Global Climate Change: Some Links

The challenges of global climate change are with us, even if Russia’s aggression in central Europe is threatening to send the world economy into recession, and populations into starvation.



84 thoughts on “Global Climate Change: Some Links

  1. rsm

    As even NPR noted the other day, isn’t money scarcity causing food scarcity?

    Does the world produce enough food to make up for shortfalls due to war? Why does NPR think so? If you do the research, do you find we way overproduce food and blips like Ukraine are inconsequential as far as physical supply?

    Why not realize that food scarcity is really due to capitalism failing to allocate resources efficiently, due to an artificial scarcity of money?

    Is it too heterodox to see food inflation as a sign of money demand rather than physical shortage? Is it too threatening to the status quo to see indexation of incomes to inflation as the natural, obvious solution?

    1. Barkley Rosser


      Are you aware that Russian navy is blockading all Ukrainian ports, one of the leading producers of wheat, potaxh, and safflower in the world, as well as outright attacking Ukrainian farms in one of the richest soil zones of the world, blocking both planting and harvesting?

      I realize that you do not believe that production is a real thing and is only the secondary part of a supply chain driven by money. But, sorry, in fact there are reasons why we might not be seeing shortages of certain food items in the world not because of something having to do with money.

      1. Anonymous

        maybe dissing the minsk accords is the blame…..

        for impending starvation events.

        despite your rattling, rambling war is a two sided affair

        zelenski is not in charge.

        1. baffling

          “despite your rattling, rambling war is a two sided affair”
          despite your propaganda, this war is indeed a one sided affair. there would be no war if Russia withdrew from its occupation of Ukraine.

        2. Barkley Rosser


          No no no! It is the US plotting the expansion of NATO right to the border of Russia that is to blame!!! I mean, look, here we now have Finland and maybe Sweden too plotting to join NATO!!! Obviously this is all due to a dastardly plot against totally innocent Mother Russia. I am sure Patriarch Kirill will agree!!! This is why those Russian ships are blocking exports of food products from Ukraine, not to mention bombing Ukrainian farms: all to protest this US plot to get Finland to join NATO!!! I mean, what do they think they are doing? They are supposed to be Finlandized!!!!!!

    2. Macroduck

      These links address an urgent issue and your only response is to strike a pose. Menzie has prepared a feast and you ignore it, cluttering up the conversation with your usual tripe.

      Still pretending to be a gadfly. Still assuming facts not in evidence. Still fetishizing heterodoxy. Still hiding behind questions.

      Thank you, Menzie.

    3. AndrewG

      “Why not realize that food scarcity is really due to capitalism failing to allocate resources efficiently, due to an artificial scarcity of money?”

      You might want to look up non-“capitalist” solutions to food scarcity. They don’t have a great track record.

      Also, it’s the 21st century. “Capitalism” is a useless word.

  2. ltr

    April 16, 2022

    China’s NEV industry revs up on powerful engine

    BEIJING — China’s new-energy vehicle (NEV) market is in the spotlight of the global automobile industry, with its sales ranking first globally for a seventh straight year in 2021 and jumping 1.4 times year on year in the first quarter of 2022.

    The country’s NEV industry is gaining steam in the fast lane of expansion, powered by growing demand, mounting investment, improved supportive facilities and policies, as well as technological breakthroughs.

    The size of China’s NEV market is expected to top 5.22 million units this year, a surge of 47.2 percent over the previous year, according to a report released by global market research firm International Data Corporation (IDC).

    China’s NEV market is likely to expand at a compound annual growth rate of around 38 percent from 2021 to 2025, with the total market size reaching 12.99 million units in 2025, the report says.

    More consumers have turned to NEVs as continuous international oil price hikes have pushed up the cost of fuel in the domestic market, the IDC says.

    At the same time, Chinese consumers, especially the younger generations, are more focused on NEV’s advantages in saving energy and costs and reducing pollution, instead of being solely motivated by subsidy incentives and preferential policies in purchasing and using these vehicles.

    In terms of supply, the report hails China’s improvements in building supportive infrastructure for NEVs, saying it consolidates consumer confidence in the NEV market….

    1. ltr

      April 17, 2022

      China’s policy bank lends over 1 trln yuan to water conservancy

      BEIJING — The Agricultural Development Bank of China, the country’s rural policy bank, said it had issued over 1 trillion yuan (about 156.5 billion U.S. dollars) of loans to water conservancy by the end of March.

      The figure came from an average annual growth rate of 16 percent since 15 years ago, the bank said, adding that the outstanding loans stood at 528.3 billion yuan as of the end of last month.

      The policy bank, in particular, has so far provided 87 national-level water conservancy projects with loan support valued at 71.1 billion yuan….

  3. Bruce Hall

    According to my daffodils and maple tree, the climate hasn’t changed in SE Michigan… or maybe it’s just colder than normal due to the Jet Stream. The 1930s were the hottest decade in the US, but maybe not in Estonia or Bora Bora. But from what is published daily, global warming accounts for everything… even colder weather. Oh, BTW, the polar ice was about normal in the Arctic while last winter was the coldest on record in the Antarctic all due to global warming.

    Fortunately, our political leaders will save us while ensuring no fortunes are made from fear mongering. Just disregard those UN pleas for more money and wealth redistribution schemes to “fight climate change”.

    Excuse my skepticism, but after the fear mongering of the 60s and 70s about “global cooling”, I take all of this with a large block of salt. Pick a period (such as the 1880s) as your base level and warming is a likely trend. Pick a base period such as the 1930s and cooling is your likely trend. Pick a base period such as the 1970s and warming is your likely trend. Now look at where temperatures are measured over a period of time and you can see the result of urbanization and land use changes that can wildly skew readings (station siting and urban island effect). Then look at the temperature adjustments from actual readings (homogenization).

    This remarkable inconsistency in the results from NOAA’s application of the Pairwise Homogenization Algorithm (PHA) [27] to the GHCN since 2011 [3,4] is quite surprising since the PHA has performed quite well over the years against various benchmarking tests [27,34,35,36]. However, we note that those earlier assessments of the PHA were generally “one-off” assessments, i.e., they did not evaluate the consistency of the breakpoints and adjustments applied with repeated runs of the algorithm. Therefore this inconsistency of the PHA adjustments between consecutive runs would have been inadvertently overlooked by those earlier tests.

    But, then, I appreciate H. L. Mencken.

    Happy Easter!

    1. pgl

      So many words – such utter stupidity. And no I am not going to counter anything here as your babble contains nothing substantive to comment on.

        1. pgl

          Barkley Rosser
          April 17, 2022 at 11:30 am

          and what 2slug said.

          You got nothing but stupid lies.

        1. pgl

          “the 46th president who got 81 million votes and no one showed up to his rallies.”

          Trump did throw a lot of super spreader events for his stupid MAGA hat wearing base, which likely killed or made seriously ill a lot of supporters who would have otherwise voted for him. Now THAT was a really STUPID thing to do.

    2. Barkley Rosser


      Something you share with our dear Moses Herzog is a propensity to embolden phrases or sentences that are especially ridiculous in an effort to impress people, somehow not getting it that doing so is prima facie evidence that what you are highlighting is a load of crap. And so it is with this post.

      Going on and on about the urban heat effect as if nobody ever heard of it before is a sign of really being completely out of it. This was figured out decades ago and appropriate corrections for it were made in estimates going way back. That you somehow think this is something that needs to be worried about and especially to shout about it in emboldened letters here is really pathetic.

      1. pgl

        “According to my daffodils and maple tree, the climate hasn’t changed in SE Michigan”

        I betcha Brucie thinks he has the most reliable means for judging global climate change with this one. What a doofus.

      2. Bruce Hall

        Yes, I realize the Urban Heat Island phenomenon was recognized quite awhile ago. I used to have a blog and wrote about it and occasionally collaborated with Anthony Watts and Joe D’Aleo on articles. There is not complete agreement that the adjustments (modifications) to the actual data are correct, especially because of siting issues with some of the older sites that were once rural and now have been encroached upon by urban areas. The study to which I provided a link also discussed part of the problem with the algorithms used to modify the actual data.

        Another aspect of the “average” temperatures that is not often discussed is that the heat sink effect (which is separate from the daytime solar gain effect) of urban areas has really been about higher lower temperatures rather than higher higher temperatures. The Wiki link shows that for the US, the decade with the greatest number of the extreme high temperature records was the 1930s (which I had written about prior to 2010). According to global warming (aka climate change) orthodoxy, extreme high temperatures are a characteristic of global warming.

        No one is saying that warming hasn’t occurred since the 1880s (a particularly cold period) or the 1960s/70s (a particularly cold period), but that’s to be expected and not so much from the 1930s. It’s the difference between measuring economic growth from a base period 2006-07 versus a base period 2008-09. The statistics are correct, but deceiving.

        1. Barkley Rosser


          You are digging yourself in deeper here. I just googled you and those guys and “climate” and no “articles” popped up by you with either of them. I did learn about them though, and the blog D’Aleo ran, which i guess you think you were a co-blogger on as well as being a coauthor of theirs. Both of them are basically TV meteorologists with questionable credentials, Watts not even completing a bachelor’s degree. D’Aleo does have some degrees and some publications, although he has managed to make some flagrantly false claims about global average temperature trends for certain periods. Apparently the two of them have an unfinished book on this matter of surface temperature estimates where they indeed debate what has been done with the adjustments, but it has not been completed or published, and you are not a coauthor.

          Oh, and apparently D’Aleo believes in intelligent design rather than evolution. That certainly shows off his scientific credentials.

          1. pgl

            “Both of them are basically TV meteorologists with questionable credentials”

            Bruce’s favorite type of “expert”. He levies fraud after fraud after fraud. And then gets all huffy when one notes the “credentials” of his “experts”.

          2. Bruce Hall


            No, I didn’t say that I co-authored a book with Watts or D’Aleo, nor did I say that I concurred in D’Aleo’s personal beliefs. What I did say is that I collaborated on some articles with them published in their blogs.

            My blog was quite eclectic with a variety of subjects and my own opinions bolstered by the research available at the time. I did some original analysis of extreme temperature patterns in the US which both Watts and D’Aleo used and subsequently updated after I stopped my blog nine years ago. You’ll find an animated gif I created that was used to help visualize the data at that time.

            Other subjects including climate were organized here:

            Would I change some of what I wrote based on a decade of new information. Certainly. I would think that most people would be open to that. On the economy, one thing I didn’t foresee was Fed funds rates saying at almost nothing for a decade while government spending increased and wars were being fought, but I suppose you were certain of that because economists can always predict with perfect accuracy the course of the economy (okay, that’s not totally fair, but I suspect there will be snarky comments about things that I wrote with a decade of hindsight).

            You might also note that early on I wrote against Obama’s expansion of the war in Afghanistan and the waste of lives and resources that would bring. Was that wrong?
            How about my concerns about China which I wrote as far back as 2007. Was that wrong?

            Anyone who attempts to write about such varied matters will, undoubtedly, have his share of failures as judged in hindsight. I accept that, because hindsight criticism is easy and involves no intellectual risk. Do economists accept that and own up to that or just move on to the next prediction? I seem to remember that a year ago there was a “consensus” that inflation was “temporary” and would be over in a few months.

          3. Bruce Hall

            I take a bit of exception to your appeal to credentialism. Yes, academic credentials are a good indication that you have mastered the intricacies of a particular subject, but it is not the only path forward. Will you accept that a person with a Bachelor’s degree could create a new approach to space travel or vehicular travel on earth? How about someone with no degree who could create the means for mainframe computers (and later personal computers) to operate? How about a person who developed the mathematical theories necessary for nuclear fission while working in as a patent clerk because the educational “authorities” didn’t view him with much respect?

            The elitism of credentialism tends to disregard those who don’t inhabit their closed loop world. But that is not alway the best course. No, I don’t put my self in the category of Messrs. Musk, Gates, and Einstein. But that doesn’t mean a person such as myself with only a Master’s degree or someone like Anthony Watts cannot continue to investigate and learn and innovate and be correct and challenge the “authorities”.

            Consider the best computer and security systems in the world designed by highly credentialed Ph.Ds that have been hacked by teenagers.
            Consider that credentials don’t alway mean correct.

          4. pgl

            Bruce’s blog bragged about common sense? He has none and never had. Now Stupidity Has Its Own Rewards is the perfect description of his incessant chirping.

          5. pgl

            Bruce Hall
            April 18, 2022 at 8:34 am
            I take a bit of exception to your appeal to credentialism. Yes, academic credentials are a good indication that you have mastered the intricacies of a particular subject, but it is not the only path forward.

            Bruce Hall writes the dumbest statements. I could care less that someone got a Ph.D. I do care what they have written or done. Bruce has this backwards as he searches the world wide web for people with degrees that happen to write some of the dumbest things ever. Now when Dr. Crack Pot is exposed to be a Crack Pot, most of us all out his writings whereas Brucie boy hails Dr. Crack Pot as THE Expert. I guess Brucie boy should his preK teacher what credentials even means.

          6. baffling

            “How about a person who developed the mathematical theories necessary for nuclear fission while working in as a patent clerk because the educational “authorities” didn’t view him with much respect?”
            einstein was working as a patent clerk while pursuing a phd, and received an undergraduate degree from an institution that produced 22 nobel laureates. it is an urban myth that he was not viewed with much respect. he was brilliant. but you do know that david hilbert developed the general relativity field equations independently of einstein, right? and it is quite possible he developed them prior to einstein.

        2. pgl

          “Yes, I realize the Urban Heat Island phenomenon was recognized quite awhile ago. I used to have a blog and wrote about it”

          Gee – I never knew you had a blog. Glad I wasted no time reading your serial lies back then. But way to admit your latest comments was nothing but your usual dishonesty.

      3. Moses Herzog

        I agree with Barkley, some of the things Barkley said on this blog, which were printed in bold text, were no doubt some of the dumbest things any human being has said, oh, in the last…..?? Does anyone know the number of years gone past since Chamberlain publicly commented about the Munich Agreement??

        February 16th, Barkley Junior said:
        “Do keep in mind I am the one here with access to Russian media. That has now been blaring for several days that the troops will go home after the exercises are done, and exercises are exactly what they are doing now. This has more recently been reinforced by statements from Putin in press conferences, such as the one just held after the visit of German Chancellor Scholze.

        There is not going to be an invasion, even if some of the details of what Zelensky and Ukraine may agree to are not fully settled, and Victoria Nuland has been shooting her mouth off too much, somebody I wish was not part of this administration.”

        Yeah, that bold print there was/is very dumb Barkley. PhD Rosser, are you saying you wish I’d stop quoting your own words in bold text???? You think that very often what you say here is “especially ridiculous”?? No…… just very dumb.

        1. Barkley Rosser

          Again, Moses, I accurately reported what was being said in the Russian media. Putin lied, but Zelenskyy believed him, and I have not seen you ridiculing him. Come on, Moses, how about a nice post with emboldened words about “just very dumb” President Zelenskyy was or maybe is? Oh, I realize he did not post his views here on this blog. Just said them in public.

          1. Bruce Hall

            Ah, so you accurately reported what was being said in the Russian media Is that superior to evaluating a variety of analyses and reports and offering up a measured conclusion?

            You are quick to dismiss people because of their personal beliefs and attempt to attach their beliefs to the validity of the non-related work they produce. Because you tend to violate the 4th principle of the Unitarian Universalist Association, should we presume your economic opinions and work product are not worth considering? I didn’t think so.

            By the way, you said you couldn’t find Anthony’s publication about surface stations. Here’s a link to it online:

            Also be aware of note 8 regarding his surface station project which was a multi-year effort. This was instigated by his doubt about the data that he was seeing if the government’s databases.

            I realize that Watts does not have the required 2-5 years of graduate studies to be taken seriously by the Gatekeepers of Credentialism regardless of several decades of advanced work in meteorology and independent research regarding the data use to evaluate climate, but if you have a spare moment, you might find it interesting. Obviously, Watts has his detractors who may dismiss the issues he identified with the data as solvable by a few algorithms (which themselves have been found to be erratically applied as corrections). Nevertheless, the work he has done merits consideration on its own regardless of the author’s “credentials”.

          2. pgl

            Bruce Hall
            April 18, 2022 at 11:11 am

            Wow Barkley – Bruce Hall thinks he has the right to mansplain sometime to you? Hey – get a good bottle of wine and enjoy it all as this has to be one low moment. Schooled by a Village Idiot!

          3. Barkley Rosser


            I have made clear that in deciding whether or not to believe what Putin was telling the Russian people just before he invaded Ukraine or US intel that said he would, I went with the Ukrainian leaders on the basis of past observing of people on the ground knowing more than distant intel people, with this having happened in the past on more than one occasion with respect to publicly reported US intel. As noted, in this case it turned out that US intel was right and Ukraine President Zelenskyy and I were wrong.

            I have been wrong about plenty of things, as Moses Herzog will endlessly tell you, although sometimes he claims I am wrong when I am right But I was among those who incorrectly thought inflation would decline more quickly than it has and have admitted it.

            What I could not find was this supposed semi-book Watts has with D’Aleo that is unpublished. Fine that Watts had a study at Heatland Institute and that he was a coauthor on a real journal article 11 years ago.

            The bottom line here is that as near as I can tell to the extent he found anything useful, which it looks like he did a bit, it has long since been taken into account by those accounting for the urban heat effect. Your effort to suggest that somehow something he and you and maybe D’Aleo did or are still doing has not been taken into account by those estimating global temperature trends still looks like a total crock of you know what. Sorry.

    3. 2slugbaits

      Bruce Hall As Barkley noted, the problem posed by urban heat islands has been known for a long time and corrections made to offset that effect. You’re literally decades behind the curve on this one. As to “fear mongering of the 60s and 70s about ‘global cooling’,” I’m afraid you’re confused about that one. The concern with global cooling had to do with the effects of a nuclear winter in the aftermath of a nuclear exchange. Back when I took mandatory core courses on environmental sciences I heard warnings about globally warming due to greenhouse gases. I don’t know where you went to school (or even if you went to school), but evidently it wasn’t very strong in the environmental sciences.

      And for the umpteenth time, your flowers and maple trees are local, not global. We don’t talk about local warming; it’s called global warming.

      1. pgl

        “for the umpteenth time, your flowers and maple trees are local, not global.”

        So you are telling me that Bruce has written this incredibly stupid and dishonest rant many times before. Even CoRev and Sammy would at least try to come up with fresh lies.

        I’m thankful you keep track of this serial liar’s past lies as his incessant stupidity and dishonesty has rather bored me by now.

      2. Bruce Hall


        Yes, I guess my flowers and tree comment was too subtle as humor so you took it literally that I meant it as a measure of global temperatures.

        See me response to Barkley. There is a lot of effort made to make the data fit the consensus rather than to open it up for debate. Settled science is not and never has been.

        1. macroduck

          This is slippery Brucey at his best. Spew climate denialism in its lowest form, aimed at hew-haw mentality and deniable as humor. Brucey is apparently a Glenn Beck acolyte, lacking the brass to mimic grandpappy Rush.

          Beck wraps his lies in shrugs and duplicity, just like Brucey.

          1. pgl

            “Spew climate denialism in its lowest form”

            But did you notice Brucie is now saying he has never questioned global warming. I guess his views are malleable.

        2. pgl

          “See me response to Barkley.”

          It was even dumber than this response. When a deep hole, you just keep digging!

        3. Barkley Rosser


          Sorry, but indeed this is a serious topic so attempted “humor” based on the weather near you is not funny, and also obviously a way to take in suckers who do not know better. You look like Sen. Inhofe some years ago when there was a snowstorm in Washington and he brought a snowball into a Senate hearing, wisecracking about “So much for global warming.”

          BTW, just in case you do not know it and also to remind others, even as global average temperature is rising, some locations on the planet’s surface are cooling. The temperature change is quite uneven across the earth’s surface. Of course the area warming the most rapidly is the Arctic, which is why we get so many photo ops of polar bears and melting tundra out of there.

    4. AndrewG

      “But, then, I appreciate H. L. Mencken.”

      While I don’t agree with the language often coming form your critics here, I see why you get so much flak.

      1. pgl

        Bruce Hall has been touting his former blog as something important. Just for laughs I wondered over and saw a lot of worthless BS with maybe one person commenting so this blog must have been as worthless as his comments here. One blog linked to some discussion entitled:

        How Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg Rigged the 2020 Election to Defeat Trump

        Just wow – Bruce Hall brags about hanging out with Trump’s minions who tried to undermine our democracy. Go figure!

    5. rjs

      Bruce Hall, we’re in the middle of a moderate La Nina event right now…before judging the global climate on this year’s growth of your daffodils, it might behoove you to check the historical effect of a La Nina on Michigan weather…

    6. Barkley Rosser


      Oh, I get why Moses Herzog is inclined to support you. You emboldened your misleading claim that somehow urbanization and land use changes are still leading people to “skew readings” of global temperature!!! Moses is easily convinced by anything that is emboldened and thinks others are as well. He also gets all excited by any mention of “skew.” You hit the jackpot with this particular piece of misleading tripe here!!!

    7. John

      At first, there was global cooling.
      But it did not come as predicted.

      Then, there was global warming (the Al Gore scam).
      But it did not come as predicted.

      Then, the scammers asked themself : “What was ever before and will ever be ?”

      Hopefully it does not get colder. My energy bills in winter time.

      1. baffling

        actually john, the point is that we now know that humans can influence global climate, possibly on a massive scale. should we simply let the current population influence the future climate, with no cost or ramifications for their actions? on a local level, we saw this with acid rain. and we also saw that you could improve the situation, and not damage the economy, by forcing people to be responsible and pay for their pollutants. these are economic costs born to somebody. or do you not believe in costs in economics, john? is it better to be a socialist, and simply spread those costs out to future populations? that seems to be what you are advocating, john.

  4. Moses Herzog

    I listened to most of this podcast today eating breakfast at a small park. It’s related to health care history in America (not environmentalism). I thought other regulars here might enjoy it:

    My Dad always kind of liked Truman. He had some negative traits that my Dad was well aware of. But I think Truman’s “smalltown vibe” or “backwoodsy-ism” kind of appealed to my Dad.

    1. ltr

      April 17, 2022

      GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP v4), 1880-2022
      Tables of Global and Hemispheric Monthly Means and Zonal Annual Means

      The basic GISS temperature analysis scheme was defined in the late 1970s by James Hansen when a method of estimating global temperature change was needed for comparison with one-dimensional global climate models. The analysis method was fully documented in Hansen and Lebedeff (1987). Several papers describing updates to the analysis followed over the following decades, most recently that of Hansen et al. (2010), as well as the uncertainty quantification of Lenssen et al. (2019).

      1. ltr

        Properly referencing:

        January, 2022

        GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

        Tables of Global and Hemispheric Monthly Means and Zonal Annual Means. 1880-2022

        The basic GISS temperature analysis scheme was defined in the late 1970s by James Hansen when a method of estimating global temperature change was needed for comparison with one-dimensional global climate models. The analysis method was fully documented in Hansen and Lebedeff (1987). * Several papers describing updates to the analysis followed over the following decades, most recently that of Hansen et al. (2010), ** as well as the uncertainty quantification of Lenssen et al. (2019). ***




    2. pgl

      Thanks for this chart as it shows temperatures have had an upward trend but also a lot of variability. Troll and serial liar Bruce Hall tried to impress us with some Wikipedia page showing the variability but not the over time trend. Now I get Brucie might be so incredibly dumb that he does not get variability and mean are two very different concepts. Even troll rsm gets that one!

      1. Bruce Hall

        Lucy, to put things in perspective. Here is a chart that is 15-years old. You can view the “variability” from a macroscopic instead of microscopic look.

        There is always the question of significance. When your face is planted, those grains of sand can look large. The Maldives haven’t disappeared; they have grown. New York isn’t flooded. There are fewer hurricanes now than 50-years ago (yes more property damage because more people live in the South along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts). The largest forest fires were over a century ago. There has be no increase in tornadoes. Arctic sea ice was about normal last winter. Mt. Kilimanjaro is still snow covered. Droughts in the west are periodic (same issue as hurricanes)

        Stick to day trading.

        1. pgl

          OK – you found something totally worthless from 15 years ago. Like everyone of those posts on your ignored and worthless blog, there seemed to be no point and your feeble attempt at explaining WTF the alleged point was said nothing. Do you just have the thousands of monkeys on old fashion typewriters 24/7 write your incredibly vacuous comments. Wake me if you ever have a coherent insight.

  5. ltr

    December, 2008

    Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
    By James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Robert Berner, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer and James C. Zachos


    Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~ 3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, * is ~ 6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and ice-free Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, the planet being nearly ice-free until CO2 fell to 450 ± 100 ppm; barring prompt policy changes, that critical level will be passed, in the opposite direction, within decades. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm ** to at most 350 ppm, but likely less than that. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. *** An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. ****

    * Surface reflectivity of sun’s radiation

    ** Currently 419 ppm

    *** Net change in radiant emittance or irradiance


      1. Rick Stryker

        Actually, I have been thinking about starting a blog. I’m glad to hear that I can count on you to be a devoted reader.

    1. AndrewG

      I absolutely agree we’re not on the brink of extinction and the alarmists do more harm than good. But the harm they do is turn people off from any climate action at all. Climate change will still cost trillions of dollars and increase many kinds of risks. It is entirely sensible to spend trillions of dollars to reduce those risks. Slowing down oil consumption will make it last longer anyway.

  6. Bruce Hall

    For those who might be interested in some midnight reading, there is a .pdf version of a paper written by Dr. Ole Humlum, former Professor of Physical Geography at the University Centre in Svalbard, Nor- way, and Emeritus Professor of Physical Geography, University of Oslo, Norway. He goes to great lengths to examine the various aspects of climate change and the various methods for obtaining surface temperatures, sea temperatures, and lower troposphere temperatures. It’s available in Dr. Benny Peiser’s blog which, admittedly, has a skeptical bias. However, science … true science ,,, is not based on a single perspective of “the truth”, but is debated and constantly reformulated by those who are not afraid that additional information might be additionally revealing.

    General overview 2021
    This report has its main focus on observations and not on the output of numerical models, with the exception of Figure 39 (see p. 38). References and data sources are listed at the end of the report.

    So, you can disregard other perspectives if you truly believe that science is settled.

    1. pgl

      First you deny global warming. Then you say you never denied global warming. And back to this? I have never seen such malleable opinions ever!

    2. pgl

      Folks – check out what Klimarealistene – (Climate Realists) is. These are Norway’s premier climate change deniers. Of course Bruce Hall hates it when his “experts” credentials are checked out.

      Hey Bruce since you put this trash up as science – be an honest little troll and also put up what real scientists had to say about this fluff.

    3. AndrewG

      Look, I can list the credentials of all the climate scientists at the IPCC too, it doesn’t make my argument stronger. But their data and analysis are not to be dismissed either, Bruce. The bulk of the people studying these things disagree with Humlum.

      It is telling that your retort (inferred from your comments above) is going to be a conspiracy theory where Americans are duped.

      1. baffling

        “It is telling that your retort (inferred from your comments above) is going to be a conspiracy theory where Americans are duped.”
        that is the most concise summary i have heard describe the right wing echo chamber in quite some time. well done.

        1. AndrewG

          The American right is all conspiracy theories. That’s what’s so troubling. It’s a hallmark of authoritarian movements.

    4. Barkley Rosser


      Since you are attempting to parade yourself as some sort of pseudo-expert on climatology, falsely claiming to have coauthored things with half-baked crackpots, let me agree with you that there is much that remains unknown as well as uncertain about all this. However, our knowledge is steadily improving and jumping up and down about how we do not know everything it not a good excuse for doing nothing based on the quite a lot that we do know.

      Regarding your link, this Humlum guy may be be highly respectable, but his piece contains some blatantly false statements, which sort of undermines his credibility. In particular, he is just plain flamingly wrong about snow cover trends, gag.

      BTW, to Rick Stryker, your Koonkin guy has the same problem. His book you touted also contains quite a few clearly just false statements. He has been pretty seriously discredited. But if you want to start a blog to spread phony bs, well, be our guest.

      1. pgl

        “Since you are attempting to parade yourself as some sort of pseudo-expert on climatology”

        Name ANY subject and Bruce Hall parades himself as an expert. But we have all read his incessant nonsense. He clearly understands NO topic. None at all.

        He has only one expertise – being the Klass Klown.

      2. Bruce Hall

        Barkley, I respect your knowledge of economics, but you’ve gotten lost in the snow.
        Slight down trend since the mid-70s; slight up trend since the mid-80s.

        You claim there are “blatantly false statements”, yet the only one you signal out as “flamingly wrong” is not. You should be specific and with citations if you want to try to discredit a scientist in a field you are not that conversant. You may be able to write about the economic impact regard assumed climate catastrophes, but those assumptions are poorly grounded in many instances. My study of and writing about climate for a decade may not make me an expert in the sense of someone who has a Ph.D and a career in that field, but I am not ignorant about the claims and issues. At least I am open to examining both sides of the debate and the argument of “settled science” has never set well with me. That’s not science; it is polemics against those who challenge your assumed facts with their own.

        1. pgl

          The more words you write – the more clear it is that have no clue WTF you are babbling about. Come on dude – you are so over your head that even Kevin Hart looks tall.

        2. 2slugbaits

          Bruce Hall The Humbug…I mean Humlum graph referred to snow cover over the northern hemisphere. Your graph only refers to North America. See the difference? Also, the Humlum graph is deliberately misleading. Notice the scale on the vertical axis. It’s intended to hide information. A better way is to normalize data and look at anomalies. Here’s the same Rutgers data for the northern hemisphere reported as anomalies:

          Not only is there a clear downward trend, but the graph further decomposes those anomalies into North America and Eurasia.

          1. Barkley Rosser


            Thanks for putting the link up in an accessible way that I tried to put up but bungled. I am still bad at that, as our friend Moses likes to get on my case about. But you got the right one/

          2. Moses Herzog

            Does anyone know who this dumb Afgan Hound belongs to?? I keep faking him out with this tennis ball and he runs towards the fake toss every time. What did you call it?? Barkster?? Barkler??

          3. Barkley Rosser


            Um, just what are you referring to here? i understand you and Bruce Hall sort of share a desire to catch me out on something, but in the case I am the one who has caught him first trying to falsely stir up doubts about how climatologists deal with the urban heat effect, something figured out a long time ago. He has known who played a miinor role over a decade ago in getting this fully figured out. But it has been fully figured out so there is no basis for him now to try to claim that somehow this is something that is still a source of problems in current measurements of global average temperature changes.

            Having been shown the door on that particular failed effort by him, he then popped up with this link to this Norwegian physical geographer Humlum’s effort to raise doubts about these kind of current estimates. So I also was first out the door to point a serious problem with what this guy cliams, notably that he falsely claimed that there has been no change in snow cover. I had the right source for showing this, while 2slug did a better job of providing a functioning link, even as I indicated the same source.

            Now you seem to be suggesting that I have somehow pursuing a “fake toss” of a tennis ball. Was this indeed supposed to be a reference to me? Sorry, I am the one who showed that it was Bruce Hall who was making a fake toss of a tennis ball. I admitted that you have accurately pointed out that I have been bad at putting up functioning links to things, but in this case I had the right source, and I thanked 2Slugbaits for providing the link better than I did.

            In this case it was Bruce Hall who was throwing out a fake ball and I was the first person to point out that he was doing so and how it was false. Was that what you were referring to, which would be accurate? Or have just made a complete fool of yourself by falesly claiming that I was somehow chasing after a fake toss? Which is it, Moses? Are you accurately joining me and 2slugbaits in criticizing Bruce Hall or are you completely missing what is going on here and coming on like a total idiot? Please clarify, buster.

        3. Barkley Rosser


          Check out spring graph in .

          If that does not work, google the Rutgers seasonal snow cover charts. Easily found. Winter snow cover has not changed much, but spring has clearly and dramatically been declining.

          You are a fraud.

        4. baffling

          ” but I am not ignorant about the claims and issues. ”
          bruce, yes you are. you have about the same mental capacity on these issues as your fellow conspiracy theorist corev. neither of you can even display a high school equivalent understanding of the issues.

        5. AndrewG

          Let’s take all of your points at face value about the science of climate change.

          Why do you put more weight on the scientific claims coming from skeptics than the claims made by the thousands of scientists at the IPCC and elsewhere, who vehemently disagree with the skeptics?

          Can you answer this question with science, not a conspiracy theory?

          You can’t have it both ways. You either argue the science or you don’t.

  7. joseph

    From one of Stryker’s links:

    “Bjorn Lomborg, whom Business Insider cited as one of “The 10 Most-Respected Global Warming Skeptics” “.

    Talk about damning with faint praise. And from Business Insider, no less.

    That’s hilarious.

    1. pgl

      Lawrence Kudlow was deemed most stupidest man alive and yet he got to be Trump’s economic advisor. Bruce Hall’s kind of expert.

Comments are closed.