All this soaring, shattering, whirlwind-reaping and climate crunching of hundredths of degrees of manipulated temperature data is not making the impression the UN-led climate alarmist desire. Their endless attempt to hang the whole climate system on the peg of the trace gas CO2 is never going to work. History shows temperature leading CO2 changes, not following, making CO2 variation an effect not a cause. Human activity is a minor sideshow.
– – –
From the LA Times (via Phys.org). Humanity is ignoring major planetary vital signs as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels soar to all-time highs and Earth records its 12th consecutive month of record-breaking heat, international climate officials warned this week.
At 60.63 degrees Fahrenheit, the global mean temperature in May was a record 2.73 degrees hotter than the preindustrial average against which warming is measured—marking an astonishing yearlong streak of heat that shows little signs of slowing down, according to the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service.
“For the past year, every turn of the calendar has turned up the heat,” António Guterres, secretary-general of the United Nations, said during a speech in New York on June 5. “Our planet is trying to tell us something. But we don’t seem to be listening. We’re shattering global temperature records and reaping the whirlwind. It’s climate crunch time. Now is the time to mobilize, act and deliver.”
According to the Copernicus service, May was also the 11th consecutive month of warming beyond 2.7 degrees, the Fahrenheit equivalent of the internationally agreed-upon limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius intended to reduce the worst effects of climate change.
Not only was it a warm month, but the global average temperature for the last 12 months—June 2023 through May—was the highest on record, at 2.93 F above the 1850–1900 pre-industrial average.
Guterres said the world is warming so quickly and spewing such considerable CO2 emissions that the 1.5 degree Celsius goal is “hanging by a thread.”
“The truth is, global emissions need to fall 9% every year until 2030 to keep the 1.5 degree limit alive, but they are heading in the wrong direction,” he told a crowd at the American Museum of Natural History. “We are playing Russian roulette with our planet, and we need an exit ramp off the highway to climate hell.”
Indeed, it’s not just global temperatures that are soaring. Carbon dioxide levels—one of the main drivers of planetary warming—are also climbing to new highs.
Recent readings were 427 parts per million—the highest ever recorded in the month of May, according to Ralph Keeling, director of the CO2 program at UC San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography.
. . .
During his speech Wednesday, Guterres said new data show the maximum amount of CO2 the Earth’s atmosphere can take in order to limit long-term warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius is around 200 billion tons. But current emissions are around 40 billion tons per year, indicating that “the entire carbon budget will be busted before 2030.”
The 1.5 degree Celsius limit is not just symbolic—every fraction of a degree could mean the difference between extinction and survival for some small island states and coastal communities, or the difference between minimizing climate chaos and crossing dangerous tipping points, Guterres said.
Full article here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
The latest broken records come as the western United States braces for a significant heat wave beginning this week that could see temperatures soar into the triple digits.
Sounds like the 1930s in the US. The UN’s alarmist psychobabble is a broken record.
See video here — https://web.archive.org/web/20220312025625/https://www.climatescience.org.au/content/868-warm-oceans-caused-hottest-dust-bowl-years/
Huh methinks that “gonk” is LONG overdue for a feet to the fire job.
Temperatures on land have next to no effect on overall global climate, which is dominated by the oceanic temperatures. And the Pacific Atol Islands rise and fall with the net sea level, always 2.5m above high tide. Guterres is dangerous ignorant fool. Knows NO science, less facts. Oceans contain over 95% of earth’s surface heat and creates most of the clouds, as well as controlling the surface temperature with dominant feedback from evaporation and also 71% of the smaller direct radiative S-B feedback. So who cares about it being a bit hot in America, 2% of the Earth’s surafce with sod all heat capacity, stuck in the middle of the global oceans? The Weather in America is largely irrelevant to 30 year average global climate, of which the oceans have control at scale over time. AS my book will explain, without the use of models. andbogus pseudo scientific langauge. Just the real physics. Hence….
SMALL AD: Hope the Moderator Doesn’t MInd/Is Asleep if they/it does mind.
Physicist Required for Thought Experiments:
I badly need a serious physicist to talk to, preferably 2, who is/are not an academic specialist with physics blinkers with no clue outside their specialisation, I have already been down that path with academic “experts”. Or even a clever one with some good jokes….. or more. SUBJECT: any possible errors of substance in my simple empirical holistic Earth energy balance model approach to “The Balance of the Earth” …. coming soon’ ‘ish to a book vendor on the interweb to join “From Alamein to Austria” as my second ever book publication, the first as editor.
…..AND ALSO, as regards the c.18W/m^2 radiative flux from Earth’s surface that is scattered by GHE with the accepted effect of reducing Earth’s cooling at these frequencies because the radiative energy from the surface is lost at a higher level in the Troposphere, so S-B applies. But. BUT, when the radiative flux leaves the surface S-B suggests it should be at a higher Intensity than when it leaves for space higher up, because its hotter down there, inside the control system, than where it leaves for space in the Troposphere, after scattering its way there.
But the scattering is supposed to be lossless, so energy into the scattering cloud must equal energy out…. I have used the input and output of a mountain lake to describe this, where only the kinetic energy of the water in and out can do work. But how does it really work……
SO…. Is there something going on with temperature gradients between surface and Troposphere? A lossless form of attenuation of radiative heat energy leaving the surface, to a lower level than the S-B equation suggests, so energy into the scattering cloud at the surface does in fact equal the energy leaving the cloud for space at these frequencies? Confused? I am. Something I don’t properly understand.
Some sort of radiative back pressure? Obs if you put on a coat with a lossless insulator in a cold environment the outside surface stays the same T while your surface T gets warmer AND less heat flows from you, at a higher temperature, so that seems to be how it works, but I don’t get the physical mechanism – the physics that describes the reduction in the heat lost to the insulator from the wearer’s surface at the higher temperature, vs. a vaccuum,say? It seems it must be that the S-B equation expects a perfect radiator into a vacuum? But now I am guessing physics like a modeller, or Jim Dale, or Bob Ward. NFI.
I just don’t know something important about radiative physics.
$EXCUSE My formation in physics was more specialised in radiation physics of the ionising kind, and later instruments and control systems, hence my empirical approach to science and the earth’s strongly controlled energy balance, at whatever temperature that requires, on the mainly oceanic surface (also what actually happens as the phsyics and observations suggests). This stuff, at fractions of an eV, is all a bit low energy and theoretical for me. More at home with GeV cosmic rays and Bevatrons. “We Brake for no one”.
Was that a question? Summary: Energy in and out of the Troposphere at the GHE frequencies must be balanced for the description of its effect to be valid. I don’t properly understand how that happens in the case of the “GHE scattered” frequencies that leave the surface at a higher temperature than that at which they leave for space, after passing through the scattering atmosphere, feeling much like the Fukarwee tribe. If you care enough…… find me at brian.catt@deconfused.com, 07770 931144. Struggling for enlightenment amongst a sea of Dunning Kruger people too hard of physics to help.Thanks.
more panic pron to get your money out of your hands, into theirs. Jerks.
The US Department of Education (a gross oxymoron) is a fifth column degrading the education of our youth so that the pols can say and do whatever they want (like right now) and the public just stares in stupefied ignorance. But! They can tell you what the 46 genders are. America’s kids have scored lower and lower against the rest of the world every year since that rotten agency got started. Thanks Jimmy /s.
We are still not as warm as either the Roman Warm Period or the Middle Ages Warm Period, but the media jackals want ‘BLOOD”, “DEATH”, “EARTH ON FIRE”, and similar headlines to generate clicks and reads to keep the ad prices up. The academics love it to generate their cashflow as well, “Pay us to study this or you ARE ALL GOING TO DIE! DIE I TELL YA!!
talk about a RICO crime!
brianrlcatt
says:
June 9, 2024 at 2:50 pm
I think you are very right to question the physics of atmospheric energy balance.
For instance, as you say no explanation of the difference in eV energy states in +22c earth surface and -80C CO2 in the troposphere. Just how do less energetic Photons make more energetic photons “hotter”.
This is apparent when a Solar Oven, which boils water in sunshine freezes water at night when exposed to “open sky” radiation.
The other question is most of the CO2 molecules lose their energy, not by radiation, but by collision with the multitude of Nitrogen & Oxygen molecules.
How then do those molecules lose that extra energy?
We know that they radiate, because that is what the satellites actually measure when they measure atmospheric temperatures and not CO2 LWIR.
I have asked this question many times, if Nitrogen and Oxygen are not radiating LWIR then surely they are actually the “GHGs” resisting the loss of heat to space. Whereas CO2 is radiating to space and thus aiding the cooling process.
Unless of course microwave energy to space is a more efficient cooler that LWIR to space.
What carbon budget?
Instead, the natural ebb and flow of clouds, solar radiation, heat rising from the oceans and a myriad of other factors added to the different time lags in which they impact the atmosphere might make it impossible to isolate or accurately identify which piece of Earth’s changing climate is feedback from manmade greenhouse gases. [bold added]
“There are simply too many variables to reliably gauge the right number for that,” Spencer said. “The main finding from this research is that there is no solution to the problem of measuring atmospheric feedback, due mostly to our inability to distinguish between radiative forcing and radiative feedback in our observations.”
I’m fed up with António Guterres silly remarks, it’s about time he was ousted from that job. Being in a ‘mouthy’ position entails responsibility too – something he clearly lacks. Why aren’t his pronouncements fact-checked first?
Because this was never about the climate facts. They were made up in pseudo science models by anti capitalist /marxist activists people paid to support the political objectives. The stated IPCC objective is to transfer wealth between nation states, impoverish Western nations to enrich Asian nations and diminish democratic freedoms in the West where people are getting to be too free and well off, and are asking questions about how the elite establishments run the country. It seems from current election rounds that the long suffering sheeple in nation states are catching on…….
”the entire carbon budget will be busted before 2030”!
Change ‘budget’ to ‘scare’ and we’re getting somewhere. EU’s leading net zero climate pushers on the ropes…
Nightmare for EU’s titans as Macron and Scholz are humiliated in European elections that see huge swing towards right-wing populists, with Le Pen, AfD and Italy’s Meloni celebrating victory – 10 June 2024
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13512501/Nightmare-EUs-titans-Macron-Scholz-humiliated-European-elections-huge-swing-right-wing-populists-Le-Pen-AfD-Italys-Meloni-celebrating-victory.html
‘right-wing populist‘ = any politician or party the left-wing media doesn’t approve of.
There is no such thing as a global average / mean temperature. Any person / organisation that claims there is, is lying. Note that there is never any information on how these clowns calculate this fiction.
I have a model that exlians how enrgy balance is achieved, because it is based on the whole system energy balance we measure to be the case ona 10 years average basis.Simply varying the dominant feedback effects as we know they vary in nature delivers a net feedback response to SST change. It’s not about how heat that leaves the surface finds its way to space, we know it always must (2nd Law). We measure energy in and out, even the energy of oceanic evaporation, by far the biggest negative feedback. So we can directly impute the temperature sensitivity of the main radiative feedbacks , which, when combined, tells you quite simply what the total radiative feedback per deg K surface heating is, hence the probable response to a given radiative perturbation. Simples!
Academics have their heads stuck so far up their computer models multi variate trees they can’t see the holistic empirical wood reality. It takes engineers used to dealing with such systems in the natural World to figure out how they work. By what really happens. Not in a computer model. IMO.
There must be an average temperature of the earth’s surface at any point in time made up of all the readings from across the world at that time divided by the total number of readings. Deg K to avoid confusion with American legacy units. Or even from the daily average temperatures. That’s a simple non sequitur.