Aug 9, 2017 · 5 min read
I’d like to offer a point by point rebuttal as most seem to center on the whole:
- Where is the graph with the balloon data?! That one was shown before congress and since balloons .even though your claim that he found an error in his data that showed the upper atmosphere was warming, it still doesn’t negate the fact that from that analysis with the current model runs used at the time and were taken directly from the ICPP. The fact that now data matches with models doesn’t say model predictions are correct, just that they keep adjusting the models because they were VERY wrong. It’s quite likely that most will still be wrong in a few years. I’d also like to point out that RSS and UAH use mostly the same satellites, but not all as described here by Dr. Spencer: http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/07/on-the-divergence-between-the-uah-and-rss-global-temperature-records/
TL;DR: RSS uses the NOAA-15 which has a decaying orbit that they apply a “diurnal cycle drift correction” on whereas UAH uses the “NASA Aqua AMSU which carries extra fuel to maintain orbit.” This means that where NASA, NOAA, BEST, and HadCRU4 (maybe 5 now?) all use the exact same data (GHCN +/- SSTs) just with different adjustments, UAH and RSS do not. - OH NO 3mph faster winds! Oh, but there is WAY less storms. That means overall intensity should be very well down because intensity would be a function of number as well as power. This means because we’re seeing far fewer damaging (extreme is a stupid word because hurricanes/tornados/typhoons are weather) weather events than ever, they’ve over predicted that extreme and less people are dying. Like a lot less.
Also, sea level rise isn’t accelerating by any stretch of the imagination: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/07/30/putting-the-brakes-on-acceleration-2/ and due to the ups and downs of sea level, you get some years of acceleration (2011–2012 Greenland melted a lot) followed by a deceleration like we’re seeing now likely tied to the massive growth this year in the Greenland Ice sheet: http://beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/ - Yeah, no. I’d like to see models correctly hindcast temperatures based on global temperatures that we’ve measured. It would be even better if they could match reconstructions for further in the past, but paleoclimatology is still very young and many kinks in reconstructions haven’t been worked out yet, so that’s less necessary, but it’s unlikely they’ll even do that since these modified economic models aren’t good at predicting anything. As well, the cells they use to analyze the global temperature are too large because UHI, clouds, solar eclipses, can have extremely high local affects only a few miles apart whereas the cells they use are about massive (100km² I think) when in reality they should be 1km², but computers would have to be computing those numbers since before the beginning of the universe and they still wouldn’t have a single model run done.
This section also forgets about UHI and land use changes which greatly affect highs and lows where UHI can up urban to rural temperature differences by 7⁰ F and keeps nights warmer as well since the LWIR is released back into the atmosphere when it’s no longer absorbing sunlight. I’m also skeptical of the claim that aerosols don’t affect nighttime temps since LWIR can still be reflected back to earth by the aerosols thus creating raising low highs (highest recorded low temperature) even while it lowers daily highs.
Lastly I’d like to point out that CO2 isn’t the most powerful greenhouse gas, it’s Water Vapor and that will always be the case because Water vapor absorbs more IR bands than CO2 and overlaps with every other GHG IR band meaning Water Vapor can highly saturate all bands even before any other GHGs are added into the mix. - We do know the past is always cooled and the present is always warmed in GHCN data used by all Meteorological data entities be they governmental or university based. As well, many global thermometers are poorly sited with many being very close to UHI heat generating areas like Airports, multi-lane highways, heat exhaust ports, centers of parking lots, etc much like an analysis done by Anthony Watts (much to the chagrin of alarmists) that show that this naturally includes a heat bias from UHI effects that aren’t corrected out of the data: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/17/press-release-agu15-the-quality-of-temperature-station-siting-matters-for-temperature-trends/
- Considering we’re still having record crop production this is highly misleading. Yes, present conditions don’t predict future outcomes much like the stock market, GMOs, farming technology, and cheaper desalination methods will likely mean that none of that actually matters. With tech, we can pretty much grow anything anywhere as we can turn “poor arctic soil” into the grain belt equivalent should we need to. After all, palm trees have grown in the Antarctic in times long long long past. As well, someone also mentioned this, but heat deaths are easily to mitigate than cold deaths because heat exhaustion and stroke can easily avoided if you drink enough water. As well, a good piece of shade or modern hat can also easily mitigate this by allowing heat to escape through our head while limiting the heat over our whole body. After all, people have thrived along the equator long before modern times.
Lastly, life has proven that it will thrive even in the direst of situations and a few degrees warmer where oceans are a little less basic aren’t going to have a large affect. After all, coral evolved in 5000 PPM conditions and since they thrive in places we never thought possible (deeper, colder, warmer, cloudier, more acidic, etc) we pretty much don’t have to worry about any of that. - Heartland is 100% right on this one and humanity already did it — GO US!!! We created nuclear power which emits 0 CO2 in power generation! That’s amazing! Yet 0 percent of catastrophists advocate for this technology to proliferate the whole earth and INSTANTLY solve the CO2 problem and energy poverty problem in ONE FELL SWOOP. This absolutely blows my mind especially since battery, solar cell, and wind turbine production is dirtier than nuclear by a long shot especially since the rods can be safely stored with hardly any leakage or radioactivity leaking out until Thorium Molten Salt Reactors reach full commercialization and we can almost completely eliminate every bit of spent rod waste in existence to generate more CO2-free power! Lets also not forget that the “renewables” are intermittent and cannot be relied upon for base-load power making them utterly useless for humanity’s drive to power the whole world and raise every man, woman, and child out of poverty.