More Climate Research that the Hysterics Won’t Like

A couple of major flaws in the climate “emergency” nonsense are that temperatures aren’t rising nearly as fast, if at all, as the hysterics portray, and that clouds are bedeviling the modeling, and it may be that warmer temperatures mean more clouds which may actually on a net basis cause cooling.  Some recent research shows just how bad these flaws are.  Dr. Roy Spencer runs one of the satellite temperature measuring programs, so has a wealth of data to work with.  He has repeatedly stated that the higher temperatures caused in cities by urbanization must be adjusted for to see true temperature trends.  Climate journals try not to publish his work, but he has a clear good reputation and his work is impeccable.  So his latest work on urban heat effects was just published, as he reports here.  (Spencer Post)

As you would expect, when you look at rural stations near cities, you see far less warming, if any.  Minnesota is a good example, in which rural stations show little or no warming, which the urban area of the Twin Cities does.  And all the supposed record warmth this summer disappears when you look only at rural stations.  The urban heat effect exaggerates warming by over 100% according to Dr. Spencer’s research.  Funny how that CO2 is smart enough to only warm the earth near cities.  You won’t hear a word of this from the hysterics or the traditional media, which only hires incompetents who will trumpet the desired message.  They couldn’t do serious reporting if their lives depended on it.

And I don’t know how this slipped by the hysterics either.  They try to claim that clouds warm the earth, through a complex mechanism.  But they don’t always do so, or perhaps not even often.  And while they hysterics claim that the Arctic is experiencing an unprecedented warming trend (it isn’t), these authors found that low-level clouds are actually cooling the Arctic, and models that fail to accurately incorporate this have exaggerated warming.  But then that is the whole point of climate models–to support doomsday scenarios, not accurately represent reality.  (GRL Paper)

And finally, like a pebble in the hysterics’ shoes, there is always some new little complication to the complexity of the climate system that undermines the bullshit climate crisis narrative.  It has been know for some time that trees emit a variety of particles and vapors that end up in the atmosphere.  This research finds that  chemicals called sesquiterpenes given off by trees can form the nucluei for cloud condensation.  Since we have more trees and the areas of forest is actually growing in the US and around the world, this likely is causing more clouds, and, ta-da, some net cooling in much of the world, while as the study above finds, creating warming in other parts.  But the main issue once more, as with the urban island effect, is that the models completely fail to accurately replicate reality in regard to these particles and shouldn’t be relied on for anything.   Note that none of this has anything to do with CO2.  (Sci. Article)