Here’s A Useful Article If You Want To Try To Explain To The Environmental Hysteric In Your Life Why The Current Heat Wave Does NOT Prove Anything About Climate Change


Not that they’ll listen, of course.

Over at Reason, Ronald Bailey has a nicely balanced, fair and calm piece explaining why The New York Times’ recent “Heat Waves in the Age of Climate Change: Longer, More Frequent and More Dangerous” is not exactly true, like much climate change advocacy.

It begins,

As evidence, the Times cites the U.S. Global Change Research Program, reporting that “since the 1960s the average number of heat waves—defined as two or more consecutive days where daily lows exceeded historical July and August temperatures—in 50 major American cities has tripled.” That is indeed what the numbers show. But it seems odd to highlight the trend in daily low temperatures rather than daily high temperatures.

As it happens, chapter six of 2017’s Fourth National Climate Assessmentreports that heat waves measured as high daily temperatures are becoming less common in the contiguous U.S., not more frequent.

What is so consistently infuriating in almost all mainstream media discussions of climate change is that they intentionally understate the continuing uncertainty in representing scientific estimates and extrapolations as unchallengable  conclusions. “The panel’s latest report notes that there is “medium confidence” that “the length and frequency of warm spells, including heat waves, has increased since the middle of the 20th century” around the world,” the Reason article explains.  “Medium confidence means there is about a 50 percent chance of the finding being correct.”

You know: that means consensus among climate scientists, making those questioning the models that have yet to prove accurate the equivalent of Holocaust deniers.

From the article:

Heat wave trends aside, the Fourth National Climate Assessment reports that “the annual average temperature over the contiguous United States has increased by 1.2°F” if you compare the period of 1986–2016 to that of 1901–1960.

Got it. That’s a fact. The current heat wave, however, has nothing to do with that fact, unless your real objective is to panic the gullible and scientifically ignorant, or, in the words of Saikat Chakrabarti, the chief of staff of Representative Ocasio-Cortez, to use still speculative science as a justification to “change the entire economy,” along with the  liberties necessary to sacrifice in order to do so.


21 thoughts on “Here’s A Useful Article If You Want To Try To Explain To The Environmental Hysteric In Your Life Why The Current Heat Wave Does NOT Prove Anything About Climate Change

  1. Fun Fact: Cold weather kills 20 times more people, (Times with a capital T) than does hot weather.

    Anywho; reminds me of O. W. Shaddock, John Matuszak in North Dallas Forty. Just substitute game and business with weather and climate:

    “Every time I say it’s a game, you tell me it’s a business. Every time I say it’s a business, you tell me it’s a game.”

    FWIW; our > 60 tomato plants are LUVIN this humid heat; shoot, I had to order taller stakes!

  2. Jack: “What is so consistently infuriating in almost all mainstream media discussions of climate change is that they intentionally understate the continuing uncertainty in representing scientific estimates and extrapolations as unchallengable conclusions.”

    I am not sure this is intentional. Remember, as you say, these are unchallengeable conclusions. If you apply critical thinking skills in the face of the 97% consensus (especially to the question about what the 97% are in consensus about), well, that makes you worse than Hitler (pulled from a Simpsons episode).


  3. Saikat Chakrabarti, the chief of staff of Representative Ocasio-Cortez

    aka, the brains of the outfit, aka, the person pulling the squad’s strings and getting them elected.

    I’m pretty convinced he’s the modern day equivalent of Pol Pot. Let’s kill electricity and send everyone to the hinterlands to tend the quinoia crop. Ironically, it will be the academics and professionals and intellectuals who’ll be the first to be given a hoe and a pair of sandals.

  4. Funny how the left (and there is definitely a causal relationship between the Left and climate-change hysteria) claims to be the more science-oriented camp, yet seems to pretty regularly abandon lots of core principles of science. Climate change seems to have all of the scientific rigor of phrenology, astrology, and a good deal of what Freud wrote.
    Zoltar wrote a good blog piece about some of the climate-change sleight-of-hand with graphs, and their seeming confusion between causation & correlation recently.

    • “Zoltar wrote a good blog piece about some of the climate-change sleight-of-hand with graphs, and their seeming confusion between causation & correlation recently.”

      My favorite quotes from Zoltar Speaks! Climate Change blog.

      “The fact that these settled science people continuously leave out the facts surrounding the verifiable evidence of a cyclical trend that is 100% natural and the fact that whether human activity might be accelerating that warming is actually unknown and to claim otherwise is BAD SCIENCE, and then to top it off, to imply that those that disagree are some kind of heretic or science deniers is unethical and morally bankrupt.”

      “There is an agenda driving the climate change alarmists and that agenda is to clean up the environment, which happens to be a really good cause, but lying about the reasons why we need to do it to hype up hysteria in the public is morally bankrupt and just bull shit. If you want to clean up air pollution then dammit, do it, it will be good for everyone, but don’t spew bad science to try and convince the masses, it makes the whole science argument in favor of cleaning up the environment look like a complete sham.”

      “Hopefully after another 400,000 years of collecting extremely detailed climate change data we can make better and more accurate predictions, but it’s certainly not going to happen for many generations to come, it’s all wild theoretical guesses for a long while.”

      • I believe there is another agenda, one that neatly dovetails with the altruistic motive of cleaning up the environment: “carbon credits” and other money-making schemes.
        Even without the enormous profit potential, it would still be impossible to dismiss all of the inconsistencies, cherry-picking, and bad science blasphemy.

    • I’d trust their consensus (I’m no scientist,) if only they had any kind of track record of predicting anything. Instead we’re told to trust the same people who have been consistently wrong about their past predictions. My low standards are still not met. Show me how “we’re all going to die from climate change in 12 years” is different from “the whole world will die of starvation by the end of the ’80s” or “New York will be underwater by the year 2000.”

      They just keep making crazy statements because they know we’ll never remember them by the time they fail to come to pass.

    • But Jack said that is as likely as Trump taking up residence in the White House. Thus, climate change hysterics would see a link; Trump is in the White House therefore there is a strong likelihood that 50 million climate refugees will result by 2020.

    • Ah; Tipping Point predictions! And lest we forget: Last Chances.

      ​*Bonn 2001: A Global Warming Treaty’s Last Chance. Time Magazine, 16 Jul 2001

      *Montreal 2005: With time running out for the global climate, your meeting in Montreal represents a last chance for action. The Independent, 28 Nov 2005

      *Bali 2007: Bali could be the last chance to avoid the worst effect of global warming, said Tony Juniper, executive director of Friends of the Earth. The New Zealand Herald, 3 Dec 2007

      *Poznan Poland, 2008: The world will “suicide” if it cannot strike a strong climate pact soon, The Age, 9 Dec 2008

      *Copenhagen 2009: The world faces a final opportunity to agree an adequate global response to climate change at a U.N.-led meeting in Copenhagen in December, The Telegraph, 10 Aug 2009

      *Cancun 2010: Jairem Ramesh, the Indian environment minister, sees it as the “last chance” for climate change talks to succeed; The Telegraph (UK), 29 Nov 2010

      *Durban 2011: Rev. Dr. Olav Fyske Tveit, who leads the World Council of Churches, says the upcoming climate conference in South Africa is mankind’s ‘last opportunity’ to address climate change. Spero News, 27 Nov 2011:

      *Doha 2012: Tomorrow: the earth’s last chance with climate change? The Examiner, 25 Nov 2012

      *Warsaw 2013: Is the Warsaw Climate Change Conference a last-chance summit? Sustainable Mobility, 14 Nov 2013

      *Lima 2014: Last chance: Change needed for climate negotiations in Lima 2014. WWF Global, 23 Nov 2013

      *Paris 2015: The UN meeting in December is “the last chance” to avert dangerous climate change, according to the Earth League. BBC News 22 Apr 2015

      How many times can you Cry Wolf and maintain credibility?

        • Where are my manners, I forgot the Tipping Points; please select the one that best suits your needs:

          *HOURS: Flashback March 2009: ‘We have hours’ to prevent climate disaster — Declares Elizabeth May of Canadian Green Party

          *Days: Flashback Oct. 2009: UK’s Gordon Brown warns of global warming ‘catastrophe’; Only ’50 days to save world’

          *Months: Prince Charles claimed a 96-month tipping point in July 2009

          *Years: 2009: NASA’s James Hansen Declared Obama Only First Term to Save The Planet! — ‘On Jan. 17, 2009 Hansen declared Obama only ‘has four years to save Earth’ or Flashback Oct .2009: WWF: ‘Five years to save world’

          *Decades: 1982: UN official Mostafa Tolba, executive director of the UN Environment Program (UNEP), warned on May 11, 1982, the ‘world faces an ecological disaster as final as nuclear war within a couple of decades unless governments act now.’

          *Millennium: Flashback June 2010: 1000 years delay: Green Guru James Lovelock: Climate change may not happen as fast as we thought, and we may have 1,000 years to sort it out’

  5. Let’s see, nighttime temperatures are higher today than they were 50 years ago in “50 major American cities”. Gee, I wonder if there’s any connection to the fact that those cities are enormously larger and more built-up than they were in the 1960s, causing a much larger “heat island” effect? Nah, it’s totally, 100% because of CO2. Wonder how that same data looks for, say, Waukenabo, Minnesota or Salt Gum, Kentucky?

    Also, comparing 1901-1960 vs. 1986-2016: do those dates seem oddly cherry-picked? What is the rationale for ignoring 1961-1985? Why compare a 60-year period with a 30-year period?

    • There was a cooling trend somewhere in those uncompared years, wackos were talking about a new ice age because the weather was colder for a few years. I moved to Wisconsin during that time period and it was friggin COLD to a southern boy like me.

    • My question is; is Obama the true climate change apocalypse believer that he portray’s himself to be or is he a leader that actively chose to use the ends justifies the means rationalization?

      Here’s some of food for thought while thinking about that question.

      None of the climate change predictions have come true and that should have raised a big red flag for a President of the United States that is concerned for the future of the country and, for that matter, the world! Obama being the sitting President for eight years, does anyone honestly think Obama didn’t sit down and privately talk directly with some of the most reputable climate change scientists and have a very frank discussion about climate change and the validity of the wild apocalyptic predictions. If you want to see some direct collusion from a sitting President and a specific “industry” trying to directly manipulate the public I think this is a place where that connection will eventually be made, the question becomes, will that connection be made public.

      There is today’s conspiracy theory.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.