1/3. MunichRe is not just an insurance company. It's the giant German reinsurance company which bankrolls Rahmstorf and Potsdam Institute (PIK). They're among the worst and most extreme promoters of crackpot climate alarmism, just short of XR.
●
●
● investors.com/politics/edito… rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/2023-update-…
2/3. Hyping climate alarmism is a business strategy for MunichRe, because they realized climate alarmism is good for their business. When people expect worsening disasters, they're willing to pay more for reinsurance.
3/3. Do you know where the "extreme weather" nonsense came from? Not from evidence, but from James Hansen's epic confusion.
Somehow he avoided learning about Arctic Amplification. He thought AGW would warm the tropics MORE than high latitudes.
That's a clip of Hansen on Letterman, explaining it. Hansen claimed that the “increasing temperature gradient” [between high & low latitudes] would "drive stronger storms.”
That's just plain wrong. The temperature gradient is DECREASING, not increasing.
You see, "global warming" isn't really very global. Thanks to stronger-than-linear negative feedbacks, such as Planck cooling, warm climates are more stable than cold climates. So AGW disproportionately warms chilly high latitudes. The tropics are affected much less (which is nice, because the tropics are warm enough already).
Hansen wrote a ridiculous book based on his confusion, and did a whirlwind publicity tour, pitching the book & spreading the claim that AGW will cause worsening storms / weather. (That's why he was on Letterman.)
Nearly all climate scientists know that's wrong, but none of them challenged him. Nearly everyone in the climate biz (maybe even Hansen, by now), has heard of Arctic Amplification, but the climate industry is so corrupt that neither Hansen's colleagues nor anyone else in the industry corrected his error. sealevel.info/feedbacks.html… amazon.com/Storms-My-Gran…
2/18.
Lyme disease was first identified in chilly Lyme, CT. Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever was first found in frigid Idaho & Montana. Both spread SOUTH — obviously NOT due to global WARMING.
Like every other climate scare, this one is a lie.
There's no evidence at all that climate change is spreading ticks and the diseases they carry, or any other disease. One degree of warming is equivalent to just 50-70 miles latitude change — completely trivial compared to tick ranges.
@zteirstein 3/18.
Here's a tweetstorm where you can learn many things about CO2 and climate that Grist and the rest of the Climate Industry will never tell you.
2/5》 If we got at most 0.92°C of warming from 58% of the forcing of a full doubling of CO2, then (at most) how much warming we could get from a full doubling of CO2?
3/5》 Those figures are very conventional estimates, widely accepted by climate alarmists. Yet those same climate alarmists believe that TCR climate sensitivity is 1.5 to 2.0°C/doubling of CO2, and ECS is about 3.0°C/doubling of CO2.
1/10. Where on earth do you "learn" such nonsense, Willard?
Growing ranges for most major crops cover climate zones with average temperatures that vary by tens of °C. Major crops like corn, wheat, potatoes & soybeans are produced from Mexico to Canada.
Compared to that, a degree or two of warming (disproportionately at night, in winter, at chilly high latitudes) is de minimis -- as is the 0.35±0.13°C between now and what the IPCC calls "1.5°C of warming").
2/10. Willard wrote, "fertilization is the male gamete to female gamete to produce seed/fruit... not the N-P-K addition"
Wrong. In agriculture, that's called pollination.
3/10. Willard wrote, "(yes, it is often temperature sensitive)"
Wrong. Farmers choose planting dates to optimize growing conditions, including temperatures, for their crops.
1/7. The only trace on that graph which does not show large improvement in cereal yield per hectare is the trace for Niger.
The graph ended with an anomalously bad crop year for cereals in Niger (2021). Fortunately, 2022 was much better; here's an article worldbank.org/en/news/press-…
2/7. By displaying high productivity countries like the USA along with Niger, you forced OurWorldInData to scale the graphs so that it's hard to see the trend in Niger.
But if you display Niger alone, as I've done here, you'll see that cereal yields declined there until about thirty years ago, but they've improved since then (except for 2021).
As you can see, as atmospheric CO2 levels have risen, the natural CO2 removal rate has sharply accelerated. (That's a strong negative/stabilizing climate feedback.) sealevel.info/AR6_WG1_Table_…