They – the scientific ‘experts’, power-obsessed politicians, globalist elites, the useful idiots, and the UNreliables grifters were wrong, while you were right, all along.
The world recently witnessed how alarmist, Imperial College COVID-19 model predictions inspired mass-global-hysteria, leading to overreaching and draconian (global) government ‘health’ edicts with the resulting economic, social and mental health fallout arguably far worse than the disease itself.
Now, the world is finally being told the truth about the 32+ “cooked” UN IPCC climate models that have single-handedly driven the most egregious and costly pseudoscientific campaign of fear and alarmism ever perpetrated upon mankind.
Relentless mainstream-media-driven hysteria, based on biased UN model predictions, has fuelled a relentless tidal wave of unhinged activism, devouring; every last respectable public institution, otherwise intelligent minds, and worst of all, the taxpayer’s hard-earned-money at a rate of 1.4 trillion dollars per year, or 4.5 billion dollars per day, according to a 2015 article by Climate Change Journal.
However, have cooler heads finally prevailed from, of all places, the head of the most ‘revered’ and influential of all the many taxpayer funded ‘climate’ institutions?
This weeks bombshell climate-model-mea-culpa delivered by none other than the head of NASA (GISS) Climate, Gavin Schmidt, a chief architect of global-climate-alarmism.
Read it and weep, climate crazies.
(Climatism bolds)
•
Leading climate scientists conceded that models used to estimate how much the world will warm with rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are running too hot.
“It’s become clear over the last year or so that we can’t avoid this,” Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, told Science magazine.
The admission is seen as a significant development by scientists who argue that not enough attention has been paid to natural cycles in the earth’s climate.
It puts another question mark over the use of the most extreme scenarios generated by models, RCP8.5, to estimate what could be expected in a warming world.
The concession has been made on the eve of this month’s release of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s report on the science of climate change.
That report, delayed a year because of Covid-19, is due to be released on August 9 and will outline what can be expected with different levels of warming.
It will play a major role in preparations for the upcoming climate change summit in Glasgow, Scotland, in November.
A Science article published this week said climate scientists faced the alarming reality that “climate models that help them project the future have grown a little too alarmist”.
“Many of the world’s leading models are now projecting warming rates that most scientists, including the model makers themselves, believe are implausibly fast”, the article said.
“In advance of the UN report, scientists have scrambled to understand what went wrong and how to turn the models, which in other respects are more powerful and trustworthy than their predecessors, into useful guidance for policymakers.”
In the past, most models projected a “climate sensitivity” – the warming expected when atmospheric carbon dioxide is doubled over pre-industrial times – of between 2C and 4.5C.
Last year, a landmark paper that used documented factors including ongoing warming trends calculated a likely climate sensitivity of between 2.6C and 3.9C but many of the new models from leading centres showed warming of more than 5C – uncomfortably outside these bounds.
The models were also out of step with records of past climate.
According to Science, the IPCC team will probably use reality – the actual warming of the world over the past few decades – to constrain model projections.
The IPCC report is also likely to present the impacts of different amounts of warming – 2C, 3C, 4C – rather than saying how quickly those impacts will be felt.
Steve Sherwood from the UNSW Climate Change Research Centre said “while it is true some new climate models have surprising climate sensitivities and predict very high future warming, what doesn’t always come through is that most new models have sensitivity values within the range estimated from observations”.
“Those models still predict substantial future weather and climate changes due to carbon dioxide, similar to predictions made by the science community for many years,” Professor Sherwood said.
US climate scientist Judith Curry said the IPCC report would certainly discuss the problem with climate models: “The elephant in the room for the IPCC is they are heavily relying on RCP8.5 emissions scenarios, which are now widely regarded as implausible.”
Michael Asten, an expert reviewer of the IPCC’s AR6 report, said the admission that climate models were running hot was a significant concession.
Graham Lloyd is a fearless reporter of all sides of the environment debate. A former night editor, chief editorial writer and deputy business editor with The Australian, Graham has held senior positions nationa… Read more
“As you know, I’m not political. If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn’t being political, it is being selfish.” – Phil Jones (Uni East Anglia CRU Head)
“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations
on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”
– Prof. Chris Folland,
Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
THE “Hottest Year Ever” meme is just one in a long line of propaganda tools used by the Climate Crisis Industry to make you believe that the 1°C rise in global temperature since the end of the Little Ice Age – around 1880 – is “unprecedented” and will bring chaos to wildlife, humans and the planet.
HOW much of these claims are scientific, versus propaganda designed to heighten alarm around the agenda of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW), is the centre of much conjecture and debate.
OF particular concern is how a handful of government climate ‘scientists’ have ‘homogenised’ the official surface-based temperature records to land us in the costly, hot mess we face today.
*
SATELLITES Vs THERMOMETERS?
*
ATMOSPHERIC SATELLITES
NASA’s 15 MSU and AMSU satellites generate the RSS and UAH datasets, which measure the average temperature of every cubic inch of the lower troposphere, the exact place where global warming climate change theory is meant to occur.
MEARS’ objectivity towards the business of global temperature data collection and reporting can be found in his commentary on his website, whilst making his global-warmist intentions clear by unleashing the groupthink pejorative “denialist” – in distasteful reference to NAZI holocaust denial…
MEARS then published a paper claiming that new and improved ‘adjustments’ had “found” that missing warming.
Mears, C., and F. Wentz, 2016: Sensitivity of satellite-derived tropospheric temperature trends to the diurnal cycle adjustment. J. Climate. doi:10.1175/JCLID- 15-0744.1, in press.
FOR the purpose of this post, we’ll look at the untampered UAH (University Alabama Huntsville) satellite data set run byDr. John R. Christy – Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville, and Roy Spencer Ph.D. – Principal Research Scientist at UAH.
SPENCER comments on the divergence between RSS and UAH post “adjustment”:
“We have a paper in peer review with extensive satellite dataset comparisons to many balloon datasets and reanalyses. These show that RSS diverges from these and from UAH, showing more warming than the other datasets between 1990 and 2002 – a key period with two older MSU sensors both of which showed signs of spurious warming not yet addressed by RSS. I suspect the next chapter in this saga is that the remaining radiosonde datasets that still do not show substantial warming will be the next to be “adjusted” upward.
The bottom line is that we still trust our methodology. But no satellite dataset is perfect, there are uncertainties in all of the adjustments, as well as legitimate differences of opinion regarding how they should be handled.
Also, as mentioned at the outset, both RSS and UAH lower tropospheric trends are considerably below the average trends from the climate models.
GLOBAL atmospheric temperatures continue their rapid decline off the record heights of the 2015/16 super El Niño, despite record and rising CO2 emissions.
UAH global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for December, 2018 was +0.25°C above the 40-year average:
Our planet has just experienced the most extreme two-year cooling event in a century. But where have you seen this reported anywhere in the mainstream media?
You haven’t, even though the figures are pretty spectacular. As Aaron Brown reports hereat Real Clear Markets:
From February 2016 to February 2018 (the latest month available) global average temperatures dropped 0.56°C. You have to go back to 1982-84 for the next biggest two-year drop, 0.47°C—also during the global warming era. All the data in this essay come from GISTEMP Team, 2018: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP). NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (dataset accessed 2018-04-11 at https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/). This is the standard source used in most journalistic reporting of global average temperatures.
The 2016-18 Big Chill was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average. February 2018 was colder than February 1998.
To put this temperature drop in context, consider that this is enough to offset by more than half the entirety of the global warming the planet has experienced since the end of the 19th century.
BY their own admission, the ocean data is also fake.
date: Wed Apr 15 14:29:03 2009
from: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk> subject: Re: Fwd: Re: contribution to RealClimate.org
to: Thomas Crowley <thomas.crowley@ed.ac.uk>
Tom,
The issue Ray alludes to is that in addition to the issue
of many more drifters providing measurements over the last
5-10 years, the measurements are coming in from places where
we didn’t have much ship data in the past. For much of the SH between 40 and 60S the normals are mostly made up as there is very little ship data there.
NOW it’s time to see how NASA GISS (Gavin Schmidt) and NOAA (Tom Karl) have created the ‘hockey-stick’ temperature rise over recent years in order to drive the Mann-made global warming agenda.
MIND-blowing adjustments to raw data that without exception – cool the past and warm the present – despite UHI (Urban Heat Island effect) undoubtedly compromising the latter parts of the modern temp record.
AND, if you think that the tampering of the earth’s temperature record, by cooling the past and warming the present to fit the man-made global warming narrative is another climate “denier” conspiracy theory then read this Climategate email from the UK’s leading climate expert, Phil Jones, to the UK Met Office and officials:
GLOBAL WARMING Is The Greatest And Most Successful Pseudoscientific Fraud In History | Climatism
THE problem of the 1940’s warming “blip” :
THEY did exactly what Wigley was suggesting, removing more than 0.15 C from 1940′s global temperatures. This tampering is what made the hockey stick possible.
If the present refuses to get warmer, then the past must become cooler …
NASA make up record temperatures in countries where they have no thermometer data. NOAA’s current data in Africa and much of the rest of the world is fake.
THIS enables them to make the fake “Hottest Year Ever” announcements. Memes that have more to do with PR and marketing than actual science:
THE NASA global temperature record has been massively altered over the last 20 years to cool the past and warm the present:
Steve Goddard on Twitter: “The @NASA global temperature record has been massively altered over the last 20 years to cool the past and warm the present.…”
*
NASA GISS : THE DATA SET OF CHOICE FOR THE CLIMATE THEORY OBSESSED MAINSTREAM MEDIA & POLITICAL ELITE!
IT’s not difficult to see why the NASA GISS data set is the preferred go-to for global warming activists, mainstream media, the UN IPCC and virtue-peddling politicians seeking to destroy cheap, efficient energy supply – namely coal-fired power – through the implementation of draconian climate change policy, and proposals like the U.S. Democrats’ “New Green Deal”, that if implemented will annihilate both the U.S. and the global economy and result in total control of every aspect of your life, lifestyle and any freedoms you currently enjoy.
NASA GISS’ Gavin Schmidt wants to use his junk science to control public policy, and says questions from policy makers are “tiresome” :
PRESIDENT EISENHOWER WARNED US OF THE “danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present — and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
President Eisenhower January 17, 1961
*
CONCLUSION
FOR so long, climate ‘sceptics’ have been labeled climate/science “deniers”, in crude reference to those who deny the holocaust, with the pejorative used in a broader effort to shut down debate and silence dissent. However, when hard evidence is laid out over alarmist rhetoric, it’s not hard to see who in fact are the real deniers of history and indeed, deniers of science.
EVEN when hard data, “the science” and empirical evidence completely contradict alarmist predictions and forecasts peddled by the mainstream media and grant-driven ‘scientists’, alarmists continue to double-down on their fear-mongering instead of evaluating their theory, adhering to the “scientific method” and admitting that they might just have got it all wrong.
*
GLOBAL WARMING dogma has ruinously snowballed into a $TRILLION dollar religion to be defended at all costs by alarmist ‘scientists’, UNreliables rent-seekers and the climate theory-obsessed mainstream media in order to protect egos, jobs, reputations and access to unlimited “Save The Planet” taxpayer trillions, completely immune to oversight.
TIME to stop the rot for the sake of “science” and Western civilisation that has given us so much to be thankful for, like the dramatic drop in global poverty. Primarily due to the deployment of cheap, reliable and abundant hydrocarbon fuels. Life-giving and poverty-reducing energy sources that the zero-emissions zealots want to replace with sunshine and breezes, forcing us backwards down the energy ladder to the days of human, animal and solar power.
JUST as socialist central planning failed miserably before it was replaced by free market economies, green central planning will have to be discarded before Australia and other Western nations, crippled by the mad rush into costly and ruinous UNreliables, will see a return to energy security, competitive pricing and a ‘liveable’ existence for our most vulnerable.
LIKEWISE, climate data fraud must be called out and crushed with the scientific method restored to allay dangerous and costly climate change fear and alarmism.
“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.“
– TimothyWirth,
Fmr President of the UN Foundation
***
GLOBAL atmospheric temperatures continue their rapid decline off the record heights of the 2016 super El Niño, despite record and rising CO2 emissions.
UAH global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for September, 2018 was +0.14°C, down from +0.19°C in August:
Since 1979, NOAA satellites have been carrying instruments which measure the natural microwave thermal emissions from oxygen in the atmosphere. The intensity of the signals these microwave radiometers measure at different microwave frequencies is directly proportional to the temperature of different, deep layers of the atmosphere. Every month, John Christy and I update global temperature datasets that represent the piecing together of the temperature data from a total of fifteen instruments flying on different satellites over the years. A discussion of the latest version (6.0) of the dataset is located here.
The graph above represents the latest update; updates are usually made within the first week of every month. Contrary to some reports, the satellite measurements are not calibrated in any way with the global surface-based thermometer records of temperature. They instead use their own on-board precision redundant platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs) calibrated to a laboratory reference standard before launch.
THE September anomaly represents a 0.72°C drop since 2016 super El Niño heights, bringing temps down now to ~1988 levels.
DON’T expect the mainstream media to report in this anytime soon. They are only concerned about hot and climbing temperatures to push their global warming climate change agenda.
*
CO2 CONCENTRATION Vs TEMPS – Correlation?
CO2 Vs Temp Correlation 1979 – SEP 2018 – CLIMATISM
*
GLOBAL TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS – You Be The Judge!
Satellites Vs Land-Based Thermometers?
Satellites Vs Thermometers?
SATELLITES
NASA’s MSU satellite measurement systems, generate the RSS and UAH datasets, which measure the average temperature of every cubic inch of the lower atmosphere, the exact place where global warming theory is meant to occur.
HOWEVER, by 2016, Carl Mears, who is the chief scientist for RSS (Remote Sensing Systems) and who has used the pejorative “denialist” in various correspondence, decided that “the pause” was not a good look for the global warming narrative so RSS was massively adjusted upwards, conveniently eliminating “the pause” in the RSS dataset.
MEARS’ objectivity towards the business of global temperature data collection and reporting can be found in his commentary on his website:
MEARS then published a paper claiming that new and improved adjustments have “found” that missing warming.
Mears, C., and F. Wentz, 2016: Sensitivity of satellite-derived tropospheric temperature trends to the diurnal cycle adjustment. J. Climate. doi:10.1175/JCLID- 15-0744.1, in press.
UAH is the satellite data set featured in this post and is jointly run byDr. John R. Christy – Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. And Roy Spencer Ph.D.Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville.
SPENCER commentary on the divergence between RSS and UAH post “adjustment”:
“We have a paper in peer review with extensive satellite dataset comparisons to many balloon datasets and reanalyses. These show that RSS diverges from these and from UAH, showing more warming than the other datasets between 1990 and 2002 – a key period with two older MSU sensors both of which showed signs of spurious warming not yet addressed by RSS. I suspect the next chapter in this saga is that the remaining radiosonde datasets that still do not show substantial warming will be the next to be “adjusted” upward.
The bottom line is that we still trust our methodology. But no satellite dataset is perfect, there are uncertainties in all of the adjustments, as well as legitimate differences of opinion regarding how they should be handled.
Also, as mentioned at the outset, both RSS and UAH lower tropospheric trends are considerably below the average trends from the climate models.
AND, before the new-NASA-activists rewrote climate ‘science’, the National Aeronautics Space Agency boldly (and correctly) noted that “Other important forcings of Earth’s climate system” such as “clouds, airborne particulate matter, and surface brightness [have] the capacity to exceed the warming influence of greenhouse gases and cause our world to cool.”
FROM the above NASA article that disappeared around 2010 :
WHAT ARE THE PRIMARY FORCINGS OF THE EARTH SYSTEM?
The Sun is the primary forcing of Earth’s climate system. Sunlight warms our world. Sunlight drives atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns. Sunlight powers the process of photosynthesis that plants need to grow. Sunlight causes convection which carries warmth and water vapor up into the sky where clouds form and bring rain. In short, the Sun drives almost every aspect of our world’s climate system and makes possible life as we know it.
Earth’s orbit around and orientation toward the Sun change over spans of many thousands of years. In turn, these changing “orbital mechanics” force climate to change because they change where and how much sunlight reaches Earth. Thus, changing Earth’s exposure to sunlight forces climate to change. According to scientists’ models of Earth’s orbit and orientation toward the Sun indicate that our world should be just beginning to enter a new period of cooling — perhaps the next ice age.
However, a new force for change has arisen: humans. After the industrial revolution, humans introduced increasing amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and changed the surface of the landscape to an extent great enough to influence climate on local and global scales. By driving up carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere (by about 30 percent), humans have increased its capacity to trap warmth near the surface.
Other important forcings of Earth’s climate system include such “variables” as clouds, airborne particulate matter, and surface brightness. Each of these varying features of Earth’s environment has the capacity to exceed the warming influence of greenhouse gases and cause our world to cool. For example, increased cloudiness would give more shade to the surface while reflecting more sunlight back to space. Increased airborne particles (or “aerosols”) would scatter and reflect more sunlight back to space, thereby cooling the surface. Major volcanic eruptions (such as that of Mt. Pinatubo in 1992) can inject so much aerosol into the atmosphere that, as it spreads around the globe, it reduces sunlight and cause Earth to cool. Likewise, increasing the surface area of highly reflective surface types, such as ice sheets, reflects greater amounts of sunlight back to space and causes Earth to cool.
Scientists are using NASA satellites to monitor all of the aforementioned forcings of Earth’s climate system to better understand how they are changing over time, and how any changes in them affect climate.
ACCORDING to NASA data, the recent 0.56°C plunge in global temperatures, following the 2015/16 super El Niño, is the greatest two-year cooling event in a century. “You have to go back to 1982-84 for the next biggest two-year drop, 0.47°C—also during the global warming era.”
NASA’s MSU satellite measurement systems, generate the RSS and UAH datasets, which measure the average temperature of every cubic inch of the lower atmosphere (0-10 kms), the exact place where global warming theory is meant to occur.
MAY TEMPS +0.18C ABOVE AVERAGE
GLOBAL temps continue their cooling trend, rebounding off the 2015/16 Super El Niño – the strongest since accurate measurements began, caused by surface waters in the Pacific Ocean, west of Central America rising up to 3C warmer than usual.
GREENHOUSE GAS THEORY CHECK?
THE latest UAH V6.0 May anomaly of +0.18 brings temperatures back to the levels they were at the beginning of the Century, reinforcing the current 18+ year global warming “pause”, despite record and rising CO2 emissions…
UAH Global Temperature Update for May, 2018- +0.18 deg. C « Roy Spencer, PhD
Latest Global Average Tropospheric Temperatures
Since 1979, NOAA satellites have been carrying instruments which measure the natural microwave thermal emissions from oxygen in the atmosphere. The intensity of the signals these microwave radiometers measure at different microwave frequencies is directly proportional to the temperature of different, deep layers of the atmosphere. Every month, John Christy and I update global temperature datasets that represent the piecing together of the temperature data from a total of fifteen instruments flying on different satellites over the years. A discussion of the latest version (6.0) of the dataset is located here.
The graph above represents the latest update; updates are usually made within the first week of every month. Contrary to some reports, the satellite measurements are not calibrated in any way with the global surface-based thermometer records of temperature. They instead use their own on-board precision redundant platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs) calibrated to a laboratory reference standard before launch.
GLOBAL TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS – JUDGE FOR YOURSELF!
Satellites Vs Thermometers?
*
SATELLITES
NASA’s MSU satellite measurement systems, generate the RSS and UAH datasets, which measure the average temperature of every cubic inch of the lower atmosphere, the exact place where global warming theory is meant to occur. Read the rest of this entry »
“CLIMATE alarmism is a gigantic fraud: it only survives by suppressing dissent and by spending tens of billions of dollars of public money every year on pseudo-scientific propaganda.” – Leo Goldstein
EXCESSIVE or exaggerated alarm about a real or imagined threat is fundamental in driving the human CO2-induced global warming climate change narrative.
THE most popular climatic and weather-related events, as marketed by the Climate Crisis Industry, fall well within the bounds of natural variability. So, in order for such events to make the headlines, attract taxpayer funding for ‘research’, and advance the misanthropic, man-made climate change agenda, they must be accompanied by inflated language, an urgent tone, imagery of doom, and in many cases, fraudulent data.
IN this series we take an objective/sceptical look at ten of the more popular metrics used by warming alarmists to push the CAGW (catastrophic anthropogenic global warming) narrative, testing the veracity of the all-too-often wild and alarmist claims associated with each…
#2. SEA LEVEL RISE
“THE Seas Are Rising”! You’ve read it, seen it and heard about it just about everywhere in conjunction with the climate change debate. However, the very statement “rising sea levels” is deceptive from the start.
SEA-levels both rise and fall depending on where you are on the planet. Absolute sea-level varies from negative to positive to stabledepending on a range of regional factors including: local vertical land motion, land use, salinity, regional ocean circulations, ocean heat content and tidal variations…
THE climate-theory-obsessed mainstream media has gleefully pawned the emotional link between climate change and ‘sinking’ tropical islands to push their man-made global warming agenda…
“The tiny pacific island nation of Tuvalu looks set to become a victim of global warming, with the entire country predicted to be washed away in 50 years.”(BBC 2002)
TUVALU’s plight even formed part of the basis for arguably the most hysterical fake news claim in the history of climate alarmism: the UN’s prediction that by the end of 2010, climate change would have created “50 million environmental refugees”!
CLIMATISM, along with the climate sceptic “denier” community have been citing actual scientific data and empirical observations that have consistently contradicted the hysterical claims made by the mainstream media of “drowning island nations” for years…
“Reporters no doubt worry that covering such findings will only embolden “deniers” and undermine support for immediate, drastic action.
But if fears of catastrophic climate change are warranted — which we seriously doubt — ignoring things like the rapid cooling in the past two years carries an even bigger risk.“
The drop in temperatures at least merits a “Hey, what’s going on here?” story.
Inconvenient Science: NASA data show that global temperatures dropped sharply over the past two years. Not that you’d know it, since that wasn’t deemed news. Does that make NASA a global warming denier?
Writing in Real Clear Markets, Aaron Brown looked at the official NASA global temperature data and noticed something surprising. From February 2016 to February 2018, “global average temperatures dropped by 0.56 degrees Celsius.” That, he notes, is the biggest two-year drop in the past century.
“The 2016-2018 Big Chill,” he writes,“was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average.”
Isn’t this just the sort of man-bites-dog story that the…
GLOBAL temps continue their cooling trend, rebounding off the 2015/16 Super El Niño – the strongest since accurate measurements began, caused by surface waters in the Pacific Ocean, west of Central America rising up to 3C warmer than usual.
THE latest UAH V6.0 February anomaly of +0.20 brings temperatures back to the levels they were at after the 1998 El Niño.
AS the old saying goes “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants“. One man who has been tireless and paid-less (sic) in the pursuit of exposing the blatant and unequivocal global temperature data fraud, executed by taxpayer funded government scientific agencies worldwide, has been Tony Heller aka Steve Goddard.
THERE are literally thousands upon thousands of mind-blowing examples of temperature data manipulation/fraud carried out in-plain-sight by climate activist agencies namely – NOAA, NASA, BoM, Met Office UK – who happen to be the literal gate-keepers of global temperature. They do this simply to make you believe that the climate is warming catastrophically thanks to your carbon dioxide (energy) emissions.
THE blink giff included in this post is really all one needs to know about how climate scientists literally “change the data to fit the theory” – a quote linked to Hungarian Marxist Georg Lukacs in his ‘Tactics and Ethics’ (1923) though often associated with Albert Einstein as a non-literal quip.
OTHER than driving the climate scare and maintaining taxpayer funding to the tune of $Trillions worldwide, hysterical claims of the “hottest year, month, day ever” tell us far more about global warming climate change marketing than they do about actual ‘science’.
They show a very detailed graph and map which expresses the claimed warming.
All that red looks pretty scary. Red is the color of fire, and it isn’t hard to convince some people that their carbon sins will lead to hell fire.
What they aren’t telling is that their graph and map are fake. They have no idea what global temperatures were in 1880, 1900, 1920, 1940, or in fact the present, because outside of the US there is very little verifiable data.
NOAA’s current data in Africa and much of the rest of the world is still fake. They make up record temperatures in countries where they have no thermometer data.
By their own admission, the ocean data is also fake.
date: Wed Apr 15 14:29:03 2009
from: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk> subject: Re: Fwd: Re: contribution to RealClimate.org
to: Thomas Crowley <thomas.crowley@ed.ac.uk>
Tom,
The issue Ray alludes to is that in addition to the issue
of many more drifters providing measurements over the last
5-10 years, the measurements are coming in from places where
we didn’t have much ship data in the past. For much of the SH between 40 and 60S the normals are mostly made up as there is very little ship data there.
All of the claims in the National Climate Assessment about global warming are unsupportable junk science, made largely with fraudulent or imaginary data. Global warming is the biggest scam in science history. It has been thoroughly corrupted by tens of billions of dollars of government money – which fake climate scientists refuse to let go of.
The only thing global and unambiguous in the National Climate Assessment, is the level of junk science and fraud it represents.
Earlier this week we learned Michael Mann and his fraudulent Hockey Stick have been slapped down in a Canadian court. Mann was ordered to produce the data on which his fake claim was based (as good science demands). He refused the request and Contempt of Court charges will follow!
Add EPA Pruitt’s “red team” to the mix and the house of climate cards is looking like a dangerous place to reside!
Don’t expect the Goebbels Media to utter a peep about any of this.
A new study found adjustments made to global surface temperature readings by scientists in recent years “are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data.”
“Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever – despite current claims of record setting warming,” according to a study published June 27 by two scientists and a veteran statistician.
The peer-reviewed study tried to validate current surface temperature datasets managed by NASA, NOAA and the UK’s Met Office, all of which make adjustments to raw thermometer readings. Skeptics of man-made global warming have criticized the adjustments.
Climate scientists often apply adjustments to surface temperature thermometers to account for “biases” in the data. The new study doesn’t question the adjustments themselves but notes nearly all of them increase the warming…
Recent Comments