Austria and Germany are also mastering this post peak lockdown approach perfectly. It's a type of religious griefing.
Example NL
6/ The "punishment" may correlate with culture tendencies towards autocratic systems. Let's have a look on the #punishmentindex.
The usual suspects are bad: IT, DE, AT, GR.
Skandinavia shines. I'm proud.
FR why?
The Slavic countries (beaten by history) have learned.
7/ Poland and Slovenia (I think SI should be top 5. The time sum flattens out what they really did) are outliers.
Those 2 are also the loudest in pushing for war.
Like most 😷 🔴🔴🔴 💉💉💉profiles.
Makes sense. Will they soon have 3 guns in their bio? "We want WW3"?
8/ The fact that most countries did mostly useless measures can be prooven by the absence of the “flattening”.
The FWHM is the same for most countries. If measures worked, this parameter should have given a signal (higher FWHM with stringency).
But let's see if we can see it?
9/ FWHM: So what do we see? You either supress it (AT), or it's out of the bag. But it simply comes back later (AT). The overall 2 year result for AT, IT, ES, NL was negative compared with SWE.
Interessting: some flatting (peak 2020Q1) in SWE seen. They did better with much less
10/ The only places where prolonged measures may have given a benefit is NZ and Australia. They managed to escape Wuhan, Alpha, Betta, Delta with a radical island isolation strategy. That's not an option on continents.
NZ will go through this with Omicron (luck) and vaccines.
10/ So what did Oxford do to burry this unconvenient fact about Sweden?
They went full Orwellian and changed the weight.
Rewrote history to fit the official truth and narrative.
"Lockdowns and radical freedom removals over years work."
11/ So let's extract FWHM a bit more systematic. They all look the same, except of course Austria which completely suppressed peak 2020 Q1, but then paid the price later (and added collateral damage).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2/ The analysis is already done. DWD and peer-reviewed literature.
It matches what we saw from JMA and KNMI raw data:
a +10–20 W/m² increase in surface solar radiation.
So the question:
How did they get away with knowing this and selling the story of ~1.4 W from CO₂ instead?
3/ What does the literature say?
“...dimming/brightening not only occurred when clouds are considered, but also under cloud-free conditions when cloud effects are absent.”
A remarkably way to say:
It’s not clouds. Not CO₂. Not climate. Pollution.
A +14 W/m² total solar increase over 50 years is realistic. Japan alone shows +20 W/m². That’s 10× larger than the minuscule additional CO₂ forcing (~1W). And nearly 50× greater than the impact of sunspot cycles (±0.5 W).
Japan has one of the best measurement data. The analysis is clear. The brightening amount to almost 20 W. That is a lot. But the main and dominant effect is still urbanization, which makes up to 6°.
Link 1: the brightening. It explains why the climate scam likes to start in the maximum smog dimming period of 1970. It is a shameless bad faith deception. The effect is ball part of +1°C. In dry areas up to 3°C.
UAH is a model inference, not a measurement. It can’t be tested, yet many treat it like real raw. Calling that a ‘measurement’ is wrong. Neither Lindzen nor us take it seriously. It starts in a cold period, with no long-term data — adjusted, multi mission stitched SW composite.🚮
UAH is not measurement — it’s model-driven inference. Satellites detect radiance, not temperature. The ‘trend’ is built through weighting functions, drift corrections, and stitched instruments. It’s untestable, synthetic, and not suitable for long-term climate baselines.
It’s astonishing how confidently some treat satellite-based inferences as god in heaven like truth. These are SW model outputs, not reliable measurements. Treating them as accurate fact is scientifically indefensible. If you do so, expect your credibility to be challenged.
London is glowing today. Wide urban heat plume. Not “climate change.” Just real estate and concrete. The effect is visible. Quantifiable. Known. This should be a good study day to quantify UHI in more detail once the IR satellite pictures come in.
2/ We start low tech. Actually nothing more is needed. There is over 6°C urban heat. It's embarrassing to pretend today's 33°C are comparable to 100 years ago. Subtract 6–8°C for UHI and you get... 25–27°C. Welcome back to reality.
3/ Nighttime, Tmin. Watch how they flatten the colors. You’re not supposed to notice the 7°C UHI. We unflatten the colors. Look again: you see it now?