Climastrologers Can Now Blame Every Weather Event On Your Carbon Footprint

This tweet from one of my favorite Warmists didn’t age well

because we now have this

Scientists Can Now Blame Individual Natural Disasters on Climate Change
Extreme event attribution is one of the most rapidly expanding areas of climate science

….

His hunch held true. Nearly 15 years later, extreme event attribution not only is possible, but is one of the most rapidly expanding subfields of climate science.

“The public stance of the scientific community about individual event attribution in the year 2000 is that it’s not something that science does,” said Noah Diffenbaugh, a Stanford University climate scientist and attribution expert. “And so to go from that to now, that you’ll find a paper every week … that’s why we say there’s been an explosion of research. It’s gone from zero to 60, basically.”

Over the last few years, dozens of studies have investigated the influence of climate change on events ranging from the Russian heat wave of 2010 to the California drought, evaluating the extent to which global warming has made them more severe or more likely to occur.

Shockingly, these climastrologers find a human-caused greenhouse gas fingerprint in each and every one! No matter what happens, this is their conclusion. Every weather event is linked to or caused by Mankind’s “carbon pollution.”

This is a long, long article, with much to fisk (like how it start out with a discussion of a rising Thames, which hadn’t been that high since 1947! You know, when CO2 was under the “safe” 350ppm), but, the basics here are that the Cult of Climastrology will continue to blamestorm and just pull “science” out of their collective asses.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

17 Responses to “Climastrologers Can Now Blame Every Weather Event On Your Carbon Footprint”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Of course global warming has global effects. You don’t want to admit it for some reason but the Earth is warming and it is a significant increase – probably beyond the entire temperature excursion range of the Holocene epoch. And with no valid reason to expect the warming to stop.

    Regardless of the cause* of this period of warming, we need to prepare ourselves.

    *We know the cause – greenhouse gases.

  2. Fargo says:

    excursion range of the Holocene epoch

    Don’t really know much do you. In fact during the Holocene warm period the temperature in the artic was 4 degrees warmer than today.

    Just a little searching dug up that gem.

    But its okay. the BLUE STATES can tax themselves at 90 percent because they are so rich. Are you kidding me? California has the 6th largest GDP in the world. You can fix this. All you Blue states who are so upset over global warming. WHY do you need POOR red states to help you fix this. We are but a nuisance to the leftists running those states.

  3. Jeffery says:

    Fargo,

    You seem a bit discombobulated the last couple of days. We hope everything is OK.

    My accountant estimates I’ll get only about a $14,000 tax cut for next year.

    Can you cite where you found your Arctic data?

    • Fargo says:

      wikipedia

      Waz a matter Jeffery? Don’t like the concept that the RICH BLUE STATES SHOULD PAY MORE THAN THERE FAIR SHARE? NOT willing to have a progressive tax structure when it comes to RICH BLUE states vs POOR RED STATES??

      Come on you know Im right. The Blue states are not paying their fair share of taxes. They should pay more. Way more. Dayum rich states who get all these tax breaks, shelters and get to USE THEIR OWN MONEY on themselves instead of PAYING FOR RED STATES.

      Come on Jeffery. We know you love taxing the rich. ALL Those BLUE STATES can FIX AGW all by themselves. Its simple. Why don’t they?

  4. Blick says:

    Global warming is a computer simulation game. Just computer projections. The temp data is basically flat and with fewer sunspots meaning the sun is putting out less heat, (my prediction is) the data will show lower temps. Since climate is a 30 year average of weather and weather patterns, there is only one complete 30 year period since 1975, to average weather across. Not enough time and not much data fluctuation to demonstrate climate change.

  5. Rotterdam says:

    Even a Red state crossbreedin hillybilly like me can figure out a few things about global warming.

    The Holocene Climate Optimum (HCO) was a warm period during roughly the interval 9,000 to 5,000 years BP. It has also been known by many other names, such as Hypsithermal, Altithermal, Climatic Optimum, Holocene Optimum, Holocene Thermal Maximum, and Holocene Megathermal.

    The Holocene Climate Optimum warm event consisted of increases of up to 4 °C near the North Pole (in one study, winter warming of 3 to 9 °C and summer of 2 to 6 °C in northern central Siberia).[1] Northwestern Europe experienced warming, but there was cooling in Southern Europe…….

    West African sediments additionally record the African Humid Period, an interval, between 16,000 and 6,000 years ago, when Africa was much wetter because of a strengthening of the African monsoon by changes in summer radiation resulting from long-term variations in the Earth’s orbit around the sun.

    Now if Wikipedia is wrong then my oh my why do people use it so much? I went to a self professed WE KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT EVERYTHING website where they also made the same evaluation but then glossed over it by saying it was regional in that it was in the northern hemisphere were all the ICE was melting. LOL You think? When you really read some of these websites its amazing the hoops you have to jump thru to arrive at where they are trying to take you.

    When its convinient for this site they say the data is sketchy, when it is not they say the data indicates. LOLOL.

    I have to say. The earth is warming and Sir Teach is correct when he talks about the holocene. You sir simply have run out of things to complain about. So lets discuss those RICH BLUE STATES that are not paying near enough of their fair share. Its no wonder the liberal whackos hate fly over country. They dare to mooch off the Elitist Blue states.

    • Jeffery says:

      Rot,

      You have also gone as crazy as the increasingly daft Fargo. What’s happening here? It’s as if mass hysteria has infected the cesspool resulting in the spewing of word salads.

      The far-right has become panicked for some reason and is now lashing out.

      Even Steve Bannon has started attacking the tRump family. Manafort is suing the prosecutors (maybe all crooks should sue their prosecutors).

      Anyway, the global average surface temperature refers to the global (all the globe) average (the arithmetic mean from all the measurements not just your favorites) surface (thermometer readings over the past 100+ years and proxies before) temperature. Yes, it is possible to select one of the dozens of proxy measurements and find one that shows higher than the average. Yes, you can find papers that claim the Arctic or Europe or North Africa showed a temperature spike – but we’re talking about the AVERAGE. You know, the overall temperature estimated by proxies over the entire globe.

      Why do you trust proxy estimates from 8000 yrs ago but distrust thermometer readings from last year?

  6. Jeffery says:

    Blick,

    So your hypothesis is that the Sun is putting out less heat (true) yet the data confirms that the Earth continues to warm? And you think that we’re on the verge of new period of significant cooling? By what mechanism?

    If 42 years of thermometer readings are not enough 30 yr cycles for you, let’s go back 60 yrs (2 cycles). Since 1958, GISTEMP shows 0.155 C /decade, Berkeley 0.147 and HADCRUT 0.144. The satellite datasets that “skeptics” rely on have only been online since 1979, but still show warming with RSS at 0.179 and UAH at 0.155. The Earth has warmed about 1C over the past century. How is that “flat”?

    Not enough time has passed to qualify as climate change? How much longer should we wait to make the call? If it’s another 1C warmer in 2100 will your great-grandkids living on the northern border of the huge midwest OklaMOKA desert be justified in cursing your memory?

    If you don’t trust thermometers when they show warming, why would you trust them to show cooling?

  7. Rotterdam says:

    Blue STATES should BUILD A WALL. To keep us cross breedin, god loving, gun toting hillbillies out of your intellectually superior states. Im surprised they have not started a tax on those with the wrong drivers license.

    But I think the BLUE STATES are not paying enough taxes. They are RICH and make us red states seem like paupers, which of course we are. So those BLUE STATES NEED TO PAY MORE!!!!!

    Scumbag blue states which dont carry their own weight. THEY are the reason we have an imbalanced budget. If you hacked and slashed them out of their money PROGRESSIVELY then we would be able to balance our budget and even have lots and lots left over for us poor red states.

  8. Blick says:

    Jeffery, the graphs for the Holocene seem to fluctuate over 10 degree F range. Let me know when the temps exceed 5+ degrees F. Not by computer simulations. Not by suspect temp data. If science is not founded on absolute integrity and honesty it is not Science. Any suspicion of evidence tampering leaves it to the prosecution (global warming advocates) to prove its data/evidence. Not me. I am a science skeptic as is any good scientist.

    In the mean time it is survival of the fittest and the most adaptable. Out.

  9. Dana says:

    So, if we should happen to hit our average high, 43º F, and average low, 23º F, one day this January, should happen to be completely normal, can we blame that on global warming climate change as well?

  10. Dana says:

    In January of 2006, thankfully-never-president Albert Arnold Gore, Jr declared that the earth had a mere ten years to get right on greenhouse gases, or we would reach a point of no return, the planet would be headed for irreversible, catastrophic climate change.

    Well, of course, the only thing done about climate change was for politicians and prognosticators to run their mouths — or keyboards — jetting around the globe telling us that we’re all doomed, kind of like Crazy Ralph in the original Friday the 13th, and thus we passed the point of no return two years ago.

    Guess that that leaves adapting to whatever climate changes occur as the only remaining option. Of course, humans do adapt, are the most adaptable creatures known, managing to live in the frozen wastes of the North, in the burning deserts of the Middle East, and in steaming equatorial jungles. Hot or cold, wet or dry, humans can, and have, survived and thrived. We have survived floods, we have survived hurricanes, we have survived tornadoes, and what have we done? We’ve modified our buildings to be more earthquake resistant in California, we’ve built homes more resistant to hurricanes in Florida, we’ve developed building codes which require greater finished floor height in potentially flood prone areas, we’ve installed larger, more efficient air conditioning in the South, while frequently ignoring air conditioning, but installed better heating in New England.

    As the climate changes, assuming it does, it will be something gradual, and our science and our civilization will adapt and change with it. Doesn’t it make more sense to build to adapt to real environmental conditions than to spend untold billions in attempts to regulate the climate, attempts which we do not even know will work?

    • Jeffery says:

      Dana,

      Humans as a species will survive and we will spend untold billions adapting to global warming. What if warming doesn’t stop at 2C? What are the effects of 4C or 6C? At the current carbon emission rate there is no reason to think warming will stop barring some catastrophe such as nuclear winter, a massive asteroid strike or the largest volcanic eruption(s) the world has ever experienced.. or until we run our of carbon sources to burn.

      • Dana says:

        We will spend untold billions adapting to global warming? Well, perhaps so, but it will be money spent adapting to real, existing conditions, conditions we will know about, conditions to which we can engineer.

        You, on the other hand, would have us spend untold billions on schemes which even global warming climate change partisans say are probably too little, too late, leaving us needing to spend the money needed to adapt anyway.

        There are times that the global warming climate change Chicken Littles remind me of some of those goofy shows on Discovery Channel, Top Ten Ways the Earth Could Be Destroyed. It is a perfectly reasonable thing to reduce fossil fuel usage, and we will, as new technologies are developed, but you would try to use government force to impoverish working Americans before some of those new technologies have been developed.

  11. Jl says:

    And from paragraph 29 of the article “Today, scientists generally agree that it’s impossible to attribute any individual weather phenomena solely to climate change.” Wow-a warmunist telling the truth?

  12. Jl says:

    And as shown here, the global temp record was sorely lacking in station coverage even up to 1950. But yet, we know the temp of the earth to .1 degree…..https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/11/28/global-temperature-trends-based-on-non-existent-data/

Pirate's Cove