“Cheery” Picking At The Poles

Kevin Pluck sent me over this map, his intention being to show me that the world is burning up outside of the US, particularly in the polar regions. And he accused me of “cheery-picking.”

A lot of climate alarmist trickery is based around the fact that humans don’t see blues as well as they do reds. So I increased the color saturation of his map, and projected it on to a sphere with equal area weighting. Now it becomes clear that there is a lot extremely cold air surrounding both poles. The jet stream is bringing cold air to the US, much of Canada, Russia, Greenland, Argentina and Brazil, and slightly warmer than normal air to the poles.

And the red-hot temperatures at the poles, are actually -30C.

Climate Reanalyzer

Climate alarmists should winter at the poles, and report back in the spring how hot it is.

Siberia cold: 88 below zero is even colder than Mars

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to “Cheery” Picking At The Poles

  1. gregole says:

    Alarmism from warmunists who have trouble visualizing a sphere. That’s why I ask people to simply project the so-called Arctic minimum ice extents onto their countries to see what “vanishing’ Arctic ice looks like.

    Bottom line: Earth isn’t warming much, if at all. And here we are on the cusp of 2019. Still no warming.

  2. Steven Fraser says:

    Using the recently-published UAH numbers for November, the average Fall (sep-nov) Anomaly for North Pole (60 degrees and north) Lower troposphere this year was .67C. The average for all the Falls (1979-2018) was .12C.

    Falls that were warmer (and anomalies). 1982 (.7), 1990 (.82), 1992 (.79), 2016 (1.30), 2017 (.86).

  3. JCalvertN(UK) says:

    All it takes, is a few clouds in the arctic night sky (or a storm) to make it go “red-hot”.

  4. AmdyDC says:

    You deserve a special award for suffering with fools.

  5. Andy says:

    To be fair you do cherry pick and you also ignore stuff you don’t want to see, hence why Greenland icecap can be mentioned one year and Antarctic the next and then neither or both.

    But to be fair so do other people from the other side who want to prove something rather than just watch it happen and wonder why.

    Andy

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      What would we do without Andy-Andy, the science gate-keeper and fairness arbiter.

      By his doctrine, one can only rebut specific claims in general. Can’t zero in on them. Must be scientific. Beat around the bush.

      Because exposing any particular bullshit the alarmists dumped on the public with the help of a friendly media is “cherry picking“. Can’t do that. Nope. Ain’t right. It triggers the right-thinking people. They won’t have it.

      So logically, separating this specific comment from dozens of other stupid statements that Andy-Andy made on this blog is also “cherry picking”.

      And he won’t have it.

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.