If you prefer always wrong wild guess predictions of a coming global warming crisis, you won't get them here.
'Coming climate crisis' predictions have been published in every year since 1957.
They appear to have started with oceanographer Roger Revelle in 1957.
There were other scientists with the same opinion, but Revelle was best known, at the time.
To his credit, Mr. Revelle had uncertainty, like all good scientists do, and was still waiting for atmospheric measurements to prove the effects of CO2, when he died in 1991.
Revelle did not seek attention from the media to make ultra-confident wild guess predictions of a future climate crisis.
But he was still wrong.
If you want details about the actual mild and harmless global warming since the mid-1970s, you'll get them here.
The details of locations and timing where there was the most warming, are disguised by using a single global average temperature.
A global average temperature is one that not one person lives in -- it is a statistic, not a measurement.
Warmer winter nights in Siberia since the 1970s tells you a lot more about the past 45 years of actual global warming than a single global average temperature.
If you want the fake simplicity, and fake certainty, of the CO2 is the global average temperature "control knob" theory, you won't get that here.
There are many possible causes of climate change.
For 4.5 billion years, no causes of climate change were man made, or CO2.
The United Nations launched the IPCC -- the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- in 1988.
The IPCC was formed to blame climate change on humans, and prove natural causes of climate change were "noise", which they announced in 1995.
They started with a conclusion about climate change, and a goal -- doing that is junk science.
One of their methods was to create complex climate computer models.
Those climate models predicted much faster global warming than estimated by lab infrared gas spectroscopy experiments with CO2.
Lab experiments suggested adding CO2 to the atmosphere had the potential for mild, harmless global warming.
Perhaps +1 degree C, global warming per CO2 level doubling, which could take 100 years, or more.
+1 degree C. warming would have been harmless, even if it happened in one year.
But climate alarmists had decided in the 1970s that warming would be much faster than lab experiments suggested -- +1.5 to +4.5 degrees C. per CO2 level doubling,
They had invented an unlikely and unproven water vapor positive feedback theory, to triple the expected global warming from CO2 alone.
Positive feedback theory made expected global warming change from mild and harmless (lab experiments on CO2 using artificially dried air) ... to potentially harmful (lab results plus the new water vapor positive feedback theory).
The climate alarmists then claimed +3.0 degrees C. warming per CO2 level doubling, rather than roughly +1.0 degree C. warming suggested by lab experiments.
They added a HUGE margin of error, of +/- 50%, as if admitting that they were guessing.
We were told to expect +3.0 degrees C. +/- 1.5 degrees warming, usually stated as +1.5 to +4.5 degrees warming C. per CO2 level doubling.
But now usually stated as +3.0 degrees C. global warming per CO2 doubling.
That theory has had no more than minor changes since the 1970s.
Proof of that theory, we were told, would be rapid global warming.
And additional evidence would be a 'hot spot', about 10 kilometers up in the troposphere, over the tropics.
Back in the real world, actual global warming measured since the mid-1970s was mild and harmless -- just as the lab experiments had predicted.
And that's if you assume there were no natural causes of warming, and blame global warming entirely on CO2, as a worst case estimate.
The troposphere 'hot spot' was never found using satellites and weather balloons.
People with common sense realized a positive feedback would be unstable.
It would eventually cause runaway global warming, that would have ended most life on our planet millions, or billions, of years ago, when CO2 levels were much higher than today.
The CO2 that used to be in the atmosphere long ago is now sequestered in rocks, and underground, as the carbon in oil, natural gas and coal.
So when we burn those fossil fuels, we are "recycling" carbon back into the atmosphere, in the form of CO2, the staff of almost all life on this planet.
Tell a climate alarmist that you support "recycling" carbon, and they will go berserk.
In fact, leftists will go berserk if you disagree with any of their 'CO2 is the devil in the sky' theory.
CO2 is the invisible gas that every human and animal exhales.
CO2 is the invisible gas that all plants need to survive, and they would prefer having a lot more CO2 than the current 420 parts per million (ppm).
Greenhouse owners typically use CO2 enrichment systems to get 1,000 to 1,400 ppm CO2 inside their greenhouses, to accelerate plant growth.
This is not a blog where I declare CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, and could not possibly cause global warming.
I know thay may upset some readers.
CO2 causing mild global warming is a reasonable assumption, based on lab science, but it's actual effect in the atmosphere can't be measured -- there are too many other variables likely to affect the climate
This is a blog where I tell you that I loved the mild warming since the 1970s, here in southeastern Michigan where I live, and I want more warming!
I appreciated global warming even more in 2021, when it seemed to have disappeared for a while.
2021 was unusually cold through mid-May, except for one week in April.
Normal temperatures finally started here in the third week of May -- so we did not have much of a spring.
Our planet has a constantly changing climate -- it is not in thermodynamic equilibrium.
It is a planet that is usually too cold for humans, except in periods called interglacials.
We are very lucky to be living in the Holocene interglacial period.
During those interglacials, there are mild warming and cooling trends, that usually last hundreds of years each.
They existed long before humans began burning fossil fuels.
We are very lucky to be living during a warming trend, rather than during a cooling trend.
Anecdotal evidence strongly suggests people prefer living during warming trends.
The last cooling trend, the Little Ice Age, was at it's coldest in the late 1600s.
People back then hated their climate -- there were even some famines in Europe, as the cold weather disrupted crop growth.
Since then, our planet has warmed by about +2 degrees C., based on climate proxy temperature reconstructions, which are always very rough estimates.
And that warming was good news.
So here we are: 2020 had the best climate for humans, animals and plants since the late 1600s.
But we are not being allowed to enjoy our wonderful climate, because leftists are hysterical -- predicting a coming climate crisis ... for the 64th year in a row.
And they are seizing more government power to control the private sector of our economy, in what will be a failed effort to somehow "fight" that imaginary climate crisis.
Or maybe because they just love political power, and telling everyone else how to live -- a coming climate change crisis gives them an excuse to do what they have wanted to do for over 100 years?
Leftists have been effective at censoring people like me, who live in climate science reality and reject always wrong wild guesses of a coming climate crisis.
And that folks, is fascism.
I edit this blog as a libertarian, to cover the basics of climate science and energy use.
As a libertarian, I have promoted less government, and more freedom, since 1973.
But we are losing the battle, with personal freedom reaching new lows in 2020.
With no ads, and no money for me, this blog is a pubic service that attempts to refute the imaginary coming climate crisis, that has been 'coming' for 64 years, but never arrives.
There are plenty of real environmental and energy problems, that get no attention from the so-called environmentalists:
(1) Air pollution over large Asian cities,
(2) One billion people with no electricity, and
(3) Another two billion people with unreliable electricity
CO2 is not pollution -- it is the staff of life -- and rising CO2 levels have not harmed anyone.
Richard Greene
Bingham Farms, Michigan