Failed Climate Change/Global Warming Predictions

Modern doomsayers have been predicting climate and environmental disaster since the 1960s. They continue to do so today. These people continue to spread the lie about man made global warming or "climate change" as the now call it.

What follows is a collection of notably wild predictions from notable people in government and science. Because these "notable" people tell other people about the lie of global warming. Uninformed or ignorant people believe this lie when it is told via the media.

The global warming man made "climate change" deceivers also tell this lie to children in public schools. Because their teacher or other notable person tells them this lie they believe it if their parents have not taught them that global warming-climate change is a lie and cannot be proven or documented in a valid way.

One of the best websites that easily proves man made global warming-climate change is a lie is ClimateDepot.com

This website includes information about the man made climate change- global warming lie.

drroyspencer.com (The founder of the weather channel.) When it was founded the weather channel did not preach the lie of man made global warming-climate change but now the weather channel teaches this lie 24/7.

Dr Roy Spencer's article Global Warming 101 explains why man made global warming-climate change is a total lie.

ExactWeather.com Disputes the lie of man made global warming-climate change and explains why man does NOT control the global weather or your local weather or any weather or any climate change.

More than merely spotlighting the failed predictions, this collection shows that the makers of failed apocalyptic predictions often are individuals holding respected positions in government and science.

While such predictions have been and continue to be enthusiastically reported by a media eager for sensational headlines, the failures are typically not revisited.

1970: ‘America subject to water rationing by 1974 and food rationing by 1980.’

Source: The Guardian, January 29, 1974

1974: ‘Another Ice Age?’

Source: TIME, June 24, 1974

1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life’

But no such ‘great peril to life’ has been observed as the so-called ‘ozone hole’ remains:

Sources: Headline

NASA Data | Graph

1976: ‘The Cooling’

Source: New York Times Book Review, July 18, 1976

1980: ‘Acid Rain Kills Life in Lakes’

Noblesville Ledger (Noblesville, IN) April 9, 1980

But 10 years later, the US government program formed to study acid rain concluded:

Associated Press, September 6, 1990

1978: ‘No End in Sight’ to 30-Year Cooling Trend

Source: New York Times, January 5, 1978

But according to NASA satellite data there is a slight warming trend since 1979.

Source: DrRoySpencer.com

1988: James Hansen forecasts increase regional drought in 1990s

But the last really dry year in the Midwest was 1988, and recent years have been record wet.

Source: RealClimateScience.com

1988: Washington DC days over 90F to from 35 to 85

But the number of hot days in the DC area peaked in 1911, and have been declining ever since.

Source: RealClimateScience.com

1988: Maldives completely under water in 30 years

Source: Agence France Press, September 26, 1988

1989: Rising seas to ‘obliterate’ nations by 2000

Source: Associated Press, June 30, 1989

1989: New York City’s West Side Highway underwater by 2019

Source: Salon.com, October 23, 2001

1995 to Present: Climate Model Failure

Source: CEI.org

2000: ‘Children won’t know what snow is.’

Source: The Independent, March 20, 2000

2002: Famine in 10 years

Source: The Guardian, December 23, 2002

2004: Britain to have Siberian climate by 2020

Source: The Guardian, February 21, 2004

2008: Arctic will be ice-free by 2018

Source: Associated Press, June 24, 2008

2008: Al Gore warns of ice-free Arctic by 2013

But… it’s still there:

Source: WattsUpWithThat.com, December 16, 2018

2009: Prince Charles says only 8 years to save the planet

Source: The Independent, July 9, 2009

2009: UK prime minister says 50 days to ‘save the planet from catastrophe’

Source: The Independent: October 20, 2009

2009: Arctic ice-free by 2014

Source: USA Today, December 14, 2009

2013: Arctic ice-free by 2015

Source: The Guardian, July 24, 2013

The paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02550-9 (open access)

Gas hydrate dissociation off Svalbard induced by isostatic rebound rather than global warming

Abstract

Methane seepage from the upper continental slopes of Western Svalbard has previously been attributed to gas hydrate dissociation induced by anthropogenic warming of ambient bottom waters. Here we show that sediment cores drilled off Prins Karls Foreland contain freshwater from dissociating hydrates. However, our modeling indicates that the observed pore water freshening began around 8 ka BP when the rate of isostatic uplift outpaced eustatic sea-level rise. The resultant local shallowing and lowering of hydrostatic pressure forced gas hydrate dissociation and dissolved chloride depletions consistent with our geochemical analysis. Hence, we propose that hydrate dissociation was triggered by postglacial isostatic rebound rather than anthropogenic warming. Furthermore, we show that methane fluxes from dissociating hydrates were considerably smaller than present methane seepage rates implying that gas hydrates were not a major source of methane to the oceans, but rather acted as a dynamic seal, regulating methane release from deep geological reservoirs.

2013: Arctic ice-free by 2016

Source: The Guardian, December 9, 2013

2014: Only 500 days before ‘climate chaos’

But…

Sources: Washington Examiner/a>

In recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data.

Data Tampering At NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) (The measured USHCN daily temperature data shows a decline in US temperatures since the 1930s. But before they release it to the public, they put it thorough a series of adjustments which change it from a cooling trend to a warming trend. This is what the EPA uses to justify their efforts to stop co2 and carbon emissions. The EPA uses FAKE computer data as explained and documented in the article above. Hockey stick graphs are indeed man-made – by climate activists pretending to be scientific heads of government agencies.

As of 1999, there wasn’t any warming trend in the US, thats when noaa began to change the computer data and graphs to reflect a global warming trend of fake, manipulated data.)

Hurricane predictions have become politicized and are hyped to the max. This is why hurricane forecasts several days ahead usually are not correct. They always make the hurricane forecasts much worse initially. When you see a person reporting outside during a hurricane and telling you the wind is blowing hard that is useless. Hurricane prediction = hype + ratings.

Global warming theory starts with the assumption that the Earth naturally maintains a constant average temperature, which is the result of a balance between the amount of sunlight the Earth absorbs, and the amount of emitted infrared radiation that the Earth continuously emits to outer space. In other words, energy in equals energy out. A false assumption!

On June 26, 2024 the us supreme court made a ruling that allows the government to edit, censor, delete, change and hide the truth about ANYTHING the biden regime doesn't want you to know!

The background of the case was very familiar to this audience, as the Biden administration was previously blocked by lower courts from telling social media platforms to remove content against their interests. Today, the Supreme Court rejected the standing of the plaintiffs, essentially giving a green light to the USA government to begin controlling social media platforms again.

If you read the opinion [FULL PDF HERE], I would strongly urge readers to focus beginning on page #11 of the Justice Barrett opinion. It is obvious in the three or four pages that follow, the court was looking for an exit from the free speech issue. Denying the case on “standing” grounds became their justification for the cop-out.

Barrett goes out of her way to make the standing issue the crux of the majority opinion. Comey-Barrett dismisses all the instances of censorship and coerced removal under the auspices that the relief sought by the plaintiffs was for future harm, not past injury. The lower courts had ruled the government could not interfere with speech in the future, without establishing that each individual plaintiff was harmed specifically by each action of the government.

Social media platforms did some censorship and content removal on their own, without government direction. Therefore, it becomes impossible for the court to determine which censorship decisions were made by government coercion, and which were made by the social media platform with ordinary moderation rules being applied. {pdf page #11}

Justice Samuel Alito Jr, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch, dissented. Alito criticized the majority for failing to address the underlying free speech questions in the case, calling efforts by the government to police content “coercion.”

The court “shirks that duty and thus permits the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear and think,” Alito wrote. “That is regrettable.”

¹We keep saying in the Government censorship 2.0 model we were going to see a shift. The original censorship removal was going to shift away from “content” as defined by the subject matter and will resurface as censorship against the specific individual person or outlet. This Supreme Court decision aligns with that visible DHS intention.

This case is part of the reason why DHS shifted from censorship based on what was being said (ex COVID-19), and now focuses on who is saying it. How big is their influence? What is the size of their audience? What is their platform? Where are they vulnerable or fragile?

The targeting is not necessarily the subject matter; now it’s the person or outlet with the voice that spreads the subject matter. This is what has already started to happen, and this is the approach that will continue to happen – only at a faster pace and larger scale.

It is even more critical now to show support to the entities that are at the forefront of the information network. We must support the voices that are digging, sharing, providing the raw material information and analyzing the ramifications, so that an understanding expands the awakening.

Those voices who provide truthful information… information that enlarges the understanding of the average person… are going to be the biggest targets now. DHS will shift away from spider crawls looking for “keywords” and “phrases,” and they will specifically be using AI to look for context within the content.

Accurate context with accurate content will be information most perceived as against the interest of government.

3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

50 Years of Failed Man Made Global Warming/Climate Change Predictions

On June 26, 2024 the us supreme court made a ruling that allows the government to edit, censor, delete, change and hide the truth about ANYTHING the biden regime doesn't want you to know!

Supreme Court Allows Government Control Over Speech on Social Media Platforms, Rejects Standing in Murthy vs Missouri

The court “shirks that duty and thus permits the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear and think,” Alito wrote. “That is regrettable.”

The targeting is not necessarily the subject matter; now it’s the person or outlet with the voice that spreads the subject matter. This is what has already started to happen, and this is the approach that will continue to happen – only at a faster pace and larger scale.

It is even more critical now to show support to the entities that are at the forefront of the information network. We must support the voices that are digging, sharing, providing the raw material information and analyzing the ramifications, so that an understanding expands the awakening.

Accurate context with accurate content will be information most perceived as against the interest of government.