Rapid Extreme Weather Attribution? Forget It. We Now Have Pre Extreme Weather Attribution!
I wrote about the dark art of rapid extreme weather attribution nearly three years ago. My, how time flies by. But that’s old hat now. Peter Stott, the Met Office pioneer of extreme weather attribution re. his study of the 2003 European heatwave has got very excited about the forecast brief spell of very hot weather in France and has jumped the gun by attributing the forecast ‘record-breaking’ temperatures to climate change. We now have pre-attribution folks! Climate change is guilty even before it’s committed the crime. Philip K. Dick would be so proud.
Update: he’s really going for it now.
‘Dangerous phenomenon’. ‘Level three warmings‘. LOL. It’s gone to his head. Chill out Peter – but not in France, obviously.
Peter seems pleased that the climate change priests have divined the weather gods so well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Actually, if this is formal extreme weather attribution, then maybe Oreskes and fellow philosophers’ Happy Slappy Attribution method doesn’t sound so bad after all!
Reporting from Ground Zero in sunny Provence… our host this morning asked how we were enjoying the weather. “It’s getting a little warm” I said. That’s what it’s like in Provence, he replied, insouciantly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The immediate cause of this heatwave is, as usual, a blocking pattern caused by a very wavy jet stream. Global warming might be responsible for increasing the background air temperature by a degree or so, but it’s the unique meteorological set up which – if June temperature records do tumble in France or elsewhere – is directly responsible for creating the conditions which result in such extreme heat. To robustly attribute this heatwave, you would need to attribute the highly accentuated meridional flow of the northern hemisphere jet stream at present to generalised warming. So far, no really convincing science and empirical evidence has been put forward by the AGW crowd which does that. The North Atlantic Oscillation has been negative throughout May and June and the wavy jet stream we’re seeing is the manifestation of that negativity. Many studies link NAO behaviour with solar activity, not so many connect it with generalised global warming. You won’t hear that from Peter Stott though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nice when an expert confirms what you just said!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Pre-attribution? Pfft. We have pre-crime here. Now go ahead and prove your innocence from that.
Jaime – Roger Snr’s tweet has attracted abusive trolls, at least according to Twitter;
Warning this may be unsafe 😉
Can’t see anything abusive there Craig, just the usual ‘but jet stream waviness is caused by global warming’ reply.
It’s insane; I’ve never seen so much global warming hype from alarmists about a heatwave which hasn’t even happened! They’re going mad, I’m sure. Such behaviour is not normal.
such behaviour is at the extremely mild end of the spectrum for fervent cultural belief. Considering the same mechanisms are in play as operate with religions, it could go some orders of magnitude more acute than mere pre-emptive bias. By convention we don’t call this ‘mad’, not least because we’re all subject to cultural influence, plus this would embarrassingly still define about 2/3 of the world as being mad for their religious beliefs. While a few like Dawkins have essentially tried to call it mad (‘deluded’), this fortunately hasn’t worked – such a view massively distorts the picture and makes people think they are actually dealing with mental deficiency / illness, when nothing could be further from the truth. (And if that was actually the case, this would be a very simple problem to solve). I think committing to a couple of trillion or more with no proper analysis and barely a second thought, is already rather more acute than some pre-emptive bias.
Andy, if they’re not mad, then direct me to the nearest asylum please:
“Because I’d rather stay here
With all the madmen
Than perish with the sad men roaming free
And I’d rather play here
With all the madmen
For I’m quite content they’re all as sane as me.”
‘…then direct me to the nearest asylum please’
No. Not even if you stick pencils up your nose and repeat ‘wibble, wibble’. So there are shifting values and different moralities, meme bombs and ruptured reason, fervent adherence with neither robes nor incense, intractable conflict and advances of crushing culture. It has always been so, and no one ever said it was easy on the front line.
Let us for a moment define madness as a belief or unshakeable faith in the impossible or the incredibly unlikely, a belief immune to rational intervention. By this measure, most politicians are mad, believing that they can somehow save the world by setting a good example in reducing the UK’s tiny contribution to global warming to zero by 2050, in the full knowledge that no other major economies are likely to follow. Just before the vote in the Commons, the EU – comprised of our closest neighbours – abandoned its net zero target. Only today, Jeremy Hunt promises a Brexit (UK exit from the EU) which “works” for the minority who voted to remain in the EU. These things leave us with two options to consider:
1. MPs are mad or their motives for implementing net zero are not what they pretend they are.
2. Hunt is mad or he has no intention of delivering Brexit and is making an absurd attempt (just like May) to convince the electorate that he can deliver a ‘Brexit’ which works both for those who voted Leave AND those who voted Remain. The very fact that he believes he can con the country again with this nonsense (an impossibility after May’s three years in office attempting to do just that) also means he must be mad, so he’s mad, full stop, no ifs no buts.
“Let us for a moment define madness as a belief or unshakeable faith in the impossible or the incredibly unlikely, a belief immune to rational intervention.”
You can’t do this. Unshakeable faith is exactly as you describe it here, a ‘belief’. Cultural beliefs trigger brain architecture that bypasses reason. 1) we all have this architecture. 2) it is not a mental deficiency or illness, the brain is working how it evolved so to do. 3) If you do define unshakeable faith as madness, with the implication of mental illness in that word, then by your definition a big majority of the world is very mentally ill, and essentially none of us would escape enough to be declarable as 100% mentally healthy.
This is a definition that aside from having no utility, is a massive misdirection when incorporated into people’s thinking about what might be done about culturally conflicted issues. Does that mean it is in any way reasonable? Of course not, cultural belief is a system that (deliberately) subverts reason. The case of mass belief in climate catastrophism is clear (with all the long list of associated cultural behaviours being present).
Charles MacKay might have called this sort of thing an “extraordinary popular delusion”.
“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.”
Of the “Climate Emergency”: “We find that whole communities suddenly fix their minds upon one object, and go mad in its pursuit; that millions of people become simultaneously impressed with one delusion, and run after it, till their attention is caught by some new folly more captivating than the first.”
And this seems pertinent to the reactions to Roger Pielke Snr: “Of all the offspring of Time, Error is the most ancient, and is so old and familiar an acquaintance, that Truth, when discovered, comes upon most of us like an intruder, and meets the intruder’s welcome.”
Of the recent Parliamentary antics: “Nations, like individuals, cannot become desperate gamblers with impunity. Punishment is sure to overtake them sooner or later.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Alex, yes, Mackay pre-empted cultural evolutionary thought on the matter, and there was no vocabulary or theory to substitute for ‘mad’ at that time.
The climate consensus, with its followers increasingly unable to function in the rational world, are damaging their judgement in other areas of life.
This means those governments being heavily controlled by the climate consensus are going to make grave costly errors in other issues that actually matter Those errors are going to end up costing more than just money.
LikeLiked by 1 person
P.S. what Mackay got spot-on is that this is a group phenomenon (‘herds’).
Andy, I can do that and I did. I defined ‘mad’ quite specifically, which stayed well within the wider dictionary definition:
“completely unrestrained by reason and judgment : unable to think in a clear or sensible way
incapable of being explained or accounted for – a mad decision”
You misinterpreted my definition by saying that I defined madness as unshakeable faith or belief. I didn’t. I defined madness as an unshakeable faith or belief in the impossible or extremely likely, a belief which is immune to logic/rational intervention. Most people have beliefs which cannot be disproved by logical argument, e.g. one cannot demonstrate conclusively that a divine, omniscient being does not exist or that there is not life after death, or ghosts or spirits. It can be demonstrated however that something is technically impossible or extremely unlikely. Persistently harbouring such beliefs where evidence is staring you in the face which demonstrates clearly their impossibility or extreme improbability does, according to my specific definition, constitute ‘madness’. You might call it delusion. I prefer madness. Alex points out that it is the ‘madness of the crowd’ = mass delusion. Either way, it is a failure of the mind to function rationally as manifest in the individual and/or the group collective.
“…a belief which is immune to logic/rational intervention”
But this is exactly the kind of unshakeable faith that is a result of cultural belief, because as noted above, the latter triggers brain architecture that bypasses logic / reason. And this is (via evolution) deliberately so, because the purpose of cultural belief is (in defiance of whatever uncertainty) to unite the in-group in a certain consensus. I.e. it is fundamentally an in-group / out-group mechanism, and that purpose is incompatible with truth. This is not a ‘flaw’, it is simply how human brains work. Mackay lived before the time we had sufficient knowledge to describe this, and ‘mad’ was his nearest concept. However, he got absolutely spot on that this is a *group* phenomenon (aka ‘herd’), and it does not occur for those who aren’t assimilated into cultural groups, or deprogrammed back out of them (as he also implies). Plus, the very same person can exhibit this behaviour in relation to those topics that are very relevant to their cultural group membership(s), while not doing so for topics outside those domain(s).
Your definition looks like Merriam Webster section 2, which is exampled by personal ‘pain’ or ‘jealousy’, which personal conditions can indeed temporarily occur, but are not what dominate large swathes of people who hold nonsense consensus narratives as unshakeable truths over long periods. Section 1 says: ‘arising from, indicative of, or marked by mental disorder’, which for sustained periods by many people, would then be the only sensible interpretation one then could draw from the application of ‘mad’ to describe the behaviour. But as noted, to think that large swathes of the population (or indeed authority) are mentally ill, couldn’t be further from the truth. And indeed the overwhelming majority of folks in the world would then be mad, as we would have to include all strong cultural beliefs such as religions or ardent nationalism or communism or whatever – not to mention just any strong group-think. The problem is far more fundamental than people being mad, aka mentally ill. If you don’t believe they are mentally ill, this is fine, but use of that descriptor will cause you to be generally misunderstood by most readers. Lew and crew are pretty far down the path of characterising skeptics as unhinged; to generically do the same for those on the orthodox side of the debate is just as wrong, not to mention a huge underestimate of the nature of what is faced.
P.S. “…or belief in the impossible…”
All strong cultural narratives are impossibly wrong; this is a feature of the emergent process that produces them (iterative emotive selection).
Andy, I really don’t give a rat’s arse what people might think or whether they might misinterpret or misunderstand my meaning or motives, or whatever, especially crackpots like Lew. The MPs who voted to fritter away at least a £trillion of British taxpayers’ money, destroy the UK economy, decimate UK industry, wreck the transport system, drastically reduce the ability of people to travel independently, annihilate vast areas of countryside to erect turbines and solar panels, propel many millions more into energy poverty most likely resulting in a huge increase of deaths during winter, etc. etc. FOR NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER are not merely labouring under a cultural spell, they are nuts, loopy, away with the fairies, crackpot, mad, insane, FUBAR in the head, screwball, bonkers, psychotic, unhinged, deranged, demented, crazy, way more than a few sandwiches short of a picnic etc. etc. The fact that these people apparently function normally in society without being locked up in an asylum, indeed the fact that they have been let loose within the rarefied and highly privileged chambers of the highest institution of our land, speaks volumes for how damaged our society in general and system of governance in particular has become over the years, without us even noticing it.
Hunt is a nutjob too. His latest public statement is that Britain is looked up to as a country where politicians do what the people demand of them! Christ, you couldn’t make it up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jaime, fine, but this just makes it far easier for all those who advocate for dramatic policies in response to an unsupported global climate emergency, to simply dismiss you along with all the reasonable points you make in opposition.
Andy, they have dismissed me, along with at least 17.4 million other people. They will go their own sweet way no matter how many people like me rant loudly or politely beg to disagree on blogs or even in articles in the main stream media. We’re all ‘climate deniers’ or Little Englanders or ‘racists’ or xenophobes/Islamophobes/far right bigots etc. etc.. The ONLY time these people will notice that they’re not flavour of the month is when they are kicked out of office or, if the worse comes to the worse, when mobs armed with pitchforks start lobbing bricks through their windows.
Back to the heatwave:
“Germany’s June temperature record smashed”
“The German Weather Service said the mercury hit 38.6 degrees Celsius (101.5 Fahrenheit) at 2:50 p.m. local time in Coschen, on the country’s border with Poland.
The previous record stood at 38.5 Celsius (101.3 Fahrenheit), which was measured in 1947 in Bühlertal, which lies close to France.
The longevity of the previous record — 72 years — shows just how unusual and intense the current heat wave is in Europe. Any sign of quick relief is not on cards either.
Climate scientists have warned that heat waves such as this one are becoming more frequent and increasingly severe because of the climate crisis. Météo-France, the French national weather authority, said the frequency of such events is expected to double by 2050.”
Absolutely barking. 72 years ago, in 1947 (before CO2 spiked the climate) a thermometer measured 0.1C less than today. This means that the record has been “smashed” and it’s proof of the “climate crisis”. You have to be unhinged to write this and expect people to take it seriously.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Think it through Jaime. Your last conclusion (You have to be unhinged to write this and expect people to take it seriously.) is patently untrue. All sorts of people, including those with recognized skills in other areas like academics, politicians, media people, business and religious leaders, school children, do believe such utterances and repeat and magnify them. Said people also consider our beliefs and reasoning to be unhinged.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It doesn’t take much thinking through Alan does it? Somebody who claims that a temperature record has been ‘smashed’ by one tenth of a degree is not possessed of reason. Somebody who views a difference of a tenth of a degree between two high temperature records set 72 years apart as compelling evidence of a climate crisis does not have a grip on reality – they are unhinged. You claim my statement is patently untrue. I claim it is patently obvious – unless you have compelling evidence which demonstrates otherwise.
Nature abhors a positive feedback loop. Such may rely upon passive acceptance of a pervasive cultural narrative in its early and middle stages, but in its advance stages it relies upon very, very stupid people to keep it going, mad people or people driven by greed, lust for power, self-interest.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The evidence is clear. The populous focuses on statements that the temperature record has been “smashed” and repeats it. The half a degree is not important to them. What is important is that I am experiencing it being “dead hot” and people who say they are expert in these things say it’s a record (which it may be). People like you and I cannot refute that it is a record. The fact that decades ago temperatures were almost as high is not going to offset the fact that it’s “dead hot”. The fact that it’s “dead hot” makes people receptive to ideas that hot spells are becoming more frequent and due to ACGW, even though those conclusions may be totally wrong. As many have observed, only nature, in the form of a prolonged downturn in temperatures, will be capable of refuting the current climate dogma.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reporting in from the Epicentre in rural S. France once more… I’m saddened to say that there are real, tangible – I’m almost moved to say devastating – implications of a further 0.5 degree of climate warming.
According to climate scientists, record-breaking high temperatures will become more frequent; an extra 0.1 degrees may become as commonplace as once every 36 years. Inhabitants of small german hamlets are particularly at risk.
So we need to be planning ahead, and putting our best minds to work on solving some of the pressing issues that will become urgent in the near future – say another 50 or 100 years. We need to be creating new green jobs, for a new green economy, for a bright new green future.
(Not too bright, though. Certainly not day-glo green – that’s far too… chemical. Bright NATURAL green. That’s what we want.)
Where was I? Ah yes, back to the devastation. Listen up people, this is serious. I’m talking about butter lakes, brie melt, pools of pate, overheated olives and – prepare yourselves – warm wine.
So we need to be thinking ahead. We need to turn our thinking ON its head. Upside down and inside out.
So what will the Home Of The Future look like?
It’ll definitely have a built-in Plate Cooler. That warming drawer under the cooker, needs to be re-purposed, up-cycled and shuffled sideways under the fridge.
Induction Cooling? You won’t need that fancy gizmo in your hob, you’ll need it (at least a couple of days a year) built into the picnic table!
Speaking of al fresco dining – how about Solar-Powered Wine Coolers – use that new-fangled bending screen technology to coat parasol fabric in flexible panels, and put USB outlets in the pole for power.
I’m just getting started, but I’m sure you can see the potential. Rather than focusing on the down-sides of warmer weather (yes, I know) let’s all cheer up, and look at the limitless possibilities of a not-too-bright new natural green tomorrow!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fenlander, some great ideas for the home of the future there. There’s no point burning brain cells worrying about the inevitable prospect of the super-heated years and decades ahead; we’ve got to make it cool to be hot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
One of Stott’s co-authors on the 2003 heatwave “attribution” was Myles Allen, a Lead Author on IPCC’s SR15 doomfest, https://www.climateprediction.net/wp-content/publications/nature03089.pdf
This piece was written post the 2003 heatwave in Europe: http://www.godutch.com/newspaper/index.php?id=474
DE BILT, the Netherlands – While the 2003 heatwave might rate a distinct entry in the record books, it hardly is the most severe summer to ever strike the Netherlands. Modern Dutch man, with his continued quest to ‘seek the sun’, is quite capable of dealing with the solar onslaught. In fact, most people considered the Summer of 2003 to be quite pleasant.
Heatwaves in earlier days, not unlike other harsh weather phenomenons, were more intrusive, and often disastrous. These days, many cars and office buildings have air conditioning, beverages are stored in fridges and ice cream makers are a growth industry. Consider the situation in earlier times when 35 degree temperatures or higher resulted in spoiled food and milk, and danger of fire everywhere.
That concludes historical geographer and retired science teacher Jan Buisman, who has dedicated much of his life to recording, investigating and analysing extreme weather conditions. Exact information on the weather in the Netherlands has been recorded since 1706.
According to Buisman’s recent findings, the year 1540 was one with an even more severe summer than was 2003. All over Europe, the heatwave lasted, off and on, for seven months, with parched fields and dried up rivers, such as the Rhine. People in Paris, France could walk on the river bed of the Seine without getting their feet wet.
In medieval times, such severe weather conditions often led to other disasters. Although the Summer of 2003 presumably led to the untimely death of some 15,000 people in France alone, death and disease in 1540 struck many countries even worse. Drought caused famine, countless deaths from dysentery and other ilnesses caused by lack of safe drinking water, and to large-scale starvation of farm animals. Another disaster usually associated with heatwaves and droughts was fire, often destroying entire villages or even towns such as Harderwijk in 1503. Wooden houses became tinderboxes, dry peat, forests and undergrowth ignited readily and led to massive wildfires.”
Also “Extreme Weather- Extreme Claims”
Click to access extreme_weather_extreme_claims.pdf
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the references Dennis. The past is an inconvenience to climate alarmists, especially those promoting ‘unprecedented’ severe weather events. I have another post planned on European heatwaves; just waiting to see how this latest one pans out. I’ve a sneaking feeling the ‘record high’ temperature predictions may have been a bit over-egged, but we shall see.
Jaime. It is really great to be in a discussion with you, where both our points of view have been awarded likes. We are not poles apart, I am just more pessimistic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, they’ve got their new record temperature, which might edge up a bit. 44.3C, which ‘smashes’ the previous record of 44.1 set in 2003. We won’t hear the last of it now.
Meanwhile, it looks like we’re going to get one hot day here in the UK tomorrow, then it’s back to the low 20s for most of us. Looks like the European heatwave will fizzle out quickly too over the weekend. If it was a preview of things to come with global warming, it certainly was a quick preview!
Still laughing at the gold medal and all the “likes” the above tweet received. Bravo la France!
“What of 2016 and beyond? There are three possibilities: the expected spike in global temperatures may initiate a ‘step up’ (like 1998 did), it may not affect global temperatures significantly, in which case the current Pause will continue, or it may initiate a ‘step down’ in global temperature via a very deep subsequent La Nina cooling. If we’re betting, my money is on the latter in late 2016/early 2017. If we get another ‘step up’ in global LT temperatures, I will be the first to admit that the anthropogenic CO2 warming theory may have something going for it, because many current climate indicators (AMO/AMOC/solar) point to imminent cooling.” https://climatecontrarian.wordpress.com/2016/01/03/betting-on-2016/
Cerridwen: Your point? Three years later the planet appears to still be in a process of general cooling. Get back to me if it starts warming again or levels off where it is now. Ta.
45.9C is the new shocking, worrying, alarming ‘highest temperature evah’ in France, set early in summer. Did any records get broken in Spain? I would have thought so. That’s where the hot air from the Sahara came via its way to France. Must have broken records there too if it was that hot.
Saint Greta has spoken:
Climate alarmists have now ‘owned’ the jet stream. I said this is what they would do. No amount of evidence to the contrary will convince them to relinquish ownership. Once they lay claim to the atmospheric circulation, then they have extreme weather and long term climate trends within their remit and they can basically claim anything they like. Who is stopping them?
Hansen: “For all practical purposes, the heat wave is caused by human-made global warming.”
Mann: “Extreme warmth in the Arctic and the loss of Arctic sea ice due to human-caused climate change, favors this jet stream pattern and indeed we are right now witnessing record Arctic warmth and record-low sea ice for so early in the season.”
WHY have we experienced warm temperatures in the Arctic? BECAUSE of the extreme phase-locked Rossby wave pattern. Thus Mann attributes the effect as the cause! He is a complete utter fraud but he gets media exposure to ply his fraudulent science whereas Curry gets labelled a denier. CBS (Climate BullShit) gives us the lowdown on the latest pseudoscience:
….so melting ice changes jet streams….
…and a heat wave is climate not weather….
….and the entrails, when closely examined in the context of the tea leaf reading, tells us so much…
….and the UFOs moved in a way that defied physics!…
Actually, as is typical of the climate catastrophist movement, the hysterical focus on a French regional heat wave is to deceive by way of distraction about the globally widespread cold snaps.
“The MPs who voted to fritter away at least a £trillion of British taxpayers’ money, destroy the UK economy, decimate UK industry, wreck the transport system, drastically reduce the ability of people to travel independently, annihilate vast areas of countryside to erect turbines and solar panels, propel many millions more into energy poverty most likely resulting in a huge increase of deaths during winter, etc. etc.”
now that’s some funny alarmism and group think madness.
Hunter, bouts of extreme cold and extreme heat are occurring around the Northern Hemisphere right now, precisely because of the accentuated wavy jet stream pattern and phase-locking of these planetary waves. NAO has been negative since before the beginning of May. There’s no sign of a return to rapid global warming and ominous signs of possible cooling, which may turn out to be temporary or not. I think it can be said with confidence that the planet appears to be in the throes of a major climate shift, which probably began at the start of the 21st century. Alarmists will try to convince us that carbon dioxide is the primary cause of that shift, but it’s going to be a tough sell if all they have are heatwaves interspersed with summer snow and patchy ocean warming interspersed with cooling.
“As impressive as the target of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 sounds, other countries will recognise the capacity it has to destroy UK plc for generations to come. The lack of scrutiny of what would be the most expensive and socially disruptive public policy since the Second World War is truly remarkable.”
They won’t achieve net zero of course, or anywhere near it, but they’ll certainly have a lot of fun trying – at the public’s expense. Increasing national debt, hobbling the economy, sacrificing industrial competitiveness, increasing poverty, increasing fuel poverty – these things will happen if the climate change fanatics grasping the reins of power in this country are even allowed to earnestly attempt to virtue-signal their way to zero net carbon. With increasing poverty comes increasing vulnerability – and death.
Tony Heller has an excellent review of the French climate crisis.
Hunter, Heller is also claiming that the 45.9C ‘record’ at Gallargues-le-Montueux is an error because someone read the ‘feels-like’ temperatures instead of the actual temperature. The data on the website certainly appears to confirm this, with the actual temperature being 44.1C. If Heller is right, this is extremely embarrassing for Meteo-France and for all the alarmist commentators saying how the national record had been smashed.
So it turns out that the pre-crisis declaration was false.
The 45.9 never even happened.
But the climate of corruption is so powerful, it doesn’t matter.
The narrative seems to beat reality.
The destruction of the countryside by wind turbines, and the dismantling if the things that work, continues as the billionaires demand.
Unpreidented temperature peak recorded at Chez Kendall yesterday. But wait! Record taken while Mdm Kendall baking Gateau Banana. Oh what an error. Shall I admit being free and easy with the thermometer, or shall I homogenize it and hide the incline?
The plot thickens. Apparently, the rooftop weather station identified by Heller is an amateur station, the one next to the busy road has closed down and the actual station which measured the 45.9C at 4.20pm is a few hundred yards from the amateur rooftop one which only managed 44.1C. A number of other weather stations in southern France also measured highs near or in excess of 45C, which was the ‘target temperature’ identified by alarmists prior to the heatwave actually occurring. Perhaps it truly was a man-made heatwave!
What I personally find strange is that the source of all this hot air (besides climate change alarmists, that is) was the Sahara. No national high temperature records were set in Spain or Portugal, which you might expect if the reason for the heatwave was abnormally hot air coming from the Sahara, making its way into Europe because of a wavy jet stream. It’s not like Saharan plumes have never happened before, so this one must have been super-heated by global warming, right? So maybe this CO2-enhanced Saharan plume sneaked its way into France not via Iberia but from Tunisia, across the Med? Then you might expect that Corsica would also have shattered its all time record. Not so. It only managed to come within 0.2 degrees of the record set in 1983. So it would seem that global warming decided it was going to make its presence felt, quite spectacularly, in France only, on just one day, June 28th 2019. Yes, yes, I know, the German June record was ‘smashed’ by 0.1C and the Polish record by 0.3C, but that’s nowhere near 1.8C all time national record set in France. How very odd, I must say.
Ooh, no, hold my Pilsner, here we go again. Germany just ‘shattered’ its June record (not all time national record) by another massive 0.1C. Wow. #climatechangeisreal.
What the climatocracy is doing is converting the people.
They already corrupted the wealthy with false virtue and easy money.
Now they are using faux miracles and signs to wow the masses.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Must be all that fossil fuel use in the Sahara desert 😂
Relevant to up-thread discussion regarding the psyche of adherents. Very belatedly as he acknowledges, Mr Delingpole starts to appreciate the real nature of that which he opposes, including; “…even the really radical ones who support Extinction Rebellion, are mostly just as nice and normal and reasonable and decent and intelligent as you and me”. So also starts to dawn, this is a far more fundamental issue than if they were mainly liars or thick or evil or deranged or whatever: “Yet still we’re losing and I really don’t know what to do”.