Wednesday, January 03, 2018

Australia: High tide at Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour

You can see that if the sea is rising, it's not rising very much.  More evidence that the alarmist figures put out by the climate bigots are a crock.  Al Gore prophecies rises of several metres

There has in fact been some rise over the 128-year-long tide gauge record. Since 1886 it indicates a long-term rate of sea-level rise of two and a half inches (6.5cm) a century. That's hardly enough to knock anybody off their horse.

But wait! There's more! Here is a plot of the rise:

You can see that the sea level has been plateaued since 1950 -- exactly the time that the climate bigots say global warming began. So NONE of the rise was due to global warming. The small amount of global warming we appear to have had in recent decades did not shift the sea level one iota. Fun!

Laugh of the day: A quarter of the world could become a DESERT if global warming increases by just 2ºC

Who do these assholes think they are kidding?  A warmer world would be a WETTER world.  Surely I don't have to spell out how rain works?  The guff below is just more modelling stupidity. One wonders what planet their models are supposed to be matching

An increase of just 2°C (3.6°F) in global temperatures could make the world considerably drier and more desert-like, new research has warned.

More than a quarter of the world's land surface, home to more than 1.5 billion people, would become more arid and droughts and wildfires could be widespread.

Limiting global warming to 1.5°C (2.7°F) would dramatically reduce the percentage of the Earth's surface affected, scientists found. 

'Aridification would emerge over 20 to 30 per cent of the world's land surface by the time the global temperature change reaches 2ºC (3.6ºF)', said Dr Manoj Joshi from the University of East Anglia's School of Environmental Sciences and one of the study's co-authors.

The research team studied projections from 27 global climate models and identified areas of the world where aridity will substantially change.

The areas most affected areas are parts of South East Asia, Southern Europe, Southern Africa, Central America and Southern Australia.

These areas are home to more than 20 per cent of the world's population - that's over 1.5 billion people.

The study looked at the current rate of  global temperature increase and compared it to data from before the industrial revolution.

The world has already warmed by 1°C (1.8°F) since then. 

Dr Chang-Eui Park, a co-author of the study from the Southern University of Science and Technology in China said another way to look at the potential changes is as a 'continuous moderate drought'.


Will we run out of CHOCOLATE? Experts predict treat will disappear in 30 years because cacao plants are perishing in the warm climate

Ya gotta  laugh.  The climate bigots trot this scare out once a year, roughly.  And they always leave out half the story, such as the fertilizing effect of more CO2 and more rain in a warmer world

Cacao beans are grown in many parts of the world -- Peru, Equador, Bolivia, Brazil, Bali, Fiji etc.  So it is obviously not hard to plant more of it elsewhere if one particular country falls short.  There has in fact been a recent big success in growing cacao in my home State of Queensland

And the guff below is just another Warmist prophecy anyway.  The supply of cacao beans at present is in glut -- so much so that prices have dropped by a third

Experts predict the world could run out of chocolate within 40 years because cacao plants are struggling to survive in warmer climates.

The trees can only grow within approximately 20 degrees north and south of the Equator - and they thrive under specific conditions such as high humidity and abundant rain.

But a temperature rise of just 2.1C over the next 30 years caused by global warming is set to wreak havoc for the plants - and in turn the worldwide chocolate industry, according to the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

As the mercury rises and squeezes more water out of soil and plants, scientists believe it is unlikely that rainfall will increase enough to offset the moisture loss.

That means cacao production areas are set to be pushed thousands of feet uphill into mountainous terrain which is carefully preserved for wildlife by 2050.

Officials in countries such as Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana - which produce more than half of the world's chocolate - will face an agonising dilemma over whether to maintain the world's supply of chocolate or to save their dying ecosystems.

Last year experts predicted that the world was heading for a 'chocolate deficit' as shoppers in developing countries snapped up more of the sweet treat.

The typical Western consumer eats an average of 286 chocolate bars a year - more if they are from Belgium, the research titled Destruction by Chocolate found.

For 286 bars, producers need to plant 10 cacao trees to make the cocoa and the butter - the key ingredients in the production of chocolate.

Since the 1990s, more than a billion people from China, Indonesia, India, Brazil and the former Soviet Union have entered the market for cocoa.

Despite the increased demand, supply has not kept up and stockpiles of cocoa are said to be falling.

Doug Hawkins, from London-based research firm Hardman Agribusiness, said production of cocoa is under strain as farming methods have not changed for hundreds of years.

He said: 'Unlike other tree crops that have benefited from the development of modern, high yielding cultivars and crop management techniques to realise their genetic potential, more than 90 per cent of the global cocoa crop is produced by smallholders on subsistence farms with unimproved planting material.'

Some reports suggest cocoa growers in the world's top producer country, Ivory Coast, have resorted to illegally farming protected forests to meet demand - what Mr Hawkins calls 'destruction by chocolate'.

He said: 'All the indicators are that we could be looking at a chocolate deficit of 100,000 tonnes a year in the next few years.'


Humans are good, after all

Greenies hate people but they have just come up with the thought that they need humans to control global warming:

Curbing climate change

Study finds strong rationale for the human factor

Humans may be the dominant cause of global temperature rise, but they may also be a crucial factor in helping to reduce it, according to a new study that for the first time builds a novel model to measure the effects of behavior on climate.

Drawing from both social psychology and climate science, the new model investigates how human behavioral changes evolve in response to extreme climate events and affect global temperature change.

The model accounts for the dynamic feedbacks that occur naturally in the Earth's climate system -- temperature projections determine the likelihood of extreme weather events, which in turn influence human behavior. Human behavioral changes, such as installing solar panels or investing in public transportation, alter greenhouse gas emissions, which change the global temperature and thus the frequency of extreme events, leading to new behaviors, and the cycle continues.

Combining climate projections and social processes, the model predicts global temperature change ranging from 3.4 to 6.2°C by 2100, compared to 4.9°C from the climate model alone.

Due to the complexity of physical processes, climate models have uncertainties in global temperature prediction. The new model found that temperature uncertainty associated with the social component was of a similar magnitude to that of the physical processes, which implies that a better understanding of the human social component is important but often overlooked.

The model found that long-term, less easily reversed behavioral changes, such as insulating homes or purchasing hybrid cars, had by far the most impact in mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and thus reducing climate change, versus more short-term adjustments, such as adjusting thermostats or driving fewer miles.

The results, published today in the journal Nature Climate Change, demonstrate the importance of factoring human behavior into models of climate change.

"A better understanding of the human perception of risk from climate change and the behavioral responses are key to curbing future climate change," said lead author Brian Beckage, a professor of plant biology and computer science at the University of Vermont.

The paper was a result of combined efforts of the joint Working Group on Human Risk Perception and Climate Change at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS) at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, and the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) at the University of Maryland. Both institutes are supported by the National Science Foundation. The Working Group of about a dozen scientists from a variety of disciplines, including biology, psychology, geography, and mathematics, has been researching the questions surrounding human risk perception and climate change since 2013.

"It is easy to lose confidence in the capacity for societies to make sufficient changes to reduce future temperatures. When we started this project, we simply wanted to address the question as to whether there was any rational basis for 'hope' -- that is a rational basis to expect that human behavioral changes can sufficiently impact climate to significantly reduce future global temperatures," said NIMBioS Director Louis J. Gross, who co-authored the paper and co-organized the Working Group.

"Climate models can easily make assumptions about reductions in future greenhouse gas emissions and project the implications, but they do this with no rational basis for human responses," Gross said. "The key result from this paper is that there is indeed some rational basis for hope."

That basis for hope can be the foundation which communities can build on in adopting policies to reduce emissions, said co-author Katherine Lacasse, an assistant professor of psychology at Rhode Island College.

"We may notice more hurricanes and heat waves than usual and become concerned about climate change, but we don't always know the best ways to reduce our emissions," Lacasse said. "Programs or policies that help reduce the cost and difficulty of making long-term changes or that bring in whole communities to make long-term changes together can help support people to take big steps that have a meaningful impact on the climate."


Al Gore’s climate change predictions IMPLODE as everybody realizes the North Pole didn’t completely melt

For some people, it doesn’t matter how often former Vice President Al Gore has been wrong in his dire predictions of planetary demise, thanks to human-caused “global warming” and “climate change.” They’ll believe him no matter what, until the day they die (from natural causes, of course, not from planetary demise due to “global warming” and “climate change”).

But for those of you who like and appreciate honesty from politicians and public figures, you have long given up any hope that Gore is anything other than a hapless, feckless Alt-Left partisan when it comes to his environmental activism.

That said, our job is to set the record straight, which is why we found it prudent to remind our readers that roughly nine years ago today, Gore predicted that many of you were going to be swallowed up by rising sea waters caused from tons of melting ice.

Needless to say, that didn’t happen.

In January 2006, Al Gore claimed that “within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return” and “a true planetary emergency” due to human-caused global warming.

Again in 2009, Gore told an audience in Copenhagen, Denmark, that there was a “75 percent chance” that during “some summer months” the “polar ice cap” would disappear completely within “five years.”

The claims were tied to his widely-debunked 2006 “documentary” An Inconvenient Truth, in which he won a very politically motivated Nobel Peace Prize. (Remember when Obama won a Nobel after just a few months in office based not on any accomplishments but on what the committee ‘hoped’ he would accomplish?)

As for Gore, nothing this man has said would happen as regards to the earth warming and slipping closer to self-destruction has come true. Nothing.

But that didn’t stop him from releasing a follow-up film to his original ‘documentary’ earlier this year called, An Inconvenient Sequel. “Sooner or later, climate deniers in the GOP will have to confront their willful blindness to the climate crisis,” Gore tweeted.

Right. Perhaps “sooner or later” climate-change and environmental hoaxers will have to confront the fact that most of us are onto them and no longer believe the lies. (Related: U.N. official actually ADMITS that ‘global warming’ is a scam designed to ‘change world’s economic model.’)

And with good reason. Not only has Gore’s wild claims of doomsday been debunked, so have other so-called environmental experts who have similarly predicted doom and gloom.

They include Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich, a longtime environmental icon and author of the 1968 book “The Population Bomb.”

“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Ehrlich confidently predicted in a 1970 issue of Mademoiselle, as reported by Investors Business Daily. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next 10 years.”

He further claimed to readers of The Progressive that same year that between 1980 and 1989, 4 billion people including 65 million Americans would be vanquished in the “Great Die-Off.”

In a 1969 essay called “Eco-Catastrophe!” he wrote that “most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born.”

The fact is, scare-mongers like Ehrlich have cried “Wolf!” so many times that few people believe them anymore. Gore is on that list.

So, too, is S. Dillon Ripley, longtime head of the Smithsonian Institute, who was once cited by Sen. Gaylord Nelson in Look magazine decades ago that, within 25 years, “between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

And so on.

To underscore Gore’s bogus predictions, there is now a cycle of global cooling, not warming, and sea ice and polar ice caps are growing, not receding.

Here are some constants: The climate is always changing, the weather is not the same as climate, and everything Al Gore says about both is wrong.




Preserving the graphics:  Most graphics on this site are hotlinked from elsewhere.  But hotlinked graphics sometimes have only a short life -- as little as a week in some cases.  After that they no longer come up.  From January 2011 on, therefore, I have posted a monthly copy of everything on this blog to a separate site where I can host text and graphics together -- which should make the graphics available even if they are no longer coming up on this site.  See  here or here


No comments: