Premonitions of the Fall (in temperature)

Guest post by David Archibald

The first prediction of the current climatic minimum was made by Hubbert Lamb in 1970 in a report (Weiss and Lamb) for the German Navy. He did it by making a reconstructed record of the average frequency of south-westerly surface winds in England since 1340. Quoting Lamb “We sense a cycle or periodicity of close to 200 years in length.” and “There may be a valuable indication of the origin of this apparent 200 year recurrence tendency, in that the sharp declines of the south-westerly wind indicated in the late 1300s, 1560s, 1740s-1770s and now, in each case fell at about the end of a sequence of sunspot cycles which built up to periods of exceptionally great solar disturbance (around 1360-80, the 1570s, the 1770s, the 1950s and more recently). The frequency maxima of the south-westerly wind, and evidence of warm climate periods in Europe sustained over several decades, all bear a similar relationship to these variations of the Sun’s activity.”

Following is Figure 11.6 from Lamb’s 1988 book “Weather, Climate and Human Affairs”:


The frequency of the southwest wind at London is shown by the solid line. A tentative forecast (broken line) is made simply by moving the whole curve 200 years to the right, i.e. the forecast implied by accepting the apparent 200 year recurring oscillation shown by the series.

The most successful prediction of the current minimum, in terms of lead time and detail, was made by two researchers in the US later that decade. Using tree ring data from redwoods in Kings Canyon in California, in 1979 Libby and Pandolfi forecast that, “by running this function into the future we have made a prediction of the climate to be expected in King’s Canyon; the prediction is that the climate will continue to deteriorate on the average, but that after our present cooling-off of more than the average decay in climate, there will be a temporary warming up followed by a greater rate of cooling-off.”

In a Los Angeles Times interview, Libby and Pandolfi gave a more detailed forecast:

“The forecast is for continued cool weather all over the Earth through the mid-1980s, with a global warming trend setting in thereafter for the rest of the century – followed by a severe cold snap that might well last through the first half of the 21st century.”

“Both the isotope record and the thermometer record show neat agreement for the cold decades at the ends of the 17th and 18th centuries, when temperatures fell by 1-10th to 2-10ths of a degree.”

“More recently, the world has enjoyed an agricultural boom during the past 70 years or so. The Earth’s annual average temperature has risen by about 1 to 1½ degrees, about as much of an increase as the decrease during the Little Ice Ages, during this interval.

When she and Pandolfi project their curves into the future, they show lower average temperatures from now thorugh the mid-1980s. “Then,” Dr. Libby added, “we see a warming trend (by about a quarter of 1 degree Fahrenheit) globally to around the year 2000. And then it will get really cold – if we believe our projections. This has to be tested.”

How cold? “Easily one or two degrees,” she replied, “and maybe even three or four degrees.”

The remarkable thing about the Libby and Pandolfi prediction is that they got the fine detail right, up to the current day, which gives a lot of credence to their projection for the next fifty years.

In 2003, two solar physicists, Schatten and Tobiska, published a paper which included the following prediction: “The surprising result of these long-range predictions is a rapid decline in solar activity, starting with cycle #24. If this trend continues, we may see the Sun heading towards a “Maunder” type of solar activity minimum – an extensive period of reduced levels of solar activity.”

The next prediction of the current minimum was made by Clilverd et al in 2006 using low-frequency solar oscillations:


Clilverd predicted that Solar Cycles 24 and 25 would have amplitudes similar to that of Solar Cycles 5 and 6 of the Dalton Minimum before a return to more normal levels mid-century.

A Finnish tree ring study ( followed in 2007 – Timonen et al. This is a portion of a figure from that study showing a forecast cold period starting about 2015 that is deeper and broader than any cold period in the previous 500 years:



Libby and Pandolfi provided timely warning of the current cooling more than thirty years ago, through the proper use of tree ring data. Given the enormous societal and financial consequences of that cooling, it would be good application of climate research funds to have a number of groups replicate and update the Libby and Pandolfi work.


Clilverd. M.A., Clarke, E., Ulich, T., Rishbeth, H. and Jarvis, M.J., 2006 “predicting Solar Cycle 24 and beyond” Space Weather, Vol. 4, So9005, doi:10.1029/2005SW000207

Libby, L.M. and Pandolfi, L.J. 1979, Tree Thermometers and Commodities: Historic Climate Indicators, Environment International Vol 2, pp 317-333

Schatten, K.H. and W.K.Tobiska 2003, Solar Activity Heading for a Maunder Minimum?, Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 35 (3), 6.03

Timonen, M., Helema, S., Holopainen, J., Ogurtsov, M., Eronen, M., Lindholm, M., Merilainen, J and Mielikainen, K. 2007 “Climate patterns in Northern Fennoscandinavia during the Last Millenium” Xvii INQUA Congress

Weiss, I. and Lamb, H.H. 1970 ‘Die Zunahme der Wellenhohen in jungster Ziet in den Operationsgebieten der Bundesmarine, ihre vermutliche Ursachen and ihre voraussichtliche weitere Entwicklung, Fachlich Mitteilungen, Nr. 160, Porz-Wahn, Geophysikalisher Bertungsdiesnt der Bundeswehr.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Keith Pearson, Formerly bikermailman, Anon No Longer

Fantastic work collating these together, Mr Archibald, and many thanks! To paraphrase James Carville, “It’s the Sun, stupid!”. (for non-Americans, in 1992, while running Bill Clinton’s campaign, he coined the phrase ‘it’s the economy, stupid’)

Looks about right and agrees with our prediction too.
Interdisciplinary work on this could be fruitful. That’s probably why it is discouraged in the climate field so far as any astrophysics is concerned.

It would be quite ironic if the very things globalwarmists are trying to get rid of are the very things which prevent complete freezing.

It is supposed to cool down anyway since the Modern warming like the THREE previous warming periods last around 350 years and this current warming is about that old already.

If the world keeps “Warming” via adjustments to historical temps, and the solar system starts a cool down cycle due to lack of sunspots, I can see the warmest declaring the hottest year ever when its snowing in July…


The fine detail? a quarter of a degree fahrenheit isn’t the same as .7 degrees Celsius.

German Lurker

“Die Zunahme der Wellenhohen in jungster Ziet” should read “Die Zunahme der Wellenhöhen in jungster Zeit”


But! But! Even if the global temp falls by 4 C, we still are hotter than we would have been because of ACO2. Don’t you guys know anything???

Gail Combs

E M Smith (ChiefIO) had a post a few years ago about bond events: So what is a Bond Event? They are abnormally cold periods that happen about every 1470 years. We are likely headed into one now, IMHO.
Bond Events do occur and here is one paper on the subject: The Physical Evidence of Earth’s Unstoppable 1,500-Year Climate Cycle
The only question is about whether or not the “Little Ice Age” was a Bond Event. E.M Smith goes into further detail as to why he thinks it was not in his thread Intermediate Period Half Bond Events If Smith is correct about his timing then we are facing another Bond Event.

Pamela Gray

Here we go again. Is there no end to wriggle matching?
The null hypothesis: The oceans circulate a HUGE amount of various oceanic conditions as Earth cranks the wheels of the overturning ocean circulation, the educated guess being around 600 years, more or less, for a complete cycle of one pool of water making it back to its starting point. The overturning ocean circulation brings bottom water up to the top in an entirely different spot on the globe, and top water down to the bottom, also in an entirely different spot on the globe.
The condition of that top water is then affected even more by Earth’s atmospheric oscillations as it rides the circulation on the top, letting in more or less shortwave radiation from our Sun into that top layer. Those conditions, the top layer of the oceans and atmospheric conditions, create whatever weather we have and is the source of both short and long term oscillations.
Eventually, that top layer, along with its weather patterns, will sink to the bottom, waiting its turn to rise to the top to live its life again in a new but related generation. Almost like the seasonal change between Winter and Summer, but on much longer time scales. In Winter, it hybernates at the bottom. In Summer, 100’s of years later, it rises to the top and blooms forth with weather patterns and variations, similar too, maybe, but not an exact duplicate of its parent.
Solar variations don’t have nearly the energy our variable oceans and atmosphere have in creating the conditions we feel. Solar variations, in all its forms, are buried in the extremely energetic noise of the intrinsic factors of an active planet.
CO2 rides on the coattails. Solar variations can be considered a constant.
Case closed.


It’s good to see Leona Libby getting a mention. May I recommend her book (out of print) “Past Climates- Tree Thermometers, Commodities, and People.. To quote from her preface:- “The method of tree thermometry depends on measuring the ratios of stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen in tree rings. These elements derive from rain and snow, which orignate as water vapor distilled from the surface of seas. Variations in sea surface temperature cause variation in stable isotopes in the distilled water vapor and therefore changes in the ratios as they are stored year by year in tree rings. By evaluating their changes in tree rings, we are able to determine climate changes in the past, as far back as tree rings may be secured. By applying the method of Fourier analysis to the stable isotopemeasurements in trees, we can predict climate changes in the near future.”


Conducting research similar to Eddy’s, Russia’s Eugene Borisenkov** discovered a quasi 200- year cycle of global cooling during the past 7,500 years that correlates to times of sunspot minima similar to the Maunder minimum.
** Eugene Borisenkov (Climate variations during the last millennium. Leningrad. 1988. p. 275)

Raymond Kuntz

We better pray that the Warmistas a correct, we may need all of the Global warming we can get.


Well, that is certainly a real doom to worry about.


Come on, we all know that the solar and water vapour variations are easily overwhelmed by that god of trace gases CO2, tut tut any idiot knows that (sarc comes so easily)…

Adam Gallon

Interesting, but with tree rings involved, I’m more than a tad sceptical!
The work by Lamb, is more interesting.
We’ve had more than our fair share of Northerly winds, as of late.
Ridiculously cold again today, for late May!

mike about town

man…right now those predictions look VERY prescient. i am curious to see if the next El Nino provides us with a new “hottest” year or if we have already begun our descent.

High Sierra Howard

The Libby and Pandolfi article is a great find. Do you have a link to it? If this comes to pass, the citrus groves of central California will be a thing of the past.
Thanks for all the work you do. Sincerely.


It’s perishing cold here in North Yorkshire. Heaven help us if there is cooling.

Ian W

All this makes Harold Ambler’s book “Don’t Sell Your Coat” very topical


“Libby and Pandolfi provided timely warning of the current cooling”
What current cooling?

Another Gareth

You’re gonna need a bigger coat.

Bill H

One thing I noticed right off was the leveling of temps prior to the major fall off and that it lasts about 15 years… we have had our Oceanic reserve giving us heat back for some 15 years now. It is waning and now comes the rapid fall into cooling..
If they are correct were about to have one hell of a ride down the slope.


The following link:
Leads us to an abstract from Environment International, Volume 2, Issues 4–6, 1979, Pages 317–333,
Tree thermometers and commodities: Historic climate indicators
L.M. Libby, Enironmental Science and Engineering, University of California
at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90024, U.S.A. and L.J. Pandolfi , Global
Geochemistry, Santa Monica, CA, U.S.A.

In four modern trees, hydrogen and oxygen isotope ratios track the modern temperature records.
In a 2000-yr sequence of a Japanese cedar, there are the same periodicities of variation of D/H and O18/O16 as have been found in O18/O16 in a Greenland ice well.
The same periodicities are found in uranium and organic carbon concentrations versus depth in a sea core from the Santa Barbara Channel, and in carbon-14 variations in a sequence of Bristlecone pine from southern California.
In a 2000-yr sequence of Japanese cedar and in a 1000-yr sequence of European oak D/H and O18/O16 are related to each other by a slope of 8, just as they are in world-wide precipitation.
In a 72-yr sequence of Sequoia gigantea, measured year by year for its oxygen isotope ratios, the 10.5-yr cycle of sunspot numbers found, but not the 21-yr cycle of sunspot magnetism; this we believe indicates that the sun is affecting the earth’s climate with non-magnetic particles, probably photons.
All these phenomena are related to periodic changes in sea surface temperature caused by periodic changes in the sun.

High Sierra Howard

Thanks for the recommendation of “Past Climates- Tree Thermometers, Commodities, and People” by Leona Libby. I just purchased a used copy on Amazon for 30 cents!


The last time it happened was in 1953. There’s a legend about a seven year winter in ~1700 – allegedly it snowed in August for seven years.

cui bono

Thanks for the very clear post Dr. Archibald. It may happen, or not. I don’t really believe any predictions of disaster nowadays, whether warmist or coolist. Basically, “nobody knows”. Which is what makes the warmistas so annoying, amongst other things.
Do I detect a bit of a ‘cut off your nose to spite your face’ attitude amongst some AGW sceptics? “Wait until you’re all crushed under the coming mile-high glaciers, that’ll teach you warmists! Nyanyanyanyanya.” This is too reminiscent of some of Phil Jones’ oft-quoted sick remarks (though in the opposite direction, of course).
I wish H. Lamb was still around. It sounds like he had more common sense and more ‘feel’ for the climate in his little finger than…oh, you know them all.

Steve Fox

I always thought the phrase was ‘wiggle matching’. Wiggles are random curves in a line. Wriggling is what you do when a naughty bit comes on the telly and your gran’s there with her knitting…. and there’s an end to that when your gran’s dearly departed and naughty bits come on the telly more regularly than the ad breaks so nobody’s bothered any more.

The nice part about all of this is that over time, it is testable.

Richard M

You may see warmists jump onto something like this. They now have an explanation for the halt in warming. They will claim that a lack of significant cooling means the warming has only been held back for a few decades only to return even stronger when this cycle ends.

I used Lamb’s 1988 book as the text for a graduate class in climate. It, and this comment by Archibald, underscores my argument that the IPCC has frozen climate science progress since its inception. Lamb knew what was going to happen as he recorded in his autobiography (1997). He created the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) because
“…it was clear that the first and greatest need was to establish the facts of the past record of the natural climate in times before any side effects of human activities could well be important.”
This is now an even greater problem as data is lost, records terminated or truncated and proxy reconstructions perverted by rewriting history for a political agenda. Lamb foresaw the potential architect for this diversion in the person of Tom Wigley who took over as director of the CRU. In my discussions with Lamb he said he felt his lack of computer skills was limiting. He hired Wigley to fill that gap at the CRU. He learned quickly it was a mistake. Here are his comments from the autobiography.
“The research project which I put forward to the Rockefeller Foundation was awarded a handsome grant, but it sadly came to grief over an understandable difference of scientific judgment between me and the scientists, Dr Tom Wigley, whom we appointed to take charge of the research.” “The scheme had been to extract the information given in the wealth of descriptive reports of the nature of individual past seasons…” “My plan was that these reports should be entered on maps of the reported weather character that prevailed in the individual seasons…”
The loss of this project underscores the problems Lamb anticipated because it is from such studies, Lamb recreated without the Rockefeller money, which is the basis for the material in Archibalds comments and Libby and Pandalfi’s predictions.
Lamb identified the problem with Wigley’s appointment and ultimately with the IPCC.
“My immediate successor, Professor Tom Wigley, was chiefly interested in the prospects of world climates being changed as result of human activities, primarily through the burning up of wood, coal, oil and gas reserves…” “After only a few years almost all the work on historical reconstruction of past climate and weather situations, which first made the Unit well known, was abandoned.”
Wigley was instrumental in the application of computer models but as Lamb knew they were only to be as good as the data on which they were built. They were and continue to be a disaster, while Lamb’s work and the studies it engendered proves prescient.
The predictions Libby and Pandolfi made are based on Lamb’s work with midlatitude cyclonic and wind patterns. Wind remains one of the essentially overlooked components in climate studies. Hans Jelbring recognized this, but like any who knew and dared question what the IPCC were doing were subjected to attacks typical of politics rather than the open discourse essential to science.
Well done David for bringing all this to people’s attention and Anthony for providing web space as we try to repair the damage the IPCC, its founders and disciples have done.

Pamela Gray

Maybe wriggling is the word I want (but you are right). Wriggling around for a solar wiggle connection seems to be the popular pasttime of many. I will continue to remind one and all that the null hypothesis is tied to natural short and long term noisy, oscillatory intrinsic factors related to a very active and highly variable planet. It holds by far and away the greater amount of energy necessary to drive temperature trends up, down, and everything in-between for short, long, and longer term periods.
The sad part has been the amount of money that has disappeared down the toilet in search of anything and everything that would disprove the null hypothesis before we have completed even the most basic research that would help us understand short, long, and longer term natural variation.
Can tax payers go on strike?

Richard Bell
Ian W

Richard M says:
May 20, 2012 at 10:14 am
You may see warmists jump onto something like this. They now have an explanation for the halt in warming. They will claim that a lack of significant cooling means the warming has only been held back for a few decades only to return even stronger when this cycle ends.

That gets a little difficult to describe scientifically We have been told ad nauseam that:
** TSI is effectively a constant (Pamela just repeated it a few posts up). So solar has NO EFFECT on the climate. (Cannot use that as an excuse for flat temperatures and no runaway warming)
** Anthropogenic CO2 overwhelms ALL other forcings and will be in the atmosphere for (choose one of) decades, millenia (cannot use any natural forcing for flat temperatures and no runaway warming)
** We are close to the tipping point (carefully fudged) 350 ppm (Bill McKibben), 400ppm Dr. Malte Meinshausen, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 450ppm (Makiko Sato of Columbia’s Earth Institute) [[Note: Mean CO2 levels measured at Mauna Loa reached 397.17 ppm for the week that started at May 6, 2012]] (Tipping point has not been reached – yet, and temperatures are flat despite CO2ppm continual monotonic climb)
** Temperatures are flat – indeed once really rural locations are taken (not airports or towns) the atmosphere may be getting cooler _and_ with reduced humidity that means energy loss not trapped. A more definitive test is that the oceans are not warming.
So we are close if not past the tipping point where it should all be running away irrecoverable hot yet – as Trenberth would say: ‘where’s the heat?’ . All that extra heat is being trapped we are told repeatedly its basic physics. Claiming that all of a sudden vast quantities of heat will leap into being is NOT basic physics its religion.

e. c. cowan

No Reply – rather a question:
I keep hearing on The Weather Channel that this (2011-12) winter was the warmest since records have been kept (1895).
Is this true? Is it true for the entire USA – for the whole northern hemisphere ?
I thought Alaska had areas of record snow fall.
Hundreds died in Eastern Europe of hypothermia due to record cold. And I saw a picture of snow in Rome!
Where was the warmest winter on record?


cui bono;
Do I detect a bit of a ‘cut off your nose to spite your face’ attitude amongst some AGW sceptics>>>
Yes you do. I’ve long bemoaned the fact that I must relcuctantly chear for every sign of cooling to put the warmists in their place, despite believing that warmer = better. But that sword cuts both ways. The warmists cheer every sign of warming to vindicate themselves, even though they believe that warming = disaster. Given that they believe warming = disaster, one would think they would be happy to be wrong. Instead they are angry.
But at day’s end, while I think the signs that we are entering a cooling period are clear, I’m not all that alarmed. We’re humans. We’re tool users. We solve problems. The coming cooling period would have to be remarkably swift and dramatic (unprecedented!) to pose any real threat to us. Unless of course we were to turn our destiny over to the shrinking violets that will quickly dump their warmist hats and don ice ageist hats instead and continue to try and use the threat of impending doom to grasp for power and send us back to the stone age on the same faulty reasoning they use to prevent warming. Their ilk care not one whit what excuse they use to rule us for our own good, they’ll change horses in a heartbeat when they see better opportunity to push their “we know better just do as you are told” agenda using a different apocalypse to instill fear.
I was in high school in the 70’s when the last ice age scare rolled through. Survived that one, and unless someone makes it impossible for uso heat our homes, for modern agriculture techniques including heated green houses to be employed, for genetic engineering to produce crops that thrive in shorter/cooler growing seasons, and so and and so forth, we will be just fine.
“I have seen the enemy, and they are us.”

Hari Seldon

I just wonder why they are hiding the decline…in temperatures. Could someone please start a new conspiracy theory please. I can’t be bothered. except were all doomed anyway .


e. c. cowan says:
May 20, 2012 at 10:40 am
No Reply – rather a question:
I keep hearing on The Weather Channel that this (2011-12) winter was the warmest since records have been kept (1895).
NOAA: Fourth Warmest Winter on Record
by Chris Dolce, Meteorologist
Updated: March 7, 2012 1:30 pm ET
The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has announced that this was fourth warmest meteorological winter on record across the contiguous United States


Pamela – the principle of liberty is that you don’t have to ask for it.
so, in your case, no, you may not go on strike. lol.

As the other commenter mentioned, we may be headed for another Bond Event, which occur roughly every 1,470 years. This from Wikipedia:
Bond events are North Atlantic climate fluctuations occurring every ≈1,470 ± 500 years throughout the Holocene. Eight such events have been identified, primarily from fluctuations in ice-rafted debris. Bond events may be the interglacial relatives of the glacial Dansgaard–Oeschger events,[1] with a magnitude of perhaps 15–20% of the glacial-interglacial temperature change.
Gerard C. Bond of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University, was the lead author of the paper published in 1997 that postulated the theory of 1,470-year climate cycles in the Holocene, mainly based on petrologic tracers of drift ice in the North Atlantic.[2][3]
The existence of climatic changes, possibly on a quasi-1,500 year cycle, is well established for the last glacial period from ice cores. Less well established is the continuation of these cycles into the holocene. Bond et al. (1997) argue for a cyclicity close to 1470 ± 500 years in the North Atlantic region, and that their results imply a variation in Holocene climate in this region. In their view, many if not most of the Dansgaard–Oeschger events of the last ice age, conform to a 1,500-year pattern, as do some climate events of later eras, like the Little Ice Age, the 8.2 kiloyear event, and the start of the Younger Dryas.

More here:

The remarkable thing about the Libby and Pandolfi prediction is that they got the fine detail right, up to the current day, which gives a lot of credence to their projection for the next fifty years.
Are you sure they aren’t geologists? I’ve met a lot of rock docs in SWA over the past five years, and whenever I’ve raised the subject of Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Chaos/Catastrophic Climatey Catastrophe, every single one of them has just smiled and said, “Still got your long johns handy, I hope…?”


Here I am believing all my life that rewoods don’t have discernable tree rings. Our house is covered with redwood and I think it was the builders who told me that ‘fact’. Learn something new every day…


Pamela Gray says:
May 20, 2012 at 10:30 am
“I will continue to remind one and all that the null hypothesis is tied to natural short and long term noisy, oscillatory intrinsic factors related to a very active and highly variable planet.”
But this should not lead one to exclude extrinsic factors, because then you have the omitted variable problem which results in meaningless models. We can’t even predict the ENSO cycle which phases in and out of the annual cycle and may be 2 or 3 years long, depending on ?.

just some guy

So I just followed the link at the left of the screen under “tools”, “UAH AMSU Daily Temps”
Then checked out the current daily graph of temps for various lower altitude channels, with all the check boxes filled to see all the past years. It appears that May 2012 is so far proving to be a relatively cold month compared to last ten years.
Am I understanding this correctly?

Without the Hockey Stick, AGW is Done
A key thing someone should do is create one ultra-effective web site that would serve as the main hockey stick rebuttal reference point (for our arguments). This site needs to be layman friendly, and done with Madison Avenue insight. It should have up front the concise basic arguments, with graphical and video support, and also be further supported by more detailed and technical click through layers (go from basic, to more detailed, to very detailed, to the raw data etc…).
In the past I’ve said that the h stick has been debunked, and have had the warmists respond with “no it hasn’t” OR “Yes, but other temperature reconstructions show the same thing [the hockey stick curves].” The debunking of the hockey stick means that the temps that the graph portrayed never happened. You can’t just fabricate another “non hockey stick” reconstruction to show the same bogus temp record.
The reason why it’s important — in creating a website to counter the hockey stick — to pull out all the stops, to spare no resources (when available), to call upon all the king’s horses and all the king’s men on this… is because with the h stick out of the picture, the global warming theory is sunk. I argue that CO2 has a negligible effect, but with the hockey stick debunked then the question about CO2 is moot. CO2 cannot be doing what the doomsayers say it is doing, because the temps are normal and natural. If temperatures and climate are not usual in any way, and the rates of temp change have not changed despite heightened CO2 levels, we don’t have a climate problem, and CO2 has nothing to do with the climate. So, with no problem to solve… don’t try to solve a problem.
With the h stick decisively definitively debunked (at 1 key reference-able place), you can argue about CO2 until the cows come home, but the fact is that the climate is fine, and so, thus, there is obviously something that the fear-mongering greenhouse gas theorists are missing. We don’t need to know what exactly they are missing, but they are missing something. There is no other logical conclusion.


The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has announced that this was fourth warmest meteorological winter on record across the contiguous United States>>>
The planet has been warming since the Little Ice Age. That being the case, one would expect that the last few years would be the warmist “ever”. That doesn’t mean CO2 is causing it, nor does it mean that anything catastrophic is happening.
If one climbs a mountain, measuring one’s altitude at each step, and then starts back down from the top, at step three on your way down you could say that your last 6 steps were at the highest altitude of the last several thousand steps. That doesn’t change the fact that you are descending…

Stephen Richards

MikeN says:
May 20, 2012 at 8:55 am
The fine detail? a quarter of a degree fahrenheit isn’t the same as .7 degrees Celsius.
No-one else has bothered so I thought I might. The 0.7°C figure comes from adjusted data. There is empirical evidence, although not definitive because of the AGW shenanigans, that the increase may be only about 0.4°C.


matt, go down to mill valley lumber and see the old redwood slice with various historical incidents marked, such as the discovery of america by columbus in 1492.

Kelvin Vaughan

I predict that the CET average maximum temperature for the month of December will be between 3 and 4 degrees Celsius this year. It was 8.7°C last December. The minimum will be about -2°C.


davidmhoffer says:
May 20, 2012 at 11:08 am
David, don’t get excited….you know I’m not a warmest
cowan said the weather channel was saying it the warmest “evah”….
it’s not…it’s the 4th warmest….”Only the winters of 1991-1992, 1998-1999, 1999-2000 were warmer”………that means it’s getting cooler