The attached report on Global Weather for April 2023Data we have a charts showing the relationship we tween CO2 growth and Temperature increases going up since we started to measure CO2 in the atmosphere in 1958? These Charts by plotting showing CO2 as a percent increase from when it was first measured in 1958, the Black plot, the scale is on the left and it shows CO2 going up by about 33.5% from 1958 to April of 2023. That is a very large change as anyone would have to agree. Now how about temperature, well when we look at the percentage change in temperature also from 1958, using Kelvin (which does measure the change in heat), we find that the changes in global temperature (heat) is about .3% and may reach .5% by 2028. To even be able to see this minuscule change we had to change the scale of the CO2 axis by a factor of ten.
This Chart 8 uses unaltered values from NOAA and NASA properly displayed ,and the Blue and Yellow projections are created by Microsoft Excel not me.
The NOAA and NASA numbers tell us the story of the Changes in the planets Atmosphere As Carbon Dioxide go up
The attached 40 page report explains how this chart was developed .
Posted originally on the CTH on May 21, 2023 | Sundance
For his weekend monologue, British pundit Neil Oliver turns his attention back toward the climate change agenda and the subsequent fear narrative as it is being promoted. Oliver notes we are approaching a moment when the truthfulness of the climate change debate needs a full and public confrontation. Either there is truth, or the foundation of the claims are built upon lies.
Oliver has discussed this topic before; however, when contrast against the collapse in trust based on conduct during the pandemic, and when overlaid against the wholesale collapse in trust toward almost all government institutions, perhaps now really is the best time to confront the fraud known as “climate change.”
Does the climate change? Of course, it does. In the short term that’s known as weather and in the longer term, a term much longer than human’s ability to influence it, climate change is why glaciers melted, mountains formed and the topography for a state like Florida rose from under the Gulf of Mexico as water levels declined. The climate change agenda really isn’t about climate change; in the final analysis, the modern climate change agenda is all about ‘control.’ WATCH:
.
The Climate Change agenda is the necessary entry narrative for control mechanisms like carbon trading economics and digital currencies. At the end of the continuum, we find that control over people is the goal of the people pushing the fraudulent narrative. The agenda is their holy grail along their road to serfdom.
Data analysis again reveals the increase in absorbed shortwave forcing has been driving modern climate change since the 1970s. CO2 changes are more of an effect than a cause of temperature increases.
Scientists have for years been pointing to the causality sequencing problem inherent in the claim that CO2 is the driver of temperature changes.
Wang et al. (2013) further estimate only 10% of the variance in global CO2 growth rates can be explained by fossil fuel emissions. Instead, there is a “strong and persistent coupling (r² ≈ 0.50) between interannual variations of the CO2 growth rate and tropical land-surface temperature during 1959-2011.”
Building on this temperature→CO2 directional causality, Jyrki Kauppinen and Pekka Malmi (2023), Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Turku, have used existing CO2 and temperature data to calculate an 83 ppm CO2 increase associated with a 1°C surface temperature increase. The authors suggest this 83 ppm/°C value is consistent with Henry’s Law and CO2 residence time calculations.
Kauppinen and Malmi further assess the warming in recent decades has been predominantly (90%) driven by the increase in absorbed solar radiation due to the downward trend in cloud cover.
The greenhouse effect has contributed just 10% to the warming trend, and the human contribution to the CO2 concentration changes is only a fraction (hundredths of a degree) of that 10% impact – about 0.03°C since 1980.
Thus, not only is the “causality used in IPCC reports wrong,” but “the greenhouse effect cannot explain climate change.”
“Since 1970, according to the observations, the changes of the low cloud cover have caused practically the observed temperature changes. The low cloud cover has gradually decreased starting in 1975. The human contribution was about 0.01°C in 1980 and now it is close 0.03°C.”
This is the first ban of its kind at the state level. Berkeley, California, was the first US city to ban gas cooking in 2019. Other blue cities have followed suit and this will be the first of many restrictions they place on the people to combat naturally occurring climate change.
Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer told the public in February 2023 that the idea of a ban on gas stoves was nothing more than a MAGA conspiracy theory.“At first you have to laugh at the ‘gas stove ban’ narrative being cooked up by the MAGA GOP,”Schumer stated. The Energy Department and the commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission also denied the claims. Similar to Obama’s claim that you could keep your doctor, Democrats are claiming that you can keep your stove and this will only apply to new construction.
Ted Cruz and Joe Manchin attempted to pass the Gas Stove Protection and Freedom Act. “The federal government has no business telling American families how to cook their dinner,” Manchin said. “The last thing that would ever leave our house is the gas stove we cook on, and I will continue to fight any overreach by the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
All of these small sacrifices will add up. They’re slowly implementing one restriction after the next so the public does not see what is happening.
COMMENT #1: I have seen the covers of various times predicting ice ages to heat waves and always it has been some exaggerated forecast that never comes true. Does anybody really know what is going on with this climate change nonsense where we are being taxed and deprived of all advancement for a theory that is unproven?
GR
COMMENT #2: Hello, I was disturbed by Kennedy’s comment on locking up climate change opponents. However, I listened to a number of things he’d do the first day – all great. I voted for Trump in 2020; but believe he’s too egotistical to admit mistakes he made during Covid. He could be forgiven for listening to wrong advice; but admit it and don’t just blame others. Also, I voted for DeSantis but with his world tour promising military support around the world; seems like he’s just sucking up to the neocons. Trump needed to be “Trumpish” to win in 2016. If he admits past mistakes and “gets real”, show some humility; he could capture some never-Trumpers. Trump may be the only person would could drain the swamp, but his echo would not allow him to do what is necessary to capture the voters. I’m afraid DeSantis is going to be absorbed by the neocons. Kennedy may be the next best thing? You would do a much better job than Biden; but sadly, that’s not a high bar. Thanks, Bruce
REPLY: I agree, that Trump got caught up in the bad advice. It would be impressive if he would come out and tell the truth about COVID and who was giving him the advice. This Climate Change is insane. I grew up with gas stoves and heaters. New York has now banned gas stoves. These people are risking everything and sending society back to the stone age. The once respectable Economist has become an enemy of the people pushing both Schwab’s you will own nothing and insisting it had to be Biden for the Neocons.
It seems that the press is just a cheerleader for war. They paint nothing but hatred of Putin so we should send hundreds of thousands of our young to die to kill one man? After tens of thousands of years, we are no different from ants which also wage wars.
The worse analysis is whenever someone tries to claim everything is caused by a single event. That has never proven to be correct in any field of analysis. It is always far more complex.
ABSOLUTELY nothing can be reduced to a single cause and effect – NOTHING!
When I was called in by the Presidential Commission back investigating the 1987 Crash, an academic was put in charge of some investigation and said we were going to find that giant short that forced the market down. I explained that theory has always been put forth since the first investigation into the 1907 Crash and nobody has ever been found. They subpoenaed in 1930 all the millionaires and put them on trial in the Senate with false allegations. They found that they were all long – not short. They all lost money. But the allegation was so outrageous, William Fox (Wilhelm Fried Fuchs) founder of the Fox movie empire, lost his company thanks to countless lawsuits filed against him and he was too sick to attend the hearing in Washington so they put him on trial and destroyed his reputation all because they hated anyone who had money. That was why Hoover apologized for the unethical and unconstitutional treatment of the rich during the Great Depression.
When I explained that nobody was ever discovered, the next question was why then did the market crash? I explained that when everyone is long and something causes some to begin to take profit, the people try to sell and there is NO BID! That is when the market crashes. Politicians then blame short sellers and want to pass laws outlawing short selling and the ONLY person with the courage to buy during a crash is the short seller.
Eliminate that and you end up with a dead market just as took place in Japan. Instead of the crash being over in 2 to 3 years like 1929-1932, it was prolonged for 19 years. Everyone who was long was just waiting for a rally to sell that never came and there were no fresh buyers.
Climate Change is nothing but propaganda taking a natural cycle that can be proven and tracked for millions of years and these people want to reduce it all to just CO2 no different than blaming shorts for a stock market crash. There are just people obsessed with this propaganda and it is just beyond belief. If they believe in that so much, please then show us the way and just commit suicide to reduce the population, and that will reduce the whole CO2 problem.
During the 1970s, scientists were all predicting a new ice age. That was the popular view. Then there was a totally theoretical proposition laid out in the book Under a Green Sky that has become the bible for the total destruction of our modern society and just maybe they know that and are looking to deprive energy to reduce the population.
If we take the graph from the paleontologist Peter D. Ward’s book, “Under a Green Sky” published in 2007, this is what has inspired this whole climate debate and there is no evidence that it was CO2 that created an extinction of hundreds of millions of years ago. This has been a theoretical model that appears to be as reliable as the one funded by Bill Gates to justify locking down the entire world economy for a man-made virus – COVID19.
In 1832, Professor A. Bernhardi argued that the North Polar ice cap had extended into the plains of Germany. To support this theory, he pointed to the existence of huge boulders that have become known as “erratics,” which he suggested were pushed by the advancing ice. This was a shocking theory, for it was certainly a nonlinear view of natural history. Bernhardi was thinking out of the box. However, in natural science, people listen and review theories, unlike in social science, where theories are ignored if they challenge what people want to believe. In 1834, Johann von Charpentier (1786-1855) argued that there were deep grooves cut into the Alpine rock concluding, as did Karl Schimper, that they were caused by an advancing Ice Age.
There is a cycle to everything. The climate ALWAYS changes, and there are warming periods and cooling periods. These charlatans are no different than the Babylonian high priests pretending to block the sun with the moon on their command. Science was turned on its head after a discovery in 1772 near Vilui, Siberia, of an intact frozen woolly rhinoceros, which was followed by the more famous discovery of a frozen mammoth in 1787. You may be shocked, but these discoveries of frozen animals with grass still in their stomachs set in motion these two schools of thought since the evidence implied you could be eating lunch and suddenly find yourself frozen, only to be discovered by posterity.
The discovery of the woolly rhinoceros in 1772, and then frozen mammoths, sparked the imagination that things were not linear after all. These major discoveries truly contributed to the Age of Enlightenment, where there was a burst of knowledge erupting in every field of inquisition. Such finds of frozen mammoths in Siberia continue to this day. This has challenged theories on both sides of this debate to explain such catastrophic events. These frozen animals in Siberia suggest strange events are possible even in climates that are not that dissimilar from the casts of dead victims who were buried alive after the volcanic eruption of 79 AD at Pompeii in ancient Roman Italy. Animals can be grazing and then freeze abruptly. Climate change has been around for billions of years — long before man invented the combustion engine.
Even the field of geology began to create great debates that perhaps the earth simply burst into a catastrophic convulsion and, indeed, the planet was cyclical — not linear. This view of sequential destructive upheavals at irregular intervals or cycles emerged during the 1700s. This school of thought was perhaps best expressed by a forgotten contributor to the knowledge of mankind, George Hoggart Toulmin, in his rare 1785 book, “The Eternity of the World”:
” ••• convulsions and revolutions violent beyond our experience or conception, yet unequal to the destruction of the globe, or the whole of the human species, have both existed and will again exist ••• [terminating] ••• an astonishing succession of ages.”
Id./p3, 110
As for the overpopulation propaganda being pushed by Bill Gates, he is just part of the collapse of Western Civilization. I find it really hypocritical that they want to imprison Trump, but not people pushing to reduce the world population and mandating a vaccine that FAILED to prevent the virus and more people who died of COVID who were vaccinated than not. It would seem we are dealing with some dangerous psychopaths running around advocating global genocide. But hey! January 6th was against the political establishment so they are evil. When those in power conspire against We the People, there is nobody to defend the people because they also control all investigations and prosecutions. Only when the military wake up and realize that they TOO are We the People and their families and no longer support the political agenda history teaches us that is the only time when the people will be saved.
There is nobody on our side in anything. All they are doing is manipulating society for their own agenda. They refuse to allow any debate and this is part of the Decline & Fall of Western Society as we move into 2032. They see the world only from their self-interest and cannot grasp that this is the very process of how empires decline and fall. They commit suicide from within, that weakens their defense, and then the barbarians swam in for the kill. Unfortunately, history repeats because human nature never changes.
There is no climate emergency. As I have been saying for years, the climate change agenda to end fossil fuels is merely a fraudulent cause intended to gain power. The Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL) is an independent foundation founded in 2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and science journalist Marcel Crok. “The climate view of CLINTEL can be easily summarized as: There is no climate emergency.”Over 1540 experts respected in their independent fields have joined CLINTEL to spread the message that there is no scientific data to indicate that climate change is political propaganda.
“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. In particular, scientists should emphasize that their modeling output is not the result of magic: computer models are human-made. What comes out is fully dependent on what theoreticians and programmers have put in: hypotheses, assumptions, relationships, parameterizations, stability constraints, etc. Unfortunately, in mainstream climate science most of this input is undeclared.
To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.”
Climate science currently starts with a preconceived notion that leads to biased, untrustworthy studies, which are often funded by those with special interests. Climate experts have convinced the world that CO2 is a pollutant when it is essential to all life. They have also lied to us and claimed that natural disasters are somehow created by man when there is zero supporting evidence. Climate has varied on a cyclical basis, with the most recent Little Ice Age ending in 1850. We are experiencing nature’s cyclical pattern of warming and there is no case for alarm.”
We MUST question why governments across the world are fighting tooth and nail to eliminate fossil fuels and our way of life as we know it. Why are we following the World Economic Forum’s 2030 agenda to save a planet that does not need saving? Why are we allowing our elected officials to spend endless funds on an imaginary cause? Everything has a cycle, including the weather. So while the climate may be changing, there is absolutely nothing humans can do to alter the course of nature, and those stating otherwise are lying.
The attached report on Global Weather for March 2023Data we have a charts showing the relationship we tween CO2 growth and Temperature increases going up since we started to measure CO2 in the atmosphere in 1958? These Charts by plotting showing CO2 as a percent increase from when it was first measured in 1958, the Black plot, the scale is on the left and it shows CO2 going up by about 32.9% from 1958 to March of 2023. That is a very large change as anyone would have to agree. Now how about temperature, well when we look at the percentage change in temperature also from 1958, using Kelvin (which does measure the change in heat), we find that the changes in global temperature (heat) is about .3% and may reach .5% by 2028. To even be able to see this minuscule change we had to change the scale of the CO2 axis by a factor of ten.
This Chart 8 uses unaltered values from NOAA and NASA properly displayed ,and the Blue and Yellow projections are created by Microsoft Excel not me.
The NOAA and NASA numbers tell us the story of the Changes in the planets Atmosphere As Carbon Dioxide go up
The attached 40 page report explains how this chart was developed .
Remember all that talk about methane being the scariest greenhouse gas? The claims are behind the war on meat, rice, farts, gas stoves, fracking, and just about everything else in the known universe that improves human life.
Well, except farts. They really don’t improve human life that much, unless you have gas pains. Man, it sucks when you have gas pains.
The science behind the claims that methane is a powerful greenhouse gas is pretty straightforward, if you look at only part of the science. Methane indeed traps more heat inside the atmosphere than CO2, by a wide margin. It disperses much more quickly, with a short life in the atmosphere, but if you only consider the warming impact it indeed is quite powerful.
“If you had said on March 15 that people were making too big a deal about the warming effects of methane, you’d have been branded a ‘climate denier.’ Now, you’re just following the science.” https://t.co/6WYOTp4wl1
Yeah, well, there is a huge problem with that claim. While technically true in some abstract sense, it is much less true when you look at all the effects methane in the atmosphere has on global temperatures.In other words, it is the sort of claim that relies upon your ignorance of the multiple effects of methane gas in the atmosphere–some of which are known widely, and many of which even climate “scientists” didn’t know when they made their wild claims about doom from leaking natural gas.
Methane warms the Earth when the gas absorbs longwave radiation. But it also cancels out some of that effect, counterintuitively, by absorbing shortwave radiation.https://t.co/hSplNPIB87
New research shows that methane is still a powerful greenhouse gas, but nothing like what is claimed regularly.
This is the sort of thing that happens all the time in climate research, where variables are viewed and modeled in isolation based upon a limited set of data, and then the “scientists” extrapolate the heck out of the limited data and come up with models that are, frankly, ridiculous.
Then they pick the most extreme outcomes from models with the worst outcomes, and call it “settled science.” It is exactly the sort of thing you see in nutrition research, for example. Creating simplistic models from limited data interpreting complex and highly interdependent systems as if they mirror the falling of a bowling ball and a feather in a vacuum.
And the results, as you can see in the real world, are quite different. Bowling balls and feathers fall at the same rate in a vacuum, but once you introduce the atmosphere a feather can “fall upwards” on a breeze while the bowling ball crashes down as predicted.
Methane is a greenhouse gas with dual personalities. It heats Earth’s atmosphere 28 times as potently as carbon dioxide, gram for gram. But its absorption of the sun’s radiation high in the atmosphere also alters cloud patterns — casting a bit of shadow on its warming effect.
So rather than adding even more thermal energy to the atmosphere, as previously thought, methane’s solar absorption sets off a cascade of events that reduces its overall warming effect by about 30 percent, researchers report March 16 in Nature Geoscience.
Oops. Kinda missed that one. Oh well.
Also, you may note that key point: gram for gram. There are a lot more grams of CO2 than methane out there. Altogether the findings change the equations quite a bit, and those equations are still very simplified versions of the real world. Simplified versions that in all likelihood don’t reflect reality.
The result is “counterintuitive,” says climate scientist Robert Allen of the University of California, Riverside. It happens because of the way that methane’s shortwave absorbance affects clouds in different layers of the atmosphere, Allen and colleagues’ simulations suggest.
When methane absorbs shortwave radiation in the middle and upper troposphere, above about three kilometers, it further warms the air — leading to fewer clouds in that upper layer. And because methane absorbs shortwave radiation high up, less of that radiation penetrates down to the lower troposphere. This actually cools the lower troposphere, leading to more clouds in that layer.
These thicker low-level clouds reflect more of the sun’s shortwave radiation back out to space — meaning that less of this solar radiation reaches Earth’s surface, to be converted into longwave radiation.
One of the biggest problems with climate science, as it stands, is that it cannot explain the natural variations in the Earth’s temperatures, which have swung wildly more than anything predicted from human activity. Clearly, those natural variations need to be understood first before adding in anything that human beings do.
Not that human beings are doing nothing. We are. The scale may not be understood, but the fact itself is pretty easy to understand. We are changing the atmosphere and the reflectivity of the Earth, changing the biome, and such changes will have some effect on the climate. But any claims that we have a clear idea of what those changes will be exactly are pure bunkum. We don’t. We don’t know the scale, and we don’t know the what.
What we do know is that massive changes to the economy will have drastic impacts on human well-being, just as the vast industrialization has improved lives and extended lifespans dramatically. Tens of years have been added to lifespans, food security has been established for almost everybody, and the prospects for further improvements without industrialization of the third world drop dramatically.
And, of course, we know that every single prediction of the apocalypse has been laughably wrong.
There is nothing benign about believing these predictions. Millions of women were forcibly sterilized, China instituted its one-child policy to great current regret, abortion became a widespread practice in the third world, and Africa’s development was stunted (and remains so today) because of them.
India, too, regrets the policies it pursued for decades.
And it was all based upon alarmist bovine excrement. Which, by the way, emits a lot of methane.
A lot of the impetus behind the movement is modern Marxism. Capitalism and human well-being are the enemies to be slain. Some extremists even push for voluntary human extinction.
Environmentalism is a religion and is becoming the state religion of Western countries.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is targeting gas vehicles in an attempt to reduce emissions. Their goal is to reduce carbon emissions by 10 billion tons before 2055 to “protect public health.” In turn, 67% of new personal vehicles will be electric by 2032. The average price of an electric vehicle (EV) is $64,338 and completely out of reach for the average American consumer. The war on the working class rages on.
The measure will also cut oil imports by 20 billion barrels. Half of all buses and garbage trucks, 35% of short-haul freight tractors, and 25% of long-haul freight tractors will also be EV. This is guaranteed to propel inflation and cause supply chain issues. What will truckers do when the weather is poor or they need to stop for hours to charge their truck? Extreme weather can cause the range of an EV to decline by 20%. One of my vehicles is electric, but that’s not the car I am depending on for long drives.
America’s infrastructure cannot handle such a steep increase in EVs. We saw California urge residents not to charge their cars during the Labor Day heat wave. Some areas in Florida lost power during Hurricane Ian, and people could not drive. Texas experienced a similar problem when its power grid was experiencing issues. How will school buses operate during bad weather?
The bill focuses solely on tailpipe emissions and fails to consider the resources needed to create these vehicles. The batteries in these vehicles use 10X more energy than the average household uses in one day. The cobalt within these vehicles is mostly mined through modern-day slavery in the Congo. This also requires mining for things like lithium and cobalt. Lithium mining is extremely harmful to the environment. South America has experienced water supply contamination near lithium mining regions, and Tibet reported marine life dying in mass near some of their facilities.
The goal is to limit fossil fuel usage, not to help the environment. “Yet another draconian rule from the Biden Admin,” Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Wash., said. “From gas stoves to vehicles, their anti-American energy policies put our nation on a dangerous path. It’s time for the government to stop over-regulating our lives and protect our energy independence.” Some have pointed out that insurance alone for an EV is 26% higher than combustion-engine vehicles, and maintenance costs are also much higher. Car ownership may soon be unattainable to a portion of the population.
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 