It is claimed Earth’s surface has warmed by 1°C in the last 140 years – which is a supposedly rapid climate change. But a new study suggests the Northern Hemisphere surface naturally cooled by 1°C in 8 or 9 years, then warmed up again by 1°C within decades during the Late Antique Little Ice Age.

Scientists have determined there were “catastrophic volcanic eruptions that took place in 536, 540 and 547 A.D.” Sulphate aerosols consequently scattered the Sun’s radiance, dramatically cooling the Earth’s surface for decades. This global cooling period, referred to as the Late Antique Little Ice Age (LALIA), resulted in crop failures, famines, disease epidemics, and societal unrest. After the cooling event, Earth’s climate naturally returned to its previous warmth.

A new study (Peregrine, 2020) specifies the amount of natural cooling from the 530s to 550s using proxy records from 20 Northern Hemisphere (NH) locations. The NH cooled by about 1°C in less than a decade in the 530s and 540s A.D. By the 570s, the NH climate had warmed back up again (by 1°C).

These rapid climate changes easily exceed the pace of modern temperature changes (about 1°C total warming since 1880) assumed to be of anthropogenic origin.

Image Source: Peregrine, 2020

Extensive volcanism is also said to explain the Little Ice Age (LIA) centennial-scale global cooling (McGregor et al., 2015).

Image Source: McGregor et al., 2015

Modern warmth can thus be interpreted as a return to the climate “normal” – much like the abrupt return to pre-LALIA temperatures after that global cooling period ended.

Since the return to “normal” temperature after the LALIA cooling was necessarily a natural warming, the 1900s-to-present warming could also be interpreted as a natural event. After all, this is the null hypothesis – and at no time has it been falsified using real-world scientific evidence.

Image Source: Chill by Peter Taylor

via NoTricksZone

https://ift.tt/3jALzk7

July 23, 2020 at 12:18PM

…

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

via JoNova

https://ift.tt/3eUPrZA

July 23, 2020 at 11:24AM

Here’s another flip-flop:

“No significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks”

Penelope

“Dr. Anthony Fauci recently said he opposed conducting studies to determine whether face masks are effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19. Is it because he already knows that the studies would put the lie to the whole mask-mandate regime?

During a July 14 conversation with students at Georgetown University’s Institute of Politics and Public Service, Fauci was asked by a student if it was possible to conduct studies to learn whether masks are effective.

“What kind of studies can we do right now in the middle of the pandemic about masks and transmission of the disease?” the student asked. “Or are we just relying on anecdotal evidence because we are not able to do those kind of studies right now?”

“Right now,” replied Fauci, “I’m convinced enough in the summation and totality of the data that has been analyzed by meta-analysis that … the benefit of wearing a mask clearly is there and is better than not wearing a mask.”

Fauci went on to suggest it would be unethical to perform a “randomized controlled study” — the most scientifically valuable type of study — “because that would mean having people not wear masks and see if they do better.”

As it turns out, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has already reviewed a number of studies concerning the efficacy of masks in preventing transmission of flu viruses — exactly the sort of “meta-analysis” that Fauci claimed proved masks worked — and found that masks and certain other practices recommended by health authorities had no “substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.” (emphasis added)

The CDC’s analysis, published in the May issue of Emerging Infectious Diseases, “review[ed] the evidence base on the effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical personal protective measures and environmental hygiene measures in non-healthcare settings and discuss[ed] their potential inclusion in pandemic plans.”

The overall conclusion, according to the abstract: “Evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.” Moreover, there is only “limited evidence on the effectiveness of improved hygiene and environmental cleaning.”

The CDC identified 10 randomized controlled studies on “the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community” published between 1946 and 2018. “In pooled analysis,” they wrote, “we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks.” (emphasis added)

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/item/36451-does-fauci-oppose-mask-studies-because-he-knows

The post “No significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks” appeared first on Ice Age Now.

via Ice Age Now

https://ift.tt/32PetH8

July 23, 2020 at 11:02AM

By Paul Homewood

Is it April 1st already?

The past few months have proved just how priceless are the values of traditional journalism in the ‘fake news’ age. Two forces in particular have brought this home in no uncertain terms.

First, the massive “infodemic” of online misinformation that has grown up alongside the coronavirus crisis. The problem is so severe that, even if a safe and effective vaccine is found, global health leaders warn that the drowning out of reliable, authoritative guidance could dramatically hinder take up.

Second, the growing use of disinformation as a tool for democratic disruption. This week’s report into Russia’s activity in the UK has laid the stakes bare. For the state-backed actors of Russia and China, the provision of news is first and foremost an extension of state influence….

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/07/23/unleash-bbcs-potential-combat-fake-news-help-global-britain/

The comments section is hilarious, with most pointing out that the BBC is the biggest purveyor of fake news of all.

There was time when the Telegraph, as I recall, ran a weekly column on BBC bias. Now they give Tony Hall the chance to promote the BBC.

Both Tony Hall’s brazen defence and the Telegraph’s decision to promote it exemplify why public confidence in the media is now at rock bottom levels.

Only yesterday Guido ran with this latest poll:

https://order-order.com/2020/07/22/53-of-voters-now-see-british-press-as-force-for-bad/

What was most significant was the astonishing rise lack of trust from Tory voters, combined with the sharp fall from Lib Dems. This surely reflects the leftward shift of much of the press in recent times, notably the Telegraph, Times and Mail.

As we are all too often aware, this has been particularly noticeable on climate issues. With one or two exceptions, nowadays the press is happy to slavishly publish whatever junk it has been fed, preferring scary headlines to proper journalism.

Compounding that has been the failure to explain to the public the real cost and implications of Net Zero targets and the rest, instead preferring AEP’s fantasy economics and the like.

Partly, this is down to the babies who write so much of the coverage these days. But above all it is the editorial management which must take the blame for losing touch with the common sense views of most of the public, who seem to have a much better understanding of what is going on.

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/2CVTasy

July 23, 2020 at 08:30AM