from climaterealism
Author: Linny Luken
A number of media published articles reporting on a report by the European Copernicus Climate Change Service (“Copernicus”). The report stated that 2024 will be the first time since the pre-industrial era that the temperature rise has exceeded 1.5°C. The media said this will cause incalculable consequences. weather disasters. This is mostly wrong. While average temperatures in 2024 are likely to be warmer than in recent decades, it is not yet the end of the year, there is limited evidence to support the claim that it will represent the highest temperatures humans have ever experienced, and there is no evidence that weather disasters have or will become more serious.
Copernicus' reports were reported by many mainstream media outlets, including the BBC and CNN.
CNN (CNN) described the report as “devastating news for the planet as the United States elects a president who promises to undo climate progress made at home and abroad.”
The Copernicus team estimates that temperatures in 2024 will be 1.55°C above the average temperature from 1850 to 1900 and 0.05°C above the warming limit set by the Paris Agreement. This may be true, but there is no evidence that the 1.5°C threshold is actually a fatal tipping point for some kind of weather disaster. The organization issued warnings for several months last year that “limits” were exceeded, but ignored natural factors such as underwater volcanic eruptions. As for the 1.5-degree limit itself, it was not set by professional climate scientists. Of the group that proposed the value, only one was a meteorologist.
There are two further points worth noting. This statement is a bit gimmicky, just cherry-picking data for comparison. When the 1850 period began, the Earth had just emerged from a Little Ice Age, one of the coldest periods of the past millennium. When you choose a typically cold period for comparison, the modest warming seems more noticeable than it actually is.
Secondly, 1.5°C is an arbitrary temperature choice. as climate realism It has been discussed over and over again, here , here , here , for example, that it is chosen by politicians for political reasons. There is no scientific evidence that it represents a tipping point for catastrophic climate change. Global warming may have exceeded 2°C since the 1700s without catastrophe.
One might think that if warming led to more extreme weather, there would be reliable data and identifiable consistent trends showing an increase in extreme weather, but there is not. The three weather events CNN (CNN) cites at the end of the article as evidence of the so-called climate emergency, namely Hurricane Milton, flooding in Spain and low snow levels on Mount Fuji, are not evidence of a climate emergency. CNN's (CNN) characterization of any severe weather as “caused by climate change” is unscientific at best and propagandistic and dishonest at worst.
Hurricane Milton climate realism The reports here, here, and here are not unprecedented. Nor is it caused by climate change. Similar storms struck the region in the mid-1800s and early 1900s, before modern mild warming began in earnest. Florida data in particular shows no trend in hurricane severity. (see picture below)
The hurricane overall also did not intensify.
This autumn's flooding in Spain also has no actual data to support any idea of ”climate fueling” – meteorological history once again shows that the event was not unprecedented or unexpected. While it's true that warmer air can hold more moisture, that doesn't mean every heavy rainfall event will be affected by this effect. There is no direct linear correlation between the air's ability to hold more water vapor and the increase in rainfall during a storm. Furthermore, there have been many times in Spain's history where massive floods with similar deadly effects have occurred during periods of cooler temperatures. all these are in climate realism Post “Climate hysteria drowns out flood facts: BBC ignores Spain's weather history.”
As for Mount Fuji, CNN is once again exaggerating. The previous records for late snowfall on the mountain were set on October 26 in 1955 and 2016.thand it snowed on the mountain on November 6 this yearthwhich is quite late, but not catastrophic. Japanese experts said it was too early to link the late snowfall to climate change.
The BBC was slightly more conciliatory, even admitting that much of this year's and last year's warmth was due to “natural El Niño weather patterns”. This is true and important context to remember when discussing weather patterns and warming. Climate Overview: El Niño and Global Warming points out that the removal of these phenomena from the climate record is responsible for nearly half of the global warming in the 21st century.Yingshi Century disappeared. It's a natural weather pattern that has a major impact on global conditions – and no amount of discarded fossil fuels can change that.
The news media is abuzz with this latest warming scare story, but as usual, a deeper look at the facts reveals that there is very little “news” in these stories and even less that is truly cause for concern. CNN and the BBC would serve their viewers better by examining their biases against climate alarms, doing some fact-checking of reports from advocacy groups like Copernicus, and sticking to the facts, including verifiable data, rather than relying on scary Anecdotes and shocking assertions. An alert may make for good headlines, but it can lead to bad coverage.
Relevant
