CFACT Climate change talking points 2014 The scientific reality is that on virtually every claim from A to the claims of the promoters of manmade climate fears are falling short or going in the opposite direction. 0 Global temperatures have flat?lined for almost 18 years according to satellite data and the peer- reviewed literature is now scaling back predictions of future warming. The US. has had the longest spell since the Civil War without a Category 3 or larger hurricane making landfall. - Strong F3 or larger tornadoes are have been in decline since the 19705. Antarctic sea ice is at record expansion and Arctic sea ice has recovered in recent years. - Despite claims of snow being ?a thing of the past?, cold season snowfall has been rising 0 Sea level rise rates have been steady for over a century with recent deceleration. Droughts and floods are not historically unusual, nor are they caused by mankind; there is no evidence we are currently having any unusual weather. - Deaths due to extreme weather have declined dramatically. 0 Polar bears are doing fine, with their numbers way up since the 19605 Climate Science Background A: C02 is a greenhouse gas and it has been rising steadily. How can you deny global warming? 002 is not the tail that wags the dog. COZ is a trace gas, but without it life on earth wouid be impossible. Carbon dioxide fertilizes algae, trees and crops,- to provide food for humans and animals. We inhale oxygen and exhale C02. higher atmospheric COP. levels cannot possibly supplant the numerous complex and inter-connected forces that have always determined Earth?s climate. As University of London professor emeritus Philip Stott has noted: ?The fundamental point has always been this. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically selected factor (C02) is as misguided as it gets.? Even the global warming activists at RealClimate.org acknowledged this in a September 20, 2008 article, where they said ?The actual temperature rise is an emergent property resulting from interactions among hundreds of factors.? Haven?t the past few years shown global warming to be worse than we thought? As the real~world evidence mounts that global warming ciaims are failing, climate activists have ramped up predictions of future climate change impacts, declaring that it is ?worse than we thought." But a prediction or projection 50-100 years into the future is not ?evidence.? If 002 is not the main driver of global temperatures, what is? The Sun? When global temperatures are the question, the answer is not the Sun or C02. it is the Sun, volcanoes, tilt of the Earth?s axis, water vapor, methane, clouds, ocean cycles, plate tectonics, shifting ocean currents, albedo (Earth?s changing reflective properties), atmospheric dust, atmospheric circulation, cosmic rays, particulates like carbon soot and volcanic dust, forests and grasslands, urban and other land use changes. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, notjust C02. How can you ignore thousands of scientists who say manmade global warming is a serious threat? The idea that there is a ?scientific consensus? does not hold up. Scientists who are skeptical about ?dangerous manmade climate change? have been speaking out for years. Many former prominent former believers in manmade global warming announced they were reconsidering the science. ?Gaia? scientist James Lovelock had been ?alarmist? about climate change for years. Now he says ?The problem is we don?t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago.? Other scientists like Dr. Leonard Dr. Judith Curry and UN IPCC Lead Author Dr. Richard Tol are growing more skeptical of climate claims. In 2010, a report documented that ?More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissented Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims.? Many of them were former scientists. How can you reject the National Academy of Sciences and other science organizations, which all agree that manmade global warming is a threat? Proponents of manmade global warming often point out that the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and American Meteorological Society (AMS) have issued statements endorsing the so-called ?consensus? view that human emissions drive climate change. However, neither the NAS nor the AMS has ever allowed member scientists to vote directly on these statements. A couple dozen members of these institutions? governing boards produced the statements - and then issued press releases. The governing boards are steeped in politics and seek more funding for ?research? that promotes currently accepted viewpoints. The full membership of actual scientists never gets to vote on the activist statements and in many cases is completely unaware until too late that the boards have issued them. Many such organizations have faced open rebellion by their skeptical member scientists for such actions, including; the American Chemical Society, American Physical Society, and international Geological Congress. 97% of scientists say manmade climate change is real. The claim that ?97% of scientists agree? is in part based on 77 anonymous scientists who responded to a survey. The survey started by seeking opinions from 10,257 scientists. However, only 77 responded. So the 97% ?consensus? claim is not based on thousands of scientists or even hundreds of scientists but only on 77. Out of those 77 scientists, 75 answered the survey to form the mythical 97% ?consensus.? in 2014, other claims of an alleged 97% ?consensus? emerged, prompting UN IPCC lead author Dr. Richard To! to publish a critique and declare: ?The 97% is essentially pulled from thin air, it is not based on any credible research whatsoever.? The ?hottest years? on record occurred in recent years. Actually, global temperatures have been holding steady for almost two decades (nearly 18 years according to RSS satellite data). 1998 is still the high point in global temperatures during the recent era. While 2005 and 2010 were both declared ?hottest? years by global warming proponents, a closer examination revealed that the claims were ?based on year-to-year temperature data that differs by only a few HUNDREDTHS of a degree Fahrenheit differences that were within the margin of error in the data. In other words, global temperatures have held very steady with no sign of ?acceleration.? Isn?t the U.S. experiencing unprecedented heat waves? Climatologist Dr. John Christy: ?About 75% of the states recorded their hottest temperature prior to 1955, and over 50% of the states experienced their record cold temperatures after 1940.? Arctic ice melted to record lows in 2012. Isn?t that due to manmade global warming? Recent Arctic ice changes are not ?proof? of manmade global warming, nor are they unprecedented, unusual or cause for alarm, according to experts and multiple peer-reviewed studies. After weeks of media hype blaming global warming, NASA finally admitted in September 2012 that an August Arctic cyclone ?broke up? and ?wreaked havoc? on sea ice. According to NASA: ?The cyclone remained stalled over the Arctic for several days pushing [sea ice] south to warmer waters, where it melted.? In 2013, the Arctic ice cap was 29% larger than in summer-2012, with 533,000 more square miles of ocean covered with ice than in 2012. Global warming activists have long hyped satellite era data, which began in 1979, to claim record low Arctic sea ice while ignoring the satellite data that show record sea ice expansion in the Antarctic. Moreover, satellite monitoring of Arctic ice began at the end of a 40?year cold cycle (remember the 19705 fears of a coming ice age?), when ice was most likely at its highest extent in the modern era. We have had similar Arctic ice panics in the past. A November 2, 1922, Washington Post article was headlined, ?Arctic Ocean getting warm: Seals vanish and icebergs melt.? The Arctic Ocean is warming, icebergs are growing scarcer, and in places the seals are finding the water too hot, it said. Isn?t manmade global warming causing extreme weather? ?There is a lack of evidence to blame humans for an increase in extreme events. One cannot convict 002 of causing any of these events, because they've happened in the past before C02 levels rose,? Climatologist John Christy testified before Congress in 2012. ?There are innumerable types of events that can be defined as extreme events so for the enterprising individual (unencumbered by the scientific method), weather statistics can supply an unlimited, target?rich environment in which to discover a ?useful? extreme event.? ?There is no evidence that disasters are getting worse because of climate change,? notes Professor Roger Pielke, Jr. ?There?s really no evidence that we?re in the midst of an extreme weather era whether man has influenced climate or not.? Aren?t hurricanes getting bigger, stronger, and more frequent due to manmade global warming? For the United States, during the past four decades, ?the fewest number of major hurricanes struck during any 40-year period since at least the 18005.? The worst decade for major (category 3, 4, and 5) hurricanes was the 1940s, according to the website Real Science, which analyzed National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data. In 2011, a new study found that ?overall global tropical cyclone activity has decreased to historically low levels during the past five years." Isn?t giobal warming causing bigger more dangerous tornadoes? No. in fact, big tornadoes have seen a drop in frequency since the 19503. ?There has been a downward trend in strong (F3) to violent (F5) tornadoes in US. since 19505.? In fact, ?warming causes fewer strong tornadoes, not more,? Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer explained. Don?t we need to stop global warming, to keep cities from being inundated by rising seas? Sea levels have been rising since the last ice age ended more than 10,000 years ago. There is currently no acceleration in sea level rise. NOAA says sea level is rising very slowly, and a recent peer?reviewed study pubiished in Coastal Engineering found that sea level rise has decelerated over past ten years. Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow 0 PO. Box 65722 Washington, DC. 20035 (202) 429-2737