Drying The Sky

By Willis Eschenbach – Re-Blogged From WUWT

Eleven years ago I published a post here on Watts Up With That entitled “The Thermostat Hypothesis“. About a year after the post, the journal Energy and Environment published my rewrite of the post entitled “THE THUNDERSTORM THERMOSTAT HYPOTHESIS: HOW CLOUDS AND THUNDERSTORMS CONTROL THE EARTH’S TEMPERATURE“.

When I started studying the climate, what I found surprising was not the warming. For me, the oddity was how stable the temperature of the earth has been. The system is ruled by nothing more substantial than wind, wave, and cloud. All of these are changing on both long and short time cycles all of the time. In addition, the surface temperature is running some thirty degrees C or more warmer than would be expected given the strength of the sun.

Continue reading

Two More Degrees by 2100!

By Vaughan Pratt – Re-Blogged From WUWT

An alternative perspective on 3 degrees C?

This post was originally intended as a short comment questioning certain aspects of the methodology in JC’s post of December 23, “3 degrees C?”. But every methodology is bound to have shortcomings, raising the possibility that Judith’s methodology might nevertheless be best possible, those shortcomings notwithstanding. I was finding my arguments for a better methodology getting too long for a mere comment, whence this post. (But if actual code is more to your fancy than long-winded natural language explanations, Figures 1 and 2a can be plotted with only 31 MATLAB commands .)

Judith’s starting point is “It is far simpler to bypass the attribution issues of 20th century warming, and start with an early 21st century baseline period — I suggest 2000-2014, between the two large El Nino events.” The tacit premise here would appear to be that those “attribution issues of 20th century warming” are harder to analyze than their 21st century counterparts.

Continue reading

Failed Serial Doomcasting

By Willis Eschenbach – Re-Blogged From WUWT

People sometimes ask me why I don’t believe the endless climate/energy use predictions of impending doom and gloom for the year 2050 or 2100. The reason is, neither the climate models nor the energy use models are worth a bucket of warm spit for such predictions. Folks concentrate a lot on the obvious problems with the climate models. But the energy models are just as bad, and the climate models totally depend on the energy models for estimating future emissions. However, consider the following US Energy Information Agency (EIA) predictions of energy use from 2010, quoted from here (emphasis mine):

In 2010, the U.S. Energy Information Administration projected that in 2019, the U.S. would be producing about 6 million barrels of oil a day. The reality? We’re now producing 12 million barrels of oil a day.

Meanwhile, EIA projected oil prices would be more than $100 a barrel. They’re currently hovering around $60 a barrel.

EIA had projected in 2010 that the U.S. would be importing a net eight million barrels of petroleum by now, which includes crude oil and petroleum products like gasoline. In September, the U.S. actually exported a net 89 thousand barrels of petroleum.

Continue reading

If You Put Junk Science In, You’ll Get Junk Science Out

By Chris Martz – Re-Blogged From WUWT

 

There are plenty of climate scientists in the world that I highly respect, many of whom I don’t share the same views with on climate change. However, these scientists are respectful towards others, they’re pretty honest with their data, and still have scientific integrity.

There are a select few scientists out there, however, whom I have lost all respect for - Dr. Michael Mann being one of them.

Continue reading

CNN vs. What the Science Says, Part 2

Re-Blogged From Sea Level Info

CNN’s war with the facts continues in this Monday article, by CNN Chief Climate Correspondent, Bill Weir:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/09/weather/alaska-climate-crisis-summer-weir-wxc/index.html

The gist of the article is that Alaska was too hot this summer. How ridiculous is that?

If we can’t even agree on something as obvious as the fact that Alaska is too darn cold, then is there any hope that we can ever agree on anything? It is a testament to the power of relentless propaganda that the Left has managed to convince even many shivering Alaskans and Canadians that a warmer climate above the 49th parallel would somehow be a bad thing.

Continue reading

Air-Conditioner Maker Lennox Cuts Forecast, Citing ‘Significantly Cooler Temperatures’

From CNBC – Re-Blogged From WUWT

Published Mon, Jul 22 2019 10:48 AM EDT Updated Mon, Jul 22 2019 12:57 PM EDT

Kate Rooney@Kr00ney

Key Points

  • Lennox International lowers its 2019 guidance, partially based on colder temperatures.
  • “Significantly cooler temperatures and higher precipitation across the United States adversely impacted the HVAC market in the second quarter,” says Chairman and CEO Todd Bluedorn.
  • The guidance cut comes after a heat wave swept through the United States this weekend. June was the hottest since the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration began recording temperatures in the 1800s and July is on track to break its own record.

Continue reading

Warming Temperature Measurements Polluted by Bad Data, Research Confirms

By H. Sterling Burnett – Re-Blogged From WUWTFor years, I have written about the poor quality control exercised by government entities promoting the theory human fossil fuel use is causing dangerous climate change. When federal agencies in the United States, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), university researchers, and weather agencies abroad, aren’t outright manipulating data (as numerous previous issues of Climate Change Weekly and other Heartland Institute publications show they’ve done) to prove their assertion the Earth is warming rapidly and to a dangerous degree, they are using data from severely compromised sources.
USHCN climate monitoring weather station in a parking lot at University of Arizona, Tucson

Continue reading