NOAA: Low Temp Records Outstripping Heat By 2-1; IPCC Defy Data To Claim Scandinavian Sea Levels Are Rising; + Carbon Credit CEO Resigns After Issuing “Worthless Offsets”

NOAA: Low Temp Records Outstripping Heat By 2-1

There is a lot wrong with the way NOAA collate global temperature data, but even their UHI-ignoring, data-fudging ways still sees you with all-time low temperature records besting new all-time highs by 2-1.

According to the government agency’s official figures, so far this year (to May 21) the world has set 68 new all-time low temperature records vs 34 new all-time high temperatures.

This disparity is even starker when looking at the United States alone, where (again to May 21) a total of 13 new all-time low temperature records have been set this year vs just the solitary 1 for heat.

IPCC Defy Data To Claim Scandinavian Sea Levels Are Rising

For more than a century, sea levels have been dropping across the Northern European cities of Oslo, Stockholm and Helsinki — that was, until 2020 when the IPCC’s new AR6 Sea Level Projection Tool inexplicably promoted an all-round sea level rise.

The discovery has baffled Ole Humlum, Emeritus Professor of Physical Geography at the University of Oslo. To him, it appears that this tool was not produced to test the validity of a scientific idea. It was instead an attempt to “alarm the user”.

Since this new IPCC computer modelling was released in 2020, ‘alarm’ has indeed been the prevailing messaging, with apocalyptic ‘flooding projections’ infecting every corner of the mainstream media.

US-based propagandizers ‘Climate Central’, which is backed by billionaire Foundations and uses the IPCC data to push custom-made flood catastrophe stories onto local media outlets, recently claimed that much of London could be “gone within 80 years” if humans didn’t accept the demands of their parasitical overlords and relinquish their access to cheap and reliable energy.

Predictably, London politicians, such as mayor Sadiq Khan used this Brothers Grimm fairy-tale to justify draconian climate polices, including attacks on private transport and as the justification for shutting down back-up coal-fired power plants.

However, when focusing on his home city of Oslo, Professor Humlum found fatal errors within the IPCC’s modelling.

The Norwegian capital, in line with other Scandinavian cities, was once buried under a massive ice sheet that only started to lift some 20,000 years ago. Even today, the area experiences an ongoing ‘isostatic’ land rise of several millimeters a year.

Oslo’s observed rate of sea level decline can be seen in the below graph (purple line). What the data clearly show is a 100+ year observational trend of falling levels, set to deliver a fall of 28cm (11 inches) by the end of the century.

Inexplicably, IPCC modelling (blue line on the above graph: ‘scenario ssp245’) projects a rise in sea levels by 2100, of 17cm (6.7 inches). On delving deeper, Humlum found similar IPCC patterns and disconnects for the capitals of Sweden and Finland.

It is “extremely surprising”, observes Humlum, that this modeled change should first appear in 2020 as a rather marked step change in the relative sea level. Humlum suggests that if the modelers had produced data going back to 1950, “the conflict between measured and modeled data would immediately have become apparent”. In Humlum’s view, “it is highly disappointing that such a simple quality –or sanity check– was apparently never requested or performed by the IPCC.”

Humlum’s evaluation features in the recently-published Clintel Report —The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC— and is part of a critical examination of the UN organisation’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6).

Clintel accuses the IPCC of emphasizing worst-case scenarios, of rewriting climate history, and of having a “huge” bias in favor of bad news while keeping good news out of their Summary for Policy Makers.

The IPCC’s worst case scenario is called ‘SSP5-8.5’ and it assumes global temperatures will rise by up to 5C within less than 80 years. Given that temperatures have increased by barely 0.1C during the first two decades of this century, no credible, logic-driven human being accepts that ANY of the IPCC’s dire scenarios are even remotely plausible. Nevertheless, Clintel notes that 43% of said predictions, as well as roughly half the climate science literature, are based on these worst-case plottings.

Humlum’s graph only uses the ‘moderate SSP2-4.5’ scenario. The IPCC’s more extreme scenarios are available via their online tool. This likely explains how, with the help of Climate Central, UK-based Wilshire Times recently reported that by 2050 sea waters could be lapping around Gloucester Cathedral, which sits at an elevation of 19 meters (62+ feet)!

Climate Central notes that it provides “authoritative information to help the public and policymakers make sound decisions about climate change and energy” — I would argue that, as would Humlum: Despite recent modeled attempts to produce an acceleration in sea level rise, the long-established tide gauge records show “remarkably linear behavior for more than a century.”

The IPCC’s founding principles effectively tasked the agency to show that ALL warming from 1850 is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. The fact that ≈1850 rang in the end of the Little Ice Age has zero weight in IPCC thinking. Given this blinding dogma, the agency is wholly unsuited to ‘follow the science’ and, by its own admission, is reverse engineering the theory: From day dot, that is 1988, the IPCC has been working with an assumption and then aligning all the stars (observations/modeling) so as to fit.

Humlum feels that the IPCC’s blinkered view may have led to its latest errors in sea level modelling. “The fundamental IPCC finding of no significant influence of natural variations since about 1850 should therefore be reconsidered,” he delicately argues.

Carbon Credit CEO Resigns After Issuing “Worthless Offsets”

The carbon credit market is one giant agenda-diving, wealth-&-power-transferring scam — here’s more proof…

Verra, the world’s leading carbon credit certifier is suspected of approving tens of millions of worthless carbon offsets to major companies. Following this revelation, its CEO, David Antonioli, said he would be leaving the organisation that dominates the $2bn voluntary carbon market, which has certified more than 1bn credits through its verified carbon standard (VCS).

The announcement comes after a difficult period for Verra, which has had its carbon credit certification process effectively exposed as a giant fraud. Back in January, a nine-month investigation by a number of investigative sources, such as the German weekly Die Zeit and the investigative group SourceMaterial, found Verra rainforest credits used by the likes of Disney, Shell, Gucci and other multinational conglomerates were largely worthless, often based on halting the destruction of rainforests that weren’t even threatened.

Antonioli rejected the findings of the investigation, but then formulated a process of introducing new rules for generating rainforest carbon credits, to come into affect by mid-2025.

A handful of firms have already moved away from offsetting-based claims, given this exposing of CO2-sequestering. Gucci, for example, recently removed a carbon neutrality claim from its website after cutting ties with Verra.

Worldwide crises, such as rising plant food, require a strong, one-world government response, of course.

It is merely a coincidence that the entities leading the demonization of human prosperity (i.e. our access to cheap and reliable energy) are the very same benefiting from it. Look, for example, to the energy company profiting during the failing transition to renewable, or, more personally, to the wage and bonuses that the likes of David Antonioli walk away with each year.

But Antonioli et al. understand the game — they know that net zero doesn’t mean ‘zero’; rather, that it is a ploy for the elite to continue excreting as much CO2 as they fancy while us proles, limited by our relative destitution, are trapped by increasingly-draconian climate-related restrictions.

Bill Gates, for example, can fly to Dubai for a ‘climate conference’ because he bought a bucket of carbon credits from Verra beforehand. But Average Joe enjoys no such luxuries, for he is stuck working two soul-crushing jobs–with a pay-packet already slapped with a carbon tax–and still struggles to afford enough fake meat and bugs to feed little Average Joey Junior.

This is the very near future: We proles will effectively be forced into trading our meager CO2 allowance–allocated for gas-guzzling vehicles, for example–in order to afford increasingly expensive basics, such as food. And as for things like summer vacations –ha!– these will soon be distant memories, ‘old world’ stories told by Granddad around the electric campfire.

Please help keep Electroverse online, consider becoming a Patreon.
Become a patron at Patreon!