Washington Post Vying For Top Fake News Climate Site

The Washington Post Capital Weather Gang has yet another wildly misleading climate article out again today.

This one GIF encapsulates global warming in the U.S. in 2016 – The Washington Post

2016 was not a hot year in the US. The number of hot days was below average, and ranked 80th hottest since 1895. Only 4.4% of days were over 95F (35C) – compared to 9.8% in 1936.

Relying on “one GIF” of one year in the US to “encapsulate global warming” is utter nonsense. It was an El Nino year, which brings warm weather to the US. The entire country averaged above normal.

The year is finishing with a near record cold December in much of the US.

Next year is looking even colder.

During cold years like 2014 and 2009, they say “the US is only 2% of the planet.” But during warm years the US proves global warming.

The raw thermometer data shows that the US is no warmer than the 1930’s.  2016 is tied with 1921 as second warmest.

Maximum temperatures show a cooling trend since the 1930’s.

Summer maximum temperatures plummeted in the US from the 1930’s to the 1950’s, and never recovered. Summer 2016 was not a hot summer in the US.

The “one GIF” used by the Washington Post tells us nothing about climate. All it tells us is that El Nino brought a very mild year to the US, with a record low number of tornadoes and the longest stretch on record without a major hurricane.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Washington Post Vying For Top Fake News Climate Site

  1. RAH says:

    The latest daily update at weatherbell makes it clear that shortly before the middle of January most of the US will once again be in the deep freeze. And this time Europe is going to get a dose of the same. But of course that, like every other weather, will be just another indication of global warming you know.

    BTW though this last summer was considerably warmer than the previous one we did not have a single day that broke into the triple digits in north and central Indiana and only a couple that got to 95 F. I think that for most of us in the US and probably the N. hemisphere the anomalous warmth was manifested during the spring and fall and not during the dog days of summer.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Yes, I have not seen the temperature break 100F in several years like it was doing with regularity in the summer of 2004.

      Heck I can remember 100F in New England on several occasions. The summers here in North Carolina the last few years are no hotter that the summers I saw up north.

  2. 2hotel9 says:

    Have the radio going in background, every news break they are running the same “Today is hottest day EVAH” crap. Really? It is “hot” in the south of US in end of December? Wow. Years we go down to my mom’s place in Pearl River county Mississippi for Christmas I walk around barefoot. Only twice in last 15 years has it been cold on Christmas Day. Funny, when the temps dump in January these same screeching idiots won’t have anything to say, other than how globall warmining is causing snow and ice. F**king idiots.

  3. Gail Combs says:

    Big Legal Win for Climate Scientist

    “A District of Columbia appeals court has given a major legal win to Michael Mann, a professor at Pennsylvania State University who studies climate change, in his defamation suits against two bloggers”'”

    …The D.C. appeals court agreed with Mann.

    “Tarnishing the personal integrity and reputation of a scientist important to one side may be a tactic to gain advantage in a no-holds-barred debate over global warming. That the challenged statements were made as part of such debate provides important context and requires careful parsing in light of constitutional standards,” the decision says. “But if the statements assert or imply false facts that defame the individual, they do not find shelter under the First Amendment simply because they are embedded in a larger policy debate.”

    The decision could be important for several reasons. Mann and others who work in climate change say that they face unfair personal smears by those who who deny climate change and Mann has emerged as a scholar willing to fight back on the issue. Mann — Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science at Penn State — is also a prominent figure among scientists who work on climate change….

    Can I barf now???

    I read another article at Inside Higher Education.

    In the middle the article states:
    “Nonprofit colleges and universities are prohibited by law from officially endorsing or opposing particular political candidates; they are compelled by mission to be places where a wide range of views, even those that are unpopular and provocative, can be expressed.”

    With that in mind Brian Rosenberg, president of Macalester College, goes on to say.

    Donald Trump, as the likely nominee of a major political party for the presidency of the United States, raises questions heretofore unimagined….

    If any doubt exists about the fact that the Trump situation is unusual, consider that some students viewed the recent chalkings of “Trump 2016” on the Emory University campus — absent any other language — as an act of intimidation. And the university’s president, James W. Wagner, observed that “the students with whom I spoke heard a message, not about political process or candidate choice, but instead about values regarding diversity and respect that clash with Emory’s own.” That is, some people considered Trump’s mere name as equivalent to an offensive epithet.

    While such sensitivity might in part be a sign of the times in which we live, it is nonetheless true that Trump is more or less a walking violation of the mission statements and codes of conduct at most American colleges. Were he a student at Emory who engaged in some of his characteristic behaviors in a classroom or residence hall, he would likely face severe criticism and even disciplinary action. Few college presidents would hesitate to condemn a member of their community who, for example, clearly appeared to mock a person with a physical disability, insulted more than one religious and ethnic group en masse, and habitually belittled women….

    Mock a person with a physical disability??? ERRrrrr, No, that was looked at closely and found to be the usual Media Propaganda smear as are all the other smears the ‘president’ names in the article. But then Brian Rosenberg writes for Huff & Puff so he should know all about Media Propaganda smears.

    Near the end Rosenberg gives his reason WHY he hates Trump.

    …Trump presents a special challenge because the policies and the personality seem so deeply interwoven and because both the policies and the manner in which they are expressed represent such a clear challenge to the work of higher education. Banning the entry of all Muslims into the United States, for instance, would have a direct impact on many international students and faculty members on campuses across the country. Forced deportation of undocumented residents would remove many students from those same campuses.

    Afraid it might hit your school in the pocketbook do you Mr Rosenberg?

    And then to add insult to injury considering the violence and temper tantrums we have seen.

    I might go further and argue that the incitement to violence and the encouragement of fear and anger also undermine the academy’s commitment to civility and rational discourse….

    Are you talking about the violence YOUR school encourages Mr. Rosenberg?

    If these two ‘presidents’ represent US Universities, and Milo’s Dangerous F@ggot Tour shows they are, then it really is time to clean house.


    The True Story: Donald Trump Did Not Mock a Reporter’s Disability
    Even MORE Video Evidence Trump Did Not Mock Reporter’s Disability

  4. gator69 says:

    Hotter than what average? To “prove” global warming or global cooling, all one has to do is move the goal posts.

  5. Steve Case says:

    U.S. Weather Stations in 2016
    Hotter Than Average
    98% of 1730+ stations

    “Hotter Than Average” whatever that means. As Tony points out:
    “Maximum temperatures show a cooling trend since the 1930’s.”
    Indeed, the reason the Washington Post can put up such stuff and get away with it is because folks on the other side of the issue are allowing the alarmists to control the language. Weather stations record the daily high and low temperatures. Taking the average of those two values effectively throws most of the information out the window. After all, the average of 49 and 51 is 50 and the average of 1 and 99 is also 50.

    When Johnny Carson said it was the hottest ever, and the audience responded “How hot was it?” Johnny didn’t tell ’em, “Well the average July Temperature was 75.2”

  6. Steve Case says:

    Since Tony put up a Max Summer Temp graph and assuming it’s Jun-Aug numbers here’s a comparison with NOAA’s Climate at a Glance. Notice the fat red line on Tony’s graph and the skinny green line from NOAA. Looks to me like the past was lowered on the NOAA rendition:

    • tonyheller says:

      Of course. That is what they do for a living – cool the past.

      • RAH says:

        and warm the present or any more recent years.

        • Steve Case says:

          I hit the “Post Comment” button to soon. Yes, the thin green NOAA rendition crosses Tony’s fat red line starting at about the 2000 mark.

          There’s lots of ways to display this stuff, here’s one done that shows changes made over a two and half year stretch six years ago:

  7. Steve Case says:

    Or I could just post it here:

  8. Gail Combs says:

    E. M. is working on A Remarkably Tiny Global Circulation Model You Can Run
    (I am computer-challenged but I try to follow.)

    He just made some rather interesting comments this morning.

    …So it has a solar constant in it, and is set up to accept change over time ( I think) if you load that into a file. I’d want to divide things into UV vs visible vs IR, but hey, all things in their proper order… first get it to run at all…

    Everything else is a diddle factor based on the Greenhouse Gas Thesis… so if the “solar constant” is kept constant, or only varies a tiny bit, then you MUST have the GHG effect to ‘tune’ the model to historical knowns…. Thus the cycle of belief begins… OK, so once this thing is running, my first thing to do is beef up the solar stuff, then add UV variation by altitude… but not, I think, today….

    And the next comment

    Gee… another interesting bit:


    Sea surface temperatures (SST) are either specified from climatological input files or may be calculated using model-derived surface energy fluxes and specified ocean heat transports. The ocean heat transports vary both seasonally and regionally, but are otherwise fixed, and do not adjust to forcing changes. This mixed-layer ocean model was developed for use with the GISS GCM and is often referred to as the “Qflux” parameterization. Full details of the Qflux scheme are described in Russell et al. (1985), and in appendix A of Hansen et al. (1997). In brief, the convergence (divergence) at each grid cell is calculated based on the heat storage capacity of the surface oce

    So the ocean has a seasonal swing to it, and has a little regional variation, but things like, oh, the Thermohaline Circulation and the Gulf Stream shifting overall global ocean heat are not going to change in response to either the sun or the gas ‘forcings’… Interesting. That thing which, IMHO, is MOST likely to be critically important to a Little Ice Age in Europe, or the onset of a global Ice Age Glacial, or even sporadic warming when it goes the other way, doesn’t change…

    Egads, no wonder they ‘believe in the CO2 Monster’ They hold everything that actually affects the climate constant — GIGO follows.

    And the comment up stream is even worse.

    Well, working down their list of documentation postings… this one is more interesting than I’d expected:


    [lots pf computer code then embedded comment]

    …. SRCOR, solar correction factor for qflux and deep ocean runs. Gone from model e because Jim doesn’t like it,

    Oh Really?… “Jim” (one presumes Hanson?) doesn’t “like” a solar correction factor…


    Computer types might like to read what he is doing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.