Scientists know that El Nino and La Nina weather patterns have been around for tens of thousands of years, affecting land and ocean temperatures, storm patterns, and “had a role” in the “demise or disruption” of human civilizations. [emphasis, links added]
Here’s this, from NASA:
The chemical signatures of warmer seas and increased rainfall have been detected in coral samples and in other paleoclimate indicators since the last Ice Age. This pattern of water and wind changes has been going on for tens of thousands of years.
Earth scientists, historians, and archaeologists have theorized that El Nino had a role in the demise or disruption of several ancient civilizations, including the Moche, the Inca, and other cultures in the Americas.
But the recorded history of El Nino really starts in the 1500s, when European cultures reached the New World and met indigenous American cultures.
La Nina makes the Pacific Ocean cooler than normal, but after 160 years of an existential increase in our use of oil, coal, and natural gas, and a huge increase in population, the water didn’t warm, still ending up cooler than normal.
The billions of gas-powered vehicles on the road, gas appliances, and our consumption of meat did not override La Nina, and the weather pattern that’s been present for tens of thousands of years remains still today, albeit a bit later than “predicted” by our climate “experts.”
From a new article out at USA Today:
Where is La Nina? Why the climate troublemaker is making a late arrival for 2024
The long-promised La Nina climate pattern hasn’t yet formed, but is still expected to within the next month or so, federal scientists announced Thursday.
Specifically, the Climate Prediction Center said there is a 60% chance that La Nina conditions will emerge by the end of November. And once it forms, it is expected to persist through January-March 2025.
[snip]
La Nina is a natural climate pattern marked by cooler-than-average seawater in the central and eastern Pacific Ocean. When the water cools at least 0.9 degree Fahrenheit below average for three straight months, a La Nina is declared.
It is one of the main drivers of weather in the United States, especially during the late fall, winter and early spring. It’s the opposite to the more well-known El Nino, which occurs when Pacific Ocean water is at least 0.9 degree warmer than average for three months.
Switching to lithium-powered vehicles will not cool or warm the climate.
There is not one piece of scientific data that shows that our consumption of oil causes temperatures to rise and more severe storms.
Temperatures rise and fall, and storm activity increases and decreases, no matter how much oil we use or how many diesel trucks are on the road.
So why do the United Nations, $cientists, most people posing as journalists, educators, Hollywood, almost all Democrats, and some gullible Republicans say the “science is settled” and that humans and our use of natural resources are the cause of warming and climate change?
The only reason I can think of is they are power-hungry and greedy. They want to take more money for themselves. They are willing to harm the poor and middle classes and destroy our quality of life.
They also are very willing to keep underdeveloped countries from improving their quality and length of life.
The green push is and has always been a massive scam just like the climate is and always has been changing cyclically and naturally.
Why do almost all journalists repeat whatever they are told about the climate without doing research and asking questions? The answer: Facts haven’t mattered to them for a long time, only power for Democrats.
Joe Biden and others said it is stupid and a conspiracy to think the government can control the climate. They are the ones who have spread the conspiracy for decades.
There is only one choice in this election to save the public from having a power-hungry government seeking to control most aspects of our lives—Trump and Vance.
Read more at American Thinker
More proof the Global Alarmists are cracked
Actually this all started in the Mesozoic era with Gondwanaland. The temps dropped as the Equator centered continents moved to their present configurations at the start of the Pleistocene ~2.6 MYA. That’s when present weather patterns started. Sun, sun, sun. Oceans, oceans, oceans.
Net Zero Policies Will Have a Trivial Effect on Temperature, But Disastrous Effects on People Worldwide.
Oct. 13, 2024.
References.
(1)“Net Zero Averted Temperature Increase”: by Drs. R. Lindzen, W. Happer and W. A. van Wijngaarden, Dated June 11, 20
(2) Methane and Climate by Drs. W. A. van Wijngaarden and W, Happer.
(3) co2 coalition: Expert Opinion prepared for The Foundation of: “The Environment and Man” The Court of Appeals, The Hague, Netherlands.
(4) Nearly 140 Scientific Papers Detail The Minuscule Effect CO2 Has On Earth’s Temperature. By Kenneth Richard on 13. January 2022.
(5) Hurricane Climatology. Wikipedia: There are three main components critical to the formation of a hurricane. They are warm water, moist warm air and light upper winds. A hurricane begins when large masses of warm water and moist warm air come in contact with cooler air. This collision prompts the warm water vapor to cool down very fast and condense, eventually forming dense storm clouds and emptying out as heavy rain. The annual number of tropical cyclones worldwide remains about 87 ± 10.
About the Authors.
Dr. Richard Lindzen Professor of Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Dr. William Happer, Professor Emeritus in the Department of Physics at Princeton University. He is a specialist in modern optics, optical radiofrequency spectroscopy of atoms and molecules, radiation propagation in the atmosphere, and spin-polarized atoms and nuclei.
Dr. W. A. Van Wijngaarden is a full professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at York. His research specialties are: high-precision laser spectroscopy, laser cooling and atom trapping, ultracold atoms, Bose-Einstein condensation. pollutant monitoring, and climate change.
Dr. Steven Koonin, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute
at Stanford. Before joining Hoover in 2024, he was a professor at New York University, with appointments in the Stern School of Business, the Tandon School of Engineering, and the Department of Physics. He founded NYU’s Center for Urban Science and Progress, which focuses research and education on the acquisition, integration, and analysis of big data for big cities.
Approximately 140 Independent Scientific Teams (Sponsored by the NO TRICKS ZONE BLOG) – Detailing The Minuscule Effect CO2 Has On Earth’s Temperature. An update of a previous paper: “Extremely Low CO2 Climate Sensitivity”.by Pierre Gosselin. Associate Degree in Civil Engineering. Vermont Technical College and a BS Degree in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Arizona in Tucson.
Nota Bene. This paper is based on the scientific analyses of References (1), (2 and (3)) and distributed to ensure Governments and Citizens are fully informed of this important information and its consequences.
The Issue. The issue is the assumption that climate change and extreme weather are caused by CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels by humans. This however is contradicted by the “scientific method” and only supported by the unscientific methods of government opinions, consensus, peer review, and cherry-picked or falsified data. Mainly by the UN.
Carbon dioxide’s ability to warm the planet is determined by its ability to absorb heat, which decreases rapidly as CO2’s concentration in the atmosphere increases. This scientific fact about CO2 changes everything about the common view of CO2 and climate change. It means that the common assumption that carbon dioxide is the “main driver of climate change” is scientifically false.
Currently, carbon dioxide is a weak Greenhouse Gas. At today’s concentration in the atmosphere of approximately 420 parts per million, additional amounts of CO2 have little ability to absorb heat and therefore is now a weak greenhouse gas. At higher concentrations in the future, the ability of future increases to warm the planet will be will be even smaller. Thus, to repeat, the common assumption that carbon dioxide is the main driver of climate change” is scientifically false.
In short, more carbon dioxide cannot cause catastrophic global warming or more extreme weather. Neither can greenhouse gases of methane or nitrous oxide, the levels of which are so small that they are Irrelevant to climate.
In addition, referring to additional atmospheric CO2 as “carbon pollution” is complete nonsense. Quite the contrary it does two beneficial things for humanity .(1) it provides a slight increase in temperature, much less than natural fluctuations. (2) it creates more food for people worldwide.
What Does All This Mean?
First – Net Zero Efforts Will Have a Trivial Effect on Temperature. More of the atmospheric greenhouse gas CO2 will increase temperature, but only slightly. How changes in atmospheric greenhouse gases affect radiation transfer are described by precise physical equations that have never failed to describe observations of the real world. Application of these formulas to the massive efforts by the US and worldwide to reduce CO2 emissions to Net Zero by 2050 are contained in a paper that is recommend to those with a technical background. They show that all efforts to achieve Net Zero emissions of carbon dioxide, if fully implemented, will have a trivial effect on temperature.
For North America, it only avoids a temperature increase of 0.02 deg. F with no positive feedback and only 0.06 deg. F with positive feedback of 4 that is typically built into the models of the United Nations international Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Worldwide, it only avoids a temperature increase of 0.13 deg. F or 0.50 deg. F with a factor of 4 positive feedback.
Second – Net Zero Policies will Be Disastrous for People Worldwide. In Canada, the United States and worldwide, Net Zero regulations and subsidies will have disastrous effects. Chief among them would be the proposed elimination of fossil fuels which would mean doing away with internal combustion engines for transportation and other uses, the power plants that provide most of the world’s electricity, gas space heaters, furnaces, cooking stoves and the feedstocks for nitrogen fertilizers that enable the feeding of nearly half the global population. The resulting economic devastation would include massive job losses, which already has occurred in places where Net Zero subsidies and regulations have diverted capital away from investments into productive assets and into ineffective technologies such as wind and solar energy as has already been indicated by the Governor of the Bank of Canada.
Those hostile to fossil fuels ignore overwhelming evidence that the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide from their combustion has significantly greened the Earth and boosted crop production.
In addition, various countries will require electric vehicles (EV’s). heat pumps and electric appliances be purchased. They will require companies to report information on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. However, since more carbon dioxide causes trivial and beneficial warming, this data is immaterial, misleading and very expensive in managerial time and dollars. It should not be required.
Third- More CO2 Means More Food. Contrary to common reporting, more carbon dioxide increases the amount of food available to people worldwide, and is particularly helpful in drought-stricken areas. Doubling carbon dioxide to 800 ppm for example will increase global food supplies by approximately 60%.
Thus, carbon dioxide emissions should not be reduced, but increased to provide more food worldwide. Moreover, there is no risk of catastrophic global warming or extreme weather because carbon dioxide is now a weak greenhouse gas. Reducing carbon dioxide emissions will reduce the amount of food available to people worldwide and produce no benefit to the climate.
Fourth – Fossil fuels must not be eliminated. Net Zero requires that fossil fuels be eliminated because they account for 90% of human-induced CO2 emissions. However, the elimination of fossil fuels will have no effect on the climate since carbon dioxide is now a weak greenhouse gas. The use of fossil fuels must not be eliminated. Rather it should be expanded because they (1) provide more carbon dioxide which makes more food (2) are used to make nitrogen fertilizer that enables the feeding of about half of the world’s population, and (3) provide reliable and inexpensive energy for people everywhere, especially for the two-thirds of the world’s population without access to electricity.
Conclusion – All Net Zero carbon dioxide regulations and subsidies in the United States, Canada and worldwide must be stopped immediately to avoid disastrous effects on North Americans and people throughout the world especially in developing countries.
Alastair Allan, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Federal Government, Science and Engineering, Military Procurement (Retired).
Valuable info. Why is it willfully ignored by governments? Why do these governments pay (our money) for misinformation that supports the opposite view? If I was in power and wanted to stay in power, I would want everyone to believe that all is well. Has no one noticed that all our sacrifices have been in vain? The headlines keep telling us, inadvertently, that the war on fossil fuels is doing nothing except tax commerce and cause inflation. Net-zero is dangerous to everyone, do not vote for it.
Knocked it out of the park, Jack Hellner.