100 Years Of US Cooling

Maximum temperatures have declined sharply in the US over the last century.

Mean temperatures have also declined.

The frequency of warm and hot days has declined.

Summer is starting later and ending earlier.

As CO2 has risen, temperatures have declined.

As CO2 has increased, the percent of hot days in the US has plummeted.

This is why government agencies tamper with the data.

NASA 1999         NASA 2019

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to 100 Years Of US Cooling

  1. Tel says:

    In the scatter graphs, the title block says “Red Line is 5 Year Mean” which suggests a copy and paste from the time series graphs.

  2. DM says:

    CHERRY PICKING! CHERRY PICKING!;-} The graphs would look SO MUCH DIFFERENT if started at the end of the Little Ice Age, or the end of the last major glaciation:-}

    Seriously now, drop the mic, Tony. This post makes the point as well as it needs to be made. Those who reject the point deny reality.

    • Archie says:

      This could be repeated on a loop and the message wouldn’t sink in.

    • Jothko says:

      Well of course! In the view of the average hyperventilated climate alarmist this story is “cherry picking” because it references only a 100-year time frame. Their contention would be precisely that the earth has been warming since “…the end of the Little Ice Age…” (or pick whatever random cooling period reference you wish). And I assume, then, that the argument would continue thus: “The 1800’s proves man’s overwhelming influence on the climate BECAUSE the industrial revolution began at the time the ice age was ending.” Yes, of course! The climate reversed course DUE TO man’s industrial influence! Brilliant! Except that such an argument would willingly overlook two major obstacles to the theory: 1) Industrialization is far more ubiquitous in America now than it was at the end of the Little Ice Age, and yet the graphs clearly demonstrate a 100-year DECLINE in temperatures, and 2) The Little Ice Age followed the Medieval Warming Period when no SUV’s or coal fired power plants existed. In fact, the idea of man-made global climate catastrophe is willfully ignorant of Milankovitch cycles in general… and these graphs (among many, many other pieces of actual evidence) prove it! Climate alarmists advance arguments such as “radiative forcing” and other nonsense DESPITE graphs like these and other compelling (read actual) evidence to the contrary. “Radiative forcing” (and other such nonsense) fails miserably when confronted with actual evidence.

      The only man-made truth is that manufactured evidence leads to manufactured outrage which leads to manufactured crises which lend themselves to politically manufactured “fixes” to supposedly man-made “problems”. The only thing “heating” this planet right now is the apparently never ending stream of hot air produced by climate alarmists who can’t seem to keep their traps shut.

    • Pablo says:

      I agree the graphs would look much different. Although lets look at the “cherry picking”. If we use graphs back to the “Little ice age” we can use the years between 1300 and 1870. YUP! you are correct coming out of the little ice age the earth warmed. Yet.. Ponder for a moment on… How many cars, planes, coal burning plants, cow farts were producing mass amounts of CO2 between 1300 and 1870…

      So if you look back as these charts show the last 100 years, which by the way have been the largest MAN made CO2 years those years have shown a cooling trend.

      How many BMW’s were there in 1345? or even 1900? How much fossil fuel burning was done during those years?

      I do not reject your point but you leaving out the obvious to make your point deserves…

      MIC DROP!

  3. DRoberts says:

    Did you run this by the Three Amigos? Moshpit, Zeke and Nick Stokes?

  4. Ron Simmons says:

    What is the source documents for these revealing charts?

  5. Peter Halligan says:

    Would love to hear thoughts on this paper that debunks the LINEAR (combined) models used by the UN IPCC.

    seems to me the margin of error is so many times greater than the observed data AND the model predictions as to render the models useless.


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.