Who am I? I am not a scientist. I am an observer. Scientists ‘observe’ too, but their observations are generally too narrowly focused to form objective opinions on anything of wider importance than their detailed work permits. Which leaves their findings open to misuse and abuse by unscrupulous manipulators whose smooth tongues are always working to confuse and persuade people with lies and disinformation on the broader issues. And that, I believe, is exactly how climate hysteria has come to grip human society in the later years of the past century but chiefly during these early years of the current one. Significantly, but erroneously, changing how we view our world today – and most definitely in ways that are not in our best interests.
That hiding of the truth and the establishment of an alternative image of reality, having gripped the world for several decades, is right now beginning to fall apart. For exactly the reasons that all untruths eventually fail. The false image does not match what is plainly visible of reality. The hope is, I guess, that we will not notice the disparency and will keep on busily working, thoughtlessly, on the new plan that has since become such an integral part of our lives. Fear of the alternatives often plays a big part in those schemes.
Knowledge of what is real is the only cure for this malaise. Knowledge of history and the broader view are what is required. I hope to provide some of that, here, below.
The primary point to understand is that nothing happens, perceptibly, in real time on climate issues. Nothing happens of any great importance either daily, weekly, monthly, or yearly on climate issues. Nothing much happens in a decade, a century, and is barely recognisable in a millennium. This is because climate elements are interactively complex and global in nature. They have been described as the movements of weather on a planetary level taking place over very long periods of time. But that is not the whole story. Our planet is just one component in a much larger cosmic system of uncountable other components, all acting together, directing constantly varying forces on each other, the scale of which is possibly beyond our comprehension.
A decade is not a long period of time. A century is not a long period of time in relation to climate. Even a millennium is not a long period of time. So anyone, no matter how qualified they may be considered to be, who speaks of ‘climate change’ across any of those periods of time, cannot be taken seriously and their words cannot be considered as being authoritative or even substantive. At best they may be taken as being indicative of something.
And yet we tend to believe pronouncements about climate change based on data and projections into the future based on unsubstantiated data produced by computer modelling techniques based on a foundation of perhaps up to 150 years of historic data, or less. Maybe even taking only some 40 years of data as a basis for forecasting important changes in global or national policy. What could go wrong?
But of course we humans, limited as we are to something usually far less than 100 years of life, tend to think only in terms of the experience gained across that lifetime. As though in some way that experience is the only basis for conjecture on the subject, with only vague reference to what went before – as though our own sample data were somehow representative of that entire history. Or perhaps that history is no longer relevant and only what we can see happening truly matters. There is a word for that. It is called ‘delusional’. Especially because we have, at considerable cost and effort, collected the most accurate scientific data possible, of various climate factors going back some half a billion (500,000,000) years. And we can see patterns in that data. We can see boundaries and limits, possible causalities and drivers for climate variation. We can even trace known events occurring throughout our history and factor into our considerations certain climate adjustments resulting from those events. They are usually of a cosmic nature, which is the only way, apart from internal planetary disruptions, that our climate can be dramatically altered, other than through slow rhythmic cycles brought about by orbital irregularities, conjunctions, and cyclic effects of that nature by the movements of other cosmic bodies operating within our local star system. Do you begin to understand the complexities occasioned by such movements, both internal and external, involving perhaps incomprehensible forces and long, if not vast, timescales, over which they occur? Nothing happens very quickly in the business of climate alterations. And whatever happens, there are limiting factors, boundaries that are uncrossable, and many minor cyclic perturbations which, all acting together, produce a continuous stream of always changing variety within those boundaries.
The second point we fail to understand is the very limited effect, over a very limited time, that we ourselves – always subject to self-guilt as we undoubtedly are (for reasons I will not pursue here) – are imposing, or could possibly impose, on that vast planetary system as a result of our being here at all, and doing whatever it is we think we are doing to the planet, with whatever effect we imagine we are having on that planet’s climate system. Let me tell you, that effect, if it is even detectable, is extremely minimal in nature. There would be little effect to the climate whether we were here or not. So, let’s stop blaming ourselves for what we perceive, or are told to perceive, is in any way changing the planet’s climate. Perhaps that is all we need to do.
Ok, enough waffle from me, let’s look at some historical facts about climate on the only planet that counts, for us, the planet Earth. How much history do we need to consider?
Modern climate science appears to have lost its way in determining this very basic question. Sometimes relying on only current year’s data to highlight dramatic changes which, due to annual variability in weather patterns, have no realistic bearing on actual climate at all. In other cases they include only changes apparent from data over the recent 47 years of satellite data, or maybe data going back to somewhere around the year 1850. No valid conclusions on climate change can be drawn from any of these sets of data, since no real climate movements can be detectable across such small time periods. They can at best only be said to be indicative of potential change but since annual weather variability is so pronounced, all such indications are likely to be incorrect.
But that is not the major source of error found in assessing climate change during the modern era. The common practice of basing projections into the future to next year, next decade or even next century, based on such flimsy data records, enhanced by what can only be guesses or designs to produce desired outcomes (for whatever dubious reasons anyone might wish to do that), is an objective of either pure folly or planned deception.
We have 500 million years of the most accurate climate data scientifically available to us. None of that tremendous body of records appear to be given consideration in determining what might be happening next. An appreciation of what that data tells us of the past should at least be gained as a necessary prerequisite basis for determining where we stand currently in the planetary climate playing field. If those involved in modern climate science possessed such a foundational basis they would not make the calamitous mistakes that they do today in assessing where we actually stand and the potential futures we face. As things stand, we are acting like the blind being led by the blind, the consequences of which stupidity could end up with most of us dead because we allowed ourselves to miss the obvious.
So, where are we? And how does that differ from what we are told? I am surprised, disappointed and angry that anyone alive today can heedlessly carry on with their life, while believing broadcast nonsense, without possessing such knowledge. Our education systems are obviously failing to inform us on this, but our personal survival instincts should be screaming constant alerts based on first hand information, not on handed down media garbage.
First take a look at this chart of the last 500 million years of Earth average temperatures. Well, perhaps as foundational knowledge you should find out what ‘Earth average temperatures’ means.
All I want you to take from this is that over extended time periods (often of tens or even hundreds of millions of years) the average temperature on the planet goes up and down. Never above around 30℃ and never below around 10℃ (remember these are averages, in fact long-term moving averages). Earth’s current long-term moving average temperature is a little under 12℃ – which means we are still well into an ice-age.
Now take a look at the most recent 65 million years of our average temperature history. You can identify this as being the expanded scale of the right end of the previous image from the label ‘Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum’ or PETM in the chart below.
There is a lot of information contained in this chart, which you should try to take on board in order to understand today’s climate conditions. First note that since 50 million years ago the average temperature has been almost constantly going down, down, down. It is within that same period that the whole of the continental land-masses have moved around to be in the positions on the planet’s surface we see them in today. That movement ended only around 3 to 6 million years ago with the closing of the Isthmus of Panama, joining the Americas, slightly before hominins first appeared. The blue line of closely squeezed (because of the scale) temperatures are the average temperature data variations (highs and lows). The red line is the long-term moving average.
See the label ‘Hominins’ at the right end of the chart? That is roughly how long science thinks there have been species like us living here (around two million years).
Finally notice that Antarctic ice sheets formed tens of millions of years before Arctic ice sheets did.
Now take a look at the following chart covering tha most recent 5 million years of history,and at bottom, in an expanded scale, the most recent 800,000 years of history,. Again you can compare it to the right end of the previous chart. Now we are beginning to be able to see some finer detail in the data. The dark blue line is again the high and low average temperature variations. The pale blue line is the long-term moving average line which, as you can see on all of these charts, is still going down – having lost around 3℃ over the past 5 million years. It doesn’t plot all the way to our time – finishing (as is the nature of moving averages) about 300,000 years ago or the mid-point of the data interval for the range of data included for its most recent averaging. I don’t knoe whrn that was done for this particular chart but assume it to have been within the last 10-20 years. So it is as accurate as it can be currently made. Statisticians would know that it could be drawn closer to today by shortening the data interval to give a less smooth line plot. But that is a case of diminishing returns which, taken to extremes, would simply reproduce the dark blue line. Without going to that effort, it is easy to see that there is no opportunity for a sudden jump upwards in temperature and, looking back to the first (half billion year) chart, it will quickly be seen that has never happened before, other than over periods of millions of years. The world is worrying over nothing.
Now we come to the crux of the matter. What does the final plot covering the past 800,000 years tell you? Well, first you nee d to realise that the vertical (temperature) scale is unaltered, covering the same average 9-15℃ as the upper chart. Only the horizontal time scale is spread further to provide a more detailed view of changes over that period. So, what detail does it reveal?
The most obvious observation is that within every hundred thousand year period there are multiple changes in average temperatures, but none of them tale place in time periods of less that a few million to a few tens of millions of years. That is significant. And what is equally significant is that the ups and downs of average temperature variation never exceed and in fact rarely reach the top and bottom limits of 15℃ and 9℃. There must be large expanses of Earth’s surface (chiefly within the central Tropical belt) where it is quite comfortable to live at either end of those extremes. The Earth has never been a Snow- or Ice- Ball planet. There has always been somewhere to go – as our ancient predecessors discovered, or perished, or had a very difficult time of existing for long cold periods.
At the other end of the temperature scale, things are a little different. That may be an understatement. An average 30℃, if it were ever to get there again, and we have to face that possibility, although not for tens or hundreds of millions of years. But no mammalian species, I think it is fair to say, has ever faced that challenge. Mammals of any kind have only emerged since temperatures began to fall from the last approximate such peak at around 90 million years BP or the PETM at 65 million. There are no guarantees that mammalian life could survive at such temperatures. But thankfully, that is not our future. At least not in any time-frame we need to consider.
Humanoid species have only ever known (as far as we know) falling temperatures and ice-age conditions. As long as there is polar ice at either pole of the planet, we are in an ice-age. So, ignore the label ‘Last Ice Age’ in the above chart. It is incorrect and misleading. While we are still looking at this chart, notice the label ‘Holocene’ at extreme right. That was when human civilisation began. The whole of human history, and the progression of every human species, along with the disappearance of most, is contained within approximately the most recent two million years of this diagram.
During this time, which followed many millions of years of moderately higher to extremely higher temperatures than either we or our ancient ancestors have ever faced, the average temperatures on planet Earth have frequently ranged between the 5-6℃ limits which seem to now be the regulated variations for our epoch as we near the extreme lower limit of average values for the planet throughout its entire history (or as far back as we can measure). Those limits appear to be a maximum of 15℃ and a minimum of 9℃. Currently, we appear to be holding or gradually still falling from a little less than 12℃ (the happy medium). And those are the conditions under which our whole civilisation has flourished. It gets no better than that.
But if it gets slightly worse, and there is no guarantee, or even a trend, for the absolute bottom of the planetary envelope to be reached (an average of 9℃), then we can be assured of two things. First, it will be uncomfortably cold in many parts of the world for a very long time. Perhaps for more time than we can cope with as a species. But we (our ancestors) have been there, as you can see in the above chart, four times over the past 800,000 years. And we (our ancestors) must have survived the experience. Our more recent ancestors also survived hotter conditions than we have ever, and possibly ever will, live/lived through during the current ‘Holocene’ period, and especially during the ‘Holsteinian’ and ‘Eemian’ periods some one to two hundred thousands of years ago (look for the labels).
Finally, looking at the current ‘Holocene’ period – check it again in the above diagram – we can see that there have been warmer conditions than today going back between two and eight thousand years. Perhaps by only a fraction of a degree, but nevertheless, the hottest period of the Holocene seems to have long passed and we are on the downward slope to those cooler glacial conditions I previously spoke about.
As the global picture and long-term trend continues to fall toward 9℃, whether it actually reaches that point or not, and the current inter-glacial period appears to be coming to an end, what can we expect in the short term? By that I mean over the next one hundred thousand years. Well there is a certainty around another fall of up to 5-6℃ from the current ~14.5℃ in recent years, to another ~9-10℃ bottom rung of the ladder. Or somewhere in between that. I see little possibility of higher temperatures, given the length of time of the Holocene period, which began around 11-12 thousand years BP. The other two major peaks in the past 800,000 years having expired to the same fate in approximately the same time-frame.
Have I convinced you? Well, whether or not, I think I have given you some things to think about, and maybe planted a seed somewhere that will grow over time. There is no rush. Climate takes its time, and is not hurried. The fever of climate enthusiasts will eventually wane as they see their expectations diminish and perhaps wonder why they were caught up in such scheming. That is not meant to be inflammatory. It’s just my view of how this will turn out. I could of course be wrong.
Not Something Else 
Leave a comment