+27 83 629-7690 henrypool7@gmail.com
An Inconvenient Truth

An Inconvenient Truth

About a decade ago, after seeing the movie “An Inconvenient Truth”, and noticing the ice melt in the Arctic, I was concerned that the theory of manmade global warming (AGW) is correct and indeed happening. Feeling a bit guilty about driving my big old diesel truck, and just to be sure, I considered that here [in Pretoria, South Africa] I could easily prove and confirm the theory. Namely the logic following from AGW theory is that more carbon dioxide (CO2) coming into the atmosphere would trap heat on earth. Hence, we should find minimum temperature rising, pushing up the average temperature. Here, in Pretoria, in the winter months, we hardly ever get any rain, but we have many people burning fossil fuels to keep warm at night. On any cold winter’s day that results in the town area being covered with a brown-greyish layer of air, viewable from a high hill outside town in the early morning. I figured that as the population increased over the past 40 years, the results of my analysis of the daily data [of a Pretoria weather station] must show minimum temperature rising, particularly in the winter months. Much to my surprise, I found that minimum temperatures here in Pretoria were falling, any month….

I first thought that somebody must have made a mistake: the extra CO2 was cooling the atmosphere, not warming it. That made sense to me as I knew that whilst there were absorptions of CO2 in the areas of the infra-red spectrum where earth emits [which would trap heat on earth], there are also the areas of absorption in the UV- and 1-2 um- and the 4-5 um range where the sun emits [which would send some heat to space].

Not convinced either way by my deliberations and discussions as a blogger on several websites, I looked at 10 other weather stations in the region to give me an indication of what was happening. In 2018 I updated the results of these 10 stations. They all have good daily data for the period 1977 – 2017, mostly. My own data were always obtained from tutiempo.net. The results are reported here:

summary of climate change south africa.xlsx (dropbox.com)

Strike 1:

My finding was that the ambient temperature in South Africa over the past 40 years had not changed, whereas, on average, minimum temperatures have dropped by 0.8K here.

Puzzled by my initial results, and still wondering about the ice melt, I decided to take a random sample of weather stations (ws) from all over the world. I ended up with 27 ws from each hemisphere that had good daily data going back 40 years. Being well trained in taking representative samples and looking carefully at my earth globe, I decided:

  • Equal number of ws in the northern and southern hemisphere.
  • As far as possible all ws balanced in latitude to 0 degrees or as close as possible to zero.
  • All ws distributed 60%/40% @sea / on land – this is representing the appearance of earth.
  • Always looking at the average change per year i.e., the derivative of the least squares’ equation.

The reasoning behind this sampling procedure was that I could minimize both the differences in height & light exposure and the differences in measurement methods between ws.

I conducted this investigation in 2015. Results include those of 2014. My results are summarized in the Table below. Original results were multiplied by 10 to show the results in degrees Kelvin per decade. Results for each of the 54 ws can be supplied upon request.

Table 1

Period: 1974-2014

Change in degrees K / decade






Southern  (27 ws)




Northern  (27 ws)




Balance on latitude

                                    15.82 degrees





My overall global result for the warming was 0.126 K/decade over the last 40 years and this was the same result as what Spencer and others had in 2015. This proves that my sampling method was good. However, my data set provided extra information about minimum temperatures that did not fit the theory of AGW…..

Strike 2:

My finding was that the ambient temperature in the southern hemisphere (SH) over the past 40 years had not changed much (0.017 x 4 = 0.07K). On average, minimum temperatures in the SH have dropped by 0.6K.

It appeared that the results I had obtained for the southern hemisphere were not even that much different than those I had found in South Africa.

Now what?

At some or other stage I came across the data from GISS LOTI. This is the global data set from NASA. Original data, see here

The figure below is a summary of all the data that they have from all the weather stations, January through to December, from 1960 until 2019, both in the NH and in the SH. Note the graphic on the bottom, showing the increase in warming versus latitude:


Warming against latitude

Strike 3:

The finding by NASA was that the warming of earth increases exponentially from 0 to +90 degrees latitude.

60 to 70% of earth is water. It would therefore be interesting to see what the warming rate is in the water around the world. The data set most often being used for the sea surface temperature is HADSST3.

 Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

Carefully looking at the above graphs, we can get a reasonable accurate estimate of the rate of warming over the past 50 years. It is ca. 0.17K/decade in the NH and about 0.09K/decade in the SH. In the water around the ‘Hoek van Holland’ they measured 0.30K of warming per decade since 1970. See here  According to this report:  Sea Surface Temperature (noaa.gov) it appears that the rate of the warming of the Arctic ocean at the highest latitude is now about 0.7K/decade.

I am a bit confused as to what happens in Antarctica. It appears that the surface of ice is growing, and it is also getting cooler when measured 2 meters above the ground. See here: https://breadonthewater.co.za/2021/04/05/unexpected-ice/

 However, it is claimed that there is still net ice loss, as measured by the satellites. I am doubtful about these results, as I wonder how they calibrated their equipment to ‘measure’ the original thickness of ice. See also further analysis by an independent party shown further down. Never mind that controversy, let us assume that at least half of the warmth as measured in the SH has arrived in and around Antarctica and is removing some ice there from the bottom.

The results of the warming of the seas and oceans are summarized by me in the Table below:

Table 2


Change in degrees K / decade





-90 (my own estimate)



-90 to 0  (average)



  0 to 90  (average)



+53 (HoekvanHolland)



+90 (Chukchi Sea)



Strike 4:

As before, my finding here is that the warming of the oceans is directly related to latitude. The lower the latitude the lower the warming rate.

Despite most of the innumerable glaciers worldwide retreating, one of the few unusual glaciers that maintains in a state of equilibrium is the large Perito Moreno Glacier because it continues to accumulate mass at a rate similar to that of its loss.[1] The reason remains debated by glaciologists.[2] See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perito_Moreno_Glacier

 At least 58 New Zealand glaciers advanced between 1983 and 2008, with Franz Josef Glacier (Kā Roimata o Hine Hukatere) advancing nearly continuously during this time. See here:  https://www.victoria.ac.nz/news/2017/02/explaining-new-zealands-unusual-growing-glaciers

Strike 5:

It appears that glaciers in the southern hemisphere are either in a state of equilibrium or advancing…..

How about snowfall? Note this report from a blogger friend about snowfall:

Real Global Snowfall Trend – Zoe’s Insights (phzoe.com)

Strike 6:

Measured from 1980, it appears snowfall has been increasing in the southern hemisphere and decreasing in the northern hemisphere. The global trend is actually up, but this appears to be due to the extra snowfall in the SH…

How is it going with the ice, exactly? I could have shown you the graph I had from Wood for Trees showing an increase in ice surface in the Sh and a decrease in ice surface on the Nh. But it seems Zoe Phin has found another source for the information which could just as well be correct . See here: Global Sea Ice Area – Zoe’s Insights (phzoe.com)

Strike 7:

The large loss in sea ice in the northern hemisphere is more than made up for by a larger gain in sea ice in the southern hemisphere.

With so many strikes against, surely AGW is out and it is now game over! 

Clearly, the heat that warms the earth is coming from the north and is slowly spreading south. Since the extra carbon dioxide that came into the atmosphere since the 1970’s is uniformly spread across the globe, the observed temperature trends indicate that global warming due to carbon dioxide was not the dominant factor over the last 50 years. It appears that the warming observed in the northern hemisphere is dominated by other factors. These factors need to be identified and resolved before any kind of accurate future climate predictions can be made.

In my honest opinion, predictions made assuming that global warming due to carbon dioxide is dominant, are likely to fail.


Victory for All!

Victory for All!

Victory4All Homes receives support by Heart for Children/ Hart voor Kinderen NL. There are 8 foster homes.

However, Victory4All also have a number of other noteworthy activities in the Humansdorp / Jeffreys Bay area. Please give some of your time to watch the work they are doing for the children.

Is it warmer now than it was in the past?

Is it warmer now than it was in the past?

I was given permission by Euan Mearns (Javier) to show his work on the reconstruction of the climate of the entire Holocene.  You can read his report here,

Periodicities in solar variability and climate change: A simple model | Energy Matters (euanmearns.com)

The Dutch version is here:

Het is nog nooit zo warm geweest? Nee dus! – Climategate Klimaat

My own comments are placed in [ ]

Fig.9 is a summary of all known results that deal with the climate reconstruction of the past.

Figure 9. Holocene climate reconstruction. Major palinological subdivisions of the Holocene (names on top) match a 2500 regular spacing (grey arches on top). The global temperature reconstruction (black curve; Marcott et al., 2013 by the differencing method with proxy published dates) has been rescaled in temperature anomaly to match biological and glaciological evidence and instrumentation temperature measurements, resulting in the Holocene Climate Optimum being about 1.2°K warmer than the Little Ice Age. The general temperature trend of the Holocene follows the Earth’s axis obliquity (purple), and significant downside deviations generally match the lows of the ~ 2500-year Bray cycle of solar activity (grey boxes labelled B-1 to B-5). Significant negative climate deviations manifested also by global glacier advances (blue bars; Mayewski et al., 2004) and strong increases in iceberg detrital discharges (red curve, inverted; Bond et al., 2001) generally agree well with the lows in the ~ 2500-year Bray cycle and ~ 1000-year Eddy cycle (not shown) of solar activity.

[Observe that the beginning of the Holocene is marked by recovery time after the Younger Dryas cooling period. Many scientists like myself believe that the cause of this cooling period was due a great catastrophe that is also related to the Big Flood of Noah]

Note that the temperature of the planet is set by the obliquity (tilt) of its axis, not so much by solar variability, and Earth’s obliquity is decreasing every day at the fastest rate in forty thousand years (figure 9). Only once in the last million years have temperatures failed to fall with falling obliquity, but when this happened (during MIS 11, 400 kyr ago), 65°N summer insolation was very high, while now it is very low.

The rebound effect of the post-LIA (Little Ice Age) natural warming together with any anthropogenic warming contribution has probably taken us above the temperature that corresponds to the present inclination of the axial tilt, since by a variety of biological and physical methods our present state appears to be similar, at least in the northern hemisphere, to the conditions around the Mid-Holocene transition ~ 5000 years ago. It is possible therefore that over the next 1-2 centuries global temperatures might naturally descend by 0.2-0.4°K to reach our obliquity target, regardless of solar activity.

I would expect significant cooling and climate change from reduced solar activity around 2600 AD when the next low in the ~ 1000-year Eddy cycle is expected.

[For more on the Eddy cycle, see here: https://breadonthewater.co.za/2021/03/04/the-1000-year-eddy-cycle/]

 [Looking at the temperature trend on the graph]

We might face a solar future similar to what the Romans enjoyed between 150 BC and 350 AD. [This is in fact ] A very positive development if true.

See also here: The weather in Jesus’ time | Bread on the water

In terms of climate, the post-LIA natural warming should end soon if it hasn’t ended already, because these recovery periods from the lows in the ~ 2500-year Bray cycle rarely last for more than 400 years. As solar centennial activity cannot increase further, we are probably moving to an end to natural warming.

Glacial inception, the onset of the next glacial period, could take place around 4000 AD when the next low in the ~ 2500-year Bray cycle acting on a much lower obliquity should set the conditions for the growth of the ice sheets.

 [Javier is a pseudonym and he wrote this document in 2016. As far as I can deduce from the caption to Fig 9, the graph is up to date including 2015. We also know from the satellite measurements that the global temperature from 2015 to 2021 has not risen further.

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

This means that the graph is up to date to present day. The reader sees with me that the image of Fig. 9 is something very different from that published by the IPCC. It is not warmer now than it has been in earlier times. God is good].



Do not be alarmed!

CLINTEL’s Message to National Politicians and World Leaders at COP 26

The big climate picture tells us that we are slowly moving – through ups and downs – to the next ice age. The current warming from the Little Ice Age is very beneficial to humanity and nature. Enjoy today’s relatively favorable climate! Sometime in the future, we will move into a colder phase again and eventually into the next ice age.
Hard facts show that global warming is NOT catastrophic, so there is NO climate crisis. Therefore, stop with your scary messages. Fear always leads to wrong decisions and above all, it obscures the minds of our youth. Instead, inspire them with a positive outlook on the future!
The big climate picture also tells us that extreme weather – consisting of heat waves and cold fronts, droughts and floods, hurricanes and snow storms, etc. – is an integral part of the Earth’s climate. Stop selecting weather events that depress young and old! It also leads to erroneous policies.
For many decades, observations have shown that the IPCC’s climate models misrepresent science. The reality is that changes in CO2 emissions have only a modest effect on Earth’s weather and climate. The reality is that sea level rise has been stable for centuries. So no reason to panic.
CO2 is not a polluting gas. It is essential for all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is good for nature and makes the earth greener. It is also good for agriculture, as it increases crop yields worldwide (see Figure 1). With more CO2, we can fight hunger in the world better.
Stop slavishly following the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. The agreement is based on fear and will only make the world poorer. Instead, develop concrete adaptation plans in collaboration with the regions. Global mitigation policies cost an exorbitant amount of money and have never saved a single life. National adaptation plans are very effective, whatever the causes of climate change may be (see figure 2).
Wind and solar energy can only play a small role in the energy transition. Use clean fossil fuels for increasing energy needs, especially in developing countries. Meanwhile, work together worldwide to develop the nuclear power plants of the future, along with new storage and transport technologies. It will result in greater prosperity and well-being for all.

Figure 1 : CO2 is not a polluter. It is essential for all life on Earth. More CO2 is good for nature and it makes the earth greener. It is also good for agriculture; crop yields are increasing worldwide, allowing us to better fight hunger in the world.


Figure 2 : Climate-related deaths have fallen by more than 95% in the past century thanks to increasing prosperity! Mitigation policies do the opposite, because it destroys wealth. Investing in adaptation always works, whatever the causes of climate change may be.


See also CLINTEL’s World Climate Declaration (WCD), www.clintel.org

On behalf of the CLINTEL ambassadors and WCD signatories,

dr. AJ (Guus) Berkhout, President of CLINTEL

Emeritus Professor of Geophysics

Member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW)

Senior Member of the Dutch Academy of Engineering (AcTI)