Data Refutes Media’s ‘Attribution’ Con That Climate Change Boosted Dubai’s Rainfall

Time to put the great(?) climate attribution con game to bed permanently. By assuming what it’s trying to prove it becomes seriously unconvincing. Talk of ‘fingerprints of climate change’ is more like waffle than science.
– – –
A few media outlets, including CNN and BBC, have run recent articles talking about flooding in Dubai, claiming that climate change made the storms worse. This is false, says Climate Realism (via Climate Change Dispatch).

There is no evidence that climate change made the rain more extreme, instead, evidence indicates that El Niño and even cloud-seeding may have contributed.

Both the BBC’s article, “Deadly Dubai floods made worse by climate change,” and the one posted by CNN, “Scientists find the fingerprints of climate change on Dubai’s deadly floods,” reference a study done by the World Weather Attribution (WWA) group, which claimed that climate change made the rain events 10 to 40 percent more intense than if global warming was not occurring.

Climate the Movie is here.

Eight years ago, talkshop readers helped film maker Martin Durkin finance ‘Brexit the Movie‘, raising over £8000 towards the total cost of production. Now, Martin has made the long awaited sequel to ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle‘ with help from long time fellow sceptic Tom Nelson. It’s called ‘Climate the Movie: the Cold Truth’ and you can watch it for free here, right now. Enjoy!

Available at Vimeo vimeo.com/924719370
On X at twitter.com/TomANelson/status/1771682333738848477
On Youtube at youtube.com/watch?v=zmfRG8-RHEI
On Rumble at rumble.com/v4kl0dn-climate-the-movie-the-cold-truth-martin-durkin.html

An increase in the number of extreme cold days in North China during 2003–2012, research finds

The researchers wrestle with the non-correlation of extreme winter weather events and the monotonic increase in CO2 levels, offering a verdict of ‘probable’ natural variation. They try to support IPCC climate assertions, but the article keeps saying ‘however’. One of the study’s authors says: “This is still a challenging issue that needs further exploration to quantify the relative contributions of natural variability and human activity to regional extreme events.”
– – –
A recent study by researchers from the Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, presents robust interdecadal changes in the number of extreme cold days in winter over North China during 1989–2021, and the findings have been published in Atmospheric and Oceanic Science Letters, says EurekAlert.

Specifically, the number of extreme cold days increased around the year 2003 and then decreased around the year 2013, with a value of 8.7 days per year during 1989–2002, 13.5 during 2003–2012, and 6.6 during 2013–2021.

During 2003–2012, the Siberian–Ural High strengthened and the polar jet stream weakened, which favored frequent cold air intrusion into North China, inducing more extreme cold days. In addition, the intensity of extreme cold days in North China showed no significant difference in the three periods.

More climate squabbling: Governments fail to set a timeline for the IPCC reports

Yet another climate conference

Another round of climate obsessives versus energy realists, as ‘Saudi, India and China led opposition against a proposal to link the IPCC’s assessment cycle with the global stocktake’. Supposed climate issues continue to be a drain on government time and resources, with attendees racking up loads of the dreaded ’emissions’ between them just to get to the latest of the endless series of venues.
– – –
Governments have failed to agree on a timeline for the delivery of highly influential scientific reports assessing the state of climate change by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), says Climate Home News.

That is after Saudi Arabia, India and China opposed attempts to ensure the scientific body would provide its assessment in time for the next global stocktake, the UN’s scorecard of collective climate action, due in 2028, according to sources present at the IPCC talks in Istanbul, Turkiye, last week.

Following “fraught” discussions that ran all night Friday, governments postponed a final decision on the timeline until the next meeting scheduled in the summer.

Oldie but Goldie: Climategate: how the conspirators gagged on their deceptions

Andrew Bolt Herald Sun Dec 6 2009

I’ve wondered whether Climategate scientist Tom Wigley, an Australian, finally choked on all the fraud, fiddling and coverups he was witnessing from fellow members of his Climategate cabal. Steven Hayward points out that many other Climategate scientists privately had trouble swallowing the practices of their colleagues:

In 1998 three scientists from American universities–Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley, and Malcolm Hughes–unveiled in Nature magazine what was regarded as a signal breakthrough in paleoclimatology–the now notorious “hockey stick” temperature reconstruction (picture a flat “handle” extending from the year 1000 to roughly 1900, and a sharply upsloping “blade” from 1900 to 2000). Their paper purported to prove that current global temperatures are the highest in the last thousand years by a large margin–far outside the range of natural variability. The medieval warm period (MWP) and the little ice (LIA) age both disappeared.

Mind the Gaps: How the UN Climate Plan Fails to Follow the Science

Image credit: livescience.com

That old nebulous concept is invoked again: ‘the science’. It aims to sound like infallible authority, but that’s not what real science is. Talk of “uncharted territory” reminds us that most of Earth’s climate history also falls into that category. Made-up temperature limits based on the use of global averaging have little meaning in reality, as some politicians appear to have noticed.
– – –
Climate negotiators meeting in Dubai last month pledged to chart a course for stabilizing the climate system using good science, says Fred Pearce at Yale Environment360.

But many scientists say these promises are at best ill-defined and at worst a travesty of good science — vague and full of loopholes.

The U.N. climate conference in Dubai agreed on an action plan for two key objectives: to keep the world on track to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees C (2.7 degrees F), and to stay below this threshold by achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

Negotiators pledged that both objectives would be pursued “in keeping with the science.”

But neither of the objectives have agreed definitions that would allow a judgment on whether they have been achieved.

Nobel Laureate Dr. John Clauser: Climate Models Miss Key Variable – Clouds

Paraphrasing a well-known misquote (‘I thought it sounded so good that I never bothered to deny it’): “A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you’re talking real money.” Why clouds make climate, briefly explained in layman’s terms.
[Start the video at 5 mins. or watch the clip here].
– – –
“This is clearly the most important, the controlling mechanism for the earth’s temperature & climate. And it dwarfs the effect of CO2 & methane.”

Nobel prize winner John Clauser says the complexities of clouds and variations in cloud cover have been largely ignored in climate models—with major implications.

He argues there is no climate emergency, says Climate Depot.

Why COP28 Will Fail: Policymakers Should Focus on ‘Insufficient’ Energy Tech

Lack of effective technology isn’t the real problem. Inability to accept the lack of a fixable problem, due to blind adherence to IPCC conjectures about the climate, is the problem.
– – –
Summary of a City AM article, from OilPrice.com:

->> In strictly numerical terms therefore, Cop28 will be a failure, like all the climate summits that came before it.

->> Governments across the world are stepping back from their net zero promises because inflation, the cost of living, Ukraine, Gaza and other issues make it appear too costly politically.

->> Politicians should acknowledge that the current level of technology is insufficient to deliver enough carbon abatement in a way that enables an energy system that is affordable, secure and reliable.

Full article here.
– – –
City AM: Why Cop28 will be a failure and leaders should stay at home – by Paul Domjan, a former Energy Security Adviser to the U.S. European Command of the U.S. Department of Defense.

Climate confusion: Differing Net Zero definitions must ‘mesh’ say Met Office scientists

[image credit: latinoamericarenovable.com]

Another trip to cloud cuckoo land. How do they plan to accurately measure all the so-called emissions and get all parties to agree with the results anyway? Time to return to reality and stop wasting time and effort on non-existent supposed remedies.
– – –
A new paper published in Nature has highlighted a fundamental mismatch in the way greenhouse gas emissions are measured which could mean that Net Zero could be met in one definition up to five years ahead of the other, says the Met Office .

The IPCC report shows that global temperature will stop increasing when we reach ‘net zero’ emissions of CO2. [Talkshop comment -*claims*, not shows].

To achieve this, human activity cannot put more CO2 into the atmosphere than it removes – we need to massively reduce our emissions, with some removal of CO2 to help areas which are really hard to decarbonise.

This sits behind the principle of Net Zero, which countries including the UK hope will be reached by 2050.

Planet racing toward ‘dead-end 3C temperature rise’, UN chief wails

It’s November again, so time to bring out the climate doomster’s crystal ball and claim once more to know how all global weather systems will behave decades into the future, unless…blah blah. The Climate Obsessives Powwow number 28 will lap up the melodrama (‘racing’?) even if others are less, or not at all, impressed. The notion of one global temperature is just a gimmick.
– – –
Plans to stop emitting greenhouse gases in order to limit global warming are nowhere near enough to avert dangerous climate change, a United Nations body has warned.

In its annual Emissions Gap report, the UN Environment Programme says the climate action plans of governments will fail to limit the global temperature to under 1.5-2C this century, reports Sky News.

That limit was the goal of the landmark Paris Agreement, struck in 2015, when almost 200 countries agreed limiting global warming was necessary to avoid extremely destructive impacts.

Current pledges put the world on track for a 2.5-2.9C of global warming, UNEP said.

Its executive director Inger Andersen told Sky News: “None of these scenarios are acceptable to many, many people who live in low-lying areas, in coastal communities in fire hazard areas or in drought prone areas or flood prone areas.

“So we really do need to step up.”

At 3C of warming, scientists predict the world could pass several catastrophic points of no return, from the runaway melting of ice sheets to the Amazon rainforest drying out.

“Present trends are racing our planet down a dead-end 3C temperature rise,” said UN secretary general Antonio Guterres.

“The emissions gap is more like an emissions canyon.”

Full report here.

New research suggests plants might be able to absorb more CO2 from human activities than previously expected

Biology has been underestimated. Anything that relies on photosynthesis just takes whatever CO2 molecules it can get for its needs, regardless of current climate theories.
– – –
New research published in Science Advances paints an uncharacteristically upbeat picture for the planet, says Phys.org.

This is because more realistic ecological modeling suggests the world’s plants may be able to take up more atmospheric CO2 from human activities than previously predicted.

Despite this headline finding, the environmental scientists behind the research are quick to underline that this should in no way be taken to mean the world’s governments can take their foot off the brake in their obligations to reduce carbon emissions as fast as possible. [Talkshop comment – smell the fear of losing funding].

Simply planting more trees and protecting existing vegetation is not a golden-bullet solution but the research does underline the multiple benefits to conserving such vegetation.

“Plants take up a substantial amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) every year, thereby slowing down the detrimental effects of climate change, but the extent to which they will continue this CO2 uptake into the future has been uncertain,” explains Dr. Jürgen Knauer, who headed the research team led by the Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment at Western Sydney University.

“What we found is that a well-established climate model that is used to feed into global climate predictions made by the likes of the IPCC predicts stronger and sustained carbon uptake until the end of the 21st century when it accounts for the impact of some critical physiological processes that govern how plants conduct photosynthesis.

“We accounted for aspects like how efficiently carbon dioxide can move through the interior of the leaf, how plants adjust to changes in temperatures, and how plants most economically distribute nutrients in their canopy. These are three really important mechanisms that affect a plant’s ability to ‘fix’ carbon, yet they are commonly ignored in most global models” said Dr. Knauer.

Photosynthesis is the scientific term for the process in which plants convert—or “fix”—CO2 into the sugars they use for growth and metabolism. This carbon fixing serves as a natural climate change mitigator by reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere; it is this increased uptake of CO2 by vegetation that is the primary driver of an increasing land carbon sink reported over the last few decades.
. . .
Silvia Caldararu, Assistant Professor in Trinity’s School of Natural Sciences, was involved in the study. Contextualizing the findings and their relevance, she said, “Because the majority of terrestrial biosphere models used to assess the global carbon sink are located at the lower end of this complexity range, accounting only partially for these mechanisms or ignoring them altogether, it is likely that we are currently underestimating climate change effects on vegetation as well as its resilience to changes in climate.

“We often think about climate models as being all about physics, but biology plays a huge role and it is something that we really need to account for.”

Full article here.

This year ‘virtually certain’ to be warmest in 125,000 years, EU scientists say — ignoring contradictory evidence?

Thermometer with Fahrenheit and Celsius units [image credit: Stilfehler at Wikipedia]

The ‘virtual’ in virtually certain is from a computer model result: ‘we combine our data with the IPCC’. Two things to bear in mind: satellite data only started in the 1970s, with other less accurate (due to shortage of data) records being kept from the 1880s onwards, and ‘the mid-Holocene … mean annual temperature reached 2.5°C above that of today’ (source: Encyclopaedia Britannica).
– – –
This year is “virtually certain” to be the warmest in 125,000 years, European Union scientists said on Wednesday (8 November), after data showed last month was the world’s hottest October in that period, says Euractiv.

Last month smashed through the previous October temperature record, from 2019, by a massive margin, the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) said.

“The record was broken by 0.4 degrees Celsius, which is a huge margin,” said C3S Deputy Director Samantha Burgess, who described the October temperature anomaly as “very extreme”.

The Era Of ‘Unquestioned And Unchallenged’ Climate Change Claims Is Over

What era? IPCC-favoured warmist scientists can’t even agree among themselves sometimes. But they usually agree that scientists who question their climate theories in research papers are fair game for sneers, jeers and various forms of harassment, if ignoring them isn’t enough.
– – –
Leading voices in the climate science community are in an uproar as their warming hypothesis is coming under fresh assault by new scientific papers, says The Epoch Times (via Climate Change Dispatch).

The authors of the papers are being attacked and say that “activist scientists” threatened by the new findings are “aggressively conducting an orchestrated disinformation campaign to discredit the papers and the scientific reputation of the authors.”

Indeed, from insults on social media and furious blog posts to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests demanding emails from a journal editor and federal scientist, the controversy is getting heated.

Several scientists who spoke with The Epoch Times expressed shock at the tactics used against those whose latest research is casting renewed doubts on the official climate narrative.

Hanson et al paper claims ‘climate is more sensitive than usually assumed’

Here we go again. Sound the alarm – louder! So far most climate models have consistently over-estimated temperature rises, compared to observations. The paper goes online shortly (see below for full details).
– – –
According to a new paper in Oxford Open Climate Change, the strategies humanity must pursue to reduce climate change will have to include more than reducing greenhouse gases.

This comes from an analysis of climate data led by researcher James Hansen, says the press release (@ EurekAlert!).

Scientists have known since the 1800s that infrared-absorbing (greenhouse) gases warm the Earth’s surface and that the abundance of greenhouse gases changes naturally as well as from human actions. [Talkshop comment – the human actions part at least is still a theory].

Roger Revelle, who was one of the early scientists to study global warming, wrote in 1965 that industrialization meant that human beings were conducting a “vast geophysical experiment” by burning fossil fuels, which adds carbon dioxide (CO2) to the air.

Has the Sun’s true role in global warming been miscalculated?

Nice day

Of course the IPCC’s preferred idea is that the Sun can be ignored as a variable in climate influence, and all attention should focus on minor trace gases (mainly CO2 at 0.04%) in the atmosphere. A recent study by Spencer & Christy weighed in on a related topic: Our new climate sensitivity paper has been published, which proposes that actual observations indicate significant IPCC over-estimation of (theoretical) non-solar climate factors.
– – –
A new international study published in the scientific peer-reviewed journal, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, by 20 climate researchers from 12 countries suggests that the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) might have substantially underestimated the role of the Sun in global warming, says Ceres-Science.

The article began as a response to a 2022 commentary on an extensive review of the causes of climate change published in 2021.

The original review (Connolly and colleagues, 2021) had suggested that the IPCC reports had inadequately accounted for two major scientific concerns when they were evaluating the causes of global warming since the 1850s:

The global temperature estimates used in the IPCC reports are contaminated by urban warming biases.

The estimates of solar activity changes since the 1850s considered by the IPCC substantially downplayed a possible large role for the Sun.

On this basis, the 2021 review had concluded that it was not scientifically valid for the IPCC to rule out the possibility that global warming might be mostly natural.

Study investigates primary drivers of observed warming: challenges of inadequate data

Urban heat island effect

The study, entitled The Detection and Attribution of Northern Hemisphere Land Surface Warming (1850–2018) in Terms of Human and Natural Factors: Challenges of Inadequate Data (August 2023), has 40 authors, some of whom are regular contributors to the ‘climate debate’ both in published papers and elsewhere. It takes a critical look at recent IPCC reports and summaries, especially the quality or otherwise of some of the data used to support its assertions. It suggests ways some of these issues could/should be addressed. Below is the abstract and the closing summary.
– – –
Abstract
A statistical analysis was applied to Northern Hemisphere land surface temperatures (1850–2018) to try to identify the main drivers of the observed warming since the mid-19th century.

Two different temperature estimates were considered—a rural and urban blend (that matches almost exactly with most current estimates) and a rural-only estimate. The rural and urban blend indicates a long-term warming of 0.89 °C/century since 1850, while the rural-only indicates 0.55 °C/century.

This contradicts a common assumption that current thermometer-based global temperature indices are relatively unaffected by urban warming biases.

New Paper Reveals Classic Logical Fallacy In IPCC Report

The alarmist media bought it at the time, which may well have been the idea.
– – –
A new paper from the Global Warming Policy Foundation reveals that the IPCC’s 2013 report contained a remarkable logical fallacy, says Climate Change Dispatch.

The author, Professor Norman Fenton, shows that the authors of the Summary for Policymakers claimed, with 95% certainty, that more than half of the warming observed since 1950 had been caused by man.

But as Professor Fenton explains, their logic in reaching this conclusion was fatally flawed.

The ‘Gulf Stream’ will not collapse in 2025: What the alarmist headlines got wrong

Gulf Stream map [image credit: RedAndr @ Wikipedia]

This article at The Conversation, by a former IPCC author warning against the excesses of media climate catastrophism, appeared on the 4th August but was somewhat undermined by another one it published the next day: The Atlantic is at risk of circulation collapse. It would mean even greater climate chaos across Europe.
– – –
Those following the latest developments in climate science would have been stunned by the jaw-dropping headlines last week proclaiming the “Gulf Stream could collapse as early as 2025, study suggests” — which responded to a recent publication in Nature Communications, says The Conversation (via Phys.org).

“Be very worried: Gulf Stream collapse could spark global chaos by 2025” announced the New York Post. “A crucial system of ocean currents is heading for a collapse that ‘would affect every person on the planet” noted CNN in the U.S. and repeated CTV News here in Canada.

One can only imagine how those already stricken with climate anxiety internalized this seemingly apocalyptic news as temperature records were being shattered across the globe.

British professor elected to lead UN climate worriers

Climate scientists are now expected to become ‘forceful advocates for practical solutions’, says one commenter on the appointment. As usual, no mention of natural climate variation in media alarmist circles.
– – –
British professor Jim Skea was elected to lead the UN’s climate expert panel Wednesday, taking the helm of the organization charged with distilling the best science to inform global policy in a critical decade for humans and the planet, reports Phys.org.

Skea, a Professor of Sustainable Energy at Imperial College London who co-chaired the report on curbing planet-heating emissions in the latest round of assessments, was elected chair at a meeting of the 195-nation organization in Nairobi.

“Climate change is an existential threat to our planet,” he told delegates.

Understanding the role of the sun in climate change

Variation in solar activity during a recent sunspot cycle [credit: Wikipedia]

Dr. Scafetta offers a new analysis of the sun-climate issue, with fresh research. Clearly a crucially important topic in climate science, where certain pre-conceived ideas have dominated the discussion in recent years, to the point of refusing to even have one.
– – –
Although the sun provides nearly all the energy needed to warm the planet, its contribution to climate change remains widely questioned, says Nicola Scafetta.

Many empirically based studies claim that it has a significant effect on climate, while others (often based on computer global climate simulations) claim that it has a small effect.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) supports the latter view and estimates that almost 100% of the observed warming of the Earth’s surface from 1850–1900 to 2020 was caused by man-made emissions. This is known as the anthropogenic global warming (AGWT) theory.

I addressed this important paradox in a new study published in Geoscience Frontiers.