This is an example of a WordPress page, you could edit this to put information about yourself or your site so readers know where you are coming from. You can create as many pages like this one or sub-pages as you like and manage all of your content inside of WordPress.

310 Responses to About

  1. George E. Smith says:


    Drop me a note at the above e-mail, so we can converse.


  2. LetsGoViking says:

    like the new look! Your site is now one of my daily forays, keep up the great work!
    Lets Go Viking!

      • Dave G says:

        Hey Steve, I’ve been following you and wuwt site since nov. 09, WOW is all I can say!! I’ve relearned stuff I remembered back from the 60’s and 70’s growing up in upstate NY, we’ve hit half our snow fall record already before dec. 21!! I never fell for this AGW stuff because “You can’t fool with Mother Nature” is what I was taught. I love the way you and Watts sucker Sense S, Chris D and company!! LOL I e-mailed Joe Bastardi about how accurate I thought his forecasts were versus IPCC, he responded, Thanks, the rest is a lot of media hype about AGW Steve keep up the GREAT!! work, I applaud you!! Dave G PS I hope I did this right because I don’t blog much

      • Dave G says:

        Thanks for response Steve, Your very much respected in my view!! Dave G

      • Dave G says:

        Steve, being that I’m computer illiterate, how do I send you articles to the site

      • Dave G says:

        Guess i’ll have to have my daughter show me how to copy and paste LOL

      • Dave G says:

        guess I did it wrong because it went to mod.

      • Keith Harter says:

        Is there any place on your new website where you identify the date of your post?
        I use this to date stamp your posts that I save and send to my friends.
        Thank you
        Keith H

  3. Patrick says:

    Hi Steve,
    great site, as above it is now part of my near daily climate related sites I visit. Do you have a short bio of yourself, most bloggers seem to and it is nice to get some idea about the person whos blog you are reading.

  4. Dr T G Watkins says:

    I’ll be a regular visitor. Always enjoy your posts and your predictions!

  5. Russell C says:


    Anthony Watts mentioned your site, but I thought I was in the wrong place when I first landed in it. I know I’m in the right blog today.

    If you can, please keep an eye on a perhaps lesser known angle of AGW politics, about those who seek to smear the skeptic scientists. My article at ClimateRealists, “Has the Mainstream Media Trusted Enviro-activists for Advice on Listening to Skeptic Scientists?” ( http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=6175 ) is a chronology of the smear as it relates to my other writings with several links at the end to my other articles & blogs about this situation.

    What happens to AGW if there is not only no scientific consensus supporting it, but also no merit whatsoever to allegations that skeptic scientists are corrupt? What happens if the general public discovers those allegations are maybe the only thing the mainstream media has an an excuse for not balancing AGW reports with skeptic scientists’ rebuttals over the last 15+ years?

  6. Green Sand says:

    Steven, leave Chelsea alone and get your teeth into this:-

    “The truth is getting lost in the Amazon”

    “A warmist coup seems to have taken place on Amazon, the online bookseller, writes Christopher Booker.”


  7. bob says:

    Nice looking theme. Normally, the About page would be information regarding you, and the reason for the blog. Actually, you don’t have to have an about page. Even so, if you keep it you can turn comments off and maintain it as a static page.

    Please don’t take this as being critical of the site. I am entering the business of using WordPress to fashion web sites for businesses. Besides being the best blogging platform around, WordPress makes a pretty good content management system.

    Good luck on the blog. It is now in my favorites.

  8. Thomas says:

    How does one contact mr. goddard? Do you have an email address or contact form someplace? Thanks.

  9. Dan in Lafayette says:

    Hi I really enjoyed this blog.

    A friend of mine by the screen name of “bergeaux” referred me to this blog. I think it’s great that dissenting opinions can be heard–they need to be. Just because a person has no formal training in science doesn’t mean their opinions are worthless. In fact, even if the available information supports another argument, there needs to an outlet to make counterarguments. … I don’t see any evidence of global warming.


  10. Charles says:

    10% of nothing might be considered an overstatement of CO2.

    If we go by the commonly accepted atmospheric makeup, greenhouse gases constitute 1 – 2% of the atmosphere. Of that 1 – 2%, 3.62% is CO2. 95% is water vapor and 1.38% other trace gases. Of the CO2, the human contribution of carbon is 3.4%.

    Lets do the math: Assume 1.5% of atmosphere is greenhouse gas.

    1.5 x .0362= .0543 (The amount of carbon in atmosphere.)

    .0543 x .034 = .0018462% (The amount of manmade carbon in atmosphere.)

    .0018462 x .2 = .00036924% (20% potential reduction of carbon.)

    Remember, CO2 is a naturally occurring gas. Does any reasonable being support spending 100’s of billions of dollars and imposing dramatic, world wide job and industry crushing regulations on schemes that will have the overall potential of a net atmospheric reduction of 4 ten-thousandth of 1% ?

  11. Russell C says:

    News tip about my own American Thinker article today – Science Czar John Holdren’s renaming of ‘global warming’ prompts perhaps more scrutiny of the new name than he might prefer: “The Curious History of ‘Global Climate Disruption’ ” http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/10/the_curious_history_of_global.html

  12. Scarlet Pumpernickel says:

    Check this out about volcanoes, something seems not right?

    Volcano quotes – the articles that are always quoted.

    Did you know that Gerlach only based his estimate from measurements on 7 subaerial volcanoes and 3 hydrothermal sites? According to his estimate, between 25-33% of all mantle CO2 comes out of one single solitary volcano (Etna). However, Gerlach himself asserts that there is nowhere near enough information for a reliable estimate.

    Maybe there is a volcanogate in there. Did you know that Gerlach only based his estimate from measurements on 7 subaerial volcanoes and 3 hydrothermal sites? According to his estimate, between 25-33% of all mantle CO2 comes out of one single solitary volcano (Etna). However, Gerlach himself asserts that there is nowhere near enough information for a reliable estimate.

    The USGS subsequently added Kerrick (2001) and it seems that they’ve yet to discover the Morner & Etiope (2002) article that sets a value more than 5x Gerlach’s estimate as a bare minimum. The emphasis on this figure being a minimum is important, as a maximum figure is yet to be established from measurements.



    I have included the full text of Gerlach’s 1991 paper concerning volcanic carbon dioxide emissions because so few people who cite Gerlach’s work have actually read it. This is hardly surprising, considering that until now, this paper has not been available online. Contrary to the claims of Monbiot, the USGS, and many other authors, Gerlach (1991) includes no measurement-based carbon dioxide emission estimates of any submarine volcanoes, makes no attempt at modal representation, and Gerlach’s global volcanic emission estimate is based on carbon dioxide emission measurements taken from only seven subaerial volcanoes (Gerlach, 1991, §4, ¶1) and three hydrothermal vent sites (Gerlach, 1991, §3, ¶3). Yet the USGS (2010) stated that:

    Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts.

    Dare I point out the fact that although a hydrothermal vent site might be one of many features of a submarine volcano, a hydrothermal vent site is most definitely not a submarine volcano. Notwithstanding such inconvenient details, suffice it to ask how seven subaerial volcanoes is roughly equal to three hydrothermal vent sites? This statement of the USGS (2010) may have something to do with the claim, put forward by Tony Jones, that the carbon dioxide emissions of submarine volcanoes are counted in the USGS figures:

    Can I ask you a question about that, if you don’t mind? Because one British journalist whom you quoted those exact figures to went back to the US geological survey after you told him about this 85 per cent figure, and asked he them to confirm their claim that actually 130 times the amount of CO2 is produced by man than volcanoes. The volcanologist Dr Terrance Gerlach confirmed that figure and said furthermore that in their counting they count the undersea volcanoes. So your response to that.

    Tony Jones
    ABC Lateline

    “In their counting, they count the undersea volcanoes.” I wonder how this might be possible if no-one can quote the carbon dioxide emission for even one submarine volcano predating Tony Jones’ statement? There are certainly no submarine volcano emission estimates listed in Gerlach (1991), which up until April, 2010, was the sole source for the USGS claim. In spite of this, George Monbiot went on to say:

    Yeah, sure. I mean, it’s, again, straightforward fabrication. Ian produces no new evidence to suggest that the USGS figures are wrong. He keeps citing this statement that they don’t include submarine volcanoes. It’s been pointed out to him many, many times that the USGS figures do include submarine volcanoes. And actually, it’s the height of bad manners Professor Plimer to lie on national television about something that you know to be plain wrong.

    George Monbiot
    ABC Lateline

    The facts of the ABC interview suggest that George Monbiot knows all about the various and diverse altitudes of “bad manners”. But more importantly, did he know the following? A measurement-based estimate of a hydrothermal vent site’s carbon dioxide emission is a completely different thing to a measurement-based estimate of a submarine volcano’s carbon dioxide emission. Although Gerlach (1991) does mention submarine volcanoes, there is not even one single submarine volcano’s carbon dioxide emission estimate in the entire paper. The point of republishing Gerlach (1991) is so you may verify this for yourself. This paper not only confirms Plimer’s (2009, p. 207) assertion that we do not measure the carbon dioxide emission of submarine volcanoes, it reveals a disturbing contrast between reality and the above-quoted statements of prominent and respected journalists such as Tony Jones and George Monbiot. Gerlach (1991), which is the putative academic source for the assertions of both Tony Jones’ and George Monbiot’s above-quoted statements, includes measurement-based carbon dioxide emission estimates of only seven subaerial volcanoes, three hydrothermal vent sites, and not one single solitary submarine volcano. Dare I ask if Jones or Monbiot actually bothered to check their sources? George Monbiot’s attack on the character of Australia’s best known geoscience professor on national television, hinges on the unavailability of Gerlach (1991) to the typical Lateline audience. This entire episode, regarding volcanic carbon dioxide emission, speaks to a conspicuous lack of caution in the assertions of those seeking to blame human beings for the cycles and seasons of climate.

    Moreover, I draw your attention to Gerlach (1991, §1, ¶4) where Gerlach telegraph’s his emphasis on the fact that the data available at the time was woefully inadequate to a global estimate. Although Gerlach (1991, §3, ¶3) does mention some proxy measurements for mid oceanic-ridge degassing, he also demonstrates that these are nonetheless doubtful as the degree of fractionation remains unknown (Gerlach, 1991, §3, ¶4). About persistant submarine volcanoes, Gerlach (1991, §3, ¶1) asserts “There are no estimates for off-ridge volcanos”. In fact, Gerlach (1991, §6, ¶5) had sufficient foresight to caution his readers as follows:

    The adequacy of seafloor spreading rates as a predictor of mid-plate volcano degassing rates is less clear, and it is possible that CO2 degassing at mid-plate volcanos is outside the conceptual framework of the current carbon cycle models. The high CO2 degassing rates for Mount Etna underscore the need to ensure that mid-plate volcano degassing is satisfactorily represented in models of the carbon geochemical cycle.

    Although Gerlach’s foresight may seem prophetic, the large number of active seamounts had already been documented (Batiza, 1982), and even this figure was later found to be somewhat conservative with the latest estimate of submarine volcanoes standing at more than three million (Hillier & Watts, 2007 – See http://carbon-budget.geologist-1011.net for details). Moreover, it has been known for more than seven years now that the global volcanic carbon dioxide emission figures put forward by the USGS are long out of date and quite clearly wrong, as the figures of Morner & Etiope (2002) show. Perhaps, if not for Monbiot’s campaign of interruption, Professor Plimer might have been afforded the opportunity to cite sources such as Morner & Etiope (2002) and explain the empirical limitations of Gerlach’s study. The text of Gerlach (1991) would suggest that Monsieur Monbiot’s fraud allegations against Plimer, regarding the content and basis of Gerlach (1991), are specious and without foundation. Moreover, I challenge anyone taken in by those specious allegations to name so much as a single submarine seamount CO2 emission measurement in any of the peer-reviewed literature to date.


    Guardian is peddling the same thing again http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/green-living-blog/2010/oct/07/carbon-footprint-volcano

    They link to this page once again for USGS http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/about/hazard/gas/ and guess which article they once again quote to prove their volcano figures…..

    Comparison of CO2 emissions from volcanoes vs. human activities.
    Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) – The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes–the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)

  13. Layne Blanchard says:

    Steve, is there an email address I can send some interesting things to? If yes, respond to the address above and put something in the subject to let me know it’s you.

  14. Steve Woodman says:

    Good afternoon Steve
    Down here in Australia it looks like we will have a carbon tax foisted on us by the rampant Greens party which has hijacked the minority Labor government. With their AGW delusions the Greens want to shut down fossil fuel power generation and stop coal and iron ore exports to China among others.
    I’ve often wondered why we get our knickers in a twist regarding CO2 emissions … after all, Australian fossil fuel electricity accounts for only 1% of the global total in emissions. Every month China’s economy emits far more than we do in a year and by 2035 that will be down to a fortnight or less as China continues its modernization and raising the standard of living of its citizens.
    Speaking of the Chinese citizen, a back of the envelope calculation tells me that in a year the Chinese exhale about 1.46 times the amount of CO2 Australia produces in a year by burning fossil fuel.
    Humans exhale approximately a kilogram of CO2 a day. There are 1,500,000,000 Chinese and that is 1,500,000,000 kgs of CO2 pr day or 1,500,000 metric tons (there being 1000 kg in a metric ton). That is 547,500,000 metric tons a year.
    Wikipedia tells me that in 2007 Australia’s fossil fuel use emitted only 374,054,000metric tons of CO2.
    To me that puts Australia’s significance (or rather insignificance) into sharp relief … forcing me to change light bulbs and then pay double for so called Green Power will have absolutely no effect on global CO2 emissions and definitely no effect on climate.

    Steve Woodman
    Wingham Australia

  15. James Sexton says:


    I thought this might interest you even if it is a bit different that what you usually post. This isn’t just libs going after libs (which is one of my favorite spectator sports), its a lib going after BO, and he’s mostly right!

  16. MikeTheDenier says:

    Stimulus follies: $535 million down the drain in California in “green jobs”


  17. peterhodges says:

    might be fun to see you go after romm’s funders

    snl skit about soros and sandlers:





    In addition, the Center publishes a daily global warming blog called Climate Progress.[9] Edited by climate and energy expert Joseph J. Romm…..”


    The Center for American Progress is classified as a 501(c)(3) organization under U.S. Internal Revenue Code. The institute receives approximately $25 million per year in funding from a variety of sources, including individuals, foundations, and corporations, but it declines to release any information on the sources of its funding. No funders are listed on its website or in its Annual Report. From 2003 to 2007, the center received about $15 million in grants from 58 foundations. Major individual donors include George Soros, Peter Lewis, Steve Bing, and Herb and Marion Sandler. The Center receives undisclosed sums from corporate donors.[22]”

  18. Patagon says:

    Sea level change, full psmsl dataset

    I have been reading your posts on sea level change recorded by gauges, and wondered why noaa uses so few stations.

    I went to the original data and made some tests. The global average trend since 1850 is just 0.3 mm/ year

    There are obvious problems in the older datasets, and there is an additional uncertainty due to isostatic rebound in near polar territories that were heavily glaciated during the LGM. But even if one chooses only lower latitudes (45S to 45N) and only from 1945 to present (2009, last full year), the trend is 0.66 mm/year, with some oscillations, that makes a very unimpressive 6.6 cm in a century.

    Here are some charts:

    Below is the R code and the link to the data to produce those charts.

    The curious thing about catastrophic sea level change is that it requires at least the full of the Greenland Ice Sheet to melt. Antarctica is more problematic as warming will probably increase ice volume there.

    For the Greenland Ice Sheet to melt you need every imaginable feedback working in the same warming direction, and that, above all, means a very large increase in atmospheric water vapour. It has been estimated at about 0.41 kg/m^2 of water vapour increase per decade, that is 4.1 kg.m^2 in a century, which for a planet of surface area about 5.10072e+14 km^2 means an additional mass of water vapour to the atmosphere of 2.091295e+15 kg. Now, the Greenland Ice Sheet has an estimated mass of 2850000 cubic km, or 2.565e+15 kg of water.

    Conclusion: In order to melt Greenland it is necessary to evaporate a similar amount of water into the atmosphere, thus the claimed resulting sea level violates the law of conservation of mass (you can not duplicate the mass of a melting ice cap, going both to the atmosphere and to the oceans)

    Warning: these are back of envelope calculations, but I don’t think it has been considered before, and I think they are about right

    ========== R code =============

    # Download and unzip
    # http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr.annual.data/rlr_annual.zip
    # into a working directory

    # choose one for low latitudes
    # indx=which(flist$lat >= (-45) & flist$lat = (-90) & flist$lat 0 )
    lis.dat[[i]]$msl[[which(lis.dat[[i]]$year == n[m])]]
    NA ))
    # compute the means of all stations by year

    # 7000 [mm] is an arbitarry level used by the PSMSL RLR
    # The RLR datum at each station is defined to be approximately 7000mm
    # below mean sea level, with this arbitrary choice made many years ago in
    # order to avoid negative numbers in the resulting RLR monthly and annual
    # mean values.

    plot(years,myears.mean-7000,’l’,xlab=’date’,ylab=’msl change [mm]’,main=’Global mean sea level change’)
    legend(1945,-190,paste(‘Trend =’,round(as.numeric(tr$coefficient[2]),2),’mm/year’))

    # plot from 1945 to present. Earlier data have more quality problems
    which(years == 1945)

    plot(years[96:160],myears.mean[96:160]-7000,’l’,xlab=’date’,ylab=’msl change [mm]’,main=’Global mean sea level change since 1945 from 45S to 45N’)
    legend(1945,35,paste(‘Trend =’,round(as.numeric(tr$coefficient[2]),2),’mm/year’))

  19. Patagon says:


    Wrong by a factor of 1000

    Greenland ice mass is 2.565e+18 , so you only need to evaporate 1/1000 of that.

    Charts and code are OK (and unrelated)

  20. Patagon says:

    The code has long lines that are truncated in the post. I could put the whole version somewhere

  21. E.G. Martin says:

    Nearly ev. day you publish another chart showing how temp. records have been fudged upwards to show warming at individual sites. Can you pl. consider consolidating these into a complete folio — It would be most helpful in showing others what is being done by “scientists” at USHCN.

  22. Pat Groves says:

    I read your comments with interest and agreement. Then I wondered if you are the Steve Goddard who went to Rice from 1957 to 1961. Please let me know.

  23. Leon Brozyna says:

    Your numbers for 4 Dec blew past real climate & climate progress for overall rank (Check out traffic stats / traffic rank … best seen when looking at trailing 7 days.)


  24. Steven ,

    How far from Woodland Park are you ?

    I find Steven Goddards in Peyton , Leadville , Dillon & Denver .

    Marty Hertzberg is up in Copper Mountain . Howard Hayden down in Pueblo . And , of course , the departments up in Boulder and Fort Collins . There seems to be a quorum of us rationalists out here .

    One of the first things I did when I moved out here to 2500 meters from a meter or so in Lower Manhattan was to do a “Mr Wizard” style black and white ping pong ball experiment in the Colorado sun to confirm that albedo per se makes no difference in equilibrium temperature : http://cosy.com/views/warm.htm#PingPong . Took me quite a while longer to understand how to calculate the temperature for any spectrum ball .

    Let’s get in touch .

  25. Sense Seeker says:

    About? There’s nothing ‘about’ on this page. Who is Steve Goddard? We don’t know. What are his credentials, and why does he hide them? We don’t know. Doesn’t inspire great confidence, Steve.

  26. Sense Seeker says:

    How do your readers know such source data even exist, then?

  27. Sense Seeker says:

    “Just because you are paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not after you.” – Kurt Cobain

    OK, I know. You’re just having fun. Evidence is over-rated anyway, don’t you think?

    • sam says:

      excellent video, tx for putting that up, it didn’t come up when i was youtube watching before probably because youtube like amazon and wiki is conspiring to hide the truth and continue the global warming profeteering racket.

  28. Dave N says:

    Here’s an idea to cut down on emissions: shut down Vegas:


  29. Sense Seeker says:

    I have a nice quote for you: “The greatest threat to free enterprise is not Communism or the New Left but, rather, “respectable elements of society”—intellectuals, journalists, and scientists. To defeat them, business leaders need to wage a long-term, unified campaign to change public opinion.” (Lewis Powell, 1971)

    Maybe you could consider this as a new motto for your blog?

  30. Dave N says:


    Australia’s Climate Change Dept has models predicting a low-end of 18mm/year sea-level change, 6 times the average for the 18 years of satellite data, which also shows the rate of sea-level rise declining over the last 8 years.

    I guess if you go by models only, you get what you ask for.

  31. Josik says:

    Access the link below,
    mark for temperatures,
    choose Dec. 18th, 00:00 UTC,
    zoom out,
    move the map to see the NH,
    and you will get a beautiful blue map of the current GW.


    (From the Norwegian Met. Inst.)

  32. Dave G says:

    Steve, I worked for an oil company and the heat/cool degree day meter was our BIBLE for future deliveries, so today I started searching for trends since the 60’s and came across Rob’t Balling Jr. ASU, He has a chart from the 50’s to 1995 that’s LEVEL, very interesting!! but nothing after that? can’t seem to find anyone else doing this trend after 2000. Do you know of anyone else running this trend to 2009?

  33. Dave N says:

    Fish and foul:


    The Met Office didn’t believe there was a storm coming, either. Fortunately they bought a Cray and didn’t miss a major storm 3 years later. I guess it’s either broken now, or it is a case of GIGO.

  34. Jim Cole says:

    Steve –

    I really appreciate our website, your in-sight, and your droll sense of humor.

    I’d be glad to send you a few bucks in appreciation. Send me a connection.

    As a fellow Colorado-an in the Boulder valley, perhaps we ought to cross paths at a brew-pub some day.

    From my geologist’s point of view, I am continually amazed that so many people (supposedly educated, smart, etc.) in the sciences here are so incredibly STOOPID about earth history – just the last 200,000 years, e.g. Many, many facts show that nothing in the last 500 years is extraordinary or “unprecedented”.

    Why is this so difficult to explain?

    I guess a calamity always makes a better story, eh?

    Best regards for 2011.

    Jim Cole

  35. sunsettommy says:


    Here is the latest drivel from John Cook and his fellow CO2 hating friends:

    The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism


    It was released just about 2 weeks ago.

    The usual crowd of AGW morons are in it.Such as Dessler,Abraham (the one Monckton raked over),Mandia and other Warmist luminaries.

    There are some very obvious errors in it.


    • Don McCubbin says:

      Hi sunsettommy,

      What are the “obvious errors” in the Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism?

      I am interested in getting them corrected.

      Don McCubbin

  36. oeman50 says:

    Look at this story:


    They say “Greenhouse gases contribute to human morbidity and mortality in the same way that smog and soot pollution and other air toxins do.” What utter drivel. This is similar to the unfactual information put out during the California campaign to overturn their cap’n-trade law.

  37. BioBob says:

    here is a story you might find useful – is sad to me but all too common

    “…survival rate of King penguins with metal bands on their flippers was 44 percent lower than those without bands and banded birds produced far fewer chicks…”

  38. Alexej Buergin says:

    Have a look at the temperature curve in this story
    The data shows that, according to tree rings, it was warmer several times in Western Europe than today, but the “adjusted” curve shows the hockey stick.

  39. Dave N says:

    CO2 emissions in perspective:


    Bottom line: unless billions of people do the same things to reduce their “carbon footprint”, it’s not going to make much difference. Perhaps we can stopper some volcanoes, stop all flights worldwide or close down the internet.

  40. oeman50 says:

    Global warming gives George Clooney malaria, it turned into a mosquito!


    • Philip Finck says:

      Holy crap! And the lefties get worked up about a shot gun up here in Canada. Wouldn’t I love to have some of that stuff to go hunting the fish eating seals.

  41. Dave G says:

    Steve, there’s a great article on freerepublic.com “The Spotted Owl Hoax”

  42. suyts says:


    huffpo is always good for a laugh or two. Making green birth-control choices…….the article is full of funny stuff and some not so funny. Clearly a misanthrope.

  43. Latitude says:

    Steve, when you have time, read this.
    John lays it out…….

    Global Panic as Green Sector Collapses and Investors Face Ruin

    Governments, investors and even the World Bank are rushing for the exits in the Great Escape from the green energy bubble.

    Solar energy appears to be the worst affected sector so far. Dow Jones reports on a startling U-turn by Britain’s ultra-green government has caught investors off guard and shock waves across the markets will likely precipitate the further rush from green energy projects to shale gas.

    The UK’s Department of Energy and Climate Change made the shock announcement as it revealed a comprehensive review of its Feed-in Tariff (FIT) program. Indications from data provider, Prequin are that over $1bn in earmarked funds may be lost as Britain now promises it will only hold tariffs until April 2012.


  44. Philip Finck says:

    Perhaps some comments on the Antarctic base line (1979 – 20080 vs the arctic base line 1979 – 2000.

    I note that minimum ice in the antarctic 80’s is quite low compared to present. If the same base lines were used in both hemispheres, e.g. 1979 – 2000, there would be a massive +ve antarctic `summer’ sea ice extent.

    Someone is pretty inconsistent. Imagine what would happen if a 1979 – 2008 arctic sea ice extent base line was used…..

  45. Philip Finck says:

    DARN…………. my bad, ignore above, they do use 1979 -2008 as arctic sea ice anomaly base. 🙁

  46. D. King says:

    I cross posted this at WUWT T&N

    Guess whose house President Obama visited tonight (Feb 17, 2011)?
    Venture Capital guy John Doerr in SF.
    Who is he? You’re not going to believe this!

    Forbes Feb. 3 2011
    “Gore joined the venture capital group Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Buyers in November 2007, whose key partner, John Doerr, has been pushing hard for biofuel subsidies.”

    Isn’t that causing third world food prices to sky rocket?


    Gore may be giving all his money to the nuns, but I doubt John Doerr is.
    It’s soooo corrupt!

  47. Erik says:

    Some great warmcold links from poster Jimbo at notrickszone if you should run out of material


    A few things caused by global warming:
    Warmer Northern Hemisphere winters due to global warming
    Colder Northern Hemisphere winters due to global warming

    Global warming to slow down the Earth’s rotation
    Global warming to speed up the Earth’s rotation

    North Atlantic Ocean has become less salty
    North Atlantic Ocean has become more salty

    Avalanches may increase
    Avalanches may decrease

    Plants move uphill due to global warming
    Plants move downhill due to global warming

    Monsoons to become drier in India
    Monsoons to become wetter in India

    Plankton blooms
    Plankton decline

    Reindeer thrive
    Reindeer decline

    Less snow in Great Lakes
    More snow in Great Lakes

    Gulf stream slows down
    Gulf stream shows “small increase in flow“

    San Francisco more foggy
    San Francisco less foggy

    Less winter snow for Britain
    More winter snow for Britain

  48. Sparks says:

    CHECK THIS OUT!! Wader birds are one of they many natural inhabitants of a peat bog


  49. suyts says:

    If run out of fun things to post, you can always go to Huffnpuff for a laugh. Today they have a great example of logic fail. First, they blather about a premise that fracking is causing earthquakes. Then they quote an “expert” referencing the Enola quakes as being “natural”. And its only “possible” that the more recent ones are also natural. That’s bad enough, but here’s the funny quote, “We see no correlation between natural gas production wells and earthquakes, but we haven’t ruled out injection wells,” he said, adding that if production wells were the cause, the earthquakes would be scattered all over the region underlain by the Fayetteville Shale formation and not in just one area.”

    Apparently, Greenbrier and Guy are the only places on earth that have injection wells.


  50. Derek says:

    Hello Steve, and All,
    Please see,
    particularly Post 4.

    ” I am purely an amateur, but I have an interest in what has happened to the “evolution” of the GISS GMT over time.
    In particular at time, I would like to get hold of a GISS data set of monthly means from 1977 or just after.
    ie, this but from back then,

    ” In short, do you have any old GISS data sets of monthly GMT please.

    Derek Alker.
    aka Derek at

  51. glacierman says:

    Glacier retreat in Canadian Rockies at a rate of 100 feet per year, in 1949. CO2 was at ~ 330ppm. How is that possible?


  52. glacierman says:

    A quote from Thomas Jefferson about climate change: Priceless.


    OK, I’ll stop now.

  53. glacierman says:

    Wow, in 1936 they understood that climate changed naturally and that extreme events were part of natural cycles. Image what the headlines would be today, or the explanations by the “experts”.


  54. glacierman says:

    Sorry, this one is too rich: According to a famous Arctic Scientist, 2-degree increase in temps were observed over 17 years in the arctic in 1937. Wow, what is the trend? Oh and winter temps increased 5 degrees in 17 years. Glaciers retreating, etc…..this article has it all.


  55. glacierman says:

    Great article about if there was a fundamental change in the climate going on 99 years ago. Gotta love the Standard Oil ad as well.


    • I find that page from the 1912 Flushing Daily very interesting . New Yorkers then must have felt on the cutting edge of modernism building new McMansions out in Queens , with electric subway links bringing MidTown just 15 minutes away , autos coming into use and the better establishments instantly reachable by telephone instead of having to spend a good bit of a day treking to them for any communication at all . Not to mention the latest designs in efficient room and central heating .

  56. suyts says:

    If you haven’t seen this yet, this is an e-mail interview by Freeman Dyson by some dumbass journalist. The idiot blew it, pissed Dyson off and Dyson rather abruptly ended the Q&A.


    My take, ……
    Dyson…… “we have seen great harm done to poor people around the world by the conversion of maize from a food crop to an energy crop.

    Conner totally ignores that statement, but in his very next e-mail….Conner “it may be true that more people die from cold than heat, but how many die of drought and famine?”

    Apparently, Conner thinks starving people while crops get turned to fuel is way better than potentially starving people from an imaginary famine.

    Anyway, I thought it interesting.

  57. Mike Davis says:

    I have 2 waiting moderation and it may be due to using a different e-mail account. It is still me am transitioning from Elink!

  58. Paul Maeder says:

    I’ve been using my new iPad to access several climate-related sites, especially yours. It seems WordPress has “upgraded” their software for iPads, including an “Onswipe” plugin designed to jazz up the appearance of blogs on iPads, with swiping and menu buttons, etc. Over at WUWT, the articles are now inaccessible as choosing any article sends you to a Google ad, where you get stuck, going no farther.

    On your blog, the first posting I tried to read this morning, “Catlin Team Faces -42C” has some kind of YouTube video that pops immediately onto the screen of the iPad. The video cannot be displayed (there’s just a play symbol with a slash through it) nor can it be dismissed. It just floats over the article, blocking the text completely out. Other articles are viewable, but this new format really sucks. It’s slow, unwieldy, and generally poorly thought out.

    I’m writing blog authors as I come across examples of just how bad this new plugin is.

    By the way, thanks for a great site. I make sure and visit several times a day.

    Paul Maeder

  59. suyts says:

    Lol, Anthony has already done an article on this, but it would fit here quite nicely.


  60. suyts says:

    Communists prevailing in Kansas Courts.

    Sierra Club continues to block jobs and cheap electricity for western KS, OK, and Colorado. $2.8 billion of private sector investment continues to be thwarted.


  61. Dave G says:

    EPA Whistleblower IceCap ^

  62. LDLAS says:

    Explain no significant warming for 20 years
    -10 – +160 east and 40 – 60 North


    Alaska hasn’t warmed from 1978 on.
    Greenland has been warmer from 1930 – 1950.
    The antarctic only got warmer at the peninsula.
    Canada’s temperature data is a mess.

    Look at this

  63. Layne Blanchard says:

    Hey Steve,

    Get a load of this: http://creationcare.org/

    a.k.a. http://www.whatwouldjesusdrive.org

  64. Here’s a recent photo and a painting from 1888 of Port en bessin, (France).
    Hard to believe it’s still there with all that sea level rise!

    Port-en-Bessin, outer Harbour at high tide by Georges Seurat 1888

    View of Port -en Bessin circa 2009
    (probably low tide?)

    View of Port -en Bessin circa 2005

    • Don McCubbin says:

      Hi Marc:

      It is a little hard to compare a painting and photos, but let’s suppose we can. And let’s say sea level is rising 2 mm/year. So, in 120 years we have about 240 mm, not quite 10 inches. This would be hard to spot.

      By the way, here are some pretty decent articles on sea-level rise:
      Nicholls & Cazenave, 2010
      Church et al, 2008

      Best regards,

  65. Lance says:

    Hi Steve, winter melt coupled with big rain here in Southern Alberta is starting to cause flooding: never had a chance to get down to the Sheep River as we got back (my son just deployed to Afghanistan and flew out today), so its late, so tomorrow i’ll go have a look see what flooding is happening here in Okotoks.


    didn’t know where or to e-mail this info….

  66. Don McCubbin says:

    Hi Steve,

    Thank you for putting together your site. I appreciated the opportunity over the last couple of days to explore. You clearly care about what you do.

    I am probably not going to post much more because the site is not really organized to focus on particular topics.

    There are lots of posts — sometimes multiple posts on the same topic — giving the posts an ephemeral quality. In the last couple of days, there were at least three separate threads on sea-level rise. Some of the threads I responded to just yesterday are now buried, and it is nuisance to resurrect them. There is a checkbox to be notified about responses, this is good, but I seem to forget to check it.

    A couple of gentle suggestions, and I emphasize gentle, as I know putting together a website is a ton of work.

    You might categorize your posts, to help organize them — maybe use some sort of tagging system. Users interested in, say, sea-level rise would now where to look.

    You might have fewer posts — save up your ammo on one topic and then blaze away — this is my preference. Associated with this, you might have your stated opinion on a particular topic that you could then update, expand on, etc as you get more info.

    You might set things up so that users can find their own posts — I am not sure this is possible with the software you are using, but I am guessing it is.

    In any case, thanks again. I wish you well.


  67. Jimash says:

    {expressions of sadness and contrition }

  68. For anybody along the Front Range :

    Global Warming’s Invasion of our Government and our Lives


    The Independence Institute invites you to attend:

    Climate Coup: Global Warming’s Invasion of our Government and our Lives

    With CATO scholar Patrick Michaels


    – June 23rd

    – 5:30pm reception/6-7pm presentation

    – Independence Institute Offices

    – 13952 Denver West Parkway, Suite 400, Golden

    Global warming alarmism is invading nearly every aspect of our society. Newly published by the Cato Institute, Climate Coup provides an antidote to this unfounded panic, gathering myth-breaking insights and data from a team of experts about its pervasive effects on public health programs, education, law, government spending, environmental enforcement, and more.

    Program is free of charge. Books will be available for purchase.

    RSVP to 303.279.6536 or [email protected]

  69. Grumpy Grampy ;) says:

    I have to change my name! 5 year old Granddaughter is coming out for 2 months and she gave me the name Grampy to which I added Grumpy as a prequel!

    Mike Davis!

  70. suyts says:

    Just a thought for a head line..

    Fed and Miami Heat have same refrain!!!!!

    Just wait ’til next year!!!


  71. earthdog says:

    I left this at WUWT too…

    The grey whales are upping their population and returning to old territory. So is a particular species of algae, that may or may not have disappeared in the northern hemisphere in the past. It is, of course, all because of global warming.

    Oh, and apparently the Northwest Passage is open again.


  72. Ferret says:

    Hi Steve
    Here’s an interesting one… Eskimos invade Scotland!
    http://www.climate4you.com/ClimateAndHistory%201700-1799.htm#1728: Inuit invation of Scotland

  73. Molon Labe says:

    I’m sure you saw this, know about, and are likely part of it, but just in case: Fred Singer is speaking at CSU Jul 18


  74. Sparks says:

    The “Green House Gas Theory” appears to have been destroyed.

    Experiment on the Cause of Real Greenhouses’ Effect – Repeatability of Prof. Robert W. Wood’s experiment

    (Article by Nasif S. Nahle)

    The greenhouse effect inside greenhouses is due to the blockage of convective heat transfer with the environment and it is not related, neither obeys, to any kind of “trapped” radiation. Therefore, the greenhouse effect does not exist as it is described in many didactic books and articles.

    The experiment performed by Prof. Robert W. Wood in 1909 is absolutely valid and systematically repeatable.

    In average, the blockage of convective heat transfer with the surroundings causes an increase of temperature inside the greenhouses of 10.03 °C with respect to the surroundings temperature.


  75. Eric Barnes says:

    The University of Montana wanted to install a woody biomass boiler to reduce it’s carbon footprint, but the “Alliance for Lunatics” says the boiler will contribute to global warming.

  76. HLx says:

    Terror attack in norway!
    Seems like the muslims did it..

  77. Grumpy Grampy ;) says:

    I think I managed to drop a post in the spam bucket with an inappropriate description.

  78. Perry says:

    Polar bear kills one teenager and mauls 4 others on Svalbard.

  79. AndyW says:

    This is a very good neutral piece of reporting.


    A piece of reporting should give you the flavour of the moment alongside some background information you were not aware of and so increases your knowledge.

    This does this in spades in my opinion.


  80. Mike Chamberlin says:

    Here is the caption for a photo which is 20th in a series in the article: “http://www.metronews.ca/edmonton/world/article/943388–in-pictures-atop-two-miles-of-ice-researchers-study-climate-change”

    “The main building at Summit Station, a remote research site situated 10,500 feet above sea level. The structure is periodically jacked up on its support columns to stay above accumulating snow. ”

    I cannot figure out how to get the individual photo copied, but the irony is incredible. The building has to be jacked up to stay above the rapidly melting Greenland Icecap. I hope you can use this.

  81. Ole Heinrich says:

    Steve, the latest about ice in Greenland – Record attempts in the north stopped: ‘Einar’ is bumped into a wall of ice http://goo.gl/R6Bvb

  82. glacierman says:

    City in Virginia gets hit with an earthquake. Hurricane about to come ashore on east coast. We must have passed a tipping point. CO2 is causing chaos to break out all over the Atlantic coast.

  83. Mike Davis says:

    I may lose my identity on the new site. I am trying to reactivate my Yahoo account because I could not find another way to post.

  84. Karen says:

    Almost all I can point out is, I don’t know what to really say! Except obviously, for the amazing tips which have been shared within this blog. I’m able to think of a trillion fun methods to read the articles on this site. I do think I will ultimately make a move making use of your tips on those things I could never have been able to manage alone. You’re so thoughtful to permit me to be one of those to benefit from your helpful information. Please recognize how great I appreciate it.

  85. Anonymous says:

    Steve, you are a self-deluding idiot. You obviously have the ablility to read scientific information, yet you do not. Good luck with that plan.

    • David Y says:

      {Is this Chris Mooney?} Regardless–Your message is akin to the anarchists in San Francisco trashing storefronts with their faces covered then running away. If you really believe what you say, why not provide an argument? Some justification? Adolescent name-calling (why stop at “self-deluding idiot”? Why not throw in a “poopy-head” while you’re at it?) only negates any hope of garnering support here. And special kudos (sarc) for your condescending conclusion (“Good luck with that plan.”). Throwing your tantrums and tizzy fits here only shows your team’s true colors.

  86. tckev says:

    Your Tax Dollars at Work!

    A little something on Agenda 21-

    I like the comments about the subject of climate change being a turn off. But then a push for “rich” countries to supplying 1% of global GDP to “poor” countries for ‘sustainable’ development and ‘green jobs’, is apparently serious.
    Also “mitigation of climate change,” has morphed into focus on promoting “sustainable growth” and pushing the debate to political ends – now it seems science, however it is skewed, is out, and politics is in.
    The bottom line is, that by some measure, the “wealthy” economies must pay the “poor” economies for all this.

  87. How does one e-mail you?

  88. Lou says:

    Why are Gore, et al so worried about Antarctica being ice free?



  89. Colorado Wellington says:


    I did not see local news until late in the evening so I did not understand why you asked me earlier about west of Fort Collins. Please email me so we can communicate offline.

  90. Kaboom says:


    Suck on the public teat all your career, demonize those who pay your salary and then go on milking their offspring by forcing them to buy fresh copies of your text books. This guy about takes the cake when it comes to rent-seeking bloodsuckers.

  91. jimash1 says:

    I made something
    110 years of sea level rise at Liberty Island.
    Sequence 1.mp4

  92. Ted says:

    Here’s we go again. I was wondering how long until I started seeing a few hot days linked to global warming.


    Great blog, I stumbled across it on day. I’ve always thought global warming was a farce.

  93. Michael Unick says:

    Dear Steve,

    Love the site. I have been vacationing, but in case you missed it, June 30, 2012 was the 100th anniversary of the most deadly tornado in Canadian history. 400Km per hr winds and 28 dead in Regina, SK. I am sure carbon dioxide caused it.


  94. gator69 says:

    Hey Steven! Did not know if you had seen this yet…

    “Michael Mann is being represented by experienced defamation lawyer John B. Williams…

    In 2001, John successfully represented R.J. Reynolds in the three-month Blue Cross/Blue Shield RICO trial before Judge Jack B. Weinstein… He successfully defended R.J. Reynolds in the commercial speech case filed by the Federal Trade Commission challenging the cartoon character, Joe Camel.”

    Just cannot make this stuff up!

  95. Michael Unick says:

    The 10 worst droughts in Alberta, Canada’s history occured during low CO2 years (prior to 1942). No multi-decadal droughts since 1937. John Palliser visited Alberta and Saskatchewan in 1857 – 59 during a multidecadal drought that ended in the late 1860’s. He reported that the area was not suited for agriculture or human settlement. Later, in the 1870’s, John Macoun, a botanist, came to the area, then known as “Palliser’s Triangle” and determined that it could be used for crops. This was the start of a multi-decadal wet spell in the region that lasted until 1917. 10 decadal or multidecadal droughts have been experienced in Palliser’s Triangle since 1482 (according to tree ring records and finally instrumental records that started in the 1880’s). The worst drought, in the late 1560’s, was twice as severe as the drought that lasted from 1917 to 1937 (with the exception of 1927 and 1928). There has been no large scale drought since 2002, although localized dry spells have occurred (such as in 2009). As I drove from Regina to Calgary in mid-July this year, a lake that was dry in 2009 was overflowing and almost up to the highway, the highest that water has been since I started travelling that route in 2007. My point is: 1. you can’t take 1 day or 1 week or 1 year or 1 decade of weather and call it climate. Palliser took 3 of the driest years in the region and declared it unfit for agriculture. 15 years later Macoun declared it fit. Today the region represents 200,000 km2 of the most productive farm land in the world. 2. If CO2 causes drought, why were all the worst droughts in measured history (the past 530 years) in Western Canada prior to 1937? For references, see for example http://www.parc.ca/saskadapt/adaptation-options/theme-assessments/water-drought

  96. jjunkin says:

    “it will not be possible to forecast sea level rise from Greenland’s water store with any accuracy”
    “it is certain that many of the present calculations and computer models of ice sheet conditions that built upon a short range of years since 2000 must be reassessed.”
    “It is too early to proclaim the ‘ice sheet’s future doom’ and subsequent contribution to serious water problems for the world.”

  97. Randall G says:

    Steve, I have been a regular reader of you site for the past two years. I’m intrigued that you often use ‘The Bend Bulletin’ as one of your historical sources. As one born in that city oh so many decades ago, I not only enjoy your point and admire your research, but get a kick out of seeing articles that my grandfather read, as well as my father as a young boy. I have tried and failed to find an online archive for the paper. Would you send me a link or information, please? As validation of my sincerity, my email address gives a last name that should appear very often in that paper from the 20’s through the 80’s.

    Thanks for any consideration and thank you for all that you do.


  98. michael says:

    Steven, the hottest July ever was pretty normal here in Calgary. Environment Canada has the average high pegged at 24.2C. July 1936 was the warmest I could find at 28.7C. That July had 11 days above 30C. There have been 5 days above 30C since 2009. 1936 had 23 days above 30C in total. 1936 also had record cold with 12 days under -30C. I guess maybe we sent all our CO2 south 75 years ago!S

  99. Michael says:

    Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada. July 2012 was the 40th hottest July on record (back to 1884). Of the 10 hottest July’s, only 1 was post 1988. 1886 and 1937 tied for the hottest, fully 5.1C hotter than the 20th century average. Hottest temperature July 5, 1937 at 43.3C. 1929 through 1942, 14 consecutive years, exceeded the 20th century average. 1990 through 1996, 7 consecutive years, were cooler than the 20th century average. This century, 6 of 12 July’s have exceeded the 20th century average and 6 were cooler. The second coldest decade on record is the 1990’s, which was 0.35C warmer than the 1900’s and 2C cooler than the 20th century average. This is global warming? Sounds more like natural variability to me!

  100. Michael Unick says:

    In 1870, British surveyor John Palliser told the Canadian government that most of Alberta and Saskatchewan was uninhabitable because it was essentially a desert. He visited the region at the tail end of a 15 year drought.

    In 2012, the region is home to more than 100,000 farms, 4.5 million people, and is on its way to a bumper crop. See the press release by the Canadian government. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/120822/dq120822b-eng.htm

    I suppose that the increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere overcame the region’s propensity to drought and allowed it to be some of the most productive agricultural land on earth. /sarc

  101. This is interesting. I’m a terminal Deadhead from my teenage years. Just read this on their site, from the regular blogger there


    According to an article in the Eugene Register-Guard newspaper in late August ’72, the Creamery benefit, which had very little advance publicity, was only expected to draw about 5,000 to the fairgrounds, but by the time the show started that afternoon with a set by the New Riders of the Purple Sage (with Buddy Cage now in the steel guitar slot Garcia once occupied), there were three times that number, and as the afternoon progressed, the crowd hit somewhere in the neighborhood of 25,000. There were traffic snarls on all roads near the concert, the facilities on site were inadequate for the size of the gathering, and, worst of all, the temperature soared as high as 108, an Oregon record

    Another one for your archives.

  102. gator69 says:

    Some good stuff here…

    “Years with large losses of sea ice are characterized by abnormal cyclone distributions and tracks…”


  103. Michael says:

    From WUWT, new study on CO2 and temperature. Abstract is available but unfortunately the full version is paywalled.


  104. Hi Steve, How do I contact you via email? My email is supplied in details, thanks!

  105. Michael says:

    by the way, i want my refund on the ocean front property I bought in the Bronx in 1989 on the recommendation of James Hansen

  106. Eric Barnes says:

    They should put the SF city council and CA’s senators in the bottom of the lake before it is drained.

  107. gator69 says:

    I’m sure you must have seen this, but felt compelled to share, right up your alley…


  108. Michael says:

    Jobless claims spike. Looks like Obama forgot to give his voters the memo : Pretend you’re working until November 7th.


  109. Steve – have you seen this?

    It’s from Sept. 21, 2012

    In it the CSMonitor makes a complete bonkers claim about something you never said in one of your blog-posts and then wheels out a liar masquerading as a “Scientist” to “debunk” [I hate that word, but Clima-tards love it] this strawman which they invented out of thin air

    It’s a textbook case of media deception

  110. My ski resort in Banff Alberta Canada opens tomorrow Oct 25!
    Earliest opening in its history. Been there since 1929.


  111. Glacierman says:


    This is who the president is: http://www.futurechildrenproject.com/

    This is almost too hard to believe, but after the last four years, it is obviously the new norm of the Democratic party.

  112. Steve – any reason why none of my posts appear on your site? I suspect this won’t either, but should you get to read it…

  113. Ahah. Worked here. I posted on your football post of yesterday, and it never appeared; same for today’s one as well. Whassup?

  114. Henry Moore says:


    I have a project going that is related to the subject matter of your site. I need some help promoting it. If you are at all interested, please email me, Hank at axedthemovie dot com, and I will get you the information. I don’t think you will be disappointed.


  115. Michael says:

    November 2012 is in the books. At YYC (Calgary International Airport), Tmax average was 22nd coldest in 100 years at 0.7C. 100 year average Tmax 3.6C. 5 “hottest” Novembers: 1917 13.1C, 1949 and 1923 11.9C, 1939 11.2C and 1890 10.6C. You won’t read this in the MSM.

    This is “hot” on the heels of the 6th coldest October in 100 years.

    Unfortunately, 96% of our Greenhouse gases are frozen, I guess that prohibits them from warming the temperature.


  116. IceKat says:


    Take a look at the photo, “Soot pours out of a factory in Romania. Photograph: Andrew Holbrooke/Corbis” The Guardian use this to illustrate an article on global warming.
    It doesn’t take much scratching around to discover the the photo was taken in 1990:
    and the factories producing this closed in 1993, although the smelter is apparently still operational.

  117. Dave in Canmore says:

    heres one for the insane bin:
    Article in Nature claims old climate model predictions “seem accurate” Surely climate craziness of the week!

  118. Michael says:

    An example of pure stupidity. The Canadian Press needs to hire a fact checker. Doesn’t journalistic integrity demand fact checking??


  119. Hi Steve. I know how you like old newspaper clippings. I don’t know if you have access to LA Times archives but there is a story about disappearing glaciers in the May 23, 1902 edition.

  120. Michael says:

    Thought you might like this one.

    Merry Christmas.


  121. IceKat says:

    Unbelievable stupidity!

    Changing weather patterns will make the perfect British lawn ‘a thing of the past’

    ” Professor Julia Slingo, the chief scientist at the Met Office, also believes gardeners will need to adapt to the change.
    She said: “We should all be worried about climate change, we are taking the planet into unchartered territories through our own activities.
    “We are taking our planet into a climate that we haven’t seen for a very, very long time, going back to before there were gardens in the UK.

    “For us in the UK we will be buffered from most of the climate change because we live downstream from the Atlantic Ocean, that is why we have lovely gardens now. ”


  122. Melvin says:

    Steven Goddard’s “Real Science” is a must-read publication for dissenting climate news. It is an eagerly anticipated part of my daily blog reading, along with Climate Depot.

  123. TonyO of Aust says:

    Steve – a bit of an idea on the success of banning guns and Islamic immigration in Australia – Andrew Bolt is a conservative commentator/blogger over here.


  124. Traitor In Chief says:

    More Globull warming proof! shock and horror! Cool tho….


  125. chris says:

    Really Steve Goddard. Who are you? What are your qualifications, other than having a chip on your shoulder? Why do you have no such information listed? Usually, when one goes to the ABOUT section one finds information about the author, their background and funders. Here I find nothing but a description of word press. Very strange. Will this posting remain? Interested to see if free speech exists on so called “conservative” blather pages such as this one. Doubtful, since the main point of your blog seems to be to get yourself a cheering section and I’m not cheering for you. Sorry little boy.

    Why is it important to know who you are and what your motivations might be? Because this will give us, your readers, some insight into what you are actually up to. Amazingly, you claim that millions of people who have never met each other are engaged in some elaborate, sinister, overarching conspiracy to do … something. Seems improbable.

    No matter how hard I try to squeeze my mind into your little box, I can’t for the life of me figure out what all these scientists are up to with this huge and elaborate hoax. More likely, you as a single individual are engaged in a “conspiracy” of sorts, to employ the power of word press to distort and distend reality to suit your ideological addiction.

  126. chris says:

    oh and happy valentine’s day to you and the kochs!

  127. chris says:

    so are you going to explain who you are or not, Steve? Shadowy conspiracy or lone loon?

  128. chris says:

    And good on ya for not censoring your commentators!

  129. chris says:

    Next question, cause I have no lover to share this silly artificial day with. Where does your income come from? Are you on disability? Do you work? If so, as what? How many hours? Details, details, my friend. Reveal everything about yourself. Be open, be honest, be free Stevie, tell the world who you really are! Don’t hide your light under a bushel like some conniving scientist, expose yourself to us. We won’t bite you.

  130. Michael says:

    Hi Mr. Goddard. Thanks again for all your great work exposing lies.

    Speaking of liars, thought you might like this on the latest antics of David Suzuki.


  131. Me says:


    Enjoy the spin on this! Notice how they say in his 18 page opinion, aaaaaahhh No it is in his 18 page ruling, just saying! 😆

  132. Chewer says:

    Feel free to use my webcam anyway you’d like, as it is “The Home of The Free”!

  133. robbcab says:

    Hey Steve,
    You might be able to have some fun with this one…

    From the “CAGW causes everything” files:

    The new Cornell & Rutgers Universities study claiming Super Storm Sandy could have been caused by global warming directly contradicts the conclusions of a Carnegie Institution paper published in GRL in 2008.

    To quote the Cornell/Rutgers paper:
    (LINK: http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/2277673/Cornell-Rutgers-study-Sandy-climate-change.pdf)

    “Unlike a typical hurricane, this huge and powerful hybrid storm did not lose strength after making landfall because it was supercharged with energy derived from a southward dip in the jet stream over the Mississippi Valley that ushered in an invasion of cold Arctic air (Figure 1). Thus, a useful way to look at the anthropogenic climatechange connection is to ask why were the extra-tropical conditions so unusual?.”

    “…perhaps the likelihood of greenhouse warming playing a significant role in Sandy’s evolution as an extra-tropical superstorm is at least as plausible…”

    The Carnegie paper:
    (LINK: (link: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008GL033614/abstract)
    (pulled from Jeff Master’s Wunderblog)
    “…researchers Cristina Archer and Ken Caldeira of Stanford’s Carnegie Institution of Washington analyzed data from 1979-2001, and found that the Northern Hemisphere jet stream moved northward at approximately 125 miles per decade (270 miles during the 22-year period of the study). ”

    “All of these changes are consistent with the behavior of the jet stream predicted by global warming theory”

    So it would seem that CAGW is responsible for moving the jet stream both north & south. Is there anything it can’t do?

  134. james says:

    New Anthony Watts Interview Just Published: Climate Change without Catastrophe (News Tip)

    Dear Steve,

    I just wanted to send you a quick mail to let you know that we have just conducted a very interesting interview with the well known figure in the climate debate Anthony Watts.
    It’s a very interesting chat and whether you agree or disagree with his comments I thought you and your readers would find some value in taking a look

    A few of the topics we discussed are:

    • The difference between “global warming” and “climate change”
    • Why CO2 is partially responsible but oversold
    • Why recent major weather events cannot be linked to CO2
    • Why we should be more worried about another ice age
    • Why carbon taxes won’t have any effect on the whims of Mother Nature
    • How the climate debate has taken on religious proportions
    • Why the Keystone protests are all for show
    • Why Mother Nature will be the final arbiter of truth
    • What we should and shouldn’t be doing to address global warming
    • Why “climate change” has become a favorite bogeyman
    • Why scientifically we’ve only scratched the surface of climate change

    You can read the full interview at: http://oilprice.com/Interviews/Climate-Change-without-Catastrophe-Interview-with-Anthony-Watts.html

    I hope you find the interview interesting.

    Best regards,

    James Stafford

  135. Glacierman says:

    Climategate 3.0 is upon us. The password has been released. Check WUWT, Bishophill.

  136. mitchel44 says:

    Mr Goddard,

    Just curious, but as I understand it, the premise of “global warming” is that the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere will cause it to retain more heat, resulting in more evaporation and higher water vapour content, which is to speed the effect. It’s often spoken of as “throwing on an extra blanket”.

    If an increase from 280 ppm to 390 ppm in the atmosphere is capable of warming the planet, what level of CO2 content for the air is my home is recommended for best heating efficiency? I know that submarines hit 4000 to 5000 ppm frequently, so it’s not really a health issue, 1500 ppm should be easy to manage.

    If CO2 is such an efficient retainer of heat in the atmosphere at the 400 ppm level, than a layer one inch thick of 100% CO2 sandwiched between 2 layers of plastic on your interior walls would add what R value to the insulation of your home?

    Surely in their pursuit of better building codes and more efficient heating and cooling, the government’s confidence in CO2 as an absorber and re-emitter of long-wave radiation would be prominently featured.

    Sadly, I can’t find any government direction on this issue, no requirements in the building codes, no enterprising young entrepreneur striking out on his own.

  137. Lynn Clark says:

    Steve, I stumbled upon this blog a few minutes ago. Thought you might be interested.


  138. FYI : Willie Soon @ Denver U , Monday : http://www.meetup.com/lpcolorado/events/111428372/ .
    { I still think this is a weird path for communication . )

  139. Steve Keohane says:

    Steven drop me a line, I have a perfect image for you, maybe more than one. I’ll send them, you can use them, I just don’t want credit

  140. Bill C says:

    Stephen– I’m thinking of referring a couple of very bright-but-leftist-brainwashed high school students to your site. In fact, I’m going to offer them $25 each if they read your site and answer a few questions on it. However, some of the entries can be a little bit too much “inside baseball” for people who do not follow your blog closely. I have to thank you for all the incredible hard work you already put into this site, and because of that I am a little reluctant to propose this, but I think it would be a great thing if you could do kind of a primer on the main data supporting your views, how you interpret it, and what it means.

    I know that all of the info is already posted for the taking, but we are living in a world where attention spans are short, and if things get obtuse too quickly 99% of people will stop reading. Also, we might be able to convert a few more low information voters if you put up something designed to be read by simpler minds.

    Again, thanks for all your hard work and bravery.

  141. Paul o'Sullivan says:

    Hi Steve,

    Can you please contact me at my email.


  142. redc1c4 says:

    found this gem at the bottom of the NWS main page for the US


    moar permanent/persistent drought maps for you to mock

  143. Jambon-X says:

    global warming officially “jumps the shark” tonight:

    “Sharknado” premieres tonight on “SyFy”


    My favorite comment on a YouTube page with the trailer for this POS:

    “lol? never seen anything more retarded in my life”

  144. phodges says:

    Bombshell! Nature publishes on climate model failure….loaded with choice quotes!


    • Andy Oz says:

      The warmist story is cracking up just like Jerry Falwell’s. These “climate forecasters” should go see the Tarot lady who’ll be much more reliable.

  145. Malcolm says:

    “We can all agree that science is scary and confusing, but now it’s AWESOME and scary and confusing, so we have a reason not to burn down the places where they teach it.”

    From the BRAWNDO site

    • Andy Oz says:

      That’s really really weird. Who else but Brawndo, is suggesting anything about “burn down the places”? I’ve never seen it anywhere. This is typical Problem, Reaction, Solution methodology.

  146. John R T says:

    16 July 3013 La Nacion, San Jose Costa Rica
    ‘Hace 50 anos’ daily note on news from half-a-century ago:
    Miss Universe pageant, Miami FL — extreme heat prostrates eight contestants, even after the organizers contracted a helicopter to cool off the area.
    Was there a record set, in Miami, In july 63?

  147. redc1c4 says:

    the NWS says drought to persist


  148. Climatism says:

    Hi Steve,
    Hawaii Govenor Abercrombie has signed a state of emergency for tropical depression Flossie packing 45ml/hr winds. ‘State of emergency’ an opportunity to advertise evil man’s effect on extreme weather or standard protocol?

    “No more tolerance: (Hawaii) Senate Democrat wants leftists to ‘ridicule’ global warming skeptics” http://www.environmentguru.com/pages/elements/element.aspx?id=1249561#.UfaKmGQY0dg

  149. Climatism says:

    Runaway Global Sea-Level Rise

    More than 1,700 U.S. cities will be partially underwater by 2100: study
    By Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian
    Monday, July 29, 2013 18:33 EDT

    Goldenberg Love$ climate models. http://climatism.wordpress.com/2013/07/30/modelling-climate-alarmism/

  150. Climatism says:

    Hi Steve,
    The US just experienced 1,122 Record Cold Temps in one week.

    Yet here ‘down-under’, news.com’s resident climate alarmist Anthony Sharwood links the east coast of Australia’s, warmest July on record, to ‘global’ warming and a climate change “Kicking in fast” !


  151. Climatism says:

    Obama: “Economy would be much better off” with more Government employees

    President Barack Obama – citing the job losses since he took office — said “the economy would be much better off,” unemployment would be 6.5 percent and the national deficit would be in decline if there were more federal, state and local government workers.

    “If those layoffs had not happened, if public sector employees grew like they did in the past two recessions, the unemployment rate would be 6.5 instead of 7.5,” Obama said. “Our economy would be much better off, and the deficit would still be going down because we would be getting more tax revenue.”


  152. Traitor In Chief says:

    I have a pretty cool article about the new “Texas Navy” but I received it in an email. If you want to receive things like this… I get a lot of them because I work in Aerospace and everybody is into this stuff… send an email address to my address below, and I will forward to that address whenever I get something that looks interesting.

  153. shazaam says:

    Looks like the AP is smelling an Arctic Ice Recovery propaganda disaster. Why else would such a retraction occur? http://rare.us/story/associated-press-retracts-bogus-north-pole-lake-photo/

    Though it was very quietly retracted (as usual).

  154. Malcolm says:

    “The science is quite clear that the human influence on climate change has become bigger than the sun’s.”

    Nuccitelli in the Guardian

  155. Scott Wallace says:

    Is climate change a cult? Sure, why not. Definitions and how to deal with it.


  156. YFNWG says:

    Why are my comments still in moderation? They agree with you!!

  157. Albert says:

    Hello Steve,

    I’ve been following this blog since 2010 (found through Climate Depot). I just recently started my own blog, I have no intention of actually blogging on a sustained basis but you HAVE TO see this:


    Tesla made a big hoopla about its battery swap demo, five months later the swap stations are nowhere to be seen. The bid deal? They pocketed $50-100M in EXTRA carbon credits because of this future.

    No kidding. They already got 4 credits, or $20,000 for every car they sold in California. CARB decided that to reward its 90-second battery swap technology, this would be upgraded to 7 credits – an extra $15,000 per car. That was one year ago. CARB just extended this loophole for another year, and it could go on until 2017.

    (n 2018, in principle, it will get closed – but they’ll find some other way of handing money to Tesla.)

    Problem is, there are no swap stations, no signs of construction at any existing Tesla station, no schedule on when construction could BEGIN, no info on price, no info on terms of service or anything really…nothing since June. Nothing but silence. Oh, and before June there was nothing too. Basically Tesla had their biggest announcement of the year, teased it for weeks, called the media, then totally forgot about it.

    Oh, and Model S owners are saying that their “swaps” take 3-4 hours and several mechanics. Oooops. Now I see why nobody was allowed near the cars during the demo.

    So Tesla is scamming $50-100M a year in fraudulent carbon credits, courtesy of California officials. Over the 2013-2017 loophole period, the scam could balloon to more than $1 billion.


    Thanks for your work and keep going

  158. donpenim says:

    In China, if you like your BBQ, you cannot keep your BBQ.

    “…Beijing is waging a war against air pollution, one barbecue at a time.
    Authorities in the capital have destroyed more than 500 open-air barbecues…”


    Flea, meet elephant.

  159. Dave N says:

    Hey Steve, I recall you have some experience in image processing? There’s a story making its way around the internet, namely:


    I had a shot at splitting the images and using this site:


    To compare the two. I’m not sure which function I should use, but I figured using “andimage” and “divideimage” might be appropriate. Either this guy is a complete freak, or he’s lying about the image in question. His other works are impressive, but this one is practically beyond belief.

  160. Dob the K says:

    Hi Steve. Thought you may get a kick out of this straight from noaa’s central library. Scroll down a bit to meteorological extremes of the southwest. http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/062/Text/mwr-062-12-0447.TXT

  161. Dante says:

    Hi Steve.
    I’ve noticed a lot of the archive.org data is being destroyed.
    What I’ve discovered is that you can archive the archive.org data on another website: archive.is
    This way, if the archive.org data gets destroyed, you’ll a backup.
    Here’s an example: http://archive.is/Jk2SO

  162. Someone recently published a book bemonaing the tendency of scientists these days to explain all sorts of natural phenomenon as resulting from global warming when the true cause is something quite different. The case I remember him mentioning concerned the disappearance of tree frogs or something like that. Does anyone know what the title of the book and the name of the author are?

  163. Psalmon says:


    Thought you may be able to get some use out of this below titled “Winter Weather 1994 and Ice Conditions for the Laurentian Great Lakes” (if you don’t already have it):


    Check out figure 8. Supposed to be bitter in Chicago thru Feb 1.

    Also figure 7, total >80% is rare, 5 years plus 1996 out of 50. >90% is more rare, just ’94 and ’79.

    Also interesting how the authors in an AMS journal summarized in the concluding remarks on page 86 the high ice years (00s-20s), low years (30s-50s), and high years (60s-early 80s). Interesting correlation there.

  164. David says:

    Hallo Steven, I was wondering what would be the best way to get a hold of you for an interview?

  165. BruceC says:

    I don’t know if you have seen this or already have this link;


    It is a journal written in 1877 called; Climate of New South Wales by H. C. Russell (Government Astronomer for New South Wales). It is a fascinating read of historical weather conditions in and around Sydney from 1788 – 1875. If you haven’t seen it, please enjoy.

    Bruce Crockett

  166. robbcab says:

    Since you excel at pointing out the duplicity in the Alarmists…

    Holdren in 2009:
    “Winters are now shorter and warmer than they were 30 years ago, with the largest temperature rise — more than 7 degrees Fahrenheit — observed in the Midwest and northern Great Plains…
    …warns the report, released yesterday in Washington by White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren and other top Obama administration officials.”


    Holdren 2014:
    “A growing body of evidence suggests that the kind of extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States as we speak is a pattern that we can expect to see with increasing frequency as global warming continues….

    We also know that this week’s cold spell is of a type there’s reason to believe may become more frequent in a world that’s getting warmer, on average, because of greenhouse-gas pollution.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eDTzV6a9F4 (starting at ~0:30)

    So is it “shorter & warmer winters” or “increasing extreme cold patterns”?

  167. I have been reading your blog for over a year Steve and find it one of the best resources for countering the arguments of the alarmists around me. I do have one question that drives me crazy.

    How can burning a gallon of gasoline which weighs 6.3 pounds, result in discharged co2 weighing 21.1 pounds? This continues to be a number I see in the press on emitted carbon, but in my simple mind it doesn’t add up. A portion of the fuel is discharged as energy, some as water vapor, but the waste product is more than 3 times the value of the original product. What am I missing.

  168. Thomas Lowy says:

    Steve, check out this story in Russia Today on a snow storm in the Urals yesterday, apparently the biggest in 126 years.


  169. Windsong says:

    Had this link show up today in the Defense News newsletter: http://www.newsweek.com/2014/05/09/world-warms-navy-strategists-plan-arctic-rush-249099.html
    How can a reputable magazine start an article about the navy with polar bear myths and outdated stats? The US Navy is parking an aircraft carrier indefinitely (no plan to refuel CVN-73) and they are worried about Marines encountering polar bears? My money is on the bears.

  170. WoodBurner says:

    Thanks for all you do, I would like to help.

  171. jlc says:

    Didn’t know if you had seen this from 2012 re geologic aquifer pumping as 42% of measured sea level rise

  172. Dan Marks says:

    Have you seen this http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/25/want-to-disprove-man-made-climate-change-a-scientist-will-give-you-10000-if-you-can/
    Want to Disprove Man-Made Climate Change? A Scientist Will Give You $10,000 if You Can

  173. Michael says:

    Steve, I thought you might want to see a MSM article that provides an actual historical approach to explaining current events. I especially like the comment that we were spoiled by the uneventful recent past. http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/07/02/why-exactly-are-floods-soaking-saskatchewan-and-manitoba-and-are-they-here-to-stay/

  174. Donna K. Becker says:

    I’ve been unable (so far) to find substantiation of the claim that NOAA has released data showing that the U.S. has cooled since 2005. Does such data exist?

    • Donna K. Becker says:

      Thanks. However, I’d rather see the original data source, rather than references from a website or publication. The only media references I can find are from “conservative” sources, which never would be believed by Progressives–or by the uninformed. .

  175. Fred Musser says:

    Hi Steve

    I love your web site and you have some amazing graphs and data that expose what NASA and the NCDC are doing to climate data etc. that I’d love to share with my democratic friends in CA. Tough being a conservative here. I’d love to see the ability to make individual Facebook posts for your individual posts?

    Your fan Fred

  176. Steven Ward says:

    http://www.energy-ingenuity.com/id43.html if you take the 5 minutes to watch the two YouTube videos and read the caption, you will have a better understanding of the Question.
    “What has caused the change in these thermometers?” Science!
    Please help educate YOUR children about what I have discovered.

  177. Windsong says:

    Texas Tech will need some that global warming stuff tonight (3/4/15). Make that a LOT of stuff:

  178. gator69 says:

    I sent a note to Drudge about your Twitter censorship.

  179. gator69 says:

    I am not receiving notifications of replies. Is this a WordPress problem?

  180. gator69 says:


    You may want to make this resource readily available to the rest of those who support you, and you peers.

    They have changed the complaint form since Tony’s suspension, but after some digging I was able to find good contact info for those who do not have an account.


    Phone: 415-222-9670

    email: [email protected],


  181. So glad to have discovered this blog.

    I am constantly having to deal with the ignorance “engineered” into so many people about this very issue! The Earth’s climate has changed, as it always has changed, and will continue its tragectory of changes – so long as it has: An atmosphere, a Sun that also changes “moods”, and any other major terrestrial event (like volcanoes, etc.). This should be a solid, commonsense GIVEN, but too many non-thinking followers keep repeating the same old doctrines of “human-caused” climate-change ad nauseum, ad infinitum.

    Looking forward to more updates, as I am “following”.

    – Rev. Dragon’s Eye

  182. I am not sure why my comments are still in moderation?

  183. jpintx says:


    I think I read on your page that a new study revealed that the number of trees on planet earth was more or less one order of magnitude GREATER than the warmists/alarmists estimates. Is the estimated number of trees used in any way in the climate modeling process?

  184. Electric Head says:

    Steve, been following your work for a while now. Keep it up. Also, I’m a power engineer in the town about 10 miles east of you – where all the ppl who work in Boulder but can’t afford to live there – and would be more than happy to offer my credentials for corroboration. Cheers!

  185. William Kay says:

    There is a new posting at http://www.ecofascism.com containing a list of 356 climate sceptical and/or enviro-critical websites; plus additional info on the enviro-critic community and its funders.

    • While http://CoSy.com as a whole is more focused on advanced programming language , the portions discussing planetary temperature present perhaps the most thorough quantitative explication of the most basic essential physics and show the utter groundlessness of the entire GHG paradigm .

  186. See you in Canberra and Sydney. You might wish to study the correct physics that not one of over 95,000 visitors to my websites has ever proved wrong, not even for AU $5,000. I’ll be very interested to see how on Earth (or Venus) you quantify the surface temperatures using the laws of physics, somehow assuming (incorrectly of course) that high pressure maintains high temperatures. Start with air at 27°C in a cylinder then slowly compress it to half the volume with a piston moving half way down the cylinder that is closed at the other end. Do you get double the temperature, namely 327°C?

    • No spectral effect can explain Venus’s surface temperature 2.25 times that of a gray ball in its orbit as calculated on my website , http://cosy.com/#PlanetaryPhysics . It finally got thru to me in comments and discussion at http://wattsupwiththat.com/ that it is the gravitational energy which is left of the energy balance which shows itself as thermal energy . It is not the pressure , per se , which maintains the temperature gradient . We all know that all things being equal that will dissipate . It is the gravitational potential which maintains the pressure gradient which is the prime cause .

      Gravity cannot be left out of the energy balance equations .

  187. MrPete says:

    Steve, I have a private question for you. Please email when you have a chance 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *