By P Gosselin
As Germany’s flooding takes hold, the media have been quick to seize upon the extreme weather as proof of the climate crisis. But the data show us that it’s normal bad weather that’s also been seen many times before in the past.
Yet, despite the widespread flooding, there are those who still believe that flooded north Germany is still suffering from severe to exceptional drought.
Not unprecedented
But the media have not wasted time in spinning the latest flooding as another sign of climate change. “Never have we seen such amount of rain in such a short period”, or, “it’s more proof the weather is getting increasingly extreme”.
All of it of course is just lots of click-baiting hype.
No significant rainfall trend since 1881
As retired professor Stefan Homburg pointed out at Twitter: “More rain than usual, but not a record. The number of heavy rain days was also within the normal range. Neither “droughts” nor “extreme weather” are recognizable in the official statistics. The difference between facts and political narratives is breathtaking.”
He presents two charts from the DWD German national weather service. The first is the total annual precipitation in millimeters since 1881.
The second chart shows the number of days with rally heavy rainfall each year. As readers will see, annual rainfall has in fact increased modestly, thus refuting claims Germany will get drier in the future, and extreme weather events as defined by very rainy days shows no real trend.
In other words, claims that the heavy rainfall over the past weeks is a sign of climate change is an absolute nothing-burger.
Drought is over, until the next one
Here where I live in northern Germany, I’ve been tracking monthly rainfall for about 3 and half years using a simple measurement cup from the local garden center. Here’s what I’ve recorded so far:
The chart clearly depicts how the months of October, November and December were very wet, with just under 500 mm of precipitation. This rain will more than compensate for the drought period seen earlier, especially in 2022.
Most of Germany at the moment is a soaked sponge.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Difference Between Facts and Political Narratives Is Breathtaking.”
And the gulf between them is getting larger
“”Germany’s Lost Year Is Over But 2024 May Not Be Much Better””
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-06/germany-s-lost-year-is-over-but-2024-may-not-be-much-better?leadSource=uverify%20wall
“”Germany’s emissions hit a 70-year low last year as Europe’s largest economy reduced its reliance on coal.
A study by the thinktank Agora Energiewende found that Germany emitted 673m tonnes of greenhouse gases in 2023, 73m tonnes fewer than in 2022. The drop was “largely attributable to a strong decrease in coal power generation””
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/jan/04/germany-emissions-hit-70-year-low-reduces-reliance-coal
Deindustrialisation works.
Germany did not reduce its reliance on coal. It just shifted its consumption to China. German imports from China are now rising exponentially like all other NutZero economies.
Germany provides intellectual property to China to gain a foothold into Chinese manufacturing plants. For example, BASF’s EUR10bn mega complex in China is now up and running. It will not go well for ex workers in Germany though. Poverty and homelessness are trending upward at alarming rates:
https://bnnbreaking.com/finance-nav/inflation/the-escalating-homelessness-crisis-in-germany-a-deep-dive/
China and India refuse to be financially hobbled by following the UN’s socialist agenda. Manufacturing companies wanting to survive need to establish operations in China or India.
Europe is in a deepening recession while Russia is climbing out of its recession following the start of the Ukraine conflict. The Russia/China nexus is going from strength-to-strength.
“Difference Between Facts and Political Narratives Is Breathtaking.”
And the gulf between them is getting larger…
“The Russia/China nexus is going from strength-to-strength.”
Lots of online economists don’t agree.
But it’s true that shifting production to another country- then claiming a reduction of emissions in the home country- that’s the story of Wokeachusetts- where all heavy industry is gone- leaving high tech, universities, world class hospitals and the like. We now import almost everything and claim dropping emissions- so we’re saving the planet!
There’s a big battle now about locking up all the forests in the state- to save the planet- while we import 99% of all wood products- from other states and nations.
It’s similar to touting economic due to increased deficit spending.
Printing money- we sort of get away with it since the dollar is the international money now. And that works as long as we remain strong- not just militarily but economically.
For now. The dollar as international money has severely weakened under Biden and will continue to do so unless the US can reverse it – and that’s going to be a huge uphill struggle now. The Biden regime has done huge lasting harm to the US and western interests.
Have you got the numbers? That is, the dollar vs other major currencies? I don’t even know where to look and too lazy to do so. I doubt that it’s weakened much if at all but I don’t know. Isn’t this the way much of the debt is financed- by foreigners purchasing bonds denominated in dollars? Where else would be safer?
I don’t necessarily mean weakened as in it buys less, I mean that it is no longer seen as the main international currency – BRICS was set up on the basis of not using the dollar for international trade, for example.
BRICS can make an effort- but it won’t succeed in dethroning the almighty dollar. I don’t know the numbers but I bet the vast majority of trade is still in dollars.
And everyday you need more of those dollars to buy the same stuff.
Have you seen the US debt clock ? And where do you think inflation (destroying your savings) is coming from. The US is a sinking ship but keep playing the music.
People have been forecasting the decline of America my entire 74 years. It’s still #1, all things considered. Churchill said America always does the right thing- but only after trying everything else- or something like that. Other nations never correct themselves.
China and India refuse to be financially hobbled by following the UN’s socialist agenda.
One of the biggest issues with widespread manufactured climate anxiety and its response is the language involved, at least on this site. Climate anxiety propaganda can serve many purposes, all related to money. The “socialist agenda”, if there is such a thing, is an insignificant part of the paradigm. By scattering typographical verbiage with the words “socialism’ and “Marxism” that don’t have any relevant context, a misconception is created that actually undermines efforts to counter engineered climate anxiety. The prostitution of science for financial gain doesn’t have anything to do with socialism or Marxism and misdiagnosing the disease allows it to metastasize.
Since man is a social animal, there are always going to be in any human society some features that could be described as socialist; public education, state highways, postal service, and many others. Raging against “socialism” displays an inability to make an accurate analysis of the actual problem, unless one also opposes land grant universities, national parks and interstate highways. The number of people living today in the US that have read “Das Kapital” in its entirety could probably be written on the head of a pin with a felt tip marker. Marx is just a derogatory term, hardly a description of the historical and economic wandering of a drunken pseudo-intellectual. Using the term “Marxist” in the usual sense is an indicator of thoughtlessness and intellectual poverty.
The motives behind the climate anxiety movement are monetary. Its progress is advanced by the potential for wealth through public acceptance of a fad, a mass belief in perverted science. Proof of this is the failure of some renewable energy projects for financial reasons. How could a lack of money curtail an “existential threat” that’s now widely known?
Simply quit being intellectually lazy and remove “socialism” and “Marxist” from your vocabulary and insert “bandit capitalists”, “corporate thievery”, ” scientific prostitution” and “media propaganda”.
It is like the mass hysteria of the stock craze in the 1920s before it all came tumbling down in the 1930s resulting in the Great Depression.
The “socialist agenda”, if there is such a thing, is an insignificant part of the paradigm.”
There is, and it isn’t.
“The prostitution of science for financial gain doesn’t have anything to do with socialism or Marxism and misdiagnosing the disease allows it to metastasize.”
Sounds like someone trying to shift the conversation and defend So-Marx.
“Simply quit being intellectually lazy and remove “socialism” and “Marxist” from your vocabulary and insert “bandit capitalists”, “corporate thievery”, ” scientific prostitution” and “media propaganda”.
Spun like a true Socialist/Marxist straight out of S/M dogma to cast blame on the “TRUE” evil of capitalism.
Very concise and compelling argument, full of details and interpretations. You’re an idiot.
ooh. looks like I touched a nerve. You didn’t make great decisions at Little Bighorn, either.
My location on June 26, 1876 isn’t germane to the argument, either. It doesn’t refute anything I posted above and seems to be typical of your form of rhetoric, if it can even be graced by that term. One doesn’t “touch a nerve” by spouting the usual mindless accusations. You, and your similars, ignore or forget that every proposed remedy for the climate fantasy involve the transfer of billions of dollars to crony capitalist combines that wouldn’t exist without the terror of a warming climate that their adopted pseudo-science has inspired. You’re invited to prove me wrong but you don’t have the ammunition or the ability. Return to your favorite stool and impress those down the bar with your non-arguments.
No, one touches a nerve by pointing out typical socialist and Marxist rhetoric.
You state, “Simply quit being intellectually lazy and remove “socialism” and “Marxist” from your vocabulary and insert “bandit capitalists”, “corporate thievery….”
I say blaming everything on “bandit capitalists” and “corporate thievery” is standard Marxist dogma and just as intellectually lazy as you claim the use of “socialism” and “Marxist” is.
In an attempt to engage in more civil conversation, I agree with you regarding ” scientific prostitution” and “media propaganda”.
Let’s assume for a second that feeble-minded Phil R and you are absolutely correct, that Marxists and socialists are the impetus behind climate armageddon. Are the research universities doing the studies agents of Marxism? Really? Is the entire world media complex, a zillion dollar business, a socialist enterprise? Are the US and state democratic governments that finance the research and award the rights to offshore turbine installations, CO2 pipelines and hydrogen research, that mandate EV production and sales into the future, are they also Marxists? And the companies that sign on to those contracts and build those solar arrays and turbine fields, they are socialist entities as well? If you actually believe that, then the game is up. We are already living in a Marxist Utopia and anything that’s said and done would be better applied to assisted suicide. Was it part of Marx’s plan to have huge corporations like Siemens build turbine fields? Was Marx the scientist that discovered the CO2-heat causality? There’s more wrong with education than people realize.
Without taking any position on the rest of the discussion: a philosophy can certainly be the “impetus” of a movement without all adherents of that movement being “agents” of the philosophy.
This applies to any philosophy or religion, not only Marxism.
You sound like some sort of social studies professor or soi-disant intellectual. if so, then you hit the nail on the head with your last comment, “There’s more wrong with education than people realize.”
Well, I think you have to admit that socialists and marxists are taking advantage of the alarmist climate crisis to push their agendas.
Of course, there are many motivations for climate alarmists doing what they are doing, and promoting socialism and markism is included in that mix.
They are just puppets in the game used as distraction. Do we really think Biden & Co have any real power ? And don’t think republicans are the solution because they have the same master behind the curtain.
A story about a huge solar array in Nevada installed to provide power for the openly Marxist Las Vegas casino business. The owners and operators of the array are Invenergy, another socialist entity.
Written by a delusional soul who thinks the UN is working in their best interests:
This link provides the UN sustainable development goals:
https://sdgs.un.org/goals
The goals are delusional. They are inherently self-defeating. A “blueprint for peace and prosperity”. It parallels Orwell’s Animal Farm. And the results are plain to see with the unelected do-gooders paying themselves huge salaries while living lavish lifestyles telling the rest of us that we must do their bidding while descending into poverty.
The UN is well on its way to establishing its “ministry of truth” – disinformation is a global disease didn’t you know! WUWT would be shut down if UN had their way.
The socialist agenda is being driven by the UN. It creates parasitic behaviour where the biggest parasites are the ultimate winners.
Goals aren’t the same as accomplishments. The point is that achieving a specific goal involves correctly identifying the issues that come between the present and the future goal. The UN can’t sign contracts for wind farms or solar arrays or CO2 pipelines and it can’t build or finance them. There is no United Nations Division of Solar Panel Installation. But there is a National Grid Renewables LLC that installs solar panels to replace serviceable hydrocarbon energy electrical generators, among other boondoggles. They don’t seem to have any connection to the UN. It’s in their financial interest that money, lots of it, be spent in remediation of a non-problem. They’re obviously capitalists. Since they’re not socialists or Marxists, what they’re doing must be OK.
The saddest aspect of this entire situation is that the most feeble-minded are the most opposed to the climate fraud and employ the least effective tactics in their opposition, especially by ignoring the beneficiaries of that fraud. History is written by the winners so you guys will be minor figures in the disaster, you weren’t the cause or the answer, merely a distraction.
Any country that signs up to the sustainable goals is on board with the UN dictating what they invest in. NetZero is UN policy and governments have signed up for it like good little boys should:
https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/03/1088142
Any country that wants to play on their patch must agree to the UN dictates.
The Australian government has set up a racket whereby electricity consumers pay extra money for “renewable” energy. The retailers are the bagmen; collecting from the consumers to give to the generators. Anyone with a roof can be a generator on the taking side of the racket. And those who do not own their roof are on the giving side of the racket. I am a beneficiary of the racket because I got in early.
Without rackets like this, there would be no point installing uneconomic wind and solar generators. These rackets are supported and encouraged by the UN. It is mandated theft that fits well with the UN’s world order. Rich getting richer and poor getting poorer.
UN organise the COP conventions where the wealthy rub shoulders with government officials and decide how they can make their super yachts look greener while working out how to screw over the poor in the name of eliminating poverty. Orwell could not make this stuff up.
the UN’s world order. Rich getting richer and poor getting poorer.
Most people would consider that the free-market’s world order. It’s illuminating to discover that Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk and Bill Gates are socialists.
Admittedly, it’s somewhat terrifying to wait at a street corner in a large US city for a battalion of UN troops to pass. Evidently deployed to enforce the UN renewable energy policies, constructed in part by the US, it does seem to be a necessity if the Net Zero plan is to succeed.
Without rackets like this, there would be no point installing uneconomic wind and solar generators.
The point is that companies are paid to install the uneconomic generators. No ordinary, uninterested citizen benefits in a material way from climate change mitigation. Those who do benefit are members of academia, government, media and the renewable industry. It really couldn’t be more obvious.
And the politicians who maintain power with the help of the kickbacks they receive form your list of leftist.
I doubt that the intellectually lazy, not, Jordan Peterson would agree with you.
I think there are many winds propelling “climate change”. Socialism is but one and not the strongest. Greed, corporate and otherwise is part of it. Stupidity and fear are the are the main parts. Fear of climatic change seems to trigger many people. Politicians have seized upon this pandoras box.
‘The motives behind the climate anxiety movement are monetary.’
Every collectivist movement requires useful idiots to ‘sell the rope’ with which they will figuratively be hanged. Hence, the junk science, the compliant media and the willing corporate cronies, etc.
While you can rail at the use of terms like ‘Marxism’, which is just one variant of ‘socialism’, to denote the fact that political power is becoming increasingly centralized, be assured that it is indeed happening, and that those pushing for it have many weapons besides ‘climate change’ at their disposal.
Nothing happens, in the western world at least, unless money changes hands. Money is what AGCW is all about. Research universities with unquestioned integrity are funded by government and other grants to produce studies that verify what government and grantors need to hear, based on goals like Net Zero. Corporations are created specifically to address the physical processes required to advance the goals.
Isn’t it interesting that in the case of the largest research universities in the country, that they are actually the most important institutions in their state, more important and with budgets and employee numbers that are larger than any business in the state and in some cases larger than all but a few cities in their states. At the same time, local media doesn’t maintain a presence on campus, except for coverage of athletics. The other machinations of the universities are explained by the institutions themselves. There’s no controversy over anything except something weird like the Gay-Harvard fiasco, where outside forces are involved. There’s no investigation of a particular department or its research to determine if its actually a positive component of the school’s primary mission. For someone who keeps a pulse on a given university’s activity that doesn’t include a ball, there are many opaque and questionable things that deserve exploration. Most people, even those living adjacent to campus, are interested only in the success of the football team. If someone living in Tempe, AZ doesn’t know or care about what ASU is up to, why should they care about the climate in Skowhegan, Maine.
An imploding centrally (central banks) controlled (Big Brother) economic power structure that has nothing to do with socialism ,marxism or capitalism. The wizards behind the curtain who have printed all that was needed to buy/corrupt the political system. Neither our vote nor our money will be able to change this. Only the complete collapse of the current system can bring a new start.
I think we’re all saying the same thing while getting hung up on the terminology, which is probably intentional on the part of those ‘running the show’.
I try to keep things simple – the Left prefers collective behavior, meaning centralized and coercive control of the economy, while the Right prefers individual behavior, meaning decentralized and voluntary control of the economy.
Institutions like ‘central banks’ are clearly within the scope of the former.
I noticed the appearance of homelessness and a drug culture in Germany on a visit this past summer. I never saw this on previous visits, but then again I remember when San Francisco was largely family friendly.
Before 1900, when aspirin was invented, opium and its derivatives were used by nearly everyone where it was available.
If you look at the US mortality and mobility reports in the 1920s and 1930s when opium and its derivatives were still legal for personal use the average death rate was 35 deaths per year. Alcohol caused about 3,100 deaths per year.
Here is the 1931 report: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsushistorical/mortstatsh_1931.pdf
They had opium bars in the major cities where opium was smoked and customers would fall asleep instead of overdosing.
The laws which make opiates extremely expensive, and the easy access to syringes to bring the cost down, are the main causes of the large numbers of death from injecting fentanyl.
When they executed Socretes they used hemlock to kill him with opium to ease the pain.
And now winter is coming.
https://www.windy.com/52.517/13.389?temp,50.548,6.306,6
From the article: “But the media have not wasted time in spinning the latest flooding as another sign of climate change. “Never have we seen such amount of rain in such a short period”, or, “it’s more proof the weather is getting increasingly extreme”.
All of it of course is just lots of click-baiting hype.”
Pure climate alarmist propagada, is what it is.
The alarmists are now reduced to claiming that every severe weather event is caused by CO2, although no connection can be shown. The climate alarmists are just making unsubstantiated assertions and expecting everyone else to believe it.
They think if they repeat this narrative over and over and over, enough times, that it will be believed. Tha’s how propaganda works. Repetition of the lie is the key.
There is absolutely NO evidence linking CO2 to ANY severe weather event.
When climate alarmists make these claims they should be challenged on them to provide evidence to back up these claims. Of course, they can’t provide any evidence for the claims, and that should be pointed out to the general public.
We need a climate alarmist propaganda smackdown. We do this by demanding the evidence for these claims, thereby showing that climate alamists have no evidence for their claims because there is no such thing. They know it, and we know it, and now it’s time for the general public to know it.
“Repetition of the lie is the key.”
Goebbels
“We do this by demanding the evidence..”
Then, of course, they just ignore us. There will be a need for stronger action. Some (especially here) have said more use of satire, sarcasm, and mocking humor, because it antagonizes the alarmists- so they try to fight back but look stupid doing so.
What also will help is simple- get out the vote- I think most people in the western world know dislike the climate BS and will vote against it- assuming any politicians have the guts to speak against it. Unfortunately, there are few- there are zero in Wokeachusetts.
In the US 61 percent of Americans agree with the so-called “Climate Change” agenda, and even two-thirds of Republicans under the age of 30 agree with it.
not so
That’s what the latest Pew Research, CNN and AP polls say. If you have others that say differently could you post their links?.
‘What the data says about Americans’ views of climate change’
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
CNN poll: Large majority of US adults and half of Republicans agree with Biden’s goal to slash climate pollutionhttps://www.cnn.com/2023/12/08/politics/cnn-poll-climate-change/index.html
Most in US want more action on climate change: AP-NORC pollhttps://apnews.com/article/inflation-biden-technology-trending-news-government-and-politics-e734337636b6dba18840649e3c9db73b
It looks to me like the brainwashing by the UN and the media has been very effective.
Polls simply aren’t very accurate. If I need to explain, you probably wouldn’t understand anyway.
“Climate pollution”, huh?
What is climate pollution? When those polled are asked this question, what do you think they think climate pollution is? Do you see this is an ambiguous question?
Definition of ambiguous: “(of language) open to more than one interpretation; having a double meaning.”
If someone is against climate pollution, does that mean they are in favor of reducing CO2? The question is open to interpretation on both sides, the person making the choice, and the person interpreting the answer.
Polls can be made to say whatever you want them to say, by how the questions are asked, and who interprets the results.
Polls have their place. I wouldn’t bet my life on one, though.
I posted under one of your many previous copies of this assertion that poll results depend on the questions asked.
Looking more closely at your link to the Pew poll (in your reply to “Joseph Zorzin”), I eventually noticed the “How we did this” bar had a “plus sign inside a circle” icon next to it.
Clicking on this opened a box ending with :
“Here are the questions used for this analysis, along with responses, and its methodology.”
On the Pew webpage, the underlined text is a link to a PDF file with the questions asked (!), along with the results.
You appear to have only looked at the response to question “EN1” of that poll.
You appear to have stopped there.
I don’t need to look for any “others”.
Some other questions, with their responses … from one of your chosen polls … lightly reformatted, with highlighting added by me.
– – – – – – – – – –
Question EN2
Thinking about the country’s energy supply, do you think the U.S. should…
Phase out the use of oil, coal and natural gas completely, relying instead on renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power only : 31%
Use a mix of energy sources including oil, coal and natural gas along with renewable energy sources : 68%
No answer : 1%
– – – – – – – – – –
Question EN3
[ Note in Pew PDF file : “ASK IF “USE A MIX” (EN2=2) [N=7,151]” ]
And do you think that …
The country should never stop using oil, coal and natural gas : 52%
The country should eventually stop using oil, coal and natural gas, but we aren’t ready yet : 47%
No answer : 1%
NB : 52% of 68% is just over 35% of “Americans” …
– – – – – – – – – –
Question NRGPROB
If the U.S. greatly reduces energy production from fossil fuel sources such as oil, coal and natural gas, and increases energy production from renewable sources such as wind and solar… [h]ow likely do you think it is that this transition would lead to unexpected problems for the country?
Very likely : 34%
Somewhat likely : 38%
Not too likely : 23%
Not at all likely : 3%
No answer : 1%
NB (for the mathematically challenged) : 34% + 38% = 72%, or almost three-quarters of “Americans”, think it is “likely or very likely” that trying to rush a transition to renewables “would” (definitely) lead to “problems”.
– – – – – – – – – –
“Americans’ views of climate change” are slightly more nuanced than the “narrative” of enthusiastic support for “slashing climate pollution / more action on climate change” that you seem to want people to infer from your posts.
TA: “We do this by demanding the evidence..”
JZ: “Then, of course, they just ignore us.”
Yes, the climate alarmists ignore us, but by doing so they show the general public that they don’t have an answer for our demand for evidence, and are just blowing smoke when they make such unsupported claims.
Being ignored hasn’t stopped me from being the biggest critic of the forestry establishment in New England. Not because I don’t like forestry- but because I love great forestry and so much of it is poorly done. So I’ve been ranting against the establishment for decades using solid evidence- and have been ignored, but I keep doing it. I do think I’ve had a modest influence over policies- but of course, they’ll never admit it. That’s good enough for me- to know that I have had that modest influence. In recent years I’ve been doing the same regarding the climate cult here- but with little effect- because the cult is so strong here that even the people who should know better have “the faith”. The entire state government, all of the media, and all of academia here has the faith- so it’s like butting my head against the Great Wall of China. Wokeachusetts!
We do this by demanding the evidence
And how is this done? You’ve just expressed this demand on international media. What will be the result? What would be the most effective format to extract the fallacious alarmist evidence? Posting on WUWT might not actually bring the installation of solar panel arrays to a halt. What would?
The Grand Solar Minimum that just started a couple of years ago might change their minds as it starts getting cooler instead of warmer, although trillions might have been wasted by that time.
No “might” about it. TRILLIONS of dollars *were* wasted, and it’s not over yet.
To be honest, climate change is not the only area thing ‘we’ have wasted resources on – there’s a lot of log rolling under our two-party system.
“And how is this done? You’ve just expressed this demand on international media. What will be the result?”
Well, my hope would be that those who come here seeking answers about human-caused climate change would note this demand for evidence, and would note that no climate alarmists even attempts to reply or prove their case, and would realize that the climate alarmists apparently don’t even have enough evidence to reply to a direct challenge to their climate change claims.
If they had the evidence, they would be quick to slap down the skeptics. But they don’t. Ever. Because they can’t. I hope that sinks in to those who are here trying to judge the matter.
The people making alarmist climate change claims refuse to back up their claims with evidence. We know why: They don’t have any evidence. Eventually, the general public will figure this out.
They won’t figure it out if skeptics go along with the hoax. The skeptic’s job is to challenge the hoax.
The last thing a Climate Alarmist wants to hear is: Prove it!
You’re denying reality. They prove it in their own way daily with studies and research done by universities that’s financed by government and business. They regularly slap down skeptics through a media that’s beholding to them for scary climate narrative click bait and television reports of floods.
The general public will never figure this out because atmospheric physics doesn’t interest people who dwell on the NFL, Taylor Swift and the Kardashians. Nobody living on your cul de sac can explain Boyle’s Law or Charles’ Law or cares about them. They have no reason to be skeptics of something that means nothing to them. They don’t deposit a climate change indemnity check weekly. Others do. Research university employees do. Many government bureaucrats do. Pseudo-journalists do. And management and employees of wind turbine, solar panel and CO2 mitigation businesses do.
There have been a number of predecessors to this phenomenon. One that’s seldom mentioned anymore but is still quite evident is radon mitigation. There’s never been a death certificate issued with words, “Cause: Radon”. Yet millions are spent annually defacing the exterior architecture of beautiful homes to prevent an imaginary affliction. Has anyone every “proven” that someone died from radon?
“You’re denying reality. They prove it in their own way daily with studies and research done by universities that’s financed by government and business.”
Climate alarmists don’t prove anything. Instead, they speculate, assume and assert without any evidence to back up any of it.
You have to know this. I think I can say without contradiction, that you have never seen any evidence proving anything Climate Alarmists say about CO2, other than the fact CO2 is a greenhouse gas (which proves nothing).
That could be said about literally anything that’s invisible to the unaided human eye. Has there ever been “proof” that gamma rays exist? I’ve never seen one and neither have you. But evidence of some sort proves their existence. Finding a criminal on the basis of DNA analysis doesn’t seem possible but there are felons looking through bars right now because of their DNA. The real issue in the case of atmospheric gases is the interpretation of their effect on each other and the earth. There’s evidence of their existence and also evidence of their effect. Whether that effect is genuine, meaningful or not is open to question, like virtually all scientific assumptions. A significant portion of the scientific community believes it to be a fact.
The role of gases introduced by humans into the atmosphere will be argued for some time to come. But there’s really no argument about the incredibly negative economic and social effects that abandoning proven reliable hydrocarbon energy for erratic and expensive “renewable” energy will produce throughout the world. Developed arguments based on the financials can’t now and probably will never be refuted. That’s where the confrontation should take place.
The leading item on the BBC’s lunchtime news slot yesterday (Friday 5th) was about the flooding in England. The item really tried to emphasise the disastrous nature of this flooding:
* “over 1000 homes under water” (actually, no homes were “under water”)
* someone’s garden has been flooded;
* a party boat has sunk on the Thames.
Then a weather presenter, Louise Lear, was brought on to pontificate and came out with a few gems:
* “I think it’s fair that we attribute climate change to the winter that we’ve been seeing” [I quote verbatim];
* “we know now that a warmer world can often mean a wetter world”;
* “you can see the _bombardment_ of cloud” (this referring to 12 days of satellite images compressed into 30 seconds);
* “we’ve already suffered 8 named storms this year” (well, stop naming them?).
So, no logic, little sense, no evidence, no indication that she has even thought about what her sentences mean, and yet Louise’s opinions (because they are nothing else) were broadcast to the entire nation without critique or comment.
Louise’s qualifications? “She graduated from Middlesex University in 1988 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Music and Drama. She plays the piano and clarinet.”.
Yes exactly, they speak “Alarmese”, sort of like water torture for the masses.
““we’ve already suffered 8 named storms this year” (well, stop naming them?).”
I’m for that! Naming weather fronts is climate alarmist propagada. They are trying to put normal weather patterns in the same category as a hurricane. The better to scare you, dear!
It’s more torturing of the language to promote alarmist climate change. The objective is to scare people into doing foolish things.
All El Niños originate in a 9000 meter deep trench near the Solomon Islands. That trench has major continuous volcanic activity, that influences the world’s weather, after about a 2-y delay.
The world had a strong El Niño event in June 2021, which warmed large areas of the Pacific Ocean, which evaporated more water, and eventually warmed the world’s atmosphere by about 0.3 C
None of that had anything to do with CO2
The results of this El Niño showed up as a warmer, cloudier, wetter atmosphere in late 2023, which resulted in increased precipitation in late fall, as happened in Germany
DEEP OCEAN VOLCANOS CAUSE PERIODIC GLOBAL WARMING BY EL NINOs
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/natural-forces-cause-periodic-global-warming
EXCERPT:
El Niño, an Exceptional Event in 2023
.
At present, one of the most determining factors in climate is El Niño.
El Niño is a recurring phenomenon that causes a sudden increase in temperature.
All El Niños originate at the same fixed “Point Source” located east of Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands
A stream of warm water wells up from that point source, departing from there, towards the Peruvian coast.
The UAH graph (see below) shows, El Niño can be dominant for a temperature rise.
The El Nino of late summer 2021 was exceptional, as its effects appeared in late summer in West Europe, etc, in 2023.
As a result, El Niño’s air temperature increase is added to the normally high summer temperatures, typical for the Northern Hemisphere.
As a result, a long, but late, hot “Indian Summer” develops, that continues until winter, when polar vortex weather asserts itself, as is already occurring in Sweden and Siberia.
What is ENSO?
El Niño is the warm part of the regularly recurring so-called ENSO phenomenon, La Niña is the colder period. ENSO stands for El Niño Southern Oscillation.
The crucial question is, whether ENSO is related to CO2 warming, as IPCC’s air temperature modelers, politicians and media keep on claiming.
They use this claim to justify a multi-$trillion energy transition towards de-carbonization, aka, Net-Zero by 2050.
ENSO affects the weather in large parts of the world. The periodically occurring cold and warming of the sea water in the aforementioned part of the Pacific Ocean is sometimes quite intense.
The warming of cold sea water creates a local alternation between high-and low-air pressure areas, a phenomenon that is sometimes so intense, that it has a global influence on both world temperature and weather across the globe.
YES !.. Thank you. !
ENSO is making for a rather pleasant winter in the United States, so far, as the general air flow is coming in off the Pacific ocean, which is milder air.
But the U.S. is going to start getting colder air from up north in the near future. Lots of snow in the forecast for a large part of the U.S.
It’s now getting to the coldest part of the year in the U.S. so this is to be expected.
The polar vortex is far stronger than the waining effects of this El Nino in the fall.
Here in Woodstock, VT, I am looking at 5 inch snow, and it will be coming down all day. Finally, some good news for skiers
Soon, I will get my snowblower to clean it off the driveway.
Story tip
In support of wilpost:
Why El Niños Originate from Geologic, Not Atmospheric, Sources — Plate climatology
Now consider the location of the Hunga Tonga volcano, and the effect ocean heat from HT might have when added into this system.
Look at the ocean currents from the HT area, then look at what happening to Antarctic sea ice over the next year or so.
What’s Driving Climate? – YouTube
Further on the effects of ocean seismic activity climate.
Yes maybe but that, if it is ‘anything’ is The Trigger that fired the gun.
The Gun required to be loaded first and secondarily, no mechanism that might simultaneously unload it
The ‘loading’ was and is done by ‘Trade Winds’ (prevailing winds) blowing westwards across the Pacific and seeping sun-warmed water with them.
If Australia and Philippines weren’t in the way, that water would have sailed right on into the Indian Ocean.
But no, it accumulates where it does, in the western Pacific. It is not a sustainable thing to happen, water tends not to accumulate in that way (The 2nd Law says not)
The accumulation of warm water would be reduced and de-fused, (the heat energy be sucked out of it) if Australia weren’t a desert.
But because Australia is a desert, large high pressure weather systems sit constantly upon Australia, causing offshore winds all around Australia’s coastline.
If Australia were a (wet) rainforest (as it was prior to 30,000 years ago) that wetness would deflate/deflect the high pressure bubble (due to the high buoyancy of water vapour) and cause onshore winds to blow onto the continent
These winds would then form a continuation of the westward flowing Trade Winds and as they passed over the place where the warm water accumulates (warm pool), would suck immense amounts of moisture (thus heat energy) out of the embryonic warm pool.
Thus would cause large amounts of rain to fall on eastern Australia, cooling the landscape also further reducing barometric pressure = working to increase the strength of the westerly trades so they’d pickup ever more moisture and heat.
The warm pool would then never get to a point of instability and ENSO would abruptly cease. Completely.
And it was The Hand Of Humankind that destroyed the Australian rainforest all that time ago
You need to read my referenced article.
Any trade winds near the equator are reinforced by periodic EL Ninos, which receive their driving force (heat) from active volcanic activity in the 9000 meter deep trough near the Solomon Islands, where several tectonic plates come together/subduct each other.
To put it into perspective with a simplified calculation on the back of an envelope
From the UAH graph, it can be concluded, an intense El Niño produces a temperature jump across the entire Earth of approximately 0.3°C.
E= K T4 K = 5.670367 x 10^-8 is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant
Taking the derivative delivers:
dE= 4 K T3 dT = 4 x 5.670367^-8 x 288^3 x 0.3 = 1.625 W/m2
If the Earth were to absorb the associated energy as radiation, the Stefan-Boltzmann equation indicates, this corresponds to a radiation effect of 1.625 W/m².
That is 829 TW for the total earth surface of 510 100 000 km², or an annual energy production of 26,143 EJ (Exajoules). Annual human primary energy production for all uses was estimated at about 557 EJ.
Conclusion
A single, strong El Niño produces a warming effect on the lower layer of the atmosphere 26143/557 = 47 times stronger than the CO2 emissions of the human annual primary energy, plus an El Niño (weak to very strong) can occur, on average, every 3.6 years. See above image.
.
Human thermal influence on Earth’s temperature compares to one of the many active faults or volcanic submarine hot spots (estimated to number 5,000) in the world (of which the El Niño heat source is just one) is immeasurably small.
It is completely self-destructive for the Western world to impose restrictions on CO2 emissions that have only a small, not even marginal impact on human energy CO2 emissions
The human energy CO2 emission is completely insignificant compared to the external thermal influences to which the earth is subjected.
.
All politicians and activists have been warned: the earth, moon, sun and celestial bodies will never listen to capricious rules and legislation imposed by them on the earth’s inhabitants.
Political narratives almost always fudge the truth to some degree. The difference now is the divergence between narrative and reality.
I don’t like the term “Nothingburger”. Hillary Clinton, attempting to appear hip or relevant, used it once and now its ruined. To me it sounds smarmy, faux intellectual, self aggrandizing, lame, insincere, oily, unctuous and slimy. I’ll stop there but you get the idea. Otherwise, a fine article.
Hillary Clinton is lame, insincere, oily, unctuous and slimy……..
Hillary Clinton is a clear and present danger to our freedoms.
She should never be let near the levers of power. There is a dictator hiding behind that arrogant smirk.
“I don’t like the term “Nothingburger”. . . Otherwise, a fine article.”
I agree, on both counts.
“Nothingburger” is not vey hard-hitting. It’s a nothingburger. 🙂
Thank you ‘Professor’
For your closed mind, your appeal to your own authority, for throwing away most of the data and for normalising all of our extinctions
All we need to see is your use of the word ‘sponge’ and the picture at the top.
The picture shows A Flood (of water)
Question: How can anyone imagine that there is any sort of sponge under there?
The very presence of the water on the surface shows that there is rock-hard impermeable ground under there
Especially, that that sort of ground does not store water and thus neither can it store any much heat energy
If it cannot store water, it cannot cool summers nor make it rain during summertime.
Likewise, it cannot use any stored heat to keep winters warmer than they would otherwise be.
Hello Munich
The colour of the water in the photo is (beyond) problematic.
It. Should. Not. Be. Brown.
What that demonstrates clearly to ‘intelligent educated people’ (such as Professors) is that the landscape the rain fell on is not any sort of sponge and that there were no plants where when it fell.
They, while alive, would have acted as sponges and their dead forebears in the soil would have absorbed immensely greater amounts of water.
But because they weren’t and are nt there, when the rain hits the bare soil, it instantly ‘liquidises;’ it into a free flowing slurry.
If the landscape was on a slope of less than 5 degrees, it would drain away off the surface very slowly but creating A Flood while it did so
if the land was on a slope of more than 5 degrees, the water would have turned into a tsunami flash-flood as gravity dragged it downhill.
It would keep on going until, maybe, it flowed onto some level ground, slow down a bit and strike a nice pose for any pretty young woman with a camera who happened by.
It gets worse.
It may look disgusting, dirty, filthy and horrible and unhealthy, but that brownness of the water is your:
That muddy water racing away into the sea (it never comes back) is taking your entire civilisation with it
As it has done myriad times in the past – isn’t that right ‘Professor’?
Eternity is a long time, don’t be in a rush to get there
Oh dear Peta, you have finally gone to the other side!
Pray Europe! Jetstream forecast for January 11.
Bloody hell. Van Gogh as meteorologist!
The Sun is the creator.
This is political narrative:
Lower Saxony’s State Premier Stephan Weil said on Thursday that the state had NEVER seen flooding of this magnitude.
“Experts have been warning for a long time that the increasingly frequent extreme weather events are linked to climate change,” he said.
Job done, give that man a promotion.
Climate Alarmists get promoted for lying about the climate.
Stephan Weil did his job.
Never is a long time, Stephan.
Extreme weather events are *not* increasing, Stephan.
Keep up the good work.
Very nice.
“ Difference Between Facts and Political Narratives Is Breathtaking.”
Man, he said a mouthful. That applies pretty much across the board to any subject
It’s gunna be El Nino dry folks but now we’ll explain why it’s the exact opposite-
El Niño doesn’t automatically mean it won’t rain. Here’s why it’s been so wet and stormy for Australia’s eastern states (msn.com)
Could some UK rivers freeze over?
It looks like the UK is right on the border of the cold air.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2024/01/07/1300Z/wind/isobaric/500hPa/overlay=temp/orthographic=-24.93,65.76,264/loc=-3.629,54.953
The United States is getting ready to get colder. That cold arctic air that was over China is now working its way towards the United States.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2024/01/07/1300Z/wind/isobaric/500hPa/overlay=temp/orthographic=-117.94,42.09,264/loc=-101.820,52.079