{"id":9093,"date":"2024-05-21T09:46:11","date_gmt":"2024-05-21T08:46:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/?p=9093"},"modified":"2024-05-21T09:46:13","modified_gmt":"2024-05-21T08:46:13","slug":"meteorologist-todorovic-to-sputnik-temperature-changes-and-co2-impact-are-negligible","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/2024\/05\/21\/meteorologist-todorovic-to-sputnik-temperature-changes-and-co2-impact-are-negligible\/","title":{"rendered":"Meteorologist Todorovic to Sputnik: “Temperature Changes and CO2 Impact Are Negligible”"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

Original article<\/a>\u00a0(in Serbian) was published on 6\/5\/2024; Author: Teodora Koledin<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

At the end of April, meteorologist Nedeljko Todorovic appeared as a guest on the podcast “Energija Sputnjika<\/a>“. Known for his strong climate skepticism, Todorovic frequently features in the media despite his controversial views. In this episode, he discussed temperature variations on both global and local scales, downplaying the scientifically confirmed warming of the planet. After analyzing several of Todorovic’s statements, we concluded that his presentation of the climate change issue is, at the very least, debatable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is Global Warming Slowing Down?<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cYou should not be afraid of drastic temperature changes. It has been on the rise until now, but the latest measurements from seven to eight years ago indicate that this trend is now slowing down. In the next ten to twenty years, there will be a slight drop in temperature, but this does not mean that there will be a change in the climate, just as this temperature rise is not a change in the climate\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Changes in the rate of warming of the planet are fully expected<\/a> by the scientific community. They do not represent anything \u201cstrange\u201d nor do they disprove the existence of global climate change. If temperature growth slows down in one period, this does not necessarily mean that the \u201ctrend\u201d of warming has stopped. So, for example, from 1998 to 2013, the rate of global mean surface warming slowed<\/a>, which does not mean that climate change has disappeared.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite the statements of meteorologist Todorovic, in the last \u201cseven to eight years\u201d, average global temperatures have been continuously increasing<\/a>. According to<\/a> NASA\u2019s data, in the previous year, the average temperature of the Earth’s surface was the highest recorded. Also, all 10 warmest years from 1850 to the present have occurred in the last decade<\/a>. That\u2019s no longer news. In 2007, scientists reported<\/a> that 11 of the previous 13 years were the warmest on record since measurements began.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An article<\/a> published on the web portal Carbon Brief (which reports on climate and energy policy topics), explains that \u201cdrawing the conclusion that warming has \u201cflatlined\u201d relies heavily on looking at data over a short period in isolation.\u201d For example, if we observe only the period from 2015 to 2022, we can get the impression that the rate of temperature increase is quite \u201clinear.\u201d On the other hand, if we slightly change the period of observation and focus on the period from 2011 to 2018, we can draw an opposite conclusion – that the rate of global warming has increased sharply to a full 5.6 \u00b0C per century. This is an exaggerated estimate, given that the global temperature is currently rising<\/a> by roughly 0.2\u00b0C (\u00b10.1\u00b0C) per decade. In both cases, the wider context is ignored, which then results in inaccurate observations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the same time, it should be mentioned that scientists have offered possible explanations<\/a> for the so-called stagnation of the Earth’s surface warming in a certain period. One of the most probable suggests that natural climate cycles (La Ni\u00f1a<\/a> and the negative phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation<\/a>) actually caused changes in ocean circulation and thus \u201cmoved\u201d excess heat into the deep ocean. In short, heat was still present, just not on the surface of our planet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are Temperature Changes in Budapest \u201cNegligible\u201d?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhen we take Belgrade into account, and when we compare it parallel to Budapest, there is a good correlation between Budapest – Zagreb – Belgrade. In Budapest from 1780 to the present day, it can be seen that the temperature change trend is 0.3 degrees. Negligible, so to speak. Especially if we also take into account that this is the influence of local microclimatic changes.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Given that Todorovic drew parallels between Belgrade and Budapest several times during the show, and called the increase in temperature in the neighboring country \u201cnegligible\u201d, we decided to investigate climate changes in Hungary and its capital.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the Hungarian National Strategy for Climate Change<\/a> from 2018, information was highlighted showing that the average annual temperature in this country increased by a full 1.15\u00b0C in the period from 1901 to 2017. Moreover, it surpassed the average temperature increase of 0.9\u00b0C at the global level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When it comes to future predictions about the climate in this area, it was stated that \u201cprojections show much fewer frosty days by the middle of this century compared to the period from 1961 to 1990\u201d, while at the same time \u201cmore summer days and extreme heat\u201d are expected. Identical predictions can be found in the report<\/a> titled \u201cClimate Change and Hungary: Mitigating the Hazard and Preparing for the Impacts,\u201d which was created in Budapest in 2010.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2014, the Hungarian meteorologist and professor Probald Ferenc wrote a scientific paper<\/a> titled \u201cThe urban climate of Budapest: past, present and future\u201d, in which he emphasized that temperatures in the Pannonian Plain are \u201cdoomed\u201d to rise in accordance with the medium projection of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). At the same time, he added that the warming will be more intense during summer periods, with an expected increase in temperature of at least 4\u00b0C by the end of the 21st century compared to the reference period at the end of the 20th century, but also that this change will be accompanied by a dramatic increase in the frequency of heat waves. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The European Network for Data-Based Journalism has also published<\/a> data on rising temperatures in the Budapest area. As they point out, since 1900, \u201cthe average temperature in Budapest and its surroundings has increased from an average of 9.6\u00b0C between 1900 and 1999 to an average of 10.7\u00b0C between 2000 and 2018.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How Does Carbon Dioxide Affect Plants?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cExperts who understand carbon dioxide and the chemistry of the atmosphere long ago showed that carbon dioxide is not a harmful gas, but that it is food for all plant life on the globe.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In March of this year, FakeNews Tragac already reported<\/a> on the distorted<\/a> claims that carbon dioxide is not a harmful gas but, on the contrary, useful and that it promotes the growth of plants. Indeed, plants grow somewhat faster with greater exposure to this compound. However, not everything is so simple. Scientists have found that plants lose their nutritional value when exposed to higher levels of CO2, despite growing faster. Thus, for example, mathematician and biologist Irakli Loladze discovered in his work<\/a> that \u201celevated CO2 levels were found to reduce the overall concentration of 25 important minerals\u2014including calcium, potassium, zinc, and iron\u2014in plants by 8% on average.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Similar results were obtained by researchers who examined<\/a> the influence of increased atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide on protein concentration in rice, barley, wheat, soybeans and potatoes. As they pointed out in the conclusion, each of the observed cultures \u201chad lower protein concentrations when grown under conditions of elevated levels compared to natural CO2 levels.\u201d In the case of wheat, barley and rice, the concentration of protein in the grain decreased by some 10 to 15 percent, while for potatoes the decrease in protein content was 14 percent. In soy, there was a much smaller decrease in protein concentration of 1.4 percent, but the authors also assessed this decrease as statistically significant. \u201cThe effect of atmospheric CO2 on crop protein therefore seems likely to be of genuine importance for human nutrition in and beyond the 21st century\u201d, the authors conclude at the end of their paper.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Original article\u00a0(in Serbian) was published on 6\/5\/2024; Author: Teodora Koledin At the end of April, meteorologist Nedeljko Todorovic appeared as a guest on the podcast “Energija Sputnjika“. Known for his strong climate skepticism, Todorovic frequently features in the media despite his controversial views. In this episode, he discussed temperature variations on both global and local […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":9094,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[316],"tags":[254,128,255,28,411],"class_list":["post-9093","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-fact-checks","tag-climate","tag-climate-change","tag-co2","tag-serbia","tag-sputnik"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9093","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9093"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9093\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9098,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9093\/revisions\/9098"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9094"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9093"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9093"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seecheck.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9093"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}