Who is Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy?

s A trick question, of course. The answer is “the author of a blog post at WUWT entitled IPCC’s Report on Climate Change: Myths & Realities“. The blog posting itself is a more-than-usually-pointless mish-mash of nonsense, and isn’t worth reading. I did anyway, though, and can assure you that “A World Meteorological Organization insider’s view of the IPCC report” is wrong, because it isn’t really about the IPCC report at all; its just the usual stuff.

But it is being sold on credentials as “A World Meteorological Organization insider’s view”, and SJR claims to be “Formerly Chief Technical Advisor – WMO/UN”. “Chief Technical Advisor” sounds impressive, but even more impressive is SJR’s stealth-like ability to leave almost no track at all on the web, despite the claim of such a high-profile position.

I found http://www.zoominfo.com/p/S.-Reddy/541694135 which I think must be the same guy, as it makes the same claim. There are misc links to stuff about Hyderabad. His “Employment History” is very brief and laconic: Scientist ICRISAT. ICRISAT really exists, but the connection between the two that google can find is a paper on sorghum from 1984 (that’s searching on “site:www.icrisat.org Jeevananda“).

There’s also a book, Climate Change Myths & Realities dating from 2008. Some of it is astonishingly crude and rough by anyone’s standards: try looking at page 80, or page 108, or indeed page 1, which assures us that 0.93% of the atmosphere is organ. There are also a whole pile of pics in there that have clearly been ripped from elsewhere, with no attribution. The few bits about GW that I read were much like the stuff he posted at WUWT; i.e., uninteresting. The pic is from the end of the book, as is his claim to have “published about 500 scientific articles”, which is a fair number. Google scholar suggests his count is some way off. And the last ones I find are from the mid-90’s: Over-emphasis on energy terms in crop yield models may or may not be a worthy if minor and little-cited contribution; but the affiliation Agricultural Meteorologist (Managing Consultant, Jeevan Agromet Consultancy), Plot No. 6, ICRISAT Colony suggests that he wasn’t formally employed at that point. Perhaps he was retired from ICRISAT? He has at least one from 1974.

And his claim to be “Formerly Chief Technical Advisor – WMO/UN”? I can find nothing to support it.

[Update: delightfully, this post is now the #1 google hit for “Jeevananda Reddy”.]

Meanwhile, in Ukraine

Far more interesting things are going on.

15 thoughts on “Who is Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy?”

  1. “Scientific non-entity inflates credentials and writes hopelessly ill-informed post at WUWT.”

    Isn’t this what journalists call a dog-bites-man story?


  2. “Isn’t this what journalists call a dog-bites-man story?”

    i belive so. i’m sure David Rose is limbering up his typing fingers as we speak.


  3. Dog bites man indeed. A regular for years at DotEarth and blatant self-promoter, not up to the standard of some of the hornets in that nest, worthy of being ignored. I was a little shocked as I would have thought he was beneath notice here, but I guess if he’s promoted himself to lead author at WUWT that gives him some standing? However, it might bring some business to his consultancy, lots of money in them weeds.


  4. My pretty-much-random Zotero database of climate-related stuff yielded only two records for Dr Reddy. One was an unobtainable and/or misnamed 1979 ICRISAT article cited in a 2007 study of Turkana droughts,


    and the other was this, a comment beneath a Revkin post about cruise-liners:


    Useful? No. But there they are.


  5. He’s front and center in Heartland’s list of NIPCC fans:

    Endorsements of NIPCC and
    Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science

    “I fully support the efforts of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) and publication of its latest report, Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science, to help the general public to understand the reality of global climate change.”

    Kumar Raina
    Former Deputy Director General
    Geological Survey of India

    “Climate Change Reconsidered II fulfills an important role in countering the IPCC part by part, highlighting crucial things they ignore such as the Little Ice Age and the recovery (warming) which began in 1800-1850. Superimposed on that recovery, there is a prominent multi-decadal oscillation. These can explain much of climate change from 1800, including the fact that the warming has halted from 2000, phenomena the IPCC reports do not properly cover. In contrast to the IPCC, which often ignores evidence of past changes, the authors of the NIPCC report recognize that climatology requires studying past changes to infer future changes.”

    Syun-Ichi Akasofu
    Founding Director & Professor of Physics Emeritus
    International Arctic Research Center
    University of Alaska Fairbanks

    “I was glad to see that a new report was coming from the NIPCC. The work of this group of scientists to present the evidence for natural climate warming and climate change is an essential counter-balance to the biased reporting of the IPCC. They have brought to focus a range of peer-reviewed publications showing that natural forces have in the past and continue today to dominate the climate signal. Considering the recent evidence that climate models have failed to predict the flattening of the global temperature curve, and that global warming seems to have ended some 15 years ago, the work of the NIPCC is particularly important.”

    Ian ClarkDepartment of Earth Sciences
    University of Ottawa, Canada

    “The CCR-II report correctly explains that most of the reports on global warming and its impacts on sea-level rise, ice melts, glacial retreats, impact on crop production, extreme weather events, rainfall changes, etc. have not properly considered factors such as physical impacts of human activities, natural variability in climate, lopsided models used in the prediction of production estimates, etc. There is a need to look into these phenomena at local and regional scales before sensationalization of global warming-related studies.”

    S. Jeevananda Reddy
    Former Chief Technical Advisor
    United Nations World Meteorological Organization

    “NIPCC’s CCR-II report should open the eyes of world leaders who have fallen prey to the scandalous climate dictates by the IPCC. People are already suffering the consequences of sub-prime financial instruments. Let them not suffer more from IPCC’s sub-prime climate science and models. That is the stark message of the NIPCC’s CCR-II report.”

    M. I. Bhat
    Formerly Professor and Head
    Department of Geology and Geophysics
    University of Kashmir


  6. Is that initial “S” real? Maybe he’s related to S. Fred Singer.

    Or maybe it’s like how all the Red Lectroids have the first name “John”.


  7. Open Letter to IPCC/UNFCCC/WMO/UN

    Sub: Comments on IPCC’s 24th September 2019 Report on “The Ocean and Cryosphere in a changing climate: Summary for Policy makers”

    From: Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy Hyderabad/TS/India/28-9-2019

    Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released on 24th September 2019, the 3rd Special Report “The Ocean and Cryosphere in changing climate: Summary for Policy Makers” [SROCC]. The 1st one refers to “Global Warming of 1.5 oC” [SR1.5] and the 2nd one refer to “Climate Change and Land” [SRCCL]. I submitted my comments on the 2nd report [Reddy, 2019a]. The 2nd and the 3rd are primarily the hypothetical outcome from the 1st report only, which is clear from ‘A1 – A3’.
    Earth’s climate is dynamic and it is always changing through the natural cycles. What we are experiencing now is part of this system only. It is beyond human control. We need to adapt to them [Reddy, 1993 & 2019b, c & d]. The fact is: global warming is not climate change but it is only small component of climate change [Reddy, 2008 & 2016].

    A1: Over the last decades, global warming has led to widespread shrinking of the cryosphere, with mass loss from ice sheets and glaciers (very high Confidence), reductions in snow cover (high Confidence), and thickness (very high Confidence), and increased permafrost temperature (very high Confidence).

    The inferences were made using model based “HOAX” Projections that are far from reality. This is not new, IPCC in its AR4 concluded that “Himalayan Glaciers will melt by 2035”

    [I apologise for the editorial interpolation. Since this post is about you, I can hardly object to a long comment, but in case naive readers should be mislead I do need to interject at least a small amount of reality; I think that

    * Himalayan glaciers to disappear by… when?
    * IPCC use of non-peer reviewed material?
    * Anatomy of IPCC’s Mistake on Himalayan Glaciers and Year 2035

    should be of interest -W.]

    and Al Gore concluded in his Inconvenient Truth that “Greenland would become ice free in 5 years”. We questioned these conclusions. R. K. Pachauri, the then Chairman of IPCC, dismissed the criticism, claim it as “voodoo science”. While this is going on IPCC & Al Gore jointly received Nobel Prize. After this event, both these conclusions were withdrawn by apologizing. IPCC says that the Himalayan Glaciers won’t melt by 2035 & expressed regret by saying that established standards of evidence not applied properly.
    According to a 2013 IPCC report “glaciers have continued to shrink almost worldwide” [about 8 out of 10 Chance] that Northern Hemisphere spring snow continues to decrease. Reddy (2016) discussed some of the results of different scientific groups. In 2014 a study of 2, 181 Himalayan glaciers from 2000-2011 showed that 86.6% of the glaciers were not receding [this was also informed to Indian Parliament by the minister of forests & environment and climate change after his return from Paris meet in December 2015]. Heavy snowfall was reported in the latter two years in Himalayan zone.
    There are several local and regional causes for ice melt [Reddy, 2016]. In Arctic and Antarctic zones in addition there are several other activities like drilling for gas and oil and Earthquakes and volcano eruptions affect the ice melting or ice destruction. Also, natural cyclic variation plays the major role on sea ice extent over Arctic and Antarctic and thus on sea level rise or fall. They presented high seasonal variations — summer to winter — & annual patterns around the mean. Such variations of Arctic and Antarctic present opposite patterns similar to Atlantic and Pacific oceans temperature cyclic variations [Reddy, 2008, 2016 & 2019b]. Geological Survey of India monitoring few important glaciers in Himalayan region. Gangotri, is one of them, feed the main river Ganga. Due to formation of fault zone the ice started receding and now it started recovering. These are factual localized conditions but the present IPCC report talks of confidence limits based on poor quality model assessments based on the projected global warming.
    India Meteorological Department (IMD) brought out a meteorological monograph on “State level climate change trends in India” [Rathore, et al., 2013]. The report used 280 met stations data and 1451 rain-gauge stations data out of 500 and 2500 stations respectively for 48 years – 1951 to 2010, which forms the so-called global warming period. Annual mean temperature trend was zero in major part of central India. Even in other parts, some showed positive (increasing) trend and some others showed negative (decreasing) trend. The basic problem here is that majority of the met stations selected for the temperature analysis are from urban areas wherein urban-heat-island effect contributes to positive side. Average number of days per station in each year reaching or exceeding 100 oF in 982 stations of the USHCN data base (NOAA/NCEI, prepared by J.R. Christy) during 1895 to 2014 in US showed the highest around 1935.
    The Sun emits energy, which is constant, present a natural cyclic pattern in association with the Sunspots cycle. Sun’s energy reaching the ground [global solar radiation – short wave part] and balance after the Earth’s emittance of absorbed radiation [net radiation – longwave part] present the Sunspot cycle [Reddy et al., 1977]. They are 10.5±0.5 years and its multiples. Global annual average temperature anomaly presents 60-year cycle. After separating the natural variability {varying from -0.3 to +0.3 oC} from trend {0.3 oC per century or 1951 to 2100 is 0.45 oC} [WMO (1966); Reddy (2008)]. Unlike model projections presented by IPCC in its report they are far far less. This is with adjusted data series. Also IPCC in its reports showed decreasing trend in climate sensitivity factor [1.95 to 1.55] which indirectly suggests that the global warming component from 1951 to 2100 is practically zero or insignificant to influence nature.
    The rainfall data used present misleading results basically because it is a truncated data set of cyclic variation data series. To answer a question raised in Indian Parliament Indian scientists used one 60 year cycle data – Sine Curve of high to low – and said Indian rainfall is decreasing. If they would have shifted backward or forward by 30 years the trend would have shown increasing trend. All-India annual average rainfall presented 60-year cycle and thus Indian rainfall follows the natural variability with no significant trend [Reddy, 2019e & f]. These patterns influence temperature and thus the selected temperature period plays vital role on conclusions. Nobody bothers on this vital aspect.

    In ‘A2’ the report talks of — marine heat waves (frequency & intensity) —-, and in ‘A3’ the report talks of —- sea level rise. Also the report says that “Increases in tropical cyclones winds and rainfall, and increases in extreme waves, combined with relative sea level ice, exacerbate extreme sea level events and coastal hazards —.

    Reddy & Rao (1978) presented heat & cold wave phenomenon in India. The high pressure belt condition around Nagpur drives the western disturbances in summer and winter around Indian regions. They vary with year to year; zone to zone. Here the general circulation pattern existing at that time plays the major role.
    The coastal zone on the east coast has been destroyed to meet the human greed, under the disguise of tourism, commercial establishments within the SEZ zones that were encouraged by government’s environment ministry — Today a report presented that on the orders of Supreme Court of India illegally built structures in SEZ zone were demolished in Koch zone. The major casualty is destruction of mangroves that causes coastal erosion under high tides as this zone is prone to frequent cyclonic activity. Also, aqua culture farms also affecting the coastal zone in terms of erosion and polluting the coastal waters. Today’s Deccan Chronicle (Vizag Edition) of 26-9-2019 presented a report “Earth is running out of time: Intellectuals”. Above the text presented a photograph “Plastic waste accumulates on the shore near Lawson’s Bay in Visakhapatnam on Thursday”. This is the scenario that is affecting the life in the coastal waters in terms of quantity and quality. This is creating livelihood problem to fisherman. Coastal waters have been polluted with urban sewage, industrial effluents, etc. Mangroves provide shelter to rich sea food and as well act as protective wall to stop tidal fury. Here the basic problem is human greed and not fictitious global warming.
    Reddy (2018) presented the historical data on Texas major hurricane landfalls and western gulf of Mexico sea surface temperature, major land falling hurricanes in Florida since 1900; sea level rise at stations along the Gulf coast, etc. Over the last 150 years, the number of major hurricanes hitting Texas has been the same when Gulf of Mexico water temperatures were below normal or when they were above normal. Land subsidence has been creating sea level rise syndrome. For example it is seen along the Gulf coast due to several human greed related actions and natural phenomenon.
    Reddy (2000) studied Andhra Pradesh rainfall. The annual march of southwest monsoon and northeast monsoon rainfall for the coastal Andhra met sub-division presented reverse mirror images for the two seasons, though the magnitude in mm differs. They followed 56-year cycle but in opposite direction – similar to 60-year cycle in Atlantic Ocean and Pacific Ocean temperatures –. The frequency of occurrence of cyclonic activity in Bay of Bengal followed the southwest monsoon 56 year cyclic patterns with mean as 10 [Reddy, 2016].
    The report observed that “Climate change is likely to mean monsoon systems affect larger areas over longer timescales, and rainfall during monsoon season is likely to intensify while becoming less predictable. The largest effect, which is already being observed today, is an increase in the year-to-year variability of the monsoon strength and the associated extremes of rainfall”. This statement is not based on factual information but based on hypothetical imagination. Reddy (1993 & 2019b) presented the natural variability in rainfall and adaptation of agriculture to these over different parts of the globe. Here the basic problem is, misusing of the word “climate change” as de-facto global warming. See for more information Reddy (2019 b, c, d, e &f).


    The IPCC special report on the 1.5 oC goal, for example, said it was possible to keep the rise in temperature to within 1.5 oC, but for that the world would need to bring down its greenhouse gas emissions to half of its 2010 levels by 2030, and to net zero by 2050. — Some countries have already announced their intention to achieve this target, but the most prominent emitters China, US, India have so far not done so. Yet, with this scenario Indian temperature presented heterogeneous pattern, some areas showed no change, some areas showed decreasing trend and some other areas showed increasing trend. Here we must remember the fact that majority of the met stations selected were in urban areas and thus urban-heat-island effect contaminates the temperature data. The intensive irrigated agriculture growth in Punjab and Haryana impacted by cold-island effect. The central Indian regions were affected by both. Even with number three in CO2 emission scenario [after China & US] there is no uniformity in temperature trend in India – same can be seen in Southern and Northern Hemispheres. That means whether you control emissions or not temperature trends were controlled by several other localized factors. Same is the case with US and China.
    The report was built on the false foundations, such as “There is already a lot of irrefutable scientific evidence to suggest that human activities have been altering climate in a way that would have disastrous consequences for the planet.” Though it is true but it is not due to global warming but due to direct intervention of humans on nature. For example, if we destroy the water flow system, flood intensities and frequencies will increase. This is a fact with urban flooding – in Mumbai, Chennai, Hyderabad, Srinagar, Uttakhand, etc. [Reddy, 2019f]. The important feature is Western Ghats: on wind-ward side heavy rains occur and on lee-ward side less rains [rain shadow zone]. But this is modified by cyclonic activity in Bay of Bengal. So, if Western Ghats are destroyed the whole rain system collapses and thus the temperature pattern.
    The report says that the frequencies of extreme El Nino and La Nina events are the Pacific Ocean is likely to increase in the coming years that could possibly result in more intense wet or dry periods in India. This is erroneous conclusion (Reddy, 1993 & 2019b, c, d, e & f) as Indian rainfall follows natural cyclic pattern but varies with region and so is the case around the Globe. During 126 years [1880-2006] : Out of the 18 El Nino years, deficit in 7 years, below normal in 5 years, normal in 5 years and 1 year excess rainfall was received. Out of 24 La Nina years, 10 years received excess rains, 7 years above normal and 7 years normal. In 84 normal years [without El Nino or La Nina], 37 years received normal rainfall, 13 years below normal, 14 years deficit, 14 years above normal and 6 years excess. In 126 years, deficit rainfall was recorded in 21 years; excess rainfall was recorded in 17 years; and normal rainfall in 49 years. The excess and deficit years followed natural cycles.
    It also pointed out that the global food system, which would include activities such as agriculture, cattle-rearing, food processing industry, energy consumed in these processes, and transportation of food items, could account for as much as a third of all greenhouse gases. It said nearly 25 per cent of all food produced globally was either lost or wasted. And even the decomposition of waste food released emissions. I myself presented food-waste in India [radio talk in 2011] is around 30-40% and thus the inputs used to produce that [FAO reported this as 30% for the globe] (Reddy, 2019c). This does not consume energy. It is due to non-availability of storage facilities, unusual weather events, etc. But, IPCC forgot the major component of energy waste – IT sector and Multinational Companies agriculture technology which in addition created air, water, land and food pollution and thus health hazards and thus pollution due to drug manufacturing industries-hospitals and the vicious circle moves on. Stan Cox’s book of “Sick Planet: —“, highlighted this issue. Paris 2015 Agreement did not include these vital aspects [only temperature was included] in the Agreement document with MNCs lobbying even after Pope Francis, US President and as well UN Secretary General emphasised this aspect. Even in 60-70s environmental movement on pollution [carbon dioxide is not a pollution – we breathe air and use oxygen and release carbon dioxide] side lined with fictitious global warming with very poor quality data set at Rio Summit.
    With the human greed and apathy from governments caused the destruction of coastal belts and polluted the shore lines that affected the sea life in India.

    Few Suggestions for Consideration

    Here are few suggestions to UN:
    • IPCC must be disbanded and the money spent for IPCC may be transferred to upliftment of downtrodden people in developing countries.
    • Also, UN must think on how to bring down the population growth and how to save energy. One of this is urban planning.
    • Give top priority to bring down pollution [air, water, land & food].
    Here are few suggestions for India:
    • India should dump the “GARBAGE” reports of IPCC which are speculative that create fear psychosis among public and use this to get billions of dollars.
    • It is clear from IMD monograph that there is no global warming threat to India.
    • FLOODS, DROUGHTS, HEAT-WAVES & COLD-WAVES were there in the past, are there now and will be there in future. However, they vary with location to region (Reddy, 2019d & e). The Paris agreement has no role on these.
    1. Reddy, S.J., 2019a: “Comments on IPCC’s 7th August 2019 Report on “Climate Change and Land”, Acta Scientific Agriculture, 3.9 (2019):147-150.
    2. Reddy, S.J., 1993: ‘Agroclimatic/Agrometeorological Techniques: As applicable to Dry-land Agriculture in Developing Countries’, (JCT, Secunderabad, India), 205p – Book Review appeared in Agric. For. Meteorol., 67, pp. 325-327 (1994) — http://www.scribd.com/.Google Books.
    3. Reddy, S.J., 2019b: ‘Agroclimatic/Agrometeorological Techniques: As applicable to Dry-land Agriculture in Developing Countries [2nd Edition]’, “Brillion Publishing”, New Delhi, 372p.
    4. Reddy, S.J., 2019c: “Workable Green Revolution: Agriculture in the perspective of Climate Change”, Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 221p (2019).
    5. Reddy, S.J., 2019d: “Water Resources Availability in India”, Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 224p.
    6. Reddy, S.J., 2008: “Climate Change: Myths & Realities”, http://www.scribd.com/Google Books, 205p.
    7. Reddy, S.J., 2016. Climate Change and its Impacts: Ground Realities. BS Publications, Hyderabad, India, 276p.
    8. Rathore, L.S., Atri, S.D. & Jaswal, A.K., 2013: “State level climate change trends in India”, Meteorological Monograph No. ESSO/IMD/EMRC/02/2013, Government of India, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Earth System Science Organization, India Meteorological Department.
    9. Reddy, S.J., Juneja, O.A. & Lahore, S.N. (Miss), 1977: “Power spectral analysis of total and net radiation intensities”, Indian Journal of Radio and Space Physics, 6:60-66.
    10. WMO [World Meteorological Organizations], 1966: “Climate Change”, Tech. Note 79, Prepared by J.M.Mitchel, et al., Genewa, Switzerland, 81pp.
    11. Reddy, S.J., 2019e: “Climate Change and it’s Impacts on Water Availability in Rivers and Crop Productivity”, Acta Scientific Agriculture, 3.10 (2019):155-163.
    12. Reddy, S.J., 2019f: “Climate change & Urbanization: a threat for urban flooding & water quality”, Invited Talk presented at All India Seminar on “Water and Sanitation Management”, on the occasion of Centenary celebrations of IEI, March 19-20, 2019, Hyderabad, pages:xxv-xxxvi.
    13. Reddy, S.J. & Rao, G.S.P., 1978: “A method of forecasting the weather associated with western disturbances”, Indian J. Meteorol. Hydrol. Gephys., 29:515-520.
    14. Reddy, S.J., 2018. Role of Climate Change on Recent Weather Disasters. Acta Scientific Agriculture 2.4: 22-29.
    15. Reddy, S.J., 2000: “Andhra Pradesh Agriculture: Scenario of the last four decades”, 104p.

    Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
    Chief Technical Advisor – WMO/UN & Expert – FAO/UN
    Fellow, Telangana Academy of Sciences
    Convenor Forum for a Sustainable Environment


  8. Latest publications by Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy, Agro-meteorologist

    List of Books:

    1. Reddy, S.J., (2016): Climate Change and its Impacts: Ground Realities. BS Publications, Hyderabad, India, 276p.
    2. Reddy, S.J., (2016): Irrigation and irrigation projects in India: Tribunals, disputes and water wars perspective, BS Publications, Hyderabad, India, 154p.
    3. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Agroclimatic/Agrometeorological Techniques: As applicable to Dry-land Agriculture in Developing Countries [2nd Edition]. Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 372p.
    4. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Workable Green Revolution: Agriculture in the perspective of Climate Change. Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 221p.
    5. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Water Resources Availability over India. Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 224p.
    6. Reddy, S.J., (2020): Agrometeorology: An answer to climate crisis. Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 235p.

    List of Journal Publications [online]

    1. Reddy, S.J., (2013): Impacts of pollution on environment: Myths and Realities, Compendium, Platinum Jubilee Celebrations of Andhra Pradesh State Centre (1838-2013), The Institute of Engineers (India):9-16.
    2. Reddy, S.J., (2014): Water-logging and water productivity in Agriculture, Proc. 4th International Conference on ‘Hydrology and Watershed Management [ICHWAM-2014], 2:683-692.
    3. Reddy, S.J., (2017): Food & nutrition security versus pollution & climate change. Adv Plants Agric Res. 6(2):43-47
    4. Reddy, S.J., (2017): Role of Pollution and Climate Change in Food and Nutrition Security, Acta Scientific Agriculture, 1(4) (2017): 24-30 [Prospective Survey].
    5. Reddy, S.J., (2017): Role of Climate Change on Tropical Storms-Hurricanes-Typhoons, Proc. National Conference on “Sustainable Water and Environmental Management” [SWEM-2017], 21-23 December 2017, Hyderabad, India, BSPublication, Hyderabad, (2017): 60-78 [KEYNOTE].
    6. Reddy, S.J., (2018): Role of climate change on recent weather disasters. Acta Scientific Agriculture, 2.4:22-29 [Research Article].
    7. Reddy, S.J., (2018): Fallacies’ in Studies of Global Warming vs Agriculture. Acta Scientific Agriculture, 2.8:33-39 [Mini Review]
    8. Reddy, S.J., (2018): Urban water Management for sustainable development: The role of “climate change and Human interference”. Acta Scientific Agriculture, 2.10:43-53 [Review Article].
    9. Reddy, S.J., (2018): Environmental issues and disaster management. Open Acc J Envi Soi Sci, 1(3):70-72 (Opinion).
    10. Reddy, S.J., (2019): For a Workable “Green” Green Revolution: A Framework. Acta Scientific Agriculture, 3.3:11-25 [Research Article].
    11. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Water Availability at Macro to Micro Level: Role of Climate Change. Acta Scientific Agriculture, 3.7:210-217 [Research Article]
    12. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Comments on IPCC’s 7th August 2019 Report on “Climate Change and Land”. Acta Scientific Agriculture 3.9: 147-150 [Letter to Editor].
    13. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Climate Change and its Impact on Water Availability in Rivers and Crop Productivity. Acta Scientific Agriculture 3.10: 155-163 [Review Article].
    14. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Comments on IPCC’s 24th September 2019 Report on “The Ocean and Cryosphere in a changing climate: Summary for Policy makers”. Acta Scientific Agriculture, 3.11: 16-19 [Letter to Editor].
    15. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Climate Change and Urbanization: a threat for urban flooding and water quality”, Invited Talk presented at All India Seminar on “Water and sanitation Management”, on the occasion of Centenary Celebrations of IEI.
    16. Reddy, S.J., (2020): Air Pollution, Heat Island and Global Warming: An Urban Scenario. Acta Scientific Agriculture, 4.1:56-63 [Review Article].
    17. Reddy, S.J., (2020): Post-Mortem Over Precautionary Principle: A Hazardous Policy. Acta Scientific Agriculture, 4.4:01-01a [Guest Editorial].
    18. Reddy, S.J., (2020): Nature has its Own Ways!!! Acta Scientific Agriculture, 4.5:01-02 [Guest Editorial].
    19. Reddy, S.J., (2020): Myths and Realities of Indian Monsoon (Onset and Rainfall) Forecasts. Acta Scientific Agriculture, 4.6:01-02 [Guest Editorial].
    20. Reddy, S.J., (2020): Indian Temperature Scenario: “No Global Warming Trend”, Op Acc J Bio Sci & Res 1(1) – 2020, 6pp. [Research Article].
    Seminar Presentations
    1. Reddy, S.J., (2017): Role of Climate Change on “Tropical Storms-Hurricanes-Typhoons”. Proc. National Conf. on Sustainable Water and Environmental Management (SWEM – 2017), JNTUH, Hyderabad, 60-78pp. [Keynote]
    2. Reddy, S.J., (2018): Water Availability in Indian Rivers: Myths & Realities. Proc. 5th National Conference on Water, Environment & Society (NCWES – 2018), Hyderabad, India, JNTUH, 22-42p [Keynote].
    3. Reddy, S.J., (2018): Water Scarcity – Possible Water Wars in Future. One-Day Seminar on “Water Scarcity – Possible Water Wars in Future”, IEI, Hyderabad, 9-10p [Invited Talk].
    4. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Climate Change & Urbanization: A Threat for Urban “Flooding & Water Quality”. Proc. All India Seminar on “Water and Sanitation Management” on the occasion of Centenary Celebrations of IEI, Hyderabad, xxv-xxxvi pp [Invited Talk].
    5. Reddy, S.J., (2019): Urban Flooding: [The Role of Urbanization & Climate Change]. Proc. 6th National Conference on Water, Environment & Society (NCWES – 2018), [BS Publications, Hyderabad], JNTUH, 3-21pp [Keynote].


  9. A note on “Climate Change & Global Warming vs Climate Crisis”

    Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
    Formerly Chief Technical Advisor – WMO/UN & Expert – FAO/UN
    Fellow, Telangana Academy of Sciences [Founder Member]
    Fellow, Andhra Pradesh Akademy of Sciences
    Convenor, Forum for a Sustainable Environment
    Hyderabad, TS, India

    All ills of the society have been talked as “climate crisis” that was linked to global warming. We see in media thousands of such reports daily. However, the word “climate change” is used either as an adjective or as a de-facto Global Warming.
    Climate is the average weather pattern at a place. In most places, weather can change from minute-to-minute, hour-to-hour, day-to-day, season-to-season and year to year. Earth’s climate is dynamic and it is always changing through natural cycles. With modern civilization population growing uninterrupted way that introduced another dimension in the changes in climate. World Meteorological Organization (WMO) of United Nations in Geneva/Switzerland brought out a manual in 1966 on “Climate Change” in which methods were proposed to separate these changes in climate. This was prepared by eminent meteorologists from meteorological departments around the world. However, climate refers to all meteorological parameters, more particularly related to rainfall, temperature and radiation from the Sun & the Earth. I, myself, studied these starting from early 1970s.
    The IPCC’s Third Assessment Report [also by UNFCCC] defined “climate change” as “statistically significant variation in either the mean state of the climate or in its variability, persisting for an extended period. Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forcings or to persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in the land use”. Therefore, climate change can occur naturally or from man-made causes.
    Natural variability consists of irregular variations that include intra-seasonal & intra-annual variations; and systematic or rhythmic variations expressed by fluctuations or cyclic variations of different durations. These were studied by several scientists including myself using WMO manual (Reddy, 1993 & 2019). Current wet period in Beira in Mozambique and current dry period in Durban in South Africa were predicted. Agriculture and water resources availability follow these [droughts & floods].
    The man induced variations have two parts, namely changes through greenhouse effect and non-greenhouse effect. According to IPCC’s AR5, 1951 is the starting year for global warming. Also, more than half of long term trend in global average annual temperature is greenhouse effect and less than half is non-greenhouse effect. It is a qualitative statement.
    The non-greenhouse effect relates to changes in land use and land cover. They cover urban heat island effect [in fact in 1818 a book was published based on London Temperature changes] and rural cold island effect (coined by me) that cover irrigated agriculture and artificial water spread areas [dams, lakes, etc.]. In the case of former, met stations present dense coverage and later space coverage. That means warm conditions over-emphasized and cold conditions under-emphasized in averaging of temperature. This was reflected in satellite data that presented lower than the adjusted surface data series with little trend (Reddy, 2008). However, satellite data was withdrawn from the internet and released new data series that match with adjusted surface temperature data series.
    The greenhouse effect includes global warming and impact of aerosols from volcanic eruptions. If we assume that 50% of the total trend as global warming, then let us see an example:
    The global [land & Ocean] temperature data of 1880 to 2010, following WMO 1966 methodology separated. From the trend line it is clear that by 2100, the global [land & ocean] temperature may raise to 1.30oC from 1880. That is in 220 years the rise is 1.30oC; this is around 0.6oC per century. Thus, global warming component is 50% of 0.6oC is 0.3oC per century or 0.45oC for 1951 to 2100 (for 150 years). That means global warming may be 0.45oC by 2100 under the linear trend.
    To provide inputs to the coming IPCC’s “AR6 Report” on global warming, institutions around the world have been burning midnight oil by two different types of groups, namely (a) statistical approach using observed data [ground & satellites]; and (b) hypothetical model simulations. Ministry of Earth Sciences of India presented for India: observed trend is 0.7oC for 120 years & modelled trend = 2.7 (best case scenario) to 4.4oC (worst case scenario) by 2100. Thus, global warming respectively is 0.3oC per century or 0.45oC by 2100 – it is the same for global average — and 1.35 to 2.2oC by 2100. According to the model predictions Paris Agreement limit has already crossed. Also, day-to-day, season to season, year to year variations in temperature presents very high variations when compared to such variations.
    In nature trend can’t be linear as the other main input Sun’s energy is constant which is modulated by natural variations associated with sunspot cycles. However, it is modified by local “soil-climate system” and also there are several other factors affecting the trend. The USA raw temperature data has no trend but the global adjusted data has a trend by lowering the starting period. The hottest daily maximum temperature data of Sydney in Australia has also no trend, but has a natural variability – adjusted data series showed 60-year cycle varying between -0.3 and +0.3oC, which will play an important role on year or moth reports. Such inaccurate data are being used in legal battles and as well by financial institutions; “climate crisis” is attributed to such global warming estimates. Unfortunately in USA Presidential Elections are being fought on such issues by planning to spend trillions of $ forgetting the major issue of pollution [air, water, soil & food]. However agrometeorological studies could help in overcoming climate crisis if any in agriculture & water resources use. .
    Temperature is a highly localized/regionalised. Several local conditions define the temperature regime, for example “Climate System” as defined by IPCC in its AR5, General Circulation patterns – for example Western Disturbances define heat & cold waves in India; circumpolar vortex formation at higher latitudes in USA, etc.
    Carbon Dioxide (CO2) presents a nearly linear increase with the population since 1960. Greenhouse effect if any associated with CO2, it must be far lower in SH compared to NH in proportion to CO2 levels in the respective hemispheres. Urban-heat-island effect must be far higher in NH over that of SH in proportion to urban areas in the respective hemispheres. Rural-cold-island effect follows area under agriculture, more particularly irrigated areas. In India and China have the same amount of areas under irrigation, though China is three times larger than India. Thus, the use of the word “global warming” a misnomer.
    In Bay of Bengal & Arabian Sea higher number of severe cyclonic storms occurred in both warm and cold seasons [May in pre-monsoon Season and November in Post-monsoon Season] with wide temperature difference. Same is the case with storms in USA [summer & winter]. Thus, temperature magnitude is not the driving force behind the formation of cyclonic storms in general but it is the temperature gradient similar to Sea-breeze, Land breeze, Lake Breeze, etc. They determine the wind speed & direction.
    The south-eastern part of India receives rainfall in both the SWM and the NEM monsoon seasons. They present 56-year cycle but in opposite direction. If in one rainfall present increasing trend and the other show decreasing trend. Similar pattern is also seen in Australian rainfall [summer & winter] but needs to be looked in to the cyclic variation issue. The cyclonic activity in Bay of Bengal follows the 56-year cycle of SWM – during above the average 28 year period, the numbers of cyclones were more than 10 per year and in below the average 28 year period they were < 10 per year; etc. It is part of natural phenomenon. This is science!


    Reddy, S.J., (1993): Agroclimatic/Agrometeorological Techniques: As applicable to Dry-land Agriculture in Developing Countries, http://www.scribd.com/Google Books, 205p; Book Review appeared in Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 67 (1994):325-327.
    Reddy, S.J., (2008): Climate Change: Myths & Realities, http://www.scribd.com/Google Books, 176.
    Reddy, S.J., (2019): Agroclimatic/Agrometeorological Techniques: As applicable to Dry-land Agriculture in Developing Countries [2nd Edition]. Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 372p.
    Reddy, S.J., (2020): AGROMETEOROLOGY An Answer to Climate Crisis, Brillion Publishing, New Delhi, 242p.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s