WMO – Global Warming Propaganda

May 1, 2023July 7, 2023 rjdavison

CSS-39 Recently, I have noticed a lot of temperature plots that only show the estimated (i.e.: homogenized, manipulated) surface temperature rise from around 1965 to the present. These plots are cherry picked and ignore the much more volatile temperature fluctuations that have preceded 1965. The version included in this post was posted by the WMO and is just one more example of their simplistic, unscientific propaganda program. A more detailed look at WMO propaganda can be found in my May 2022 rebuttal to their May 18^th, 2022, press release, “Four key climate change indicators break records in 2021”. The story could end there, but I noticed that the overall temperature increase on the WMO plot was actually a series of step increases on a ±9 year cyclicity. That same ±9 year cyclicity shows up in the UAH Lower Troposphere satellite temperature data at both the north and south poles.

#climatechange #delaythegreen #globalwarming #showusthedata

I first noticed those pulses when I put together my CSS-32 – UAH-LT Temperatures – November 2022 post. Those pulses look a lot like a strong El Niño followed by a longer lasting La Nina dominated ENSO phase. That ±9 year cyclicity suggests that the global temperatures are noticeably affected by one more parameter that is not CO₂. A potentially obvious reason for the ±9 year cyclicity is the 18.6 year lunar tidal cycle. Not all that surprising given there are many papers that link the lunar cycle to climate and/or arctic temperatures (a few of them are included in the post). Like climate science in general, the lunar/climate interactions are very complicated on their own. I am not going to go into the detail here. However, I will point you to Professor David Dilley for that detail. He (conveniently for me) just released a new video in April 2023 (Signals that global cooling is beginning | Tom Nelson Podcast #97).

Prof. Dilley’s climate change position is “based on Geomagnetic Cycles of the earth-moon-and sun, and how these cycles align with historical, present day and future cycles of climate and weather.” I personally have not researched the lunar connection in detail yet, but I have looked at many of the other gravitational interactions and their potential effects on volcanic and seismic activity and their potentially under appreciated roles in driving the climate. The moon is obviously gravitationally active. As a smaller celestial body, I had wrongly not paid much attention to its influence, focusing on the sun and the larger gas giants. My bad, but my position has always been that I will alter my position on “climate change” when I am presented with data that confirms a different perspective. Unlike CO₂, the empirical data presented here does appear to show the lunar connection and is worth folding into my view of climate change. You, the reader ultimately must make up your own mind but do so with some research behind that decision. The climate is extremely complex and interactive. Much more so than the simplistic, unscientific CO₂ focused CAGW alarmist narrative.

Rolling that lunar influence into my climate change view does give me some cause for concern. The solar and ocean cycles are already pushing our planet into a significant cooling phase. Adding the ±220 year lunar cooling cycle into the mix could add up to some potentially very dangerous cold temperatures over the next few decades. Based on historical cycles/influences, the Grand Solar Minimum (GSM) could drop temperatures by more than 1 °C and the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO) is just moving into its cold phase (another 1 °C+ drop). The lunar cycle cooling over the next few decades is another 0.5 to 1.0 °C drop. If these cold forcings are cumulative (2.5 to 3.0+ °C), we are in for some real climate/societal problems (on top of the ones we are already facing). You can also throw in some PDO cooling just for good measure (maybe 0.5 °C). As an aside, temperatures have already dropped over 0.5 °C over the last 8 years due to a La Niña dominated ENSO cycle. However, the ENSO cycle is switching back to its warm phase (El Niño) and will recover some or all that temperature drop (briefly).

I wish CO₂ had some significant warming capacity. We could really use it. What we will be needing is more reliable, cheap, high-density, transportable energy. Not the sporadic, expensive, low density renewable options being idiotologically shoved down our throats right now. Just my opinion.