Climategate scientists said they wanted to get rid of the 1940’s blip, and they did. They don’t want people to know what the climate was like in the past, because it wrecks their story and exposes their graphs as complete nonsense.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
Recent Comments
- Ed on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Walter on Ellen Flees To The UK
- conrad ziefle on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- conrad ziefle on Scientist Kamala Harris
- conrad ziefle on Ellen Flees To The UK
- William on Ellen Flees To The UK
- William on Ellen Flees To The UK
- arn on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Greg in NZ on Ellen Flees To The UK
- arn on Ellen Flees To The UK
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2014/08/30/arctic-ice-cap-expands-41-percent-two-years-al-gore-thought-it-might-be-#comment-1568627484
The comments may entertain.
Mother Nature has always been in charge….LOL!
“Phil, Here are some speculations on correcting SSTs to partly explain the 1940s warming blip. If you look at the attached plot you will see that the land also shows the 1940s blip (as I’m sure you know). So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC, then this would be significant for the global mean — but we’d still have to explain the land blip. I’ve chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of these). When you look at other blips, the land blips are 1.5 to 2 times (roughly) the ocean blips — higher sensitivity plus thermal inertia effects. My 0.15 adjustment leaves things consistent with this, so you can see where I am coming from. Removing ENSO does not affect this. It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with “why the blip”. [Tom Wigley, to Phil Jones and Ben Santer]
Tony, the link to the newspaper article isn’t working.
Reblogged this on the WeatherAction Blog.
Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
We just need to keep reminding everyone!
Thanks, Steven aka Tony, for your effort to sort “truth from propaganda.”
With the submission of a new manuscript on “solar energy” for publication at ~6:30 am (Central Time) this morning, there is now a self-identification process in operation to separate real from phony science:. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Solar_Energy.pdf
1. If the 97% consensus community consists of real scientists, they will openly address all nine pages of precise experimental measurements that disagree with the Standard Solar Model of Hydrogen-filled stars.
2. If the 97% consensus community consists only of phony scientists, they will refuse to address any of nine pages of precise experimental data that disagree with the Standard Solar Model of Hydrogen-filled stars.
With kind regards,
– Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
Thread bomber.
Are you looking to be spam, Brian?