Earth Cooling At The Fastest Rate On Record

Global temperatures have plummeted this year at a record rate. Over the last ten months, temperatures have dropped more than three quarters of a degree, breaking the previous global cooling record set in 1999.

RSS_TS_channel_TLT_Global_Land_And_Sea_v03_3.txt

Much of the Arctic was extremely cold last month, not “super-hot” as claimed by the Washington Post.

ch_tlt_2016_12_anom_v03_3.png

Satellites show that there has been little or no warming for 20 years.

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

Meanwhile criminals working for government agencies and their cohorts in the press are doing their best to hide the news – screaming today that global warming is accelerating and there was no hiatus.

These claims from today’s fraudsters directly contradict their top fraudster Michael Mann, who says there was a hiatus.

Making sense of the early-2000s warming slowdown : Nature Climate Change

There is no settled science. There is no consensus. There is no climate science, period. Just a group of criminals who are terrified that their global warming scam is about to end. Climate scientists make Enron accountants look like saints.

“Oh, what a tangled web we weave…when first we practice to deceive.”

  • Sir Walter Scott
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

97 Responses to Earth Cooling At The Fastest Rate On Record

  1. Eric Simpson says:

    “There is no climate science, period.”

    Right, climate ‘science’ = politicized science.
    Politicized science by definition is not science but partisan advocacy.
    They don’t seek the impartial truth. Instead everything they do is geared only toward supporting and advancing their cause.

    It’s also politicized media.
    And the politicized media and politicized science ooze out of exactly the same leftist stock. You got the mainstream media, as the WaPO, NYT, LA Times, ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN on and on toeing the leftist line. And then you got all the science sites like Scientific American / Live Science / PhysOrg doing the same thing, serving as an unquestioning outlet for the bs coming from the press releases of the Crying Wolf chicken littles.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      California just hired Eric Holder to promote rigorous socially and racially just climate science against President Trump.

    • RAP says:

      Follow the $$$$$

    • Ewin Barnett says:

      Climate science may go down as the 21st century version of Lysenkoism. That was what passed for genetics and agricultural science under Stalin in the Soviet Union. People who denied the theories and decrees of Trofim Lysenko were fired from their jobs, arrested, imprisoned and even executed.

      From the article on Lysenkoism in Wikipedia:

      “The term Lysenkoism can also be used metaphorically to describe the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias, often related to social or political objectives”

      see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism

      When the solutions to climate change all seem to converge on socialistic government intrusion and policies, then what you are seeing is the manipulation of science to fulfill an ideological agenda.

      On my part, since I know that less than 30,000 years ago the area where the city of Chicago sits was under thousands of feet of glacial ice, then it should be clear that the climate is always changing. To claim otherwise is to deny continent-shaping dynamic forces of nature. The issue then cannot be climate “change”, but the extent to which human activity has changed the climate in a way that harms humanity first and secondly harms the biosphere upon which humanity depends for life.

      The only ideology that should permeate science is the ideology of truthfulness.

      • Denz... says:

        Absolutely spot on!

        Been reading about I=PAT formula used to prevent “Jevons’ Paradox” as regards controlling energy use/CO2 emissions, using taxation policies/corporate pricing by G Brown.
        This ties in with Lysenkoism, couldn’t agree more sir.

      • Neal S says:

        I hope that at some point in the future, with the help of climate-gate emails, that people who either deleted or attempted to delete emails that originated from or went to government computers, will be prosecuted for destruction of government property.

        Basically if an email in the climate-gate trove either came from or went to a government computer, then person who either sent or received that email on a government computer needs to be able to produce it, or face consequences for having destroyed it.

        This is fairly clear and unambiguous. Even if you believed lies about not answering congressional subpoenas due to preserving scientific integrity, there can be no good excuse given for destruction of government property. It is fairly clear that the reason for deletion of any of these emails, was to attempt to hide the fraud and collusion between those involved.

        “The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine” While I don’t expect such prosecutions immediately upon inauguration day, I would hope that once the Augean Stables of the justice department have been cleaned up, that we can be so blessed.

        • Gail Combs says:

          OR Climastrologists at universities who had taken state or federal grants at the time the e-mail was created.

  2. Shooter says:

    They’re so confident on how the Pause allegedly doesn’t exist. Add that to the 63 other times they’ve tried to explain it away, as Hockey Schtick has shown. According to one of the lead researchers, ocean buoys ‘underestimate’ warming because there isn’t a lot of them, and that biases prevent them from accurately reporting the temperature. He was on WUWT, justifying his research.

    Even once the work has been debunked, the Greenies will cling to these news reports, and continue to push for new carbon taxes.

    • AB says:

      I think we all know where the bias comes from! Liberal scientists who were told they were exceptionally smart and want to feel their “science” can make a difference. Reality is weather study is great but imperfect and depending almost entirely on a great ball of burning gas a million miles from us and flying through space!

  3. Jimmy Haigh says:

    My fivourite is “climate bollocks” coined by a commenter on Bishop Hill.

  4. Kyle_Fouro says:

    Tony,

    What do you think of that recent study? Have you looked into it at all?

    • tonyheller says:

      Complete crap.

    • AndyG55 says:

      They are getting closer and closer to attributing all variations in the temperature record (amazingly even those with NOAA/GISS agenda based “adjustments™©”)
      ….. to NATURAL VARIABILITY.

      They will have no choice to go to 100% NATURAL over the next several years as the HUGE divergence between models and real data becomes even more laughably ENORMOUS.

    • AndyG55 says:

      I find this comment in the papers conclusion absolutely HILARIOUS..

      “This is particularly true in the embryonic field of decadal climate prediction,..”

      Sorry but……. WTF !!! SERIOUSLY !!!

      All that money WASTED because of an “EMBRYONIC field of decadal climate prediction”..

      WTF happened to so called “settled science” !!

      These guys are a bunch of total W**KERS” running scared of the new Trump reality.

      • Latitude says:

        By their own doing…they can’t claim anything right now.
        In a couple of years they will adjust todays temperature again…
        …so we will never know what the temperature is today

        Anything they claim is happening right now…is total BS

  5. gator69 says:

    Climate disruption! Just as the models predicted. Panic and raise taxes.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      97% of scientists predicted that Hillary will win with 97% certainty.

      I predict that in the coming years universities’ political science departments and climate science departments will formally complete the de facto merge that has already happened. They are using the same Critical Theory methods and they will save tons of money by using the same supercomputer models.

    • oldguy52 says:

      ^^^Indeed!^^^

  6. Harry says:

    A direct quote from the BBC article (my emphasis):
    “The authors showed that the ocean buoys used to measure sea temperatures tend to report slightly cooler temperatures than the older ship-based systems.
    Back in the 1990s, ship measurements made up the vast majority of the data, whereas now the more accurate and consistent buoys account for 85% of measurements.
    When the researchers corrected the data to take this “cold bias” into account…”

    So they “corrected” the more accurate and consistent data. It is definitely not science as I understand the term.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Big DUH!
      People on WUWT ripped apart the ship-based systems vs ocean buoys years ago.

      The ship-based systems get divided into two types.
      OLDER: Toss a bucket over the side, haul THE WET bucket (evaporative cooling) up on deck and have some bored to death sailor measure the temperature.

      YOUNGER: measure the temperature of the water sucked in to cool the engines.

      Of course the “WHY” is always left out.
      The Gulf Stream, together with its northern extension towards Europe, the North Atlantic Drift, is a powerful, warm, and swift Atlantic ocean current. The process of western intensification causes the Gulf Stream to be a northward accelerating current off the east coast of North America.

      Ben Franklin, worked with a distant cousin Captin Folger and other experienced ship captains, charted the Gulf Stream. Timothy Folger, a Nantucket Island whaling captain, explained that the then-unnamed Gulf Stream could be identified by whale behavior, measurement of the water’s temperature and the speed of bubbles on its surface, and changes in the water’s color. Franklin’s Gulf Stream chart was published in 1770. The Gulf Stream is typically 100 kilometres (62 mi) wide. — WIKI

      (Seems WIKI/ got it wrong. link

      A SYSTEM OF PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY by D. M. Warren 1856: “The Waters of the Equatorial current again become heated in the Gulf of Mexico, and under the name of the Gulf Stream, flow forth into the Atlantic, ten degrees warmer than the surrounding ocean.”

      Some where I read the temperature as you head towards Europe is about 3 to 5C warmer. Therefore all a ship’s captian is interested in is WHAT CURRENT am I in and not the absolute temperature.

      NORTH ATLANTIC DRIFT – WIKI/NASA-GODDARD

  7. Gail Combs says:

    What is hysterical is the ClimAstrologists are now claiming it is NOT the Gulf Stream that warms Europe but air…

    I guess no one explained the concepts of mass or Specific Heat to ClimAstrologists.

    Climate mythology: The Gulf Stream, European climate and Abrupt Change by Richard Seager, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University

    The Gulf Stream-European climate myth
    The panic is based on a long held belief of the British, other Europeans, Americans and, indeed, much of the world’s population that the northward heat transport by the Gulf Stream is the reason why western Europe enjoys a mild climate, much milder than, say, that of eastern North America. This idea was actually originated by an American military man, Matthew Fontaine Maury, in the mid nineteenth century and has stuck since despite the absence of proof.

    We now know this is a myth, the climatological equivalent of an urban legend. In a detailed study published in the Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society in 2002, we demonstrated the limited role that ocean heat transport plays in determining regional climates around the Atlantic Ocean….

    Back to the Gulf Stream:

    “The Gulf Stream.” Ocean Surface Currents. — Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative, University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmoshperic Science.

    The Gulf Stream [white] as represented by the Mariano Global Surface Velocity Analysis (MGSVA). The Gulf Stream is the western boundary current of the N. Atlantic subtropical gyre. The Gulf Stream transports significant amount of warm water (heat) poleward. The averaging of velocity data from a meandering current produces a wide mean picture of the flow. The core of the Gulf Stream current is about 90 km wide and has peak velocities of greater than 2 m/s (5 knots).

  8. Hivemind says:

    That chart labelled “Brightness Temperature Anomaly” is extremely misleading. Most of the colours would seem to indicate heating. Purple for extreme cold creates an overall impression of warming over most of the planet, which is not the case if you look carefully at the legend. How many ordinary people look carefully enough?

    A better colour scheme would start at dark blue for cold, go through white for zero and red for hot at the other end.

    Such a misleading choice of colours could not have been made by accident and suggests deliberate deception on the part of it’s creators.

    • Gail Combs says:

      The misleading choice of colours is done deliberately to mislead the public.

      “Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) is a scientific research company located in Northern California, specializing in satellite microwave remote sensing of the Earth. Established in 1974 by Frank J. Wentz, Remote Sensing Systems, presently, consists of a team of atmospheric, oceanic, and earth scientists and support personnel”

      At least some of their research is funded by NASA:
      http://www.remss.com/research

      They really can’t go outside the CAGW meme and keep their funding.

      Carl Mears VP and Senior Scientist, at Remote Sensing Systems, was a major contributor to “Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere: Steps for Understanding and Reconciling Differences,” the first released report from the US Climate Change Science Program.

      The Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) was the program responsible for coordinating and integrating research on global warming by U.S. government agencies from February 2002 to June 2009.

      Mears also contributed to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Working Group one report, Climate Change 2007 – The Physical Science Basis.

      Remote Sensing Systems does trt to sit on the fence:
      http://www.remss.com/research/climate

  9. Pingback: CLAIM: Earth Cooling at Fastest Rate on Record… – Killuminati Records

  10. RichPeterson says:

    It was the 1972 Stockholm Conference on Environmental Crisis which gave a face to Today’s environmental movement. Meeting notes from the pre-conference preparatory committee co-sponsored by the Institute for Theological Encounter with Science and Technology and the Institute of Environmental Studies reveals this:

    “So, we are proposing to the Conference, or to the governments, the establishing of a global monitoring system, which is called Earth Watch…”

    “So we see in the environmental issue, an issue that transcends boundaries and transcends politics…”

    “…we do not foresee a sovereign state yielding its sovereignty to an international police force at this time. This may come about eventually…”

    “What kind of vehicle will get the world community along the road that we’ll have to travel?”

    “This very pedestrian nature of the Stockholm Conference may be an advantage for another reason: in a revolution you have to have an idea and an ideal.”

    “There is another problem here that we ought to face before we get too romantic about world government…It is an interesting exercise to wonder how long it will be before Principle 18…reads that resources are the common heritage of all mankind. A generation? Ten generations?”

    “There is a limit to sovereignty in that the world’s resources are the common property of all mankind. Nations will have to share everything, as in questions of private property. Private property is a defense of an individual’s possibility to maintain his quality of life, but it is not an absolute right…”

    “Sometime something is going to happen that is truly irretrievable, but we have not yet come to this. What is most likely to become irreversible? Should this be the topic of the Stockholm Conference? Not really because Stockholm is looking to world-wide situations and there is no particular environmental (pollution, at least) issue that needs an immediate global response.”

    ”Furthermore, if global problems are to be soled, nations have to come to international agreements and ultimately to some form of supranational authority and power.”

    “We consider the Stockholm Declaration as the first enunciation of a Global Environmental Constitution…”

    “Earth Watch as a global effort at environmental cooperation, should obviously be directed to a global problem. The problem priority for Earth Watch should involve that global problem which may most easily become irreversible. WE SUGGEST THAT SEAS AND OCEANS…REPRESENT A PRIME GLOBAL CONCERN.” [emphasis mine].

    Politicization of the issue had begun as early as 1973 as global cooling (see Time magazine covers: Dec. 3, 1973; Jan 31, 1977; and Dec. 24, 1979). Then we were going to fry (see Time magazine covers April 9, 2001; April 3, 2006; and April 9, 2007).

    In the US, “Deniers” are now being threatened with imprisonment for quoting from the horses’ mouths (or whatever you prefer to call them).

  11. Sonny says:

    WE use to have a saying when I lived in California; that the Unusual weather was usual. I’m taking the long view, that the natural cycles of the Earth and the Solar System are probably more intelligent than all the Climate Change/Global Warming scientists put together.

  12. Jeff H says:

    Until such time as a Group of Climate Scientists are arrested and trialed on fraud. No justification qualification will be committed to complying Climate Science Researchers to be honest about what they do. There is NO PENALTY in being wrong. There is NO PENALTY in falsifying research. There is NO PENALTY in profiting from Global Warming Research.
    But there is a penalty if a banker or financial institution commits fraud. There is a penalty when a Stock Trader cheats trading practice and colludes with others that permits Stock Cheats to benefit from insider trading.
    But there is NO PENALTY in Global Warming/Climate Change agenda participants. Until a group is rounded up and arrested on insider research cheating. There will be no responsibility on their part to be honest in what they do.

  13. Pingback: CLAIM: Earth Cooling at Fastest Rate on Record... | ValuBit News

  14. kvn says:

    There have been at least 5 Glacial Periods, or Ice Ages, in 800 million years of Earth history in the Geologic Timeline. You can find many graphs with a simple internet search. Each Glacial Period has been separated by a cleverly named Interglacial Period marked by intermingled Global Warming and Global Colling trending to or from a Glacial Period. Natural state of the Earth is covered with ice is a much more convincing argument than the perfect state of the Earth is climate circa 1980.

  15. Dura_Ace says:

    How many extra fake data points got added in this time to influence the results?

    Climate science is not settled science. Settled science is dogma, science is always looking
    at he results then resolving problems presented by the data. Once they get to where it is
    “settled science” it sure starts to sound like climate change as a religion .

    Here’s the issue: the ecosystem is way too complex for the models we use to account for
    every factor..consequently its difficult to draw absolute facts out of some of these
    scientists work..especially when they put their thumb on the scale to influence the results
    to support the conclusions they want everyone to reach.

    Computational climate thermodynamics has never explained why in the computational
    model water vapor is supposed to heat the plant, yet when they measure it, it cools the
    planet. Climate scientists fight each other over producing fictitious results especially those
    supporting the story the Obama administration wants all of them to tell. Not to mention
    that’s where the grant money is. Do you think Obama and his crowd will fund anyone
    whose results confound the story they want to tell??

    Science is the pursuit of the truth good or bad..but the truth supported with statistically valid data.

  16. Pingback: REPORT: Earth Cooling At The Fastest Rate On Record - Vessel News

  17. A comment says:

    Wait for the soon-to-be-made claims that their “efforts have paid off” and that a “disaster was averted” followed by our need to “ever be vigilant”.

    At least until they cook up another scare.

  18. Paul Gorsuch says:

    I don’t understand the data under the topic “the Arctic was extremely cold last month, not “super-hot” as claimed by the Washington Post” or the map “MSU/AMSU channel TNT Brightness Temperature Anomaly, December, 2016”.

    This is not my area of expertise.

    Can anyone direct me to an explanatory link or source?

  19. David Harper says:

    If you wonder why paradise vanished so soon… remember the Man with the Big Red Balloon.

    https://www.amazon.com/Man-Big-Red-Balloon/dp/1498493602/

  20. Grizz Mann says:

    It is the windmills. Not only, these storms , earthquakes, are caused by the use of windmills. The blades draw heavy cold air with the birds and Monarch butterflies through the blades, cooling the air more. The imbalance of the blades cause a vibration in the earth’s crust accounting for more severe earthquakes. This effect is amplified by the proximity of solar panels to the windmills. Tesla experimented with vibrations and found them indeed dangerous.

    • toorightmate says:

      Grizz’s reasoning is outstanding.
      Worthy of an award.
      Nobel Peace Prize or Hockey Stick? – Your choice Grizz.

    • David Jay says:

      Absolutely!

      Birds are exothermic. Every time a bird killed by a windmill, the earth warms at a slower rate.

  21. Johnny Colaw says:

    The essence of science is skepticism and theory. After all is said and done, we shall learn that global temperatures are most affected by solar activity, just like other planets. It is cyclical with trends, and both warming and cooling are natural.

    We can no more raise or lower the overall temperature of the Earth than we can stop it from spinning. Follow the money, Young Man.

  22. John Lawhon says:

    Someone needs to look at Time magazine and farm magazines from the late 60s and early 70s.
    At that time the ‘Chicken Littles’ were predicting a ‘Global Ice Age’ and encouraging farmers to grow a lot of food ‘because of the coming cold weather, there was going to be world wide famine.’
    Didn’t happen!
    The ‘Global Cooling’ fools did an about face and became ‘Global Warming’ fools.
    In neither case do they know what they are talking about.
    Weather men are the only people that can be wrong 80% of the time and still keep a job.

  23. JohnB says:

    Very tricky bit of misinformation by the author. He knows that most people will look at that first graph and conclude that no real warming has occurred since 1980. But that graph is the 10 month running change not that actual measured temperature. For example the current value is -0.76 but that does not even cancel out the previous high of 0.8. You are still left with +0.04. In other words for a running change graph it matters how often the data points are above or below zero. A simpler way to see this for those who care is to grab and plot the data set linked right below the graph. You will need to remove the values for 1978 as they are all -99 (no value). You can then see what the actual temperature trend is. Not surprisingly it is rising not falling as the author suggests.

    • tonyheller says:

      Moron alert

    • pmc47025 says:

      Dear John,

      The graph Tony provided is clearly labeled “Ten Month Change In Lower Troposphere Temperature”, no intent to deceive.

      How can the planet cool at a record RATE with elevated (unprecedented?) CO2 levels burning the planet to a crisp? Is there something, uh, alarming in your “Chart Title” graph? Does your “Chart Title” graph directly link the eyeballed 1998 temperature step change to CO2?

      • JohnB says:

        The chart was generated from the linked data above below the authors chart. You can do this yourself in about 30 seconds if you cared to. I didn’t annotate the chart because I clearly stated what the data was. The planet can indeed cool at a record rate right after a record heating. Same thing happened last El Nino. However, even the “record” cooling still leaves the temperature greater than in 2015. That’s what the data shows. Download it yourself and tell me otherwise.

      • JohnB says:

        Here a better view of the data with fractional years added since the data put months into the same year. Notice anything? I would suggest that if you are using this data source to disprove any temperature change you might find another one. Again, this is the data reference in the article.

        • pmc47025 says:

          JohnB says:

          “I would suggest that if you are using this data source to disprove any temperature change you might find another one.”

          Uh, the post asserts that the global temperature is changing, and dropping at a record rate (while CO2 is INCREDIBLY high).

          See “Eemian”, “Glacial Period”, and “Holocene” for completely natural temperature changes that dwarf the bogus changes predicted by CAGW hypothesis.

          Your effort in producing a graph from data gave me hope, looks like Tony was right…

          • pmc47025 says:

            And… I don’t need to download and chart the linked data, I believe you. I’ve seen the RSS data many times, no need to argue with good evidence:
            http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1978/to:2018

          • JohnB says:

            BTW, you may want to ask why Tony used a ten month change instead of a 12 month which makes much more sense to compare December to December instead of December to February but it’s pretty clear why if you compare the two. The ten month shows this “record” cooling while the 12 month shows nothing of the kind. Once again – cherry picking for what? dramatic effect?

          • Gail Combs says:

            ENSO

          • pmc47025 says:

            I can’t speak for Tony, but…

            Eyeballing the data point file…
            10 months is the maximum number of months that would include the 2016 El Nino peak.

            If you use the last sample in the file and the 12 month prior sample, you have two samples on either side of the 2016 El Nino peak, which would be very misleading.

          • pmc47025 says:

            Clarification:
            10 months is the maximum number of months that would include the 2016 El Nino peak as a reference point for a temperature drop.

          • AndyG55 says:

            DOH. when was the peak of the El Nino, 10 months ago.

            WAKE UP , John

            December 2016 was actually =5th warmest December in RSS.

            It was below 1987

            Your DESPERATION at trying to prove warming that has ONLY come from El Nino events is quite funny

            We LURVE watch desperate alarmist :-)

            Did you know that there was NO WARMING from 1980 to the start of the 1998 El Nino..

            and NO WARMING from the final effects of that El Nino to just before the 2015 El Nino

            That means that there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO CO2 WARMING SIGNAL in the whole satellite data.

            If the Anti-CO2 scam where based on science rather than political agenda, it would have died ages ago. !!

          • AndyG55 says:

            “in RSS”

            oops.. in UAH. !

          • AndyG55 says:

            December 2016 is the NINTH warmest December in RSS

            Massive drop since last year.

      • AndyG55 says:

        Seems that John is stuck at a pre-Junior high comprehension level.

        We can’t help him if you are him prepared to help yourself.

        Tony’s graph is completely reproducible, and shows, exactly as stated. The last 10 months have seen the deepest and steepest 10 month drop in temperature in the whole RSS satellite data .

        Figure it out.. or Don’t. we don’t care.

        • JohnB says:

          Oh I get it. I said as much in my first post. I also said it was deceptive. He chose a 10 month cycle to magnify his point. The bottom line is that the temperature is STILL HIGHER than it was at the low point in 2015. Not to mention the actual drop is not as large as the last el nino. That’s what I mean by deceptive – AKA cherry picking. My graph is the data set he uses. I don’t see anything comforting in that.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            You don’t see anything comforting, eh?
            Many people do but I don’t think you’d understand …

          • gator69 says:

            I absolutely love it when alarmists bring up cherry picking. Where would you like to start JB?

          • AndyG55 says:

            December 2016 is only equal 5th December in UAh

            Below December 1987

            Massive drop over the last 10 months.

            And more to come.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Dear John,

      Oh, how I hate to write. Your beloved theory is leaving.
      Just as you thought the battle had been won.
      And when I tell you who we elected
      I know you won’t care, dear, anyhow …

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYauy1DVITs

    • Gator69 says:

      Once again, we see the hypocrisy of the alarmists. They have no issue with completely false claims from the trillion dollar climate change industry officials, but holler and squeal if they don’t like Tony’s graph.

      Spare us your BS John.

  24. griff says:

    Here’s a handy graphic showing where the arctic actually is:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic#/media/File:Arctic_(orthographic_projection).svg

    and yes, it has been abnormally warm of the bulk of that area, especially Alaska and the Arctic ocean.

    The temp chart displayed is only one hemisphere and not a polar view, which conveniently obscures that…

  25. Benonetanya says:

    Nothing is more illustrative of the fraud then the name change from global warming to climate change.

  26. Charles says:

    Another fake news site.

    • tonyheller says:

      Progressives consider satellite data to be “fake news” and propaganda to be reality.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Tony,
        It is too bad we can’t hand the Progressives the ‘world’ they are so adamant they want.

        The latest Progressive Paradise:
        70,5% de los venezolanos evalúa su situación económica como “mala”; mientras que al 89,7% de los encuestados no les alcanza el dinero para vestirse y el 79,6% asegura que el ingreso es insuficiente para comprar comida y medicinas.

        • Colorado Wellington says:

          Gail, I understand that veteran Radio Yerevan reporters are opening a station in Venezuela to offer their vast expertise and understanding of socialism.

          This is Radio Yerevan. Our listeners asked us, “Is it possible to build communism in America?”
          We’re answering: “It’s possible, but who will we buy grain from?”

          Q: “When the final phase of socialism, namely communism, is built, will there still be thefts and pilfering?”
          A: “No, because everything will be already pilfered during socialism.”

          Q “What is the most permanent feature of our socialist economy?”
          A: “Temporary shortages.”

          Q: Why is there no flour in the market?
          A: Because they began adding it to the bread.

          Q: “What is the difference between capitalism and socialism?”
          A: “In a capitalist society man exploits man, and in a socialist one, the other way around.”

          Q: Will the police still exist when communism is built?
          A: Of course, not. By that time, all citizens will have learned how to arrest themselves.

          Q: Is it true that the Berlin Wall was built to separate West from East?
          A: No, it’s not true. It was built to separate East from West.

          Q: Is it possible to build socialism in Switzerland?
          A: It’s possible, but why? Did Switzerland really do something wrong to you?

        • RAH says:

          That’s the way some stores in the south are going to look with the Arctic temps and snow coming in.

  27. Daniel Morris says:

    More Fake News from Fake Scientists bullhorned by the Fake Media.

  28. Amber says:

    The scary global warming con -game is over. Real scientists that practice the scientific method they learned in high school can come out from hiding because either credible science will be restored or funding will be gone .
    Being caught on the wrong side of the earth has a fever fraud is now going to
    be worn by those who decide to continue the con -game .
    The people that whine the most know their grant programs , government funding ,
    and tax grab are going to be gone . It’s about Time .

    • Neal S says:

      I do hope that people who are expecting great changes will have some patience. Not everything will progress as fast as we may hope or like. With a Trump administration things will progress and improve, but things take time. Be patient enough to give things the time they take.

      Trump needed our support to be elected. He will continue to need our support in years to come. We should remind our representatives, that if they will not support Trump in MAGA, that we will in upcoming elections, elect other representatives who will.

      • Gail Combs says:

        First task is to call your reps and senators and tell them you expect them to support Trump and you expect them to confirm his Cabinet picks.

        • RAH says:

          Yep. Reining in the RATS by making them quake in their boots is going to be necessary. The most vulnerable are the Republican establishment types and Democrat Senators from states that Trump took in the election. Those that want to help Trump need to identify such vulnerable key nodes in their States. The ones that are weak and whose positions are on the line during the 2018 mid terms I have Democrat Senator Joe Donnlley to lambaste here in Indiana. Then there are the types like my Representative. She is one of those that tends to go the way she sees the political winds blowing. Republican Susan W. Brooks. She has already received a shot across the bow from me about generally supporting Trumps agenda and she’ll get more issue by issue. But, as is usual, the Senate is where the real hold ups are going to occur.

  29. writeby says:

    The AGW folks may wish to consider the following–which they themselves have reported: CO2 levels today are equivalent to those millions of years ago (when, of course, fossil fuel belching factories, power plants and automobiles blanketed the planet).

    Perhaps that will lead them to the central question to be asked in the context of planetary climate cycles: Which comes first, rising CO2 levels or rising temperatures?

    2.7 Million Years Ago Icy Greenland was Pretty Green, Study Finds
    “‘More than 2.5 million years ago Greenland looked like the green Alaskan tundra, before it was covered by the second largest body of ice on Earth,’ the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory said in a statement Thursday.”
    https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleases/2014/Apr/NR-14-04-05.html#.U1BNpfldXv4

    Atmospheric CO2 at highest levels in 3 million years
    “The level of the most important heat-trapping gas in the atmosphere, carbon dioxide, has passed a long-feared milestone, scientists reported Friday, reaching a concentration not seen on the earth for millions of years.”
    http://americablog.com/2013/05/global-warming-heat-trapping-co2-concentration-passes-400-ppm-milestone.html

    Antarctic CO 2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4 Million Years — Scientific American
    “Carbon dioxide has been steadily rising since the start of the Industrial Revolution, setting a new high year after year. There’s a notable new entry to the record books.”
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/antarctic-co2-hit-400-ppm-for-first-time-in-4-million-years/

    Doing that, though, would require more than just headlines & sound bytes.

  30. I ve proven for so many years and quantified the cooling to come though not heard yet

    http://dimispoulos.wixsite.com/dimis
    https://www.facebook.com/solarclimate

  31. Brian G Valentine says:

    People froze to death in Germany last year and the year before because the people could not pay their energy bills in the winter. All because of Klimate Kooks who shoved it down Merkel’s throat

    I’ll be dead before that happens in the USA and I did nothing to stop it

  32. Pingback: Morning Reads for #Snowmageddon17 (January 6, 2017) - GeorgiaPol

  33. Pingback: Friday Linkzookery — 06 Jan 2017 – Murdoc Online

  34. David Harrington says:

    @Tonyheller.

    Struggling to understand the numbers in the first graph; where does the -0.76 come from?

    Thanks

    • tonyheller says:

      As marked on the graph, it is the 10 month change in temperature. Subtract the current month anomaly from the anomaly 10 months earlier.

  35. Jopo says:

    Interesting chance correlation. Just stumbled upon it. How uncanny it is?

    Solar magnetic activity. The Bz component! Same one that has been linked with the North Atlantic Oscillations. What are the chance of this happening?

    http://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/form/dx1.html

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.