We must hope Dr. Soon is right …

The prescribed cure for Global Warming is far worse than the purported disease – the economy will sink like the Titanic.
– Dr Jeffrey Foss


_____________

Introduction by Paul Driessen

“We should all hope Earth will cool, says science philosopher Jeff Foss, because nobody with any trace of human decency would hope the Earth will actually suffer catastrophic warming. Not that catastrophic warming is actually likely. But calamitous global warming bad news is endlessly rewarded by big money from the government and servile amplification from traditional big news media – while the good news of global cooling is largely silenced and unheard. (We’re not talking about the frigid conditions visited on so much of the USA in recent weeks by the massive polar vortex.)”

“Why is global cooling good news? Because real science shows us that cooling is part of a natural cycle, driven by solar cycles that atmospheric physicist Dr. Willie Soon has discussed for years. The increase in global temperatures since 1800 was caused by two centuries of increasing solar output – not by human use of coal and oil. But then solar output began to fall around 2000, in another cycle of solar activity, and global warming stopped. Around the middle of this century, solar activity will recover and temperatures will begin warming once again – again because of solar activity, not fossil fuels or carbon dioxide emissions.”

“As Dr. Foss explains in this article, the prescribed cure for the alleged Climate/Global Warming Apocalypse is far worse than the purported disease.”

____________

We must hope Dr. Soon is right …

And the global warming apocalypse is not nigh. Real-world evidence certainly supports him.

Jeffrey Foss, PhD

Everyone has heard the bad news. Imminent Climate Apocalypse (aka “global warming” and “climate change”) threatens humanity and planet with devastation, unless we abandon the use of fossil fuels.

Far fewer people have heard the good news. The sun has just entered its Grand Minimum phase, and the Earth will gradually cool over the next few decades.

Why should we all hope Earth will cool? Because nobody with any trace of human decency would hope the Earth will actually suffer catastrophic warming.

Many of us believe in the threat of global warming, but live in the hope that we can switch to “renewable energy” before it is too late. But this is a false hope. Despite our best efforts over several decades, renewables such as wind and solar energy still meet only 2% of global energy needs, while hydro adds only 7% or so.

So avoiding the alleged Climate Apocalypse by relying on renewable energy would require surviving on less than 10% of our current energy requirements. But that is impossible. It would also be really catastrophic: billions could die.

Our global economy runs on energy, and over 80% of it is still fossil fuels, with nuclear and other non-renewables providing another 10%. If we switch to renewables tomorrow, 90% of our energy will be lost, and the global economy will sink like the Titanic. Keeping nuclear power would merely add a second lifeboat as the great ship sinks. Even if the energy loss were spread out over decades, the final result would still be the same.

Humankind could not produce enough food, clothing and shelter. Jobs would vanish. Massive starvation, disease and death would result. Hard physical labor would once again become the norm. Even though life could be maintained for some portion of humanity, liberty and happiness would be lost.

Let’s stop pretending. The prescribed cure for Climate/Global Warming Apocalypse is far worse than the purported disease. If we don’t use coal, oil and natural gas for energy, many of the 7 billion of us now alive must die. Those who survive will be impoverished and enslaved, toiling and scavenging for food by day, and fearing the darkness by night – except for the privileged few who still have money, energy and power.

The sudden and dramatic growth of human life, liberty, and happiness since the industrial revolution was achieved by replacing muscle power with coal and oil power. Before that, Hillsdale College professor of history Burt Folsom points out, only the wealthy could afford whale oil and candles. Everyone else had to go to bed early, and often hungry, when the sun went down, sleeping to recover enough energy to work – only to repeat the daily cycle yet again. Freedom of thought and travel had little real worth when we were too tired to think or walk.

The petroleum age saved whales from the brink of extinction – and brought cheap kerosene to the masses, so that they could read at night, bringing light into their lives and their brains.

The premature switch to renewable energy recommended by the false prophets of Climate Apocalypse is really just one step in an industrial counter-revolution devoutly desired by those discontented with modern life in free market democracies – and ready to erase our hard-won prosperity and freedom.

The Climate Apocalypse global warming bad news is rewarded by big money from the government and servile amplification from traditional big news media – while the good news of global cooling is silenced and unheard, stifled by both traditional media and most of today’s social media platforms.

We should all be suspicious of the motives of those who push this bad news, and welcome those who push back. Dr. Willie Soon is one scientist, although by no means the only one, who has the courage to stand up to big money, big government, big (pseudo) science, big media and big environmentalism to spread the good news. It’s high time we all heard it.

The good news from Dr. Soon and his fellow solar scientists is that the increase in global temperatures since 1800 was caused by two centuries of increasing solar output – not by human use of coal and oil.

But then solar output began to fall around 2000, in a repetition of a well-known 200-year cycle of solar activity, and global warming stopped. That’s more good news that too few people know. The purveyors of Climate Apocalypse have no explanation for this two-decade failure of their prophecy, which fortunately for all of humanity shows the superiority of solar science over apocalyptic warming foretold by computer models, hysteria and headlines – but not by real-world evidence.

Finally, solar science says we should expect steady but manageable global cooling until about mid-century, when solar activity will recover and temperatures begin to warm once again. Once again, this will be due to solar activity, and not to fossil fuels or carbon dioxide emissions.

In the best news of all, that means humanity’s successful pursuit of life, liberty, happiness, and better living standards and healthcare needn’t be stopped by Climate Apocalypse – or its prescribed cure. The only thing we have to fear is the fear of Climate Apocalypse itself.

Equally important, a warmer or cooler planet with more atmospheric CO2 and plentiful, reliable, affordable fossil fuel and nuclear energy would be infinitely preferable to a cooler planet with less CO2 and only expensive, intermittent, weather-dependent wind, solar and biofuel energy.

At the very least, humankind has an historic opportunity to witness a crucial test between two scientific hypotheses of enormous consequence. The next decade or two will reveal whether Earth warms or cools.

Surely all right-minded people must hope that it cools – and that the fear-mongering of imminent global warming apocalypse cools as well.

I might add that no one should wish the current severe Chicago-style polar vortex cold on anyone. I extend my sympathies and prayers to all who are now suffering from the cold. But be of good cheer in the knowledge that this cold-snap at least puts the lie to vastly worse climate scare global warming stories.

I also wouldn’t wish on anyone the “Green New Deal” energy reality of February 1, 2019 – when wind power provided 1.5% of the energy that kept lights on and homes warm in America’s Mid-Atlantic region, solar provided zero, and derided and despised coal, natural gas and nuclear power provided a whopping 93% or that energy! Imagine the cold, misery and death toll under 100% pseudo-renewable energy.

Source: PJM Interconnection regional electricity transmitter

Dr. Jeffrey Foss is a philosopher of science, Professor Emeritus at the University of Victoria, Canada, and author of Beyond Environmentalism: A Philosophy of Nature.
_________

Note: I (Robert) agree with most of this article by Dr Foss. However, I do not, repeat, do not agree with the idea that we should hope for global cooling. Nor do I expect “steady but manageable global cooling until about mid-century.”

I fear that we could sink into the same sort of misery, starvation, impoverishment, enslavement and deprivation that accompanied the the Little Ice Age solar minimum.

In fact, I worry that things could get even worse than they were during the Little Ice Age, because this time, the earth’s magnetic field strength (which protects us), has been dropping precipitously.

 

 


22 thoughts on “We must hope Dr. Soon is right …”

  1. I agree with Robert.
    The dangers are much underestimated.
    I expect people to start rioting this year and dying next year.
    When do you think it’s going to stop snowing ?
    March, April or May ?
    What about June !
    Whenever it’s not likely to be anything but a disastrous harvest on top of last years terrible harvests.
    When prices have increased you’ve paid more, what about those who couldn’t pay already.
    What about the countries whose people get U.N. food supplies, the U.N. will demand more money and America may well leave the U.N.
    I would and I’m not even an American.

  2. Robert
    Have you abandoned the ice age. Global warming would be good assuming survival after the viscous, destructive politics passes.
    Even without power a warmer world would be more survivable. I think current weather argues for the true nature of even a modestly colder world. There is nothing to love about a colder world. Its best feature is hopefull the destruction of global warmiing politics. A small consolation if we enter a true ice age. Spare me this optimism.

  3. The last thing I heard was that the upwarming was the cause of the present split in the polar vortex according tot the dutch weather forecast bureau KNMI. That brings me to the idea that what D. Hume wrote about cause and effect, was unnecessary as to a lot of modern scientistst. They even haven’t probably read of modern approaches to the subject ’cause and effect’. I now hear left-green-youth on the radio speaking about that incredible complex idea of climate, and as phantasy can bring humans to the end of universe, which for them is some unit that can be handled in a government agreement. Government as an insurance of climate; government as an insurance for life and climate and income and jobs and finally death.

  4. A warm world is a wet world. Full of life and energy.
    A cold world is a dry world. Bereft of life giving energy and moisture.
    We better hope Soon is right and this cooling isn’t permanent.

  5. So, the premise of your argument is based on an out-of-control cabal? Embrace cooling because the idiots promote global warming? Aren’t we (quantifiably) towards or past the end of an interglacial period of an ice age we exists in? Cooling may make some feel vindicated but more pointedly, may be the end of civilization as we know it. I’d tread lightly…

  6. Like Robert I agree with much but there is much to disagree with, much mesmo! Nuclear power is horrible…..the cold much worse than a little warming, and now we have six horsemen of cold climate change when back in the last mini-ice age we only had three so expect colder than anyone expects and wants……

    The Six Horsemen of Climate Change
    There are six horsemen of climate change and all of them are cooling.
    1) Diminishing solar output – Grand Solar Minimum
    2) Diminishing magnetic protection yielding increasing cosmic rays, increasing cloud coverage, which blocks even more sunlight and warmth from the sun as it simultaneously increases precipitation.
    3) Air Pollution proved to dim the sun.
    4) Increased Volcanic Activity, caused by increasing cosmic rays are blocking more solar radiation.
    5) Solar dimming from air traffic
    6) Geoengineering is used, according to CIA director, to cool the imaginary global warming.

  7. According to ice core records, the last millennium 1000AD – 2000AD has been the coldest millennium of our current Holocene interglacial. This point is more fully illustrated with ice core records on a millennial basis back to the Eemian period here:

    https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/holocene-context-for-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-warming/

    Our current, warm, congenial Holocene interglacial, although cooler than the Eemian interglacial 120,000 years ago, has been the enabler of mankind’s civilisation for the last 10,000 years, spanning from mankind’s earliest farming to the most recent technologies.

    Viewing the current Holocene interglacial on a millennial basis is rational. Sadly it seems that, driven by the need to continually support the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis / religion Climate Alarmists irrationally examine the temperature record at much too fine a scale, weather event by weather event, month by month, or year by year.

    From the broader perspective, each of the notable high points in the current 11,000 year Holocene temperature record, (Holocene Climate Optimum – Minoan – Roman – Medieval – Modern), have been progressively colder than every previous high point.

    Greenland ice core records show that for its first 7-8000 years, the early Holocene, had variable but virtually flat temperatures, including its early high point known as the “climate optimum”. But the more recent Holocene, since a “tipping point” at around 1000BC, 3000 years ago, has seen temperature fall at about 20 times faster than its earlier rate.

    The Holocene interglacial is already 10 – 11,000 years old and just judging from the length of previous interglacial periods, the Holocene epoch should be drawing to its close: in this century, the next century or this millennium.

    Nonetheless, Climate alarmists promoting their views have converted the slight and truly beneficial warming at the end of the 20th century to a Modern high point “Great Man-made Global Warming Catastrophe”.

    The recent warming since the end of the Little Ice Age has been wholly beneficial when compared to the devastating impacts arising from the minor cooling of the Little Ice Age.

    As global temperatures, after their short spurt at the end of the last century, are showing stagnation or cooling for the last twenty years, the world should now fear the real and detrimental effects of cooling, rather than being hysterical about limited, beneficial or probably now non-existent further warming.

    Warmer times are times of success and prosperity for man-kind and for the biosphere.

    But the coming end of the present Holocene interglacial will eventually again result in a mile high ice sheet over much of the Northern hemisphere.

    That reversion to Ice Age conditions will be the real climate catastrophe.

    With the present reducing Solar activity, significantly reduced temperatures, at least to the level of another Little Ice Age are predicted quite soon this century.

    Whether the present impending cooling will really lead on to a new glacial ice age or not is still in question.

    As an interested layman, I would say that the betting is more heavily weighted towards a catastrophically cooling world rather than one that will be overheating because of the comparatively minor CO2 emissions from mankind.

  8. I also had issue with the assumption we had warmed much if anything worth worry
    around POINT 6 of a degree maybe?
    but I also worry that between low sun cycles weakened shielding from incoming gamma and other radiation as well as possible magnetic reversal or a messier semi flip, things may get ugly
    all of the above worry me far more than a minuscule “adjusted” warming.
    throw in a couple of hefty volcanic eruptions and it would be very nasty

  9. Per median 12,250-year interstadials such as the Holocene Interglacial Epoch beginning 14,400 YBP, plus periodic plate-tectonic Ice Ages over 3.6 million years, Earth’s latest glacial remission ended AD 1350 with a 500-year Little Ice Age (LIA) through AD 1850/1890, followed by a 140-year “amplitude compression” rebound through AD 2030.

    As this final 20-year chill phase shades to a 70+ year Grand Solar Minimum through 2100, similar to that of AD 1645 – 1715, reduced total solar irradiance (TSI) renders global warming physically impossible in face of a 102-kiloyear Pleistocene Ice Time begun 669 years back.

    Regarding Industrial Revolution “anthropogenic CO2 emissions” from 1725, Australian researcher Robert Holmes definitively showed in December 2017 that all planets in Earth’s solar system exhibit global atmospheric surface temperatures (GAST) = PM/Rp, setting Atmospheric Pressure P times Mean Molar Mass M over its Gas Constant R times Atmospheric Density p. Applying this relation from Mercury through Neptune, zero error-margins attest that there is no empirical or mathematical basis for any “forced” carbon-accumulation factor (CO2) affecting Planet Earth.

    In sum, however Delingpole’s politicized Green Gang “Watermelons” bleat and squeak, Reality bites thrice:

    First, Earth’s Holocene Interglacial Epoch ended with the Medieval Warm in AD 1350, beginning a 500-year Little Ice Age through 1850/1890.

    Second, the current 140-year rebound from this episode is ending with a fiercely chill Grand Solar Minimum, due to persist 70+ years to AD 2100.

    Third, coinciding with an overdue Magnetic Reversal stripping away Earth’s intrasolar “plasma sheath”, this looming drop in TSI presages recurrent 102-kiloyear Pleistocene glaciations covering 70% of Earth’s habitable landmasses with ice sheets 2.5 miles thick.

    Sociopathic Luddites sabotaging global energy economies on behalf of a despotic One World Order may have mega-deaths to answer for.

  10. Good article, im building a greenhouse right now(UK), hope I can keep it warm, I dont have high Hope’s for the UK. I’m putting my kiwi, orange, melon, peach trees in it. been growing veg for 10 yrs and noticed a change in crop yield. now I grow alot indoors. it’s going to be a wake up call for those living off a weekly pay check. 90% of people are not prepared.

  11. “global cooling” ???

    GLOBAL COOLING IS -[ NEVER ]- A GOOD THING !

    Even a slight cooling trend often results in mass-starvation across the globe (Planet) killing millions. global warming brings life livable with excess food supplies for all !!!

    Cold = Death !

    Warm = Life !!

    It’s not even close…

    WarmOn

  12. Every time I see discussions about the greenhouse effect the supporters of the hypothesis claim that 99% of the gases in the atmosphere aren’t greenhouse gases. This means they do not absorb significant amounts of infra-red radiation. This also means they do not emit significant amounts of infra-red radiation.

    Climate scientists like Trenberth et al claim that 83% of the infra-red emitted to space by the Earth originates from the atmosphere.

    IF this is true this must mean that ~2% of the atmosphere that is water vapour and the 0.042% that is CO2 emit 83% of the infra-red emitted to space.

    There is ample evidence that Earth has been emitting more infra-red to space as the concentration of CO2 has increased over the period of satellite monitoring – this is one of few areas of climate science that is consistent – the Earth has been emitting more infra-red radiation to space not less as the “heat trappers” claim.

    IF CO2 has increased the emissivity of the atmosphere then a reduction in solar activity with a more emissive atmosphere should result in obvious atmospheric cooling as evidenced by the rapid drop following the 2106 El-Niño.

    Only time will tell but I think alarmists are beginning to panic about their hypothesis as evidenced by their increasingly absurd claims and ever increasing shrill abuse of any who dare question.

    But this is all just speculation about an insignificant, nonreactive trace gas with a tiny absorption spectrum.

  13. In addiitoon to Robert’s points;

    I would question the notion of the “privileged few” still having the goodies of life in a collapse.

    Without a productive and viable “deplorables” economy, there will not be steel mills, foresters, auto makers, rubber plantations, chemical factories, farmers, food pickers, etc. etc.

    The rich and privileged will be just as deprived of industrial goods as everyone else when indusrty stops. Who will grow, ship, and process the coffee for their latte while starving? Eh?

    Revolutions are usually bad for the existing rulers…

  14. Quote: We must hope Dr. Soon is right

    He is partialy right, and 70 years to early, following this GSM due to end around 2033 will be another Tepid Gleissberg cycle of around 70 years, follwed by another Three Hot cycles, a single cycle like SC20 and followed agin by another Three Hot cycles before the next GSM.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle
    What have Charvatova, Eddy, Gleissberg, Landscheidt , Smith, and Sharp all have in common: Solar cyclic moderation and a halo point between the Sun and the rest of the Solar system called the BarryCentre which the Sun orbits.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point

  15. Hi robert, i agree with you but also believe that if, as Valentina Zharkova predicts, the sun is entering a super gsm then all bets and predictions are off!

  16. “Humankind could not produce enough food, clothing and shelter. Jobs would vanish. Massive starvation, disease and death would result. Hard physical labor would once again become the norm. Even though life could be maintained for some portion of humanity, liberty and happiness would be lost.”

    This is what the globalist oligarchs and fellow travelers hope for. A world with fewer people in it and except for themselves life for the survivors is nasty, brutish and short.

  17. With scientists like Dr. Soon, even when they are “wrong,” they are more correct than hysterical fanatical activists.

    It’s the integrity of those adhering to tried and true methodologies with a proven track record of success; as opposed to dreamer’s wishful thinking and just-so stories that have a long history of failure and it’s accompanying pain.

  18. I second the motion, Robert. I do not want to see “gentle cooling,” and I do not believe that we will suddenly see a higher energy solar output in 50 years. In fact I place “in 50 years” in the same place I put all predictions placed beyond probable memory – something that can’t likely be proved or disproved.

    I agree that we are headed for something far worse that the cooling period from the highs of the 30s & ’40s to the ’70s. I do not feel – intuition here – that we will see anything as “gentle” as the 1600s. It is going to go far beyond that.

    We are currently living off the stored energy in the oceans, but that won’t last for long if the Sun stays in its slumber. If that slumber lasts too long, and we make the dive back into the early part of an ice age, the snow cover will offset the increased solar output by reflecting it back into space, and we will have to hope that there is some high latitude volcanism that spews enough ash over a large enough area to help pull the Earth back towards a milder, gentler climate.

    I won’t be around for the end of what is coming, but I expect to still be alive when we finally realize the reality of the cycle that we are in. I just don’t know if I can find enough insulating clothing to be able to live in that world!

  19. There is nothing to love about a colder world writes James Wood in these commentaries. Things will be much worse than some warming with more agricultural collapse and life after all comes to a full stop in the present cold and snow. The only good with the onslaught of cold coupled paralleled with financial and economic collapse is the we could hope that it will wipe out politicians and governments and mainstream organizations that are out to get us. I have been reading and suffering from the current wave of digital censorship and its against vaccine (which I hate forced on kids) on climate now as it does get alarmingly colder, on anything against the mainstream. So though I have been writing and publishing on all of this, and recently and especially on cold climate change (ten years and about 100 essays) and using Roberts tremendous site as a main source of easily had truthful information, I am being forced to protect my core work at drsircus.com which is medicine. Even there I am vulnerable since they are after natural medicine as well. So I am thinking this morning that I am forced to stop publishing on climate until hell freezes over so perhaps I can participate more here.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.