Useful information on climate from someone who does know what she is talking about.
Changing climate goalposts and extreme weather events
Many years ago, I first heard Professor Judith Curry speak about climate science. Previously, she was Professor and Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Here is a [link] to her c.v.
I have excerpted from a recent article of hers below, because it touches on two important points:
-
The globalist climate goalposts keep changing as the predicted temperature increases fail to eventuate
-
Extreme weather events have not been scientifically linked to climate warming. [Some propose they are due to “weather warfare” using technologies not publicly known.]
Dr. Curry elaborated on extreme weather events in her 2019 congressional testimony. She noted, surprisingly:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Extreme Events acknowledges that there is not yet evidence of changes in the global frequency or intensity of hurricanes, droughts, floods or wildfires.
From a December 2022 article of hers:
Given the apocalyptic rhetoric surrounding climate change, does the alleged urgency of reducing carbon dioxide emissions somehow trump these other considerations? Well, the climate ‘crisis’ isn’t what it used to be. The COP27 has dropped the most extreme emissions scenario from consideration, which was the source of the most alarming predictions. Only a few years ago, an emissions trajectory that produced 2 to 3 degrees C warming was regarded as climate policy success. As limiting warming to 2 degrees C seems to be in reach, the goal posts were moved to limit the warming target to 1.5 degrees C. These warming targets are referenced to a baseline at the end of the 19th century; the Earth’s climate has already warmed by 1.1 degrees C. In context of this relatively modest warming, climate ‘crisis’ rhetoric is now linked to extreme weather events.
Attributing extreme weather and climate events to global warming can motivate a country to attempt to rapidly transition away from fossil fuels. However, we should not delude ourselves into thinking that eliminating emissions would have a noticeable impact on weather and climate extremes in the 21st century. It is very difficult to untangle the roles of natural weather and climate variability and land use from the slow creep of global warming. Looking back into the past, including paleoclimatic data, there has been more extreme weather everywhere on the planet. Thinking that we can minimize severe weather through using atmospheric carbon dioxide as a control knob is a fairy tale. In particular, Australia is responsible for slightly more than 1% of global carbon emissions. Hence, Australia’s emissions have a minimal impact on global warming as well as on Australia’s own climate.
There is growing realization that these emissions and temperature targets have become detached from the issues of human well-being and development. Yes, we need to reduce CO2 emissions over the course of the 21st century. However once we relax the faux urgency for eliminating CO2 emissions and the stringent time tables, we have time and space to envision new energy systems that can meet the diverse, growing needs of the 21st century. This includes sufficient energy to help reduce our vulnerability to surprises from extreme weather and climate events.