Comments by "Old Scientist" (@OldScientist) on "BBC News" channel.

  1. @Aaronwhatnow  You'll have to be specific about which reports. I have certainly read some reports. Here's a prècis: The Northern region reached a low point in 2016. However, it has since completely recovered, with coral cover now at double the 2016 level, and recording record cover. The Central region has experienced a greater degree of fluctuation, but is also now at record high coral cover. The Southern region is now at record equalling coral cover, three times higher than at its low point in 2011. Every region is at record-equalling high coral cover, once uncertainty estimates are taken into account. For example take Capricorn Bunkers. This is one of the sections within the Southern Region (one of eleven). In 2022, Capricorn Bunkers had record high coral cover of 59%, around four times the lowest value, seen in 2011, of 16%. This doesn't do it justice though as the data for the reef shows a great degree of variability. This is natural. The reef always recovers strongly. And it's got nothing to do with CO2. Increases in bleaching events has not prevented rapid and record increases in coral cover. AIMS states "Percent hard coral cover is one standard measure of reef condition recorded by scientists worldwide, it provides a simple and robust measure of reef health" with that in mind, and it being such a robust measure, let's just say it loud and clear: hard coral cover is at record-equalling levels in all three sectors of the GBR. Crown of Thorns Starfish are also a non-problem. Northern: no starfish or no outbreak on all reefs. Central: no starfish or no outbreaks. Southern: out of 30 reefs, 27 had no starfish or no outbreaks. And once more, oh yes, there is record hard coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef. And that is a robust measure of reef health. What a robust reef!
    3
  2. There is “no evidence” that Jostedalsbreen, a southern Norway glacier, even existed during the first several thousand years of the Holocene, or when CO2 hovered near 260 ppm (Winker, 2021).
    3
  3. Propaganda. As regards the melting of Arctic Ice, the records nearly always seem to start in 1979. Strange that, considering it was a year of record extent for Arctic Ice. Even so, data from NOAA (2022) show winter (March) ice coverage has hardly changed since '79, and that the summer (September) coverage trend had stopped declining since 2007. How inconvenient! Didn't someone predict in 2007 Arctic ice free by 2010, or 2015, or 2013, or in 5 years? Or was it in 2008 the Arctic ice sheet would melt away. Also predicted in 2008 North Pole ice free in ... 2008 ... or in 10 years. 2009 prediction: Arctic ice free in 2014. 2012 prediction: snow will be gone by 2020. And 2013 star prediction: Methane catastrophe in 2 years because of ice free Arctic. 2018 prediction: zero chance of permanent ice in Arctic by 2022. It's still there, and it's stopped shrinking. If you consider global sea ice cover, it was basically flat from 1981 to 2008, rose until 2010, stayed level until 2015, dropped until 2018, and then rebounded almost all the way back to the 1990-2000 average. Nobody predicted theses changes, nor can they explain them. The changes have no relationship to the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. The climate crisis/emergency/apocalypse is make-believe.
    3
  4. @Niko257x  The big problem for doomists is peak interglacial warmth is not now but around 8,000 years ago. Proxies show a downward trend to the present day but with an interruption for the Medieval Warm Period (that doomists aren't allowed to believe in) followed by a decent into the The Little Ice Age (which doomists think also didn't exist), and a very slight recovery to the present day still below MWP though. Now I know what you're going to say about the supposed rapid warming over the last century but that's not a fair comparison. That's instrumental - which is unreliable due to it poor spatial and temporally collection -with annual instrumental measurements compared with proxy data whose the resolution is 200 years. If we smooth out the current data over the last two centuries you'd be lucky to see ½ degree per century. Your rapid warming disappears, and a very large number of bicentennial periods over the last 16,500 years warm at a faster rate (than 0.5°C/century). And let's not forget the Dansgaard–Oeschger events. The Dansgaard–Oeschger events were global (Dima et al, 2018). One about 11,500 years ago, averaged annual temperatures on the Greenland ice sheet increased by around 8°C over 40 years, in three steps of five years, but a 5 °C change over 30–40 years is more common for these events. So shall we say a rate of change about 20°C per century. If that happened now you'd be foaming. But life carried on.
    3
  5. Life is most diverse in the warmest parts of the world’s oceans. This has been shown across 13 major taxonomic groups from zooplankton to marine mammals. Warmer water = more biodiversity. This is a scare story about things you cannot see. As the oceans warm they will be able to spread away from the equator. Their range will expand. There is no climate crisis.
    3
  6. Everything we do releases carbon dioxide, so the Carbon Cult want to control everything. There will be global starvation if fossil fuels are eliminated. At risk in coming decades will be half of the world’s 8.5 billion to 10 billion people who are fed by crops grown with fertilizers derived from fossil fuels. Getting to Net Zero by 2050 would cost $9.2 trillion a year globally (McKinsey). That's not going to be good value for money. That's nearly one-tenth of global GDP. That money would be better spent on a myriad of things including educating the fifth of humanity who are illiterate and represent a 7% annual loss to the world's economy. Any country that attempts it will be indebted or impoverished. Example: For the UK to reach net zero by electrification of its transport fleet and heating system, it will require a tripling (as a minimum) of its current electrical generation capacity among other things. This will essentially require the UK consuming all of the current global supply of copper and other rare metals for the next 25 years. The cost will be unaffordable and the skilled manpower levels unattainable
    2
  7. @Jc-ms5vv  😉
    2
  8. The famine in the Horn of Africa is endemic not because of climatic factors but because of bad governance and poverty. If you compare these regions to the Gulf States, the climate of the Gulf is similar, although even drier, but the latter have a much higher standard of living due their wealth of fossil fuels and better social organisation. What the Horn of Africa needs is a good dose of reliable energy from fossil fuels to raise their living standards.
    2
  9. Another climate propaganda video from Auntie Beeb. There is nothing abnormal about Portugal's wildfires this year. The weekly burn area is average. And about one-sixth of the record. Cumulative weekly burn area is below average. Weekly CO2 emissions are way below average. The weekly number of fires is way below average. All of this information is readily available on the EFFIS website. This video and report isn't journalism. It is a tissue of lies. It's propaganda. It's political.
    2
  10. The current warming trend, and the heat of 2023-2024 is not explained by the rise in gases like CO2. There has been an increase in Absorbed Solar Radiation of around +1W/m²/decade with a record anomaly in 2023 around +1.83W/m² (CERES) or +1.31W/m² (ERA5). This is correlated with Total Solar Irradiance (how shiny the Sun is), which reached an all time record-breaking high in 2023 and 2024 as confirmed by satellite measurement (SORCE and TSIS). 90% of this solar radiation is absorbed directly by the ocean. 1% is absorbed by the atmosphere. Changing Greenhouse gas concentration has no effect on this increase in ASR. There is more energy from the Sun reaching the ocean, and this is warming it, and then the ocean is warming the atmosphere, then the atmosphere is radiating this energy away into space at an increasing rate. “The EEI [Earth's Energy Imbalance] trend and 2023 peak are not associated with decreasing outgoing longwave radiation (OLR), as one would expect from increasing greenhouse-gas concentrations" "Instead, OLR has been increasing and largely offsetting even stronger absorbed solar radiation (ASR) anomalies" (Goessling et al., 2024).
    2
  11. @jaspercaelan4998  "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." And that's all you've presented here just assertions. No evidence. No data. My comment makes reference to the most up-to-date peer reviewed research published in the world renowned and well respected journal 'Science'.
    2
  12.  @jaspercaelan4998  The Goessling paper was peer reviewed and published in the world renowned and well respected journal 'Science'.
    2
  13. Sea surface temperatures (SST) were trending downwards 2000-2018 (HadSST 4), and from 1950-1980, and from 1880-1910. The oceans warmed at a faster rate 1910-1940 than 1980-2010. Remember CO2 has been accumulating in the atmosphere at an accelerating rate all the time, so there is little correlation between the two. The most recent rise stopped in August 2023, and has been declining since (NOAA SST v5 monthly). The ocean has warmed rapidly and repeatedly during the current interglacial with no correlation to CO2 e.g. 10,300-10,200 years before the present (y BP), 9,500y BP, 6,000-5,900y BP, 5,400-5,300y BP, 2,500-2,300y BP, 1,700-1,600y BP (Berner et al., 2008). There is a high frequency (18 events) of SST variability on the order of 1-3°C during a 10-50 year time resolution throughout the Holocene in the North Atlantic with no correlation to CO2. And Life just carried on.
    2
  14.  @sebastianguerre6868  Whatever floats your boat! 😆
    2
  15. @blurgle9185  If you have some reputable sources to support your argument I would be interested to research them. However, the strange thing is the Earth is getting greener, so potentially there is more biomass to burn, but it is burning less. Also humans are becoming very efficient at producing more and more food from the same amount of farmland. Deserts have shrunk considerably since the 1980's. The Sahara shrank by 12,000km² per year 1984-2015(Liu & Xue, 2020). The Earth has greened by 15% or more in a human lifetime. "The greening of the planet over the last two decades represents an increase in leaf area on plants and trees equivalent to the area covered by all the Amazon rainforests. There are now more than two million square miles of extra green leaf area per year"(NASA, 2019). Observations of Earth’s vegetative cover since the year 2000 by NASA’s Terra satellite show a 10% increase in vegetation in the first 20 years of the century. Global tree canopy cover increased by 2.24 million square kilometers (865,000 square miles) between 1982 and 2016 (Nature, 2018). As well as human intervention, the reasons for this include forests expanding polewards aided by additional CO2 and a slight rise in temperature. The Earth’s natural vegetation productivity actually increased 6% in 18 years (Nemani et al, 2003) with 42% of this increase coming from the Amazon rainforests. Between 1961 and 2021 cereal production increased 250% and cereal yield increased over 200%, but Land used for cereal hardly increased (Data from World Bank, FAO/UN). So basically, although our species does have a disproportionate effect on the planet, there is no climate catastrophe that's allowing wildfires to rage out of control.
    2
  16. @dondoodat  I synthesise the information from multiple strands. The actual sources are shown in the comment so you can check their veracity. All sources are global, governmental or from peer-reviewed scientific papers published in well-respected journals.
    2
  17.  @tubecated_development  🍒 Mmm! Delicious.
    2
  18. BBC propaganda. Global temperatures maxed out in 2016 and have been lower ever since (UAH v6 global satellite data). 500 billion tonnes of emissions in that time (14% of man-made CO2) and no warming. There is no climate crisis.
    2
  19. @8fledermaus8  Wildfire: Global burned area has decreased by one quarter this century! The World is burning less. For the whole of Canada, there is no trend in burn acreage for the period 1980-2021. The previous highest burn acreage was in 1989. Over that same period the trend for number of fires was slightly downwards (CNFDB). Note that 2020 had the lowest recorded burn acreage and number of fires, so can that record be attributed to man-made climate change? Burn acreage was much, much, higher in the US during the 1920's, 30's and 40's. It peaked in 1930 at well over 50,000,000 acres. The trend is downwards (1926-2020 NIFC US) eventhough CO2 has increased exponentially. For 2000 onwards the average burn acreage is much less than 10,000,000 acres. The number of fires has also declined. Remember CO2 was increasing all the time. Burn area for US so far in 2023 including Maui is 3rd lowest on record. Data for Siberia seems harder to come by. However, for the period 1997-2016, the trend was highly variable (by a factor of 4) but the trend for the annual burn acreage was downwards (Global Fire Data). For the Amazon (2003-2019), 2010 was the record year for fire emissions with all subsequent years lower by at least ½. When it comes to wildfires there is nothing unusual about this summer's fire season in Europe (look it up on the EFFIS website). Besides all this the forest fire record in Southern Europe is related to the previous winter rains, not summer temperatures. Wetter winters encourage more plant grow, which forms more fuel for fires when it dries out. Mediterranean summers are always hot and dry enough to allow fires to spread. Furthermore, with regard to the IPCC, they have not detected or attributed the number of fires or the burn acreage to man-made climate change. Also IPCC only has medium confidence ( that's a 50-50, so toss a coin) that weather conditions that promote wildfires (fire weather) have become more probable in southern Europe, northern Eurasia, the USA, and Australia over the last century. Note that annual Global Wildfire Carbon Emissions have been declining dramatically since 2003, with 2022 being the lowest on record (Copernicus). "With higher CO2, increased tree cover leads to reduced fire ignition and burned area, and provides a positive feedback to tree cover" (Chen et al, 2019), so burning fossil fuels actually leads to less forest fire! Global burned area has decreased by nearly by 24.2% in 20 years (Chen et al, 2023). The World is burning less! There is no climate crisis...there isn't even any evidence for it.
    2
  20. @8fledermaus8  The whole of East and West Antarctica is cooling, and has been for 40 years. East Antarctica has cooled by an impressive 0.7°C per decade. Resulting in an overall substantial and statistically significant decline of 2.8°C since 1980. So much for "Global" warming. I am referring to a paper by Zhu et al (2021) that looked at the reanalysed ERA5 satellite dataset. Check out table 4. Furthermore, the Antarctic Peninsula ice has since been shown to be on the increase “The eastern Antarctic Peninsula Ice Sheet has grown in area over the last 20 years, due to changing wind and sea ice patterns.” (University of Cambridge, May, 2022.) "Overall, the Antarctic ice shelf area has grown by 5305 km² since 2009, with 18 ice shelves retreating and 16 larger shelves growing in area. Our observations show that Antarctic ice shelves gained 661 Gt of ice mass over the past decade." (Andreasen et al, 2023). It is from a paper entitled "Change in Antarctic Ice Shelf Area from 2009 to 2019". They use MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) satellite data to measure the change in ice shelf calving front position and area on 34 ice shelves in Antarctica from 2009 to 2019. Also, as the mass gain (661Gt) was given, you could calculate the volume of the ice gained using the formula: Volume = Mass ÷ Density (assume Density of glacier ice 0.9167 Gt/km³). This would give you (well not you obviously) an Ice Gain Volume ≈721km³. That's how much extra of the lovely white stuff there is around Antarctica. Imagine standing in the centre of this extra ice. It would stretch beyond the horizon in all directions and would be 45 storeys high.
    2
  21. @@smelltheair8311 There is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis. The UN's IPCC AR6, chapter 12 "Climate Change Information for Regional Impact and for Risk Assessment", section 12.5.2, table 12.12 confirms there is a lack of evidence or no signal that the following have changed: Air Pollution Weather (temperature inversions), Aridity, Avalanche (snow), Average precipitation, Average Wind Speed, Coastal Flood, Agricultural drought, Hydrological drought, Erosion of Coastlines, Fire Weather (hot and windy), Flooding From Heavy Rain (pluvial floods), Frost, Hail, Heavy Rain, Heavy Snowfall and Ice Storms, Landslides, Marine Heatwaves, Ocean Acidity, Radiation at the Earth’s Surface, River/Lake Floods, Sand and Dust Storms, Sea Level, Severe Wind Storms, Snow, Glacier, and Ice Sheets, Tropical Cyclones. There is no objective observational evidence that we are living through a global climate crisis. None.
    2
  22. @8fledermaus8  That's an unfair and unfounded comment. I contend that I am none of those things. Your ad hominem remarks regarding my character are merely a diversion. It doesn't matter what I am. You are attempting to divert yourself and others from the facts, the objective reality, probably because it does not sit well with your own belief system regarding the world. You cannot argue against the facts so you insult me in the hope of downgrading the worth of those facts in order that you do not have to accept the truth, and damage your own internal narrative as that would be too uncomfortable for you.
    2
  23. @8fledermaus8  The correlation between temperature and CO2 if examined closely shows CO2 followed temperature with a lag of about 800 years at the transition from the last ice age to the current interglacial. I.e. the ice core evidence for Pleistocene/Holocene shows temperature rise caused CO2 to rise not the other way around probably due to outgassing from a warmer ocean. In fact, it gets more complicated, when comparing temperature data from Greenland for the Holocene (GISP 2) with CO2 (EPICA ice dome c) the correlation from about 3,500 years ago onwards appears to be negative. The temperature fell first, then CO2 went up. So over time the correlation between temperature and CO2 is very poor.
    2
  24. @8fledermaus8  You say I misrepresent, but I reference my data sources so anybody can check. That is unlike you. You denigrate me and make sweeping statements without supporting references or evidence.
    2
  25. @8fledermaus8  When they are shown to be correlated the temperature rises first then the concentration of carbon dioxide rises. As I explained. As shown by the ice core data.
    2
  26. Since 1900 the global temperature has increased by 1.3°C. In that time humanity has flourished. Life expectancy has more than doubled from 32 to 73 years. Literacy has quadrupled from 21% to 86%. Humans are seven times more productive ($2,241 to $15,212 GDP per capita, per annum). People are better fed, having ⅓ more calories every day (2,192kcal to 2,928kcal). Global extreme poverty rates have tumbled from 70% to less than 10% (<$1 a day). And death from weather events have collapsed by a factor 50 from 241 million down to 5 million even while the global population has increased by a factor of 5. There is no climate crisis. There is no evidence of a climate crisis. Even if there is radical climate change (and that is a very, very big 'if') with the manifestation of numerous tipping points (including permafrost thaw, ocean hydrates dissociation, Arctic sea ice loss, rainforest dieback, polar ice sheet loss, AMOC slowdown, and Indian monsoon variability) the disruption to economic growth and well-being will be minimal. The world's economy will continue to grow making everyone much richer. By 2050 world mean consumption per capita should be $29,100 with tipping points or $29,300 without tipping points. Barely noticeable. Apart from it being approximately double what it is now. By 2100 world mean consumption per capita should be $71,000 with or without tipping points (Dietz et al, 2021). This is the most fortunate time to be alive in the whole of history.
    2
  27. Since 1900 the global temperature has increased by 1.3°C. Despite that humanity has flourished. Life expectancy has more than doubled from 32 to 73 years. Literacy has quadrupled from 21% to 86%. Humans are seven times more productive ($2,241 to $15,212 GDP per capita, per annum). People are better fed, having ⅓ more calories every day (2,192kcal to 2,928kcal). Global extreme poverty rates have tumbled from 70% to less than 10% (<$1 a day). And death from weather events have collapsed by a factor 50 from 241 million down to 5 million even while the global population has increased by a factor of 5. In a world that's 3°C warmer by the end of the century, it has been estimated that incomes will be between 1.9% (Tol, 2024) and 3.1% lower (Nordhaus) than that would otherwise have been. However the UN estimates that total incomes will have increased by 450% by 2100. If the effects of climate are included we will only be 440% or 435% richer! Oh my God, it's the end of the world! There is no climate crisis. There is no evidence of a climate crisis. Even if there is radical climate change (and that is a very, very big 'if') with the manifestation of numerous tipping points (including permafrost thaw, ocean hydrates dissociation, Arctic sea ice loss, rainforest dieback, polar ice sheet loss, AMOC slowdown, and Indian monsoon variability) the disruption to economic growth and well-being will be minimal. The world's economy will continue to grow making everyone much richer. By 2050 world mean consumption per capita should be $29,100 with tipping points or $29,300 without tipping points. Barely noticeable. Apart from it being approximately double what it is now. By 2100 world mean consumption per capita should be $71,000 with or without tipping points (Dietz et al, 2021). This is the most fortunate time to be alive in the whole of history.
    2
  28. More fake predictions by scientists: 1958 the Arctic Ocean will be Ice free in one generation. 1967 there will be global famine. 1970 there will be an ice age in the 21st century. 1970 Oceans will be dead in less than a decade. 1971 50 years away from an ice age. 1972 glacial temperatures within a century. 1974 satellites show ice age coming fast. 1978 no end to cooling trend. 1979 ice at North Pole will melt in one lifetime. 1982 environmental catastrophe by 2000. 1988 Maldives underwater in 30 years. 1989 entire nations underwater by 2000. 2000 snowfall has become a thing of the past. 2004 UK climate will become Siberian. Cities will sink into the ocean. 2006 10 years until a point of no return. 2007 if no action 2012 will be too late. Also 2007 Arctic ice free 2010, or 2015, or 2013, or 5 years take your pick. 2008 the Arctic ice sheet would melt away. Also 2008 North Pole ice free in ... 2008 ... or in 10 years. 2009 Arctic ice free in 2014. 2012 snow will be gone by 2020. 2013 Methane catastrophe in 2 years because of ice free Arctic. 2018 zero chance of permanent ice in Arctic by 2022. Also 2018 humans to go extinct by 2023 from climate change. 2022 End of Snow predicted.
    2
  29. Forest fires are endemic to Californian. If you build homes in known fire prone areas they will catch fire at some point. That is what has happened. This has got nothing to do with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
    2
  30. Yes, China is the largest producer of turbines and panels. The reason is you need the cheap energy from burning coal to do that. In just 8 years (prior to 2021) China emitted more CO2 than Britain did since the start of Industrial Revolution that began over 220 years ago! And China plans to vastly increase its coal fired generating capacity. The UK is responsible for less than 1% of global CO2 emissions.
    2
  31. The current warming trend, and the heat of 2023-2024 is not explained by the rise in gases like CO2. There has been an increase in Absorbed Solar Radiation of around +1W/m²/decade with a record anomaly in 2023 around +1.83W/m² (CERES) or +1.31W/m² (ERA5). This is correlated with Total Solar Irradiance (how shiny the Sun is), which reached an all time record-breaking high in 2023 and 2024 as confirmed by satellite measurement (SORCE and TSIS). 90% of this solar radiation is absorbed directly by the ocean. 1% is absorbed by the atmosphere. Changing Greenhouse gas concentration has no effect on this increase in ASR. There is more energy from the Sun reaching the ocean, and this is warming it, and then the ocean is warming the atmosphere, then the atmosphere is radiating this energy away into space at an increasing rate. “The EEI [Earth's Energy Imbalance] trend and 2023 peak are not associated with decreasing outgoing longwave radiation (OLR), as one would expect from increasing greenhouse-gas concentrations" "Instead, OLR has been increasing and largely offsetting even stronger absorbed solar radiation (ASR) anomalies" (Goessling et al., 2024)
    2
  32. ​ @WhyWorldWet Look it up. I provided references from reputable sources.
    2
  33.  @Wormkiller-v8e  Even the biased UN's IPCC AR6 WG1, chapter 12 "Climate Change Information for Regional Impact and for Risk Assessment", page 1856, section 12.5.2, table 12.12 confirms there is a lack of evidence or no signal that the following have changed: Air Pollution Weather (temperature inversions), Aridity, Avalanche (snow), Mean precipitation, Average Wind Speed, Coastal Flood, Agricultural drought, Hydrological drought, Erosion of Coastlines, Fire Weather (hot and windy), Flooding From Heavy Rain (pluvial floods), Frost, Hail, Heavy Rain, Heavy Snowfall and Ice Storms, Landslides, Marine Heatwaves, Ocean Acidity, Radiation at the Earth’s Surface, River/Lake Floods, Sand and Dust Storms, Sea Level, Severe Wind Storms, Snow, Glacier, and Ice Sheets, Antarctic Sea Ice, Tropical Cyclones.
    2
  34.  @Wormkiller-v8e  Even the biased UN's IPCC AR6 WG1, chapter 12 "Climate Change Information for Regional Impact and for Risk Assessment", page 1856,  section 12.5.2, table 12.12 confirms there is a lack of evidence or no signal that the following have changed: Air Pollution Weather (temperature inversions), Aridity, Avalanche (snow), Mean precipitation,  Average Wind Speed, Coastal Flood, Agricultural drought, Hydrological drought, Erosion of Coastlines, Fire Weather (hot and windy), Flooding From Heavy Rain (pluvial floods), Frost, Hail, Heavy Rain, Heavy Snowfall and Ice Storms, Landslides, Marine Heatwaves, Ocean Acidity, Radiation at the Earth’s Surface, River/Lake Floods, Sand and Dust Storms, Sea Level, Severe Wind Storms, Snow, Glacier, and Ice Sheets, Antarctic Sea Ice, Tropical Cyclones.
    2
  35. More propaganda from Auntie Beeb. The truth is Climate Change, i.e. warming, saved 555,103 lives in England and Wales between 2001 and 2020 (ONS, 2022). There are over 5 million excess deaths per annum globally due to abnormal temperatures, so says the 2000-2019 study led Prof. Guo of Monash University. It found that over 90% of excess deaths were caused by excess COLD rather than excess heat. That's 4½ million souls died of the cold. This applied globally including in the hottest continent, Africa. So, in a world with increasingly warmer temperatures, there will be less excess death. Warming is good not bad. There has been a 10% decline in natural disasters since 2000 (CRED). Normalised disaster losses have decreased since 1990 and human mortality due to extreme weather has decreased by more than 95% since 1920.
    2
  36. ​ @JJRM8 The Arctic minimum summer sea ice trend is zero for the past 18 years. In the past few years it was almost as high as 1995. The probability that this could be due to chance has now dropped to 10% (after Swart et al calculations, 2015). If the hiatus continues until 2027, it will become statistically significant (p<0.05, or less than 5%) and no longer explainable by chance. Using National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) information for September minima (million km²): 2007 4.16 2008 4.59 2009 5.12 2010 4.62 2011 4.34 2012 3.39 2013 5.05 2014 5.03 2015 4.43 2016 4.17 2017 4.67 2018 4.66 2019 4.19 2020 3.82 2021 4.77 2022 4.67 2023 4.23 2024 4.28 Plot the trend line for this data and it will be flat. ZERO net change in 18 years. The linear trend since 2007 is indistinguishable from zero ( around -0.17% per year ). In the early 1950s the sea ice concentration anomaly was lower than it is at present. The sea ice anomaly then rose during the 50s, 60s and 70s. This was followed by a decline. This is demonstrated in Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute (AARI) data, which is based on historical sea ice charts from several sources (aircraft, ship, and satellite observations). The AARI data shows the sea ice concentration anomaly was lower in 1952 (-5%) than 2005 (-3%). The anomaly increased in the 50s, 60s and 70s. In the 80s, 90s and early 2000s it decreased. Since 2007 the trend has been flat. JAXA (Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency) satellite data from 2002 to 2024 Arctic Sea Ice Extent (365 day running average) shows no noticeable trend with values close to 10,000,000km² throughout. Their minimum extent for daily values was in 2012. No other year since has come close. MASIE (Multisensor Analyzed Sea Ice Extent - Northern Hemisphere) shows something similar to JAXA. From 2005 to 2024 Arctic Sea Ice Extent (365 day running average) shows no noticeable trend with values close to 10,000,000km² throughout. Their minimum extent for daily values was in 2012. Again no other year since has come close. It also shows a marked increase in Ice in the Greenland Sea since 2018. Polyakov et al (2003) show "ice extent (1900-2000) in the Kara, Laptev, East Siberian, and Chukchi Seas provide evidence that long-term ice thickness and extent trends are small and generally not statistically significant". Trend -0.5% per decade (±0.7%). They also noted "the Arctic temperature was higher in the 1930s–40s than in recent decades, and hence a trend calculated for the period 1920 to the present actually shows cooling." Zhang (2021) showed there was no trend for Arctic sea ice volume since at least 2010, and observes that ice draft increased from 1995 onwards. Including more recent satellite data from Cryosat-2 (2010-2023)reveals the Arctic ice volume minimum (Oct-Nov) is increasing at 56km³/yr (Kacimi and Kwok, 2024). Vinje (2001) shows a deceleration in the rate of ice loss from 1864 to 2000. Recent sea ice extent is very high when compared to the last 10,000 years. Also changes in sea ice extent and the speed of those changes were greater in the past (Stein et al, 2017). NOAA's Global Time Series Average Temperature Anomaly monthly data (1995-2004) for the Arctic region shows the peak anomaly occurred in January 2016 (+4.99°C), an El Niño year, and the trend is now downwards (-0.42°C per decade) as of June 2024. HadCRUT4 Arctic (70N - 90N) monthly surface air temperature anomalies record (1920-2021) shows the greatest number and magnitude of positive temperature anomalies occurred between 1930-49. All anomalies in excess of 5°C, including +7°C (referenced to 1961-1990) are from that period. No temperature anomalies from 2000-2019 exceeded 5°C. It shows no decade warmed faster than the 1930s and the current 'warming' finished in 2005. JRA55 SAT (2010-2020) shows most of the Canadian Arctic and Greenland cooling with parts of Canada cooling by 3°C and western Greenland cooling by 2.5°C in a decade. KNMI data (Twentieth Century Reanalysis V2c, 1851-2011, 68°N-80°N, 25°W-60°W, so Greenland) shows the most pronounced warming took place in the 1870s, and when comparing temperature anomalies, highest are in the 1930s and comparison of that period with recent temperature anomalies shows no net warming.
    2
  37. This is a propaganda video. In reality, "there have been statistically significant positive trends in total Antarctic sea ice extent since 1979." (Fogt et al, 2022. Published in Nature) "since 1979 is the only time all four seasons demonstrate significant increases in total Antarctic sea ice in the context of the twentieth century". What the BBC are reporting is an unusual weather event dressed up as the end of the world. Antarctic sea ice was at a record maximum in 2015. The BBC didn't report that as part of a climate crisis. And why don't the BBC report on the Arctic? Because there's been no warming there this summer. Summer 2023 is one of the coldest in decades in the Arctic, and May 2023 was the coldest on record there. The Greenland ice sheet surface mass balance (SMB) for the past 11 months is a massive 450 billion tonnes of ice accumulated. 5 out of the last 7 years have seen huge accumulations above the average (1981-2010). No, Auntie Beeb isn't going to report that. In addition, the extent of ice on the planet has no correlation to the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
    2
  38. So it was never then. There has been a 10% decline in natural disasters since 2000 (CRED). Normalised disaster losses have decreased since 1990 and human mortality due to extreme weather has decreased by more than 95% since 1920.
    2
  39. If you took away El Niño, a record increase in Total Solar Irradiance, and the Tonga eruption (all natural events) there would have been nothing to see in 2023. The Tonga eruption injected 142 megatonnes of water vapour into the stratosphere, increasing its water content by 15%. Water vapour is a far more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2. Total solar irradiance: satellite data from 1979 onwards shows June 2023 at an all time high in over 40 years of measurements (ncei.noaa). There were lows below 1361 W/m² in 2019 to current highs over 1362 W/m² in June (using a lowess curve, which also shows the fastest rate of increase during this recent period). So we are looking at a change of around 1½ Watts over the course of 5 years (the maximum difference is 2.1W/m²). That may not sound much but it exceeds the increase in the Earth's Energy Imbalance (0.9 W/m², 2018 - 1.97 W/m², 2023) (NASA CERES EBAF TOA). Overall the current increase in solar irradiance should give a direct global heating effect of +0.1°C, with an indirect effect of +0.2°C (after Schmutz, 2021). This increase in solar irradiance is related to an earlier than expected increase in sunspot activity, which has not yet reached its zenith, and that may not happen for several years (Royal Observatory Belgium), so further heating from this cause can be expected.
    2
  40. Pakistan Floods: area flooded 8%, much of this short term. 2010 floods were worse. Both associated with La Niña phase during a Northern Hemisphere summer - a natural phenomenon. There is no connection to the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. August 1961 was wetter. For Pakistan's annual rainfall totals the 7-year moving average has barely changed since the 1980s, fluctuating up and down, but with no long term trend. Pakistan has endured major floods long before any significant rise in CO2. Since 1850 Pakistan has experienced 7 major droughts and 6 major floods. Since 1880 there is no trend in excess rainfall or drought conditions over the greater Indian region. I might add the people of Pakistan are also suffering from poverty, bad governance and uncontrolled population growth. In addition in the immediate future they will suffer from the perverse environmental policies of Developed countries that have decided to stop extracting their own energy resources, but will consume the rest of the world's, outbidding poorer countries, like Pakistan, consigning them to darkness and further poverty.
    2
  41. Everything we do releases carbon dioxide, so the Carbon Cult want to control everything. There will be global starvation if fossil fuels are eliminated. At risk in coming decades will be half of the world’s 8.5 billion to 10 billion people who are fed by crops grown with fertilizers derived from fossil fuels. Getting to Net Zero by 2050 would cost $9.2 trillion a year globally (McKinsey). That's not going to be good value for money. That's nearly one-tenth of global GDP. That money would be better spent on a myriad of things including educating the fifth of humanity who are illiterate and represent a 7% annual loss to the world's economy. Any country that attempts it will be indebted or impoverished. Example: For the UK to reach net zero by electrification of its transport fleet and heating system, it will require a tripling (as a minimum) of its current electrical generation capacity among other things. This will essentially require the UK consuming all of the current global supply of copper and other rare metals for the next 25 years. The cost will be unaffordable and the skilled manpower levels unattainable. And that is just to eliminate the 1% of the global CO2 emissions that the UK is responsible for. So times that by 100 for the Earth. 10,000 child slaves in the cobalt mines of the Congo not enough for you? Make it a million. Imagine all the human suffering and environmental damage done from all that resource extraction! It's pointless anyway. In just 8 years (prior to 2021) China emitted more CO2 than Britain did since the start of Industrial Revolution that began over 220 years ago! And China plans to vastly increase its coal fired generating capacity. An electric vehicle requires 6 times the mineral input compared to a conventional one, and the carbon cost is greater until you reach 80,000 miles. Production of all of these minerals has been mastered by China: a totalitarian communist regime that thinks nothing of the mass murder of its own citizens, imagine how much it cares about the rest of us. And why are we embarking on this great net zero crusade? For what? So someone can virtue signal by driving around in a Tesla. Maddeningly, there is no climate crisis. The Earth was warmer in the recent and distant past.
    2
  42. ​@J.R.Y. Venus has a very dense, high-pressure atmosphere. Temperature is directly proportional to pressure.
    2
  43. @JeffreyGoddin  Gas Laws not your thing, or just beyond your ken?
    2
  44. @Skyhawk1480  Oh dear, I hope you're not doing the educating. What you wrote about Jupiter shows a lack of understanding. When you refer to 'surface' there isn't one. Jupiter is a gas giant and may not have a solid surface in the way in which you imagine (like Earth or Venus). The 'surface' you refer to is an astronomical convention. It is the atmospheric point at which in the section of the gas column of Jupiter's troposphere where the pressure is equal to 1bar (i.e. the approximate atmospheric pressure at sea-level on Earth). So not 1000bar. Silly mistake, "and speaks poorly to the state of education you've been exposed to". The Galileo entry probe was dropped into Jupiter's atmosphere in 1995. As it descended it measured the temperature and pressure. 21km above your imaginary surface the pressure was 0.45bar, and the temperature was -145°C. At 1bar it was indeed -110°C. But it continued its descent through the atmosphere for a further 146km to a point where the temperature was +153°C. The pressure had become so great (22 bar) that the probe stopped transmitting. The pressure would increase as you descend deeper through Jupiter's atmosphere. Approximately 3000km below your imaginary surface, the pressure is so great the atmosphere starts behaving as a supercritical fluid. At around 500,000bar of pressure, the temperature is around 5,000°C. At 4,000,000 bar, the temperature should exceed 8,000°C. The temperature and pressure inside Jupiter increase steadily inward. As far as Venus is concerned, the point in its atmosphere where the pressure is 1bar is 53km above the actual hard, rocky surface of the planet. The temperature at that altitude is 20 to 30°C as you might expect from a planet so close to the Sun. To summarise on both planets tropospheric temperature increases with increasing atmospheric pressure. The temperature in their atmospheres at 1bar is related to their distance from the Sun. This relationship also holds true for Earth, Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus (Mercury and Mars do not retain enough of an atmosphere to reach 1bar of pressure). I know it's uncouth but I really do take some pleasure in rude, insulting, ignorant people getting things wrong and it being pointed out to them.
    2
  45. @Skyhawk1480  "Gravitational collapse" leads to an increase in pressure and, hence, of course, an increase in temperature.
    2
  46. @Skyhawk1480  Do you still think Jupiter has a "surface" at 1bar (or even 1000bar) of pressure?
    2
  47. @andrew30m  It appears to be warming, but less than predicted. Moreover, there is no climate crisis.
    2
  48. The Arctic minimum summer sea ice trend is zero for the past 17 years. In the past few years it was almost as high as 1995. The probability that this could be due to chance has now dropped to 10% (after Swart et al calculations, 2015). If the hiatus continues until 2027, it will become statistically significant (p<0.05, or less than 5%) and no longer explainable by chance. Using National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) information for September minima (million km²): 2007 4.16 2008 4.59 2009 5.12 2010 4.62 2011 4.34 2012 3.39 2013 5.05 2014 5.03 2015 4.43 2016 4.17 2017 4.67 2018 4.66 2019 4.19 2020 3.82 2021 4.77 2022 4.67 2023 4.23 Plot the trend line for this data and it will be flat. ZERO net change in 17 years. The linear trend since 2007 is indistinguishable from zero ( around -0.17% per year ). In the early 1950s the sea ice concentration anomaly was lower than it is at present. The sea ice anomaly then rose during the 50s, 60s and 70s. This was followed by a decline. This is demonstrated in Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute (AARI) data, which is based on historical sea ice charts from several sources (aircraft, ship, and satellite observations). The AARI data shows the sea ice concentration anomaly was lower in 1952 (-5%) than 2005 (-3%). The anomaly increased in the 50s, 60s and 70s. In the 80s, 90s and early 2000s it decreased. Since 2007 the trend has been flat. JAXA (Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency) satellite data from 2002 to 2024 Arctic Sea Ice Extent (365 day running average) shows no noticeable trend with values close to 10,000,000km² throughout. Their minimum extent for daily values was in 2012. No other year since has come close. MASIE (Multisensor Analyzed Sea Ice Extent - Northern Hemisphere) shows something similar to JAXA. From 2005 to 2024 Arctic Sea Ice Extent (365 day running average) shows no noticeable trend with values close to 10,000,000km² throughout. Their minimum extent for daily values was in 2012. Again no other year since has come close. It also shows a marked increase in Ice in the Greenland Sea since 2018. Polyakov et al (2003) show "ice extent (1900-2000) in the Kara, Laptev, East Siberian, and Chukchi Seas provide evidence that long-term ice thickness and extent trends are small and generally not statistically significant". Trend -0.5% per decade (±0.7%). Vinje (2001) shows a deceleration in the rate of ice loss from 1864 to 2000. Recent sea ice extent is very high when compared to the last 10,000 years. Also changes in sea ice extent and the speed of those changes were greater in the past (Stein et al, 2017). NOAA's Global Time Series Average Temperature Anomaly monthly data (1995-2004) for the Arctic region shows the peak anomaly occurred in January 2016 (+4.99°C), another El Niño year, and the trend is now downwards (-0.42°C per decade) as of June 2024. HadCRUT4 Arctic (70N - 90N) monthly surface air temperature anomalies record (1920-2021) shows the greatest number and magnitude of positive temperature anomalies occurred between 1930-49. All anomalies in excess of 5°C, including +7°C (referenced to 1961-1990) are from that period. No temperature anomalies from 2000-2019 exceeded 5°C. It shows no decade warmed faster than the 1930s and the current 'warming' finished in 2005. JRA55 SAT (2010-2020) shows most of the Canadian Arctic and Greenland cooling with parts of Canada cooling by 3°C and western Greenland cooling by 2.5°C in a decade. KNMI data (Twentieth Century Reanalysis V2c, 1851-2011, 68°N-80°N, 25°W-60°W, so Greenland) shows the most pronounced warming took place in the 1870s, and when comparing temperature anomalies, highest are in the 1930s and comparison of that period with recent temperature anomalies shows no net warming.
    2
  49.  @renatoantonelli3894  How inscrutable! At least I didn't get the head up the arse advice you gave some other poor sod. All I can glean is your not a fan of objective truth.
    2
  50.  @koalaplays8855  Be generous and share.
    2