You have probably heard President Obama and other administration notables feverishly lament that 2015 was the hottest year “on record” following a previous one set in 2014.
Yes, but did you also hear any mention of by how much?
According to surface measurements, the 2015 El Nino year record amounted to only 29 hundredths of one degree warmer than global mean temperatures over the past 100 plus years, while 2014 was seven hundredths of a degree warmer.
Headlined media announcements of a warmest day, week, year, or even decade on record aren’t in the habit of telling us that those record-breaking events are teensy fractions of a degree Fahrenheit, when we are entirely accustomed daily temperature fluctuations of many degrees, and seasonal swings of 80 degrees or more. Nor do they mention that anything lasting less than 30 years is conventionally characterized as “weather” rather than “climate.”
In any case, more reliable satellite data reveal that 2015 was only the third warmest year since recordings first began in 1979. Other than major 2015 and 1998 El Nino ocean spikes, there has been no statistically significant warming in nearly two decades. Yet although weather balloon (radiosonde) measurements closely agree with satellites, no temperature monitoring systems were designed to measure such small changes over decades.
Nevertheless, a July 22 Washington Post feature breathlessly announced: “Inaction on climate change would cause billions, major EPA study finds.” The article quoted EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy saying: “The results are quite startling and very clear. Left unchecked, climate change affects our health, infrastructure, and outdoors we love. But more importantly the [EPA-sponsored] report shows that global action on climate will save lives.”
McCarthy previously admitted during a U.S. House hearing that anti-coal CO2 regulations attached to EPA’s so-called “Clean Power Plan” wouldn’t have any measurable impact on global warming. She testified, “We see it as having had enormous benefit in showing sort of domestic leadership as well as garnering support around the country for the agreement we reached in Paris.”
So what enormous benefits would this non-impacting regulatory check on climate change actually serve? According to McCarthy, local governments would avoid tens of billions of dollars in damage from floods and other severe-weather events, while farmers would save up to $11 billion a year in damage from a combination of drought, flooding, and destructive storms.
Tens of millions of forests would be preserved because of fewer wildfires.
McCarthy and the Post apparently neglected to notice that no UN category 3-5 hurricanes have struck the U.S. coast since October 2005, setting a more than century-long record lull since 1900. In fact, NOAA and even the UN’s alarmist Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that there have been no increases in the severity or frequency of droughts, floods, thunderstorms, or tornadoes in decades.
Incidentally, U.S. Midwest summer temperatures (June-August) have shown little change between 1900 and 2015 despite big upward shifts predicted by 42 theoretical models. The warmest U.S. temperatures in modern times very likely occurred in the 1930s when atmospheric CO2 concentrations were lower.
As for that CO2 “pollution,” there is some other good unreported news for farmers, families, and forest creatures. Satellite images reveal a widespread increase of CO2-fertilized greening over 25% to 50% of the “global vegetated area” over the past 35 years.
Plants apparently love the stuff. They generally prefer long, warm growing seasons, too.
But now that global warming alarm has been rebranded as “climate change,” what about a warning posted by Office of Science and Technology Director on the White House website that global warming will cause cold winters to happen with greater regularity?
A May 9th ruling by U.S. District of Columbia Judge Amit Mehta determined that the Obama Administration had engaged in “bad faith” for stonewalling repeated Freedom of Information Requests issued by the Competitive Enterprise Institute seeking any such scientific evidence.
They’re still waiting.
Yes, climate really does change. It was likely just as warm during the Roman warm period 2,000 years ago . . . followed by the Medieval warm period 1,000 years later. Global mean temperatures have since been rising in fits and starts since the little ice age ended about 150 years ago. Overall, this amounts to about 1.5º F since the mid-1800s —averaging about 0.1º F per decade. Recent increases have been less than half of the rate predicted by more than 100 IPCC computer models.
Such failed projections should come as no great surprise. As the IPCC’s own 2001 Assessment Report concludes: “The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”
There is one linear chaotic climate state, however, that all can predictably count on. Don’t expect any good news so long as many billions of taxpayer dollars reward agenda-driven political science fear mongering.
This article first appeared at NewsMax