NoTricksZone

The Germany-based European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) presents a detailed analysis on the IPCC’s recently published final 40-page Synthesis Report released earlier this month.

Image source: IPCC

EIKE, however, concludes that the IPCC report is fraught with error and distortion. Author Klaus-Eckart Puls writes:

Not only does it contain major contradictions, simplifications and even falsehoods with respect to the earlier comprehensive partial reports, it is a stark contraction to almost every measurement and trend in nature. This is being noticed by event the alarmist tending media [3] : ‘Indeed while the previous climate reports [The 3 comprehensive reports of 2013/14] for the most part provided the science and the contradictions, the new Synthesis report suppresses most of the scientific findings.'”

Puls then provides a list contradictions, falsehoods and distortions stemming from the new Synthesis Report, all of which are refuted by measurements and facts which Puls provides:

1. air temperature
2. sea level rise
3. ocean temperature
4. storms
5. polar ice
6. extreme weather
7. crop yields
8. species extinctions
9. man is responsible

Puls summarizes (reiterating some of what he wrote in his introduction:

In the 40-page Summary for Policymakers [1] published in early November, the IPCC in large part contradicts the depictions and data in its own(!) comprehensive reports (several thousand pages) it released at the end of 2013 and early 2014. The summery-statements stand also in crass contradiction to almost every trend-measurement found in nature over the past 150 years.

For example the online SPIEGEL [3] writes: ‘Final IPCC Report: At the Intergovernmental Panel on climate Change, Alarmism Comes before Accuracy’ … ‘The document is supposed to rationally inform on the science – instead it suppresses the central contradictions.’ … ‘Indeed while the previous climate reports [The 3 comprehensive reports of 2013/14] for the most part provided the science and the contradictions, the new Synthesis Report suppresses most of the scientific findings’.”

Thanks – that suffices!”

UPDATE: Read Carbon Brief here for implications of GOP victory
===============================

When it comes to climate change policymaking, the proposed so-called global treaty designed to protect climate (i.e. the global temperature, precipitation amounts, pressures, relative humidities, wind speeds, etc.) now faces a formidable obstacle: a US Congress now in the hands of the GOP Party.

DRUDGE writes:

Republicans Take Congress
+7 +8? +9? Senate
The Dem Disaster

Germany’s Spiegel writes:

Debacle for Democrats in US Congress Elections
Goodbye, Mr. President

My understanding is the USA needs the consent of the US Senate before it can ratify any international treaty.

Of course President Obama could attempt circumventing Congress to enact a treaty, but that would merely confirm why voters punished his party in the first place: abuse of power.

Why Obama did not pass a climate treaty back in 2009 when he had the chance remains a mystery to me. Worse, in my view, President Obama squandered the chance to work together with the opposition and accept compromise on every issue, which is the way democracies are designed to work. Instead he obstinately stuck to ideological lines and, using Chocago style political tactics, tried to muscle his policy onto the entire country.

Backfired!

Let’s hope lessons are learned here.

A heated exchange has just taken place at Twitter between Spiegel science journalist Axel Bojanowski and some of Germany’s leading climate alarmism politicians and ideologues who are pushing for a fast-track green coup d’état.

The row swirls around a critical opinion piece written by Bojanowski – on the roadmap-for-politicians IPCC final Synthesis Report. The Spiegel piece is titled: “Final IPCC Report: At the IPCC alarm comes before accuracy“.

In it Bojanowski identifies a number points where the IPCC misleads the public and needlessly sounds the alarms. At Twitter Bojanowski calls these points “gross problems” that “need to be discussed”.

In summary, the ever inquisitive Spiegel journalist writes that the IPCC final report “should rationally inform of the science  – rather it suppresses central contradictions“. He also adds that “the new synthesis report suppresses important scientific findings“.

Bojanowski brings up some gross examples of IPCC factual suppression and how the UN body made glaring contradictions. The first concerns the subject of species extinction. In the 2013 IPCC main report, no predictions were made on to what extent species were threatened, demonstrating that too little is known to make reliable forecasts. But the latest synthesis report claims species have already began dying off due to climate change.

Bojanowski also points out that the latest synthesis report writes of numerous species having been forced to relocate because of climate change. But the main 2013 report writes: “There’s very little confidence in the conclusion that already some species may have gone extinct due to climate change.”

Another misleading claim by the new synthesis report is that today’s climate change is happening faster than at any time from natural causes over the last 1 million years – thus stressing out species. But learned-geologist Bojanowski cites the main IPCC report’s real findings:

At the end of the ice age, as the first part of the UN climate report shows, in large parts of the world climate fluctuations of 10°C in 50 years, i.e. 20 times faster than in the 20th century, took place and large climate-caused species extinctions are not documented.”

The Spiegel journalist also writes how the IPCC is not really being truthful with its predictions for the future. In the new synthesis report for policymakers the IPCC warns of a 4°C warming by the end of the century, and that this will be a formidable threat to species. Here the IPCC even asserts “high confidence”.

However, Bojanowski reminds Spiegel readers what the experts wrote in the main IPCC report (translated from the German):

Climate models are unable to illustrate key processes with respect to species development which foremost impact the susceptibility of species with respect to climate change.”

In a nutshell Bojanowski comes down hard on the IPCC report – for blatantly putting alarmism ahead of scientific accuracy.

Some German activists and Green politcians have reacted irritably to Bojanowski’s article. Green Party honcho Dr. Hermann Ott tweeted:

@GYGeorg …sad! Dear@Axel_Bojanowski, we have discussed so often about climate change – for what? @sven_giegold“

It’s early November and now is a good time to look at some of this year’s global crop harvest results. Let’s recall that global warming models projected poor harvests and hunger in the future due to droughts (and floods).

But that is hardly the case…at least certainly for this year. And recall how Joe Bastardi last spring projected a “Garden of Eden” harvest for the US Great Plains. Looks like he was right. The story is similar many places worldwide, and not just the US.

10-foot corn

For example Bloomberg here reports of a record US corn harvest in 2014, writing:

From Ohio to Nebraska, thousands of field inspections this week during the Pro Farmer Midwest Crop Tour show corn output in the U.S., the world’s top producer, will be 0.4 percent above the government’s estimate. Months of timely rains and mild weather created ideal growing conditions, leaving ears with more kernels than normal on 10-foot (3-meter) corn stalks and more seed pods on dark, green soy plants.”

All-time high of 3.631 billion bushels of soybean

Bloomberg also writes here that the US production of soybean “will jump 10 percent this year to an all-time high of 3.631 billion bushels, and inventories before the 2015 harvest will be double a year earlier.”

In Europe the story is the similar. Last May the online marktkompass here already wrote of record wheat harvests:

In all regions of Central and Eastern Europe the weather for growth was close to being optimal and the yield potential has drastically improved.”

“All-time records” in Europe

In Germany’s agricultural state of Mecklenburg West-Pomerania, corn and barley reached record harvests. The online bauwesta reports that both winter and summer barley harvests set all-time records. Overall across Europe Crop Site reports this year’s cereal harvest “has generally been strong in Europe and Ukraine“.

Doom and gloom media silent on bumper crop yields

Moreover, numerous analysts report of falling grain and commodity prices. All of this, of course, is great news for consumers and a planet that still has close to a billion people who do not get enough to eat. Yet the good news is generally not getting reported by the doom-and-gloom obsessed media.

“Bounty of wheat, barley and oats”

Almost every country one looks at in Europe, one is finding record bumper crops this year. The usually gloom-obsessed UK Guardian also reported in September on UK 2014 harvests:

Long sunny spells after a mild winter and early spring delivers a bounty of wheat, barley and oats. [...] 2014 could be the biggest yield ever for wheat when the final data is released in October.”

If climate change is supposed to be resulting in poor harvests, higher food prices and acute hunger for the poor, as many experts have warned incessantly, then the opposite must mean that climate change is not happening at all, or that it is having a profoundly beneficial effect for man instead.

Glut of apples

The Guardian also reports of bumper apple harvests and that “growers still face losses due to glut of apples and supermarket price wars.” The Guardian adds, “A cold winter gave the trees a good rest, then plenty of rain – especially in August – helped plump up the fruit, and then a dry September allowed the picking to get started early.”

If anything, all the bumper crops are leading to only one single food crisis: the rock bottom prices farmers are getting for their crops!

“bumper world harvest this year”

thompsonslimited.com here reports that the bumper-crop low-price crisis has also not spared Canada for almost everything from apples to zucchini. It writes that the “world commodity prices are worryingly low for arable farmers following a bumper world harvest this year.”

Russia “in awash in grain”

www.martellcropprojections.com here writes that Russia “is awash in grain from a bumper harvest in the growing season just ended.  The 2014 grain harvest increased to 105 million tonnes threatening to break a record.”

The Crop Site also reports of record rice production in Bangladesh, and bumper maize harvests in Pakistan. Even Scotland’s 2014 cereal harvest “is estimated to be the largest in 20 years, with favourable conditions expected to produce more than three million tonnes of cereals.”

So, if you are not moping about all the good news on this year’s global harvest, and failed predictions of catastrophe, and wish instead to celebrate the good news with glasses of cheer, the wine-searcher here reports that France is “looking forward to a bigger and better wine harvest“. Indeed all the natural ingredients needed for fermenting or brewing your favorite spirit appear to be in bountiful supply this year.

Visions of Ehrlichian-style widespread crop failures and mass starvations postponed yet again. And they show absolutely no signs of ever materializing any time soon.

In fact one could easily argue that the world is better fed today than at any time in human history. We can in part thank higher CO2 concentrations and warmer climate for that.

An Empirical Review of Recent Trends in the Greenhouse Effect

By Robin Pittwood, Kiwi Thinker

Abstract

The core of the human caused global warming proposition is that an increasing level of greenhouse gases acts to reduce heat loss from the planet making the atmosphere here warmer. The amount of warming anticipated by the IPCC models is from about one to several degrees C for a doubling of CO2 concentration.

But a conundrum has arisen lately:  While CO2 has continued rise significantly the temperature has not.  There has been no global warming since about 1997. Scientists on both sides of the debate have noticed this and have offered something like 55 explanations as to why this could be so. Some of those explanations lock into the dogma built into the IPCC models, taking for certain that the greenhouse effect is increasing, but because there is no atmospheric temperature rise, they then have to explain the retained heat is somewhere else.

Is the greenhouse effect occurring as the IPCC models propose?

This study analysed two important factors directly associated with the greenhouse effect, atmospheric temperature and outgoing radiation and finds that outgoing radiation has not declined. The missing heat has gone back to space as usual.  But more importantly the (lack of a) trend observed in an empirical derivation of the Stefan Boltzmann relative emissivity factor directly contradicts the greenhouse theory built into the IPCC models.

Article

Regular readers at any of the main climate change blogs will be aware that since about 1997 there has been nearly no global temperature rise. And they will know too, that this is despite atmospheric CO2 concentration continuing to rise. To date there are some 55 ideas to explain this slowdown in global warming. Some of the ‘explanations’ presume the so-called ‘greenhouse effect’ must still be increasing as the IPCC models calculate; it’s just that the heat has been hidden elsewhere, maybe deep in the ocean.

This study, based on 34 years of satellite data; outgoing long-wave infrared radiation (OLWIR) and temperature, demonstrates otherwise.

I used three data sets, OLWIR from NOAA, and the average of both UAH and RSS for global temperature.

I obtained monthly average OLWIR (W/m2) for each 2.5 degree latitude by 2.5 degree longitude area of the globe. After converting the netCDF files to Excel, I scaled each 2.5*2.5 area’s OLWIR to account for the varying size of its area, resulting in a global average OLWIR.  (There was some missing data mid 1994 to early 1995. I populated this by a linear interpolation).  The resulting annual average OLWIR is shown in the graph below for the years 1979 to 2012. A linear regression fit shows a generally increasing trend in OLWIR over this period.

The temperature data is also plotted on the graph below. A linear regression fit shows a generally increasing trend for the years 1979 to 2012.

The relationship between temperature and emitted radiation follows a universal law of physics, Stefan Boltzmann’s law states the emitted radiation is the product of the fourth power of absolute temperature and an emissivity factor. A reduction in the emissivity factor means less outgoing radiation for a given temperature.  That would indicate a stronger greenhouse effect.  An increase in the emissivity factor means more outgoing radiation for a given temperature.  That would indicate a more transparent atmosphere.  The study derived earth’s emissivity factor for each of the 34 years and the results displayed.

Using an average global temperature of 287 Kelvin added to the temperature anomaly, the relative emissivity has been derived for each year using the formula:

j / (k*T^4)

where j is OLWIR, k is the Stefan Boltzmann constant, and T is the temperature.

If the greenhouse effect was increasing, relative emissivity should be declining. A quick look at the graphs shows clearly this is not the case.

Our planet’s relative emissivity has been flat-lining, despite increasing CO2 concentration over the study period. The derived emissivity factor, being basically constant, directly contradicts all of the IPCC models. No increased greenhouse effect is observed.

Findings:

The two primary findings of this empirical study are:

• Outgoing radiation has not declined over this period as expected by IPCC models. The missing heat has gone back to space – as usual and as per Stefan Boltzmann’s law, via OLWIR, and,
• The increasing greenhouse effect expected by IPCC models, has not exposed itself. There has been no increased greenhouse effect over this period. [A closer inspection of the relative emissivity trend shows the atmosphere is even becoming a little more transparent - though little should be made of this given the variability of the data].

Conclusion:

The core of the human caused global warming proposition is that an increasing level of greenhouse gases acts to reduce heat loss from the planet making the atmosphere here warmer. But is the greenhouse effect occurring as the IPCC models propose? This study analysed two important factors directly associated with the greenhouse effect, atmospheric temperature and outgoing radiation and finds that outgoing radiation has not declined. The missing heat has gone back to space as usual.

But more importantly the (lack of a) trend observed in an empirical derivation of the Stefan Boltzmann relative emissivity factor directly contradicts the greenhouse theory built into the IPCC models.

The original post on this study may be found here.

Data Table: