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

  1. Oh God! Only 8 years left! It's always 10 years away. Grass will be growing in our jaw bones and still the climate crisis will not have happened. The Earth was warmer in the recent and distant past. It also warmed faster in the past.
    5
  2. We are not in a climate crisis when you look at the data: Globally the ACE index (accumulated cyclone energy) 1980-2021 shows no increasing trend. Global Hurricane Landfalls 1970-2021 (updated from Weinkle et al, 2012) shows no trend. Satellite data since 1980 shows a slight downward global trend for total hurricaine numbers with 2021 being a record low year. The IPCC reports in AR6, chapter 11, "The total global frequency of TC [tropical cyclone] formation will decrease or remain unchanged with increasing global warming (medium confidence)." Multidecadal variability in Atlantic hurricaines is most probably related to the AMO (Vecchi et al, 2021). NOAA data 1851-2021 shows no trend in number of hurricaine landfalls with the record high being 1886. What the data from NOAA SPC shows about tornados: EF1-EF5 (1954-2022) no trend; EF3-EF5 (most destructive) (1954-2022) 50% decline. No EF5s in US since 2013 (a record absence). The Global Land Precipitation Anomaly from AR5 will disappoint with deviations from the average increasing by 0.2% per decade, but if you look at the actual data, it's just very variable over the decades. Drought appears to be decreasing (Watts et al, 2018) measured by SPI 1901-2017. Deaths from natural disasters are about 0.6% of what they were a century ago. What else? Oh, deserts like the Sahara have shrunk considerably and the Earth has greened by 15% or more in a human lifetime (NASA).
    4
  3. The world's deserts are greening themselves, thanks partially to the extra CO2 in the atmosphere. There is no climate emergency. The Earth was warmer in the recent and distant past. It also warmed faster in the past.
    3
  4. The Great Barrier Reef's coral cover reached the greatest extent ever recorded in 2022, 2023 and 2024 (AIMS) despite reports of supposed repeated bleaching. If you look at the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) data, the WIO (West Indian Ocean) shows 26% hard coral cover in 1985 upto 30% in 2020. South Asia reefs shows a decline around 2000 to below 25% then a regrowth to around 40% (2010) and a decline to 25% (2020). The Red Sea shows no change at around 25% (1995-2020). So the pattern in these three areas show no relationship to each other or to a changing climate. The Caribbean region reefs have a cover of around 0.15 ± 0.02. There is no evidence of a major reduction in coral cover in the Caribbean over the last two decades. GCRMN data for the most important coral bioregion, the East Asia Seas, with 30% of the world’s coral reefs, and containing the most diverse coral of the ‘Coral Triangle’, show no statistically significant net coral loss since records began. The East Asia region has the biggest human population living in close proximity to reefs, and is located in the Indo-Pacific Warm Pool – the hottest major water mass on earth. 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.
    3
  5. 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.
    3
  6. 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 the 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.
    3
  7. @christophorfaust2457  I assume data is not your thing. You seem to be a more emotional and dogmatic type of guy.
    3
  8. 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.
    3
  9. 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.) 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". A study of Antarctic ice shelves from 1980 to 2021 (Banwell et al, 2023) showed meltwater volume dropped with "decreasing trend in both annual melt days and meltwater production volume over the 41 years.” "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. Antarctica contributes 0.36mm to sea-level rise per year (that's essentially nothing as well). At the current rate it will take well over ¼ million years to melt, but we are due for two more glacial periods in that time. That ice is here to stay.
    2
  10. Between 1961 and 2021 global cereal production increased 250% and cereal yield increased over 200%. Land used for cereal hardly increased (Data from World Bank, FAO/UN). This is the only time in human history that you are more likely to be overfed rather than underfed. We should be thankful we were borne into an age of such abundance. A US DoE study (Taylor & Schlenker, 2021) estimated that a 1 ppm increase in CO2 led to an increase of 0.4%, 0.6% and 1% in yield for corn, soybeans and wheat, respectively, and that CO2 increase was the main driver of the 500% yield growth in corn since 1940. Global tomato production has set a record each year for the past 10 years. Banana production has doubled in 20 years. All 10 of the largest sugar crops in global history occurred during the past 10 years. All 10 of the 10 largest rice crop years occurred during the past 10 years (UNFAO). 2023 was another record cereal crop. Increases in cereal production since 1961: Africa +384%, Asia +348%, Australia +458%, Europe +110%, North America +184%, South America +547%. Percentage increase in production in all regions also exceeded the percentage increase in population. Global and regional food security is improving. 2024-2025 will see another record high production of wheat, soybeans and rice. Compared with a decade ago, the world will harvest in 2024-25 about 10% more wheat, about 15% more corn, nearly 30% more soybeans, and about 10% more rice. Global food supply (kcal per capita per day) has increased from 2181kcal in 1961 to a record 2959kcal in 2021.
    2
  11. Or listen to the IPCC? There is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis. The 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), 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, Antarctic Sea Ice, Tropical Cyclones.
    2
  12. There is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis. The 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), 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, Antarctic Sea Ice, Tropical Cyclones.
    2
  13. When it comes to fires, 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? And the fires of 2023 seem to have been largely started by arsonists. 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 in 2023 was 3rd lowest on record. It was under 3 million acres well below the ten year average of 7 million, the lowest since 1998 (NIFC), and 3% of the burn in the 1900s 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 was nothing unusual about 2023 summer's fire season in Europe (look it up on the EFFIS website). The burned area was lower than 2021, 2022, and most of the 80's and 90's. In Portugal, Spain, France, Italy and Greece 2023 was only the 20th highest in the modern satellite burnt acreage record going back to 1980. 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 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
  14. This guy is a watermelon. Green on the outside. Red on the inside.
    2
  15. An antiracist is a racist.
    2
  16. 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
  17. Looking at Hansen's predictions (used by the IPCC) running out to 2020. They said that increased human sources of carbon were going into the atmosphere would result higher temperatures. More CO2, warmer world. Scenario A ('Business as Usual') was predicting a little over 35GtCO2/yr by 2020 (21.25 GtCO2 in 1987 with 1.5% predicted annual growth) which exactlty what we got). That should have given a warming in excess of 1.3°C between 1988 and 2000. But it didn't, so did Scenario B, hit the mark? No. Scenario B had emissions of about 21 GtC/yr in 2020. Around 60% of actual emissions, with a temperature rise of around 0.8°C. Oops that prediction was still too hot. Temperature-wise we have to get to Scenario C before we get close to reality. Scenario C predicted a temperature rise of 0.3°C to 2020, but that's with us reaching net zero from 2000! The actual temperature rise was 0.4°C. So Hansen's (and hence the IPCC's) prediction of a huge rise in emissions (which did happen) would result in steep rise in temperature (which didn't happen) is bunk. Instead we got a small rise in temperature, much lower than predicted by Scenario A, and half that of Scenario B. The actual rise was essentially the same as predicted if we had stopped burning fossil fuel. To hammer the point home, Hansen’s predictions were worse than 'Big Oil'. A report from Harvard University noted "projections modeled by ExxonMobil scientists had an average ‘skill score’ of 72 ± 6 %, with the highest scoring 99%. For comparison, NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen’s global warming predictions presented to the U.S. Congress in 1988 had skill scores ranging from 38% to 66%. (When we account for differences between forecast and observed atmospheric CO2 levels, the ‘skill score’ of projections modeled by ExxonMobil scientists was 75 ± 5%, with seven projections scoring 85% or above. Again, for comparison, Hansen’s 1988 projections had corresponding skill scores of 28 to 81%.)" However even the Big Oil overestimated the warming at 0.2°C per decade. The IPCC followed Hansen on other aspects of climate. Both published charts showing the Medieval Warm Period was considerably warmer than the present (Hansen 1984, IPCC 1990). Of course, the Medieval Warm Period has magically ceased to be. Were they right? Are they wrong? Hansen also made some other cracking predictions. In his stagecrafted presentation to Congress in 1998 the New York Times reported his predictions thus “If the current pace of the buildup of these gases continues, the effect is likely to be a warming of 3 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit from the year 2025 to 2050,” and “The rise in global temperature is predicted to… melt glaciers and polar ice, thus causing sea levels to rise by one to four feet by the middle of the next century”. Yes, of course it will, Mr Hansen. In 2006 "We have at most ten years—not ten years to decide upon action, but ten years to alter fundamentally the trajectory of global greenhouse emissions." So presumably we are FUBARed. In 2009 he said Obama only had four years to save the Earth. Also in 2009 he endorsed a book that suggested razing civilisation to the ground.
    2
  18. @christophorfaust2457  If those little girls and their families get richer, and that is what is going to happen, they won't have to haul water. They will, of course, just turn on a tap. And they won't have to chop down trees for firewood, they will just switch on the heating. If they are farmers, modern agricultural methods will allow them to produce more food from less land. They will have less of an impact on the environment, not more. Richer societies divert more resources to the preservation of the environment. It is poverty that degrades the local environment. The little girls who now don't have to haul water, will go to school, and when they come home, they will be able to do their homework thanks to electric lighting. Their higher levels of education will lead to reduced inequality and a lowered birth rate. What's your alternative? Vegan Marxism? 'Big Mother is watching you.' That will not solve your socioeconomic inequality. That communist experiment has been tried repeatedly and caused disaster and misery every time. Unfortunately, there will always be inequality. It is an unpleasant fact of human nature, and you cannot change human nature. Nevertheless people will lift themselves out of poverty if given the right circumstances, and that is what is happening all over the world with the spread of low cost, plentiful energy, and cheap technology. Your point about extinction is also a red herring. Extinction rates (1500-2009) peaked around 1900 at 50 per decade. Extinction rates have declined dramatically to around 4 to per decade in the 2000s. So the extinction rate is very low: 900 known lost species for 2.1 million known species in 500 years (IUCN), so from observations there are an average of slightly less than 2 species lost every year. Out of a known species total of over 2 million. That gives an annual percentage loss of less than 0.0001%. That's background extinction. At that frequency it will take over 930,000 years to reach 80% extinction of species experienced at the K-T boundary that saw the extinction of the dinosaurs. Of course, extinction is a natural part of the evolution of life on this planet with the average lifespan of a species thought to be about 1 million years (cf 930,000). It is estimated that 99.9% of all plant and animal species that have existed have gone extinct. It should also be noted that no taxonomic families have become extinct in the last 500 years. In fact marine diversity at the taxonomic level of families is the highest it has ever been in the Earth's long history (see Sepkoski Curve). In a review of 16,009 species, most populations (85%) did not show significant trends in abundance, and those that did were balanced between winners (8%) and losers (7%) (Dornelas et al, 2019). There have been only 9 species of continental birds and mammals confirmed extinct since 1500 (Loehle, 2011). No global marine animals have become extinct in the past 50 years (McCauley et, 2015 using IUCN data). You say you like data. I hope you like that data.
    2
  19. @christophorfaust2457  If those little girls and their families get richer, and that is what is going to happen, they won't have to haul water. They will, of course, just turn on a tap. And they won't have to chop down trees for firewood, they will just switch on the heating. If they are farmers, modern agricultural methods will allow them to produce more food from less land. They will have less of an impact on the environment, not more. Richer societies divert more resources to the preservation of the environment. It is poverty that degrades the local environment. The little girls who now don't have to haul water, will go to school, and when they come home, they will be able to do their homework thanks to electric lighting. Their higher levels of education will lead to reduced inequality and a lowered birth rate. What's your alternative? Vegan Marxism? 'Big Mother is watching you.' That will not solve your socioeconomic inequality. That communist experiment has been tried repeatedly and caused disaster and misery every time. Unfortunately, there will always be inequality. It is an unpleasant fact of human nature, and you cannot change human nature. Nevertheless people will lift themselves out of poverty if given the right circumstances, and that is what is happening all over the world with the spread of low cost, plentiful energy, and cheap technology. Your point about extinction is also a red herring. Extinction rates (1500-2009) peaked around 1900 at 50 per decade. Extinction rates have declined dramatically to around 4 to per decade in the 2000s. So the extinction rate is very low: 900 known lost species for 2.1 million known species in 500 years (IUCN), so from observations there are an average of slightly less than 2 species lost every year. Out of a known species total of over 2 million. That gives an annual percentage loss of less than 0.0001%. That's background extinction. At that frequency it will take over 930,000 years to reach 80% extinction of species experienced at the K-T boundary that saw the extinction of the dinosaurs. Of course, extinction is a natural part of the evolution of life on this planet with the average lifespan of a species thought to be about 1 million years (cf 930,000). It is estimated that 99.9% of all plant and animal species that have existed have gone extinct. It should also be noted that no taxonomic families have become extinct in the last 500 years. In fact marine diversity at the taxonomic level of families is the highest it has ever been in the Earth's long history (see Sepkoski Curve). In a review of 16,009 species, most populations (85%) did not show significant trends in abundance, and those that did were balanced between winners (8%) and losers (7%) (Dornelas et al, 2019). There have been only 9 species of continental birds and mammals confirmed extinct since 1500 (Loehle, 2011). No global marine animals have become extinct in the past 50 years (McCauley et, 2015 using IUCN data). You say you like data. I hope you like that data.
    2
  20. @christophorfaust2457  Your point about extinction is also a red herring. Extinction rates (1500-2009) peaked around 1900 at 50 per decade. Extinction rates have declined dramatically to around 4 to per decade in the 2000s. So the extinction rate is very low: 900 known lost species for 2.1 million known species in 500 years (IUCN), so from observations there are an average of slightly less than 2 species lost every year. Out of a known species total of over 2 million. That gives an annual percentage loss of less than 0.0001%. That's background extinction. At that frequency it will take over 930,000 years to reach 80% extinction of species experienced at the K-T boundary that saw the extinction of the dinosaurs. Of course, extinction is a natural part of the evolution of life on this planet with the average lifespan of a species thought to be about 1 million years (cf 930,000). It is estimated that 99.9% of all plant and animal species that have existed have gone extinct. It should also be noted that no taxonomic families have become extinct in the last 500 years. In fact marine diversity at the taxonomic level of families is the highest it has ever been in the Earth's long history (see Sepkoski Curve). In a review of 16,009 species, most populations (85%) did not show significant trends in abundance, and those that did were balanced between winners (8%) and losers (7%) (Dornelas et al, 2019). There have been only 9 species of continental birds and mammals confirmed extinct since 1500 (Loehle, 2011). No global marine animals have become extinct in the past 50 years (McCauley et, 2015 using IUCN data). You say you like data. I hope you like that data
    2
  21. The Earth was warmer in the recent and distant past. It warmed faster in the past. There is no climate crisis. But give us your money anyway.
    2
  22. 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 the 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
  23. There is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis. The 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), 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, Antarctic Sea Ice, Tropical Cyclones.
    2
  24. Sea level appears to be rising at a small 3mm per year. Atolls in the Pacific nations of the Marshall Islands and Kiribati, as well as the Maldives archipelago in the Indian Ocean, have risen up to 8 percent in size (Ford and Kench, 2020). 89% of the globe’s islands and 100% of large islands have stable or growing coasts (Duvat, 2019). No island larger than 10ha decreased in size. As regards NOAA tide gauge data, let's look at some examples from around the world. N.B. All sites show a linear Relative Sea Level Trend: Kanmen, China 2.40mm/yr; Sydney, Australia 0.75mm/yr; Ferandina Beach, Florida 2.20mm/yr; Los Angeles, California 1.04mm/yr; Mera, Japan 3.8mm; Cascais, Portugal 1.32mm/yr; Newlyn, UK 1.94mm/yr. Jevrejeva, et al (2014) estimated 2 mm/year (± 0.3), and Church and White (2006) estimated 1.7mm/year (± 0.3). So that's a total rise of between 126 and 151mm (less than 6 inches) from 2024 to the end of the century. Or try PSMSL data: Kwajalein (Marshall Islands) 1.95mm/yr; Maldives (Indian Ocean) 3.21mm/yr; Lautoka (Fiji Islands, Pacific Ocean) 3.50mm/yr; Port Elisabeth (South Africa) 2.34mm/yr. Remember, all linear over many decades, or more than a century. Anyway, if you prefer satellite data NOAA's trend was +3.0mm/year Global Mean Sea Level (1993-2022), again linear last time I looked for each set of satellite data (but hey, it may have accelerated in the last month). NASA satellite data (1993-present) for Global Mean Sea Level shows a rise of 3.3mm per year. That's the same as two stacked penny coins. There is no relationship to the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. It's going to be decades before even your big toe is submerged.
    2
  25. As regards flooding, the U.N. IPCC admits having “low confidence” in even the “sign” of any changes—in other words, it is just as likely that climate change is making floods less frequent and less severe. In a study on the climate impact on flooding for the USA and Europe, published in the Journal of Hydrology, Volume 552, September 2017, Pages 704-717, the study found: ‘The number of significant trends was about the number expected due to chance alone.’ ‘Changes in the frequency of major floods are dominated by multidecadal variability.’ ‘The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded (Hartmann et al., 2013) that globally there is no clear and widespread evidence of changes in flood magnitude or frequency in observed flood records.’ ‘The results of this study, for North America and Europe, provide a firmer foundation and support the conclusion of the IPCC that compelling evidence for increased flooding at a global scale is lacking.’
    2
  26. @karlwheatley1244  Warming events in the Cenozoic do not correlate to mass extinction, whether the warming is correlated to CO2 or not. The Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum PETM (55mya), a time when the Earth warmed rapidly to temperatures far in excess of today's, only resulted in a noticeable extinction of some benthic foraminifera. That was so small of an event it doesn't even show up on a marine extinction intensity chart for the Phanerozoic. There was, in fact, a more general flourishing of life at that point, especially terrestrial. Many major mammal groups appeared and spread around the globe including hyaenodontids, artiodactyls, perissodactyls, and primates. So if the Earth is warming, we've got that to look forward to. The next largest extinction event, since the dinosaurs bit the big one, is the Eocene-Oligocene transition ("Grande Coupure" = The Great Rupture). This seems to have been connected with cooling (rapid Antarctic glaciation), not warming.
    2
  27. Quotes from the UN's IPCC AR6 WG1: Flooding - “the assessment of observed trends in the magnitude of runoff, streamflow, and flooding remains challenging, due to the spatial heterogeneity of the signal and to multiple drivers” "Confidence about peak flow trends over past decades on a global scale is low." "In summary there is low confidence in the human influence on the changes in high river flows on the global scale. Confidence is in general low in attributing changes in the probability or magnitude of flood events to human influence" So in absence of detected trends, there won’t be much ability to attribute to humans. You can't say floods are caused by, driven by, or intensified by climate change. The evidence doesn’t support that. Drought - "There is low confidence that human influence has affected trends in meteorological droughts in most regions" So no real evidence we changed the weather to cause periods of dryness. Tropical Cyclones (TC) - "Identifying past trends in TC remains a challenge...There is low confidence in most reported long-term (multidecadal to centennial) trends in TC frequency - or intensity based metrics" So we can't spot a trend and therefore we can't really attribute that unknown trend to us humans. Storminess - outside the tropics (ETCs) - "There is overall low confidence is recent changes in the total number of ETCs over both hemispheres" "Overall there is low confidence in past-century trends in the number and intensity of the strongest ETCs" So we don't know what's happening with winter storms, so we can't say it's us that changed them. Tornadoes, hail, lightning, thunderstorms, extreme winds - "It is not straightforward to make a synthesizing view of trends in severe connective storms [thunderstorms] in different regions. In particular, observational trends in tornadoes, hail and lightning associated with severe connective storms are not robustly detected" "the observed intensity of extreme winds is becoming less severe in lower to mid latitudes" That's between 60°N and 60°S, so pretty much where everyone lives.
    2
  28. It was dogsh1t then and it's dogsh1t now. Globally the ACE index (accumulated cyclone energy) 1980-2021 shows no increasing trend. Global Hurricane Landfalls 1970-2021 (updated from Weinkle et al, 2012) shows no trend. Satellite data since 1980 shows a slight downward global trend for total hurricaine numbers with 2021 being a record low year. The IPCC reports in AR6, chapter 11, "The total global frequency of TC [tropical cyclone] formation will decrease or remain unchanged with increasing global warming (medium confidence)." Not that I really care about what the IPCC says. Multidecadal variability in Atlantic hurricaines is most probably related to the AMO (Vecchi et al, 2021). NOAA data 1851-2021 shows no trend in number of hurricaine landfalls with the record high being 1886. What the data from NOAA SPC shows about tornados: EF1-EF5 (1954-2022) no trend; EF3-EF5 (most destructive) (1954-2022) 50% decline. No EF5s in US since 2013 (a record absence). The Global Land Precipitation Anomaly from AR5 will disappoint with deviations from the average increasing by 0.2% per decade, but if you look at the actual data, it's just very variable over the decades. Drought appears to be decreasing globally (Watts et al, 2018) measured by SPI 1901-2017. For every million people on earth, annual deaths from climate-related causes (extreme temperature, drought, flood, storms, wildfires) declined 98%--from an average of 247 per year during the 1920s to 2.5 in per year during the 2010s. Data on disaster deaths come from (EM-DAT, CRED / UCLouvain, Brussels,Belgium. ) Globally 2000-2019 there was a large decrease in cold-related deaths and a moderate increase in heat-related deaths (Zhao, 2021, Lancet). However, coldwaves are over 9 times more likely to kill than heatwaves, so the overall result is very beneficial. What else? Oh, deserts like the Sahara have shrunk considerably and the Earth has greened by 15% or more in a human lifetime (NASA). The Great Barrier Reef's coral cover has reached the greatest extent ever recorded. On extinction the rate is very low: 900 known lost species for 2.1 million known species in 500 years. At that frequency it will take over 930,000 years to reach 80% extinction of species experienced at the K-T boundary that saw the extinction of the dinosaurs. There is no climate crisis.
    1
  29. This is a scare story about things you cannot see. To quote the Chief Scientist at the National Oceanography Centre, Professor Penny Holliday, "There hasn't been a slow down. There hasn't been a slowing of the AMOC." Actual observations using the RAPID-MOCHA array from 2004 to 2023 show, that although there can be a great deal of variability of flow in the ocean from month to month or even day to day, there has been no decline in the Gulf Stream, with flow oscillating around 32Sv (32 million cubic metres per second) throughout the period of observation. Continuous section measurements of the AMOC, available since 2004 at 26°N from the RAPID-MOCHA array, have shown that the AMOC strength decreased from 2004 to 2012, and thereafter, it has strengthened again. No relationship to CO2. MOC spanning the North Atlantic at 27°N derived from RAPID/MOCHA/WBTS, satellite altimeter, and Argo floats for 1994 to 2020 shows no statistically significant decline (-0.06 Sv per decade). Furthermore blended meridional overturning basin-wide circulation (MOC) trend estimates (Sv) based on combinations of satellite altimetry and in situ hydrography data exist for the South Atlantic for 1994 onwards: at 34.5°S (often referred to as SAMBA) is +0.48Sv per decade. This is a significant positive trend, so no decline, no tipping point, no correlation to CO2. (GLOBAL OCEANS G. C. Johnson and R. Lumpkin, Eds., 2021) The OSNAP MOC Timeseries of observations from Canada to Greenland and across to Scotland, although a shorter timescale (from 2014), show no decline in MOC with the flow fluctuating around 17Sv. "Florida Current transport observations reveal four decades of steady state" Volkov et al, 2024 (published in Nature). This paper shows that a key component of AMOC, the Florida Current, has remained remarkably steady for over 40 years. There is no climate crisis. The North Atlantic current has doubled its velocity over the course of a quarter of century (Oziel et al, 2020). This is based on actual satellite observations. The idea the AMOC is going to shut down is based on modelling. There is minimal real world evidence to support these outlandish claims. It relies upon climate models. You know, those Magical Truth Machines that keep making false predictions. It claims with 95% certainty that the AMOC with collapse by the end of the century. Come on! Really? These models can't even replicate one of the key physical processes, Convection, in ocean currents "because convection is a small-scale process, it is not captured well in most current models (Jackson et al (2023)" (Rahmstorf, 2024). So they can't model Convection. So they can't model ocean currents. 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. Also the 'Cold Blob' has disappeared from North Atlantic surface temperatures, when annual anomalies for 2013-2023 are compared to the average for the period 1979-2010 (ECMWF ERA5). The International Comprehensive Ocean-Atmosphere Data Set (ICOADS) shows a Sea Surface Temperature departure of over +2°C exactly where the Cold Blob used to be. It may have been there but it's gone. Looking more carefully using NOAA ERSST V5 data for North Atlantic Sea Surface Temperature anomalies (50N-65N, 50W-10W) shows in 1942 a +1°C anomaly declining to -0.7°C in 1992 then rising to almost +1°C in 2010, declining again to -0.6°C in 2010, and of course rising again to +0.75°C in 2023. There are also oscillations in the data back to the 1850s, but there is no trend overall up or down, and no correlation to CO2. The same is true for the heat content in the North Atlantic down to 1000m (Met Office data). No correlation to CO2, just a natural variability. That's the data. The Cold Blob is an artefact. The North Atlantic ocean has cooled and 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. See Figure 8 in the paper). 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.
    1
  30. Johan has been banging on about this for years. Nothing has happened.
    1
  31. 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.
    1
  32. Everything we do releases carbon dioxide, so they 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! 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.
    1
  33. @dancoffey8412  Yes, agreed, gas solubility declines with increasing temperature. However, it is also a fact that biodiversity is highest in the warmest waters, and declines away from the equatorial regions.
    1
  34. @dancoffey8412  Life is most diverse in the warmest parts of the world’s oceans.
    1
  35. @franckr6159  The only real change identified is an increase in heat globally but that has not resulted in any of the other calamitous changes foretold. No man made droughts, floods or hurricanes etc. How boring. Even table 12.12 confirms evidence is lacking or the signal is not present, leading to overall low confidence of an emerging signal both for the recent past and out to 2050 even under the most extreme climate modelling (RCP 8.5) of the following: Air Pollution Weather (temperature inversions), Aridity, Avalanche (snow), 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, Radiation at the Earth’s Surface, River/Lake Floods, Sand and Dust Storms, Severe Wind Storms, Glacier, and Ice Sheets, Tropical Cyclones. And that's under the extreme model 8.5, which is laughable. For more realistic trajectories there will be nothing to see.
    1
  36. @franckr6159  I have edited my previous comment to include sections and page numbers.
    1
  37.  @HealingLifeKwikly  It was warmer during the Medieval (Elbert, 2013, 2.9°C above present), Roman (Margaritelli, 2020), 2°C above present, also Wang et al, 2013, showing the change was at least hemispheric, and Minoan Warm Periods (Lécuyer, 2018, 4°C above present, links Mediterranean to Greenland Ice so at least hemispheric). It was certainly warmer during the Holocene Climatic Optimum, so during our current interglacial. If you want a citation, try Quaternary Research Volume 53, Issue 3, May 2000, Pages 302-311. This makes the point that it was upto 7°C warmer on the shores of the Arctic during that time, with trees growing on the shores of the ocean (which would have been ice free in the summer - so don't worry about an ice-free Arctic), far to the north of the current treeline.
    1
  38. @karlwheatley1244  The big problem for you 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, 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 at the mouth, but it's all within the range of natural events.
    1
  39. @karlwheatley1244  As regards ocean acidification, it is estimated that the ocean’s global mean surface pH may have declined (i.e., become less alkaline and thus more “acidic”) by -0.07 to -0.08 in the last 200 years — from pH8.12 during pre-industrial times to 8.04 to 8.05 today (Wei et al, 2015). N.B. The decline in pH occurred before 1930. However, and very importantly when you look the data after CO2 emissions began rising precipitously in the 1930s, the oceans have become less “acidic”!!! By way of comparison, from one season to the next, or over the course of less than 6 months, pH levels naturally change by ±0.15 pH units, or twice the overall rate of the last 200 years. On a per-decade scale, the changes are even more pronounced. Oceanic pH values naturally fluctuate up and down by up to 0.6 U within a span of a decade, with an overall range between 7.66 and 8.40. This decadal rate of pH change is larger than the overall 200-year span (0.07-0.08) by a factor of 8. Indeed the daily noted maximum pH range of 0.7 (Santos et al. 2011) is far greater than the overall change predicted between now and the end of the century.
    1
  40. There is no climate breakdown. Let's talk numbers. Globally the ACE index (accumulated cyclone energy) 1980-2021 shows no increasing trend. Global Hurricane Landfalls 1970-2021 (updated from Weinkle et al, 2012) shows no trend. Satellite data since 1980 shows a slight downward global trend for total hurricaine numbers with 2021 being a record low year. The IPCC reports in AR6, chapter 11, "The total global frequency of TC [tropical cyclone] formation will decrease or remain unchanged with increasing global warming (medium confidence)." Multidecadal variability in Atlantic hurricaines is most probably related to the AMO (Vecchi et al, 2021). NOAA data 1851-2021 shows no trend in number of hurricaine landfalls with the record high being 1886. What the data from NOAA SPC shows about tornados: EF1-EF5 (1954-2022) no trend; EF3-EF5 (most destructive) (1954-2022) 50% decline. No EF5s in US since 2013 (a record absence). The Global Land Precipitation Anomaly from AR5 will disappoint with deviations from the average increasing by 0.2% per decade, but if you look at the actual data, it's just very variable over the decades. Drought appears to be decreasing globally (Watts et al, 2018) measured by SPI 1901-2017. For every million people on earth, annual deaths from climate-related causes (extreme temperature, drought, flood, storms, wildfires) declined 98%--from an average of 247 per year during the 1920s to 2.5 in per year during the 2010s. Data on disaster deaths come from (EM-DAT, CRED / UCLouvain, Brussels,Belgium. ) Globally 2000-2019 there was a large decrease in cold-related deaths and a moderate increase in heat-related deaths (Zhao, 2021, Lancet). However, coldwaves are over 9 times more likely to kill than heatwaves, so the overall result is very beneficial. What else? Oh, deserts like the Sahara have shrunk considerably and the Earth has greened by 15% or more in a human lifetime (NASA). On extinction the rate is very low: 900 known lost species for 2.1 million known species in 500 years. At that frequency it will take over 930,000 years to reach 80% extinction of species experienced at the K-T boundary that saw the extinction of the dinosaurs. There is no climate crisis.
    1
  41. @christophorfaust2457  If those little girls and their families get richer, and that is what is going to happen, they won't have to haul water. They will, of course, just turn on a tap. And they won't have to chop down trees for firewood, they will just switch on the heating. If they are farmers, modern agricultural methods will allow them to produce more food from less land. They will have less of an impact on the environment, not more. Richer societies divert more resources to the preservation of the environment. It is poverty that degrades the local environment. The little girls who now don't have to haul water, will go to school, and when they come home, they will be able to do their homework thanks to electric lighting. Their higher levels of education will lead to reduced inequality and a lowered birth rate. What's your alternative? Vegan Marxism? 'Big Mother is watching you.' That will not solve your socioeconomic inequality. That communist experiment has been tried repeatedly and caused disaster and misery every time.
    1
  42. @christophorfaust2457  If those little girls and their families get richer, and that is what is going to happen, they won't have to haul water. They will, of course, just turn on a tap. And they won't have to chop down trees for firewood, they will just switch on the heating. If they are farmers, modern agricultural methods will allow them to produce more food from less land. They will have less of an impact on the environment, not more. Richer societies divert more resources to the preservation of the environment. It is poverty that degrades the local environment. The little girls who now don't have to haul water, will go to school, and when they come home, they will be able to do their homework thanks to electric lighting. Their higher levels of education will lead to reduced inequality and a lowered birth rate. What's your alternative? Vegan Marxism? 'Big Mother is watching you.' That will not solve your socioeconomic inequality. That communist experiment has been tried repeatedly and caused disaster and misery every time.
    1
  43. @christophorfaust2457  If those little girls and their families get richer, and that is what is going to happen, they won't have to haul water. They will, of course, just turn on a tap. And they won't have to chop down trees for firewood, they will just switch on the heating. If they are farmers, modern agricultural methods will allow them to produce more food from less land. They will have less of an impact on the environment, not more. Richer societies divert more resources to the preservation of the environment. It is poverty that degrades the local environment. The little girls who now don't have to haul water, will go to school, and when they come home, they will be able to do their homework thanks to electric lighting. Their higher levels of education will lead to reduced inequality and a lowered birth rate. What's your alternative? Vegan Marxism? 'Big Mother is watching you.' That will not solve your socioeconomic inequality. That communist experiment has been tried repeatedly and caused disaster and misery every time.
    1
  44. @christophorfaust2457  If those little girls and their families get richer, and that is what is going to happen, they won't have to haul water. They will, of course, just turn on a tap. And they won't have to chop down trees for firewood, they will just switch on the heating. If they are farmers, modern agricultural methods will allow them to produce more food from less land. They will have less of an impact on the environment, not more. Richer societies divert more resources to the preservation of the environment. It is poverty that degrades the local environment.
    1
  45. It was b*ll*cks then, and it's b*ll*cks now. 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! And 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.
    1
  46. @eeeaten  Then I'll just have to go along with the data that scientists have collected. And remember this is global data. Globally the ACE index (accumulated cyclone energy) 1980-2021 shows no increasing trend. Global Hurricane Landfalls 1970-2021 (updated from Weinkle et al, 2012) shows no trend. Satellite data since 1980 shows a slight downward global trend for total hurricaine numbers with 2021 being a record low year. The IPCC reports in AR6, chapter 11, "The total global frequency of TC [tropical cyclone] formation will decrease or remain unchanged with increasing global warming (medium confidence)." Not that I really care about what the IPCC says. Multidecadal variability in Atlantic hurricaines is most probably related to the AMO (Vecchi et al, 2021). NOAA data 1851-2021 shows no trend in number of hurricaine landfalls with the record high being 1886. What the data from NOAA SPC shows about tornados: EF1-EF5 (1954-2022) no trend; EF3-EF5 (most destructive) (1954-2022) 50% decline. No EF5s in US since 2013 (a record absence). The Global Land Precipitation Anomaly from AR5 will disappoint with deviations from the average increasing by 0.2% per decade, but if you look at the actual data, it's just very variable over the decades. Drought appears to be decreasing globally (Watts et al, 2018) measured by SPI 1901-2017. For every million people on earth, annual deaths from climate-related causes (extreme temperature, drought, flood, storms, wildfires) declined 98%--from an average of 247 per year during the 1920s to 2.5 in per year during the 2010s. (EM-DAT, CRED / UCLouvain, Brussels,Belgium. ) Globally 2000-2019 there was a large decrease in cold-related deaths and a moderate increase in heat-related deaths (Zhao, 2021, Lancet). However, coldwaves are over 9 times more likely to kill than heatwaves, so the overall result is very beneficial. What else? Oh, deserts like the Sahara have shrunk considerably, which has retreated northwards dramatically since the 1980s and the Earth has greened by 15% or more in a human lifetime (NASA) due to the fertilising effect of that nasty pollutant CO2. On extinction the rate is very low: 900 known lost species for 2.1 million known species in 500 years. At that frequency it will take over 930,000 years to reach 80% extinction of species experienced at the K-T boundary that saw the extinction of the dinosaurs. There is no climate crisis.
    1
  47. @eeeaten  The Petm only resulted in a noticeable extinction of benthic foraminifera. There was a more general flourishing of life at that point, especially terrestrial. So if you're right we've got that to look forward to. The next largest extinction event, since the dinosaurs bit the big one, is the Eocene-Oligocene transition. This seems to have been connected with cooling, not warming. Oh dear. I noticed you repeatedly used "expect". Why such Great Expectations? The truth is the world is a far better place to live in than our grandparents experienced.
    1
  48. @eeeaten  Apart from the migration of ecosystems polewards and the foraminifera I mentioned I am unaware of a mass extinction event at the petm that you referred to. I would appreciate some referenced material to confirm your point. Otherwise I think we should assume it did not occur. However the E-O transition did and was connected to cooling. This vague 'period of imbalance' that you refer to and what you 'expect' to happen is countered by facts. The global climate facts I have already referred to, and the exposure of the unscientific way in which IPCC models failed to predict what has, and is happening. These models, I presume are where you get your expectations from. Please be aware that the IPCC's (Scenario A) modelled predictions are junk. Back in 1990 they predicted a warming of 0.30-0.34°C per decade. Of course we've only had 0.13°C per decade, which is well below the IPCC's lower bound of 0.20°. IPCC’s business-as-usual scenario was founded on the assumption that CO2 emissions would increase by 10-20% by 2025. The truth, however, is that global CO2 emissions are not 20% above their 1990 level but 60% above it! But there is still no crisis just an unexciting set of observations. The attribution of all warming to human activity by the IPCC is junk science as well. Take AR5: that says all observed warming (0.66°C) since 1950 is due solely to combined anthropogenic forcing (Fig. 10.5, IPCC core writing team, page 6). This relies upon modelling, or rather multi-modelling. In fact when you lift the curtain it relies on 15 models (Fig. 10.4, page 882). These models are all over the place. The models' results are not consistent with the assumption that there is a clear connection between GHGs and warming. GISS-EH-2 is particularly 'not well constrained' as the terminology goes. "Scaling factors" then have to be applied so things fit with the HadCRUT dataset. Some of the scaling factors are even negative!!! So many scientists/politicians may have reached a consensus, but the science on which that has been built shows no such agreement. That's the facts, not ignorance. And since when did an accumulation of factual information become wilful ignorance?
    1
  49. Give me your money. Please give me your money. There is no climate crisis. 10% decline in natural disasters since 2000. Accumulated cyclone energy shows no increasing trend. Global hurricane landfalls shows no trend. Downward global trend for total hurricaine numbers. NOAA: "We conclude that the historical Atlantic hurricane data at this stage do not provide compelling evidence for a substantial greenhouse warming-induced century-scale increase in: frequency of tropical storms, hurricanes, or major hurricanes, or in the proportion of hurricanes that become major hurricanes." NOAA data 1851-2021 shows no trend in number of hurricaine landfalls with the record high being 1886. The trend for over 7 decades has been downwards in the Pacific as well. Drought appears to be decreasing globally measured by SPI 1901-2017. Global trends show no increasing flooding frequency or severity. For every million people on earth, annual deaths from climate-related causes have declined 98%. Deserts have shrunk considerably since the 1980's. The Sahara shrank by 12,000km² per year 1984-2015. The Earth has greened by 15% or more in a human lifetime. The Great Barrier Reef's coral cover has reached the greatest extent ever recorded. On extinction the rate is very low: 900 known lost species for 2.1 million known species in 500 years, so from observations there are an average of slightly less than 2 species lost every year. Global temperatures maxed out in 2016 and have been lower ever since. There is no climate crisis.
    1
  50. 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.
    1