Wrong, The Guardian, Oil Company Operations Arenโ€™t Making Heatwaves Worse

In The Guardianโ€™s article, โ€œCarbon emissions from oil giants directly linked to dozens of deadly heatwaves for first time,โ€ Damian Carrington reports on a study claiming that the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from just 14 major fossil fuel companies were enough to cause more than 50 heatwaves that โ€œwould otherwise have been virtually impossible.โ€ This is false. Heatwaves were far worse in the past than today and it is impossible to link any particular heatwave to emissions from any company or group of companies, since data show no causal connection between emissions and changes in heat waves, at all.

A historical photograph depicting a group of houses in a flat landscape under a dark, overcast sky, suggesting an impending dust storm.
ย 1930s Dust Bowl

From ClimateRealism

By Anthony Watts

Screenshot of an article from The Guardian discussing carbon emissions from oil companies linked to heatwaves, with the word 'WRONG' prominently overlaid.

Inย The Guardianโ€™sย article,ย โ€œCarbon emissions from oil giants directly linked to dozens of deadly heatwaves for first time,โ€ Damian Carrington reports on a study claiming that the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from just 14 major fossil fuel companies were enough to cause more than 50 heatwaves that โ€œwould otherwise have been virtually impossible.โ€ This is false. Heatwaves were far worse in the past than today and it is impossible to link any particular heatwave to emissions from any company or group of companies, since data show no causal connection between emissions and changes in heat waves, at all.

The piece frames the research they reference as a legal turning point, arguing that oil producers could now face liability for specific extreme weather events. The article quotes researchers as stating that โ€œthe emissions from any one of the 14 biggest companies were by themselves enough to cause more than 50 heatwaves that would otherwise have been virtually impossible.โ€ It goes further, citing campaigners who assert: โ€œWe can now point to specific heatwaves and say, โ€˜Saudi Aramco did this. ExxonMobil did this.โ€™โ€

The claim that โ€œglobal heating is making heatwaves more frequent and more intense across the globeโ€ ignores historical records, runs contrary to peer-reviewed evidence, and lacks any evidence of a causal connection in data.

Studies published in peer reviewed journals like the Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology show that U.S. heatwave frequency peaked in the 1930s Dust Bowl era, long before modern emissions rose dramatically. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrationโ€™s U.S. Climate Extremes Index confirms that while recent decades have seen notable heatwaves events, there is no clear, consistent upward trend surpassing the 1930s. This graph, shown below, using that data and published by the U.S Environmental Protection Agency, discussed in Climate at a Glance: U.S. Heat Waves, underscores just how unsupportable the claim made by The Guardian is:

A graph depicting the Heat Wave Index from 1890 to 2020, showing a significant peak during the 1930s and fluctuating values in subsequent decades.

There is no upward or worsening trend in heatwaves in recent decades. Nor is there a trend of heatwaves that tracks the rise in greenhouse gas emissions, much less a trend linked to greenhouse gas emissions from particular oil companies or the industry as a whole.

The attempt to pin specific weather disasters on particular companies stretches science far beyond its limits. Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) AR6 report acknowledges that while attribution science can estimate probabilities, many categories of extreme weather, including droughts and tropical cyclones, cannot yet be definitively linked to incremental global warming. The IPCC itself warns that uncertainties remain high, particularly when applying global climate models to regional, short-term events. If the leading authority on climate science admits the limitations, it is implausible that a handful of researchers can leap directly from model outputs to courtroom-ready claims of individualized corporate culpability.

Attribution studies rely heavily on counterfactual scenarios produced by computer models rather than actual observed and measured climatic changes. The Guardian itself admits the method compares todayโ€™s world to a โ€œworld before mass burning of fossil fuelsโ€ by simulating what the world might have looked like absent industrial emissions. This counterfactual world is not observableโ€”it is generated inside computer climate models that remain riddled with uncertainties about clouds, aerosols, and ocean cycles, and the biases of the modelers whose assumptions about how the climate responds rising greenhouse gas emissions are built into the models. Linking ExxonMobil or Saudi Aramco to a single heatwave is pure speculation dressed up in scientific language, but it has no basis in fact. It is nothing more than science fiction, dressed up as scientific fact in furtherance of a political/lawfare objective.

Even legal scholars cited in the article concede that the road to liability is โ€œlittered with legal and evidentiary potholes.โ€ Those potholes exist for good reason: because weather is influenced by countless factors including natural climate oscillations like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and El Niรฑoโ€“Southern Oscillation. The study referenced by The Guardian tried to assign corporate responsibility for a specific 2021 Pacific Northwest heatwave which has been thoroughly debunked in the Climate Realism article: Expert Analysis: โ€˜Climate Changeโ€™ Had No Significant Role in Pacific Northwest Heatwave. The claims made in the study ignore the long history of extreme events in that very region, such as the record-setting 1941 heatwave, which occurred when the Earth was cooler and when CO2 concentrations and emissions were lower.

Even if, contrary to the evidence, CO2 emissions could be linked to a trend in worsening heatwaves, which they canโ€™t since no such trend exists, it is not the oil companies that are producing the emissions, but rather the governments, industries, companies, and people using fossil fuels to power modern society that are actually producing the emissions. Emissions are the result of our individual and collective choices in the modes of transportation and products we use, and the way we generate electricity, not oil companies making fossil fuels available for such uses.

By highlighting the assertions made in this false attribution study, The Guardian abandoned journalism in favor of activism. Instead of soberly reporting the limits of attribution science, it stages a morality play where oil companies become convenient villains and every heatwave a courtroom exhibit. This isnโ€™t scienceโ€”itโ€™s propaganda masquerading as news. Readers who should be able to expect their media outlets to inform them by discussing evidence and revealing hidden truths, got theatrics instead from The Guardian, which, with some regularity,  produces baseless alarmism in furtherance of a scary narrative for political ends when the facts donโ€™t cooperate.

CERES team presentations at the DDP conference in El Paso, TX, July 2024

The CERES team were kindly invited to contribute not just one, but three presentations at the Doctors for Disaster Preparedness (DDP)โ€™s 42nd annual conference. This year it was hosted in El Paso, TX and the theme was โ€œAre We in a Hybrid War on Science and the West?โ€œ.

From Watts Up With That?

From CERES

CERES TEAM

The CERES team were kindly invited to contribute not just one, but three presentations at the Doctors for Disaster Preparedness (DDP)โ€™s 42nd annual conference. This year it was hosted in El Paso, TX and the theme was โ€œAre We in a Hybrid War on Science and the West?โ€œ.

Each presentation covered a different aspect of CERESโ€™s recent scientific research. In this post, we will provide links to the slides and videos of all three presentations (courtesy of the DDP). Videos for the other presentations at this conference (and many of the earlier conferences) can be found on the DDPmeetings YouTube channel.


1. Dr. Willie Soon: โ€œScientific Challenges of Detection and Attribution of Global Warmingโ€

The first of our presentations was by Dr. Willie Soon in which he discussed our recent papers on the controversial topic of the โ€œdetection and attribution of global warmingโ€, i.e., investigating the causes of global temperature changes since the mid-19th century:

The slides from his presentation can be downloaded here:

Dr. Willie Soon โ€“ DDP, 6 July 2024, El Paso, TX.pdf

Download PDF โ€ข 22.85MB

2. Dr. Michael Connolly: โ€œUsing Weather Balloon Data to Test Assumptions of Computer Climate Modelsโ€

The second of our presentations was by Dr. Michael Connolly in which he reviewed some of our research into atmospheric physics and chemistry using weather balloon radiosondes. He also gave an advance preview of some of our upcoming work on this exciting frontier of atmospheric science.

This presentation is quite technical because it is applying cutting-edge ideas to old concepts in the fields of physics and meteorology. However, the work he is describing is based on many years of empirical research into this topic and is based on the analysis of millions of weather balloon soundings from around the world:

The slides from his presentation can be downloaded here:

Dr. Michael Connolly โ€“ DDP, 6 July 2024, El Paso, TX.pdf

Download PDF โ€ข 8.09MB

3. Dr. Ronan Connolly: โ€œHow COVID Health Policies Neglected the Disease, the Patient, and the Physicianโ€

Our third presentations was by Dr. Ronan Connolly in which he reviewed our published and upcoming research into the COVID-19 pandemic.

As he discusses in the presentation, some of the information presented disagrees with the World Health Organization (WHO)โ€™s current positions on various proposed COVID-19 treatments. The WHOโ€™s current positions can be found on their WHO.it website. However, all of the ideas he presented are based on the scientific information that is currently available as of July 2024:

The slides from his presentation can be downloaded here:

Dr. Ronan Connolly โ€“ DDP, 6 July 2024, El Paso, TX.pdf

Download PDF โ€ข 17.20MB

No, CBS News, New York City Isnโ€™t Going to Be Flooded by Sea Level Rise

An recent CBS News article claims that climate change induced sea level rise could result in large parts of New York City being underwater by the year 2100. This is false. The best and most relevant data measuring sea level rise in the New York Battery Park area shows a slow but steady rate of rise since 1850 that would fall very far short of submerging any locations in New York City by 2100.

From ClimateRealism

By Anthony Watts

An recent CBS News article claims that climate change induced sea level rise could result in large parts of New York City being underwater by the year 2100. This is false. The best and most relevant data measuring sea level rise in the New York Battery Park area shows a slow but steady rate of rise since 1850 that would fall very far short of submerging any locations in New York City by 2100.

In the article, CBS News cites the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) saying:

โ€œNOAA predicts sea levels in Battery Park City and on the East Side of Manhattan will rise between 2.5 feet and 6.5 feet by the year 2100.โ€

CBS interviewed a resident nearby who said:

โ€œThatโ€™s crazy to even picture,โ€ said Nef Garcia, who lives in Battery Park City.

Heโ€™s right, it is crazy and here is why.

NOAAโ€™s prediction is heavily predicated on computer climate models that assume a huge acceleration in sea level rate of rise over the next 75 years. In particular, NOAAโ€™s Sea Level Rise Viewer, upon which the prediction is based, relies on estimates and models used in 2007. These estimates are woefully outdated, and with the new generation of models now in use, the old estimates used by CBS donโ€™t accurately represent the future the current best projections. The predictions CBS cites are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1- IPCC estimation for the average surface temperature rise based on the rate of CO 2 emissions. Reproduced from Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Marquis, M., Averyt, K., Tignor MMB., et al (2007). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Since 2007, research has shown that computer climate models consistently run too hot. The unfortunate part of these โ€œtoo hot modelsโ€ is that they have been in use for years, referenced by other scientific papers, and have been the basis for claiming future doom scenarios in thousands of media stories just like this one.

So, thereโ€™s a built-in bias in these models, and if you use their outputs to predict things like sea level rise, youโ€™ll end up with exaggerations rather than reality. This is a dramatic case of Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Speaking of reality, actual data exists on sea level rise from the Battery Park area of New York City, cited in the story. NOAA has plotted the data here, seen in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2 โ€“ NOAA plot of sea level rise since 1855 in New York City.

Note the text provided by NOAA at the bottom of the graph:

The relative sea level trend is 2.92 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.09 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from 1856 to 2023 which is equivalent to a change of 0.96 feet in 100 years.

Actual data says 0.96 feet (less than a full foot) in 100 years, and of course, it will be even less that for the 75 years until 2100. Despite the hard data, another division of NOAA, who produced the sea level viewer that CBS News touted, says โ€œbetween 2.5 feet and 6.5 feet by the year 2100.โ€ Clearly, somebody is wrong, they both canโ€™t be right. Sound science practice dictates that when data and theory conflict, you question the theory, not the data, which in this case would mean trusting actual data, rather than computer model projections.

Also notable are the past failed predictions of NYC being inundated by rising seas by some prominent people, such as James Hansen, Ph.D. of NASA, often referred to as the father of global warming, who had an office just a few blocks away from the Battery Park tide gauge. In a 2001 interview with Salon.com, he said this:

While doing research 12 or 13 years ago, I met Jim Hansen, the scientist who in 1988 predicted the greenhouse effect before Congress. I went over to the window with him and looked out on Broadway in New York City and said, โ€œIf what youโ€™re saying about the greenhouse effect is true, is anything going to look different down there in 20 years?โ€ He looked for a while and was quiet and didnโ€™t say anything for a couple seconds. Then he said, โ€œWell, there will be more traffic.โ€ I, of course, didnโ€™t think he heard the question right. Then he explained, โ€œThe West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds wonโ€™t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.โ€ Then he said, โ€œThere will be more police cars.โ€ Why? โ€œWell, you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.โ€ (emphasis, authors)

When WUWT reported the story in 2011, discussing Hansenโ€™s falsified prediction, it made some waves, and lo and behold, the original reporter comes to the Hansenโ€™s rescue, by moving the goalposts out another 20 years saying he had misquoted Hansen, and it was actually 40 years not 20 years.

So, by that Hansen claim, the West Side Highway will be under water in 2028. Here is a 2023 Google Earth Street View of the West Side Highway, about a mile North of Battery Park. It seems the ocean has a huge way to go before the highway is flooded in 5 years, seen in Figure 3 below:

Figure 3 โ€“ 2023 Google Earth Street View from the West Side Highway in New York City showing the level of the ocean there is not close to flooding at all

When the topic is climate change, even the โ€œfather of global warmingโ€ has repeatedly been proven wrong.

The bottom line: hyperbolic predictions on New York City and sea level have been around for decades, and not one of them has come true, nor is there evidence that they will come true within any realistic time frame. If CBS News had bothered to fact check, they would have discovered this. Instead, they chose to write a scare story citing outdated, flawed computer models predictions of future doom, ignoring real world data to the contrary, in the process.

About the only accurate portion of the CBS News story is the quote from Battery Park resident Nef Garcia, who said โ€œThatโ€™s crazy to even picture.โ€