Check out this spectacular fraud published by UCLA in the Journal of Climate
“The most important message we want to convey is that it really depends on each scenario we choose — whether we keep on putting carbon dioxide in the air,” said Fengpeng Sun, the lead author of the UCLA study published in the Journal of Climate. “We should probably prefer new energy, like solar or wind, and try to be not be so addicted to gasoline.”
Number of days with temperatures above 95°F to soar in L.A. County – LA Times
Ojai is a small town 10 miles northwest of the LA sprawl.
Ninety-five degree days there were much more common in the 1920’s when CO2 was lower. The UCLA study started their trend in 1981, near the coolest point of the 20th century, after 50 years of plummeting temperatures.
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/daily/all/USC00046399.dly
The other half of their treachery is using downtown LA as their reference – the world’s largest urban heat island.
Temperatures in Ojai peaked in the 1950’s, and look nothing like the LA graph.
The temperatures are indicative of ocean cycles and urban heat island effects. There isn’t the slightest indication that CO2 has had any impact on LA temperatures. Chalk up another study for climate fraud.
two “could” in one sentence…..!
Scientists are telling us Antarctic Ice is melting…
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/05/15/3659338/antarctic-larsen-b-nasa-study/
Yet, I’m trying to find a Weather Station there above Freezing!!
http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/Antarctica/DomeF.htm
Think Progress is not the most credible source for… anything.
Also, they are ignoring this *2004* discovery under or near the Larsen B ice shelf:
“Scientists working in the stormy and inhospitable waters off the Antarctic Peninsula have found what they believe is an active and previously unknown volcano on the sea bottom.”
… “Evidence of the volcano came as an unintended bonus from a research plan to investigate why a massive ice sheet, known as the Larsen B, collapsed and broke up several years ago. Scientists hope to understand whether such a collapse is unique or part of a cycle that extends over hundreds of thousands of years.”
… “Scientific evidence the team collected also corroborates mariners’ reports of discolored water in the area, which is consistent with an active volcano.”
http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=100385
Surely the activity of this volcano needs to be monitored. It could easily have an influence on the integrity of the ice shelf.
Antarctica has several volcanoes and hot spots.
http://www.utexas.edu/news/2014/06/10/antarctic-glacier-melting/
http://www.livescience.com/15006-underwater-volcanoes-discovered-antarctica.html
Read with a large grain of salt and a clothes pin for your nose:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/07/110715-undersea-volcanoes-antarctica-science-tsunamis/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/131118-antarctica-volcano-earthquakes-erupt-sea-level-rise-science/
It seems that the volcano mentioned in the 2004 article is a long way from Larsen B. … “… the volcano lies in an area known as Antarctic Sound, at the northernmost tip of Antarctica.” .. Obviously I didn’t check how close it was. My bad 🙁
UCLA may overtake Harvard, MIT, CalTech etc in federal research grant awards if it continues this spectular performance!
That is spectacularly dishonest of The LA Times. I saw how they blocked you, subsequent to your pointing out their specious comparison of Ojai and Los Angeles (both geographically and chronologically) in the comments section. That is distasteful behavior as well.
I read this and gagged a little:
He doesn’t even mention nuclear energy! I’m not dismissive of climate change and the dangers it would pose, but there’s no excuse for science journalism like this. I’m also getting skeptical of publications like Journal of Climate.
Even Josh Willis knew about L.A. and UHI
http://climate.jpl.nasa.gov/files/LAHeatWaves-JournalArticle.pdf
Should send it to the LAT’s writer, here: [email protected]
“using downtown LA as their reference”
I checked and the NOAA downtown LA data doesn’t support their claim at all. Neither does the airport data.
I guess as long as the sheeple continue to buy it the scientist will continue to produce it. Fraud, that is.
Scientists? They aren’t scientists.
Hey Tony. I think you got this from M @ CD. From me, if the case. I’ve got a better one for you, but how do I contact you – send me an email. OK? Delete this.
Reblogged this on Climatism.
Daytime temperatures have nothing to do with CO2. Daytime highs are caused by incoming solar short wave (visible) radiation, not downwelling IR.
If increased CO2 did anything at all in LA, it would increase night time lows. But it wouldn’t, because even in the desert, water vapor is 95+ % of the greenhouse effect. Increasing CO2 does nothing except at the poles where there is little water vapor.
Note, the lowest water vapor on earth is at the south pole, where CO2 plays the largest role relative to water vapor. Note, however, there is no warming there at all.
“Fengpeng Sun”
Whoa, that name is sooo loaded…
Reblogged this on Globalcooler's Weblog.