One of the most pathetic things about climate alarmism is the fact that it seems the people who profess such views have no capacity to be ashamed of their own statements. For example, Brad Johnson, who is a paid spokesman for a shadowy outfit called “forecast the facts” has previously made outrageous statements trying to link tornado activity to the voting record of some southern states.

We’ve called him out on these claims before, but being paid to do it he does, he’s right back at it this week with an even more outrageous claim as seen below on his Twitter feed:

Johnson is a paid political advocate, his job is to scare up emotions with whatever statements he can muster so that it can be regurgitated by low information voters even though there’s not one speck of truth in anything he has ever said in this matter of severe weather events related to climate.

He is the worst kind of alarmist: paid to create lies, such as trying to link a blizzard to climate change.

Even the IPCC doesn’t buy into the climate to severe weather link as we have covered before:

This is consistent with what was reported last year in the IPCC SREX report ( IPCC Special Report on Extremes PDF)

From Chapter 4 of the IPCC SREX report:

“There is medium evidence and high agreement that long-term trends in normalized losses have not been attributed to natural or anthropogenic climate change”

“The statement about the absence of trends in impacts attributable to natural or anthropogenic climate change holds for tropical and extratropical storms and tornados”

“The absence of an attributable climate change signal in losses also holds for flood losses”

Dr. Roger Pielke Jr adds in blog post some points from the IPCC AR5 WGI Chapter 2 on extremes.

“Overall, the most robust global changes in climate extremes are seen in measures of daily temperature, including to some extent, heat waves. Precipitation extremes also appear to be increasing, but there is large spatial variability”

“There is limited evidence of changes in extremes associated with other climate variables since the mid-20th century”

“Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century … No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin”

“In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale”

“In summary, there is low confidence in observed trends in small-scale severe weather phenomena such as hail and thunderstorms because of historical data inhomogeneities and inadequacies in monitoring systems”

“In summary, the current assessment concludes that there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century due to lack of direct observations, geographical inconsistencies in the trends, and dependencies of inferred trends on the index choice. Based on updated studies, AR4 conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated. However, it is likely that the frequency and intensity of drought has increased in the Mediterranean and West Africa and decreased in central North America and north-west Australia since 1950”

“In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low”

And says:

Of course, I have no doubts that claims will still be made associating floods, drought, hurricanes and tornadoes with human-caused climate change — Zombie science — but I am declaring victory in this debate. Climate campaigners would do their movement a favor by getting themselves on the right side of the evidence.

There are numerous studies that show no linkage between tornado activity and climate change, and last month was the quietest Mmnth on record for US. Tornadoes since 1969.

Even Nature’s editorial two years ago was dashing alarmist hopes of linking extreme weather events to global warming saying:

Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.

Brad Johnson should be ashamed for pushing such lies, but when you’re paid to do so, I suppose it’s impossible to embrace such an emotion.

Share this: Print

Email

Twitter

Facebook

Pinterest

LinkedIn

Reddit



Like this: Like Loading...