Monthly Archives: January 2014

Jan 22-feb  5  could be one of coldest periods plains east in last  50 years, if not longer Superbowl is February 2, outdoors at Chris Christie’s  “I Shouldn’t Have Listened To Al Gore” Stadium

Hansen’s 1988 definition, which has been deleted from the GISS website and blocked from the web archive Scenario A assumes continued exponential trace gas growth, scenario B assumes a reduced linear growth of trace gases, and scenario C assumes a … Continue reading →

Hansen’s 1988 BAU forecast for scenario A was a complete disaster. They weren’t even in the ballpark. Popular Science – Google Books This is what Dana shows in his 100% fraudulent graph. Nothing about this graph resembles reality.

SIGNIFIGANT RISE IN SEA LEVEL NOW SEEMS CERTAIN February 18, 1986 MANY scientists are so sure that the sea level will rise visibly in the coming decades that they are advising planners to adopt new strategies now. A predicted rise … Continue reading →

Not only did Dana use the wrong scenario (B when it should have been A) but he plotted scenario B too low (red line) GISS is now 0.4C below scenario B, and Dana shows it 0.2 C below.

Not only is everything else about the graph fraudulent,  but it turns out that Dana ‘s claimed Lindzen forecast is also a fake. Does anyone have any idea where the curve attributed to me came from?  I don’t do forecasts. … Continue reading →

Dave Burton found another CIA paper from 1974 : documents.theblackvault.com/documents/environment/potentialtrends.pdf They blamed dips in the polar vortex on Arctic cooling, unlike the current administration – which thinks cold is caused by heat, debt is wealth, liabilities are assets, and being … Continue reading →

Check out this crock of lies from Peter Sinclair. Puffing Lindzen | Climate Denial Crock of the Week He made up fake numbers for every line in his graph, didn’t normalize the non-existent Lindzen forecast. and used the wrong Hansen scenario. … Continue reading →

Having the 1975 NAS report in hand completely disarms alarmists. Thanks Dave!   https://ia801806.us.archive.org/7/items/understandingcli00unit/understandingcli00unit.pdf It also provides a smoking gun that Mann had no legitimate reason to delete Briffa’s trees, which precisely matched the NAS graph.   http://climateaudit.org/2009/11/26/the-deleted-portion-of-the-briffa-reconstruction/ …

www.climatemonitor.it/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/1974.pdf h/t to omnologos