The Latest On Global Warming Is … There Is No Global Warming

A new study out of Norway is exactly what was needed to shut down the climate alarmists. Its findings show that man has not set fire to his home planet.

Right from the top, in the abstract not 10 lines into the study, the authors get to the point.

“Using theoretical arguments and statistical tests we find,” the researchers say, “that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be strong enough to cause systematic changes in the temperature fluctuations during the last 200 years.”

In other words, our words, the greenhouse effect is so weak that it should be sidelined as an argument.

“Even if recent recorded temperature variations should turn out to deviate from previous variation patterns in a systematic way it is still a difficult challenge to establish how much of this change is due to increasing man-made emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases.”

The researchers, from Statistics Norway, the government’s official data agency, also address the apparent “high degree of consensus among many climate researchers that the temperature increase of the last decades is systematic (and partly man-made),” while noting that “is certainly the impression conveyed by the mass media.”

Of course the climate zealots won’t like the study. Well, they also won’t like another new paper, this one from University of Alabama in Hunstville climate scientists Roy Spencer and John Christy, who have submitted Urban Heat Island Effects in U.S. Summer Surface Temperature Data, 1880-2015 to a science journal.

They believe they have demonstrated “that, not only do the homogenized (‘adjusted’) dataset not correct for the effect of the urban heat island (UHI) on temperature trends, the adjusted data appear to have even stronger UHI signatures than in the raw (unadjusted) data.”

According to Spencer, “the bottom line is that an estimated 22% of the U.S. warming trend, 1895 to 2023, is due to localized UHI effects,” and that “the effect is much larger in urban locations.”

In other words, our words, the temperature record we’re expected to accept without question is a sham – an argument we’ve been making for more than 20 years.

11-12 year solar cycles drive Pacific Ocean circulation. They come in pairs, with even-numbered cycles being equatorial and odd-numbered cycles being polar. El Niños happen near the peaks of odd-numbered cycles.

El Niños happen when the two Pacific oceans stop turning outwardly, and compress to center circulation. The western hot water migrates back to the eastern equatorial Pacific Oceans.

We are nearing the peak of solar cycle 25 where we should see an El Niño. However, solar cycle 24 was so weak that the weakened pacific circulation allowed an El Niño to occur two years early.

The North Pacific circulation (PDO) slings kinks into our northern atmospheric jet stream, and causes North America’s cold fronts and monsoon rains. The current western drought is happening because of weakened North Pacific circulation, and ultimately because of weak solar output.

This exact scenario is being repeated with counter-clockwise circulation in the South Pacific Ocean (ENSO) and in South America.

Advocates of “global warming” love to point at thousands of scientific papers that demonstrate “global warming.”

I have read countless scientific papers. Usually, when global warming (or climate change) is mentioned, it is in this context: “We observed X, Y, and Z, which is happening because of global warming.” Wait a minute. The authors of the paper discussed how they collected samples and analyzed them. They described the local conditions where they found the samples. They formed various hypotheses about the samples. But not once in their research did they do any sort of analysis or experiment that would establish “global warming” as a cause.

The latest example of this is the local transmission of leishmaniasis, mostly in Texas. It’s because of global warming. Really? And opening borders so that anyone from areas where leishmaniasis is endemic can freely enter the country has NOTHING to do with the importation of infected sand flies into Texas?

A lot of times, global warming is thrown out as an explanation for whatever the topic of the research is. It’s lazy. Claiming that global warming causes everything means that researchers don’t have to look any further for the root causes. Bat colonies in the northeast are dying of white-nose fungus? Global warming! Frogs and toads are dying from nematode infections? Global warming! Cases of local malaria transmission in the US? Global warming! Bad hurricane season? Global warming! Lack of hurricanes? Global warming! Sudden beehive death syndrome? Global warming!

Lest we forget, life on earth is based on carbon. The attempts to remove carbon dioxide from the air are, in fact, shrinking the capacity of the earth to support life. Ironically, if those attempts are successful enough to have an impact on atmospheric CO2 concentration, the effect will be to heat up the earth. This is because plants will be the first to die off. Bare ground is always hotter than vegetation covered ground. Plants absorb a LOT of solar energy which otherwise would be converted to heat. Of course, once plants start dying off, animals will die off, too. Plants convert CO2 to sugars, proteins, nucleic acids, and fats that are consumed by animals. Literally, all of the carbon in any organism’s body originated as CO2. Also, because plant metabolism of CO2 causes oxygen to be released into the air, O2 levels will drop proportionally to the drop in CO2 levels.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.