• Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Climate Change Dispatch
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
Climate Change Dispatch
No Result
View All Result

With Sea-Level Rise, Climate Science Meets Reality

by Jack Weatherall
August 06, 2019, 8:03 AM
in News and Opinion
Reading Time: 11 mins read
A A
5
Share on FacebookShare on XwitterShare on Linkedin

sea level rise cityThe splendiferous east coast of Tasmania never ceases to please with all its myriad landscapes.

So it was a little discombobulating to recently pass a sign planted hard against the flow of traffic following the serpentine track that threads the coastal communities, proclaiming ‘Climate Change Is Killing the Planet’.

As it was only about eight degrees at the time, I was reasonably confident I would make my destination before something akin to the fate of the death star transpired and, thankfully, I was right.

It did, however, get me to thinking of how corrupt the science of the carbon cycle has truly become in the hyperbolic atmosphere of climate politics.

You would likely need a temperature increase in excess of 100 degrees in order to extinguish all life, including prokaryotes, from the biosphere — and even then creatures at depth, both aquatic and terrestrial, would probably find safe harbor.

Not to disappoint my sign-erecting fellow Taswegian, but his or her prophecy can’t possibly be achieved through carbon emissions alone.

Furthermore, the complete death of the planet, depending on how you might define that, may require extinguishing all its iron and siliceous substrate into stardust, a mighty feat even for that arch-villain, CO2.

Wishing to stay open-minded about what 400 parts per million of carbon dioxide had inflicted on the planet, I was intrigued when it was announced recently that what has been a great example of citizen science orchestrated under the banner of the Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre (ACE CRC) was to be more or less abandoned, possibly due to being unhelpful to the narrative that accompanies climate change dogma.

Known as the TASMARC Project (Tasmanian Shoreline Monitoring & Archiving Project), this admirable public access project, with dedicated volunteers at the dune face of data collection, commenced tracking the gradient of 16 beaches around the Apple Isle in 2005, the object is to measure ‘the shoreline and the way it is responding to storm events and sea-level rise.

Utilizing standard surveying equipment (as depicted above) employed by engineers in civil construction projects and the like, over the course of the project the number of sites measured and profiled expanded to thirty.

Without putting too fine a point on it, there is no possible way the resultant data can be manipulated to demonstrate anything other than “nothing to see here” in regard to supporting the notion of CO2-mediated sea level rise.

Right around the diverse coastline of my island state, the consolidated picture revealed over 15 years is one of cyclic erosion and beach regeneration, from low water mark to high water mark and into the foredunes.

In the period from 2005 through 2019, the general picture is of increased erosion in outlying years around much of the coast and increased regeneration, often to peak maximum sand accumulation, with the resultant decrease in profile gradient in the terminal years of the project.

Nowhere in the data is there compelling evidence, not even a scintilla, of uniform sea-level rise. If anything the data points to a gentle retraction of sea level and associated severe storm events affecting the bulk of the coastline surveyed in recent years.

Below is data from half a dozen sites taken from the differing aligned coastlines that define the rough triangle that is Tasmania.

Think of each plotline as a cross-section of the gradient of the beach from foredune to water’s edge, exaggerated by the fact that the unit divisions on the X & Y axis are a ratio of 20:1.

Note that the terminal end of the plot lines along the far right of the X-axis is simply a reflection of where in the tidal phase the measurement was recorded.

Any change in sea level would see the plot lines migrate left along the x-axis over time, a trend that is clearly absent in this data.

Image 1. Selection of TASMARC beach gradient plots.

With claims now emanating from CO2 catastrophists that the world has just 12 years to act before catastrophic climate change destroys all life on earth —  Hobart’s City Council has declared a climate emergency no less — it is becoming patently clear that politics has left behind any rational appraisal of the science in order to turn the bogeyman of CO2 into a Trojan horse for the radical hijacking of modern capitalist economies.

Back at over 400ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere (the planet has been there before) and up from the 260-330 ppm that marked the last ice age (but way down on the much higher levels of the Ordovician ice ages), not an iota of evidence from the commendable science conducted by TASMARC suggests sea level has risen or are rising, least of all to the peril of all living creatures.

This pleasing result accords with my own experience of inshore reef systems in Samoa, Fiji, Sumbawa, and Sri Lanka in recent years, none of which demonstrated any alteration whatsoever to the inter-tidal zone of the near-shore reefs, which have quite clearly remained within discernible parameters for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

It is accepted that sea levels vary markedly around the globe and fluctuate dynamically, both through relatively short-lived and longer phases, leading to what is in effect a ‘lumpy’ ocean.

This reality makes the concept of a static mean sea level, which acts as a reference benchmark for the globe as a whole, very problematic.

Numerous satellites utilized by Australian agencies and research bodies are able to take a measure of sea level by way of an altimeter. However, according to the CSIRO, it should not be overlooked that the signal to do so requires

# A satellite in an orbit which repeats the same ground track very closely (within about 1 kilometer)

# A radar system to measure the distance from the satellite to the sea surface to high accuracy. TOPEX/Poseidon and Jason-1 use two radar frequencies, Ku band (13.6GHz) and C band (5.3Ghz).

# A tracking system capable of locating the satellite vertically at any time to within a few centimeters. Some of the components of such a system are:

1/ Systems (usually a combination of GPS, satellite laser ranging and the French DORIS system) to locate the satellite

2/ A high-quality gravity model

3/ A model of the drag from solar wind and the atmosphere

4/ Suitable software to combine all of the above

Other corrections to correct the range:

On the satellite:

1/ A water vapor radiometer to measure the amount of water vapor between the satellite and the sea surface (the water vapor slows down the radar pulse, causing the raw measurement to be too long)

2/ Measurement of the range at two frequencies to estimate the “ionospheric correction” — that is, the degree to which the radar pulse is slowed down by free electrons in the ionosphere

3/ The troughs of waves contribute more to the radar reflection than the crests, so we need correction for this. This is estimated from the wind speed and the wave height, both of which can be estimated from the characteristics of the returned radar pulse.

On the ground:

1/ Ocean tide models to convert the raw altimeter measurement to “de-tided”

2/ Estimates (from a model) of the atmospheric pressure. This is used to calculate a correction to the radar range to compensate for the atmosphere slowing down the radar pulse

3/ A correction for the “inverse barometer” effect, where sea level is depressed in areas of high atmospheric pressure, and vice versa.

No one besmirches the accomplishments of the engineering and technology involved.

However, it is a basic truism that the greater the number of separate corrections needing to be applied, the greater the risk of miscalculation.

Ultimately, the lived experience as manifest through the empirical evidence of what is actually occurring at the shoreline and observed over time is a truer reflection of reality than the highly manipulated data required for a satellite altimeter to operate meaningfully.

This should be especially true of the Australian continent as a whole, which although obviously susceptible to localized subsidence, is largely stable in relation to the confounding factors of tectonic activity and post-glacial rebound.

Thankfully, these measurements are regularly recorded around Australia by the BoM via tide gauges. So an exercise in comparing them is illuminating.

It is of interest to see NASA reference the CSIRO for its public online depiction of sea level rises in the order of 24 cms from around 1880s until now, as determined by tide gauges.

This is in the context of sea-level rise in the order of 50 – 120 meters since the last ice age. It is unclear how the CSIRO arrive at this aggregated figure, given the vast geographic spread of all the individual datasets.

On first blush, satellite and ocean-temperature data suggest a neat fit in correlation to where the ocean has both warmed the most and exhibits a higher sea level.

The CSIRO models suggest that since 2005, when the TASMARC study also commenced, the east coast of Tasmania, along with that of NSW, has experienced sea level rise in the order of 10 – 15 mm per annum.

If applied throughout the period of TASMARC observation along Tasmania’s east coast, then a significant rise in order of 14 – 21 cms should have been observed.

Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour has registered a mean sea level rise of no greater than 10cms in 115 years and this might be due to subsidence or even increased water displacement by large volumes of very heavy vessels in and around the site and significant waterside developments such as the Opera House.

Just down the road at Botany Bay, the mean sea level has barely varied at all since 1982, the most significant departure from mean being a decrease during the mid-1990s.

Further afield, and also since 1982, Eden on the NSW south coast has witnessed barely a nudge on the dial, while Lord Howe Island looks to have escaped the ravages of sea-level rise altogether since 1993 — this despite being at the epicenter of the CSIRO’s historic sea-level rise model.

Indeed, there does not appear to be a single dataset which comes even close to explaining the mean sea level rise observed in the consolidated graph as supplied by the CSIRO to NASA.

The only site in Australia that can seemingly approximate the values in the NASA-published graph above is the oft-cited example of the Isle of the Dead at Port Arthur in Tasmania.

Given that the data from this site is an extreme outlier in the bell curve of mean results from other Australian, and even Tasmanian, sites should ensure a degree of caution is applied in holding it up as a poster child — an academic caution that has well and truly been abandoned in this instance.

However, the problematic nature of this site’s dataset and overall lack of clear evidence for the sea-level rise was highlighted by the late Tasmanian John Daly  (see: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Completed_Inquiries/jsct/kyoto/sub44c) during the early years of this century. Daly would have felt vindicated by the ongoing lack of convincing data trends over the ensuing years.

Image 3. Graphs from BoM tidal gauges

Image 4. CSIRO heat map of historic sea-level rise. It is clear there is a notable disparity between the data from the above sea level rise heat map, satellite readings and the real-world empirical data collected at the coastline.

What should be most alarming to those climate scientists who remain committed to the principles of science, sadly diminishing in number, is that the above empirical evidence will be quietly shelved and discarded in favor of deeply flawed predictive models that whip catastrophists and a sympathetic mainstream media into a frenzy despite being wrong time and time again.

As a keen surfer, I was alarmed to learn in my youth that the Maldives would by now be fully immersed in the Indian Ocean. Fortunately, that thirty-year prediction from the early 1990s looks to be just another deranged moment in the long history of doomsday predictions.

The Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PMSL), operated by the UK’s National Oceanographic Centre, uses a select assortment of both acoustic pressure gauges and your more run-of-the-mill tide gauges from around the globe to assess mean sea levels.

The data sites currently operating around the world as part of the PMSL project (many no longer provide data, or have not done so for a number of years), may look impressive on first sight, but it quickly becomes evident that they are utterly deficient to give a global average in sea level, as there are significant fields of concentrated activity recorded and others with little detailed coverage.

The only data from Australia’s eastern seaboard to feature on a relative sea-level trend map is Fort Denison. Overall, the PMSL data reveals relative sea-level trends of both rising and falling sea levels in different parts of the globe. The trend data map qualifies that

The map should be used with some care as anomalous trends have many causes:

1/ land movements (e.g. earthquakes, glacial isostatic adjustment)

2/ unexplained instrumental datum shifts

3/ changes in atmospheric pressure

4/ short records

While climate change alarmists love to wheel out their version of an uncritical weaponized ‘science’ to bash all non-believers, the truth is their quasi-religious zealotry in advocating faith in CO2’s influence on climate brings dishonor to the very concept of science itself.

The fact of the matter is that scientific inquiry covers a very large spectrum indeed, with the most rigorous represented by such methodologies as the double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, as seen in medical science right through to the rather inferior suppositions that represent climate models’ predictions twenty, thirty and a hundred years hence.

This kind of science should ring the skeptic alarm bell in any well-grounded critical thinker.

So blinkered has this politicized branch of science become that its priests and disciples cannot even effectively explain the role of CO2 in the context of the climate’s primary drivers — factors such as solar activity and the Earth’s obliquity, which have now fallen off the radar in public discourse on climate.

We now have the media, the education system and, hence our kids, telling us that CO2 in the atmosphere is “a pollutant”. Even the terminology – “climate change” – presumes a rigidly static climate is normal.

Those who believe all science is a linear progression of knowledge without significant departure into the realm of the ‘false positive’ hypothesis should think again.

We have just emerged from decades of consensus science on the seemingly critical role of anti-oxidants in the combat of runaway free radical oxygen species in the human body, only to realize now that much of it was poor science garnished with large dollops of hyperbole.

As with climate science, the amount of wasted money, and the unnecessary anxiety, as a result, is incalculable.

The results of studies such as TASMARC and so many others (eg: Kench et al, who published in 2018 the finding that Pacific islands  such as Tuvalu are actually increasing, not shrinking at all) should act as a clarion call to the real climate scientists out there to turn away from the monomaniacal adherence to CO2-induced climate change; rather, climatological orthodoxy needs to re-survey the broader horizon of inquiry around all the drivers of climate and sea-level fluctuation.

I, for one, will be encouraging my children not to march against CO2 with their uncritical peers but rather to protest the doomsday alarmists who seek to add the notional threat of catastrophic sea-level rise to the burdens of what is widely accepted to be the most  anxious and depressed generation in recorded history — a generation whose educators have  betrayed them by shepherding our schools’ retreat from the tenets of critical thinking, replacing it with intellectually crass and emotive advocacy learning.

The most irresponsible adults of our age are those who happily accept the elderly shivering through cruel winters in homes made too expensive to heat, likewise indifferent to industry’s needs, job creation and growth of the nation’s wealth being stymied.

These are the same true believers who advocate the runaway use of lithium in so-called renewable energy applications, dismissing this century’s poisonous “new lead (Pb)”.

Their children and ours are growing up thinking behind the veil of their anti-depressants that CO2 is an atmospheric pollutant that will ‘kill the planet’. It is they our children should be raging in the streets against.

Read more at Quadrant Online

  • Truth
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Gettr
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
Share via
  • Facebook
  • Like
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Skype
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky

Join our list

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.

We respect your privacy and take protecting it seriously

Related Posts

Lawfare

Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Bid To Kill NYC Congestion Toll

May 28, 2025
Electric Vehicles (EVs)

Gavin Newsom Is Seething After Congress Repealed California’s Gas Car Ban

May 27, 2025
Energy

Congress Resurrects Fight Against The Climate Cult’s Regulatory Assault

May 27, 2025

Comments 5

  1. Dr Tim Ball says:
    6 years ago

    Dr Tim Ball – Historical Climatologist
    ti*********@**aw.ca
    Book ‘The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science’.
    Book “Human Caused Global Warming”, ‘The Biggest Deception in History’.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPzpPXuASY8

    https://www.technocracy.news/dr-tim-ball-on-climate-lies-wrapped-in-deception-smothered-with-delusion/
    http://www.drtimball.com

  2. Dave of Reedy Creek, Qld. Aust. says:
    6 years ago

    The sign in Tassie should read “Climate change idiots are destroying the planet”!

  3. Amber says:
    6 years ago

    The climate changes every day . It’s called night time .
    No one seems to freak over a roughly 10 degree change every day
    but that supposed 2 degrees over the next 50 years is light the hair on fire time .
    Human intelligence was supposed to go up but MSM acts as an anchor selling
    someones business plan .

  4. Spurwing Plover says:
    6 years ago

    On a seperate note the Useless Nations now says we all must go Vegan to half Climate Change/Global Warming.So why should all go vegan over a fake crisis the UN needs to be evicted and moved over to Europe like in Moscow

    • ShinkuToner says:
      6 years ago

      Bulldoze the UN for farm land.

Stay Connected On Social Media

gab-logo

Donate Today

Beating back the alarmist narrative takes time and money. Please donate today to help!

Recent Posts

  • NYC traffic congestionFederal Judge Blocks Trump’s Bid To Kill NYC Congestion Toll
    May 28, 2025
    A federal judge blocked Trump’s bid to kill NYC’s congestion toll, preserving New York’s climate law and traffic-cutting program—for now. […]
  • Gavin Newsom PresserGavin Newsom Is Seething After Congress Repealed California’s Gas Car Ban
    May 27, 2025
    Gov. Newsom is steamed after Congress repealed a Biden EPA waiver letting California ban gas-powered cars and said he'll fight back. […]
  • Capitol Hill DCCongress Resurrects Fight Against The Climate Cult’s Regulatory Assault
    May 27, 2025
    Congress eyes bills to rein in climate overreach, challenge secret science, and expose hypocrisy fueling the elite-driven climate change narrative. […]
  • mosquitoNo, Climate Change Isn’t Behind Britain’s Mosquito Fears
    May 27, 2025
    The Guardian asserts that climate change will make the UK more hospitable to mosquito-borne diseases, ignoring established drivers. […]
  • wind turbine blades landfill‘Green’ Waste Piles Up As Solar Panels And Wind Turbines Pollute Landfills
    May 27, 2025
    Solar and wind waste is piling up with no clear plan for disposal, raising new questions about the cost of going green and the myth of net zero. […]
  • new orleans blackoutMISO Ignored Warnings Before Holiday Blackout Left Blue City In The Dark
    May 27, 2025
    Nearly 100,000 lost power in New Orleans after MISO cut the grid, raising alarm over blackout risk tied to green energy replacing coal and gas. […]
  • protest FFF world on fire‘Doomed From Birth’: How Climate Alarmism Is Stoking An Epidemic Of Youth Anxiety
    May 26, 2025
    Hollywood heirs like Ramona Sarsgaard and Violet Affleck are spiraling into climate panic—fueled by activism, media hype, and elite institutions. […]
  • Biden touting green economyGOP’s Big, Beautiful Bill Would Rescind $500 Billion In Green Energy Handouts
    May 26, 2025
    The House-passed BBB would repeal $500B in green handouts, slash subsidies, and undo key parts of the inaptly named Inflation Reduction Act. […]
  • humpback whale ny coastHow Climate Buzzwords Hijacked The Language To Hide Environmental Harm
    May 26, 2025
    Climate buzzwords like ‘carbon footprint’ and ‘green energy’ mislead the public and mask real environmental damage. […]
  • north sea oil rigTrump Urges UK To Cut Sky-High Bills With More Drilling, Less Renewables
    May 23, 2025
    Trump urged the UK to slash sky-high energy bills by expanding oil and gas drilling, embracing fracking, and ditching costly renewables and imports. […]

Get Instant Email Notifications

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts by email either instantly or daily. Check your Junk folder for any verification emails upon subscribing.

Submit a tip

Please enter your email, so we know you're human.

Books We Like

very convenient warming

exposing great lie

Have a suggestion? Let us know! We swap out books based on your input. We participate in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. See here.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us

© Portions copyright Climate Change Dispatch

Share via
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us

© 2025 Climate Change Dispatch