Climategate

last update: 01 Jan 2024

Watch your breath! You contribute to global warming by your methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions! Read the paper by Dawson et al. in PLOS One. If all the people in the UK stopped this noxious breathing, emissions of 54000 metric tons CO2eq could be avoided!
And vegans beware: "Converting from high meat and protein content diets to higher fibre vegetarian options to mitigate emissions of greenhouse gases from meat production potentially results in higher production of gases in the human gut"

Koutsoyiannis et al. published a very important paper on the causality between CO2 and Temperature in MDPI, using a new stochastic analysis to find who is the cause and who the effect

. They conclude that "The results are clear: changes in CO2 concentration cannot be a cause of temperature changes". Wow!!! (see also guest post in Climate_etc. and this paper by Stuart A. Harris)

It's now over 20 years that Michael Crichton held his famous Michelin-Caltech lecture.

Please reread this presentation, that remains as important and true today as it was 20 years ago. His famous sentence

"There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period"
should be the leitmotiv of every serious scientist, but alas, it isn't.
Read the entire text carefully, it will be time well spent!

M. Crichton a medical doctor, scientist, writer,  filmmaker, passed away in 2008. He remains famous for his books like Jurassic Park and State of Fear.

Dr. Roy Spencer has a very telling article in his blog on the difference between observations and models of the summer temperature trends in the US corn belt: the blue rectangle = observations of the 50 years trend, , the reds = prediction of 36 different CMIP6 models.

Click here for full article!
So would you built your climate policies on these "model foundations"?

Excellent paper by e.Venture (in German) on the future of the German decarbonized grid in 2040"Wesentliche, erwartbare Erkenntnis ist, dass die Erzeugung aus Wind und PV der geforderten Nachfrage, bzw. Last nicht entspricht...Die Höhe des leistungsseitigen Defizits ist mit brutto 120 GW bei einer Maximallast von 146 GW erheblich. Anders ausgedrückt reicht an 5.000 Stunden im Jahr die Erzeugung aus Wind und PV nicht aus, die Bedarfe zu decken.

Renée Hannon has a new article on the Holocene (last 12000 years) CO2 and global temperature evolution, comparing observations (= temp.&CO2 derived from proxies) and models. The difference is breathtaking: Global temp. from proxies are inverse proportional to CO2 levels (upper plot), whereas the models show the opposite (lower plot).... and all our curent climate policies are based on these models!

Hannon concludes: "The fact that CO2 correlates well to Holocene temperatures for only the Antarctic, or <10% of our planet's surface, yet CO2 is considered as the dominant influence on climate change is a scientific dilemma."

Read also the comments after the article, especially what XJavier Vinos writes:
So it turns out that the CO2 hypothesis and associated models can only explain 50 years of the past 11,700. And in doing so they render 11,650 years of climate change unexplainable. This is the mark of a failed theory. It would have been ditched long ago if it wasn’t for the strong political support. Many paleoclimatologists are very unhappy with it.

Read CLINTEL's latest report on the IPCC AR6 (must give email to download full report)

Read this short, but very clear comment by Daniel Nebert:
"The fact is: the more one looks into the intricacies of Earth’s extraordinarily complex climate system, the more apparent it is, how little we really know. Therefore, it’s best to proceed slowly and carefully — ignoring the subjective hype generated by mainstream media and politicians."

Nobelist (Physics, 2022) Dr. John Clauser says this: “The popular narrative about climate change reflects a dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people. Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience. In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists. In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis. There is, however, a very real problem with providing a decent standard of living to the world’s large population and an associated energy crisis. The latter is being unnecessarily exacerbated by what, in my opinion, is incorrect climate science.”

Click here for the video of his exposé.

The 53th Earth Day is here, and not a single of the doomsday predictions by the "experts" and the media have been come true!

New very complete paper in Nature Science Communications on "Spatial energy density of large-scale electricity generation..." by Noland et al. Biomass is worst, nuclear by far the best!and "... onshore wind farms are the second most dilute source for power generation". Read a math-free, easy to follow discussion here! Attention: on the left-side figure the Y-scale is logarithmic!

Listen to the conference given by Prof. Steven Koonin in Paris the 23th March 2023 (in English, 56 minutes). Koonin is the former scientific and energy adviser of Barack Obama.His latest book is "Unsettled, what climate science tells us, what it doesn't"

The energy transition delusion: the inescapable mineral realities (Youtube, 46 min.)

Mark MILLS has a very unsettling presentation on the mineral demands needed for the wind/solar energy transition, and also the transition from thermal to electrical transportation. The magnitude of the minerals needed are mind-boggling (an EV car needs 2 times more minerals than a Diesel car).
(Youtube, 46 min.)

Interesting and easy to read debate contra and pro a carbon tax: Happer & Everett are against, Everett under very precise conditions is pro.

Happer & Everett give a sober diagnose of our putative CO2 driven climate problems.

New paper by Mingzu et al. in "Theoretical and Applied Climatology (Springer)" shows that 2/3 of the global warming during 2001 to 2018 is caused by natural changes in albedo (= mostly in cloud cover). Only 1/3 is caused by rising atmospheric CO2 levels (figure from paper, added text; calculations see my blog)

See also here. Read also this paper that shows that reduction in aerosols are mostly responsible for recent warming. Both paper  minimize (at different magnitudes) the role of CO2 increase.

Very  interesting and readable paper by Prof. Gautam  Kalghatgi (ex. Uni Oxford). He clearly shows how naive the concept of a quickly attainable net zero energy structure is. Forget the political or eco-blablabla and look at the numbers!

"Energy policy certainly needs to be informed by much more realism, honesty, and appreciation of broader global economic development, economic and  environmental needs"

Dr. Patrice Poyet, a French graduate from the Ecole des Mines and a PhD from University de Nice, has published an outstanding e-book of 640 pages which can be downloaded free of charge.
It is written for readers with a scientific background, and has received many compliments from distinguished scientists and professors.
He cites the professors Happer and Lindzen
“reliable scientific theories come from validating theoretical predictions with observations, not consensus, peer review, government opinion or manipulated data”
and this is the scientific spirit through this book from start to end.

Javier Vinõs & Andy May have a many-part sequence of papers on the "Sun-Climate-Effect... (the search for a solar signal)" at the Climate Etc. blog.
It is a demanding but very interesting reading, close to a book on climate physics. Recommended reading for all who want to dive deeper into the underlying physical phenomena.

The papers start on July 31, and the last part V has been published in August 28th.
Part I begins with a sentence from Landsberg: “Probably no subfield of meteorology has had as much effort devoted to it as the effects of solar variability on weather and climate. And none has had as little to show for the research labor.” Helmut E. Landsberg (1982)

by Prof. Judith Curry

One of the best comments I read during the last years... read it carefully!

"The build out of wind, solar and natural gas can fuel the transition, but this combination probably will not survive competition from new and better technologies that become available in the coming decades."

Presentation given by Björn Lomborg for the "Stuttgarter Energiewende Tage" (in English).

"Smart policy requires less hype... Global Warming is often badly exaggerated...why do we get it so wrong on global warming: because we ignore adaptation!"

Read here (in German) an open letter of 20 German university professors asking to continue using the remaining nuclear facilities:

"Mit einseitiger Ausrichtung auf Sonne, Wind und Erdgas wurde Deutschland in Energienot manövriert... plädieren wir für den Weiterbetrieb der deutschen Kernkraftwerke als dritte Klimaschutzsäule neben Sonne und Wind...Wir fordern die sofortige Aufhebung der Atomausstiegs-Paragraphen"

Listen also this podcast (in German) with 2 nuclear experts.

Very interesting paper by V. Courtillot, JL Le Mouël et F. Lopez analyzing the multiple cycles buried in the changes of the sea level.

These cycles are mostly found also in the orbits and astronomic influenc of the Jovian Planets. The authors also show the huge difference found when data from tidal stations or satellites are used (the former being much lower).

The "natural" cycles can explain practically the history of sea-level change, without resorting to an anthropogenic cause.

This is an older (2013), but very interesting paper from J-E.Solheim, emeritus professor from the University of Tromsö (Norway), published in the journal "Pattern Recognition in Physics"
 He writes: "The recent global warming may be interpreted as a rising branch of a millennium cycle, identified in ice cores and sediments and also recorded in history. This cycle peaks in the second half of this century, and then a 500 yr cooling trend will start. An expected solar grand minimum due to a 200 yr cycle will introduce additional cooling in the first part of this century."

One more of the numerous scientific papers ignored by the consensus and politicized climatology, and by our media and politicians.

(2nd link, if first not ok here.)

Stuart Kirk, Global Head of Responsible Investments at HSBC has been fired for making a presentation at the Moral Money Europe conference of the FT, where he told the public that climate change was not a big risk for the banks, and that they should preferentially invest in adaptation technology than in mitigation politics. So far for what is called "free speech".

Watch this excellent 15 minute presentation!

Other comments: https://nypost.com/2022/05/24/hsbc-banker-stuart-kirk-suspended-for-climate-change-remarks/

Excellent report of KU Leuwen and Eurometaux on what will be needed in 2050 to reach Net Zero.

The necessary percentage increases are mind boggling!

Watch this presentation by Tom Gallagher : a sober and easy to follow voyage into the past 66 millions of Earth's climate.
Some conclusions: "...in the Holocene there is nothing unusual about our current rate of warming...embrace the warmer, humid, CO2 fertilized times now..Prepare for more glaciation ahead!"

Read here a discussion in easy words from SEPP (original here)

The History of the LNT (Linear No Treshhold) theory of radioactive risk: watch this series of videos of the HPS debunking this almost 70 years old theory, which gathered momentum by fear, but also dishonesty and unscientific behavior. Dr. Calabrese is critical of LNT and says that hormesis is real for low dosis of radiation.
A report on the same subject (Reassessing Radiation Safety) is here.

Look also at www.radiationanswers.org for Q&A.

Prof. Guus Berkhout (emeritus, Uni Delft) stresses the importance of political decisions based on measurement data and not on theoretical models. Concerning climate action he asks:

1. Is CO₂ really the big culprit?

2. Does massive wood burning really contribute to less global warming?

3. Why does the output of ‘settled’ climate models not match real observations?

4. Why do universities still go ahead with supporting green energy policies, while these policies will lead to severe poverty? Why did universities not make a plea for nuclear technology? Why was such a debate forbidden at COP26*?

Ruhnau and Qvist have published an interesting paper on the electrical storage requirements for Germany, assuming 100% renewable electricity production (no gas, no nuclear, state 2030). They find in their 35-years analysis that one should account for 12 weeks of energy scarcity in a year, and propose mostly hydrogen as a storage medium, with batteries playing a very small role; they ignore all the technical problems related to hydrogen storage, and probably under-estimate its cost. Including storage related losses, they find that during the 35 years there is one period where almost 3 month of storage would have been needed!
What makes one think again, is that they suggest vastly overbuilding wind and solar, and curtailing the excess power when needed. There is no reflection on the extra material consumption  for this excess capacity (which for instance needs 10 times more offshore wind than today!)

Read a critique of the R&Q paper here, and another discusssion here.

Comment by Dr. Roy Spencer (UAH)... uncertainty about balance of outgoing/incoming radiation about 5-10 W/m2, to compare to presumed radiation forcing of human CO2 emissions of 1 W/m2. "...most recent warming could be mostly natural.. and we would never know it"

R.C. Dickson has written a very interesting 3 part essay "What every journalist and politician should know":

Part 1: The Scientific Process
Part 2: Numbers in Science
Part 3: Pathological Science

Read this, it is time well spent!

Read this new article by Prof. Richard LINDZEN

"Despite the fact that increases of CO2 thus far have been accompanied by the greatest increase in human welfare in history, and despite the fact that there have been large increases in the Earth’s vegetated area largely due to increases in CO2’s role in photosynthesis, governments seem to have concluded that another 0.5 C will spell doom...climate hysteria in the West leads to policies that clearly benefit China...the need for an open debate over both our assessment of climate science and the proposed policies is, indeed, desperately needed"

Watch this short video on Facebook by Jean Pütz, our most famous Luxembourg former TV presenter of technical things. He talks about the previsible GAU ("Grösster Anzunehmender Unfall") that the Energiewende risks to bring to the German Electricity Net. (8 minutes, German spoken). Read also this article and this one! (both in German)

Watch this podcast no. 373 by Modern Wisdom. It is an interview with one of Greenpeace founders Dr. Patrick Moore and covers a large section of ecologism and climate change, CO2 etc. problems.
This is a very long 1h36min video, which needs some standing power to watch...but this really is time well spent!

This is the time of the.  The Montréal Protocol should make it shrinking... does it really? Is the protocol a success?

Read my article in the blog!

Researchers at the MIT fusion center MIT-CFS have developed a 20 Tesla superconducting magnet, which allows to build a classical tokamak fusion reactor 40 times smaller. Their SPARC prototype is expected to start at 2025 and to be the first fusion device delivering more energy than it needs to operate (Q>1).
Remember that Luxembourg's energy minister wants to stop all research financing related to nuclear fusion!

Look also at this explaining video!

New and very important paper by Connolly et al. in Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics (April 2021). Read short discussion in the blog.

Prof. Ross McKitrick shows that the IPCC relies since more than 20 years on a statistically flawed paper when attributing global warming to GHG's (AR6 says "unequivocal")

Short easy to read version here (contains link to full paper) and version with highlighted text (by me) here.

Read this excellent article by Alasdair McLeod :

"But it is not widely appreciated that the process of hyping up climate change into a full-blown crisis has become the consequence of a crowd psychology rather than a pursuit of the facts."

Here it is again! The AR6 SPM reintroduces the ignominuous hockeystick, and cancels the Roman and Medieval Warm Periods.

Read this damning critique of Steve McIntyre on this woke SPM ! "...one surely presumes that IPCC climate scientists, who are employed full time on these topics, to be competent enough to notice things that I was able to observe in my first day or so of looking at PAGES2019. But their obtuseness never ceases to amaze. "

Read also here, here and here.

A marvellous, really must-read essay by Anna Krylov (Uni. Southern California, LA) published in the Journal of Physical Chemistry (10 June 2021)

Teachers: let your students read this!

New important paper by Millstein et al. on the decline of wind and solar electricity value with increasing penetration. This is a 28 pages paper, well worth to read twice! Above 20% of wind/solar penetration, the produced electriccity value falls by 30 to 40%. See BLOG !

An excellent exposé by Prof. Judith Curry

Planning for big battery storage systems for your intermittent solar and wind electricity? Beware of the huge fire risk, and read this June 2021 paper by 3 British university physics professors: "Safety of Grid Scale Lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage Systems". They write "the explosion potential and lack of engineering standards to prevent thermal runaway may put control of battery fires beyond control, experience and capabilities of local Fire and Rescue Services"

Another older comment here.

The oceans absorb much more CO2 than assumed! Read this paper (Sep.2020, Nature Communications) by Watson et al. with the conclusion that "...most ocean models underestimate uptake... Some revision of the global carbon budget is required".

Supplementary information here.

Read this latest report by Prof. Ole Humlum; this is a report based on observations, not models! Just one sentence of this outstanding report:

"Since 1979, lower troposphere temperatures have increased over both land and oceans, but most clearly over land areas. The most straightforward explanation for this phenomenon is that much of the warming is caused by solar insolation, but there may well be several supplementary reasons, such as changes in cloud cover and land use."

Watch this very sober, clear and non emotional presentation by Prof. Ross Mc Kitrick (Guelph University), 12 May 2021.
43 minutes well spent!

"...emissions mix globally... so unilateral action is useless...policies that were too small to have an effect turned out to be too costly to implement...increasing the scale of policies pushes the costs up faster than the benefits..."

New large 30 pages report by Marcel Crok from CLINTEL.

Conclusion: "In any case, the message of this essay was that we are in no hurry and that panic is unwarranted. Climate change always deserves our attention, but the idea that we need to turn our energy supply upside down right now seems mainly an emotional decision."

Read this extraordinary clear and lucid comment of Prof. Judith Curry:

"This redefinition of ‘climate change’ to refer only to manmade climate change has effectively eliminated natural climate change from the public discussion on climate change....Climate change has thus become a grand narrative in which human-caused climate change has become a dominant cause of societal problems...This grand narrative misleads us to think that if we solve the problem of manmade climate change, then these other problems would also be solved"

Read also this comment by Andrew Roman.

Excellent, very clear and sober article by two world-renowned physicists : Richard Lindzen, MIT, and William Happer, Princeton. A French translation is here.

Read also this article of Dr. Roy Spencer: An Earth Day Reminder: "Global Warming" is Only ~50% of What Models Predict.

Excerpt: "Yes, more CO2 must produce some warming. But the amount of warming makes all the difference to global energy policies. Seldom is the public ever informed of these glaring discrepancies between basic science and what politicians and pop-scientists tell us."

Watch George Carlin's humorous presentation, and bring a few laugh's into these depressing times! (YouTube, 8 minutes)

Full text of the report "An Assessment of the Sustainability of Nuclear Power for the EU Taxonomy Consultation 2019"
"The state of public and political discussion around nuclear energy rarely reflects the factual state of things. Emotions like fear take hold, even though from a statistical and scientific point of view, there is less to fear from nuclear energy than from practically any other energy source..." Read also the BLOG

Read this excellent policy brief by Prof. Vaclav Smil (Uni. of Manitoba) and reflect on this sentence, that says it all:

"Designing hypothetical roadmaps outlining complete elimination of fossil carbon from the global energy supply by 2050 is nothing but an exercise in wishful thinking that ignores fundamental physical realities."

Read the new UNSCEAR report on the health consequences of the Fukushima accident:
"increased body of evidence that the observed thyroid cancers are not attributable to radiation exposure... no health effects in emergency and recovery workers... average doses of evacuees less than 6mSv" (the average dose in Luxembourg is about 3 to 5 mSv,  without any medical usage as X-Rays, thyroid or heart screening...)

Comments here.

Discussion of a new paper by Rode&Fischbeck (Carnegie Mellon) "...When it comes to climate change, the authors advise "thinking small." That is, focusing on making predictions that are less grandiose and shorter in term."

(the full text of the paper is pay-walled)

Read this caustic article (in German) by Dr. Björn Peters (a physicist) at the Umwelt-Watchblog. "Die Energiewende ist also an ihren eigenen Zielsetzungen und ihrer eigenen Metrik gescheitert, nicht auf Basis der Verleumdungen ihrer Gegner".

for going to net zero in 2050, if actual fuel consumption would not increase and would be replaced by "renewables" in 2050

Build two 2.1 GW nuclear stations every week up to 2050

or

Build 1000 Wind Turbines every day and one 2.1 GW nuclear station every week up to 2050

or

Build 500km² area of solar panels and one 2.1 GW nuclear station every week up to 2050

(free adapted from here, very conservative numbers)

Clintel has a new Press Release titled  "adaptation much more profitable than mitigation".

They write that "one dollar invested in adaptation yields about 4 dollar in benefits" whereas (according to B. Lomborg) "one dollar spent for mitigation leads only to 11 cent benefit".

Especially telling is the graph (click for full scale) which shows that the deaths from climate related catastrophic events decreased spectacularly since 1920, whereas the non-climate catastrophe death toll remains more or less constant.

Very interesting new  paper by Roger Pielke Jr. (University of Colorado)and  Justin Ritchie (University of British Columbia):
"... much of the climate research community is presently off-track from scientific coherence and policy-relevance. Attempts to address scenario misuse within the community have thus far not worked. The result has been the widespread production of myopic or misleading perspectives on future climate change and climate policy"

"..the hegemony of the IPCC has become a source of myopia, rather than enlightment"

Attention: the paper is paywalled!

One of the best long-time temperature series is the Central England Temperature series, called CET. It goes back to about 1650 (read more on it's history here).
This series does not show any dangerous or disturbing warming at all!
The little warming (1.2°C) begins with the end of the Little Ice Age (LIA) after the 1850's. You may remember that the LIA was a general colder period!

Read more here! 

W.A.Wijngaarden (York Uni., Canada) and W. Happer (Princeton Uni.,USA) have published a remarkable paper on the influence of doubling the actual concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHG). The paper is very math-heavy and not easy to read, but 2 conclusions are important:

1. at current concentrations the forcings from all GHG are saturated, so...
2. doubling the concentrations of 5 GHG increases the forcings only by a few percent in the cloud-free atmosphere

Link is to the preprint.

Persistent warm Mediterranean surface waters during the Roman period

A new paper by Margaritelli et al. published in Nature - Science Reports (link) shows that the Mediterranean surface water temperature were during the Roman Warm Period about 2°C warmer than today! CO2 levels are assumed < 280 ppm at these times, which should make you think again. The authors conclude that during the Roman Optimum " ... developed the greatest ancient civilization of all time, the Roman one. We hypothesise the relevance that these climate conditions may had in the expansion of the Roman Empire and its collapse with the general development of colder conditions." (the original figure left has been edited by me by adding text and arrows).

Tell this the climate alarmists of today!

A very important new paper by Kramm et al. shows how historic papers from 1850 to 1910 evaluate zonal yearly average temperatures, and how they differ to the "consensus" values.
The authors conclude that the historic data do not show global warming during the last 100 years, as the older temperatures are higher than those given by the consensus climatology.
Read the blog for part1 and part2.

 ... (Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences) by Prof. Guus Berkhout, founder of CLINTEL (Climate Intelligence Foundation), asking for not excluding scientists with alternative views.
" What concerns me about this embarrassing state of affairs is that science is being misused to provide spurious justification for wishful climate policy and that the scientific establishment is looking the other way...The IPCC was supposed to be a scientific initiative – I was a strong supporter of it myself. However, it has emerged as a political organisation that abuses science."

Read also this open letter by CLINTEL "Fight Virus not Carbon"

writes well known environmentalist and climate activist Michael Shellenberger. In his list of what to do note this:

- 100% renewables would require increasing the land use for energy from today's 0.5% to 50%
- the most important thing for reducing air pollution and carbon emissions is moving from wood to coal to petroleum to natural gas to uranium

Prof. Richard Lindzen has published a very interesting paper "An oversimplified picture of the climate behavior based on a single process can lead to distorted conclusions". Please read the blog!

New study by Ulrich Schmidt (Kiel Policy Brief 143, Jun. 2020, Institut für Weltwirtschaft) on E-cars: "...führen zu 73% höheren Treibhausgasmissionen als moderne Diesel-PKW"

Research done at a geothermal power station in Iceland has shown that gazeous CO2 dissolved in water which is injected into underground basalt rocks mineralizes in just 2 years, and such will be safely stored away indefinitely without any risk of leakage as they may exist in traditional CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) systems..

The ongoing solar minimum continues to increase the cosmic radiation at the altitudes of transatlantic flights (20000 - 40000 feet). The hourly dose may reach about 3800nSv, to be compared to the 80nSv common at ground level (look at our radioactive measurements!)

Look at these graphs which show a similar 60-year sinus-pattern for the velocity of warming and the change in ocean heat content. Note also that the velocity of warming seems to be uncorrelated to the yearly CO2 emissions (here gigaton C/year, right axis, red plot).

The German philosoph Gunnar KAISER asks 12 very logical, but easy to understand questions regarding climate and its variation; he asks these questions to the famous TV physics professor Harald Lesch. Watch the YouTube video (German spoken, about 17 minutes) and just try to follow the logic! h.t. Die Kalte Sonne

Read this interesting article on HALEU (high-assay, low enriched) nuclear fuel from disused ERBII reactor and its planned use in the Oklo Aurora micro-reactor at INL (Idaho National Laboratory). HALEU is seen by many as the fuel for small reactors and as a tool to recup energy from spent nuclear fuel.

The Oklo Aurora reactor is a reactor running on metallic fuel, without any liquid circuits.

800 scientists wrote a letter to the UN Secretary-General with the message that there is no climate emergency.They write that "warming is far slower as predicted", that "climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities" and that "our advice to political leaders is that science should strive for a significantly better understanding of the climate system, while politics should focus on minimizing potential climate damage by prioritizing adaption strategies based on proven and affordable technologies"

Read the text here with the (provisional) list of the signatures. Read also here, watch this video (3.2 min.) by Prof. Denis Rancourt and this video (17 min) of Prof. Guus Berkhout from COP25.

Decadal Changes of the Reflected Solar Radiation and the Earth Energy Imbalance

Even if some alarmist (German) climatists speak of accelerating global sea-level rise, this is not so. Read this comment and this report from Prof. Judith Curry. Click here for observational data from tide-gauges (Prof. Ole Humlum's climate4you web site) for many locations. The level measured by tide-gauges (relative sea-level) is what counts for eventual adaptation measures!German (Wismar) and Dutch (Den Helder) tide gauges show an unspectacular linear trend of about 1.41 mm/y since 1860 (i.e. the end of the Little Ice Age cooling).

This paper by Dr. Patrick Frank (SLAC, Princeton University) did much furore and lead to many lively discussions, also among climate realists. Applying standard text-book error/uncertainty calculations, he shows that the temperature projections by the climate models can not be trusted, as the small predicted increase is buried in a huge uncertainty (because these models ignore/do not properly account for cloud forcing uncertainty). Read also the comments here and here.