Climate News Round-Up
The latest science-driven news and analysis to counter the cult of climate catastrophe
“Study: The strange and persistent psychological distance between us and climate disaster” – A new study looks at why most people still feel strangely detached from all the talk of climate disasters despite years of warnings, reports Eric Worrall in Watts Up With That?
“No, TIME, the planet isn’t ‘heating faster than ever’” – TIME’s recent claim that the planet has been heating up faster than ever since 2015 doesn’t hold up – satellite data shows temps are actually below the 2015–2016 El Niño high point, rebuts Anthony Watts in ClimateRealism.
“Right, Financial Times, climate models don’t accurately reflect sea levels” – The FT has pushed a study saying sea level rise is worse than thought, but real-world data shows the models have been blowing hot air, says Linnea Lueken in ClimateRealism.
“Iran war is a wake-up call for Miliband, says Ratcliffe” – Sir Jim Ratcliffe reckons the Iran mess should be a wake-up call for Ed Miliband to stop being so hardline on North Sea drilling, according to GB News.
“Ed Miliband’s Net Zero obsession is breaking the Labour alliance apart” – Ed Miliband’s Net Zero drive has long strained Labour’s ties with unions and working-class voters, says Tom Harris in the Telegraph.
“Guardian: Net Zero would be less expensive than one Persian Gulf oil crisis” – The Guardian reckons UK Net Zero to 2050 would cost way less than just one big Persian Gulf oil crisis. Eric Worrall in Watts Up With That? has his doubts.
From the Climate Skeptic today:
“The Climate Change Committee’s claims about the cost of energy crises vs Net Zero don’t add up” – The Climate Change Committee claims the cost of Net Zero is less than “the cost of a single fossil fuel price spike”. Nonsense, says Paul Homewood: such spikes are dwarfed by the towering cost of green subsidies.



«That injection temporarily enhanced radiative forcing, aka the greenhouse effect, because water vapor is in fact the strongest greenhouse gas. It was a short-term perturbation — not evidence of a structural acceleration in the underlying greenhouse-driven trend.»
Tony provides no evidence that this is true, and neither do you.
You’re deliberately spreading disinformation.
So Watts uses only lower atmosphere measurements, and ignores surface and ocean warming, huh?
You’re an idiot who lacks critical thinking. Go back to your lane, dude.