New analysis attempts to reconcile differences between satellites and climate models

The degree of doublethink required to publish this is quite astonishing Rather than being an indicator of fundamental model errors, the model-satellite difference can largely be explained by natural fluctuations in Earth’s climate and imperfections in climate-model forcing agents It very much brings to mind what Jaime Jessop said back in July: In a normal … Continue reading New analysis attempts to reconcile differences between satellites and climate models

Arctic carbon conveyor belt discovered; ‘the surprise was great’

As Michael Shellenberger says Narcissism, nihilism, and fanaticism: the dark green triad. To have such certainty that it's all about us when our understanding and observation of the planets climate is so poor. The ocean carbon cycle [credit: IAEA] Nature’s carbon cycle works even better than was believed. The researchers say ‚it can be assumed … Continue reading Arctic carbon conveyor belt discovered; ‘the surprise was great’

Climate Change Risk to Castles? No, Just More BBC Fake News!

Before the Global Warming/Climate Change scam was a thing, this was well known. I was taught it in basic Geography and it was widely reported on news shows with erosion in one area, usually resulting from trying to save a beach elsewhere. But you'll never get the ideologues to understand. Their reaction to the cost … Continue reading Climate Change Risk to Castles? No, Just More BBC Fake News!

Satellite Temperature Data Show Almost All Climate Model Forecasts Over the Last 40 Years Were Wrong

If the Science™️ has taught me anything these recent years, it's when your theory doesn't fit the data, change the data. Image credit: livesci Maybe a climate model with no ‘ECS’ factor could do better? But anything that smacks of natural variation inevitably faces resistance from climate alarm promoters. – – – A major survey … Continue reading Satellite Temperature Data Show Almost All Climate Model Forecasts Over the Last 40 Years Were Wrong

What caused the world’s largest die-off of mangroves? A wobble in the moon’s orbit is partly to blame

While evidence clearly implicates El Niño, we found this climate cycle had a very large accomplice: the moon.In our study, published in Science Advances today, we mapped the expansion and contraction of mangrove forest cover over the past 40 years, and found clear evidence that the moon’s orbital wobble had an effect.Our mapping also shows … Continue reading What caused the world’s largest die-off of mangroves? A wobble in the moon’s orbit is partly to blame

Listening to European Electricity Traders Is Very, Very Scary

By Paul Homewood h/t Dave Ward         Every week, the people who trade electricity in the UK get to quiz the managers of the national grid for an hour. The conference call, which anyone can monitor, offers an insight into what the men and women on the front line of the power … Continue reading Listening to European Electricity Traders Is Very, Very Scary

Watch Tony Heller “CNN Climate Reporting Circa 1935”

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.H. L. Mencken watch? v=XiFGaUEDPUU

UK Heatwave Analysis I: Total Model Failure So . . . . . . It must be worse than we thought!

In a normal world, this would prompt scientists to conclude that the models were faulty and that perhaps the science and a priori assumptions which are built into them need to be re-examined. Or they would ask themselves, did some other factor or factors contribute significantly to this event? But no, in the world of post-normal, post Enlightenment ‘science’, the conclusion is that the models are right, but not right enough, in that they underestimate how bad heatwaves are getting, so then we get the inevitable siren call of alarmists everywhere: “Arrggghhh, it’s much worse than we thought! Urgent action is now super-urgent! Act now or we’re all going to die!”

Nevermind that extremes of temperature and/or precipitation were seen in the 1970s as a sign of global cooling. Nevermind that Piers Corbyn predicted this over a decade ago, as have many working on the solar influenced aspect of climate, including the magnitude of this event, which was preceded by a new moon and a strong flux in solar activity (correlation ≠ causation).

Or it could be natural variability, the swings of which our climate has shown time and time again it is more than capable of on short and long time scales. However, just like my childhood doctor, who diagnosed sausages (or any meat if you’d foresaken sausages) as the cause of every tummy upset, these quacks diagnose the gas of life as an excuse whatever the weather (except when the weather is quite ordinary they suddenly go silent).

We narcissistic humans think everything is caused by us, that we are the deities of this planet. Humility is a concept beyond cultists. Don’t be a ClimateQuack™️. Be humble.


That’s the basic message fromWorld Weather Attributionwho have – of course – run off a quick-fire, non peer-reviewed attribution analysis of the two day ‘heatwave’ which affected the UK on July 18th and 19th which – of course – concludes that it was man-made climate change wot dunnit.

Here’s what they say about their study, which we’ll look at in detail in Part II:

  • The likelihood of observing such an event in a 1.2°C cooler world is extremely low, and statistically impossible in two out of the three analysed stations.
  • The observational analysis shows that a UK heatwave as defined above would be about 4°C cooler in preindustrial times.
  • To estimate how much of these observed changes is attributable to human-caused climate change we combine climate models with the observations.It is important to highlight that all models systematically underestimate the observed trends. [My emphasis]…

View original post 691 more words

Ned Nikolov: Does a Surface Solar Radiation Dataset Expose a Major Manipulation of Global Temperature Records?

Hubert Lamb wrote of the discrepancy between the documented cold period of the 60s and 70s and the continuing rise of CO2.

As Ned highlights, it had to be removed. They made sure the awkward moment of discovery never happened.

That’s how the party keep power – rewriting history and language.

This GWPF report covers Lamb’s work during that period:

Tallbloke's Talkshop

Once again it’s my pleasure to publish a new paper by Ned Nikolov and Karl Zeller at the Talkshop. In this study, we see the presentation of a climate conundrum, and recent surface solar radiation data which helps shed new light on the questions surrounding the ongoing adjustment of global temperature datasets. This new study applies theory developed in Ned and Karl’s previous paper to enable quantification of the global temperature drop during the “1970s ice-age scare”. This won’t be the last word on the topic, but it offers a solid grounding for further research.

Implications of a New Gridded Dataset of Surface Solar Radiation
for the Evolution of Earth’s Global Surface Temperature Since 1960

Ned Nikolov, Ph.D. and Karl Zeller, Ph.D.
July, 2022

  1. Introduction

It is a matter of conventional wisdom now that the Earth was significantly cooler during 1960s compared to the 21st Century. Similarly, no one…

View original post 6,113 more words

“We Live In The Coldest Period Of The Last 10.000 Years"

I wonder how the polar bears coped with all that heat…

The oldest known polar bear fossil is a 130,000 to 110,000-year-old jaw bone, found on Prince Charles Foreland in 2004.[23]


By Paul Homewood

Jørgen Peder Steffensen is an Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen and one of the world’s leading experts on ice cores. Using ice cores from sites in Greenland, he has been able to reconstruct temperatures there for the last 10000 years. So what are his conclusions?

  • Temperatures in Greenland were about 1.5 C warmer 1000 years ago than now.
  • It was perhaps 2.5 C warmer 4000 years ago.
  • The period around 1875, at the lowest point of the Little Ice Age, marked the coldest point in the last 10,000 years.
  • Other evidence from elsewhere in the Northern Hemisphere confirms this picture.

His final comment is particularly telling :-

I agree totally we have had a global temperature increase in the 20thC – but an increase from what? ..Probably an increase from the lowest point in the last 10,000 years.

We started to observe meteorology at the…

View original post 31 more words

Alarmist dismay as US Supreme Court rules against EPA on climate regulation powers

Like NetZero in the UK, if they want it they have to vote for it, but they can’t do that because no one but the zealots and predator class wasn’t it. Instead they used legislative fiat and got rumbled.

Tallbloke's Talkshop

Verdict [image credit:]
Democracy overseeing the flow of EPA climate edicts? A ‘huge blow’, say alarmists, as over-the-top reactions from some of the usual suspects pour in.
– – –
This means Congress will now have to pass off on any climate regulations, says Energy Live News.

In what’s been considered a blow to climate mitigation in the US, the Supreme Court has ruled against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

This means the EPA will now be limited in how it can regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and help stave off global warming in the country.

View original post 183 more words

Have climate models outlived their usefulness? – Net Zero Watch

As Hubert Lamb observed in 1994

“there has been too much theory and not enough fact in predicting the future.

Computer models are a rather expensive example of that error.

Tallbloke's Talkshop

Is more computing power just getting us the wrong results from overheated models faster?
– – –
Outside of their academic fascination, looked at in terms of their contribution to climate policy, it seems that we may have reached the useful limit of computer climate modelling, says Dr. David Whitehouse.

The first computers built in the 1950s allowed climate scientists to think about modelling the climate using this new technology.

The first usable computer climate models were developed in the mid-1970s.

Shortly afterwards the US National Academy of Sciences used their outcomes to estimate a crucial climate parameter we still calculate today – the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) – how much the world would warm (from ‘pre-industrial’ levels) with a doubling of CO2 — and concluded that it had a range of 1.5 – 4.5°C.

View original post 333 more words