No Climate Crisis. Very Little Climate Change.

NOAA data, and NOAA notes that pre-1900 data is probably missing some storms. Click for larger view.

by Steve Haner

Wednesday’s climate propaganda sermon in the Richmond Times-Dispatch focused on the most recent failure of alarmist media messaging concerning the now-completed Atlantic hurricane season, which turned out to be average. It was predicted to be far more active than average, so once again the prophets of doom were wrong.

Folks in Florida certainly had a bad year, with two of the eight U.S. hurricanes hitting vulnerable and heavily populated beaches and barrier islands. But in the Atlantic region overall, looking at decades of records, it was a typical year. There is no sign in long-range data of any increase in storm activity or intensity over time.

Predicting increased extreme weather is now the go-to move for the alarmist media. Just about every local or wire story about flood or drought or fire, extended hot days or record snows, includes a claim that climate change will bring more extreme weather. In every case, the long-term trends do not agree.  Sometimes the trend lines are down, as is the case with wildfires.

You will never read that admission about wildfires. The fact that the Times-Dispatch revisited and sought to explain away the failed hurricane prediction displayed more honesty than is usual in the media. But, then, it used an illustration that shamelessly started the storm count in the 1980s, intending to mislead readers by ignoring the whole data set you see above.

There is no climate crisis.  There is very little climate change.  The data are why I reject the need for a crash program to reduce CO2, such as Virginia’s ongoing rush toward energy poverty.

There was an earlier discussion here in February, when an advocacy group called the CO2 Coalition compiled a Virginia-specific data set challenging climate change and climate catastrophe claims.  The data are solid, so expect instead personal attacks on the credentials of the scientists or claims the group is just a fossil fuel industry front.

The data show that Virginia’s recorded surface temperatures have risen only very slowly, with much of the rise a reflection of rising nighttime lows, not daytime highs. The actual change trails the models. A few months ago, in an email exchange, one of the contributors to that report went into a bit more depth with me.

The following is from John Christy, a professor at the University of Alabama Huntsville, director of its Earth Systems Science Center, and Alabama’s State Climatologist:

The (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) June-August daytime temperature for Virginia has a trend for 1895 to 2022 of +0.6 °F per century, i.e. almost zero. The nighttime summer temperatures are rising twice as fast (+1.1 F/century), but still nothing to write home about.

But the big story is if you cherry-pick the starting date to be 1960. From that point nighttime summer temps are rising at a rate of +5.7 F/century and summer daytime at +2.9 F/century. But that’s a trick that “disappears” the hot years prior to 1960.

In fact, if I start at 1930, the daytime summer temps have a trend of +0.1 F/century (which is the same as zero). Starting in 1930, the summer nighttime temps have risen at a rate of 2.0 F/century, so you can see that this differential warming is a consequence of development around the station sites and not greenhouse gases.

Christy has published research to back up his argument that most of the nighttime temperature rise is due to heat-retaining structures influencing many of the measurement locations. Indeed, the so-called heat island effect is widely accepted, even popular with climate alarmists who point to disparate impacts of rising temperatures on urban residents. See this from the Times-Dispatch.

But the vast atmosphere above the immediate surface of the planet is the same rural and urban, and constantly in motion. The climate models so crucial to all the dire prophecies all predict comparable temperature rises day and night, which isn’t what happens. The night versus day disparity and similar urban versus rural disparities in temperature change point to development patterns and not CO2 or methane as the cause, or certainly a major factor.

University of Alabama Huntsville also processes and tracks the satellite data on global temperatures by month, data which currently show an 8-year pause in atmospheric temperature increases. It could start to rise again  It could also reverse and start to drop. Trust neither prediction.

Heat waves? Christy was also the source of this illustration (below) in the CO2 Coalition Virginia report. It tracks 7-day heat waves in Virginia, the Southeast U.S. and the whole U.S. The wave of heat waves peaks in the 1930s, drops dramatically for several decades, and then is back up a bit in Virginia in the last two decades. But the peak in the 1930s and then drop through the 1900s are totally inconsistent with the narrative about post World War II emissions growth.


Tornados?  This week’s late November outbreak was touted as proof of climate change on Wednesday’s NBC Nightly News. But a quick check finds that similar November outbreaks go back for years, and in a 2013 report on that year’s November flurry NOAA data showed a November average of 58 tornados.

Rainfall? Here is another chart from the CO2 Coalition report. The effect of poor rainfall that matters most is drought, and over the 130 years mapped below the up and down pattern has gyrated within narrow parameters here in Virginia. The major drought outlier happened in the 1930s, same as the heat waves.

NOAA data. Below the line is moisture deficit and above the line moisture surplus.

Relative sea level rise? That one has been addressed often here on Bacon’s Rebellion (also here and  here.) The most accurate tidal gauges show slow and steady change that contradicts the claims of acceleration of land loss. It predates modern CO2 emissions. In Virginia, land subsidence is the real issue. Improved storm water management and coastal protections are imperative, but unrelated to CO2 from natural gas or gasoline. It is, however, one data set showing a discernable and steady pattern, so the alarmists love it.

Sea ice? It is building nicely already in the Arctic, which might be a harbinger of more polar express weeks this coming winter. We are now up to forty years of failed climate catastrophe warnings, yet a huge portion of the world’s population simply accepts the one-sided reporting and stands ready to pay immensely more for unreliable wind and solar electricity.

This column won’t change minds set in concrete. The debate this might spark in the comment columns below will illuminate nothing. The true believers run to the false claim of “settled science,” ignoring data. The political and financial benefits of terrifying the population into accepting a radical shift to a dangerous energy policy are just too rich to abandon.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

18 responses to “No Climate Crisis. Very Little Climate Change.”

  1. Deckplates Avatar
    Deckplates

    The climate has been changing in cycles on its own for, uh, thousands of years. That is inclusive of both cold & hot and wet & dry cycles – all of which are so small that we physically cannot even discern that it is a cycle. That big ball of fire, 93 million miles aways, cannot be delt with by mere humans. Do we even try to do any kind of research or compilation of data while thinking about what it means? Ummm, deductive reasoning, eh? Something (which should be) taught in high school.

    Notwithstanding, some can milk it for easy money by convincing the weak of mind that we (mere) humans can change the sun and its cycles. Am guessing that we have extra dough, to give to those who try to sell…stuff?

    One thing about forest, exclusively in the U.S. We have way more square miles of forest now than we did when the first Europeans landed on the East Coast back in the late 1600s. And even more than when the first Asian’s landed on the West coast a few thousand years ago. Our forest management is superior when the states make the efforts to do so. Thank You Teddy Roosevelt.

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “Do we even try to do any kind of research or compilation of data while thinking about what it means?”

      Short answer: Yes, we do in a very big way. It is what the Conservative nihilists routinely pan…

  2. DJRippert Avatar

    I try to keep it simple:

    1. There are enough humans (growing fast enough) that the amount of greenhouse gasses released by the growing throng of humanity will eventually cause climate change (perhaps it already has).

    2. Greenhouse gasses do more harm than just possible climate change. Acid rain, for example changes the Ph of estuaries like the Chesapeake Bay.

    3. If humanity had started with green power generation nobody would be suggesting that we shift to burning fossil fuels. Green is better.

    4. Economics count. Ask the Europeans who are suffering long term economic decline in large part because they no longer produce power at competitive world prices.

    Based on the above, I believe there should be a steady plan (complete with government regulation and subsides) to encourage de-carbonization.

    However, Virginia’s plan is extreme and was developed through an unholy relationship between Dominion and our elected politicians. Our state’s unlimited campaign contribution rules contributed more to this Rube Goldberg approach than any science.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Never try to pull a man off of a position with reason when he got there without it.

    2. The problem is that the time for a steady plan was 20-30 years ago.

    3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      Strange day when I find myself agreeing with much of a DJ post…. 👏☝️

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        And I very little of it. GHG such as CO2, water vapor and CH4, for example, play no role in “acid rain” (#2) and humanity did start with non fossil fuel sources such as wind and hydro (and horses for transport), but didn’t achieve much economic progress until switching to fossil fuels (#3). Now, other emissions from coal burning very much contributed to acid rain, but not GHG.

        1. DJRippert Avatar

          The same power plants that release CO2 also release sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. Convert the power plants to green energy and you both reduce the CO2 and the chemicals that cause acid rain.

          #3 I should have written “modern green energy” although the Dutch had a pretty good wind generation system hundreds of years ago. The point is that any economically sensible path to end the burning of fossil fuels should be taken. If the costs of generating green energy were the same as the costs of burning fossil fuels to generate energy – nobody would burn fossil fuels. Green energy is better. The only question is how to get there and h0w much economic sacrifice to make in the process.

      2. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        And I very little of it. GHG such as CO2, water vapor and CH4, for example, play no role in “acid rain” (#2) and humanity did start with non fossil fuel sources such as wind and hydro (and horses for transport), but didn’t achieve much economic progress until switching to fossil fuels (#3). Now, other emissions from coal burning very much contributed to acid rain, but not GHG.

      3. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        And I very little of it. GHG such as CO2, water vapor and CH4, for example, play no role in “acid rain” (#2) and humanity did start with non fossil fuel sources such as wind and hydro (and horses for transport), but didn’t achieve much economic progress until switching to fossil fuels (#3). Now, other emissions from coal burning very much contributed to acid rain, but not GHG.

  3. I can’t find your landfall chart on the NOAA site. A direct link would be appreciated. I feel a downward trend line when you have a century’s worth of difference in how this data is recorded is going to make trend-seeking difficult.

  4. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “It was predicted to be far more active than average, so once again the prophets of doom were wrong.”

    “Once again”? This seems to be a fairly good record as weather prediction goes.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/25a8b7ed83a51ddc847cd65e21ddd1f0b17e03d743c22ca1391434aac0cdc38b.jpg

    1. DJRippert Avatar

      Why would you start in 1984 – other than an homage to Orwell?

  5. William O'Keefe Avatar
    William O’Keefe

    Climate change is the magic elixir of environmental apocalyptic because it is always changing and it poorly understood. Climate models, which are a mixture of science and assumptions, are the basis for stoking fear and providing large pots of money that goes to mostly to true believers–charlatans.
    CO2 represents a small fraction of the atmosphere and also of greenhouse gases. Water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas but it is extremely hard to measure and impossible to control. So, the focus is on CO2 which is a by product of fossil fuel use and industrial development.
    An interesting paper is “An Assessment of the Conventional Global warming Narrative” by the Global Warming Policy Foundation and authored by Richard Lindzen–https://co2coalition.org/publications/an-assessment-of-the-conventional-global-warming-narrative/. This paper reinforces the arguments made by Steve Haner.

  6. I can’t find your landfall chart on the NOAA site. A direct link would be appreciated. I feel a downward trend line when you have a century’s worth of difference in how this data is recorded is going to make trend-seeking difficult.

    1. As for Arctic Ice, your linked article is about snow.

      In reality, this is the eighth lowest year thanks to warming waters (https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/) And the trend is downwards. Usually “growth” is cherry-picking between two dates where the natural flux can allow you to set an upwards trend.

      And can we stop acting as if you’re any more incline to change your mind?

  7. disqus_VYLI8FviCA Avatar
    disqus_VYLI8FviCA

    Climate change is religion to many and therefore impervious to facts and reason. Climate alarm models have overstated the change in climate as well as its consequences for decades, yet the climate crowd continues to reference new models after the old ones have failed. If takes a great deal of faith to continue following a movement that has been wrong for 40 years.

  8. Deckplates Avatar
    Deckplates

    “Lack of Wind Pushes Europe’s Power Prices Higher, Just as Cold Sets In”
    “The continent has stockpiled natural gas, easing worries of shortages and prices, but now they are climbing again”
    WSJ – updated Dec. 2, 2022 10:30 am ET

    It is easy to travel the coasts of almost all EU countries and find motionless windmills. They can double or triple the installations and the bad deal only gets worse. Too much money for way too little ROI – “I squared R.”

    So, how many people in Europe will freeze & die or get really sick this winter, cuz the EU & member countries made poor choices?

Leave a Reply