The Ice Age Cometh! Forget Global Warming!

[Chad]

According to DiscloseTV's Twitter account, using Greenland Polar Portal's charts, 'Greenland ice sheet gained 7 Gigatons of mass in just one day yesterday — the largest daily gain ever recorded during the summer.'

For some reason the portal is currently unavailable, so i can't check this claim. No outlets are currently reporting it, but i came across a report of a similar ice gain back in 2020, except it occurred in February. ADDED: according to Electroverse, there was another 7 Gigatons recorded in June 2022 (which actually seems to show on the cart below):

https://twitter.com/x/status/1564576027350913024

Pic for posterity:

Link to portal: https://t.co/2EvukuPcAM

 

[Alix]

According to DiscloseTV's Twitter account, using Greenland Polar Portal's charts, 'Greenland ice sheet gained 7 Gigatons of mass in just one day yesterday — the largest daily gain ever recorded during the summer.'

For some reason the portal is currently unavailable, so i can't check this claim. No outlets are currently reporting it, but i came across a report of a similar ice gain back in 2020, except it occurred in February.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1564576027350913024

Pic for posterity:

Link to portal: https://t.co/2EvukuPcAM

I guess it's a good thing I bought that blizzard suit...

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Prof. Nils-Axel Mörner: "The Approaching Grand Solar Minimum and Little Ice Age Conditions" - Electroverse

"We now seem to be in possession of quite convergent data indicating that we, by 2030-2040, will be in a New Grand Solar Minimum."

electroverse.co

One interesting point midway down in this piece is the relationship between earth acceleration (which is happening) and grand solar minima. I've been seeing the year 2030 hypothesized as the start of the next GSM with a degree of consistency. This paper is another one.

The article mentions that there's a correlation between earth's rotation speed and solar minimum and maximums.

So I took a look here and reproduced their table below. Look at the Total yearly difference:

Year	Average day	Total yearly difference	Shortest day	Longest day	Leap second added
2022	-0.30 ms	-111.08 ms	Nov 29 -3.40 ms	Nov 5 +0.71 ms	-
2021	-0.18 ms	-65.15 ms	Jul 9 -1.46 ms	Apr 26 +1.00 ms	-
2020	-0.00 ms	-1.30 ms	Jul 19 -1.47 ms	Apr 8 +1.62 ms	-
2019	+0.39 ms	+141.25 ms	Jul 16 -0.95 ms	Mar 22 +1.68 ms	-
2018	+0.69 ms	+252.47 ms	Jun 30 -0.64 ms	Feb 4 +1.69 ms	-
2017	+1.03 ms	+375.01 ms	Aug 4 +0.06 ms	Apr 25 +2.20 ms	-
2016	+1.34 ms	+490.76 ms	Jul 18 -0.03 ms	Mar 10 +2.49 ms	Dec 31
2015	+1.25 ms	+458.03 ms	Jun 17 +0.19 ms	Oct 26 +2.31 ms	Jun 30
2014	+0.99 ms	+362.96 ms	Jul 24 +0.02 ms	Apr 26 +2.02 ms	-
2013	+1.02 ms	+373.99 ms	Jul 6 -0.35 ms	Mar 28 +1.97 ms	-
2012	+0.83 ms	+304.11 ms	Jul 16 -0.35 ms	Apr 5 +1.87 ms	Jun 30
2011	+0.76 ms	+277.94 ms	Jul 27 -0.34 ms	May 14 +1.85 ms	-
2010	+0.70 ms	+254.74 ms	Jul 23 -0.76 ms	Mar 1 +2.09 ms	-
2009	+0.80 ms	+293.37 ms	Jul 6 -0.43 ms	Apr 22 +1.81 ms	-
2008	+0.87 ms	+319.49 ms	Jul 16 -0.41 ms	Apr 5 +1.91 ms	Dec 31
2007	+0.85 ms	+310.81 ms	Jul 27 -0.63 ms	Apr 16 +2.31 ms	-
2006	+0.82 ms	+300.88 ms	Jun 12 -0.40 ms	Oct 7 +2.26 ms	-
2005	+0.43 ms	+157.76 ms	Jul 5 -1.05 ms	Feb 27 +1.73 ms	Dec 31
2004	+0.31 ms	+114.01 ms	Jul 15 -1.05 ms	Apr 5 +1.56 ms	-
2003	+0.27 ms	+100.16 ms	Jul 13 -0.96 ms	Mar 19 +1.55 ms	-
2002	+0.48 ms	+173.79 ms	Aug 6 -0.74 ms	Mar 2 +1.66 ms	-
2001	+0.57 ms	+208.94 ms	Aug 2 -0.71 ms	Mar 11 +1.64 ms	-
2000	+0.72 ms	+262.42 ms	Aug 11 -0.25 ms	Oct 26 +1.58 ms	-
1999	+0.99 ms	+361.19 ms	Jun 30 -0.13 ms	Apr 15 +1.93 ms	-
1998	+1.37 ms	+501.72 ms	Jul 9 +0.01 ms	Mar 1 +2.66 ms	Dec 31
1997	+1.84 ms	+671.08 ms	Jul 4 +0.52 ms	Apr 6 +2.98 ms	Jun 30
1996	+1.82 ms	+666.37 ms	Aug 10 +0.67 ms	May 12 +2.68 ms	-
1995	+2.31 ms	+843.66 ms	Jul 25 +0.81 ms	Mar 17 +3.29 ms	Dec 31
1994	+2.19 ms	+800.86 ms	Jul 6 +0.86 ms	Feb 27 +3.36 ms	Jun 30
1993	+2.36 ms	+862.66 ms	Jul 17 +1.25 ms	May 2 +3.49 ms	Jun 30
1992	+2.22 ms	+812.25 ms	Jul 12 +0.84 ms	Mar 18 +3.59 ms	Jun 30
1991	+2.04 ms	+743.88 ms	Jun 27 +0.79 ms	Mar 1 +3.00 ms	-
1990	+1.95 ms	+710.04 ms	Jul 20 +0.63 ms	Mar 26 +3.28 ms	Dec 31
1989	+1.52 ms	+555.00 ms	Jul 2 +0.25 ms	Nov 10 +2.82 ms	Dec 31
1988	+1.31 ms	+480.30 ms	Jul 12 -0.09 ms	Feb 20 +2.76 ms	-
1987	+1.36 ms	+497.35 ms	Jul 23 -0.06 ms	Mar 1 +2.67 ms	Dec 31
1986	+1.24 ms	+451.06 ms	Aug 2 -0.04 ms	Apr 23 +2.30 ms	-
1985	+1.45 ms	+528.83 ms	Jul 16 +0.11 ms	Mar 9 +2.64 ms	Jun 30
1984	+1.51 ms	+554.42 ms	Jul 12 +0.16 ms	Mar 18 +2.77 ms	-
1983	+2.28 ms	+832.08 ms	Jul 23 +1.01 ms	Feb 1 +3.57 ms	Jun 30
1982	+2.16 ms	+789.64 ms	Aug 2 +0.84 ms	Apr 23 +3.14 ms	Jun 30
1981	+2.15 ms	+786.03 ms	Jul 16 +0.82 ms	Mar 8 +3.42 ms	Jun 30
1980	+2.30 ms	+842.04 ms	Aug 8 +1.34 ms	Oct 23 +3.24 ms	-
1979	+2.61 ms	+953.02 ms	Jul 23 +1.46 ms	Mar 27 +3.65 ms	Dec 31
1978	+2.88 ms	+1051.83 ms	Jul 31 +1.49 ms	Mar 9 +3.83 ms	Dec 31
1977	+2.77 ms	+1012.60 ms	Jul 14 +1.46 ms	Apr 4 +3.72 ms	Dec 31
1976	+2.91 ms	+1064.67 ms	Jun 26 +1.87 ms	Oct 21 +3.90 ms	Dec 31
1975	+2.69 ms	+980.87 ms	Jul 20 +1.54 ms	Nov 1 +3.72 ms	Dec 31
1974	+2.72 ms	+991.99 ms	Jul 30 +1.57 ms	Apr 5 +3.79 ms	Dec 31
1973	+3.04 ms	+1106.21 ms	Jan 2 +0.00 ms	Apr 2 +4.03 ms	Dec 31

I created a graph from the data to make the trend more apparent:


It really took a dip from 1995 to 2003 or so. And another dip from 2016 onwards.

Here is what the solar cycles look like for roughly the same period:



It's not perfectly correlated but there's definitely a general correlation. Maybe there's a lag - maybe the rotation speed changes and the sun takes a few decades to "catch up"? If so, we could hypothesize that the 1995-2003 dip in day length is correlated with solar cycle 24, the first one that was very weak. So roughly a 10-20 year lag. If so, then the dramatic dip that started in 2016 should reflect in the sun's behavior around 2026-2036. And that timeframe lines up with your link's prediction where the sun kinda bottoms out between 2028 and 2042.



And for what it's worth, this also matches up roughly with Valentina Zharkova's prediction of 2020-2055 as well.

If accurate, it looks like we're in for a wild ride very soon!

 

[Laura]

The article mentions that there's a correlation between earth's rotation speed and solar minimum and maximums.

So I took a look here and reproduced their table below. Look at the Total yearly difference:

Year	Average day	Total yearly difference	Shortest day	Longest day	Leap second added
2022	-0.30 ms	-111.08 ms	Nov 29 -3.40 ms	Nov 5 +0.71 ms	-
2021	-0.18 ms	-65.15 ms	Jul 9 -1.46 ms	Apr 26 +1.00 ms	-
2020	-0.00 ms	-1.30 ms	Jul 19 -1.47 ms	Apr 8 +1.62 ms	-
2019	+0.39 ms	+141.25 ms	Jul 16 -0.95 ms	Mar 22 +1.68 ms	-
2018	+0.69 ms	+252.47 ms	Jun 30 -0.64 ms	Feb 4 +1.69 ms	-
2017	+1.03 ms	+375.01 ms	Aug 4 +0.06 ms	Apr 25 +2.20 ms	-
2016	+1.34 ms	+490.76 ms	Jul 18 -0.03 ms	Mar 10 +2.49 ms	Dec 31
2015	+1.25 ms	+458.03 ms	Jun 17 +0.19 ms	Oct 26 +2.31 ms	Jun 30
2014	+0.99 ms	+362.96 ms	Jul 24 +0.02 ms	Apr 26 +2.02 ms	-
2013	+1.02 ms	+373.99 ms	Jul 6 -0.35 ms	Mar 28 +1.97 ms	-
2012	+0.83 ms	+304.11 ms	Jul 16 -0.35 ms	Apr 5 +1.87 ms	Jun 30
2011	+0.76 ms	+277.94 ms	Jul 27 -0.34 ms	May 14 +1.85 ms	-
2010	+0.70 ms	+254.74 ms	Jul 23 -0.76 ms	Mar 1 +2.09 ms	-
2009	+0.80 ms	+293.37 ms	Jul 6 -0.43 ms	Apr 22 +1.81 ms	-
2008	+0.87 ms	+319.49 ms	Jul 16 -0.41 ms	Apr 5 +1.91 ms	Dec 31
2007	+0.85 ms	+310.81 ms	Jul 27 -0.63 ms	Apr 16 +2.31 ms	-
2006	+0.82 ms	+300.88 ms	Jun 12 -0.40 ms	Oct 7 +2.26 ms	-
2005	+0.43 ms	+157.76 ms	Jul 5 -1.05 ms	Feb 27 +1.73 ms	Dec 31
2004	+0.31 ms	+114.01 ms	Jul 15 -1.05 ms	Apr 5 +1.56 ms	-
2003	+0.27 ms	+100.16 ms	Jul 13 -0.96 ms	Mar 19 +1.55 ms	-
2002	+0.48 ms	+173.79 ms	Aug 6 -0.74 ms	Mar 2 +1.66 ms	-
2001	+0.57 ms	+208.94 ms	Aug 2 -0.71 ms	Mar 11 +1.64 ms	-
2000	+0.72 ms	+262.42 ms	Aug 11 -0.25 ms	Oct 26 +1.58 ms	-
1999	+0.99 ms	+361.19 ms	Jun 30 -0.13 ms	Apr 15 +1.93 ms	-
1998	+1.37 ms	+501.72 ms	Jul 9 +0.01 ms	Mar 1 +2.66 ms	Dec 31
1997	+1.84 ms	+671.08 ms	Jul 4 +0.52 ms	Apr 6 +2.98 ms	Jun 30
1996	+1.82 ms	+666.37 ms	Aug 10 +0.67 ms	May 12 +2.68 ms	-
1995	+2.31 ms	+843.66 ms	Jul 25 +0.81 ms	Mar 17 +3.29 ms	Dec 31
1994	+2.19 ms	+800.86 ms	Jul 6 +0.86 ms	Feb 27 +3.36 ms	Jun 30
1993	+2.36 ms	+862.66 ms	Jul 17 +1.25 ms	May 2 +3.49 ms	Jun 30
1992	+2.22 ms	+812.25 ms	Jul 12 +0.84 ms	Mar 18 +3.59 ms	Jun 30
1991	+2.04 ms	+743.88 ms	Jun 27 +0.79 ms	Mar 1 +3.00 ms	-
1990	+1.95 ms	+710.04 ms	Jul 20 +0.63 ms	Mar 26 +3.28 ms	Dec 31
1989	+1.52 ms	+555.00 ms	Jul 2 +0.25 ms	Nov 10 +2.82 ms	Dec 31
1988	+1.31 ms	+480.30 ms	Jul 12 -0.09 ms	Feb 20 +2.76 ms	-
1987	+1.36 ms	+497.35 ms	Jul 23 -0.06 ms	Mar 1 +2.67 ms	Dec 31
1986	+1.24 ms	+451.06 ms	Aug 2 -0.04 ms	Apr 23 +2.30 ms	-
1985	+1.45 ms	+528.83 ms	Jul 16 +0.11 ms	Mar 9 +2.64 ms	Jun 30
1984	+1.51 ms	+554.42 ms	Jul 12 +0.16 ms	Mar 18 +2.77 ms	-
1983	+2.28 ms	+832.08 ms	Jul 23 +1.01 ms	Feb 1 +3.57 ms	Jun 30
1982	+2.16 ms	+789.64 ms	Aug 2 +0.84 ms	Apr 23 +3.14 ms	Jun 30
1981	+2.15 ms	+786.03 ms	Jul 16 +0.82 ms	Mar 8 +3.42 ms	Jun 30
1980	+2.30 ms	+842.04 ms	Aug 8 +1.34 ms	Oct 23 +3.24 ms	-
1979	+2.61 ms	+953.02 ms	Jul 23 +1.46 ms	Mar 27 +3.65 ms	Dec 31
1978	+2.88 ms	+1051.83 ms	Jul 31 +1.49 ms	Mar 9 +3.83 ms	Dec 31
1977	+2.77 ms	+1012.60 ms	Jul 14 +1.46 ms	Apr 4 +3.72 ms	Dec 31
1976	+2.91 ms	+1064.67 ms	Jun 26 +1.87 ms	Oct 21 +3.90 ms	Dec 31
1975	+2.69 ms	+980.87 ms	Jul 20 +1.54 ms	Nov 1 +3.72 ms	Dec 31
1974	+2.72 ms	+991.99 ms	Jul 30 +1.57 ms	Apr 5 +3.79 ms	Dec 31
1973	+3.04 ms	+1106.21 ms	Jan 2 +0.00 ms	Apr 2 +4.03 ms	Dec 31

I created a graph from the data to make the trend more apparent:

View attachment 63399
It really took a dip from 1995 to 2003 or so. And another dip from 2016 onwards.

Here is what the solar cycles look like for roughly the same period:

View attachment 63400

It's not perfectly correlated but there's definitely a general correlation. Maybe there's a lag - maybe the rotation speed changes and the sun takes a few decades to "catch up"? If so, we could hypothesize that the 1995-2003 dip in day length is correlated with solar cycle 24, the first one that was very weak. So roughly a 10-20 year lag. If so, then the dramatic dip that started in 2016 should reflect in the sun's behavior around 2026-2036. And that timeframe lines up with your link's prediction where the sun kinda bottoms out between 2028 and 2042.

View attachment 63402

And for what it's worth, this also matches up roughly with Valentina Zharkova's prediction of 2020-2055 as well.

If accurate, it looks like we're in for a wild ride very soon!

Thank you very much SAO for the graphs and comparisons. When I started reading, even before I scrolled down and saw the graphs, I was thinking "I want a graph of that"!

It does look like we are in for a wild ride.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Thank you very much SAO for the graphs and comparisons. When I started reading, even before I scrolled down and saw the graphs, I was thinking "I want a graph of that"!

It does look like we are in for a wild ride.

No problem at all! Another thought I had after I posted is that the slowing down and speeding up of rotation seems to come in waves, and it would be interesting to try to find data before 1973 as well to see what it was up to. It’s possible that we are in for an extended acceleration leading into the ice age, but it’s also possible that it will continue to go up and down more and more dramatically, even if the general trend, at least since 1973, is down. It’s acting like a swing that is being pushed. Unfortunately they didn’t have the tech to measure it before 1950’s or so, but I believe I read that it can be inferred from observing the moon and the stars, which we have done for a long time, I just need to see if anyone did the math.

The C’s specifically mentioned slowing down of the rotation as causing all the “opening up” on the planet, so I’ll try to see if the rotation data correlates with earthquake spikes or other weirdness in any way as well.

 

[iamthatis]

No problem at all! Another thought I had after I posted is that the slowing down and speeding up of rotation seems to come in waves, and it would be interesting to try to find data before 1973 as well to see what it was up to. It’s possible that we are in for an extended acceleration leading into the ice age, but it’s also possible that it will continue to go up and down more and more dramatically, even if the general trend, at least since 1973, is down. It’s acting like a swing that is being pushed. Unfortunately they didn’t have the tech to measure it before 1950’s or so, but I believe I read that it can be inferred from observing the moon and the stars, which we have done for a long time, I just need to see if anyone did the math.

The C’s specifically mentioned slowing down of the rotation as causing all the “opening up” on the planet, so I’ll try to see if the rotation data correlates with earthquake spikes or other weirdness in any way as well.

I checked with good ol' Ben Davidson, and his take on the acceleration is that it is caused by the severe drop in the Earth's geomagnetic field. With shields down, this allows more energy into the system. "Higher supply, faster rotation - not unlike an electric motor".

And our shields are seriously down, apparently. There the following paper cited by Davidson and crew for another one of their videos:

A new power spectrum and stochastic representation for the geomagnetic axial dipole

SUMMARY. Earth’s internal magnetic field is dominated by the contribution of the axial dipole whose temporal variations are wide ranging and reflect characteris

academic.oup.com

I admit I haven't read the article, which looks waaay over my head. But there is this nifty set of graphs.



This graph below is the one that apparently shows that the geomagnetic field is taking a nosedive.


Him and his team call the -6000 point 'the Noah Event'. I'm not very familiar with his nomenclature, but apparently it was roughly 8000 years ago, and includes a deluge at that time. Brief video here for those interested, with some linked papers. But that's a bit of a digression.

Point being, according to this paper, the magnetic field is weakening at a significant rate. The data on this graph isn't fine enough to correlate it to what you've laid out in your rotation speed graph, unfortunately. The overall picture is clear, though. According to this chart, the geomagnetic field was on a decline for the past 500 years. And now it looks like the drop is similar to an exponential curve.



I don't know if I can get behind this 'You are Here - Going Here' in the last slide, though. There's no data involved, just the intuitive finishing of a line to a supposed end point. Anyone can do that. There could be a lot of fluctuations on the way down.

In general, what this data could mean is that if the shields continue to drop, the earth would ostensibly spin faster and faster, which we can watch for.

The thought kinda reminds me of my brother and I when we were kids, and we would twist up the tire swing on the willow tree and then have 'a lot of fun' getting extremely nauseated...

Edit: grammar

 

[thorbiorn]

As suspected a few weeks ago, the icecap in Greenland has had a "good" season

While it may be hard to say exactly how much has been gained, this year has proven special in a number of ways: The melting season was shorter by a two to three weeks (both lower diagrams), the amount of melt appears to be below average (left image lower diagram), and there has been material added in many areas close to the coast (left image map). The map to the right only shows what was accumulated on August 31, so it fairly inconsequential, except to provide the grand final add-on, as seen in the spike of accumulation.

Surface Conditions: Polar Portal

polarportal.dk

It would not surprise, if there will be videos made claiming that the icecap gained 450 gigatons (left image lower diagram), but that is not true:

The Greenland Ice Sheet evolves throughout the year as weather conditions change. Precipitation increases the mass of the ice sheet, whilst greater warmth leads to melting, which causes it to lose mass. The term surface mass balance is used to describe the isolated gain and loss of mass of the surface of the ice sheet – excluding the mass that is lost when glaciers calve off icebergs and melt as they come into contact with warm seawater.

If one looks at the left map, notice the red areas a little inland on the western side. Is that what it would also look like, if the motion of the ice was assisted from below, due to the Earth heating up or being less cold? Or is it just that less snow fell inland, while the drift of the cap, due to gravity, continued?

 

[Voyageur]

It would not surprise, if there will be videos made claiming that the icecap gained 450 gigatons (left image lower diagram), but that is not true:

No video, yet a long range look back:

Greenland Ice Loss Will Cause Dangerous Sea Level Rise

Greenland’s Ice Sheet – The thickness is generally more than 2 km (1.2 mi) and over 3 km (1.9 mi) at its thickest point. Credit: NASA’s Scientific Visualization St…

everythingclimate.wpcomstaging.com

One can read the 'Pros' and the 'Cons' within. However, reality states (less yrs. 2021/2022):


Figure 1: comparison of satellite data for Greenland ice mass loss. Cumulative ice mass loss on the left, and that same data compared to the total mass of ice on the right. Data source: http://imbie.org. Graphs originally by Willis Eschenbach, adapted and annotated by Anthony Watts.

Here is an older historical accounting of sea ice (somewhat free and thick again, waning and waxing):

Historic Variation in Arctic Ice

Historic Variation in Arctic Ice Guest post from the Air Vent by Tony B The following is a guest post by Tony B on the history of Arctic ice. I nominated him Arctic ice historian on WUWT when I not…

wattsupwiththat.com

snip:

His subsequent Account of the Arctic Regions with a History and Description of the Northern whale Fishery (1820) contained his own findings as well as those of earlier navigators. There is an intriguing entry from the book, as subsequently recorded by his chroniclers;

“The uncharted coastline of east Greenland became clear of ice around 1820, and in 1822 Scoresby, in the midst of an arduous whaling voyage, sailed along some 400 miles of this inhospitable landscape, charting it, and naming point as he went in honour of scientific and other friends, chief of which was Scoresby Sound, named for his father. Almost all his place names survive today.”

That Scoresby junior was a man to be believed when he claimed that the arctic was melting can be further seen here in this extract;

“Carrying on with great success the most demanding and arduous of all maritime activities -the hunting and capture of whales – he yet collected over a period of some 15 years data on sea currents and temperatures, ice formation and movement, wind directions and velocities, magnetic variations, marine organisms, biology of whales, structure of snow crystals and much besides, gathering all this original work in the historic-volume classic Account of the Arctic Regions. The publication of this work in 1820 marks the beginning of the scientific study of the polar regions.”

So we have clear evidence of substantial melt in the years prior to 1817, during 1817 around 1820 and that ice returned in subsequent years but then retreated again, as recorded here;

Full text of "Arctic geography and ethnology. A selection of papers on Arctic geography and ethnology"

“On the voyage to Greenland in 1828, Captain Graah fell in with the first ice in 58° 52′ lat. n., and 41° 25′ w. Greenwich, which is only 57′ s., and about 77 nautical miles to the eastward of Cape Farewell ; and he says, ” Since 1817, I do not know that the ice has been seen so far to the eastward of the Cape.” — ‘ Narrative of an Expedition to the East Coast of Greenland, by Cnpt. W. A. Graah, Royal Danish Navy,’ p. 21, (Note; Cape Farewell is at the extreme southern tip of Greenland) map here.

 

[thorbiorn]

One can read the 'Pros' and the 'Cons' within. However, reality states (less yrs. 2021/2022):

For some reason, the run-off diagrams have not been updated since 2018:
The source is: Surface Conditions: Polar Portal

 

[Voyageur]

For some reason, the run-off diagrams have not been updated since 2018:
The source is: Surface Conditions: Polar Portal

You can enter date ranges and run the animation simulator from here. If one were to narrow out the dip, it is not substantial (and likely not well represented by weather station data) - however as they say:

Data from the meteorological stations may be missing due to problems with instruments or transmissions via satellite if the power of the solar-powered battery is low or if the meteorological station is covered in snow, or, in the worst case, has toppled over.

The other thing noticed while running the simulator, is from day to day if one were to grab a screen map of that day, the swings are wild and could paint a misleading picture. An the maps below, on those dates, 3 weather stations had no data. That is long way to go to fix a remote weather station.

example:



A few days later there is mass gain (blue):

 

[hlat]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

"Nothing To Do With Man" - Astrophysicist Says Climate-Cultists "Are On A Gravy Train" To Make Money
BY TYLER DURDEN
SATURDAY, SEP 10, 2022 - 11:00 AM

This year's heat waves and subsequent droughts resulted in the hottest summer in recorded European history, according to a report by the Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) - an EU-funded Earth observation agency.

“We’ve not only had record August temperatures for Europe, but also for the summer, with the previous summer record only being one year old,” said Freja Vamborg, a senior scientist at the Copernicus Climate Change Service.

Of course, this 'record' heat in the summer has prompted activists to trot out the same old tropes that this 'confirms climate change' is having a catastrophic effect on the world already. With the energy crisis facing Europe, this is not a particularly comfortable topic as numerous nations abandon - albeit apparently temporarily - their green policies in favor of not letting their citizenry starve or freeze.

Given that it's all 'settled science', the following RT News anchor was probably expecting a rote response to his questions about climate change.

He was in for a big surprise...

Piers Corbyn - physicist, meteorologist, and elder brother of former UK Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn - explained to the shocked RT anchor that the climate "has always been changing, but this has nothing to do with man"

The astrophysicist instead believes that changes in the Earth’s climate and its weather are dictated primarily by cyclical activity on the surface of the sun (and not, pointedly, by the effects of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere).

“For one thing science doesn’t do settled opinions,” Corbyn says.

“And for another they are all wrong.”

"Surely man has something to with this," exclaims the struggling new anchor, to which Corbyn responds:

"No, the only connection is that man is here at the same time as the sun and the moon are doing things."

The frustrated anchor falls back to consensus, asking "so how come then that so many climate change scientists disagree with you and they get so much support for that?"

Corbyn's laughing response was straightforward:

"...those that say this are just trying to make money... They're on a gravy train for heaven's sake."

Watch the brief interview below:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1568338056943665154

Finally, we note that in former UK PM Boris Johnson once lauded Corbyn as “the world’s foremost meteorological soothsayer”.

We suspect this is the last time Mr.Corbyn will be allowed on TV...

 

[Alix]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

I saw this and thought, Welp, the PTB don't like the truth seeping out so no network is going to have this guy come on anymore!

 

[XPan]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

I found it so "funny", when the RT reporter stated (or quoted?) "hottest summer since 1000 years".

Uhm, really ?

Did he read the "Gaillard's Medical Journal", New York, July 1884 ? (I am not sure if i published this in the forum, my guts tell me, I did in the past... but i am not sure). I post it in this context, regarding European summers in the past 1500 years, telling a very different tale, which the RT reporter/or the source from which he referred to, didn't have on the radar.



It stated following as text:

Many a man has mopped his brow during the summer months of 1884, declaring it was the hottest weather the world ever knew, which, of course, would not be true, for the extreme heat in the record of the past has not been approached during the late summer.

In 627, the heat was so great in France and Germany, says the London Slandard, that all springs dried up; water became so scarce that many people died of thirst.

In 879, work in the field had to be given up; agricultural laborers persisting in their work were struck down in a few minutes, so powerful was the sun. In 993, the sun's rays were so fierce that vegetation burned up as under the action of fire.

In 1000, rivers ran dry under the protracted heat, the fish were left dry in heaps and putrefied in a few hours. Men and animals venturing in the sun in the summer of 1022 fell down dying.

In 1132, not only did the rivers dry up, but the ground cracked and became baked to the hardness of stone. The Rhine in Alsace nearly dried up. Italy was visited with terrific heat in 1139; vegetation and plants were burned up.

During the battle of Bel, in 1200, there were more victims made by the sun than by weapons; men fell down sunstruck in regular rows.

The sun of 1277 was also severe; there was an absolute death of fornge. In 1303 and 1304, the Rhine, Loire and Seine ran dry.

In 1615, the heat throughout Europe became excessive. Scotland suffered particularly in 1625 men and beasts died in scores. Meat could be cooked by merely exposing it to the sun. Not a soul dared to venture out between noon and 4 P.M.

In 1718, many shops had to be closed; the theatres were never opened for several months. Not a drop of water fell during six months.

In 1753 the thermometer rose to one 118°F** [47.7°C]. In 1779, the heat at Bologna was so great that a large number of people died.

In July, 1793, the heat became intolerable. Vegetables were burned up and fruit dried upon the trees. The furniture and woodwork in dwelling-houses cracked and split up; meat became bad in an hour.

In Paris in 1846, the thermometer marked one hundred and twenty-five degrees** [52°C] in the sun. The summers of 1859, 1860, 1869, 1870, 1874, etc., although excessively hot, were not attended by any disaster.

**) I assume this was measured as Fahrenheit, since it was an American publication.

 

[Chad]

I found it so "funny", when the RT reporter stated (or quoted?) "hottest summer since 1000 years".

Uhm, really ?

Did he read the "Gaillard's Medical Journal", New York, July 1884 ? (I am not sure if i published this in the forum, my guts tell me, I did in the past... but i am not sure). I post it in this context, regarding European summers in the past 1500 years, telling a very different tale, which the RT reporter/or the source from which he referred to, didn't have on the radar.

It stated following as text:

Thanks for posting that Gaillard's Medical Journal page, if i had seen it before, i'd forgotten! For reference, i'm pretty sure this is the full text of the journal at archive: https://archive.org/stream/gaillardsmedical38newy/gaillardsmedical38newy_djvu.txt

 

[Laura]

What a great collection!