Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1

[Blake]

Forecast says 93 degrees for the high next Friday.

February 27.

I guess it's time to get the pool ready, amirite, Darrin?

[Blake]

Aww forecast changed to mid 80s. Maybe we'll open the pool the following week to start March off.

[Winehole23]

heat ac ulation

natural feedback loops will not be mocked

[Blake]

High heat incoming: San Antonio could break a 72-year old record on Thursday

https://www.expressnews.com/san-anto...s-21941259.php

February time is now pool time!

[Winehole23]

"Warming has already melted so much ice in Greenland and Antarctica that Earth’s rotation has slowed and its axis has shifted, slightly altering the length of the day and disrupting the precision of satellite tracking, global positioning systems and timekeeping."

hhttps://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/24/opinion/blizzard-snow-storm-winter.html?utm_source=cbnewsletter&utm_medium=ema il&utm_term=2026-02-25

[Winehole23]

Exxon projected anthropogenic climate change roughly in line with academic projections from 1977-2003

Many of the uncovered fossil fuel industry do ents include explicit projections of the amount of warming expected to occur over time in response to rising atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. Yet, these numerical and graphical data have received little attention. Indeed, no one has systematically reviewed climate modeling projections by any fossil fuel interest. What exactly did oil and gas companies know, and how accurate did their knowledge prove to be? Here, we address these questions by reporting and analyzing all known global warming projections do ented by—and in many cases modeled by—Exxon and ExxonMobil Corp scientists between 1977 and 2003.

Our results show that in private and academic circles since the late 1970s and early 1980s, ExxonMobil predicted global warming correctly and skillfully. Using established statistical techniques, we find that 63 to 83% of the climate projections reported by ExxonMobil scientists were accurate in predicting subsequent global warming. ExxonMobil’s average projected warming was 0.20° ± 0.04°C per decade, which is, within uncertainty, the same as that of independent academic and government projections published between 1970 and 2007. The average “skill score” and level of uncertainty of ExxonMobil’s climate models (67 to 75% and ±21%, respectively) were also similar to those of the independent models.

Moreover, we show that ExxonMobil scientists correctly dismissed the possibility of a coming ice age in favor of a “carbon dioxide induced ‘super-interglacial’”; accurately predicted that human-caused global warming would first be detectable in the year 2000 ± 5; and reasonably estimated how much CO2 would lead to dangerous warming.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk0063

[Winehole23]

Wall Street and PE looking to make $$$ off extreme weather

Attention: DOGE’d and RIF’ed U.S. government meteorologists and climate scientists. JPMorgan Chase & Co. is looking to hire a new executive director focused on “catastrophe modeling.” Ideally, someone who could be a “subject matter expert in natural catastrophe and climate,” upping their portfolio’s “resilience to physical climate risks.”

And they’re not alone. Some hedge funds are offering as much as $1 million per year for the right extreme weather forecaster. As one recruiter who specializes in placing experts in this niche world of “insurance-linked securities” told Bloomberg News, anthropogenic climate change’s most canny and enterprising Cassandras have been netting “exponentially higher” pay bumps compared to their past salaries over the last two years.
Not unlike the mortgage-backed securities of the 2008 financial crisis, insurance-linked securities (ILS) reimagine an insurance company’s outstanding policy risks and potential rewards as assets that it can market to outside investors, like hedge funds.

https://gizmodo.com/hedge-funds-are-...sks-2000770164