New AP Article on “Global Cooling Myth” Spins a Bad Study

I saw the headline on the CBS web site “Statisticians: “Global Cooling” a Myth – Claims about Last 10 Years Are Deceptive; Temperatures Rise and Fall, But Overall Trend Is Higher”. Rest assured what is deceptive is this article that misrepresents what is already a bad study that stands in direct contradiction to a previous data set from the NCDC from January.

I was hoping that the Obama Administration had not politicized the National Climactic Data Center (NCDC) as they had the EPA when they suppressed a report showing how global warming skeptics are correct (LINK – LINK).

CBS/AP:

Have you heard that the world is now cooling instead of warming? You may have seen some news reports on the Internet or heard about it from a provocative new book.

Only one problem: It’s not true, according to an analysis of the numbers done by several independent statisticians for The Associated Press.

Ok time to stop right there, as has been documented by us (one example we reported LINK) and others such as the Media Research Center (example LINK, LINK, LINK and I could fill a page of links with examples of this problem), that almost always, the people the elite media portray as “independent” are people who are known to the reporter or news organization, with a known point of view, who will say what the reporter wants to report. The same few “random experts” appear in the elite media over and over and over again. It is a main component of how the elite media editorializes the news and hide the fact that in reality it is the news organizations editorial point of view they are presenting.

Why is IPCC author Dr. John Christy not a common talking head in the elite media?

CBS/AP continues:

In a blind test, the AP gave temperature data to four independent statisticians and asked them to look for trends, without telling them what the numbers represented. The experts found no true temperature declines over time.

“If you look at the data and sort of cherry-pick a micro-trend within a bigger trend, that technique is particularly suspect,” said John Grego, a professor of statistics at the University of South Carolina.

Yet the idea that things are cooling has been repeated in opinion columns, a BBC news story posted on the Drudge Report and in a new book by the authors of the best-seller “Freakonomics.” Last week, a poll by the Pew Research Center found that only 57 percent of Americans now believe there is strong scientific evidence for global warming, down from 77 percent in 2006.

Global warming skeptics base their claims on an unusually hot year in 1998. Since then, they say, temperatures have dropped – thus, a cooling trend. But it’s not that simple.

Since 1998, temperatures have dipped, soared, fallen again and are now rising once more. Records kept by the British meteorological office and satellite data used by climate skeptics still show 1998 as the hottest year. However, data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA show 2005 has topped 1998. Published peer-reviewed scientific research generally cites temperatures measured by ground sensors, which are from NOAA, NASA and the British, more than the satellite data.

The recent Internet chatter about cooling led NOAA’s climate data center to re-examine its temperature data. It found no cooling trend.

[Oh wait, could they mean this, UK Telegraph: 2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved – UPDATED!. This was one of our little posts that went viral on the internet and got my little IUSB Vision Web Log pronounced the second most reviled web site on global warming by the Huffington Post. I really should buy Arianna a nice lunch for the publicity she gave me on that one - Chuck Norton]

Notice how they said that the study relies on ground sensors and pay special attention to the quote “recent Internet chatter about cooling led NOAA’s climate data center to re-examine its temperature data” …under NOOOOOO political pressure from the new administration I’m sure…

So I headed over to the WUWT blog to see if they had found the data that I was suspecting and sure enough. The data the story relies on comes from NOAA ground sensors and ignores the oceanic data sets and other important data sets. The NOAA ground censors have been discredited as controlled data because in a great many cases the NOAA censors are placed on or near asphalt, stone, heat vents, parking lots, surrounded by black tires in junk yards etc. all of which absorb heat during the day and release it at night. Also notice how the article states that they did not rely on satellite data that tends to show cooling and that presents another problem. According to alarmist global warming theory more warmth is trapped under the “greenhouse layer” of the atmosphere causing temperatures globally to rise. This layer of the atmosphere can be read by satellites and weather balloons (the John Christy method). So if you are to measure greenhouse warming according to the theory, that is the place to do it. However, measuring it that way does not give global warming alarmists the measurements they want.

Pielke Senior via WUWT:

This [AP] article, however, (which is not a true independent assessment if the study was completed by NOAA scientists) is not based on the much more robust metric assessment of global warming as diagnosed by upper ocean heat content. Nor does it consider the warm bias issues with respect to surface land temperatures that we have raised in our peer reviewed papers; e.g. see and see.

So as Pielke points out at WUWT, the “study” and the AP article doesn’t even address oceanic data sets. Nor does it address other data sets. It gets worse, would you like to see examples of NOAA ground sensors??

WUWT is up to part 91 of its “How not to measure temperature” series on these NOAA ground sensors.

Oh Look! Its a NOAA sensor in a junk yard with black tires.

Oh Look! Its a NOAA sensor next to that concrete porch and look to the left, its a grill. It has no cover so I guess it has been used pretty frequently.

Oh look! Its a NOAA sensor in a parking lot of asphalt. Would you like to walk barefoot on that on a warm summer day? I wonder how much heat the cars that park right next to it give off when the people who live in those apartments come home. Hey what is that a few yards behind the sensor? It's the heat pump for a home air conditioner!

But worry not scientific community and global warming alarmists, WUWT reports in “How not to measure temperature: Part 87” that NOAA “adjusts” for these types of anomalies….yup they adjust the temperatures DOWN in the PAST thus increasing the “current statistical warming trend”!! There are 91 of these ground sensors that WUWT has catalogued so far and they all seem to have one thing in common. They are placed in areas that will artificially make them read higher temperatures.

As we stated above, the new NCDC “study” ignored other data sets such as ITS OWN North American Temperature Data Set updated just last January… hmmm now what has happened between January and today….oh yes we have a new political administration that has already demonstrated that it has no problem trying to shut scientists up (LINK – LINK) who dare tell the truth about global warming.

As we reported January 10, 2009:

Yet ANOTHER dataset showing the cooling of the last 10 years.

NCDC now has December 2008 in the database. Annual North American temperature since 1998 (11 years of data) is falling over the period at a rate of 0.78(F)/decade or 7.8(F)per century. At this rate we will be in an ice age within 5 decades. If you can get the graphic, the heavy black line is the average over the century 1901 to 2000.

This data set is a collection of this continent only, but it shows the same cooling trend that other global data sets have shown. Since 1998 the Earth is cooling and it happens to coincide with a similar period of unusually low solar activity.

Of course we realize that to many people, including many radicalized professors, global warming alarmism is almost like a religion. No data set or series of data sets is going to put a dent in those people. Fortunately there are still plenty of people who are not zealots who can appreciate the information. Thanks to the famed WUWT Blog for the heads up.

Maybe this article can get the Huffington Post to rank me the number one most reviled global warming columnist on the internet. Being number two just seems so second best.

EPA Tried to Supress Global Warming Report Admitting Skeptics Correct

In light of recent and upcoming international global warming conferences, a new examination of this story seems in order.

The Washington Examiner:

CEI releases global warming study censored by Obama’s EPA

Natural forces as opposed to human activity are largely responsible for temperature fluctuations, according to a new study the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) released today as Congress prepares to vote on global warming legislation.

Internal email messages show the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) suppressed the report and silenced the author because the scientific evidence did not square with the Obama administration’s agenda of regulating carbon dioxide, CEI claims. The EPA has become overly reliant upon outdated information from the United Nations and has ignored major new scientific developments, the censored study concludes.

“While we hoped that the EPA would release the final report, we’re tired of waiting for this agency to become transparent, even though its administrator has been talking transparency, since she took office,” said CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman.

New scientific data highlighted in the report shows that ocean cycles and solar cycles are probably the most important factors behind temperature fluctuations. Moreover, satellite information now indicates there is little chance of endangerment from greenhouse gases, according to the report.

Some of the major developments overlooked by EPA official include a continued decline in global temperatures, an emerging consensus that hurricanes will not be more frequent or intense and new studies that demonstrate water vapor will have a moderating influence on temperature.

The report was exposed by hard work from the Competitive Enterprise Institute.  See the entire EPA Report HERE.

This is a key page in the report (Hat Tip Dwight Schultz):

This report has other gems like this one. The EPA and the UN have reports that they tried to hide from you that tell this simple truth. As we have said repeatedly in IUSB Vision coverage. The evidence is clear that there has been global cooling for over a decade and the WUWT Blog has published hundreds of articles and data sets demonstrating this.  The bulk of global warming and cooling cycles is the result of solar activity. CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas and man’s contribution to that is minor. Water vapor is the chief greenhouse gas.

Most “peer reviewed” global warming studies are based on computer models. The problem is that when actual recorded data from the past is entered into such models they cannot even accurately predict climate from yesterday or last year.

The CEI unveils the evidence that the EPA ordered people to shut up about the  findings and you can see the report with ALL of the emails HERE . Here are just two of the emails reveled (Via Powerline):

Here, the two scientists’ superior declines to make their report public because “the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment.” Click to enlarge:

Here, Carlin and Davidson are ordered not to communicate to the public their conclusion that the global warming alarmist theory is wrong:

Powerline sums up this scandalous behavior with a devastating analogy:

Global warming zealots are a bit like Iran’s mullahs. They are fanatically devoted to a series of false propositions. Unable to win an open scientific debate, they consistently resort to bullying and brute force to suppress their opposition. Once again, we see the Obama administration taking the lead in this regard, putting political ideology above scientific truth and demanding that all others do likewise.

UPDATE: Newsbusters notes the almost complete media blackout of this story, and contrasts it with the news media’s treatment of the Bush administration.

Leftist BBC Asks: What happened to Global Warming:

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

So what on Earth is going on?

Climate change sceptics, who passionately and consistently argue that man’s influence on our climate is overstated, say they saw it coming.

They argue that there are natural cycles, over which we have no control, that dictate how warm the planet is.

Gross Posted at Poligazette.

What if Star Wars was written by Enviro-extremists?

Via http://endciv.com/ :

Obama Lied in UN Speech on Global Warming

And I am proud to say that the United States has done more to promote clean energy and reduce carbon pollution in the last eight months than at any other time in our history. – B. Obama

The problem is that this statement is just not true.

As the Anchoress and Hotair.com correctly point out :

In the first place, we succeeded through partnership with the private sector where Europe and Kyoto did not in 2006, when we grew our economy and reduced our carbon emissions by 1.3%:

U.S. carbon dioxide emissions dropped slightly last year even as the economy grew, according to an initial estimate released yesterday by the Energy Information Administration.

The 1.3 percent drop in CO{-2} emissions marks the first time that U.S. pollution linked to global warming has declined in absolute terms since 2001 and the first time it has gone down since 1990 while the economy was thriving. Carbon dioxide emissions declined in both 2001 and 1991, in large part because of economic slowdowns during those years.

In 2006 the U.S. economy grew 3.3 percent, a fact President Bush touted yesterday as he hailed the government’s “flash estimate” that the country’s carbon dioxide emissions dropped by 78 million metric tons last year.

What’s more, while Europe pursued the completely ineffective Kyoto strategy, the US worked to engage the world’s biggest polluters in a joint program that seriously addressed both emissions and economic growth:

In a surprise move that caught Europe’s smug moralists and the environmental movement’s noisy extremists flatfooted, the United States announced in Vientiane, Laos, last week that it was joining five other nations – China, India, Japan, South Korea and Australia — in a new pact that offers a refreshing and effective alternative route to tackling the problem of climate change.

While given short shrift by the puzzled media, this is a big deal, in many ways.

First, it breaks the climate-change deadlock. This is the agreement that responsible scientists and public officials have been seeking since the failure of the Kyoto Protocol became evident at the global warming conclave in Delhi two years ago. Call it “Beyond Kyoto” – Way Beyond Kyoto.

Second, the new deal was negotiated and settled without the involvement of the United Nations or the European Union – a clear message from the United States that multilateralism does not have a single definition. In fact, according to The Guardian newspaper, the agreement – called the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate — was kept secret by President Bush from British Prime Minister Tony Blair, an uncompromising champion of Kyoto, during last month’s G8 meeting” in Scotland.

The net result of these policies?  Instead of imposing a $1700 cost burden per American household and costing the US 3.5% of its GDP by 2050, Bush grew the economy — and increased tax revenues as a result:

An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year, even though spending has climbed sharply because of the war in Iraq and the cost of hurricane relief.

On Tuesday, White House officials are expected to announce that the tax receipts will be about $250 billion above last year’s levels and that the deficit will be about $100 billion less than what they projected six months ago. The rising tide in tax payments has been building for months, but the increased scale is surprising even seasoned budget analysts and making it easier for both the administration and Congress to finesse the big run-up in spending over the past year.

Tax revenues are climbing twice as fast as the administration predicted in February, so fast that the budget deficit could actually decline this year.

Tax cuts and pro-growth policies actually increased the economy while reducing carbon emissions, something that Europe has yet to match.  Perhaps that success should be the model of future programs for curbing emissions, although the need for it becomes less and less certain every year.

Avowed Communist & Presidential Advisor Van Jones Under Fire. – UPDATE: Bob Beckel Says Jones Must Go.

UPDATE II – OUT. Keep in mind that before the resignation, ABC, CBS, NBC, NYT and WashPost did ZERO coverage of this story before the resignation. Fox News was the only one that covered it. – Byron York on the elite media giving no coverage of the mounting story.

UPDATE: Bob Beckel says that Jones should be filing for unemployment.

The past of Van Jones has been coming out for a while and as David Horowitz said, “One does not declare himself to be a communist three years after the wall came down without knowing and approving of what went on behind that wall.”

Gateway Pundit, a prominent blogger, did the background checks that the White House and/or FBI failed to do and found Van Jones as signatory number 46 on 911truth.org. The 9/11 Truther’s believe that the Bush Administration engineered the attack to murder 3000 Americans.

Jones was 47 on the list and now he is 46 (LINK to view), I wonder whose name got scrubbed.

Jones also helped to found a group called STORM, a self proclaimed revolutionary Marxist group. On September 12, 2001 STORM held an event to bring attention to the victims of evil AMERICAN imperialism. So much for our 300 victims of radical islamists.

Jones also led a protest to free a convicted cop killer LINK.

Charles Krauthammer, Mara Liasson and Stephen Hayes comment on Van Jones

In this video Van Jones Compares President Bush to a “Crack head” for wanting to increase the US supply of domestic energy. The problem with Van Jones point of view here is that it is typical of someone who is an avowed communist in that they are in complete denial of basic laws of economics. If I were thrown out a broken window I would hope that the laws of gravity would not apply to me, it is just as foolish to claim that the laws of supply and demand do not apply to energy as Van Jones does. perhaps Jones forgot that there is this oil cartel called OPEC that manipulates the market to suck as many dollars out of us as possible. The more domestic energy we produce the more energy prices fall and the more the influence of the cartel is lessened.

Van Jones says that white people and white environmentalists are putting poluution in minority communities. Ok talk about your goofball conspiracy theories.

Van Jones says and advocates that the “green movement” is being used to incrementally transfer the capitalist system to a socialist system. No shock we have been saying that for years, but at least now they admit it. Via Hotair.com and Naked Emporer News. This interview was from 17 months ago.  

Ed Morrissey comments: Jones, the green jobs czar, explains how his allies want to conduct a revolution on the sly.  Call it radical incrementalism, call it an offshoot of the Alinksy method, but it certainly seems that Jones is easily the most radical White House aide in many, many years.

By the way, the networks, the NYT and Washington Post  have not covered this story at all. If Bush were president and a joker like this was in the administration they would be all over it, wall to wall. Fox is covering it.

Glenn Beck dedicated a show to Van Jones:

Ann Coulter: The elite media has become the guard dog for the administration instead of the guard dog for the people –

Michelle Malkin – On Jones and the other Marxist Czar’s that got lucky and were propped up bt far left foundation money from Tides Foundation, Ford Foundation and George Soros. –

Africa wants $67 BILLION a year in global warming funds (your money).

Yet another example of what we have been saying since day one. Global warming hysteria would be used as an excuse to tax carbon dioxide, because almost every kind of economic activity produces or uses CO2. It would be used to tax and redistribute wealth around the world.  The fact that the Earth has been cooling since 1998 means nothing to those who want this tax.

For 67 Billion a year would you say that you believed that man made global warming is a “crisis”?

Reuters:

By Tsegaye Tadesse

ADDIS ABABA, Aug 24 (Reuters) – African leaders will ask rich nations for $67 billion per year to mitigate the impact of global warming on the world’s poorest continent, according to a draft resolution seen by Reuters on Monday.

Ten leaders are holding talks at African Union (AU) headquarters in the Ethiopian capital to try to agree a common stance ahead of a U.N. summit on climate change in Copenhagen in December.

Experts say Africa contributes little to the pollution blamed for warming, but is likely to be hit hardest by the droughts, floods, heatwaves and rising sea levels forecast if climate change is not checked.

The draft resolution, which must still be approved by the 10 leaders, called for rich countries to pay $67 billion annually to counter the impact of global warming in Africa.

The Cap & Trade Song

Government to dictate what color car you can buy. Ok is government too big yet?

The Debate is Over. Global Warming Alarmism is About Achieving Central Control of the Economy and Now They Admit It Openly.

Conservatives and science realists have said for years that the global warming hysteria has nothing to do with science and everything to do with central control of the economy and the global redistribution of wealth.

Global warming alarmists and leftists (who by ideology always wanted central control over the economy) said that we were nuts, they said we were akin to holocost deniers and other such silly attacks. Now we have this, which confirms everything we always said about the issue.
FNC:

U.N. ‘Climate Change’ Plan Would Likely Shift Trillions to Form New World Economy

Friday, March 27, 2009
By George Russell

A United Nations document on “climate change” that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

Those and other results are blandly discussed in a discretely worded United Nations “information note” on potential consequences of the measures that industrialized countries will likely have to take to implement the Copenhagen Accord, the successor to the Kyoto Treaty, after it is negotiated and signed by December 2009. The Obama administration has said it supports the treaty process if, in the words of a U.S. State Department spokesman, it can come up with an “effective framework” for dealing with global warming.

The 16-page note, obtained by FOX News, will be distributed to participants at a mammoth negotiating session that starts on March 29 in Bonn, Germany, the first of three sessions intended to hammer out the actual commitments involved in the new deal.

In the stultifying language that is normal for important U.N. conclaves, the negotiators are known as the “Ad Hoc Working Group On Further Commitments For Annex I Parties Under the Kyoto Protocol.” Yet the consequences of their negotiations, if enacted, would be nothing short of world-changing.

Noel Sheppard on the Fox Forum in reaction:

The UN Makes it Official: Global Warming Hysteria Is All About Redistributing Wealth

By Noel Sheppard
Associate Editor, Newsbusters.org

For years, climate realists around the world have been warning the international community that the entire man-made global warming myth and resulting hysteria is all a scheme to redistribute wealth under the pretense of saving the planet.

In a document obtained by FOX News, the United Nations has made it official.

How Radical Environmentalism Destroys an Oregon Town

We have some of the most fruitful forest land in the world and we are importing wood and putting our own out of work.

We have said before that “environmentalists” don’t care about the environment at all. They are anti-capitalists. This fact was proved with even more certainty given the fact that it is “environmentalists” that have opposed wind and hydro-electric power. They have even successfully opposed solar panel farms. They know that plentiful, affordable energy is the fuel of capitalism. These same groups are also perfectly happy to see Mexico and China make oil wells off our shores.

BBC changed coverage after threat from an eco-extreemist.

News Busters’ Noel Sheppard on the Glenn Beck program, which is now the second highest rated show on cable.

The BBC changed an article after a threat from environmentalist whacko who ended up being a nobody, just a nut. Unfortunately, all forms of media attract nuts, but there is no reason to give in to them.

AWESOME VIDEO: Steven Crowder on US “Torture” of Detainees

The obligitory “Ashley Judd has no idea what she is talking about in regards to Palin” post…

This is why most actors should about making public political PR campaigns. The problem is that most every statement made in this ad is misleading or a direct falsehood. Here is the ad:

Governor Palin’s office put up a press release rebuking the ad . It was strong in rebuke but light on substance so I called Governor Palin’s press Secretary Bill McAllister and asked him to provide a link so we can look up the policies for predator control in Alaska on our own. This morning a new link appeared at the bottom of the press release (good job Bill).

Through that link I started reading, and reading, and reading and I found this report titled “Wolf Management in Alaska with an Historic Perspective Presentation to the Alaska Board of Game March 2002“. This report explains the history of wolf/predator control policy in Alaska almost step by step going back to the 1940’s.

You can read the report in full or I can just give you the “Cliff’s Notes” version; wolf control policy has been a subject of great political, scientific, and ethical study in Alaska for decades. After years of bipartisan efforts working with the scientific community as well as conservation experts, hunters, etc Alaska worked out a predator control policy that is limited and reasonably effective.  Much of the current law and scientific studies were completed before Palin was elected in previous administrations such as former Democrat Governor Tony Knowles. After reading this report no one could honestly say that Alaska’s predator control laws are unscientific.

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey at Hotair.com asks if Ashley Judd supports packs of wolves eating all the baby caribou. He also points out that the Anchorage Daily (who is often unfair to Palin) News has recently pointed out that Alaska’s predator control policy works and that previously the wolf population had gotten excessive resulting in significant losses in the caribou population.

UCLA “Study” Claims Conservative Talk Radio is Hate Speech – But Wow Look at the Real Hate Speech They Ignored

UCLA put out a ridiculously partisan study claiming that conservative talk radio is “hate speech”, but they ignored repeated calls for violence by left wing talkers.

So much so called “scholarship” today is nothing but propaganda with a predetermined outcome. This is not just in the social sciences, but in the biological and geological sciences as well.

 To quote Ben Stien, “I want all scientific inquiry to happen — not just what the ruling clique calls science.”

(Hat Tip Radio Equalizer)

In November 2007, NovaM syndicated libtalker Mike Malloy called for violence against White House spokesperson Dana Perino, as well as the Bush family. Removing any doubt about his wishes, he spoke of “violence fantasies” toward Perino.

In December of that year, Malloy was at it again, this time calling for the hanging death of Internet star Matt Drudge.

During a Randi Rhodes Show broadcast in February 2008, the host aired a prerecorded skit which claimed Mitt Romney supporters would go on a “killing rampage” if John McCain emerged as the GOP’s presidential nominee.

In 2005, Rhodes aired another bit that suggested the Bush family be taken out Sopranos-style.

Heading into the 2008 Democratic National Convention, Southern Californian libtalker Roseanne Barr called for violent riots during the Denver-based event.

And in November, Barr went on a verbal rampage against African-Americans for overwhelmingly supporting California’s Proposition 8 at the ballot box.

Finally, in a story just reported today by Tim Graham at NewsBusters, Malloy has called for the execution of Republicans (in addition to any Democrats who voted with President Bush).

Myth: The World is Running Out of Oil (Seriously We Aren’t)

ABC News:

Arctic sea ice now 28.7% higher than this date last year – still rallying

WUWT has a great post on the latest arctic sea ice data:

10/14/2008 7,064,219 square kilometers

10/14/2007 5,487,656 square kilometers

A difference of: 1,576,563 square kilometers, now in fairness, 2008 was a leap year, so to avoid that criticism, the value of 6,857,188 square kilometers can be used which is the 10/13/08 value, for a difference of 1,369,532 sq km. Still not too shabby at 24.9 %. The one day gain between 10/13/08 and 10/14/08 of 3.8% is also quite impressive.

You can download the source data in an Excel file at the IARC-JAXA website, which plots satellite derived sea-ice extent:

 

Watch the red line as it progresses. So far we are back to above 2005 levels, and 28.7% (or 24.9% depending on how you want to look at it) ahead of last year at this time. That’s quite a jump, basically a 3x gain, since the minimum of 9% over 2007 set on September 16th. Read about that here.

Go nature!

There is no mention of this on the National Snow and Ice Data Center sea ice news webpage, which has been trumpeting every loss and low for the past two years…not a peep. You’d think this would be big news. Perhaps the embarrassment of not having an ice free north pole in 2008, which was sparked by press comments made by Dr. Mark Serreze there and speculation on their own website, has made them unresponsive in this case.

What I like about the IARC-JAXA website is that they simply report the data, they don’t try to interpret it, editorialize it, or make press releases on it. They just present the data.

Click HERE to see the entire post and to view their satellite top-down pole view.

IPCC Author Dr. John Christy Lecture on Climate Change

You have heard all about it, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that tells us that global warming is our fault and the world will burn (slight satirical exaggeration) unless we do the exact same thing the alarmists said we should do when the fear was the next ice age, hand over our economy to central control and Marxist theory.

Here is one of the IPCC authors you don’t here about and he isn’t alone. Dr. John Christy, whose credentials are impeccable, gives you the view of the IPCC authors that didn’t make NBC News. The lecture is one hour long at Auburn University and you will NOT be disappointed. It’s rather amusing at the end when a global warming alarmist tries to give Dr. Christy a hard time; Dr. Christy handles the poor propagandized student most gently and effectively.

Those who practice envirinmentalism as some kind of pegan religion should watch this video at their own risk as you may find yourself in a fit of cognitive dissonance.

National Climatic Data Center: Cooling in Last 10 Years

Yet ANOTHER dataset showing the cooling of the last 10 years.

NCDC now has December 2008 in the database. Annual North American temperature since 1998 (11 years of data) is falling over the period at a rate of 0.78(F)/decade or 7.8(F)per century. At this rate we will be in an ice age within 5 decades. If you can get the graphic, the heavy black line is the average over the century 1901 to 2000.

This data set is a collection of this continent only, but it shows the same cooling trend that other global data sets have shown. Since 1998 the Earth is cooling and it happens to coincide with a similar period of unusually low solar activity.

Of course we realize that to many people, including many radicalized professors, global warming alarmism is almost  like a religion. No data set or series of data sets is going to put a dent in those people. Fortunately there are still plenty of people who are not zealots who can appreciate the information.  Thanks to the famed WUWT Blog for the heads up.

UK Telegraph: 2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved – UPDATED!

Welcome Climate Progress Readers – Welcome Huffington Post Readers

UPDATE - Editor’s Note – First and foremost – I consider it an honor that our site is named in the top 10 global warming stories of 2008. Anti-Science (and anti First Amendment) global warming alarmists are out in force to smear and this time we are the target. One of those outfits who’s alarmism and lies are reaching near panic proportions are these jokers at Climate Progress who not only claim to have a monopoly on the truth, but smeared this very site and why…because we QUOTED the article below from a top British newspaper. I am not surprised that these people didn’t dare link another article where we QUOTED some of the recent data sets from the University of Alabama and the UK’s Hadley Center which show that since 2002 the Earth has been in a slight cooling trend (indeed other data sets show the trend starting in 1998). 

With a name like “climate progress” it is not a surprise that you would expect to find all the science that is politically inconvenient to an agenda of central control goes ignored and they have the chutzpa to call anyone who disagrees with them “anti-science”. When ever people like “Climate Progress” are confronted with data sets that they find inconvenient for their agenda they cover their ears and start in with the hate and smears. Their rhetoric is so alarmist, hateful and over the top that most thinking Americans will have no problem figuring out what they are all about in about one minute.  Of course the alarmists have made themselves famous by making death threats and other fear mongering. Those who are interested in the science where ever it leads are too ethical to bother with such tactics.

For those not familiar with the death threats epidemic, here is the tip of the iceburg, we have links HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.

Maybe the global warming alarmists will start sending some of their death threats to the Europeans now. So much for consensus. Enjoy this excerpt from yesterday’s UK Telegraph.

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved
By Christopher Booker
Last Updated: 5:51PM GMT 27 Dec 2008
UK Telegraph

The first, on May 21, headed “Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts” , reported that the entire Alpine “winter sports industry” could soon “grind to a halt for lack of snow”. The second, on December 19, headed “The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation” , reported that this winter’s Alpine snowfalls “look set to beat all records by New Year’s Day”.

Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.

First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.

Ever shriller and more frantic has become the insistence of the warmists, cheered on by their army of media groupies such as the BBC, that the last 10 years have been the “hottest in history” and that the North Pole would soon be ice-free – as the poles remain defiantly icebound and those polar bears fail to drown. All those hysterical predictions that we are seeing more droughts and hurricanes than ever before have infuriatingly failed to materialise.

Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a “scientific consensus” in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world’s most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that “consensus” which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.

Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades, harsh reality at last began to break in on those self-deluding dreams which have for so long possessed almost every politician in the western world. As we saw in this month’s Poznan conference, when 10,000 politicians, officials and “environmentalists” gathered to plan next year’s “son of Kyoto” treaty in Copenhagen, panicking politicians are waking up to the fact that the world can no longer afford all those quixotic schemes for “combating climate change” with which they were so happy to indulge themselves in more comfortable times.

Suddenly it has become rather less appealing that we should divert trillions of dollars, pounds and euros into the fantasy that we could reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 80 per cent. All those grandiose projects for “emissions trading”, “carbon capture”, building tens of thousands more useless wind turbines, switching vast areas of farmland from producing food to “biofuels”, are being exposed as no more than enormously damaging and futile gestures, costing astronomic sums we no longer possess.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/3982101/2008-was-the-year-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html

Global Cooling Continues – Global Warming Alarmists Still Issuing Death Threats

As we have reported before, the global cooling trend since 1998 is continuing.

Roger Helmer from the European Parliament comments:

This graph shows average global temperature records for the last five [to 6.5 years] years from two of the world’s most respected meteorological institutes, the UK’s Hadley Centre, and the University of Alabama in the US. Both show a clear downward trend, and the graph contrasts that trend explicitly with the rising trend of atmospheric CO2. So we have two conclusions: first of all, Al Gore’s alarmist predictions of rapidly accelerating temperatures, run-away warming and imminent Armageddon are just plain wrong, with each year that passes adding more nails to the coffin of his disaster movie. Second, the supposed correlation between atmospheric CO2 levels and temperature just does not exist. For years, temperatures have been falling while CO2 levels have risen.

The alarmists will try to explain this by calling on short-term effects which temporarily disrupt a long-term warming trend. But some scientists who accept the alarmist position are now suggesting that these “short-term effects” could continue for another ten years. How many decades have to pass before they recognise that they got it wrong, and that our climate mitigation policies represent a worse economic disaster than the current financial crisis?

ABC’s John Stossel on global warming alarmism:

Global Warming Alarmists Using Death Threats:

Top Scientists Say: You Are Not the Cause of Global Warming

We have all heard the theory a thousand times: man and his evil industrialization is causing the Earth to warm because CO2 (carbon dioxide) is a greenhouse gas and the exhaust from human activity is the primary cause of global warming and that there is a consensus of top scientists that the theory is true. They tell us that this warming will cause catastrophic effects and we have to act now. There is only one problem, many top scientists are convinced that none of this is true and actual measurements (not computer simulated models) of the Earth and solar system by top scientists demonstrate this beyond reasonable doubt.

Before we examine the technical data it is important to understand how the greenhouse effect global warming theory works. Greenhouse gases settle in a layer of our atmosphere called the troposphere and it is here that the heat that rises from the surface of the Earth gets trapped in atmosphere keeping us all warm. Think of the troposphere as a giant heat mirror or blanket in the sky that reflects escaping heat back down to the surface.

The computer models that global warming alarmists point to tells us that the troposphere is getting warmer at an ever increasing rate because of human generated CO2 causing the excessive greenhouse effect. However, the actual temperature readings of the atmosphere show no such increase in temperature in the troposphere.

Allow me to introduce Dr. John Christie. Dr. Christie is the scientist who is largely responsible for the methods used in measuring the temperature of the atmosphere. Dr. John Christie was awarded a medal from NASA for exceptional scientific achievement in 1991 and in 1996 received a special award from the American Meteorological Society for fundamentally advancing our ability to measure climate. Dr. Christie is also a lead author for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He measures climate temperature using satellites and weather balloons.

Says Dr. Christie, “What we have found consistently, in a great part of the planet that the bulk of the atmosphere is not warming as much as we see at the surface and that is a real head-scratcher for us because the theory is pretty straight forward; that if the surface warms the upper atmosphere should warm rapidly. The rise in temperature of that part of the atmosphere is not very dramatic at all and really does not match the theory that the climate models are expressing.”

Dr. Christie continued to say that, “I have often heard it said that there is a consensus among thousands of scientists on the global warming issue that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system. Well I am one scientist, and there are many, that simply think that is not true.”

Dr. Fred Singer stated, “All the climate [computer] models, every one of them, calculates that the warming should be faster  as you go up from the Earths surface and go up into the atmosphere. Maximum warming should take place at an altitude of about 10 KM. The observations do not show an increase with altitude, in fact most observations show a slight decrease in the rate of warming with altitude. So in a sense you can say that the hypothesis of man-made global warming is falsified by the evidence.”

Dr. Singer is Professor Emeritus of the Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia and is also the former director of the National Weather Satellite Service.

The idea that human generated CO2 is the cause of global warming is falsified by the evidence in several other ways. One of the most important facts to understand in regards to CO2 is that it is a minor greenhouse gas and that the amount of CO2 that humanity generates is but a tiny fraction of what the Earth generates naturally.

Dr. Timothy Ball, Professor of Climatology from the University of Winnipeg and director of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project tells us that “The atmosphere is made up of a multitude of gases. A small percentage of them we call greenhouse gases, and of that very small percentage of greenhouse gases 95% of it is water vapor and it is the most important greenhouse gas. If you take CO2 as a percentage of all the gases in the atmosphere it makes up 0.54%, it is an incredibly small portion; and then you have to take that portion that supposedly the humans are adding that is the focus of concern and the number gets even smaller.”

According to a BBC documentary on climate change, “More CO2 comes from animals and bacteria which produce 150 gigatons of CO2 each year compared to mere 6.6 gigatons from humans. An even larger source is dying vegetation, but the biggest source of CO2 by far is the oceans.”

Professor Carl Wunsch of the Department of Oceanography, M.I.T. is the author of four major text books on oceanography. States Dr. Wunsch, “The ocean is the major reservoir of where CO2 goes. If you heat the surface of the ocean it tends to release CO2 and if you cool the oceans surface it will absorb more CO2.”

The temperature record shows that man made CO2 levels do not correlate with changes in global temperature, but changes in solar activity and global temperatures do.

Examine the graph [above] carefully. It shows that most of the warming that has happened in the last 200 years occurred before 1940; well before most industrialization and before most people had used cars. It shows that global temperatures actually decreased from 1940 to 1975, which is the time of the post war economic boom, the highest period of global industrialization in world history. According to the theory of man made global warming the temperatures should not have gone up much before 1940 and should have went up quickly after 1940. Exactly the opposite is what took place.

Says Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu, the director of the International Arctic Research Center, “[man-made] CO2 began to increase exponentially in about 1940 but the temperature actually began to decrease and continued ‘til [sic] 1975. We cannot say that CO2 and temperature go together.” Dr. Nir Shaviv of the Institute of Physics, University of Jerusalem states that “there were periods in Earth history when we had three times as much CO2 as we have today or ten times as much CO2 as we have today and if CO2 has a large effect on climate we would see it in the temperature reconstruction.”

Dr. Piers Corbyn, lead climate forecaster for Weather Action (England) said, “None of the major climate changes in the last 1000 years can be explained by CO2.” Dr. Patrick Michaels from the University of Virginia and IPCC author states that “Anyone who goes around and says that CO2 is responsible for most of the warming of the 20th century hasn’t looked at the basic numbers.”

Dr. Ian Clark a leading paleo-climatologist from the University of Ottawa says, “If we look at climate in the geological timeframe we would never suspect CO2 as a major climate driver. You can’t say that CO2 will drive climate. It certainly never did in the past.”

So what about Al Gore? It is right about at this point in any conversation about global warming I have when I am asked, what about Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth”? Gore’s movie is largely centered around two pieces of evidence. The first is those computer models that we discussed earlier that show the ever increasing temperatures in the troposphere that just is not happening in real world measurements. The second is the long graph that Gore claims shows a correlation between global CO2 levels and global temperatures over thousands of years. The graph is from what is called the ice core record. This measurement is taken by drilling into ice glaciers that are many millennia old. The CO2 levels of the atmosphere trapped in the ice can then be compared to the known global temperature records.

According to a BBC interview with Dr. Clark, paleo-climatologists have discovered a link between CO2 levels and temperature, but what Al Gore doesn’t say in his movie is that “the link is the wrong way around.” When the global temperature rises or falls, only after 800 years do the CO2 levels follow. Every ice core record measurement has shown this same correlation.

Global warming alarmists don’t want you to know that global CO2 levels lag behind temperature levels by 800 years and Gore’s own method of comparing CO2 to the global temperatures shows this to be true. The data is clear, warming causes CO2, CO2 does not cause warming; if it did the CO2 levels would have to rise before the global temperature does and the data shows that this just isn’t the case. Says Dr. Clark, “Temperature is leading CO2 by 800 years. CO2 clearly cannot be causing temperature changes, it is a product of temperature levels, it is following temperature changes.”

Below is the graph showing the CO2 levels measured using the ice core method that Gore is so fond of over the last 400,000 years and as you can see the CO2 levels spike about every 100,000 years in what appears to be a natural cycle. There is no way that the CO2 spikes over the last 400 millennia can be explained by man or industrialization. Al Gore and the global warming alarmists are trying to either stop a natural cycle, or exploit it for political purposes. The science has spoken.

Chuck Norton

Inconvenient Questions Global Warming Alarmists Don’t Want You to Ask.

Global Warming alarmists like to tell people that the Earth is warming and that man is the primary cause. They point to us, not evidence that has been verified over and over using the scientific method, but instead they show us “computer models” and claim that there is a “consensus” that man is the primary cause of global warming. So below are some of the questions that such alarmists do not want to answer.

If man is the primary cause of global warming please explain what man did to warm us out of the last five known ice ages.

According to NASA, 2004 was the fourth warmest year on records since the 1800’s. If man has caused the Earth to continually warm why were the 1800’s warmer than today, especially considering that the world was far less populated and industrialized than it has been since 1930?

According to the BBC, China’s factories and homes burn 40% more coal than the United States, yet proposed treaties that are alleged to address global warming focus on regulations in the United States and give China a pass. Why?

According to the Illinois State Museum there have been 20 known glacial advances and retreats in the last two million years. So why is this one man’s fault?

Why is Al Gore’s name not on his own movie poster? Take a look. http://media.monstersandcritics.com/movies/aninconvenienttruth_1/images/group1/inconvenientruthonesheet.jpg

Why did Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia say that “Gore’s circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention”

According to NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies solar output has been increasing by .05% per decade since the 1970’s. How can you be certain that solar output has an effect that is far less than man? (Update: Solar output noticably started decreasing in the last few years and according to some data sets global warming has leveled off and is now showing a slight reduction)

If man is the primary cause of global warming why is it that NASA has a study on their web site that shows how solar activity increases and decreases actually correlate to North-American temperature changes since 1700? Why did the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, publish a study by Turkish physicist Ali Kilcik that demonstrated a parallel between solar activity change and variations in the Earth’s climate?

Why is it that in the years between 1645-1715, which was the middle of what is called “The Little Ice Age” with the coldest average European temperatures known, coincide with what astronomers call the Maunder Minimum, the lowest period of sun spot and solar activity recorded?

According to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology the moons of Neptune and the former planet Pluto are warming. What has man does to cause this global warming?

Why have leading astronomers such as Philip Marcus of the University of California at Berkeley published studies that show that Jupiter is warming?

If consensus creates such a scientific certainty, explain why a study done by the University of Ioannina School of Medicine in Greece and published in the Public Library of Science Medicine, shows that more than 50% of published studies are later proven to be false; saying that small sample sizes, poor study design, researcher bias, and selective reporting and other problems combine to make most research findings false?

After Hurricane Katrina, the global warming alarmists said that because of global warming the following hurricane seasons would continue to grow more harsh and destructive, only to  be followed by one  the mildest hurricane seasons on record. Why?

Why did the Senate vote down the Kyoto Treaty unanimously in 1998? Why has Canada also pulled out of the treaty?

According to the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, not only is solar output rising, but the polar ice caps on Mars are melting. Could it be that this is happening because the Mars Rover is an SUV?

How can any causes of global warming be tabulated accurately when, according to the Journal of Science, “A confusing array of new and recent studies reveals that scientists know very little about how much sunlight is absorbed by Earth versus how much the planet reflects, how all this alters temperatures, and why any of it changes from one decade to the next”?

Why has the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia measured global temperatures decreasing from 1998-2005?

Why does Dr. Richard M. Lindzen of the School of Atmospheric Science at MIT say that “Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence”? If Dr. Lindzen is wrong why did global warming alarmists stage a protest calling for the resignation of the heads of the National Hurricane Center (NHC) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for saying that Hurricane Katrina was a part of the natural hurricane cycle and had nothing to do with global warming?

Why has the popular U. S. based environmental magazine Grist called for Nuremberg-style trials for global warming skeptics?

According to the Associated Press, “First-of-its-kind core samples dug up from deep beneath the Arctic Ocean floor show that 55 million years ago an area near the North Pole was practically a subtropical paradise, three new studies show.” So how can man be the primary cause of global warming?

Why did Carleton University paleo-climatologist Professor Tim Patterson testify, “There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth’s temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years. On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century’s modest warming”?

Why have three studies from universities in Norway and one in Russia shown that the glacial ice sheet in Greenland is growing? One Danish study says that the Greenland Glacial sheet has been shrinking for 100 years so where is the consensus?

Why does a study published in Science Express tell us that “satellite radar altimetry measurements indicate that the East Antarctic ice-sheet increased in mass by 45 ± 7 billion metric tons per year from 1992 to 2003”?

An article from Newsweek, “The Cooling World”, April 28, 1975 told us that if global cooling continues “The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now.” Why?

The Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, a part of the Department of Energy, has studies that show that global carbon-dioxide levels have spiked every 100,000 years. How can man possibly be the primary cause of increased CO2 in the atmosphere?

Why have the hottest summers on record occurred in the 1930’s?

If the burning of fossil fuels by man is the primary cause of global warming, why did a recent United Nations report tell us that livestock are responsible for 18 percent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming; more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together?

Could you explain why from 1940-1970 global temperatures decreased while CO2 increased?

Of all of the possible causes of global warming (if it is indeed happening) please list for me in order of importance, what percentage each is responsible for in order and back it up with verifiable evidence that can be duplicated repeatedly. Fossil fuels, changes in solar activity, animal flatulence, the cyclical changing in the Earths rotational axis, ocean current changes, etc.

Are ethical scientists testing the scientific hypothesis with sound methods and quantifiable observations? The goal of the tests is to DISPROVE the hypothesis. It is the duty of the scientist to try their absolute best to disprove the hypothesis. If it cannot be disproved, it becomes theory, and over time, with more studies, is accepted as fact. To be responsible, don’t you have to look for evidence that disproves the theory and not ridicule or ignore those who publish it (because there is plenty out there)? Why do global warming alarmists do this and attack people so often?

Two new books about global warming have just been released, Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years, by physicist Fred Singer and The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change, by Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark and former BBC science writer Nigel Calder, which is due out in March. Both books say that global warming is a part of a natural cycle and give evidence to support the claim; do you intend to read the books?

Chuck Norton