Whisper it quietly – and don’t tell Al ‘Boiling Oceans’ Gore – but the Northern hemisphere may be entering a temperature cooling phase until the 2050s with a decline up to 0.3°C. By extension, the rest of the globe will also be cooled. These sensational findings, ignored by the mainstream media, were released last year and are the work of six top international scientists led by Nour-Eddine Omrani of the Norwegian Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research. Published in the Nature journal Climate and Atmospheric Science, the scientists say that the North Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, an important sea current that has been pumping warmer water into the Arctic, is weakening and that’s leading to a cooler North Atlantic area and lower temperatures, as was observed in the period 1950-1970.
Certainly, current observations back up these suggestions. As we reported recently, Arctic summer sea ice stopped declining about a decade ago and has shown recent growth. The Greenland surface ice sheet grew by almost 500 billion tonnes in the year to August 2022, and this was nearly equivalent to its estimated annual loss. Of course, climate alarmists have not quite caught up with these recent trends, with Sir David Attenborough telling his BBC Frozen Planet II audience that the summer sea ice could all be gone within 12 years.
Interestingly, the six scientists, whose work has helped debunk the ‘settled’ science myth, still attribute some global warming to human causes. The Northern hemisphere is characterised by “several multidecadal climate trends that have been attributed to anthropogenic climate change”. But producing work that predicts 30 years of global cooling puts them outside the ‘settled’ narrative that claims human-produced carbon dioxide is the main – possibly the only – determinant of global and local temperatures. At the very least, it dials down the hysteria pushing for almost immediate punitive net-Zero measures. Lead author Omrani is reported to have said that the expected warming pause “gives us time to work out technical, political and economic solutions before the next warming phase, which will take over again from 2050”.
Needless to say, such thinking was absent at last week’s Davos climate freak show, with elite delegates ramping up the fearmongering to record heights. Former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore went into full meltdown, ranting about “rain bombs” and “boiling oceans”. Current U.S. climate envoy, and private jet owner, John Kerry described the gathering as a “select” group of people trying to “save the planet”, while chief UN carnival barker Antonio Guterres claimed we were flirting with climate disaster and every week brought a new horror story. Of course, some might suggest that in the circumstances this was an all-round excellent effort to whip up more money – ahem, I mean more genuine climate concern – at a time when corals, Arctic sea ice, the Greenland ice sheet, polar bears and now global warming are having to be retired from the poster-alarm portfolio.
As we have noted on numerous occasions, rising global temperatures ran out of steam about two decades ago. Accurate satellite records show pauses from around 2000 to 2012 and a current one lasting over eight years. It could be argued that the only real warming for over 20 years was caused by a particularly powerful El Nino natural oscillation around the middle of the last decade. Surface datasets run by operations like the U.K. Met Office have added retrospective warming, while there are increasing doubts about the on-site recording of massive heat distortions caused by the growth in cities and towns across the globe.
The Omrani paper is complex but it revolves around the effect of the cyclical and natural North Atlantic Multidecadel Oscillation (AMO). Observations and records dating back to the start of the 19th century have shown enormous Arctic sea ice changes. It appears the AMO plays a major part in these changes. A key projection of the paper is “further weakening of the North Atlantic Oscillation, North Atlantic cooling and hiatus in wintertime North Atlantic Arctic sea ice and global surface temperatures just like the 1950 – 1970s”. If there is a drop comparable with this period, the global temperature could fall by up to 0.3°C.
Any science that downplays the involvement of human-caused CO2 is largely ignored in mainstream academia, politics and the media. But even some scientists who argue there is considerable anthropogenic input recognise the role played by natural atmospheric factors in a constantly changing climate. More sceptical scientists such as Emeritus Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT have an intellectual objection to blaming all or most changes in global temperatures on just one trace atmospheric gas. Lindzen is dismissive of this “one dimensional” view of the climate. He is of the climate science school of thought that argues that temperature changes are caused by dynamic heat flows in the atmosphere and the oceans, and these in turn are caused by latitudinal differences in temperature, or ‘baroclinic instability’ to give it a scientific term.
For Lindzen, it is “absurd” to assume that the controlling factor for temperature changes in our complex, three-dimensional climate is the small contribution made by CO2. It seems that the more scientists look and explore, the more they understand that the atmosphere and the climate it produces is an immensely complex environment affected by many far-reaching natural influences.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. He was a recent guest on the podcast of online climate journalist Tom Nelson, where he talked about his early journalistic influences, life as a journalist and an entrepreneur, joining a rock and roll band and his recent work on the Daily Sceptic. You can listen here.
Stop Press: Check out the Extinction Clock, a website that keeps track of all the predictions climate alarmists have made that haven’t come true. For example, this prediction in a 2009 MSNBC documentary called ‘Future Earth: What Will Earth Look Like in 2025?’ that the Hoover Damn would be a ‘dry hole’ by 2021 if nothing was done to avert the looming water shortage.
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.
The only anti lockdown candidate standing that I am aware of is Laurence Fox and he will lose his deposit
He won’t if people vote for him. I know this is controversial to some but what have you to lose? A Labour or Conservative MP will have exactly the same pro-WEF, pro-Climate change, pro 15 minute cities, pro-lockdown policies, so why not vote for someone else?
Exactly.
Oh I totally agree
Just find it immensely sad and frustrating that support for mainstream parties on both sides of the political spectrum remains so high despite their obvious disregard for the support base they pretend to represent
The implication of the article is that support for the ULEZ will damage them at the expense of the Tories. While this may be true, I don’t see it as an especially good thing. Journalists from the political right need to come and and tell people they shouldn’t vote Conservative
As will the Lib Dems and Greens were they to win.
Exactly. There is nothing to gain whatsoever by voting for establishment parties- quite the reverse those voting for establishment parties are delusional fools who encourage the scoundrels to double down on their evil agendas.
UKIP wanted to talk about a strategy for all centre right challengers to come together but Reclaim and Reform UK are so far up their own backsides they refused to engage.
Aren’t all political parties a fair way up their own backsides? I’m suspicious of any party that didn’t firmly oppose lockdowns and fake vaccines from the start.
I think that Piers Corbyn is standing too….
I don’t know much about what his economic policies would be, but he was a star during covid.
He’s continuing to be a star in speaking out about the agenda – has a raft of unpaid ULEZ fines which he continues to refuse to pay.
Good to hear. I think I’d vote for him just for that.
You still think a by-election matters? Where have you been for the last three years? The entire political class of the Western world is moving in lockstep and gets its orders not from the party or the people but from the WEF at Davos.
This isn’t a conspiracy theory, it is a conspiracy FACT.
MP’s don’t need orders, just a keen sense of self-preservation, some proclivities that make them suggestible, or an ideological mindset that aligns with Other Interests. Less likely to generate incriminating documentation.
Then why do they go to Davos and why can’t you know what they are talking about with the global elite? Why is every major political party rep in every country saying they same things? I grew up wathing the politics of the 1970s, MPs had al the things you stated but completely differing views of even members of their own parties. Now you could most MPs in any rosette and they’d be fine with party policy.
Wake up my friend, time is getting short.
It was an observation that we’d be lucky to find any document making this explicitly clear. People can easily prove to themselves whether their MP will represent them. I have and he doesn’t.
Why is a candidate considered mofe favourably because they are/were:
born in Hillingdon Hospital
educated at a local comprehensive
raised by a single-mother
in South Ruislip and Ruislip Manor
the first person in his family to go to university
a former charity worker
I can think of several much more important qualities in a candidate.
As a comprehensive schooled pupil myself I would think that (and several other of those traits) would make them less suited in fact.
“A policy that was introduced to create cleaner air in the city centre”
No, it wasn’t. It was introduced to force the closure of shops, convert them to housing and create a 15 minute neighbourhood in which there would be few or zero cars. Read “Absolute Zero” by UK FIRES, page 5, for further details.
https://ukfires.org/absolute-zero/
Correct.
Absolutely, Allmouth.
Air “pollution” is at all-time record LOW levels. So the premise for this scheme is weapons grade bolix.
But we have “Conservatives” who conserve nothing, “Labour” who don’t care a fiddler’s fart about working people and “Liberal Democrats” who are absolutely illiberal and actively anti-democratic. Ony Gang”Green” stand out as having an appropriate name – albeit most of their policies are actually environmentally damaging.
Vote for ANYONE other than the LibLabCon artists. Or spoil the ballot.
A more emphatic response to the whole charade would be the best choice, but won’t happen.
Down with the Tories… but hold on, no… down with Labour even more! Let’s side with the underdogs… Vote REFORM!!! Oh, shucks, they’re pro-vaccination, where are we going to go from here? C’mon Nige, we need you to form another party, or Richard Tice to form a coalition with the Conservative party, yes that would be nice. But we’ve got to get rid of that pro-vax dogma somehow. You gotta be anti-lockdown, you gotta be pro-choice, you gotta be pro-personal freedom. Perhaps, just perchance, Westminster politics isn’t the best arena to satisfy all the above criteria. Maybe the punks of the 1960s were right all along, and maybe the hippies and beatniks to boot. It doesn’t matter which way you vote, you get the same greenwashed slime either way. I suspect Joseph Goebbels is turning in his grave as we speak, smugly and posthumously acknowledging the current establishment’s inability to match up to the best of 1940’s National Socialist Propagandists.
The woke, greenwashed left, as satirized and caricatured by Kier “What Is A Woman?” Starmer, was always doomed to face such a dilemma as this, as it has unthinkingly placed itself between a “rock” (the ULEZ scheme, part of the unchallenged Net Zero Sense agenda) and a “hard place” (the Labour Party’s supposed allegiance to those whom it represents – the struggling working class majority).
I’m not sure there is a shovel, nay, a JCB digger, large and powerful enough for Mr Starmer to dig himself out of the chasm he has dug himself by not challenging the ruling party and the prevailing agenda over the past three years.
The “Green Agenda”—- Central planning with the planet as the excuse.———– You can be sure that the fence sitter in chief (Starmer) who waits to see which way the wind is blowing before deciding if men are women or if children are foxes will squirm like the social justice pretend to save the planet parasite he is on this issue as on all others. ——-Starmer needs to be viewed through a microscope like all other parasites in the hope we can one day find a cure.
Dangerous Men