Point-in-fact, we’ve noted repeatedly over the last decade–that the hidden hands behind all of the climate change sensationalism’s true goal is, in fact, one of a centralized world government and totalitarian Socialism financial system worldwide.

A former treasurer of a major world organization even admitted to the fact that global economic changes were the actual goal being sought–so, it’s not surprising that when the searing heat of late Summer arrives, all of the indoctrinated academics start clucking that the sky is literally falling.

The climate hasn’t changed, nor has the true science, however, the cult of individuals trying to gain authority over it, along with pretty much everything else, have.

It’s the Hegelian Dialectic on full display…

 ~ Refocus Notes

The Daily Caller

By Michael Bastasch | Contributor

While scientists and environmentalists debate when global warming may turn Earth into a “hothouse,” conservatives and other experts were skeptical of renewed warnings of a “tipping point.”

Why? Because scientists warning of “hothouse Earth” veered from presenting a scientific case (a dubious one) for alarmism into political activism.

The “hothouse Earth” paper that’s made waves in the media calls for a “deep transformation based on a fundamental reorientation of human values, equity, behavior, institutions, economies, and technologies.” Many conservatives took that to mean global government and socialism.

Bloomberg New Energy Finance co-founder Michael Liebreich, who’s not a skeptic of man-made warming, called the paper “a crock,” adding “as a conservative I can’t be bothered to read it.”

 (RELATED: Scientists Issue ‘Absurd’ Doomsday Prediction, Warn Of ‘Hothouse Earth’)

 When challenged, Liebrich doubled down, quoting directly from the paper that called for “collective human action” on global warming.

The paper Liebrich is referring to was published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. A group of scientists warned of a global warming tipping point at 2 degrees Celsius — the goal of the Paris agreement.

The authors call for “fundamental societal changes” to human society while generating alarming media headlines.

Even liberal environmental writer Eric Holthaus tweeted the “hothouse” paper had “some @DemSocialists shit,” referring to the Democratic Socialist of America political party.

The Global Warming Policy Forum, the political arm of a U.K.-based think tank co-founded by former conservative Member of Parliament Nigel Lawson, blasted the “socialist agenda of climate alarmism.”

Conservatives weren’t the only ones calling out the “hothouse” paper’s political tinge. Alex Trembath of the ecomodernist Breakthrough Institute noted his skepticism of the paper.

University of Colorado professor Roger Pielke, Jr. noted the lead authors of the “hothouse Earth” paper put out a similar essay in 2013, calling for an “institution (or institutions) operating, with authority, above the level of individual countries to ensure that the planetary boundaries are respected.”

Click Here to View Tweets and additional documentation

As written about for almost an entire decade, scientists are now recognizing that a solar cycle-driven global cooling period has begun, and it could last as long as two-hundred years.

The simple fact is that climate change, as an agenda, was already on the way out, along with Obama, the Democrats, and the now uncovered climate change funding ideology, which sought to fraudulently affect worldwide financial systems changes, and draconian controls, by virtue of changing climate cycles.

While the global climate cultists will continue their efforts in earnest, what they’ve predicted and what has actually happened, with the world’s temperatures, will simply be too much for them to overcome.

They will argue that we’re seeing record low temperatures due to climate change, however, no one has forgotten that climate change is merely a revisioned way of saying global warming, and the globalists will not be able to escape this simple fact.

~ Refocus Notes

Forbes

Peter Ferrara,  CONTRIBUTOR

Around 1250 A.D., historical records show, ice packs began showing up farther south in the North Atlantic. Glaciers also began expanding on Greenland, soon to threaten Norse settlements on the island. From 1275 to 1300 A.D., glaciers began expanding more broadly, according to radiocarbon dating of plants killed by the glacier growth. The period known today as the Little Ice Age was just starting to poke through.

Summers began cooling in Northern Europe after 1300 A.D., negatively impacting growing seasons, as reflected in the Great Famine of 1315 to 1317. Expanding glaciers and ice cover spreading across Greenland began driving the Norse settlers out. The last, surviving, written records of the Norse Greenland settlements, which had persisted for centuries, concern a marriage in 1408 A.D. in the church of Hvalsey, today the best preserved Norse ruin.

Colder winters began regularly freezing rivers and canals in Great Britain, the Netherlands and Northern France, with both the Thames in London and the Seine in Paris frozen solid annually. The first River Thames Frost Fair was held in 1607. In 1607-1608, early European settlers in North America reported ice persisting on Lake Superior until June. In January 1658, a Swedish army marched across the ice to invade Copenhagen. By the end of the 17th century, famines had spread from northern France, across Norway and Sweden, to Finland and Estonia.

Reflecting its global scope, evidence of the Little Ice Age appears in the Southern Hemisphere as well. Sediment cores from Lake Malawi in southern Africa show colder weather from 1570 to 1820. A 3,000-year temperature reconstruction based on varying rates of stalagmite growth in a cave in South Africa also indicates a colder period from 1500 to 1800. A 1997 study comparing West Antarctic ice cores with the results of the Greenland Ice Sheet Project Two (GISP2) indicate a global Little Ice Age affecting the two ice sheets in tandem.

Conservative Refocus: Eleven Proven Climate Change Lies the Media Has Told You

The Siple Dome, an ice dome roughly 100 km long and 100 km wide, about 100 km east of the Siple Coast of Antartica, also reflects effects of the Little Ice Age synchronously with the GISP2 record, as do sediment cores from the Bransfield Basin of the Antarctic Peninsula. Oxygen/isotope analysis from the Pacific Islands indicates a 1.5 degree Celsius temperature decline between 1270 and 1475 A.D. 

The Franz Josef glacier on the west side of the Southern Alps of New Zealand advanced sharply during the period of the Little Ice Age, actually invading a rain forest at its maximum extent in the early 1700s. The Mueller glacier on the east side of New Zealand’s Southern Alps expanded to its maximum extent at roughly the same time.

Ice cores from the Andes mountains in South America show a colder period from 1600 to 1800. Tree ring data from Patagonia in South America show cold periods from 1270 to 1380 and from 1520 to 1670. Spanish explorers noted the expansion of the San Rafael Glacier in Chile from 1675 to 1766, which continued into the 19th century.

The height of the Little Ice Age is generally dated as 1650 to 1850 A.D. The American Revolutionary Army under General George Washington shivered at Valley Forge in the winter of 1777-78, and New York harbor was frozen in the winter of 1780. Historic snowstorms struck Lisbon, Portugal in 1665, 1744 and 1886. Glaciers in Glacier National Park in Montana advanced until the late 18th or early 19th centuries. The last River Thames Frost Fair was held in 1814. The Little Ice Age phased out during the middle to late 19th century.

The Little Ice Age, following the historically warm temperatures of the Medieval Warm Period, which lasted from about AD 950 to 1250, has been attributed to natural cycles in solar activity, particularly sunspots. A period of sharply lower sunspot activity known as the Wolf Minimum began in 1280 and persisted for 70 years until 1350. That was followed by a period of even lower sunspot activity that lasted 90 years from 1460 to 1550 known as the Sporer Minimum. During the period 1645 to 1715, the low point of the Little Ice Age, the number of sunspots declined to zero for the entire time. This is known as the Maunder Minimum, named after English astronomer Walter Maunder. That was followed by the Dalton Minimum from 1790 to 1830, another period of well below normal sunspot activity.

The increase in global temperatures since the late 19th century just reflects the end of the Little Ice Age. The global temperature trends since then have followed not rising CO2 trends but the ocean temperature cycles of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). Every 20 to 30 years, the much colder water near the bottom of the oceans cycles up to the top, where it has a slight cooling effect on global temperatures until the sun warms that water. That warmed water then contributes to slightly warmer global temperatures, until the next churning cycle.

Global Warming Meltdown: An Academia Army of Avaricious Chicken Littles ThroughoutHistory

Those ocean temperature cycles and the continued recovery from the Little Ice Age are primarily why global temperatures rose from 1915 until 1945 when CO2 emissions were much lower than in recent years. The change to a cold ocean temperature cycle, primarily the PDO, is the main reason that global temperatures declined from 1945 until the late 1970s, despite the soaring CO2 emissions during that time from the postwar industrialization spreading across the globe.

The 20 to 30-year ocean temperature cycles turned back to warm from the late 1970s until the late 1990s, which is the primary reason that global temperatures warmed during this period. But that warming ended 15 years ago, and global temperatures have stopped increasing since then, if not actually cooled, even though global CO2 emissions have soared over this period. As The Economist magazine reported in March, “The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO2 put there by humanity since 1750.” Yet, still no warming during that time. That is because the CO2 greenhouse effect is weak and marginal compared to natural causes of global temperature changes.

At first, the current stall out of global warming was due to the ocean cycles turning back to cold. But something much more ominous has developed over this period. Sunspots run in 11-year short term cycles, with longer cyclical trends of 90 and even 200 years. The number of sunspots declined substantially in the last 11-year cycle, after flattening out over the previous 20 years. But in the current cycle, sunspot activity has collapsed. NASA’s Science News report for January 8, 2013 states,

“Indeed, the sun could be on the threshold of a mini-Maunder event right now. Ongoing Solar Cycle 24 [the current short term 11-year cycle] is the weakest in more than 50 years. Moreover, there is (controversial) evidence of a long-term weakening trend in the magnetic field strength of sunspots. Matt Penn and William Livingston of the National Solar Observatory predict that by the time Solar Cycle 25 arrives, magnetic fields on the sun will be so weak that few if any sunspots will be formed. Independent lines of research involving helioseismology and surface polar fields tend to support their conclusion.”

That is even more significant because NASA’s climate science has been controlled for years by global warming hysteric James Hansen, who recently announced his retirement.

But this same concern is increasingly being echoed worldwide. The Voice of Russia reported on April 22, 2013,

“Global warming which has been the subject of so many discussions in recent years may give way to global cooling. According to scientists from the Pulkovo Observatory in St.Petersburg, solar activity is waning, so the average yearly temperature will begin to decline as well. Scientists from Britain and the US chime in saying that forecasts for global cooling are far from groundless.”

That report quoted Yuri Nagovitsyn of the Pulkovo Observatory saying, “Evidently, solar activity is on the decrease. The 11-year cycle doesn’t bring about considerable climate change – only 1-2%. The impact of the 200-year cycle is greater – up to 50%. In this respect, we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years.” In other words, another Little Ice Age.

Mini-Ice-Age Coming: Latest Study On Solar Cycles Destroys "Climate Change" Theory

One school of thought largely represented by the political left puts forth the onus that man is responsible for any and all climate changes that occur, including droughts, violent storms, and wide temperature variations.

The other and more valid school points to solar cycles, proffering the well-accepted theory that Earth's climate is almost solely predicated on the Sun's solar cycles, and the many variations associated with the Sun's activities.

The latest studies, after REAL scientific reviews, has been judged to be extraordinarily accurate...this is, most likely the real story, that will prove difficult for the globalist to politically advantage...especially, at this point

~Refocus Notes

By Anthony Watts 

There’s a lot of evidence mounting that solar cycle 25 will usher in a new grand solar minimum.

Since about October 2005, when the sun’s magnetic activity went into a sharp fall, solar activity has been markedly lower, with solar cycle 24 being the lowest in over 100 years.

Interplanetary magnetic field – Image from NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center

Solar cycle 24 – Image from NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center

Cycle 24 is part of a weakening progression of solar cycles since 1980:

Daily observations of the number of sunspots since 1 January 1900 according to Solar Influences Data Analysis Center (SIDC). The thin blue line indicates the daily sunspot number, while the dark blue line indicates the running annual average. The recent low sunspot activity is clearly reflected in the recent low values for the total solar irradiance. Data source: WDC-SILSO, Royal Observatory of Belgium, Brussels. Last day showed: 28 February 2018. Last diagram update: 1 March 2018. (Credit climate4you.com)

Meteorologist Paul Dorian at Vencore weather writes:

All indications are that the upcoming solar minimum which is expected to begin in 2019 may be even quieter than the last one which was the deepest in nearly a century.

Some scientists are even saying that we are on the cusp of a new grand solar minimum, and the upcoming cycle 25 may have even lower cycles after it.

This empirical modeling of solar recurrent patterns has also provided a consequent multi-millennial-scale experimental forecast, suggesting a solar decreasing trend toward Grand (Super) Minimum conditions for the upcoming period, AD2050–2250 (AD 3750–4450).

Source: Evidence of cosmic recurrent and lagged millennia-scale patterns and consequent forecasts: multi-scale responses of solar activity (SA) to planetary gravitational forcing (PGF) 

(open access)

Simon Constable, in Forbes writes:

The question is whether we will enter another grand solar minimum just like the Maunder minimum which, if history is a guide, would mean a period of much colder weather winters and summers.

Once upon a time, people would worship the sun as a deity. It was with good reason that they did so for the sun provided much of what sustains life on our small planet, warmth and bountiful harvests. How would we survive if the sun stopped beating down on us? It was a real fear.

Then came science and industrialization. As the new era took over, we mostly forgot the sun and its importance to our existence. (Of course, most people occasionally complain that it is either too sunny or not sunny enough.)

But just because we stopped paying close attention doesn’t mean that it lost any of its importance to our world. And neither does the fact that the life of the sun is far more complex than many people realize. Indeed, if we are to believe the experts,the sun’s behavior is about to change in a way that could have dramatic consequences for the food we eat and the broader economy.

 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has yet again been caught exaggerating  ‘global warming’ by fiddling with the raw temperature data.

Breitbart

by JAMES DELINGPOLE

This time, that data concerns the recent record-breaking cold across the northeastern U.S. which NOAA is trying to erase from history.

If you believe NOAA’s charts, there was nothing particularly unusual about this winter’s cold weather which caused sharks to freeze in the ocean and iguanas to drop out of trees.

Here is NOAA’s January 2018 chart for Northeast U.S. – an area which includes New England along with NY, PA, NJ, DE and MD.

You’d never guess from it that those regions had just experienced record-breaking cold, would you?

That’s because, as Paul Homewood has discovered, NOAA has been cooking the books. Yet again – presumably for reasons more to do with ideology than meteorology – NOAA has adjusted past temperatures to look colder than they were and recent temperatures to look warmer than they were.

We’re not talking fractions of a degree, here. The adjustments amount to a whopping 3.1 degrees F. This takes us well beyond the regions of error margins or innocent mistakes and deep into the realm of fiction and political propaganda.

Homewood first smelt a rat when he examined the New York data sets.

He was particularly puzzled at NOAA’s treatment of the especially cold winter that ravaged New York in 2013/14, which he describes here:

The cold weather really began on Jan 2nd, when an Arctic front descended across much of the country, and extended well into March.

The NWS wrote at the end of the winter:

The winter of 2013-14 finished as one of the coldest winters in recent memory for New York State.  Snowfall across Western and North Central New York was above normal for many areas, and in some locations well above normal. This winter comes on the heels of two previous mild winters, making the cold and snow this winter feel that much harsher.

Temperatures this winter finished below normal every month, and the January through March timeframe finished at least 4 degrees below normal for the two primary climate stations of Western New York (Buffalo and Rochester)…..

Relentless cold continued through the month of January across the region.

So why, he wondered, did NOAA have this marked down as only the 30th coldest winter (since 1895) on its New York State charts, with a mean temperature of 16.9F?

Homewood compared the local records for January 1943 and January 2014 – months which, according to NOAA’s charts, had very similar average temperatures.

What he found was that NOAA’s charts were deeply inaccurate. The 2014 local temperatures had been adjusted upwards by NOAA and the 1943 local temperatures downwards.

Continue Reading

CRN Politics

By Barry Secrest

According to a recent report from Scientific American,  the global pollution which was supposedly causing all the global warming out there is also the very thing that is keeping the Earth cooler than it might have been without all the pollution.

Yes indeed, you read that correctly.

The study from the journal Geophysical Research Letters asserts the following, in part:

"Pollution in the atmosphere is having an unexpected consequence, scientists say—it's helping to cool the climate, masking some of the global warming that's occurred so far.

"That means efforts worldwide to clean up the air may cause an increase in warming, as well as other climate effects, as this pollution disappears."

So, if indeed pollution is the culprit that causes climate change, then how is it that pollution is also the very thing that's simultaneously saving the planet?

It's a question for the ages.

However, Al Gore, who crisscrosses the planet in his private jet spewing carbon like a mini-volcano while howling about all the ill-effects that modern industry has on warming the planet, could, again profit splendidly from his global warming narrative, by stating that his lavish activities are merely intended to save the planet, from itself.

However, this particular theorem also fits rather snugly with the climate change industry's other paradoxical assertion that global warming is now causing wide-ranging global cooling and a great deal more snow.

We wonder, by the way, if perhaps, the scientists originating these particularly mind-bending reports might, in fact, be based in Colorado...

More on this enigmatic story from Scientific American:

"Pollution in the atmosphere is having an unexpected consequence, scientists say—it's helping to cool the climate, masking some of the global warming that's occurred so far.

That means efforts worldwide to clean up the air may cause an increase in warming, as well as other climate effects, as this pollution disappears.

New research is helping to quantify just how big that effect might be.

A study published this month in the journal Geophysical Research Letters suggests that eliminating the human emission of aerosols—tiny, air-polluting particles often released by industrial activities—could result in additional global warming of anywhere from half a degree to 1 degree Celsius.

This would virtually ensure that the planet will warm beyond the most stringent climate targets outlined in the Paris climate agreement. World leaders have set an ambitious goal of keeping global temperatures within 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius of their pre-industrial levels. But research suggests the world has already warmed by about 1 degree—meaning even another half a degree of warming could push the planet into dangerous territory.

"Since we're trying to keep to a 1.5- or 2-degree target, then this is something we still need to keep in mind," said Bjørn Samset, a climate scientist at Norway's CICERO Center for International Climate Research and the study's lead author.

The research also suggests that removing aerosols could have striking regional consequences by causing major changes in precipitation and other weather patterns in certain parts of the world. Aerosols don't linger in the atmosphere for very long, meaning they don't have time to spread around the world the way carbon dioxide and some other greenhouse gases do. Their effects tend to be strongest in the regions where they were emitted in the first place.

This means the places where air pollution is most severe are likely to experience some of the greatest effects if that pollution were to disappear.

East Asia, where aerosol emissions are some of the highest in the world, would be likely to experience a strong increase in precipitation and extreme weather events. To a certain extent, these effects might carry over to other parts of the Northern Hemisphere, which are connected to Asia via major atmospheric currents.

"We also see that the impact that these aerosols have on the temperature in Asia really transports northwards to the Arctic region, northern Europe, Norway, the northern U.S.," Samset noted. "That part of the world is also quite sensitive to the changes in aerosols in Asia."

Continue Reading