- As of 1981, Hansen showed about 0.4C warming from 1890 to 1980.
- In 2002, GISS showed 0.6C warming from 1890 to 1980
- Now GISS shows 0.8C warming from 1890 to 1980
The White House demands data which backs their policy, and Gavin delivers.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- Timo, not that one! on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Bill on Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Gamecock on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Gamecock on “pushing nature past its limits”
- William on Mission Accomplished
- Gordon Vigurs on Mission Accomplished
- Disillusioned on Mission Accomplished
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
sarc on
There is nothing wrong with the adjustments. We must forget the satellites that contradict the adjusted surface temps. The satellites are part of the fossil fuel industry conspiracy. We should only listen to the the Ministry of Truth and those (missing) 97% of scientists who tell us the science of man-made global warming is real, and that “the science is settled.”
So, do your patriotic duty to fight “carbon pollution” which is destroying our planet. Turn in a “climate denier” today!
Jawohl herr kommandant!
sarc off
Cooking the books right out in the open.
A grand Jury is needed really badly right now. This should be one of the top priorities of the Rep’s.
A Grand Jury investigation could kill off many dangerous birds with one stone.
Only the really smart people are able to know the exact temperatures on the globe a century ago and a century into the future. Get with the program.
I posted your comment on tsu.co , the social media website that PAYS you to post. If you’d like to join – use my shortcode Lenell31411
It’s one reason for using global temperatures, rather than showing the regional changes. It’s hard to argue with a global figure. The local climate changes are another matter. But the important one.
Thanks to Climategate emails and AGW debate, the horrific
“Global Ministry of Information” that controls news media and mainstream research journals was exposed, and the
“Global Ministry of Truth” is being revealed in false, but world-wide, Standard Models of:
1. Earth’s Climate
2. Nuclear & Theoretical Physics
3. Ordinary Stars
4. Big Bang Cosmology
The UN’s IPCC seems to be the “Global Ministry of Truth” for #1, climate.
The UN’s IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) seems to be the “Global Ministry of Truth” for #2, nuclear and theoretical physics.
See: Organizational Chart of the IAEA*
https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/orgchart_0.pdf
*This includes the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP), legally referred to as the “International Centre for Theoretical Physics”, is operated as a joint programme by UNESCO and the Agency. Administration is carried out by UNESCO on behalf of both organizations.
Thanks, Steven, for your brave role in exposing worldwide fraud disguised as “consensus science.”
There are 4 rules, the 3rd is the one I live by:
1. the laws of Germany
2. be nice to Mommy
3. don’t talk to commies
4. eat kosher salami
http://yalepress.yale.edu/images/full13/9780300053876.jpg
An examination of the role of leading scholars – philosophers, historians and scientists – in Hitler’s rise to power and eventual war of extermination against the Jews. This reissue contains a new introduction by historian Martin Gilbert.
The biggest joke on Hitler was Prof. Carl von Weizsacker’s nuclear binding energy equation. Weizsacker was the theoretical nuclear physicist advising Hitler’s team that tried and failed to make atomic bombs.
After WWII, von Weizsacker’s flawed nuclear binding energy equation was inserted in western textbooks of nuclear physics to replace the valid concept of “nuclear packing fraction” by 1922 Nobel Laureate F. W. Aston.
That is the way the energy in cores of heavy atoms, stars and galaxies – NEUTRON REPULSION – was hidden from the public.
Before you swallow Steve’s next attempt to denigrate the instrumental temperature record , please take a look at what it looks like if you erase all of the data points he disputes !
Bullshit
Pretty colors Russell! Keep playing with your crayons, and remember to stay in the lines, anything else ist verboten!
Dr Don Easterbrook talks to data tampering back in 2013 in testimony to Congress
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LkMweOVOOI
Thanks for that link.
Everyone is quick to remember Eisenhower’s warning about the “military-industrial complex”. Few know he also warned about government funding of science:
“Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of
scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically
the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the
conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes
virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds
of new electronic computers.
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.”