Global Warming News: Cold Weather, #SnowVember and ‘Muffed Margins’

The last couple of weeks have seen an uptick on global warming news. And none of it good for the left.

First, another “error” in global warming propaganda…oops I mean science research:

A highly circulated study claiming oceans are warming at a much higher rate due to global warming contains “key errors,” forcing researchers to issue a correction.

The study published by the journal Nature on Oct. 31 by researchers at Princeton University and UC San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography claimed the oceans were warming at a rate 60 percent higher than previously thought.

However, a mathematical error discovered by independent climate scientist Nic Lewis after he perused the study’s first page has led the journal to retract its key finding. The study has a much larger margin of error, making their findings of a 60 percent increase in ocean warming less precise, and actually between 10 percent and 70 percent.

So an independent scientist, one individual, finds something a team of scientists publishing the paper overlooked. And on the FIRST page!! I thought peer review was supposed to be strict.

The lead researcher now says its findings are practically meaningless, with a margin of error “too big now to really weigh in” on ocean temperatures.

You think? And guess which culprits hailed this report using their climate change destruction template?

When first published, the study led to “alarming” warnings in mainstream media outlets, claiming the “world has seriously underestimated the amount of heat soaked up by our oceans over the past 25 years.” CNN initially reported the planet is “‘more sensitive’ than thought” based on the study and would lead to “more dire” predictions than the U.N.’s latest, which gave Earth only 12 more years.

Dang! If only this catastrophe would wait until I can at least enjoy a few years of retirement. Of course we were told in 1988 by the renowned scientist Ted Danson that we only had 10 years left! Funny how they keep saying that. Currently we’re on the 30th anniversary of having 10 years left.

CNN has since reported “errors were made” but is still defending the study claiming its scientific errors “do not invalidate the study’s methodology.”

Dan Rather would be proud. In the words of Three Dog Night, “The Show must go on”.

Ralph Keeling, co-author of the study said. “We really muffed the error margins.”

Oh OK, no big deal! Just a little muff here! Nothing to see! We’ll still on the eve of climate destruction. Hey, at least we didn’t make up the data this time.

Now let’s move on to some real world, on the ground climate news. Last week New York City experienced an early season snowstorm that paralyzed the city:

By most accounts the disruptions of this #SnowVember snowstorm caught New York City and others parts of the Northeast with its boots off. Normally hour-long evening commutes turned into all-night, angry affairs.

Why does everything have to be some clever hashtag? Can’t we just say ‘November Snowstorm’ and leave it at that? Meteorologist Jeff Berardelli attempts to explain how they missed the storm:

The answer is simple. All of our experience tells us that mid-November is just too early for a disruptive snowstorm like this in New York City. Sure, we know it can snow in November. Sometimes there’s heavy accumulation, but almost never near the coast.

In this case our life experience outweighed our forecast experience and training. We let “what are the odds this could happen in November?” get in the way of what should have been a challenging, but doable forecast. If this exact same pattern appeared on the models in January the forecast would have come with plenty of warning and higher snow potential. Statistics and human psychology would not have gotten in the way.

Human psychology?? I thought weather forecasting was a science. And if they can’t correctly now-cast the weather, how in the world can they say we have ten years left to climate destruction from global warming?

Now in addition to the snow, this Thanksgiving will see some of the coldest temperatures ever for this time of year in the northeast:

For some Northeast cities, high temperatures on Thanksgiving could be close to the coldest on record no matter what day of the month the holiday was celebrated (e.g. Nov. 22, Nov. 24, Nov. 26, etc.).

New York City has only had three Thanksgivings dating to 1870 when the high temperature failed to rise out of the 20s, according to National Weather Service statistics. The coldest was a high of 26 degrees on Nov. 28, 1901. Forecast highs Thursday could be near that all-time record-coldest high set almost 117 years ago.

The temperature for the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade in New York City is expected to be in the low- to mid-20s. It will feel even colder when you factor in the wind chill, possibly in the mid-teens.

It’s a shame mother nature is not fulfilling the template of the climate change alarmists!

The polar opposite of the cold and snow is of course the devastating wildfires out in California. Last week President Trump made this observation in a tweet:

“There is no reason for these massive, deadly and costly forest fires in California except that forest management is so poor. Billions of dollars are given each year, with so many lives lost, all because of gross mismanagement of the forests. Remedy now, or no more Fed payments!”

This set off a firestorm (no pun intended) of criticism from the usual suspects decrying Trump’s partisan tweet. You know, the same people who immediately blame the NRA after a school shooting. This included Jerry Brown who predictably blamed the fires on climate change. Yet a curious thing happened. A few days later the California legislature begin considering a bill to aid in the effort to clear out underbrush in the forests:

California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is proposing sweeping new legislation that would make it easier for private landowners to cut down trees on their land as the state deals with one of its worst wildfire seasons in years. Brown’s plan, which first was reported by the Mercury News Thursday, would allow landowners living on property of 300 acres or less to cut down trees with up to a 36-inch diameter without a permit. The current regulation ends at 26 inches in diameter. Additionally, owners would be able to build private roads up to 600 feet long without getting a permit first as long as they are maintained. The idea is to let landowners help thin forests to decrease the spread of fires.

Well, it looks like Trump was right after all. But this also raises a conundrum for the left. If Climate Change is to blame for these fires then how is this legislation going to help? And if this legislation IS going to help reduce fires then climate change really isn’t the culprit. Bad management is. Or should I say bad legislation preventing people from protecting their own private property. The left in California should be held responsible politically for this. But I doubt it will ever happen.

Finally, a peek into how the younger generation has been completely indoctrinated into believing this climate alarm-ism:

It was a moment of the kind that changes lives. At a press conference held by climate activists Extinction Rebellion last week, two of us journalists pressed the organisers on whether their aims were realistic. They have called, for example, for UK carbon emissions to be reduced to net zero by 2025. Wouldn’t it be better, we asked, to pursue some intermediate aims?

A young woman called Lizia Woolf stepped forward. She hadn’t spoken before, but the passion, grief and fury of her response was utterly compelling. “What is it that you are asking me as a 20-year-old to face and to accept about my future and my life? … This is an emergency. We are facing extinction. When you ask questions like that, what is it you want me to feel?” We had no answer.

The answer is simple: Stop with the climate change/global warming propaganda. There has been NO global warming for over a decade. Educate yourself and stop listening to people who have lied about or miscalculated the science of climate change. Read the views of scientists who oppose this viewpoint. And there are many. Despite what Al Gore says, there is not a consensus on it. And we are NOT on the eve of destruction.