The Great “Extreme Weather” Climate Change Propaganda Con

extreme-weather-news1st

The “Extreme Weather” meme has earned its place in climate change history as the fundamental driver of climate scaremongering, used deceptively and effectively to promote the catastrophic man-made climate change theory by instilling fear, doom and gloom directly into the human psyche through simple imagery and repetitive correlation rhetoric.

Even though “weather” is not climate, the daily bombardment via news and multi-media of climatic disaster clips provide more than enough evidence for the casual observer to convince them that the climate is in fact changing as a direct result of human CO2 emissions.

Much of the mainstream media gleefully encourages and promotes the catastrophic man-made warming narrative. Hence, sensationalising a typhoon in the Phillipines or a forest fire in California has become fair-game in the virtuous and IMHO nefarious push to enhance the supposed human CO2-induced climate catastrophe.

However, when you look at hard data and scientific evidence pertaining to extreme weather through the lens of “Government data” and “Peer-Reviewed Science”, as opposed to scary pictures and videos, absorbed via billions of iPhones and hysterical climate-obsessed mainstream media, things are not quite as bad as they seem. In fact, by most metrics, extreme weather events are becoming ‘less’ extreme as CO2 increases. This should come as relieving news to all, though sadly, yet predictably, such data will come as extremely inconvenient news to the virtuous “Save The Planet” lobby and especially those invested in the trillion dollar global warming climate change industry that feeds and thrives off doomsday scenarios.

*

Below are listed the more common metrics associated with the much maligned and deceptively ascribed “extreme weather” meme. A term which I would label as a very clever weapon of mass climate propaganda to elevate hysteria, emotions and fear with the ultimate end to mould groupthink belief in human CO2-induced climate change…

HURRICANES

The US is currently experiencing a record 12 year (4,380 days) drought of major landfall hurricanes (Cat3+). The last major hurricane to hit was “Wilma” in 2005:

2016-hurricane-drought.jpg

The major hurricane drought for Category 3 or greater storms continues. Updated December 2016 by Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. (via WUWT)

Interesting historical reference point:

NOAA keeps hurricane records back to 1850. The average number of US hurricane strikes per presidency is about eleven. Obama’s presidency had five hurricane strikes, the last being “Matthew” (Cat 1 at landfall, October 8,2016).

Grover Cleveland (1885 – 1889 & 1893 – 1897) and Franklin D Roosevelt (1933 – 1945) both presided over 26 hurricanes, almost six times as many as Obama:

Hurricane count by President.jpg

The presidency of Barack Obama had the lowest frequency of US hurricane strikes of any president:

Hurricane count by President2.gif

Charts via Steve S Goddard – Only updated to 2014

NOAA – Chronological List of All Hurricanes

During Obama’s presidency, atmospheric CO2 levels were between 384-400 ppm. At the time of Grover Cleveland, atmospheric CO2 levels were at 294 ppm. (NASA CO2 Data)

*

TORNADOES

Last years tornado season marked the fifth consecutive year of below normal tornado activity in the US:

US Tornadoes.png

NOAA | Storm Prediction Center WCM Page

NOAA

Over the past 55 years there has been a large reduction in frequency of stronger tornadoes:

ef3-ef5-t_thumb

There has been no trend in EF-1+ Tornadoes 1954-2014:

EF1-EF5-t.png

Historical Records and Trends | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) formerly known as National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)

Paul Homewood, of the excellent climate blog NALOPKT, notes that NOAA has not bothered to update Tornado data for 2015/16. “Could it be they would rather the public did not find out the truth?”

Last year may set the record for the least number of Tornadoes on record:

torngraph-big.png

http://www.spc.noaa.gov/wcm/#data

In summary, with an interesting caveat from NOAA:

  • No trend in EF-1+ Tornadoes 1954-2014 tornadoes.
  • Large reduction in frequency of stronger tornadoes over the past 55 years.
  • 2016 perhaps a record for the least number of Tornadoes on record.

ALL THIS despite rising CO2 and advanced technologies, including doppler radar and greater attention to reporting – Tornado chasers, increased population etc – which can create “a misleading appearance of an increasing trend in tornado frequency.” – NOAA

*

TROPICAL CYCLONES

Jamal Munshi of Sonoma State University published this paper last June, A General Linear Model for Trends in Tropical Cyclone Activity:

ABSTRACT

The ACE index is used to compare tropical cyclone activity worldwide among seven decades from 1945 to 2014. Some increase in tropical cyclone activity is found relative to the earliest decades. No trend is found after the decade 1965-1974. A comparison of the six cyclone basins in the study shows that the Western Pacific Basin is the most active basin and the North Indian Basin the least. The advantages of using a general linear model for trend analysis are described.

Trop Cyclone trends.png

A General Linear Model for Trends in Tropical Cyclone Activity by Jamal Munshi :: SSRN

Again, despite rising CO2, there is no trend in tropical cyclone activity after the decade 1965-1974. With a sharp decline in activity over the past two decades.

AUSTRALIAN TROPICAL CYCLONES

Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology graph shows a significant downtrend in all tropical storms, with no discernible trend for severe tropical cyclones:

Screen Shot 2017-02-22 at , February 22, 11.52.48 AM.png

Tropical Cyclone Trends | Bureau Of Meteorology

Again, it’s clear from the BoM graph that as CO2 has increased, the frequency and strength of cyclones has decreased.

NB, the (warmist) BoM is still yet to update its cyclone graph from 2011. Are they simply lazy? Have no data since 2011? Or are they trying to hide inconvenient climate data that doesn’t fit the CO2-induced extreme weather narrative? You decide.

*

SNOW

Snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event.”
“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”
Dr David VinerSenior scientist, climatic research unit (CRU)

Climate change alarmists (experts) use tangible and emotional climatic horror scenarios to scare you into belief. One of the more classic instances of such fear-mongering, gone horribly wrong, was that by Dr David Viner – esteemed climatologist from the UK’s CRU, in 2000.

From the Independent’s most cited article: Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past by Charles Onians:

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.

After over 15 years, the Independent removed that article, and the URL used to come up like this:

snowfall-thing-of-the-past-404.png

It originally read like this:

snowfall-thing-of-the-past Original.png

The original link now boots back to their homepage.

Our friends at WUWT have preserved the entire article as a PDF for posterity:

Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past – The Independent (PDF)

In fairness, perhaps the good Dr Viner was colluding consulting with the virtuous partners of climate catastrophe expertise, the UN IPCC…

IPCC Less Snow.png

IPCC Third Assessment Report – Climate Change 2001 – Complete online versions | GRID-Arendal – Publications – Other

Warmer winters IPCC.png

IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The (warmist) CSIRO jumped on the “end of snow” bandwagon in August 2003:


Simulations of future snow conditions in the Australian alpine regions were prepared for the years 2020 and 2050…

Conclusion:

The low impact scenario for 2020 has a minor impact on snow conditions. Average season lengths are reduced by around five days. Reductions in peak depths are usually less than 10%, but can be larger at lower sites (e.g. Mt Baw Baw and Wellington High Plains).

The high impact scenario for 2020 leads to reductions of 30-40 days in average season lengths.  At higher sites such as Mt Hotham, this can represent reductions in season duration of about 25%, but at lower sites such as Mt Baw Baw the reduction can be more significant (up to 60%)…

We have very high confidence (at least 95%) that the low impact scenarios will be exceeded and the high impact scenarios will not be exceeded.

In 2014, the New York Times signalled “The End of Snow”:

ScreenHunter_314 Feb. 07 11.00

The End of Snow? – NYTimes.com

BACK TO THE REAL WORLD

2017 Northern Hemisphere snow cover extent was amongst the highest on record last month:

NH Snow extent.png

Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab

Winter Northern Hemisphere snow extent is trending upwards, despite rising CO2 emissions:

Winter SNow NH.png

Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab

And for Australia’s CSIRO who assured the end of snow by 2020/2030…

Screen Shot 2017-02-22 at , February 22, 8.05.58 PM.png

Heavy snow forecast for the Australian Alps despite ski season ending a month ago

Australia’s snowfields have been overdosed by snow over the past 5+ years.

*

FLOODS / DROUGHT 

“So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems…” Tim Flannery 2007

This planet is on course for a catastrophe.
The existence of Life itself is at stake
.”
– Dr Tim Flannery,
Climate Council

Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology 2008:

IT MAY be time to stop describing south-eastern Australia as gripped by drought and instead accept the extreme dry as permanent, one of the nation’s most senior weather experts warned yesterday.

“Perhaps we should call it our new climate,” said the Bureau of Meteorology’s head of climate analysis, David Jones….

“There is a debate in the climate community, after … close to 12 years of drought, whether this is something permanent…”

The Bureau’s David Jones in 2007:

As Jones wrote to the University of East Anglia the year before: “Truth be know, climate change here is now running so rampant that we don’t need meteorological data to see it. Almost everyone of our cities is on the verge of running out of water and our largest irrigation system (the Murray Darling Basin is on the verge of collapse…”

The CSIRO, 2009:

A three-year collaboration between the Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO has confirmed what many scientists long suspected: that the 13-year drought is not just a natural dry stretch but a shift related to climate change

”It’s reasonable to say that a lot of the current drought of the last 12 to 13 years is due to ongoing global warming,” said the bureau’s Bertrand Timbal. 

THE REAL WORLD (as of 2016 data)

For the continent of Australia as a whole, there is more rain, not less – and certainly no permanent drought:

aus-rainfall.jpeg

2016:

Winter was Australia’s second wettest on record – just missing out on a new high by a couple of millimetres, leaving many regions already sodden.

“It’s about as wet as it has been in the past 110 years [of records] across Australia,” David Jones, head of climate predictions at the Bureau of Meteorology, said.

Floods! Near-record rainfall! When will the head of climate predictions at the Bureau of Meteorology (David Jones) explain why his 2008 prediction of a “new climate” of drought turned out so, so wrong?

THE CONSEQUENCES OF PROFESSIONAL CLIMATE ALARMISTS’ DUD-PREDICTIONS

How warmists cost us billions

The price of global warming alarmism is enormous. Take the cost of the mothballed desalination plants, built after warmists persuaded politiciansthe rains would dry up:

Sydney’s privatised desalination plant, which is costing residents more than $500,000 a day to keep on standby, will not be needed for at least another four or five years. The sale of the plant last year to a private company for $2.3 billion means residents are locked into paying about $10 billion in fees for the next 50 years, whether the plant is operating or not. Not one drop of water has come out of the Kurnell facility since it stopped operating more than a year ago. With dam levels at 93.4 per cent, the plant has been placed into “water security” mode, a long-term shutdown which is likely to continue for some time.”My best estimate is it will still be about four to five years before we turn the desalination plant on,” Sydney Water’s managing director Kevin Young told 7.30 New South Wales

Mind you, big cities did need more water security as they grew. Dams were the cheap option, but who made those almost illegal?

How warmists cost us billions | Herald Sun

More: The legacy of Tim Flannery..White elephant desalination plants | Climatism

Australia is now awash with water. Nearly every dam is full. And we are left with x4 mothballed desal plants that cost $12Billion to build and are costing the taxpayer $1million per day (each) under contract until 2030/50.

Unfortunately, the worst Flannery and his climate change alarmist comrades can ever be accused of, for the litany of failed alarmist dud-predictions resulting in massive taxpayer-dollar waste, is an excess of “Save the planet”virtue.

CALIFORNIA

Last September, New York’s Daily News forecast centuries of global warming drought for California:

One of the myriad incorrect assertions by climate-change deniers is that scientists who have proven manmade causes for the current global warming ignore periods of warming in the Earth’s past that were not caused by industrial pollution.

Since it’s essentially, and of course ironically, entirely non-scientists who make this claim, the deniers would do well to read a recent UCLA study that indicates California’s current six-year severe drought could be exacerbated enough by global warming to extend the dry period for centuries.

Five months later the “Permanent” drought is over and the prediction drowned:
California has now seen more moisture in the last 8 weeks than it typically does in an entire year… San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, and several other cities have recorded one of their wettest Januarys on record and an incredibly wet 8 weeks overall.

And for those who desire to claim the recent California floods are “unprecedented” and “extreme”, the below graph shows that inflow to Oroville so far this year is far from unprecedented, with a much greater total in 1997.

oroville_inflow_1995-2017feb_620.png

And we can see from the state rainfall totals that January 2017 was nothing special:

Orville Precip.png

HISTORICAL DROUGHT PERSPECTIVE

USA drought during the low-CO2 1930’s:

conus_palmerindex_june_1934.png

USA drought during 400ppm “unprecedented”-CO2 levels of 2017:

Drought USA 2017.png

Drought – January 2017 | State of the Climate | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

 *

For the next few “Extreme Weather/Climate” categories, feel free to click on the links to read government data and peer-reviewed science sourced to unfold any concern(s) you may have…

HEATWAVES

Shock news : Australia has always had heatwaves | Climatism

SEA LEVEL RISE

NASA “Sea Level Rise” Fraud | Climatism

44th Pacific “Sinking Islands” Extortion Forum (COP21 Update 2015) | Climatism

If Sea Level Rise were such a threat, ask yourself one simple Q: Why would Barack Hussein Obama (spruiker-in-chief of climate change alarmism) purchase the Hawaii seaside mansion where Magnum PI was filmed?

While warning us of ‘rising oceans’ in SOTU, did Obama just buy a beachfront mansion? | Watts Up With That?

Maybe its because, outside of his eco-pantheist ideology and Leftist, wealth redistribution agenda, Obama too, knows very well that Islands like Hawaii “Shape-shift” i.e. they grow with Sea Level Rise. In fact, 80% of Island nations around the world are growing, not “Sinking” as climate activists and alarmists will have you believe.

*

RECENT “EXTREME WEATHER” RELATED SCIENTIFIC STUDIES

China’s not so extreme weather study:

China’s weather now better

The biggest study of China’s extreme weather finds the frequency of hail storms, thunderstorms and high wind events has actually halved since 1960.

In one of the most comprehensive studies on trends in local severe weather patterns to date, an international team of researchers found that the frequency of hail storms, thunderstorms and high wind events has decreased by nearly 50 percent on average throughout China since 1960…

“Most of the data published on trends in severe weather has been incomplete or collected for a limited short period,” said Fuqing Zhang, professor of meteorology and atmospheric science and director, Center for Advanced Data Assimilation and Predictability Techniques, Penn State. “The record we used is, to the best of our knowledge, the largest, both in time scale and area of land covered.”

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/global-warming-helps-chinas-weather-now-better/news-story/12b5c26ab1a5f27fffc3b416f95cee7c

When will warmist scientists admit the apocalypse they predicted simply isn’t coming?

Oh and just as a side, Al Gore’s “Extreme Weather” poster child sufferers – POLAR BEARS – are doing more than fine…as CO2 rises!

*

If we rely on the above scientific hard data and peer-reviewed evidence, it should hopefully become clearer that colourless, odourless, plant food and trace gas CO2 – the gas of life – does not control the climate or the weather.

*

In my opinion if the temperature gradient between the polar regions and tropics were to increase because of polar cooling, expect to see more and genuine extreme weather occurrences. Ergo, has slight global warming since the 1970’s actually decreased the frequency and strength of extreme weather events? The above evidence strongly supports this case. Especially in the case of Northern Hemisphere Hurricanes, Tornadoes and drought.

Ironically and to this point, in 1974 climatologists blamed extreme weather on “Global Cooling”.

The panic was so real during the “Global Cooling” scare of the 1970’s that UN scientists wanted to melt the Arctic by spreading black soot on it!

Arctic UN Black soot.jpg

02 Feb 1972 – Scientists fear for Arctic Sea ice – Trove

And today, the UN, all those expert climatologists and their sycophant media gleefully blame any extreme weather event, not on “global cooling” but now “global warming”. Nuff said.

*

TO FINISH. A message, in their own words, from the promulgators of climate change fear, doom and gloom – the UN’s very own IPCC …

Direct from their IPCC SREX report released 2012 :

We Do Not Know If The Climate Is Becoming More Extreme

•••

Recommended / Related :


Is Carbon Dioxide A Pollutant?

co2

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

Driving down on Saturday, we stopped off at Crickley Country Park in Gloucestershire.

On the information board there was the usual eco stuff we often see these days. At the top it mentioned (roughly)

Carbon Dioxide is a pollutant and is harmful to the environment.

According to the Oxford Dictionary, the definition of pollution is;

The presence in or introduction into the environment of a substance which has harmful or poisonous effects.

Clearly, CO2 is not poisonous, and far from being harmful is absolutely essential for life on Earth as we know it.

At best, the only argument can be that an increase in CO2 levels MAY, on balance, be harmful, but equally a reduction could be even more harmful.

Unfortunately, this sort of sloppy, lazy propaganda is far too common these days.

Crickley Park is owned and run by Gloucestershire County Council. It is sad we cannot count on…

View original post 8 more words


China won’t classify CO2 as a pollutant in new environment law

102_2_co2-logo.png

Umm, perhaps because China is pragmatic and still ‘scientific’ enough not to yield to the radical environmentalist con that the colourless, odorlesss, trace gas and plant food carbon dioxide (CO2) is a “pollutant”.

The big lie of climate alarmist’s is to conflate real ‘carbon’ pollution (soot) with CO2. China sees this a mile away and isn’t influenced by ‘carbon’ propaganda and western eco-political correctness.

Yet again – smart China, dumb West.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

View original post


L.A. Times climate science denial article instead shows the Times clearly denying well established climate science

Shock news : Global Warming hysterical mainstream media, spewing anti-science alarmist agitprop.

Watts Up With That?

The L. A. Times published an article claiming that “Trump’s climate science denial clashes with the reality of rising seas in Florida

clip_image002

The article fails to address easily available and comprehensive NOAA tide gauge data updated through the year 2015 (http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_us.htm) showing that the Florida coastline is experiencing no acceleration in coastal sea level rise and that the rate of coastal sea level rise there remains constant and consistent over more than 100 years of long term period tide gauge data measurements.

This long term steady rate of coastal sea level rise is documented at numerous locations around the state including Mayport, Fernandina Beach, Key West, St. Petersburg, Cedar Key, and Pensacola.

clip_image004

clip_image006

clip_image008

clip_image010

clip_image012

clip_image014

Climate alarmists have been falsely claiming for 3 decades now that coastal sea level rise is accelerating but NOAA tide gauge data demonstrates that this is not happening in Florida or anywhere else around…

View original post 186 more words


Claim: climate effects violence

I have definitely become more violent, over the past ten years, since moving from the uplifting, bitter cold winters of Southern Australia to the depressing tropical heat of South East Asia.
/sarc.

Yet another ‘global warming causes everything’ agitprop study.

Does anyone actually believe the constant, daily climate BS being drilled into them anymore?! Studies on belief and interest on majority man-made ‘warming’ suggest they don’t…
https://climatism.wordpress.com/2015/11/05/triumph-of-the-sceptics/

Watts Up With That?

From the “murder rate must be highest near the equator” department comes this odd piece of research

Researchers offer new theory on how climate affects violence 
Climate impacts life strategies, time orientation, self-control

OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Researchers have long struggled to explain why some violent crime rates are higher near the equator than other parts of the world. Now, a team of researchers have developed a model that could help explain why.

This new model goes beyond the simple fact that hotter temperatures seem to be linked to more aggressive behavior.

The researchers believe that hot climates and less variation in seasonal temperatures leads to a faster life strategy, less focus on the future, and less self-control – all of which contribute to more aggression and violence.

“Climate shapes how people live, it affects the culture in ways that we don’t think about in our daily lives,”…

View original post 651 more words


“The Hottest Year Evah”

FRANCE-ENVIRONMENT-CLIMATE-COP21-gas-ring-Getty-640x480

 

Been hearing that 2015 was the hottest year on record? This depends entirely on which temperature data set is being referred. There are two main methods of measuring global temperature:

  • The much more accurate and comprehensive satellite measurement systems, RSS/UAH, which measure the average temperature of every cubic inch of the lower atmosphere, the exact place where global warming theory is meant to occur and be measured! Or…
  • NASA and NOAA’s preferred surface-based thermometers which measure “different parts of the system [UHI affected parking lots, asphalt heat sinks, AC exhaust air vents], different signal to noise ratio [we bias toward warm stations], different structural uncertainty [we ‘homogenise’ the data set to cool the past and warm the present to fit the global warming narrative].”NASA GISS Gavin Schmidt’s admission about the satellite record versus the surface temperature record (doctored in square brackets by Climatism)
  • The other issue with surface-based thermometer readings is that you can travel hundreds if not thousands of kilometres without finding a thermometer nearby. The Arctic region is a great example of this, as well the oceans which cover 70 percent of the planet.

With the ever increasing divergence of surface temperatures (NASA GISS) from satellite ones (UAH/RSS), and the subsequent divergence of overheated climate models (IPCC CMIP5) to observed reality, it is worth some background on the temperature measurement systems used to measure global temperature and fundamentally to help combat misinformation about NASA and NOAA’s “Hottest Year Ever” – PR claims that tell us everything about marketing, and nothing about science…

Satellite-v-thermometer-628x353.png

Measuring global temperatures: Satellites or thermometers? 

via CFACT

by

The University of Alabama in Huntsville

The official global temperature numbers are in, and NOAA and NASA have decided that 2015 was the warmest year on record. Based mostly upon surface Dr_-Roy-Spencerthermometers, the official pronouncement ignores the other two primary ways of measuring global air temperatures, satellites and radiosondes (weather balloons).

The fact that those ignored temperature datasets suggest little or no warming for about 18 years now, it is worth outlining the primary differences between these three measurement systems.

Three Ways to Measure Global Temperatures

The primary ways to monitor global average air temperatures are surface based thermometers (since the late 1800s), radiosondes (weather balloons, since about the 1950s), and satellites measuring microwave emissions (since 1979). Other technologies, such as GPS satellite based methods have limited record length and have not yet gained wide acceptance for accuracy.

While the thermometers measure near-surface temperature, the satellites and radiosondes measure the average temperature of a deep layer of the lower atmosphere. Based upon our understanding of how the atmosphere works, the deep layer temperatures are supposed to warm (and cool) somewhat more strongly than the surface temperatures. In other words, variations in global average temperature are expected to be magnified with height, say through the lowest 10 km of atmosphere. We indeed see this during warm El Nino years (like 2015) and cool La Nina years.

The satellite record is the shortest, and since most warming has occurred since the 1970s anyway we often talk about temperature trends since 1979 so that we can compare all three datasets over a common period.

Temperatures of the deep ocean, which I will not address in detail, have warmed by amounts so small — hundredths of a degree — that it is debatable whether they are accurate enough to be of much use. Sea surface temperatures, also indicating modest warming in recent decades, involve an entirely new set of problems, with rather sparse sampling by a mixture of bucket temperatures from many years ago, to newer ship engine intake temperatures, buoys, and since the early 1980s infrared satellite measurements.

How Much Warming?

Since 1979, it is generally accepted that the satellites and radiosondes measure 50% less of a warming trend than the surface thermometer data do, rather than 30-50% greater warming trend that theory predicts for warming aloft versus at the surface.

This is a substantial disagreement.

Why the Disagreement?

There are different possibilities for the disagreement:

1) Surface thermometer analyses are spuriously overestimating the true temperature trend
2) Satellites and radiosondes are spuriously underestimating the true temperature trend
3) All data are largely correct, and are telling us something new about how the climate system operates under long-term warming.

First let’s look at the fundamental basis for each measurement.

All Temperature Measurements are “Indirect”

Roughly speaking, “temperature” is a measure of the kinetic energy of motion of molecules in air.

Unfortunately, we do not have an easy way to directly measure that kinetic energy of motion.

Instead, many years ago, mercury-in-glass or alcohol-in-glass thermometers were commonly used, where the thermal expansion of a column of liquid in response to temperature was estimated by eye. These measurements have now largely been replaced with thermistors, which measure the resistance to the flow of electricity, which is also temperature-dependent.

Such measurements are just for the air immediately surrounding the thermometer, and as we all know, local sources of heat (a wall, pavement, air conditioning or heating equipment, etc.) can and do affect the measurements made by the thermometer. It has been demonstrated many times that urban locations have higher temperatures than rural locations, and such spurious heat influences are difficult to eliminate entirely, since we tend to place thermometers where people live.

Radiosondes also use a thermistor, which is usually checked against a separate thermometer just before weather balloon launch. As the weather balloon carries the thermistor up through the atmosphere, it is immune from ground-based sources of contamination, but it still has various errors due to sunlight heating and infrared cooling which are minimized through radiosonde enclosure design. Radiosondes are much fewer in number, generally making hundreds of point measurements around the world each day, rather than many thousands of measurements that thermometers make.

Satellite microwave radiometers are the fewest in number, only a dozen or so, but each one is transported by its own satellite to continuously measure virtually the entire earth each day. Each individual measurement represents the average temperature of a volume of the lower atmosphere about 50 km in diameter and about 10 km deep, which is about 25,000 cubic kilometers of air. About 20 of those measurements are made every second as the satellite travels and the instrument scans across the Earth.

The satellite measurement itself is “radiative”: the level of microwave emission by oxygen in the atmosphere is measured and compared to that from a warm calibration target on the satellite (whose temperature is monitored with several highly accurate platinum resistance thermometers), and a cold calibration view of the cosmic background radiation from space, assumed to be about 3 Kelvin (close to absolute zero temperature). A less sophisticated (infrared) radiation temperature measurement is made with the medical thermometer you place in your ear.

So, Which System is Better?

The satellites have the advantage of measuring virtually the whole Earth every day with the same instruments, which are then checked against each other. But since there are very small differences between the instruments, which can change slightly over time, adjustments must be made.

Thermometers have the advantage of being much greater in number, but with potentially large long-term spurious warming effects depending on how each thermometer’s local environment has changed with the addition of manmade objects and structures.

Virtually all thermometer measurements require adjustments of some sort, simply because with the exception of a few thermometer sites, there has not been a single, unaltered instrument measuring the same place for 30+ years without a change in its environment. When such rare thermometers were identified in a recent study of the U.S., it was found that by comparison the official U.S. warming trends were exaggerated by close to 60%. Thus, the current official NOAA adjustment procedures appear to force the good data to match the bad data, rather than the other way around. Whether such problem exist with other countries data remains to be seen.

Changes in radiosonde design and software have occurred over the years, making some adjustments necessary to the raw data.

For the satellites, orbital decay of the satellites requires an adjustment of the “lower tropospheric” (LT) temperatures, which is well understood and quite accurate, depending only upon geometry and the average rate of temperature decrease with altitude. But the orbital decay also causes the satellites to slowly drift in the time of day they observe. This “diurnal drift” adjustment is less certain. Significantly, very different procedures for this adjustment have led to almost identical results between the satellite datasets produced by UAH (The University of Alabama in Huntsville) and RSS (Remote Sensing Systems, Santa Rosa, California).

The fact that the satellites and radiosondes – two very different types of measurement system — tend to agree with each other gives us somewhat more confidence in their result that warming has been much less than predicted by climate models. But even the thermometers indicate less warming than the models, just with less of a discrepancy.

And this is probably the most important issue…that no matter which temperature monitoring method we use, the climate models that global warming policies are based upon have been, on average, warming faster than all of our temperature observation systems.

I do believe “global warming” has occurred, but (1) it is weaker than expected, based upon independent satellite and weather balloon measurements; (2) it has been overestimated with poorly adjusted surface-based thermometers; (3) it has a substantial natural component; and (4) it is likely to be more beneficial to life on Earth than harmful.

About the Author: Dr. Roy Spencer

Roy W. Spencer is a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He received his Ph.D. in Meteorology from the University of Wisconsin in 1981. As Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, Dr. Spencer previously directed research into the development and application of satellite passive microwave remote sensing techniques for measuring global temperature, water vapor, and precipitation. He is co-developer of the original satellite method for precision monitoring of global temperatures from Earth-orbiting satellites. Dr. Spencer also serves as U.S. Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer for EOS (AMSR-E) flying on NASA’s Terra satellite. He has authored numerous research articles in scientific journals, and has provided congressional testimony several times on the subject of global warming.

•••

See also :


NOAA Blows Away Their Fraud Record By A Wide Margin In September

“It [global warming] is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.”

– Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Harold Lewis, on resignation from the American Physical Society.

Not much has changed since Harold resigned from the APS in 2010.

Real Science

2015-10-22-14-53-34

Lots of headlines today that September was the hottest ever – by a wide margin. The level of fraud which NOAA had to use to obtain this result (ahead of Paris) is quite stunning.

The first thing to note is the massive data tampering they did since last September. They increased the temperature of all recent years to get rid of the hiatus.

NOAASeptember2014-2015201409.gif (813×525)
201509.gif (813×525)

But that is the least of their fraud. They generated this red colored map, which does not even vaguely represent their measured data.

201509 (2)

201509.gif (990×765)

The map below shows their actual station data. They have coverage for less than 50% of the land surface, meaning that more than half of their surface temperatures in the map above are fake. Note that there are only two warm areas – the US and eastern Europe. They simply made up fake temperatures in the missing areas to paint their map…

View original post 140 more words