Four leading Italian scientists have undertaken a major review of historical climate trends and concluded that declaring a ‘climate emergency’ is not supported by the data. Reviewing data from a wide range of weather phenomena, they say a ‘climate crisis’ of the kind people are becoming alarmed about “is not evident yet”. The scientists suggest that rather than burdening our children with anxiety about climate change, we should encourage them to think about issues like energy, food and health, and the challenges in each area, with a more “objective and constructive spirit” and not waste limited resources on “costly and ineffective solutions”.
During the course of their work, the scientists found that rainfall intensity and frequency is stationary in many parts of the world. Tropical hurricanes and cyclones show little change over the long term, and the same is true of U.S. tornadoes. Other meteorological categories including natural disasters, floods, droughts and ecosystem productivity show no “clear positive trend of extreme events”. Regarding ecosystems, the scientists note a considerable “greening” of global plant biomass in recent decades caused by higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Satellite data show “greening” trends over most of the planet, increasing food yields and pushing back deserts.
The four scientists are all highly qualified and include physics adjunct professor Gianluca Alimonti, agrometeorologist Luigi Mariani and physics professors Franco Prodi and Renato Angelo Ricci. The last two are signatories to the rapidly growing ‘World Climate Declaration’. This petition states that there is no climate emergency and calls for climate science to be more scientific. It also calls for liberation from the “naïve belief in immature climate models”. In future, it says, “climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science”.
‘Extreme’ weather events attributed by climate models – somehow – to anthropogenic global warming are now the main staple of the climate alarmist industry. As the Daily Sceptic reported on Monday, Sir David Attenborough used a U.K. Met Office model forecast in the first episode of Frozen Planet II to claim that summer Arctic sea ice could be gone within 12 years. But the likelihood of hardy swimming galas over the North Pole by 2035 seems somewhat remote, not least because Arctic sea ice has been growing in many summers since 2012. According to a recent report from the U.S.-based National Snow and Ice Data Center, at the end of August “sea ice extent is likely to remain higher than in recent years”.
Hurricane and cyclones are favourite subjects for green alarmists. It is unsurprising why they focus on these storms, since the Italian scientists note that historically around 60% of all economic damage caused by global disasters is the consequence of U.S. hurricanes. On May 27th, the Met Office predicted that the 2022 Atlantic hurricane season, which runs from June to November, would “most likely” be above average, with a “likelihood” of 18 named tropical storms including nine hurricanes and four major hurricanes. In fact, the current Atlantic hurricane season has had its slowest start for 30 years. At the end of August there have been no hurricanes, and only three named storms, none of which produced winds of 74mph or higher.
There is plenty of evidence that hurricane and cyclone frequency and intensity has changed little over the recent historical record. “To date, global observations do not show any significant trends in both the number and the energy accumulated by hurricanes,” note the Italian scientists. The two graphs below demonstrate this.
The IPCC has reported that hurricanes have increased in frequency in the North Atlantic since 1878, but the scientists note that observations were relatively low during the first decades of the 20th century. After adjusting for lack of observational capacities in the past, there is a nominal upward trend. This trend, they explain, “is not significantly distinguishable from zero”.
The scientists accept that there has been a recent increase in heatwaves, which they attribute to the 1°C rise in global temperatures, although they note global heatwave intensity trends “are not significant”. They also point out that only a limited number of weather stations have observed an increase in global rainfall. Corresponding evidence for increases in flooding remains elusive, they say, “and a long list of studies shows little or no evidence of increased flood magnitudes, with some studies finding more evidence of decreases than increases”. So far as drought is concerned, the scientists note the AR5 finding of the IPCC that “conclusions regarding global drought trends increasing since the 1970s are no longer supported”. Several studies are said to show no increase in the main indices regarding global droughts.
In fact, a slightly warmer and wetter planet and a little extra CO2 seem to have done wonders for global crop yields. For the period 1961-2019, maize, rice, soyabean and wheat global average yields are reported to have grown every year by 3.3%, 2.4%, 2.6% and 3.8% respectively.
Well-researched, fact-driven, credible scientific papers such as this are crucial in the battle to stop green activists and rentiers having a free run to catastrophise every bad weather event in the interest of promoting a command-and-control Net Zero agenda. Attempting to attribute single weather events to humans burning fossil fuels is the product of feverish imaginations and ‘garbage in, garbage out’ climate models. Rational, evidence-based science should be promoted at every opportunity.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
No scientist would ever use the term climate emergency, it’s entirely political.
Or utter the word “consensus”.
Consistently excellent articles from Mr Morrison.
Very interesting. Thank you very much.
I’m 61.
If the climate had changed since I was a nipper I’m sure I’d have noticed .
I am going tobe 62 this month and I cant see any difference either !!
Same here, early ’60s … climate hasn’t changed in my lifetime.
Mid 60’s and ditto.
Mid ’70s and ditto
Same here. Over the years, there have been quite a few weather events, but climate variation appears to be normal. I can just about remember one winter, which must have been 1962/3, and summer 1976, and a few others. Many of the changes where I live are more to do with urban development, not meteorological changes, though – e.g. minimum temperature on cold nights.
“In fact, a slightly warmer and wetter planet and a little extra CO2 seem to have done wonders for global crop yields.”
Huh? But the crops are all dying. Ah wait.. they’re banning fertiliser to create food shortages they can blame on the ‘climate emergency’. I get it now.
When they say they want to get rid of carbon, they mean you and me.
And the rest of life on Earth, it all being carbon-based…
‘Climate Emergency’ has nothing to do with the climate.
I think that should be pretty obvious by now, but it seems 90% of the world is brainwashed with this nonsense, some to the point of it being a religious experience. There are also lots of people who need this to be true because its how they earn their living, or run their business. They aren’t interested in a reasonable case against their beliefs. They didn’t use reason to formulate their beliefs. Reason will not change their thinking.
Then we have the Great Resetters who have to have a nice fat excuse for all the horrors they are foisting on us, and this one is perfect. ‘Save the world..!’ Just let us tax you to the hilt, and I’m sure it will all be alright. What a load of cobblers.
But Greta said –
We MUST note this properly documented observation: That emissivity (the gas property that is supposedly responsible for ‘trapping’ heat) does not trap heat at all. It’s a measure of how fast a gas can absorb heat and is a zero-sum game. If it absorbs faster it also EMITS faster at equilibrium temperature and emissivity is not a factor in that temperature (Kirchoff’s law of thermal radiation – at equilibrium temperature, emission=absorption). See page 14 of the document linked below
That’s the reason there’s no human-forced climate change. Fill the entire atmosphere with Co2 if you like and it won’t make a jot of different to the climate. (Mars is 95% Co2. It can lose 100 degrees of temperature overnight. Why ? Because the atmosphere is THINNER and no Co2 ‘greenhouse effect’ does anything to offset that. It’s atmospheric density that traps heat and the relevant thermodynamic property is SPECIFIC HEAT CAPACITY).
Earth atmospheric Co2 is 4 hundredths of 1 percent !
See this document where it’s all worked out by a gas turbine engineer – someone who actually understands thermodynamics. Observed temperatures are all accounted for without recourse to any Co2 ‘trapping. If you don’t read the whole document at least see PAGE 14:
https://gvigurs.wordpress.com/2019/04/28/the-emperors-new-climate/
So far, so good, but it’s more complex than that. E.g. local temperature is strongly related to wind direction (when there is any), and cloud cover, which reduces thermal loss from the ground after dark, leading to frost. Quite rapid variations like that are noticeable when you are inland far enough, compared with being near the coast.
It’s not more complex than that. The document calculates the two reference temperatures based on the available solar heat flux: surface temperature and atmospheric radiative equilibrium.
These are the “controls” if you like for everything, including the kind of physical phenomena you describe.
The discontinuity in the two reference temperatures is accounted for by physical activity in the tropopause which is analysed in detail in the document which derives the atmospheric temperature lapse rate from first principles and accounts for the existence of the tropopause within which all “weather” (including the phenomena you describe) is to be found.
The radiative equilibrium temperature is then found above the tropopause in the stratosphere which is isothermic (demonstrating the veracity of the equation shown on Page 14). It also notes that the stratosphere is found at the same pressure level on other planets and moons of planets having an atmosphere.
There’s no role for emissivity in all of this – as I say it’s a zero sum game. The constituents of the atmosphere have very little to say, it’s rather about atmospheric thickness (density).
Spot on petro, but tell that to ‘the masses’ who fell for the COVID nonsense, the Lockdown lunacy, the VAX and multi vax farce, the Ukraine Russia war by proxy and on and on and on, and who will continue to worship at the altar of mendacity.
Over time the truth will prevail. It simply isn’t possible to sustain such basic scientific fraud forever because it’s in the interests of everybody (even ultimately the elite “fraudsters”) to take advantage of the real characteristics of natural phenomena. The greenhouse effect is on very thin ice now due to the amount of time past with nothing happening and, in particular, its single point of failure described in that document above.
i.e.
A: the fact that the gas property of “emissivity” is not a factor in the radiative equilibrium temperature and
B: that the atmospheric reference temperatures (surface and atmospheric radiative equilibrium at the stratosphere) can be accounted for without recourse to some voodoo “trapping” effect beyond the heat capacity of said gas
Is the snowball starting to roll downhill? We will know it has when the BBC permits free and open discussion of climate on its airwaves.
It’ll never happen. Hell will never freeze over.
“For the period 1961-2019, maize, rice, soyabean and wheat global average yields are reported to have grown every year by 3.3%, 2.4%, 2.6% and 3.8% respectively.”
source please, Mr. Morrison.
Repeating the good that co2 does in being turned into carbohydrates by plants might eventually get through to people how stupid, – evil, really, – decarbonisation policies are.
limate Crisis In The Australian Alps
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fz5e-gKV8qI
Tony Heller
Yellow Boards By The Road
If you are feeling down get out and do some Yellow Boards.
Feel the positive vibes.
Tuesday 20th September 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction A329 London Road & Oak Avenue
Near Oakingham Belle Pub
Wokingham RG40 1LH
Thursday 22nd September 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction A30 London Rd &
A325 Portsmouth Road
Camberley GU15 3UZ
Stand in the Park Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham
Howard Palmer Gardens Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park, Rear Lawn, RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
The IPCC reports have been misleading for decades. The summaries say that they are “90% confident that human activity is changing the climate” but in all the main studies and reports, a phrase search of ‘90% confidence’ shows that “we are 90% confident that temperature is changing the climate”.
I have been trying to tell anyone who will listen, but am always ignored by those with self interest, or who can’t believe such a simple mistake.
Not a series of documents (the summaries) that have any credibility…
I just looked up this article with the intention of sharing it with a friend, to back up the comments I made last night. Lucky I thought to click through to the source material – the paper now appears with « Retracted » on every page. What has happened? Why was the paper retracted. Not a good look for me.