.jpg){kind=link}
Green outrage is growing that Congress tweeted a link to an article by James Delingpole, which details how global average land temperature has just crashed by 1C (1.8F).
Bernie Sanders Slams Climate Denying House Tweet
Bernie Sanders sent a curt response to a climate change denying tweet from the House of Representatives Science Committee on Thursday.
The initial tweet, sent from an official government account, sends a clear message about how environmental policy will shift under a Republican Congress and a Donald Trump presidential administration.
It links to a climate change denying Breitbart News story that cited a misleading report in the UK tabloid the Daily Mail. The Daily Mail report claims, “Nasa featured a new study which said there was a hiatus in global warming before the recent El Niño.”
.@BreitbartNews: Global Temperatures Plunge. Icy Silence from Climate Alarmists https://t.co/uLUPW4o93V
— Sci, Space, & Tech GOP (@housesciencegop) December 1, 2016
Here’s how the Vermon senator responded.
Where'd you get your PhD? Trump University? https://t.co/P5Ez5fVEwD
— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) December 1, 2016
…
Read more: http://www.attn.com/stories/13227/bernie-sanders-slams-climate-denying-house-tweet
Why are climate advocates so upset? The reason is they were expecting global temperatures to keep shooting up. Consider the following statement from Michael Mann, back in March.
Why is 2016 smashing heat records?
… according to Professor Michael Mann, the director of Penn State Earth System Science Centre. He said it was possible to look back over the temperature records and assess the impact of an El Niño on global temperatures.
“A number of folks have done this,” he said, “and come to the conclusion it was responsible for less than 0.1C of the anomalous warmth. In other words, we would have set an all-time global temperature record [in 2015] even without any help from El Niño.”
…
As WUWT recently reported, James Delingpole’s claim is correct – the plunge in land temperatures over the last 6 months is the fastest drop on record.
The collapse in global temperature is a bitter disappointment to climate advocates like Bernie, who were apparently hoping that the recent El-nino driven spike in global temperature would be final vindication for all their climate scare stories.
SO Bernie is a one way temperature denier?
Confucius
Correct Language.
“If language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant;
if what is said is not meant, then what ought to be done remains undone,
if this remains undone morals and arts will deteriorate,
justice will go astray, if justice goes astray there will be confusion
Hence there must be no doubt in what is said.
A word of wisdom.
‘Tis clear, Grasshoopper, Confucius understood Confusionism.
George Tetley
What did you say?
Bulls**t baffles brains. The resulting confusion is bad.
He said:
” Say what you mean
Mean what you say
One thing leads to another”
son of mulder — You have a sick mind. Stay off your meds.– Eugene WR Gallun
So how long will it take, given the current weak La Nina conditions, for them to state that it is the La Nina that is causing the cooling and not a hiatus?
How long?
We’ll see.
If the La Nina is used as a causal explanation for global cooling than El Nino must be allowed as a cause of Global Warming
I think it was something like, “I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”
(But maybe I misunderstood.)
PS Someone else said that first but I’m not sure who.
I’m sure Confuscious didn’t say that.
He probably said something in ancient Chinese dialect, that didn’t sound anything like that. Modern Chinese doesn’t sound like that either.
g
Where’d you get your PhD, Bernie?
OH what ? You don’t have one but you did get a BA in political science.
That probably explains why you come into a scientific argument ( about which you know nothing ) by questioning someone’s qualifications instead of addressing the facts. Like for most of you ignorant alarmists, it’s all politics and no science.
And a typical socialist hypocrite that will be enjoying the cold blast next week snuggled down in his new mansion powered, no doubt, by solar and windmills to keep his composting toilet functioning?
Is this the same Bernie Sanders who thinks that Castro was a great leader? Is this the same Bernie Sanders who obviously had a deal with Hitlery and knew he wouldn’t get the nomination but hoodwinked all his supporters anyway? OK…..Got it. Bernie – just go to your new lake house and shut the hell up!!!
AYUP. the same Bernie that couldn’t beat Hillary who, because of her hypocricy and untrustworthyness AND thanks in great part to the inability of her constituency to back her and thus cast their votes for Gary Johnson, couldn’t beat Trump.
I’m just a Canadian observer who hates to comment on U.S. politics ’cause we have enough of our own idiots here, but Bernie is a demented old fool who almost pedalled his useless 1930’s solutions into a trip to the White House. I’m no fan of Trump or Hillary but “the Bern” would have been a disaster!
I understand that Vermint wasn’t allowed into the USA at first, although some of its settlers did help in the revolutionary war effort.
But I think it was something like five years later they were allowed to become a State.
G
At the time of the War of Independence, Vermont was part of New York. Residents living in what is now Vermont wanted their own state. So they threatened to side with the British if Vermont was kept as a part of New York.
Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain (Montagne Verte) boys rebelled against New York before the colonies rebelled against George III.
But they went on to figure prominently in the early days of the American Revolution against the British crown.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethan_Allen
Unfortunately now Vermont has been colonized by New Yorkers like Bernie Sanders, destroying its rock-ribbed Yankee individualism with Communism. Same as has happened to so many Western states with California refugees who still don’t get it and want to recreate in new territory the same mistakes which destroyed CA. Also like all the Damn Yankee liberals polluting formerly freedom-loving VA, NC and FL.
Vermont was an independent country at the time of the American revolution.
these are some great comments …. hahahaha
But he is a curmudgeon! And he misses his 15 minutes. 😉
+1
Out at the assisted living center there are many Bernies and a number of them with the same curmudgeon behavior that staff have to deal with.
This drop in temperature was predicted four months ago in July in this post. The Nino3.4 area temperatures continue to fall, so the UAH Global LT temperatures should soon catch up with the LT land temperatures.
Bill Illis did an earlier and more detailed analysis of this subject, with a three-month predictor of Tropical LT temperatures..
Regards, Allan
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/07/01/spectacular-drop-in-global-average-satellite-temperatures/comment-page-1/#comment-2250667
I plotted the same formula back to 1982, which is where I (I think arbitrarily) started my first analysis. Satellite temperature data began in 1979.
That formula is: UAHLT Calc. = 0.20*Nino3.4SST +0.15
It is apparent that UAHLT Calc. is substantially higher than UAH Actual for two periods, each of ~5 years,
BUT that difference could be largely or entirely due to the two major volcanoes, El Chichon in 1982 and Mt. Pinatubo in 1991.
This leads to a startling new hypothesis: First, look at the blue line, which shows NO significant global warming over the entire period from 1982 to 2016. Perhaps the “global warming” observed after the 1997-98 El Nino was not global warming at all; maybe it was just the natural recovery in global temperatures after two of the largest volcanoes in recent history.
Comments?
Regards, Allan
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1030751950335700&set=a.1012901982120697.1073741826.100002027142240&type=3&theater
Alan, the reason the actual T is lower than the calculations using the El Nino is because something very different is going on. Tisdale noted years ago that following the end of an El Nino, warm water spreads toward the poles (an exaggerated case is the warm blob Phenom) and drags out atmospheric heating for another yr or two. Presently a large cold blob has quickly replaced these warm waters. We should be treating this as an “extraterritorial” La Nina and getting it into the calculation. I’ve been trying to get someone interested in this over the last few blogs on the subject. We mustn’t get to slavish with our index type calculations. This appears to be something new. There is a twin cold blob in the southern hemisphere that no one refers to as well . Do T look to the ENSO region for assessing the big cooling.
Gary wrote: “Alan, the reason the actual T is lower than the calculations using the El Nino is…”
Allan again: Gary, the actual T is about 0.3-0.4C HIGHER than the calculation using the El Nino is, but should catch up soon, unless whatever is causing this cooling hiatus persists.
According to the Nino3.4 temperature projections, UAH global LT temperature should be close to the zero anomaly by now.
All the above from memory – hope I got it right.
Best, Allan
The leftist belive they have politicized climate science in order to promote their agendaes?
“Here’s how the Vermon senator responded”
Vermin.
..Vermont…?
No, Vermin Supreme. Got a boot handy?
Where is the Verminator when you need him???
Didn’t he say “I’ll be back”
Well I’m an advocate for climate. Bernie doesn’t have it all to himself.
Personally, I think climate is wonderful; we should all have some.
G
Perhaps this whole Global Climate change is simply a misunderstanding and was really meant to indicate Political Climate Change
then we would have thet international body
Intended Political Climate Change
“Well I’m an advocate for climate.”
Eric has yet to get past the *mimic the mass media* stage of journalistic development, it seems to me . . he thinks the labels they apply to things and people are like sacred text. If extra terrestrials were to look in on the planetary discussion according to Eric’s label mimicry, with his “climate advocates” vs his “climate skeptics”, they might rationally conclude we’re arguing about whether or not the evidence is clear . . that there is such a thing as climate . .
I’m a firm believer in climate, myself, but in Eric’s MSMM (Main Stream Media Mimicry) dislexo world, I end up in the climate skeptic basket . . an extremely insulting thing to call someone if you ask me, but he’s as tone deaf as Hillary apparently, when it comes to such things.
I haven’t given up hope on him maturing beyond the MSMM stage, and see signs of hope in things like his closing paragraph, wherein “climate advocates like Bernie”, eventually become tellers of “climate scare stories”. I can see a day coming, maybe not this year, but someday, when he shatters the fiberglass ceiling, and writes rational, truthful, meaningful-meat on them vacuous mass media buzzword bones headlines like;
Climate Scare Advocate Outrage Over “Global Cooling” Congress Tweet
Hola, JohnK,
Eric does a great job. If he wrote like those well educated in the hard sciences normally discuss the AGW hypothesis, it would sound like gibberish to most of the public.
“…climate change denying…” is the kind of media-driven nonsense the general public parrots — but to most readers here it sounds like fingernails on a chalkboard.
Yo, dbstealey,
Yeah I know, and yeah he’s rather good at this, but I just don’t think we can afford to let the PC BS go unchallenged forever . . This is an article about climate scare advocates trying to shut down free speech, to me. And in the case highlighted, the notion that we (non-climate scientists) are not qualified to detect a lack of hopefulness one would expect if people actually afraid of a climate meltdown get news that indicates maybe it’s not real threat. It tells me the “advocates” don’t really believe we face impending climate doom, and/or don’t really care about those who might suffer badly if it happens . . much as the luxury jet-setting in the name of reducing CO2 emissions does. It rings hollow . .
Right now, at this point in time, we can let the general public know (if) we hear it too, so the average person who (according to numerous polls) is not much worried about the supposed greatest threat facing humanity, can perhaps grasp that they’ve been manipulated, by the same mass media/political establishment they just saw massively discredited in Briton and in America. Which doesn’t necessarily mean the the “global warming” scare is bogus, but means it certainly could be, and that skepticism is a respectable/logical approach to the whole matter . . just as it always was, of course.
They can hear me now . . me thinks ; )
Sander’s no doubt understands climate science, having graduated with a bachelor of arts degree in political science from the University of Chicago. He has described himself as a mediocre college student
Well I wouldn’t say the University of Chicago is a mediocre College.
g
time to pay the piper.
“SO Bernie is a one way temperature d*nier?”
Yes, he only “feels the bern”…
They spelled “vermin” wrong as well.
Bernie and the left are the new deniers. They deny the truth that AGW is a hoax, with no credible evidence to support AGW. We need a steady flow of information from official government sources to get the truth about the AGW hoax out there. Elections have consequences. There will be a different message coming out of the EPA, NASA and NOAA – hopefully NASA will get out of the climate stuff altogether, and get back to what they are suppose to do – space exploration and advancing the related technology. The Idiotic “Muslim outreach” is a dog pile that will be scooped.
Pyeatte, I am working on putting together a special funding request to try and get NASA the extra funding they will need to finish the research required to perfect the fabrication of carbon nanotubes (CN) and when that is done, give them the funding they will need to the space elevator. The research is expected to cost between $5 and $10 billion and the construction will run between $50 and $75 billion, but the cost of putting a kilogram of material into orbit will fall from an average of $20,000 down to $100. Plus the space elevator removes the risk of a failed rocket and the loss of the probe/rover/satellite. In short, it will allow NASA to spend a much larger percentage of their annual budget on science and exploration instead of having to spend half of their annual budget on launching payloads into space.
This first space elevator will have a maximum payload of 250 tons which means that we could actually build a real space station here on the ground and then send those sections into orbit on the space elevator where astronauts would assemble them. Once the station backbone is completed, they can install the reactor core module, one of the life support modules, the first crew module, and the first science module. Then fill in the rest of the station sections as they become available. Before the reactor is brought online, the station will operate using power from solar panels. This new space station will have a circumference of 25 kilometers and when it’s finished it will spin to create near Earth normal gravity for the 1500-2000 astronauts, scientists, students and even a few tourists that are living, working and vacationing on the new space station.
The space elevator will make access to space so cheap that there will no longer be any excuses for not moving forward with the creation of an asteroid processing facility, an orbital shipyard, a colony on Mars, a science station on the moon, a science station on Ceres and on moons around Jupiter and Saturn, an orbital farm to test how well plant food crops will grow in space versus on the ground, and finally a 1km diameter telescope. With a 1 kilometer telescope in orbit, we can directly image exoplanets to see whether or not they are able to support human life. I look forward to the day that we find the first exoplanet covered in plants and a telescope that large would even let us detect whether or not there is intelligent life on that planet.
The asteroid processing facility would be similar to the new space station in size, but all of that size would be devoted to cutting up and crushing asteroids as large as 500 meters in diameter. The facility will extract all precious metals and minerals and turn all of the iron into steel plates that could then be used to construct the other facilities we would need. The asteroids would be gathered from the asteroid belt or captured near Earth asteroids. The spacecraft that would do this would be specially designed asteroid tugs that use quantum thrusters for primary propulsion. By using quantum thrusters, a round trip to the asteroid belt and back would take about 100 days.
While all of this is great, think about the new consumer products that would come about because of discoveries made do to the research that was done on carbon nanotubes alone. That would mean many millions of new jobs and that’s just because of the carbon nanotube research. So we grow the economy, we get cheap and safe access to space, and we get to focus on space exploration instead of war.
I assume you are replying to
He’s quoting 13:3 in the Analects. Did Confucius actually say that? Did Socrates say the things attributed to him by Plato? Did Jesus say the things attributed to him in the Bible?
What can be said is that the various translations of 13:3 that I have read are in broad general agreement. The wiki article on the Analects gives a good idea of the thinking on their origins.
I rather think that Confucius did say something pretty close to what is recorded in 13:3.
and does Bernie he have a PhD? or just read the Chicken Little papers?
I sent him this :
“we the people” are okay with you believing in imaginary things, we just don’t wanna PAY FOR IT https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/01/global-cooling-compilation/ via @Anthony Watts
Global warmongering climate bollicks fondlers like Sanders haven”t a scooby.
Why do all your graphs start in ’98?
Where would you like them to start?
You are correct that the period of the graphs is totally wrong – I suggest starting 8000 years before present. You will then find we are at the cold end of the Holocene as the ‘temperatures’ have been dropping since the Holocene ‘Optimum’. This temperature profile has nothing to do with CO2 and as yet all hypothesized explanations for Earth glacials and interglacials and their various temperature profiles have been falsified by observations. However, there is nothing special or extreme about the current climate it is neither the warmest nor the coldest and the rates of change have all been seen before.
What you are seeing is political scare mongering to influence opinions and allow extra taxation and control. This is supported by ‘rent seeking’ scientists with poor or no ethics who will ensure that funded research provides the result that the funding source wants.
“Why do all your graphs start in ’98?”
One reason would be that you are comparing apples to apples when you start at 1998. You are comparing two strong El Nino’s, one in 1998, and one in 2016, and all points in between.
This is a satellite record so it only goes back to 1979, and things really don’t get exciting until 1998, on this chart, but if you put the entire satellite record chart on the page, it wouldn’t change the profile at all, so starting with 1998, is not a ploy on someone’s part to slant the data in one way or another.
I would supply a copy of the entire UAH satellite record for you but Roy Spencer’s website keeps giving me a “403” when I try to access the chart itself.
See royspencer.com. The full chart is right on the first page.
How about if we start them at the end of the last glacial period ?
http://www.mythsarehistory.com/uploads/2/1/2/8/21280596/hypsithermal_temps.jpg
For perspective, start the graphs at the Eemian optimum, which was likely warmer than the Holocene.
Because that is where the first data in this data set was taken. To plot the graph back further in time, he would need to use a different data set with numbers taken earlier than 1998.
g
François,
It does not make any difference when the temperature vs time chart starts, if the planet now cools.
It also does not make any difference what Bernie or any of the other CAGW cheerleaders say, if the planet significantly cools.
There have been at least a dozen different analysis results (in peer reviewed papers) that support the assertion that the entire scientific basis of the IPCC reports is incorrect. The majority of the warming in the last 150 years has caused by solar cycle changes, not AGW and the increase in atmospheric CO2 was not caused by anthropogenic emission.
If the warming in the last 150 years was caused by solar cycle changes, global warming is over as the solar cycle has been interrupted.
Global cooling will start as a political issue as the cult of CAGW back peddles and try to come up with imaginative explanations for what they will assert is natural variability of climate.
The majority of the warming in the last 150 years has been high latitude which matches the pattern of pervious warming periods in the paleo record which all correlate to solar cycle changes. All of the past high latitude warming periods were followed by cooling periods when the solar cycle again changed.
http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2016/anomnight.12.1.2016.gif
Beyond that, much of, perhaps even most, AGW isn’t caused by CO2.
Hivemind
December 2, 2016 at 4:12 am
The second warm period is called the Egyptian WP, not a continuation of the Holocene Optimum. And the following red bump is the Minoan WP.
R Taylor
December 2, 2016 at 6:29 am
The Eemian was definitely warmer than the Holocene, and lasted 5000 years longer than our present interglacial has to date. The Southern Dome of the Greenland Ice Sheet melted quite a bit more then than it has during the Holocene. Eemian sea level highstand is visible on raised beaches around the world. Hippos swam in the Thames at the site of London. All that salubrious warmth was without benefit of a Neanderthal industrial age.
All the graphs are doubly wrong. Why do the y-axes always show arbitrary values like °C? We should be looking at total energy as measured in degrees K. That’ll disappear not only the LIA and the MWP; Mann’s blade will melt to nothing as well.
I have an image in my mind of a brick falling on a house of cards
I like the analogy. Maybe a block of ice?
Or a polar bear?
Straight in with the insults. However the whole atmosphere is changing. No wonder Merkel is saying she needs the power to shut down websites she doesn’t like.
Yea, we need to do something with this hate speech from left wing extremists.
By the way, even though Dr Mann was, according to the Guardian, wrongly saying this is not only an El Niño but a record from the underlying warming trend, the cooling now by no probable means is caused by a cooling trend. We just lost the heat related to El Niño as so usual and might temporarily “enjoy” relatively normal or even La Niña times for a couple of years. Trends we see only later on, I’d say at least 15 years must pass before you can say what kind of year for real 2016 was.
I’m pretty certain the climate alarmism (my spelling checker alarms again) must come to an end during the next two decades – no all-defining societal phenomena can last for a lifetime? Right?!?
Santer and Hansen are old men. There has to be a revolution coming how we see the anthropogenic global warming.
“We just lost the heat related to El Niño”
Actually we have no clue, since we’re presented with a single line on a graph representing averaged temperatures. Physically meaningless nonsense.
And thus science progresses one funeral at a time.
Hugs December 2, 2016 at 1:27 am
Yea, we need to do something with this hate speech from left wing extremists.
By the way, even though Dr Mann was, according to the Guardian, wrongly saying this is not only an El Niño but a record from the underlying warming trend,
The quote by Mann referred to 2015 not to 2016, the fact that the quote was used in an article about the record temperature in 2016 appears to have misled you.
I can assure you she didn’t say this. It was an article in WUWT which sugggested this.
I think you are tight, this is a clear over-reaction. AFAIK, it is a question of cracking down on hate sites that are clearly racist, and I very much doubt the German public will accept any such thing against skeptical websites.
Oh, no: typo again. RIGHT, not tight.
“it is a question of cracking down on hate sites that are clearly racist”
It’s a crackdown on “fake news”. And Merkel decides what is fake and what is not. Sounds like a plan to take away more of the free speech rights of Germans, to me.
She and Obama were dog whistling to the usual leftist totalitarians and naturally they’re responding-
http://joannenova.com.au/2016/12/in-brave-pr-move-kelloggs-cancels-breitbart-advertising-and-calls-millions-its-own-customers-bigots/
http://www.euronews.com/2016/12/01/french-mps-vote-to-ban-misinformation-anti-abortion-websites
Nice of them to publicly anoint themselves as the arbiters of what’s fake news and what isn’t but they’ll have their work cut out for them-
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/blogs/tim-blair/shakers-and-fakers/news-story/80bfd0dfd4bf415c524aa28de342302c
Why does the government get to decide what is and isn’t racist?
To most socialists, any disagreement with a protected minority is by definition racism.
just let me explain a bit. I think that CAGW is not true. Possibly human influence on warming is negligible.
But if someone -like Merkel- has another opinion means not that every thing she does is wrong or she does it out of an evil plan.
Calling Merkel communist or something is plain wrong.
She’s the daughter of an east German pastor, who had – like any of them – a lot of problems in the former DDR/GDR.
Possibly non of you can imagine how to survive as an individual in a dictatory regime. If you belief or not, you have to attend certain groups or meetings in order to survive or to get appropriate education or jobs.
Most people did it in East Germany, knowing that is just a game you have to play to survive.
(my father, until the age of 12 had to attend to the Hitlerjugend – Hitlers youth organisation. He has not been asked if he liked. Despite of this he was always a big supporter of Israel, saying that those who have touched the Jews have touched God’s eyeball)
Merkel is a member of the Christian Democratic Party, and if she let a big number of refugees in, she did it out of christian virtue. Possibly the way she did was not wise, but she did it out of the bottom of her heart.
If we German call her Mutti – which means Mommy – shows that she tries to keep things together and even to car for foreigners.
TMHO, the way she did it, was wrong, ignoring the thoughts and fears of many.
But this doesn’t mean she is an evil or dangerous person.
And, the refugee problem has been solved by other countries, just blocking the way to Germany.
She has stated that she backs shutting down “fake news” sites. Sanders and other folks seem to think that is what WUWT is.
Have you ever heard them call Fox News, Faux News?
There was a priceless story yesterday about Obama bemoaning false news stories to Rolling Stone…who was busted not too long ago for writing and publishing possibly the most notable false news story I can think of.
naturbaumeister,
“Merkel is a member of the Christian Democratic Party, and if she let a big number of refugees in, she did it out of christian virtue.”
Um, sorry to burst your fantasy bubble, but the Christian God does not just aceppt whatever a person presents themselves as being, as though a politician couldn’t be faking it . . nor does He advise us to be so gullible.
. . I just didn’t want unbelievers to get the wrong impression, based on your -blind faith in politician’s posturing- proposition. That is not Christian doctrine, period.
Well you know how Germans, politics and science can get a bit out of hand. I could see Merkel playing the role of Dr. Strangelove very convincingly, come to think of it.
“Dr. Strangelove” is a great movie, but it is not actually a documentary movie.
Hmmmm, did I suggest that Dr. Strangelove is a documentary? Dr. Strangelove, the character played brilliantly by Peter Sellers, could be played by Chancellor Merkel if a remake is ever planned. I doubt if she could do like Sellers and play the multiple characters he played
She seems much shallower and with less range than Peter Sellers at his best.
@Hunter, You might read ( I think every one should at least read the summary) The man who “stalked” Einstein. In it it describes how the the Germans pre WWII basically shot themselves in the foot by outlawing all Jewish professors and scientists from German Universities etc Many of whom ended up in the West, all because one guy ( Phillip Lenard, who had a disagreement with Einstein’s theories) had the ear of Hitler and convinced him to do this. It put , in many ways, those scientists with new theories into the west, which led to many advances there. An interesting read.
The whole atmosphere is changing?
Yep, and it always has been, since long before humans trod upon the surface of this planet.
Oh you mean the human ‘atmosphere’ in the ‘twittersphere’? Yep. That too. People are waking up, smelling the coffee, and figuring out all by themselves that the media is a great place to sell product by telling lies, and that means that the value of the ‘free’ information the media dishes out, is approximately zero.
Which is why sites like this, where data is discussed analysed and torn apart, are so popular. This site doesn’t tell you what to think, but sometimes it teaches you how to think. Well not you, personally of course.
Some things are simply not possible.
And the atmosphere in the twittersphere has also changed, as exemplified by Merkel whose real plaintive cry is ‘why aren’t they believing the same old lies any more?’
Well partly because they are bored with them, so new lies are needed, but actually because they are bored with lies altogether. The power of the media to actually change stuff is on the wane, because by and large there is now so MUCH conflicting ‘evidence’ of anything that has money or power involved, that people don’t believe any of it, and that’s why Mutti Merkel is so upset., as a stasi employee in charge of agitprop her whole life has been dedicated to the art of propaganda, but teh internet has put so many conflicting messages up that state propaganda no longer works. Hence her desire to remove access to any but the ‘official’ news and any good Communist (or catholic pope) knows is absolutely necessary to keep an unelected totalitarian regime in power.
Faced with an unrelenting stream of politically and commercially inspired bulldung, peole have two choices. Ignore it all completely, or learn to think for themselves.
For the first time since WW2 a slender majority of people in the UK, and then the USA are doing one or the other of those.
We have been promised the age of Aquarius for a long time now…
Merkel is saying that websites with completely fake news need to be controlled, not websites she doesn’t like should be shut down. you can make money by putting out completely fake news – is that a good thing?
shutting down websites you didn’t like would be like shutting down NASA climate studies because you don’t like the figures they produce…
” you can make money by putting out completely fake news – is that a good thing?”
I dunno griffy, do you make money by putting out completely fake news?
Are you paid to regurgitate any given article over and over again?
This is why people respond to you. Back a few weeks ago, even I said, just don’t respond to him. As I saw Mr. Watts make a comment recently about the possibility of just not responding to your comments, I also realized that the majority of responses to you, are for the fact that they feel the need to make it crystal clear that your opinion or view on any certain subject is at best, blather. I believe the majority of people here that really, really, know what they are talking about, have a strong moral character to want to correct that blather.
GUG!
EJ makes a good point. Griff is so sure that fake news is profitable because he profits by it! We all know about OFA and the Hillary disinformation teams paid by Soros. Apparently Soros has extra money laying around.
But Griffy, when socialists are involved, any site that they don’t like is instantly labeled fake.
Not bad Griff……………shutting down NASA/GISS would eliminate some fake news and a bunch of liars at the same time. I like twofers.
” you can make money by putting out completely fake news – is that a good thing?”
Well, since most advertising is outright false, apparently it is a good thing. Otherwise AGs would go after advertisers for all their falsehoods.
“you can make money by putting out completely fake news – is that a good thing?”
It is if you are the NYTimes, WaPo, CBS, ABC, NBC or any of the other MSM.
The leftists are complaining because their monopoly of fake news is crumbling.
the Griff troll
Fake news? Like John Edwards’ love child? Like the Blue Dress?
Who decides what is “fake news”? And is inserting a word into a quote to make a point not made by the speaker, “fake news”?
Sorry, “fake” is in the eye of the beholder. Clearly what you think is fake is only what you do not like, just like Merkel. Once you give the censor pen to any person, you cede control over your freedom to their whims.
Griff, I’m surprised you’d dare post comments on a site most on the Left consider “Fake Climate Science”. What’s with your supposed lack of discernment?
And regarding Ms. Merkel, who on earth appointed her the title of “Queen of Proverbial Principles”?
YOU?????
LOL!
But your example of shutting down NASA because of distorting figures isn’t a bad idea–because that’s what they’ve been doing.
It seldom happens, but you accidentally discovered a truth.
I’m trying to remember the name of the NYT reporterette who once used ellipses (…) to completely change the meaning of a quote.
Griff said “completely fake news”.
Neither Merkel nor Obama nor anyone else (but Griff) has said “COMPLETELY fake news” websites.
George Tetley quoted Confucius in the second comment from the start. What very few people know, with respect to that quote, is that the second to last line was edited out of the original quote 3,000 years ago. It originally included the phrase, “Those that know this and try to take advantage this for their own self-aggrandizement are complete asshole trolls”
Griff, can you point me to a “completely fake news” website that makes money (and harms the ignorant)?
There’s the Onion. It’s completely fake, makes money, and only harms idiot politicians who don’t get the joke.
Well, Merkel will start with completely fake news sites. Everyone has to start somewhere. This would be only the first goose-step.
And, as the source of funding for NASA, I have a right to demand what I’m paying for, science, not lysenkoist propaganda.
Griff December 2, 2016 at 6:00 am
Is this what you are referring to? Seems NPR went and track down a fake news story and guess what they found.
But then again is this fake news story by NPR itself fake news?
https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2016/11/23/npr-tracked-down-a-fake-news-creator-in-the-suburbs-heres-what-they-learned/
michael
Griff is an expert on fake news – he reads the Guardian who are experts at it.
“Merkel is saying that websites with completely fake news need to be controlled”
So that’s the Guardian scuppered, isn’t it?
Not to mention the Bolshevik Broadcasting Company.
“Ignorance is Bliss”
Be very careful just how much information you relate to Griff in an effort to enlighten him, proper enlightenment could make him very unhappy
The problem isn’t fake news. The problem is those that believe they or anyone else that governments should have the legal power to determine what is fake and what is real or what is suitable for everyone else without compelling reasons such as national security. That’s called government censorship.
And a government administration shutting down or altering a part of the agencies under it’s legal control for what ever reason is not government censorship.
Your attempt to equate to the two Griff is pathetic.
Yep! The Great Blue Wall of alternate made-up “reality” is crumbling, and the UK and Trump have swung the hammer.
You aren’t my sister are you ??
G
I think the most famous Margaret Smith is now called Margaret Court for some reason.
You should really have grown up from liberal and socialist beliefs by the time you get to about 20. The fact that this 70 year old never-has-been hasn’t tells you everything you need to know about him. And Hillary had to cheat to beat him!
Its about 25 according to Neuroscientists’ consensus. Until then your prefrontal cortex is still developing.
This means your ability to differentiate among conflicting thoughts, determine good and bad, better and best, same and different and future consequences of current activities are all impaired. You act emotionally rather than logically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefrontal_cortex
That’s about the time male brains mature.
TerryS There’s that word again CONSENSUS. The translation is they all believe the same bias, they can’t prove.
I think Dame Margaret Thatcher said ” Consensus is getting a whole bunch of people to agree to something that none of them believe. ”
Well She probably didn’t use street talk like ” a whole bunch.”
G
This is the reason I think the voting and drinking ages should be set to 25. The point at which the reasoning capability of humans gets to the point that they can think for themselves. It’s also why under 25’s have more traffic accidents, frontal cortex in not yet fully developed so decision making capacity is impaired.
george e. smith December 2, 2016 at 3:40 pm
I think Dame Margaret Thatcher said ” Consensus is getting a whole bunch of people to agree to something that none of them believe. ”
What Maggie actually said was: “Consensus: The process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values, and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects; the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead.”
“If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.”
Winston Churchill
20-year-olds know as much about socialism as they do about the making of sausages, and they have yet to have the privilege of paying for it.
One of the reasons why I would love to be able to restrict the right to vote, to those people who are actually paying income taxes.
MarkW, what about the people that pay property taxes?
What about the people that pay sales taxes?
What about the people that pay “sin” taxes (on alcohol & tobbaco) ?
What about the people that pay payroll taxes?
What about the people that pay gasoline (road use) taxes?
Tell em to get a job.
I always thought that was a stupid statement. An educated, experienced 20 year old knows that socialism itself is without a heart and that capitalism will provide far more wealth to take care of the truly disadvantaged members of society.
Not everyone who pays some type of tax is a US citizen.
Only US citizens should be allowed to vote.
Ballots should be printed in English only and the ability to both Read and Write it fluently should be a prerequisite for citizenship
MarkW December 2, 2016 at 9:49 am
Tell em to get a job.
Owning property at one time was a requirement for the right to vote.
so what would you propose 1 cent? 1 dollar?
Hmm get a job. If a person is able to pay all the taxes and fees Henry listed why? They are not a werght on society. And what about the ones who work but have enough write offs to pay nothing?
Best to stick with the Constitutions its work pretty well.
michael
Begs the question; Why are those things taxed ?? Says nowt about that in the Constitution.
g
For Bryan A it already is a requirement for naturalized citizenship.
G
You can’t convince me that the voter pamphlet in 57 languages (Santa Clara Co.) says EXACTLY the same thing in 57 languages.
How do you say (exactically) : ” He had to have had a reason for doing that. ” in Cantonese ??
“And Hillary had to cheat to beat him!”
Just shows what a horrible candidate she was.
…and that’s just the tip of the iceberg, as the FBI will eventually prove.
Not a chance…President Barack Obama will issue a Presidential Pardon eliminating any and all potential criminal charges from being levied against Hillary
Sorry, Bryan–she has to be convicted of something before Barry can pardon Hillary.
And if he DOES issue a presidential pardon, it will give credibility to all the “Lock Her Up” chants ringing throughout the land the past year.
And the Democrats don’t want THAT!
(You’ve heard she plans on running again in 2020, right? Of course, that might mean running away from the police when they come to apprehend her. With Hillary, you can bet a month’s wages she’s not telling the truth. Ever.)
“If a man is not a socialist at age 20, he has no heart. If he is still a socialist by the time he is 40, he has no brain.” usually attributed to Winston Churchill, but several variations exist. I like this version.
Dang, beat me to it. But that quote is sufficiently thought provoking that it should be said more often. My frequent response to young socialists is a variation of: “Yes, I also believed that when I was your age”
And Winston Churchill is some kind of genius?
Wrong 20th century political figure:
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Georges_Clemenceau
One of his many bons mots.
dan;
“felt that”, surely.
Why the hell would any French man say any of those things Clemenceau is reported to have said. Surely they have their own language.
I know they can’t even say or understand an old Irish name like ” Dulin ”
Comes out garbled like ,,,,, doo LARN ….
@davidgmillsatty–yes, Churchill was “some kind of genius”; just ask his contemporary Austrian that stirred up WWII and tried to vanquish Churchill but was vanquished instead. I’d describe that as “some kind of genius”.
Besides, rather than attack the man, you should analyze what he said and point out wherein you disagree.
See?
Churchill promoted the idea of a ‘United States Of Europe’, which eventually became the EU, fought a disastrous war that bankrupt the UK, destroyed what was left of the Empire, and gave half of Europe to Stalin. I guess you could call that ‘some’ kind of genius, but I’m not sure what kind it would be.
davidgmillsatty: Wow, your statement points out the huge chasm between your thought processes and mine. You seem to connect the validity of the statement to the credentials of the person quoted with the statement. I hadn’t even considered that. To me, the usefulness and veracity of the statement stands on its own, and out of courtesy or to allow the tracking of the sentiment, I added the person’s name. I describe my thoughts as skepticism, and yours as appeal to authority. .
MarkG, Churchill had lots of faults but what you claim is nonsense. Churchill had no hand in the EU whatsoever. You bemoan him handing over half of Europe to Stalin when that was FDR and complain that Churchill fought a war to stop another dictator ruling Europe.
As for destroying the Empire, I don’t even know what that refers to.
Political climate change is really happening at last, thanks to WUWT and all its’ helpers.
The temperature should increase quite a lot (next week) in Phoenix, Arizona.
Thank you Eric. Excellent stuff.
Regards,
WL
As valuable as WUWT has been. There are others who have worked in that effort.
Keep it toasty til Feb., WL. We’ll be visiting Apache Jct.
its
Back away from the apostrophe key, slowly …
i agree with Dr Ryan Maue of Weatherbell the tropical el Nino based temperature rose april to October above global temperature. from October onwards both the tropical El Nino temperature and the measured global temperature move together proving the temperature spike had nothing to do with humans.
What’s more, they show you analog and antilog years which demonstrate that there are no one-way trends in weather.
Where did Sanders get his thermometer? Pulled it out of…
…his witty comebacks thesaurus
Is there another word for thesaurus?
Perry, there used to be but it’s now extinct.
Well there’s your arse ; Close enough !
g
How can you tell an oral thermometer from a rectal thermometer?
The taste.
smell?
No, taste.
(Or the label that says “Global temperature averages may be approximated with proper use.”)
color?
Length & width.
Bernie can’t tell regardless because he’s full of it.
Rectal thermometers typically have a 90 degree bend in them. This is to avoid ‘losing’ it in situ.
I knew someone years ago who worked as an orderlie where rectal thermometers were commonly used.
One day when the nurse asked him for the reading, he said he couldn’t tell. Instead of wiping it off, he ran it through his mouth to clean it.
He didn’t tell her that he had dipped a clean one in peanut butter.
If El Niño was responsible for 0.1C increase in global temperature then obviously La Nina can’t possibly be responsible for more than 0.1C drop. That leaves quite a bit (about 0.8C I’d say) of change that they apparently can’t explain.
Well, of course you need to define the temp set – land-based, global surface or satellite TLT or what. Satellites see a different kind of blip, and the drawing featured appears to be satellite-derived.
Besides, there is no need to cherry-pick, as people tend to do. Showing 15 years or so of satellite without a reason mentioned can be considered cherry-picking.
The 8 month drop in RSS land data is the fastest and deepest in the WHOLE satellite record.
whoops forgot chart.
for good measure , lets include UAH land as well.
Andy, and frankly to cut through all the political stuff on this page ( plus griff) I am way more worried about the downward spike than anything else. ( as many historical reports show, cold kills, warm means a growing, wealthier society.
There is no global temperature, Bill, so your statement is meaningless.
Bernie thinks that NOAA is a character from the Book of Genesis.
ROTF LOL Very good.
What’s so funny?
NOAA and Bernie were friends, back in the day.
Well, here’s another quote for Bernie, Mann and co..
Thank you for that! One of my favorite tunes from that era..
+1, Luckily, I have a spare keyboard and a big bag of rice for drying out soggy electronics.
Because Noah knew all about rising sea levels!
The Noah tale is a allegorical account of a flooding event (probably Mediterranean breakout) that impacted the Black Sea area approx. 5000 B.C. Not one to miss a bad news item, the religious nuts at the time of the Old Testament caught hold of it and added the usual spin and wrote it down as “a warning to us all” Dig deep enough and ignore the “fake news” and the scales shall fall from thine eyes…..
Speaking of religious nuts, your house needs a little cleaning as well.
AleaJactaEst
December 2, 2016 at 4:28 am
Probably wasn’t the Black Sea event, but larger than normal annual Mesopotamian flood. The site of Ur preserves evidence of such events.
Famous underwater archaeologist Bob Ballard thinks the rapid rise of Black Sea level more than 7000 years ago may have inspired the Noah myth and its Mesopotamian precursors, but IMO there is too much of a time lag and geographic distance. The Sumerian ancestor of the biblical flood story was not written down until around 4000 years ago. If the epic character Gilgamesh actually existed, he would have lived some centuries earlier, around 2700 BC.
The myth was adopted and adapted by Semitic peoples in Babylonia and Assyria, then finally reworked by Canaanites and Hebrews, whose environment was not as flood-prone as lower Mesopotamia or the Nile Valley. Same goes for the creation myths in Genesis and elsewhere in the OT.
Moses thought otherwise.
g
Famous underwater archaeologist Bob Ballard
He can’t be that famous as I’ve never heard of him.
But then again, I spend very little time under water.
His fame stems inter alia from his discovery of the following:
RMS Titanic in 1985, the battleship Bismarck in 1989, and the aircraft carrier USS Yorktown in 1998 and the wreck of John F. Kennedy’s PT-109 in 2002
So, it’s clear isn’t it? When temperatures rise it is definitely climate change but when temperatures drop it’s just the weather.
Right. And if everything cancels out over time, it means both the climate crisis and the weather crisis are getting worse. And since weather is ultimately caused by climate, stagnation means the climate crisis is getting even worser.
We know climate is ultimately caused by weather because climate is defined based the average weather at a given location or in a given region over an extended length of time. So I hope weather is not ultimately caused by climate as that could lead to runaway positive feedbacks that would freeze, boil, drown and desiccate us all simultaneously.
As a lot of WUWT readers in the previous report of that special curve or graph pointed out, in this case Sanders is right.
RSS themselves said that the data cannot be trusted anymore.
Then, it is a cherrypicked local trend, whereby in other locations a much lower cooling is shown.
Methinks Eric Worrall is suffering from confirmation bias to a certain extend.
Somtimes the forum looks a bit like a sceptics echo chamber.
Just a bit more objectivity in some WUWT articles would make this great side even better and less vulnerable.
David Rose, the author of the previous post made the mistake not to inidcate which graph he used. As Anthonys Watts pointed out, it is the RSS land only graph.
The latest UHA global graph from today at drrocspencer.com shows only 0.4°C drop from the el Nino spike.
UAH northern hemisphere is a drop of 0.66°C from the spike until now.
So using the RSS land graph only to prove something is not 100% proof.
naturbaumeister, if you feel that there are good stories that are being neglected, feel free to write them up and submit them. Anthony is very open about the stories he allows to be printed.
Don’t just whine about it, do something about it.
“Somtimes the forum looks a bit like a sceptics echo chamber.”
Well, it *is* a little bit of a skeptic echo chamber. That doesn’t mean the echo is scientifically inaccurate.
There is also an alarmist echo chamber here, although much smaller. I attribute that to the weak case the alarmists have to offer such as hanging their hat on arctic sea ice levels, or claiming that the surface temperature record is accurate.
If you have your data together, you don’t get shouted down on this website. If you don’t, you are subject to a little bit of ridicule for not having your data together. That’s the way it works in most of the world for most things, isn’t it?
The reason those who accept climate science – not alarmists, if you please, if I don’t call you deniers – emphasise the arctic sea ice and especially current conditions there is that is an observed, not modelled example which clearly shows the effects of a warming world.
I am still waiting for a skeptic site to cover the arctic temp anomaly in the last month and/or the record sea ice low level as a main article, let alone offer an explanation from the skeptic viewpoint as to why this is occurring.
and there is nothing wrong with the surface temperature record: I refer you again to the independently -skeptic -funded Berkley Earth project which checked it an upheld it, ruling out any UHI bias in the process.
Quote from Griff “I am still waiting for a skeptic site to cover the arctic temp anomaly in the last month and/or the record sea ice low level as a main article, let alone offer an explanation from the skeptic viewpoint as to why this is occurring.”
You were answered in the Rose thread and you ignored it.
Call me a “Denier”, it does not offend me. I am proud of it, and here is why:
“There is the grand truth about Nathaniel Hawthorne. He says No! in thunder; but the Devil himself cannot make him say yes. For all men who say yes, lie; and all men who say no, — why, they are in the happy condition of judicious, unencumbered travelers in Europe; they cross the frontiers into Eternity with nothing but a carpet-bag, — that is to say, the Ego. Whereas those yes-gentry, they travel with heaps of baggage, and, damn them! they will never get through the Custom House.
Herman Mellville Letter to Nathaniel Hawthorne, [April 16?] 1851
http://www.melville.org/letter2.htm
And he’ll ignore it again in the next thread. And when the ice levels are no longer at record lows in a few months, he’ll go back to ignoring the arctic altogether.
Griff, 3.5 million years ago there was a boreal forest on Ellesmere Island in the Canadian Arctic. It was populated by, among other creatures, very large camels. There was no ice cap, and Arctic temperatures were 15 C above today’s levels. (Google “Arctic camels” for numerous references to source articles, or see the article “Cold Case” starting on page 46 of the April 2015 issue of Discover magazine.) The absence of the ice cap obviously had nothing to do with humans. Roughly 20,000 years ago, most of Canada was covered with 3000 metres of ice, which has since melted, again with no help from humans. I imagine early North Americans Grog and Gronk screaming, “The ice is melting, the ice is melting, we’re all going to die.”
Your indirect comment that those sometimes labelled “alarmists” are the ones who accept science, and the inference that those who do not buy into the AGW meme are “science deniers,” is simply wrong. Some of us “deniers” look at climate science as relating to the Earth’s entire climate history, which puts roughly 40 years of ice decline in the Arctic in its proper perspective. Why isn’t the growth of the southern ice cap during the satellite era evidence of global cooling? The problem I see with the AGW believers (or is there a different term I should use?) is that the “baseline” for temperature is (say) 1900, while the “baseline” for Arctic ice is 1978. It is only human arrogance that suggests that those dates are somehow special and are the targets we should be shooting for with our “CO2 control knob.” What “alarmists” seem all to ready to ignore is the role natural forces play in the climate change that has been occurring for 500 million years.
Here you go,Griff:
http://realclimatescience.com/2016/12/the-true-climate-deniers/
Griff says: “I am still waiting for a skeptic site to cover the arctic temp anomaly in the last month and/or the record sea ice low level.” This isn’t the main article you asked for, but here are a couple of comments.
About 3.5 million years ago, Ellesmere Island in the Canadian Arctic was home to a boreal forest populated by camels, beavers, deer, fish, and rabbits, and there was no Arctic ice cap at all. Temperatures in the region were 15 C higher than today. (K. Powell. “Cold Case: Is our climate’s future written in Arctic fossils from a warmer past?”, Discover Magazine, April 2015, pp. 46-53.) About 20,000 years ago, most of Canada was covered with an ice sheet 3000 to 4000 metres thick. The swing from no ice to lots and lots and lots of ice and then to where were in (say) 1900 was not a result of human influence. Your reference to “record sea ice low level” is false unless it is qualified by “in the micro-sliver of climate history in which we’ve been able to measure it.” It takes a staggering amount of human hubris to take the view that this time in Earth’s climate history is so special that 1978 is our “target” level of Arctic ice, or that 1900 is the “target” temperature, which we will be able to achieve with our “CO2 climate control knob.”
Your comment that “those who accept climate science – not alarmists,” and the implication that those (like me) who do not buy the AGW meme are “science deniers,” is simply false. To accept climate science is to accept all of climate science, which shows unequivocally that the climate has been changing for 500 million years and will continue to change regardless of what we do with CO2.
I apologize if a similar comment shows up elsewhere; my first attempt at a response is apparently hiding in the deep ocean.
Griff says: “I am still waiting for a skeptic site to cover the arctic temp anomaly in the last month and/or the record sea ice low level.” This isn’t the main article you asked for, but here are a couple of comments.
About 3.5 million years ago, Ellesmere Island in the Canadian Arctic was home to a boreal forest populated by camels, beavers, deer, fish, and rabbits, and there was no Arctic ice cap at all. (K. Powell. “Cold Case: Is our climate’s future written in Arctic fossils from a warmer past?”, Discover Magazine, April 2015, pp. 46-53.) About 20,000 years ago, most of Canada was covered with an ice sheet 3000 metres thick. The swing from no ice to lots and lots and lots of ice was not a result of human influence. Your reference to “record sea ice low level” is false unless it is qualified by “in the micro-sliver of climate history in which we’ve been able to measure it.” It takes a staggering amount of human hubris to take the view that this time in Earth’s climate history is so special that 1978 is our “target” level of Arctic ice, or that (say) 1900 is the “target” temperature, which we will be able to achieve with our “CO2 climate control knob.”
Your comment that “those who accept climate science – not alarmists,” and the implication that those (like me) who do not buy the AGW meme are “science deniers,” is simply false. To accept climate science is to accept that the climate has been changing for 500 million years and will continue to change regardless of what we do with CO2.
I apologize if this comment shows up elsewhere; my first attempts at posting a response are apparently hiding in the deep ocean.
Arctic sea ice extent bottomed out about ten years ago, about the same time the AMO peaked and plateaued. Again, give it a few years before you fundamentally change our society, economy and energy systems. We don’t have a few trillion in spare change laying around.
Why should Griff care? It’s not like he’s spending his own money.
Griff, “The reason those who accept climate science – not alarmists, if you please…”
Griff, you had zero comments in the thread following the recent post on my DDP talk, showing there is no scientific case for AGW.
Did you miss it? Or did you just avoid it because, well, no one likes to face a thorough-going refutation.
“I am still waiting for a skeptic site to cover the arctic temp anomaly in the last month and/or the record sea ice low level…” So, the climate has warmed. So what? How do you or anyone else know it’s caused by CO2? Recent warming is nothing unusual on any relevant time-scale.
“and there is nothing wrong with the surface temperature record: …” Except the compilers studiously ignore the ±0.5 C of systematic error that contaminates the measurements. Error that makes the temperature change since 1900 indistinguishable from zero at the 95% confidence interval.
“I refer you again to the independently -skeptic -funded Berkley Earth project…” the Berkeley Earth people who not only ignore the systematic measurement error, but also, like the other practitioners in the field, also seem to have no understanding of instrumental resolution.
Melting Arctic sea ice precedes a new Ice Age. http://harpers.org/archive/1958/09/the-coming-ice-age/
erik the red December 2, 2016 at 10:41 am
Careful with the Harpers article. I posted copy a few Articles ago just to show that there has been other theories. How well it stands up today after nearly 60 years is open to debate. We really don’t want a ice free arctic. I do not want their theory put to the test.
michael
Griff: “I am still waiting for a skeptic site to cover the arctic temp anomaly in the last month”
Griff, that’s because single events lasting a few days or weeks are called “weather”. “Climate” is generally considered to involve periods of – at a minimum – thirty years.
Why is it you appear to be utterly incapable of grasping this simple fact?
“Just a bit more objectivity in some WUWT articles would make this great site even better and less vulnerable.”
Objectivity is in the eye of the beholder. Eric gets to have an opinion, too.
And “vulnerable” to what? Would be my question.
Everyone ot the alarmist party, checking in here, could say that there are incorrect statements. WUWT is not about to have a forum for skeptics only; there is even a mission to convince the other party. By using hostile or incorrect statements, this task will be much more difficult.
Ok, I see you are making a constructive criticism. And I think you are correct, we don’t want to be putting out false or misleading information.
This one article about an unusual drop in last month’s number is a rare exception. It does overstate the cooling. But then you have seen the criticism of the number, by a lot of people, and that’s the way it is supposed to work. If something is misleading, it will be found out. Your contribution is helping us sort it out.
Meanwhile, the temperature here is supposed to drop 20C on Sunday night and stay there for at least two weeks. That’ll make the high daily temperatures around the low daily average for this time of year.
naturbaumeister said:
“Somtimes the forum looks a bit like a sceptics echo chamber.”
Unfortunately WUWT is for many people, a social club based around their ideology, and that doesn’t make for a great environment for sensible debate and discussion. If you can’t have a sensible respectful discussion with someone like Nick Stokes then I would suggest that the real motivation is something other than seeking a better understanding of science.
[Nick Stokes isn’t capable of respectful discussion, because he is never ever able to admit when he’s wrong. You have the same problem -mod]
“the Vermon senator”?!
Obviously a typo – darn these tiny keyboards. I think he meant the “Vermin Senator.”
Writing Observer
December 2, 2016 at 1:58 am
Obviously a typo – darn these tiny keyboards. I think he meant the “Vermin Senator.”
I had the same idea – but it#s obviousy politically incorrect. so Ididn’t dare to mention it.
Good ideals natur … stick to politically the correct (statements, thoughts, & ideas). Keep fitt’n in.
WTH is the Senator from Vermont still doing rally’s in Maine? He sold his lake front summer home there and bought one in Vermont. Bernie, we have had enough of the windmill tilting already. They do a splendid enough job of crashing, burning and causing statewide outages just as you (and the liberals) have. Hey, maybe you can run for president of….Cuba, I hear there will be an opening soon. Just think of all those expats that are moving to Nova Scotia will soon find out this winter that Cuba is MUCH, MUCH warmer.
You know, ole Bernie spent his honeymoon in the old Soviet Union.
My first thought was another presidential candidate, Vermin Supreme. He finished in 4th place in the NH presidential primary. His 4th plank was his most popular:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/vermin-supreme-finishes-fourth-in-new-hampshire-democratic-primary/
If you like your current pony, you can keep your current pony.
Delingpole, Breitbart and the Daily Mail are three of the planet’s least reliable sources on climate change…
Less reliable than Gavin ? Wow
I tried to get back to you with the references for grid instability but having written a long comment we had a microcoupure at the end of it and lost it. Genuinely. We get instability cuts very often usually 1 or 2 secs duration but that’s enough to wipe out data and some delicate equipment I have.
Get an uninteruptiple power supply to buffer your power. It will extend the life of your RAM too.
I fully agree with Roger about the UPS. As an alternative, the next time you replace your computer, consider a laptop. Even if you have a full out power failure, you still have time to save all your work. They’re also a lot more power efficient. Depending on what you pay for electricity you could save enough to more than make up the difference between a laptop and a desktop. link
sounds like you’d be better on a German style renewable grid…. 🙂
Well, its an old topic now: we can catch up next time it comes up
Guys griff gets paid for every response he gets not for his posts. Please ,please just let him babble on , you are wasting your time . Stop responding.
asybot said:
“Guys griff gets paid for every response he gets not for his posts. Please ,please just let him babble on , you are wasting your time . Stop responding.”
Could you provide some more information about this? Who pays him every time he gets a response?
If you actually know something about this, I would like to hear about it. I suspect, more likely though, that you are just making stuff up and are being dishonest in your attempts to insult Griff.
On the other hand, whether they get paid or not, these blogs are read far and wide. So sometimes they just go on and on. After awhile it’s not Griff that I’m talking to or mayloutrees or something. And because I have to think about what I’m writing, I come across a new idea or sharpen the clarity I have on a particular aspect on any particular subject.
Ah Griff…I can hear your little heart squealing in your chest…like a little piggy…waiting in the queue at the sausage factory…you know what’s coming, don’t you!
Griffs wrong that would be NOAA and BOM own this one .
according to Griff, so it must be so
Griff and Bernie Sanders! Griff and Gruff huff and puff!
Like cleantecnica,ABC, BBC, Gaurdian, Wikipedia etc etc etc…well done Griff
Guardian
Griff
What is your source of empirical data that justifies making such a statement or are you just the least reliable source of information posting here?
No Griff… any of your sources are the MOST unreliable.
You have NOTHING but baseless propaganda.
and every time I post a link, its a link which links on to the actual science/research paper. and you never seem to look at that, just jump straight at rubbishing the place I link to… which I have to use since strangely none of the skeptic sites carries links to that science/research…
just in case griffy……….I want to make sure you see my posting. And have a great day ! I have to go to WORK, really I do. !
This is why people respond to you. Back a few weeks ago, even I said, just don’t respond to him. As I saw Mr. Watts make a comment recently about the possibility of just not responding to your comments, I also realized that the majority of responses to you, are for the fact that they feel the need to make it crystal clear that your opinion or view on any certain subject is at best, blather. I believe the majority of people here that really, really, know what they are talking about, have a strong moral character to want to correct that blather.
GUG!
Griftroll
don’t feed the troll
“and every time I post a link, its a link which links on to the actual science/research paper”
So far, in this thread, nope. Seems you are LYING !!
Just to the gruniad and some far left non-entity site.
No science anywhere
Technically, it is really the warmist propaganda people like Griff who do not actually read the study. What Griff reads is the spin put on it by some warming site without reading through the fine print which almost ALWAYS says something different.
The next time Griff links to some study, I want everyone to read the fine print and point out to him why he has, once again, been subjected to the illusions provided by the spin that this science is based on.
Bill Illis: “The next time Griff links to some study…”
Bill, you are assuming that Griff is amenable to sensible, reasoned, fact-based debate.
I assure you, he isn’t.
He is a propagandist, he is paid to disrupt and divert.
Bill,
IMO no science. All spin.
http://www.climate4you.com/index.htm
Take some time to look through this Griff. It may surprise you.
Great site… lot of data… I don’t see any surprises… care to direct me?
Griff, since you say it is a great site, then you should accept this empirical data based chart:
http://www.climate4you.com/images/EquatorSurface300hPa200hPaDecadalTempChange%20BARCHART.gif
At total refutation of the “Hot Sport” conjecture.
@Griff
December 2, 2016 at 1:33 am: And griffbot is not mendacious? Yeah, right! Game is up, robonut.
“Delingpole, Breitbart and the Daily Mail are three of the planet’s least reliable sources on climate change”
Translation: They disagree with my take on the subject.
er… no – they have repeatedly been caught presenting inaccurate data.
Delingpole makes a living out of winding up climate skeptics. (and is a mate of Steve Goddard/tony Heller, Mr reliable on sea ice, I see from Tony’s blog)
Not every person or site who posts from the skeptic viewpoint is of equal value… for every Curry or Watts there are a dozen lunatics and liars out there.
If the skeptic side does want to convince, it ought to start sorting and weighting its sources..
Still, the bottom line, Griff, is that the skeptic viewpoint is the scientific viewpoint.
Your side has still to offer convincing, reproducible proof that CO2 has an identifiable impact on the climate:
Links, please.
Otherwise, you’re an imposter.
“Delingpole makes a living out of winding up climate skeptics. (and is a mate of Steve Goddard/tony Heller, Mr reliable on sea ice, I see from Tony’s blog)”
Better watch out! Ole Tony will slap you with a pertinent chart.
“If the skeptic side does want to convince”
Technically, it’s not up to skeptics to try to convice anyone of anything. It is up to the promoters of a speculation, such as CAGW, to do the convincing.
“they have repeatedly been caught presenting inaccurate data”
No they haven’t. Just data you don’t understand and that disagrees with your “beliefs”
“there are a dozen lunatics and liars out there.”
And you are one of them.
TA said:
““Delingpole makes a living out of winding up climate skeptics. (and is a mate of Steve Goddard/tony Heller, Mr reliable on sea ice, I see from Tony’s blog)”
Better watch out! Ole Tony will slap you with a pertinent chart.”
TA, are you aware of why Anthony booted Tony Heller from WUWT?
But for sheer unadulterated wombat turds, we can always rely on you, and Skepticalscience, and Michael Mann, eh Griff?
Trnslation: They disagree with me the most.
Your Mom should be really proud of you!
Spewing another Fake Opinion, Griff? See, it’s easy to identify your post-normal commenting, which consists of:
a) Think of how you want reality to be,
b) extrapolate some crazy comment to support it, and
c) without any consideration of the facts, post it on WUWT and hope your trolling works.
Problem is, you’re nowhere near the master:
http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2016/12/01/trollmaster-trump-is-driving-liberals-to-new-heights-of-fussy-fury-n2252852
Maybe there could be a new industry materialize out of the this. I know I’ve been delusional and sick for awhile. I need some stronger meds to help me realize that it is actually warmer than the 25 F that my thermometer keeps insisting that it is. But the worst part is the hallucinations I’m having, I know it doesn’t happen as it is a rare and exciting event, but … but… I think it’s snowing. That just goes to show how deep in denial I am. It can’t possibly be snowing. …
Griff, it must be sobering to realize Trump’s election will shorten your life by 40 years, especially since you only seem to be about twenty years old, intellectually anyway.
Suppose (for the sake of discussion) Arctic Sea Ice is currently shrinking, perhaps even at an unprecedented rate. If the satellite data prove that, few here would (indeed have been) refuting that. Think El Nino.
But we have seen sea ice contract, then recover remarkably quickly in recent years. More important, however, is that there is no possibility to prove sea ice extent is determined by atmospheric CO2 (or any greenhouse gas) levels, and even less so human-sourced CO2.
Memorize this phrase, then repeat it to yourself, over and over, as a mantra: “The world is currently warming – naturally.”
Believe me, you’ll feel better. Then please, please, stop posting the arctic sea ice extent graph and doggedly demanding an explanation. Just chant your mantra. Simple, hey?
https://twitter.com/JoelNihlean/status/804409966874525696
Gavin is fighting back. Interesting @ClimateOfGavin did not tweet this. But he must’ve written it.
I’ve often thought of producing a Global temperature where I just keep adding a downjust to the figures. So, I could be just as Juvenile as Gavin.
Is this after adjustments?
Interesting. Almost as interesting as point 10 from here: http://www.dailywire.com/news/2071/most-comprehensive-assault-global-warming-ever-mike-van-biezen
Thanks for the link , astounding!
Excellent link, spetzer86. Everyone ought to read it.
Here are a couple of pertinent excepts of the article:
“”3. Current temperatures are always compared to the temperatures of the 1980’s, but for many parts of the world the 1980’s was the coldest decade of the last 100+ years:
If the current temperatures are compared to those of the 1930’s one would find nothing remarkable. For many places around the world, the 1930’s were the warmest decade of the last 100 years, including those found in Greenland.”. . .
“10. “Data adjustment” is used to continue the perception of global warming:
For the first several years of my research I relied on the climate data banks of NASA and GISS, two of the most prestigious scientific bodies of our country. After years of painstaking gathering of data, and relentless graphing of that data, I discovered that I was not looking at the originally gathered data, but data that had been “adjusted” for what was deemed “scientific reasons.” Unadjusted data is simply not available from these data banks [what do you think about that, Nick, et al]. Fortunately I was able to find the original weather station data from over 7000 weather stations from around the world in the KNMI database. (Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute). There I was able to review both the adjusted and unadjusted data as well as the breakout of the daytime and nighttime data. The results were astounding. I found that data from many stations around the world had been systematically “adjusted” to make it seem that global warming was happening when, in fact, for many places around the world the opposite was true.”
end excerpts
This article demonstrates that it was as hot or hotter in the 1930’s as it is today, that the heat was worldwide, and that NOAA/NASA have changed the original historic surface temperature record in order to support the CAGW speculation.
The graphs at the bottom of the link page show before and after the numbers were chaged by NOAA/NASA.
I guess those poor ole Icelandic meteorologists, and those from other nations, were so incompetent they had to turn to NOAA/NASA to get their temperature history right.
I would love to put some of these people under crossexamination in a court. Tell me, Mr. Icelandic meteorologist, are you so incompetent that you are incapable of recording the correct temperature? That’s what NOAA and NASA are saying when they make these alterations to these guy’s historical records. I wonder if those meteorologists would accept that characterization in public.
This chart has issues. The vertical axis identifies the anomaly in degrees C with respect to 1980-2015. However, the summer month anomalies NEVER go below the average for the reference period, and none of the Winter anomalies go above the reference. This makes no sense on a logical level.
Then, the data represented on the chart were filtered, omitting the odd-numbered decades. No 1890s, 1910s, ’30s, ’50s, ’70s, etc. Some of those were warming, and some were cooling.
Even with the omission of 1/2 of the decades, the chart is very muddled in the middle of the range. Why chart something with discretely colored lines that cannot be differentiated?
Then, no apparent representation of the vast changes thermometer census which occurred across the period.
Also, no error bars, any year, or for the anomaly baseline.
Even with all that, looking at the chart… What does it mean that the summer anomaly variance is only a little more than 1 degree, and the winter is about 2?
The final thing to note is that the trace color choices are sorted ‘cool to warm colors’, ascending by decade, so that the early decades plot to cooler anomalies, and that the later decades plot to the warmer.
IMO, this is an excellent example of a less-than-useful graphic… A waste of computer time.
“The vertical axis identifies the anomaly in degrees C with respect to 1980-2015”
The heading clarifies. They have added the seasonal cycle to the anomalies. Not a great idea, IMHO, but it has a logic.
” omitting the odd-numbered decades”
No, they are showing individual years, with rainbow shading. The key just shows representative colors.
“Also, no error bars,”
No, it would be useless here. The idea is to show the progressin of the central estimates.
“the trace color choices are sorted ‘cool to warm colors’, “
Yes, a universal custom. People recognise the colors. Cool and warm do exist.
Well, who wudda thunk? We see that the world has slowly warmed a bit from the depths of the Little Ice Age, and 2016 was a super-El Nino year. Other than minor temperature effects, no other climate metric has worsened.
Give the kleptocrats another trillion, my boy.
Dave Fair
“Well, who wudda thunk? We see that the world has slowly warmed a bit from the depths of the Little Ice Age” A nonsense repeated by those who want to deceive. We stopped warming from the depths of the LI a long time ago. That is not the cause of the warming now.
” We stopped warming from the depths of the LI a long time ago. That is not the cause of the warming now.”
No we didn’t.
Nor will we do so for at least another century.
was responsible for less than 0.1C of the anomalous warmth.
Is it coincidence that the UKMO UHI adjustment is 0.1C ? and I think it might be positive as well
Naturemeister says Bernie was right so I have to think BS , sorry it’s just a reflex after years of warmist flat earthers screaming the sky is falling who do you expect me to believe , surely not the old boy who cried wolf for the umpteen dozenth time .
No such drop in the UAH Lower Troposphere over land just released (which readers here usually put above all else). In fact UAH shows a big jump in November over land from +0.23 to +0.48 anomaly. Why the sudden trust in RSS?
http://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0beta/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0beta5.txt