The Last 25 Years

The last 25 years contain all 15 of the warmest years on record. So should they not also demonstrate that temperatures are unequivocal, unprecedented and accelerating?

Let us use the CO2 datasets and the HADCRUT4 V4.4 temperature dataset to test this expectation.

We know that the 1920-1944 period was a time of rising temperatures.

We have experienced a warmer world over the last 25 years from 1990 to 2014.

Here is the data. Datasets in the links.

Range	CO2 Increase	Temp Anomaly
1920-1944	7.4	.427C
1990-2014	45.5	.446C

That represents an increase of over 6 times the amount of CO2 in our contemporary period of CO2 growth compared to the 1920-1944 period. Based on the constant MSM reminders we are not surprised at the rapid CO2 growth in the last 25 years. It is what we expect.

But the temperature results do not resemble what we would expect from the unprecedented and accelerating description that we keep hearing about. An increase of .019C over the earlier decades does not seem sufficient to justify a fear of rising CO2. These two periods of warming are remarkably similar with vastly different increases in CO2. Does that not allow us to question the supposed unequivocal connection between CO2 and temperature? Isn’t this a poor demonstration of the alleged heat trapping superpowers of CO2?

What temperature increase for the 1990-2014 period would cause you worry? Double, triple, quadruple the earlier period?

DISCLAIMER:

Those were the numbers obtained when this post was created. HADCRUT4 goes through revisions and the next update may change the temperature differences slightly. You might want to ask yourself why a DATA dataset would have a version attached to it. DATA is not a computer program whose code is updated with bug fixes and new features.

What Modern Warming Uncovers

As the world warms from its geologically recent experience in the LIA freezer both receding glaciers and melting permafrost uncover relics that prove the world was warmer in the past than it is at present.

As they retreat up valleys and mountains melting glaciers expose trees that once lived at higher elevations. The significance of this for climate change worries must be pointed out to the public. If trees grew at higher elevations in the past the world must have been warmer then than it is now.

Similar discoveries are being made as permafrost melts. Frozen mummies are now being exposed to our warming planet but this immediately raises the question of how and when did the mummies get buried in the permafrost. The obvious conclusion is that the world was even warmer in the past than it is now in order for them to be buried in that ground in the first place.

This tells us that without the aid of human emissions of CO2 the world attained a warmer state that we experience today and there was no tipping point, no runaway global warming. The world can warm without the assistance of CO2 in a flux of natural variability. We must account for this in our attempts to assign blame to CO2, the current star of our climate drama.

If CO2 is not necessary to climate variability then how do we know that our modern warming is not due only to the natural factors that created a warmer world in the past. Without the metrics to explain that warming we have NO BASIS to indict CO2 for our current warming.

In fact, CO2 may be contributing nothing at all to our current warming. How would we know if we can’t assign metrics to previous planet warmings? Were past warmings due to solar variability, differences in cloudiness, volcanic activity, ocean currents, etc. If we don’t know how to assign metrics to these and other factors that can alter the climate then how can we know whether or not they are active and to what extent today?

The uncovering of artifacts of past natural warmings tells us that our current warming is NOT unequivocal or unprecedented. Our modern instrumentation - satellites - corroborated by radiosonde balloons tells us that our modern warming is NOT accelerating.

The story of the melting mummies in the NYT exonerates our CO2 emissions as the perp of modern warming. NYT, we are forever grateful.

Moon Over Ban Ki

“We are living in a world of peril,” Ban tells Mashable, according to ThinkProgress. “This climate change, even if it is not visible, is the worst threat to human beings.”

Emphasis mine.

Now  listen to that great climatologist

Robert Redford: People Are ‘Seeing Climate Change from Their Homes’

If Redford can see it how come Moonie can’t?

Robert doesn’t seem to be aware that ‘Not only is there not increasing trends because of extreme weather, but there are actually either no trends or declining’ Actors are good at imagining things. That is what they do.

Ban Ki must sense the lack of proof for the CO2 centric theory championed by the UN IPCC. He must have his doubts to even make such a statement.

Certainly, the casual observations of climate change by the ordinary Joe have not terrorized them as they rank it last on a list of priorities according the UN’s own poll. .

The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike.

The only place where climate change has been shown to be worrisome to some is in the dangerous man made compute code of the Global Climate Models(GCMs). The GCMs forecast a rising temperature which could attain heights last seen in the Holocene Climatic Optimum 6000-8000 years ago. However, there was no tipping point of runaway global warming at that time. And the warmth of the HCO was reached without the aid of CO2 which was obviously at pre-industrial levels at that time. This simple fact ought to be enough to destroy the CO2 centric theory of Global Warming that persists in the minds of humans today.

But eco-activists are not interested in truth. They have something else on their minds. And this is the real reason for the bogus climate change hysteria.

“No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” ~ Christine Stewart, former Canadian Enviro Minister

“We’ve got to ride the global-warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” ~ former  Senator Timothy Wirth

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose." ~ Club of Rome

Truth does not matter to eco-activists. It is the opportunity to redistribute wealth and gain control over the resources of the world that is attractive to the totalitarians among us.

So, at COP21 Let’s get hysterical, hysterical. We’re gonna get hysterical. We’re into hysterical. Let me hear your money talk, your money talk...

Unlike eco-activists calling for the demise of fossil fuels CO2 is not guilty of crimes against humanity. In fact, CO2 is a benign trace gas essential to life on Earth. etc.

If you eat, the SOCIAL BENEFITS of CO2 are PRICELESS.

The World's Greatest Threat

You will be excused if you believe it is ISIS.

Flashback: Obama calls global warming ‘greatest threat’

Flashback: Hillary Clinton calls global warming the greatest threat to the world

Ten Hours Since Obama Contained ISIS Is he delusional? Rhetorical question. ISIS has expanded to Europe, DUMMY!                                   

Paris Massacre Heightens Security Fears For UN Climate Summit

To say the least the ‘leaders’ of the free world have their priorities backwards. But what else is new?       

Terrorism is real and it is here now. ISIS wants the ‘malahim’. 'The U.S. and its allies will descend on Syria once they see that the air campaign has failed. That is a promise by God and his Messenger.'

A 7th century mindset with access to 21st century weapons - a lethal combination as we continue to experience while our idiot ruling class think a harmless, invisible, trace gas essential to life on earth is the enemy. We Practice Tolerance at our peril.

Were the ISIS terror attacks in Paris retaliation for the Jihadi John drone attack? Hit back fast and harder than ever? Well, they did that!   

Will anyone now seriously claim climate change is the most urgent ‘national security threat’?

France Says It’s ‘Essential’ To Fight Global Warming In Wake Of Paris Terror Attacks

And does anyone care what the people think?

Despite the ‘urgency’ of Paris climate talks, a U.N. global poll rates climate change dead last

Apparently not.  UN climate conference to go ahead despite terror attacks – Obama confirms attendance

This is why it is going ahead.

Lorne Gunter: Climate change scare is ideological, not scientific

“But a recent study by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center shows that far from shrinking, the Antarctic ice sheet is growing – a lot.”

Brian Williams Asks About How Paris Attacks Will Affect Climate Summit Messaging        

Williams: 'What becomes of what you had hoped to be this big public campaign leading up the climate summit?'

Well, Brian, one would hope it restores some perspective to what is really important but with the Obozo in the WH I wouldn’t be holding my breath.

NASA

In the 1970s NASA was busy with the climate as well as space adventures.

1971: NASA Scientists Predicts New Ice Age Likely By 2020

1975: "Cooling Trends Arouse Fear" From NASA Scientists & Climatologists

1976: NASA Study Expresses Concern About Global Cooling – Recommends Focus On Climate, Not Space Exploration

1979: Skylab's Crash Caused By NASA Underestimating Solar Warming of Atmosphere

At least they knew enough to take solar cycles into account when determining orbital height and orbital decay.

Hmmm... it appears a case could be made for either one. They got the ‘cooling trend’ wrong although the jury is still out on the 1971 prediction. And they wanted out of space exploration before the SkyLab miscalculation.

Now they are reduced to adjusting temperature data to bolster the mythical CO2 centric global warming story.

97% Of Climate Scientists Base Their Research On Fraudulent Data From NASA And NOAA

1970s NASA knew the sun mattered. NASA in the 21st century forgets what they knew and replaces the sun with politically chosen CO2. Their 21st century predictions aren’t panning out either hence the necessity to ‘adjust’ the data to follow the politically preferred script.

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose." ~ Club of Rome

NASA now helps with the invention. Sad but true.

The Price of Telling the Truth

What do you do if you are a scientist that knows that the song you have been singing that backs the theory you have been harping has turned out to be wrong?  

Do you tell the truth?

What are the risks?

Your reputation? Your funding? Your job?

The reputation of your profession?

All of the above?

What to do?

Pretend you didn't know? Plead ignorance?

Double down on your theory?

Alter the data to support your view?

Defend your data diddling?

Hide your data diddling?

What would a person of character do? Tell the truth?

Hire OJ’s lawyer?

Keep quiet?

Ride the wave as long as one can?

Double down.

Let someone else take the hit?

Collude with others in the same boat to....?

What would most people in such a quandary do?

The job comes first because the family comes first? We have to eat! Thanks, CO2.

Doesn’t conscience come first because it has to? It will try to force its way into your consciousness no matter how you try to suppress it.

Or you go nuts? In some way it will manifest.

Lies beget lies. Now you have to remember everything you said or be caught out.

Best to admit truth early when you first verify it. Then esteem goes up among colleagues. Some have done this. See James Lovelock..

You are still respected as a scientist and a fallible human being.

Or double down and become a clown.

It is not easy to admit that you have been part of the biggest scientific fraud in history.

Embarrassment follows but is minimized the sooner you get out of the gutter. We can all have a laugh and then continue on still with mutual respect.

You escape with your self respect (don’t underestimate that). It’s worth more than your job.

Consider this, you have still contributed to human knowledge by showing what was wrong.

Others will know not to follow your path. This is a useful contribution.

But continue the malfeasance and soon the fraud catches up to you without protection in high places. Now criminality becomes a part of the picture.

Consider the makeup of the lawmakers and the possible next inhabitant of the WH. Will he protect you?

Fallible scientist or criminal? Which shall it be?

Who will have the cajones to step away from the fraud? Are there any people of character at NOAA/NASA?

‘How much longer before journalists finally challenge these false prophets?’

Tick tock.

We Can Only Hope

OC Register: 40 years of climate ‘hysteria’ not about ‘saving the planet’…It’s always been about control & money. Their control. Your money’        

Let’s be blunt. Forty years of global warming hysteria never has been about the globe getting warmer, or saving the planet. It’s always been about control and money. Their control. Your money. If you need to be told who “they” are, you haven’t been paying attention. They are a cabal of intertwined common interests that include government regulators who stand to gain power, financial opportunists who stand to profit and ideologues whose mission is to separate you from your money, and from control over your lives. They are socialists or progressives. They like to be called “environmentalists,” tarring the reputation of an otherwise well-intentioned group.

Warmist: ‘On global warming, will they come after hamburgers next?’

‘Environmentalists Who Dream of a World without Themselves’

We can only hope! Leave alone my burger!