Whatever lies it takes to keep funding alive.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- NPR Climate Experts
- Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- “Siberia might stay livable”
- Deep Thinking From The Atlantic
- Making Up Fake Numbers At CBS News
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- “experts warn”
- End Of Snow Update
- CBS News Defines Free Speech
- “Experts Warn”
- Consensus Science With Remarkable Precision
- Is New York About To Drown?
- “Anti-science conservatives must be stopped”
- Disappearing New York
- New York To Drown Soon
- “halt steadily increasing climate extremism”
- “LARGE PART OF NORTHERN CALIF ABLAZE”
- Climate Trends In The Congo
- “100% noncarbon energy mix by 2030”
- Understanding The US Government
- Cooling Australia’s Past
- Saving The World From Fossil Fuels
- Propaganda Based Forecasting
- “He Who Must Not Be Named”
- Imaginary Cold And Snow
Recent Comments
- arn on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- William on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- gordon vigurs on “Siberia might stay livable”
- conrad ziefle on NPR Climate Experts
- conrad ziefle on NPR Climate Experts
- conrad ziefle on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- conrad ziefle on “Siberia might stay livable”
- Timo, not that one! on “Siberia might stay livable”
- arn on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- arn on “Siberia might stay livable”
Why are they measuring December thru November. What’s wrong with Jan – Dec???
I guess they are afraid of the extreme lows from December 2010.
If memory serves, there was an email in the climategate mails where a couple of the cabal were laughing about releasing yearly data before everyone went off on holidays.
Meterological year starts with Winter which is considered as December January February!
Using Jan, Feb and the following Dec to represent a winter does not make sense. Using JFM to represent winter also does not make sense. It was based on a seasonal thing!
However they all need to pick a period as base reference and all use that for ALL claims. They also have to pick a reference period of years for Climate reference and all use the same period as different periods give different anamolies. Because none of the data are fixed attempting to adjust one to match the other is futile. Of course we have seen the futility of attempting to match one years reports to one from a few years later from the same source.
Which ever period provides what is needed to support the agenda is what will be stated!
we should see a lot more of this latest line of bull from all the puppets now that their strings have been pulled and they have been reprogrammed to believe warm causes cold and snow!
Here is a chart I made from ESRL/NOAA data to look at relative humidity in the atmosphere. I did this for numerous heights in the atmosphere to verify the warming = more water vapor claim.
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/cgi-bin/data/timeseries/timeseries.pl?ntype=1&var=Relative+Humidity+%28up+to+300mb+only%29&level=300&lat1=-90&lat2=90&lon1=-180&lon2=180&iseas=1&mon1=0&mon2=11&iarea=1&typeout=2&Submit=Create+Timeseries
Their is a steady decline in Atmospheric RH since 1950 so where Trenberth is getting his 4% increase in the last 30 years is a mystery. Tucker then regurgitates the hottest year green shirt/GISS talking points before other data sets are out. RSS is official at .51C anomaly for 2010 as compared to .55C for 1998. Professional journalism is a lost art to Ms. Tucker with respect to the linked article.
the sad thing is people will simply accept the warmer=colder argument.