Showing posts with label Global Warming Alarmists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Global Warming Alarmists. Show all posts

Friday, November 18, 2022

The Lancet response to Bjørn Lomborg

Bjørn Lomborg Wall Street Journal article (Climate Change and the Lancet’s ‘Heat Death’ Deception With COP27 approaching, {Lancet} claims rising temperatures have killed people but ignores that they appear to have saved far more.) criticized a Lancet study that found a increasing heat deaths among old people without adjusting for the fact that there are a lot more old people now, thanks to medical and environmental progress as a result of fossil fuel use.


Lancet then responded by going wildly off topic: "Behind this discussion lies an ethical conflict. Older generations have enjoyed enormous benefits from industrialization, mostly based on fossil fuels. But global heating from fossil-fuel greenhouse gases leads to extreme weather events such as floods and droughts, wildfires, reduced crop yields, increased risk of infectious disease, biodiversity loss and sea-level rise, all with effects on health and survival. We are putting our children’s future in the balance. The generational injustice can’t be ignored."

Now it's not the old people, who are actually doing better because of fossil fueled progress, but the young in a distant future who are threatened by climate change events that, with all the scrutiny today, still haven't materialized. In fact, this chart shows that our children's risks caused by climate change have declined dramatically over the past 100 years of rapidly expanding fossil fuel use.

Heat and cold deaths?


The Lancet is hoist on its own petard.

Droughts?


Floods and droughts?



Extreme weather events?

Wildfires?


Reduced crop yields?

 


Increased risk of infectious disease?


Apparently the Lancet physicians never heard of the pandemics that killed hundreds of millions in colder periods of past centuries: the Black Death (Bubonic Plague) that killed 200 million over six hundred years ago; Smallpox killed 56 million about 500 years ago; Spanish Flu killed almost 50 million only one hundred years ago; the Plague of Justinian killed perhaps 50 million 1,500 years ago; and AIDS/HIV so far has killed around 30 million. 

Of the roughly 259 pandemics spanning the past several thousand years, the probable link to climate change is rapid increase in population and cities after the end of the last glacial period (Ice Age) about 11,700 years ago.

Sea level rise?

Historic sea level higher for most of the past 3,000 years.



Honolulu sea level?

Honolulu rate of sea level rise is six inches per century and steady.

The key points of the Lancet response are all unsupported.

So I wrote a letter to the Editor of the Wall Street Journal:

Editor

The Lancet response to Bjorn Lomborg’s article (Climate Change and the Lancet’s ‘Heat Death Deception’” was breathtaking in its deceptions. Its portent of fossil fuel doom didn’t acknowledge the 99% decrease in climate related deaths during the past 100 years due to wealth creation and development as a result of fossil fuel use. Placing the present in the context of the last 1,000 years, we find in the past greater weather events such as droughts and floods and over ten times the acreage burnt by wildfires annually. Rather than “reduced crop yields”, the world now produces record harvests without increased acres planted on an almost annual basis. Sea levels, now lower than during half of the past 10,000 years, are increasing at a rate of six inches per century with no signs of acceleration, per the world’s tide gauge records. 

 

The Lancet letter then goes off tangent about deaths caused by small particulate matter air pollution. Unmentioned by Lancet, these deaths are primarily due to burning wood and dung to cook and heat in enclosed spaces and have been since humans mastered fire. The growing use of natural gas and electricity generated from burning fossil fuels reduces these deaths dramatically.

 

“ Physician (Lancet), heal thyself!”

Friday, October 14, 2022

Blissful Intentional Science Ignorance - Encouraged and Promoted by Big Media

Over six years ago our local weekly newspaper, The Independent (big laugh) Coast Observer, emailed me that my letters would no longer be published. However, on rare occasions one of mine slips through, and this is the latest.

Editor

Believers in human-caused climate change argue that they follow the science, but then don’t. For example, sea-level increase; many Bay Area scientists predict a six-foot increase by 2100, but these predictions lack mention of San Francisco’s tide gauge, installed in 1854, the oldest in the Western Hemisphere. Its history is easily accessed online, as are those of all the world’s tide gauges, at psmsl.org. Per San Francisco’s 166-year record, sea level has risen six inches, at a steady pace of 3.6 inches per century. At the end of 2021 sea level was at its lowest for the past eight years, and 4.6 inches lower than its peak in 1983.

San Francisco tide gauge record since 1854 showing the 1983 peak 
and lack of significant change since then.

 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) website shows sea level at Los Angeles increasing at a steady rate of 3.8 inches per century. Neither San Francisco nor Los Angeles show any increase in the rate of sea-level rise for the past century, and if their current rates are sustained the forecasted six-foot increase will be reached after the year 3800.


The Los Angeles rate of increase of 0.96 millimeters per year is less than four inches per century (3.8 inches)

The San Francisco rate of increase of 1.94 millimeters per year is less than eight inches per century (7.6 inches ) and was achieved by a curious adjustment by NASA at ~1896 not found in the tide gauge data. 

 

Many scientists also ignore Greenland ice core studies that indicate that we now live in the coldest 1,000-year period of the past 10,000 years. 



(It's a pity that I wasn't able to put these charts and links in my letter to the editor, because as you can see, a picture is worth a thousand words.)

 

For (human-caused global warming) scientists, ignorance is bliss.

Saturday, July 18, 2020

Before Michael Shellenberger "Saw The Light"

Break Through: Why We Can't Leave Saving the Planet to EnvironmentalistsBreak Through: Why We Can't Leave Saving the Planet to Environmentalists by Ted Nordhaus
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is extremely well written and contains a lot of information about climate change that the author now completely repudiates in "Apocalypse Never." I was intrigued by his former position on wind turbines, particularly on the failed Cape Wind project, compared to his present understanding of the waste and futility of wind, solar, and biomass energy generation. Just to say "he saw the light" would be to understate the brilliance of his transformation. Still, this book is so well written and original, and his treatment of limit-constricted environmentalists so accurate, that it should be read after reading "Apocalypse Never" to give the reader an appreciation of the thought that has gone into both endeavors.


View all my reviews

Tuesday, July 07, 2020

Apocalypse Never - Everyone Should Read

Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us AllApocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All by Michael Shellenberger
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This book is must reading for everyone, but particularly environmentalists. Each concept - energy generation, plastic waste, adaptation, natural disasters, prosperity vs. preservation, and many others - are treated clearly and thoroughly, with copious footnotes. Of particular interest is Shellenberger's treatment of environmentalism as religion substitute, where each can feel that they by doing some small thing are performing heroic service to the world. He contrasts that with the needs of poor people to gain enjoyment and meaning from their lives, not be inhabitants of an elites' back to the-way-it-was vision of earthly paradise. He shows how agricultural modernization using machinery, fertilizers, and GMOs create food surpluses while freeing people to stop being low production farmers and to be city workers and dwellers. The economic clarity of his illustrations are among the most valuable contributions of this book to approaching and solving the environment of panic created and spread by environmental alarmists. Malthus, Ehrlich, McKibbins are all honored by the left and are all monumentally wrong. Shellenberger gives them the attention they deserve.


View all my reviews

Friday, June 14, 2019

"Haseya.guru" - wants us to "Rise up and stop climate change together"




According to the Haseya.guru website: "One hundred corporations are responsible for 71% of global carbon emissions."
      
Whatever the “100 corporations” are doing concerning CO2 emissions is irrelevant. Fossil fuels enabled the level of prosperity developed nations enjoy today and are the means for developing nations to achieve comparable prosperity. China is the best example, followed by India, and with reliable electrical power and water storage and distribution – attainable only with reliable electrical power from fossil fuel consumption now and in the foreseeable future – Africa will be next.




Burning biofuels in enclosed spaces (homes) – wood and dung – for heating and cooking is responsible for four million deaths each year from respiratory illnesses. Reliable electricity and LPG would eliminate most of these deaths.

Our annual human-created output of 29 gigatons of CO2 is tiny – only 4% - compared to the 750 gigatons moving through the natural carbon cycle each year.





Increase in CO2 emissions is caused by developing countries, not developed. The US and Europe have reduced their CO2 emissions.

CO2 is only a trace gas in the atmosphere – only 0.04%. “Earth's atmosphere is 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 0.9% argon, and 0.04% carbon dioxide with very small percentages of other elements. Our atmosphere also contains water vapor.”
CO2 is also not the most important greenhouse gas. Water vapor comprises about 96% of greenhouse gases and CO2 only about 4%. Methane is a hardly measurable component of greenhouse gases. 


At atmospheric CO2 levels of 150ppm or lower complex life forms on Earth cease existence. At current increasing levels – roughly 400ppm – there has been measurable greening of the planet. During the past billion years atmospheric CO2 levels have normally been much higher – 4,000 to over 7,000ppm. 

Higher CO2 levels increase plant growth and reduce water consumption.

Greenland ice cores, ocean and lake sediment cores, tree lines, coral mounds, ancient beaches, and many other studies show that we now live in the coldest 1,000-year period of the past 10,000 years. Four previous warm periods – the Holocene Climate Optimum (9,000 to 5,000 years ago), Minoan (3,800 to 3,100 years ago), Roman (2,300 to 1,900 years ago), and Medieval (1,150 to 800 years ago) were all warmer than present and each became progressively cooler than its predecessor.




 Haseya.guru continues: "Biodiversity plummets as every twenty-four hours 175 species of plant, insect, bird and mammal become extinct." 

Here is a recent article debunking the mass extinction claims.

It highlights that recent extinctions, which have been moderate and declining in rate, are primarily on islands where non-native species were introduced. I saw the effects of that when I lived on Oahu for four years – mongoose, rats, cats, mosquitos, and plants such as trees, bushes, and fruit like blackberry vines.


To understand recent Great Barrier Reef (GBR) problems it’s good to look at the long picture; coral has existed for about 500 million years. During that time sea levels have varied by over 150 meters, atmospheric CO2 has been ten to twenty times higher, and global temperatures have varied over 10 degrees Celsius. Coral thrived, since it is a warm water organism.

Only 12,000 years ago, the GBR evolved its current form. Prior to that, sea level in the 100,000-year glacial period (Ice Age) was about 120 meters (roughly 400 feet) below the current level. In the 6,000-year period, 18,000 years to 12,000 years ago, sea level rose 120 meters, an average rate of two meters (over 6 feet) per century. Coral kept up with that rapid rate of sea level rise.

The best article I’ve found on the 2016 bleaching is by Jim Steele, Director emeritus Sierra Nevada Field Campus, San Francisco State University and author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism.
The significant findings are that the 2016 El Nino caused prolonged low sea level at low tide and that the upper 15 cm of reef coral was bleached. Coral at deeper levels were not affected. The Hughes study that reported coral disaster was an aerial survey and did not identify that the bleaching was only in the top reef level and had nothing to do with water temperature.


Coral exposed by low tides caused by 2016 El Nino

Here is  a comprehensive article about coral over time

Here’s a good article that includes summaries of many coral studies

I have dozens of studies that all support coral resilience and the causes of fluctuations – and that coral is doing very well, particularly in areas where scuba divers are rare.

Your statistics on rates of extinction are also totally out of whack, but that’s an item for a later look.

Climate Change Alarmists fiddle while California burns – “It’s the forest management, stupid!”

Even the LA Times figured it out. In fact, The Times and others noted that warnings to Paradise and other cities went back decades and predicted then what happened last year. 


Concerning wildfires and climate change: “The state’s climate alarmist politicians, media and climate activists have attempted to make nebulous and lame excuses that man made “climate change” is accountable for the poor forest conditions and increased wildfires but these claims are unsupported by climate data going back more than 1,000 years showing extensive periods of extreme droughts and precipitation in California have long existed and that no definitive change in this very long term climate record has been established as was noted in a Los Angeles Times article from 2014.”


As I have noted in several of my previous letters in the ICO, going back over a decade, Californians live in a Fool’s Paradise; the past hundred years have been much wetter – and cooler - than most of the past 7,000 years. 

Good forest management removes fuel and prevents small trees from serving as “fire ladders.” It also conserves water by removing small trees that take water from big trees. 

While you go on about stopping climate change, which has occurred naturally millions of times, the real work of preventing wildfire devastation needs to be done in California’s forests now!



Monday, August 19, 2013

Useful Climate Change Alarmist Idiots



The Santa Rosa Press Democrat had another nonsensical alarmist climate change article. This one was about recent Clear Lake warming (LakesWarming Up: ‘Sentinels for climate change’, August 19, 2013), which sounded significant and ominous until near the end of the article when Thomas Smythe, Lake County’s water resource engineer for 25 years, noted that Clear Lake’s temperature declined from 1970 to 1990, but by 2008 had rebounded to the 1970 level.

Interestingly, Clear Lake cooled for twenty years during a period Al Gore called unprecedented warming, and warmed during the past 23 years, the last sixteen of which haven’t warmed.  

The article also mentioned that Clear Lake warmed at a rate of 0.09 degrees per year from 1992 to 2008, compared to 0.23 degrees per year for Lake Tahoe at the same time. More nonsense, since Lake Tahoe has an average depth of 1,000 feet, and Clear Lake averages 27 feet deep.  Being charitable, the reporter probably got the temperatures reversed. However, Al Gore was at Lake Tahoe on Monday this week, and he said it was getting clearer and never mentioned its warming. Since the warming rate reported in the article is 23 degrees per century, if that were truly the case Big Al would have been all over it.
The article also mentioned the usual panic items: rising sea levels, shrinking glaciers, decreasing snowmelt runoff, and increasing wildfires.  However, sea levels have been rising at a rate of seven inches per century since 1800 (link); glaciers shrank much faster in the 1800s than in the past century (link); Northern Hemisphere snow cover was the highest in 2013 since records began in 1966 (link); and wildfires are at a record low (link).
The Press Democrat article was typical of modern science “journalism” – useful idiots in service to alarmist agendas.

Saturday, April 20, 2013

The Realm of Asinine - Keystone Pipeline Hysteria


The hysteria surrounding approval of the Keystone Pipeline has crossed the border of Ridiculous and entered the realm of Asinine. Thanks to the Recession and natural gas from fracking, the United States is the only developed nation that has met its CO2 reduction goal. North America produces 6.5 gigatons of CO2 emissions annually, and opening the Keystone Pipeline would only increase global CO2 emissions 0.01%. Even after the Keystone Pipeline opens, total US emissions will still be falling, while China will increase its CO2 emissions over 230 times the Keystone Pipeline total each year. As FDR could have said about this issue: “Have you ever heard an ant break wind in a hurricane?”

Numbers must be compared to other numbers to put matters in context. For example, since 1751 (roughly the end of the Little Ice Age), atmospheric CO2 has increased five times faster than human production of CO2 emissions. Science clearly explains that this would be expected as ocean temperatures rebounded from 500 years of Little Ice Age cooling. As a high school chemistry class refresher, cooling water absorbs CO2, and warming water releases it, and that explains why atmospheric CO2 has increased far more than human emissions could cause.

Thanks to China, human CO2 emissions are at record levels, yet (miraculously?) there has been a slight global cooling trend for the past fifteen years, the opposite of what the 44 most sophisticated climate models predicted.

When the Keystone Pipeline is approved, over 100,000 direct and spin-off jobs will be created and the US will be less dependent on unstable overseas oil. Even if the pipeline isn’t built, Canada will produce the oil and deliver it via Canadian pipelines to tankers on its west coast to transport it to China – and probably California, too, until we get fracking.