Cycle Poland 2012 2 10 June 2012: Fill & Download for Free

“China's DF-26 'Carrier-Killer' Missile Could Stop the Navy in Its Track (without Firing a Shot)And that's just what Beijing might have in mind.This week Chinese state media reported that a new brigade of Beijing’s most advanced intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) has been “activated.”The newly commissioned brigade is armed with the Dong Feng-26 (DF-26) IRBM. According to the Diplomat , “Video footage carried in Chinese state media showed at least 22 integrated six-axle DF-26 transporter-erector-launchers along with their crews.” What do we know about this missile?First, the basics. The Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Missile Threat Project notes that the DF-26 is a road-mobile, two-stage solid-fueled IRBM. The Missie Threat Project cites Chinese sources as saying that the “missile measures 14 m in length, 1.4 m in diameter, and has a launch weight of 20,000 kg.” Notably, the DF-26 is believed to have a range between three and four thousand kilometers. This means it can hold Guam—a major hub of U.S. military operations in the western Pacific—at risk. In fact, as the Missile Threat Project points out, this is China’s first conventionally armed ballistic missile capable of threatening Guam.China first unveiled the DF-26 during a military parade in September 2015. The missile subsequently participated in a massive strike simulation last year as part of a larger barrage of missiles. The Diplomat reported , citing an unnamed U.S. government source, that the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force (PLARF) shot off “four DF-26C intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBM), ten DF-16A medium-range ballistic missiles, and six CJ-10 land attack cruise missiles in the live fire portion of the exercise.” The drill was a simulation of attacks on U.S. missile-defense systems as well as aircraft on the ground.When China first unveiled the missile in 2015, state media said that the DF-26 would have conventional, nuclear and antiship variants. This was later confirmed by the Pentagon. In its most recent assessment of Chinese military power, the Department of Defense said , “In 2016, China began fielding the DF-26 intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM), which is capable of conducting conventional and nuclear precision strikes against ground targets and conventional strikes against naval targets in the western Pacific Ocean.”In this sense, the DF-26 fits in perfectly with the direction China’s nuclear and conventional force doctrines are headed. With regards to its nuclear arsenal, recent years have seen Beijing building a more mobile, survivable force. As a 2017 RAND Corporation report noted , “China has been transitioning to a more survivable, road-mobile theater nuclear force for many years.” More recently, according to a report by Ankit Panda , China has been flight testing a new nuclear-capable air-launched ballistic missile (ALBM) based off the DF-21. In some ways, a more mobile, survivable force makes China’s No First Use declaratory policy more credible, since Beijing is better able to withstand a first strike. At the same time, the greater accuracy of precision-guided missiles like the DF-21 and DF-26 gives China a better nuclear warfighting capability. It’s also worth noting that having dual-use missiles continues Beijing’s pattern of intermingling its conventional and nuclear forces.The DF-26’s conventional variant enhances China’s ability to destroy U.S. bases in the region, which is an underappreciated threat. A June 2017 report published by the Center for a New American Security argued, “The greatest military threat to U.S. vital interests in Asia may be one that has received somewhat less attention: the growing capability of China’s missile forces to threaten U.S. bases in the region.”In the report, the two authors, Thomas Shugart and Javier Gonzalez, simulate a preemptive Chinese attack on U.S. bases in Japan. They found the results would be devastating, including “every major fixed headquarters and logistical facility being struck” and “almost every U.S. ship in port in Japan struck pierside by ballistic missiles.” Shugart and Gonzalez’s simulation also found that most of the military runways would be cratered in the attack, effectively grounding America’s Air Force in Japan.The DF-26 will enhance China’s ability to carry out a similar attack on the U.S. military in Guam, where nearly four thousand U.S. military personnel are based. The U.S. Air Force forward deploys bombers at the Anderson Air Force Base in the region. Thus, Beijing would view destroying America’s military installations here as crucial to preventing the United States from intervening in a conflict between China and one of its neighbors, most likely Taiwan. That said, China’s ability to attack places closer to the Chinese mainland is much greater compared to those that can threaten Guam.The DF-26’s antiship variant is likely to garner a lot of attention in the Western press. The DF-21D—which is the antiship variant of that missile—has received many headlines over its purported ability to sink U.S. aircraft carriers. In theory, the DF-26’s greater range could force U.S. carriers to operate far outside China’s second island chain, whereas the DF-21D might be limited to the first island chain. Still, both missiles’ ability to perform this mission are currently questionable. As Andrew Erickson has noted , “limitations in China’s reconnaissance-strike complex, along with evolving American and allied countermeasures, continue to render their [DF-21D and DF-26] operational effectiveness uncertain.”Undoubtedly, China is working hard to acquire this capability. And, even if the United States is simply uncertain about whether China can sink its carriers, it may decide not to put them at risk given the lives and material costs involved. This might be what Beijing is banking on.”The response is this:“Aegis Ballistic Missile DefenseAegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) is the naval component of the Missile Defense Agency's Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). Aegis BMD builds upon the Aegis Weapon System, Standard Missile, Navy and joint forces' Command, Control and Communication systems. The Commander, Operational Test and Evaluation Force, formally found Aegis BMD to be operationally effective and suitable. The Navy embraces BMD as a core mission. In recognition of its scalability, Aegis BMD/SM-3 system is a keystone in the Phased Adaptive Approach (PAA) for missile defense in Europe.Regional Defense – Aegis BMD Engagement CapabilityDefeats short- to intermediate-range, unitary and separating, midcourse-phase, ballistic missile threats with the Standard Missile-3 (SM-3), as well as short-range ballistic missiles in the terminal phase with the SM-2.Flight tests are conducted by Fleet warships. Each test increases the operational realism and complexity of targets and scenarios and is witnessed by Navy and Defense Department testing evaluators.Homeland Defense – Aegis BMD Long Range Surveillance and TrackAegis BMD ships on Ballistic Missile Defense patrol, detect and track ballistic missiles of all ranges — including Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles and report track data to the missile defense system. This capability shares tracking data to cue other missile defense sensors and provides fire control data to Ground-based Midcourse Defense interceptors located at Fort Greely, Alaska and Vandenberg Air Force Base, California and other elements of the BMDS including land-based firing units (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, Patriot) and other Navy BMD ships.DeploymentAs of October 2017, there are 33 Aegis BMD combatants (5 cruisers [CGs] and 28 destroyers [DDGs] in the U.S. Navy. Of the 33 ships, 17 are assigned to the Pacific Fleet and 16 to the Atlantic Fleet. In response to the increasing demand for Aegis BMD capability from the Combatant Commanders, the MDA and Navy are working together to increase the number of Aegis BMD capable ships. Such efforts consist of upgrading Aegis DDGs to the BMD capability, incorporating Aegis BMD into the Aegis Modernization Program and new construction of Aegis BMD DDGs.The first deployment of European PAA Phase I capabilities came on March 7, 2011, when the Aegis BMD cruiser, USS MONTEREY (CG-61), armed with SM-3 Block IA missiles, deployed to Europe.International EffortsSM-3 Cooperative Development Program is the joint U.S.-Japan development of a 21-inch diameter variant of the SM-3 missile, designated SM-3 Block IIA, to defeat longer range ballistic missiles. Deployment begins in 2018.Japan has four KONGO Class Destroyers that have been upgraded with Aegis BMD operational capabilities.Aegis AshoreAegis Ashore is the land-based component of the Aegis BMD system. The deckhouse and launchers – designed to be nearly identical to the version installed aboard U.S. Navy destroyers and cruisers – are equipped with the Aegis BMD weapon system and the SM-3.Aegis Ashore is part of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA). The Aegis Ashore site in Romania was certified operational in 2016 as part of the EPAA Phase II. In 2018, Aegis Ashore will be installed in Poland as part of EPAA Phase III.The Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex (AAMDTC) at the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Kauai, Hawaii, is a test and evaluation center used in the development of Aegis Ashore.”“According to a Congressional Research Service report dated July 31, 2014, the lack of a test target simulating the Chinese DF-21 ASBM is highlighted.The December 2012 report from DOT&E (i.e., DOT&E’s annual report for FY2012) did not further discuss this issue; a January 21, 2013, press report stated that this is because the details of the issue are classified.According to Roger Cliff, a senior political scientist at the RAND Corporation, while the SM-3 would have limited effectiveness against Anti-ship ballistic missiles(ASBMs), the U.S. arsenal has a "variety of potential countermeasures" and the "kill chain" of for example a potential DF-21D attack would be so "complicated" that it would provide a "number of opportunities to defeat the attack". He also stated that unless one country integrates an "entire system of systems" to make this work, the missile itself would be pretty "useless".[46]A December 16, 2016, press report states the following:The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) said its new Sea Based Terminal (SBT) system achieved its second ballistic missile intercept during a Dec. 14 test over the Pacific Ocean. During the test, the USS John Paul Jones (DDG-53)... fired a salvo of two Raytheon [RTN] Standard Misisle-6 (SM-6) interceptors in immediate succession against a medium-range ballistic missile target launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, Hawaii. The first interceptor was not armed and was designed to collect test data, MDA said. The second interceptor, which carried an explosive warhead, intercepted the Lockheed Martin-built target.... MDA called the target “complex” but declined to elaborate. However, according to the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, the target emulated China’s Dong-Feng 21 (DF-21), a ballistic missile equipped with a maneuverable re-entry vehicle and designed to destroy U.S., aircraft carriers. The event, designated Flight Test Standard Missile-27 (FTM-27), was SBT’s first salvo test and its second intercept in as many tries.As of December 2018, Aegis BMDS has performed 40 successful intercepts in 49 attempts against ballistic missile targets.CTV-1Sep 26, 1997FailureThe first flight test for the Navy Theater Wide program's Control Test Vehicle-1 (CTV-1) was on September 26, 1997, using a SM-2 Block IV missile modified for exo-atmospheric flight and launched from USS Russell. The missile self-destructed soon after launch after veering off course. The root cause of this problem was a defect in the Navy's existing SM-2 Block IV ordnance, not due to any guidance modifications for high-altitude flight. The Navy and BMDO thus characterized the flight as a "No-Test".CTV-1ASep 24, 1999SuccessThe next flight for Raytheon's SM-3 came on September 24, 1999, during Control Test Vehicle (CTV)-1A (Codename: Stellar Phoenix). CTV-1a was a test of the first and second stage of the SM-3. The mission was considered a success. USS Shiloh was the launching ship.FTR-1Jul 8, 2000FailureThe next mission was conducted in July 2000 and designated Flight Test Round (FTR-1) (Codename: Stellar Archer). This mission ended in failure when the Third Stage Rocket Motor (TSRM) failed to separate from the second stage. USS Shiloh was the launching ship.FTR-1AJan 25, 2001SuccessFTR-1a (Codename: Stellar Gemini) was conducted on January 25, 2001. This mission would be the first time a live unitary target was engaged by the Aegis BMD system. The test target was launched from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility located on the Hawaiian island of Kauai.FTR-1a would demonstrate exo-atmospheric avionics operation of the SM-3 Kinetic Warhead (KW) and the real-time performance of the Aegis BMD AN/SPY-1 radar. At the time this test was conducted, the KW's propulsion system, the Solid Divert and Attitude Control System (SDACS), was still being developed. Total system operation was demonstrated in FM-2. The mission was considered successful when the KW acquired and tracked the test target for several seconds. USS Lake Erie was the launching ship.FM-2Jan 25, 2002SuccessThe purpose of Flight Mission (FM)-2 (codename: Stellar Eagle) was to characterize the Aegis Weapon System and Standard Missile 3 interceptor. The mission was not required to intercept the target. On January 25, 2002, an SM-3 launched from USS Lake Erie collided with a test target northeast of the island of Kauai. This mission was the first interception of a ballistic missile from a sea-based platform.FM-3Jun 13, 2002SuccessAegis BMD succeeded in intercepting a unitary target missiles launched from PMRF during FM-3 (Codename: Stellar Impact). USS Lake Erie was the firing ship. This mission marked the successful completion of the Aegis LEAP Intercept program. June 13, 2002 was also the date that the United States withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty), which limited the development of a strategic anti-ballistic missile system (to be considered strategic Aegis would need capability against the current Russian ICBMs and SLBMs).FM-4Nov 21, 2001SuccessAegis BMD intercepted a unitary ballistic missile during FM-4 (codename: Stellar Viper). FM-4 was the first Aegis BMD test to conduct the "aimpoint shift" maneuver. The aimpoint shift increases the probability that the ballistic missile ordnance will be destroyed at intercept. USS Lake Erie was the launching ship.FM-5Jun 18, 2003FailureOn June 18, 2003 the FM-5 mission (codename: Stellar Hammer) resulted in the first test failure of an operational Aegis BMD system. During the test, the SDACS propulsion system used to guide the SM-3's kinetic warhead suffered a malfunction after ignition. It is important to note that prior to the rocket motor failure the SM-3 kinetic warhead was on an intercept course with the test target. USS Lake Erie was the firing ship.FM-6Dec 11, 2003SuccessThe next mission, Codename: Stellar Defender, implemented a modification to the SDACS design so as not to endanger the warhead's ability to intercept. This override allowed the KW to navigate with reduced (but no less lethal) capability. FM-6 once again featured a successful interception. USS Lake Erie was the firing ship.FTM-04-1Feb 24, 2005SuccessAfter the FM-6 mission, the Missile Defense Agency implemented a change to the flight test naming convention for all subsequent ABMD flight tests. According to MDA the new convention better reflected the program's position within the Block 2004/2006 schema of development. The new name, Flight Test Mission (FTM) 04-1 (codename: Stellar Dragon), indicated that this would be the first flight test under the Block 2004 development cycle for Aegis BMD. The flight test demonstrated yet again the system's ability to destroy an enemy ballistic missile. USS Lake Erie was the firing ship.FTM-04-2Nov 17, 2005SuccessCodename Stellar Valkyrie, this was the first mission to utilize a target missile with a separating warhead. This new target missile, termed a Medium Range Target (MRT) more closely resembled real world threat missiles, but the SM-3 Block I missile was not fooled and intercepted the warhead to score the sixth interception for the program out of seven tries on November 17, 2005. USS Lake Erie was the firing ship.FTM-10Jun 23, 2006SuccessThe FTM-10 test target was the MRT with a separating warhead. USS Shiloh was the launching ship and utilized the Aegis Weapon System version 3.6 for the first time. This test was the first to feature the latest model of the SM-3, the Block Ia. The mission was considered a success when the KW tracked, selected and intercepted the MRT reentry vehicle (RV).FTM-10 marked the first time another country participated in a sea-based anti-ballistic missile exercise. The Japanese government was interested in purchasing a system similar to Aegis BMD to deter potential threats and was invited to participate in the FTM-10 exercise. The Japanese naval vessel JDS Kirishima (a Kongō-class destroyer) was stationed off the coast of PMRF and observed all FTM-10 events.FTM-11Dec 7, 2006FailureDue to an on-board error, the Aegis Weapon System failed to engage the test target and never launched the interceptor. The error was discovered and corrected prior to the retest of FTM-11 test flight. USS Lake Erie was the firing ship.[53]FTM-11 Event 4Apr 26, 2007SuccessAegis BMD successfully intercepted its eighth target in ten attempts. This test marked the 27th successful "Hit-to-Kill" intercept (for all MDA systems) since 2001. USS Lake Erie was the launching ship and utilized the Aegis 3.6 Weapon System. The interceptor was the SM-3 Block-Ia. This test not only demonstrated the ability of ABMD to intercept a ballistic missile but also demonstrated Lake Erie's ability to simultaneously track and intercept antiship missiles. This test also utilized the Solid Divert and Attitude Control System (SDACS), in the full pulse configuration.[54]FTM-11AAug 31, 2007SuccessClassified flight test.FTM-12Jun 22, 2007SuccessUSS Decatur, using the operationally certified Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Weapon System (BMD 3.6) and the Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IA missile, successfully performed a "hit to kill" intercept of a separating, medium range, ballistic missile. The target missile was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, Hawaii. The Ticonderoga-class cruiser USS Port Royal, Spain's Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate Méndez Núñez, and MDA's Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) mobile ground-based radar also participated in the flight test. FTM-12(Codename: Stellar Athena) was the first to use an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer as the launching ship.FTM-13Nov 6, 2007SuccessUSS Lake Erie launched two interceptors off the island of Kauai, Hawaii, engaging two short-range ballistic missile targets almost simultaneously.FTM-14Jun 6, 2008SuccessUSS Lake Erie successfully intercepted a terminal phase target with a modified SM-2 Block IV interceptor. The aim of this mission was to test the interception and destruction of a short range ballistic missile target launched from a mobile launch platform.FTM-15Apr 15, 2011SuccessThe Missile Defense Agency (MDA), USS O'Kane, and the 94th Army Air and Missile Defense Command operating from the 613th Air and Space Operations Center at Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii, successfully conducted a flight test of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) element of the nation's Ballistic Missile Defense System, resulting in the intercept of a separating ballistic missile target over the Pacific Ocean. FTM-15, was the most challenging test to date, as it was the first Aegis BMD version 3.6.1 intercept against an intermediate-range target (range 1,864 to 3,418 miles) and the first Aegis BMD 3.6.1 engagement relying on remote tracking data. The ability to use remote radar data to engage a threat ballistic missile greatly increases the battle space and defended area of the SM-3 missile.FTM-16 Event 1Mar 15, 2011SuccessUSS Lake Erie successfully tracked a ballistic missile target. In addition to the BMD mission, Lake Erie also validated the ship's anti-air warfare (AAW) capability by destroying an incoming anti-ship cruise missile target with an SM-2 Block III missile in a live firing exercise. This was the first event in which a ship used BMD 4.0.1 Weapon System to engage an AAW threat.FTM-16 Event 2Sep 1, 2011FailureA short-range ballistic missile target was launched from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, Hawaii. Approximately 90 seconds later, a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block 1B interceptor missile was launched from USS Lake Erie but an intercept of the target was not achieved. The failure was due to a third stage rocket motor pulse failureFTM-16 Event 2AMay 9, 2012SuccessUSS Lake Erie successfully conducted a flight test of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, resulting in the first intercept of a short-range ballistic missile target over the Pacific Ocean by the Navy's newest Missile Defense interceptor, the Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IB.[62]FTM-17Jul 30, 2009SuccessUSS Hopper, detected, tracked, fired and guided a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block (Blk) IA to intercept a sub-scale short range ballistic missile.FTM-18Jun 27, 2012SuccessUSS Lake Erie successfully conducted a flight test of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, resulting in the intercept of a separating ballistic missile target over the Pacific Ocean by the Navy's newest missile defense interceptor missile, the Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IB. The test event was the second consecutive successful intercept test of the SM-3 Block IB missile and the second-generation Aegis BMD 4.0.1 weapon system. The first successful SM-3 Block IB intercept occurred on May 9, 2012.FTM-19May 16, 2013SuccessUSS Lake Erie successfully conducted a flight test today of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, resulting in the intercept of a separating ballistic missile target over the Pacific Ocean by the Aegis BMD 4.0 Weapon System and a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IB missile. This test exercised the latest version of the second-generation Aegis BMD Weapon System and Standard Missile, providing capability for engagement of longer-range and more sophisticated ballistic missiles.FTM-20Feb 13, 2013SuccessUSS Lake Erie successfully conducted a flight test of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, resulting in the intercept of a medium-range ballistic missile target over the Pacific Ocean by a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IA guided missile. The in-orbit Space Tracking and Surveillance System-Demonstrators (STSS-D) detected and tracked the target, and forwarded track data to USS Lake Erie. The ship, equipped with the second-generation Aegis BMD weapon system, used Launch on Remote doctrine to engage the target. This event, designated Flight Test Standard Missile 20 (FTM-20), was a demonstration of the ability of space-based assets to provide mid-course fire control quality data to an Aegis BMD ship, extending the battlespace, providing the ability for longer range intercepts and defense of larger areas.FTO-1Sep 10, 2013SuccessFTO-01 was conducted in the vicinity of the U.S. Army Kwajalein Atoll Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site and surrounding areas in the western Pacific. The test stressed the ability of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) weapon systems to function in a layered defense architecture and defeat a raid of two near-simultaneous ballistic missile targets. USS Decatur with its Aegis Weapon System detected and tracked the first target with its onboard AN/SPY-1 radar. The Aegis BMD weapon system developed a fire control solution, launched a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IA missile, and successfully intercepted the target.In a demonstration of BMDS layered defense capabilities, a second AN/TPY-2 radar in Terminal Mode, located with the THAAD weapon system, acquired and tracked the target missiles. THAAD developed a fire control solution, launched a THAAD interceptor missile, and successfully intercepted the second medium-range ballistic missile target. THAAD was operated by soldiers from the Alpha Battery, 2nd Air Defense Artillery Regiment. As a planned demonstration of THAAD's layered defense capabilities, a second THAAD interceptor was launched at the target destroyed by Aegis as a contingency in the event the SM-3 did not achieve an intercept.FTM-21Sep 18, 2013SuccessUSS Lake Erie successfully conducted a flight test today of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, resulting in the intercept of a complex separating short-range ballistic missile target over the Pacific Ocean by the Aegis BMD 4.0 Weapon System and a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IB guided missile. This was an operationally realistic test, in which the target's launch time and bearing are not known in advance, and the target complex was the most difficult target engaged to date.[69]FTM-22Oct 3, 2013SuccessUSS Lake Erie successfully conducted an operational flight test of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, resulting in the intercept of a medium-range ballistic missile target over the Pacific Ocean by the Aegis BMD 4.0 Weapon System and a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IB guided missile. FTM-22 is the 28th successful intercept in 34 flight test attempts for the Aegis BMD program since flight testing began in 2002. Across all Ballistic Missile Defense System programs, this is the 64th successful hit-to-kill intercept in 80 flight test attempts since 2001.Stellar DaggarsMar 26, 2009SuccessUSS Benfold simultaneously engaged a SRBM in terminal phase and a cruise missile using SM-2s.JFTM-1Dec 17, 2001SuccessThe JFTM-1 test event verified the new engagement capability of the Aegis BMD configuration of the recently upgraded Japanese destroyer, JS Kongō. At approximately 12:05 pm (HST), 7:05 am Tokyo time on December 18, 2007, a ballistic missile target was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii. JS Kongōcrew members detected and tracked the target. The Aegis Weapon System then developed a fire control solution and at approximately 12:08 pm (HST), 7:08 am Tokyo time, a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IA was launched. Approximately three minutes later, the SM-3 successfully intercepted the target approximately 100 miles above the Pacific Ocean.JFTM-2Nov 19, 2008FailureJFTM-2 was a test of the newest engagement capability of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense configuration of the recently upgraded Japanese destroyer, JS Chōkai. At approximately 4:21 pm (HST), 11:21 am (Tokyo time) a ballistic missile target was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii. JS Chōkai crew members detected and tracked the target using an advanced on-board radar. The Aegis Weapon System then developed a fire control solution, and at approximately 4:24 pm (HST), 11:24 am (Tokyo time) on Nov 20, a single Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IA was launched. Approximately two minutes later, the SM-3 failed to intercept the target. The cause of the failure was due a SM-3 Block IA interceptor divert and attitude control malfunction.JFTM-3Nov 19, 2008SuccessThe JFTM-3 test event verified the newest engagement capability of the Japan Aegis BMD configuration of the recently upgraded Japanese destroyer, JS Myōkō. At approximately 6:00pm (HST), 1:00 pm Tokyo time on October 28, a separating, medium-range ballistic missile target was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii. JS Myōkō crew members detected and tracked the target. The Aegis Weapon System then developed a fire control solution and, at approximately 6:04pm (HST), 1:04 pm Tokyo time a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IA interceptor missile was launched. Approximately three minutes later, the SM-3 successfully intercepted the target approximately 100 miles above the Pacific Ocean.[73]JFTM-4Oct 28, 2010SuccessThe JFTM-4 test event verified the newest engagement capability of the Japan Aegis BMD configuration of the recently upgraded Japanese destroyer, JS Krishima. At approximately 5:06 p.m. (HST), 12:06 p.m. Tokyo time on October 29, 2010, a separating 1,000 km class ballistic missile target was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii.JS Kirishima crew members detected and tracked the target. The Aegis Weapon System then developed a fire control solution and launched a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IA missile. Approximately three minutes later, the SM-3 successfully intercepted the target approximately 100 miles above the Pacific Ocean.FTI-01Oct 25, 2012FailureThe live-fire demonstration, conducted at U.S. Army Kwajalein Atoll/Reagan Test Site, Hickam AFB, and surrounding areas in the western Pacific, stressed the performance of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD), THAAD, and PATRIOT (PAC-3) weapon systems. USS Fitzgerald successfully engaged a low flying cruise missile over water. The Aegis system also tracked and launched an SM-3 Block 1A interceptor against a Short-Range Ballistic Missile. However, despite indication of a nominal flight of the SM-3 Block 1A interceptor, there was no indication of an intercept of the SRBM. The failure was attributed to an Inertial Measurement Unit failure.Pacific BlitZNov 1, 2008MixedPacific Blitz was the first U.S. Navy proficiency firing to employ the SM-3 missile against a ballistic missile target. During the Fleet Exercise "Pacific Blitz", two Pearl Harbor-based Aegis BMD destroyers, USS Paul Hamilton and USS Hopperfired SM-3 missiles at separate targets. Upon detecting and tracking the target, USS Paul Hamilton launched an SM-3 missile resulting in a direct hit. USS Hopper successfully detected, monitored and fired at the second target, but the interceptor missed. The cause of the failure was attributed to an infrared seeker failurePacific PhoenixMay 6, 2006SuccessUSS Lake Erie successfully intercepted a Unitary short-range target.FTM-25Nov 6, 2014SuccessUSS John Paul Jones successfully conducted a flight test of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, resulting in three successful near-simultaneous target engagements over the Pacific Ocean. One short-range ballistic missile target was intercepted by a Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) Block IB guided missile, while two low-flying cruise missile targets were engaged by Standard Missile 2 (SM-2) Block IIIA guided missiles near-simultaneously.MMW event 1July 28, 2015SuccessA short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) target was launched from PMRF in a northwesterly trajectory. USS John Paul Jones, positioned west of Hawaii, detected, tracked, and launched a SM-6 Dual I missile, resulting in a successful target intercept in the terminal stage.MMW event 2July 29, 2015SuccessA short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) target was launched from PMRF in a northwesterly trajectory. USS John Paul Jones, positioned west of Hawaii, detected, tracked, and launched a SM-2 block 4 missile, resulting in a successful target intercept.MTMDOctober 20, 2015SuccessA Terrier-Orion short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) target was launched from the UK's Hebrides Range, northwest of Scotland. With multinational vessels in the North Atlantic participating in Maritime Theater Missile Defense, USS Rosslaunched a SM-3 Block IA missile, resulting in a successful target intercept.FTO-02 event 2aOctober 31, 2015FailureThe test stressed the ability of Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) weapon systems to negate two ballistic missile threats while Aegis BMD simultaneously conducted an anti-air warfare operation. A Short Range Air Launch Target (SRALT) was launched by a U.S. Air Force C-17. THAAD successfully intercepted the SRALT target. While THAAD was engaging the SRALT, an extended Medium Range Ballistic Missile (eMRBM) was air-launched by another Air Force C-17. The eMRBM target was detected and tracked by multiple BMDS assets including the AN/TPY-2 in forward-based mode, and USS John Paul Jones with its AN/SPY-1 radar. Shortly after eMRBM launch, a BQM-74E air-breathing target was also launched and tracked by USS John Paul Jones. Both Aegis BMD and THAAD launched interceptors to engage the eMRBM. USS John Paul Jones successfully launched a Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IB Threat Upgrade guided missile, but an anomaly early in its flight prevented a midcourse intercept. However, the THAAD interceptor, in its terminal defense role, acquired and successfully intercepted the target. Concurrently, Aegis BMD successfully engaged the BQM-74E air-breathing target with a Standard Missile-2 Block IIIA guided missile. A failure review is currently underway to investigate the SM-3 anomaly.FTO-02 event 1aDecember 9, 2015SuccessDuring the test, a target representing a medium-range ballistic missile was air-launched from a U.S. Air Force C-17 aircraft over the broad ocean area southwest of Hawaii. The Aegis Ashore Weapon System then launched the SM-3 Block IB Threat Upgrade guided missile from its Vertical Launch System. The SM-3's kinetic warhead acquired the target reentry vehicle, diverted into its path, and destroyed the target using the kinetic force of a direct impact.FTM-27December 14, 2016SuccessUSS John Paul Jones, an Aegis baseline 9.C1 equipped destroyer,successfully fired a salvo of two SM-6 Dual I missiles against a complex medium-range ballistic missile target, demonstrating the Sea Based Terminal endo-atmospheric defensive capability.SFTM-01February 3, 2017SuccessThe test from USS John Paul Jones was the first launch of an SM-3 Block IIA missile from an Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) ship, and the first intercept engagement using the Aegis Baseline 9.C2 (BMD 5.1) weapon system. SFTM-01 was the third flight test of the SM-3 Block IIA missile, but the first intercept attempt.SFTM-02June 21, 2017FailureA medium-range ballistic target missile was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Kauai, Hawaii. The USS John Paul Jones (DDG 53) detected and tracked the target missile with its onboard AN/SPY-1 radar using the Aegis Baseline 9.C2 weapon system. Upon acquiring and tracking the target, the ship launched an SM-3 Block IIA guided missile, but the missile did not intercept the target.[80]The attempt was unsuccessful because a sailor onboard the firing ship inadvertently designated the target as friendly, causing the Aegis Weapon System to break the engagement and initiate a message commanding the SM-3 Block IIA missile to destruct, destroying the missile in flightFTM-27 E2August 29, 2017SuccessThe USS John Paul Jones (DDG 53) successfully conducted a complex missile defense flight test, resulting in the intercept of a medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) target using Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) guided missiles during a test off the coast of Hawaii.FS-17 E4October 15, 2017SuccessThe guided-missile destroyer USS Donald Cook (DDG 75) successfully detected, tracked and intercepted a medium-range ballistic missile target with a Standard Missile-3 Block IB guided missile.FTM-29January 31, 2018FailureThe Missile Defense Agency and U.S. Navy sailors manning the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex (AAMDTC) conducted a live-fire missile flight test Jan. 31 using a Standard-Missile (SM)-3 Block IIA missile launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Kauai, Hawaii. This was a developmental and operational test of a new capability and utilized a missile variant not yet in production. The primary objective of the test, to intercept an air-launched intermediate-range ballistic missile target with an SM-3 Block IIA missile, was not achieved.JFTM-5 Event 2September 11, 2018SuccessThe test event verified the newest BMD engagement capability of the Japan (J6) Aegis BMD configuration of the recently upgraded Japan destroyer, JS ATAGO (DDG-177). At approximately 10:37pm HST on September 11, 2018 a simple separating, ballistic missile target was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii. JS ATAGO crew members detected and tracked the target. The Aegis Weapon System then developed a fire control solution and a Standard Missile -3 Block IB Threat Upgrade (SM-3 Blk IB TU) missile was launched. The SM-3 successfully intercepted the target above the Pacific Ocean.FTM-45October 26, 2018SuccessThe USS John Finn (DDG-113) successfully conducted an intercept of a medium-range ballistic missile target with a Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IIA missile during a flight test off the west coast of Hawaii.FTI-03December 10, 2018SuccessThe Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex (AAMDTC) at the Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF) at Kauai, Hawaii, successfully conducted Flight Test Integrated-03 (FTI-03). This was an operational live fire test demonstrating the Aegis Weapon System Engage On Remote capability to track and intercept an Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) target with an Aegis Ashore-launched Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IIA interceptor.”Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System - Wikipedia

The top line of the Paris Accord is the bad science pushed by the UN IPCC resulting in a conference of governments taking action to make the climate colder for fear of runaway global warming. What global warming? We are living in the middle of an ice age and runaway global warming is impossible.Also evidence shows the earth’s temperatures are stable and polar ice is expanding. See expansion of Antarctica ice just this past September.Arctic Ice Volume Growth Surprises As Solar Activity Approaches Near 200-Year LowBy P Gosselin on20. March 2018Frank Bosse and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt look at the sun and oceans in their latest report here at Die kalte Sonne. The sunspot number for February 2018 was 10.6 and thus was some 30% below the meanfor this time into the cycle. At the moment solar activity is close to quiet. Solar cycle no. 24 (red) […]Posted in Antarctic, Arctic, Oceans | 40 ResponsesExtraordinary September Arctic Sea Ice Growth…Rate Of Increase As Strong As Typical November!By P Gosselin on5. October 2016Contrary to what is often claimed, Arctic sea ice is not in a death spiral, and has been stable for the past 10 years. Yesterday Japanese skeptic blogger Kirye informed at Twitter that the sea ice volume and area rates of growth for September and early October this year are astonishingly rapid and at a […]Posted in Arctic | 7 ResponsesArctic Melting Due To Global Warming, But Antarctic Ice Growth Due To Ocean Currents, NSIDC SaysBy P Gosselin on8. October 2012Hooray, Spiegel reports on the Antarctic sea ice record! Though, the piece was pretty much buried in the back pages. Yet, thanks to science reporter Axel Bojanowski, Spiegel at least mentions that the South Pole did set a sea ice record last month, and even presented the following NSIDC chart: September sea ice extent at […]Posted in Antarctic, Arctic, Cooling/Temperature | 3 ResponsesComprehensive Data, Recent Studies In Top Journals: Antarctica Stable, Temps Falling, Ice Mass Growing!By P Gosselin on14. January 2020News from Antarctica: how’s the ice? By Kalte Sonne (German text translated/edited by P. Gosselin) The ice in Antarctica, how is it doing? Is it melting, is it growing? In the following we wishto present the latest literature on the subject. There is a lot to report. Fasten your seat belt, there’s a lot to […]Posted in Antarctic | 7 Responses2019 Science Refutes Climate Alarm On Every Front… Shrinking Deserts, Growing Islands, Crumbling Consensus, Weaker Storms, Cooler Arctic Etc. Etc. Etc.By P Gosselin on31. December 20192019 science: Absolutely no climate alarm No alarm on every aspect: stable polar ice, normal sea level rise, no consensus, growing snow cover, less tropical storms, tornadoes, shrinking deserts, global greening, predictions wrong, models flawed, climate driven by sun, ocean cycles, biodiversity, warmer 1000 years ago…etc… 2019 saw a great amount of new science emerge […]Posted in Alarmism, Scepticism | 16 ResponsesArctic Sea Ice Surprise Global Warming Experts By Remaining Stable This DecadeBy P Gosselin on28. June 2019Reports of shrinking sea ice are fake news By Snowfan (June 19) The Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) expects sea ice extent growth in June 2019: The DMI plot for the development of Arctic sea ice area (extent) from June 1979 to the PROGNOSE for June, 2019. Since 2010, i.e. 9 years ago, the sea ice […]Posted in Arctic | 21 ResponsesArctic Glaciers ADVANCED 16 km During 2008-2016 In A Region That Was 6°C Warmer ~9,000 Years AgoBy Kenneth Richard on20. December 2018Newly published science indicates glaciers in the High Arctic Svalbard/Barents Sea region have rapidly advanced in the last decade — surging 16 kilometers since 2008, which is the greatest ice growth since 1890. About 8,000 to 10,000 years ago, this region was 6°C warmer than today. Consequently, the region’s glaciers were much smaller (or non-existent) at that […]Why are winters getting colder if the world is getting too hot? It doesn’t compute, just like the totally false predictions of the end of snow repeated ad nauseam by alarmist scientists.2000 : a prediction from Professor Mojib Latif of Germany’s GEOMAR Heimholtz Centre for Ocean Research…“Winters with strong frosts and lots of snow like we had 20 years ago will no longer exist at our latitudes.” – Professor Mojib Latif2007 : Die Zeit…“First the snow disappears, and then winter.”2020: UKThe COLD TIMES are returning, the mid-latitudes are REFREEZING in line with historically low solar activity, cloud-nucleating Cosmic Rays, and a meridional jet stream flow.UK photoExtreme Weather GSMSUBSTANTIAL EARLY-DECEMBER SNOW FORECAST TO BLANKET THE UK AND EUROPE: 11 FOOT (3.28 METRES) PREDICTED IN THE ALPSDECEMBER 2, 2020 CAP ALLONThe UK is set for a flurry of heavy and rare early-December snow this week, with even far southern regions on course for disruptive accumulations.Shifting attention to the mainland, the Alps and Pyrenees are on for some truly debilitating totals — sections of the Alps are forecast to receive almost 11 foot (3.28 metres) of global warming goodness over the next 10 days alone, while “bad weather” has already set in across the Pyrenees, tragically putting an end to the search for British hiker Esther Dingley, 37, who went missing last week.Iceland and Scandinavia can also expect disruptive accumulations running into the feet over the coming days.Also seeing heavy snow this week will be Portugal, central and southern Spain, central France, Germany, Poland, Ukraine, Czechia, all of Austria and Slovenia, central and southern Italy, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Lithuania, Turkey, Georgia, and even Morocco, and northern Algeria–in hindsight, it would have actually been easier to list the nations that aren’t expecting snow.UK snow forecast: Heavy snow will fall across the UK as temperatures fall (Image: Netweather)Notwithstanding we are living in the middle of an ice age and the evidence does not show as alleged an unusual HOCKEY STICK of warming today, unless, like UN scientist Michael Mann, you erase past history of the Medieval Warming period.This is the past history that was erased to make a case for dramatic climate change.Hundreds of papers debunk the Mann hockey stick and show the Medieval Period was warmer and warmer than today knocking the legs out from under human caused global warming.Recent studyAll four of these temperature reconstructions show the Medieval Warm Period ~1000 years ago was warmer than the present [year 2000].Fig. 1. Different estimates of Northern Fennoscandian temperature anomalies between 400-2000 AD. Shown are the present conventional estimate (T torn, green) which is rather close to that in Grudd08, the present filtered estimate (Tlong, blue), smoothed temperatures of Esper12 (T esp , red) and smoothed August SST reconstruction from the Norwegian Sea (black).Fig. 3. August SST [sea surface temperature] reconstructions from the south of Iceland (above, blue) and the Norwegian Sea (below, blue) (modified from Miettinen et al., 2012). Red solid lines show smoothed values.The new temperature reconstruction presented by this paper shows the Medieval Warm Period [~1000 years ago] in the Arctic was warmer than the present [year 2000] temperatures.Fig. 4. The present estimate of the climatic temperature anomalies (red, Tclim = T esp + T sea + T volc), and T espfrom Fig. 1 (thick blue).The paper: A 70–80 year periodicity identified from tree ring temperatures in Northern Scandinavia and its relation to the Arctic sea-ice oscillation AD 550–1980After describing the development of the new approach, they used it to construct a history of the last thousand years of central Greenland surface air temperature, based on values of the isotopic ratios of nitrogen and argon previously derived by Kobashi et al. (2008) from air bubbles trapped in the GISP2 ice core that had been extracted from central Greenland, obtaining the result depicted in the figure below.Central Greenland surface temperature reconstruction for the last millennium. Adapted from Kobashi et al. (2010).This figure depicts the central Greenland surface temperature reconstruction produced by the six scientists; and as best as can be determined from this representation, the peak temperature of the latter part of the Medieval Warm Period – which actually began some time prior to the start of their record, as demonstrated by the work of Dansgaard et al. (1975), Jennings and Weiner (1996), Johnsen et al. (2001) and Vinther et al. (2010) – was approximately 0.33°C greater than the peak temperature of the Current Warm Period, and about 1.67°C greater than the temperature of the last decades of the 20th century.The Medieval Warm Period in the ArcticEnd Of May Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Highest In Five Years… No Evidence Of Warming Or MeltingBy P Gosselin on 31. May 2020Over the past 40 years of satellite observation, Antarctic sea ice defied global warming predictions and gained impressively. The mean temperature of the southern ice cap also shows no warming.In 2017, after decades of inconvenient rise, sea ice extent suddenly fell to record low level and panic activity among global warming alarmists began to perk up. Surely the days of a growing Antarctic ice cap were over – at least they hoped.But since 2017, the ice has grown back and once again has reached near normal levels and the long-term trend continues to be upward:Sea ice extent up to 2019. Data source: JMASchneefan just posted that latest May Antarctic sea ice extent. The data show that minimum 15% sea ice concentration coverage has climbed to a 5-year high for this time of the year:Image: NSIDC.So the Antarctic long-term trend for sea ice continues to be robustly upward.No warmingOne aspect that is supposed to indicate global warming is a rapid warming at the poles. But here too there has been no evidence of warming over Antarctica:Global warming alarmists likely are going to have to wait a long time before they can begin dreaming about sounding the climate alarms over Antarctica. Things there are going the opposite way.Posted in Antarctic | 4 ResponsesRickWillRickWill 1. June 2020 at 1:37 AM | PermalinkSadly, those waiting for the forecast snow free Australia will have to wait another year. 2020 is shaping up to be one of the best snow seasons on record, good snow falls through May and plenty of snow on the first day of Winter:Icy blast to bring snow, storms and hail to Australia’s south and eastThis is consistent with Antarctic cooling.New research also shows during the Holocene 6000 years ago temperatures were 1 - 3 * F warmer than today. This debunks the alarmist thinking that warming today is unusual and therefore must be man-made.Not the Holocene temperatures began to decline 6000 years ago and the decline continues today.The bottom line of the Paris conference real agenda is economic and political not about the environment. This real agenda is exposed by the UN IPCC leaders who explain that global wealth redistribution is the primary concern.A key part of the real Paris agenda is to attack market economics with wasteful subsidies of intermittent wind and solar that only increase cost of energy for consumers and do nothing for the climate.While the science behind the Paris Accord is shoddy and not settled, yet there is broad public support for the misnamed “carbon targets” because of the lie that reducing carbon dioxide is reducing carbon pollution.The more renewables the higher the cost of electricity to the consumer, witness Denmark and Germany. Also no grid electricity is provided by stand alone wind or solar because of intermittency requiring back up fossil fuels adding more cost.The alleged climate crisis is a political tempest in a teapot that ignores natural variability and the past history of the Earth warming naturally as it recovers from the Eemain interglacial over 120,000 years ago.Sadly we are in glacial cycles and the present Holocene is going to head to cooling like the last Eemain interglacial.As this last graph shows the Paris Accord is a bad idea as the climate issue is the fact the earth is cooling and in danger ot runaway global warmingAustralia major snowfall in April 2020.California buried in snow in 2019.Crop Loss Extreme Weather GSMNEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR FARMERS SERIOUSLY HAMPERED BY HISTORICALLY HARSH WINTER (AND IT AIN’T OVER YET)MARCH 19, 2020 CAP ALLONWinter 2019/20 has been one of persistent Arctic cold for much of Canada, particularly for Newfoundland and Labrador. The province has been battered by sub-zero temperatures, heavy snow and high winds during the past few months, making life utterly miserable for NL farmers.SNOWFALL Will Signal The Death Of The Global Warming MovementPosted: November 18, 2019 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under:BREAKING : ‘A Very Rare And Exciting Event’ To The Rescue | ClimatismSNOWFALL will become “A very rare and exciting event…Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”Dr David Viner – Senior scientist, climatic research unit (CRU)“Winters with strong frosts and lots of snowlike we had 20 years ago will no longer exist at our latitudes.”– Professor Mojib Latif (2000)“Good bye winter. Never again snow?” – Spiegel (2000)“Milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms” – IPCC (2001)“End of Snow?” – NYTimes (2014)***WE all associate snowstorms with cold weather. But, the effects of snow on our climate and weather last long after the storm has passed. Due to snows reflective properties, its presence or absence influences patterns of heating and cooling over Earth’s surface more than any other single land surface feature.“THE EARTH IS ACTUALLY COOLING”Global Temps Continue Century-Record Plunge, Despite Rising Co2 Emissions!NO CLIMATE CHANGE IN TEMPERATURE.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 the data. Yes, weather by itself is evidence of no global warming/ climate change as the test is whether the weather adds to a new weather pattern over many years even millennia.Monday, 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 -- 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."NASA Sees Climate Cooling Trend Thanks to Low Sun Activity - The New AmericanResearch and commonsense shows that for human civiliztion warming is always superior to cooling. Our non-linear climate swings HOT BOX (Civilization thrives) to ICE BOX (Civilization dies)over millions of years. This book urges us to stop the madness conspiring with the Paris Accord to make the climate colder!"Bjorn Lomborg's new book offers a data-driven, human-centered antidote to the oft-apocalyptic discussion characterizing the effect of human activity on the global climate. Careful, compelling, and above all sensible and pragmatic."―Jordan Peterson, author of 12 Rules for LifeWe hear extreme heat can be deadly, but we do not hear cold weather is deadlier. There are 33 cold-related deaths for every heat-related death. In what may seem ironic, heat waves are less deadly in hot cities than in cooler ones. This is good news for a warming planet. People who are used to the heat adapt better.An overarching theme of the book is that humans are creative and adaptable. Further, the wealthier they are the better they are able to adapt and not just to extreme weather but to any adversity.This brings us to one of Lomborg’s major points. Climate policies are frequently ineffective and sometimes harmful. By ignoring the benefits of adaptation in favor of policies to cut CO2, we provide meager benefits with an unconscionable delay and at a cost that reduces the growth that will make future generations resilient in the face of all kinds of problems.A case in point is the Paris Agreement. Lomborg devotes a whole chapter to it. By the year 2030 he estimates the agreement will cost $2 trillion to $3 trillion per year and these annual costs will continue through the end of the century. Yet, these trillions will moderate world average temperature by a ridiculously small 0.05 degrees Fahrenheit. Even that tiny temperature impact will not occur until the year 2100. The intervening years will see an even more trivial cut. Saddling future generations with a $100 trillion burden whose reward is 0.05-degree moderation in average world temperature is nothing for which the present generation should expect thanks.Book Review: False Alarm by Bjørn Lomborg46 STATEMENTS By IPCC Experts Against The IPCCPosted: March 7, 2020 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under: Climate Change,| 31 CommentsU.N. IPCC (logo)“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,we will be doing the right thing in terms ofeconomic and environmental policy.“– Timothy WirthFmr President of the UN Foundation***THANKFULLY we usually always get to hear the inconvenient and raw truth about taxpayer funded, unelected, bloated government bureaucracies when members eventually leave and are not subject to bullying and financial repercussions. Definitely no exception here…46 enlightening statements by IPCC experts against the IPCC:Dr Robert Balling: The IPCC notes that “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” This did not appear in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.Dr Lucka Bogataj: “Rising levels of airborne carbon dioxide don’t cause global temperatures to rise…. temperature changed first and some 700 years later a change in aerial content of carbon dioxide followed.”Dr John Christy: “Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report.”Dr Rosa Compagnucci: “Humans have only contributed a few tenths of a degree to warming on Earth. Solar activity is a key driver of climate.”Dr Richard Courtney: “The empirical evidence strongly indicates that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is wrong.”Dr Judith Curry: “I’m not going to just spout off and endorse the IPCC because I don’t have confidence in the process.”Dr Robert Davis: “Global temperatures have not been changing as state of the art climate models predicted they would. Not a single mention of satellite temperature observations appears in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers.”Dr Willem de Lange: “In 1996 the IPCC listed me as one of approximately 3000 “scientists” who agreed that there was a discernible human influence on climate. I didn’t. There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that runaway catastrophic climate change is due to human activities.”Dr Chris de Freitas: “Government decision-makers should have heard by now that the basis for the long-standing claim that carbon dioxide is a major driver of global climate is being questioned; along with it the hitherto assumed need for costly measures to restrict carbon dioxide emissions. If they have not heard, it is because of the din of global warming hysteria that relies on the logical fallacy of ‘argument from ignorance’ and predictions of computer models.”Dr Oliver Frauenfeld: “Much more progress is necessary regarding our current understanding of climate and our abilities to model it.”Dr Peter Dietze: “Using a flawed eddy diffusion model, the IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic carbon dioxide uptake.”Dr John Everett: “It is time for a reality check. The oceans and coastal zones have been far warmer and colder than is projected in the present scenarios of climate change. I have reviewed the IPCC and more recent scientific literature and believe that there is not a problem with increased acidification, even up to the unlikely levels in the most-used IPCC scenarios.”Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen: “The IPCC refused to consider the sun’s effect on the Earth’s climate as a topic worthy of investigation. The IPCC conceived its task only as investigating potential human causes of climate change.”Dr Lee Gerhard: “I never fully accepted or denied the anthropogenic global warming concept until the furore started after NASA’s James Hansen’s wild claims in the late 1980s. I went to the [scientific] literature to study the basis of the claim, starting with first principles. My studies then led me to believe that the claims were false.”Dr Indur Goklany: “Climate change is unlikely to be the world’s most important environmental problem of the 21st century. There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.”Dr Vincent Gray: “The [IPCC] climate change statement is an orchestrated litany of lies.”Dr Mike Hulme: “Claims such as ‘2500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous … The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was only a few dozen.”Dr Kiminori Itoh: “There are many factors which cause climate change. Considering only greenhouse gases is nonsense and harmful.”Dr Yuri Izrael: “There is no proven link between human activity and global warming. I think the panic over global warming is totally unjustified. There is no serious threat to the climate.”Dr Steven Japar: “Temperature measurements show that the climate model-predicted mid-troposphere hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them.”Dr Georg Kaser: “This number [of receding glaciers reported by the IPCC] is not just a little bit wrong, it is far out by any order of magnitude … It is so wrong that it is not even worth discussing.”Dr Aynsley Kellow: “I’m not holding my breath for criticism to be taken on board, which underscores a fault in the whole peer review process for the IPCC: there is no chance of a chapter [of the IPCC report] ever being rejected for publication, no matter how flawed it might be.”Dr Madhav Khandekar: “I have carefully analysed adverse impacts of climate change as projected by the IPCC and have discounted these claims as exaggerated and lacking any supporting evidence.”Dr Hans Labohm: “The alarmist passages in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers have been skewed through an elaborate and sophisticated process of spin-doctoring.”Dr Andrew Lacis: “There is no scientific merit to be found in the Executive Summary. The presentation sounds like something put together by Greenpeace activists and their legal department.”Dr Chris Landsea: “I cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.”Dr Richard Lindzen: “The IPCC process is driven by politics rather than science. It uses summaries to misrepresent what scientists say and exploits public ignorance.”Dr Harry Lins: “Surface temperature changes over the past century have been episodic and modest and there has been no net global warming for over a decade now. The case for alarm regarding climate change is grossly overstated.”Dr Philip Lloyd: “I am doing a detailed assessment of the IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science. I have found examples of a summary saying precisely the opposite of what the scientists said.”Dr Martin Manning: “Some government delegates influencing the IPCC Summary for Policymakers misrepresent or contradict the lead authors.”Steven McIntyre: “The many references in the popular media to a ‘consensus of thousands of scientists’ are both a great exaggeration and also misleading.”Dr Patrick Michaels: “The rates of warming, on multiple time scales, have now invalidated the suite of IPCC climate models. No, the science is not settled.”Dr Nils-Axel Morner: “If you go around the globe, you find no sea level rise anywhere.”Dr Johannes Oerlemans: “The IPCC has become too political. Many scientists have not been able to resist the siren call of fame, research funding and meetings in exotic places that awaits them if they are willing to compromise scientific principles and integrity in support of the man-made global-warming doctrine.”Dr Roger Pielke: “All of my comments were ignored without even a rebuttal. At that point, I concluded that the IPCC Reports were actually intended to be advocacy documents designed to produce particular policy actions, but not a true and honest assessment of the understanding of the climate system.”Dr Paul Reiter: “As far as the science being ‘settled,’ I think that is an obscenity. The fact is the science is being distorted by people who are not scientists.”Dr Murry Salby: “I have an involuntary gag reflex whenever someone says the science is settled. Anyone who thinks the science is settled on this topic is in fantasia.”Dr Tom Segalstad: “The IPCC global warming model is not supported by the scientific data.”Dr Fred Singer: “Isn’t it remarkable that the Policymakers Summary of the IPCC report avoids mentioning the satellite data altogether, or even the existence of satellites — probably because the data show a slight cooling over the last 18 years, in direct contradiction of the calculations from climate models?”Dr Hajo Smit: “There is clear cut solar-climate coupling and a very strong natural variability of climate on all historical time scales. Currently I hardly believe anymore that there is any relevant relationship between human CO2 emissions and climate change.”Dr Richard Tol: “The IPCC attracted more people with political rather than academic motives. In AR4, green activists held key positions in the IPCC and they succeeded in excluding or neutralising opposite voices.”Dr Tom Tripp: “There is so much of a natural variability in weather it makes it difficult to come to a scientifically valid conclusion that global warming is man made.”Dr Gerd-Rainer Weber: “Most of the extremist views about climate change have little or no scientific basis.”Dr David Wojick: “The public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates.”Dr Miklos Zagoni: “I am positively convinced that the anthropogenic global warming theory is wrong.”Dr Eduardo Zorita: “Editors, reviewers and authors of alternative studies, analysis, interpretations, even based on the same data we have at our disposal, have been bullied and subtly blackmailed.”Via : 46 statements by IPCC experts against the IPCC | grumpydenierDr Robert C Balling, Jr. is a professor of geography at Arizona State University, and the former director of its Office of Climatology. His research interests include climatology, global climate change, and geographic information systems. Balling has declared himself one of the scientists who oppose the consensus on global warming, arguing in a 2009 book that anthropogenic global warming “is indeed real, but relatively modest”, and maintaining that there is a publication bias in the scientific literature.Dr Lucka Bogataj (Kajfež Bogataj Lučka) The joint recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007, she is one of Slovenia’s pioneers in researching the impact of climate change, and she regularly informs the general public of her findings.She is a full professor and teaches at the Biotechnical Faculty, while also lecturing at the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics and at the Faculty of Architecture. More…Dr John Christy John Raymond Christy is a climate scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) whose chief interests are satelliteremote sensing of global climate and global climate change. He is best known, jointly with Roy Spencer, for the first successful development of a satellite temperature record.He is the Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He was appointed Alabama‘s state climatologist in 2000. For his development of a global temperature data set from satellites he was awarded NASA‘s Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement, and the American Meteorological Society‘s “Special Award.” In 2002, Christy was elected Fellow of the American Meteorological Society.Dr Rosa Compagnucci : Retired but she continue advancing in her past line of research. Four years ago he worked at the Department of Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences, Universidad de Buenos Aires and was Principal Research in the Argentina Research Council CONICET. Rosa does research in Climatology, Meteorology and Paleoclimatology. Their most recent publication is ‘RELATIONSHIP AMONG A SUPERNOVA, A TRANSITION OF POLARITY OF THE GEOMAGNETIC FIELD AND THE PLIO-PLEISTOCENE BOUNDARY’.Dr Richard Courtney is a Technical Editor for CoalTrans International (journal of the international coal trading industry) who lives in Epsom, Surrey (UK). In the early 1990s Courtney was a Senior Material Scientist of the National Coal Board (also known as British Coal) and a Science and Technology spokesman of the British Association of Colliery Management. Member of the European Science and Environment Forum. Acting as a technical advisor to several U.K. MPs and mostly-U.K. MEPsDr Judith Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She is a member of the National Research Council’s Climate Research Committee. After publishing over a hundred scientific papers and co-editing several major works, Curry retired from academia in 2017.Dr Robert Davis is a Professor of Climatology at the University of Virginia‘s Department of Environmental Sciences.Davis received his Ph.D. in 1988 from the University of Delaware. His research contributions include the development of a system for measuring the power of Nor’easters. In his studies of global warming, he has suggested that it may manifest more by milder winters than by hotter summers, and predicted that its effects on human population will not be severe.Dr Willem de Lange Position: Senior Lecturer, Earth Sciences, Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Waikato.Field: Earth and ocean sciences, focus on coastal oceanography. An earth scientist and lecturer at the University of Waikato, was born in the Netherlands and moved with his family to New Zealand when he was 18 months old. Since then, he has stayed put in Hamilton. He did his Bachelor of Science, master’s and PhD at the University of Waikato and is now a Senior Lecturer in the Earth and Ocean Sciences Department there.Dr Chris de Freitas New Zealand climate scientist. He was an associate professor in the School of Environment at the University of Auckland. De Freitas, born in Trinidad, received both his Bachelor’s and his Master’s at the University of Toronto, Canada, after which he earned his PhD as a Commonwealth Scholar from the University of Queensland, Australia. During his time at the University of Auckland, he served as deputy dean of science, head of science and technology, and for four years as pro vice-chancellor. He also served as vice-president of the Meteorological Society of New Zealand and was a founding member of the Australia–New Zealand Climate Forum.Dr Oliver Frauenfeld My research activities include a broad range of topics in climate variability and climate change. I focus primarily on surface-atmosphere interactions, over both the land and the oceans. One of these research areas investigates changes in Arctic and high-altitude environments; specifically, the interactions between frozen ground (permafrost and seasonally frozen areas) and other cryospheric variables in the high latitudes of Eurasia, with the overlying atmosphere.Dr Peter Dietze Independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller; official reviewer, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Bavaria, Germany.Independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller; official reviewer, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Bavaria, Germany.Dr John Everett is a marine biologist who has worked with NOAA and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and manages the UN Atlas of the Oceans; he is currently president of the consulting firm Ocean Associates, Inc.”I was a Member of the Board of Directors of the NOAA Climate Change Program from its inception until I left NOAA. I led several impact analyses for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from 1988 to 2000, while a NOAA employee. The reports were reviewed by hundreds of government and academic scientists as part of the IPCC process.”Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen Friis-Christensen received a Magisterkonferens (Ph.D. equivalent) in Geophysics from University of Copenhagen in 1971. In 1972, he was a geophysicist at the Danish Meteorological Institute. His interest in solar activity began in August, in his tent, when he experienced an extreme solar storm:Dr Lee Gerhard is a retired geologist from the University of Kansas. His profile at Thomasson Partner Associates, Inc. describes him as as an Honorary Member of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, past president and Honorary Member of that society’s Division of Environmental Geosciences, an Honorary Member of the Association of American State Geologists, and an Honorary Member of the Kansas Geological Society.Dr Indur Goklany is a science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior, where he holds the position of Assistant Director of Programs, Science and Technology Policy.He has represented the United States at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and during the negotiations that led to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. He was a rapporteur for the Resource Use and Management Subgroup of Working Group III of the IPCC First Assessment Report in 1990, and is the author of Clearing the Air (1999), The Precautionary Principle (2001), and The Improving State of the World (2007).Dr Vincent Gray (24 March 1922 – 14 June 2018) was a New Zealand chemist, and a founder of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition. Gray was awarded a PhD in physical chemistry by the University of Cambridge. He commented on every publication of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, with 1,898 comments on the 2007 Report.Dr Mike Hulme Professor of Human Geography in the Department of Geography at the University of Cambridge. He was formerly professor of Climate and Culture at King’s College London (2013-2017) and of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia (UEA). Hulme served on the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) from 1995 to 2001.[5] He also contributed to the reports of the IPCC.Dr Kiminori Itoh Japanese award winning environmental physical chemist who contributed to the U.N. IPCC AR4 climate report. Itoh on the man-made global warming theory: Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” Received his Ph.D. in industrial chemistry from University of Tokyo in 1978. “I have written (or participated in) four books (in Japanese, unfortunately) on this issue including the present one. I also took a patent on sunspot number anticipation, and did some contribution to the IPCC AR4 as an expert reviewer.”Dr Yuri Izrael was a vice-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) until September 2008, when the new bureau was elected. zrael was former chairman of the Committee for Hydrometeorology. He also served as director of the Institute of Global Climate and Ecology, which is a part of the Russian Academy of Sciences. He was a first vice-president of the World Meteorological Organization and helped develop the World Weather Watch.Dr Steven Japar a PhD atmospheric chemist who was part of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Second (1995) and Third (2001) Assessment Reports, and has authored 83 peer-reviewed publications and in the areas of climate change, atmospheric chemistry, air pollutions and vehicle emissions.Dr Georg Kaser is a South Tyrolean glaciologist and is considered one of the most influential climate researchers worldwide. He worked twice as lead author on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nations‘ World Council of Nations.Dr Aynsley Kellow is a climate skeptic at the School of Governement University of Tasmania. Aynsley Kellow was an IPCC reviewer to Working Group II of AR4.Dr Madhav Khandekar is a former research scientist from Environment Canada and is presently on the editorial board of the Journal of Natural Hazards (Kluwer). He is an environmental consultant on extreme weather events and a scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project. He has worked in the fields of weather and climate for nearly 50 years and has published more than 120 papers, reports, and book reviews and a monograph on ocean surface wave analysis and modeling (Springer-Verlag 1989). Khandekar is one of the external reviewers for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 1997 Fourth Assessment Report.Dr Hans Labohm Hans HJ Labohm was born in 1941. He studied economics and economic history at the Municipal University of Amsterdam. After his military service, from 1967 he worked for the Ministry of Defense at the Dutch Permanent Representation to NATO in Brussels. In 1971 he joined the Foreign Service and was sent to Sweden. After returning to the Netherlands in 1974, he worked in various positions at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs: from 1978 as Deputy Policy Planning Advisor. From 1987 to 1992 he was Deputy Permanent Representative of the Netherlands to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris. Since September 1992, he has been affiliated with the Clingendael Institute as a guest researcher and advisor to the Board of Directors. He has regularly published in Het Financieele Dagblad, NRC Handelsblad, de Volkskrant, the Internationale Spectator and Liberaal Reveil, among others. From 2002 he worked as a columnist on the American website of ‘Tech Central Station’. After years of blogging for The Daily Standard (DDS), he has been writing for Climategate Klimaat Wetenschapsjournalisten Energie CO2 and Yalta since June 2015.Dr Andrew Lacis NASAGISS National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA AST, CLIMATE & RADIATION STUDIES). Andrew A. Lacis received his B.A. in Physics in 1963, M.S. in Astronomy in 1964, and Ph.D. in Physics in 1970, all from the University of Iowa. He was selected for the NASA traineeship program, a program established by NASA to encourage graduate students in the pursuit of scientific research and study. While a graduate student, he also did research in astrophysics and astronomy in Japan at the University of Kyoto, and at the University of Tokyo. Following his Ph.D., he was Instructor in Astronomy at the University of Iowa. In 1972, he teamed up with James E. Hansen for post-doctoral research in planetary atmospheres at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) more…Dr Chris Landsea is an American meteorologist, formerly a research meteorologist with the Hurricane Research Division of the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory at NOAA, and now the Science and Operations Officer at the National Hurricane Center. He is a member of the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society.Dr Richard Lindzen is an American atmospheric physicist known for his work in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides, and ozone photochemistry. He has published more than 200 scientific papers and books. From 1983 until his retirement in 2013, he was Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was a lead author of Chapter 7, “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change‘s Third Assessment Report on climate change. He has criticized the scientific consensus about climate change and what he has called “climate alarmism.”Dr Harry Lins is a Scientist Emeritus (Hydrology) with the U.S. Geological Survey. During his years at USGS, his work spanned several Earth science disciplines, including coastal processes, surface water hydrology, and hydroclimatology. Although most of his career was spent conducting research, he managed the USGS Global Change Hydrology Program from 1989 to 1997, and served as Co-Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Hydrology and Water Resources Working Group for the IPCC First Assessment Report. In 1999, he and USGS colleague David Wolock developed “WaterWatch”, the Nation’s first website depicting maps and graphs of water resources conditions in near real-time. Lins currently serves as President of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Commission for Hydrology.Dr Philip Lloyd UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author, [Nuclear Physicist] and Chemical Engineer, and author of more than 150 [189] refereed publications. “The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil. I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.” Google natural CO2 vs man-made CO2 for the real facts.Philip Lloyd’s Professional details- Honorary Research Fellow: Energy Research Centre: University of Cape Town, Cape Town; Fellow: SA Acad of Engineering ; Chair: VAF: Chemical & Allied Industries Association; Fellow: SA Chemical Institute (SACI)Dr Martin Manning Professor Martin Manning was the Founding Director of the New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute at Victoria University of Wellington, established to build better interactions between science, policy, and society on climate change issues. From 2002 to 2007, Martin was Director of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group I Technical Support Unit that produced the Fourth Assessment Report on climate change for governments. He has produced over 50 papers in peer-reviewed science literature and been an author and review editor for several of the major IPCC reports. Martin has worked in several countries but spent most of his life in New Zealand where he led research on greenhouse gases, atmospheric chemistry, and other aspects of climate change science over the last thirty years. In 2008, Martin became an Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit for his services to climate change science.Steven McIntyre is a Canadian mining exploration company director, a former minerals prospector and semi-retired mining consultant whose work has included statistical analysis. He is best known as the founder and editor of Climate Audit, a blog devoted to the analysis and discussion of climate data. He is most prominent as a critic of the temperature record of the past 1000 years and the data quality of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. He is known in particular for his statistical critique, with economist Ross McKitrick, of the hockey stick graph which shows that the increase in late 20th century global temperatures is unprecedented in the past 1,000 years.Dr Patrick Michaels is a past president of the American Association of State Climatologists and was program chair for the Committee on Applied Climatology of the American Meteorological Society. He was a research professor of Environmental Sciences at University of Virginia for 30 years. Michaels was a contributing author and is a reviewer of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.Dr Nils-Axel Morner is the former head of the paleogeophysics and geodynamics department at Stockholm University. He retired in 2005. He was president of the International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA) Commission on Neotectonics (1981–1989). He headed the INTAS (International Association for the promotion of cooperation with scientists from the New Independent States of the former Soviet Union) Project on Geomagnetism and Climate (1997–2003). He is a critic of the IPCC and the notion that the global sea level is rising.Dr Johannes Oerlemans is a Dutch climatologist specialized in glaciology and sea level.[1] He is a professor of meteorology in the Faculty of Physics and Astronomy at Utrecht University.Dr Roger Pielke is an American political scientist and professor, and was the director of the Sports Governance Center within the Department of Athletics at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado Boulder. He previously served in the Environmental Studies Program and was a Fellow of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) where he served as Director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado Boulder from 2001 to 2007. Pielke was a visiting scholar at Oxford University’s Saïd Business School in the 2007-2008 academic year.Dr Paul Reiter is a professor of medical entomology at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, France. He is a member of the World Health Organization Expert Advisory Committee on Vector Biology and Control. He was an employee of the Center for Disease Control (Dengue Branch) for 22 years. He is a specialist in the natural history, epidemiology and control of mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue fever, West Nile fever, and malaria. He is a Fellow of the Royal Entomological Society. Reiter says he was a contributor to the third IPCC Working Group II (Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability) report, but resigned because he “found [himself] at loggerheads with persons who insisted on making authoritative pronouncements, although they had little or no knowledge of [his] speciality”. After ceasing to contribute he says he struggled to get his name removed from the Third report.Dr Murry Salby is an American atmospheric scientist who focused on upper atmospheric wave propagation for most of his early career, and who more recently argued against aspects of the scientific consensus that human activity contributes to climate change.[1] He has written two textbooks, Fundamentals of Atmospheric Physics (1996),[2] and Physics of the Atmosphere and Climate (2011). The latter textbook, building on his first book, offers an overview of the processes controlling the atmosphere of Earth, weather, energetics, and climate physics.Dr Tom Segalstad has conducted research, publishing, and teaching in geochemistry, mineralogy, petrology, volcanology, structural geology, ore geology, and geophysics at the University of Oslo and at Pennsylvania State University. His current research interests include general geochemistry (the chemistry of the Earth), metallogenesis (how mineral deposits and ore deposits form), igneous petrogenesis (how magmatic rocks form), and carbon dioxide and the “greenhouse effect” (how carbon dioxide cannot cause “global warming”).He is past head of the Natural History Museums and Botanical Garden of the University of Oslo and currently a member of several international and national professional working groups and committees, including an expert reviewer for the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change.Dr Fred Singer an atmospheric and space physicist, founded the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) and the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). He served as professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA (1971–94); distinguished research professor at the Institute for Space Science and Technology, Gainesville, FL (1989–94); chief scientist, U.S. Department of Transportation (1987– 89); vice chairman of the National Advisory Committee for Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA) (1981–86); deputy assistant administrator for policy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1970–71); deputy assistant secretary for water quality and research, U.S. Department of the Interior (1967– 70); founding dean of the School of Environmental and Planetary Sciences, University of Miami (1964–67); first director of the National Weather Satellite Service (1962–64); and director of the Center for Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Maryland (1953–62).Dr Hajo Smit a former member of the UN IPCC committee who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a sceptic. (Climatism: very limited online footprint.)Dr Richard Tol is a professor of economics at the University of Sussex. He is also professor of the economics of climate change at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. He is a member of the Academia Europaea. Tol was a coordinating lead author for the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Tol said in March 2014 that he had withdrawn from the writing team for the Summary for Policy Makers of the report in September 2013, citing disagreement with the profile of the report which he considered too alarmist and putting too little emphasis on opportunities to adapt to climate changes.Dr Tom Tripp is Professor of Management, Rom Markin Endowed Leadership Chair in Business, and Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at the Carson College of Business at Washington State University. He previously taught at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University and at the Sauder School of Business at University of British Columbia.Dr Gerd-Rainer Weber undertook undergraduate and graduate studies in atmospheric sciences at the Free University of Berlin, during which time he was a Fulbright and Indiana University Scholar. Further study in America gained him an http://M.Sc. degree in atmospheric sciences from the University of Michigan. He returned to the Free University of Berlin to study for his Meteorology Ph.D. in conjunction with the Max-Planck Institute of Aeronomy.Dr David Wojick has a Ph.D. in the philosophy of science and mathematical logic from the University of Pittsburgh and a B.S. in civil engineering from Carnegie Tech. He has been on the faculty of Carnegie Mellon University and the staffs of the U.S. Office of Naval Research and the Naval Research Lab.Dr Miklos Zagoni is a physicist and science historian at Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, now governmental adviser. He is a well-known science writer in Hungary. He participated in the Hungarian Academy of Science’s climate change project and was the expert-reporter of three documentary films on that project. His list of publications, interviews, papers, and book chapters on the issue is more than 200 items (most of it in Hungarian).Dr Eduardo Zorita is a Spanish paleoclimatologist. As of 2010, he is a Senior Scientist at the Institute for Coastal Research, GKSS Research Centre in Geesthacht, Germany, where he has worked since 1996. Zorita was a contributing author to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC, and is review editor of the journal Climate Research.***UPDATE“The climate blog article of 2020, so far, is up …”MANY thanks to the team at Suspicious0bservers for their generous review of this post.•••U.N. IPCC Related :UN IPCC : Climate “Has Almost Nothing To Do With Environmental Policy.” | ClimatismUN IPCC : “Long-Term Prediction of Future Climate States Is Not Possible.” | ClimatismUN IPCC Rewrote Temperature History To Suit Their Political Agenda | ClimatismPeer into the Heart of the IPCC, Find Greenpeace | Climatism•••Carbon Dioxide ‘Pollution’ On Vacation In HawaiiPosted: February 13, 2019 | Author: Jamie Spry | Filed under: Carbon Dioxide, Climatism, CO2, Dud predictions, Extreme Weather, Failed Climate Models, Fake News, Hot Spot, Snow Pack, Uncategorized | Tags: Carbon Dioxide, carbon dioxide emissions, Climate Change, Climatism, CO2, Extreme weather, Global Warming, Grand Solar Minimum, Green New Deal, Hawaii, Maui, Mauna Kea, nature, Polipoli State Park, Science and Environment, snow, Snow Extent, Snow Pack, The Hot Spot, The Missing Hot Spot| 2 CommentsSource Photo : Things People in Hawaii Generally Don’t Have to Worry About“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.” – Bertrand Russel***ANTHROPOGENIC global warming theory implies that mankind’s gasses, primarily, carbon dioxide (deceptively known as “carbon pollution” for politics and shock value) is supposed to be warming the lower troposphere – the first 10 kilometres of Earth’s atmosphere.WHILE the fingerprint for Carbon Dioxide forcing exists in computer simulations, it is yet to be found in the physical world:THE MISSING ‘HOT SPOT’One of the most important pieces of the climate change debate rarely cited … the missing ‘Hot-Spot’ | The Missing Hot Spot | Climatism*WHILE debate rages about the causes of global warming, most of the public and our policy makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts:1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever.If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again.Dr David Evans, former consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005FULL Report here : The Missing Hot Spot | Climatism*S-NO-W HOT SPOT OVER HAWAII!BESIDES precipitation, the most important element required for snow to form is cold air. Yesterday’s winter blast set a new (interim) record cold temperature for the 50th state of -12°F or -11.1°C.via weather.com :Just after midnight on Monday, a number of sensors atop Mauna Kea dipped below 12 degrees Fahrenheit, according to the Mauna Kea Weather Center, a facility supporting a number of telescopes atop the 13,770-foot volcano on the Big Island of Hawaii.If those temperatures are deemed accurate, at least four of those sensors would exceed the official all-time state record low in Hawaii of 12 degrees (-11.1 degrees Celsius) also set atop Mauna Kea on May 17, 1979.Hawaii Storm Might Have Set the State’s All-Time Record Low; Snow Fell on Maui, Too | The Weather Channel*LOWEST-ELEVATION SNOWFALL EVER RECORDEDSNOW is not unheard of in mountainous parts of the tropical island chain, but officials say the coating at 6,200 feet (1,900 meters) at Polipoli State Park on Maui could mark the lowest-elevation snowfall ever recorded in the state.Strong storm brings damage — and snow — to Hawaii | The Seattle Times*SEE original video of ’emotional’ gentleman discovering rare snowfall at 6,200 feet here :‘It’s f***ing snowing’: Snow falls in Maui, Hawaii | Metro Video‘It’s f***ing snowing’ – Snow falls in Maui, Hawaii | Metro Video*IT’S ONLY WEATER, BUT…GLOBAL Warming alarmists have already been quick to denounce this as just a weather event, which it is. “You’re confusing weather with climate!” they insist on my twitter account. As they themselves aggressively look for the next heatwave, flood, drought or forest fire to blame on “CLIMATE CHANGE!”.REMEMBER that rule: Cold = Weather, Hot = Climate.YES, this is just a weather event. However, it’s worth keeping in mind that such “weather” including the record cold and snow experienced in the current NH winter was not expected in the era of the “HOTTEST XXX EVAHH”, so gleefully marketed by the global warming theory obsessed mainstream media.IN FACT, according to the ‘97% consensus’ of ‘climate experts’ and sycophant mainstream media, “Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past“. And, “a very rare and exciting event [where] children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”SEE for yourself what climate ‘experts’ predicted about snow…IN 2000, climate expert Dr David Viner of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) assured us that :Snowfall will become “A very rare and exciting event…Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”Dr David Viner – Senior scientist, climatic research unit (CRU)SNOWFALL Will Become “A Very Rare And Exciting Event…” | Climatism*IN 2001, the UN IPCC predicted diminished snowfalls as human CO2 increased, claiming that “milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms” due to human activity…IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeTHEY also forecast “warmer winters and fewer cold spells, because of climate change…”warmer-winters-ipcc*2000 : a prediction from Professor Mojib Latif of Germany’s GEOMAR Heimholtz Centre for Ocean Research…“Winters with strong frosts and lots of snow like we had 20 years ago will no longer exist at our latitudes.” – Professor Mojib Latif2000 : Spiegel…“Good bye winter. Never again snow?”2004 : Mark Lynas told us…“Snow has become so rare that when it does fall – often just for a few hours – everything grinds to a halt. In early 2003 a ‘mighty’ five-centimetre snowfall in southeast England caused such severe traffic jams that many motorists had to stay in their cars overnight. Today’s kids are missing out . . . Many of these changes are already underway, but have been accelerating over the last two decades. Termites have already moved into southern England. Garden centres are beginning to stock exotic sub-tropical species, which only a few years ago would have been killed off by winter…” – Mark Lynas2005 : Christopher Krull, Black Forest Tourism Association / Spiegel…Planning for a snowless future: “Our study is already showing that that there will be a much worse situation in 20 years.”2005 : George Monbiot on climate change and snow…Winter is no longer the great grey longing of my childhood. The freezes this country suffered in 1982 and 1963 are – unless the Gulf Stream stops – unlikely to recur. Our summers will be long and warm. Across most of the upper northern hemisphere, climate change, so far, has been kind to us…2006 : Daniela Jacob of Max Planck Institute for Meterology, Hamburg …“Yesterday’s snow… Because temperatures in the Alps are rising quickly, there will be more precipitation in many places. But because it will rain more often than it snows, this will be bad news for tourists. For many ski lifts this means the end of business.”Less Snow and Drier Summers in German Forecast | Germany| News and in-depth reporting from Berlin and beyond | DW | 30.04.20062006 : The Independent‘s somber editorial admonished us that the lack of snow was evidence of a “dangerous seasonal disorder”…The countryside is looking rather peculiar this winter. It seems we have a number of unexpected guests for Christmas. Dragonflies, bumblebees and red admiral butterflies, which would normally be killed off by the frost, can still be seen in some parts of the country . . . Some might be tempted to welcome this late blossoming of the natural world as a delightful diversion from the bleakness of this time of year. But these fluctuations should be cause for concern because it is overwhelmingly likely that they are a consequence of global warming . . . all this is also evidence that global warming is occurring at a faster rate than many imagined…2007 : BBC “One Planet Special”…“It Seems the Winters of Our Youth are Unlikely to Return” presenter Richard Hollingham … speaks to climate scientists to get their views. Their conclusion? In the words of the BBC, they all give “predictions of warmer winters, for UK & the Northern Hemisphere”.2007 : Schleswig Holstein NABU…“Ice, snow, and frost will disappear, i.e. milder winters” … “Unusually warm winters without snow and ice are now being viewed by many as signs of climate change.”2007 : Western Mail (Wales Online) … article, entititled “Snowless Winters Forecast for Wales as World Warms Up” quotes one of the global warming movement’s key figures, Sir John Houghton, former head of the IPCC and former head of the UK Met Office…Former head of the Met Office Sir John Houghton, who is one of the UK’s leading authorities on climate change, said all the indicators suggest snowy winters will become increasingly rare He said, “Snowlines are going up in altitude all over the world. The idea that we will get less snow is absolutely in line with what we expect from global warming.”2007 : Die Zeit…“First the snow disappears, and then winter.”2008 : Another prediction…A study of snowfall spanning 60 years has indicated that the Alps’s entire winter sports industry could grind to a halt through lack of snow…. In some years the amount that fell was 60 per cent lower than was typical in the early 1980s, said Christoph Marty, from the Swiss Federal Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research in Davos, who analysed the records. ”I don’t believe we will see the kind of snow conditions we have experienced in past decades,” he said.2014 : the global warming theory-obsessed New York Times touted “The End of Snow?” Reassuring their readers that “This is no longer a scientific debate. It is scientific fact.”“The truth is, it is too late for all of that. Greening the ski industry is commendable, but it isn’t nearly enough. Nothing besides a national policy shift on how we create and consume energy will keep our mountains white in the winter — and slow global warming to a safe level.This is no longer a scientific debate. It is scientific fact. The greatest fear of most climate scientists is continued complacency that leads to a series of natural climatic feedbacks…”(Climatism bolds)The End of Snow? – The New York Times2017 : The Age’s resident global warming catastrophist Peter Hannam signalled the end of snow…Snowy retreat: Climate change puts Australia’s ski industry on a downhill slope | The AGEAustralia’s ski resorts face the prospect of a long downhill run as a warming climate reduces snow depth, cover and duration. The industry’s ability to create artificial snow will also be challenged, scientists say.Snowy retreat: Climate change puts Australia’s ski industry on a downhill slope | The AGE*A 2003 CSIRO report, part-funded by the ski industry, found that resorts could lose a quarter of their snow within 15 years…Icons under threat: The Alps – General – In Depth – theage.com.au*DOES the CSIRO and ‘97% of all experts’ still stand by their predictions of “no-snow”? Or is their alarmist sophistry simply moreglobal warmingclimate change fear-mongering designed to push their socialist agenda based not on evidence but on political dogma, ideology and overheated UN IPCC / CSIRO climate models?*SNOW EXTENT DATAWINTER snow extent is increasing globally as CO2 emissions rise…Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow LabRutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow LabRutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab*HIGHEST snow mass build-up since 1982Highest snow mass build-up since 1982 pic.twitter.com/Ot4C4rzgHs— Yota111 (@yota_berlin) February 9, 2019*RECORD NORTH AMERICAN SNOWFALL 2018Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab*‘FALL’ snow extent is also increasing globally as CO2 emissions rise…Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab (Fall NH)Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab (Eurasia Fall)Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab (NorAm Fall)*ALARMISTS U-TURNNOW, of course, climate scientists are trying to dig themselves out of snow that’s kept falling…Looking back at 65 years’ worth of statistics, Environment Canada’s senior climatologist David Phillips noted that since 1948, winter temperatures in the prairie regions have increased by an average of four degrees Celsius… Ironically, warmer weather can mean greater snowfall. “As we warm up, we may see more moisture, we may see more moist air masses, and therefore we could very well see more snow rather than less snow, because the air masses are going to be more moist and so therefore you’re going to be able to wring out more snow than you would be if it was dry air,” Phillips said.NB//“Interestingly, some scientists have stated that increasing snow is consistent with climate change because warmer air holds more moisture, more water vapor and this can result in more storms with heavy precipitation. The trick, of course, is having sufficient cold air to produce that snow. But note that 93% of the years with more than 60″ of snow in Boston were colder than average years. The reality is cooling, not warming, increases snowfall.” – Veteran Meteorologist Barry Burbank*CONCLUSIONLISTEN to what the ‘experts’ promised you back then. Because, if they got it wrong then, how can you trust what they are foretelling today or tomorrow? The answer is you cannot, because they have no idea what long-range conditions Mother Nature is going to serve up in such a “chaotic” and complex system as our climate.BUT, one thing is a “97%” certainty within the current and scary world of post-modern climate ‘science’ – whatever scenario suits and supports the political and ideological position of man-made ‘climate change’ will be predicted, promoted and spread like a hurricane within the compliant mainstream media, throughout our most ‘esteemed’ scientific institutions, our schools and of course throughout academia – DAMN the data and real-world evidence!Search Results for “Global warming causes colder winters” – Climatism

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.