Real Climate Science

The University of Colorado shows sea level rising at a steady rate of 3.3 mm/year, which is a higher rate than 84% of tide gauges report

But they didn’t always show that. In 2004, they showed the rate of sea level rise as 2.8 mm/year

sl_cu2004_rel1.2.pdf

Overlaying the two graphs (of the same data sets) you can see that they don’t look anything like each other. In the old graph, there was a trough in 1997, and in the new graph there is a peak that year.

The next animation shows how their published data set has changed since 2004.

2004 : sl_ib_ns_cu2004_rel1.2_global.txt

2015 : 2015_rel2/sl_ns_global.txt

The next graph shows the changes made to the data. They added an extra 10 mm of sea level rise from 1993 to 2004.

As with every other US government funded climate data set, the data is continuously being altered to create the case for imaginary global warming. The temperature is not increasing, so they have to keep faking the data to keep the scam alive.

h/t to Steve Case

The White House generates “consensus” though a combination of $29 billion/year in bribes, and overt threats.

According to the University of Colorado, sea level is rising at 3.3 mm/year

 

CU Sea Level Research Group | University of Colorado 

This is quite remarkable, because the average of all NOAA tide gauges is less than one third of that, at 1.01 mm/year. Eighty four percent of the tide gauges show lower rates than 3.3 mm/year. The median value is only 1.28 mm/year.

GlobalStationsLinearSeaLevelTrendsCSV.htm

In an actual field of science, this sort of huge discrepancy would concern the scientists. But climate science has nothing to do with science. It is propaganda.

Climate experts live in this world

Climate change study predicts refugees fleeing into Antarctica – Telegraph

why-antarctica-will-soon-be-the-ionlyi-place-to-live–literally-561947.html

The rest of us live in this world :

04 Jan 1908 – A STARTLING THOUGHT. DO WE CATCH DISEASES FROM O…

Zeke Hausfather claimed that US temperatures had to be measured as anomalies, rather than absolute temperatures – because of “changing station composition.” Several skeptics took the bait.

This is nonsense. The absolute temperature and anomaly graphs are nearly identical. This is because the US has a large number of widely distributed stations, and random station changes tend to null each other out over the entire group.

NCDC reports US temperatures as absolute temperatures, because they know it doesn’t make much difference.

People should do some research before weighing in on topics they don’t understand. The important topic is the huge amount of data tampering, not the minute and nearly irrelevant details alarmists use to distract.

‘Temperature data fraud from NOAA and NASA enables the global warming scam. It can’t exist without the fraudulent claims from these agencies.

For example

(CNN) New climate change records have come along to remind us that Earth’s thermostat is steadily pushing upward.
More exactly, there are two global high temperature records and a smattering of climate change low points.

March 2015 was the warmest March since record-keeping began in 1880, says the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. And the first quarter of 2015 was the warmest first quarter on record in those same 136 years.

New records highlight global warming’s continued rise – CNN.com

There isn’t one word of truth to this. March was about average and cooler than 1983

vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0beta/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0beta2.txt

rss_monthly_msu_amsu_channel_tlt_anomalies_land_and_ocean_v03_3.txt

January-March temperatures were nowhere near the warmest.

The April data shows a clear cooling trend this century, despite the current El Nino

The amount of sea ice on Earth is second highest on record. This is completely inconsistent with NOAA’s claims of record warm seas

Past years were much warmer than this year.

The NOAA/NASA temperature data is fraudulent. It is essential to maintaining the climate scam.

Skeptics who pretend that the NOAA and NASA temperature record is somehow legitimate, enable this scam. They shouldn’t do that. Even NASA doesn’t believe their own data

Scientific American published this map showing an increase in heavy rains since 1958, and blamed them on global warming.

Global Warming May Mean More Downpours like in Oklahoma – Scientific American

Now check out the spectacular fraud being committed. The author  cherry picked the start date of 1958, because it was the minimum in the US climate record. In fact, heavy rainfall events were much more common in the early 20th century, when temperatures were cooler.

There is no correlation between US temperature and heavy precipitation events

The author is engaged in scientific malfeasance, in an effort mislead Scientific American readers and direct them to the wrong conclusion.

Crux of AGW’s Flawed Science

(Wrong water-vapor feedback and missing ocean influence)

William M. Gray

Professor Emeritus

Colorado State University

There are many flaws in the global climate models. But the largest flaw is a result of the climate model’s inability to realistically deal with the small horizontal scale (and model unresolvable) changes brought about by the globe’s thousands of individual deep cumulonimbus (Cb) cloud elements (Figure 1). An increase in the totality of these deep Cb convective units adds drying to the upper troposphere (Figure 2). This is in contrast to the assumptions implicit in the General Climate Model (GCM) simulations which increase upper tropospheric water-vapor as a result of enhanced rainfall and Cb convection associated with rising levels of CO₂.

Figure 1. Illustration of how the large grids of the GCM models cannot resolve the individual convective cloud elements and all the local up-and-down vertical motion between the grid units. This sub-grid scale convection can result in enhanced IR loss to space and lesser amounts of warming than the coarser GCMs would allow for.

Figure 2. Idealized portrayal of global deep cumulus rain and cloud areas. The left diagram illustrates the upper-level sinking mass coming from the raining deep Cb cloud. This sinking acts to dry and warm the upper troposphere. The right diagram shows water-vapor and cloud particles being advected from the same high rain areas. Observations indicate that the sinking-drying in the upper troposphere is greater than the water-vapor and cloud water replacement by moist air outward advection and evaporation. Enhanced Cb convection leads to upper-level drying and extra IR loss to space.

Continue reading →