Newspaper letter references: • Watts Up With That?

A list of references used in my Letters to the Editor, so that the ill-informed can’t say that I’m “making stuff up”, or their personal favorite: “He doesn’t know the difference between weather and climate”. – Anthony

For my Guest Opinion Piece on Nov 16th, 2023 – full text with embedded reference links follows

‘Paradise Lost’ – How the Maui Wildfire Was ‘Déjà Vu All Over Again’

The title is with apologies to John Milton and Yogi Berra, who surely would have something to say about these dual tragedies.

On November, 8 2018, a massive wind-driven wildfire destroyed the town of Paradise, California. I experienced it firsthand, watching the plume from relative safety and later comforting friends and co-workers who lost homes, and nearly their lives. Eighty-five people did, some who I knew. It was an unparalleled tragedy – until August 2023, when the town of Lahaina in Maui burned to the ground and at least 115 people died. The weather events, fire conditions, and human folly that led up to the Maui fire were nearly identical to what happened in Paradise. It reminded me of what British Prime Minister Winston Churchill famously said in a 1948 speech, “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

Some journalists and vocal green activists were quick to immediately blame “climate change” in both fires before the fire investigations were even started, much less completed. A detailed analysis by my colleague, meteorologist Cliff Mass, PhD., of the University of Washington shows that the Maui fire was a perfect storm of a high wind weather event, predicted days ahead, combined with a high fuel load due to dry invasive grasses, a similar scenario was the setup for the 2018 Paradise Campfire.

In both fires, power lines and high winds were the ignition source and the driver. In both fires, dry high fuel loads contributed to the intensity of the fires. In both fires, there were ample warnings in weather forecasts.

The other common denominator in both fires was the institutional failure of electric utility companies. Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) in California and Hawaii Electric (HE) both were pursuing green energy plans to satisfy green energy advocates and investors instead of paying attention to basic maintenance of their electrical power lines. The Paradise Campfire was blamed on PG&E ignoring maintenance on century-old power lines, which broke and sparked in a high-wind event. With video and data showing Maui power lines sparking during high winds, Hawaiian Electric is now the focus for lack of maintenance. The Wall Street Journal, in their article Hawaiian Electric Knew of Wildfire Threat, but Waited Years to Act, noted, “Four years ago, the utility said it needed to do more to prevent its power lines from emitting sparks. It made little progress, focusing on a shift to clean energy.”

In 2019, HE stated the risk of fires and in a press release, outlining strategies to mitigate the wildfire risks from its aging power lines. The company noted that it was studying how utilities in California were dealing with similar wildfire threats. None of that was implemented. Meanwhile, the company focused on green energy goals, instead.

In June 2022, HE filed an application with the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission stating it wanted to spend around $190 million over five years upgrading its transmission infrastructure to be more resilient, but at the time of the Lahaina fire, that plan still languished, mostly unimplemented. In an August 19 New York Times article, the risk and the delay were laid bare.

“Hawaiian Electric has known for years that extreme weather was becoming a bigger danger, but the company did little to strengthen its equipment and failed to adopt emergency plans used elsewhere, like being prepared to cut off power to prevent fires. The utility knew it needed to upgrade its equipment but did not make changes that could have reduced risks of fires, energy experts said.”

The pattern of deferring maintenance and safety upgrades at the expense of populist green energy goals is the same reason contributing to the PG&E Paradise fire, and now the Maui fire. Literally, it is “déjà vu all over again.”

Perhaps it’s time to put aside populist green energy demands and create a company constitution to ensure that system maintenance and the safety of ratepayers is the top priority. Hopefully, with two tragic examples now in full view, other power companies will learn from this history, rather than repeat it.

For my letter of September 12, 2023

Letter: Florida buoy didn’t record ocean temperature

I almost didn’t respond to Jorge Smirnoff’s August 22nd letter, which was mostly a factless rant-fest of his political opinions. However, one point is worth rebuttal.

“Anthony should have read the E-R’s global warming coverages; then he would have known about Florida’s coastal waters reaching record-breaking temperatures of 101.1F”

I was well ahead of that AP article, which was posted by hundreds of news outlets and regurgitated by Smirnoff as if it was climate noteworthy. It isn’t. The buoy, NOAA MNBF1, sits in a shallow coastal mud flat just a few feet off the point of Manatee Bay, part of the Everglades National Park, and not in the waters of the Atlantic Ocean. At low tide it likely sits on the bottom of the mud flat or in water just a few inches deep. The one hour of the day it recorded 101.F was near low tide. At that time, it wasn’t measuring ocean temperatures at all.

The buoy isn’t far from the hot-water outlet of the Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant, and was even hotter before – 102F, Aug. 15, 2017. Media/Smirnoff missed that. Draw your own conclusions about what the buoy is measuring, but it isn’t “climate change.” One errant data point means nothing.

I did a TV show on the topic. Watch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFKLOE7oeRA

References here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/newspaper-letter-references/

Anthony Watts

REBUTTAL REFERENCES:

An examination of the actual data from that buoy designated as MNBF1 shows that the peak in temperature of 101.1F (38.4C) was very brief and then the water rapidly cooled off, with such a temperature not being repeated since (see Figure 1 below):

*Figure 1 – plot of temperature data from the Manatee Bay (MNBF1) buoy. Image and data from National Data Buoy Center.*

However, what the media missed is that MNBF1 is not an ocean buoy at all, in fact it is partially inland, designated as part of the Everglades National Park, and not in the waters of the Atlantic Ocean, as seen in this Google Earth image in Figure 2:

*Figure 2: Google Earth image showing placement of buoy MNBF1. Note that it is not actually in the Atlantic, but is behind the Key Largo barrier reef, and in a shallow bay called Manatee bay.*

On this Google Earth closeup, seen in Figure 3, we can see this buoy is in exceptionally shallow water, near the shoreline – you can see the bottom of the bay.

*Figure 3, Google Earth closeup image showing placement of buoy MNBF1 at Bay Point of Manatee bay.*

Note how shallow the water is, enabling you to see the dark bottom.

One of the most important things that the media missed is the fact that due to the shallow water and placement near land, this buoy is sensitive to tides and wide temperature fluctuations due to the shallow nature of the water. With very shallow water, it is very easy for the sun to heat the sand/mud beneath the buoy, which is dark (which will absorb more sunlight), which will then increase the temperature reading recorded in the water.

Indeed, the high temperature reading correlates closely to low tide. Temperature peaked at 2200 HR GMT – which was after low tide at 1:35PM – water had a chance to warm because sunlight was hitting the bottom.

*Figure 4A and 4B: Tide data for Manatee Bay and temperature data and time for buoy MNBF1.*

The media completely missed the fact that this sort of temperature at that buoy has happened before and this was not the highest temperature ever seen there. The record for the Manatee Bay site is 102 degrees. It was set on Aug. 15, 2017. The data from that buoy only goes back to 2004. With such a short period of data, it cannot possibly be representative of any climate trend, which requires at least 30 years or more of data. Certainly one (or even two) high temperature data points isn’t a climate indicator.

Further, one buoy in Florida with an errant high temperature isn’t indicative of the overall condition of Florida’s coastal waters.

*Figure 5: plot of temperature data from Manatee Bay buoy MNBF1 from 2004 with peak temperatures noted. Note also that in 2009, temperature hit 100°F there. Source: Michael Lowry SFNRC.*

Had the media (or Jorge Smirnoff) bothered to check, they would have discovered that the buoy is in shallow relatively stagnant water, somewhat inland, and not in the ocean, and therefore not representative of Atlantic Ocean temperatures. They would have also discovered that it was “not a record,” with higher temperatures previously being recorded at that particular buoy. Furthermore, if they had bothered to check tide tables, they would have learned that the high temperature correlated with a lower than normal tide, which allowed the dark shallow bottom heated by the sun to also contribute to heating the water.

Indeed, the water is so shallow where this buoy is placed, it is entirely possible that the buoy itself rests on muddy tidal bottom during extremely low tides. What is it measuring then? Is the water temperature sensor exposed to the sun? Or, is it measuring that water temperature in a few inches of water?

And then there is the fact that buoy MNBF1 is not far from the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station, which has a hot water outlet into the same area as the buoy in Manatee Bay. How much of that power plant hot water is contributing to the water temperature at buoy MNBF1 under certain tide and currents conditions? Probably a lot more than the dreaded “climate change.”

*Figure 6: Location comparison of Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station, its hot water outlet, and NOAA buoy MNBF1. Image from Google Earth.*

But they (and the feckless Jorge Smirnoff) didn’t bother to check. Instead, following the climate crisis narrative they are pushing, they hyped false tales of unprecedented ocean temperatures and warned of impending doom.

Meanwhile, as this link to the live data and Figure 1 above shows, nature has brought the water temperatures back to expected values for this time of year. It is important to note that The Guardian reported, “Normal water temperatures for the area this time of year should be between 73F and 88F (23C and 31C), according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).”

The “crisis” is over, water temperatures at MNBF1 are back to normal levels, but the incompetent media and letter writing fools aren’t reporting on that.

For my letter of August 5, 2023:
Letter: ‘Solving climate change’ is the ‘golden ticket’

I’m amused by letters trying to rebut my factual statements in two recent letters: not one succeeded. Most ignored my citations, making unrelated statements, like throwing mud at the wall to see what “sticks.” One suggested “stay in your lane, bro” while having no expertise himself. These reminded me of two statements.

There’s a 2009 video of Climate Czar John Kerry stating, “In five years, scientists predict, we will have the first ice free arctic summer.” Well, the Arctic ice is still there today.

Last week, U.N. secretary-general António Guterres declared “The era of global warming has ended; the era of global boiling has arrived.” Really? Where’s the boiling ocean report from Mendocino?

They can’t believe what they say. These officials can see the data, knowing what the science reports contain. But, like a drug addiction, they can’t stop making scary claims because “solving climate change” is the “Golden Ticket.” It gives governments and “global authorities” like the U.N. power craved for decades to rule with near-absolute control in the name of saving the planet. They won’t take your personal freedom by force; people will just give it to them once enough are scared into submission.

Climate change has morphed into a doomsday cult; most cult leaders aren’t true believers in their “theology,” which is why they own beachfront homes and private jets. But being the leader of the cult gives them amazing power over fools.

I look forward to Greta-esque “How dare you!” style replies.

References here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/newspaper-letter-references/

— Anthony Watts, Chico

The John Kerry Video:

‘The era of global boiling has arrived’ warns the UN – video

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2023/jul/27/the-era-of-global-boiling-has-arrived-warns-the-un-video

Find the “global boiling” – real time image from the DSCOVR satellite on Aug 5, 2023:

The climate change cult: 10 warning signs:
https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/the-climate-change-cult-10-warning-signs/

The cult of the climate apocalypse:
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/03/26/the-cult-of-the-climate-apocalypse/

For my Letter of July 21, 2023:

Heatwaves usually bring out “climate caterwaulers”, so with last weekend’s hot temperatures, I figured I’d get ahead of it. Despite seeing weekend temperatures in Chico of 105-109°F, this is not abnormal for our area at all.

In a recently released dataset from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which shows cities that have a “Change in “Unusually Hot Temperatures in the Contiguous 48 States, 1948–2020,” Chico actually had a DECLINE of 9.61% for unusually high temperatures. Orland shows a decline of 11.08%.

The EPA data for 1,066 weather stations across the United States showed a total of 863 stations, or 81%, reporting either a decrease or no change in the number of unusually hot days. Only 19% of all weather stations report an increase in the number of hot days since 1948. Many of these stations were at airports or otherwise badly sited locations that created heat biases.

And, the EPA data also shows that the worst heat waves in the contiguous US happened in the 1930s, not in the present day. These heatwaves were well before “climate change aka global warming” became a political cause of the left and people started driving those much-hated SUV’s.

These inconvenient and cooler facts from the EPA make the “hotter Chico temperatures due to increased greenhouse gas” claims of the vociferous and emotional Valley’s Edge opponents completely moot if not outright ridiculous.

Stay cool folks, the only Chico “climate crisis” that exists is in some people’s heads.

Anthony Watts

From the EPA website, the map of hotter temperatures vs cooler temperatures:

This map shows trends in unusually hot temperatures at individual weather stations that have operated consistently since 1948. In this case, the term “unusually hot” refers to a daily maximum temperature that is hotter than the 95^th percentile temperature during the 1948–2020 period. Thus, the maximum temperature on a particular day at a particular station would be considered “unusually hot” if it falls within the warmest 5 percent of measurements at that station during the 1948–2020 period. The map shows changes in the total number of days per year that were hotter than the 95^th percentile. Red upward-pointing symbols show where these unusually hot days are becoming more common. Blue downward-pointing symbols show where unusually hot days are becoming less common. Full data is available here: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/high-low-temps_fig-3.csv

From the EPA interactive map: https://arcg.is/0C9zK4

Data for Chico (station at the Chico State University Farm):

Data for Orland (station at the Water District office):

Heat waves in the United States since 1895, from the EPA website:

For my Letter of July 13, 2023:

This is a response to Michael Bertsch who wrote:

“July 4th was the hottest day in the history of humanity so far. … and when science proves you wrong you still deny the heat record’s connection to oil — this position is thick as a brick. We laugh at you. We’re all laughing at you.”

This shows Michael’s “thick” knowledge of the situation. That July 4th claim is false. It came from a website called climatereanalyzer.org using model data, not actual temperatures, and got picked up by know-nothing social media fools going viral, followed by the media that didn’t bother to check. Only two problems: it wasn’t an official temperature. In a July 5 Associated Press story, NOAA distanced itself:

“NOAA, whose figures are considered the gold standard in climate data, said in a statement Thursday that it cannot validate the unofficial numbers. It noted that the reanalyzer uses model output data, which it called “not suitable” as substitutes for actual temperatures and climate records.”

And there is the fact that the model only goes back to 1979, not “the history of humanity.”

Ooops!

The “excess heat” that spurred social media panic came from the waters off Antarctica, where apparently a computer model glitch made it look like shrimp were boiling in the ocean. Meanwhile, according to actual data, you know, from real measurements, the temperature of the Earth as of this writing is 57.47°F. That’s not “hot.”

I laugh at you Michael, in fact, we’re all laughing at you.

Full details and references here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/newspaper-letter-references/

Anthony Watts

Here is the Associated Press story: https://apnews.com/article/global-heat-record-hottest-climate-change-july-483fc8e2a286062773692db1a37efe23

Here is the graphic that caused the social media panic. See the little uptick in the center to 17°C. Note that it only has data back to 1979.

I’m pretty sure there were heatwaves before 1979, like the big one in July 1936. So much for Michaels claim of “the hottest day in the history of humanity.”

Here’s the big “heat source” that caused the panic – a glitch in model output that made it look like the waters off Antarctica were boiling hot, and when “averaged” over the entire globe, made that false 17°C uptick.

Dr. Ryan Maue weighs in on Twitter trying to put out the wrongheaded social media fire. It isn’t even an up to date climate model, circa 2009:

The global temperature as of this writing:

For source/info see: https://temperature.global

For my Letter April 22, 2022

It’s the year 2022. Cumulative effects of overpopulation, pollution and “climate catastrophe” have caused severe worldwide shortages of food, water and housing. Scientists confirm oceanographic reports saying the oceans are dying. The food chain is disrupted. Food is becoming scarce, and the temperature is so hot that heat waves have become year-round thanks to climate change aka “global warming.”

Homeless people are everywhere; only half the workforce is employed while the other half is barely making it. Many people are illiterate and few factories are producing new goods.

The homes of the elite are barricaded, with private security. Only the elite can afford air conditioning. Strawberries are now a delicacy at $75 a quart. The situation with food has gotten so bad that people are being harvested off the streets and “recycled protein” is being distributed to the population.

Yes, it’s the movie Soylent Green released in 1973, describing life in 2022.¹

While some of the self-inflicted (thanks to COVID, PG&E, inflation) items above might be considered climate-caused today by serial doomsters frequenting here, the climate itself is not a catastrophe. March 2022 global temperatures measured by satellite are 0.27°F (0.15°C) and U.S. temperature (NOAA’s U.S. Climate Reference Network) is just 0.38°F (0.21°C) above normal; nearly undetectable fractions of a degree, with little change measured in 15 years.^2,3

Soylent Green portrayed a “climate catastrophe” that hasn’t happened; everything else we experience today is self-inflicted. Runaway inflation and Democratic party policies are the real catastrophes today.^4,5

— Anthony Watts, Chico

REFERENCES:

Soylent Green, Movie released in 1973 PG 1h 37m, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green and https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070723/
UAH Global Satellite Temperature, March 2022, https://www.drroyspencer.com/2022/04/uah-global-temperature-update-for-march-2022-0-15-deg-c/
National Temperature Index, NOAA National Climatic Data Center, https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/national-temperature-index/time-series/anom-tavg/1/0
Monthly 12-month inflation rate in the United States from February 2021 to February 2022, Statista, https://www.statista.com/statistics/273418/unadjusted-monthly-inflation-rate-in-the-us/
These twenty-five Biden administration policies are raising energy costs, Americans for Prosperity, https://americansforprosperity.org/biden-policies-raising-gas-prices/

Some pertinent graphs for the reference reading impaired:

Further reading, covering hunger, energy and other topics related to this letter.
https://climaterealism.com/2022/04/nearly-fifty-years-ago-soylent-green-forecast-a-grim-future-for-the-year-2022-reality-is-far-different/

For my Letter December 14th, 2021

President Biden blames the recent tornado outbreak in Kentucky on “climate change.” Biden states, “The fact is we all know everything is more intense when the climate is warming and obviously it has some impact here …”¹ Biden’s statement is laughably inept, and easily disproved.

First, the top five deadliest tornadoes in America all occurred between 1840 and 1936.² Second, the last half of the 65-year U.S. tornado record had 40% fewer strong to violent tornadoes (EF3 rated or greater)^3,4 than the first half. To claim that climate change is causing severe tornadoes is speculation and directly opposite data publicly available from the National Weather Service.⁵ While there’s an upward trend in all tornadoes, due to increased reporting courtesy of millions of cellphones and expanding populations, violent tornadoes are significantly down. (see graph below)

Third, the number of tornadoes this year has been below average, and in 2018, a record low year for tornadoes in the United States.⁵ Tornadoes in December aren’t unknown, or rare.

Finally, tornado outbreaks can’t happen without cold air, when cold air juxtaposes with warm moist air on a front, we get strong thunderstorms, and tornadoes.⁶ With a modestly warming world, the difference between equatorial and polar temperature lessens, which is why we have had a downward trend in violent tornadoes.⁷

They left can’t fix COVID, inflation, gas prices, shortages, or even get cargo ships unloaded, but they would have you believe we can tax the climate and weather into submission.

— Anthony Watts, Chico

For my Letter November 15, 2021:

A recent letter “Carbon fees a wise investment for our future”¹ was so off-the-rails ridiculous that it deserves a factual rebuttal. The writer claims “A well-designed price on carbon would halve greenhouse gas emissions in a decade.” What he really means is an additional tax on gasoline, natural gas, coal, etc. He doesn’t say “tax”, as that’s a word greenies don’t like to use.

The result: higher prices to live our lives, while China and India, the main emitters on the planet, laugh at us.² They pay lip service to climate goals, then ignore the goals for their own economic development.³

While China and India soared⁴, without any carbon taxes at all, the USA has significantly dropped its own emissions in 15 years, mainly from switching electrical generation from coal to natural gas, thanks in part to (gasp!) fracking.⁵ Oh, the horror!

The writer then claims “Solar and wind are the cheapest new energy sources in most of the world.” Well, that’s just hogwash, er, greenwash. Look at California, the wind/solar state, with an average electricity price of 18 cents per kilowatt-hour (with summer tiers reaching up to 400% more)⁶ compared to non-green Nevada, at 8.3 cents kW/h year-round.⁷ Next, PG&E in cahoots with corrupt PUCC is about to give home solar owners a colonoscopy, dropping reimbursement for solar generated electricity down to 25% of what it was with NEM3, coming in January 2022.⁸

If you think you’re being gouged to “save the planet” now, just wait.

Anthony Watts, Chico

REFERENCES:

Letter, Carbon fees a wise investment for our future, Gordon Gregory, Chico Enterprise-Record November 5, 2021, https://www.chicoer.com/2021/11/05/letter-carbon-fees-a-wise-investment-for-our-future/
The Real Story of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Energy Equipment and Infrastructure Alliance, https://www.eeia.org/aboutus/about-one.cfm?Getone=yes&category=Current&ID=530
Glasgow climate pledges are ‘lip service’ without far more aggressive plans, https://www.gpb.org/news/2021/11/10/glasgow-climate-pledges-are-lip-service-without-far-more-aggressive-plans
EIA: U.S. CO2 Emissions Declined 11% in 2020 – No Change in Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide, https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/16/eia-u-s-co2-emissions-declined-11-in-2020-no-change-in-rising-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide/
THERE’S NO DEBATE FRACKING BRINGS DOWN GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, Energy In Depth, https://www.energyindepth.org/theres-no-debate-fracking-brings-down-greenhouse-gas-emissions/
PG&E’s Tiered Rate Plan (E-1), https://www.pge.com/en_US/residential/rate-plans/rate-plan-options/tiered-base-plan/tiered-base-plan.page
State Electricity Profiles, EIA, https://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/
Net metering 3.0: what does it mean for you, https://news.energysage.com/net-metering-3-0/

Shale gas is “fracked” Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA)

For my Letter on October 30, 2021:

For those wondering about the recent heavy rains, here’s some data. The Chico State University Farm is the official station of record, recording 4.41 inches of rain on Sunday, earning fourth in the all-time record. Chico’s heaviest rain occurred on January 3, 1916 with 5.73 inches in a single day.¹

While Chico didn’t have a weather station back then, the highest rainfall ever likely occurred in January 1862, during the “Great Flood”.² This was an atmospheric river event like we experienced Sunday, but lasted several days, dumping 24.63 inches of rain in San Francisco, 66 inches in Los Angeles, leaving downtown Sacramento underwater.

December 20 1955, had huge amounts of rain in a 24-hours, with Shasta County recording a record 15.34 inches in just one day. On December 23, 1955, the Russian River reached a crest of 49.7 feet in Guerneville, the highest ever recorded there, and a broken levee along the Feather River on Christmas Eve flooded Yuba City, drowning 37 people.³

The American River Watershed Project noted: Native Americans who’d lived for centuries in the region “knew the Sacramento Valley as an inland sea when the rains came,” and their “storytellers told of water filling the valley from the Coast Range to the Sierra.” ⁴

This all occurred well before “climate change” started being blamed for every weather event. Imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth from woke media and keyboard warriors if those events occurred today.

– Anthony Watts, Chico

Kuyperlocalweather, https://kuyperlocalweather.com/home/f/sunday-soaker
Great Flood of 1862, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862
Remembering California’s Great Flood Of 1862, https://sfist.com/2017/01/16/remembering_caifornias_great_flood/
California Megaflood: Lessons from a Forgotten Catastrophe https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/atmospheric-rivers-california-megaflood-lessons-from-forgotten-catastrophe/

For my Letter on October 19th, 2021:

Many recent letters mentioned my name negatively related to my pragmatic views on climate. They ranged from the derogatory (BS) to the hilarious (I’m paid to have an opinion), the fact is, I’m not.

They were all of a meme, “weather man bad.”

I used to be entirely on the other side of the issue. I used to be a climate activist, until I met Jim Goodridge, former California state climatologist, who retired here and befriended me, showing me how to look at climate data objectively.¹ He pointed out that data has no agenda, but some people who “manage” data do. All of our climate data is “adjusted”.²

Another said we “… have a team of 12,000 meteorologists, biologists, climate scientists, etc.” implying don’t listen to my opinion, listen the theirs. Ironically, they’re under government pay; they don’t toe the line, they don’t advance, or get research funding.³ Trust the government, that’s your answer?

If you are brave enough to visit the reference link I provide with each of my letters, you might learn to think objectively too, rather than believing scary climate headlines purveyed by the media. If any of you are brave enough, I’ll debate you on-stage, anytime.

But wait, there’s more! I just completed a book on climate, illustrating how there’s really no climate disaster looming around the corner.⁴ I’m told 300,000 copies will be printed and sent to educators and students around the country. I’ll make sure my detractors get copies. You’re welcome.

Anthony Watts
Chico

References:

James D. Goodridge – climate skeptic pioneer and mentor, 1928-2020 https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/09/james-d-goodridge-climate-skeptic-pioneer-and-mentor-1928-2020/
A comparison of adjusted -vs- unadjusted surface data https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/01/a-comparison-of-adjusted-vs-unadjusted-surface-data/
Climate Change:Analysis of Reported Federal Funding federal climate change funding was $13.2 billion across 19 agencies in 2017 https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-223
The book:

For my Letter on October 9th, 2021:

I laughed at Jorge Smirnoff’s acknowledgement of my book gift⁰. I set a simple trap for him, and he predictably fell in. He avoided stating the title of the book I gave him “A Disgrace to the Profession“¹, “The worlds scientists, in their own words, on Michael Mann, his hockey stick, and their damage to science.”

Science is objective and factual. Scientists, less so. Nothing could be truer about self-declared Nobel Prize winner², climatologist Dr. Michael Mann. Mann’s hubris precedes him.

Smirnoff confuses “following the science” with “following the scientists,” such as Mann.

If science was never questioned, you’d still be believing Earth was the center of the universe³, drinking cocaine (Coca-Cola)⁴, giving kids heroin infused cough syrup⁵ was a good idea, using cyclamate⁶ to sweeten coffee, “knowing” Earth’s tectonic plates didn’t move⁷, Earth is 75,000 years old,⁸ and that “cold-fusion”⁹ actually works.

You’d still believe ulcers were caused by stress, rather than a curable infection of heliobacter pylori, discovered in 1982,¹⁰ yet rejected for over 20 years,¹¹ and finally awarded the Nobel Prize¹² in 2005. Cures don’t generate a long-term revenue stream, treatment does. The same goes with “climate science”, which is now a multi-billion-dollar business.¹³ To question it is to threaten revenue.

Doubt is essential to science. If you don’t understand how science works, you can’t understand how to think about new information. With the book gift, I demonstrated Mr. Smirnoff can’t (and won’t) assimilate new information – because it goes against his belief system.

Anthony Watts
Chico

References:

0. Letter: Thank you for the book … now, about that, Chico Enterprise-Record, October 6, 2021, https://www.chicoer.com/2021/10/06/letter-thank-you-for-the-book-now-about-that/

“A Disgrace to the Profession” – September 1, 2015 by Mark Steyn https://www.amazon.com/Disgrace-Profession34-Mark-Steyn-editor/dp/0986398330
Professor Mann claims to win Nobel Prize; Nobel Committee says he has not, Examiner.com Oct. 26, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20130118003918/http:/www.examiner.com/article/professor-mann-claims-to-win-nobel-prize-nobel-committee-says-he-has-not
History of the center of the Universe, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_center_of_the_Universe
Putting The Coke In Coca-Cola®: The Original Recipe For America’s Most Iconic Drink, https://vertavahealth.com/blog/cocaine-in-coca-cola/
From cough medicine to deadly addiction, a century of heroin and drug-abuse policy, Yale School of Medicine, 1999, https://medicine.yale.edu/news/yale-medicine-magazine/from-cough-medicine-to-deadly-addiction-a-century/
The FDA Orders a Total Cyclamate Ban, Aug. 23, 1970, New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/1970/08/23/archives/the-fda-orders-a-total-cyclamate-ban-another-switch.html
Shaking up Earth, ScienceNews, https://www.sciencenews.org/century/earth-history-plate-tectonics-volcanoes-earthquakes
Past Research on the Age of the Earth, University of Illinois, https://publish.illinois.edu/clair-patterson/past-research-on-the-age-of-the-earth/
Cold fusion died 25 years ago, but the research lives on, Chemical and Engineering News, November 7, 2016, https://cen.acs.org/articles/94/i44/Cold-fusion-died-25-years.html
Nobel prize is awarded to doctors who discovered H pylori, Oct. 8th, 2005, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1246068/
The Doctor Who Drank Infectious Broth, Gave Himself an Ulcer, and Solved a Medical Mystery, Discover Magazine, Apr 7, 2010, https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/the-doctor-who-drank-infectious-broth-gave-himself-an-ulcer-and-solved-a-medical-mystery
The Nobel Committee. Press Release, 3 October 2005, https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2005/press-release/
Multi-billion dollar climate change fund hits barrier, 20 October 2011, International Institute for Environment and Development, https://www.iied.org/multi-billion-dollar-climate-change-fund-hits-barrier

For my Letter on September 23, 2021:

I laughed out loud when I read the letter¹ claiming “We need to prepare for sea level rising 30 feet in the next 15 years.” “100s of millions [are] going to have to move…”

The farce is strong with this one.

Tide gauge records at San Francisco Bay, going back to 1854 (way before SUV’s were blamed for destroying our future) show a steady rising sea level trend of just 1.97 millimeters/year.² That’s just 0.078 inches per year. In 15 years, that would be just 1.17 inches, or 358.83 inches (29.9 feet) short of the claim.

For the claim to come true in 15 years, global ice melt would have to be over 300 times the current rate – not even plausible even under the worst-case climate scenario.

Some perspective – in 1989 a U.N. official went on record to say in the Associated Press“…entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”³ Of course, that never happened. The source of failed fearmongering? The same – computer climate model projections. Then there’s this doozy from the U.N. high priests of doom. In 2005, the U.N. claimed, “Rising sea levels…will create up to 50 million environmental refugees by the end of the decade.”⁴ Nope, didn’t come true, and the U.N. “disappeared” the claim from its website in 2011.⁵

Anthony Watts
Chico

References:

Letter: Get ready for rapid rise of the seas, Chico Enterprise-Record, August 30, 2021
Relative Sea Level Trend, Tide Gauge #9414290 San Francisco, California, NOAA Tides and Currents. https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=9414290
Rising Sea Level Threat May Wipe Entire Nations Off the Face of the Earth, Associated Press, 1989 News Archive, https://apnews.com/article/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0
50m environmental refugees by end of decade, UN warns, The Guardian, 12 Oct 2005.
The UN “disappears” 50 million climate refugees, then botches the disappearing attempt, WattsUpWithThat, April 15, 2011, https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/15/the-un-disappears-50-million-climate-refugees-then-botches-the-disappearing-attempt/

For my letter in the in the Chico Enterprise-Record September 14th:

Some recent letters here remind me of the Washington Post story titled Why we shouldn’t give in to climate despair,¹ saying people are so upset over climate change they are suffering mental health issues labeled “climate despair.”

“Young adults are among the groups most vulnerable to feelings of depression and anxiety related to climate change, said Leslie Davenport, a climate psychology educator and consultant who is a member of a directory of climate-aware therapists.”

All this because of a small rise in global temperature over the past 150 years.

WaPo thinks people need mental-health treatment to cope with climate change. What they may in fact need treatment for is disorder known as “catastrophizing.” Psychology Today defines it this way:²

“Catastrophizing is a cognitive distortion that prompts people to jump to the worst possible conclusion, usually with very limited information or objective reason to despair. When a situation is upsetting, but not necessarily catastrophic, they still feel like they are in the midst of a crisis.”

What’s missing for those who think climate change poses “an existential threat” to people is the fact that the human condition is actually far better than it was than 100 years ago.

Crop production has increased dramatically,³ the Earth is greener⁴ thanks to the additional carbon dioxide man has out into the atmosphere, and human health is better than ever.⁵

Also, climate related deaths are also way down, approaching zero.^6,7 (See figure below.)

These facts are something to feel good about.

Anthony Watts
Chico

References:

For my letter published week of 8/9/21 in the Chico Enterprise Record.

I’m glad all the armchair climatologists have had a chance to weigh in about how terrible it is that I have an opinion contrary to theirs. Meanwhile, this week, the public is treated to a new round of scary climate stories courtesy of the U.N. (United Nations)

The new UN climate report¹ is nothing new. If you track the history of U.N. climate statements, all the way back in 1972, Maurice Strong, first UN Environment Program director warned that “the world had just 10 years to avoid catastrophe²” and he was speaking of global cooling then^2A. When the alarm switched to global warming, similar gloomy statements were made by the U.N. in 1982³, 1989⁴, 1990⁵, 2007⁶, 2015⁷, and in 2018.⁸ Example: “If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late,” said former UN/IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri in 2007 ⁶ .

It seems climate disaster is always just 5-10 years away; the “before it is too late” claim has come and gone, many times.

Just last week, climate scientists admitted that their new AR6 generation of global climate models such as RCP8.5 are ‘implausibly hot’⁹ and therefore incorrectly predicting a hellishly hot future. Their admission raises questions on the reliability of UN temperature forecasts often touted in the media and used to promote extreme climate action¹⁰.

Climate is defined as 30 years weather averaged in a given area¹¹. Climate doesn’t change the weather, weather changes the climate. But, somehow, believers erroneously think every weather event is actually climate¹².

Anthony Watts
Chico

Reference list:

Share this:

Like this: