HOTTEST YEAR ON RECORD the Tampa Bay Times and every other left-wing media outlet blared on Saturday. When I saw that headline, I knew it was bogus because I've watched how these climate astrologists massage data to fit their narrative. And I wondered how long it would take actual scientists to shoot down this b.s.
Didn't have to wait too long. Climate realists are a lot quicker on the draw now, and the lies and fabrications get debunked almost as fast as they come out. Which is a good thing. Although I'm sure the President will mention some bill he's going to pass by executive fiat to combat this supposed menace in his State of the Union address tomorrow evening.
If you haven't looked closely at this recent collection of lies and omissions, let me catch you up a bit:
To begin with, the record high is a whopping .69°C above the supposed 20th century average. What NOAA and GISS don't bother to mention, nor do the media outlets trumpeting this horsesh*t, is that the incredible .04°C increase over the previously considered hottest year is within the statistical ±.09°C margin of error. So basically, they can't say with statistical certainty that 2014 was in fact the hottest year on record. Except of course that they did.
In other words -- they lied.
And also, is a 1.24°C increase that significant? To quote climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer:
"...if the global average temperature is 58 or 59 or 60°F . . . if it increases by 1 or 2°F, that would be a catastrophe?"
just sayin'
And if the measurements are even correct, about which there is debate, what we have is three years in the last ten that measured within .04°C of one another. Doesn't that sound like global temperatures have been fairly stable this last decade?
The Times also points out in their article that all this warming occurred when there was no El Niño weather oscillation, the better to imply that the warming was man-caused. They got this from the NOAA paper. Except that it turns out there was an El Niño weather occurrence last year. NOAA used a specific data set that excluded the equitorial Pacific where El Niño conditions had existed since June according to the Japan Meteorological Agency.
Along with the omitted El Niño event was a secondary unusual weather event in the eastern extratropical Pacific, which is so well known that climate scientists call the hotspot it creates the blob. So NOAA and climate astrologists claims that there were no other factors in play that might have lead to any increase in global temperatures is false. And they know it.
In other words -- the lied. By omission, but it is still a lie.
As I've said in many of my posts on this before -- all this data is out there for anyone to look up. It doesn't take a lot of work. I'm lazy as hell, and I can find the data that blows Al Gore and his minions out of the water. So can you. Don't be bullied into silence. Educate yourself and fight back.
2 comments:
I have for years. I remember being taught that the same weather models we use today (which have never predicted anything with accuracy in more than 50 years)were showing a clear mini-ice age on the horizon unless we did something about it. That was 1978-81 in High school. I understand the models better than most people and there is a grain of truth to AGW. If you add the man-made emissions to the model without any additions from nature, the world would warm. Now if you add unpredictable nature the Krakatoa eruption, for instance, put more emissions into the air than the entire history of mankind and somehow we are all still alive...
I remember that cover of Time with the illustration of the globe and half the Northern Hemisphere covered in a sheet of ice.
They jump to conclusions to get the attention and don't care about actually getting it right. Then or now. Sad.
Post a Comment