1/4. Rising CO2 levels improve plants' water use efficiency and drought resilience, through reduced stomatal conductance. Simply put, plants need to process less air to get the carbon they need for growth, and thus they lose less water to transpiration.
x.com/ncdave4life/st…

That's one of the reasons that catastrophic famines no longer happen. For all of of human history, until recently, famine was one of the great scourges of mankind: the "Third Horseman of the Apocalypse." But widespread famines are fading from living memory, and rising atmospheric CO2 concentration is one of the reasons for that.

That's a very, very Big Deal. For comparison:

● COVID-19 killed about 0.1% of the world's population
● The catastrophic 1918 flu pandemic killed about 2%
● WWII killed 2.7% of the world's population
● But the nearly-worldwide drought and famine of 1876-78 killed about 3.7% of the world's population.

@Panta_Rhei06 @simonmaechling --

2/4. Improved water use efficiency and drought resilience are especially beneficial in arid regions, like the Sahel, which is one of the reasons that region of Africa is "greening" even faster than most other places.

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1878227407712456766

3/4. I asked ChatGPT about that benefit of CO2 emissions and rising CO2 levels:

"With reference to the agronomy literature, quantify how elevated CO2 helps plants use water more efficiently, and increases crops' drought resilience, by reducing stomatal conductance and water loss through transpiration."

ChatGPT replied with a very good answer:

In agronomy, the effects of elevated CO2 on plant water use efficiency and drought resilience are extensively studied. One of the key mechanisms through which elevated CO2 levels improve water use efficiency is by reducing stomatal conductance and, consequently, water loss through transpiration.

Stomata are small pores on the surface of plant leaves that regulate gas exchange, including the uptake of CO2 for photosynthesis and the release of water vapor through transpiration. When CO2 levels are elevated, plants can maintain the same or higher rate of photosynthesis while reducing stomatal conductance. This reduction in stomatal conductance leads to a decrease in water loss through transpiration without significantly affecting CO2 uptake, resulting in improved water use efficiency.

Several studies have quantified the effect of elevated CO2 on stomatal conductance and transpiration. For example, a meta-analysis published in 2013 (Kimball et al., 2013) found that under elevated CO2 levels, stomatal conductance decreased by an average of 22%, while transpiration decreased by only 17%. This indicates that plants under elevated CO2 levels were able to reduce water loss more efficiently than they reduced CO2 uptake, leading to an overall improvement in water use efficiency.

Improvements in water use efficiency due to elevated CO2 levels can increase plants' drought resilience by allowing them to maintain adequate hydration during periods of water scarcity. This can be particularly beneficial in arid and semi-arid regions where water availability is limited.

Overall, the literature suggests that elevated CO2 levels can improve water use efficiency in plants by reducing stomatal conductance and water loss through transpiration, which can enhance their resilience to drought conditions.

1/6》 Marcus, please tell me that you're not fooled by a fake "study" of a three-day-old event, from a climate industry propaganda outlet. Do you know how long real studies take?

This is the real global trend:
● sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@Marcusgibson @WeatherProf 2/6》 NASA measures it from MODIS satellites. They show a decreasing trend in fires.
● earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/145421/…
● archive.ph/WfDJh
● earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/90493/r…

@Marcusgibson @WeatherProf 3/6》 The main factors affecting fires are land management and forestry practices.
● phys.org/news/2022-11-1…
● forestpolicypub.com/2021/07/30/gri…
Global warming has negligible impact on wildfires.

1/8. Gov. Newsom's press release falsely blames "a hotter, drier world." In fact, the world is warming only very slightly & slowly, and it hasn't gotten at all drier. Here're the facts:
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…
As you can see from the graph, the fraction of the globe in drought has decreased slightly, not increased.

Oh, and BTW, NCA4 (circa 2018) estimated that global average temperatures have risen only 1.14 ±0.13°C since the 1800s, and the warming is disproportionately at chilly high latitudes.

2/8. Also, higher CO2 levels greatly reduce drought impacts, by making plants more drought-resistant and water-efficient, through reduced stomatal conductance. That's very beneficial in arid regions, like the Sahel & much of California. Here's an article.
web.archive.org/web/2017061915…
That's is one of the reasons that region of Africa is "greening" even faster than most other places.

@NewScientist reported the "remarkable environmental turnaround," including a “quite spectacular regeneration of vegetation,” and "a 70 per cent increase in yields of local cereals such as sorghum and millet in one province in recent years."

@WeatherProf 3/8. National Geographic @NatGeo also wrote about it.
web.archive.org/web/2009080201…

sealevel.info/Owen2009_Sahar…

MBH98 features its famous hockey stick graph in two figures. By mistake, an older version of the reconstruction was actually used for one of the figures.

I like a good puzzle so decided to do some reverse engineering on the "old" MBH98 reconstruction. 🧵

MBH98 uses the old reconstruction for signal detection. Since the forcing data begins in the early 1600s, only the post-1600 portion of the reconstruction is shown in the paper.

The goal of this thread is to reproduce that part of the reconstruction and then extend it.

The post-1760 portion also appears in an earlier paper by Mann and Bradley (MB98). This paper will be useful.

"Pro-choice"? Not so much.

A thread about a shocking new legal tactic we're seeing from pro-abortion officials in multiple states. 👇

We’re currently litigating cases in NY, CO, and CA where state officials have tried to ban/punish pro-life speech.

These officials are trying to punish doctors, nurses & pregnancy centers who provide a treatment called abortion pill reversal (APR)... or even TELL women about it.

These politicians accuse APR providers of “misleading” women. But the evidence says otherwise.

APR uses progesterone, a natural hormone which has been safely prescribed to pregnant women for decades. Progesterone can counter the deadly effects of mifepristone when taken in time.

1/8》Doc wrote, "You’re not going to change my mind."

Please do not be impervious to evidence, like trillionofcells. That would make me sad.

2/8》Doc wrote, "Wasn’t Gleick cleared of any wrongdoing?"

No, he was not cleared. That was disinformation from The Grauniad:
x.com/ncdave4life/st…

In fact, Gleick eventually admitted the identity theft, and disseminating the forgery & the stolen documents (though only after he was caught & publicly identified).

I can see that you didn't read my article about it. You should:
sealevel.info/Peter_Gleick_D…

3/8》Gleick never admitted being the forger, but there can be no doubt of that, either.

It was the incongruous appearance of his name in the document, with the strangely flattering description of him as a "high-profile climate scientist," in a document which said NOTHING positive about ANY other climate activists, which first drew Steve Mosher's attention to Gleick. But it was the idiosyncrasies of Gleick's own writing style, found in the forged document, which Mosher mostly discussed, when explaining why he believed Gleick wrote it.

Mosher explained it, at length, in a series of blog comments, beginning here:
rankexploits.com/musings/2012/t…

Note that that was all BEFORE Gleick confessed to being the person who had impersonated the Heartland Board Member to steal the other documents. THAT iced it: there's no question that Gleick was the forger.

(BTW, Mosher used to be with Berkeley Earth.)

1/8. The IPCC authors expect  a worsening trend. No such trend is actually detectable, so far.

In fact, here's a paper about the downward  trend in hurricane destructiveness, tho I suspect the decrease might be a fluctuation rather than a durable trend.
nature.com/articles/ncomm…

2/8. The IPCC authors are sly. They know hurricanes & other tropical cyclones aren't worse, but they dodge & weave to avoid admitting it. Here's a tricky quote from AR6:

"It is likely that the global proportion of Category 3–5 tropical cyclone instances has increased over the past four decades."

ref: ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1…

3/8. That's a textbook illustration of Chesterton's point:

"Falsehood is never so false as when it is very nearly true."

It's "spin." It is calculated deception without QUITE lying.

Look at that graph again:

(Updated version: )climatlas.com/tropical/globa…

@JamesFaris_ & @BusinessInsider, here's reality:

Hurricanes and other tropical cyclones:


tl;dr: Hurricanes are not worsening.

sealevel.info/learnmore.html…
climatlas.com/tropical/globa…

Tornadoes:


tl;dr: Tornadoes are not worsening.

sealevel.info/learnmore.html…
climateataglance.com/wp-content/upl…

Droughts & floods:


tl;dr: Droughts & floods are not worsening.



sealevel.info/learnmore.html…
ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitor…
sealevel.info/US_percentage_…

1/5. I trust that it is obvious to you that the most important effects of climate change are on agriculture. Right?

So if you really want to read the best relevant scholarly literature, you should start with agronomy papers. Agronomy is a much older, more rigorous, and less politicized field than "climate science," and it's the field which studies the effects of CO2 and climate change on agriculture.



Here are "cereal crops" (wheat, corn, rice, etc.), averaged:
ourworldindata.org/crop-yields
sealevel.info/ourworldindata…

@JDubbs1982 @Bidenisafacist @ChrisMartzWX 2/5. For instance, here's a paper about wheat:

Fitzgerald GJ, et al. (2016) Elevated atmospheric CO2 can dramatically increase wheat yields in semi-arid environments and buffer against heat waves. Glob Chang Biol. 22(6):2269-84. doi:10.1111/gcb.13263.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…

@JDubbs1982 @Bidenisafacist @ChrisMartzWX 3/5. That doesn't even take into account the direct benefits of fossil fuels.

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1707069265998655912

. @CNN is hyping its "unprecedented" presidential debate.

Please.

It's a debate. And it won't even be a good one.

That said, people do seem to think that debates are woven into the fabric of American presidential politics, They're not. The first one that we had that would be recognizable to contemporary American eyes was Nixon/Kennedy in 1960.

After that we didn't have another until Ford/Carter in 1976. From that point on debates have been a regular feature, but this is all a relatively new thing.

1/15≫ Dr. Belch (why oh why isn't she a gastroenterologist?) seems not to recognize the significance of the story.

Climate activists predicted that if Earth's average temperature got to 1.5°C above the pre-industrial (late Little Ice Age) baseline it would be a disaster. But they did, and nothing bad happened.

The significance of that is that it means the climate activists were completely wrong.

2/15≫ In case you're wondering, the 4 known factors which caused 2023 to be so mild were:

1. A strong El Niño spike. And

2. IMO 2020 shipping regulations drastically reduced sulfate aerosol air pollution (The IMO says they resulted in "an estimated 46% decrease in ship-emitted aerosols," which equates to a sudden 10% decrease in total global SO2 emissions, which is a large improvement in a short time, with a significant warming effect). And

3. The unusual 2022 Hunga Tonga eruption, which humidified the stratosphere. And

4. Also a little bit of warming from the ongoing slow rise in atmospheric CO2 levels (though only about 25 ppmv/decade).

It's all good, though (unfortunately) #1 & #3 are temporary.

3/15≫
Q: And what was the result of all that warmth?

A: Nothing. Nothing bad, anyhow.

We still get storms, but they're no worse than in the past.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

1/7. Christopher wrote, "Energy balances, not heat, not a flux."

Flux just means flow or movement. "Energy flux" is synonymous with "movement of energy."

Inbound solar radiation is a flux. So is outbound LW IR.

Definitions:
1.
2. ahdictionary.com/word/search.ht…
scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Flux.h…

@CDCollins5269 @Willard1951 @jpgcrowley @AdrianC47C @ShroedingerBird @ChrisBBacon3 @Mark_A_Lunn @Rosie45703313 @PvtMcAuslan @EthonRaptor @Anvndarnamn5 @DaleGribble_666 @priscian @Then__And__Now @tim_dunkerton @AristotleMrs @FD2you @BradPKeyes @KCTaz @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @paulp1232 @MartinJBern @Data79504085 @ammocrypta @B_Bolshevik100 @Robert76907841 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone 2/7. If you call incoming fluxes positive and outgoing fluxes negative, then an "energy imbalance" simply means incoming plus outgoing fluxes do not sum to zero.

Persistent energy imbalance causes temperature change. That gives us clues to estimate EEI.
sealevel.info/radiative_imba…

3/7. Willard wrote, "The what matter's is the Earth's overall energy imbalance (EEI)"

If it REALLY mattered to Willard, he wouldn't play make-believe with it.

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1779764304977211605

1/7. Contrary to Prof. Christopher Taylor's claim, global greening is not "maxed out." That outlier Baozhang Chen study he cited is even contradicted by the IPCC:

(Note: accelerated terrestrial carbon uptake = greening.)

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1719382451095535760

2/7. Here's a compilation of that thread (because Twitter/𝕏 keeps shadowbanning my tweetstorms):


@elonmusk, @lindayaX, @support, @premium PLEASE end 𝕏's SHADOWBANNING of replies — even replies to one's own tweets (tweetstorms). What good is a tweetstorm if you can't find the 2nd tweet while viewing the 1st?threadreaderapp.com/thread/1719382…

3/7. Xin Chen et al (2024) refutes that outlier Baozhang Chen et al (2022) study:

Chen, Xin et al (2024). The global greening continues despite increased drought stress since 2000. Global Ecology and Conservation, Volume 49, 2024, e02791, doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2023.e02791.sciencedirect.com/science/articl…

1/10. When climate activists like Prof. Christopher Taylor have the power to block publication and deny tenure to young professors with differing opinions, it corrupts academia and distorts science.

sealevel.info/ammocrypta_180…

https://x.com/ammocrypta/status/1808686484867760224

2/10. Scientific consensuses exist about many things, but we don't talk much about them, because we don't disagree about them. If there's a hot debate about the existence of a consensus, it means there's no consensus.

3/10. One of the dishonest tactics used by the parasitic climate industry to promote their products is to pretend there's a scientific consensus that the "climate crisis" is real. That's a plain lie.

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1792682125226921987

1/7. The "nutrition scare" is marketing FUD. Increasing CO2 does not decrease crops' nutritional value, except under contrived circumstances.


I had an impromptu online debate about the nutrition scare with its most prominent promoter, mathematician Irakli_Loladze, in comments on that Quora answer. If you're not a Quora member you can't read it there, so I saved it here:


If you skim it, do not overlook the important fact that since elevated CO2 is especially beneficial for legumes (beans, peas, etc.), which are grown for their high protein content, the rising CO2 level helps mitigate protein shortages in poor countries.

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1800278501674652017

sealevel.info/Is_Irakli_Lola…

@cosmicfirepeace @a1337sti 2/7. Rising CO2 levels do not increase fires, either. That's climate industry propaganda. Here's what the data show:
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@cosmicfirepeace @a1337sti 3/7. Rising CO2 levels do not increase droughts, either. That's also climate industry propaganda. Here's what the data show:

sealevel.info/learnmore.html…
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

1/4. Joe P. wrote, "Averages are meaningless for determining heat"

You mean "confusing" (to you), not "meaningless."

Set your non-Panasonic microwave oven to half-power. It alternates between full power and zero power with a 50% duty cycle. That heats your coffee just as fast as a half-power microwave oven.

2/4. Joe P. wrote, "160w/m2 bb T is -40C, much too low"

You forgot to add roughly 342 W/m² of downwelling LW IR which originates from GHGs in the atmosphere:
sealevel.info/NCA4_global_en…

3/4. Joe P. wrote, "It's derived after reducing TSI / 4 unnecessarily"

It accounts for the fact that the average  irradiance over a sphere is 1/4th of the peak irradiance at the point where the surface of the sphere is perpendicular to the light source. It is not "unnecessary."

1/7. This PBS piece is extremely misleading. Elevated CO2 greatly improves crop yields, and it mitigates drought impacts, by improving plants' water use efficiency (WUE) and drought resilience. See:


I asked ChatGPT to explain the mechanism by which agronomists have found that elevated CO2 improves crops' WUE and drought resilience. It did a good job:
‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍
‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍ ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍꧁꧂

In agronomy, the effects of elevated CO2 on plant water use efficiency and drought resilience are extensively studied. One of the key mechanisms through which elevated CO2 levels improve water use efficiency is by reducing stomatal conductance and, consequently, water loss through transpiration.

Stomata are small pores on the surface of plant leaves that regulate gas exchange, including the uptake of CO2 for photosynthesis and the release of water vapor through transpiration. When CO2 levels are elevated, plants can maintain the same or higher rate of photosynthesis while reducing stomatal conductance. This reduction in stomatal conductance leads to a decrease in water loss through transpiration without significantly affecting CO2 uptake, resulting in improved water use efficiency.

Several studies have quantified the effect of elevated CO2 on stomatal conductance and transpiration. For example, a meta-analysis published in 2013 (Kimball et al., 2013) found that under elevated CO2 levels, stomatal conductance decreased by an average of 22%, while transpiration decreased by only 17%. This indicates that plants under elevated CO2 levels were able to reduce water loss more efficiently than they reduced CO2 uptake, leading to an overall improvement in water use efficiency.

Improvements in water use efficiency due to elevated CO2 levels can increase plants' drought resilience by allowing them to maintain adequate hydration during periods of water scarcity. This can be particularly beneficial in arid and semi-arid regions where water availability is limited.

Overall, the literature suggests that elevated CO2 levels can improve water use efficiency in plants by reducing stomatal conductance and water loss through transpiration, which can enhance their resilience to drought conditions.masterresource.org/carbon-dioxide…

2/7. Contrary to climate industry propaganda and misinformation from the leftists at PBS, the scientific evidence is compelling that CO2 emissions and rising CO2 levels are beneficial. Here are some relevant papers:
sealevel.info/negative_socia…

3/7. The beneficial effects of elevated CO2 are helping make famines rare for first time in human history. If you're too young to understand how important that is, count yourself blessed! Famine used to be a scourge comparable to war & disease.

sealevel.info/learnmore.html…
ourworldindata.org/famines

@Anymous84861064 @Veritatem2021 @joe51du @JohnWil12363553 @HalBeowa @TheDisproof @SpudNielsen @rln_nelson @GillesnFio @Anvndarnamn5 @MartinDn1001 @3GHtweets @MarcEHJones @tonyjsargeant @Willard1951 @ammocrypta @Rabs1958 @DenisDaly @AristotleMrs @S_D_Mannix @Camburnclimate @ozzorro1 @bomac_macbo @BenKoby1911 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @PeterGleick @DeSmog 2/7. I've also already explained to you why the natural sinks which remove CO2 from the air will continue to accelerate as long as CO2 levels continue to rise.

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1719382106432733349

3/7. Natural CO2 removal mechanisms, which already remove at least (5.4 Gt CO2 / 2.1294 Gt/ppmv) = 2.5 ppmv/year, accelerate by an additional 1 ppmv/year for every 40-50 ppmv increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.


That's a very powerful "negative feedback" which limits the rise in CO2 concentration, and ensures that the temperature increase will remain modest and benign.

Refs:

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1795586137974579416

ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1…
sealevel.info/carbon/carbonf…
sealevel.info/feedbacks.html…

@Anymous84861064 @Veritatem2021 @joe51du @JohnWil12363553 @HalBeowa @TheDisproof @SpudNielsen @rln_nelson @GillesnFio @Anvndarnamn5 @MartinDn1001 @3GHtweets @MarcEHJones @tonyjsargeant @Willard1951 @ammocrypta @Rabs1958 @DenisDaly @AristotleMrs @S_D_Mannix @Camburnclimate @ozzorro1 @bomac_macbo @BenKoby1911 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @PeterGleick @DeSmog 4/7. We've also already covered that VPD red herring. Rising CO2 levels make plants more water-efficient and drought-hardy, and more resilient to "water vapor pressure deficit" (dryness).

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1367284775719997441

1️⃣/4️⃣. That graph shows an estimate of a total of about 500 ZJ added to the the upper 2 km of the oceans since 1955.

Aside: Actually, the first 50 years of the graph are nothing but guesses.

OHC is estimated by models, informed by temperature measurements, made by Argo floats. The first Argo float was deployed in 2000. They didn't reach 3000 units (i.e., one float per 120,000 km²) until 2007.

So the part of their graph prior to about 2005 is 100% codswallop. The kindest thing you can say about it is that it's a plausible guess, consistent with (but you can't say based upon!) convenience samples of sea surface temperatures. It is not data, in any sense.

But never mind that, because that graph also has another problem...

2️⃣/4️⃣. Does it seem odd to you that, even though all the measurements are of temperature, rather than heat content, THEY NEVER REPORT TEMPERATURES?

You should calculate what 500 ZJ means in terms normal people can grok: average water temperature change. If you do that simple exercise, it will be obvious why they do not report it.

3️⃣/4️⃣. I know you won't do it, so I'll do it for you. (You're welcome.)

Total volume of water in the oceans is 1,338,000,000 cubic-km = 1.338e9 km³.

Volume of water in the upper 2000 meters of the oceans: 3.6e8 km² × 0.95 × 2.0 km = 6.84e8 km³ = ≈50% of total ocean volume.

The density of seawater is about 1027 kg/m³ = 1.027 tonne/m³ = 1.027 Gt/km³.

6.84e8 km³ of seawater weighs:
1.027 × 6.83e8 = 7.0e8 Gt

1 Gt = 1e12 kg, so the top 2 km of the world's seawater masses:
7.0e8 Gt × (1e12 kg/Gt) = 7.0e20 kg

So, let's calculate how much energy it takes to warm that much water by 1°C.

Everyone knows 1 cal of energy will raise one gram of fresh water by 1°C, and 1 kcal (1000 cal) warms 1 kg of water by 1°C. 1 cal = 4.184 J, so 4.184e3 J warms 1 kg of pure, fresh water 1°C.

Seawater has an 8% lower specific heat of 3.850e3 J / (kg °C). So:

It takes 7.0e20 kg × 3.850e3 J/kg = 2.695e24 Joules to raise the average temperature of the top 2 km of the oceans by 1°C.

So 500 ZJ (= 5.0e23 J) warms the top 2 km of seawater by an average of (5e23 / 2.695e24) = 0.185 °C, or almost 1/5 of 1°C.

1/7. Paul, is my very sunny site. If you find errors on it I'll be sincerely grateful if you tell me. (See "About" for contact info.)

But the graph I used is from NOAA.

My caption says, "Illustration omitted from Slangen et al (2016)…"

Is that unclear?
Sealevel.info
sealevel.info/1612340_Honolu…

@_PrinceOfMilk @JoeTegerdine @NASAClimate 2/7. I gave you the link to the source for NOAA's graph:

Did you overlook it?

I added the red, green & brown annotation, and bottommost caption, based on Slangen's reported conclusions. tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltre…

3/7. I also gave you the link to the graph on my site:


As both sites report, the linear trend is 1.54 ±0.20 mm/yr (which is 6 inches per century).

NOAA doesn't calculate/report acceleration, but I do. The acceleration there is 0.000 ±0.013 mm/yr².
sealevel.info/MSL_graph.php?…
sealevel.info/1612340_Honolu…

@UnrollHelper

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1589655335203401729

(Pinging to un-shadowban the thread.)

If anyone reading this has Elon's or Linda's ear, please forward it to them!

@elonmusk, @lindayaX, @support & @premium, PLEASE end 𝕏's SHADOWBANNING of replies! What good is a tweetstorm if we can't find the 2nd tweet while viewing the 1st?


Also, @elonmusk, @lindayaX & @support, @premiu, PLEASE put a stop to the avalanche of porn-ad "fake engagement spam" on 𝕏.

Here are 100 examples of 𝕏 accounts with fake profiles, used solely for advertising porn sites, all of which I saw in my feed and reported & blocked over roughly 48 hours. (Check my block list for hundreds more.) They're all easily identified by the pornography links in the profiles, yet Twitter/𝕏 has not even disabled many of the accounts:


I did not pay for a 🟦blue checkmark🟦 to get bombarded with porn-ad spam.

If I try to directly mention more than a few of the fake profiles, Twitter complains: "The text of your post exceeds the number of allowed @ mentions." So I've stripped the "@" from most of these:
@Kristen499030 @Cheryl761157239 @Christy30634338 @Claudia1576846 @Kara64616027244 @Aaliyah83242495 @Paty799042 @Pamela116899698 Naomi1257622117 Naomi7642310808 Adrienne167057 Naomi0177459766 Mila16595386122 Mila16551252909 Laura312368174 Laura5457647412 Liz131282514359 Amy162447836271 Amy296335838232 Rica137288 Rhonda77327239 Renee1912291623 Rosa39198249062 Sabrina1162852 Ryan08989677107 Sabrina25065601 Roberta842445 Samanth04129508 Samanth88094951 Sara99283412066 Sarah292649 Andrea1146566 Sejal336534 Shannon21995401 Shannon29060570 brooklyn97085 Andrea1167203 Oscar0066332528 Rob479079418443 Shannon77069605 Shannon77754516 Shannon82162120 Shelly286816698 Shelly298337310 Lucy05662887743 Sherry753675658 Sheila518813426 Sheena551350186 Shawn9724724568 Sherry959070288 Angela088028292 Stacey115174 Ellie2074174205 Stephan20439268 Penelop71292214 Penelop58043498 Penelop52797551 Susan5923810338 Steve4676198240 Donna0144726518 Theresa5132497 Thelma285812 Donna6260551050 Tiffany79162893 Tim619912857565 Maria2541887922 Jennifer376848 Cynthia97629988 Julie5002346258 Jamie1743184449 Mariam850057710 Dorine144800 Lynn1176926853 Maria752774673 Kara00919827506 Jutamas678716 Amanda10286121 Amanda160070688 Karen9451863212 Karen6416165988 Amanda074116923 Alyssa845299054 Allison646266 Allison632587 Alison890556571 Alisha023388874 Alicia1342164 Alicia1342138 Alicia1332098 Alicia1319696 Alexis823038372 Alex92740111375 Zoey136362 Adam22592295798 Adam55498197045 Alyssa1986873 Angela872236973 Angela535054384 Mila80293315871 Zoey110688

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1591186871400660995

sealevel.info/Twitter-X_porn…

@NASAClimate 1/11. When someone talks about a sea-level measurement record starting in 1993 it means they're using low quality satellite altimetry data, and they're ignoring the much higher quality coastal measurements. It's political propaganda, not unbiased science.
sealevel.info/satellite_alti…

2/11. If you use the (much higher quality) coastal measurement data, it becomes clear that there's nothing to worry about.


That's Honolulu, which has the best quality, well-sited, sea-level measurement record in the world. The "straightness" of the blue sea-level trend means that rising CO2 levels haven't had much effect on sea-level.sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@NASAClimate 3/11. The "straightness" is called "linearity," and it's opposite is called "acceleration." If you don't know how to recognize "acceleration," "deceleration," or "linearity" in a graph, here's a little primer which should help:
sealevel.info/acceleration_p…

1/9. @NASAClimate is not one of the divisions & departments of NASA that do science. It's the "JPL Earth Science Communications Team" in Pasadena, which is comprised of "communicators," not scientists.

NASAClimate is a frequent source of misinformation and outright political propaganda.sealevel.info/learnmore.html

@NASAClimate 2/9. Many other parts of NASA still employ real scientists, who do excellent work.

Here's a NASA video about some of that work.

CO2 emissions are very beneficial for natural ecosystems, and NASA satellites measure the resulting "greening" of the Earth.

@NASAClimate 3/9. Do you worry about the Antarctic Ice Sheet melting? This excellent NASA study should put your fears to rest.



Note: Antarctic temperatures average below −40°, so a few degrees of warming obviously cannot melt it. cambridge.org/core/journals/…

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1646170395169439745

@Mark_A_Lunn @SpudNielsen @joe51du @HalBeowa @JohnWil12363553 @TheDisproof @rln_nelson @Veritatem2021 @GillesnFio @Anvndarnamn5 @MartinDn1001 @3GHtweets @MarcEHJones @Anymous84861064 @tonyjsargeant @Willard1951 @ammocrypta @Rabs1958 @DenisDaly @AristotleMrs @S_D_Mannix @Camburnclimate @ozzorro1 @bomac_macbo @BenKoby1911 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL 1/4. Science is not fundamentally either Left or Right. But, periodically, the Left goes to war against science.

In the mid-20th century Trofim Lysenko was the communist point man in the Left's war against science.
theatlantic.com/science/archiv…

@Mark_A_Lunn @SpudNielsen @joe51du @HalBeowa @JohnWil12363553 @TheDisproof @rln_nelson @Veritatem2021 @GillesnFio @Anvndarnamn5 @MartinDn1001 @3GHtweets @MarcEHJones @Anymous84861064 @tonyjsargeant @Willard1951 @ammocrypta @Rabs1958 @DenisDaly @AristotleMrs @S_D_Mannix @Camburnclimate @ozzorro1 @bomac_macbo @BenKoby1911 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL 2/4. Today the Left is once again openly at war against science.
sealevel.info/intersectional…

@Mark_A_Lunn @SpudNielsen @joe51du @HalBeowa @JohnWil12363553 @TheDisproof @rln_nelson @Veritatem2021 @GillesnFio @Anvndarnamn5 @MartinDn1001 @3GHtweets @MarcEHJones @Anymous84861064 @tonyjsargeant @Willard1951 @ammocrypta @Rabs1958 @DenisDaly @AristotleMrs @S_D_Mannix @Camburnclimate @ozzorro1 @bomac_macbo @BenKoby1911 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL 3/4. The Scientific Method is the foundation of science, the single thing which distinguishes science from all other scholarship.


But the left-dominated U.S. National Academy of Science now opposes the Scientific Method.
sealevel.info/papers.html#wh…

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1648033766546239522

1/19› This is the source of those graphs:

They are perfectly accurate.

You seem to have confused the source of the graphs with a paper that cited them. I don't know how you did that, since the source is shown right on each of the graphs.

You can learn more about the topic here:
climatlas.com/tropical/
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

2/19› Storms are NOT increasing. I JUST explained that; have you already forgotten?


Learn more about it here:

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1794086210400322040

andymaypetrophysicist.com/2017/12/22/glo…

@Anymous84861064 @BenKoby1911 @joe51du @Willard1951 @Rabs1958 @HalBeowa @SpudNielsen @TheDisproof @rln_nelson @Veritatem2021 @GillesnFio @Anvndarnamn5 @MartinDn1001 @3GHtweets @MarcEHJones @tonyjsargeant @ammocrypta @JohnWil12363553 @DenisDaly @AristotleMrs @S_D_Mannix @Camburnclimate @ozzorro1 @bomac_macbo @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL @PeterGleick 3/19› Neither hurricanes and nor'easters have worsened, and strong tornadoes have declined in frequency:


sealevel.info/learnmore.html…
sealevel.info/EF3_to_EF5_tor…

1/10. Mouse wrote, "Increased CO2 does not increase the yield of maize or corn."

Wrong:


Even though I've seen it over and over, it still seems strange to me that climate activists just make things up  like that. Surely you must realize that the benefits of elevated CO2 for corn/maize have been measured, right? So why do you do that??

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1707074962337444017

@Anymous84861064 @joe51du @Willard1951 @Rabs1958 @HalBeowa @SpudNielsen @TheDisproof @rln_nelson @Veritatem2021 @GillesnFio @Anvndarnamn5 @MartinDn1001 @3GHtweets @MarcEHJones @tonyjsargeant @ammocrypta @JohnWil12363553 @DenisDaly @AristotleMrs @S_D_Mannix @Camburnclimate @ozzorro1 @bomac_macbo @BenKoby1911 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL @PeterGleick 2/10. The "nutrition scare" is also a red herring. I discussed it at length in this thread:


en.rattibha.com/thread/1674312…

https://x.com/ncdave4life/status/1674312716545040384

3/10. Although C4 plants are better at scavenging CO2 from the air at low levels than are C3 plants, the most important C4 crops, corn & sugarcane, have been found to benefit dramatically from higher CO2 levels.


(That's probably because they grow so fast. On a still, sunny day, a healthy corn field can deplete the CO2 in the air by noon, at which point it stops growing. With a higher starting level, it can grow longer before running out of CO2.)

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1707075188439884166

〔1/7〕Storms:

Do you understand graphs?


"It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so."
- Ronald Reagan

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1507701656250732548

@Anymous84861064 @Willard1951 @Rabs1958 @HalBeowa @SpudNielsen @joe51du @TheDisproof @rln_nelson @Veritatem2021 @GillesnFio @Anvndarnamn5 @MartinDn1001 @3GHtweets @MarcEHJones @tonyjsargeant @ammocrypta @JohnWil12363553 @DenisDaly @AristotleMrs @S_D_Mannix @Camburnclimate @ozzorro1 @bomac_macbo @BenKoby1911 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL @PeterGleick 〔2/7〕Floods:

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1507701872488062979

@Anymous84861064 @Willard1951 @Rabs1958 @HalBeowa @SpudNielsen @joe51du @TheDisproof @rln_nelson @Veritatem2021 @GillesnFio @Anvndarnamn5 @MartinDn1001 @3GHtweets @MarcEHJones @tonyjsargeant @ammocrypta @JohnWil12363553 @DenisDaly @AristotleMrs @S_D_Mannix @Camburnclimate @ozzorro1 @bomac_macbo @BenKoby1911 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL @PeterGleick 〔3/7〕Temperatures:

Milder climates save lives.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1766494627408855105

1/9❯ The Grauniad's Ian Sample called Nobel Laurate Svante Arrhenius "The father of climate change."

Arrhenius said CO2 emissions and rising CO2 levels would be highly beneficial.

The evidence confirms that.

But Joe thinks anyone who says it is a "science denying idiot."
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

2/9❯ Somebody is VERY confused. (And it wasn't Arrhenius!)

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1781777636022186471

3/9❯ CO2 emissions are greening the Earth, 3 ways:

1. By helping trees grow through CO2 fertilization.

2. By making plants more water efficient & drought resilient.

3. By improving crop yields, thus reducing the amount of land needed for agriculture.

sealevel.info/learnmore.html…
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

1/7❯ Rising CO2 levels are greening India, 3 ways:

1. By helping trees grow through CO2 fertilization.

2. By making plants more water efficient & drought resilient.

3. By improving crop yields, thus reducing the amount of land needed for agriculture.

The top 2 photos are from India.sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@ciais_philippe 2/7❯ The benefits of rising CO2 levels for agriculture are spectacular. CO2 is not the only reason for improving crop yields, but it is one of the major reasons:

sealevel.info/ourworldindata…
ourworldindata.org/crop-yields

@ciais_philippe 3/7❯ The best scientific evidence shows that CO2 emissions are beneficial, and manmade climate change is modest and benign. Here are some relevant studies:
sealevel.info/negative_socia…

1/7》 50 years ago the "climate change" which worried the scientific community was global COOLING, not warming.

I remember it clearly. I was there, you weren't.

One of the symptoms of the rot you speak of is the fact that they lie about things like that.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1432810945017962505

@AkademiskC 2/7》Here's the Most Trusted Man in America™ (Walter Cronkite) reporting on the threat of Global Cooling, 9/11/1972:


Prof. Hubert Lamb (the source who Cronkite cited) was founding director of the UEA Climate Research Unit.

@AkademiskC 3/7》Here's a 1974 CIA report about the looming threat of a return to the neo-boreal conditions of the Little Ice Age (global cooling). It summarized the scientific consensus:


Excerpts:

sealevel.info/CIA1974Climate…
sealevel.info/CIA1974Climate…
sealevel.info/CIA1974Climate…

1/7》Myles Allen, "Net Zero" promoter.🙄

Net Zero is based on fallacies:

Ⅰ. The fallacy that CO2 & a slightly milder climate are harmful.

Actually, the best evidence compellingly shows CO2 emissions are beneficial, not harmful.


sealevel.info/learnmore.html
co2coalition.org
co2coalition.org

2/7》
Ⅱ. The fallacy that CO2 levels will continue to rise as long as human CO2 emissions continue, even if emissions continue at a reduced rate.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1708322182177124411

@ShroedingerBird @Willard1951 @Rabs1958 @AlkernS71 @3GHtweets @Veritatem2021 @IsaacCline42 @Anymous84861064 @MarcEHJones @LottRan @GillesnFio @S_D_Mannix @ItsTheAtmospher @navigator087 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @BenKoby1911 @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @DenisDaly @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @TheDisproof @MaggieL @Willy1000 @AuroriaTwittori @MartinJBern @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm 3/7》For each 40-50 ppmv rise in CO2 level, net natural CO2 removals accelerate by another 1 ppmv/year.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1719382451095535760

@Rabs1958 @AlchemistNinja2 @MarcEHJones @Veritatem2021 @3GHtweets @LottRan @Anymous84861064 @GillesnFio @S_D_Mannix @ItsTheAtmospher @navigator087 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @BenKoby1911 @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @DenisDaly @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @Willard1951 @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @TheDisproof @MaggieL @Willy1000 @AuroriaTwittori @MartinJBern @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @EricWil06256732 1/17. That's false.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1591843053287112704

2/17. That DeSmogBlog article about Will Happer is a brazen, despicable smear.

DeSmogBlog claimed that "Peabody Energy paid [Happer] $8,000 which was routed through the CO2 Coalition."

That's a LIE. Prof. Happer was not paid, because he asked that his entire fee be donated to charity.

3/17. DeSmog also falsely claimed, "Happer told Greenpeace reporters that he would be willing to produce research promoting the benefits of carbon dioxide for $250 per hour, while the funding sources could be similarly concealed by routing them through the CO2 Coalition."

That's ANOTHER LIE.

Happer did no such thing. Rather, he was asked to produce a white paper (which is not "research") explaining the best scientific evidence about the costs and benefits of fossil fuel use—and he generously asked that the fee for that work be donated to charity.

The CO2 Coalition @CO2Coalition is a 501(c)(3) educational charity. Happer didn't "route" anything "through" them. He very generously donated the fees to which he was entitled, to that very worthy charity.

@Willard1951 @MarcEHJones @GillesnFio @AGW_is_bad @Devonian1342 @Rabs1958 @Anvndarnamn5 @jpgcrowley @mikeshearn49 @Anymous84861064 @ItsTheAtmospher @navigator087 @GAJAJW @BenKoby1911 @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @DenisDaly @S_D_Mannix @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @TheDisproof @MaggieL @Willy1000 @AuroriaTwittori @MartinJBern @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @EricWil06256732 1/7. That's nonsense, Willard. We've discussed this topic and that graph before, have you forgotten?

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1720253680111263845

2/7. The improvement in agricultural productivity in Africa is not "very, very modest." It is real, and it is spectacular.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1720513944396181757

@Willard1951 @MarcEHJones @GillesnFio @AGW_is_bad @Devonian1342 @Rabs1958 @Anvndarnamn5 @jpgcrowley @mikeshearn49 @Anymous84861064 @ItsTheAtmospher @navigator087 @GAJAJW @BenKoby1911 @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @DenisDaly @S_D_Mannix @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @TheDisproof @MaggieL @Willy1000 @AuroriaTwittori @MartinJBern @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @EricWil06256732 3/7. Even in West Africa, crop yields have doubled since 1961 (104 ppmv ago).

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1720647173371560415

@ChrisBBacon3 @MarcEHJones @LottRan @Anymous84861064 @GillesnFio @Rabs1958 @S_D_Mannix @mikeshearn49 @ItsTheAtmospher @navigator087 @Veritatem2021 @Devonian1342 @GAJAJW @BenKoby1911 @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @DenisDaly @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @Willard1951 @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @TheDisproof @MaggieL @Willy1000 @AuroriaTwittori @3GHtweets @MartinJBern @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @EricWil06256732 1/6. Skrable (2022) is 100% nonsense. Read some of the "comment on" responses to it, to understand why.

I have the paper, and the five responses, and Skrable's responses to the responses, on my site, here:
sealevel.info/Skrable2022/

2/6. The 14C bomb spike decay reflects 3 main processes:

1. Removal of CO2 from the air, into other "reservoirs" (ocean & terrestrial biosphere).

2. Exchanges of carbon between atmosphere & other reservoirs.

3. "Suess effect" dilution: the addition of fossil CO2 with no 14C.

3/6. The bomb spike decay follows a beautiful logarithmic decay curve, with an 11 year half-life, so an 11 / ln(2) = 16 year apparent lifetime. But that fails to take into account Suess effect dilution.
sealevel.info/logc14_two_hal…

1/5. Anymous84861064 & Lynas (2021) are bludgeoning a strawman. They pretend  the climate debate is whether anthropogenic climate change is real, so they can claim there's a scientific consensus - while slyly avoiding saying what  the consensus is about.
sealevel.info/consensus_defi…

@Rabs1958 @LottRan @Anymous84861064 @GillesnFio @S_D_Mannix @mikeshearn49 @ItsTheAtmospher @navigator087 @Veritatem2021 @Devonian1342 @MarcEHJones @GAJAJW @BenKoby1911 @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @DenisDaly @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @Willard1951 @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @TheDisproof @MaggieL @Willy1000 @AuroriaTwittori @3GHtweets @MartinJBern @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @EricWil06256732 2/5. Most skeptics of climate alarmism agree with that "consensus" view, including me. So what? That's not what the debate is about!
quora.com/It-is-claimed-…

3/5. Of course AGW is "real." The climate industry's problem is that the best evidence shows that CO2 & manmade climate change are beneficial, not harmful. The "social cost of carbon" is negative.
sealevel.info/negative_socia…

1/5. Stoichastich wrote, "He says quite clearly that the hothouse is warm because the glass absorbs dark rays from the ground (IR), which is clearly not why the hothouse is hot."

That's not what Arrhenius wrote. This is the paper:


This is the excerpt to which I think you must be referring:

"Fourier maintained that the atmosphere acts like the glass of a hot-house, because it lets through the light-rays of the Sun, but retains the dark-rays from the ground."

You've mistaken his meaning. In the first place, Arrhenius was summarizing what another scientist said. In the second place, the word "it" clearly refers back to "the atmosphere," not to the hot-house, as you've apparently supposed.

The main way that greenhouses retain heat is by preventing convective and evaporative cooling. That's why greenhouses made of plastic which is transparent to LW IR work just fine. (Glass greenhouses do get a small amount of additional warming effect by blocking outgoing LW IR.)iopscience.iop.org/article/10.108…

2/5. Stoichastich asked, "Where has anyone said that [Arrhenius] did use that term?"

You retweeted Dale Cloudman pointing out that "the greenhouse effect is a misnomer," in your tweet saying that Arrhenius' paper was "fundamentally flawed." So I thought that's what you meant.

3/5. Stoichastich asked, "Estimating it sounds interesting, but has it ever been measured?"

There've been some attempts both to calculate and to measure the "radiative forcing." I summarize them here:

sealevel.info/Radiative_Forc…

1/7》GCP emission data shows 185.58 ppmv of fossil carbon emissions from 1959-2021 (plus a poorly constrained amt of non-fossil "land use change emissions"). Only about 5.56 ppmv (3%) was CO2 released from limestone [CaCO3] as it's baked to make cement.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1753806747658051899

@Piyush__Tank @JessePeltan 2/7》It's estimated that, on average, as concrete weathers it absorbs roughly half as much CO2 as was released from the limestone when it was made. That halves the 3% (5.56 ppmv) figure to 1.5%. The process is akin to natural rock weathering:
sealevel.info/feedbacks.html…

3/7》It's often claimed that cement manufacturing causes "up to 8%" of anthropogenic CO2 emissions, but that figure includes estimated emissions from the fossil fuels burned to heat the kilns, typically accounting about half the total (though it varies according to how the kilns are fired).
cfdflowengineering.com/cfd-modeling-o…

1/5. Willard, why do you ask questions that were answered at links I just gave you—that you refused to read?

I linked to a 7-part tweetstorm about the discredited Shakun/Marcott/Pages2K/Hagelaars "wheelchair" graph, which goes back 22K years. It completely erased D-O event #1, every last trace of it.

2/5. That wheelchair graph also erased all but ¼℃ of D-O event #0, a/k/a the Younger Dryas termination, a/k/a the start of the Holocene.

3/5. It also shows the middle of the Dark Ages Cold Period as slightly warmer than the middle of the Medieval Warm Period.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1777835118968672387

@Willard1951 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @lapogus1 @ItsTheAtmospher @Mark_A_Lunn @SimpleSoul10 @Climatehope2 @gstrandberg1 @3GHtweets @MartinJBern @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @EricWil06256732 @DTGvmd @Jaisans @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @EthonRaptor @TheDisproof @Veritatem2021 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @Valja46Zhark5 @paulp1232 @ShroedingerBird @J0aquIm_B4rb0s4 @Sky48115666 @0Sundance @BradPKeyes @DoesThisW0rk @FD2you @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @ChrisBBacon3 @B_Bolshevik100 @Robert76907841 @Anvndarnamn5 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC 1/4〕 Good grief, not that old Wahl & Ammann garbage again!

Read how it came to be, here:
bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2008/8/11…

@Willard1951 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @lapogus1 @ItsTheAtmospher @Mark_A_Lunn @SimpleSoul10 @Climatehope2 @gstrandberg1 @3GHtweets @MartinJBern @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @EricWil06256732 @DTGvmd @Jaisans @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @EthonRaptor @TheDisproof @Veritatem2021 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @Valja46Zhark5 @paulp1232 @ShroedingerBird @J0aquIm_B4rb0s4 @Sky48115666 @0Sundance @BradPKeyes @DoesThisW0rk @FD2you @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @ChrisBBacon3 @B_Bolshevik100 @Robert76907841 @Anvndarnamn5 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC 2/4〕 Then peruse the relevant ClimateAudit articles, listed here:
sealevel.info/Wahl_and_Amman…

@Willard1951 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @lapogus1 @ItsTheAtmospher @Mark_A_Lunn @SimpleSoul10 @Climatehope2 @gstrandberg1 @3GHtweets @MartinJBern @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @EricWil06256732 @DTGvmd @Jaisans @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @EthonRaptor @TheDisproof @Veritatem2021 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @Valja46Zhark5 @paulp1232 @ShroedingerBird @J0aquIm_B4rb0s4 @Sky48115666 @0Sundance @BradPKeyes @DoesThisW0rk @FD2you @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @ChrisBBacon3 @B_Bolshevik100 @Robert76907841 @Anvndarnamn5 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC 3/4〕 @detgodehab's tweetstorm is also worth studying. Here's a compilation:
sealevel.info/detgodehab-(1_…

@GillesnFio @JonathanSwayze @Rabs1958 @Willard1951 @navigator087 @Anymous84861064 @Veritatem2021 @Devonian1342 @MarcEHJones @GAJAJW @BenKoby1911 @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @DenisDaly @S_D_Mannix @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @TheDisproof @MaggieL @Willy1000 @AuroriaTwittori @3GHtweets @MartinJBern @gstrandberg1 @ItsTheAtmospher @Jakegsm @EricWil06256732 ⟪1/8》 The climate debate isn't about whether "AGW is real" (and Exxon pensioners do not risk their pensions by admitting it, Rabst). Scientists skeptical of climate alarmism do not doubt that AGW is real. The science shows that it is real—and beneficial!

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1757900010333548584

@GillesnFio @JonathanSwayze @Rabs1958 @Willard1951 @navigator087 @Anymous84861064 @Veritatem2021 @Devonian1342 @MarcEHJones @GAJAJW @BenKoby1911 @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @DenisDaly @S_D_Mannix @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @TheDisproof @MaggieL @Willy1000 @AuroriaTwittori @3GHtweets @MartinJBern @gstrandberg1 @ItsTheAtmospher @Jakegsm @EricWil06256732 ⟪2/8》The debate is not about whether anthropogenic climate change is real, the debate is about whether anthropogenic climate change is harmful (or a "crisis" or "emergency").
quora.com/It-is-claimed-…

@GillesnFio @JonathanSwayze @Rabs1958 @Willard1951 @navigator087 @Anymous84861064 @Veritatem2021 @Devonian1342 @MarcEHJones @GAJAJW @BenKoby1911 @Jaisans @bulkbiker @Climatehope2 @DenisDaly @S_D_Mannix @Data79504085 @Mark_A_Lunn @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @priscian @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @BointonGiles @AristotleMrs @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @EthonRaptor @RMcgillss @paligap17 @TheDisproof @MaggieL @Willy1000 @AuroriaTwittori @3GHtweets @MartinJBern @gstrandberg1 @ItsTheAtmospher @Jakegsm @EricWil06256732 ⟪3/8》One of the climate industry's favorite tricks is pretending the debate is about a strawman: whether AGW is real. They publish papers claiming "97% scientific consensus," but don't want you to notice that the "consensus" isn't about what matters.
sealevel.info/97pct/#doran

1/6. From measurements of downwelling LW IR, 342 W/m² is a reasonable, approximate estimate of downwelling LW IR radiation averaged over the entire surface of the Earth.

It's essentially identical to MacCracken's 1985 estimate (which he called "only an approximation"):

(Note: the numbers are percentages.)

The quoted text excerpt is:
“The fluxes of energy within the atmosphere-surface system can be illustrated using an energy balance diagram. Although many measurements have been made at the surface and from satellites, there are still uncertainties of 10-20% in the values of some of the fluxes because of the difficulty of making representative global measurements. In some cases model calculations have been used to generate estimates. The values shown in the diagram in Figure 1.2 are derived from consideration of energy balances prepared by Gates (1979), Liou (1980), and MacCracken (1984), and are only an approximation.”

Source:
M. C. MacCracken and F. M. Luther (Ed.), "Projecting the Climatic Effects of Increasing Carbon Dioxide," United States Department of Energy, DOE/ER 0237, Dec. 1985.


Note that the main source of uncertainty is not that we cannot measure downwelling LW IR. Rather, it is "the difficulty of making representative global measurements." Actual downwelling LW IR fluxes vary wildly with time and location, so finding an accurate global average is problematic, to put it mildly.sealevel.info/MacCracken1985…
researchgate.net/profile/Michae…

2/6. Lindzen 1990 cited MacCracken:


Source:
sealevel.info/Lindzen1990_Fi…
sealevel.info/Lindzen1990_So…

3/6. Here's the NCA4 version (with my notes about the "radiative imbalance" added). They show downwelling LW IR = 338 to 348 W/m², with a best estimate of 342:
sealevel.info/NCA4_global_en…

@joelgombiner @RARohde 1/5》I agree. Without those ice sheets, there's no source for vast influxes of freshwater into the northern North Atlantic, to slow the AMOC.

There are a few key lessons to be learned from Dansgaard-Oeschger events (and D-O #0, a/k/a the Younger Dryas).
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@joelgombiner @RARohde 2/5》Because D-O terminations had warming trends an order of magnitude faster than current warming, and because nearly all extant species survived those large, sharp warming events, we needn't worry that the current slight warming could cause extinctions.
archive.is/aUi9R#selectio…

3/5》Because D-O events only occur during glaciations, and never during interglacials, we can say with confidence that warmer climates are more stable than colder climates.


That might be largely because without the great northern ice sheets, there's nothing which could pour vast quantities of freshwater into the northern North Atlantic, slowing the AMOC.

It's surely also because Planck Feedback is ∝ T⁴, so the warmer the climate gets, the stronger that negative (stabilizing) feedback is.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1753793884352610608

sealevel.info/feedbacks.html…

1/4. Here's a good example of Climate Movement insanity.

"We are not doing anything about this crisis! The water is coming for us!" he says.

Here's the reality:
sealevel.info/learnmore.html

2/4.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1578297630987149312

sealevel.info/MSL_graph.php?…

3/4. The best science shows manmade climate change is modest & benign, and CO2 emissions are beneficial, not harmful. The major harms from CO2 are all hypothetical, and mostly implausible. The major benefits are proven, measured, and very large.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1767733123456848092

1/11》 Don't believe the Climate Industry propaganda. Here are some academic papers and articles about what fossil fuels, carbon emissions, and #climatechange are ACTUALLY doing to the Earth:

sealevel.info/greening_earth…
sealevel.info/greening_earth…

2/11》 Here's a NASA video about it. It's based on measurements, unlike most of the Climate Industry's "climate impact" claims, which are based on dubious modeling and baseless speculation.

3/11》 The CO2 Coalition's website also has many excellent resources to help you learn about this issue:


The CO2 Coalition is an organization of volunteer scientists, dedicated to combating disinformation about CO2 & climate change, and pushing back against the corruption of science for political & pecuniary reasons.

Many of the CO2 Coalition's members are extremely distinguished. Their newest Board Member is Dr. John Clauser, 2022 Nobel Laureate (Physics).
co2coalition.org

https://twitter.com/GWrightstone/status/1655634353387446276

1/11❯ You've been lied to. The impacts of rising CO2 levels are in both the past and the future, and they are overwhelmingly positive.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

2/11❯ The fact that elevated CO2 is dramatically beneficial for crops has been settled science for more than a century. This was not the "mid 20th century."
sealevel.info/ScientificAmer…

@collapse2050 3/11❯ Thanks, in significant part, to rising CO2 levels, crop yield improvements have outpaced population growth.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1670084555355611136

1/5. Here's what CO2 emissions and #ClimateChange are actually doing to the world's food supply.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

2/5. The relationship between food (in)security and CO2 emissions / climate change is that CO2 emissions greatly improve crop yields, improve crops' drought resilience, and improve food security everywhere in the world.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1759954086168830453

3/5. Thanks, in significant part, to rising CO2 levels, crop yield improvements have outpaced population growth.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1670084555355611136

1/5. Not even unadulterated U.S. data from back then is available, let alone data from the whole world.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1720270610838810850

2/5. It is suspiciously convenient that the largely undocumented revisions to old data so predictably support the Climate Industry's "hockey stick" narrative.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1743543223958569308

3/5. A global 0.35°C decline over roughly 30 years is a cooling trend similar in rate to the recent warming trend (depending on which temperature index you believe, of course).


Here's a 1974 newspaper article, with a nice, clear version of the 1974 plot:

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1743543629967241696

sealevel.info/World_is_getti…

1/4≫ You're in denial, Gerald.



This is fact:

The best scientific evidence, confirmed by thousands of robust studies, shows compellingly that anthropogenic warming is modest and benign, and CO2 emissions are highly beneficial, just as Arrhenius predicted, over a century ago.

Why won't you read these excellent papers?sealevel.info/negative_socia…

2/4≫ For instance, here's a paper about what rising CO2 levels do for wheat:

Fitzgerald GJ, et al. (2016) Elevated atmospheric CO2 can dramatically increase wheat yields in semi-arid environments and buffer against heat waves. Glob Chang Biol. 22(6):2269-84. doi:10.1111/gcb.13263.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26929390

3/4≫ The most important impacts of CO2 and climate change are obviously on agriculture, and thousands of rigorous agronomy studies have quantified the large benefits.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@GeraldKutney @BeeAsMarine @EPennysworth @typocatCA @PTrebaul @beemouv @ECOWARRIORSS @OurEcoCommunity @RobRobbEdwards @LanceUSA70 @AlmuthSiegl @joncoopertweets @MarshaCollier @OccupyDemocrats @ReedTimmerUSA @GreenpeaceUK @IPCC_CH @CO2Coalition 『1/3』 Gerald, please do not attribute to me things I've not said. I'm NOT "challenging the science of climate change."

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1753780425619652670

『2/3』 The best scientific evidence shows that anthropogenic warming is modest and benign, and CO2 emissions are highly beneficial:


I do not challenge the science of climate change, I only challenge misrepresentations of the science. The reason scientists & historians call the warmest climate periods "climate optimums" is that we understand that warm periods — including periods significantly warmer than now — are objectively BETTER than cold periods.sealevel.info/negative_socia…

@GeraldKutney @BeeAsMarine @EPennysworth @typocatCA @PTrebaul @beemouv @ECOWARRIORSS @OurEcoCommunity @RobRobbEdwards @LanceUSA70 @AlmuthSiegl @joncoopertweets @MarshaCollier @OccupyDemocrats @ReedTimmerUSA @GreenpeaceUK @IPCC_CH @CO2Coalition 『3/3』 To understand politicized issues like climate change, you need balanced information. I'm here to help:


@ThreadReaderApp @Rattibha @threaddotblue unroll

@reSeeIt save threadsealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@Willard1951 @priscian @DanSull36510584 @DaleGribble_666 @B_Bolshevik100 @AdrianC47C @rob51816708 @Anvndarnamn5 @BradPKeyes @Rosie45703313 @ChrisBBacon3 @bootcanyon @TWTThisIsNow @MartinJBern @Mark_A_Lunn @Data79504085 @ammocrypta @Pow_Pop_Blam @ShroedingerBird @25_cycle @CDCollins5269 @jpgcrowley @PvtMcAuslan @EthonRaptor @Then__And__Now @tim_dunkerton @AristotleMrs @FD2you @Callan23474387 @KCTaz @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @DoesThisW0rk @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @JustThi30117912 @paulp1232 @Robert76907841 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone @PeterDClack 1/8.》 As it happens, I was part of that 2021 conversation, and I remember it. Zeke effectively accused Spencer of cherry-picking. That was untrue: Spencer used all of the available data.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1444435462165344261

@Willard1951 @priscian @DanSull36510584 @DaleGribble_666 @B_Bolshevik100 @AdrianC47C @rob51816708 @Anvndarnamn5 @BradPKeyes @Rosie45703313 @ChrisBBacon3 @bootcanyon @TWTThisIsNow @MartinJBern @Mark_A_Lunn @Data79504085 @ammocrypta @Pow_Pop_Blam @ShroedingerBird @25_cycle @CDCollins5269 @jpgcrowley @PvtMcAuslan @EthonRaptor @Then__And__Now @tim_dunkerton @AristotleMrs @FD2you @Callan23474387 @KCTaz @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @DoesThisW0rk @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @JustThi30117912 @paulp1232 @Robert76907841 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone @PeterDClack 2/8.》 Here's a more recent comparison:
heritage.org/environment/re…

@Willard1951 @priscian @DanSull36510584 @DaleGribble_666 @B_Bolshevik100 @AdrianC47C @rob51816708 @Anvndarnamn5 @BradPKeyes @Rosie45703313 @ChrisBBacon3 @bootcanyon @TWTThisIsNow @MartinJBern @Mark_A_Lunn @Data79504085 @ammocrypta @Pow_Pop_Blam @ShroedingerBird @25_cycle @CDCollins5269 @jpgcrowley @PvtMcAuslan @EthonRaptor @Then__And__Now @tim_dunkerton @AristotleMrs @FD2you @Callan23474387 @KCTaz @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @DoesThisW0rk @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @JustThi30117912 @paulp1232 @Robert76907841 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone @PeterDClack 3/8.》 And a discussion of it:
drroyspencer.com/2024/01/new-ar…

1/4. Gerald, if you really care about "facts, evidence, the truth or science," then why did you ignore this question?

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1762980405303468074

@GeraldKutney 2/4. The climate debate is about whether calling warm periods "climate optimums" (as scientists & historians have done for over a century) is correct (as I contend), or incorrect (as the climate industry pretends).

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1753780425619652670

@GeraldKutney 3/4. The scientific evidence is compelling that rising CO2 levels, and consequent modest climate change, are both beneficial, just as Arrhenius predicted, over a century ago. Here are some relevant, high quality, papers:
sealevel.info/negative_socia…

@typocatCA @PTrebaul @beemouv @BeeAsMarine @EPennysworth @ECOWARRIORSS @OurEcoCommunity @RobRobbEdwards @LanceUSA70 @AlmuthSiegl @joncoopertweets @MarshaCollier @OccupyDemocrats @ReedTimmerUSA @GreenpeaceUK @GeraldKutney 1/4. The claim that manmade climate change threatens bees is a brazen lie, one of many from the climate industry's FUD marketing campaign.

Don't give your money to bee scare scammers!

nypost.com/2021/09/18/why…
nypost.com/2021/09/18/why…

@typocatCA @PTrebaul @beemouv @BeeAsMarine @EPennysworth @ECOWARRIORSS @OurEcoCommunity @RobRobbEdwards @LanceUSA70 @AlmuthSiegl @joncoopertweets @MarshaCollier @OccupyDemocrats @ReedTimmerUSA @GreenpeaceUK @GeraldKutney 2/4. Wild bees have withstood glaciations & deglaciations, in times when the Earth was much colder, and warmer, than our climate today. They are not threatened at all by manmade climate change.

sealevel.info/negative_socia…
sealevel.info/negative_socia…

@typocatCA @PTrebaul @beemouv @BeeAsMarine @EPennysworth @ECOWARRIORSS @OurEcoCommunity @RobRobbEdwards @LanceUSA70 @AlmuthSiegl @joncoopertweets @MarshaCollier @OccupyDemocrats @ReedTimmerUSA @GreenpeaceUK @GeraldKutney 3/4. To understand a politicized issue like climate change, you need balanced information. If you think CO2 emissions are harmful, that means you aren't getting it. But I'm here to help.

nypost.com/2021/09/18/why…

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1432810945017962505

@Willard1951 @Rosie45703313 @Pow_Pop_Blam @bootcanyon @Mark_A_Lunn @jonsimschina @AdrianC47C @Dardedar @DaleGribble_666 @Data79504085 @priscian @ammocrypta @ShroedingerBird @25_cycle @CDCollins5269 @jpgcrowley @ChrisBBacon3 @PvtMcAuslan @EthonRaptor @Anvndarnamn5 @Then__And__Now @tim_dunkerton @AristotleMrs @FD2you @BradPKeyes @Callan23474387 @KCTaz @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @DoesThisW0rk @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @JustThi30117912 @paulp1232 @MartinJBern @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab @Robert76907841 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone @PeterDClack @TonyClimate 1/6. Sea-level trends have scarcely changed from when the CO2 level was 110 ppmv lower.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html

@Willard1951 @Rosie45703313 @Pow_Pop_Blam @bootcanyon @Mark_A_Lunn @jonsimschina @AdrianC47C @Dardedar @DaleGribble_666 @Data79504085 @priscian @ammocrypta @ShroedingerBird @25_cycle @CDCollins5269 @jpgcrowley @ChrisBBacon3 @PvtMcAuslan @EthonRaptor @Anvndarnamn5 @Then__And__Now @tim_dunkerton @AristotleMrs @FD2you @BradPKeyes @Callan23474387 @KCTaz @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @DoesThisW0rk @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @JustThi30117912 @paulp1232 @MartinJBern @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab @Robert76907841 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone @PeterDClack @TonyClimate 2/6. Climate change has not worsened droughts, and elevated CO2 makes plants more water-efficient and drought-resilient.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@Willard1951 @Rosie45703313 @Pow_Pop_Blam @bootcanyon @Mark_A_Lunn @jonsimschina @AdrianC47C @Dardedar @DaleGribble_666 @Data79504085 @priscian @ammocrypta @ShroedingerBird @25_cycle @CDCollins5269 @jpgcrowley @ChrisBBacon3 @PvtMcAuslan @EthonRaptor @Anvndarnamn5 @Then__And__Now @tim_dunkerton @AristotleMrs @FD2you @BradPKeyes @Callan23474387 @KCTaz @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @DoesThisW0rk @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @JustThi30117912 @paulp1232 @MartinJBern @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab @Robert76907841 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone @PeterDClack @TonyClimate 3/6. Warming temperatures prevent far more climate-related deaths than they cause, because cold causes far more deaths than heat.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1655476874066243586

1/4. We've discussed this before, Mark. Don't you remember this thread?


E.g., do you REALLY believe that global average temperatures 3000 years ago are known with a 1σ uncertainty of just 0.2°C, and 2σ (95%) of just 0.4°C? You've GOT to know that's absurd!

The Hockey Team even completely erased Dansgaard-Oeschger event #1, which was the HUGE warming event, recorded in ice cores, that you can see in this NOAA plot:

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1698160818892775586

sealevel.info/Dansgaard-Oesc…

@Mark_A_Lunn @Dardedar @bootcanyon @Willard1951 @Pow_Pop_Blam @jeff_luciana @priscian @ShroedingerBird @25_cycle @AdrianC47C @CDCollins5269 @jpgcrowley @ChrisBBacon3 @Rosie45703313 @PvtMcAuslan @EthonRaptor @Anvndarnamn5 @DaleGribble_666 @Then__And__Now @jonsimschina @tim_dunkerton @AristotleMrs @FD2you @BradPKeyes @Callan23474387 @KCTaz @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @DoesThisW0rk @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @JustThi30117912 @paulp1232 @MartinJBern @Data79504085 @ammocrypta @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab @Robert76907841 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone @PeterDClack 2/4. It is certainly sad that so much politicized drek gets churned out in the name of "paleoclimatology."

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1740351810848571738

@Mark_A_Lunn @Dardedar @bootcanyon @Willard1951 @Pow_Pop_Blam @jeff_luciana @priscian @ShroedingerBird @25_cycle @AdrianC47C @CDCollins5269 @jpgcrowley @ChrisBBacon3 @Rosie45703313 @PvtMcAuslan @EthonRaptor @Anvndarnamn5 @DaleGribble_666 @Then__And__Now @jonsimschina @tim_dunkerton @AristotleMrs @FD2you @BradPKeyes @Callan23474387 @KCTaz @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @DoesThisW0rk @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @JustThi30117912 @paulp1232 @MartinJBern @Data79504085 @ammocrypta @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab @Robert76907841 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone @PeterDClack 3/4. There's a huge body of evidence in support of the climate variations which the "hockey teams" (Jones/Mann/Osborn/Bradley/Hughes/Briffa, Pages 2K, etc.) want to erase from history, with their revisionist straightened hockey stick handles.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1740126816344408485

1/4. Neonics are mainly used for treating seeds, before planting. They're not significantly present in pollen & nectar, so they do not affect pollinators.


The campaign against neonics is based on lies. It's really a campaign against food production, and hence against people.entomologytoday.org/2014/02/06/neo…

@BeeAsMarine @GreenpeaceUK @NehoNana 2/4. Also, beware of climate industry propaganda claiming that the current trend to slightly milder climates is harmful. The scientific evidence is compelling that the opposite is true.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1753780425619652670

@BeeAsMarine @GreenpeaceUK @NehoNana 3/4. Does that surprise you? Read the agronomy literature and see for yourself! There've been thousands of rigorous studies & excellent papers about it, of far higher quality than the politicized drek which dominates "climate science." Here are a few:
sealevel.info/negative_socia…

1/18》The current slight warming trend is generally GOOD for crops, and rising CO2 levels are VERY GOOD for crops. Scientists call the periods of highest temperatures "climate optimums," because, by all objective measures, they're BETTER.
scholar.google.com/scholar?as_sdt…

2/18》That includes times substantially warmer than now, like the Eemian Optimum, which is thought to have been, on average, several degrees warmer than our current climate.
sealevel.info/Temperature-ch…

3/18》 We'll never get anywhere near that much warming, from the effects of burning fossil fuels. We might, plausibly, get 1°C of additional warming, but probably not in our lifetimes. Do you understand how miniscule that is?

The Trial of the Century
Michael Mann Vs Mark Steyn
Climate Activism Vs Skepticism & Free Speech
Mark Steyns Opening Statement
A masterpiece of logic &oratory
From Papua New Guinea to Australia and Canada with cameos by Rupert Murdoch and Eleanor Roosevelt
@MarkSteynOnline

Steyn, who is representing himself, apologises to the jury for not being able to stand up " I have difficulty standing but I have no difficulty standing on the truth"

"the truth of what I wrote, the truth about what happened at a famous American institution and the truth about this man, Michael Mann - the plaintiff. To modify a famous line from an American courtroom drama, I think you can handle the truth"

A blast of extreme cold air has plunged deep into central North America. Some places have set record cold temperatures. It turns out there’s a bit of a scientific debate about whether these types of cold snaps can be linked to… *global warming*

🧵on what the science says…

The general idea is that melting sea ice within the warming Arctic is causing instability in the jet stream, resulting in large Rossby waves which during the winter season can push frigid Arctic air deep into areas where they wouldn’t in a more stable climate…

https://twitter.com/historian_steve/status/1745920780624711886

The idea really gained traction after this 2012 paper came out, titled “Evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in mid-latitudes”: agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.10…

Trash look from the most vocal proponent of the Arctic warming causes extreme winter cold theory Jennifer Francis: she calls Republican voters in Iowa "deniers" for not believing that global heating causes extreme cold in Iowa. Most other climate scientists don't either.

https://twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/1748202911262285844

Jennifer Francis is not unique in her bigoted view of Republicans among her climate science colleagues.

However, this type of partisan rhetoric is required to operate within the climate science space to receive promotion, grants, and awards. It's rather ugly.

More than 10-years ago, a weak defense of her theory appeared in the Washington Post.

It was a signal to other early career researchers to back off by questioning the motivation and objectivity of another academic. A real ugly and trash look.

washingtonpost.com/news/capital-w…

1/6> annmclan wrote, "but the oceans are already too hot for coral reefs🪸"

You've been lied to, Ann.

Most coral thrive best in the warmest water. If you look at a map of coral reef locations, you'll see that they're clustered around the equator:
sealevel.info/coralreefmap.j…

2/6> Even the very warm southern Red Sea is dotted with healthy coral reefs (unlike the cooler Mediterranean). Why do you think that is?

Some coral inhabit temperate zones, but most prefer tropics. In fact, where there are seasons, corals grow fastest in summer.

In fact, where there are seasons, corals are commonly dated like trees, by "coring" them, and examining the growth rings. The thick rings represent summers, because that's when the coral grows fastest.

@annmclan @Kenneth72712993 @RoelofBoer @Mark_A_Lunn @Willard1951 @GneissName @gazpacho_now @KCTaz @ShroedingerBird @priscian @AristotleMrs @Veritatem2021 @FD2you @DawnTJ90 @BradPKeyes @Callan23474387 @0Sundance @TheDisproof @BointonGiles @DoesThisW0rk @3GHtweets @Climatehope2 @Jaisans @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @JustThi30117912 @paulp1232 @MartinJBern @Data79504085 @ammocrypta @ChrisBBacon3 @EthonRaptor @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab @Robert76907841 @Anvndarnamn5 @EricWil06256732 @ProfMickWilson @FillmoreWhite @TommyLambertOKC @JohnDublin10 @NoTricksZone @DawnJT90 @DawnTj9 @PeterDClack @FriendsOScience @wattsupwiththat @AlexEpstein 3/6> At 7:20 in this BBC video you can hear how wonderfully healthy the coral are in warmest part of the very warm southern Red Sea, off Eritrea.

1/8》
The temperature indexes are inconsistent, but you can't tell that from Priscian's misleading graph.

An honest graph would offset the traces so you can tell them apart, or else start them at the same temp. Instead he aligned the full-period averages, to hide the spread.

Here's what he's hiding:



What Jim Java / Priscian doesn't want you to notice is that the GISS (and Berkeley Earth, etc.) surface temperature indexes show much more warming than the UAH and NOAA STAR satellite-based lower troposphere measurements.

Land "surface" measurements are air temperatures measured with thermometers in Stevenson screens, usually 1.25 to 2 meters above ground. Satellite "lower troposphere" indexes (UAH, NOAA STAR, RSS) are from higher altitudes. Due to "lapse rate feedback," the (higher) altitudes where satellites measure temperatures should  see a slightly greater  warming trend than is seen 1.25 to 2 meters above the surface. Instead, they see less.


That's good cause to suspect that the surface temperature indexes from GISS etc. overstate warming.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/f…
sealevel.info/GISS_vs_UAH_an…
sealevel.info/feedbacks.html…

2/8》
Do the math: 0.92 / 0.59 = 1.56

So, UAH6 & NOAA STAR satellite-based measurements suggest that those high-end surface temperature indexes are reporting at least 56% too much warming.

But even if it is exaggerated, the warming isn't worrisome. After all, humans are a tropical species, and most of the Earth is much too cold.


Warming saves lives, and excess cold causes many times more human deaths than excess heat — even in tropical counties, believe it or not! Here are some recent papers about it:

1. Masselot et al (2023).


2. Gasparrini et al (2022).

Composite of two figures from the paper:


3. Zhao et al (2021).

Discussion:

Summary:


4. Gasparrini et al (2015).

Fig. 2:


Are you familiar with the term "climate optimum?" If you go to ResearchGate or Google Scholar, and search for "Climate Optimum" (or Eemian Optimum, Mid-Holocene Optimum, Roman Optimum, or Medieval Optimum), you'll find thousands of papers using that terminology. Those "optimums" were warm periods.


The reason so many academic papers call the warmest periods in history "climate optimums" is that there is a consensus among historians and scientists that those warm "climate optimums" — including periods warmer than now — were, by all objective measures, better than colder periods.

Or, look at the flip side: cold periods, like the Dark Ages Cold Period (DACP) and the Little Ice Age (LIA). There's a broad consensus that those cold periods were, by all objective measures, worse for humanity than the warm "optimums."


Here's a 1974 CIA study about the threat of global cooling:


This graph from that study shows how cooling temperatures threaten food supplies:


There are no important negative impacts from anthropogenic warming.sealevel.info/GasparriniFig2…
thelancet.com/journals/lanpl…
thelancet.com/journals/lanpl…
sealevel.info/GasparriniFig2…
thelancet.com/journals/lanpl…
unherd.com/thepost/bjorn-…
sealevel.info/Zhao2021_Lance…
thelancet.com/journals/lanpl…
sealevel.info/Gasparrini2015…
scholar.google.com/scholar?as_sdt…
scholar.google.com/scholar?as_yhi…
sealevel.info/CIA1974Climate…
sealevel.info/CIA1974Climate…

3/8》
Depending on whose temperature index you use, we’ve seen an average of between 0.59 and 0.92 °C of warming since 1958 (when Mauna Loa CO2 measurements began).



That warming has shifted growing zones and “temperature isotherms” slightly toward the poles (northward, in the NH). So, the obvious question is, how far?

That’s easy to answer, by looking at an agricultural growing zone map. Here's one, shared by permission from the Arbor Day Foundation:


From eyeballing the map, you can see that 1°C (1.8°F) = about 50-70 miles latitude change.

Here's James Hansen and his GISS colleagues reporting a similar figure:

Excerpt: "A warming of 0.5°C... implies typically a poleward shift of isotherms by 50 to 75 km..."

That's 100 to 150 km = 62 to 93 miles per 1°C. So, the 0.59 to 0.92 °C of warming which we've seen has caused, on average, a growing zone shift of only about 30 to 86 miles). Ho hum.🥱woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/f…
sealevel.info/GISS_vs_UAH_an…
sealevel.info/2015_zones_hig…
pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha02700w.h…

It is a proven, scientific fact that the earth's atmosphere has gotten warmer since humans started burning fossil fuels.

(1/15)



#Environment #ClimateCrisis #ClimateChange #GlobalWarming #GreenNewDeal #AOC #GretaThunberg #NuclearPowerweb.archive.org/web/2016112507…

Back when the dinosaurs were alive, carbon dioxide levels in the air were five times as high as they are today. The world did not come to an end.

(2/15)



#GreenNewDeal #AOC #GretaThunbergweb.archive.org/web/2014070321…

Back when the dinosaurs were alive, global temperatures were so high that there were no polar ice caps. The world did not come to an end.

(3/15)



#GreenNewDeal #AOC #GretaThunbergweb.archive.org/web/2015032700…

1/3. MunichRe is not just an insurance company. It's the giant German reinsurance company which bankrolls Rahmstorf and Potsdam Institute (PIK). They're among the worst and most extreme promoters of crackpot climate alarmism, just short of XR.
●
●
● investors.com/politics/edito…
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/2023-update-…

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1718330864134738252

2/3. Hyping climate alarmism is a business strategy for MunichRe, because they realized climate alarmism is good for their business. When people expect worsening disasters, they're willing to pay more for reinsurance.


They're using a updated version of the old "FUD" marketing strategy.
sealevel.info/rahmstorf/
google.com/search?q=defin…

3/3. Do you know where the "extreme weather" nonsense came from? Not from evidence, but from James Hansen's epic confusion.

Somehow he avoided learning about Arctic Amplification. He thought AGW would warm the tropics MORE than high latitudes.


That's a clip of Hansen on Letterman, explaining it. Hansen claimed that the “increasing temperature gradient” [between high & low latitudes] would "drive stronger storms.”

That's just plain wrong. The temperature gradient is DECREASING, not increasing.

You see, "global warming" isn't really very global. Thanks to stronger-than-linear negative feedbacks, such as Planck cooling, warm climates are more stable than cold climates. So AGW disproportionately warms chilly high latitudes. The tropics are affected much less (which is nice, because the tropics are warm enough already).


Hansen wrote a ridiculous book based on his confusion, and did a whirlwind publicity tour, pitching the book & spreading the claim that AGW will cause worsening storms / weather. (That's why he was on Letterman.)


Nearly all climate scientists know that's wrong, but none of them challenged him. Nearly everyone in the climate biz (maybe even Hansen, by now), has heard of Arctic Amplification, but the climate industry is so corrupt that neither Hansen's colleagues nor anyone else in the industry corrected his error.
sealevel.info/feedbacks.html…
amazon.com/Storms-My-Gran…

1/18.
Zoya Teirstein @zteirstein, please stop spreading climate disinformation. Climate propaganda is killing people. Do you care?

There are NO "climate sensitive diseases." That's unscientific marketing FUD, from the parasitic climate industry.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1432810945017962505

2/18.
Lyme disease was first identified in chilly Lyme, CT. Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever was first found in frigid Idaho & Montana. Both spread SOUTH — obviously NOT due to global WARMING.
Like every other climate scare, this one is a lie.


There's no evidence at all that climate change is spreading ticks and the diseases they carry, or any other disease. One degree of warming is equivalent to just 50-70 miles latitude change — completely trivial compared to tick ranges.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1432810945017962505

@zteirstein 3/18.
Here's a tweetstorm where you can learn many things about CO2 and climate that Grist and the rest of the Climate Industry will never tell you.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1718328892161740908

1/5》 Do the math, Martin!

WMO estimates a total of 1.15 ±0.13°C of warming since "preindustrial" (late LIA).

At most  80% of human GHG forcing was from CO2, so even if ALL  the warming was from GHG emissions, 1.15°C means at most 0.92°C was from CO2.


Here's the WMO reference:


NCA4 gives a similar figure (1.14 ±0.13°C).

(Aside: those confidence intervals are, IMO, overly confident.)

Here are estimates for the percentage of warming due to CO2.

AR6:


NOAA's AGGI (compare heights at the right edge):


Myhre 1998:


AMS (compare the numbers in the "Rad. Forcing" column):


Kiehl & Trenberth 1997:
google.com/search?q=1.15+…

2/5》 If we got at most  0.92°C of warming from 58% of the forcing of a full doubling of CO2, then (at most) how much warming we could get from a full doubling of CO2?

Ask google:
google.com/search?q=0.92+…

3/5》 Those figures are very conventional estimates, widely accepted by climate alarmists. Yet those same climate alarmists believe that TCR climate sensitivity is 1.5 to 2.0°C/doubling of CO2, and ECS is about 3.0°C/doubling of CO2.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1683396526138179585

1/10. Where on earth do you "learn" such nonsense, Willard?

Growing ranges for most major crops cover climate zones with average temperatures that vary by tens of °C. Major crops like corn, wheat, potatoes & soybeans are produced from Mexico to Canada.

Compared to that, a degree or two of warming (disproportionately at night, in winter, at chilly high latitudes) is de minimis -- as is the 0.35±0.13°C between now and what the IPCC calls "1.5°C of warming").

2/10. Willard wrote, "fertilization is the male gamete to female gamete to produce seed/fruit... not the N-P-K addition"

Wrong. In agriculture, that's called pollination.

3/10. Willard wrote, "(yes, it is often temperature sensitive)"

Wrong. Farmers choose planting dates to optimize growing conditions, including temperatures, for their crops.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1718333253990453305

1/7. The only trace on that graph which does not show large improvement in cereal yield per hectare is the trace for Niger.

The graph ended with an anomalously bad crop year for cereals in Niger (2021). Fortunately, 2022 was much better; here's an article
worldbank.org/en/news/press-…

2/7. By displaying high productivity countries like the USA along with Niger, you forced OurWorldInData to scale the graphs so that it's hard to see the trend in Niger.

But if you display Niger alone, as I've done here, you'll see that cereal yields declined there until about thirty years ago, but they've improved since then (except for 2021).

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/172004439970958975

@Willard1951 @JimBlack48 @BlasphemousBan1 @S_Metzeler @Anvndarnamn5 @GAJAJW @RClausius42 @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @priscian @EthonRaptor @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @NomadicQuantum @AristotleMrs @ScienceBlog3 @AuroriaEn @AndreGrossza @DenisDaly @Veritatem2021 @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @ChrisBBacon3 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @Climatehope2 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @ammocrypta @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @DaleGribble_666 3/7. The other major staple crop in Niger is cassava. Its yields have improved considerably.
sealevel.info/Niger_Cassava_…

1/9. The beneficial effects of rising CO2 levels are not "reversing." Don't let Bonus mislead you, Jim. He really just doesn't care about facts.

Here's AR6 WG1 Table 5.1, which shows how natural CO2 removals are accelerating:


I annotated it here:
ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1…

@JimBlack48 @TheDisproof @BlasphemousBan1 @S_Metzeler @Anvndarnamn5 @GAJAJW @RClausius42 @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @priscian @EthonRaptor @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @NomadicQuantum @AristotleMrs @ScienceBlog3 @AuroriaEn @AndreGrossza @Willard1951 @DenisDaly @Veritatem2021 @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @ChrisBBacon3 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @Climatehope2 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @ammocrypta @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @DaleGribble_666 2/9. Here're the relevant bits:


As you can see, as atmospheric CO2 levels have risen, the natural CO2 removal rate has sharply accelerated. (That's a strong negative/stabilizing climate feedback.) sealevel.info/AR6_WG1_Table_…

@JimBlack48 @TheDisproof @BlasphemousBan1 @S_Metzeler @Anvndarnamn5 @GAJAJW @RClausius42 @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @priscian @EthonRaptor @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @NomadicQuantum @AristotleMrs @ScienceBlog3 @AuroriaEn @AndreGrossza @Willard1951 @DenisDaly @Veritatem2021 @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @ChrisBBacon3 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @Climatehope2 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @ammocrypta @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @DaleGribble_666 3/9. AR6 FAQ 5.1 also shows how both terrestrial and marine carbon sinks have accelerated, here:


Here's the key graph; I added the orange box, to highlight the only part climate activists notice.
ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1…
sealevel.info/AR6_FAQ_5p1_Fi…

@Willard1951 @JimBlack48 @BlasphemousBan1 @S_Metzeler @Anvndarnamn5 @GAJAJW @RClausius42 @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @priscian @EthonRaptor @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @NomadicQuantum @AristotleMrs @ScienceBlog3 @AuroriaEn @AndreGrossza @DenisDaly @Veritatem2021 @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @ChrisBBacon3 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @Climatehope2 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @ammocrypta @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @DaleGribble_666 1/12.


Despite the benefits of elevated CO2, it's still possible to destroy agricultural productivity with bad governance, as Mao demonstrated 60+ years ago.
twitter-thread.com/t/171923222693…
bmj.com/content/319/72…

@Willard1951 @JimBlack48 @BlasphemousBan1 @S_Metzeler @Anvndarnamn5 @GAJAJW @RClausius42 @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @priscian @EthonRaptor @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @NomadicQuantum @AristotleMrs @ScienceBlog3 @AuroriaEn @AndreGrossza @DenisDaly @Veritatem2021 @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @ChrisBBacon3 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @Climatehope2 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @ammocrypta @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @DaleGribble_666 2/12.
...and as Gotabaya Rajapaksa proved again in Sri Lanka in 2021:

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1717668057093476572

@Willard1951 @JimBlack48 @BlasphemousBan1 @S_Metzeler @Anvndarnamn5 @GAJAJW @RClausius42 @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @priscian @EthonRaptor @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @NomadicQuantum @AristotleMrs @ScienceBlog3 @AuroriaEn @AndreGrossza @DenisDaly @Veritatem2021 @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @ChrisBBacon3 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @Climatehope2 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @ammocrypta @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @DaleGribble_666 3/12.
Sri Lanka's humanitarian and economic disaster is the poison fruit of climate alarmism.
fee.org/articles/sri-l…

1/9. You're right, Jim.

BBanana wrote, "Temperature increases have already reduced global yields of major crops."

That's false. It's long been known that warming generally improves agricultural productivity. Here's a CIA study which summarized the relation:

2/10. Fig.7 from that study shows the number of people who could be supported per hectare of arable land, vs. temperature. The 7 curves represent varying precipitation rates. In each case, higher temperatures allow the support of higher populations, due to better crop yields.

3/10. Also, elevated CO2 directly improves crop yields, and mitigates drought impacts. That's helping make famines rare for first time in history.


Those too young to grok how revolutionary that is should count themselves blessed! Famine used to be a scourge comparable to war & disease.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1207159482607898625

1/4. We've been over this, Willard.



According to NOAA's AGGI chart, over the last 1/3 century CH4 has accounted for just 8.6% of the radiative forcing increase from anthropogenic GHGs. Not 18% or 25%.

That's about 1/10ᵗʰ of the contribution which we get from the ongoing rise in CO2. If that tiny contribution to modest and benign warming worries you, perhaps counseling would help.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1717212931660685379

2/4. Here's the CH4 graph:



Despite the modest uptick in CH4 level over the last 15 years, the rate of rise in CH4's radiative forcing is still much slower than it was 50-60 years ago.

In the 1960s and 1970s the CH4 level rose relatively fast, and consequently CH4 was a larger contributor to radiative forcing increase.sealevel.info/CH4.html
sealevel.info/CH4_2012-2022_…

3/4. The relatively sharp rise in CH4 level in the 1960s & 1970s was insufficient to reverse the worrisome 1950s-70s cooling trend.

Here's a clip from CBS TV, in which Walter Cronkite, The Most Trusted Man in America™, reporting:


Hubert Lamb (source for that CBS story) was the founding director of the UEA Climate Research Unit.

Here's a 1974 CIA report, based on the best current science, about the worrisome cooling trend:


Here's an excerpt, from the Summary:

"The western world's leading climatologists have confirmed recent reports of a detrimental global climatic change… during 50 of the last 60 years the Earth has, on the average, enjoyed the best agricultural climate since the eleventh century… The world is returning to the type of climate which has existed over the last 400 years. That is, the abnormal climate of agricultural-optimum is being replaced by a normal climate of the neo-boreal era. The climate change began in 1960…"

The grim climate to which we were thought to be returning was the Little Ice Age. "Boreal" means cold:

boreal. adj. Relating to or characteristic of the climatic zone south of the Arctic, especially the cold temperate region dominated by taiga and forests of birch, poplar, and conifers…
‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍
The global cooling scare was one of the main reasons for the shiny new anti-air-pollution laws governing power plants, in the 1970s. The other main reason was "acid rain." (Note: Unlike "acidified" oceans, which are actually alkaline, acid rain really is acidic.)

1/25. The leading organization promoting the Climate Industry's "climate emergency" PR campaign is the IPCC. It has severe credibility issues. Investigative journalist Donna Laframboise explains some of them in this lecture about the IPCC's 2007 AR4 Report:


(It's 31 minutes but she speaks very clearly, so she's perfectly understandable at 2x speed.)


(Caveat: I've been an IPCC Expert Reviewer on a couple of their assessment reports.)

2/25. It's only gotten worse since then. The IPCC's 2022 AR6 Report explicitly promotes what I call "homeopathic climatology" (TCRE/RCB), which represents an overt rejection of science.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1671596673699569665

3/25. The TCRE ("Transient Climate Response to cumulative CO2 Emissions") and RCB ("Remaining Carbon Budget") concepts are homeopathy applied to climatology: the belief that the mere memory of a substance is all that's necessary for it to have its effect.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1647976027770028034

The reason climate activists aren't worried about China's CO2 emissions is that they aren't really worried much about emissions. They're mainly worried about keeping Piggy fed.

They don't call it a crisis "for nothing." $1.5 trillion/year ain't "nothing."

It's all about the Benjamins. They call it a crisis to amp up support for feeding Piggy. The parasitic climate industry needs a LOT of propaganda to prop it up.

https://twitter.com/JoanneNova/status/1681889495711449088

1/17》Climate change is not making hurricanes more destructive.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

https://twitter.com/AndrewDessler/status/1717551020799086707

2/17》Nor is it making tornadoes more destructive.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

3/17》Nor is it making wildfires worse.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

1/13》I remember when @SciAm was a highly respected scientific periodical, rather than a political tabloid that reprinted disinformation like this, from other publications, written by nonscientists.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1508833038167330819

https://twitter.com/sciam/status/1717287958242295897

@sciam 1.1/13》

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1508833038167330819

@sciam 2/13》Back when @SciAm was trustworthy, you could read it to learn about what real scientific research was discovering about a wide variety of topics, including CO2. Here's an excellent Scientific American report — from a century ago:
sealevel.info/ScientificAmer…

1/4.
Re: the two definitions of "heat"

Joe wrote, "a body does not contain heat"

Are you sure about that, Joe? Then riddle me this:

Ａ. What does "heat capacity" mean?

Ｂ. What does "heat content" mean? (E.g., "ocean heat content" [OHC].)

Those are "open book" questions. Feel free to use a dictionary, or search google scholar, etc. In fact, I'll help you get started:

Heat capacity:
●
●

Ocean heat content (OHC):
●
●

Heat content (other than OHC):
●
●

2/4.
Re: lapse rate, and what the air absorbs

Joe wrote, "The atmosphere has different T’s based on what it absorbs from above or below."

That's correct, in part. †

But Joe also wrote, "lapse rate is not enhanced by CO2."

Here's the thing: CO2 in the air affects "what [the atmosphere] absorbs from above and below."

This is Earth's emission spectrum (measured from orbit, over the tropical Pacific). The big notch which I've annotated in green is due to CO2 in the air absorbing radiation from below (and also emitting radiation from air at colder temperatures):


(† However, asking what causes the zip-zag lapse rate shape was kind of a trick question, because there are several causes, and thermodynamic expansion/ compression of air is another, and condensation/ evaporation of moisture is a third.)

3/4.
CO2 (and other GHGs) are colorants. They tint the atmosphere (though in the far infrared, rather than visible part of the spectrum). That causes the air to absorb radiation that otherwise would have passed through. Absorbing radiation warms the air.


It doesn't take much "colorant" to have a substantial effect on absorption of radiation.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1259053094526169088

1/5. If you learn about agronomy from climate-activist journalists, instead of agronomists, you're sure to be misled. Author Eleanor McCrary @ellie_mccrary apparently started from a 2018 disinformation piece by freelance journalist Annie Sneed @aisneed.

The Sneed article is entitled "Ask the Experts…" and the McCrary article is entitled "…Experts Say." Yet both of those journalists are so clueless about their topic that neither of them even knew who the "experts" were to ask! For their articles about agronomy, neither author spoke to a single agronomist!!

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1258119463104385025

2/5. The result is that both articles are full of false information.

My hypothes⋅is annotation of the Sneed article has a detailed, point-by-point critique of the major mistakes in it:

Scroll down and click on each highlighted section to see the critique of that section.

(Let me know whether it works for you.)via.hypothes.is/https://www.sc…

3/5. Agronomists have conducted THOUSANDS of rigorous studies, measuring the benefits of elevated CO2 (eCO2) for crops. All major crops benefit from eCO2, most of them dramatically.

It's long-settled science. In fact, the benefits of eCO2 for crops have been known to science for >100 yrs.sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

1/3》 No reefs are dying due to climate change. Climate Industry agitprop CLAIMS coral reefs WILL die due to climate change. But they stubbornly refuse to comply.

A web search finds lots of Climate Industry propagandists frantically "spinning" that news:
google.com/search?q=recor…

2/3》 There are coral reefs which have been damaged by storms, starfish, water pollutants, dragging anchors, dredging, silt, etc. But not climate change.

With an El Niño coming on, the Pacific will probably "slosh east," lowering water levels at the GBR. So there'll probably be more frequent bleaching events there, pretty soon. But that's normal.

3/3》 In other words, as you can see for yourself, the sources you've been trusting on the topic of climate change lied to you.

But the takeaway point is less about climate than about epistemology. This is the important lesson:

1/10. That Grauniad article is disinformation. I'll see you their "11,000 scientists" and raise you over 30,000 scientists who know better.

The best scientific evidence shows that manmade climate change is modest & benign, and CO2 emissions are beneficial, not harmful. Over 30,000 American scientists signed a petition attesting to those facts. I'm one of them.quora.com/Did-30-000-sci…

2/10. Climate change does not threaten coral reefs. In fact, most coral thrive best in the warmest water. Even the very warm southern Red Sea is dotted with healthy coral reefs (unlike the cooler Mediterranean).

If you look at a map of coral reef locations, you'll see that they're clustered around the equator.

3/10. Some coral inhabit temperate zones, but most prefer tropics. In fact, where there are seasons, corals grow fastest in summer.

At 7:20 in this BBC video you can hear how wonderfully healthy the coral are in warmest part of the very warm southern Red Sea, off Eritrea.

@tobiaszowi @ProfMarkMaslin @COP28_UAE 1/11. India! That's your example? Are you joking??

Fact: Everyone, everywhere benefits from rising CO2 levels, but the Indian subcontinent benefits much more than most.

These photos were both taken in the eastern / southeastern Indian subcontinent.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

2/11. Fact: Rising CO2 levels have substantially boosted global crop yields, and improved crops' drought resilience.

The Indian subcontinent used to be plagued by periodic catastrophic famines. Now, despite greatly increased population, they have food surpluses every year. Rising CO2 levels are a major reason why.sealevel.info/negative_socia…

3/11. Fact: rising CO2 levels are helping to make famines rare, for the first time in human history. Few places on earth have benefited more than the Indian subcontinent.




When I was a child, horrific famines were often in the news, in places like Africa and the Indian subcontinent. But Bangladesh and India now have food surpluses, every year. Rising CO2 level is one of the major reasons.sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1673212076104331264

1/6. I agree that that air pollution probably masked the warming effect of GHGs during the 1940s-1970s cooling period. But "measured warming" often uses baselines starting in 1979, because that's the start of satellite-based temperature measurements.


The correlation between temperatures and aerosol/particulate air pollution abatement is not perfect, but it is noticeable.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah6/mean…

2/6. The problem is that aerosol/particulate pollution abatement also dates from the 1970s. CO2's forcing has rising monotonically since ≈1945, yet temperatures only started rising (in fits & starts) with the advent of air pollution abatement in the West.


The 1979 baseline temperature, against which warming is compared, was artificially depressed due to aerosol/particulate air pollution. That means subsequent warming due to GHGs is exaggerated.agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.10…

3/6. By the 1990s, the West had made great strides cleaning up aerosol/particulate air pollution, but it was worsening in rapidly industrializing Asia — and (once the super El Nino subsided) we had "The Pause" in global warming.


Santer et al attempted to compensate for ENSO and volcanoes:
agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.10…

1/10. You obviously didn't read any of the studies I showed you. None of your claims are true.

Humans have killed off many species, but not even one  has been driven to extinction by manmade climate change. (Not even the Bramble Cay mosaic-tailed rat.)
theatlantic.com/science/archiv…

@RealCryoraptor @twit4thot @RARohde @BerkeleyEarth 2/10. Please peruse the resources I showed you:

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1712379360454271077

3/10. The climate industry propagandists who told you that "we're in a mass extinction" demonstrably lied to you. Do you even care?

That Madras photo on the right, taken when CO2 levels averaged <300 ppmv, is the "net zero" goal. Is that what you want?

If you want to learn about the science of climatology, instead of industry propaganda and political spin, here are some resources which can help you:

To learn about #ClimateChange see:

It has:
● accurate intro climatology info
● in-depth science from BOTH skeptics & alarmists
● links to balanced debates between experts on BOTH sides
● info about climate impacts
● links to best blogs on BOTH sidessealevel.info/learnmore.html

To learn about #ClimateChange see:

It has:
● accurate intro climatology info
● in-depth science from BOTH skeptics & alarmists
● links to balanced debates between experts on BOTH sides
● info about climate impacts
● links to best blogs on BOTH sidessealevel.info/learnmore.html

@theresphysics 1/3. So, Ken, which of the facts that I mentioned in my comment on this blog post was so discomforting that it provoked you to delete the entire comment?


This was my comment: sealevel.info/attp_2023-10-0…

2/3. [Part 1 of 2]

It is refreshing to see you mention reductions in anthropogenic aerosol emissions, because most left/alarmist sources just panic,

hyperventilate,

and say we're burning up.

In fact, it is clear that aerosol / particulate air pollution abatement is responsible for some of the recent warming. Here's a paper about it:


Quaas et al (2022), Robust evidence for reversal of the trend in aerosol effective climate forcing. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. 22, 12221–12239. doi:10.5194/acp-2022-295

The significance is obvious: If a higher percentage of observed warming is due to aerosol / particulate air pollution abatement, that means a lower percentage of observed warming is due to GHGs. This is more evidence that climate sensitivity to CO2 is generally overestimated.


Here's a article about the paper:


This is Figure 1 from the paper, showing regional trends from 2000 to 2019:


Note the 2019 end date...pedestrian.tv/news/climate-c…
nbcnews.com/science/scienc…

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1705904288877162710#:~:text=Our%20world%20is%20changing%20out%20of%20all%20recognition

3/3. [Part 2 of 2]

...Note the 2019 end date. Subsequently, the new IMO 2020 international shipping regulations have drastically reduced aerosol emissions from ships.

The widely hyped recent spike in air and ocean temperatures is a predictable consequence.

The new regulations resulted in "an estimated 46% decrease in ship-emitted aerosols," and (because ships are a major contributor), a 10% decrease in total global sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions. Those are very large air pollution reductions for such a short time interval. If you want to learn more about the effects of the new regulations, you can search for articles with titles like these:

● Global reduction in ship-tracks from sulfur regulations for shipping fuel

● NASA Study Finds Evidence That Fuel Regulation Reduced Air Pollution from Shipping

● Low-sulfur shipping rules are affecting global warming

It's not a problem, it's good news, because it is evidence that the pollution controls are working. It has nothing to do with carbon emissions, and it doesn't mean people need to scrap their SUVs or freeze in the dark to "save the planet."

I do hate it when people use misleading graphs to support their agendas. Now that we finally have another El Niño, plus warming from the aerosol pollution abatement, SkS can, at long last, update this one:

imo.org/en/MediaCentre…

1/26》Cornel West @CornelWest, abundant, affordable energy from fossil fuels has been lifting people out of poverty for >200 years, but the Climate Industry is reversing that progress. Do you care how many people suffer to promote the climate scam?
sealevel.info/learnmore.html

https://twitter.com/CornelWest/status/1704327968183799826

2/26》There's no consensus among scientists that manmade climate change is dangerous, nor even that it is harmful at all. The best SCIENTIFIC evidence is that manmade climate change is modest & benign, and CO2 emissions are beneficial, rather than harmful.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1432810945017962505

3/26》Do you care how many people die due to energy poverty, to make climate scammers rich?

This story is from the UK, but it's also happening here. Replacing clean, reliable, affordable fossil fuels with hideously expensive wind & solar KILLS poor people
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-n…

The claim that wind and solar energy are less expensive than electricity from dispatchable sources like fossil fuels is false. It's a product of either economic illiteracy or deliberate deception by the renewable energy marketers, because it confuses price with total cost.

You've probably heard the old saying that there's nothing more expensive than a free puppy, except a free boat. Wind and solar energy are like that: it's not their price which makes them costly.

The reason average wind and solar electricity prices are low is they tend to produce power when it is not needed. Power produced when it isn't needed fetches low prices.

But it's the converse which is the big problem with wind and solar: they very often do not produce power when it is needed.

That unreliability causes enormous spikes in electricity prices.

During those price spikes most of the electricity being produced is generated by fossil fuels and nuclear plants. Wind and solar apologists pretend that means electricity from fossil fuels and nuclear plants is expensive. But the real reason for the high prices is replacement of reliable fossil fuel and nuclear plants with unreliable wind and solar.

Exorbitant electricity prices are an inevitable cost of reliance on wind and solar for electricity.

Fossil fuel and nuclear powered electricity generation is said to be "dispatchable," because their electricity production can be ramped up ("dispatched") to meet demand. Wind & solar output cannot be ramped up to meet demand, so increased reliance on wind and solar means increasingly unreliable electricity production. When demand increases and/or the wind dies, reliance on wind and solar causes enormous spikes in the price of electricity — or, in extreme cases, even brownouts and blackouts.

The inevitable consequences of increasing reliance on wind and solar "renewables" are rising electricity prices and worsening grid reliability — and absolutely no environmental benefit.

That's right: the punch line is that it's all for naught. The rationale for the immensely destructive transition to wind and solar is to "fight climate change." But that's a fool's errand, because the "climate crisis" is a marketing ploy. It's not real, it's just "FUD."

The scientific evidence is compelling that manmade climate change is modest and benign, and CO2 emissions are highly beneficial, rather than harmful.

Does that surprise you? If so, it means you're not getting balanced information. But I'm here to help:



That webpage has:
● accurate introductory climatology info
● in-depth science from BOTH skeptics & alarmists
● links to balanced debates between experts on BOTH sides
● info about climate impacts
● links to the best blogs on BOTH sides

https://twitter.com/joshreimer55/status/1696665125787254949

@Stephen57908892 Stephen Maloney @Stephen57908892, did you read the article? Did you see WHY Duke Energy is raising our rates?

"closing the final chapters on our reliance on coal-fired generation"

"$3.5 billion investment in clean energy and grid resiliency"

"to achieve our carbon goals"

@Stephen57908892 2/3. Lazard's figures for new nuclear plants are almost entirely speculative. (They're based on only one data point, Vogtle Unit 3!)
eia.gov/todayinenergy/…

@Kenneth72712993 @ScienceBlog3 @RichardLWeiss @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @ammocrypta @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @emilio97493490 @InspirallPE @Mark_A_Lunn @ChrisBBacon3 @SpiruSensei @DenisDaly @WernerReinhard5 @controscience @Willard1951 @Fynnderella1 @SapientHetero @Veritatem2021 @C_R_O_M________ @balls95652097 @S_D_Mannix @Devonian1342 @AndreGrossza @Climatehope2 @S_Metzeler @priscian @3GHtweets @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @AuroriaEn @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @AristotleMrs @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @BillPrecht @DiseaseMatters @CoralReefFish @DavidJSuggett @CoralResearch @SteinhartBart @CoralMorph @ConnTrinity @reefgenomics Tweetstorm compilation:


@ThreadReaderApp @Rattibha @threaddotblue unrolltwitter-thread.com/t/169620519818…

@Veritatem2021 @ScienceBlog3 @Kenneth72712993 @InspirallPE @ammocrypta @Mark_A_Lunn @RichardLWeiss @ChrisBBacon3 @SpiruSensei @BenKoby1911 @Data79504085 @DenisDaly @WernerReinhard5 @controscience @Willard1951 @Michael_D_Crow @Fynnderella1 @SapientHetero @C_R_O_M________ @emilio97493490 @balls95652097 @S_D_Mannix @Devonian1342 @AndreGrossza @Climatehope2 @S_Metzeler @priscian @3GHtweets @Anvndarnamn5 @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @AuroriaEn @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @AristotleMrs @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @BillPrecht @DiseaseMatters @CoralReefFish @DavidJSuggett @CoralResearch @SteinhartBart @CoralMorph @ConnTrinity @reefgenomics V, you've made that accusation against her before:


And I've corrected you before:


Did you forget that?

https://twitter.com/Veritatem2021/status/1614395138456932353

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1614443988798275586

@Kenneth72712993 @ScienceBlog3 @RichardLWeiss @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @ammocrypta @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @emilio97493490 @InspirallPE @Mark_A_Lunn @ChrisBBacon3 @SpiruSensei @DenisDaly @WernerReinhard5 @controscience @Willard1951 @Fynnderella1 @SapientHetero @Veritatem2021 @C_R_O_M________ @balls95652097 @S_D_Mannix @Devonian1342 @AndreGrossza @Climatehope2 @S_Metzeler @priscian @3GHtweets @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @AuroriaEn @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @AristotleMrs @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @BillPrecht @DiseaseMatters @CoralReefFish @DavidJSuggett @CoralResearch @SteinhartBart @CoralMorph @ConnTrinity @reefgenomics 2/3. A rapidly increased evaporation rate would mean rapidly accelerated latent heat loss, which doesn't happen. The reason it doesn't happen is that the skin layer doesn't heat up above the temperature of the water below, due to mixing.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1696205198182564249

@Kenneth72712993 @ScienceBlog3 @RichardLWeiss @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @ammocrypta @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @emilio97493490 @InspirallPE @Mark_A_Lunn @ChrisBBacon3 @SpiruSensei @DenisDaly @WernerReinhard5 @controscience @Willard1951 @Fynnderella1 @SapientHetero @Veritatem2021 @C_R_O_M________ @balls95652097 @S_D_Mannix @Devonian1342 @AndreGrossza @Climatehope2 @S_Metzeler @priscian @3GHtweets @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @AuroriaEn @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @AristotleMrs @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @BillPrecht @DiseaseMatters @CoralReefFish @DavidJSuggett @CoralResearch @SteinhartBart @CoralMorph @ConnTrinity @reefgenomics 2/8. Note that Wong & Minnett didn't measure IR from CO2, they just mentioned it in passing. For their work they used IR from clouds, instead.

What's more, elsewhere in the paper they cited the IPCC's (too high) 3.7 W/m² (at TOA) per doubling figure.
sealevel.info/Wong_and_Minne…

@Kenneth72712993 @ScienceBlog3 @RichardLWeiss @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @ammocrypta @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @emilio97493490 @InspirallPE @Mark_A_Lunn @ChrisBBacon3 @SpiruSensei @DenisDaly @WernerReinhard5 @controscience @Willard1951 @Fynnderella1 @SapientHetero @Veritatem2021 @C_R_O_M________ @balls95652097 @S_D_Mannix @Devonian1342 @AndreGrossza @Climatehope2 @S_Metzeler @priscian @3GHtweets @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @AuroriaEn @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @AristotleMrs @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @BillPrecht @DiseaseMatters @CoralReefFish @DavidJSuggett @CoralResearch @SteinhartBart @CoralMorph @ConnTrinity @reefgenomics 3/8. 2.4 W/m² at the surface per doubling of CO2 and 3.8 W/m² at the surface per tripling of CO2 are consistent with van Wijngaarden & Happer's calculation of 3.0 W/m² radiative forcing at the mesopause per doubling of CO2.

arxiv.org/pdf/2006.03098…
sealevel.info/vanWijingaarde…

@Kenneth72712993 @ScienceBlog3 @RichardLWeiss @Anvndarnamn5 @Michael_D_Crow @ammocrypta @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @emilio97493490 @InspirallPE @Mark_A_Lunn @ChrisBBacon3 @SpiruSensei @DenisDaly @WernerReinhard5 @controscience @Willard1951 @Fynnderella1 @SapientHetero @Veritatem2021 @C_R_O_M________ @balls95652097 @S_D_Mannix @Devonian1342 @AndreGrossza @Climatehope2 @S_Metzeler @priscian @3GHtweets @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @AuroriaEn @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @AristotleMrs @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @BillPrecht @DiseaseMatters @CoralReefFish @DavidJSuggett @CoralResearch @SteinhartBart @CoralMorph @ConnTrinity @reefgenomics 4/8. An odd caveat in your Wong & Minnett excerpt is, "Assuming still waters." That's a strange assumption, because still water is rare in the ocean.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1694277566855512136

@Whariwharangi @Data79504085 @RichardLWeiss @BenKoby1911 @JezRoff @emilio97493490 @balls95652097 @ScienceBlog3 @Kenneth72712993 @InspirallPE @Nockit1 @ammocrypta @Mark_A_Lunn @ChrisBBacon3 @SpiruSensei @DenisDaly @WernerReinhard5 @controscience @Willard1951 @Michael_D_Crow @Fynnderella1 @SapientHetero @Veritatem2021 @C_R_O_M________ @S_D_Mannix @Devonian1342 @AndreGrossza @Climatehope2 @S_Metzeler @priscian @3GHtweets @Anvndarnamn5 @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @AuroriaEn @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @AristotleMrs @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @BillPrecht @DiseaseMatters @DaviesswPhD @CoralReefFish @DavidJSuggett @CoralResearch @SteinhartBart @CoralMorph @ConnTrinity Also, at 49 minutes Valentina Zharkova claimed LW IR wavelenths are so long, "10,000 meters, something, I don't remember exactly" that "the energy produced by this radiation is negligible." The wavelength is actually about 15 µm, and the energy is far from negligible.

@ScienceBlog3 @Kenneth72712993 @TheDisproof @InspirallPE @Nockit1 @ammocrypta @Mark_A_Lunn @RichardLWeiss @ChrisBBacon3 @SpiruSensei @BenKoby1911 @Data79504085 @DenisDaly @WernerReinhard5 @controscience @Willard1951 @Michael_D_Crow @Fynnderella1 @SapientHetero @Veritatem2021 @C_R_O_M________ @emilio97493490 @balls95652097 @S_D_Mannix @Devonian1342 @AndreGrossza @Climatehope2 @S_Metzeler @priscian @3GHtweets @Anvndarnamn5 @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @AuroriaEn @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @AristotleMrs @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @JimBlack48 @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @Joeyd87745119 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @antonioguterres I'm reminded of the junk science "studies" falsely claiming that crop yields will suffer from tiny temperature increases.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1362281342445191173

@DaleGribble_666 @priscian @ammocrypta @Michael_D_Crow @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @emilio97493490 @InspirallPE @ScienceBlog3 @Kenneth72712993 @Nockit1 @Mark_A_Lunn @RichardLWeiss @ChrisBBacon3 @SpiruSensei @DenisDaly @WernerReinhard5 @controscience @Willard1951 @Fynnderella1 @SapientHetero @Veritatem2021 @C_R_O_M________ @balls95652097 @S_D_Mannix @Devonian1342 @AndreGrossza @Climatehope2 @S_Metzeler @3GHtweets @Anvndarnamn5 @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @AuroriaEn @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @AristotleMrs @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @BillPrecht @DiseaseMatters @CoralReefFish @DavidJSuggett @CoralResearch @SteinhartBart @CoralMorph @ConnTrinity @reefgenomics …He also taught in ornithology & botany, and served as the Principal Investigator for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Monitoring of Riparian Habitats on the Tahoe National Forest project sponsored by the US Forest Service from 1991 to 2007.

1/15》Is there a rule at @PBSNews / @NewsHour against EVER telling the truth about ANY aspect of the #ClimateChange issue?

It's not just that they get the science wrong. They also lie. Here's an example:

by @LisaDNews, @mattloff, @GeoffRBennett & @tkconchpbs.org/newshour/show/…

@pbsnews @NewsHour @LisaDNews @mattloff @GeoffRBennett @tkconch 2/15》At 1:08 they reported, "He doubled down on climate denial, when asked about devastating wildfires & heatwaves that scientists agree are exacerbated by human activity."

That's false. MANY scientists DON'T "agree" that climate change exacerbates fires
co2coalition.org

@pbsnews @NewsHour @LisaDNews @mattloff @GeoffRBennett @tkconch 3/15》Scientific organizations like the CO2 Coalition @CO2Coalition, and many top scientists, dispute the climate industry propaganda blaming fires on manmade climate change. What a shame that @PBSNews / PBS @NewsHour spread such misinformation.

https://twitter.com/GWrightstone/status/1655634353387446276

@BenKoby1911 @DenisDaly @Zane1968 @Hji45519156 @SpiruSensei @AndreGrossza @Data79504085 @Willard1951 @ammocrypta @Climatehope2 @AristotleMrs @Anvndarnamn5 @InspirallPE @ChrisBBacon3 @C_R_O_M________ @S_Metzeler @priscian @ScienceBlog3 @3GHtweets @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @Veritatem2021 @AuroriaEn @Michael_D_Crow @JusticeTrudeau @Mark_A_Lunn @judgementalbe1 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @JimBlack48 @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @NASA Re: "The last interglacial period saw temperatures higher then we are now."

You're referring to the Eemian Interglacial Optimum. I have info on it here


Its peak is believed to have been substantially warmer than even the warmest part of current Holocene. https://t.co/JyRG6GyFxjsealevel.info/glossary.html#…

@BenKoby1911 @DenisDaly @Zane1968 @Hji45519156 @SpiruSensei @AndreGrossza @Data79504085 @Willard1951 @ammocrypta @Climatehope2 @AristotleMrs @Anvndarnamn5 @InspirallPE @ChrisBBacon3 @C_R_O_M________ @S_Metzeler @priscian @ScienceBlog3 @3GHtweets @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @Veritatem2021 @AuroriaEn @Michael_D_Crow @JusticeTrudeau @Mark_A_Lunn @judgementalbe1 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @JimBlack48 @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @NASA Re: "The fastest warming period in the last 15k years was the younger dryas."

True! The Younger Dryas termination saw warming about an order of magnitude faster than our recent warming.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1685482363147476992

@BenKoby1911 @DenisDaly @Zane1968 @Hji45519156 @SpiruSensei @AndreGrossza @Data79504085 @Willard1951 @ammocrypta @Climatehope2 @AristotleMrs @Anvndarnamn5 @InspirallPE @ChrisBBacon3 @C_R_O_M________ @S_Metzeler @priscian @ScienceBlog3 @3GHtweets @PvtMcAuslan @EdwardRiffle @Veritatem2021 @AuroriaEn @Michael_D_Crow @JusticeTrudeau @Mark_A_Lunn @judgementalbe1 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @JimBlack48 @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @NASA Re: What made the Sahara into a desert?

It's believed to have been global cooling:

UN spending billions on climatechange fallacy & its bureaucracy while 800 millions go hungry & millions more live in poverty of food & elec.

Spatial map of 2017 global wealth indicator by country as Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per Capita. Rank:
1 Luxembourge (US$104,103)
8 U.S. (59,532)
77 China (8,827)
148 India (1,942)
154 Pakistan (1,548)
26 countries below US$ 1000/y
UN Socialist climate agenda to make all poor.

1/5》Lauren Witzke @LaurenWitzkeDE lies.

#1. Calling a lifesaving vaccination a "bioweapon experimental shot" is a deadly, satanic lie.

#2. Garnet Harper died of a hemorrhagic stroke while on dialysis.

Even though he was in Canada, he was NOT denied appropriate treatment.

https://twitter.com/LaurenWitzkeDE/status/1683140460099821569

@LaurenWitzkeDE 2/5》Garnet Harper was ineligible for transplant consideration for 2 reasons:

1. Poor health. He had severe heart & lung problems, and he'd nearly died from a staph infection.

2. His refusal to take essential steps to protect his own health, like masking and Covid vaccination.

@LaurenWitzkeDE 3/5》Because transplant recipients must be on immunosuppressants for life, it is critically important for them to take every reasonable precaution to protect against infections — and Mr. Harper had already almost died from an infection.

But he refused to take such precautions.

UN spending billions on climatechange fallacy & its bureaucracy while 800 millions go hungry & millions more live in poverty of food & elec.

Spatial map of 2017 global wealth indicator by country as Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per Capita. Rank:
1 Luxembourge (US$104,103)
8 U.S. (59,532)
77 China (8,827)
148 India (1,942)
154 Pakistan (1,548)
26 countries below US$ 1000/y
UN Socialist climate agenda to make all poor.

By now you've surely seen this figure, it was the talk of #climatetwitter today. But the most interesting part is the region I've circled. It's where Earth is constantly sliding in and out of ice ages 📉❄️📈🌲📉❄️📈🌲📉❄️

There's a paper you don't hear about very often Ganopolski-2016 that starts with Earth's orbital eccentricity, obliquity, and precession, which affect how much solar radiation the Northern hemisphere receives. Then it calculates...

...how much CO₂ is needed to boost the greenhouse effect enough to have prevented those ice ages. Turns out, ~425 ppm is pretty good estimate for "ice-age proofing" Earth.

We're talking about nearly a half billion fellow humans dealing with unprecedented heat

https://twitter.com/extremetemps/status/1672535526073565186

@billmckibben @CherylBozarth The advantages of elevated CO2 for agriculture are even more important. Rising CO2 levels have raised global crop yields by at least 20%, and helped mitigate drought risks, which greatly improves global food security.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@billmckibben @CherylBozarth The best scientific evidence shows that CO2 emissions are beneficial, rather than harmful. Here are some studies:
sealevel.info/negative_socia…

We’re celebrating the one year anniversary of the overturning of Roe v. Wade today because we believe that this monumental event was a massive step towards protecting the family unit and honoring the sanctity of every life.

We’re proud to stand for the right to life, liberty,… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

@officialpsq I love that someone wants to challenge the Amazon/eBay/etc. leftist oligopoly. But how can you be claiming to challenge online retailers when there's literally NOTHING FOR SALE on your site?

@officialpsq If you want to challenge the Big Boys you need to offer "parallel listings" with lower fees & better search capabilities. Sellers on your site would be encouraged to link to their listings at eBay, Amazon & Walmart.

It is also essential that you offer superior search capability.

《1/12⟫ Someone asked how we can know the ongoing rise in atmospheric CO2 level is entirely from human emissions, since Earth's climate is so complex.


Fortunately, you don't need a climate model to answer that question. It's as easy as (steps) A, B, C:sealevel.info/co2.html

《2/12⟫ A. The bean-counters keep good track of production & use of fossil fuels and Portland cement, and simple chemistry tells us how much CO2 is produced from them. That's "fossil carbon." (Irrelevant side note: fossil carbon is almost completely depleted of radioactive 14C.)

《3/12⟫ There are also "land use change emissions" (e.g., clearing forests, draining swamps), which produce non-fossil CO2 emissions. They are poorly constrained, but certainly less then 15% of fossil emissions (probably about 10%).
sealevel.info/carbon/Dohner2…

It looks like Twitter has made some changes to the APIs that is confusing our poor🤖. Will be suspending new unrolls until we resolve this.

We're restored most unroll services. It required quite a big change to the core unrolling services, so there are probably bugs lurking, esp. with embedded videos. But we figured it's better to get this out and fix over next few days.🙏🏼 for your patience!

@Veritatem2021 @benmooreau @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @Jaisans @atherton_chris @ItsTheAtmospher @Climatehope2 @WillWat6 @3GHtweets @DGinCheshire @BointonGiles @Mark_A_Lunn @AuroriaTwittori @RushhourP @MartinJBern @EthonRaptor @Willard1951 @Anvndarnamn5 @AristotleMrs @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @EricWil06256732 @DTGvmd @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @TheDisproof @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @Valja46Zhark5 @paulp1232 @ShroedingerBird @J0aquIm_B4rb0s4 @Sky48115666 @0Sundance @BradPKeyes @DoesThisW0rk @FD2you @glinch72 @JustThi30117912 @ChrisBBacon3 @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab 1/ We have excellent production data for C from fossil fuels (9.5±1 PgC/yr), good data for C from cement manufacturing (0.45±0.1), and poor data for C from land use changes (1±0.5). The sum of those is the CO2 mankind adds to the atmosphere: 11±1.5 PgC/yr.
sealevel.info/carbon/carbonf…

@Veritatem2021 @benmooreau @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @Jaisans @atherton_chris @ItsTheAtmospher @Climatehope2 @WillWat6 @3GHtweets @DGinCheshire @BointonGiles @Mark_A_Lunn @AuroriaTwittori @RushhourP @MartinJBern @EthonRaptor @Willard1951 @Anvndarnamn5 @AristotleMrs @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @EricWil06256732 @DTGvmd @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @TheDisproof @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @Valja46Zhark5 @paulp1232 @ShroedingerBird @J0aquIm_B4rb0s4 @Sky48115666 @0Sundance @BradPKeyes @DoesThisW0rk @FD2you @glinch72 @JustThi30117912 @ChrisBBacon3 @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab 2/ The total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere can be directly calculated from the average CO2 concentration, because total mass of the Earth's atmosphere is quite precisely known:

1 ppmv CO2 = 7.8024 Gt CO2 = 2.12940 PgC

So 11 PgC = 5.17 ppmv CO2.
google.com/search?q=11%2F…

@Veritatem2021 @benmooreau @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @Jaisans @atherton_chris @ItsTheAtmospher @Climatehope2 @WillWat6 @3GHtweets @DGinCheshire @BointonGiles @Mark_A_Lunn @AuroriaTwittori @RushhourP @MartinJBern @EthonRaptor @Willard1951 @Anvndarnamn5 @AristotleMrs @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @EricWil06256732 @DTGvmd @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @TheDisproof @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @Valja46Zhark5 @paulp1232 @ShroedingerBird @J0aquIm_B4rb0s4 @Sky48115666 @0Sundance @BradPKeyes @DoesThisW0rk @FD2you @glinch72 @JustThi30117912 @ChrisBBacon3 @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab 3/ So mankind is adding about 4.5 to 5.9 ppmv of CO2 to the atmosphere each year (probably about 5.2).
But the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is only rising by an average of 2.45 ppmv/year (averaged over 10 years).
sealevel.info/co2_2012-2022_…

@benmooreau @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @Jaisans @atherton_chris @ItsTheAtmospher @Climatehope2 @WillWat6 @3GHtweets @DGinCheshire @BointonGiles @Mark_A_Lunn @AuroriaTwittori @RushhourP @MartinJBern @EthonRaptor @Willard1951 @Anvndarnamn5 @AristotleMrs @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @EricWil06256732 @DTGvmd @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @TheDisproof @Veritatem2021 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @Valja46Zhark5 @paulp1232 @ShroedingerBird @J0aquIm_B4rb0s4 @Sky48115666 @0Sundance @BradPKeyes @DoesThisW0rk @FD2you @glinch72 @JustThi30117912 @ChrisBBacon3 @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab 1/ "Trying to disprove AGW" is a strawman. There's no legitimate scientific debate about the fact that adding CO2 & other GHGs to the atmosphere has a warming effect.

The debate is between climate alarmists who fear warming, and scientists who call warm periods Climate Optimums.

@benmooreau @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @Jaisans @atherton_chris @ItsTheAtmospher @Climatehope2 @WillWat6 @3GHtweets @DGinCheshire @BointonGiles @Mark_A_Lunn @AuroriaTwittori @RushhourP @MartinJBern @EthonRaptor @Willard1951 @Anvndarnamn5 @AristotleMrs @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @EricWil06256732 @DTGvmd @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @TheDisproof @Veritatem2021 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @Valja46Zhark5 @paulp1232 @ShroedingerBird @J0aquIm_B4rb0s4 @Sky48115666 @0Sundance @BradPKeyes @DoesThisW0rk @FD2you @glinch72 @JustThi30117912 @ChrisBBacon3 @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab 2/ When people are confused about what the debate is actually about, it is sometimes because they've not seen balanced information. Here are some resources which can help with that problem:

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1432810945017962505

@benmooreau @S_D_Mannix @TWTThisIsNow @Jaisans @atherton_chris @ItsTheAtmospher @Climatehope2 @WillWat6 @3GHtweets @DGinCheshire @BointonGiles @Mark_A_Lunn @AuroriaTwittori @RushhourP @MartinJBern @EthonRaptor @Willard1951 @Anvndarnamn5 @AristotleMrs @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @EricWil06256732 @DTGvmd @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @TheDisproof @Veritatem2021 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @Valja46Zhark5 @paulp1232 @ShroedingerBird @J0aquIm_B4rb0s4 @Sky48115666 @0Sundance @BradPKeyes @DoesThisW0rk @FD2you @glinch72 @JustThi30117912 @ChrisBBacon3 @B_Bolshevik100 @rosmadiwahab 3/ The scientific evidence is compelling that anthropogenic warming is modest and benign, and CO2 emissions are highly beneficial, just as Arrhenius predicted >115 years ago.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1660889834972499969

sealevel.info/Svante_Arrheni…

@NewNormality20 @EthonRaptor @sandcastle1975 @Anvndarnamn5 @4tis @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @BenKoby1911 @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @ChrisBBacon3 @NolanCarlton2 @balls95652097 @RushhourP @Huroner2 @Willard1951 @Devonian1342 @AristotleMrs @Jaisans @Hji45519156 @S_D_Mannix @JusticeTrudeau @JimBlack48 @glinch72 @DenisDaly @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @priscian @Joeyd87745119 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @JustThi30117912 @SniemN @BointonGiles @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @CDMarshall7 @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL 1/6 MM&I wrote, "A 15um radiation from a 20C body wont heat a 100C gas. 15um radiation from surface wont heat already heated N2 and O2."

That is 100% false. Something which absorbs 15µm photons cannot tell the temperature of the thing which emitted them.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1587664656054845441

@NewNormality20 @EthonRaptor @sandcastle1975 @Anvndarnamn5 @4tis @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @BenKoby1911 @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @ChrisBBacon3 @NolanCarlton2 @balls95652097 @RushhourP @Huroner2 @Willard1951 @Devonian1342 @AristotleMrs @Jaisans @Hji45519156 @S_D_Mannix @JusticeTrudeau @JimBlack48 @glinch72 @DenisDaly @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @priscian @Joeyd87745119 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @JustThi30117912 @SniemN @BointonGiles @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @CDMarshall7 @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL 2/6 MM&I, are u fischerfischy/GAJAJW?

Absorption of IR by a body makes the body warmer than it otherwise would be:
👉regardless of the body's temperature,
👉regardless of the source or frequency of the IR, and
👉regardless of whether the body's temperature is rising or falling.

@NewNormality20 @EthonRaptor @sandcastle1975 @Anvndarnamn5 @4tis @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @BenKoby1911 @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @ChrisBBacon3 @NolanCarlton2 @balls95652097 @RushhourP @Huroner2 @Willard1951 @Devonian1342 @AristotleMrs @Jaisans @Hji45519156 @S_D_Mannix @JusticeTrudeau @JimBlack48 @glinch72 @DenisDaly @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @priscian @Joeyd87745119 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @JustThi30117912 @SniemN @BointonGiles @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @CDMarshall7 @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL 3/6 If you're fischerfischy/GAJAJW / Jim/Joe then I've already explained this to you, ad nauseam. Please stop wasting everyone's time by repeatedly tweeting the same PSI/Postma nonsense from multiple anonymous aliases.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1587335304645693441

@Bazthebemused @Veritatem2021 @AristotleMrs @EthonRaptor @Willard1951 @ChrisBBacon3 @Climatehope2 @WillWat6 @SGMTrailbuilder @priscian @BouchellJohn @Mark_A_Lunn @ShroedingerBird @6lennybravo @glinch72 @ianrowley677 @tevet @MustBeJoshing @BlasphemousBan1 @Winston43105474 @ItsTheAtmospher @Dannyboy7293 @Jaisans @jbonbon91 @EricWil06256732 @DarthFeodor @TWTThisIsNow @BradPKeyes @atherton_chris @3GHtweets @DGinCheshire @BointonGiles @AuroriaTwittori @RushhourP @MartinJBern @Anvndarnamn5 @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @DTGvmd @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @TheDisproof @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @threadreaderapp @rattibha 1/10」Greenpeace lied. Happer refused to accept a fee. Instead he asked that his fee be donated to charity!

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1536791851872706560

@Bazthebemused @Veritatem2021 @AristotleMrs @EthonRaptor @Willard1951 @ChrisBBacon3 @Climatehope2 @WillWat6 @SGMTrailbuilder @priscian @BouchellJohn @Mark_A_Lunn @ShroedingerBird @6lennybravo @glinch72 @ianrowley677 @tevet @MustBeJoshing @BlasphemousBan1 @Winston43105474 @ItsTheAtmospher @Dannyboy7293 @Jaisans @jbonbon91 @EricWil06256732 @DarthFeodor @TWTThisIsNow @BradPKeyes @atherton_chris @3GHtweets @DGinCheshire @BointonGiles @AuroriaTwittori @RushhourP @MartinJBern @Anvndarnamn5 @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @DTGvmd @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @TheDisproof @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @threadreaderapp @rattibha 2/10」Contrary to Greenpeace's @Greenpeace & DeSmogBlog's @DeSmog lies, Prof. Happer wasn't paid a cent.

He's a mensch. He generously DONATED his time, and asked that his entire fee be donated to charity.

@Bazthebemused @Veritatem2021 @AristotleMrs @EthonRaptor @Willard1951 @ChrisBBacon3 @Climatehope2 @WillWat6 @SGMTrailbuilder @priscian @BouchellJohn @Mark_A_Lunn @ShroedingerBird @6lennybravo @glinch72 @ianrowley677 @tevet @MustBeJoshing @BlasphemousBan1 @Winston43105474 @ItsTheAtmospher @Dannyboy7293 @Jaisans @jbonbon91 @EricWil06256732 @DarthFeodor @TWTThisIsNow @BradPKeyes @atherton_chris @3GHtweets @DGinCheshire @BointonGiles @AuroriaTwittori @RushhourP @MartinJBern @Anvndarnamn5 @gstrandberg1 @Jakegsm @ammocrypta @DTGvmd @wille99 @PaulDFarrar @TheDisproof @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @KCTaz @threadreaderapp @rattibha @Greenpeace @DeSmog 3/10」DeSmog claimed, "Happer told Greenpeace reporters that he would be willing to produce research promoting the benefits of carbon dioxide for $250 per hour, while the funding sources could be similarly concealed by routing them through the CO2 Coalition."

That's another lie.

@EthonRaptor @ClimateOfGavin @NASAGoddard 1/6 Eli, please tell me that YOU do not think CO2 which was FORMERLY in the air STILL has a warming effect!

I was SURE you are smarter than THAT!

Any two steadily increasing quantities correlate nicely. That doesn't mean one causes the other, of course.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1669885871204585473

@EthonRaptor @ClimateOfGavin @NASAGoddard 2/6 Our CO2 emission rate is currently about twice the rate natural sinks (terrestrial greening, ocean uptake, etc.) remove CO2. But it's mere coincidence the ratio has been near 2:1 for a quite a while. If we halved CO2 emissions the ratio would be 1:1.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1670009543881904130

@EthonRaptor @ClimateOfGavin @NASAGoddard 3/6 Coincidentally, for several decades the trend in CO2 concentration has been about half of the trend in "cumulative emissions."
But if we were to halve emissions that correlation would disappear entirely. Cumulative emissions would continue to rise, but CO2 level would not.

1/36 It's amazing how effective the Climate Industry has been at frightening people, beyond the capacity for rational thought. Rutger Bregman @rcbregman, though a smart fellow, is nevertheless "terrified" by a miniscule (≤1°C), completely harmless, sea surface temperature blip.

https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1668323521045331976

@rcbregman 2/ 1°C is the outdoor air temperature change ("climate change") you get from an elevation change of only about 500 feet. 🥱

(That's based on an average temperature vs. altitude "lapse rate" of 6.5°C/km; 1000 / 6.5 = 154 meters.)

@rcbregman 3/ At mid-latitudes, 1°C is about the temperature change you get from a latitude change of only 60 miles (100 km).

(How different are the flora and fauna 60 miles from where you live?)
sealevel.info/2015_zones_hig…

@EthonRaptor @ClimateOfGavin @NASAGoddard 1/6」You've been ridiculing Donna Laframboise's work for years, without EVER bothering to even find out what she says, and you just did it again. How would you like it if someone did that to YOU?

https://twitter.com/EthonRaptor/status/1292089019636031488

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1292636761940779008

@EthonRaptor @ClimateOfGavin @NASAGoddard 2/6」You just did it again, last night, despite the fact that you STILL have no clue what she says.

https://twitter.com/EthonRaptor/status/1669872566670962691

@EthonRaptor @ClimateOfGavin @NASAGoddard 3/6」You need to open your mind: watch Donna Laframboise's talk before passing judgement on her.

At 2x speed it'll take you only 15½ minutes.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1669808766236123137

You'll be impressed.

@EthonRaptor @sandcastle1975 @Climatehope2 @priscian @Robert76907841 @Data79504085 @NewNormality20 @ChrisBBacon3 @NolanCarlton2 @Anvndarnamn5 @balls95652097 @4tis @BenKoby1911 @RushhourP @Huroner2 @Willard1951 @Devonian1342 @Mark_A_Lunn @AristotleMrs @Michael_D_Crow @Jaisans @Hji45519156 @S_D_Mannix @JusticeTrudeau @JimBlack48 @glinch72 @DenisDaly @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @JustThi30117912 @SniemN @BointonGiles @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @CDMarshall7 @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL @NOconsensus It is obvious that you neither viewed her presentation nor read her book.

She did them after the AR4 release. It has gotten much worse since then.

If you still think the IPCC reports are scientific, then how do you excuse their TCRE & RCB pseudoscience?

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1647976027770028034

@EthonRaptor @sandcastle1975 @Climatehope2 @priscian @Robert76907841 @Data79504085 @NewNormality20 @ChrisBBacon3 @NolanCarlton2 @Anvndarnamn5 @balls95652097 @4tis @BenKoby1911 @RushhourP @Huroner2 @Willard1951 @Devonian1342 @Mark_A_Lunn @AristotleMrs @Michael_D_Crow @Jaisans @Hji45519156 @S_D_Mannix @JusticeTrudeau @JimBlack48 @glinch72 @DenisDaly @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @JustThi30117912 @SniemN @BointonGiles @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @CDMarshall7 @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL @NOconsensus "Transient Climate Response to cumulative CO2 emissions" (TCRE) & "Remaining Carbon Budget" (RCB) are based on the premise that, not merely does CO2 in the air cause warming, but that the mere MEMORY by Gaia, of CO2 formerly in the air, ALSO does.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1649178612778643457

@EthonRaptor @sandcastle1975 @Climatehope2 @priscian @Robert76907841 @Data79504085 @NewNormality20 @ChrisBBacon3 @NolanCarlton2 @Anvndarnamn5 @balls95652097 @4tis @BenKoby1911 @RushhourP @Huroner2 @Willard1951 @Devonian1342 @Mark_A_Lunn @AristotleMrs @Michael_D_Crow @Jaisans @Hji45519156 @S_D_Mannix @JusticeTrudeau @JimBlack48 @glinch72 @DenisDaly @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @JustThi30117912 @SniemN @BointonGiles @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @CDMarshall7 @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL @NOconsensus You might think that's too ridiculous to possibly be what they contend, but I'm not kidding, they really do.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1649181910785040384

@BradyGWilson @PaulHBeckwith 1/12》Crop yields rose in part because of CO2 fertilization.

Plus, the catastrophic, drought-triggered famines which plagued mankind for all of human history are disappearing from living memory, in part because elevated CO2 helps mitigate drought impacts.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@BradyGWilson @PaulHBeckwith 2/12》Rising CO2 levels improve both crop yields and drought resistance. That's helping make famines rare for the 1st time in history.

If you're so young you don't understand how important that is, count yourself blessed! Famine used to be a scourge comparable to war & disease.

@BradyGWilson @PaulHBeckwith 3/12》Ending famine is a VERY Big Deal, comparable to ending war and disease. Compare:

● 1918 flu pandemic killed 2% of world population.

● WWII killed 2.7% of world population.

● The global drought & famine of 1876-78 killed 3.7% of world population.

@priscian @Willard1951 @gargantuandwarf @NotAHoax @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @BenKoby1911 @ChrisBBacon3 @Hji45519156 @DaleGribble_666 @WernerReinhard5 @Michael_D_Crow @Anvndarnamn5 @Gabwbw181237 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Mark_A_Lunn @adlrope @ejwwest @Devonian1342 @ammocrypta @safcpete67 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @CO2Coalition You can't seem to make up your mind. Which is it, Jim?

"Wigley was just making an educated guess—which he's allowed to do as a climate scientist"

OR

"that didn't happen"

@priscian @Willard1951 @gargantuandwarf @NotAHoax @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @BenKoby1911 @ChrisBBacon3 @Hji45519156 @DaleGribble_666 @WernerReinhard5 @Michael_D_Crow @Anvndarnamn5 @Gabwbw181237 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Mark_A_Lunn @adlrope @ejwwest @Devonian1342 @ammocrypta @safcpete67 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @CO2Coalition 2/5. Wigley PROPOSED (to Jones & Santer) that they alter the "measured" sea surface temperatures, to reduce the inconvenient warm blip. He was PROPOSING fraud.

We don't have the replies from Jones & Santer, but Wigley obviously THOUGHT they'd be amenable.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1669374566773272577

@priscian @Willard1951 @gargantuandwarf @NotAHoax @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @BenKoby1911 @ChrisBBacon3 @Hji45519156 @DaleGribble_666 @WernerReinhard5 @Michael_D_Crow @Anvndarnamn5 @Gabwbw181237 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Mark_A_Lunn @adlrope @ejwwest @Devonian1342 @ammocrypta @safcpete67 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @CO2Coalition 3/5. I suppose it is possible that Jones and/or Santer objected to Wigley's proposed fraud, but I've seen no evidence of it.

If you have such evidence, please share it. But I won't hold my breath waiting.

@BenKoby1911 @Anvndarnamn5 @sandcastle1975 @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @NewNormality20 @ChrisBBacon3 @NolanCarlton2 @EthonRaptor @balls95652097 @4tis @RushhourP @Huroner2 @Willard1951 @Devonian1342 @Mark_A_Lunn @AristotleMrs @Michael_D_Crow @Jaisans @Hji45519156 @S_D_Mannix @JusticeTrudeau @JimBlack48 @glinch72 @DenisDaly @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @priscian @Joeyd87745119 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @JustThi30117912 @SniemN @BointonGiles @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @CDMarshall7 @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL 1/6. Feldman measured downwelling longwave IR “backradiation” from CO2, at ground level, under clear sky conditions, for a decade. They reported that a 22 ppmv (+5.946%) increase in CO2 level (= +8.333% forcing) resulted in a 0.2 ±0.06 W/m² increase in downwelling LW IR from CO2.

@BenKoby1911 @Anvndarnamn5 @sandcastle1975 @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @NewNormality20 @ChrisBBacon3 @NolanCarlton2 @EthonRaptor @balls95652097 @4tis @RushhourP @Huroner2 @Willard1951 @Devonian1342 @Mark_A_Lunn @AristotleMrs @Michael_D_Crow @Jaisans @Hji45519156 @S_D_Mannix @JusticeTrudeau @JimBlack48 @glinch72 @DenisDaly @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @priscian @Joeyd87745119 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @JustThi30117912 @SniemN @BointonGiles @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @CDMarshall7 @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL 2/6. That's 2.40 ±0.72 W/m² per CO2 doubling.

But ≈22.6% of incoming solar radiation is reflected away, without reaching the surface or being absorbed in the air. So, adjusting for having measured at the surface gives ≈1.29 × (2.40 ±0.72) = 3.10 ±0.93 W/m² per doubling at TOA.

@BenKoby1911 @Anvndarnamn5 @sandcastle1975 @Climatehope2 @Data79504085 @NewNormality20 @ChrisBBacon3 @NolanCarlton2 @EthonRaptor @balls95652097 @4tis @RushhourP @Huroner2 @Willard1951 @Devonian1342 @Mark_A_Lunn @AristotleMrs @Michael_D_Crow @Jaisans @Hji45519156 @S_D_Mannix @JusticeTrudeau @JimBlack48 @glinch72 @DenisDaly @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @priscian @Joeyd87745119 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @JustThi30117912 @SniemN @BointonGiles @ammocrypta @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @CDMarshall7 @RMcgillss @paligap17 @MaggieL 3/6. That's on the low side of Myhre's 3.7 ±0.4 W/m² estimate, but the uncertainty intervals overlap. It does preclude the very high 4.37 W/m² (𝞪=6.3) figure in the FAR & SAR.

It's nearly identical to van Wijngaarden & Happer (2022)'s 3.0 W/m² figure:
sealevel.info/vanWijngaarden…

@priscian @Willard1951 @gargantuandwarf @NotAHoax @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @BenKoby1911 @ChrisBBacon3 @Hji45519156 @DaleGribble_666 @WernerReinhard5 @Michael_D_Crow @Anvndarnamn5 @Gabwbw181237 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Mark_A_Lunn @adlrope @ejwwest @Devonian1342 @ammocrypta @safcpete67 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @CO2Coalition 1/8. Jim, I showed you that the Hockey Team's fraudulent WMO cover graph sliced instrumental data in place of wrong proxy derivations, to hide the proxies' inconsistency with reality. They even matched trace colors & smoothed slice points to hide the deed.
sealevel.info/wmo_1999_clima…

@priscian @Willard1951 @gargantuandwarf @NotAHoax @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @BenKoby1911 @ChrisBBacon3 @Hji45519156 @DaleGribble_666 @WernerReinhard5 @Michael_D_Crow @Anvndarnamn5 @Gabwbw181237 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Mark_A_Lunn @adlrope @ejwwest @Devonian1342 @ammocrypta @safcpete67 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @CO2Coalition 2/8. The Hockey Team included Mann. Their fraud SHOULD have gotten them all fired, at the very least — if not incarcerated "in the state pen instead of Penn State."

Your rebuttal was, "a) That's not Mann's plot," implying Jones did the deed without Mann.
sealevel.info/climategate.ht…

@priscian @Willard1951 @gargantuandwarf @NotAHoax @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @BenKoby1911 @ChrisBBacon3 @Hji45519156 @DaleGribble_666 @WernerReinhard5 @Michael_D_Crow @Anvndarnamn5 @Gabwbw181237 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Mark_A_Lunn @adlrope @ejwwest @Devonian1342 @ammocrypta @safcpete67 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @CO2Coalition 3/8. I showed you Jones' progress report email to Mann etc., as he was working on the dishonest graph. But you said my evidence showed merely that Mann was cc'd on an email, implying that Mann wasn't involved and might not have even known about the fraud.

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1668450291006545921

most readers are familiar with famous "hide the decline" from Climategate. Below are 1850-2000 parts of 5 series calculated from Asian tree ring data, explained below. I recently received some fantastic PAGES2k reverse engineering from @detgodehab and am re-visiting.

The data illustrated below comes from
(1) original Briffa 2001 Asian series with late 20th century decline (chopped off in Mann's IPCC diagram);
(2) average of Asian series in gridded MXD series sent by Briffa/Osborn to Rutherford and Mann, ostensible input in Mann 2008

(3) average of (the 45) gridded MXD as used in Mann 2008. As discussed long ago at Climate Audit, Mann chopped off the offending declines and replaced them with temperature data. This was a different incident to the IPCC diagram or the 1999 WMO "hide the decline" diagram.

@priscian @Willard1951 @gargantuandwarf @NotAHoax @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @BenKoby1911 @ChrisBBacon3 @Hji45519156 @DaleGribble_666 @WernerReinhard5 @Michael_D_Crow @Anvndarnamn5 @Gabwbw181237 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Mark_A_Lunn @adlrope @ejwwest @Devonian1342 @ammocrypta @safcpete67 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @CO2Coalition 1/7》Andy May is a fine scientist, with a keen analytical mind, and a virtue far too rare in the climate biz: integrity. The fact that he worked in an industry which has made the world a vastly better place, rather than in the parasitic climate industry, is a feather in his cap.

@priscian @Willard1951 @gargantuandwarf @NotAHoax @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @BenKoby1911 @ChrisBBacon3 @Hji45519156 @DaleGribble_666 @WernerReinhard5 @Michael_D_Crow @Anvndarnamn5 @Gabwbw181237 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Mark_A_Lunn @adlrope @ejwwest @Devonian1342 @ammocrypta @safcpete67 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @CO2Coalition 2/7》As for Mann, please stop dodging the questions I asked:

1. Are you REALLY pretending that Mann didn't know about the plot?

2. Can you point to any evidence that Mann has ever claimed that he didn't know what they were doing?

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1668457103097200640

@priscian @Willard1951 @gargantuandwarf @NotAHoax @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @BenKoby1911 @ChrisBBacon3 @Hji45519156 @DaleGribble_666 @WernerReinhard5 @Michael_D_Crow @Anvndarnamn5 @Gabwbw181237 @Climatehope2 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Mark_A_Lunn @adlrope @ejwwest @Devonian1342 @ammocrypta @safcpete67 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @CO2Coalition 3/7》Here's Steve McIntyre explaining the scandal, and the gross scientific malpractice perpetrated by Jones / Mann / Osborn / etc.
climateaudit.info/pdf/climategat…

and here:

@JonathanSarfat1 @TigerlillySusan @skepticalraptor @han_francis 1/9》 I agree, Jonathan. Additionally, Michael Simpson @skepticalraptor's denial of the abortion / breast cancer ("ABC") link is factually incorrect.
I explained it to him on his site, but he's not responded:
skepticalraptor.com/skepticalrapto…
disq.us/p/2ukouaf
sealevel.info/skepticalrapto…

@JonathanSarfat1 @TigerlillySusan @skepticalraptor @han_francis 2/9》 There's an undisputed, strong association between breast cancer risk and a woman's age at first full-term pregnancy, and an inverse correlation between breast cancer risk and number of children she's borne. Here's a reference:
cancer.gov/about-cancer/c…
sealevel.info/cancer_dot_gov…

@JonathanSarfat1 @TigerlillySusan @skepticalraptor @han_francis 3/9》 If a woman has an abortion before her first full-term pregnancy, that necessarily increases her age at first full term pregnancy, which increases her risk of breast cancer later in life.

@priscian @Mark_A_Lunn @ejwwest @Climatehope2 @Anvndarnamn5 @JayDee64861546 @Willard1951 @MarshallCd @FredHikes @ammocrypta @BenKoby1911 @gargantuandwarf @DaleGribble_666 @adlrope @Devonian1342 @Michael_D_Crow @safcpete67 @BJChippindale @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @TopAlliedAceWW1 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @WernerReinhard5 @glinch72 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 1/3》Only 6 minutes elapsed from my tweet to yours. You obviously didn't even click the links I gave you.

Marcott 2013 strained credulity even at the WaPo.

E.g., Marcott completely erased the Dark Ages Cold Period & Iron Age Cold Period from history!
rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2013/03/fixing…

@priscian @Mark_A_Lunn @ejwwest @Climatehope2 @Anvndarnamn5 @JayDee64861546 @Willard1951 @MarshallCd @FredHikes @ammocrypta @BenKoby1911 @gargantuandwarf @DaleGribble_666 @adlrope @Devonian1342 @Michael_D_Crow @safcpete67 @BJChippindale @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @TopAlliedAceWW1 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @WernerReinhard5 @glinch72 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 2/3》Also, that temperature dip which they show around the time of Christ was actually the Roman Warm Period (RCO). Marcott et al would have you believe that the RCO was the COLDEST period that the Earth had seen in over 8000 years!

Why aren't you laughing at such nonsense?

@priscian @Mark_A_Lunn @ejwwest @Climatehope2 @Anvndarnamn5 @JayDee64861546 @Willard1951 @MarshallCd @FredHikes @ammocrypta @BenKoby1911 @gargantuandwarf @DaleGribble_666 @adlrope @Devonian1342 @Michael_D_Crow @safcpete67 @BJChippindale @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @TopAlliedAceWW1 @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @WernerReinhard5 @glinch72 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @ChrisBBacon3 @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 3/3》Marcott et al 2013 has been thoroughly debunked. Here's another resource for you to learn about it, if you change your mind and decide that you want to:
climateaudit.org/2013/03/16/the…

@AGW_is_bad @priscian @gargantuandwarf @Anvndarnamn5 @Devonian1342 @BobPartridge16 @NotAHoax @Mark_A_Lunn @DaleGribble_666 @BenKoby1911 @ammocrypta @ChrisBBacon3 @Michael_D_Crow @Gabwbw181237 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Willard1951 @adlrope @ejwwest @safcpete67 @Climatehope2 @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @WernerReinhard5 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 1/9》To pray for a cold climate is to pray for more people to die. Is that what you want, Gerrit?

Cold climate is BAD for humanity, warm is good. That's been settled science for most of a century. Here's a 1974 CIA Report about it:
sealevel.info/CIAclimateRese…

https://twitter.com/ncdave4life/status/1661125415023288321

@AGW_is_bad @priscian @gargantuandwarf @Anvndarnamn5 @Devonian1342 @BobPartridge16 @NotAHoax @Mark_A_Lunn @DaleGribble_666 @BenKoby1911 @ammocrypta @ChrisBBacon3 @Michael_D_Crow @Gabwbw181237 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Willard1951 @adlrope @ejwwest @safcpete67 @Climatehope2 @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @WernerReinhard5 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 2/9》Your graph starts in 1880. But there's no disputing that our current (modestly warmer) "climate optimum" is BETTER than the chilly 1800s.

Data show global warming saves lives, and improved global food security from more CO2 is saving MANY lives.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…

@AGW_is_bad @priscian @gargantuandwarf @Anvndarnamn5 @Devonian1342 @BobPartridge16 @NotAHoax @Mark_A_Lunn @DaleGribble_666 @BenKoby1911 @ammocrypta @ChrisBBacon3 @Michael_D_Crow @Gabwbw181237 @glinch72 @MarshallCd @BJChippindale @TopAlliedAceWW1 @FredHikes @Willard1951 @adlrope @ejwwest @safcpete67 @Climatehope2 @S_D_Mannix @DenisDaly @JimBlack48 @AndersBrunstad2 @periodicaudio @JusticeTrudeau @andrewmac71 @WernerReinhard5 @Jaisans @stitchnstab @CarrudoDon @Veritatem2021 @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @AristotleMrs @Joeyd87745119 @Data79504085 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 3/9》Higher CO2 levels are greening the Earth, especially in arid regions, like the Sahel.
sealevel.info/learnmore.html…