has been an expansion of ice in Antarctica, as discussed in “Thanks, Frontline News, For Debunking Alarming Claims Made About Antarctica’s Temperature and Ice Trends.” In the areas that have seen melting, the total ice loss per year is around 0.0003 percent of the total ice mass, and the melt is being driven by subsurface geothermal activity and shifting ocean currents.

ABC also makes alarming claims about Arctic warming, claiming that sea ice and snow extent are well below the long-term average. While it’s true that the Arctic has seen sea ice mass loss over time, recent years have seen a decline in the rate of loss, not acceleration.

Most telling is that ABC News makes no mention whatsoever of some of the natural factors that gave 2023’s heat a boost.

First, in January 2022, the largest underwater volcano eruption on record blasted 40 trillion gallons of water vapor all the way into the stratosphere – water vapor is the most potent greenhouse gas. Early in 2023, scientists warned that the effects of the eruption would have a significant impact on global average temperatures.

Also, as 2023 got underway, the Pacific ocean began shifting to the warmer-phase of the El Niño Southern Oscillation, which is now in full swing and is expected to remain into late spring 2024. This natural event causes warmer temperatures on land and sea, and causes average global temperatures to rise, as well as delivering warmer, wetter weather to parts of North and Central America. ABC doesn’t mention the significant impact of ENSO on this fall and winter’s weather once.

It’s bad enough that ABC News falsely hypes a variety of hot weather news to claim that the Earth’s temperature is spiraling ever upward, out of control. It is particularly egregious for a supposedly honest news agency to place exclusive blame on fossil fuel “extraction” (a strange word choice, since it is the use not the extraction of fossil fuels that releases the majority of human carbon dioxide emissions) for this year’s warmth, while completely ignoring significant natural factors that have undoubtedly played a role in 2023’s warm year. ABC should retract and correct many of the false claims made in this post, if only to preserve the façade of integrity in its reporting the news.

4.8 25 votes
Article Rating
59 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
January 2, 2024 10:29 pm

Interesting pointing out the use of the word “extraction” rather than use, if I had to guess this is a conscious decision as this demonizes those extracting i.e. oil and gas companies but would forgive those using those products, that is just about 8 billion people. It continues the leftist talking points of big capitalists being evil, of course if there were no customers to sell it to I suppose they would stop their extraction. Any realist surely must acknowledge the utility of hydrocarbons, and while I am no great lover of “Big Oil”, particularly when they try to artificially inflate prices by reducing output while having record profits, the world would be a much worse place without them.

Reply to  Jonny5
January 2, 2024 11:25 pm

“of course if there were no customers to sell it to I suppose they would stop their extraction. ”

That’s plan B for environmentalists – get rid of people. Abortion, euthanasia, permissive atitudes to addictive drugs, forced vaccine mandates using hastly tested experimental gene therapy, stay at home orders that led to huge increases in depression, suicide and domestic violence, economic policies that suck the life out of people, etc., all part of the socialist paradise.

Reply to  PCman999
January 3, 2024 8:33 pm

Correct!

You-are-the-carbon
ozspeaksup
Reply to  PCman999
January 4, 2024 2:41 am

club of romes catch cry about humans being a plague on the planet is massively quoted by most warmists and yet they have NO idea who/where it came from at all…I had someone agree with it when I quoted it at a lunch at xmas

January 2, 2024 11:18 pm

The use of the word “extraction” instead of burning the fossil fuels let slip the true anti-oil company bigotry of the so-called environmentalists. They would gleefully mow down forests and jungles and cover every lake with solar cells and wind turbines, decimating any birds and insects that get in the way, and ignore any resultant pollution, if it means “sticking it to the oil companies” – besides being anti-Christian, hating oil companies is the only socially accepted bigotry/racism/irrationality.

strativarius
Reply to  PCman999
January 3, 2024 12:56 am

“”Fury over plans to ‘divert’ iconic 350ft waterfall in Snowdonia beauty spot that has inspired ‘storytellers, artists and poets’ by laying plastic pipes to supply hydro-electric scheme””
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/news/fury-over-plans-to-divert-iconic-350ft-waterfall-in-snowdonia-beauty-spot-that-has-inspired-storytellers-artists-and-poets-by-laying-plastic-pipes-to-supply-hydro-electric-scheme/ar-AA1mmR4L

Scissor
Reply to  PCman999
January 3, 2024 4:19 am

You are correct in their intent, but to many people “extraction” has a positive connotation. It does to me as I use extraction in one form or another to do my job and try to make the world a better place.

And I am so thankful right now for the extracted natural gas I used to make morning coffee and to warm my house.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Scissor
January 3, 2024 9:40 am

Extraction males me think ogf getting my wisdom teeth extracted

But this new word is important

The greenies used to just hate burning the oil products When challenged about thousands of products made from oil, they said that’s not what we care about.

Being against oil extraction (oil production) is a step further into leftist looney tunes land.

January 3, 2024 12:55 am

“Across the 854 urban areas in Europe, we estimated an annual excess of 203 620 deaths attributed to cold, and 20 173 attributed to heat.”

A quote from a recent article in the Lancet reiterating what we all know to be true, that cold kills 10x more people than heat.

“Humans have just experienced what will go down as the hottest year in recorded history” – ABC News.

For the vast majority of people in the Northern Hemisphere 2023 was a year like any other year, but thanks for letting us know.

It was apparently very hot in Death Valley, so avoid picnics in that area if possible.

“It is terrifying. And it is just the beginning.” – U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres

Welcome to weather Antonio, the planet has a lot of it, and it’s been going on for some time now, you should really keep up.

Reply to  Alpha
January 3, 2024 1:50 am

It’s worse than that.
There was a story on MSN UK detailing how ⅓ of UK houses are now riddled with mould and damp>
I laid in to try and inform the debate: That this dampness was caused by:

  • Over zealous insulations
  • Near total elimination of natural ventilation via ‘draughtproofing’…
  • …esp the removal and blocking of chimneys and the use of ‘balanced flues’
  • The demonisation of tumble driers for folks’ laundry leading them to hang endless stream of damp things on radiators
  • Endless extortions to ‘turn down the heating’
  • Rampant inflation and tax rises leaving people with less to spend on even basic home/house maintenance….
  • ….especially letting moss and lichen grow rampant on cement-tiled roofs, as vast numbers of UK houses have

and that these things were leading to the air quality in folks’ home being 10 to 100 times worse that what comes out the exhaust of your average modern diesel-engined car
And THAT is why ‘cold’ seems to kill. It goes perfectly hand-in-hand with damp and mould.
You do not ‘mess around’ with fungi – they may look all innocent/benign and sometimes very pretty (e.g. the moss-covered cottage roof) but they are callous ruthless killers

As typical for MSN, that story had completely vanished inside 12 hours = a whole new way of cancelling, censoring and doing ‘magical thinking’

Richard Greene
Reply to  Peta of Newark
January 3, 2024 3:42 am

Cold does noy kill

Bad health, accidents and homicides kill
Also TMB Too Many Birthdays

Add the stress on the heart of cold weather and deaths from heart problems increase.

Also, respiratory diseases spread mainly in cold months when people are indoors so deaths from pneumonia increase too

This has nothing to do with mold or mildew.

What is the most common cause of death in the winter?

Although excess winter deaths are associated with low temperatures, conditions directly relating to cold, such as hypothermia, are not the main cause of excess winter deaths. The majority of are (usually) caused by cerebrovascular diseases, ischaemic heart disease, respiratory diseases and influenza.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 7:51 am

Except for the TMBs, {I don’t really understand – are there more births in winter than in summer?} . . .
Why RG’s comments have gotten down votes (11 as I write) is a mystery to me.
Two winter-related deaths that need not happen are (a) old geezers shoveling snow, and (b) folks new to living in cold areas bringing charcoal burners inside just to keep warm.

Drake
Reply to  John Hultquist
January 3, 2024 9:20 am

As to # 1, there is not much snow to shovel when it is warm, to I still blame those deaths on the COLD.

As to #2, new people living in cold climates using charcoal to keep warm, the cold IS a factor, secondly, the liberals allowing poor ignorant immigration from warmer climates is a compounding factor for those deaths but the COLD is the primary factor.

In Las Vegas, we have had occasions of ignorant immigrant families who lost electrical service in their homes having gas generators IN their homes or in the garage with the intervening door open die of CO poisoning. Always in the winter during a cold spell. Yep, cold related. Of course the immigrants are all from warmer climes of Mexico or Central America, where their homes were much more “ventilated” then modern homes in LV, so unaware of the consequences of their actions, i.e. ignorant.

Richard Greene
Reply to  John Hultquist
January 3, 2024 9:54 am

“Why RG’s comments have gotten down votes (11 as I write) is a mystery to me.”

Now you are going to get down votes just for saying that. The world of climate and energy commets is like a lunatic asylum. Half the patients say the government is 100% right and the other half say the government is 100% wrong.

Facts, data and logic that does not support the prevailing mood here: The government climate consensus is 100% wrong … gets the Bronx cheer.

They used to have leftist Griff as their punching bag but he disappeared. I always thought he was Charles’ alter ego, commenting as “Griff” to get the audience all stirred up when Nick Strokes failed.

I could list 20 faults with EVs but if I post that EV sales were strong in 2023, the audience here goes berserk … like me walking past the monkey cage at the zoo clanging my steel drinking cup against the bars. Not that I’d ever do that again and get hit in the head by a banana peel.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  John Hultquist
January 4, 2024 2:46 am

TMB ie people getting old and dying

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 9:52 am

Cold does noy kill

So death from hypothermia isn’t a thing?

conditions directly relating to cold, such as hypothermia, are not the main cause

Or are you admitting that cold does kill?

Richard Greene
Reply to  Tony_G
January 3, 2024 10:20 am

3.3 million Americans died in 2022

1,300 die from hypothermia in a typical year
That’s like a rounding error

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 10:33 am

1,300 die from hypothermia in a typical year

So cold does kill?

Tom.1
January 3, 2024 3:04 am

“2023 was a year of record heat temperatures” What’s a “heat” temperature?

Richard Greene
Reply to  Tom.1
January 3, 2024 6:50 am

I do not know what a record heat temperature is but I’m sure it’s bad, and worse than previously thought. It can only be stopped by Nut Zero, forced upon us by fascism.

Curious George
Reply to  Tom.1
January 3, 2024 7:29 am

Maybe a “heat index”. Always higher than “temperature”. Very useful for scaremongering.

John Hultquist
Reply to  Tom.1
January 3, 2024 7:59 am

My software keeps introducing words it guessed at. If you substitute “hot” for “heat”, the statement makes sense, even if the truthfulness is questionable.

Reading blog comments, it is best to ignore some things because of these software suggestions and, 2nd, apparent mis-wording by people who use English as a second or third language. I say, “good for them” and I am very accepting of their comments.

Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 3:33 am

A good column that had one misleading paragraph and missed a few points

The Tonga volcano had ZERO observed effect on the global average temperature. The alleged 10% increase of stratospheric water vapor would make the percentage of WV in the stratosphere increase from 1.0% to 1.1%
ho hum

The record heat in 2023 is part of a long term trend since 1975 and more CO2 is one cause
The 2023 El Nino had a big temporary effect

2023 Was the Warmest Year In the 45-Year UAH Satellite Record

Points missed in the article

(1) Warming is good news, as is more CO2 in the atmosphere Colder is bad news.

(2) About two thirds of the heat records since 1975 are TMIN, which suggest CO2 warming and UHI warming, while one third are TMAX, which suggests less SO2 pollution and fewer daytime clouds.

(3) There is more warming in the colder N.H. nations and more warming in the coldest six months of the year

(4) Antarctica is not warming because of the permanent temperature inversion over most of the continent. The claimed ice melting is tiny and certainly within the margins of error of th estimates.

NOTE:
The CO2 Does Nothing Nuts
may now start the usual insults
and character attacks
Make no attempt refute anything I wrote
Debate is so un-American

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 4:01 am

“Debate is so un-American”

It’s rare everywhere but less rare here than anywhere else that I’m familiar with.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 3, 2024 2:38 pm

You don’t get out much
Debate is rare here

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 4:22 pm

Tell us all the places you find MORE debate. Certainly not among enviro groups and their lawyer friends- certainly not in any government agencies- certainly not in 99% of the media- so please tell us so we can all go there. What you really mean is that there is no debate here because many people disagree with your views.

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 4:18 am

“The record heat in 2023 is part of a long term trend since 1975 and more CO2 is one cause”

How much warmth does CO2 add? Is it detectable? What about negative feedbacks? I think there are more questions than answers when it comes to how CO2 and the Earth’s atmosphere interact.

To date, there is no evidence CO2 is having any influence on how the Earth’s weather unfolds.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 3, 2024 4:41 am

There is evidence that the warming northern half of the Northern Hemisphere since 1975 has reduced the temperature differential with the tropics. According to Meteorology 101 that should make weather milder in the Northern Hemisphere. And that has happeneddespite false headlines.

There is plenty of evidence of an increasing greenhouse effect and the only two causes could be CO2 increasing and night clouds increasing.

Any cause of tropospheric warming has a positive water vapor feedback and that feedback has a negative feedback, or some limiting factor, possibly more clouds from more water vapor in the atmosphere.

The effect of CO2 from lab spectroscopy is from 0.75 degrees C to 1.5 degrees C. per CO2x2

The range depends on the magnitude of a water vapor positive feedback. This range is what “skeptic” scientists estimate. Nothing in that range will harm anyone, especially because most greenhouse warming will be TMIN.

And then we have

The CO2 Does Nothing Nuts
The There’s No Greenhouse Nuts
The El Nino / Volcano Nuts
The CO2 is All Natural Nuts
and then there
are the Leftists
They Are All Nuts
All the Time

The big problem
is proving your theory
and I have solved
that mystery

My theory is it
is impossible
to prove anything,
but I can’t prove it.

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 7:47 am

I think all these facts you spout are generated in your head. To double the CO2 level and hit that 0.75° to 1.5°increase we would need to hit 820 ppm. We are a long way from doubling the atmospheric CO2 concentration and there is serious doubt that there is enough fossil fuel on the planet to be able double the CO2 level. Another negative point is that the atmospheric CO2 level has been 17.5 times higher than it is now and the earth didn’t end. CO2 is not the earth’s thermostat and never has been due to that fact that atmospheric water vapour totally swamps CO2’s absorption region depriving CO2 from having any effect whatsoever. Those are real facts. Funny thing is the earth’s plants would love 820 ppm of CO2. According to this study growth rates could increase by up to 40%.
https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/effects-of-rising-atmospheric-concentrations-of-carbon-13254108/

Richard Greene
Reply to  Matthew Bergin
January 3, 2024 10:58 am

I think all these facts you spout are generated in your head.

Thank you for the least offensive insult I’ve received here. I was expecting to read another location. As a “reward” I will give you my two cents. It is possible I am wrong, but that is far from the top of my list of possibilities.

To double the CO2 level and hit that 0.75° to 1.5°increase we would need to hit 820 ppm. We are a long way from doubling the atmospheric CO2 concentration and there is serious doubt that there is enough fossil fuel on the planet to be able double the CO2 level.

At the current rise rate of +2.5 ppm a year, the doubling from 420 to 840ppm CO2 would take 168 years. There’s plenty of raw materials. Will we still be burning hydrocarbon fuels in 100 years? Maybe not.

Another negative point is that the atmospheric CO2 level has been 17.5 times higher than it is now and the earth didn’t end.

It’s possible CO2 was 100x higher when Earth was formed. CO2 most likely has been in a long term decline for 4.5 billion years which may have ended at 180ppm in the ice core era. Even the current 420ppm is historically low in geologic time. The C3 plants (85% of plant species) evolved at about 1000ppm, and would prefer 1000 ppm again, as greenhouse owners know.

CO2 is not the earth’s thermostat and never has been due to that fact that atmospheric water vapour totally swamps CO2’s absorption region depriving CO2 from having any effect whatsoever.

“CO2 does nothing” is completely wrong and the lab spectroscopy absorption chart proves that statement is wrong. You are a CO2 denier. CO2 is not a thermostat — the global average temperature can go up, down or sideways while CO2 rises. But more CO2 always impedes Earth’s ability to cool itself. Climate change is the net result of the effects of all global, regional and local causes of climate change combined.

Those are real facts. Funny thing is the earth’s plants would love 820 ppm of CO2. According to this study growth rates could increase by up to 40%.

Most of my climate science reading from 1997 to 2017 was several hundred CO2 enrichment – plant growth scientific studies. Almost all the studies involved C3 plants but C4 photosynthesis plants benefitted too. Enrichments was typically from 600 to 800ppm CO2. C3 plant growth (biomass) tend to increase from 10% to 100%, and water use efficiency almost always increased (water requirements reduced. As a result of these studies and greenhouse practices I have advocated for 750 to 1500ppm CO2 in the atmosphere — more CO2 not less. The warming effect of the CO2 will not harm anyone because the absorption power of CO2 declines logarithmically as the atmospheric concentration of CO2 increases.

This website has archives of one page summaries of plant studies that are much easier to read than the studies themselves:

CO2 Science

I love CO2 and global warming.

But never forget
A climate crisis coming in 10 years
Better batteries coming in 10 years
Fusion power coming in 10 years
Global warming will kill your dog in 10 years

comment image

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 11:16 am

A couple of points. Water vapour at an average of 4% atmospheric compared CO2 at 0.041% shows that CO2 ‘s ability to absorb energy is swamped by water vapour at the critical 15 micron band.I have been waiting 55 years for the fusion in ten years to come true. I’m not holding my breath.

4ubuX
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 12:39 pm

You are a CO2 denier. “

You are a CO2 evidence-free lukewarmist junkie.

Lab results are for absorption.. didn’t you know that?

Then in the atmosphere… the mythical “CO2 warming” action takes place. Do you still “believe” such nonsense.. really?

NO , there is NO EVIDENCE that CO2 impedes cooling.

That is a lukewarmer fallacy you have been brain-washed with.

Any tiny increase in absorption in the CO2 range is more than compensated for by an increase in the atmospheric window.

Ignore the actual measured science… stick with your little fantasies that you can’t back up with science…

At least you didn’t go down the short-term correlation idiocy this time…

Everything else you say is real and sensible.

Stop destroying it all with scientific fantasies.

radiative-change-2
Richard Greene
Reply to  bnice2000
January 3, 2024 2:41 pm

You arer= a science dingbat
bnice2000 so I will not waste
my time responding to you.

Reply to  Matthew Bergin
January 3, 2024 11:33 am

dickie-griff doesn’t “do” science. !!

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 11:32 am

You still haven’t produced any evidence of CO2 warming in the atmosphere.

Just your usual non-science blethering.

Even DENYING El Ninos now.. puts you at the simpleton level.

That really is NUTS !

You are the one that is NUTS…

… you are a non-science lukewarmer little squirrel !

Richard Greene
Reply to  bnice2000
January 3, 2024 2:43 pm

If you ever had an intelligent post
under the moniker you hide behind,
I’d know you hired a ghostwriter.

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 11:36 am

The effect of CO2 from lab spectroscopy”

Is absolutely ZERO once CO2 reaches about 280ppm.

And that is radiative “absorption”

It ignores everything else that controls the atmosphere

Ignore the science, it is what lukewarmers and CO2 cultist do. !

It is all you are capable of doing.

eggert-co2
Richard Greene
Reply to  bnice2000
January 3, 2024 2:44 pm

The HITRAN and MODTRAN databases used by scientists all over the world say you have no idea what you are talking about (as usual)

Janice Moore
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 11:20 am

Re: “more CO2 is one cause”

Prove it. With data establishing causation.

All your generalizations about the laboratory properties of CO2 and broad, sweeping, statements about earth’s geological and climate history, etc., etc., satisfy only –> YOU.

One cannot refute you — your conjecture is not falsifiable. (in other words, you don’t even have a valid hypothesis about human CO2 and “global warming”).

The burden of proof is on you.

Oh, and that burden got much heavier since:

1) the ice core proxy data strongly indicated that warming PRECEDES rises in atmospheric CO2.

2) human CO2 emissions up greatly. Warming NOT (only rising at the same, slow, rate it has since the end of the Little Ice Age).

By the way:

Keep up the name calling 😄 — it adds some MUCH-needed humor to this place (as well as, in view of your own flimsy “arguments,” giving the credibility of data-driven science advocates a slight boost).

Richard Greene
Reply to  Janice Moore
January 3, 2024 3:22 pm

Janice Moore, not a scientist, but who likes science fiction movies, resorts to a childish response to anything she does not like to hear with cries or prove it, prove it, you can’t prove it, nyah, nyah, nyah

“One begins with an atmosphere that has a pre-induttrial value for CO₂, and asks how much warming will be associated with a doubling of that concentration. It turns out that the warming is logarithmic in CO₂ (because the absorption bands of CO₂ are almost saturated, and absorption is associated with line wings), so that each doubling is associated with the same warming. The contribution is about 3.5W/m2, or of the order of 2% of the normal flux, and leads to warming of about 1°C.”

Richard Lindzen, Ph.D.
Climate Scientist
Page 8 of 30 pages from link below

As Assessment of the Conventional Global Warming Narrative (thegwpf.org)

The Role of Greenhouse Gases in Energy 
Transfer in the Earth’s Atmosphere

W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer
Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Canada, Department of Physics, Princeton University, USA March 3, 2023

“Greenhouse gases warm the surface because they increase the “thermal
resistance” of the atmosphere to the vertical flow of energy from the solar-heated surface to space. The larger the thermal resistance between the surface and the emission altitude, the larger the temperature difference needed to drive the solar energy absorbed by the surface
back to space. Without the thermal resistance induced by greenhouse gases, Earth’s surface would be much colder and life as we know it would not be possible.
Increasing carbon dioxide will cause a small additional surface warming. It is difficult to calculate exactly how much, but our best estimate is that it is about 1 C for every doubling of CO2 concentration, when all feedbacks are correctly accounted for. Alarming predictions of dangerous warming require large positive feedbacks. The most commonly invoked feedback
is an increase in the concentration of water vapor in the upper troposphere. But most
climate models have predicted much more warming than has been observed, so there is no observational support for strong positive feedbacks. Indeed, most feedbacks in nature are negative as expressed by Le Chatelier’s Principle. When any system at equilibrium for a long period of time is subjected to a change in concentration, temperature, volume or pressure, the system changes to a new equilibrium, and this change partly counteracts the
applied change.”

The-Role-of-Greenhouse-Gases-in-Energy-Transfer-in-the-Earths-Atmosphere.pdf (co2coalition.org)

Page 30 of 32

NOW WE HAVE A PROBLEM

Ph.D. scientists Richard Lindzen, William Happer and William van Wijngaarden say there is a greenhouse effect and CO2 is part of it. As do nearly 100% of climate scientists living on this planet

Homemaker Janice Moore, a fan of science fiction movies, claims those Ph.D. climate scientists have no idea what they are talking about. Perhaps she will write letters to all of them saying: “prove it, prove it you can’t prove it, nyah, nyah, nyah”

Now I have a choice:
Either these three scientists are fools and
Ms. Moore is right, or Ms. Moore is a fool
and these are good scientists.

Let me think about this
I have my decision
Ms. Moore is a
science denying dingbat.

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 3, 2024 11:26 am

The CO2 Does Nothing Nuts”

You mean those who know you cannot produce a single bit of scientific evidence that it does, ??

CO2 is great of plant life.

Warming by CO2 ?? … Produce the evidence !

and no, silly short term correlations are NOT evidence.

Richard Greene
Reply to  bnice2000
January 3, 2024 3:25 pm

The evidence is in a comment to fellow CO2 Does Nothing Nut Janice Moore

Please produce evidence that you can chew gum and tie your shoes at the same time, all by yourself.

MarkW2
January 3, 2024 3:37 am

Use of the word “extraction” is either remarkably naive or completely stupid for the simple reason that it implies the removal of all products made from fossil fuels, especially plastics. While extreme environmentalists might be happy with this, neither governments nor 99% of the world’s population would be as it would affect a huge number of products, including those used for very positive reasons, such as hospital equipment.

Joe Public is already pushing back on the banning of fossil fuels for energy, with governments across the world having to reconsider green initiatives; and removal of products made from fossil fuels, which people now take for granted, would reveal the absurdity of extreme green initiatives even more powerfully.

Incredibly, many environmental supporters have absolutely no idea just how much of the stuff they use on a daily basis is made from fossil fuels. The threat of losing their mobile phones is just one example highly likely to make young people think twice about supporting extreme environmental measures.

Reply to  MarkW2
January 3, 2024 4:04 am

Fanatic enviros also hate “extraction” of wood- though of course they love wood products in their homes.

January 3, 2024 4:27 am

From the article: “It is particularly egregious for a supposedly honest news agency {ABC News] to place exclusive blame on fossil fuel “extraction”

That would be because ABC News is not an honest news agency. They have not been an honest news agency for a very long time, on a lot of subjects, not just CO2-caused Climate Change.

You can’t expect to get the truth out of any of these leftwing news agencies. Ideology trumps the truth with these people.

January 3, 2024 4:29 am

ABC is a significant part of the corporate media complex that has adopted climate hysteria as an everyday feature of their programming. Even though none of them have any importance in what is or will happen on earth, the members of the UK royal family and their partners are also a regular subject of American media. These two obsessions probably have less value than the once very popular astrology analysis.

Since this cultural malady is so wide-spread some one should look into how it occurred. This organization is an important factor.

Gary Pearse
January 3, 2024 6:49 am

There is yet no sign of alarming developments in climate, but this piece is thin gruel, a bit of Whack a Moley-type argument. Let’s not have WUWT simply respond “yeah but this, yeah but that.” It isn’t convincing. Have a ‘take’ as they say.

The global media in its desperation uses the climate alarm flood approach. It isn’t convincing either. They shifted to nonstop climate scares precisely because they have been unsuccessful. People are sick of it. Concentrate on the fact that the whole nine yards of climate silliness is falling apart. Remember, if things can’t work, they stop.

Curious George
January 3, 2024 7:24 am

Could it be partly caused by a recent fashion of reporting “heat index” instead of temperature? Heat index seems to be always a degree or more higher.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Curious George
January 3, 2024 3:36 pm

The heat index is good for a scare, especially with Kelvin degrees. But the next step should be interviewing really fat people sweating outdoors on a hot summer day.

The camera might make them nervous, and they’ll sweat more than usual.

They will be asked if it was this hot when they were young.

Of course when they were young and slim it did not feel so hot in the summer … but as obese adults carrying around 300 pounds of blubber, it always feels really hot outside on a summer day.

I call this my Blubber Warming Theory and hope to win the Nobel Prize my correct 1997 climate prediction should have won:

“The climate will get warmer,
unless it gets colder”

John Hultquist
January 3, 2024 8:06 am

Is there a list of all the places that have warmed faster
than all the other places in the world?
I think the latest I’ve read about is Spain. That article
was mostly about availability of H2O for personal use
and water for fruit trees.

Reply to  John Hultquist
January 3, 2024 4:36 pm

We could make a list of all the places in the world that have *not* had record high temperatures in 2023.

I nominate my State of Oklahoma as one that has not experienced record high temperatures in 2023. Our record temperatures occurred back in the 1930’s.

Dave Andrews
January 3, 2024 8:22 am

The team of four contributors write “hotter than normal temperatures could soon become the norm if fossil fuel extraction does not significantly decrease before 2030”

Sorry guys, I’ve got news for you.

Even the cheer-leader IEA acknowledges peak oil will not happen until 2030 and that oil demand for petrochemicals, aviation and shipping will continue to increase to 2050. Although there will be falls in other areas “the decline will be a slow one all the way to 2050”

Meanwhile they also report that increased coal use in China, India, Indonesia, Vietnam and the Philippines in 2023 more than offset the big falls in Europe and the US and lower rates of decline in Korea, Japan,Canada and India. They expect China and India will account for more than 70% of global coal consumption in 2026.

You need to get out more guys!

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Dave Andrews
January 3, 2024 8:27 am

Dang! re coal “Lower rates of decline in Korea, Japan, Canada and Australia”

Mr Ed
January 3, 2024 8:55 am

Interesting discussion, ABC and the other media covering the weather in alarmist tone’s reminds me of a psychology 101 bit about what kind of people always talk about the weather. Also Linnea’s point about the Hunga Tonga event not being recognized by the media in this context is also very telling.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Mr Ed
January 3, 2024 11:34 am

Moreover, Ms. Luekens’ point, Most telling is that ABC News makes no mention whatsoever of some of the natural factors, slams the coffin lid down resoundingly on ABC’s bogeyman scare tactics.

Candy Hall
January 3, 2024 2:51 pm

Coal is necessary for the manufacture of steel and cement. New methods of manufacture are being tried but have not yet been perfected. Without steel and cement (necessary to make concrete), we can’t make bridges, buildings, factories, ships, etc! Steel and reinforced concrete are the primary building products used today.

Reply to  Candy Hall
January 3, 2024 4:48 pm

Those trying to get rid of coal haven’t thought things all the way through, if they are sincere in their ignorance of the consequences. Unfortunately, some are quite aware of the ramifications of getting rid of coal and are deliberately trying to destroy our ability to make bridges, buildings, factories and ships.

Fortunately, getting rid of coal is just talk, as coal usage will continue to increase for decades at least.

Climate Change Alarmists are living in a False Reality where they think they can control coal use and the Earth’s weather. Reality is, they can’t control either.

The Net Zero battle has been lost by the climate alarmists. They are spinning their wheels now, while claiming they are making progress. Whistling past the graveyard, is what they are doing.

Reply to  Candy Hall
January 3, 2024 9:15 pm

In an ironic twist coal is also necessary for solar panel manufacturing.

ozspeaksup
January 4, 2024 2:39 am

it should be renamed the aboriginal broadcasting company .50% of the shows are now targeted there and it was full on for the yes mob.
whats left? the woke n queer agendas and theyre all green biased as well
and it has ZERO integrity or honesty in reporting any more.
“guests” and staff rattle of a list of utter rubbish claims about climate daily and refuse to ever prove data.
abc news online ran an item yesterday admitting that HALF at least of the Vic black friday fires were started BY powerlines …but that wont be widely read or heard by the public.
Guardian and james cRook uni guests are treated as gods never questiond
and the ONLY decent announcer left Tom Switzer(between the lines) quit in december, too honest/edgy non woke for their team id bet.
about 30 yrs ago it was a decent channel, now? its crap and the only reason i have it on is the news and the fact it has no ads and idiot music.I spend more time cursing their lies than enjoying decent information anymore