Throwing Cold Water on the ‘Boiling Oceans’ Narrative

Jefferey Jaxen and Del Bigtree at The Highwire recently reported on the media narrative of oceans “boiling” as a result of human-caused global warming, which climate alarmism is being used as a pretext to manufacture our consent for ushering in authoritarian global governance.

Watch the segment “Turning Down the Heat on the Boiling Ocean Narrative” here:

Of course, nobody serious goes so far as to claim that the oceans are literally on the verge of boiling, so you might be tempted to think it’s a strawman argument, but Jaxen proves the point by showing numerous absurdly dishonest mainstream media headlines using exactly that hyperbolic language as a scare tactic.

The segment discusses solar cycles and the possibility of a “grand solar minimum”, which is an extended period of decreased solar activity.

Jaxen cites a 2015 paper in the journal Natural Science titled “The Approaching New Grand Solar Minimum and Little Ice Age Climate Conditions“, which cites various studies that together suggest that we should expect a grand solar minimum by about 2030 to 2040. The paper states:

The solar activity exhibits a fairly regular alternation between solar maxima and solar minima. The grand solar minima known as the Spörer Minimum (ca 1440-1460), the Maunder Minimum (ca 1687-1703) and the Dalton Minimum (ca 1809-1821) are all well known, not least because they correspond quite well with cold periods known as “Little Ice Ages”.

Jaxen also shows the following graph from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) showing cycles of varying sunspot activity.

Searching for that graph, I also came across an article from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) that dismisses the idea of an impending mini ice age. NASA describes it as mere coincidence that the last time a grand solar minimum happened, there was also a period “of lower temperatures called the ‘Little Ice Age'”. But it doesn’t mention the two prior minima that also correlated with lower temperatures.

At the same time, NASA acknowledges “the possible decades-long cooling from a prolonged Grand Solar Minimum”, but it begs the question by asserting that any such cooling effect will be more than offset by human carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions so global temperatures will continue to rise.

But that just begs the question by accepting the “scientific consensus” as determined by the UN International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — the very existence of which is dependent on the assumption that there is a human-caused climate crisis — that “variations in solar activity play only a very small role in Earth’s climate.”

Humorously, after citing the “consensus” view of the main political organization pushing the agenda of global authoritarian governance, NASA acknowledges disagreement among scientists on this very question.

“While scientists continue to research whether an extended solar minimum could have contributed to cooling the climate,” NASA states, “there is little evidence that the Maunder Minimum sparked the Little Ice Age, or at least not entirely by itself (notably, the Little Ice Age began before the Maunder Minimum).”

So there’s a “consensus” that solar activity basically has a trivial impact on global temperatures at the same time that scientists maintaining a different view plausibly argue that decreased solar activity was a significant contributing factor in the Little Ice Age.

The folks at NASA appear to be suffering some cognitive dissonance!

Interestingly, I also happened to stumble on this 2009 article from the National Science Foundation (NSF) reporting on a study by an international team of researchers led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and funded by the US Department of Energy (DOE). In contrast to NASA’s present poo-pooing of the influence of solar activity on global temperatures, that article states:

Chemicals in the stratosphere and sea surface temperatures in the Pacific Ocean respond during solar maximum in a way that amplifies the Sun’s influence on some aspects of air movement.

This can intensify winds and rainfall, change sea surface temperatures and cloud cover over certain tropical and subtropical regions, and ultimately influence global weather.

The website Astronomy Now reported on the study by saying,

Subtle connections between the solar cycle, the stratosphere and the tropical Pacific Ocean generate regular weather patterns that could help predict the intensity of climate phenomena years in advance.

More than a century of weather observations and three computer models helped scientists led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) to arrive at an answer to the riddle of how such a small variation in the energy that reaches Earth across the 11 year solar cycle – just 0.1 percent – can drive major changes in weather patterns on our home planet.

So perhaps the impact of solar activity on our planet is not so trivial after all?

I haven’t written much over the years about the topic of climate, in part because I haven’t researched the literature on it nearly as much as I have vaccines and COVID-19, but particularly since climate change is being used as a pretext to push policies that will increase energy costs and therefore cause disproportionate harm to the poor, it’s something I’ve long paid attention. Here is a relevant article I wrote back in 2016 on rising sea levels:

Coming back to The Highwire segment, Jaxen also cites this study published in the Lancet journal Planetary Health in July 2021 that found that, in the first two decades of the twenty-first century, there were far more cold-related than heat-related deaths.

The idea that we could enter a little ice age is one I thought I’d share with my readers since I posted twice about the climate topic earlier this month.

On April 4, I published a post explaining how I learned that the key claim Al Gore made in his film An Inconvenient Truth that persuaded me that temperatures have historically been driven by CO2 levels turned out to be precisely the opposite of the truth. Here’s that post in case you missed it:

Then on April 5, I shared a new documentary providing skeptics’ arguments that the mainstream media refuse to expose us to. I shared screenshots of many of the graphs presented in the film:

With relevance to the topic of this Highwire segment, I also noted how we have actually been in an unusually long interglacial period known as the Holocene, how the Holocene is actually just the most recent “glacial minima” period in the current ice age we are still living in, and how the Energy Education website from the University of Calgary credits “human induced climate change” with delaying the anticipated return to a period of glaciation!

Maybe a little global warming isn’t such a bad thing after all?

What do you think? Share your thoughts in the comments below.