Why is the world's hottest day on record in 1913? Where the record was set, it has not come close to that temperature again. Even in 2023 it was 8 degrees cooler than in 1913 at Death Valley, Ca.
Folks it gets colder in winter and warmer in summer. That is pretty much 'settled' science.
And again we have been keeping temperature records for such a short time relative to the history of humankind and have had satellite imaging for a far shorter time that it is a near certainty that there will be record heat and record cold somewhere on the planet each and every day that goes by and that will no doubt likely continue for a very long time in our future.
It is important to be good stewards of the environment, not just so that we don't exterminate ourselves or anything else, or even risk toxifying wastelands. Instead of wasting all these resources on this MMGW hoax we should be cleaning the oceans. Even when the earth's climate does change, and lets pretend to accept the absurd theory we can even do anything about it, what if what we did fucked it up far worse? Ever see The Colony?I honestly don't fault those who pay attention to the IPCC and talking heads pushing the AGW/climate change doctrines. So do I.
What I cannot accept as 'logic, reason, honest science' though are those who refuse to even look at or even allow any point of view other than what is being pushed by governments and 'scientists' funded by governments and other interested parties who allow nobody with different points of view to participate in the discussion and policy making. And selective editing or even falsifying of data as well as those constantly moving goal posts do not inspire confidence in anybody capable of critical thinking.
Science is a field that cites conventional wisdom yes, but science requires an open mind and acceptance of ALL points of view and all pertinent criteria and challenges to the conventional wisdom so that it can get it more and more accurate. More and more correct. Just think how the 'science' was all over map and constantly changing during the pandemic as everybody was learning and trying to figure out what did and did not work to deal with it. It is no different with any other aspect of science. What was the 'conventional wisdom' about many many things--what causes fire to burn, the sound barrier, cause and treatment of many diseases, the structure of the universe etc. etc. etc. was all 'settled science' that changed with new information and capability to gather different information.
But 'official' climate science has become closed and refuses any differing opinions. Any who do not agree with the government, IPCC doctrines and Summary for Policy Makers are forced out of the participating scientific groups or made so unwelcome they quit. The leftwing MSM and other information sources shut them out, do not allow them a voice. We get nonsense like this from Heidi Cullen back in 2006:
"The Weather Channel’s most prominent climatologist is advocating that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming. This latest call to silence skeptics follows a year (2006) in which skeptics were compared to "Holocaust Deniers" and Nuremberg-style war crimes trials were advocated by several climate alarmists.
The Weather Channel’s (TWC) Heidi Cullen, who hosts the weekly global warming program "The Climate Code," is advocating that the American Meteorological Society (AMS) revoke their "Seal of Approval" for any television weatherman who expresses skepticism that human activity is creating a climate catastrophe. . ."
<b>Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics</b>
The Weather Channel’s most prominent climatologist is advocating that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming. This latest call to silence skeptics follows a year (2006) in which...www.epw.senate.gov
Anybody who says there is any such thing as 'settled science' for which no new information matters is not a scientist but is a politician or opportunist or unthinking brainwashed numbnut or idiot.
I would expect from too much Carbon Dioxide an increase of plant life globally. And due to plants having a cooling impact on Earth, we would see cooler temperatures now than in 1913 in Death Valley, CA. Death Valley is the gold standard of Earth when it comes to record temperatures. So due to more plants on Earth than in 1913, today we see it cooling off at Death Valley, CA and yet IPCC is not ringing alarm bells it is cooler than normal.Folks it gets colder in winter and warmer in summer. That is pretty much 'settled' science.
And it is pretty much settled science that climate changes from day to day, year to year, century to century, eon to eon, sometimes dramatically, whether or not homo sapiens are part of that. Drought, flood, rain, snow, weather and other Earth catastrophes have always been part of the human experience.
And an increase of 7 billion people in a little over 200 years will definitely affect our immediate environment as would that kind of increase of any species on Earth. To say humankind has no effect is just as unscientific as to to blame it all on humankind. But any person capable of critical thinking has to question if human activity is so important in increases in CO2 in our atmosphere, then why have all the efforts to stop that--wind, solar, electric cars, 'energy efficient' appliances, etc. etc. etc.--made no difference whatsoever?
I think that's an honest question that deserves an answer.
If you noticed, it is scientists presenting both sides of the argument. Politicians including the media present one side only. That humans control climate and only deniers allege humans do not control climate. They fail to mention Climate is not short term changes. Climate is a pattern established taking at least 30 years by definition. They want us to believe politicians have magic wands able to predict the future of Earth into another 30 years into the future. Despite they can't predict weather past 7 days into the future. Richard Lindzen, Judith Curry and far more present the side that man is not warming Earth and in fact might be cooling it down.
Real scientists present and welcome all sides of an argument. So-called 'scientists' like Heidi Cullen may be educated in science but they are not scientists. They are politicians or 'woke' SJW activists or economic opportunists who allow only one point of view on anything, i.e. that which benefits themselves. And they should never be in a position to make or recommend policy for anybody.
Interesting. So after 2 decades of studying the paleoclimate, do you believe that mankind's emissions have led to a warmer climate?
That's weather. We were discussing averages.
Yes, by 0.5C which is the theoretical surface temperature increase from 300 ppm to 420 ppm calculated from the simple physics of radiative forcing from CO2.
The average was hotter then than now.
That is not climate. Climate is that Death Valley, CA is 8 degrees cooler than it was in the heat waves around 1913.
Information about that Mansion.
www.propublica.org
Death Valley, CA expects snow to fall for the first time in over 100 years.
Which again testifies to anomalies that occur all over the planet in ways that the scientists neither fully understand nor can they predict. Some day we'll no doubt be able to pinpoint the cause and probabilities of those anomalies. But for now there can be rare weather occurring pretty much anywhere.
Guess the 350 ppm safety valve is long since gone, and I seriously doubt very many climate scientists thought it was even possible to maintain that goal, we are in a runaway feedback loop now, with the forecast for an increasing CO2 concentration to enter the earths atmosphere. Surprisingly, the worst emitter of this is the ruminant stomachs of cattle from humans need for beef.
