Senior Information For Awards Night Due Monday April 20: Fill & Download for Free

My answer view -The greatest consequence is we would leave the current Quaternary Ice Age and enjoy a tropical climate throughout the world as in the past.By definition when both polar ice caps are under ice all year WE ARE IN AN ICE AGE.What is it like to be in an ice age? Terrible and devastating much more so than a non-ice age like the majority of our past history when tropical climes prevailed. Also the recent Little Ice Age showed how millions die from flooding and starvation as agriculture fails.How do we get out of an ice age? Climate change from cooling to warming.Has the current warming taken us out of the Quaternary ice age? No. Temperatures have not risen more than 1* C in the past 150 years and over the past 7000 years there is a consistent decline in temperatures. Also of course our polar ice caps have not melted and are now expanding.Why did governments attack recent warming with a plan in the Paris Accord to make the climate colder? They said the warming was happening too fast?Is this true? No. How can too little warming to matter support the claim that the warming is too fast to be natural? It cannot.Is it possible for the climate to get too hot during an Ice Age? No.Why? Glaciation is the reason when the interglacial ends next is devastating glaciation as we experienced in Canada and North America 12000 years ago.When you raise this issue of wanting global warming so we can leave the Quaternary Ice the first response is “Oh dear if the glaciers melt and we leave our ice age behind this will cause terrible sea rise that will destroy all the coastal cities. Wrong on two counts as the evidence of sea rise is not well correlated with temperatures and glaciation is proven while Al Gore’s wild sea rise exaggerations are not.MY REFERENCES in supportGetting rid of polar ice including Antarctica is great for humans.How Global Warming Made Civilization PossibleWhen Antarctica was a tropical paradiseGeological drilling under Antarctica suggests the polar region has seen global warming beforeRobin McKie Sat 16 Jul 2011 19.04 EDTAn impression of a tropical Antarctica as it may have appeared 100 million years ago. Image: Robert Nicholls/paleocreations.comAntarctica is the coldest, most desolate place on Earth, a land of barren mountains buried beneath a two-mile thick ice cap. Freezing winds batter its shores while week-long blizzards frequently sweep its glaciers.Yet this icy vision turns out to be exceptional. For most of the past 100 million years, the south pole was a tropical paradise, it transpires."It was a green beautiful place," said Prof Jane Francis, of Leeds University's School of Earth and Environment. "Lots of furry mammals including possums and beavers lived there. The weather was tropical. It is only in the recent geological past that it got so cold."Prof Francis was speaking last week at the International Symposium on Antarctic Earth Sciences in Edinburgh. More than 500 polar researchers gathered to discuss the latest details of their studies, research that has disturbing implications for the planet's future. Drilling projects and satellite surveys show the whole world, not just Antarctica, was affected by temperature rises and that these were linked, closely, to fluctuations in levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.WE ARE A TROPICAL SPECIETropical nations are expected to hold 50% of the world’s population by 2050, up from 40% now.©IEMBICKI/MARKZPHOTO.COMTropical nations are expected to hold 50% of the world’s population by 2050, up from 40% now.©IEMBICKI/MARKZPHOTO.COMExpanding tropics will play greater global role, report predictsBy Allie WilkinsonJun. 29, 2014 , 8:30 AMBy 2050, half of the world’s population will reside in the tropics—the relatively warm belt that girdles the globe—according to State of the Tropics, a hefty report released today. Rapid population growth, coupled with economic growth, means that the region’s influence will grow in coming decades, the authors of the 500-page tome predict. At the same time, tropical conditions are expanding poleward as a result of climate change, but at a slower rate than previously believed.“The tropical population is expected to exceed that of the rest of the world in the late 2030s, confirming just how crucial the Tropics are to the world’s future,” said Sandra Harding, project convener and vice chancellor of Australia’s James Cook University, in a statement. “We must rethink the world’s priorities on aid, development, research and education.”The result of a 3-year collaboration between 12 prominent tropical research institutions, State of the Tropics grew out of an effort to acknowledge the region as an environmental and geopolitical entity in its own right. Geographers define the tropics as the belt that is centered on Earth’s equator, between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn (each 23.5° of latitude off the equator). Although tropical regions vary considerably, they are “typically warm and experience little seasonal change in daily temperatures.” These geographic and environmental commonalities play a key part of shaping human societies in the region, which is currently home to about 40% of the world’s population, the authors add.Climate change hoax COLLAPSES as new science finds human activity has virtually zero impact on global temperatures[Charles Tips QUORA writer and former Science Editor organized these facts.]“Fact 1: We are in an ice age, the Quaternary to name it, and have been for 2.58 million years. Given that the previous four ice ages lasted for right at 30 my, we likely have more than 27 my to go (the two ice ages that kicked things off were of snowball-Earth proportions and lasted much longer. Ice ages occur every 155 my, and we don’t know why. That’s a much longer cycle than Milankovitch cycles can account for. Those tell us things like why North Africa has been a desert for 5 ky when before that it was a populated savanna.“Fact 2: We are in an interglacial, the Holocene epoch to give it its name, a respite from glaciation. During an ice age, interglacials occur at 90 to 125 ky intervals and last approximately 7 to 14 ky. The Holocene is 11.7 ky old, but there is new evidence that the Allerød oscillation 13.9 ky ago was the actual start with a meteor strike 1 ky in producing the Younger Dryas cooling.* If we are actually, 13.9 ky into our interglacial, then natural cycles tell us we will be rapidly descending back into glaciation in 5… 4… 3…“The combination of glacials and interglacials looks like this:Holocene climatic optimum - WikipediaThis graph is taken from Wikipedia. It shows eight different reconstructions of Holocene temperature. The thick black line is the average of these. Time progresses from left to right.On this graph the Stone Age is shown only about one degree warmer than present day, but most sources mention that Scandinavian Stone Age was about 2-3 degrees warmer than the present; this need not to be mutually excluding statements, because the curve reconstructs the entire Earth's temperature, and on higher latitudes the temperature variations were greater than about equator.Some reconstructions show a vertical dramatic increase in temperature around the year 2000, but it seems not reasonable to the author, since that kind of graphs cannot possibly show temperature in specific years, it must necessarily be smoothed by a kind of mathematical rolling average, perhaps with periods of hundred years, and then a high temperature in a single year, for example, 2004 will be much less visible.The trend seems to be that Holocene's highest temperature was reached in the Hunter Stone Age about 8,000 years before present, thereafter the temperature has generally been steadily falling, however, superimposed by many cold and warm periods, including the modern warm period.However, generally speaking, the Holocene represents an amazing stable climate, where the cooling through the period has been limited to a few degrees.History of Earth's ClimateNO CLIMATE CHANGE IN TEMPERATURE.For climate science the data most followed is temperature and yet it is surely the most unreliable at the global level. Also temperature has shown no evidence over the past 140 years of anything but natural variability.Temperature increases over the past 140 years at 0.8*C are too small and within the range of natural variability to constitute human made global warming.NASA Goddard Institute finds warming of 0.8* Celsius (1.4* Fahrenheit) since 1880. This means an average of only 0.0175 degree Celsius temperature increase annually. This minute amount is within the statistical error of data.Weather by itself cannot be evidence of global warming/ climate unless there is statistical record stretching far enough back to account for thousands of years or at least for centuries.SALT LAKE CITY (KUTV) — Increased run-off from several western states is raising the levels at Lake Powell dramatically.On July 18, we showed you photos that showed a 51-foot increase in water levels at Alstrom Point, but new photos are showing the rising lake levels from another area; The Castle Rock Cut.This reference shows a proxy for cooling temperatures that make increased snowfall causing increased rainfall and runoff and flooding across the US.Epic And Massive Flooding In Europe During The Little Ice AgePublished on June 24, 2016Written by http://iceagenow.orgKilled more than 500,000 people.1607 Flood In Bristol Channel A Uk Tsunami 1607Andrew McKillop has a new article posted at The Market Oracle. Here are some excerpts.This is the global cooling fearIntense flooding in the low countries of Europe became “darkly repetitive” during the Little Ice Age, writes McKillop. The cooling period lasted 450 years,For the Dutch, the Grote Mandrenke is nothing to do with Linux software, but means “The Great Drowning” and is named for the epic and massive flooding that occurred, more and more frequently in the Low Countries of Europe’s North Sea region as Europe’s Little Ice Age intensified.Grote Mandrenke flood killed at least 100 000Normal or predictable spring and autumn flooding was increasingly replaced by large-area and intense flooding, sometimes outside spring and autumn from about 1300, in recurring crises which lasted into the 18th century. In the Low Countries and across Europe, but also elsewhere, the cooling trend starting in the late 13th century became more intense. It brought long cold winters, heavy storms and floods, loss of coastal farmlands, and huge summer sandstorms in coastal areas further damaging agriculture. Climate historians estimate that major flooding on an unpredictable but increasingly frequent basis started as early as 1250. Extreme events like the Grote Mandrenke flood of 1362 which killed at least 100 000 people became darkly repetitive.Other giant floods probably killed 400 000Other giant floods in the region through the next 200 years probably killed a total of 400 000 persons in the coastlands of what is now Belgium, Germany and Holland. At the time, Europe’s population was at most a quarter of today’s, meaning that corrected for population size these were really catastrophic disasters. During this time, the Zuider Zee region of northern Holland was inundated and its former farmlands disappeared under water – for several centuries.Crop failures and faminesThe basic reasons was that the weather was getting colder, as well as more unpredictable. As the climate cooled, it also became wetter. Combined with the cold, this caused more crop failures and famines spread as the northern limit of farming retreated south. The start of the cooling – called Europe’s Little Ice Age by glaciologist Francois Matthes in 1939 – in the 13th century was in fact the start of a long, sometimes steep dip in temperatures that held sway on an unpredictable, on-and-off basis until at least the first decade of the 19th century. Overall, the cooling lasted about 450 years.Preceded by more than two centuries of much warmer more predictable weatherMaking things worse, the cooling had been preceded by more than two centuries of much warmer and better, more predictable weather. Farming moved northwards, seasons were predictable, food supplies had expanded. Europe’s population also grew, in some regions tripling in 200 years. The colonization of Greenland, which failed when the cooling intensified, was a well-known historical spinoff from the previous warming, but by the 16th century there was no trace of Europeans in Greenland. Only ruins of their farms and homes could be found, but with few or no tombstones dated beyond the early 15th century, leading to the theory that these early “Climate Refugees” packed their longboats and sailed south, to what is now the New England coast. Where they became easy prey for American Indian tribes along those coasts.And as more evidence shows that the Medieval Warm Period was no isolated event in Europe but was a global phenomenon, McKillop’s analysis takes on more immediate relevance:The climate historian Hubert H. Lamb in his 2002 book ‘Climate History and the Modern World’ dates the cooling to two main phases. The first leg of this change he places at about 1200-1400, but his second phase of about 1500-1825 which for some climate historians is Europe’s Little Ice Age, was marked by much steeper drops in average temperatures. Indicators used by Lamb and other climate historians like Emmanuel Leroy Ladrie and Wolfgang Behringer include food price peaks as cold summers followed cold and wet springs, with increasing examples of “climate wars”, such as Louis X’s Flanders campaign where the climate chilling was a sure factor in play.I fear that we’re headed into such a period of great cooling and repetitive catastrophic flooding right now.This while our leaders prattle on about global warming, leaving us almost totally unprepared.Andrew McKillop is former chief policy analyst, Division A Policy, DG XVII Energy, European Commission, and co-author of ‘The Doomsday Machine’, Palgrave Macmillan USA, 2012McKillop has more than 30 years experience in the energy, economic and finance domains. Trained at London UK’s University College, he has had specially long experience of energy policy, project administration and the development and financing of alternate energy. This included his role of in-house Expert on Policy and Programming at the DG XVII-Energy of the European Commission, Director of Information of the OAPEC technology transfer subsidiary, AREC and researcher for UN agencies including the ILO.Epic and massive flooding in Europe during the Little Ice Age | PSI IntlFlooding of Europe continuesFlooding spread further through east Germany today, leaving emergency crews scrounging for sandbags to shore up crumbling dikes as the country faced its biggest relief effort since World War II.In Hungary, the Danube River peaked at a historic high in Budapest without causing major flooding after relief workers spent a frantic night bolstering dikes. The capital's high flood walls, built at the turn of the last century, held off the floodwater in the city center, though one barrier gave way in a northern suburb.The Czech Republic, facing a staggering cleanup bill after nearly two weeks of devastating flooding, said it is reconsidering plans to buy 24 new air force fighter jets. Heavy flood damage "has changed priorities for everyone," Defence Ministry spokesman Milan Repka said in Prague.Europe is wrestling with the aftermath of violent storms that swept the continent two weeks ago. German authorities reported three more deaths, bringing the Europewide toll to at least 109.Floodwaters have ebbed in Austria and the Czech Republic and also were falling in Dresden, the biggest German city hit so far, allowing the start of a massive cleanup and rebuilding operation expected to cost some 20 billion euros Europewide.Weather forecasts for Germany and central Europe called for generally dry weather in the next few days, though rain was forecast for western Hungary.Under sunny summer skies today, thousands of emergency workers, soldiers and volunteers still worked nonstop to pile tons of sandbags onto sodden dikes along Germany's Elbe and Mulde rivers to protect towns along the way.A government relief agency, the Technical Aid Service, said that sand bags were "in short supply" and that Denmark had shipped 650,000 to Germany to help. Italy, France, the Netherlands and other countries have also offered to help, the agency said.Sweeping north toward the North Sea from the hills on the Czech border after record rainfall, high water flooded part of Dessau, a city best known for its Bauhaus modern architecture school.The two rivers converge there, and military helicopters dumped sand on the dikes to strengthen them.Upriver, the Elbe forced workers to retreat after bursting its banks in seven places Sunday near Wittenberg, the town where Martin Luther launched the Reformation in 1517. But officials said the old town was not under immediate threat.Rescuers used boats on ropes to pull people trapped in their homes to safety and scoured outlying villages in the darkness to evacuate stragglers.More than 80,000 people have been evacuated across the region.In Dresden, where expensively restored monuments such as the Semper Opera and Zwinger Palace museum were partly flooded, officials said some residents may be allowed to return home.Further north, the city of Magdeburg began to move people out as the Elbe's crest surged toward the North Sea. The river is expected to threaten there in the next few days.In Budapest, 10-metre high flood ramparts in the center of town kept the Danube at bay. The river peaked at a level of 8.49 metres early today, a touch over the previous record set in 1965, then began falling, said Tibor Dobson, a spokesman for Hungary's national disaster relief office."Our main concern now is to ensure that waste from the city's sewers does not cause any problems or enter the water supply," Dobson said.Most evacuated towns in Hungary lie north of Budapest. A few areas in the southern part of the capital also were evacuated - areas where the flood walls don't rise as high as in the city center.The government postponed an annual fireworks ceremony scheduled for Aug. 20, or St. Stephen's Day, which commemorates the king who founded Hungary 1,000 years ago."It would be unbecoming to celebrate with fireworks in a situation where tens of thousands are working on the dams," Prime Minister Peter Medgyessy said after the meeting.Szodliget, a village 30 kilometres north of Budapest, road posts barely stuck out above the muddy floodwater. But resident Janos Koros, 43, was counting his blessings."On the whole, I think we have gotten off pretty lightly," he said. "Compared with what I've seen of Prague and Dresden on television, this is just a tiny rain drop."Flooding of Europe continuesMay 22, 2019Flooding, thunderstorms to threaten millions across central and eastern Europe into midweekBy Eric Leister, AccuWeather senior meteorologistNEXT UPHail, hail as far as the eye can seeA slow-moving storm system brought deadly flooding to Germany and more dangerous weather is possible across central and eastern Europe through Wednesday.Torrential downpours brought widespread rainfall of 50-100 mm (2-4 inches) to southern Germany from Monday into early Tuesday.The heavy rainfall triggered flooding and dangerous driving conditions which claimed the life of a motorist that skidded off a roadway in Bavaria.Several roadways were closed due to flooding throughout southern Germany from Monday into Tuesday.As the storm spins over Poland, the heaviest rainfall will shift from Germany into western Poland into Wednesday. Rainfall will taper off during the day across southern and eastern Germany."Some roadways may be closed due to flooding," said AccuWeather Meteorologist Tyler Roys. "When you see a flooded roadway, always turn around."Farther east, thunderstorms will be a threat from eastern Poland and the Baltic states to the Balkan Peninsula and Ukraine on Wednesday.https://www.accuweather.com/en/w...Cars make their way through a flooded road near Marquartstein, Germany, Tuesday, May 21, 2019. (AP Photo/Matthias Schrader)A few locations from Ukraine to the Baltic states will endure severe thunderstorms Wednesday afternoon and evening.These storms will be capable of producing blinding downpours, localized flash flooding and damaging winds."There will also be a risk for thunderstorms capable of producing damaging hail in Poland on Wednesday," added Roys.UK Floods, Worst Flooding Since 2007, Extreme Weather Global Weirding?Politics / Environmental IssuesNov 25, 2012 - 05:58 AM GMTBy: Nadeem_WalayatThe UK looks set to experience its worst series of floods since at least the great floods of 2007 when areas that had never flooded in living memory experienced what would turn out to be their worst floods in over 150 years.The latest of a series of heavy rain fall induced flooding is being experienced by the south and south west areas of England and Wales, with over 500 flood warnings in place nation wide, as one of the wettest summers on record had left the ground saturated, unable to soak up additional heavy rain fall that is resulting in the failure of drainage systems.When temperatures are rising sharply as in the dirty thirties the result is devastating droughts not flooding.John Steinbeck—who would have been 113 today—wrote more than thirty books, and The Grapes of Wrath, which you were most likely assigned to read in high school, is widely considered to be his best work. The novel was published in 1939 to great acclaim, both critically and commercially; it “was a phenomenon on the scale of a national event. It was publicly banned and burned by citizens, it was debated on national talk radio; but above all, it was read.” It was also the New York Times’ bestselling book of 1939, and won both a Pulitzer Prize and a National Book Award.How ‘The Grapes of Wrath’ Got Its NamePOLAR BEAR POPULATIONS EXPANDING AND THRIVINGThe ice melt mythBy Dr. Jay Lehr |April 30th, 2019|Climate|130 CommentsAccording to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (nsidc.org), ice currently covers 6 million square miles, or one tenth the Land area on Earth, about the area of South America. Floating ice, or Sea Ice, alternately called Pack Ice at the North and South Poles covers 6% of the ocean’s surface (nsidc.org), an area similar to North America. The most important measure of ice is its thickness. The United States Geologic Survey estimates the total ice on Earth weighs 28 million Gigatons(a billion tons). Antarctica and Greenland combined represent 99% of all ice on Earth. The remaining one per cent is in glaciers, ice sheets and sea ice. Antarctica can exceed 3 miles in thickness and Greenland one mile. If they were to melt sea level would indeed rise over 200 feet, but not even the most radical alarmists suggest that possibility arising due to the use of fossil fuels. However the ice that flows off of the Antarctic and Greenland called shelf ice represents only half a percent of all the Earth’s ice and which if melted would raise sea level only 14 inches, (nsidc.com).Although Sea Ice covers 6% of the entire oceans at an average thickness of 6 feet, were it all to melt sea level would rise only 4 inches. If we melted all 200,000 of the Earth’s temperate zone glaciers sea level would rise another two feet. So total catastrophe can only occur if we can melt the Antarctic and Greenland. But the Antarctic is the coldest place on Earth. At www.coolantarctica.com calculations show the temperature would have to rise 54 degrees Fahrenheit to start the warming of that Ice Cap.The geologic record provides a perspective on how climate impacts the quantity of ice on Earth. They have encompassed every extreme. 800 million years ago the planet was almost entirely encased in ice (Rafferty, J.P. Cryogenics Period). Since then there have been many extended periods when there has been no ice present. As recently as 3 million years ago sea levels are believed to have been 165 feet higher than today. While ice covered a third of the entire planet during the last ice age, when sea levels were 400 feet lower, allowing ancient peoples to cross the Siberian Land Bridge to populate North America.Al Gore predicted in 2007 that by 2013 the Arctic Ocean would be completely ice free. In the summer of 2012 ice levels did reach all time lows in the Arctic. Emboldened by this report Australian Professor Chris Turney launched an expedition in December of 2013 to prove that the Antarctic Sea Ice was also undergoing catastrophic melting only to have his ship trapped in sea ice such that it could not even be rescued by modern ice-breakers.The Professor should have known that a more accurate estimate of sea ice can be had from satellite images taken every day at the Poles since 1981. These images show that between summer and winter, regardless of the degree of summer melting, the sea ice completely recovers to its original size the winter before for almost every year since the pictures were taken. The sea ice has been stubbornly resistant to Al Gore’s predictions. In fact the average annual coverage of sea ice has been essentially the same since satellite observations began in 1981. However that has not stopped global warming advocates and even government agencies from cherry picking the data to mislead the public.Africa’s Mt. Kilimanjaro has been the poster child for land based melting supposed to be caused by Global Warming. It did loose half of its ice cover between 1880 and 1936 before the major use of fossil fuels and only 30% more in the past 80 years. However the temperature at its peak has not risen at any time during these years above freezing (32 degrees Fahrenheit). The melting has been due to deforestation and the dry air rising to the mountain top causing the ice to turn directly into water vapor a process called sublimation.Melting glaciers are another topic of the warming alarmists. Indeed they can choose to point to some that are actually melting, ignoring those that are growing or remaining stable. Why the differences? They are largely dependent on whether over periods of time more snow falls than ice melts or the reverse. They are a great place to cherry pick data.The solution to public fear about ice melting and sea level rising is simply using common sense.The good news is that over the past decade increasing scientific research has shown that we don't need to choose between conquering poverty and saving the planet from disastrous warming. The actual warming effect of doubled carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will be much smaller than the 2.7–8.1˚F the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has claimed. It is certainly less than half, probably less than a third.Indeed, as climatologist John R. Christy, meteorologist Joseph D'Aleo, and climate statistician James Wallace put it, observational evidence indicates that "once just the Natural Factor [solar, volcanic, and ocean current cycle variability] impacts on temperature data are accounted for, there is no ... Natural Factor Adjusted Warming at all" left to blame on carbon dioxide. I.e., carbon dioxide's warming effect is likely so small as to be undetectable.THE MIDDLE EAST IS UNDER RECORD RAINFALL AND FLOODINGMonday, 01 October 2018NASA Sees Climate Cooling Trend Thanks to Low Sun ActivityWritten by James MurphyThe climate alarmists just can’t catch a break. NASA is reporting that the sun is entering one of the deepest Solar Minima of the Space Age; and Earth’s atmosphere is responding in kind.So, start pumping out that CO2, everyone. We’re going to need all the greenhouse gases we can get.“We see a cooling trend,” said Martin Mlynczak of NASA’s Langley Research Center. “High above Earth’s surface, near the edge of space, our atmosphere is losing heat energy. If current trends continue, it could soon set a Space Age record for cold.”The new data is coming from NASA’s Sounding of the Atmosphere using Broadband Emission Radiometry or SABER instrument, which is onboard the space agency’s Thermosphere Ionosphere Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics (TIMED) satellite. SABER monitors infrared radiation from carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO), two substances that play a vital role in the energy output of our thermosphere, the very top level of our atmosphere.“The thermosphere always cools off during Solar Minimum. It’s one of the most important ways the solar cycle affects our planet,” said Mlynczak, who is the associate principal investigator for SABER.Who knew that that big yellow ball of light in the sky had such a big influence on our climate?There’s a bit of good news in all of this. When the thermosphere cools, it literally shrinks, therefore reducing aerodynamic drag on satellites in low Earth orbit. In effect, the shrinking thermosphere increases a satellite’s lifetime.But that appears to be where the good news ends, unless you prefer cold weather and increased space junk. “The bad news,” according to Dr. Tony Phillips, editor of SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids, is: “It also delays the natural decay of space junk, resulting in a more cluttered environment around Earth.”Mlynczak and his colleagues have created the Thermosphere Climate Index (TCI), which measures how much NO is dumped from the Thermosphere into outer space. During Solar Maximum the TCI number is very high. At times of Solar Minimum, TCI is low.“Right now, (TCI) is very low indeed,” said Mlynczak. “SABER is currently measuring 33 billion Watts of infrared power from NO. That’s ten times smaller than we see during more active phases of the solar cycle."SABER has been in orbit for only 17 years, but Mlynczak and the scientists at NASA’s Langley Research Center have been able to recreate TCI measurements back to the 1940s. “SABER taught us how to do this by revealing how TCI depends on other variables such as geomagnetic activity and the sun’s UV output — things that have been measured for decades,” said Mlynczak.In fact, TCI numbers now, in the closing months of 2018, are very close to setting record lows since measurements began. “We’re not quite there yet,” Mlynczak reports. “but it could happen in a matter of months.”The new NASA findings are in line with studies released by UC-San Diego and Northumbria University in Great Britain last year, both of which predict a Grand Solar Minimum in coming decades due to low sunspot activity. Both studies predicted sun activity similar to the Maunder Minimum of the mid-17th to early 18th centuries, which coincided to a time known as the Little Ice Age, during which temperatures were much lower than those of today.If all of this seems as if NASA is contradicting itself, you’re right — sort of. After all, NASA also reported last week that Arctic sea ice was at its sixth lowest level since measuring began. Isn’t that a sure sign of global warming?All any of this “proves” is that we have, at best, a cursory understanding of Earth’s incredibly complex climate system. So when mainstream media and carbon-credit salesman Al Gore breathlessly warn you that we must do something about climate change, it’s all right to step back, take a deep breath, and realize that we don’t have the knowledge, skill or resources to have much effect on the Earth’s climate. God — and that big yellow ball of light in the sky — have much more impact on our climate than we ever could.James Matkin • 6 months agoThe earth is actually cooling and NASA grudgingly begins to admit reality over the fiction of failed computer modelling by the iPCC. So much waste and damage from the futile attempt to reduce our Co2 emissions for a colder climate. The climate alarmists have ignored solar natural variability not because of the science but because of their left wing economic agenda. They have ignored leading science papers like the 400 page study THE NEGLECTED SUN Why the Sun Precludes Climate Catastrophe, by Professor Fritz Vahreholt and Dr. Sebastian Luning. This study demonstrates that "the critical cause of global temperature change has been, and continues to be, the sun's activity." As NASA admits the sun is in a cooling phase and the solar cycles make impossible "the catastrophic prospects put forward by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the alarmist agenda dominant in contemporary Western politics."https://www.thenewamerican.com/t...Climate change doesn't threaten to "destroy civilization." Misguided responses to it—including those promoted by Pope Francis—do.In reality, the postulate that CO2 is significantly trapping heat is still subject to debate (verifying the theory by measuring trapped heat can’t be done) and there are so many other factors involved in planet-wide warming and cooling that it’s impossible to say with any degree of certainty. For example, atmospheric water vapor (clouds) has a much more profound effect on temperature than CO2. The global circulation models—upon which rests the “proof” that CO2 is causing recent warming is based—don’t account for water vapor. This is one of many reasons the climate models were so inaccurate 6 years ago and why they’re even further off(p.5 graph) as time passes.Climate scientists haven’t been able to explain previous natural warming and cooling periods like the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period, and the Little Ice Age, which had global temperature fluctuations that rivaled the current 1° C since the end of the Little Ice Age. In other words, despite the massive collective study of global climate by climate scientists over the past few decades, and the assurance by many vocal climate scientists who are concerned about catastrophic warming, the current temperature rise appears to be mostly—if not completely—within the range of natural variability.Advanced and accurate measurements of density of the growth rings in Northern Scandinavian pine trees have formed the basis for a highly accurate modern reconstruction of temperatures over the past 2,000 years. It shows that today's warm period is colder than the medieval warming, which again was colder than the Roman era. In modern times, there have been some particularly warm years, such as 2004, but they will be much less visible after a mathematical smoothing. Probably there have always been few years with exceptional heat or cold. It also follows from the historical accounts above about particular severe winters.Sea surface temperature in the East China Sea (between Japan, Taiwan and China). It is seen that changes in temperature did not happen simultaneously over the whole Earth. The Roman Warm Period took place also in China, the cold spell of the Peoples migration period was significant, but not very long lasting, instead, it was replaced by the Sui-Tang heating period. The Medieval warm period was not particularly significant in East Asia and nor was the Little Ice Age. But the steadily falling temperature trend has been the same in China as around the Atlantic.Jan Esper and his co-authors to "Variability and extremes of northern Scandinavian - -" conclude that their results "provide evidence of considerable warming during the Roman and Medieval warm period in larger scale and of longer duration than the twentieth century heating period." More specifically they identify the Medieval Warm Period to has taken place around 700 to 1300 AD and identify the warmest 30-year intervals during this period, which occurred from 918 to 947 AD in which period the June, July and August temperatures were about 0.3 degrees hotter than the hottest 30-year interval in the current warm period. Their findings differ from other researchers, who think that the Medieval Heating period began around 950 AD.If for example we have declining temperatures from the past 7000 years then the onus to rebut this cooling and declare a new weather pattern of warming that amounts to ‘climate change’ is high and has not happened since our industrialization.The US has the most accurate weather stations although not enough and they show declining trend in temperature seesawing from hot to cold. Raw data shows a more accurate picture of the temperature decline.The rate of warming is not unusual. It’s often suggested that the current rate of warming is unprecedented, thereby implying that the current warming must be caused by humans. But the IPCC may want to explain why the global mean surface temperature increased at virtually the same rate from 1860-1880, as it did between 1910-1940, and from 1975-1998 and 1975-2009 (see here). Human CO2-emissions increased by around 3500% from 1860-1880 to 1975-1998 and yet the rate of warming stayed essentially the same.The warming between the years 1860-1880 must have been natural because the IPCC’s own logarithmic equation for calculating radiative forcing (RF) increases from CO2 increases only gives 0.028 W/m2 of RF (or a total temperature increase of about 0.02°C — with the hypothesized positive feedbacks included). The data for anthropogenic CO2-emissions are from CDIAC and it can be seen here (note that units are million metric tonnes; to convert to CO2 multiply by 3.67 and then to convert to gigatonnes divide by 1,000). The time-periods and warming trends below are from the 2010 BBC interview with climatologist Phil Jones.RICHARD EVANS QUORA POST IN APRILTHE sun continues to be very quiet and it has been without sunspots this year 62% of the time as we approach what is likely to be one of the deepest solar minimums in a long, long time.New research shows fear of global warming is bad science.Marine species evolved, thrived, and diversified in 35 to 40°C ocean temperatures and CO2 concentrations “5-10x higher than present-day values” (Voosen, 2019 and Henkes et al., 2018).(Voosen, 2019 and Henkes et al., 2018).FROM SHORT MINI ICE AGE TO LONG ICE AGE GLACIATION Global warming peaked in 1988 and slowly ending the Interglacial Warm Holidays to begin the short Mini Ice Age affecting all spectrum.After a return to short warming period, we expect a U-turn to long sleep of Ice Age Glaciation. It happened many times in the past, each time resetting Human evolution.During this shortcoming Ice Age, there won't be enough space to grow food and for comfort living, except between the two 33° latitudes north and south of the equator which is not enough lands, and there won't be enough cheap and fresh drinking water neither for mass survivals.Our SEAWAPA project is to harvest fresh drinking water from the 7 month monsoons and rains, the melting ice from Tibet and from the most abundant tropical cyclones region in the world on top of Lao mountain range, transfer it below via gravity by producing electricity, food, and goods, at the same time, distribute them to far-flung floating agricultural modules, to newly built megacities, and to industrial complex across the equator, between the tropical cyclones zone, connecting them to other continents, avoiding post ice age big melt danger. Once done, we can tap into the Primary Water Cycle for larger scale space programs, build Hyperloop transport system for universal distribution of drinking water, food, goods, electricity and heat, all year round. The heat and coldness redistribution across the world will minimize risks caused by Ice Age and post-Ice Age. Asteroids mining and universal commodity dispersion will allow humanity to progress beyond "Sustainability", and to solve other risks. http://SEAWAPA.orgcarmen rouppit has all happened before and it will happen again -flooding, freezing, warming thawing ,flooding, and on and on . it is nothing new.THIS GRAPH SHOWS CURRENT WARMING IS NATURAL AND NOT UNPRECEDENTEDTHE EVIDENCE IS CLEAR YET DENIED BY ALARMIST THAT IN THE SIXTIES TEMPERATURES FELL FAR CAUSING FEAR OF A NEW LTTLE ICE AGE.SCIENTISTS AGREE WORLD IS COLDER – But Climate Experts Meeting Here Fail to Agree on Reasons for Change – View Article – NYTimes.comRUSSIA BREAKS MORE ALL-TIME LOW TEMPERATURE RECORDS, INCLUDING ONE FROM 1893JULY 19, 2019 CAP ALLONOn the back of Russia’s horde of new record low temperatures set on July 12, a bucket-load more were set over the following few days, busting records that had previously stood for well over 100 years.The mercury across the majority of Europe has remained well-below averageduring the month of July as a string of Arctic blasts continue to delay the start of the continent’s summer. Large regions are seeing temperature departures of up to 20C below average, sending all-time cold records tumbling.So far this month, we’ve reported on the new all-time low temperature recordsset in Germany, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Hungary, Poland, the Netherlands, as well as the Nordic Nations.And now Russia has 7 more daily records to add to the ever-expanding list (data courtesy of www.hmn.ru):·Sortavala recorded 3.8C (38.8F) — busting the previous record of 4.2C (39.6F) set in 1971.·Vytegra’s 0C (32F) beat the previous record of 1.5C (34.7F) from way back in 1893.·Vyborg observed 6.7C (44F) surpassing the 7C (44.6F) set in 1978 (solar minimum of cycle 20).·Roslavl’s 7C (44.6F) beat out the 7.9C (46.2F) from 1935 (solar minimum of cycle 15).·Cherepovets‘ 4.1C (39.4F) busted the 4.8C (40.6F) set in 1995 (solar minimum of cycle 22)·Rybinsk registered 7.2C (45F) smashing the previous record low of 9.9C (49.8F) from 1977 (solar minimum of cycle 20).·While Kostroma’s 5.7C (42.3F) beat 1948’s record of 6.9C (44.4F).In addition, hmn.ru points out that “in the Vologda region, during the whole of July, the temperature never even approached the norm, and its negative anomaly on some days was 6-7C.”GFS TEMP ANOMALIES for JULY 16The Mainstream Media remains silent.Their bias clearer than ever.Regardless though, the cold times are returning, in line with historically low solar output:The time to prepare is now.Grand Solar Minimum + Pole ShiftRUSSIA BREAKS MORE ALL-TIME LOW TEMPERATURE RECORDS, INCLUDING ONE FROM 1893CLIMATE-DEBATEA NEW TEMPERATURE RECONSTRUCTION FROM CENTRAL ASIA SHOWS 432 YEARS OF NO WARMING, RECENT COOLING BY KENNETH RICHARD ON 2. MAY 20194 MAI 2019 ALAIN PRÉATTree-ring evidence reveals recent cooling and glacier thickening in Central Asia as well as flat temperatures throughout the last 432 years.Tree rings were the proxy used by Dr. Michael Mann to invent the original hockey stick graph.Twenty years later, yet another reconstruction (1580 to 2012 AD) indicates modern warmth in Central Asia is not unusual in the context of the last 432 years.In fact, there was a recent cooling period, in line with natural variability, that was accompanied by regional glacier mass gains.THE GREENHOUSE GAS THEORY IS FALSE AND WILL NOT TAKE US OUT OF THE CURRENT ICE AGEClimate change hoax COLLAPSES as new science finds human activity has virtually zero impact on global temperatures07/12/2019 / By Mike AdamsThe climate change hoax has collapsed. A devastating series of research papers has just been published, revealing that human activity can account for no more than a .01°C rise in global temperatures, meaning that all the human activity targeted by radical climate change alarmists — combustion engines, airplane flights, diesel tractors — has virtually no measurable impact on the temperature of the planet.Finnish scientists spearheaded the research, releasing a paper entitled, “No Experimental Evidence for the Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change.”The paper explains that IPCC analysis of global temperatures suffers from a glaring error — namely, failure to account for “influences of low cloud cover” and how it impacts global temperatures. Natural variations in low cloud cover, which are strongly influenced by cosmic radiation’s ability to penetrate Earth’s atmosphere due to variations in the strength of our planet’s magnetosphere, account for nearly all changes in global temperature, the researchers explain.As this chart reveals, more cloud cover is inversely related to temperature. In other words, clouds shield the surface of the Earth from the sun, providing shade cover cooling, while a lack of clouds results in more warming:Cloud cover accounts for the real changes in global temperaturesThis is further supported by researchers at Kobe University in Japan who published a nearly simultaneous paper that reveals how changes in our planet’s magnetic field govern the intensity of solar radiation that reaches the lower atmosphere, causing cloud formation that alters global temperatures.That study, published in Nature, is called, “Intensified East Asian winter monsoon during the last geomagnetic reversal transition.” It states:Records of suborbital-scale climate variation during the last glacial and Holocene periods can be used to elucidate the mechanisms of rapid climate changes… At least one event was associated with a decrease in the strength of the Earth’s magnetic field. Thus, climate records from the MIS 19 interglacial can be used to elucidate the mechanisms of a variety of climate changes, including testing the effect of changes in geomagnetic dipole field strength on climate through galactic cosmic ray (GCR)-induced cloud formation…In effect, cosmic rays which are normally deflected via the magnetosphere are, in times of weak or changing magnetic fields emanating from Earth itself, able to penetrate further into Earth’s atmosphere, causing the formation of low-level clouds which cover the land in a kind of “umbrella effect” that shades the land from the sun, allowing cooling to take place. But a lack of clouds makes the surface hotter, as would be expected. This natural phenomenon is now documented to be the primary driver of global temperatures and climate, not human activity.Without clouds the sun becomes too hot. With clouds more rain and tree growth.Evidence Points To Declining Cloud Coverage As Real Culprit For 80's and 90's Global WarmingThe IPCC's catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) hypothesis is on verge of collapse as non-existent warming facts force unpleasant admissions of truth - and, the empirical evidence implicates increasing clouds as being the culprit for the halt of warming(click on image to enlarge - data sources)This chart is a plot of global "warming" as represented by the red curve (a 5th order fitted trend) and the grey curve for CO2 levels (a 5th order fit). As the red curve indicates, global temperatures started sliding lower during the early 2000's.The highly variable thin blue line is a plot of global cloud coverage from this source with the following change: the blue curve has been inverted. The result being that when the blue curve goes up, that indicates a smaller cloud coverage; when the blue curve goes down, that means the cloud coverage is increasing.As this chart clearly depicts, when cloud coverage decreases, allowing more solar energy to reach the surface, the global temperatures climb (note the 1980-1990's period). In addition, the warming stopped and started to slide lower when the cloud coverage increased after the 1990s - apparently, small changes in cloud coverage are quite powerful in terms of subsequent temperature trends.Obviously, there is a significant relationship between clouds and temperatures. Just as obviously, the relationship between CO2 and global temperatures (and clouds) is from weak to lame, at best - confirming evidence here.The physics is not difficult to understand by skeptics, nor objective scientists: less clouds allow more sunshine to strike the Earth's surface (1980-1990s); more clouds decrease sunshine at surface (2000s).Although the cloud coverage data are only available through 2009 for the above chart, a recent 2012 study verifies that cloud coverage is a major determinant of global warming (climate change):“The global average cloud cover declined about 1.56% over 39 years (1979 to 2009) or ~0.4%/decade, primarily in middle latitudes at middle and high levels (Eastman & Warren, 2012). Declining clouds appear to be a major contributor to the observed global warming. A 1 percentage point decrease in albedo (30% to 29%) would increase the black-body radiative equilibrium temperature about 1°C, about equal to a doubling of atmospheric CO2. e.g. by a 1.5% reduction in clouds since they form up to 2/3rds of global albedo (IPCC report AR4 1.5.2 p.114). [Ryan Eastman, Stephen G. Warren, A 39-Year Survey of Cloud Changes from Land Stations Worldwide 1971-2009: Journal of Climate]Conclusions:#1: Evidence indicates a strong relationship between clouds and global temperatures.#2. Evidence indicates a weak relationship between CO2 levels and global temperatures.....major, catastrophic global warming from CO2 is highly unlikely#3. Evidence indicates a weak relationship between CO2 levels and global cloud coverage.#4. Clouds are so important to global temperatures, crazed alarmist billionaires are investing huge amounts to manufacture anti-warming, floating cloud machines.#5. The IPCC climate models are programmed to predict the opposite of what objective scientists believe due to the above actual evidence, and what crazy billionaires know (and will invest) due to common sense.Additional peer reviewed postings and modern temperature charts.Evidence Points To Declining Cloud Coverage As Real Cuprit For 80's and 90's Global WarmingNB GREENHOUSE GASES ARE NOT MAKING THE CLIMATE HOTTER AS THE THEORY IS FALSE. MANY STUDIES DEMOLISH THE RADICAL GGH HYPOTHESIS.The Refutation of the Climate Greenhouse Theory and a Proposal for a Hopeful AlternativeThomas Allmendinger*Glattbrugg/Zürich, Switzerland*Corresponding author: Thomas Allmendinger, CH-8152 Glattbrugg/Zürich, Switzerland, Tel: +41 44 810 17 33; E mail: [email protected] March 14, 2017; Accepted April 12, 2017; Published April 18, 2017 Citation: Thomas Allmendinger (2017) The Refutation of the Climate GreenhouseTheory and a Proposal for a Hopeful Alternative. Environment Pollution Climate Change 1: 123.‘Environment Pollution and Climate Change’ is an international, open access research journal that convers several problems, associated risks, remediation methods and techniques pertaining to air, water, soil, noise, thermal, radioactive and light pollutions and climate change. This peer reviewed journal reports original and novel research observations in regard to environmental pollution and climate change thereby contributing to the new knowledge addition in the field.AbstractIn view of the global acceptance and the political relevance of the climate greenhouse theory–or rather philosophy- it appeared necessary to deliver a synoptic presentation enabling a detailed exemplary refutation. It focuses the foundations of the theory assuming that a theory cannot be correct when its foundations are not correct. Thus, above all, a critical historical review is made. As a spin-off of this study, the Lambert-Beer law is questioned suggesting an alternative approach. Moreover, the Stefan-Boltzmann law is relativized revealing the different characters of the two temperature terms. But in particular, the author’s recently published own work is quoted revealing novel measurement methods and yielding several crucial arguments, while finally an empiric proof is presented.The cardinal error in the usual greenhouse theory consists in the assumption that photometric or spectroscopic IR-measurements allow conclusions about the thermal behaviour of gases, i.e., of the atmosphere. They trace back to John Tyndall who developed such a photometric method already in the 19th century. However, direct thermal measurement methods have never been applied so far. Apart from this, at least twenty crucial errors are revealed which suggest abandoning the theory as a whole.In spite of its obvious deficiencies, this theory has so far been an obstacle to take promising precautions for mitigating the climate change. They would consist in a general brightening of the Earth surface, and in additional measures being related to this. However, the novel effects which were found by the author, particularly the absorption of incident solar-light by the atmosphere as well as its absorption capability of thermal radiation, cannot be influenced by human acts. But their discovery may contribute to a better understanding of the atmospheric processes.Summary and ConclusionIn fact, it would be feasible to refute the climate greenhouse theory already by some simple arguments: The fact, that the atmospheric carbon-dioxide has increased while the average global temperature has increased, too, does not at all reveal a causal relationship but solely an analogous one. Moreover, a greenhouse needs a solid transparent roof which is absent in the case of the atmosphere. And finally, it seems unlikely that the extremely low carbon-dioxide concentration of 0.04 percent is able to co-warm the entire atmosphere to a perceptible extent.(Heat power 37.1 W, initial temperature 23.5°, pressure ca. 1032 hPa, humidity 45-55%)Figure 35: Limiting temperatures for different gases at different positions, average values of two measurements.However, these arguments are not taken seriously. This theory appears to be well-founded and untouchable. It is accepted by thousands of scientists, and numerous professional publications exist which guarantee the correctness of this theory. It cannot be that it is false.But the present treatise reveals yes, it can!It is hard to believe: But at least twenty objections could be alleged to question and refute the climate greenhouse theory, which may be characterized as a huge accumulation of theoretic constructs being opposed to a poor empiric foundation. Its main deficiency consists in the never verified assumption that within a gas the absorbed thermal radiation would entirely be transformed into heat. Further common misconceptions arise from the concept that the whole atmosphere is responsible for the Earth temperature, instead of its lowest layer being relevant for our perception of climate, and from the negligence of the boundary processes between Earth’s surface and atmosphere, in particular regarding the colour-dependent temperature of the surface material. Finally, the assumption is abstruse that the atmosphere behaves as a black body. Besides, and as a spin-off of this study, the Lambert-Beer law was questioned suggesting an alternative approach. Furthermore, and in particular, the Stefan-Boltzmann relation was relativized revealing the different characters of the two temperature terms.But this treatise is not confined to a mere critique. It rather presents a variety of recently published results which are based on novel thermal measuring methods using simple but adequate materials, and being consistent with basic physical laws. In any case, limiting temperatures were reached. Firstly, the solar reflective characterization of solid opaque materials is considered, delivering a direct measuring method for the solar reflection coefficient. Moreover, the cooling-down behaviour of solid bodies is studied. Secondly, the discovery of the near-infrared absorption by gases is reported which is relevant for the incident solar radiation. Surprisingly, and contrary to any former knowledge, any gas is warmed up, while the difference between air and pure carbon- dioxide is minor-that which delivers the first empirical evidence that «greenhouse gases» do not exist. The second and definite evidence is delivered by the here first mentioned warming-up experiments of air and of pure carbon-dioxide in the presence of thermal radiation, which even revealed a temperature reduction by carbon-dioxide, apart from the fact that the carbon-dioxide content of the air is so low that it can be neglected.As a consequence, it is absolutely certain that the atmospheric temperature is not at all influenced by trace gases such as carbon- dioxide. On the contrary, the Earth surface represents the governing factor affecting the climate considerably, in particular due to its colouring. Hence this entails the only option to influence the climate by taking human measures while the radiative behaviour of the atmosphere cannot be influenced. They would consist in a general brightening of the Earth surface, and in additional measures being related to this. However, so far any really effective measures have been impeded. This passivity is favoured by ever subordinating such measures to the greenhouse proclamation. A typical example for this is given in [47], while its abatement by alleging a global model computation using the greenhouse assumption, as delivered in [48], is even more destructive.Thus, it is high time to realize that each day on which the climate greenhouse theory is maintained, in spite of its here alleged refutation, and hindering any appropriate and effective measures at the Earth surface–particularly in cities, is a lost day.Perhaps it will be one lost day too many...https://www.omicsonline.org/open...GERMAN CLIMATE RESEARCH PAPERFalsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of PhysicsFalsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of PhysicsGerhard Gerlich, Ralf D. Tscheuschner(Submitted on 8 Jul 2007 (v1), last revised 4 Mar 2009 (this version, v4))The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that many authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1861), and Arrhenius (1896), and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, [Emphasis added] in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system. According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist.Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and in a widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation. In this paper the popular conjecture is analyzed, and the underlying physical principles are clarified. By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 degrees Celsius is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.115 pages, 32 figures, 13 tables (some typos corrected)Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics (http://physics.ao-ph)Journal reference: Int.J.Mod.Phys.B23:275-364,2009DOI: 10.1142/S021797920904984XCite as: arXiv:0707.1161 [http://physics.ao-ph](or arXiv:0707.1161v4 [http://physics.ao-ph] for this version)PEER REVIEWIzvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics is a peer reviewed journal. We use a double blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes 75 reviewers, both internal and external (90%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 30 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 30 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 20%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.SEA LEVEL RISE??? Fear not!It is becoming more and more apparent that sea levels rise and fall without any obvious connection to CO2 concentrations.Florida coastal sea levels are stable with no change contrary to fake media stories.Relative Sea Level Trend8723170 Miami Beach, FloridaThe relative sea level trend is 2.39 millimeters/year with a 95% confidenceinterval of +/- 0.43 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from 1931 to 1981 which is equivalent to a change of 0.78 feet in 100 years.MIT Climate Scientist: ‘Ordinary People Realize That This Is A Phony Issue’Published on September 12, 2018Written by Climate DepotDr. Richard Lindzen: The time history of such matters as droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes and temperature extremes is well recorded by official bodies like NOAA, and display no systematic increase. Indeed, some, like hurricanes, appear to be decreasing. These trends have been documented by R. Pielke, Jr., and even the IPCC has acknowledged the absence of significant associations with warming.The attempt to associate present weather extremes and other matters ranging from obesity to the Syrian Civil War, with climate change is frequently hilarious.Sea levels: “Carefully analyzed tide gauge data shows sea-level increasing about 20 cm per century for at least 2 centuries – with no sign of acceleration to the present. The claim that this increase is accelerating is very peculiar. Tide gauges don’t actually measure sea-level. Rather, they measure the difference between land level and sea level. At many stations, the former is much more important. In order to estimate sea level, one has to restrict oneself to tectonically stable sites. Since 1979 we have been able to measure sea level itself with satellites. However, the accuracy of such measurements depends critically on such factors as the precise shape of the earth. While the satellites show slightly greater rates of sea level rise, the inaccuracy of the measurement renders the difference uncertain. What the proponents of alarm have done is to accept the tide gauge data until 1979, but assume that the satellite data is correct after that date and that the difference in rates constitutes ‘acceleration.’ They then assume acceleration will continue leading to large sea level rises by the end of this century. It is hard to imagine that such illogical arguments would be tolerated in other fields.”“According to the IPCC, models find that there is nothing competitive with man-made climate change, but observations contradict this. The warming from 1919-1939 was almost identical to the warming from 1978-1998. Moreover, there was an almost total slowdown of warming since 1998. Both imply that there is something at least as strong as man-made warming going on.”https://principia-scientific.org...Tony HellerPublished on 1 Jan 2018In this video I show how the "Union of Concerned Scientists" uses sea level junk science in an effort to obtain donations.NASA Confirms Falling Sea Levels For Two Years Amidst Media Blackout“Sea level has been rising for the last ten thousand years, since the last Ice Age…the question is whether sea level rise is accelerating owing to human caused emissions. It doesn’t look like there is any great acceleration, so far, of sea level rise associated with human warming. These predictions of alarming sea level rise depend on massive melting of the big continental glaciers — Greenland and Antarctica. The Antarctic ice sheet is actually growing. Greenland shows large multi-decadal variability. …. There is no evidence so far that humans are increasing sea level rise in any kind of a worrying way.” — Dr. Judith Curry, video interview published 9 August 2017Gravity has enormous influence on the oceans by controlling the tides around the world. It is the force of gravity from the moon and sun control the amazing tides. Dr. Khan’s new paper also finds gravity in a different way not climate change is responsible for sea level rise and fall just like the tides coming in and out.CONCLUSIONSADLY NO THANKS TO PSEUDO SCIENCE OF THE PARIS ACCORD THE PUBLIC ARE FOOLED TO BELIEVE WARMING IS BAD ESPECIALLY WHEN IT HAPPENS TOO FAST - NEITHER OF THESE FEARS ARE TRUE. WE ARE HEADED FOR THE NEXT QUATERNARY GLACIATION WITH EXPANDED POLAR ICE CAPS AND THE END OF CANADA AS A COUNTRY UNDER ICE MORE THAN 1 MILE THICK AS HAPPENED JUST 12000 YEARS AGO.

“Environmentalism is a noble cause. It is damaged by propaganda and half-truths.” Camille Pagliapolicies often result in unintended consequences where some political fad causes more harm than good. This is very true of environmental regulation and management. For example, arresting controlled burn of under brush in Australia and California because of protests about the smoke has a much worse consequence when wild fires become so much more intense and dangerous because of the fuel load of the abandoned under brush.Government action of Paris Accord is too tepid to matter to the any warming but if continued will cause untold harm for no benefit to the environment as there is no climate crisis and CO2 is very beneficial for plants and at best a very minor GHG and worse causes cooling as much as warming. We need more CO2 for a healthy environment not less.Switching our energy from fossil fuels to wind and solar is wrong and very costly killing more from heat poverty from high cost electricity than lives lost from road accidents. Also the attack on coal powered energy has no effect on the climate while denying grid electricity benefits to millions in underdeveloped countries.Refusing to do adequate controlled burns in desert forests like Australia and California because of environmental protests about the smoke.[My intent in posting an answer is to provide references and studies that show leading scientists find no climate crisis from CO2. Also to expose the debacle of wind and solar as alternatives to fossil fuels. Also to show studies of the causes of wild fires today and in the past proving that it is “ridiculously inadequate controlled burn of the under bush” not climate change that pushes the fires out of control.]ReferencesThe public are badly mislead thinking wind and solar are the way forward and better than coal and nuclear.In reality wind and solar failing miserable as alternatives to fossil fuels globally. Indeed solar has 0% of world consumption by 2014 notwithstanding huge subsidies. THE KEY PROBLEM IS INTERMITTENCY CAUSING FULL DUPLICATION AND EXPENSE OF RUNNING FOSSIL FUEL BACK UP.HYDRO AND NUCLEAR ARE THE MOST PROMISING ALTERNATIVES TO OIL AND GAS.https://seekingalpha.com/article/3254825-global-energy-trends-bp-statistical-review-2015The hypothesis of a climate crisis from increased but minute amounts of CO2 is false according to these studies and leading scientists.There is no significant man-made Global Warming underway and the science on which the computer projections of weather chaos are based is badly flawed.John Coleman QuotesBelieve it or not, very little research has ever been funded to search for natural mechanisms of warming... it has simply been assumed that global warming is manmade. Climate change - it happens, with or without our help.Roy SpencerCamille PagliaAmerican criticDescriptionCamille Anna Paglia is an American feminist academic and social critic. Paglia has been a professor at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, since 1984. WikipediaJust wondering what your thoughts are on the global warming issue. Have you seen the Al Gore movie? Any thoughts on the current debate on climate science?Many thanks,AprilVancouverOh, great, here comes the hornet's nest!As a native of upstate New York, whose dramatic landscape was carved by the receding North American glacier 10,000 years ago, I have been contemplating the principle of climate change since I was a child. Niagara Falls, as well as the even bigger dry escarpment of Clark Reservation near Syracuse, is a memento left by the glacier. So is nearby Green Lakes State Park, with its mysteriously deep glacial pools. When I was 10, I lived with my family at the foot of a drumlin -- a long, undulating hill of moraine formed by eddies of the ancient glacier melt.Geology and meteorology are fields that have always interested me and that I might well have entered, had I not been more attracted to art and culture. (My geology professor in college, in fact, asked me to consider geology as a career.) To conflate vast time frames with volatile daily change is a sublime exercise, bordering on the metaphysical.However, I am a skeptic about what is currently called global warming. I have been highly suspicious for years about the political agenda that has slowly accrued around this issue. As a lapsed Catholic, I detest dogma in any area. Too many of my fellow Democrats seem peculiarly credulous at the moment, as if, having ground down organized religion into nonjudgmental, feel-good therapy, they are hungry for visions of apocalypse. From my perspective, virtually all of the major claims about global warming and its causes still remain to be proved.Climate change, keyed to solar cycles, is built into Earth's system. Cooling and warming will go on forever. Slowly rising sea levels will at some point doubtless flood lower Manhattan and seaside houses everywhere from Cape Cod to Florida -- as happened to Native American encampments on those very shores. Human habitation is always fragile and provisional. People will migrate for the hills, as they have always done.Who is impious enough to believe that Earth's contours are permanent? Our eyes are simply too slow to see the shift of tectonic plates that has raised the Himalayas and is dangling Los Angeles over an unstable fault. I began "Sexual Personae" (parodying the New Testament): "In the beginning was nature." And nature will survive us all. Man is too weak to permanently affect nature, which includes infinitely more than this tiny globe.I voted for Ralph Nader for president in the 2000 election because I feel that the United States needs a strong Green Party. However, when I tried to watch Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" on cable TV recently, I wasn't able to get past the first 10 minutes. I was snorting with disgust at its manipulations and distortions and laughing at Gore's lugubrious sentimentality, which was painfully revelatory of his indecisive, self-thwarting character. When Gore told a congressional hearing last month that there is a universal consensus among scientists about global warming -- which is blatantly untrue -- he forfeited his own credibility.Environmentalism is a noble cause. It is damaged by propaganda and half-truths. Every industrialized society needs heightened consciousness about its past, present and future effects on the biosphere. Though I am a libertarian, I am a strong supporter of vigilant scrutiny and regulation of industry by local, state and federal agencies. But there must be a balance with the equally vital need for economic development, especially in the Third World.Real inconvenient truthsWhat if we are in the beginning of a new Little Ice Age epoch making any concern about the climate getting too hot terrible folly?Brutal record cold winters with massive snowfall contradict the alarmism predictions of what winter should be like if warming is a reality.NewsNewfoundland Snowpocalypse Day Five: Trading Smokes for PepsiOur four key resources now are pop, cigarettes, beer, and chips. Control the corner stores, control the Island.By Drew BrownJan 21 2020, 10:45amA SOLDIER FROM THE 4TH ARTILLERY REGIMENT BASED AT CFB GAGETOWN CLEARS SNOW AT A RESIDENCE IN ST. JOHN’S ON MONDAY, JANUARY 20, 2020. THE CANADIAN PRESS/ANDREW VAUGHANGentle reader, please forgive these shaky hands; the shoveling has broken my arms. It has been five days since St. John’s first declared a state of emergency after a monster blizzard gusting up to 170 km/h dumped more than six feet of snow on the city in a day. Civilization has ground to a halt under snow drifts 12 feet deep. Snowmobiles blast through uncleared city streets and Holloway Street has been turned into the island’s sickest ski jump. We shiver under the spectre of martial law as Canadian troops patrol the roads with fearsome plastic scoops in search of seniors who need aid. Snowbanks rise like towering mountains from the city sidewalks.http://HTTPS://WWW.VICE.COM/EN_CA/ARTICLE/DYG7VV/NEWFOUNDLAND-SNOWPOCALYPSE-DAY-FIVE-TRADING-SMOKES-FOR-PEPSIDr. Tim Ball: The Evidence Proves That CO2 Is Not A Greenhouse GasSeptember 14, 2018 Pam Barker ENVIRONMENT, GOVERNMENT, Tyranny 0Tim Ball: The Evidence Proves That CO2 Is Not A Greenhouse GasDR. TIM BALL“The CO2 error is the root of the biggest scam in the history of the world, and has already bilked nations and citizens out of trillions of dollars, while greatly enriching the perpetrators. In the end, their goal is global Technocracy (aka Sustainable Development), which grabs and sequesters all the resources of the world into a collective trust to be managed by them. ⁃ Technocracy News EditorThe Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claim of human-caused global warming (AGW) is built on the assumption that an increase in atmospheric CO2 causes an increase in global temperature. The IPCC claim is what science calls a theory, a hypothesis, or in simple English, a speculation. Every theory is based on a set of assumptions. The standard scientific method is to challenge the theory by trying to disprove it. Karl Popper wrote about this approach in a 1963 article, Science as Falsification. Douglas Yates said, “No scientific theory achieves public acceptance until it has been thoroughly discredited.”Thomas Huxley made a similar observation.“The improver of natural knowledge absolutely refuses to acknowledge authority, as such. For him, skepticism is the highest of duties; blind faith the one unpardonable sin.”In other words, all scientists must be skeptics, which makes a mockery out of the charge that those who questioned AGW, were global warming skeptics. Michael Shermer provides a likely explanation for the effectiveness of the charge.“Scientists are skeptics. It’s unfortunate that the word ‘skeptic’ has taken on other connotations in the culture involving nihilism and cynicism. Really, in its pure and original meaning, it’s just thoughtful inquiry.”The scientific method was not used with the AGW theory. In fact, the exact opposite occurred, they tried to prove the theory. It is a treadmill guaranteed to make you misread, misrepresent, misuse and selectively choose data and evidence. This is precisely what the IPCC did and continued to do.A theory is used to produce results. The results are not wrong, they are only as right as the assumptions on which they are based. For example, Einstein used his theory of relativity to produce the most famous formula in the world: e = mc2. You cannot prove it wrong mathematically because it is the end product of the assumptions he made. To test it and disprove it, you challenge one or all of the assumptions. One of these is represented by the letter “c” in the formula, which assumes nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Scientists challenging the theory are looking for something moving faster than the speed of light.The most important assumption behind the AGW theory is that an increase in global atmospheric CO2 will cause an increase in the average annual global temperature. The problem is that in every record of temperature and CO2, the temperature changes first. Think about what I am saying. The basic assumption on which the entire theory that human activity is causing global warming or climate change is wrong. The questions are, how did the false assumption develop and persist?The answer is the IPCC needed the assumption as the basis for their claim that humans were causing catastrophic global warming for a political agenda. They did what all academics do and found a person who gave historical precedence to their theory. In this case, it was the work of Svante Arrhenius. The problem is, he didn’t say what they claim. Anthony Watts’ 2009 article identified many of the difficulties with relying on Arrhenius. The Friends of Science added confirmation when they translated a more obscure 1906 Arrhenius work. They wrote,Much discussion took place over the following years between colleagues, with one of the main points being the similar effect of water vapour in the atmosphere which was part of the total figure. Some rejected any effect of CO2 at all. There was no effective way to determine this split precisely, but in 1906 Arrhenius amended his view of how increased carbon dioxide would affect climate.The issue of Arrhenius mistaking a water vapor effect for a CO2 effect is not new. What is new is that the growing level of empirical evidence of the warming effect of CO2, known as climate sensitivity, is zero. This means Arrhenius’ colleagues who “rejected any effect of CO2 at all” are correct. In short, CO2 is not a greenhouse gas.The IPCC through the definition of climate change given them by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) were able to predetermine their results.a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over considerable time periods.This allowed them to only examine human causes, thus eliminating almost all other variables of climate and climate change. You cannot identify the human portion if you don’t know or understand natural, that is without human, climate or climate change. IPCC acknowledged this in 2007 as people started to ask questions about the narrowness of their work. They offered the one that many people thought they were using and should have been using. Deceptively, it only appeared as a footnote in the 2007 Summary for Policymakers (SPM), so it was aimed at the politicians. It said,“Climate change in IPCC usage refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity. This usage differs from that in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, where climate change refers to a change of climate that is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and that is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.”Few at the time challenged the IPCC assumption that an increase in CO2 caused an increase in global temperature. The IPCC claimed it was true because, when they increased CO2 in their computer models, the result was a temperature increase. Of course, the computer was programmed for that to happen. These computer models are the only place in the world where a CO2 increase precedes and causes a temperature change. This probably explains why their predictions are always wrong.An example of how the definition allowed the IPCC to focus on CO2 is to consider the major greenhouse gases by name and percentage of the total. They are water vapour (H20) 95%, carbon dioxide (CO2) 4%, and methane (CH4) 0.036%. The IPCC was able to overlook water vapor (95%) by admitting humans produce some, but the amount is insignificant relative to the total atmospheric volume of water vapour. The human portion of the CO2 in the atmosphere is approximately 3.4% of the total CO2 (Figure 1). To put that in perspective, approximately a 2% variation in water vapour completely overwhelms the human portion of CO2. This is entirely possible because water vapour is the most variable gas in the atmosphere, from region to region and over time.Figure 1In 1999, after two IPCC Reports were produced in 1990 and 1995 assuming a CO2 increase caused a temperature increase, the first significant long term Antarctic ice core record appeared. Petit, Raynaud, and Lorius were presented as the best representation of levels of temperature, CO2, and deuterium over 420,000 years. It appeared the temperature and CO2 were rising and falling in concert, so the IPCC and others assumed this proved that CO2 was causing temperature variation. I recall Lorius warning against rushing to judgment and saying there was no indication of such a connection.Euan Mearns noted in his robust assessment that the authors believed that temperature increase preceded CO2 increase:In their seminal paper on the Vostok Ice Core, Petit et al (1999) [1] note that CO2 lags temperature during the onset of glaciations by several thousand years but offer no explanation. They also observe that CH4 and CO2 are not perfectly aligned with each other but offer no explanation. The significance of these observations are therefore ignored. At the onset of glaciations temperature drops to glacial values before CO2 begins to fall suggesting that CO2 has little influence on temperature modulation at these times.Lorius reconfirmed his position in a 2007 article.“our [East Antarctica, Dome C] ice core shows no indication that greenhouse gases have played a key role in such a coupling [with radiative forcing]”Despite this, those promoting the IPCC claims ignored the empirical evidence. They managed to ignore the facts and have done so to this day. Joanne Nova explains part of the reason they were able to fool the majority in her article, “The 800 year lag in CO2 after temperature – graphed.” when she wrote confirming the Lorius concern.“It’s impossible to see a lag of centuries on a graph that covers half a million years, so I have regraphed the data from the original sources…”Nova concluded after expanding and more closely examining the data that,The bottom line is that rising temperatures cause carbon levels to rise. Carbon may still influence temperatures, but these ice cores are neutral on that. If both factors caused each other to rise significantly, positive feedback would become exponential. We’d see a runaway greenhouse effect. It hasn’t happened. Some other factor is more important than carbon dioxide, or carbon’s role is minor.Al Gore knew the ice core data showed temperature changing first. In his propaganda movie, An Inconvenient Truth, he separated the graph of temperature and CO2 enough to make a comparison of the two graphs more difficult. He then distracted with Hollywood histrionics by riding up on a forklift to the distorted 20th century reading.Thomas Huxley said,“The great tragedy of science – the slaying of a lovely hypothesis by an ugly fact.”The most recent ugly fact was that after 1998, CO2 levels continued to increase but global temperatures stopped increasing. Other ugly facts included the return of cold, snowy winters creating a PR problem by 2004. Cartoons appeared (Figure 2.)Figure 2The people controlling the AGW deception were aware of what was happening. Emails from 2004 leaked from the University of East Anglia revealed the concern. Nick at the Minns/Tyndall Centre that handled publicity for the climate story said,“In my experience, global warming freezing is already a bit of a public relations problem with the media.”Swedish climate expert on the IPCC Bo Kjellen replied,“I agree with Nick that climate change might be a better labelling than global warming.”The disconnect between atmospheric CO2 levels and global temperatures continued after 1998. The level of deliberate blindness of what became known as the “pause” or the hiatus became ridiculous (Figure 3).Figure 3“The assumption that an increase in CO2 causes an increase in temperature was incorrectly claimed in the original science by Arrhenius. He mistakenly attributed the warming caused by water vapour (H2O) to CO2. All the evidence since confirms the error. This means CO2 is not a greenhouse gas. There is a greenhouse effect, and it is due to the water vapour. The entire claim that CO and especially human CO2 is absolutely wrong, yet these so-called scientists convinced the world to waste trillions on reducing CO2. If you want to talk about collusion, consider the cartoon in Figure 4.Figure 4″************Original articleDr. Tim Ball: The Evidence Proves That CO2 Is Not A Greenhouse Gas | Europe ReloadedSo-called renewables comprised just over 11% of U.S. energy consumption in 2017. Of the renewable sources, hydro, geothermal, and biomass aren’t going to grow enough to achieve any of the Green New Deal’s goals.Rep.-elect Ocasio-Cortez must be counting on wind and solar to power her plan. Together they supply just 3% of total energy consumed.If we confine the discussion to power generation, wind and solar comprise just 7.6% of the 4 trillion kilowatt-hour total. (Source: What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source?)Renewable energy’s dreadful costs and awful electricityUnreliable capacity and excessively high costs make renewable energy nothing more than a ‘green’ idealogue’s dream12 DECEMBER 2018 - 13:55 ANDREW KENNYWind turbines are not the way to go, says Andrew Kenny, just ask Germany. Picture: THINKSTOCKSA is stumbling towards energy disaster. On top of Eskom’s failures comes the calamitous Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2018, a plan for ruinously expensive electricity. (The IRP 2018, drawn up by the department of energy, plans SA’s electricity supply.) The IRP is mad, based not on the real world but on a fantasy world of computer models.The IRP’s “least-cost option” is in fact the most expensive option possible, which has seen electricity costs soaring wherever it has been tried. This is a combination of wind, solar and imported gas. It was drawn up by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and supported by the IRP. It is a recipe for calamity.It seems strange that SA should forsake its own huge resources of reliable energy and depend on foreign sources. Worse is its reliance on unreliable solar and wind.South Australia actually did implement something like the CSIR’s “least-cost option”. It closed coal stations, built wind turbines and some solar plants, and supplemented them with natural gas, which Australia, unlike SA, has in abundance. The result was soaring electricity prices, reaching, at one point in July 2016, the astonishing figure of A$14,000/MWh (R140/kWh). Eskom’s average selling price is R0.89/kWh. The “least-cost solution” resulted momentarily in an electricity price more than 150 times Eskom’s. It would be worse here because we don’t have much gas.The renewable energy companies and the greens seem to have captured the department of energy (quite legally, quite differently from Gupta capture)It also caused two total blackouts for South Australia. In panic it ordered the world’s biggest battery from Elon Musk. Jaws dropped when people discovered how expensive it was and how inadequate (with 0.5% of the storage capacity of our Ingula Pumped Storage Scheme).The IRP and CSIR refuse to recognise the essential cost that makes renewables so expensive. Here is the key equation: cost of renewable electricity equals price paid by the system operator plus system costs.The system costs are the costs the grid operator, Eskom in our case, has to bear to accommodate the appalling fluctuations of wind and solar power so as to meet demand at all times. The renewable companies refuse to reveal their production figures but I have graphs of total renewable production since 2013, the beginning of renewable energy independent power producers (IPPS) procurement programme. The graphs are terrible, with violent, unpredictable ups and downs.In March 2018, power output varied from 3,000MW to 47MW. To stop this dreadful electricity shutting down the whole grid, Eskom must have back-up generators ramping up and down to match the renewables; it must have machines on “spinning reserve” (running below optimum power), and extra transmission lines. These cause system costs, which can be very expensive. The renewable companies don’t pay for them; Eskom does, and passes them on the South African public.NonsenseThe system costs, ignored by the IRP and CSIR, are one of the reasons their models are nonsense. They explain an apparent paradox. Week by week we hear that the prices of solar and wind electricity are coming down; but week by week we see electricity consumers around the world paying more as solar and wind are added to the grid. Denmark, with the world’s highest fraction of wind electricity, has just about the most expensive electricity in Europe. Germany, since it adopted the absurd Energiewende (phasing out nuclear and replacing it with wind and solar) has seen electricity costs soaring.The answer lies in the green desire for conquest. Nuclear power, as you can see driving past Koeberg, works in harmony with nature. The greens don’t like that. They want to conquer and dominate natureThe renewable energy IPP procurement programme, hailed by renewable companies as a huge success, has forced on SA its most expensive electricity ever — and its worst. Eskom’s last annual report, for the year ending 31 March 2018, revealed it was forced to pay 222c/kWh for the programme’s electricity compared with its selling price of 89c/kWh. But the system costs make it even more expensive.We get an idea how much more from the one renewable technology that does provide honest electricity and covers its own system costs. This is concentrated solar power (CSP) with storage, where sunshine heats up a working fluid, which is stored in tanks and used for making electricity for short periods when required. The latest such plants charge about 500c/kWh at peak times. So the best solar technology, with an award-winning project, in perhaps the world’s best solar sites, produces electricity at more than 10 times the cost of Koeberg and about five times the cost of new nuclear.Carbon dioxide realityAfter the procurement programme proved a failure, Lynne Brown, then public enterprises minister, ordered Eskom to sign up for a further 27 renewable power purchase agreements (PPAs), each lasting 20 years. Malusi Gigaba, then finance minister, endorsed her.Nuclear reduces carbon dioxide emissions; renewables don’t. The Energiewende has turned Germany into the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide in Europe, because wind and solar, being so unreliable, had to be supplemented with fossil fuels, especially coal.Two reasons drive renewables: money and ideology. Renewable energy companies make a fortune when they persuade governments to force their utilities to buy their awful electricity.But why do the green ideologues love wind and solar? Not because of free energy, which is actually very expensive. Tides, waves, solar, wind and dissolved uranium in the sea can all provide free energy but, except for the uranium, it is always very costly to convert it into usable power. (Uranium from the sea would be naturally be replenished but it is cheaper to buy it from a commercial mine.)I think the answer lies in the green desire for conquest. Nuclear power, as you can see driving past Koeberg, works in harmony with nature. The greens don’t like that. They want to conquer and dominate nature. They love the idea of thousands of gigantic wind turbines and immense solar arrays dominating the landscape like new totems of command. Wind and solar rely entirely on coercion by the state, which the greens also love (in a free market nobody would buy wind or solar grid electricity).SA NEEDS TO DIVERSIFY ENERGY SOURCES TO DELIVERSA is not taking advantage of the clear lead the country has in solar and wind resources.OPINION 2 months agoThe renewable energy companies and the greens seem to have captured the department of energy (quite legally, quite differently from Gupta capture). If they get their way, the rest of us are going to suffer.Since 1994, Eskom has been wrecked by bad management, destructive ideology and corruption. Because it didn’t build stations timeously, the existing stations have been run into the ground and are failing. Its once excellent coal supply has been crippled. There is massive over-staffing and Eskom is plunging into debt. Seasonable rains threaten another fiasco to match January 2008, which shut down our gold mines.The last thing Eskom needs now is to be burdened by useless, very expensive renewable electricity. Recently, the parliamentary portfolio committee on energy, after listening to submissions on IRP 2018, recommended that coal and nuclear should remain in our energy mix. Perhaps a ray of hope for sanity.• Kenny is a professional engineer with degrees in physics, mathematics and mechanical engineering.Let’s look at the current picture, according to the Energy Information Administration.GREEN MADNESS: THE LIGHTS ARE GOING OUT IN NEW YORK CITYGov Andrew Cuomo’s green obsession is making the Russian roulette blackout game ever more dangerous.Since the five-hour blackout that hit Manhattan on Saturday night, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has repeatedly attacked Con Ed, the utility that provides electricity and gas to customers in the New York area. He has threatened to strip the utility of its operating license and said the city was playing “Russian roulette” with electricity reliability.That’s pretty rich. Over the past few years, Cuomo has repeatedly made political decisions that have reduced the reliability of New York’s energy infrastructure. Cuomo telling Con Ed that it needs to improve its reliability is like an arsonist telling the fire department to buy more pumper trucks.The most obvious example of the reliability risks facing New York City is the looming closure of the Indian Point nuclear plant, a move that Cuomo began pushing for back in 2011.Next April, one of the two operating reactors at the facility will be shuttered. The other reactor is slated for shutdown in 2021. While the premature closure of the 2,069-megawatt facility may please Cuomo’s friends at Riverkeeper and the Natural Resources Defense Council, the New York Independent System Operator, the agency that manages the state’s electric grid, has repeatedly warned about the threat to reliability.Indian Point provides about a quarter of the electricity consumed in the city. Further, it helps assure the stability of the grid. The electric grid runs on narrow tolerances of voltage, which is akin to water pressure in a pipeline. The grid must be continually tuned so that electricity production and electricity usage match and voltage on the grid stays at near-constant levels. If voltage fluctuates too much, blackouts can occur.In 2011, NYISO said that “under stress conditions, the voltage performance on the system without the Indian Point plant would be degraded.”In 2016, the agency reiterated its concerns, saying, “Retaining all existing nuclear generators is critical to the state’s carbon emission reduction requirements as well as maintaining electric system reliability.” That same year, two analysts—one from General Electric and another from consulting firm ICF—provided a presentation to the system operator that discussed a reliability standard known as “loss of load expectation,” or LOLE, an event in which electricity demand exceeds available generation.The reliability standard for grid operators in the U.S. allows for a LOLE of one day every 10 years, or 0.1 days per year. By 2030, the GE-ICF presentation estimated that closing Indian Point will result in the doubling of LOLE in the New York City area to 0.2 days per year.In addition to the premature closure of Indian Point, New York has been blocking new natural-gas pipelines that would help provide cleaner and cheaper energy supplies into the state and into New England. As I show in a recent report for Manhattan Institute, the governor’s appointees at the Department of Environmental Conservation have repeatedly refused to grant permits for new pipelines at the same time the grid has become more reliant on gas-fired generators.Since 2004 gas-fired electricity production in the state has nearly doubled and it will jump again after the closure of Indian Point. In response to Cuomo’s pipeline blockade, the region’s biggest utilities, Con Ed and National Grid, have said they will quit providing new gas connections in their service areas in and around New York City. That, in turn, forces some consumers to continue relying on heating oil, which is more expensive and more polluting.Finally, Cuomo has agreed to implement the Climate and Community Protection Act, which mandates that 70% of electricity consumed in the state come from renewables by 2030 and 100% from carbon-free sources by 2040. Forcing the electric grid to rely more heavily on intermittent sources such as solar and wind will put yet more stress on the grid, particularly during extreme weather.In short, Cuomo is pushing for the biggest changes in New York’s electric grid since Thomas Edison launched the Electric Age on Pearl Street in 1882, and he’s doing so without any understanding of how those changes may affect reliability.Green Madness: The Lights Are Going Out In New York City - The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)No, wild fires are not the result of climate change, far from it. They are natural and research finds the fires are mostly caused by human action EITHER DELIBERATE OR ACCIDENTAL and by “ridiculously inadequate controlled burns.” An excellent reference for this view and analysis of this issue eighty years ago is in the Stretton Royal Commission Report after the horrific loss of life from the 1939 Black Friday bush fire starting in Victoria.After the horrific Black Friday bush fire of 1939 killing many more than 2019 Australia wild fires the government commissioned the Stretton Royal Commission to look into causes and how to prevent future severe bush fires. In CHAPTER II the Commission concluded:“Immediate Causes.—Almost all fires are caused by man.”The 36 page report is available free here and full of useful evidence relevant to the fires of 2019.ref. http://www.voltscommissar.net/docs/Leonard_Stretton-1939_Bush_Fires_Royal_Commission_Report.pdfI urge you to read the whole report in pdf for free here -http://www.voltscommissar.net/docs/Leonard_Stretton-1939_Bush_Fires_Royal_Commission_Report.pdf (http://www.voltscommissar.net/docs/Leonard_Stretton-1939_Bush_Fires_Royal_Commission_Report.pdf)“CHAPTER IIImmediate Causes.—Almost all fires are caused by man. The experience of the past shows that the persons who caused the 1939 fires are to be found among the following classes which are set forth in a descending scale offrequency of responsibility for fire;the manner in and reason for which they cause fireis shortly indicated:—(i) Settlers.—Burning off for growth, clearing or protection.Graziers.—Burning to promote grass growth.Miners and Prospectors.—Clearing to facilitate operations.(ii) Sportsmen.—Neglect of camp¬fires, billy fires.Tourists.—Lighted matches for smoking.Campers.Burning, to facilitate passage through the bush.(iii) Forest Workers.Misuse of fire used for mill operations and for domestic purposes.(iv) Persons using roads.—Neglect of billyfires ; lighted matches; and burning obstructing logs on roadway.(v) Road and Railway Work Gangs.—Billy and camp fires ; careless burning off on railway property.(vi) Locomotives.Defective spark arresters.(vii) Lightning.— Infrequent, as generally followed by rain.Of these classes settlers, miners and graziers are the most prolific fireCausing agents. The percentage of fires caused by them far exceeds that of anyother class. Their firing is generally deliberate. All other firing is, generally, due to carelessness.“Immediate Causes.—Almost all fires are caused by man.”http://www.voltscommissar.net/docs/Leonard_Stretton-1939_Bush_Fires_Royal_Commission_Report.pdfThe report also strongly criticizes the government for “ridiculously inadequate controlled burn.” Sadly the same problems identified by the Royal Commission exist today and are worse with increasing populations, in particular the mismanagement of the land. This key failure of using controlled burns accounts for a lot of the severity of the fires loaded with underbrush. The Aborigines knew this helped and they regularly burned the grass with fire sticks.The Australian Aborigines used control burn going back thousands of years.The Australian soil is enhanced with grass fires from time immemorial and in fact Aborigines have used fire sticks for this purpose. Sometimes controlled burns get out of control.Aboriginal burn practices again used on countryA recent burn conducted at a bush reserve near Wedderburn held significance beyond being a land management tool.Members of the Dja Dja Wurrung community applied the burning practices of their ancestors to Bush Heritage Australia’s Nardoo Hills Reserve, a parcel of land set aside for bush regeneration and conservation.“Our fire management practice, which we call Djandak Wii, is an obligation we have to the land, and we love to see the greater biodiversity it brings, and the gradual return to health it brings to country,” Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation chief executive officer Rodney Carter said.Arson, mischief and recklessness: 87 per cent of fires are man-madeBy Paul ReadNovember 18, 2019 — 12.00amBUSHFIRESThere are, on average, 62,000 fires in Australia every year. Only a very small number strike far from populated areas and satellite studies tell us that lightning is responsible for only 13 per cent. Not so the current fires threatening to engulf Queensland and NSW. There were no lightning strikes on most of the days when the fires first started in September. Although there have been since, these fires – joining up to create a new form of mega-fire – are almost all man-made.About 40 per cent of fires are deliberately lit ... The Hillville fire that destroyed homes last week.CREDIT:NICK MOIRA 2015 satellite analysis of 113,000 fires from 1997-2009 confirmed what we had known for some time – 40 per cent of fires are deliberately lit, another 47 per cent accidental. This generally matches previous data published a decade earlier that about half of all fires were suspected or deliberate arson, and 37 per cent accidental. Combined, they reach the same conclusion: 87 per cent are man-made.Arson, mischief and recklessness: 87 per cent of fires are man-madeAustralian wild fires are not relevant to climate change, but they are part of short term and long term environmental issues. From time immemorial fires have had a very beneficial effect on the Australia and pre European Aborigines engaged in burning grass and the under brush.The Australian Aborigines used control burn going back thousands of years.The Australian soil is enhanced with grass fires from time immemorial and in fact Aborigines have used fire sticks for this purpose. Sometimes controlled burns get out of control.Aboriginal burn practices again used on countryA recent burn conducted at a bush reserve near Wedderburn held significance beyond being a land management tool.Members of the Dja Dja Wurrung community applied the burning practices of their ancestors to Bush Heritage Australia’s Nardoo Hills Reserve, a parcel of land set aside for bush regeneration and conservation.“Our fire management practice, which we call Djandak Wii, is an obligation we have to the land, and we love to see the greater biodiversity it brings, and the gradual return to health it brings to country,” Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation chief executive officer Rodney Carter said.Wild fires spewing smoke and aerosols have a dimming effect on the sun and reduce local temperatures. The fires certainly do not make the climate warmer you will see that for yourself after a large volcanic eruption. I witnessed the immediate cooling effect from the Mount St Helens eruption while living in Victoria.The science of aerosols is proven by observation unlike the alarmism pseudo science demonizing CO2 minute gas as pollution when the evidence is contrary as CO2 has a largely beneficial role for plants and life on the earth.The smoke from California’s deadliest fire is so thick that it’s blotting out the sun and lowering surface temperatures by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit (6 Celsius), according to the U.S. National Weather Service.