When the National Climate Assessment was released last fall, a massive barrage of hysterical propaganda came with it – like this article in The Atlantic saying we are all going to burn up, based on an increase in US heat waves since the 1960s.
The graph was taken from page 38 of the Fourth National Climate Assessment document released in November 2018.
But why did they choose the 1960s for their start date? The US has excellent temperature records going back the late 19th century, and in fact the 2017 National Climate Assessment showed heat wave data going back to 1900. The 2017 data showed unambiguously that US summers were much hotter prior to 1960, and that the 1960s and 1970s had the fewest heatwaves of any period in the US. This very important data was excluded from the 2018 report.
Data from the EPA shows the same thing.
I overlaid the 2018 NCA graph on the 2017 NCA data, and it becomes very clear what they are doing. The 2018 report released to the public, cherry-picked the only start date in the graph which they could use to create the appearance of a warming trend.
Here is the same overlay with the EPA graph – once again showing the extreme fraud in the 2018 NCA document.
The next two graphs show the very hot pre-1960 weather which is being hidden in the 2018 NCA report.
Reality is the exact opposite of what is claimed in the Atlantic article and the 2018 National Climate Assessment report. The frequency of hot days has plummeted in the US over the past century.
The number of all-time record maximum temperatures peaked in the US in the 1930s, and bottomed in the 1960s when then the NCA started their graph.
The number of record daily maximum temperatures in the US peaked in the 1930s, and bottomed in 1960’s, when the NCA started their graph.
The 1930s were extremely hot, and thousands of people died in the heat.
Same story in 1896.
During June 1896, Parker, Arizona had seven consecutive days over 120 degrees – a record which was only matched in 1905. Since 1960, the longest stretch of days over 120 degrees in Arizona is three.
The 1896 heat was not confined to the US. January, 1896 was the hottest month on record in New South Wales, Australia. Bourke averaged 110 degrees that month.
The Australian heatwave of January, 1896 was much hotter than this year’s claimed record heatwave. Like in the National Climate Assessment, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology hides all inconvenient hot temperatures prior to 1910.
The 1930s heat was also not confined to the US, with glaciers rapidly melting in Greenland, North America and Europe.
By 1954, Spitzbergen had warmed 18 degrees.
But the warmth of the 1930s and 1940s, turned rapidly into cooling, and by the 1960s there was unanimous consensus the Earth was cooling.
In 1972, the world’s leading climate experts wrote a letter to President Nixon warning of a new ice age “in about a century.”
NASA predicted an ice age by the year 2020.
It isn’t difficult to see why the 2018 National Climate Assessment chose to start their graph during the very cold 1960s, and hide all the hot weather prior to that. They are committing blatant fraud, deceiving the public, and telling a story which is the exact opposite of reality. This is exactly what President Eisenhower warned about in his 1960 farewell address. Scientists are attempting to seize control of policy.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed 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.