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

  1. Using data from the JMA 1951-2022 we see typhoon activity trending downwards for over 7 decades.
    1
  2. Can I recommend “In Search of Climate Crisis in Greece Using Hydrological Data” (Koutsoyiannis et al, 2023)? It shows since records began in the mid-nineteenth century, there is no long term climate variability. Apart from it being slightly wetter 1990-2020 than 1960-1990.
    1
  3. @gesilsampaioamarantesegund6692  So let's spread some information then. This is from the reputable World Data website "In the years 2001 to 2022, there were only these 3 weather stations in the whole country, which reported continuous temperature values (Caratinga, Irati, Posse). From these weather reports, we have created a long-term development that shows the monthly average temperatures. The average annual temperature was about 21.3 °C in the years after 2001 and about 21.4 °C in the last years before 2022. So it has hardly changed at all in the past 22 years." Get that. There's a lot of coffee but no warming in Brazil.
    1
  4. 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.
    1
  5. IPCC's (Scenario A) modelled predictions are junk. Back in 1990 the IPCC predicted a warming of 0.30-0.34°C per decade. Of course we've only had about 0.1°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. All the climate models run too hot, 100% of them. 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.
    1
  6. @abody499  The Greenland Ice Sheet contains about 2.9 million cubic kilometers of ice (NSIDC). Using the formula M=Vd (and assuming density of glacier ice 0.9167 Gt/km³), the mass of GrIS is approximately 2.7 million Gt. If we use the figure of annual loss of 270 Gt, we get 0.01%, or 10,000 years, so around 12,024 AD. The problem is the average figure of 270 Gt (NASA data 2002-2023, 0.8mm/year sea-level rise, so a non-problem). That average value and the data range used gives no understanding of the changes taking place. Prior to 2000 GrIS was not losing mass. From 2002 to 2012 mass loss accelerated, then from 2012 to the present mass loss trend decelerated (85 Gt, 2021). The changes aren't linear they are sinusoidal and are related to the North Atlantic Oscillation, not the the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
    1
  7. @abody499  Antarctic ice sheet (1992-2020) annual loss was 90Gt/yr. It's total mass is 24,380,000 Gt (24380000000000000 tons), so it loses less than 0.0004% of its mass annually, which I think you could reasonably round down to zero. It 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. There's a bit of a problem with the accelerating ice loss in Antarctica idea. It's not accelerating. If you want to dig down to the actual data, that is. Just so we're clear, I'm referring to the paper entitled "Mass balance of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets from 1992 to 2020" by Otosaka et al, 2023. Can I direct you to table 2, and the text below it? If we include the APIS in "continental" (although I wouldn't) there's no pattern with a slight loss overall - neglible. EAIS, by far the larger of the continent's ice caps, both by surface and volume, hasn't lost mass. It has gained mass, but again it's neglible. So that leaves us with WAIS. It's only WAIS that's driving the mass loss from Antarctica, and you can see that from the Figure 4 graph. Figure 4 and Table 2 show there is a step up in mass loss around 2007. You might want to call that an acceleration. However there's a deceleration from 2017 or at least a noticeable reduction in the rate of annual ice mass loss for the period 2017-2020 when compared to 2012-2016. So accelerating then decelerating. The Antarctic Ice sheet is massive and it's never going to melt on the timescale of human civilisation. Coming back to what we know though about Antarctica, you doomster cult followers have got a problem with Antarctica, haven't you? It's ice shelves are expanding by mass and volume, plus the continent has cooled very significantly in the past 40 years. But a small part (WAIS) of the ice cap is losing mass. Something is making the WAIS melt it would appear, and it cannot be the increasingly colder climate. Maybe geothermal activity? Or maybe a change in wind direction from the Pacific? There's evidence for both. I don't know, but the climate has to warm for the ice to melt significantly and it isn't.
    1
  8. @abody499  The Great Barrier Reef's coral cover reached the greatest extent ever recorded in 2022 and 2023 (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.
    1
  9. @abody499  I assume that's a confected 2°C since, say 1850. Unfortunately there is no way we can be that accurate and precise to ¹/10ths or ¹/100ths of a degree with the paucity of data prior to that collected by satellites.
    1
  10. @kurtilein3  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". Antarctic sea ice extent was an unusual weather event dressed up as the end of the world. Antarctic sea ice was at a record maximum in 2015. No one mentioned that as part of a climate crisis. 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.
    1
  11.  @Danallyo  Intriguing. Is there any research to back that up?
    1
  12. @user-ib9ky2jo9h  I'm the only person in this commentary referencing objective scientific information. In my previous response to kurtilein3, I referenced 4 separate sources. The climate-catastrophists have got nothing except blind faith. There is no climate crisis.
    1
  13. @gesilsampaioamarantesegund6692  My statement relies on GIOMAS from the Polar Science Center, Washington. You can disagree, but you need to reference a reputable source to support your position.
    1
  14. @NoidoDev  This is just weather. There is no evidence that we are enduring a global climate catastrophe.
    1
  15. The IPCC AR6 report, chapter 11 'Weather and Climate Extreme Events in a Changing Climate' summarises the fact that severe weather events cannot be detected as increasing, nor attributed to human caused climate change: Increased Flooding: not detected, no attribution. Increased Meteorological Drought: not detected, no attribution. Increased Hydrological Drought: not detected, no attribution. Increased Tropical Cyclones: not detected, no attribution. Increased Winter Storms: not detected, no attribution. Increased Thunderstorms: not detected, no attribution. Increased Hail: not detected, no attribution. increased lightning: not detected, no attribution. Increased Extreme Winds: not detected, no attribution. There is no climate crisis.
    1
  16. And I'm one. The retreat of Himalayan glaciers began before the current warming and was caused by reduced precipitation (Shekhar, 2017. Singh, 2020.). This supported by further work done by Schneider (2014), and Chen (2019). The retreat was due to a reduction in precipitation. Currently, precipitation is half of what it was 20 years previously. Research by Salerno (2015) "challenges the assumption of the main driver [i.e. temperature] of glacier mass changes". Satellite data shows the glaciers in the Karakoram largely unaffected by current warming. Of 1219 glaciers surveyed, 79.5% were stable, 5.3% were advancing, and 7.6% retreating (Rankl, 2014). Swiss Alps glacier extents were smaller than 2000 C.E. during the warmer-than-today Roman and Medieval Warm Periods and throughout 75% of the Holocene, or when temperatures were 1-3°C warmer (Schimmelpfennig et al., 2022). Glaciologists Bohleber et al, 2020 of the Austrian Academy of Science discovered from ice cores that the 3500-meter high Weißseespitze summit was ice free 5900 years ago. 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). There is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis. Glacial retreat is certainly not evidence of this.
    1
  17. @AA-vi1cc  Ah, memories. And you thought it was accelerating when it wasn't. 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. Your cupboard is bare.
    1
  18. @AA-vi1cc  There's a bit of a problem with the "accelerating continental ice loss in Antarctica" position. It's not accelerating. If you want to dig down to the actual data, that is. Just so we're clear, I'm referring to the paper entitled "Mass balance of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets from 1992 to 2020" by Otosaka et al, 2023. Can I direct you to table 2, and the text below it? If we include the APIS in "continental" (although I wouldn't) there's no pattern with a slight loss overall - neglible. EAIS, by far the larger of the continent's ice caps, both by surface and volume, hasn't lost mass. It has gained mass, but again it's neglible. So that leaves us with WAIS. It's only WAIS that's driving the mass loss from Antarctica, and you can see that from the Figure 4 graph. Figure 4 and Table 2 show there is a step up in mass loss around 2007. You might want to call that an acceleration. However there's a deceleration from 2017 or at least a noticeable reduction in the rate of annual ice mass loss for the period 2017-2020 when compared to 2012-2016. So accelerating then decelerating. The Antarctic Ice sheet is massive and it's never going to melt on the timescale of human civilisation. Coming back to what we know though about Antarctica, you doomster cult followers have got a problem with Antarctica, haven't you? It's ice shelves are expanding by mass and volume, plus the continent has cooled very significantly in the past 40 years. But a small part (WAIS) of the ice cap is losing mass. Something is making the WAIS melt it would appear, and it cannot be the increasingly colder climate.
    1
  19. 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.’
    1
  20. Two World Wars, one World Cup.
    1
  21. They are using lies to get money. Sea level appears to be rising at a small and steady 3mm per year. It is neither acclerating or decelerating. The trend is linear. 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. Remember, all linear over many decades, or more than a century. No acceleration (or deceleration for that matter). 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 (but hey, it may have accelerated in the last month). NASA satellite data (1993-present) for Global Mean Sea Level shows a linear rise of 3.3mm per year. All linear. No acceleration, so no relationship to the exponential increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. It's going to be decades before even your big toe is submerged.
    1
  22. All this is based on false premises. There is no climate emergency. The Earth was warmer in the recent and distant past. It also warmed faster in the past.
    1
  23. @Hosni Mubarak  Oh great! It's Hos! I got a bit worried after you asked for citations, and I gave you some then you never replied. Good to see you're still in the game. Anyway, I've got some more of those citations you like. Maybe this time you will concede or better still counter my position. Or at the very least respond. So my position as you can see still remains it It was warmer during the Medieval (Elbert, 2013, 2.9°C above present), Roman (Margaritelli, 2020, 2°C above present), and Minoan Warm Periods (Lécuyer, 2018, 4°C above present). I have also discovered there are numerous scientific papers (sort of a hundred) when taken together demonstrate the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the present and that it was a global phenomenon. I must thank you for that as your request for citations stimulated me to do more thorough research. Cheers, Hos.
    1
  24. @Hosni Mubarak  The reason I chose the Elbert paper is that it was from Chile in the Southern Hemisphere, so that you wouldn't say it was local. I have failed. And you're probably going to need a sprinkling of citations from all over the world. Even then you will refuse to be convinced.
    1
  25. @Hosni Mubarak  The Lécuyer paper ties the Mediterranean record in with the Greenland Ice data, so it could be argued it is global or at least hemispheric. And if you want to go global with the Roman Warm Period there's a 2013 paper by Wang et al. that identifies it in South West Florida. Hos, if I can produce a range of citations from a range of continents identifying the Medieval Warm Period as warmer than the present, will you concede that the Earth's climate has been warmer in the recent past?
    1
  26. @Hosni Mubarak  Citations please. It's only fair, Hos. And how about taking me up on my offer?
    1
  27.  @hosnimubarak8869  Thanks for this. I will check it out when I get the chance.
    1
  28. @Hosni Mubarak  These papers together are promoting the idea that the climate of the past was spatially and temporally variable but that the warming that the Earth is currently experiencing is consistent and global. This is not the case. The warming in the current modern era has been neither consistent nor rapid both temporally and spatially. The climate of the US in the 20th century is a good example of this. Remember that the land surface of the US is very comparable to that of China. The US has by far the best actual temperature recordings for this modern period (with very little coverage elsewhere outside of Europe). The accuracy of this data is obviously far superior to estimates using proxies from the past. This is not to disregard the use of proxies (after all there weren't any Chinese peasants wandering around in the Middle Ages with a thermometer) but to use caution and allow for the fact that there will be a large error range from them. Hence the variability demonstrated from past climates may be an artefact. Modern data from NOAA (2021) must be considered more reliable. It shows uneven warming focused on the South East through the early part of the 20th century until it peaks in the 1930s. At which point it should be noted the highest average maxima temperature records were set for the modern era. Some areas of the West showed negligible warming. There then followed a general continent-wide cooling into the 1970s. Then the West began to warm, but the South East continued to cool, so that by the end of the century some SE areas were cooler than they had been a century before. This pattern of uneven warming continues up to the present day. All of this demonstrates to my mind that the climate has a strong internal variability both temporally and spatially without the requirement for any external anthropogenic forcing. Globally satellite data also shows how variable the Earth's climate is with changes up or down of 1°C occurring from one year to the next.
    1
  29. @Hosni Mubarak  You might want to also take a look at the state of the art US Climate Reference Network (run by NOAA). It shows a large degree of variability over shorter timescales but no warming overall since 2005 when they started recording. In fact it shows cooling of about 0.6°C. Of course one needs to take some care with this because of the relatively short period of time. But it is intriguing.
    1
  30. @Hosni Mubarak  So we can agree the current warming has been variable both temporally and spatially. On large scales and small. Just like previous warmings. I'm not sure aerosols can explain the patterns of temperature change we see in the data. What do you think about slight cooling (0.6°C) in the USCRN data from 2005?
    1
  31. @Hosni Mubarak  That's fair enough as I indicated in the comment you replied to. Let's say the jury's out. I just would have expected at least some warming in the data by now rather than cooling, especially as there has been an accelerating increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. Another 5, 10, 15 years could be decisive.
    1
  32. @Hosni Mubarak  Yes, it's super isn't it? Current warming from global satellite data (UAH v6) from 1979 shows warming at a rate of 0.13°C per decade (although there's been no overall warming for the past 8 years). As there's less than 80 years left in this century by 2100 a warming of 1°C will have occurred. Hardly noticeable. Barely an inconvenience.
    1
  33. @Hosni Mubarak  This just shows how much internal variability there is in the climate. But to get back to it, there's very little warming going on. There is no climate emergency. The Earth was warmer in the past. It also warmed faster in the past. My original statement stands.
    1
  34.  @hosnimubarak8869  The Dansgaard–Oeschger events. They are global (Dima et al, 2018). They are usually a change of 5°C over a few decades. However, 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.
    1
  35.  @hosnimubarak8869  But aren't you describing a climate like the present? The Arctic warms, the Antarctic does not.
    1
  36.  @hosnimubarak8869  What are you saying no to? Do you disagree that the Arctic is warming and Antarctica is not?
    1
  37. @Hosni Mubarak  So what are you saying? Both are warming?
    1
  38. @Hosni Mubarak  Oh dear. No, I'm afraid that's not the case. The whole of continental 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. That's brrrrr-illant 🥶! Get it! So much for "Global" warming.
    1
  39. @Hosni Mubarak  I don't know who that is. I'll have to look him up. I was referring to a paper by Zhu et al (2021) that looked at the reanalysed ERA5 dataset. Check out table 4. Furthermore, the Antarctic Peninsula has since been shown to be cooling.
    1
  40.  @hosnimubarak8869  Michael Cricton appears to be a sci-fi author. Was that a joke, Hos?🤔
    1
  41.  @hosnimubarak8869  You may have misunderstood. The Zhu paper from 2021 (using ERA5 dataset) shows statistically significant continent wide cooling of both East and West Antarctica over 40 years.
    1
  42.  @hosnimubarak8869  Yes! So nearly the whole of Antarctica is cooling - significantly! 2.8°C for East and 1.6°C for West in 40 years.
    1
  43.  @hosnimubarak8869  ERA5 −0.70 ± 0.24 −0.42 ± 0.37 that's copy and pasted directly off the scientific paper for East and West Antarctica respectively. There are 30 points of data for these two areas covering annual and seasonal in Table 4. All except one (Spring in West A.) show cooling.
    1
  44. This is just bad weather. There is no climate crisis. The Earth was warmer in the recent and distant past. It also warmed faster in the past.
    1
  45. @Slevin Channel  This video makes attribution claims to single weather events. 50% for those floods. 30% for that hurricane. Which is ridiculous! And as regards snow, can we make some human attribution to the fact that snow extent has been increasing in the autumn and winter in the Northern Hemisphere since the 1960s, that USCRN has shown a temperature decline of -0.61°C since 2005? No? I didn't think so? Let's just cherry pick some bad weather, and call it a man-made climate crisis.
    1
  46. 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.
    1
  47. No. I disagree. You'll have to provide some scientific observational evidence to back up your ascertation. Otherwise we can all say, and believe, anything. There is no global climate crisis.
    1
  48. @Kristóf Kozári  Not where I live. Nevertheless, what it demonstrates is how naturally variable the weather is. There are no global trends in the data to support a narrative of a climate crisis/apocalypse/emergency. It's a scare story to control and exploit the gullible.
    1
  49.  @kristofkozari9040  There is no climate crisis.
    1
  50. This is all about keeping the common man scared so that the elites can lead us to "safety". Just keep paying your tithes so that our masters can pay themselves indulgences ensuring they can fly around the world.
    1