Posted on 06/04/2024 8:33:04 AM PDT by Red Badger
The world of climate science is in shock following extraordinary findings from a team of high-powered NASA scientists that suggest most of the recent global temperature increases are due to the introduction of draconian fuel shipping regulations designed to help prevent global warming. The fantasy world of Net Zero is of course full of unintended consequences, but it is claimed that the abrupt 80% cut in sulphur dioxide emissions from international shipping in 2020 has accounted for 80% of global warming since the turn of the decade. Although the extra heat is described as “transient”, the warming is extraordinary and is expected to rise during the 2020s at a rate of 0.24°C a decade, 20% higher than the claimed warming trend since 1980.
The news is likely to cause considerable concern among the mainstream climate hoaxers in media, academia and politics. They have had a field day of late by pointing to rises in temperature as evidence for their evidence-free prediction that the climate is in danger of imminent collapse. But the NASA scientists, working out of the Goddard Space Flight Centre, predict a trend of rising temperatures due to the IMO2020 regulations going forward, and state, “the 2023 record warmth is within the ranges of our expected trajectory”.
The science behind the NASA findings, which have been published in Nature, is simple. Fewer fuel particles injected into the atmosphere reduce cloud droplet density and this leads to clouds that reflect less solar radiation back into space. As the scientists note: “IMO2020 effectively represents a termination shock for the inadvertent geoengineering experiment through a reverse marine cloud dimming through reducing cloud droplet number concentration.” In the course of their work, the team calculated large particle reductions in major shipping routes in the North Atlantic, the Caribbean Sea and the South China Sea.
The NASA paper is likely to be fiercely contested, not least because it blows holes in all the attribution pseudoscience attempting to blame recent temperature rises and individual weather events on human-induced increases in carbon dioxide. Already the climate activists at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact say the observation period is too short, and man-made greenhouse gases continue to play the decisive role in climate change. Much of this thinking, that provides the ’settled’ science base for the planned Net Zero collectivisation, is supported by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC promotes the view that almost all climate change since around 1900 is caused by the activities of humans. This unproven opinion looks shakier by the day. The NASA scientists have forced the issue of particles, or aerosols, to the centre of the climate debate, although there are other explanations for the recent rise in temperatures. These include a now departing strong El Niño, and possible changes in the upper atmosphere caused by the huge injection of water by the early 2022 Hunga Tonga submarine eruption.
The El Niño effect is well known and strong past oscillations, which involve global transfers of heat from oceans to the atmosphere, have shown short-term temperature spikes. As the current El Niño declines, to be likely replaced in short order by the cooling effects of a La Niña, there are signs that sea temperatures are falling. It will be up to the scientists to fight it out over what has played a more significant role in recent temperature rises – aerosols or El Niño – with some backing for third place Hunga Tonga. Moving further out in the betting – odds lengthening all the time, it seems – is the inventive notion that humans control the overall climate by burning hydrocarbons. What is clear, of course, is that climate is impossible to predict. The recent temperature rise is tiny and well within the natural variation seen across all known and reliable records. When it comes to making political decisions about human society, computer models that claim to replicate and forecast future climate trends need careful examination, while in the hands of powerful people with wrongheaded or even sinister agendas they are potentially dangerous.
The effect of the Hunga Tonga eruption continues to intrigue some scientists, although their curiosity is not reciprocated by the all-in mainstream CO2 promoters. Recently a team of Australian climatologists used the eruption, which increased the amount of water vapour in the stratosphere by up to 10%, as a ‘base case’ for further scientific work. Working out of the University of New South Wales, they reported that volcanoes blasting water vapour – a strong if short-lived ‘greenhouse’ gas – into the high atmosphere, “can have significant inputs on the climate system”. In fact they found that surface temperatures across large regions of the world could increase by over 1.5°C for several years, although some areas could cool by up to 1°C.
Yet more fascinating, conflicting and debatable climate science that under no circumstances should be drawn to the attention of the general public.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
Ping
I rarely laugh out loud, but that headline did it.
A whole lot of the climate change scam is based on the population reduction agenda.
This Headline will be ignored and buried at the speed of light!
In colonial India, Delhi suffered a proliferation of cobras, which was a problem very clearly in need of a solution given the sorts of things that cobras bring, like death. To cut the number of cobras slithering through the city, the local government placed a bounty on them. This seemed like a perfectly reasonable solution. The bounty was generous enough that many people took up cobra hunting, which led exactly to the desired outcome: The cobra population decreased. And that’s where things get interesting.
As the cobra population fell and it became harder to find cobras in the wild, people became rather entrepreneurial. They started raising cobras in their homes, which they would then kill to collect the bounty as before. This led to a new problem: Local authorities realized that there were very few cobras evident in the city, but they nonetheless were still paying the bounty to the same degree as before.
City officials did a reasonable thing: They canceled the bounty. In response, the people raising cobras in their homes also did a reasonable thing: They released all of their now-valueless cobras back into the streets. Who wants a house full of cobras?
In the end, Delhi had a bigger cobra problem after the bounty ended than it had before it began. The unintended consequence of the cobra eradication plan was an increase in the number of cobras in the streets. This case has become the exemplar of when an attempt to solve a problem ends up exacerbating the very problem that rule-makers intended to fix.
The Cobra Effect: Lessons in Unintended Consequences (fee.org)
Well well well, if it isn’t the consequences of their own actions...
So fewer sulfur compounds means fewer clouds which in turn means a hotter surface. Svensmark and Calder are absolutely correct and continually validated in their theories. Humans play a bit part in climate. And now we’re really impacting things by reducing what they claimed was causing warming in the first place.
True science is dead.
True science is dead.
<>
And censured.
QUICK PEOPLE, USE MORE PETROLEUM PRODUCTS...NOW! Do it for the children.
Make the marine industry burn nothing except dirty heavy fuel oil also known as “Bunker C.” It is for the earth you know.
Talk about unintended consequences of the eviromental nuts. LOL
All bunk.
"Calculated" is a far cry from "measured". All this means is they ran, yet another model.
Even though you may think this is bad for greenies and good for us, you are forgetting the underlying premise that GW is largely due to human activity.
This is flat out false.
Never accept the premise of your opponent’s argument.................
Interesting. As an aside, I am a father of four.
[[Almost All Recent Global Warming Caused by Green Air Policies – Shock Revelation From NASA]]
While that is a change from their usual “Man is bad” mantra- it still is not the truth- climates change on their own and we don’t produce nearly enough greenhouse gases or CO2 to cause any changes to the climate- The changes are purely natural-
The whole purpose of the Climate Change scam was to enable government to enact population controls in the name of ‘Saving the Earth’.
The whole purpose of enacting the J6 witch hunt was to imprison the most activist persons of the conservative side of the aisle in the name of ‘Saving our Democracy’.
The issue is never the issue. The issue is always The Revolution..................
We went from two to four - twins. BTW, I don't consider you a real parent until you are outnumbered - one per hand is easy! :)
The dogma of the climate change cult is that part per million changes in CO2 levels attributed to human activity, especially burning fossil fuels, causes global warming. This simplistic dogma does not take into account the literally hundreds of other variables that affect the earth’s climate. Perfectly natural events like major volcanic eruptions are known to unequivocally change the earths average temperature. Historically major volcanic eruptions cause a decline in global temperatures. The wobble in the earths axis affecting the tilt of the planet relative to the sun may have profound effects. This tilt is responsible for our seasons and even slight variations could mean hotter summers and colder winters. The suns output also varies from year to year. Nothing in the climate change dogma also can explain the great ice ages when large parts of the northern hemisphere were covered in glaciers up to a mile thick and subsequently the melting of those glaciers.
Bookmark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.