By Yen Makabenta
Nov 27 2018 (Manila Times)
To comprehend the complex arguments and abstruse terminology of
the climate debate, I have been helped by the advice of one
scientist who said it is essential to grasp the difference between
weather and climate.
Much of the confusion in the climate debate is the outcome of
mistaking one for the other and clinging doggedly to error.
The current conundrum is the widespread and erroneous belief
(propagated by climate alarmists) that 1) the California fires, 2)
the Hawaii volcanic activity, and 3) super typhoon Haiyan-Yolanda
in Leyte are proof of global warming or climate change.
This belief is as mistaken as believing that planet Earth is
The way out of this thicket is to understand first the
difference between weather and climate.
Confusion about the two has led to the fear-mongering about
global warming, and now the absurd UN prediction of global climate
Weather and climate: The difference
You can’t take better guidance on these concepts than from the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), two major
science agencies in the United States.
I have taken the following from a brief of NASA and NOAA. I
“The difference between weather and climate is a measure of
time. Weather is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short
period of time, and climate is how the atmosphere ‘behaves’
over relatively long periods of time.
When we talk about climate change, we talk about changes in
long-term averages of daily weather. Today, children always hear
stories from their parents and grandparents about how snow was
always piled up to their waists as they trudged off to school.
Children today in most areas of the country haven’t experienced
those kinds of dreadful snow-packed winters, except for the
Northeastern US in January 2005. The change in recent winter snows
indicate that the climate has changed since their parents were
“If summers seem hotter lately, then the recent climate may
have changed. In various parts of the world, some people have even
noticed that springtime comes earlier now than it did 30 years ago.
An earlier springtime is indicative of a possible change in the
Weather is basically the way the atmosphere is behaving, mainly
with respect to its effects upon life and human activities. The
difference between weather and climate is that weather consists of
the short-term (minutes to months) changes in the atmosphere. Most
people think of weather in terms of temperature, humidity,
precipitation, cloudiness, brightness, visibility, wind, and
atmospheric pressure, as in high and low pressure.
In most places, weather can change from minute-to-minute,
hour-to-hour, day-to-day, and season-to-season.
Climate, however, is the average of weather over time and space.
An easy way to remember the difference is that climate is what you
expect, like a very hot summer, and weather is what you get, like a
hot day with pop-up thunderstorms.”
Global warming errs badly
To understand the great confusion about global warming or climate
change, my most lucid guide has been Dr. Richard Lindzen — a
former Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology at MIT and member
of the US National Academy of Sciences — and his now famous
lecture for the Global Warming Policy Foundation last October
Some say that the lecture is must reading for everyone who
thinks about global warming/climate change, and for everyone who
thinks about science and its role in human society and
In just a number of segments of his lecture, Dr. Lindzen
crystallized for me why the church of global warming errs so badly
in its dogma.
Global warming promoters fostered the popular public perception
of the science of climate change as quite simple. It is that
here’s one phenomenon to be explained (“global average
temperature,” or GAT, which, says Lindzen, is a thoroughly
unscientific concept). And there’s one explanation for it: the
amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
But the reality is that Earth’s climate system is probably the
most complicated system ever studied, with the exception of DNA and
the human brain.
There are dozens of categories of factors that influence it, and
thousands to billions of individual pieces of each category…
GAT is only one of many important phenomena to measure in the
climate system, and CO2 is only one of many factors that influence
both GAT and all the other phenomena.
CO2’s role in controlling GAT is at most perhaps 2 percent,
yet climate alarmists think of it as the “control knob.”
Most people readily confuse weather (short-term, local-scale
temperature, humidity, precipitation, wind, cloudiness, and more)
with climate (long-term, large-scale of each) and think weather
phenomena are driven by climate phenomena; they aren’t.
Consequently, as Lindzen says, the currently popular narrative
concerning this system is this: The climate, a complex multifactor
system, can be summarized in just one variable, the globally
averaged temperature change, and is primarily controlled by the 1
to 2 percent perturbation in the energy budget due to a single
variable — carbon dioxide — among many variables of comparable
This, says Lindzen, is an extraordinary pair of claims based on
reasoning that borders on magical thinking. But this is the
narrative that has been widely accepted.
Crisis of credibility
I turn next to my latest find in my continuing research on the UN
doomsday scare and the global warming debate. I refer to an article
published on April 24, 2018 in Real Clear Markets and Investors
Business Daily titled: “Did You Know the Greatest Two-Year Global
Cooling Event Just Took Place?” by Aaron Brown.
Brown reports that NASA data show that global temperatures
dropped sharply over the past two years. Does this make NASA a
global warming denier?
Brown looked at the official NASA global temperature data and
noticed something surprising. From February 2016 to February 2018,
“global average temperatures dropped by 0.56 degrees Celsius.”
That, he notes, is the biggest two-year drop in the past
“The 2016-2018 Big Chill,” he writes, “was composed of two
Little Chills, the biggest five-month drop ever (February to June
2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar
event from February to June 2018 would bring global average
temperatures below the 1980s average.”
Brown’s discovery did not warrant any news coverage in US
In fact, in the three weeks since Real Clear Markets ran
Brown’s story, no other news outlet picked up on it. Instead they
reported on such things as tourism’s impact on climate change,
how global warming will generate more hurricanes this year,
threaten fish habitats, and make islands uninhabitable. They wrote
about a UN official saying that “our window of time for
addressing climate change is closing very quickly.”
In short, the mainstream media repeated only what climate change
advocates have been saying for decades.
Brown’s point is that the drop in temperatures at least merits
a review of the global warming narrative.
But there is a refusal to cover inconvenient scientific
findings. Brown recalled them.
There was the study published in the American Meteorological
Society’s Journal of Climate showing that climate models
exaggerate global warming from CO2 emissions by as much as 45
percent. It was ignored.
Then there was the study in the journal Nature Geoscience that
found that climate models were faulty, and that, as one of the
authors put it, “We haven’t seen that rapid acceleration in
warming after 2000 that we see in the models.”
Nor did the press see fit to report on findings from the
University of Alabama-Huntsville showing that the Earth’s
atmosphere appears to be less sensitive to changing CO2 levels than
Now, they are also turning their backs on NASA’s findings.
In sum, says Brown, global warming faces a crisis of
This story was
originally published by The Manila Times, Philippines
Extreme weather not proof of global warming, NASA on global
cooling appeared first on Inter Press Service.
Source: FS – All – Ecology – News
Extreme weather not proof of global warming, NASA on global cooling