Or so they tell you. But you when you examine the
facts, you come to the opposite conclusion. It is a classic example of using
half-truths to mislead.
They don’t tell you how much warmer it actually was.
If they did, the myth would be exposed immediately.
The amount of warming depends on which of the five
recognised temperature records you use.
If you believe the satellite records – that NASA
says are the most accurate – the warming since 1998 is between 0.02° and 0.04°
– 0.1° to 0.2° per century. Statistically, it provides no evidence of warming
of any sort.
The other measurements are the surface temperature records
that have very poor surface coverage – virtually nothing over the ocean and
huge areas of the earth – and have been systematically “adjusted” over the
years to exaggerate the warming over the last hundred years or so. For
instance, according to the GISS 2008 temperature record, the world warmed by
0.45° between 1910 and 2000. By January 2017, the GISS records showed that the
warming for the same period had increased to 0.75°. Remarkable!
According to the satellites, the 2016 El Niño was not much hotter than that of 1998 but the surface temperature records
indicate a more rapid rate of warming. But there is a big problem with this. El
Niño events are natural and unpredictable and, because they are isolated
events, they are unrelated to increasing carbon dioxide concentrations that
would lead to a steady temperature rise. Measuring from the 1998 peak
temperature to 2016 peak temperature gives a much more rapid rate of warming
than measuring the average temperature trend over the period. So they use
the temperature peaks. Putting it another way, if the 2016 El Nino had been
cooler than that of 1998, would they have told us that it heralds global
cooling? I think not.
The plain fact is that although the computer models
predicted 0.5° temperature rise during the last 18 years the records show that
world has not warmed in any statistically significant sense. Even the
surface temperature records show a warming of 0.2° over that period. According
to the IPCC, half of this warming will be man-made. Nothing to get excited
about.
Once again, the global warming fraternity have used
half-truths to mislead the public into believing that dangerous man-made global
warming is really happening when the information they quote from shows the
opposite.
Wikipedia definition of half-truth:
The purpose and or consequence of a half-truth is to
make something that is really only a belief appear to…lead to a false
conclusion…. A person deceived by a half-truth considers the proposition to be
knowledge and acts accordingly.
4 comments:
The figures I heard is < 2017 was the hottest year recorded by 7 100ths of a degree, with 69 per-cent reliability > Why are the U.N. Globalists stupid enough to continue peddling a THEORY that is proving to be so far removed from reality, that even the brain-washed, dumb-down generation that have been taught to believe this rubbish, are starting to ask, why has N.Z. got snow in January, & why has last Winters ice not melted before this Winters ice arrived, in some parts of Europe? Well at least the thinking few from this generation are starting to ask.
I completely agree Bryan – what you did not comment on was that 1938 to 1940 was hotter than 2016 according to the NASA temperature graphs that were on their website display until 1985 when they were ‘adjusted’ down prior to 1985 and upwards after 1985 giving the illusion that we had had a continuing warming trend over a hundred years. Dishonest data manipulation to suit the AGW claim.
Now that Trump has taken power, NASA GISS, DoE and the EPA are about to have their budgets cut so that they can no longer fund the production of junk science supporting the Obama global warming scam.
The screams from the soon to be fired EPA and NASA climate scientists trying to organize a protest march is music to my ears.
Along with Trump not ratifying the Paris Climate Accord, these executive Orders, reining in these out of control corrupted Government Agencies is about to herald the demise of the anthropogenic runaway global warming scam.
I have been waiting ten years for a US President to have the courage to take this action – this day has arrived so that now we can direct this waste of resources toward gifting coal fired power stations and electrical reticulation to the third world to bring them into balance with the richer nations.
A far better use of resources than building a wall…
Rex Sellar.
Well said Bryan, but logic, reality-based facts, and the rational application of government expenditures have long proven to be the one thing AGW protagonists ignore or, if not ignorable, vilify (eg "denialist"). The problem is that the myth is now so well established, and such an industry has grown to be dependent on it for power and income/wealth (including all involved government departments, and certainly the local chapters of the (now globalised) Absolutist Enviro-(City/Central) Planning Complex gAE-PC (analogous to the once-American, now-globalised Military-Industrial Complex), that unreality has come to prevail. It seems to me that such unreality will not be unseated without some major at-least-western-world, possibly global, disruption, enabling reality to reassert itself. Witness the post-WWII period until dissent and complexity emerged in the late sixties. Tony Abbot may have been removed for the danger he posed to the AGW thesis and the destruction of democracy-under-national-rule-of-law in favour of globalist centralisation of power thus wealth. It will be interesting to see if The Donald can avoid similar "removal", and popular revolt against european and global centralisation can survive the furious and ongoing assault being mounted against it by the idealistic (ie unrealistic) group-think collectivists otherwiise known as "Progressive" lefties.
So the ice melting is a myth? Now I know not to worry about rising sea levels from melting ice.
Post a Comment